The Lion, the Lily, and the Leopard: The Crown and Nobility of Scotland, France, and England and the Struggle for Power (1100-1204) 9782503540405

Citation preview

The Lion, the Lily, and the Leopard

Medieval Identities: Socio-Cultural Spaces Editorial Board under the auspices of the Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Hull Adrian P. Tudor, University of Hull Anu Mänd, Tallinna Ülikool (Tallinn University) Lesley A. Coote, University of Hull Ildar H. Garipzanov, Universitetet i Oslo Sophie Cassagnes-Brouquet, Université de Toulouse-II-Le Mirail Catherine Emerson, National University of Ireland, Galway

Previously published volumes in this series are listed at the back of the book.

Volume 4

The Lion, the Lily, and the Leopard The Crown and Nobility of Scotland, France, and England, and the Struggle for Power (1100-1204)

by

Melissa Pollock

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

© 2015, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. D/2015/0095/85 ISBN: 978-2-503-54040-5 Printed on acid-free paper

Contents

List of Illustrations vii Acknowledgements ix Introduction: Sources and Context

1

Chapter 1: Image and Identity

33

Chapter 2: The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

55

Chapter 3: The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

111

Chapter 4: Identity Challenged: Restructuring and Change in the Three Kingdoms, 1154–73

149

Chapter 5: William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

199

Chapter 6: William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

287

Chapter 7: King William and King Richard

337

Chapter 8: The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

383

Conclusion 414 Appendix 421 Bibliography 425 Index 493

List of Illustrations

Figures Figure 1, p. 77. Cahaignes family tree. Figure 2, p. 78. Watteville family tree. Figure 3, p. 140. Clare family tree. Figure 4, p. 163. Malherbe family tree. Figure 5, p. 202. Aubigny/Moubray family tree. Figure 6, p. 212. Stuteville family tree. Figure 7, p. 217. Bisset family tree. Figure 8, p. 225. Twelfth-century Scoto-Breton marriages. Figure 9, p. 247. Branches of the Vaux family tree. Figure 10, p. 254. Lindsay family tree. Figure 11, p. 257. Ridel/Basset family tree. Figure 12, p. 260. Hai family trees. Figure 13, p. 264. Hommet family tree. Figure 14, p. 278. Branches of the Mortemer family tree. Figure 15, p. 299. Branches of the Vieuxpont family tree. Figure 16, p. 338. Family tree of the Viscounts de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe.

viii

List of Illustrations

Figure 17, p. 343. Mauvoisin family tree. Figure 18, p. 421. Scottish succession. Figure 19, p. 422. Tosny family tree. Figure 20, p. 423. Counts of Holland.

Maps Map 1, p. 95. Landholdings and/or location in Somerset of Matilda de Chandos, the Coloummiers, the Louvels, Robert de Berkeley, counts of Boulogne and Edmund of Scotland. Map 2, p. 129. Landholdings of the Breton Families of FitzAlain, Montfort/ Beaumont of Leicester, FitzBaderon lords of Monmouth, Saint-Jean, Aubigny Belvoir. Map 3, p. 207. Landholdings of the Ornois Families of Moubray, Briouze, William de la Hai, Vieuxpont. Map 4, p. 355. Landholdings of the Evrecin and Yvelines Families of Mauvoisin, William de Soules, Beaumont of Leicester, Tosny, Neauphlé, Watteville, Cahaignes, earls of Devon.

Acknowledgements

T

his book has only come into fruition because of the encouragement and guidance of several colleagues, friends and family. My doctoral supervisor, Michael Brown, and Norman Macdougall were invaluable in the early stages of this work. Michael Brown heartily endorsed the project and enabled me to obtain funding for research in the French archives. Alex Woolf and William Aird guided me towards the furtherance of the Breton dimension of Franco-Scottish affairs, where I also found the invaluable support of Judith Everard. Judith and Daniel Power have both advised on political dimensions of particular families and put me into contact with others working in a similar vein. I am also indebted to Professor Edward James who laboriously read through my manuscript and proffered suggestions for improving aspects of my work that would make the material more accessible to readers outside the subject area. I hope I have done justice to all of the suggestions made by those listed above and by the anonymous readers. There are two people who deserve special recognition — my father, Anthony Pollock MD, who funded my PhD and made this monograph possible, and my husband, Sandy Wilkinson. Sandy has been a considerable source of support. He has been a consistent reminder that dry genealogical information makes a boring read. His contribution to this work is immeasurable and I will always be indebted to him for believing in me and in this study. I must also thank my dearest Olivia. You have deepened my respect for family and history.

Introduction: Sources and Context

Methodology — Dynastic Contemplation The ‘Auld Alliance’ has been historically defined as a military alliance between the French and Scottish thrones that was formed in response to English aggression in 1295. The problem is that this interpretation of the alliance oversimplifies a very complex historical development between the three kingdoms and undermines the true nature of relations beginning with the Norman conquest of England in 1066. The conquest of England ushered in a new socio-political structure that unified England and Normandy under one royal authority — that of William of Normandy, who claimed the throne of England based on familial and political ties dating back to the reign of his great aunt, Emma of Normandy, the consort of King Aethelred ‘the Unready’.1 William’s succession was not sealed by a bond of blood with the ruling House of Wessex but relied primarily on a promise made by King Edward the Confessor, who allegedly named William his heir in 1052.2 Without military support and victory on the battlefield, William stood little chance of taking and successfully holding the kingdom of England as a foreign ruler. For this reason, he turned to families who held land of him in Normandy and who recognized the potential for advancement in England under the aegis of a new Norman king. These families were, for the most part, loyal to him 1 

William of Poitiers, Gesta, ed. by Davis and Chibnall, pp. 2–3, 150–51. William of Poitiers, Gesta, ed. by Davis and Chibnall, pp.  68–69, 114–15, 118–19, 120–21, 150–51; Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 158–61; Barlow, Edward the Confessor, pp. 214–27, 240–55. 2 

2

Introduction

and they protected his interests against a native population. More importantly, without the support of these families, William the Conqueror would never have been able to amass a large enough force to cross the Channel and to confront his rivals or to establish a new aristocracy that owed fealty to him and to his heirs on both sides of the Channel. However, despite the undeniable success of King William I and of his heirs in creating a new Norman Empire, the political structure spanning the Channel became increasingly problematic. The kings of France pressed their claims to overlordship in the Continental territories held by the Norman kings and supported rivalry within the AngloFrench royal family that consistently undermined and threatened the stability of the Norman Empire. In response, the Norman rulers endeavoured to maintain amicable relations with rivals at the periphery of their kingdom both on the Continent and in the British Isles. Kings William II ‘Rufus’ and Henry I, the sons of William I, sought to improve relations with the kings of Scotland in particular whose territory posed a threat to their lorship in the north of England. Between 1094 and 1135, Rufus and Henry successfully formed bonds of protection strengthened by a series of marriages between the two royal houses that brought the kingdoms closer together. More specifically, by the 1120s, men and women from Continental families, who had settled in England, began to emigrate to Scotland because of the close relationship between the kings of Scotland and King Henry I of England, William I’s son. The marriage of King Henry I to King Alexander of Scotland’s sister, Maud, or Edith, and Alexander’s marriage to Henry’s natural daughter, Sibilla, united the families. 3 Maud’s marriage to Henry proved particularly important to interrelations between England, Scotland, and western France, because the Queen’s youngest brother, David, followed her to England and became an integral part of the Anglo-French court. Subsequently, when David succeeded to the throne of Scotland in 1124, he brought a number of landless younger sons from cross-Channel families with him. He also imported many of the administrative and judicial structures from Henry’s Anglo-Norman court.4 The immigration of new Anglo-French families into Scotland reshaped not only the aristocratic structure on both sides of the Channel but especially the Scottish crown’s relationship with other European powers. David’s interest in promoting this Anglo-French, cross-Channel elite within his borders introduced the kingdom of Scotland to a new world — a world that was more inti3  Alexander’s sister’s name was Edith but she changed it to Maud, an English name, when she married Henry. 4  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 25–37.

Sources and Context

3

mately bound to the papacy and to new ideas flooding into the west through contact with the Arab world. Although Scotland would remain conservative in its response to these new influences, the king and his subjects became far more politically involved with France particularly as the kings of England began to pose more of a threat. The crown and nobility of Scotland and France found that they had a common interest in containing the king of England’s cross-Channel domination. Scotland became especially important by the middle of the twelfth century as the former ties that had bound Britain and France together under one aristocratic structure weakened in response to the Capetian drive to reunify France. Kings Louis VII and Philip II challenged the Norman power-bloc in the west winning in the case of Philip the sobriquet ‘Augustus’, and their success was largely due to their ability to undermine King Henry II of England’s authority on both sides of the Channel.5 Henry II’s power reached from Britain (including at times Scotland, Wales, and Ireland) to Normandy, and included Anjou and Maine by inheritance from his father, and Poitou, Aquitaine, and the Touraine by his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine, but he proved unable to appease and control some of his most powerful cross-Channel lords and even his own sons. The alliances made against him exposed weaknesses in the land-lord relationships that crossed the Channel and demonstrated that the Angevin empire had ultimately never been centralized under one rule.6 Kings Louis and Philip capitalized on the increasing disenchantment with Henry II’s style of rule by drawing military support from men and their families who held fees and owed service on both sides of the Channel, which, due to the nature of this cross-Channel system, also involved men with land and titles in Scotland. The fabric of the lord-vassal relationship was seriously strained within this political structure as men and their families from all three kingdoms were forced to choose between royal overlords from whom they held their lands and titles. It is clear that the idea that aid was based on support from men who only held fees in Scotland or France is not applicable here. The ‘Auld Alliance’ as it was understood in 1295 had no place in the political scope of the twelfth century. Some work has been undertaken on the relationship between Scotland, France and England in the twelfth century, but Scotland has only been treated as a foot5  Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 6–7. He was called ‘Augustus’ as opposed to his former nickname of ‘Dieudonne’ or ‘God-given’. 6  R. V. Turner, ‘The Problems of Survival’.

Introduction

4

note to the ‘greater’ war between England and France.7 Moreover, the ethnic and social identity that the Scottish court shared with the English and French has been understated. There is some justification for this in that Scotland was a smaller kingdom, with far fewer resources, and located in an isolated geographical position, but she did play a pivotal role in the conflict between the crowns of France and England. For France, Scotland was increasingly viewed as an excellent ally who could, by virtue of her physical position, divert England’s military resources as happened in 1173 and 1174, and even more importantly Anglo-French Scottish families had lands and allies in England and in France, which undermined the financial and military reserves of the Plantagenet rulers. What will be seen throughout this work is just how significant networks surrounding individual lords could be to relations between the crowns. The kings of all three kingdoms were vulnerable to alliances formed between particular families whose members spanned the Channel. As such, this work relies heavily on a genealogical and prosopographical methodology that is well-founded in historical studies, but it is accompanied by its own strengths and weaknesses.8 Familial relationships are the foundation of the social and political environment of the medieval period in Scotland as elsewhere. As Karl Ferdinand Werner has noted, ‘Genealogy is, at least in its origins, primarily at the service of dynastic self-contemplation.’9 Forming bonds of service and fealty with an 7 

G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era. Professor Barrow in a more recent book gave a little more attention to the strength of Scotland’s relationship with France. G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 279–95; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 230, 255, 262–64; Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 133–339, 145, 342–43. 8  Searle, Predatory Kinship, pp. 88–132, 159–249; Jessee, Robert the Burgundian, pp. 175–79; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins; Green, ‘Kinship, Marriage, and Family’; Keats-Rohan, Family Trees and the Roots of Politics; Bates, ‘The Prosopographical Study of Anglo-French Royal Charters’. The latter work by Bates, though valuable in questioning the authority of some charters, tends to overemphasize the significance of absent witnesses and has caused a general distrust by historians. Cf. Schmid, ‘Geschlechtbewusstsein’ for the German historiographical approach to family. Karl Schmid relies on naming patterns and its development from the ninth century. He suggests that there may have not been a great change or break among ruling patterns of the upper nobility until the twelfth century. For French approaches to prosopographical studies see Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises; Barthélemy, ‘Noblesse, chevalerie et lignage’; Bisson, ‘Nobility and Family in Medieval France’. 9  Werner, ‘Important Noble Families in the Kingdom of Charlemagne’, p. 150. Although the structure of the family and its methods of self-assessment had changed between 800 and 1100, the basis of medieval society was still driven by marital alliances and bonds of loyalty. Werner was one of the first scholars to question that the feudal bond superceded family networks: Werner, ‘Royaume et regna’, pp. 25–26.

Sources and Context

5

overlord or protector was particularly significant to regional politics. The loyalty of men to a lord could prevent a hostile takeover by newly appointed men of the king or of a rival so could in essence save a family from disseisment since it was the lord’s duty to protect them.10 For this reason, many families made gifts to their lord’s foundations to strengthen these commitments. Alliances among the nobility were formed both to elevate the dignity and patronage network of a family as well as to protect it against external threats either from the crown, from within their own family lines, or from other kin groups working against them.11 Periods of heightened animosities illustrate that patterns of alliance were used as a protective measure against these threats and that marriage was the most common and often most effective form of bond between allies.12 However, the problem with any bond based on marriage was that it could easily break down because of problems in successions, which in turn caused rifts within a kin group as each line fought over the disputed inheritance.13 In the context of this work it is important to understand how important the kin group was throughout the medieval world. Literary works reflect the central importance marriage in particular played in resolving or causing disputes between families. For example, the Norse redaction of Thomas’ Tristan provides a contemporary commentary on the positive effect of a marital bond when King Mark’s men suggest that he marry the daughter of the king of Ireland to end the protracted animosities between Ireland and England:14 10  Crouch, ‘Strategies of Lordship in Angevin England’. David Crouch examines the strength of ties between lords and vassals of the baronial class. 11  The significance of marriage as a political tool is found throughout contemporary litera­­ ture: Cf. Crouch, The Birth of Nobility, pp. 99–155; Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’; Genicot, ‘Recent Research on the Medieval Nobility’, pp. 18–22; Bouchard, ‘Family Structure and Family Consciousness’; Mooers, ‘Familial Clout and Financial Gain’; Holt, The Northerners. 12  Barton, Lordship in the County of Maine, pp. 37–100. 13  See Hajdu, ‘Family and Feudal Ties in Poitou’ for an example of an approach to the significance of family networks but for Poitou alone. Hajdu examines both types of familial reactions. He relies on the frequency of members of the family witnessing the charters of their elder siblings as a gauge for positive family loyalties. There are some problems with this approach. Younger siblings throughout the French principalities did not witness for the eldest because they were absent on crusades, managing their own fees, or fighting on campaigns with the king. For example, the case of William, Ivo, and Robert de Vieuxpont witnessing together is a rare example of obvious family solidarity and even so they do not witness together that often. The charters can usually be clumped together over a few days when they were obviously travelling together. See Chapter 6 on the Vieuxponts. 14  Norse Romance 1: The Tristan Legend, ed. by Kalinke, p. 91.

Introduction

6

Lord, it often happens that kings in various countries have been at war, bringing grief and manifold sorrows and loss of life. Afterward their wrath and hatred subside, and their conflict turns into peace, and hatred into love for the sake of their daughters and sisters, and into the most honourable friendship for the sake of the offspring of their families.15

Although it is rare today for marital contracts to be politically motivated or to bear the exigencies of statecraft, in the Middle Ages marriage bonds carried an entire host of preconceived judgements tied to blood and lineage.16 For example, the late twelfth-century De ortu Waluuensii stressed that the hero, Gawain, was destined for great things by virtue of his kinship with King Arthur: ‘From the proof I will give you, you will learn he is the nephew of Arthur, King of Britannia, the man whose fame for great prowess flies everywhere; I do not doubt that this boy, outstanding in nobility, will maintain this quality without dishonour.’17 Indeed, the medieval cosmological belief in the relationship between blood and body, based on the Christian model of perfection and transubstantiation, was tied to images of healing or disease representing a state of salvation, sin and suffering.18 This was one reason why perfidy associated with the rebellion of sons against their father was particularly shocking — it represented a sin against the same body. The trauma of such treachery against one’s own familial body comes through one of the accounts on the death-scene of King Henry II of England in 1189 for: ‘Quo audito, pater, infirmitate correptus, prae ira et dolore (ut dicitur) mortuus est.’19 The body reflected a physical and a spiritual state of being bound indissolubly to one’s lineage and, as such, it was believed that Henry’s wars against his sons affected the entire political community. Richard of Devizes, writing during the reign of Richard  I, said of the Plantagenets that they were ‘Oedipodae confusa domus’, or the ‘confused house of Oedipus’.20 Gerald of Wales used the imagery of an eagle attacked by its 15 

Norse Romance 1: The Tristan Legend, ed. by Kalinke, p. 93. Crouch, The Birth of Nobility, pp. 99–155. 17  Rise of Gawain, ed. and trans. by Leake Day, pp. 16–17. 16 

18 

Pouchelle, ‘Le sang et ses pouvoirs au Moyen Âge’. The medieval mind was inundated with the imagery of blood particularly since the liturgy and sacral representation of Christ’s blood was not merely a symbol. It was believed that the wine in communion was converted into the true blood of Christ. 19  Radulphus Niger, Chronica, ed. by Anstruther, p. 95: ‘When the father heard [his son, John, was colluding with his son, Richard, against him] infirmity took a hold over him because of anger and sadness (it is said) and he died.’ 20  Richard de Devizes, Chronicon, ed. by Stevenson, p. 3; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt,

Sources and Context

7

eaglets,21 while Walter Map, Gerald’s friend, probably writing his account in the early 1180s, compared Henry the Young King to the lynx who, ‘[…] penetrans omnia exicio proprie gentis imminebit […]’, and to the biblical Absalom who plotted against his father, King David.22 Thus there was much more mentally and psychologically than meets the eye to the listing of one’s parents. This also comes through in the Roman de Fergus, or more poignantly in Perceval when the hero Perceval failed to ask the question of the Fisher king that would have revealed his blood lineage and his destiny as the Grail protector.23 The troubadour poet, Marcabru, says it another way in his Dirai vos en mon lati: Often a rich man feeds a bad neighbour on bread and wine; and if he got him from a bad lineage, he’s certain of a bad awakening — if the peasant isn’t lying from whom the proverb came. The Miller passes judgement at the mill: ‘He who binds well unbinds well,’ and the villein says, behind the plough: ‘Good fruit comes from a good garden, and a worthless son from a worthless mother, and from a worthless stallion comes a nag.’24

Men and women were formed psychologically by both their mother and father. Jean-Guy Gouttebroze suggests that the death of the father and attachment to the mother was part of a significant process of finding oneself and conquering pp. 45–51. 21  Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, viii, 295–96: ‘[…] ubi postmodum aquilam depingi jussit et quatuor aquilae pullos ei insidentes, duos alis duabus et tertium renibus, parentem unguibus et rostris perfodientes […]’ (‘[…] where presently he described an eagle, the parent, and four grey eaglets preparing to attack him, the other two against two opposing and a third, piercing through with talons and beaks […]’). 22  Walter Map, De nugis curialium, ed. by Brooke and Mynors, pp. xxv, 279–83: ‘strikes out, penetrating all things, he will threaten the destruction of his own people’. Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 46–58. Walter gave a very favourable portrayal of the King in most cases. 23  This concept was coined as roman biographique by Gaston Paris in the late nineteenth century. Cf. Guillaume le Clerc, The Romance of Fergus, ed. by Frescoln, pp. 40–41, ll. 303–44. Fergus was the son of Somerled, a rustic of Galloway, and of a noblewoman. The issue of blood legitimacy and nobility between his parents provoked his father to insult both mother and son. The name-calling of Fergus may also have been a play on the legend of Saint Mungo: Guillaume le Clerc, The Romance of Fergus, ed. by Frescoln, pp. 45–46, ll. 480–512; p. 51, l. 667. Other literary works of the Arthurian sagas carry the same interest in blood and lineage. This motif stresses the strength of one’s ancestral past as outweighing any other claim on identity. Noble blood alone, however, did not make a knight: Bruckner, ‘Rewriting Chrétien’s Conte du Graal’; Whitman, ‘The Body and the Struggle’; E. Kennedy, ‘The Quest for Identity’; Chrétien de Troyes, Perceval, trans. by Bryant, pp. 5–6. 24  Léglu, ‘Moral and Satirical Poetry’, p. 50.

Introduction

8

one’s identity, an identity that was intimately tied to personal character carried through each generation according to ‘the psychic complexion of individuals’.25 For Gouttebroze and others, this maturation process was to a late twelfth-century audience indelibly informed by a second Oedipal stage in which a man could only progress by denying his mother’s influence then only later to return and to embrace his maternal heritage.26 In the Grail Cycle, the heroic figure of Gawain usually represented the mature culmination of these various life stages as compared to the heroic figure of Perceval whose maturation was stunted and unfulfilled by his failure to accept his paternal and maternal heritage. King Richard I of England represented a prime example of the Oedipal/ Percevalian conflict because he was intimately bound to his mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, both by the nature of their close relationship and by his inheritance of Aquitaine, which his mother had ceded to him; however, by turning against his father throughout the 1180s, he turned away from his father’s lineage as his father rebuked his sons one after the other by playing them against each other in the succession arrangements for the Angevin empire. It was only after Henry’s death that Richard was able to embrace his maternal and paternal lineage. At this seminal moment, son and mother were freed from Henry, and Eleanor could publicly play a significant role in her son’s political career by arranging his marriage to Berengaria of Navarre and by becoming regent of England while he was abroad on the Third Crusade. Another interesting medieval development concerning familial identity was the adoption of particular personal names within a kin group. Personal names not only recalled the structure and memory of the lineage but also revealed the identity and destiny expected of the individual. An example of the burden of such expectations can be seen in the case of the historical Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey Plantagenet. Arthur of Brittany was believed to be a reincarnated King Arthur and the promised heir and saviour of the Bretons.27 He was given the name Arthur as a direct affront to Henry II, who had demanded that his grandson be named after him. Other examples of the import of naming are in the romance, Perceval and in the ‘Fair Unknown’ cycle linked to Gawain. Perceval became known as Perlesvaus, or ‘Perd les vaux’, because he initially failed to understand his destiny, and Gawain was known as ‘puer sine nomine’,

25 

Gouttebroze, Qui perd gagne, p. 5. Gouttebroze, Qui perd gagne, pp. 3–35, 84–128. 27  Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp. 166–69. 26 

Sources and Context

9

or ‘boy with no name’ until he was recognized as the son of Anna and Loth, and as the nephew of King Arthur.28 The issue of familial contemplation and blood lineage is exceedingly important to understanding the psychological framework of medieval society. Parents served not only as the basis for one’s claim to titles but also contributed to the character of each person. The contemporary Touraingeau Benoît de SaintMaure captured the essence of this belief when he said, ‘Autresi sunt cum mireors | les estoires des anceisors | maintes choses i ot l’om dire | u l’om mult cler se veit e mire.’29 Ancestors were believed to be part of the whole being, and the soul, in successive generations,30 and it often fell to the wives of these men to preserve this dignity for their heirs.31 It was for this reason that wives, and also mothers and daughters, often protected the lineage and image of the family. Aside from bonds formed directly through marital and political alliances, relationships between families were also strengthened by fosterage, adoption, god-parenthood, or by the creation of fictive kin-networks or constructed broth­­ erhoods.32 Bonds were often fabricated outside a blood relationship through these different methods in order to protect families experiencing a common threat and to enhance their image. This was a process taking place in all western societies including that of the native people of Scotland, Ireland, and Wales and it was extremely important to enhancing a family’s prestige.33 28 

Lacy, ‘Naming and the Construction of Identity’; Rise of Gawain, ed. and trans. by Leake Day, pp. 16–17. 29  Benoît de Saint-Maure, Chronique, ed. by Michel, i, 592, ll. 14837–40: ‘The histories of ancestors are just like mirrors; many things are said by means of it when a man sees and observes himself more clearly.’ 30  This notion is seen in romance scenes, as in the Lai of Doon, where the son does not recognize his father after several years of separation and yet the father recognizes the son as a mirror-image of himself. 31  Ingledew, ‘The Book of Troy’; Nelson, ‘Gender and Genre’; Van Houts, Memory and Gender; Van Houts, History and Family Traditions; Van Houts, Medieval Memories; Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’; Nelson, ‘Gender, Memory, and Social Power’. 32  Searle, Predatory Kinship, especially pp. 1–11, 96–104, 230–45; L. B. Smith, ‘Fosterage, Adoption, and God-Parenthood’; R. Nicholson, Scotland in the Later Middle Ages, p. 73; Goody, The Development of the Family, pp. 68–75; Richter, ‘The European Dimension of Irish History’, pp. 334–35. Richter points out how adoption crossed ethnic boundaries into Ireland. For the latter type of bond prevalent especially in rural communities see Genicot, Rural Communities in the Medieval West, p. 57. 33  G. Barrow, ‘Scotland, Wales, and Ireland’, p. 583. The significance of agnatic lineage and fosterage can be seen throughout Western Europe but the reliance on ‘the honour price’

10

Introduction

For example, the Anglo-French Vaux family were able form a close bond with the Scottish royal house when Robert de Vaux spent his early childhood in fosterage at the court of Earl Henry of Huntingdon. Even more significant to this study, David of Scotland’s fosterage at Henry I’s court in England drastically changed the political structure of Scotland for over a century.34 David’s early career in England reinvented the Scottish kingdom as a European power when he became King of Scotland in 1124. All of these different types of bonds were significant to the social fabric of medieval society and complemented political realities. Although conflict was not always the basis for agreement between kin groups, the fear of threat from a king or another lord was a significant motivating factor. Most alliances were formed for political survival even when peace was predominant at the time the agreement was made. Such political alignments could be likened to recent modelling on the structure and survival of viruses in the human body: Viruses can be envisaged as communities with diverse talents like humans or ants […] the community must defeat numerous host defences simultaneously in order to move through the body, replicate and jump to a new host […] this vision of a cooperative viral attack (could be weakened) […] when drugs that produce extra mutations can push viruses with high mutation rates over the edge […] (which in turn) makes the virus less aggressive.35

In this model, cooperative alliances, mutation and division of cell labour that assign tasks according to the specialized skills of each virus create a finely balanced overall virulence. The strength of this model is seen in the different types of partnerships that the aristocracy formed to great effect during the fratricidal contest between the sons of William the Conqueror, during the civil wars between Empress Matilda and King Stephen, and during the reign of Henry II, who struggled continuously against his sons and the kings of France and Scotland.36 (wergild) was particular at this time to Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and parts of Eastern Europe. 34  See Chapter 5 on the Vaux relationship with the Scottish crown. 35  Mackenzie, ‘Slow Copies Make Deadlier Viruses’. The ‘slow copy’ or gene is referring to a weak mutation, which actually make a far stronger virus because it represents a new strain. In political terms this could be represented by new and unforeseen alliances that catch the king offguard like the change of alliance of Guillaume des Roches and Robert d’Alençon in early 1203. The ‘less aggressive’ factor would come into play when the king was able to coalesce enough counter force via his own army and allies against his rivals who in turn have to submit or face political extinction. One of the most well-recognized recent genetic studies in the ‘family’ dynamics of ‘selfish’ gene activity can be found in Burt and Trivers, Genes in Conflict, pp. 1–18, 420–75. 36  Bachrach, ‘Henry II and the Angevin Tradition of Family Hostility’; R. V. Turner, ‘The

Sources and Context

11

Various families were able to survive and augment their positions during such crises because of the adaptability and division of resources offered by an extended kin-structure. In this way, kin groups acted as federations serving local interests and protecting members from external threats. However, this balance could be destabilized by the introduction of crown interference (or, if you will, in the viral model, drug therapy) and by encouragement of other external threats (rival families). Bond-formations and alliances were ultimately at the whim of shifting political tides. Converting an enemy into a friend had a ripple effect on the allies on each side, who had to quickly respond to changing loyalties.37 Matrimonial alliance was by far the most common type of agreement because it could be much stronger than a simple bond of friendship and it could end long-standing disputes. However, these familial affiliations could also be very dangerous to political stability. Even longstanding alliances between families could quickly become irrelevant and even more importantly affect families further down the social scale, who were bound to one or the other of the men near the top. Worse still, since alliances were often formed within a geographical or affinal proximity, these families could also find themselves confronted and pressured on a local level by others who had been forced to the opposing side. For this reason, part of this study has involved an examination of the locality and proximity of fees held by kin groups and by affinities. Examining territorial positions of families is extremely important particularly when taking into account the cross-Channel structure. Geographical proximity and land interests, often based on inheritance derived from matrimonial alliances, can indicate why specific families divided or united in their support towards one overlord or the other.38 Likewise, on a very basic level, men and women in the same areas often witnessed together, prayed together and fought together. When hostilities erupted, they knew the strengths and weaknesses of their neighbours and they would react accordingly.39 Problems of Survival’. 37  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 112–15. 38  Holt, ‘Politics and Property in Early Medieval England’. Holt’s work focuses particularly on the development of inheritance laws and the effects that inheritance could have on political affinities within a kin group. Daniel Power uses this approach to great effect in his recent works: Power, The Norman Frontier; Power, ‘The End of Angevin Normandy’. 39  Ohler, The Medieval Traveller, p. 97. In order to provide a frame of reference for travel speed, it must be noted that a medieval traveller on horseback could cover about thirty-five miles a day, depending on weather conditions and the terrain. It can be useful to understand the proximity of some of these families and their fees because matrimonial alliances often occurred between neighbours.

Introduction

12

Witness lists and registers are our first indicators about whether particular men with lands or familial relations in Scotland were also witnessing and administering lands and offices in France. Chronicles are also useful to understanding social responses and the reasons for particular conflicts between the crowns and between families while general prosopographical research provides a basic foundation for understanding familial networks. These latter works are not always reliable but I have tried to corroborate information that is circumspect by examining other sources like charters and chronicles. This type of approach is not without its weaknesses. Various relationships have been offered which cannot always be traced directly across the Channel, but they are conceivable based on surviving records. These suggestions are not meant to be final but are intended to invigorate historical debate and to incite more research about familial networks in the three kingdoms.

‘Auld Alliance’ Revisited Since the bond between the three kingdoms was so close based on familial networks one can see why to speak of the ‘Auld Alliance’ in the context of this work is misleading. The ‘Auld Alliance’ was representative of a period when the crowns of Scotland and France no longer shared an aristocratic structure and needed a legally binding document to spell out the nature of their relationship. By contrast, this work focuses on a period when relations between the kingdoms were intimate. Men and women held land and intermarried on both sides of the Channel and held fees of all three kings. Official, or diplomatic, alliances between the kingdoms are in many ways irrelevant because the intention here is to examine the role that the Anglo-French nobility played in interaction between the three kingdoms and not to focus primarily on the crowns. Nonetheless, the notion of the ‘Auld Alliance’ is important in that it seems to have come into being shortly after Anglo-French emigration into Scotland and it quickly became the stuff of legend. This was the case as early as the date of its first mention in 1295 when it was assumed to have existed for at least three centuries as a ‘confederation of the old friendship between the French and Scots’.40 Subsequent historiography about Franco-Scottish interaction has been dominated by this depiction of the alliance, and yet, a question remains as to whether the ‘old friendship’ was actually based on the tradition of an ancient union between these kingdoms still active in the thirteenth century or whether 40 

Paris, Arch. Nat., Franco-Écossais Traités, MS J 677, fol. 1.

Sources and Context

13

it was a phrase created in 1295 as propaganda to glorify and to authorize a new alliance forged during the Wars of Independence. One of the problems faced with tracing the historical relationship between France and Scotland is that prior to the tenth century most descriptions of the ‘Scoti’ were referring to the Irish, which has caused some confusion, particularly compounded by a twelfth-century fascination with the belief in an ancient affinity between the French and Scots. Within the historical context it is reasonable to suggest that there was an alliance of the Irish and Scottish inhabitants with the French in the ninth and tenth centuries considering that the Norse attacks in Brittany and France going as far as Tours and Chartres were also occurring in England, Scotland and, Ireland and these people would have naturally been pulled together into protective networks.41 However, contemporary evidence is sparse. On the basis of Einhard and Alcuin of York’s ninth-century accounts of Charlemagne’s embassy to the Scots, the English historian, William of Malmesbury, claimed in c. 1120 that emissaries had been sent from ‘Scotia’, which he interpreted as Scotland.42 Accustomed to interaction between the Scots and French in his own day, Malmesbury believed in an ancient FrancoScottish alliance despite that he failed to recognize that his early source was actually referring to the Irish ‘Scoti’.43 His interpretation of Alcuin and Einhard’s accounts established the notion of a Franco-Scottish alliance dating to the late eighth century that continued to dominate and misconstrue perceptions of the Scottish and French relationship for centuries to come.44 However, although Emperor Charlemagne’s biographer, Einhard, was certainly referring to the Irish ‘Scoti’,45 neither the Chronicum Scotorum nor other

41 

A. Smyth, ‘The Effect of Scandinavian Raiders on the English and Irish Churches’. William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 107; Allott, Alcuin of York, pp. 53–54; Einhard, Vita Karoli Magni, ed. by Waitz, p. 19; Einhard, Vie de Charlemagne, ed. and trans. by Halphen, pp. 46–47. 43  J. Barrow, ‘William of Malmesbury’s Use of Charters’. Julia Barrow has pointed out that Malmesbury also fabricated or embellished material and can be found ‘pulling the reader’s leg’, but there is no reason to believe he intentionally fabricated contact between Charlemagne and the Scoti. 44  Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, viii, 74. In the late twelfth century, Gerald of Wales also mentioned that the King of Scots did homage to Charlemagne. 45  Einhard, Vita Karoli Magni, ed. by Waitz, p. 19; Einhard, Vie de Charlemagne, ed. and trans. by Halphen, pp. 46–47. Later chroniclers in France relying on Einhard remained con42 

14

Introduction

Irish sources mentioned a Franco-Irish alliance.46 Some of the Irish ‘Scoti’ had settled in Argyll and the Western Isles and remained part of the same political community extending to Ireland so the confusion is understandable. Further inconsistency also arises because the Scots were also cohabiting on the northern mainland with the Picts by the early ninth-century so in reality the difference between Scot and Pict was less clear by the time of Charlemagne’s reign.47 Following these loose references to ‘Scoti’ contact with the French, the four­­teenth-century writer, John of Fordun, was the first Scottish chronicler to directly mention any relationship between a specified King of the Scots, Achaius, and Charlemagne, and he was probably relying on an earlier tradition written in about 1247.48 This earlier tradition developed at a time when the Scottish and French courts were in direct contact because of the King of Scots’ marriage to Marie de Coucy, the daughter of one of the most powerful families in France. Even more importantly, Marie may have been responsible for the fabrication of Achaius and the revival of the belief in early Franco-Scottish contact so that she could promote the image of her own union with the Scottish royal

fused between the Irish and Scots: Les grandes chroniques de France, ed. by Viard, iii, 133: The monks of St Denis related that in 812 a sailor called Normant (possibly alluding to a random ‘northman’) arrived on an isle of the sea that was not an island, probably Argyll (certainly not Ireland which is an island), and ‘he journeyed to Scotland and combated the people of that region, but the Danes were defeated and held back from further mischief ’. 46  Chronicum Scotorum, ed. and trans. by Hennessey; Annals of Ulster, ed. by Hennessy and MacCarthy, i; Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland, ed. and trans. by O’Donovan, i. 47  Broun, Scottish Independence and the Idea of Britain, pp. 72–79; Broun, ‘Pictish Kings 761–839’. 48  John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 127–28; Bonner, ‘Scotland’s “Auld Alliance” with France’. In the sixteenth century, Hector Boece and George Buchanan immortalized and encouraged the proliferation of the myth, which was not called into question until the eighteenth century by Father Thomas Innes. Elizabeth Bonner sees some merit in the origin myth of the alliance between King Achaius and Charlemagne based on an 1120 charter of the abbey of Absie regarding the ‘land of a Scot’. She introduces the possibility that the charter was confirming a grant having been made roughly during the period of Charlemagne’s reign. Bernard Mathieu and Noelle Gand de Vernon in 1956 also claimed in the France-Écosse exposition that the story is also found in the Chronicle of Nicholas Trivet written about 1305 for Edward I’s daughter Marie but I have been unable to locate such a reference in the Paris manuscript and this chronicle is too late to support a date any earlier than the twelfth century. Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Fr. 9687 [Dicoviencent les cronicles Frère Nichol Trivet escrit a ma dame Marie la fille mounseignour le roi d’Engleterre Edward le Filtz Henri]; Cf. Dean, ‘The Manuscripts of Nicholas Trevet’s Anglo-French Chronicles’.

Sources and Context

15

house. It was for this reason that she may have hired a Champenois immigrant at her court, called Richard Vairemont, to write a history for her.49 The most significant point to be made about the tracing of the early alliance is that possibly by 1120, whether legend or not, there was a belief in the prior existence of a Franco-Scottish alliance despite that this legend was being encouraged at a time when the Scots were only just beginning to be directly involved with the Ile-de-France. These claims were mainly coming from sources in England and Scotland but the French were also becoming more interested in the Anglo-French who had settled in Scotland namely because some of the settlers were related to them. By the late twelfth century, Scottish places and heroes were appearing in the trendy romances of the day not only because Scotland was the birth-place of some of the Arthurian materials but also because kin groups extended from France to Scotland. Early discussions about the alliance were, in fact, representative of the extent of Anglo-French migration into Scotland and remark upon how intimate communication was between men and women on both sides of the Channel following the Norman conquest of England in 1066.

Written Sources and Scotland This work relies on documents and correspondences from all three kingdoms — Scotland, England, and France — in order to recreate the Anglo-French experience in the late twelfth century. Understanding the ties that bound this society together may elucidate why the loss of Normandy in 1204 made such a profound impact on subsequent developments between the three kingdoms. However, the number of surviving sources for the crown of England far outweigh surviving sources for the crowns of Scotland and France in the twelfth century, which has often in current historiography created a very Anglo-centred interpretation of events.50 In the case of France, this problem was caused primarily by a lack of centralization in the royal administration and the disparateness of the French kingdom prior to the reign of Philip Augustus. King Philip increased royal authority and possessions in France over the course of his reign by asserting his direct overlordship in territories that had been alienated and/or allowed autonomy under 49  Broun, Scottish Independence and the Idea of Britain, pp. 260–61. Vairmont is probably referring to Dommartin-Varimont which was in the midst of Coucy networks with the Dampierre family. 50  Vincent, ‘Les Normands de l’entourage d’Henri II Plantagenêt’, p. 79.

16

Introduction

his predecessors. Unfortunately, the early years of Philip’s reign were lost to posterity when Philip suffered the humiliating loss of his baggage train to King Richard in 1194.51 From the surviving records, it is clear, however, that as Philip began to expand the royal demesne, he experimented with administrative techniques, sometimes borrowing from structures already in use in Normandy (like registers depicting knight service and fees under royal control), while in other cases he devised new and innovative methods to meet the needs of an ever-expanding kingdom.52 Furthermore, although crown records may not be as forthcoming as desired prior to 1194, there are remarkable collections of charters housed within the ecclesiastical establishments that elucidate bonds formed on a more localized level in areas like the Vendôme, Maine, Champagne, Brittany, and, of course, Normandy and Anjou.53 The kingdom of Scotland has a number of surviving royal charters for the reigns of King David, Malcolm, and William but specifics about royal centralization like assizes, knights’ fees, and feudal dues were rarely committed to writing or have not survived.54 Ecclesiastical records are also virtually non-existent before 1124. The royal records were seriously damaged and much was lost dur-

51  William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, ii, 118–21; Hollister and Baldwin, ‘The Rise of Administrative Kingship’. 52  Baldwin, ‘Qu’est-ce que les Capétiens ont appris des Plantegenêt?’; Baldwin, The Gov­ ernment of Philip Augustus, pp. 37–58, 137–75, 220–303; Hollister and Baldwin, ‘The Rise of Administrative Kingship’, pp. 894–905. The latter study also reflects the function of this crossChannel elite in the King’s administration of England and Normandy as men appeared as witnesses and administrators on both sides of the Channel. 53  Chartes et documents de l’abbaye de Saint-Magloire, ed. by Teroine and Fossier, pp. 53–71; Cartulaire de Saint-Victeur au Mans, ed. by de Broussillon; Cartulaire de l’abbaye du Ronceray, ed. by de Broussillon, pp. 35, 68, 85, 90, 95–96, 105, 109, 137, 167, 174, 190, 201, 218, 257–58, 264–68, 278, 279–80, 282, 283, 288–89, 294–384. The Angevin charters at Ronçeray reflect a sophisticated understanding of accounting for the abbey. Morelle, ‘The Metamorphosis of Three Monastic Charter Collections’; Recueil des pancartes de l’abbaye de La Ferté-sur-Grosne, ed. by Duby; Guillot, ‘A propos de la qualite litteraire’, pp. 25–39 and Martin, ‘Note sur la “litterature” coutumiere Angevine’, pp. 40–49. 54  See Broun, The Charters of Gaelic Scotland and Ireland for a comparison between Irish, Welsh and Scottish administrative documents. Because Scotland was more unified by the twelfth century, the Scottish royal chancery quickly overtook Irish charter production, but the Irish did have an older tradition in other forms of writing. See Alice Taylor, ‘Leges Scocie and the Law Codes’ about the early assizes that have survived in writing. It is clear that legal procedures existed well before these reigns but relied heavily on traditons and customs handled within

Sources and Context

17

ing the Wars of Independence when Edward I removed a number of the official records to England; however, there also did not appear to be as much interest in the written instrument in Scotland.55 Out of the eight hundred rolls lost at the end of the thirteenth century only a handful were from before the end of the reign of Alexander III in 1286 and, as will be shortly discussed, political treatises, philosophical/theological discourses, letters, poetry, and epic or romance literature were few and far between.56 The Scottish administration was not as bureaucratically focused prior to 1124 but it did not necessarily need to be considering her population density and geographical size. It may be argued that a decrease in notarial production under the eleventh and early twelfth-century Capetian rulers occurred for a similar reason. Territorial contraction led to a weakening of the reliance on written documents because there were fewer relationships to define. The Capetian kings only held nominal sway over outlying regions. However, unlike the response to decentralization in Scotland, the lack of royal centralization in France was met with administrative procedures handled increasingly by the local courts of the counts, dukes and bishops.57 For this reason, the French historian has a wealth of materials — charters, agreements and deeds — emitted from each county, duchy and bishopric outside the Ile-de-France.

smaller communities. This is why the comparison is made with France in the tenth and eleventh centuries. Without royal centralization, local communities enforced moral/legal, judicial and ‘feudal’ codes to keep the peace. Taylor has demonstrated that there are more assizes that can be assigned to the reigns of William and Alexander II than previously thought. It also seems the king’s court was detailing feudal service and even the royal prerogative to handle cases involving murder and blood feuds that had previously been handled within communities. These issues were being regularized from the late twelfth century onward. 55  Hughes, ‘Where are the Writings of Early Scotland?’; The Triumph Tree, ed. by Clancy and others, pp. 144–45, 158–63, 178–86, 188–89, 236–84; Broun, Scottish Independence and the Idea of Britain, pp. 54–61, 233–68. A handful of Gaelic poems have survived prior to the twelfth-century Renaissance but even these seem to have been mainly generated from Ireland. There are also a few Latin verses from the end of the eleventh century and a reworking of the Historia Brittonum in Gaelic. 56  B. Webster, Scotland from the Eleventh Century to 1603, pp. 121–24; M. Livingstone, A Guide to the Public Records of Scotland, p. 33; Exchequer Rolls of Scotland, ed. by Stuart and Burnett, i, 1–51; Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, ed. by Innes and Thomson, i, 113–18; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Neville and Simpson, iv. 1, passim. 57  The church was in decline in Scotland prior to the reign of Malcolm III’s sons which probably had a lot to do with the lack of local records.

Introduction

18

Overall, even compared to her affiliates in Wales, Ireland, and Brittany,58 Scotland did not appear to be as interested in written records.59 For example, the only surviving contemporary chronicle source originating from Scotland, covering the period before the reign of David I, is the Chronicle of the Kings of Alba, which has survived in a late twelfth- or early thirteenth-century copy, and it was based on an early eleventh-century Irish account.60 A few other texts have survived which may have been generated from Strathclyde or Edinburgh (Briton settlements),61 and at Iona in the Hebrides,62 but significantly, records about Iona and the kings of the Picts are mainly due to ‘Scottic’ Irish, Welsh 58 

Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’. Although the concept of ‘Celtic’ should be limited in its usage, it does capture the basic premise of some shared cultural traditions. 59  Pryce, ‘Lawbooks and Literacy’; Koch, ‘Why Was Welsh Literature First Written Down?’; J. Smith, ‘Oral and Written’; W. Davies, ‘Celtic Kingships in the Early Middle Ages’, p. 105. Wendy Davies points out that Cornish and Scottish sources were consistently poor compared to their ‘Celtic’ neighbours of Ireland, Wales, and Brittany. Between the ninth and twelfth centuries, the ongoing written communication and literary exchange between Wales and Brittany is well-documented by the surviving Vitae of Saint Guénolé (Winwaloe), Saint Pol Aurelian, Saint Samson, Saint Corentin, Saint Brieuc and Saint Tudual in Brittany: Flobert, ‘Le témoignage du rédacteur de la Vie Ancienne de Saint Samson; Merdrignac, ‘Henoc, les Philosophi et Pental’; Simon, ‘Les hagiographes de Landevennec’; Piriou, ‘Quelques remarques à propos de l’ancien mystère de Saint-Gwénolé’; le Moing, ‘Saint Winniau et Saint-Uniac’. 60  See Broun, ‘Pictish Kings 761–839’, p. 72: Some materials may have originated from Alecross and Iona in the eighth century but nothing after. Cf. Woolf, From Pictland to Alba, pp. 177–350, 357–59 and Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, i, xxii–ci for the sources and the period. Alex Woolf points out that our most reliable primary sources for the period are English, Norse and Irish in origin. Our main source for the period before the reign of Kenneth II is the early eleventh-century Chronicle of the Kings of Alba: Chronicle of the Picts and Scots, ed. by Skene, pp. xvii–lxxiv, 130–41, 144–45, 148–52 (De Situ, a Legend of St Andrew, and genealogy of King William date to the late twelfth century). There may be a few surviving translations of other works in additions to the Historia Brittonum dated 1072 and in the Chronicle of Marianus Scotus. 61 

Gododdin, ed. and trans. by Jackson, pp. 4–8, 11–13, 63–67, 76–78, 137, 140, 147; Evans, The Heroic Poetry of Dark-Age Britain, pp. 31–34, 65–75, 86–87; Padel, ‘A New Study of the Gododdin’; Wmffre, ‘Mynydawc – Ruler of Edinburgh?’. Wmffre suggests Mynydawc was not the ruler of Edinburgh but does not deny that Edinburgh held a prominent place in the poem and in the sixth-century wars against the Saxons. The earliest surviving manuscript copy of Y Gododdin was from the thirteenth century but was probably based on a written tradition dating back to the sixth century. The problem is that the dating of the poem is inconclusive. The weight of scholarly opinion currently argues in favour of a date no earlier than the tenth century: Isaac, ‘Gweith Gwen Ystrat’; Dumville, ‘Early Welsh Poetry’. 62  Bannerman, ‘Notes on the Scottish Entries in the Early Irish Annals’.

Sources and Context

19

and Bernician accounts found in Bede’s History of the English People, in the Annals of Ulster and in the Annals of Tigernach.63 The majority of information to be gathered issued not from Scotland but from Ireland, England, Wales, and Scandinavia, which is problematic. Scotland did not have a long tradition of written communication though recent archaeological work on stone slabs and stone carvings has shown that early Scottish society was not entirely illiterate.64 This is corroborated by the eighth-century Anglo-Saxon historian, Bede, who referred to a revival in learning during the reign of King Nechtan of the Picts.65 He ascribed Nechtan with ‘frequent meditation of ecclesiastical writing’; however, it may be that Nechtan could not read or write Latin or even his native tongues, Gaelic and Pictish. He may have had members of his court read and discuss scripture with him.66 This would explain why in Bede’s account of Nechtan, Abbot Ceolfrith’s letter was read aloud and then translated into Nechtan’s native tongue. More­over, there is also no indication that the King’s Pictish or Gaelic clerics could necessarily read or write. Bede relates that King Nechtan decreed that the Roman dating of Easter be ‘sent publicly’ and then ‘transcribed, learned and observed’, which suggests that many clerics could not read and that they relied upon a verbal explanation.67 The transcription of such decrees may have been carried out by Anglo-Saxon immigrants at Nechtan’s court and not by native clerics just as Anglo-French clerics brought from England or the Continent seem to have handled much of the charter production in Scotland in the twelfth century. In both historical cases, the reformation of ‘Scottish’ society was for the express purpose of aligning Alba with the rest of Europe and it may have been initiated and carried out by non-native immigrants. A failure to rely upon written records does not mean that Scotland was without leadership nor that local potentates (in Strathclyde, Moray, or Cumbria)

63 

Woolf, ‘AU 729.2 and the Last Years of Nechtan mac Der-Ilei’. See Forsyth, ‘Literacy in Pictland’ for the most updated assessment of the role of the Pictish language and the church prior to 900 ad. 65  Bede, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. by Colgrave and Mynors, V. 21, pp. 532–33. Bede said it was through that the reform of the Pictish Church was initiated. 66  Bede, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. by Colgrave and Mynors, pp. 534–36, 552–53; Clancy, ‘Philosopher-King’. Clancy has convincingly shown that Nechtan was born of a Cenél-Comgaill father and a Pictish mother from the kingdom of Fortriu, which as Alex Woolf argues, was located on the Moray Firth in Badenoch: Woolf, ‘AU 729.2 and the Last Years of Nechtan mac Der-Ilei’. 67  Bede, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. by Colgrave and Mynors, pp. 552–53. 64 

Introduction

20

did not recognize the Scottish king’s overlordship;68 nor does it mean that oral literacy did not hold intrinsic value as a form of political influence,69 but it may be argued that a kingdom without such instruments could not expand and compete against those who had become more complex because of the freedom afforded by the adoption of written authority. This authority was important. The writing of a claim proposed to its audience a value-judgement that could vilify or condemn an oral account. For example, Robert Wace condemned the Breton oral tradition about the fountain of Barenton in Brocéliande: ‘I went there in search of marvels; I saw the forest and the land and looked for marvels, but found none. I came back as a fool and went as a fool […].’70 By writing about his experience, Wace created a sense of uncertainty about the supposed powers that the fountain was said to have possessed. Similarly, the granting of fees by a king did not necessarily mean that the recipient or the king held power over the lands particularly in territories that the king did not control. Actual possession — seizing and conquering the land and its inhabitants — was necessary for such authority to be recognized but the grant in a written form represented an initial step towards establishing real control of the land for both parties.71 The failure of the kings of Scots to centralize their authority through charter production and to interact with legal discourse at an earlier stage, as had been occurring in other European kingdoms, may have been why the Scots were initially slower to adopt written forms of social and political intercourse and why they did not become as fully involved in the twelfth-century Renaissance movement.72 It is difficult not to recognize this fundamental difference between attitudes towards the centralising effects of administration via the written word as a form of political preservation and historical memory in England and France in com68 

See Grant, ‘Lordship and Society’ for an excellent and recent study on a regional structure of power in Scotland that was ‘Normanized’ by as much as sixty-eight per cent. 69  Chinca and Young, ‘Orality and Literacy in the Middle Ages’. The insinuation that letters and official documents may have been read aloud is evidenced through literature as well: Brandsma, ‘The Presentation of Direct Discourse in Arthurian Romances’. Although Brandsma was addressing the oral recitation of romances, that Lancelot’s letter was read aloud to the court at the order of the king in order to avoid any misunderstandings suggests that it was politically prudent to adopt this practice when the political situation was volatile. 70  Robert Wace, Roman de Rou, ed. by Holden, ii, 121–22, ll. 6389–98. 71  Foot, ‘Reading Anglo-Saxon Charters’. 72  Political treatises, letters, poetry and romance writing, hallmarks of the twelfth-century Renaissance, appear few and far between in Scotland.

Sources and Context

21

parison to the lack of such in Scotland. France in particular had a long tradition going back to Merovingian and Carolingian times in which authority and rule were augmented and asserted through a royal bureaucracy reliant upon the written word, which meant that even during a period of royal decentralization, local agents like the counts and bishops recognized the merit of the written word and filled the gap. By comparison, the lay attitude in Scotland towards the written word trickled very slowly down into the earldoms and baronies where few charters were generated for and by the nobility before the reign of King William I ‘the Lion’,73 grandson of David I, nearly half a century after the royal court of King David I had introduced charters as a means of depicting land-ownership.74 Nor were the nobiles homines patronising great literary works to elevate the dignity of their forebears amongst the European elite; a tradition appearing as early as the eleventh century under the patronage of the illustrious Angevin and Norman houses.75

73 

John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 259; ii, 254–55. The fourteenth-century chronicler, John of Fordun, was the first to dub William the ‘lion of justice’. He was not called ‘the Lion’ in any contemporary twelfth-century account unlike similar sobriquets associated with King Henry I of England who was called the ‘lion of justice’ by Geoffrey of Monmouth or Richard I who was described as ‘that most foul lion’ when he responded to the rising up of the Greeks in Sicily against him during the Third Crusade: Geoffrey of Monmouth, The History of the Kings of Britain, trans. by Thorpe, p. 174; Richard of Devizes, De Rebus Gestis Ricardi Primi, ed. by Howlett, iii, 397: ‘[…] leo ille teterrimus’. 74  The scarcity of charters generated for and by the nobility before about 1200 can be easily viewed online through the AHRC-funded Charter project at Glasgow University supervised by Dauvit Broun. Cf. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record, pp. 103–13, 294–99 for registers; Andrew Taylor, ‘Manual to Miscellany’. The most notable collections that capture pre-1200 non-royal activity are in the south at Kelso Abbey, Dryburgh Abbey, and Melrose Abbey. There was a boom in charter production during William’s reign. 75  Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts; William of Poitiers, Gesta, ed. by Davis and Chibnall; Dudo of St Quentin, History of the Normans, ed. and trans. by Chistiansen; Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou; Chroniques des comtes d’Anjou, ed. by Halphen and Poupardin; Chroniques des comtes d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Salmon; Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. and trans. by Campbell, pp. xxii–xxix, lxvi–lxxx; Blacker, The Faces of Time, pp. 15–16, 32, 49, 59, 106–08, 113–14, 183–90; Damien-Grint, The New Historians of the Twelfth-Century Renais­­sance, pp. 19–20, 43, 60–01, 110–12, 204, 214–16. Although not intended to be a panegyric of the Norman house, Queen Emma of England, who had commissioned Encomium Emmae Reginae, was Norman, which inadvertently served the purpose of elevating the dignity of the Norman dynasty and, furthermore, she provided the blood relationship within the house for William, her nephew, to claim the English throne in 1066.

Introduction

22

Even King David I, whose sister, Queen Maud, had commissioned a panegyric about their mother, Margaret, did not employ a writer to elevate his own royal roots in a Saxon or Scottish tradition,76 nor was he influenced by his sister and niece’s patronage of their holy predecessor, Ida of Boulogne.77 Despite spending his formative years with his sister and her Anglo-French husband, David was not overtly influenced by the trend in familial guardianship and political expressionism though he may have been personally interested in other forms of writing, more specifically, in philosophical works that were fashionable elsewhere.78 The king and his men were slow to adopt many written forms of expression, which means that the historian has less information about Scotland that was written from a ‘Scottish’ viewpoint. What can be said is that Scottish interaction with Anglo-French lords brought Scotland more into line with the rest of Europe and increased the production of written documents from what had been available before. This was clearly the case during the reign of David I, which gained momentum during the reign of William I.79

76 

Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van  Houts, i, lxxxvi–viii; ii, 241–43, 245–48; Van Houts, Memory and Gender, pp. 71, 73–75; Weiler, ‘William of Malmesbury on Kingship’. The Empress had followed her mother’s example and may have tried to engage Robert de Torigni to write a Life about her mother as part of a broader scheme to legitimize her and her heir’s right to the throne of England, which was partially successful. Baker, ‘A Nursery of Saints’. It has also been suggested that the Life was dedicated to David I based on William of Malmesbury’s career, but Malmesbury was less than favourable to David’s sister. He described her as easily swayed by the flattery of foreigners and overgenerous to the point that she was corrupt and prodigal with her tenants. This would not make sense if the work was intended for David: William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 754–57. 77  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 261–85, 344. The Vita S. Idae was written between 1118 and 1130 and focused on Mary’s Saxon and Scottish heritage. She was praised in her epitaph as ‘kind, upright in character, and dwelling in heaven’. The family had also received attention in an even earlier account written in about 1082. Ecclesiastical writers continued to be fascinated by the Boulonnais family because of their importance in the crusading movement but the Scottish identity of the lineage did not become prominent until the fifteenth century. 78  Glasgow, UL, GB 0247 MS Hunter 279, U.5.19 [Boethius, De Consolatione Philosophiae]. 79  Taylor, ‘Leges Scocie’, pp. 207–88. King William transformed the Scottish legal system by holding parliaments and issuing assises more often than any of his predecessors. By the end of the thirteenth-century, Scotland was, albeit on a smaller scale, handling legal procedures more regularly and in much the same way as other European powers.

Sources and Context

23

Scotland and the Late Twelfth-Century Literary Movement Interest in the written word and the importation of ideas from the Continent paved the way for a new interest in belles lettres but the majority of the literary movement that did take place in Scotland was conservative and initiated by the Scottish crown and by the Church. In the late twelfth century, Anglo-French and French bishops in particular played an important role in preserving oral tra­­­ ditions about Scottish saints. This is where it is clear that the Anglo-French and French nobility did make an impact on Scottish literature. They began to patronize the image of saints based on oral traditions associated with their territories so that they could, like the king, elevate their status and the status of their diocese in the kingdom.80 They were responsible for rekindling a spiritual movement in favour of the ancient Romano-Gaelic roots that had existed for centuries within different regions as oral traditions. The timing of this movement insinuates an Anglo-French influence since these legends began to appear in writing in the mid-twelfth century, within a generation of the French arrival and, most notably, the bishops behind the movement were usually of AngloFrench stock. For example, St Kentigern (St Mungo) made a revival in the late twelfth century under the patronage of the Anglo-French bishop, Jocelyn of Glasgow, who also commissioned a Life of St Waltheof and the Chronicle of Melrose, the latter which was one of the few historical records about Scotland for this period.81 The Life of St Waltheof was important because it was probably commissioned for the purpose of impressing King William of Scotland, to whom the Life was dedicated. Not only was Waltheof the great half-uncle of William but he had also risen to prominence and become a symbol for Scottish resistance at York when, in 1140, William’s grandfather, King David, tried to force the appointment of his stepson, Waltheof, to the archbishopric against King Stephen’s candidate.82 80 

Alice Taylor, ‘Historical Writing in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Scotland’. The first example was the Vita S. Margarete written by Turgot about King Malcolm III’s Queen, Margaret, granddaughter of Edmund ‘Ironside’, King of England. The Dunfermline compila­­ tion seems to have been written between 1249 and 1285, which also has an early example of the Vita. This compilation does stress the Anglo-Saxon roots of the royal Scottish family. 81  Jocelin of Furness, Vita sancti Waldeni, ed. by Bolland, pp. 241–47; Broun, Scottish Inde­ pendence and the Idea of Britain, pp. 124–28, 136–46. His predecessor, Bishop Herbert, had pat­­ronized an earlier work on Kentigern that set the wheels in motion. Also see Chapter 2 about Waltheof. 82  Waltheof was denied the archbishopric and he died in 1159/60 as abbot of Melrose Abbey.

Introduction

24

It was certainly in King William’s interest to promote the image of his half-uncle, who had become a religious cult-figure, particularly in the 1170s (the period in which the work was undertaken) when he was fighting for his rights in northern England against King Henry II of England. He could hardly ignore the impact that royal ties to a sacred lineage could have on the popular imagination. Henry II was also a master of royal imagery. He had been using this type of royal-saint imagery to great effect during the canonization of Edward the Confessor between 1161 and 1163 when he claimed he was descended from Edward.83 Aelred of Rievaulx, who had spent many years at King David’s court, was sufficiently impressed by the English King’s claim that he commented that Henry was, because of this relationship, able to unite the Norman and English people.84 On the other side of the Channel, at the same time as the translation of Edward the Confessor to Westminster, Henry had also sanctified his Norman line at Holy Trinity of Fécamp, an important centre of ducal power, by moving the bodies of Dukes Richard I and Richard II behind the high altar when, it was said, a vial was found believed to contain the blood of Christ that had been hidden in a column by the venerated Duke Richard I.85 King William of Scotland could not have been ignorant of his rival’s success in empowering his image through his forebears particularly since William was also in contact with the same Anglo-French networks. Noticeably, though, these materials were not ‘Normanized’ because the intent was to create a connection between the Anglo-French and native traditions in Scotland. It would also have been difficult to separate the traditions since a lot of the existing materials, not only in Scotland but also in France and in England, borrowed heavily from a multiplicity of sources. Parts of the mythologized Life of St Kentigern (the saint was even claimed to have been the great-nephew of King Arthur),

83 

Theilmann, ‘Political Canonization’; Scholz, ‘The Canonization of Edward the Con­ fessor’. St Waltheof of Melrose is not to be confused with his grandfather, the Anglo-Danish Waltheof of Northumbria, whose Life was the precursor of the legend of Beowulf and the dra­ gon: Rauer, Beowulf and the Dragon, pp. 126–33; O’Donoghue, Old Norse-Icelandic Literature, pp. 143–48. 84  Ailred of Rievaulx, Vita S. Edwardi, ed. by Migne, pp. 738, 774: ‘[…] in extremis agentem didicimus designasse, in quem velut lapidem angularem Anglici generis et Normannici gaudemus duos parietes convenisse’ (‘in the end he was designating you the agent, the corner stone at which two walls meet, the English and the Norman people, we rejoice’). Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 149–50. 85  Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 151–52.

Sources and Context

25

Life of Saint-Malo,86 Life of Saint-Gildas, Life of Saint-Judicaël, Chrétien de Troyes’ Yvain, the Tristan romances, and the works by Geoffrey of Monmouth and Robert Wace exemplify some of the difficulties with thematic origins. They were all relying on Scottish, Irish, Welsh and Breton sources that had evolved from one another over centuries.87 Cross-textual borrowing was commonplace thus these legends appear in similar forms over different territories. For example, the location of the Briton seat at ‘Mynydd Eidyn’ mentioned in Y Gododdin can also be corroborated in the Black Book of Carmarthen and in Vita Cadoci (late eleventh century) as ‘Mynyd Bannawc’ in Middle Welsh even though the exact location is as yet undecided with possibilities ranging from Edinburgh to the Highlands.88 King William was the first King of Scots to see the merit in commissioning works that lifted his family’s genealogy out of a predominantly oral tradition. He patronized a compilation that glorified his ancestral pedigree going back to Fergus mac Erc, the founder of Dal Riata.89 This genealogy reinvented social memory and was used to legitimize his kingship, particularly over his Gaelic subjects in the north against whom he struggled to assert his authority. This was particularly important because he, his brother and his grandfather had 86 

Selmer, ‘The Beginnings of the Saint Brendan Legend’. Saint Malo seems to have been confused with Saint Brendan by the ninth century. 87  MacQuarrie, The Saints of Scotland, pp. 115–44; Bartlett, ‘Cults of Irish, Scottish, and Welsh Saints’; Brockington, ‘Discovery in the Morrois’; R. E. Bennett, ‘Arthur and Gorlagen’; C. Loomis, ‘The Ring of Polycrates’. Some of the Gaelic influence seems to have been directly reinvented on the Continent based on the Irish Táin Bó Cúailnge, the Voyages of Bran and St Brendan, and perhaps an earlier version of the Life of St Kentigern that has not survived. The Historia Brittonum’s contribution of the wandering madman (Ambrosius Aurelius — the precursor to Geoffrey’s Merlin) is also evident in this historicization process about Britain on the Continent in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia and Chrétien’s Yvain. For Norse and French disseminations see the recent study: Rauer, Beowulf and the Dragon, passim. 88  Wmffre, ‘Mynydawc – Ruler of Edinburgh?’, pp. 95–99. The Black Book manuscript is from the thirteenth century but based on material believed to date back to the ninth century. 89  Broun, ‘The Seven Kingdoms in De Situ Albanie’; Bannerman, ‘The King’s Poet’; Woolf, From Pictland to Alba, p. 89; Broun, The Irish Identity of the Kingdom of the Scots. Dauvit Broun’s emphasis on royal lineages going back to Ireland in kingship lists is quite interesting considering, as he pointed out, that most of these lists were probably written by non-native clerics. This suggests that the king commanded the list be written and by foreigners probably at his court. Cf. Innes, ‘Memory, Orality and Literacy’ and Broun, ‘Gaelic Literacy in Eastern Scotland’ for detailed examinations of the more recent historiographical ideas concerning orality and social memory and how significant the written word could be in disseminating ideas among different classes and social groups.

Introduction

26

alienated native support in outlying regions. Recreating the image of his native roots could be used to form a sense of common purpose with his native subjects, which would also reinforce crown rights. Despite that the crown of Scotland and a handful of their Anglo-French clerics initiated a literary movement in Scotland, the Anglo-French Scottish lords did not, like their king, become involved in familial panegyric until much later.90 This is surprising in that they came from families who sponsored works in France as early as the eleventh century. By contrast, native noble families began to participate in the literary movement by the early thirteenth century in a form of panegyric not based on the Continental model. This movement interestingly occurred when native families were supposedly becoming more ‘Normanized’, which suggests that the process of Normanization may have insti­­ gated a drive to patronize works that glorified their endemic past, thereby preserving the historical memory of the kin group.91 It is hard to explain why Anglo-French lords in Scotland did not respond to the king’s model or to other intellectual movements that they must have been aware of through contact with their Anglo-French contemporaries. For example, John de Courcy was an Anglo-French Irish lord who recognized the potential of utilising a written panegyric of a popular ‘local’ figure to augment his authority in a recently acquired and distant lordship.92 He hired Jocelyn of Furness, the author of the Scottish Life of St Kentigern, to write a Life of 90 

John Barbour’s The Bruce was written in the 1380s for the Stewart kings so falls under royal patronage like that of William the Lion in the late twelfth century. The Buke of the Howlat about the Douglas family is the first explicit example of this genre outside of royal patronage in Scotland. English families did not begin to openly patronize this form of familial history until the early thirteenth century with the History of William Marshal, Gui de Warewic and Gesta Fulke fitzWarine. The Gesta Herwardi written in the first part of the twelfth century is one exception. This latter work was probably patronized either by someone in Hereward’s fam­­ily (said to be related to Count Ralph the Staller, father of Ralph-de-Gaël de Montfort) or at least by an Englishman from the Lincolnshire area who was proud of Hereward’s fight against the Normans. Gui de Warwick may have been patronized by a member of the Arden family of Warwick who also had a branch that may have settled in Scotland (see Chapter 2). Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis, in Geoffrey Gaimar, Lestorie des Engles, ed. by Hardy and Martin, i, 339–41; Richard Holland, The Buke of the Howlat, ed. by Laing, pp. xxx–xxiv; Stewart, ‘Holland’s Howlat’; Riddy, ‘Dating the Book of the Howlat’. 91  Skene, Celtic Scotland, iii, 117–19, 454–55; Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’; Ní Úrdail, ‘Two Poems’; Hillers, ‘Poet or Magician’. The few notable examples of men interested in literary patronage like the earls of Lennox and the Lords of the Isles and Man were strongly rooted in this Gaelic world. 92  Sharpe, Medieval Irish Saints’ Lives, pp. 209–10.

Sources and Context

27

St Patrick as a means to assert his lordship and to legitimize his grant of a monastic site at Nendrum in County Down to St Bees.93 John de Courcy was part of a cross-Channel familial network that spread from Scotland and the Isle of Man to Ireland, England and Normandy. His uncle or father, William II de Courcy (d. 1171–1175), and his cousin or brother, William III, continued serving the king in France for their Norman fees as late as 1204,94 and they also regularly witnessed for King Henry II on the Continent in the late twelfth century.95 John’s interest in establishing ecclesiastical foundations throughout his territories in England and Ireland was based on his family’s extensive patronage of the orders in a kin-network reaching from northern Scotland to Normandy. However, this network did not seem to affect extended kin-networks in Scotland through his de Courcy and Remilly kin and through his wife, Affrica of Man, although it may have helped him receive aid in Ireland from Duncan of Galloway/Carrick in 1197.96 93 

MacQuarrie, ‘The Career of St Kentigern of Glasgow’, p. 4. Jocelyn probably settled at Down in about 1185. St Bees had been founded by the Meschin family, to whom he was related through either his father or uncle, William II de Courcy: William married Avice de Remilly, daughter of William Meschin and Cecily de Remilly. Avice and William de Courcy may even have been John’s parents but the geneaology is not entirely clear. Flanders, De Courcy, pp. 51–69; S. Duffy, ‘The First Ulster Plantation’, pp. 4–5. 94  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 169, 227; ii, cclxxx, 498, 627, 799; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 e–d, 616 j, 618 l, 684 c, 707 b. The Courcy fee in Calvados should not be confused with Courcy-sur-Dives in the Poitou-Charente region. John’s family’s fees were at Courcy (thirteen kilometres northeast of Falaise) and at Écajeul. 95  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 35, 40, 43, 44, 85, 87, 88, 90, 95. Hugh I de Lacy also witnessed regularly for King Henry. 96  See Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 25 for Irish aid. Cf. Flanders, De Courcy, pp. 130–31, 155–56, 158–65; S. Duffy, ‘The First Ulster Plantation’, pp. 6–12 about John de Courcy’s networks. John de Courcy, Earl of Ulster, had a number of contacts with Scottish families by marriage. He was also a benefactor of Furness Abbey, which had links with Ulster because John had formed his abbey at Inch as a daughter-house of Furness and he also brought Scotland into the equation by establishing a house of Praemonstratensians at Carrickfergus that was subject to Dryburgh Abbey in the Scottish Borders. St Bees had been founded by his Meschin kin so John was carrying on the traditions associated with ecclesiastical patronage in the kin group. Early Yorkshire Charters, The Honour of Warenne, viii, 28–31. John de Courcy’s kinswoman by marriage, Gundreda de Warenne, was the niece of Ada, who married King David of Scotland’s son, Henry, and her grandmother was Isabel of Vermandois. She may also have had a sister, Ela, who married Earl Duncan of Fife. John de Courcy was the first Courcy to settle in Ireland and he married Affrica, daughter of Godred, King of Man, and of a MacLochlainn. John also had Scottish kin. He was related to the royal house of Scotland through his aunt, Alice de Remilly, who had been married to William, son of King Duncan II,

28

Introduction

One of the areas that one would have expected to have seen more of an impact is in the writing of romances based on the Arthurian materials. Scottish place-names and heroic figures appeared throughout the Arthurian materials being generated on the Continent and yet romances did not take root in Scotland until the late fourteenth century.97 There is only one surviving manuscript from the mid- to late thirteenth century, called the Roman de Fergus, which suggests a Scottish influence. It seems to have been encouraged by the Bailleuls and the Coucys, who held estates in Picardy, where half of the surviving vernacular plays and an impressive array of Chrétien de Troyes’ romances were preserved and adapted.98 It was probably through them that another Picardian author was able to describe the Scottish royal heraldry for the first time as ‘un lyon de geules sour l’or | a un double treçon vermeil’.99 These two families were probably the reason behind why the Soules family, their allies, commissioned a Picardian to write the Roman de Fergus.100 The head of the family, William de Soules, had married into the royal Scottish family through the daughter of an illegitimate daughter of Alexander II. His father-inlaw was Alan Durward, who had been causing trouble for King Alexander III based on the assumption that John was the son of Avice de Remilly and William de Courcy, which is unclear: Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, i, 352–53; Oram, David I, pp. 93–97; S. Duffy, ‘John de Courcy’; S. Duffy, ‘The First Ulster Plantation’, pp. 4–7. 97  Le Roman de Fergus is the only early example of this genre in Scotland and even then it may not have been generated in Scotland. Nitze, ‘On the Chronology of the Grail Romances’; Cf. Symes, ‘The Appearance of Early Vernacular Plays’ for a recent reappraisal of theatre and drama before 1300 and its proliferation in Picardy and Arras. King John Bailleul would later retire to his estates in Picardy after his loss of the Scottish crown. They would have been familiar with the volume of plays, poems, and music being generated on their doorstep. 98  This family was interested in education and learning and founded Balliol College in Oxford in 1263. They were intermarried with the Picquigny, Vidames d’Amiens and the Fontaines and Saint-Valerys — which brought them into further contact with the Coucys and the Counts of St Pol, of Aumale, and the Lords of Nesle (Châtelains de Bruges) through a series of intermarriages. The well-known late twelfth-, early thirteenth-century poet and patron of the arts, Jean de Nesle, or Blondel de Nesle, was a member of the Nesle family, whose lands were in Picardy east of Amiens. See Chapter 5 about the importance of the Picardian network. 99  Girart d’Amiens, Escanor, ed. by Trachsler, i, 261, l. 3692. Escanor was written in about 1280 for the English King, Edward I, and his wife. 100  See Schmolke-Hasselmann, The Evolution of Arthurian Romance, pp. 251–67; Oram, ‘Fergus, Galloway, and the Scots’, pp. 119–21 about other suggestions about the origins of Fergus. The Soules involvement with these families explains the Picardian influence in the manuscript and it also explains why sites like Liddel and Roxburgh Castle were so prominent in the Romance. The Soules were sheriffs of Roxburgh castle and they held the lordship of Liddel Castle.

Sources and Context

29

throughout his minority between 1248 and 1258, and it was believed that Alan was trying to make a bid for the throne in 1251.101 The Soules might have been patronising Fergus to legitimize their relationship with the royal family and to glorify the image of the family abroad though they did not seem to support Durward directly. They were affiliates and allies of the Bailleuls and the Coucys, Durward’s enemies.102 The writing of only one Franco-Scottish patronized romance is disappointing, and it seems that the response to other forms of intellectual expression was also conservative. The church played a vital role in the dissemination of ideas and contributed to other new and innovative forms of intellectual expression throughout Europe. In Scotland, a handful of musical and biographical works specifically appeared in the kingdom because of contributions made by clerics like Bishop Jocelyn of Glasgow and Bishop William Mauvoisin of St Andrews. Mauvoisin was specifically responsible for writing the first surviving musical scores in Scotland.103 There are also a small handful of semi-historical poems dating from the twelfth century that may have been written by Scots.104 However, other than these few works, the kingdom’s involvement with political and literary discourses in the form of correspondences and theological and philosophical treatise was noticeably lacking. Those interested in such discourse went abroad.105 Even the quintessential hallmark of twelfth-century learning, the development of cathedral schools, did not generate a form of literary achievement and political acumen in Scotland that was recognized by other intellectual movements at Chartres, Rheims, Hereford, Paris, Bologna and York. The Scots rarely engaged with this wider intellectual world from within the confines of the Scottish Borders. There is no evading the reasons for why contemporaries believed the Scots to be so backward. This impression was not only 101 

Chronica de Mailros, p. 88. See Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’ , Chapter 5, about the Soules family in Scotland and on the Continent. 103  Everist, ‘From Paris to St Andrews’; Bowers, ‘Scotland’s Early Church Music’; Tischler, ‘English Traits in the Early Thirteenth-Century Motet’. 104  Lawrence of Durham, Dialogi, ed. by Raine, pp. 78–85; Raby, A History of Secular Latin Poetry, ii, 141–42; Rigg, A History of Anglo-Latin Literature, pp. 96–98. 105  For example, David ‘Scottus’ entered the service of Emperor Henry V and went to Rome in 1110, returning to England and becoming bishop of Bangor in 1120. Richard of St Victor was a Scot who helped to form the core of mystical scholasticism at the Abbey School of St Victor in Paris. Jean Châtillon (pref.), Richard of St Victor, The Twelve Patriarchs, ed. and trans. by Zinn, pp. xii–50. 102 

Introduction

30

determined by a perceived proclivity for violence but also by a lack of literary finesse in a society where courtliness, fair speech and literacy were believed to be hallmarks of good breeding.106 It may be that the long-term effect of Scottish artistic accomplishment in this period was negligible because the French influence in Scotland, fuelled by only a handful of men, had dissipated following the demise of Anglo-French contact after 1204. Scotland was irredeemably affected by the English loss of Normandy in 1204 to the degree that, once the 1204 generation had died, contact had dramatically fallen between the royal courts and families in Scotland and France. It is interesting that the volume of royal charters also significantly decreased following the loss of Normandy in 1204 and the death of King William I in 1214. Despite these various problems with the sources, the Scottish ecclesiastical houses and the royal charters after about 1124 have captured some of the activities of the baronage and there are also four valuable contemporary sources that can be found in chronicles dealing with the period between about 1160 and 1300. The Chronicles of Holyrood and Melrose, and the Chronicle of the Kings of Alba are very useful as are the Scotichronicon of Walter Bower and the Gesta Annalia. The latter three sources have until recently fallen by the wayside because they were believed to have been written in the 1440s and 1360s. Evidence has come to light, which demonstrates that these accounts relied upon contemporaneous sources perhaps from Coupar Angus and Dunfermline Abbeys and from Ireland.107 Other than these four chronicle sources and the charter records from Scot­ tish religious institutions and the royal repository, much of what has been gleaned about Scotland in this work has come through other mediums, especially from England. English sources in particular must be approached with some caution because of the tension that usually existed between the two kingdoms throughout most of the period. What is clearly reflected in the sources of all three kingdoms, however, is that the men and women of the Anglo-French realm shared familial and political ties across the Border and the Channel. Whereas relationships in the Borders have been the subject of considerable scholarly attention, 106 

C. Page, ‘Listening to the Trouvères’. Broun, ‘A New Look at Gesta Annalia’; Broun, Scottish Independence and the Idea of Britain, pp. 216–29, 240–58; Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, ix, 204–08; Watt, ‘A National Treasure?’; Woolf, From Pictland to Alba, pp. 88–93, 356–59. Professor Watt suggests that Bower may have used a French source between 1150 and 1250, but Dauvit Broun has convincingly argued that Bower and the Gesta were relying upon a contemporary Scottish account. 107 

Sources and Context

31

cross-Channel networks have attracted less interest, which this work hopes to address.108 Although there was less of an impact on the arts, the greatest con­ tri­bution that the Anglo-French world made to Scotland was in its political development. Without Anglo-French penetration into Scotland, the northern kingdom would not have become a key player in the contest between England and France. She would not have had the military innovation — the knights, the organ­­ization or the firepower — to develop an ‘auld amitie’ with France.

108 

Border ties have already been examined by historians for the twelfth and thirteenth centuries: Strickland, ‘Arms and the Men’; Strickland, ‘Securing the North’; Stringer, ‘Nobility and Identity in Medieval Britain and Ireland’; Stringer, ‘Identities in Thirteenth-Century England’; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon; Holt, The Northerners, passim.

Chapter 1

Image and Identity

The Problem with National Identity National identity is extremely complicated in the twelfth century, because the concept of identity was bound to land, lordship and kinship. There was a very limited sense of a ‘national’ purpose because each kingdom was divided into sub-regions and into other smaller territorial units within these sub-regions. The peasant class experienced land and lordship on a regional level in closely knit communities. Their world was dominated by local overlords and the church. Only rarely did they have a sense of identity with the kingdom as a whole and that usually occurred only briefly and because of a foreign threat. The lords of these various territories often had even less of a sense of a ‘national’ purpose because they and their kin held lands and owed service to other lords and kings, and their experience of laws and customs were varied between territories. For this reason, identity was more difficult to define. Nonetheless, to say that the inhabitants of each kingdom did not feel a sense of what it meant to be from that realm would be misleading. Men and women who lived solely in one territory that shared common laws and customs probably did identify with what it meant to be from that territory. I will be very cautious about the use of the term ‘national identity’ though my discussion of identity does clearly bear a sense of nationalism in that the people of these kingdoms, to varying degrees, identified with one kingdom and its political agenda over another. Saying that, it is very difficult to quantify an individual’s ‘national’ self-identification considering that patriotism, unreserved commitment to one kingdom, rarely played an overt role in political

34

Chapter 1

decision-making and, if it did, it was often with some other agenda in mind as evidenced by accounts from early twelfth-century chronicles. Prior to 1204, the political reality was that ties were less to a people, or ‘nacio’, and more to an overlord, an ally, or a specific cause and therefore relationships were extremely ephemeral. Loyalties shifted depending on political tides so one’s identification with a particular lord and land could rapidly change. Since this work focuses on the Anglo-French world, it is important to establish some parameters concerning what is specifically meant by ‘Anglo-French’ or ‘Anglo-Norman’ in order to understand what role ‘national’, or communal, identity played in the three kingdoms. One of the problems with this discussion is that the trend has been to refer to the cross-Channel elite as ‘AngloNorman’, or ‘Normanangli’, which was first coined by the twelfth-century author of the Hyde Chronicle.1 The reality was that many of the men and women who held land in England were not Norman but of Breton, Angevin, Picardian or Flemish birth, and it is apparent in charters that they saw themselves as having multiple identities or affinities based on the location of their lordships and on their place of birth. This work will usually use the phrase ‘Anglo-French’, rather than ‘Anglo-Norman’, to signify those men and women who owed service and were involved on both sides of the Channel, notably because many families did hold lands in different areas of France and not just in Normandy. It is important to understand that the majority of the cross-Channel nobility was of mixed English, ‘French’ and Scottish descent and that within each of these kingdoms they came from different regions with sometimes very different customs and languages. As such, they were called and called themselves not just English, French, or Scottish, but also, for example, Cornish, Breton, Picardian and Galwegian, depending on the context.2 The men and women who appear in 1  Chronica monasterii de Hyda, ed. by Edwards, pp. 303, 308–15; Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp. 142–44; Bates, ‘Normandy and England after 1066’, pp. 862–66, 877–80; Le Patourel, The Norman Empire, pp. 222–78. It has been suggested that this term is a product of the thirteenth rather than the twelfth century but there are problems with the argument. There were very few men and women who still held land on both sides of the Channel by the mid-thirteenth century. It would make more sense that the term was invented when there were a number of families who did still have cross-Channel lordships i.e before 1204. See Webber, The Evolution of Norman Identity, p. 154 about a thirteenth-century dating. Webber mentions this debate and that it is based on Diana Greenway’s palaeographical work on the manuscript at Hyde. 2  Barth, Introduction to Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, pp. 13–38; D. Walker, ‘Cultural Survival in an Age of Conquest’, pp. 35–38, 46–50; Geary, ‘Ethnic Identity as a Situational Con­ struct’. The issue of national identity is situational and completely subjective depending on the person’s desired image and the response of others to that image. This is a point that Bouchard,

Image and Identity

35

this examination could be vassals and hold land of not only the king of England as overlord of England and/or as duke of Normandy but they could also be vassals of the kings of France and Scotland and even of the counts of Flanders and Princes of Wales. They had, as I will argue, several, multi-faceted identities that informed how they interacted in the political community. Although there was a shared aristocratic and linguistic structure crossing the Channel, the Anglo-French settlers and their descendants faced the prospect of somehow finding an accepted place as foreign lords over a native Anglo-Saxon, Welsh, Irish or Scottish populace.3 It was necessary for effective lordship that they did somehow create a sense of shared identity with their new subjects, but at the same time, by espousing such an identity, they could be divorced from their more prestigious European image. They struggled to find and embrace a single ‘national’ voice because it could undermine lordships elsewhere. They became adept at moulding their identity to the situation, which, to modern eyes, seems to contradict the very definition of ‘national’ identity.4 Hugh Thomas has recently conducted a study on identity and ethnicity devoted to the Anglo-French world in which he discusses the difficulties with ascertaining identity among the Anglo-French following the Norman Conquest.5 With some insight, John Gillingham has also examined the question of identity among the Anglo-French, realising the difficulties posed concerning identity particularly when this identity could be representative of the interests of a court faction rather than tied to any ethnic background based on land-holding patterns.6 He relied heavily on Geoffrey Gaimar’s Estoire des Engleis and on Henry of Huntingdon’s History of the English to demonstrate that memStafford, and Barthélemy also make about family consciousness, that it is very dependent on one person’s perspective and agenda at one given moment in time: Bouchard, ‘Family Structure and Family Consciousness’, p. 641; Barthélemy, La société dans le comté de Vendôme, pp. 540–56; Barthélemy, ‘Deux Mutations du “Feudalism”’; Stafford, ‘La mutation Familiale’, pp. 115–23. 3  Mortimer, ‘The Beginnings of the Honour of Clare’, pp. 130–41. It is clear that in certain parts of the kingdom the Anglo-Saxon lords and their men remained in England after having been disinherited. Clarke, ‘Women’s Names in Post-Conquest England’. Cecily Clarke provides evidence that although the ‘English’ and ‘French’ intermarried and settled peacefully alongside one another in the countryside and even more so in the towns as late as the 1190s, there were cases of tension between the settlers and native people because the latter were at times replaced by the French newcomers. 4  Geary, The Myth of Nations, pp. 15–21, 37–38. 5  Thomas, The English and the Normans. 6  Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp.  3–144; Gillingham, ‘Henry of Huntingdon’; Drell, Kinship and Conquest, pp. 1–29, 125–46.

Chapter 1

36

bers of the Anglo-French aristocracy identified themselves as ‘English’, and he forged the path that others have followed.7 My intention here is to deconstruct some of the ethnic and social markers, like language and customs, that have been assumed to have informed identity in the Middle Ages. For example, there is no denying that the early legacy of the English language was preserved in the West-Saxon literary dialect of the twelfth century in works like Layamon’s Brut, the Peterborough Chronicle, The Owl and the Nightingale, and in the clerical order written for three noble ladies, called The Ancren Riwle: Al þet ye euer siggeð of swuch oðer bonen, ase of Pater nostre et auez, on ower owene wise, psalmes et vreisuns: al ich am wel ipaied euerichon sigge þet hire best bereð on heorte: verslunge of hire sautere: redinge of Englichs, oðer of Freinchs: holi meditaciuns.8 Whatever other devotions you use in private, as Paternosters, Hail Maries, psalms and prayers, I am quite satisfied that everyone should say that which her heart most inclined her to, a verse of her psalter, reading in English or French: holy meditations.

However, Anglo-French patronage of works in Anglo-Saxon did not necessarily mean that these men and women saw themselves as Anglo-Saxon though it might have improved the acceptability of their lordship in England. Not even the King of England, Henry II, had bothered learning English but this said little about his ‘Englishness’.9 At the end of the twelfth century, the Bishop of Ely and chancellor of England, William de Longchamp, also did not speak English,10 7 

Damien-Grint, The New Historians of the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, pp.  49–65; Dalton, ‘Geffrei Gaimar’s Estoire des Engleis’; Matthew, ‘The English Cultivation of Norman History’; Gillingham, ‘Kingship, Chivalry and Love’; Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp. 113–22; Short, ‘Gaimar et les débuts de l’historiographie en langue français’. 8  The Ancren Riwle, ed. by Morton, pp. 45, 193; Wilson, ‘English and French in England’; Anchoritic Spirituality, ed. and trans. by Savage and Watson, pp.  7–15; Dance, ‘The AB Language’; Trotter, ‘The Anglo-French Lexis of Ancrene Wisse’; Innes-Parker, ‘The Legacy of Ancrene Wisse’; Görlach, Studies in Middle English Saints’ Legends, pp. 5–15. Ancren Wisse, or Riwle, has been dated between 1190 and c. 1230. Cf. Hilmo, ‘The Revival of the Vernacular and the Illustrated Caligula’ for the use of imagery in the vernacular tradition in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 9  Gerald of Wales, Itinerarium Kambriae, ed. by John Brewer and others, vi, 64–65: at Cardiff the king ‘[…] dixit lingua Gallica’, ‘spoke the Gallic language’ and had to ask for a translation into English of what a local man had said to him. Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, viii, 180; Walter Map, De nugis curialium, ed. by Brooke and Mynors, p. 476. 10  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 146: ‘[…] quai linguam Anglicanum pror-

Image and Identity

37

and brought French minstrels to compose and recite laudatory rhymes in his honour whilst living in England, but one could hardly assume he did not identify himself as a committed member of English political interests.11 He was a statesman deeply involved in the politics of England during the reigns of Henry II and Richard I. The Norman ( Jersey born) Robert Wace commented on the Norman ignorance of English in mid-century when he said: ‘Next the Normans and the French came, who did not know how to speak English nor how to say “Londene”, but spoke it as best they could. They called “Londene” “Londres”, thus keeping it in their language.’12 However, the French spoken by the AngloFrench was also slightly different than that spoken by the Normans. The AngloFrench nun at Barking apologized for her ‘false French’ in mid-century. 13 The body politic of England was represented in the majority by this AngloFrench elite, many of whom did not speak English, but some members of the community did begin to realize the weakness posed by the language barrier.14 It was for this reason that they began to create another identity tied to their new lordships by patronising works written in English, glorifying an Anglo-Saxon and Briton past. They also tried to learn the language of their people but this process was slow. Confusion over certain Anglo-Saxon/English words demonstrates the difficulty that the Anglo-French had with the English language. It was suggested by the poet of the Life of St Waltheof that for this reason a separate romance tradition, written in Anglo-Norman and catering to an AngloFrench audience, developed from ‘English’ materials.15 It must not be assumed that patronage always reflected the intention of claiming a particular identity. The increasing interest in Anglo-Saxon history in the twelfth century does not necessarily suggest any concrete connection with sus ignorabat’ (‘[…] since he did not know the English language at all’). 11  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 143; Wilson, ‘English and French in England’, pp. 42–46. 12  Robert Wace, Roman de Brut, trans. by Weiss, p. 96, ll. 3762–84. 13  La Vie d’Edouard le Confesseur, ed. by Södergård, pp. 14–26, 109, l. 7. La Vie was written before c. 1170 and dedicated to King Henry II. Cf. Mitchell, ‘Patrons and Politics’. 14  Geoffrey Gaimar, L’Estoire des Engleis, ed. by Bell, pp. ix–xiii, li–lxxvii. For example, the fitzGilberts specifically hired Geoffrey Gaimar to provide a translation of the Old English Anglo-Saxon Chronicle into Latin. 15  Robert Wace, Roman de Brut, trans. by Weiss, p.  182, ll.  7235–38, 7245; p.  184, ll. 7299–302; Field, ‘Waldef and the Matter of/with England’, pp. 32–39. The claim to an English identity made by the Waldef/Waltheof poet is from an early thirteenth-century tradition despite claiming older roots.

Chapter 1

38

an English identity, particularly when written in Latin or French, but rather it may reflect a range of interests. Geoffrei Gaimar’s romanticising of the AngloSaxon past for a Norman audience in his French L’Estoire des Engleis may indicate a personal taste in the subject and/or that of his patrons, the Lincolnshire fitzGilberts.16 An example of this subjectivity can be seen in Scandinavian influ­­­ ences that also crept into L’Estoire but which in no way seem to indicate that Gaimar or his patrons identified themselves as ‘Scandinavian’.17 Another Anglo-French contemporary, Robert Wace, also wrote in AngloNorman French and relied heavily on the Historia Regum Britanniae of Geoffrey of Monmouth and thus Geoffrey’s main early source, Historia Brittonum.18 These two sources saw the Anglo-Saxon contribution to the history of Britain slightly differently than Gaimar because of their own agendas and experiences. Their reliance on the materials of the early Britons, who had been defeated by the Saxons, coloured their approach to history and formed the basis for a mirror image of their own experience of the Norman invasions. Thus, Robert Wace and Geoffrey viewed the Anglo-Saxons as at times interlopers and heathens, as opposed to Gaimar’s interpretation of the Anglo-Saxons as heroes because his source was pro-Saxon.19 Gaimar went so far as to praise the tenth-century King Alfred of Wessex for instigating the composition of a history of the English through his sponsorship of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.20 Interpretation of historical materials was informed by sources and by the personal experiences and agenda of the writers and their patrons. There is no doubt that resurrecting the image of the English people from the past appealed to the new Anglo-French settlers in the twelfth century but this is hardly evidence that they espoused a pre-conquest identity, which in itself is a problematic argument to make considering that two divergent Anglo-Saxon and Briton histories were both developing at the same time. That Gaimar agreed 16 

Geoffrey Gaimar, L’Estoire des Engleis, ed. by Bell, pp.  ix–xiii, li–lxxvii; McCash, ‘Negotiating the Text’, pp. 33–37. Marie de Champagne may have controlled the substance of Lancelot against Chrétien’s artistic preference. Gaimar also admitted to accepting the aid of his patron, Constance. 17  Geoffrey Gaimar, L’Estoire des Engleis, ed. by Bell, p. x. 18  Fleming, The Arthurian Material in the Chronicles, p.  138. Wace’s Roman de Brut departed from the image of Arthur created by Geoffrey casting Arthur within a chivalric light. 19  Foot, ‘The Making of Angelcynn’. The ‘Anglo-Saxon’ identity of the kings of Britain was coined during the reign of King Alfred as part of his attempt to unite different groups of people under his rule. 20  Geoffrey Gaimar, Lestorie des Engles, ed. by Hardy and Martin, i, 93, ll. 2329–40.

Image and Identity

39

to take on this task and use an Anglo-Saxon source written in the English vernacular and that he was the first to then readapt the source into vernacular French elucidates the free will and expression of his creative individualism, certainly a hallmark of the twelfth-century Renaissance.21 His choice of work may indicate that he personally espoused at least two identities but this intent is unclear.22 What is also unclear is whether his patron, Constance fitzGilbert, was intent on acknowledging the Anglo-Saxon past as part of her own identity or if she purely had a personal interest in the material because it excited her imagination and strengthened her family’s lordship over their native subjects. Focusing on the Saxon past made good political sense. The Anglo-French kings and lords ruled over people of different social mores, ethnicities and languages. They used words like ‘Anglo-Saxon’, ‘English’, ‘Scots’ or ‘French’ to try to create a sense of solidarity and to cement support for their authority over a geographical territory.23 It was harder to claim authority based on a further removed Briton past, which may partially explain why the Saxon heritage became more legitimately historicized while the Briton was mythologized in the trendy romances of the day. The Anglo-French nobility would have wanted the ‘native’ men and women to feel that they had at least something in common in order to exercise effective lordship,24 particularly since the Anglo-Saxons had for long not been able to distinguish Normans from French, or sometimes even from Scandinavians, even though many Normans had lived among them in regional pockets prior to 1066.25 The Normans were the ones to stress that 21 

Starkey, ‘Traversing the Boundaries of Language’. Eschenbach was probably Bavarian but in addition to Middle High German, he had a working knowledge of French, English, and ‘Heathen’. 22  Van Houts, ‘Historical Writing’, pp. 111–21; Short, ‘Gaimar’s Epilogue and Goeffrey of Monmouth’s Liber vetustissimus’. 23  E. Treharne and Swan, Rewriting Old English, pp. 41–61. Recent work on the resilience of Anglo-Saxon texts generated after the conquest points to an enduring presence of the AngloSaxon language and identity into the thirteenth century. The stress here is that there was already an undercurrent of interest in the Anglo-Saxon past and present not only in historical texts but in texts that met the community’s spiritual needs through homiletic textbooks in Old English. Use of a language often only indicates acceptance of a living language as a political tool for effective lordship over a native speaking territory. 24  Hollister, ‘Anglo-French Political Culture’, pp. 6–8. Hollister, relying on Martin Brett and R. W. Southern, sees Gaimar’s focus on the Anglo-Saxon past as a response to the Norman invasion. 25  C. P. Lewis, ‘The French in England’, pp. 130–39. Cf. Thomas, The English and the Normans, pp. 32–39 about Norse identification.

Chapter 1

40

they were different from other French speakers so that they could build a new future and patronize the Saxon past. They honoured the history of their subjects in order to assimilate this past into their own as a means of asserting their territorial rights. The early twelfth-century historian, Henry of Huntingdon, represents in his life and works this multi-faceted symbiosis of the ‘old’ and ‘new’ past of the peoples of Britain.26 Henry was born after the Norman invasion to an English mother and an Anglo-Norman father, who came from a family based in the Pays de Caux, so he was a man of both worlds and traditions. His involvement in the revitalization of an English pre-Norman history was directly linked to a new interest in the Saxon past by post-conquest settlers like Bishop Alexander of Lincoln.27 Bishop Alexander’s patronage of Henry was meant to preserve and immortalize the genesis of a ‘new’ embryonic Anglo-Norman identity culled from the records of Britain’s history of which both Henry and Alexander were a part: ‘[…] huius regni gesta et nostre gentis origins, iussu tui presul Alexander, qui flos et cacumen regni et gentis esse videris, decurrenda suscepi.’28 For this reason, Henry of Huntingdon’s Historia Anglorum captures the tension of a social order forcibly united into a Norman and English ‘gens’. For Henry, the Normans were not liked but well-loved for introducing advances, militarily and administratively, to the English, who had been defeated because they had turned against each other out of greed and ambition.29 ‘Histories’ took on a new prominence in the twelfth century. Elisabeth van Houts has suggested that historical works written up to four generations after the conquest have a special place in the construct of historical memory, while Francis Ingledew describes this new passion for historical writing as reflective 26 

Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp. 113–44. Gillingham suggests Henry identified himself as more ‘English’ and thus he was writing in praise of an Anglo-Saxon past. His argument that Henry’s anti-Norman comments were in reference to the political intrigues under Waleran de Beaumont make a great deal of sense, which would show that Henry was not specifically against the Normans but against one faction of Normans, but he believes Henry was still writing from a purely ‘English’ standpoint. 27  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. lvii–lxvi, 4–9, 496–97. Alexander originated from Blois. 28  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 4–6: ‘[…] I have undertaken to tell of the history of this kingdom and the origins of our people, at your command, Bishop Alexander, who is regarded the glory and the highest of people in the realm. They were both members of families who held land and positions in England and Normandy.’ 29  Cf. Van Houts, ‘The Norman Conquest’.

Image and Identity

41

of a ‘class-interested historical consciousness’ within the confines of an imagined community.30 These histories were written by men based on the hearsay of elderly witnesses of the conquest as a means to committing to memory a dying past for future generations; and they were created for particular patrons as part of their self-definition as lords over native peoples.31 However, this interest in the past does not indicate that the Anglo-French were willing to completely take on an ‘English’ image as their only or even primary identity. Even after the loss of Normandy, it was very difficult for families to relinquish their French ancestry and the prestige that followed this identity, even if they saw themselves mainly as English.

Land and Identity in the Middle Ages The nature of the relationship between land and identity has been the subject of debate for several decades.32 From the 1980s until recently, historians have stressed the differences between families on both sides of the Channel and over­­ emphasized a break between the landholding classes of Normandy and England by the end of the twelfth century.33 There have been different interpretations con­­cerning the nature of this elite and how united or divided they were in the kingdoms. It has been suggested by David Bates, John Gillingham and Ralph V. Turner that the propertied class of England and Normandy was clearly divided 30 

Ingledew, ‘The Book of Troy’. Cf. the foundational work of Anderson, Imagined Com­ munities, pp. 9–46; and Fentress and Wickham, Social Memory, pp. 1–86, 144–72. 31  Van Houts, ‘The Memory of 1066’; Ingledew, ‘The Book of Troy’, pp. 674–704. There was a similar response in Ireland even before the Norman invasion in 1169, initially because of the reorganization of the Irish church according to the Continental model. Native rulers also responded to interaction with the Norman world and began to hire court poets to glorify the family’s origins in epic vernacular tales and genealogies that quickly became formalized and highly complex. Although Irish lords had always had an interest in this type of familial panegyric, there is a noticeable increase in the generation of these works after the Anglo-French invasion of Ireland in 1169: Caball and Hollo, ‘The Literature of Later Medieval Ireland’, pp. 77–109. 32  Hilton, ‘Were the English English?’, pp. 40–41; Harris, Race and Ethnicity in Anglo-Saxon Literature, pp. 1–43; Short, ‘Patrons and Polyglots’; Lodge, ‘Language Attitudes and Linguistic Norms’; Short, ‘Language and Literature’. Ian Short and R. Lodge stress the strength of the Anglo-French multi-culturalism and its subsequent effect on literature and multi-lingualism. 33  Bates, ‘Normandy and England after 1066’; Crouch, ‘Normans and Anglo-Normans’; Bates, The Normans, pp. 99–100, 107–13; Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp. 3–39, 93–100, 113–44.

42

Chapter 1

between those who held land in France and those who held land mainly in England and who had lost interest in Normandy.34 This line of argument was also espoused by Scottish historians, who saw an even greater divide between the English and French. The pioneer of Anglo-French studies in Scotland, Pro­­ fessor Barrow, made a seminal contribution towards the current historical under­­ standing of the composition of the Scottish nobility in the later twelfth century. His study provides the first collected genealogical survey of some families in Scotland with French roots, but Professor Barrow was working from an historiographical tradition reliant upon the assumption that the landholding class was confined to an identity bound to Britain not to France. He stated that: Although many of these families may have had Continental ancestry, as far as Scotland was concerned they would to all intents and purposes have been English. Their speech was doubtless English, their experience was limited to England, and they would have regarded themselves as English by race.35

Barrow made this assumption about the Anglo-Norman settlers in Ireland as well as in Scotland. He stated the Irish settlers should be more accurately termed ‘English’; however, he did not realize that many of the men who settled in Ireland not only originated from and held land in England and in the border of Wales but they or their families also still held land in France.36 Recent research has demonstrated that even a generation after 1171, Anglo-Irish lords like the Lacys, Courcys and Briouze were not only ‘English’. Their lordships in the borders of Wales, in England and in France meant their fortunes were bound to service on both sides of the Channel.37 As such, they appear regularly in the 34  Bates, ‘Normandy and England after 1066’; Crouch, ‘Normans and Anglo-Normans’; Bates, The Normans, pp. 99–100, 107–13; Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp. 3–39, 93–100, 113–44; R. V. Turner, ‘The Problems of Survival’. Judith Green examines the reign of Henry I and Stephen primarily and she does account for an increased cross-Channel interest under Henry II. J. C. Holt is also less emphatic and remarks upon the Plantagenet ability to unify its empire under one coinage and trade network: Green, ‘Unity and Disunity’; Green, The Government of England under Henry I, pp. 156–57; Green, ‘King Henry I and the Aristocracy of Normandy’; Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’; Everard and Holt, Jersey 1204, pp. 22–28. 35  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 82. Professor Barrow in a more recent book gave a little more attention to the strength of this relationship with France. G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 279–95. 36  G. Barrow, ‘Scotland, Wales, and Ireland’, p. 583. 37  See Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’, pp. 1–13 about the Briouze (Braose) and Lacy families and see Appendix and Chapter 7 about the Courcy family.

Image and Identity

43

kings’ correspondence in England and in Normandy with other members of the cross-Channel elite. It is important to realize, however, that these historians were focusing on administrative documents generated from one side of the Channel. For example, Professor Bates relied on charters issued from England and therefore did not see that a large number of the men witnessing for the king in England were the same men who appeared in the king’s charters issued in France.38 He argued that the separate issuing of royal writs from a Norman and English administration, which were also stylistically different, was proof of an aristocratic divide.39 He also suggested that regional interests belied any such cross-Channel homogeneity from the period of the Conquest on and overrode any singular sense of Anglo-French identity. This was also the predominant opinion of Martin Aurell when he examined localized divisions in Western France.40 Judith Green also remarked upon regional interests when examining families in the Norman Vexin but she was focusing on families with little or no English interests.41 John Gillingham focused on England and has more recently argued in favour of a well-formed English identity that seemed to override any Norman identity or Norman interests among the early twelfth-century nobility.42 Following the same line of thought as Bates, J. C. Holt focused on later developments between England and France and read the political structure backwards from what the Plantagenet realm would become by the mid-thirteenth century when the difference between a French and English identity was acute.43 Bates, Holt and Le Patourel do come to agreement about the Anglo-French position by the mid-twelfth century when Le Patourel said of the administration of Henry II: ‘[…] there was no Angevin colonization of England or any other part of his empire after 1154 in any way comparable with the Norman

38 

Le Patourel, The Norman Empire, passim. In Bates’ defence, he was trying to combat John le Patourel’s overemphasis on a complete union between the English settlers and Normans between 1066 and 1135. Hollister, ‘Normandy, France and the Anglo-Norman Regnum’. Hollister also argues that the Anglo-Normans were united across the Channel. 39  Bates, ‘The Earliest Norman Writs’. 40  Bates, ‘Normandy and England after 1066’; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 205–39. 41  Green, ‘Lords of the Norman Vexin’. 42  Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, pp. 3–39, 93–100, 113–44. 43  Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, pp. 223–65.

Chapter 1

44

colonization after 1066.’44 By this point, they argue, there was certainly little vestige of a Norman identity for the Anglo-Normans. The basis of these arguments may be true in that there were two different administrative systems in place for Normandy and England and there may have been a decrease in sheer volume of those holding land on both sides of the Channel by the end of the twelfth century, but these two developments do not actually address the issue of identity. These historians were not investigating the dual or even triple or quadruple identities that many families bore by virtue of their cross-Channel and cross-border interests via marriage and communication because they were focused on charters and writs issued from one particular vantage point at a particular time. The key to understanding what the Norman or Angevin empire was about is not how the crown saw these men and women or their fees but how these men and women functioned in this realm and saw themselves. As such, there is a fundamental problem with trying to argue that because regional and localized political identities existed then there could be no sense of commonality that extended across the Channel and informed multiple identities. Regional interests do not necessarily disprove that these men and women also identified themselves in other ways, that is as ‘Norman’, ‘Angevin, ‘French’, ‘Scottish’ and English’ and that, based on their lordships and alliances, they might choose different identities at different times in order to turn the political tides in their favour. Bates’, Gillingham’s and Holt’s understanding of identity is accurate for those who only held land in Normandy and thought of themselves as Norman and for those who held only in England and saw themselves as English, but for those holding fees on both sides of the Channel, a different identity could be claimed at any given point in time depending on a number of factors and it may be misleading to say that they saw themselves as having only one identity. Nonetheless, this oversimplification of identity still dominates studies on ethnicity and race and continues to undermine approaches to the political structure and attitudes in the medieval period towards the English, French and Scots.45 Furthermore, caution must be exercised here for although royal witness lists under Henry II do expose a ‘Norman French’ and ‘Norman English’ divide in 44 

Le Patourel, ‘The Norman Conquest’, p. 115. Thomas, The English and the Normans, pp. 305–46. Thomas’ study is interesting especially when assessing individual reactions but like so many historians before him, he assumed these families confined themselves to a single identity, that is, English, because he did not account for their positions on the other side of the Channel. This approach then coloured his understanding of the ‘English’ response to the ‘Celts’. 45 

Image and Identity

45

that Henry regularly addressed his ‘Norman’, ‘French’, ‘Angevin’ and ‘English’ separately to the very end of his reign, the difference between Norman French and Norman English is more subtle and requires knowledge of the specific families and their roles in the royal and ducal court.46 Some men, who were part of this cross-Channel elite, like the earls of Chester, Warenne, Richmond and the lords Percy, Moubray and Paynel, also distinguished the multiple identities of their peoples in their charters, which it must be assumed was based on how the lord saw the witness, what identity the witness felt themselves most a member of, and perhaps who was present, and where and when the charter was issued.47 The Anglo-French lords were conscious of their and their vassals’ or clerics’ multiple identities associated with their multiple landholdings and loyalties to different royal overlords. When drawing up charters they demonstrated a sensitivity to the claimed identities of their men and women and to the political situation. Another problem exists in trying to compare the nature of identity during the reign of William ‘the Conqueror’ to that of Henry II though both were Kings of England and Dukes of Normandy. Firstly, it can be very difficult to distinguish newcomers from established families based on nomenclature during the reign of Henry. Under William I in 1066 a conceptually new ethnic group replaced or was superimposed on native families and could more easily be distinguished based on naming customs, but this was not the case in 1154.48 46 

Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, passim. Cf. Recueil des Actes, introductory volume, on Henry’s administrative agents; Paris, Bibl. de Sainte-Geneviève, MS 1850 (MS 962) [Cartulaire de Séry, l’Abbaye de Notre-Dame de Séry, 1127–1612 in 1728 (Stein, no 3692)]; Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MSS Y. 13, 16–17, 44, 51, 53, 200–01. The Tancarville family are a good example of a ‘Norman’ family because they held only in Normandy and were at the head of the administration at Rouen. The Hommet family were constables of Normandy but they held lands in England and intermarried across the Channel with families with English and Scottish interests so identity would be determined by the individual at a certain time and place. 47  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 22, 32, 36, 38, 52, 58, 60, 61, 62, 70, 124–27, 156, 159, 172, 173, 180, 187, 191, 195, 203, 212, 215, 216, 220, 222, 223, 225, 226, 227, 230, 231, 236, 238, 239241, 243, 244–46, 249, 250–55, 259. Nearly all of Roger de Moubray’s charters refer to the English and French separately. His son, Nigel, also used separate terms of address as late as 1190, which suggests that they were referring to men on the witness list who still identified themselves as ‘French’: Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. 67. Cf. Bagge, ‘The Individual in Medieval Historiography’; Bagge, ‘The Individual in the Middle Ages’; Bagge, ‘Ideologies and Mentalities’ for a source-based rendering of the significance of the individual in medieval Western thought. 48  Potts, Monastic Revival, pp. 1–12. Cf. for a general study on acculturation Teske, ‘Accul­­ turation and Assimilation’. There is a difference between acculturation and assimilation but the two developments can occur simultaneously.

46

Chapter 1

Secondly, the Anglo-French world under the early Norman kings in the late eleventh and early twelfth century was situationally different from the structure of power in England and Normandy under Henry II and his sons. Those who settled in England under King William ‘the Conqueror’ were foreigners ruling over new territories held by the duke of Normandy in England. After the initial campaigns in 1066, these settlers had to exercise a more visible and enduring presence on their new estates in England in order to establish their lordship over the native population and to protect against the return of disinherited lords.49 Although some men found the hardships that came with new territorial gains on foreign soil too much and returned home after 1066, others devoted their energy to these new estates.50 This situation had demonstrably changed by the mid-twelfth century. A century had passed when Henry II and his sons ascended the throne of England by which point these territories gifted in 1066 had been retained within the same aristocratic families for two or more generations and thus the overall structure was more stable. This stability meant that cross-Channel lords could travel more frequently, knowing that lands they left behind were not usually under the same level of threat that cross-Channel lords had experienced in the late eleventh century. These lords had, over the previous years, introduced their own officers to administer their lands during their absence. Ultimately, the differences between the French and the Anglo-French must not be overstated. The Anglo-French served, witnessed and married alongside their French brethren particularly later in the century under the Angevin kings. The registers and charters of Normandy and of England from 1153 to 1204 dem­onstrate that a significant number of the conquest-descended nobles continued to hold land in Normandy and in England, including minor barons. Although not always the case, naming patterns often captured the intensity of this structure in that names that were Anglo-Latinized in France often reflected that the individual belonged to a family that held lands or had made marriages across the Channel. For example, Guillaume might appear as ‘William’ or ‘Willelmus’ in French records or an Englishman’s name, ‘Walter’ could be translated into French as ‘Gautier’. Marjorie Chibnall, C. Warren Hollister and Véronique Gazeau have worked on the foundation of new ecclesiastical houses in England by Norman/French 49  C. P. Lewis, ‘The Formation of the Honor of Chester’, pp. 45–54; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 196–97. William I did not for the most part change the existing territorial structure except in the southwest of England. 50  Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 192–93, 197.

Image and Identity

47

patrons, which reflect a twelfth-century desire to continue the Norman ‘image’ of certain families who also still held land in England, like the counts of Meulan/ Beaumont, Eu, Giroie, Gournai, Chester, Tosny and Montgomery/Bellême. From their work it is clear that these families did see themselves as straddling an intranational border.51 Hollister and Véronique Gazeau’s work shows the strength of cross-Channel ties particularly through the influence of the abbey of Bec and the continued landholding interests of the abbey’s foundations in England. Judith Everard has also been able to demonstrate that cross-Channel ecclesiastical interests extended into Brittany and Jersey as part of a greater struggle rooted in the factional politics of England and France.52 It would make sense that men and women who felt a common experience would gravitate to one another, which can certainly be seen among the Breton settlements in England during the civil war between King Stephen and Empress Mathilda as discussed in Chapter 3.53 Politically, continuing a family’s image of different identities protected all of their lands — those held of any of the three kings. Claiming multiple identities did not diminish the value of any one identification, rather families were able to pursue and even augment their position on both sides of the Channel as long as rivalry between the crowns did not force the issue. However, the degree to which this cross-Channel structure continued well into the twelfth century has been under assessed because of the approach adopted by historians of the period. Unfortunately, there are fewer studies on the Anglo-French aristocracy under the Angevins, which is what this work attempts to address on a small scale, but this structure has been studied most recently by Daniel Power, Nicholas Vincent, Robert Bartlett, Martin Aurell and David Crouch.54 51 

Chibnall, ‘Monastic Foundations in England and Normandy’; Gazeau, ‘The Effect of the Conquest of 1066’; Hollister, ‘Anglo-French Political Culture’; Van Houts, ‘Robert of Torigni as Genealogist’. 52  Everard, ‘The Abbey of Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt’; Everard and Holt, Jersey 1204, pp. 15–119. 53  Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’; Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, pp. 49–54; Green, ‘Family Matters’. 54  Crouch, The Beaumont Twins; Crouch, ‘Normans and Anglo-Normans’; Power, The Nor­ man Frontier; Power, ‘French and Norman Frontiers’; Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’; Power, ‘Angevin Normandy’; Vincent, ‘Les Normands de l’entourage d’Henri II Plantagenêt’, pp. 75–88; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, passim; Bartlett, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, pp. 4–35; Power, ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans’; and Vincent, ‘The Court of Henry II’; Gillingham, The English in the Twelfth Century, passim. Powicke was the founder of this approach.

Chapter 1

48

Boundaries and Frontiers A seminal part of understanding identity among this mixed aristocracy is reliant upon the issue of boundaries and frontiers, geographical and non-geographical, that were defined by differences. Boundaries represent a liminal stage, a deconstruction and reconstruction, of self-determination and self-interest within the political community, where the ‘self ’ and the ‘other’ forcibly meet and define their terms and desires. Facing an oppositional force instigates the first stage in an ethnic, or communal, reawakening and awareness. It is for this reason that the cross-Channel elite, who held land in frontier territories, struggled in particular to find expression in England or in France.55 Frontier animosities brought the issue of rights and identity to the fore more so than in settled areas. Most of the interaction with the Scottish court was based on these communal identities that formed among families in areas of conflict. Because frontier territories were particularly vulnerable to political shifts, frontier families encouraged more protective bonds of kinship and of friendship than elsewhere and these bonds often spread far from the territorial core where the conflict originated. Thus, the extended kin-networks in these areas spilled over into Scotland and brought families across the Channel together behind a common cause as will be seen during the 1173 war. Within the broader context of the European political structure, events seem­ingly confined to animosities between the crowns of France and England affected those families whose lands were scattered in frontiers throughout France, Scotland, and England differently than those who were confined to one region and one overlord. Many Anglo-French families held fees in the frontier regions of Wales, Scotland, and Normandy, and, as in the latter case, they were forced to choose to support their immediate overlord, King Henry II of England as Count of Normandy, or the overlord of Henry II, the King of France. The inherent dangers of political intrigue were deeply personal. CrossChannel families risked their livelihood and that of their offspring if they did not support the final victor, but, by virtue of the landholding patterns, they also had a greater degree of choice and a political malleability that their counterparts did not have. Most recently Daniel Power has contributed to this argument concerning frontier mentalities during the struggle between the Angevin and Capetian kings. He has suggested that there are two types of frontiers: one of separa55 

M. Warren, History on the Edge, pp. 1–59.

Image and Identity

49

tion and one of contact and appeasement between different groups of people. Lemarignier and Chenon said much the same, expressed within the confines of homage and lordship, and they focused on the march as having a geographical limit or boundary based loosely on the tenth-century Carolingian pagi and its customs.56 W. Scott Jessee has conducted a similar study about frontier lordship in Maine under Robert the Burgundian in the eleventh century, while Michel Brand’Honneur has addressed the frontier politics in Brittany, and Heather Tanner has illuminated the socio-political structure and frontier mentality between the lordships of the counts of Boulogne and Flanders.57 These frontier zones were often accompanied by clashes in identity exacerbated by the structure of multiple lordships.58 The fluidity of the Norman frontier alone complicated the issue of identity and political alignment which is intensified when the frontiers of Wales and Scotland are added to the mix.59 This can be seen readily in areas like the Chartrain, the marches of Brittany, Maine, Alençon, the Vexin, Beauvais, Champagne, and Burgundy;60 and in Britain in the western approaches to the Isles, northern Scotland in the former Cénél Loairn territories, the Anglo-Scottish Border, and in the marches of Wales and in Ireland where multiple lordships and vague boundary lines slowed the progress of political stability.61 56 

Lemarignier, Recherche sur l’hommage en marche, pp. 4–8; Chenon, ‘Les marches separantes d’Anjou, Bretagne et Poitou’; Chenon, ‘Les marches separantes d’Anjou, Bretagne, et Poitou: note additionnelle’. Lemarignier prefers ‘marches’ but uses ‘frontier’ and ‘march’ interchangeably. 57  Jessee, Robert the Burgundian; Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies. 58  Power, ‘French and Norman Frontiers’, pp.  2–3; Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, passim 59  Power, The Norman Frontier, passim but in particular, pp. 23–80; See the articles by Chappell, ‘Ethnogenesis and Frontiers’; and Miller, ‘Ethnogenesis and Religious Revitalization’ that discuss the general principles of frontiers as ‘zones of transformative interaction between systems’; and the ‘Introduction’ in Barth, Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, pp. 1–38. However, it is still necessary that each historical case be examined separately. 60  Lemarignier, ‘La dislocation du pagus’; Power, The Norman Frontier; Thompson, Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France; Barton, Lordship in the County of Maine, especially pp. 21–111; Carolus-Barré, ‘Le service militaire en Beauvais’; A. Livingstone, ‘Kith and Kin’; Lemarignier, Recherche sur l’hommage en marche; Searle, Predatory Kinship, pp. 23–58, 179–229; Potts, ‘Normandy or Brittany?’; Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’; LoPrete, ‘Le conflit Plan­ tagenêt-Capétien vu des frontières’. 61  P. Duffy, ‘The Nature of the Medieval Frontier in Ireland’; B. Smith, ‘The Medieval

50

Chapter 1

The obvious difference between the experience of those in frontier territories in Britain and those in frontier territories in France, however, is remarkable. The French territories may have had some local custumal differences but they came from the same ancient Frankish roots (except perhaps the far west of Brittany and in Languedoc). Even the Normans had been well Frankified by the mid-eleventh century. By contrast, the Irish, Welsh and Scots had emphatically different experiences and customs from the Anglo-French settlers, who were very much foreigners, although they too began to absorb the outward manifestations of the customs and traditions of the settlers. However, in one key respect all of these people whether French, English, Scottish, Irish, Breton or Welsh shared one commonality no matter their language, skin, hair colour or customs. Political power relied predominantly upon kinship — a blood relationship or bond that determined claims to lands and titles. Attitudes towards succession and the transfer of power were also fairly similar across Western Europe. Kinship by blood or marriage formed the basis for claims to succession so for example, there was little difference between claims to the ducal title of Brittany made by the Porhoët family, who were linked by marriage to the preceding dynasty, compared to claims made by the MacWilliams in northern Scotland; that is, they both represented rival dynastic rights against the ruling line though the MacWilliam claim lasted much longer and was arguably more valid. Brittany and Scotland had, intermittently since at least the tenth century, experienced serious succession disputes between rival lines, which was not an uncommon problem for families throughout the Middle Ages.62 Kinship formed the backbone of medieval society. Border’; Lydon, ‘The Problem of the Frontier in Medieval Ireland’; R. R. Davies, ‘The Law of the March’; R. R. Davies, Lordship and Society in the March of Wales, pp. 1–33; R. R. Davies, ‘Frontier Arrangements in Fragmented Societies’; G. Barrow, ‘Frontier and Settlement’; Stringer, ‘Kingship, Conflict, and State-Making’; Bartlett, Gerald of Wales, pp.  20–25; Strickland, ‘Securing the North’; Neville, ‘Keeping the Peace on the Northern Marches’; Sellar, ‘Hebridean Sea-Kings’; McDonald, ‘Rebels without a Cause?’; McDonald, ‘Matrimonial Politics’; McDonald, ‘Soldiers Most Unfortunate’; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles; McDonald, ‘Treachery in the Remotest Territories of Scotland’; Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’. 62  Woolf, ‘The “Moray Question”’ has argued for more peaceful interaction between the Cenél nGabráin and Loairn dynasties. The basis of his argument that the lines of descent passed the kingship back and forth is certainly true but several of these heirs were killed or mysteriously died in quick sequence so it may not have been so peaceful. Certainly one can see the inherent basis of feud between MacBeth and Malcolm III and even between the sons of Malcolm III and his brother, Donald, as problematic. The Breton situation was just as complex as rival counts of Rennes and Nantes fought for supremacy with the aid of the counts of Blois and

Image and Identity

51

The Scottish Identity The cultural development in Scotland leaned initially towards a process of accul­­turation rather than assimilation after colonization.63 One reason for this sep­­aration in the twelfth century was the kings of Scotland’s interest in the French and Anglo-French court. The twelfth-century Barnwell chronicler and Jordan Fantosme were not merely paying lip service to Scottish interest in the Anglo-French world when they mentioned King William the Lion’s love of the French; they were commenting on the state of the Scottish court. They both noted the Scottish king’s preference for foreigners, who ‘counted themselves as Frenchmen in race, manners, and speech’.64 As a result of this favouritism towards the newcomers, the native nobility was sidelined to some extent and did not demonstrably show any interest in the French dimension of politics beyond what could be experienced in Scotland and England and even this interaction was limited. Very few of the ‘native’ fam­ ilies were directly involved in the Scottish court except in times of war as in 1174. In his study on the family of Mar, Richard Oram has recently admitted to the absence of the native earls at court into the thirteenth century. Even the few marital alliances with Anglo-French families in England cannot always be relied upon for the twelfth century.65 Cynthia Neville mentions the regular attendance of the earls of Strathearn between 1171 and 1199 (some of which charters Anjou, respectively, in the tenth and eleventh centuries. Cf. Dunbabin, France in the Making, pp. 82–84, 196–98, 331–33; Chédeville and Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale, pp. 24, 42–43, 45, 49, 62, 84–96, 119–23; Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, pp. 101–02, 104–09, 112, 118. Cf. Giot, Guigon, and Merdrignac, The British Settlement of Brittany, pp. 160–65, 173–76, 184–92; Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp. 63–100, 106–24 about the Porhoët claim through his wife, 353–62, 379–94. It is because of conflicts like that between Eudes de Penthièvre and his nephew, Count Conan II, that the families of La Guerche, Dinan, Vitré, Tinténiac, and Châteauneuf were able to establish lordships which has led French scholars to discuss this period as a time of ‘feudal dislocation’ or the ‘devolution of fiefs’. 63  Teske, ‘Acculturation and Assimilation’, pp. 359–61. 64  Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 206; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 48–49, ll. 640–43. 65  Oram, ‘Continuity, Adaptation and Integration’, p. 50: ‘While Morgrund (Earl of Mar)’s possible marriage to a Warenne lady did not open up Mar to an influx of land-hungry relatives, neither did it secure the immediate succession to the earldom for their son […].’ Without dating clauses, as was the royal custom at the time, even the claim that earls regularly attended the king’s court is slightly misleading because they may have only been with the king a few times in a thirty-year period when they witnessed multiple charters at one time so the output and thus attendance seemed to be greater than it actually was.

Chapter 1

52

were clearly all done at the same time), but she also notes that this regularity represented an aberration in the family’s character which ended in c. 1199.66 The native nobility was not disinterested in the new Anglo-French customs but this interest did not extend into relations with France. Furthermore, as stated by Cynthia Neville, it is equally fair to say that in the political climate of Scotland in the late twelfth and early thirteenth century ‘an earl who is not dancing attendance on the king is an earl who is failing the government of his earldom’. It was more necessary perhaps for the earls to be at the centre of power in their territory and thus able to protect and to act in the interest of their people. The lack of interest in the French dimension of politics is most obvious when looking at marriage patterns, but there are problems with ascertaining the origins of many of the wives of the native nobility. Lineages were rarely elucidated in cartulary records, the main resource for this period, and there is little concrete evidence that marital alliances were formed directly between native Scots and French families in the twelfth century.67 Fife was probably the first territory to experience some intermarriage with the Anglo-French nobility. The house of Fife and their Lascelles and Quincy tenants were the earliest known families to form marital contracts with the AngloFrench possibly beginning with the marriage of Ela, a daughter of Reginald de Warenne (Wormegay), a younger brother of Ada de Warenne, to Earl Duncan of Fife between c. 1140 and 1154.68 The Lascelles in Fife were from an English family but Alain de Lascelles’ son’s name was Duncan, which may indicate that Alain had married a native wife. The family did not have a strong connection with France though their family’s Breton overlord in England may have influenced some of their political decisions. The Quincys, on the other hand, are a rare example of a family who were explicitly involved in France, where they held land and served the dukes of Normandy. Evidence does not indicate that the native Scots pursued establishing themselves across the Channel politically nor did they make claims to French fees or titles through their Anglo-French extended kin. For example, at the end of 66 

Neville, Native Lordship in Medieval Scotland, p. 41. The twelfth-century earls of Dunbar, other than Patrick, fourth Earl of Dunbar, married wives whose origins are unknown but based on naming practices certainly not French though Patrick’s mother may have been Anglo-French. There is no concrete indication that the earls of Menteith, Moray, Lennox, Galloway, Ross, Caithness, and Atholl married Anglo-French wives who had direct links to the Continent before 1204, although it is possible, as argued in Chapter 4 that the widow of Malcolm, second Earl of Atholl, married Richard Comyn, who may have been involved on the Continent. 68  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 87–88, 197. 67 

Image and Identity

53

the twelfth century, Earl Gilbert of Strathearn probably married the AngloBreton daughter of William II d’Aubigny ‘le Breton’ but Gilbert did not seem to pursue any interests in France though his father-in-law may have continued to appear in Brittany in accordance with his patrimonial fees.69 The one certain Franco-Scottish marriage of the twelfth century was that of Morgrund Earl of Mar’s daughter to the Scoto-Breton son of Walter fitzAlain, the latter who did continue his relationship with his Breton cousins at Dol until his death in 1177. However, there is no indication that Walter’s son fostered these links. Although the native nobility accepted some of the customs introduced by the newcomers from England and France, they did not appear to be interested in any French political dimension belonging to these settlers.70 Most of the settlers also lost interest in their French roots after their French fees were confiscated by King Philip Augustus in 1204. After the loss of Normandy, the Anglo-French Scottish nobility focused more fully on their image as lords in Scotland. They became more insular and more consumed by native interests and customs. The English Anglo-French lords would increasingly see the Scots, native or of French derivation, as ‘backwards’, and foreign, and even the AngloFrench Scots increasingly saw themselves as less French. By the mid-thirteenth century, a new aristocratic consciousness was taking hold in Scotland as marital alliances were being confined to families in Scotland and England and it was this latter development that helped shape and prepare Scotland for an official treaty with France against England in 1295. The Scots had for all intense purposes lost their French identity, their French kinship, and thus an official treaty spelling out the nature of this new relationship became necessary. 69 

Charters, Bulls and Other Documents Relating to the Abbey of Inchaffray, ed. by Lindsay, Dowden, and Thomson, p. 25; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, viii, 242; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 604, 611, 646, 692 and see Chapter 5. For the argument about the Anglo-French wives of the earls of Strathearn and the earls of Fife see G. Barrow, ‘The Earls of Fife in the 12th Century’; Bannerman, ‘MacDuff of Fife’; Crawford, ‘The Earldom of Caithness and the Kingdom of Scotland’; Oram, ‘Continuity, Adaptation and Integration’. The latter studies are referring to Scottish marriages with English or Anglo-French families whose interests were primarily focused on their English fees. When they speak of the acculturation of ‘Anglo-Norman’ traditions and customs, they are referring to a broad system of ‘feudal’ or Western practices that belonged to families in France, England, Castile, and Germany and not to identification with French lands or political interests even though they still spoke French as did the English aristocracy. 70  The Scots did become interested in gaining French territories at the end of the Hundred Years’ War but by then they saw themselves as ‘Scots’. Macdougall, An Antidote to the English, pp. 53–99, 107, 131–33, 140–45; M. Brown, James I, pp. 109–12, 116, 153, 162; M. Brown, The Black Douglases, pp. 34, 64, 112–13, 117, 127, 153, 161, 210–24.

Chapter 2

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

Scotland and England: Fealty and Homage King David’s accession to the Scottish throne in 1124 ushered in a new era — an era that brought Scotland closer to the cradle of political developments in France. The new King brought many men with him whose families still held lands on both sides of the Channel or who formed marital contracts in England and in France. These families shared a common heritage and interpretation of identity that interwove French and Anglo-French descent with native traditions and local imagery. Like their kin in England and France, the patchwork of native and Anglo-French identity gave the settlers in Scotland a fluid perspective and attitude towards identity, land, and crown authority that made them a threat or a valuable asset to any of the three rulers who could clinch their support when conflict dominated communication. This political structure, intertwined with a complex network of matrimonial and political alliances based around territorial grants, protective pacts of friendship and shared interests, caused a very fragile and vulnerable environment for peaceful intercourse between the three kingdoms. Families often owed homage and fealty to two or three different overlords and crowns creating a structure in which allegiance to multiple lords was problematic.1 Terra was the source 1 

For general studies about multiple lordships and patronage see: G. Barrow, Robert Bruce; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy; Tuck and Goodman, War and Border Societies in the Middle Ages; Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus; Stringer, ‘Scottish Foundations’.

Chapter 2

56

of reward given in exchange for faithful service. As such, land also became the basis for dispute, representing not only a resource for providing for one’s family but it was also a symbol of status and denoted one’s relationship to a magnate or the king.2 However, this system was even more complicated for rulers. Throughout Western Europe, the fluctuating claims of superiority and the language utilized to describe overlordship created ambiguities concerning rights of authority in this period.3 Helmerichs, Lifshitz, Chibnall, and Reynolds have shifted some of the views concerning feudal relationships and argued in favour of a more fluid and less strict interpretation of particular feudal bonds, which has merit when trying to understand the English crown’s relationship with the Scots and indeed also that of the Scottish kings with their men, native and foreign.4 The same distrust of determinate terminology in reference to lordships has been expressed even earlier concerning Brittany.5 Avoiding rigid interpretations about ‘feudal’ relationships may open the avenue to a more fluid understanding of the constructs of socio-political foundations in the Middle Ages. Many bonds existed outside the strictures of fief, vassal and overlord. Historians have for too long based their analysis of these relationships on preconceptions about what ‘his man’ meant and accepted at face value descriptions of overlordship written from within a claimed overlord’s 2 

Cownie, ‘Religious Patronage and Lordship’. Helmerichs, ‘Princeps, Comes, Dux Normannorum’; Lifshitz, ‘Translating “Feudal” Vocabulary’; Chibnall, ‘Feudalism and Lordship’; Reynolds, Fiefs and Vassals, passim but see particularly Chapters I–III and V; Reynolds, ‘Afterthought on Fiefs and Vassals’; Reynolds, ‘Fiefs and Vassals in Scotland’. The relationship between the dukes of Brittany and Normandy before the reign of Henry II are one such example of a horizontal bond of alliance. The existence of this type of bond has also been commented on in reference to Wales: Babcock, ‘Imbeciles and Normans’. In the case of the Scottish kings, submission often implies a vertical bond undeniably but neither William I nor William Rufus exercised such authority so the practical implications of Scottish vassalage were ephemeral. 4  If the relationship that the kings of Scots had with their men was strictly that of overlord and vassal then King David in 1138 and King William in 1173 would not have been forced to seek the counsel of their men before entering into war. This was not the case, which implies that the king was first among equals not a supreme and final authority. Furthermore, there are only a handful of acts (three) in the reign of David I referring solely to Lothian that do explicitly state knight-service, or forinsec, owed to the king. That is not to say that the king did not hold land elsewhere but it does suggest that a lot of the land was held directly by the native ‘earls’ who then owed service to the king. Military service owed by a lord to the king in exchange for lands that was spelled out in charters became far more prevalent during the reign of his grandson, King William. Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 141, 149, 167. 5  Jeulin, ‘L’Hommage de la Bretagne’. 3 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

57

patronage network, as seen with the counts of Anjou and Normandy. These claims were also accepted without placing them into a wider historical context. Between the eleventh and early thirteenth centuries, the contract between lord and vassal was legally vague in cross-Channel lordships. Such ambiguity was the weakness with which royal prerogative was forced to contend, particularly when its champion was another king whose resources to military manpower could seriously undermine his opponent’s authority. From the time of the Norman invasion in 1066, the kings of England were not only kings and overlords of England in their own right but they also held lands and were vassals of the kings of France. However, the dukes of Normandy/kings of England made clear that they saw their relationship with the French crown as one between equals with each owing fidelity to the other,6 and those families who followed them across the seas were rewarded for their personal involvement in conquering England even if they were also vassals of the king of France. Both the kings of England and France encouraged the decentralization of large tracts of lands as a precaution against too much landed power residing in the hands of one magnate.7 However, these rules did not apply to the kings themselves. The Angevin and Norman kings of England, with the conditioning and mindset of an imperial overlord, were reluctant to perform homage to the kings of France for their lands in Normandy, Anjou, and Aquitaine and were keen to obtain full independence from the French crown. As such, the English king, a distant and arguably less demanding overlord, often encouraged their subjects to fight against their French overlord by promising land as a reward for service. Other French nobles supported the king of France in the hope that they might obtain more concessions thereby leaving tracts of land, particularly in the sensitive frontier regions of the Ornois and Maine, vulnerable to the vagaries of invading armies.8 These opposing forces caused a division in loyalties that cut across the Norman and French frontier and disrupted 6 

Breuis Relatio de Guillelmo, ed. by Van Houts, p. 45; Van Eickels, ‘L’hommage des rois anglais’ C. P. Lewis, ‘The Early Earls of Anglo-Norman England’; C. P. Lewis, ‘The Formation of the Honor of Chester’; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 137–38; Crouch, ‘Normans and Anglo-Normans’, pp. 51–67; Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, pp. 25–171; Green, ‘Unity and Disunity’; Green, The Government of England under Henry I, pp. 118–19; KeatsRohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 183–84. Many of the English honours were already scattered when the Normans arrived. However, William did not change this structure except for in frontier territories in the north and west. French territories were usually also scattered but for some of the upper nobility like the Beaumonts, Bellêmes, and Giffards, their Norman territories were more compact. Philip Augustus broke all of the Norman estates up among different families after 1204. 8  See Keats-Rohan, ‘Two Studies in North French Prosopography’ for an excellent account of the early history of Maine and regional politics. 7 

58

Chapter 2

the political and familial structures that spilled over into England and Scotland and later Ireland.9 The kings of England, however, failed to recognize that their antipathy towards the demands for service and fealty increasingly enforced by the crown of France was the same sentiment felt north of the English border. W. L. Warren aptly described the situation as — ‘it was in the construing of oaths that the king of England had difficulty with the king of Scots, and it was just such a problem that the kings of France had with the dukes of Normandy.’10 In the eleventh century, these oaths were unexacting and ambiguous, which opened up a cesspool of legal subjectivity and exposure to continuing aggression. This very case is made concerning the nature of homage performed by the kings of Scots to the kings of England prior to 1204. In the eleventh century, the relationship between the crowns of England and Scotland, like that between England and France, was ‘legally’ vague. For example, the contempo­ rary accounts provided by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and the Chronicle of Melrose stated that in 1072/73 Malcolm III became William the Conqueror’s man: ‘Malcolm cyngc com  gryðode wið Wyllelm cynge,  wæs his man.’11 As des­cribed, this relationship was based on a personal contract between two men not necessarily contingent upon a territorial claim, but King William I of Eng­ land may have been encouraging a different interpretation of this relationship by capitalising on a myth that the Norman dynasty was circulating earlier in the century under Dudo of Saint Quentin, who stated that Duke Richard II of Normandy ‘ruled the Scots under his patronage’.12 This claim was circumspect since Richard was, at the time, only Duke of Normandy, and he and his father had only recently expanded their borders beyond Rouen, Bayeux, and Coutances. They certainly had no authority in Scotland. Other Anglo-Norman writers were also less than clear about what it meant for the king of Scots to be ‘the man’ of the king of England. Writing between 9  Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 28–34. Some families chose to assign different branches of the family to different royal parties to increase their chances of retaining some lands. This is certainly true in 1138 with the Brus family and it occurs again in 1204 among other families. 10  W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 225. 11  Chronica de Mailros, p. 56; Anglo-Saxon Chronicle E-Text, ed. by Susan Irvine, in AngloSaxon Chronicle, ed. by Dumville and Keynes, vii, 90–91; Annals of Ulster, ed. by Hennessy and MacCarthy, ii, 24–25; Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D-Text, ed. by G. P. Cubbin, in Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. by Dumville and Keynes, vi, 85: ‘King Malcolm came and made peace with King William and was his man.’ According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and Chronicle of Melrose, Malcolm became ‘his man’. 12  Dudo of St Quentin, History of the Normans, ed. and trans. by Chistiansen, p. 140.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

59

c. 1112 and 1141, Orderic Vitalis claimed that Malcolm III ‘commendavit’, or ‘had been entrusted’ with, Lothian by King William II ‘Rufus’ of England, in 1091, but by implication Malcolm held Lothian for Rufus without reference to any subservience. This service was, as described by Orderic, based on Edward the Confessor’s gift of Lothian to King Malcolm in c. 1059 as part of the dowry for his projected marriage to the King’s grand-niece, Margaret, but there is no other supporting evidence that Margaret was betrothed to Malcolm before the Confessor’s death.13 The claim that the king of Scots held Lothian of the king of England because of a previous agreement with Edward the Confessor may have been fabricated to give William II rights where he did not have them before. Henry of Huntingdon writing between 1130 and 1154 is equally ambiguous when he says about 1091 that Malcolm was made William Rufus’ man and was subject to him by an oath of fealty.14 Geoffrey of Monmouth also alludes to service owed by three kings of Scotland in return for having been restored to their realm.15 The majority of these chroniclers were writing at least twenty years after the arrangement between Malcolm and William and from an Anglo-centric point of view. This same confusion over overlordship concerning what it meant ‘to be the man’ of another can be applied to Brittany, which, as will become apparent throughout this study, shared a lot of similarities with Scotland. Orderic Vita­ lis is the only contemporary source for the description of homage performed by the counts/dukes of Brittany to the dukes of Normandy, which has been inter­­preted by historians as a firm statement of Norman overlordship without taking into account the historical context of the author and events. Orderic states explicitly that in 1113 Louis VI of France granted to William I’s son, King Henry I, the territories of Maine, Brittany, and Bellême and that Alain IV Fergant, Count of Brittany, ‘had already been made the man’ of Henry when he betrothed his son, Conan, to Henry’s natural daughter, Maud (Mahaut), but there was no mention that Alain did homage to Henry.16 Furthermore, to be 13 

Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 270; Chibnall, ‘Anglo-French Relations in the Work of Orderic Vitalis’. 14  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 598–99. Another question about claimed homage to the English king hovers over events in 1093: Broun, Scottish Independence and the Idea of Britain, pp. 19–20. 15  Historia regum Britannie, ed. by Wright and Crick, ii, 172–73. Geoffrey was probably alluding to Kings Duncan, Edgar, and possibly Alexander I. 16  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 180: ‘[…] homo regis Anglorum iam factus fuerat […]’. Chibnall’s translation is misleading. The Latin text does not say Alain was

60

Chapter 2

the man of someone else did not necessarily mean that one was subservient to the other but that a bond of personal fidelity existed. The basic problem with such an interpretation is that Alain had already granted full governing power of all of Brittany to his son, Conan III, in 1112 which was also about the same time Conan married Maud. Maud began to bear witness for her husband and father-in-law in this same year but it must be stressed that no mention was made of homage to the Norman Duke associated with territory either when Alain named Conan his successor or when Conan married Henry’s daughter.17 Furthermore, only Alain was mentioned as a ‘man of ’ Henry without reference to Conan though the marriage of Conan and Maud would have created a mutual bond of allegiance between Henry and Conan. What is more clear, however, is that when Conan succeeded his father the duchy was perceived as weakened by Alain’s rule. The new Duke specifically referred to his father’s administration as ‘fatigatus’ and to the duchy as ‘fractus’, which was why he immediately began to reorganize and centralize his administration. It may have been partly for this reason that King Louis and King Henry tried to interfere in ducal politics in 1113, but their attempts were not entirely convincing. Pope Honorius II was still calling Conan ‘princeps’ of Brittany and King Louis VI of France’s lordship was only recognized in lower Brittany.18 Ultimately, in 1113, Louis VI lacked the authority to grant Brittany to Henry since he did not exercise a direct and recognized lordship over the entire duchy.19 Simply put, there is no evidence that if Louis granted overlordship of Brittany to Henry I that the dukes of Brittany recognized their claim or that the dukes of Normandy exercised active overlordship until the reign of King Henry II.20 This same ambiguity existed with the Scots, which weakened Norman rule in the north of England. King Malcolm’s right to rule Scotland was unquestionable with respect to the antiquity of his lineage, which had been strengthened by his marriage to Margaret, a member of the Anglo-Saxon bloodline that the vassal but the man, ‘homo’, of the king of the English nor was there any mention that the relationship between Alain and Henry was defined by the duchy of Brittany. 17  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Redon en Bretagne, ed. by de Courson, pp. 323–24, 298–300; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 526, 527. 18  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Redon en Bretagne, ed. by de Courson, pp. 323–24, 298–300; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 526, 527. 19  M. Jones, ‘The Capetians and Brittany’, pp. 6–7. 20  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 180–81; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, p. 218; Chédeville and Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale, pp. 68–69; W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 74.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

61

had been removed from power by William I. Malcolm and his wife, Margaret, and brother-in-law, Edgar Aetheling, threatened the legitimacy of William I’s stake to the throne by making alliances with William’s enemies. The King of France, Philip I, used the rival claim of Edgar Aetheling against William by planting Edgar at Montreuil-sur-Mer during a rebellion against King William in 1074/75. He also opened negotiations with Earl Waltheof of Northumbria, and possibly with King Malcolm, with whom Waltheof had found refuge before his departure for Flanders in 1072.21 This decision was part of Philip’s strategy to extend royal authority to the north of the Ile-de-France against the count of Flanders, who was King William’s ally.22 These alliances challenged King William’s position in England, but ultimately he nor his sons were able to exercise any authority in Scotland. They were too busy with affairs on the Continent. Animosities continued between Malcolm and William, but ironically it was because of their discord that their successors were able to come to a more peaceful understanding. The oath of fidelity in 1072 that Malcolm III made to William was conditioned by Malcolm’s agreement to also send his son, Duncan, south as a hostage. Because of this arrangement, Duncan was introduced to the Anglo-French court where he was educated and as was the custom ‘[…] et armis militaribus honoratus, abire permisit’ until his release in 1087.23 The years that Malcolm’s sons spent in the south created a closer bond with the Anglo-French court.24 After Malcolm’s death in 1093 his sons, Duncan 21 

John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 199; Henry of Hun­ tingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, p. 398; William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 468; Anglo-Saxon Chron­ icle E-Text, ed. by Susan Irvine, in Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. by Dumville and Keynes, vii, 90–91; Oram, David I, p. 31. Montreuil continued to be a source of dispute between the counts of Ponthieu and Boulogne: Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 27. 22  See Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 112–15 for Goda and Anglo-Saxon alliance, which also involved the county of Boulogne. Count Eustache II of Boulogne’s brother-in-law through Goda, his wife, was Edward the Confessor. Goda’s first husband had been the count of Amiens and of the Vexin. He gained land in Normandy through marriage to Goda, which may explain how families like the Bailleuls, who later settled in Scotland, developed branches further south (similar to the land and lordship structure that emerged under the counts of Ponthieu and Alençon in the twelfth century). Younger sons found advancement in other territories because of marital networking. 23  Florence of Worcester, Chronicon, ed. by Thorpe, ii, 21: ‘[…] he was allowed to train in military discipline and honourable conduct’. 24  Rise of Gawain, ed. and trans. by Leake Day, pp. 2–3. The author of De Ortu (probably

Chapter 2

62

(ruled 1094) and Edgar (ruled 1097 to 1107), were able to obtain aid from William’s son and successor, William II ‘Rufus’, for their campaign against their uncle, Donald. Duncan seized the Scottish throne from Donald in 1094 specifically because he had an English and French army fighting for him, but the animosity of the native population towards his newfound allies made his victory short-lived. Duncan not only had Anglo-French contingents fighting for him in Scotland but also Anglo-Saxon Northumbrians who were bound in service to Duncan through his wife, Ethelreda, daughter of Earl Gospatrick I of Northumberland (1067–72) and Lord of Allerdale (d.  c.  1075). 25 Earl Gospatrick had found refuge at the Scottish court after he had been deposed by William I in 1072. Presumably, some of his men, including his son and heir, Gospatrick II and his other children, remained in Scotland where the Earl was given land in Lothian at Dunbar.26 Donald used Duncan’s alliance with for­­eigners to undermine Duncan’s status as a ruler and within a year after his accession Duncan was murdered, leaving only a young son, William (probably named after William the ‘Conqueror’ or his son).27 Duncan’s half-brother, Edgar, followed in his footsteps and he was also sent military aid by King William Rufus, who helped him defeat his uncle, Donald, in 1097.28 Rufus recognized that having an agent-king who owed possession of at least a portion of Lothian and of Scotia to him would be of greater benefit to Anglo-Scottish relations than an unknown, independent ruler of the north.

Robert de Torigni) commented on this dual purpose of taking hostages when describing the king of Britain’s subjugation of neighbouring provinces. De Ortu was probably written in the late twelfth century after King Henry II had expanded his lordship over several territories and had forced many lords to perform homage to him for their lands. 25 

Oram, David  I, pp.  43–44; Macdonald, ‘King’s of the Wild Frontier?’; Macdonald, ‘Gospatric, First Earl of Lothian’; Aird, ‘Gospatric, Earl of Northumbria’. Duncan and Ethelreda married in c. 1093. Earl Gospatrick’s son, Gospatrick, succeeded him and became very important in controlling the Borders during the reign of King Henry I and during the Succession War. His lordship was significant to the political interests of both crowns because it spanned from Lothian to Northumberland. His daughter married Ralph de Merlay. See Chapter 3 about the Merlays. 26  Macdonald, ‘King’s of the Wild Frontier?’, pp. 139–43. 27  John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 66–69, 72–73; Chronica de Mailros, p. 60. John of Worcester is a late source and the Chronicle of Melrose, which is contemporary, only mentions that, though Duncan had been a hostage of the King, Rufus only gave him aid and counsel to take the kingdom without any mention of fealty and homage. 28  Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 46, 64. Duncan was a son of Malcolm III and his first wife, Ingeborg.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

63

For this reason, in the arrangement he made with Edgar, he specifically ensured that this relationship was described in territorial terms. The agreement was stated as, ‘Edgar, son of Malcolm, King of Scots, was possessing by paternal inheritance all the land of Lothian and sovereignty of Scotia by the gift of my Lord William, King of the English.’29 There is a sense of subordination in Edgar’s status because Rufus won Edgar his position over his lands that had been lost to his uncle but it is admittedly unclear that Rufus had a right to the land itself. In other words, Edgar possessed his paternal inheritance because of the rights held by his father in Scotia and Lothian and because William Rufus helped him to attain them. It was a gift in that Edgar would not have held Scotia without William’s aid and he held Lothian because of the arrangement in 1091. To the English and French chroniclers it seemed that the kings of Scots were vassals of the English king and to some degree they probably were. The contemporary French chronicler and theologian, Guibert de Nogent, who was writing during the reign of Rufus’ brother, Henry I, believed that the Scots had been under the rule and subjection of the kings of England since the time of William I of England.30 News of the subjection of Scotland to the Norman kings was also taken at face value from as far afield as Burgundy by c. 1096.31 Whether Edgar was a vassal of Rufus or not is to some extent irrelevant because Rufus, like his father, never pursued overlordship as a political reality.32 Furthermore, Edgar’s arrangement with Rufus ended in 1100 when Rufus died in a hunting accident.

29 

Duncan, ‘The Earliest Scottish Charters’, p.  126: ‘Edgarus filius Malcolmi regis Scottorum totam terram de Lodoneio et regnum Scotie dono domini mei Willelmi Anglorum regis et paterna hereditate possidens.’ The argument about this homage is based on a charter from 1095, called Lawrie XV, XVI and XIX and found in A. C. Lawrie’s Early Scottish Charters, in which King Edgar gave Berwick and Coldingham to the church of Durham. Cf. Early Scottish Charters, ed. by Lawrie, pp. 14–15; Duncan, ‘Yes, The Earliest Scottish Charters’; Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, p. 56. 30  Guibert de Nogent, Dei gesta per Francos, ed. by Huygens, p. 89 31  Chronique de Saint-Pierre-le Vif de Sens, ed. by Bautier and Gilles, pp. 126–28. 32  Green, ‘King Henry I and Northern England’, p. 44. From the English vantage point of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle there may have been a sense of overlordship when Alexander I succeeded his brother with Henry’s consent but the situation is unclear since it has only been mentioned by this one source and the description of the bond is murky.

Chapter 2

64

Henry ‘the Matchmaker’ The relationship between Scotland and England underwent a drastic change upon the accession of King Henry I to the English throne after his brother, William Rufus, died. Henry I approached the northern problem under the far more peaceful guise of marital pacification. Between 1100 and 1153, Scottish and English relations were dominated by a series of marriages between the royal houses of Scotland and England, which found further support among the baronage, who also used marriage as a tool to bind families together across the Border. These marital alliances across political boundaries bore fruit, uniting dynasties together under the same affinities, which made an impact on relations between the two kingdoms after Henry I’s death in 1135. King Henry I realized the potential of a Scottish alliance soon after his acces­­ sion. Within four months, he married Maud (or Edith) of Scotland, the sister of King Edgar and daughter of King Malcolm III and of Margaret. This marriage was arranged not only to protect the north of his kingdom but also because it would unite the centuries old Anglo-Saxon royal blood with his Nor­­ man ancestry; an extraordinarily important step to his native contemporaries for defining his authority as a foreign ruler in England. This mode of social intercourse and political staging represented a process of aristocratic self-definition that had been dominating socio-political relations throughout the west for over a century. Henry’s temporal rights were importantly redefined and augmented through his personal affiliation with England’s former master, and for both kingdoms this newfound consanguinity changed the nature of relations between north and south. King Henry also ensured that relations between the kingdoms would remain amicable (in case Maud died early) by arranging the marriage of his Anglo-Norman daughter, Sybilla of Domfront, by his mistress Sybilla Corbet of Alcester, to King Alexander I, who had succeeded to the Scottish throne in 1107.33 Alexander responded to relations with Henry favourably, sending aid to his father-in-law for his 1114 Welsh campaign.34 Marriage alone did not ensure goodwill between 33 

William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 724–25; Liber ecclesie de Scon, ed. by Smyth, pp. 1–3; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, p. 128. 34  Brut Y Tywysogion, ed. by Williams, pp. 114–15. Richard Oram suggests that Alexander’s service in 1114 was meant to win favour with Henry I after Alexander had a falling out with his brother, David, over Lothian. Henry had been supporting David’s claim to the territory: Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 56–57.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

65

the two marital parties, but it did help stabilize relations between the kingdoms allowing for a more open border whereby the English queen’s youngest brother entered the Anglo-French court and Anglo-French men and women migrated to Scotland. For example, the appearance of the Corbet family in Scotland may have been the direct result of Sybilla’s marriage to Alexander. Sybilla’s brother, William, was made constable of Scotland and he was the first of the family to attend the Scottish court. Other members of the family also received royal favour even after Alexander and Sybilla’s deaths.35 Throughout the Middle Ages marriage had been used successfully to end disputes and to create networks of support. King Henry I needed such support on both sides of the Channel because he faced opposition to his succession led by his older brother, Robert ‘Curthose’ of Normandy, his nephew William ‘Clito’, and their allies. By creating a new political community based around marriage and patronage with the Scots, Henry intended to strengthen his control in the north of England while he addressed rebellions elsewhere in his demesne and especially in Normandy. His brother-in-law, David, was specifically groomed as a royal agent of the king of the English from early in his career particularly because the northern counties of England had for long represented the focal point of conflict between the English and Scottish crowns. Cumbria in particular, running from the Solway Firth to the Pennine Hills in the east, had been of especial interest to both royal masters, because it bordered both kingdoms.36 Although Cumbria had officially been joined to the English domain in 1092 with the acquisition of the region’s core at Carlisle, the territory was still open 35 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 19, 20, 54, 58–60, 71, 73; Liber ecclesie de Scon, ed. by Smyth, p. 4; Green, ‘David I and Henry I’, p. 14. Robert Corbet, who appears in Scottish charters, might have been Queen Sybilla’s Shropshire uncle but his relationship to the Queen was unexplained in the records possibly because the Queen had died by the date of his first appearance in c. 1122. Thompson suggests that Alexander’s wife was not a Corbet based on the argument that Henry’s mistress, Sibyl, was a Dunstanville, and that their known son, Reginald, was born too late to be Sybilla’s brother. The latter of these suggestions is not convincing since we do not know when Reginald was born. Furthermore, the Dunstanvilles were related to the Corbets by marriage anyway: Thompson, ‘Affairs of State’, p. 149. 36  G. Barrow, ‘The Pattern of Lordship and Feudal Settlement’; Green, Henry I, p. 129; Oram, ‘Fergus, Galloway, and the Scots’, pp. 122–30. Richard Oram has recently suggested that Galloway was not completely under David’s overlordship. The trouble in the region goes back to 1092/93, when Dolfin, the brother of Gospatrick II of Dunbar, was expelled from Cumbria by William Rufus. Dolfin may have originally ruled in Cumbria as a vassal of King Malcolm: Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 120–21; Chandler, ‘The Last of the Montgomerys’.

Chapter 2

66

to conquest from the north. The Norman kings of England had already been placing their own men in territories near those held by native lords, who had been allowed to remain in the north after the conquest. Roger the Poitevin was one such man. He was given significant land in Cumbria and he also held fees scattered throughout Essex, Suffolk, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and Hampshire. He was a ‘new’ and foreign lord. He, like many, held his estates solely by the king’s grace, but he could not necessarily be trusted because of his cross-Channel kin-networks.37 Roger the Poitevin’s brother was Earl Robert of Shrewsbury, Count of Ponthieu and of Bellême. Earl Robert was not only a powerful lord in the Mid­ west of England but he was also a formidable opponent of Henry at Bellême (held through his mother), in Ponthieu (held through his wife), in the Dives valley (held through his father), and he had held the highly strategic castle of Domfront in the Ornois. Both brothers supported Henry’s brother, Duke Robert Curthose of Normandy, in 1101 when Robert made a bid for control of England. The brothers’ involvement against Henry led to their removal from England and eventually to the loss of their Norman lands.38 The threat Robert Curthose posed to his brother was serious. Support for Robert was given by families who held land in England, which had an immense impact on the geopolitical community that spread beyond Normandy and England to the walls of Paris. Even after Robert had been defeated and imprisoned for twenty years at Devizes castle, his son, William ‘Clito’, with the aid of his powerful allies, Earl Robert of Bellême, Earl William II de Warenne, Count Baudouin of Flanders and King Louis VI of France continued to fight against Henry.39 Therefore, men like Earl Robert of Shrewsbury and Roger the Poitevin posed a threat that could not easily be ignored. Henry addressed the threat that such alliances posed to him on the Con­ tinent and in England in the same fashion he handled the situation with 37 

Chandler, ‘The Last of the Montgomerys’; C. P. Lewis, ‘The King and Eye’. Roger the Poitevin was also related to Henry I. He was a great-great-nephew of Henry’s great-greatgrandmother. His mother was the daughter of the Count of Bellême and his father, Roger de Montgomery, was an important Norman Lord in Calvados in the frontier to the Ornois. Roger's brother, Arnulf, and nephew, William of Mortain, Arnulf of Montgomery and William of Mortain, supported Robert Curthose. 38  Hollister, ‘The Anglo-Norman Civil War’. 39  Green, Henry I, pp. 68–137, 179–89; Green, ‘Robert Curthose Reassessed’; Mooers, ‘“Backers and Stabbers”: Problems of Loyalty’; Mason, ‘Roger de Montgomery’; Thompson, ‘Robert of Bellême Reconsidered’; Hicks, ‘The Impact of William Clito’; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 183–84. Louis backed ‘Clito’ in the French Vexin in 1127.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

67

the Scots. He bribed men — men like the viscount de Beaumont, the count of Perche, and the duke of Brittany — with lands and titles which he then cemented by forming marital arrangements between them and his brood of illegitimate children.40 In this manner, he managed to charm men in regions noted for animosities towards Norman control so that within two decades he had created a kin-based empire with families strategically situated in particularly volatile areas.41 The reasoning behind this policy is clear. The removal from power of lords like Earl Robert de Bellême left the King vulnerable in areas like the western marches to Wales, where Robert had been Lord of Shrewsbury, but even more so in the core of his eastern frontier near the Chartrain where Earl Robert had fled and attempted to foment support.42 Henry specifically gifted fees in the Bellêmois along with one of his own daughters to Rotrou I, Count of Perche,43 in order to safeguard his position against his enemies in upper Maine and the Ornois for the same reasons he advanced his brother-in-law, David in Northumberland, Cumbria, upper Tweeddale, Teviotdale and in HuntingdonNorthampton, which was also sealed by a marital alliance between David and the widow of the former Earl of Northampton, Maud de Senlis, in 1113.44 Henry also granted in maritagium the manors of Aldbourne and Wanborough in the Wiltshire/Berkshire border to Rotrou of Perche in order to bind him to the King on both sides of the Channel just as he may also have granted a lordship in the Cotentin to David.45 The King’s policy of gently wooing his nobility

40 

Thompson, ‘Dowry and Inheritance Patterns’; Thompson, ‘Affairs of State’. He was following a policy initiated by his father after the Norman Conquest. DeAragon, ‘In Pursuit of Aristocratic Women’. 42  Chandler, ‘The Last of the Montgomerys’, p. 9; Mason, ‘Roger de Montgomery’, p. 15. Robert’s father had formed a second marriage with a member of the Puiset family to safeguard the family’s position in the Chartrain, which worked in Robert’s favour when he fell out with the king. See Chapters 5 and 6 for the significance of the Puiset family. 43  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 182; Thompson, Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France, pp. 61–67. Rotrou had been supporting Henry’s brother until Robert’s capture in 1112. Rotrou also maintained good relations with the counts of Blois/ Chartres. His sister was married to the son of Richer de l’Aigle, and both families were patrons of the Tironensian order that had gained so much support in Chartrain territory by this point. 44  Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 272–73. 45  Thompson, ‘Dowry and Inheritance Patterns’, pp. 53–56. See pp. 82–89 about David’s lordship in the Cotentin. 41 

Chapter 2

68

for support was successful. Both of his sons-in-law, Count Rotrou and Duke Conan III of Brittany, fought for Henry at Bellême in 1113.46 Henry I understood the intrinsic weakness with frontier lordships and used his illegitimate children to win over several frontier lords like the l’Aigles (or L’Aquila), Perches, Tosnys, Fergus of Galloway,47 and the Breteuils;48 but marriage did not always end rivalry with the crown. Henry’s daughter, Julianne, tried to assassinate her father with a crossbow in c. 1119 on behalf of her husband, Eustache de Breteuil, Lord of Pacy.49 In other cases, these marriages created loyal networks that well outlasted even Henry. Roscelin de Beaumont’s marriage to Henry’s illegitimate daughter, Constance, was mainly informed by Roscelin’s existing key lordship of the Beaumont castles on the road from Le Mans to Normandy but he also gained land in Devonshire by marriage, which he personally administered at least once in 1130.50 The French dimension of Roscelin’s lordship also put him and his wife into contact at Sées with

46 

G. Barrow, ‘The Charters of David I of Scotland’, pp. 8, 60; Oram, David I, pp. 63–72; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 26, 116, 179, 208, 225, 237, 275, 307–08, 315, 340–42, 345, 351, 360, 364, 366, 370, 382, 386, 390–93. The marriage of Henry I’s natural daughter, Maud, to Conan is representative of the danger with relying solely on marriage to ensure support. Conan was fighting against Henry by 1124 and he would remain aloof from Henry’s heir, Empress Matilda, after 1135 while his son-in-law, Alain ‘le Noir’, was supporting her rival to the English throne, King Stephen. Cf. Suger, Vie de Louis VI le Gros, ed. by Waquet, pp. 225, 233, 237 about Rotrou and Conan at Bellême. 47  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 105; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 79–80; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 229. Some doubt has been cast on this marriage but contemporaries certainly referred to King Henry II’s kinship with Fergus of Galloway’s son, Uchtred, and with the king of Man through Empress Matilda. Howden spoke of Uchtred as ‘consanguinous’ of Henry II through Henry’s mother, Empress Mathilda, and Torigni mentioned the same relationship between Henry II and Godred, King of Man, again through his mother. This all makes sense if Fergus married an illegitimate daughter of Henry. Fergus’ daughter, Affrica, married Godred’s father Olafr, King of Man, and was the only known link to Henry. Cf. D. Brooke, ‘Fergus of Galloway’; Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 52, 59–61; Oram, ‘A Family Business?’, pp. 115–16. 48  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 209. Earl Robert II of Leicester gained the honour of Breteuil by 1135 and his son, Earl Robert III, also gained the castelry of Pacy in 1153. 49  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 212–14; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 18–19, 296–97, 370, 372, 382–83. The Breteuils could be found witnessing with the Tosnys often in the early twelfth century and they gained lands in Surrey at Bromley as part of Julianne’s dowry: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 65. 50  Pipe Roll of 31 Henry I, Michaelmas 1130, p. 155; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 98.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

69

the Warenne family,51 when Roscelin was caught in the crossfire between Count Geoffrey V of Anjou and Henry I in early 1135.52 In two generations, the Beaumonts would rise even further when Roscelin’s granddaughter married King David’s grandson, King William I of Scotland. All of these men were of value to King Henry because of their lordships. David’s position as ‘Prince of the Cumbrians’ from c. 1113 is similar to that of Rotrou’s at Bellême and Conan’s in Brittany in that Cumbria, Bellême and Brit­ tany were areas arguably outside or on the fringe of the English King’s ‘real’ polit­­­ ical authority.53 Henry was able to use David as an ally in the north. Ultimately, Henry’s relationship with David and Alexander gave him the free­­ dom to attend to more pressing concerns in France where his brother, nephew, and their allies were threatening his Continental possessions. It is clear that by 1113, Henry I had reassessed his position and realized that he needed a trustworthy agent who would be perceived as a ‘northerner’, as one of their own, or at least one who understood their ways and who could safeguard his position in the north of England during his long absences. He formed a series of alliances and patronage networks based around David and other northern English families, the latter who had for long been running their own administrative machinery independent of the kings of England.54

51 

This contact came namely through Reginald, a son of William II de Warenne. William de Warenne was suggested in marriage to Maud, sister of Earl David, in the 1090s, as will shortly be discussed, but Maud went on to marry Henry I. Cf. Vincent, ‘The Court of Henry II’, pp. 301–02 for Reginald’s importance on both sides of the Channel. Reginald’s daughter, Ela, may also have married Earl Duncan of Fife. The Warenne-Fife marriage is highly controversial because the evidence is based on a charter of Malcolm IV, who mentioned Duncan’s wife, Ela, as his ‘nepte’ or niece, but ‘nepte’ can also mean kinswoman or cousin so the relationship is unclear. Cf. G. Barrow, ‘The Earls of Fife in the 12th Century’, p. 60 for the charter. 52  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 345; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 444. Roscelin’s castle at Beaumont-sur-Sarthe was sacked by Geoffrey as part of Geoffrey’s pre-emptive bid to take Normandy from the King. 53  Although Henry made claims to territories in the Ornois and the Eure-et-Loir, he did not specifically have rights as Duke of Normandy and so this frontier continued to be a particularly vulnerable area. Cumbria was also a difficult territory to assimilate into the kingdom of England but Henry II was ultimately more successful, having seized and retained control of Cumbria by the late 1150s. For the title, ‘Prince of the Cumbrians’, see Early Scottish Charters, ed. by Lawrie, p. 46; Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 57–58, 65–66, 87–88, 227, 228–29, 242, 284, 316. 54  Green, ‘King Henry I and Northern England’, pp. 35–55.

Chapter 2

70

David I and the Anglo-French Nobility Henry’s patronage of David has to be understood as part of an agenda not contingent upon David becoming king. He was advanced in England because he was the younger brother of the ruling king, which King Henry was able to use to his advantage.55 The early demise of Alexander in 1124 probably prevented rivalry over the succession had Alexander lived, remarried, and fathered a son.56 As it was, Alexander’s death without a legitimate heir left the Scottish crown to his younger sibling, David ‘Prince of the Cumbrians’. Over the years, David had become a close ally and trusted friend of the King of England to such an extent that even contemporaries commented on the impact that the Norman court had made on him. The Wiltshire born historian, William of Malmesbury, said of David, ‘the tarnish of Scottish barbarity had been removed through being polished by intercourse and friendship with us.’57 David was also attributed with trying to raise the Scottish living standards, and with introducing refinement, elegance and civility to his subjects.58 These were all characteristics learned directly from his English brother-in-law, who was outwardly scathing towards kings who were ‘illiterate’, calling them nothing more than ‘crowned asses’.59 Charter records reflect the new Scottish King’s love of the French and Anglo-French court and customs. He brought men with him from England, who were of Anglo-French or French extraction, and as a gesture of his love for Henry had named his firstborn son and heir after the King in c. 1114. Families in Eng­land and Normandy also benefited from the King of Scot’s early career and residence at the English court. King David’s marriage to the widow of Earl Simon de Senlis of Huntingdon, and the rights he gained through this marriage meant that he encouraged many lords from the honour of Huntingdon, 55 

Oram, David I, p. 66 citing The Triumph Tree, ed. by Clancy and others, p. 84. Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 58–64. 57  William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 726–27. 58  William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 726–27; Weiler, ‘William of Malmesbury on Kingship’, pp. 9–10. 59  William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 711: ‘asinus coronatus’; From Irenaeus to Grotius, ed. by O’Donovan and Lockwood O’Donovan, pp. 287–88. This was a sentiment reiterated by John of Salisbury in his Policraticus and by Breton d’Amboise in the Gesta Consulum Andegavorum about thirty-five years later: Chroniques des comtes d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Salmon, i, 71. 56 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

71

and other men he came into contact with at Henry’s court, to emigrate to Scotland. This can be seen with the settlement of junior branches of families like the Engaines,60 Bolbecs,61 Hesdins62 and Bruses, and of men like Payn de Braose (Briouze),63 Hugh le Breton,64 and Walter fitzAlain.65 Others like the Brouys family and Osbert de Arden were also supported by the Scottish crown

60 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 19–20, 60, 69–70, 78, 88–89, 163, 164; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 108, 139, 140, 145; ii, 163, 164; Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, p. 123; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era in Scottish History, pp. 72, 98, 178. Geoffrey Barrow is cautious about explaining any connection between the Pytchley Northamptonshire Engaines and the Somerset/Moreville branch. However, Judith Green suggests that the Engaines of Pytchley in the honour of Huntingdon were related to the Engaines who married the Morevilles of Burgh-by-Sands. The Morevilles were also landholders in the south of Scotland and the founders of Dryburgh Abbey. Berengar and probably his son or nephew William Engaine, who held at Crailing and witnessed for King David and Earl Henry, were probably brought from Pytchley. 61  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 59, 66, 103–04; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 3–4. 62 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 35, 41, 153, 168, 79, 81–82, 111–12, 136, 141–42, 150–52, 156–57; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 13–14, 64–70; M. Pollock, ‘Frontier Patronage and Politics: the fitzAlains of Dol in the twelfth century’, paper presented at the Leeds International Medieval Congress 2009. 63 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 20, 59–60, 69–70; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 158–59; Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, p. 57. Robert de Briouze was the son of Payn, and he also witnessed for the Scottish King. 64 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 19, 53, 55–56, 58, 69–70, 81–83, 103; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 72, 78; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ed. by Cronne and others, ii, 52–53. Hugh ‘Briton’ was in Henry I’s entourage as a witness by 1106. The Brett (Breton) family like the Engaines came from Somerset. 65 

G.  Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp.  12–15, 62, 64–70, 122–23, 126, 169; La Condamine, ‘Les Stuarts et la Bretagne’, pp. 163–65. Walter had three more brothers or halfbrothers, Jordan, William and Simon, who held in Dol, Shropshire (Oswestry) and Norfolk (Sporle and Newton) respectively. Sporle had probably been granted to them by the Duke of Brittany who gained it from Ralph de Montfort-de-Gaël after 1076: Cam, ‘The English Lands of the Abbey of St. Riquier’, pp. 445–47. These lands were also part of the holdings of the abbey of St Riquier which the fitzAlains gained through their uncle, Gerbod the Fleming. Simon probably died before 1130. G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 287, 312–28; Round, Studies in Peerage and Family History, pp. 115–34: Walter fitzAlain held estates from the crown at Birkenside and Legerwood in Berwickshire, Stenton and Innerwick in East Lothian, and at Renfrew in the west and Mearns in the northwest. He also held land in England at North Stoke, Manewode (Sussex) and Coneton (possibly Conington in Cambridgeshire).

72

Chapter 2

from early on but do not appear to have had any connection to Huntingdon or the Senlis family.66 For example, the new King of Scots’ lordship of Doncaster, near Tickhill, held intermittently by the counts of Eu, represented a network that the Scots became involved with through men like Reginald de Builli, whose family originated from Bully, located four kilometres from Neufchâtel-en-Bray and twelve kilometres from the Warenne fee at Mortemer.67 The Buillis were involved with another family on the Continent who moved across the northern Border during David’s reign — the Melvilles.68 Both the Melvilles and Buillis held lands of the count of Eu on both sides of the Channel: the Melvilles in Eu at Melleville and the Buillis at Tickhill, and their lands in Normandy were under thirty kilometres apart.69 It seems likely that these families came into contact through the 66  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 60, 99, 102. There is a Brouys thirty kilo­ metres northeast of Le Puiset in the Ile-de-France. Although direct contact with the Puiset family would not occur for a few more decades, Chartrain communication, some through religious affiliations soon to be discussed, may have influenced families from this area to travel to Britain to try their fortunes abroad. 67  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 11, 66. The Norman Buillis were also cousins and vassals of the rebel Earl of Shrewsbury and Count of Ponthieu, Robert de Bellême, who had revolted against Henry in 1101. 68  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 149. Geoffrey de Melville, the first member of the family to settle in Scotland, became justiciar of Scotland under David’s grandsons and Geoffrey’s heirs continued to figure prominently at the Scottish court: Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 29, 123, 228; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 6, 17, 37, 40, 43, 64, 127, 128, 134, 138, 142, 144, 148–49, 152, 160, 162, 174–77, 185, 210, 223, 230, 231, 232, 233, 247, 259, 286, 297–99, 301, 304, 330–31, 346–48, 392, 422–23, 464; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 36, 40, 96. Geoffrey Barrow suggests Geoffrey was possibly from the Norman village of Malleville-sur-le-Bec, south of Rouen, but there is another Melleville near the fees held by the count of Aumale which was also in the diocese of Rouen: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 261 a. I assume he based this derivation of the family from the mention of Malleville in a sale of lands made by Count Gilbert de Brionne to the abbey of Le Bec in 1077: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: William I, ed. by Bates, p. 550; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 56. Loyd suggested the family came from Mirville just north of the Giffard fee at Bolbec, which is possible since a branch did originally settle in the English honour of Giffard but that does not mean the kin group did not also hold the Melleville fee further north: Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 64. It is difficult to say what the exact relationship was with the main branch in Normandy but the Scottish family continued to use prominent first names that were also used by their Norman counterparts. 69  Thompson, ‘Robert of Bellême Reconsidered’; Holt, Colonial England, p. 155; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 277. The Melville family also held land in England at Karkedon in Worcester: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 527–28, 610 — see Hugh and W. de Melville (Myleville).

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

73

lordship of the counts of Eu on both sides of the Channel, which then spilled over into Scotland through King David’s lordship of Doncaster. However, the exact relationship between the English, Scottish, and French Melvilles is not clear so more cannot be said about familial bonds within the family.70 Other connections are difficult to trace but indicate that families were still moving directly from France and especially from frontier regions that had been experiencing intermittent warfare between the kings of France and England.71 For example, the families of Cahaignes and Watteville (Vatteville) were only twenty-two kilometres apart north of the Seine River in the Vexin, one of the areas of France afflicted by conflict between the crowns,72 and it was also a centre of activity during the Succession War between ‘Empress’ Matilda, Henry I’s daughter, and Stephen of Blois, King of England, that broke out following Henry’s death in 1135.73 Based on the appearance of these families in Scotland at about the same time, it might be suggested that the Cahaignes and Wattevilles were from branches in the Norman Vexin near Vernon and SaintClair-sur-Epte (see Map 4). Many of the fees in the Vexin were divided between the kings of England and of France, which complicated the issue of fealty and service. For example, the Vernon family held the lordship of Vernon of the English king as duke of Normandy but lands further south of the king of France.74 The Cahaignes and Wattevilles were in the midst of these types of networks and their lands were also approximately twenty-six kilometres north of another French family who soon settled in Scotland — the Mauvoisins. The Mauvoisin, Vernon and Watteville (Vatteville) lordships in France were all involved with the Seine River trade. Both the Cahaignes and Watteville families were near Vernon held by Earl Baldwin 70 

G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 40, 96. Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 55, 60, 67, 68, 71; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 136. Scottish witness lists suggest that men originated from France based on regional nomenclature. Usually names reflected place of origin or the location of primary lordships: Wido, or Guy, de Cahaignes (in the Norman Vexin) or (Cahagnes in Calvados); Robert de Watteville (Vatteville — near Cahaignes and/or west of Rouen); Geoffrey de Andegavensis (of Anjou); Osbert de Arden; Hugone Britone or Brett (Breton); and Walter de Bolbec. However, this was not always the case as can be seen with the Quincy family. See Chapter 5 about the Quincys. 72  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 81–114, 134, 160–61, 346, 388–94; Crouch, The Beau­ mont Twins, pp. 101, 129; Bur, ‘De quelques champenois dans l’entourage français’. 73  Beem, The Lioness Roared, pp. 50–51. There is some question as to whether she had a right to call herself ‘Empress’ since her first husband, the former Emperor, had died and she did not hold the title by her own right. 74  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 346, 526. 71 

Chapter 2

74

of Devon (Cahaignes was only fifteen kilometres north),75 and Vatteville was held directly by Count Waleran de Beaumont of Meulan, the uncle of David’s stepdaughter, Maud de Senlis.76 Furthermore, the Wattevilles witnessed on the Continent alongside the Mauvoisins for the Beaumont counts of Meulan and at least one branch of Cahaignes and Wattevilles had been brought over by the Beaumonts and settled on the Beaumont’s Leicestershire fees in England.77 The difficulty is in placing specific men within only one network particularly since charters rarely state familial relationships in the witness lists and often fees were held by different branches of the same family in several different parts of France. For example, William II de Cahaignes, a Dorset knight in the earl of Gloucester’s household, who was responsible for capturing King Stephen in 1141 at the Battle of Lincoln,78 probably came from a family who originated from Cahagnes in Calvados, only fifteen kilometres from Torigni-sur-Vire. Cahagnes was part of the earl of Gloucester’s Norman lordship, which was probably how William came to serve the earl in England.79 However, William was also related to the Cahaignes in Northamptonshire and Cambridgeshire, who descended from William I de Cahaignes (see Figure 1).80 According to David 75 

Thompson, ‘Dowry and Inheritance Patterns’, pp. 60–61. Earl Baldwin de Revières may also have married a natural daughter of Henry I. 76  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 346–47; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 4, 20–23, 54, 114, 189, 193. 77  Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 109–10, 129; Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, i, 150–51; Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 14; Billoré, ‘Y a-t-il une “Oppression” des Plantagenêt’, p. 149. In c. 1175, Robert de Cahaignes applied to Henry II for restoration to his lands that Earl Robert of Leicester had confiscated because Cahaignes had failed to support the Earl during the 1173 war. The family continued to be involved in the Leicester lordship throughout the twelfth century. 78  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 738–40; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 64, 376; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 87; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, ccli–lii. 79  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 50 — the fee passed to his son, Ralph; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 131n, 142n, 143n; Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, p. 472; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 k. 80  William  I de Cahaignes held one hide in Northamptonshire by c.  1086: Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xxi: Northamptonshire, 34. It also seems likely that William I de Cahaignes was the same who held in Cambridgeshire. See below about William de Cahaignes’ fees in Cambridgeshire held of the earl of Northumbria in the late eleventh century: xviii: Cambridgeshire, p. 37. This may be William II de Cahaignes’ grandfather, William. William was also a small tenant-in-chief in Suffolk and a tenant of the Warennes in Sussex and Essex outside the Clare honour.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

75

Crouch, William II’s uncle, Hugh, held land in Northamptonshire, which put his family into contact with the King of Scots and his son.81 The bond of service tied to land held of the earl of Gloucester was important for it defined William’s support networks and informed his decision to fight for the Angevin party during the succession crisis. But the Cahaignes family was not confined to the Gloucester-Chester and Northamptonshire networks. William I de Cahaignes provides the key to the subsequent spread of the family throughout England because of the landholdings he obtained from King William I. In addition to fees in Northamptonshire and Cambridgeshire, the family was also granted land in Sussex and most importantly in Buckinghamshire,82 and the Buckinghamshire fees put them into contact with the Giffard-Clares (see Figure 3). Guy de Cahaignes, who appeared as a witness in Scottish records in the 1120s, was part of this Cahaignes kin group but it is unknown exactly how other than that he was in a Buckinghamshire network associated with the GiffardClares, which seems, at first glance, to have had no affiliation with William II de Cahaignes, the Dorset knight.83 However, William II de Cahaignes was also probably a member of an even larger kin group, which held land not only in Calvados but also in the Vexin specifically through the Giffard-Clares.

81  See Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, p. 738; and Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 14 about the Cahaignes family in the twelfth century and see Van Houts, ‘Wace as Historian’, p. 121; and Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, p. 472 for the argument that William II was the son of Hugh, sheriff of Northamptonshire and grandson of William I de Cahaignes. Crouch’s argument seems more convincing. Nonetheless, there was also another William alive at the time who was the son of Roger and of Alice de Langtot: Eynsham Cartulary, ed. by Salter, i, 104. This William was the brother of Hugh, Bishop Robert of Lincoln, Ralph, and Roger. It is unclear which William and Hugh succeeded in Northamptonshire, but the weight of the evidence suggests that William II and his brother, Hugh, were sons of Ralph. See Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 131n, 142n 143n about William and Hugh as sons of Ralph. The Northamptonshire lands were part of the fees held by the earls of Leicester as noted above: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 18, 50, 72, 87, 380, 424, 502, 504, 603; ii, 736, 738, 819, 820, 821, 838–39, 1288. In the thirteenth century, the Montforts gained (through a previous marriage between the families) the lordship in Northamptonshire formerly held by the Beaumonts, which included Ralph de Cahaignes’ fee. 82  Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xiii: Buckinghamshire, 21. 8; ii: Sussex, 2. 1g, 10. 1, 10. 7, 10. 17–18. 83  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 19, 60, 65; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 99. Guy’s son, Richard, took the proper name of Milton Keynes tied to the lordship in Buckinghamshire.

Chapter 2

76

There are two different roots of this nomenclature in France — Cahagnes in Calvados and Cahaignes in the Vexin. These two branches were possibly related based on lordship patterns between the two territories and on their appearance with the Watteville family, another Giffard-Clare affiliate. William de Watteville was the first of the family involved with the Scottish court when he appeared with David in 1113 as a witness to a ‘notitia’, or register, of Rohese Giffard’s gifts to St Mary of Bec and to St Neot, well-established foundations of the house of Clare.84 He was probably the same man who held Chertsey and Malden in Surrey along with other lands belonging to Rohese and her husband, Richard fitzGilbert de Clare (see Figure 3).85 Rohese Giffard was the daughter of Walter Giffard, Earl of Buckingham and Lord of Longueville, and her brother, Walter II Giffard continued the family’s crossChannel networking by marrying the Picardian, Agnes de Ribemont.86 He succeeded to their father’s lordship of Longueville in Calvados (about thirty-three kilometres south of Cahagnes) and claimed a stake to further fees at Ribemont near Saint-Quentin in the far north of the French realm through his wife. 87 84 

Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 107; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 269; Blair, ‘The Surrey Endowments of Lewes Priory’. This was the only time the Wattevilles seem to be at the royal court. Several Clare tenants and allies also witnessed the ‘notitia’ of Rohese along with William I d’Aubigny ‘le Breton’ and Geoffrey Ridel. In mid-century, William d’Aubigny’s son married Rohese’s granddaughter, Maud de Clare, daughter of Robert, Lord of Little Dunmow and of King David’s stepdaughter, Maud de Senlis. See Chapter 3 about this marriage and its significance. If this is William II de Watteville, he would have been in his early twenties at the oldest. 85  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: William I, ed. by Bates, pp. 534, 538. William de Watteville was probably the same man who appears in c. 1110 for the Clares concerning Lewes priory: Chartulary of the Priory of St. Pancras of Lewes, ed. by Salzman, pp. 155–56; Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, pp. 426, 428–29. Keats-Rohan suggests that William was Robert’s heir to Chertsey and that this family originated from Vatteville. They were also benefactors of Bermondsey Abbey: Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, pp. 382–83. 86  Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xiii: Buckinghamshire, 14. 1–49 about the Giffard fees in Buckinghamshire. Her father, Walter, or Gauthier, was given Buckinghamshire but it is unclear whether he was actually given the title of earl: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, ii, 265. 87  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 36–39; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Delisle, p. 353; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ii, 387. Arnauld de Ribemont who held in Middlesex and Essex in the mid-twelfth century was probably related to the Ribemonts in France. He held land in Middlesex near another northern Anglo-Picardian Lord, Reginald, or Renauld de Saint-Valery, father of Bernard III de SaintValery discussed in Chapter 5: The Pipe Rolls of 2–3–4 Henry II, pp. 5, 17.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

77

William I (fl. 1086) = Adelais

Ralph, Lord of Tarrant Keynes

Hugh

Guy, fl. 1120s

Hugh Philip William II Sheriff of Northampton fl. 1141 Figure 1. Cahaignes family tree.

The Clares subsequently became overlords of Bolbec near Fécamp and held Bienfaite and Orbec in Calvados.88 Rohese and her husband held fees in nine different English counties — Lympstone in Devon, Sutton in Wiltshire, Harefield in Middlesex, Standon in Hertfordshire, Eynesbury in Huntingdonshire and extensive fees in Kent, Suffolk, Surrey and Essex; the latter two counties where the Cahaignes also settled.89 It was because of the scattered nature of territorial rights that the Clares could offer a vast network of connections throughout England, but they also seemed to move in the same circles on the Continent.90 For example, as early as c. 1083, Walter I Giffard witnessed for William I de Watteville (Vatteville) a confirmation of a gift to the abbey of Jumièges.91 William II de Watteville and Walter II Giffard also both appeared in the Meulan charters for Sainte-Trinité 88 

Historia et cartularium monasterii Sancti Petri Gloucestriae, ed. by Hart, ii, 73–74; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 184–85. On the eve of the civil war, Rohese Giffard’s grandson, Gilbert, reunited the Norman and English fees as Earl of Pembroke and Lord of Bienfaite and Orbec. Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 129–32. When the Succession War erupted, Walter II Giffard chose to serve King Stephen but other members of the kin group did not. His nephew, Earl Gilbert of Hertford and Lord of Tonbridge, chose to support his other uncle, Earl Ranulf IV ‘de Gernon’ of Chester, against Stephen during the wars. Cf. Power, ‘The French Interests of the Marshal Earls’, pp. 203–07 about Bolbec. 89  See Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 480; ii, 685, 687 for fees in Essex and Surrey. Mortimer, ‘The Beginnings of the Honour of Clare’, p. 139; Mortimer, ‘Land and Service’, pp. 179, 182–84, 194, 196. Cf. Power, ‘Cross-Channel Communication’; Gerald, ‘A Norman Lawsuit’; Arnoux and Maneuvrier, ‘Deux abbayes de Basse-Normandie’, pp. 21–22, 54–57 about Cahaignes connection to Merton Priory in Surrey. 90  Mortimer, ‘The Beginnings of the Honour of Clare’. 91  Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, ii, 110.

Chapter 2

78

William I, fl. 1083 Robert I (Surrey, Huntingdon, ?Leicestershire), fl. 1127 ?

William II, fl. 1142

Geoffrey = (1) Ascelina Peverel Lord of Thorpe Arnold = (2) Saher de Quincy, brother of Robert

*William de Watteville, who witnessed with David in 1113, may have been either the father or a brother of Robert I.

Figure 2. Watteville family tree.

(in the Vexin). William witnessed in 1142 for Count Waleran de Beaumont, and Walter witnessed for the Beaumonts in 1131 and 1142.92 It is this GiffardClare connection that suggests that the Wattevilles who appeared in Normandy were related to if not even the same William and Robert de Watteville who appeared in England and Scotland. William II de Watteville’s father, Robert de Watteville, was a significant tenant in Surrey at Chelsham, which he held of the fitzGilberts in the honour of Clare,93 and he was probably the same who witnessed for King David in 1127.94 Both William and Robert were also tenants of Peterborough Abbey at Orton Waterville and Marholm, and these fees were less than six kilometres apart in the honour of Huntingdon held by the King of Scots. Orton Waterville was also within two kilometres of Orton Longueville, a place-name that was associated with the Giffard family’s Norman lordship at Longueville. The Watteville family continued to appear on both sides of the Channel into the late twelfth century when another William and Robert de Watteville, descendants of the 92 

Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, pp. 10, 15, 25. Mortimer, ‘The Beginnings of the Honour of Clare’, pp.  132–41. Robert also held Malden and Picot in Surrey along with a few fees in East Anglia at Orton Waterville and Marholm. Robert de Watteville’s descendants continued to hold land in Essex at Hempstead and at Chessington and Chelsham in Surrey. William II may have been the son of Robert, as suggested by Keats-Rohan, and thus brother of Geoffrey de Watteville or at least a cousin: Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, pp. 382–83. 94  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 68. Robert de Watteville appeared as a witness for King David in 1127 alongside Roger de Coignières (Coignières is in the Yvelines). 93 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

79

first Robert de Watteville, made a grant of the church of Croix-Mare, about thirty kilometres northeast of Bolbec, to the abbey of Jumièges in the 1170s.95 Anglo-French Scottish interaction with families in or near their lordships in England complemented cross-Channel patronage. For example, Saher de Quincy, brother of Robert de Quincy, Lord of Leuchars in Scotland, married Ascelina Peverel, the widow of Geoffrey de Watteville, Lord of Thorpe Arnold in Leicestershire (two kilometres from Melton Mowbray and part of a very important lordship that will be discussed later). Geoffrey probably came into contact with the Scots after he joined the Angevins following his overlord, Count Waleran de Beaumont’s decision to join Geoffrey of Anjou in late 1141,96 and he was possibly related to Robert and William de Watteville who witnessed for King David.97 Interaction between families who supported the Angevins during the Succession War informed future marital alliances and patterns of ecclesiastical patronage. Watteville patronage of the abbey of Jumièges probably influenced Geoffrey’s widow to encourage her second husband, Saher de Quincy, to also become a benefactor of the abbey in the second half of the century.98 However, although Geoffrey may have been the son of Robert de Watteville, Lord of Thorpe Arnold in Leicestershire, it is unclear what Robert of Thorpe Arnold’s relationship was to the Wattevilles who held Chelsham of the honour of Clare in Surrey and who held land near Peterborough.99 The Watteville and Cahaignes family lineages are not easy to unravel partially because lordships were often scattered over different regions and as such junior members of the kin group settled far from the original lordship. Moreover, 95 

Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 94, 95; Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, ii, 26. This Robert and William may also have been related to if not the same men witnessing in Durham and north Yorkshire between c. 1160 and 1186: Pipe Roll of 8 Henry II, p. 19; Pipe Roll of 9 Henry II, pp. 40, 64; Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I, p. 29; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 183. 96  Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, ii, 26. The family’s Angevin loyalties may have extended to Henry II during the Great War in 1173. William de Watteville gave the church of Croix-Mare to the abbey of Jumièges when the King confirmed the abbey’s holdings in c. 1172/73. 97  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 22–23, 26–27, 42. Geoffrey de Watteville who witnessed for the Angevins between 1141 and 1146 was probably the same who was Lord of Thorpe. 98  See Chapter 7 about Jumièges and de Quincy. Cf. Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 15n. for Ascelina and Geoffrey. Her brother and co-heir was William Peverel, Lord of Bourne, a Cambridgeshire baron. Geoffrey was still alive in 1161: Pipe Roll of 7 Henry II, p. 45. She married Quincy in c. 1162: Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 285, 380. 99  Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 109–10.

Chapter 2

80

political tides often shifted the very core of primary lordships elsewhere. For this reason, it is possible that the two French branches of the Cahaignes family were related, but settled apart as happened in the case of families like the Vieuxponts discussed in Chapter 6.100 In England alone the Cahaignes seemed to settle in three different English counties — in Northamptonshire, in Buckinghamshire, and in Dorset — and as had been the case with the Wattevilles, it was probably David’s lordship in England or more specifically in Northamptonshire that informed Guy de Cahaignes’ presence in David’s charters in the 1120s. The land interests of families were rarely confined to only one region partially because of changing fortunes within families through marriage, fortuneseeking and extinctions in lines. This may very well be applied to the Cahaignes family who held lands near families like the Giffard-Clares and Vernons in England and in Normandy in the Vexin and Calvados.101 Furthermore, William de Watteville, who appeared in the charters for Jumièges mentioned above, was probably an ancestor of the same who held a knight’s fee of Richard de Vernon, baron of Néhou, at the end of the century.102 It was not unusual for families to spread lordships and patronage across regions as younger sons sought advancement elsewhere. Other migrations from the Continent during David’s early reign are equally illuminating. The immigration of men from Surrey into Scotland has usually been attributed to the marriage of David’s son, Henry, to Ada de Warenne in 1138 but this was not necessarily the case. Between 1128 and 1141, David already had contact with Surrey men as Lord of Huntingdon and through his contact with the Clare family based on Giffard-Clare interests in Surrey at Waverley.103 For example, David’s sheriff of Huntingdonshire was the Norman knight, Gilbert Foliot, who was also sheriff of Surrey and of Cambridgeshire and Gilbert’s family was a tenant of the honour of Clare.104 Gilbert’s ties in 100 

Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 528–31 and see Chapter 6. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 554 n. 2, 608 b, 609 g, 622 f, 683 f, 695 d, 711 g–j. The Vernons also held fees thirty kilometres south of Cahaignes in Calvados from where William de Cahaignes, the Dorset knight, originated. 102  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 609 g; Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, pp. 30–31. See pp. 73–83, 138–45 about Clares and Vernons. This territorial position would have been informed by the Watteville under-tenancy of the GiffardClares, who had in turn intermarried with the Vernons. 103  Holdsworth, ‘The Cistercians in Devon’, p. 183. 104  Mortimer, ‘Land and Service’, pp. 178–79. Gilbert was probably the brother of Robert Foliot. 101 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

81

Surrey may also have been what brought Payn de Braose (Briouze) briefly to the north in c. 1120.105 Payn de Braose was probably related to the Briouze family who held land in Sussex at Bramber and two manors in Surrey,106 along with the honour of Briouze and Argentan in the Ornois, and at Couvert, and they were later involved with Scots during the reign of King William of Scotland.107 The King’s patronage of foreigners in his English and Scottish lordships was not necessarily overtly driven by tenancy patterns. Many networks in England that spilled over into Scotland had no relation to land but they were nonetheless just as strong. Familial bonds and bonds of loyalty, service and friendship were discussed less in official records but they were the glue that held medieval society together. For example, it was probably David’s interaction with his Boulonnais’ brother-in-law, Eustache, that brought families like the Bolbecs and Hesdins to the Scottish court. Despite the king’s encouragement for families to migrate north, not all of David’s new contacts decided to settle permanently in Scotland. Families like the Briouze, Engaines, Ardens and Brouys appear not to have remained in Scotland. These lines either died out or returned to France or England to take up inheritances as younger surviving sons. In some cases, it is possible that these men did settle but changed their last names to coincide with fees they gained in Scotland. Osbert de Arden in particular may represent the case of someone who left more of a mark than previously thought.108 He may have only appeared at David’s inquest into the pos105 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 59–60, 69–70; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, p. 160; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 158. The Briouze land-base was within twenty-four kilometres of the Surrey lands at Pevensey and Lewes. Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, pp. 58–59, 149–50, 380. The family later made further gains in Devon at Barnstaple by marriage and even later in the marches of Wales near the Lacy family. See below about Gilbert Foliot. 106  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 59, 66, 103–04. Cf. Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 25–26, 83–85, 87–89, 128–30, 185–86, 188–89, 227, 234–25, 236, 238–39, 310 n. 74 for later Sussex influence. Sussex also came to represent a nexus of Scottish interests because families like the Tosnys, Dinans, Briouze and Moubrays held fees in the county. 107  Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’, p. 5. 108  Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, ii, 289; Green, The Aristocracy of Norman Eng­ land, pp. 88–89. Osbert of Arden was probably the grandson of Thurkil of Arden, the latter who had held part of the lands that made up the earldom of Warwick, and he owed fealty to Henry, Earl of Warwick, a brother of Robert of Meulan, Earl of Leicester, who was the father of Robert II, Earl of Leicester. Henry’s son, Roger, married Ada de Warenne’s sister, Gundreda, in 1130 but this marriage is too late to explain Osbert’s migration via the Warenne movement into Scotland, though a Roger of Leicester was witnessing for David as early as 1118: Liber de

82

Chapter 2

sessions of the church of St Kentigern but the name-place of Arden still exists today at Loch Lomond, which suggests that he may have been an absentia lord who was not involved with these lands directly but left progeny who married into a western Scottish family.109 If this were the case, the son may have taken his wife’s name in order to be more easily recognized as a lord over the western lands and thus he would have been unrecognisable in royal records. This was a decision sometimes made among the Anglo-French lords and could even be reversed as in the case of Guy de Cahaignes’ son, Richard.110 The Bassets and fitzJohns also took on different names in order to be accepted into new territories and geo-political networks.111

The Cotentin David’s residence at Henry I’s court during the reign of his brother, Alexander, put him into contact with many Anglo-French lords whose families spanned the Channel.112 As has already been demonstrated, some of this contact can be seen explicitly through regional pockets originating in Normandy. Henry I, like David I, was the youngest of four legitimate sons of King William I, who was probably never envisaged as the future King of England.113 His inheritance at his father’s death in 1087 was 5000 marks with which he bought the Cotentin from his eldest brother and future rival, Duke Robert ‘Curthose’ of Normandy.114 The Cotentin was an important area to the Norman family S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 4. Osbert may have been a son seeking fortune elsewhere following his father’s demotion in Warwick in favour of the Beaumont family. Osbert is found issuing a charter at Kingsbury, Warwickshire, in which he appoints as a retainer of Thurkil Fundu dated 1124 × 1139: Crouch, Tournament, p. 163. 109  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 60–61. It seems odd that the place-name, Arden, still exists in Argyll if the family had not continued having a presence in Scotland. Osbert may have himself taken a Scottish wife or concubine who bore a son. This is all highly conjectural. The Arden ancestry is unclear. 110  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 19. 111  Collin’s Peerage of England, ed. by Brydges, iii, 224. One branch of the Arden family would change names again at Compton in the next century. 112  G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 157, 160–61. 113  His brother, Richard, died in 1081 in the same place (New Forest) that his brother, William Rufus, would die almost twenty years later, both victims of hunting accidents. 114  Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 204–05; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 120; v, 314; Aird, Robert Curthose, pp. 134–44, 146–47; David,

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

83

because of its geographical position and because of the vast networks that had been built over the eleventh century based on the lineage of Gunnora, Henry’s great-great grandmother.115 For this reason, several Cotentin families were advanced under Henry once he became king in 1100 and it was not long before they were also involved with the Scottish court.116 Robert Foliot, the steward of Huntingdonshire for David and David’s son, Earl Henry, may have been one of the first members of the family to settle in England under Henry I. Once he arrived in England, he maintained contact with cross-Channel families from the Cotentin. He was a witness for Richard de Revières, a Devonshire lord who still held land in the Cotentin at Néhou, and he came into contact with the Clare family, who were closely involved with the Revières.117 Robert continued to serve Richard’s son, Baldwin, after Richard’s death in 1107 and his involvement with the family gave him access to other Anglo-French Scottish lords. Moreover, the Revières had an interest in the abbey of Montacute, which was also patronized by the royal Scottish family.118 During the Succession War between Empress Matilda and King Stephen, Robert and Gilbert Foliot, who was probably Robert’s son, nurtured communication between King David and King Henry’s daughter, Matilda. Gilbert Robert Curthose, pp. 48–49. Henry held Avranches, Coutances, and Le Mont Saint-Michel as part of the agreement. He briefly lost the Cotentin in 1091, and he also briefly held Domfront against Robert de Bellême in 1092 from which he was able to stage a reconquest of the Cotentin. 115  See Searle, Predatory Kinship, pp. 94, 100–07, 124–40, 184, 193–98, 205–20 for the importance of Gunnora’s lineage and subsequent ties with the Norman nobility that bound together the families of Warenne, Beaumont, Montgomery, fitzOsbern, and Arques. Gunnora’s marriage to Richard I of Normandy brought Cherbourg and Brix into the ducal patrimony. 116  C. N. L., Brooke, ‘Foliot, Gilbert’; Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, pp. 43–44; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 529 f; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 376. 117  See Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, pp. 2, 5, 18, 37–38, 42, 44, 55, 59, 63–64, 156, 175, 178, 182 about Foliots, Revières, and Vernons. Mortimer, ‘Land and Service’, p. 179. Robert Foliot and his son, Gilbert, Bishop of London, seemed to have a personal relationship with the earls of Devon from whom they held fees: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 447; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclxix–cclxxx; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 348. The Vernons were a familial stem of the Revières earls of Devon through whom they later gained the lordship of Néhou in the Cotentin, and they also already held the lordship of Vernon in the Evrecin (west of Meulan) and lands in Buckinghamshire. The Vernon-Revières kin-structure was bound to the networks of the Giffard-Clares territorially on both sides of the Channel and by marriage, which was how families like the Wattevilles and Cahaignes came to hold lands scattered throughout their lordships. 118  Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, pp. 45, 63, 71, 157, 181–82.

Chapter 2

84

was also respected enough by King Stephen for him to intervene with the King to obtain the restoration of his cousin, Elias, to fees he held of the honour of Huntingdon in Lincolnshire that Elias had lost because of his support to David and Matilda.119 Gilbert began his career as a prior at Cluny in Burgundy and then became prior at the Cluniac abbey at Abbeville in Picardy near the Bailleul lordship. His appointment at Abbeville complemented his father’s contact with families from Picardy who witnessed diplomata in Scotland.120 This contact may also have influenced the marriage of his kinsman to a member of the Rambeaucourt family.121 Gilbert subsequently emigrated from Picardy to England under the patronage of his kinsmen, Bishop Miles of Hereford and Bishop Robert Belmeis of London (from Beaumais-sur-Dives in Calvados), after

119 

Morey and Brooke, Gilbert Foliot and his Letters, pp. 38–39; Letters and Charters of Gilbert Foliot, ed. by Morey and Brooke, pp. 197–98; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 11, 19, 20, 37, 54–55, 83, 87–88, 99, 103–05, 168; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 23; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 99. 120  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 88–89. There were a number of contacts between northern French families like the Bailleuls and Coucys that crossed into the Pasde-Calais, which fostered alliances between families in the two regions. Men like Bernard de Bailleul, Milo de Araines, and Berengar Engaines came from families who originated from Picardy and elsewhere in northern France. 121  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 59; iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 230, 325; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 33; Loyd, The Origins of Some AngloNorman Families, p. 43; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 238–39. Sanders suggested that Robert Foliot’s wife was Margery, granddaughter of Guy de Raimbeaucourt from north of Douai, who also held land in Cambridgeshire in c. 1086: Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xviii: Cambridgeshire, 31. 1–7. This argument is based on a grant of the heiress, Margery, in wardship to a Robert Foliot between 1154 and 1161: Ward, Women of the English Gentry and Nobility, p. 23; Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, ii, 982. Sanders may have confused Robert Foliot II with his father, Robert I. Christopher Brooke suggests that Robert’s wife and Gilbert’s mother’s name was Agnes de Chesney (Cahaignes) and that she was the daughter of Roger de Chesney (from Quesnay-Guesnon in Calvados near the Soules family and within ten kilometres from Cahagnes) and of Alice de Lanquetot, whose father had been a tenant of Walter Giffard of Buckingham at Lanquetot, only about four kilometres northeast of Bolbec. Roger also had a brother William. They were probably descendants of William de Cahaignes who settled in Cambridgeshire under William I: Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xviii: Cambridgeshire, 37. 1–2. These lands were held of Earl Waltheof of Northumbria at the end of the eleventh century. Brooke, more convincingly, suggests that the Robert who married Margery was Robert Foliot II, not Robert Foliot I. Robert who married Margery gained her father’s lordship of Chipping Warden in Northamptonshire and he may have been the same who witnessed for King William of Scotland. Cf. Morey and Brooke, Gilbert Foliot and his Letters, pp. 32–51 about the family in England.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

85

which he became Abbot of Gloucester and Bishop of London.122 He was also the nephew of Bishop Robert Chesney of Lincoln, through his mother, Agnes, and the nephew of William Foliot, who fought for King Stephen during the Succession War and who was a tenant of the Earl of Aumale.123 It may have been his nephew, Robert Foliot II, who can be found later witnessing for King William of Scotland alongside a man who originated from the Cotentin, Robert.124 The Foliots were an important family in England and Normandy because of their ecclesiastical and secular positions on both sides of the Channel.125 Another family which may have been brought over directly from Brix in the Cotentin by Henry and David were the Bruses. The family first came to the notice of the Norman house because of their position in the Cotentin in the 1090s when Henry was desperately trying to use the support of men from the region against his brothers.126 Assertions that the family had crossed with William I in 1066 are inaccurate and originated from Robert Wace’s Roman de Rou, written between 1160 and c. 1175, when the Bruses were rebuilding their relationship with the Norman house by fighting for Henry II.127 Wace’s rewriting of the family’s past gave the Bruses a fresh start with the Angevins, who they had not supported during the Succession War.128 122  C. N. L., Brooke, ‘Foliot, Gilbert’; Morey and Brooke, Gilbert Foliot and his Letters, pp. 32–50. 123  Morey and Brooke, Gilbert Foliot and his Letters, pp. 32–51; English Episcopal Acta, ed. by Smith and others, viii: Hereford, 1079–1234, ed. by Barrow, xl–xli; i: Lincoln, 1067–1185, ed. by Smith, xxxv–vi, xliii–xlv; English, The Lords of Holderness, p. 148; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 238–39. 124  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 159. 125  Morey and Brooke, Gilbert Foliot and his Letters, p. 41. Gilbert also had a nephew called Gilbert who continued to hold the family’s fee at Vauville. 126  Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 12–13. 127  Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 10–12. They seem to have been granted their Cumberland estates and other fees in about 1103. 128  Robert Wace, Roman de Rou, ed. by Holden, ii, 195–206, ll. 8329–8602; M. Bennett, ‘Poetry as History?’. Robert Wace often conflated men who accompanied William I to England in 1066 with their ancestors in England in the mid-twelfth century. He mentions that the lords of Brix along with the lords of Soules, Hommet, L’Aigle, Aubigny, Caux, Trussebut, Vitré, Moubray, Munfichet, Loge, Hai, Avenel, Cahaignes, Courcy, Lacy, Colombières, Asnières, Coignières, and Saint-Jean fought alongside one another at Hastings and subsequently settled in England. These names were prominent in the 1173 campaigns. Other men, like William de Vieuxpont and William of Moyon, were specifically named who, it is known, did not exist in 1066 but did in 1173.

Chapter 2

86

Geoffrey Barrow and more recently Ruth Blakely suggest that the Bruses became intimates of David when David briefly held Querqueville in the Cotentin, which Henry I had granted to him in lordship before David was king.129 The Cotentin is an area previously dominated by the settlement of Bretons and Norsemen, the latter who partly emigrated from Ireland and the Western Isles in the late tenth century.130 The Norman house extended its reach into these peripheral territories by initially forming a series of alliances in the late tenth and early eleventh centuries through Count Richard I of Normandy’s marriage to the Danish heiress of the Cotentin, Gunnora, and through the double-marriage of Richard’s son, Richard II, and his daughter with the Breton house at Rennes.131 It was not long before Rennes, Rouen and the Cotentin formed a triangle of power associated with the steady creep of Norman expansion under Count Richard I and his son, Duke Richard II.132 The Brus family may have been intimately connected with this Breton orbit around Rennes in the eleventh century. It has been suggested that Robert I de Brus of Annandale’s great-grandmother was a daughter of Alain III of Brittany and that her sister was the grandmother of Duke Conan III.133 Furthermore, Robert I de Brus’ lands in Cleveland put him in the midst of territories in England held by the Breton counts of Penthièvre and earls of Richmond, who descended from the ducal house in a collateral line.134 The proximity of their 129 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 53; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iii, 583; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 284–85, 322–23; Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 22–23; Green, ‘David I and Henry I’, p. 10. There is not enough evidence to prove David’s lordship of Querqueville but it is a possibility. The argument is based on the grant of a ‘Karkarevil’ to St Mary’s York that was confirmed by David for Robert de Brus. 130  Le Patourel, The Norman Empire, p. 305; Musset, Aperçus sur la colonisation scandinave’; Van Houts, ‘Robert of Torigni as Genealogist’; Breese, ‘The Persistence of Scandinavian Connections in Normandy’, pp. 50, 54–55. 131  Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 14–15, 28–29, 102–03, 226–27, 266–69. Richard II of Normandy married Judith of Brittany, daughter of Count Conan I and of Ermengarde of Anjou, daughter of Geoffrey Grisegonelle, and her brother, Count Geoffrey of Rennes, married Richard II’s sister, Hawise. 132  Musset, Aperçus sur la colonisation scandinave’, pp. 34–37. 133  Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, ii, 428; Cf. Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 5–7 for the French derivation of the family. 134  Mayer, ‘Angevin versus Normans’, p. 12. Mayer mentions that a Renier Brus held the lordship of Banias, on the coast north of Tripoli, of King Fulk of Jerusalem from c. 1125 but he argues that Renier was probably not related to Robert Brus of Annandale. There really is no way of knowing this since titles and names were hardly consistent. It is possible that Renier was

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

87

fees to the Penthièvres in England probably led to the marriage of Robert de Brus, Lord of Annandale’s daughter, Agatha, to the grandson of Count Eudo.135 It was also probably because of the centrality of his lordship amid these AngloBreton networks that Robert chose to continue supporting King Stephen during the Succession War alongside his neighbouring Lord, Alain ‘le Noir’ Earl of Richmond, the son-in-law of Duke Conan III of Brittany. The family’s cross-Channel presence had not disappeared after they emigrated to England. Robert II de Brus’ brother, Adam, continued contact with their patrimony in the Cotentin before his death in c. 1143 when he conceded to the abbey of Saint-Sauveur-le-Vicomte their abbey-churches at Brix and Couville, just west of Brix, that had been given to Saint-Pierre de la Luthumière.136 It was not long before the family’s interest in expanding their lordship also spilled over into Scotland. By c. 1124, King David’s friendship with Robert I de Brus extended the Brus lordship into Annandale in southwest Scotland.137 The rap­­ port between Robert and the King was secure enough for David to overlook Robert’s contribution to the defeat of David’s army at the Battle of North­ allerton where Robert served against the King of Scots.138 The Bruses were not the only family who played a role in the Scottish attraction to Anglo-Breton alliances. The Scottish and English involvement with Anglo-Breton families became even more important after the death of Henry I, but the royal house of Scotland had already sought an alliance with the powerful house of Penthièvre as early as 1093 when David’s father, Malcolm III, considered marrying David’s sister, Maud, to Alain ‘le Roux’, Earl of Richmond and son of Count Eudo of Penthièvre, the brother of Count Alan III of Brittany. Alain ‘le Roux’ was a very powerful and wealthy man with estates throughout the north of England in Yorkshire, and in Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire, and he had also gained the confiscated lands of Ralph de Gaël-de-Montfort in

a member of the Cotentin Brus family and he moved to Tripoli with the Guiscards during the First Crusade or before. 135  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, xi, 551; vi.2, 1001; Early York­ shire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 3. Agatha married Ralph, son of Ribald, an illegitimate son of Count Eudo. Robert gave the manor of Elwick in Hartness to the couple in maritagium. 136  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 331; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, pp. 11–16; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, p. 284. 137  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 61–62. 138  Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 20–27. It does not appear that David disseized Robert of his Scottish lordship after the battle.

Chapter 2

88

Norfolk and Suffolk.139 This alliance would have given Malcolm III an important ally not only by virtue of Alain’s territorial wealth but also through the contacts associated with the latter’s lands throughout England and Brittany. The marriage never occurred though because, as related by one of Arch­ bishop Anselm of Canterbury’s men, William Rufus barred the match saying that Maud had dedicated herself to a religious life at Wilton.140 This turned out to be a false claim, according to her father, which may have contributed to the outbreak in hostilities between William Rufus and Malcolm later that year.141 William Rufus must have been all too aware that a match between the daughter of the King of Scots and one of the most powerful men in northern England could seriously undermine his authority in an already volatile region. His brother, Henry I, thought enough of the heiress and her powerful family in the north to marry her himself when he became king in 1100, but these royal brothers were not the only ones to recognize the advantage of an alliance with the Scottish family. The Warenne family also made a bid for Maud shortly after the Richmond marriage had failed to come to fruition, but these negotiations were also dropped.142 Furthermore, Maud’s sister, Mary, may also have been the subject of a marital alliance with William, Count of Mortain, a supporter of Robert Curthose and King Henry I’s cousin, before she was eventually married 139 

Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 185–86. Keats-Rohan, ‘Domesday Book and the Malets’, pp. 189–90; Southern, Saint Anselm, pp. 260–64; Oram, David I, pp. 36, 52–56; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 189–90. Richard Oram considers this account as dubious and late but Hermann of Tournai received his information from one of Anselm’s men, Baldwin, who would have had access to these events. Anselm himself exchanged personal letters with Gunhilda, who was with Maud at Wilton. 141  Oram, David I, pp. 36, 52–56. Oram gives a thorough assessment of the various possibilities about Maud’s status, which is based on the accounts of Orderic Vitalis, Eadmer and Walter Map, who all indicate that Maud for whatever reason was found by Rufus with a veil on, a sign of her vow. The vow was also discussed during the debate of Empress Matilda’s right to the English throne against Stephen at the 1139 Lateran Council. Eadmer, Historia Novorum, ed. by Rule, pp. 123–24; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 272–73; Walter Map, De nugis curialium, ed. by Brooke and Mynors, p. 474; Chibnall, ‘John of Salisbury as Historian’, p. 173. Orderic also mentions that Mary accompanied her sister to Romsey Abbey in Hampshire, where their aunt, Christina, was a nun. It is just unclear whether Rufus wanted to prevent the marriage with Alain by accusing her of taking the veil or if the abbess put a veil on her to protect her from any advances by Rufus. Anselm of Canterbury’s letters indicate that she had not taken actual vows but that she had been coerced into wearing the veil by Rufus: Letters of Saint Anselm, ed. and trans. by Fröhlich, ii, 91–92. 142  Van Houts, ‘The Warenne View of the Past’, p. 105; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 272–73. 140 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

89

to Count Eustache III de Boulogne in 1102.143 Maud’s marriage to King Henry has overshadowed the import of the marriage of Maud’s sister to the Count of Boulogne, despite that the Boulonnais marriage proved to be invaluable to extending David’s influence in the south of England between 1113 and 1135.

The Boulonnais Marriage David’s sisters were two of the most eligible ladies in Europe in 1100. They had spent their formative years together with their aunt at Romsey Abbey most likely in order to groom and prepare them for the marriage market. Maud’s marriage to Henry I was, as discussed, the reason for David’s launch into the AngloFrench world, but his other sister’s marriage became equally as valuable to him for extending Scottish interests into the south of England and into northern France and Flanders. The Scottish-Boulonnais marriage had deep roots based on Norman interests in northern France during the reign of Henry’s father, William I ‘the Conqueror’. It was because of the conflict between the AngloSaxon, Danish and Norman houses that William I deliberately chose a bride with the oldest and thus most authoritative blood rights to the English throne when he married Matilda of Flanders, the daughter of Count Baldwin V of Flanders, who descended from Aelfthryth, daughter of the Anglo-Saxon King, Alfred the Great. It was also probably not an accident that William finalized the marital arrangement in 1053, the year after it was claimed that Edward the Confessor had named William his heir.144 William was trying to formalize his rights to the English throne in a way that ensured his succession when Edward the Confessor died. The marriage worked to his advantage when his campaigns in England and in northern France made him many enemies and drove men to ally against him on both sides of the Channel. The Count of Boulogne, Eustache II, and the King of Scotland, Malcolm III, were among those who allied against William. The counts of Boulogne were already struggling for power in northern France against the counts of Flanders, who were supporting William in his Continental campaigns. Eustache II, Count of Boulogne, had also alienated William because two years after William’s own marriage he presented a rival claim to the Anglo-Saxon throne by marrying 143 

Chronica monasterii de Hyda, ed. by Edwards, p. 306; Florence of Worcester, Chronicon, ed. by Thorpe, ii, 51; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 275; Hollister, ‘The Anglo-Norman Civil War’, p. 322. 144  William of Poitiers, Gesta, ed. by Davis and Chibnall, pp. 68–69, 114–15, 118–21, 150–51; Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 158–61.

Chapter 2

90

Goda, sister of Edward the Confessor and great-aunt of Malcolm III’s wife, Margaret.145 The threat became more imminent when the powerful northern English lord, Earl Waltheof of Huntingdon (later of Northumbria), also joined the alliance against King William. Although married to King William’s niece in 1070, Earl Waltheof was influenced more by his affinity with the Count of Boulogne, who was his wife’s first cousin. 146 These various alliances and William’s territorial aggression on both sides of the Channel drove the Count of Boulogne, Malcolm of Scotland and Earl Waltheof, cousin of Earl Gospatrick of Northumbria, to plot against William between 1067 and in 1070/71. Com­ munication had been established between Scotland and Boulogne well before the 1102 marriage of Mary to Eustache II’s son. However, shifts in power could very rapidly change the pattern of alliances even when marriage bound families together. The kings of Scotland changed their policy towards the Boulonnais alliance in the next generation because Count Eustache III supported Count Robert of Normandy against his brothers between 1087 and 1106. Edgar, Alexander I and David all decided to align with the reigning kings of England between 1095 and 1136, at first because they needed their help in regaining the Scottish throne and afterwards because of a mutual friendship. Only after the Battle of Tinchebrai in 1106 did the Boulonnais and Scots find themselves once again on the same side of the bat­ tle-line. Ultimately, Mary of Scotland’s marriage to Count Eustache III of Boulogne in 1102 was to become an important springboard for King Henry’s policies in the north of France because northern Continental families like those at Lens and Boulogne were the key to limiting the newfound French alliance with the count of Flanders.147 145 

Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 5, 79–81, 91–92, 101, 113–14, 258, 312; Barlow, Edward the Confessor, pp. 219, 307–08. Frank Barlow and Heather Tanner suggest, based on William of Poitiers, that Eustache may have rebelled in 1067 in the hope of winning the throne for his ‘grandson’: William of Poitiers, Gesta, ed. by Davis and Chibnall, pp. 182–85. There is no other proof of a grandson but he did have a son that was given as a hostage to William in 1066 so it would make sense if he were making a claim to the throne on behalf of his son by Goda rather than a grandson. 146  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp.  95, 145, 178, 256, 290–91, 295; C.  P. Lewis, ‘Waltheof, Earl of Northumbria’; A. Williams, The English and the Norman Conquest, pp. 33–34, 57–65; Morris, Marriage and Murder, pp. 17–18, 22–27. Waltheof had just been defeated by William in battle in 1070. The marriage of William’s niece was intended to bind the Earl to Norman interests. 147  Tanner, ‘The Expansion of the Power and Influence’; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 91, 93, 110.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

91

In 1102 the counts of Boulogne still represented an alternative base of power in northern France against the counts of Flanders, which Henry I had been using to his advantage after he defeated his brother, Robert Curthose, at Tinchebrai in 1106.148 In return for his change of allegiance, Henry gave Eustache, Count of Boulogne, lands in Essex and confirmed the Boulonnais endowments in England and he also extended the Count’s territories to include land in Oxford, Hampshire, Somerset, Hertfordshire, Suffolk (including the honour of Eye), Kent, Surrey, Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdon and Norfolk. The 1102 marriage of Eustache and Mary was significant to political affinities in the north of France and ended several decades of animosity between the counts of Boulogne and the dukes of Normandy. Furthermore, it connected the royal Scottish house with a vast network of noblemen in the north of France, England and, impressively, with the crusading kingdom of Jerusalem, held by Eustache’s brother, King Baldwin. The Scottish-Boulonnais marriage was probably the foundation for David’s interest in bringing several families like the Bretts, Engaines and Louvels,149 and later the Berkeleys from Somerset to the north.150 The counts of Boulogne held Combwich, six kilometres west of the Louvel fee at Puriton,151 and seven kilometres east of Nether Stowey soon to be gained by the Coloummiers in mar­­riage. The Coloummiers family would also come into contact with the Scots when King David’s grandsons, Malcolm and William, travelled to the Continent in 1159.152 The relationship between King David and his sister, Mary, seemed to be as equally close as that between David and his sister, Queen Maud. Mary was per148 

Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 129–30, 145–48, 178, 260. Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 79; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 277; ii, 163–66, 179, 199, 241. The reference to Radulph de Nuuel under David I may have been to Radulph de Louvel. The Louvels held Castle Cary against Stephen in 1138 for Empress Matilda. Henry Louvel of Hawick was the first Louvel to permanently settle in Scotland. 150  Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, p. 13.The Berkeleys were also tenants of the earls of Gloucester and in the service of the earls of Hereford and therefore were usually supporting the Angevin cause during the Succession War. They were disseized by Henry in 1153 and their Somerset land was given to Robert fitzHarding, a Bristol based banker. They had, however, regained some stature in Somerset by intermarrying with the fitzHardings: Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 13, 114–15. G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 292–93; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 24, 42, 44, 57, 73, 92. 151  The Boulonnais manor at Kingweston was also only eleven kilometres from the Louvel seat at Castle Cary. 152  See Chapter 4 on Coloummiers. 149 

Chapter 2

92

sonally influential in brokering her brother, David’s, marriage to Maud de Senlis because of her and her husband’s strategic role in Henry’s agenda,153 and she was fulfilling the expectations of a woman at court by arranging Maud’s marriage to a ‘worthy vassal’ of the king.154 The Senlis marriage strengthened Henry’s pre-­­ existing alliance with David’s brother-in-law, Eustache III of Boulogne, and gave David official recognition as Henry’s trusted agent in the north of England since Maud’s father had been the former Earl of Northumbria.155 Eustache and Mary’s future son-in-law, Stephen of Blois, was probably also becoming wellacquainted with the King of Scots at the time of the Senlis marriage, when he was granted the honour of Eye at the same Christmas court at Windsor that David received Northampton.156 As a member of Henry’s court, David would continue to be in regular contact with Stephen before Stephen became a member of the extended kin-networks of the Scottish royal house following his marriage to David’s niece, Matilda of Boulogne, in 1125.157 David’s marriage to Maud de Senlis in c. 1114 put the Scots more overtly on the Continental map, which had a longstanding influence on political relations between the Scots and the French. For example, the French dimension of Maud’s familial identity brought David into contact with Tosny networks since Maud’s sister, Judith (also called Alice, or Adelise), had married Ralph III de Tosny in 1097 (See Figure 19). This marital alliance was also meant to be strengthened by the marriage of Ralph’s sister with the brother of Eustache III of Boulogne.158 Ralph III de Tosny was, at the time of David’s marriage, receiving support from Henry against the Breton, Ralph II de Montfort (de-Gaël), at Breteuil in the Evrecin, an area increasingly difficult for the Norman King of England to control.159 It was a clever and strategically sound decision on Henry’s part to foster ties with families, like the Tosnys, in frontier zones on the Continent. The conflict between Tosny and Breteuil is symptomatic of the 153 

Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 145, 178, 290–91. Béroul, The Romance of Tristan, ed. by Gregory, p. 105, ll. 2211–16. 155  The Boulonnais marriage with Henry I’s nephew, Stephen, was also designed to protect Henry’s position in Boulogne, which was a major trading post for wool. Maud was the daughter of Earl Waltheof of Northumbria and of Judith of Lens. This was the same Waltheof who had allied with King Malcolm III and Count Eustache II in the 1070s. 156  Green, ‘David I and Henry I’, pp. 2–3, 6; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 18. 157  R. Davis, King Stephen, pp. 7–8. 158  Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 272; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 296, 376–77, 525; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 145, 178. Judith died in c. 1126. 159  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 222, 246–50. 154 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

93

problems the King was facing across the Channel, which directly informed his decision to advance men in these regions. This was also why he appointed Stephen of Blois to the lordship of Alençon following the removal of William Talvas, the former Lord of Alençon, in 1112 at the very time that the conflict broke out between Ralph de Tosny and the Montforts.160 Rivalry in the Bellêmois and in the Evrecin was to dominate loyalties setting families like the Beaumont-Meulans, Tosnys and Montforts against each other for decades. After 1135, Ralph de Tosny’s son, Roger, supported the Angevin cause during the Succession War because of the family’s earlier struggle against Count Waleran of Meulan over Breteuil. Waleran’s father, Earl Robert of Leicester, had previously married a Tosny but the marriage was with­ out issue. The conflict between the Tosnys and Beaumonts continued until the two families came to an agreement solidified by a marriage between Ralph IV de Tosny and a daughter of Robert II de Beaumont in mid-century but both families were causing problems for the kings of England on both sides of the Channel by then.161 The kings of Scots were later able to exploit these connec­­ tions between the Beaumonts and Tosnys when they too fell out with the English crown in 1173, particularly since they were part of the Beaumont and Tosny kin groups.162 Family connections were not just about bringing families together. They informed political decisions and, in the case of Scotland, brought the Scots closer to developments on the Continent. This influence can be seen in the relationship between David and his sister, Mary. Mary of Boulogne’s favour was not limited to her role in helping arrange David’s marriage to Maud de Senlis. David’s ecclesiastical reforms in Scotland further reflect the extension of Scottish interests into French and BoulonnaisFlemish territory provided by his younger sister’s marital alliance. In about the same year that Mary and Eustache III of Boulogne travelled to England 160  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 204–08; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 377. Stephen was unsuccessful. He was accused of being oppressive and driven out. It is notable that all grants of land in England and Normandy from King Henry to Stephen occurred before Empress Matilda remarried and had heirs. Henry may have recognized quite early that Stephen was one of the most viable candidates to the throne, particularly after the death of his son, if Matilda failed to provide heirs or died before the king. 161  See Chapter 3. Robert II de Beaumont, Earl of Leicester, was also the Lord of Breteuil. Robert de Beaumont and Ralph’s son, Roger de Tosny, fought over Breteuil, in the 1130s. Beaumont’s brother, Waleran, used this rivalry to his advantage and allied with Count Alain ‘Le Noir’ of Brittany. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 225–26, 228–31, 296–98, 366, 376–77, 389–90, 393. 162  See Chapter 5 about later Scottish relationship with the Tosnys and Beaumonts.

Chapter 2

94

and granted Kingweston Abbey in Somerset to Mary’s favourite foundation, Bermondsey Abbey, David brought monks from the Cluniac abbey of La Charité-sur-Loire in Burgundy to the priory churches of St Andrew and Daventry in Northamptonshire (in the honour of Huntingdon).163 These en­­ dow­­ments were meant to affiliate David with his wife’s patrimony, which was a common means by which husbands, whose rights were only legitimated by marriage and not by a direct blood right, effectively exerted lordship over new territories.164 Furthermore, David’s patronage of the regular canons at St Nicholas in Arrouaise, through whom he established Harrold priory (Bedfordshire), may have been influenced by his brother-in-law’s patronage of Arrouaise abbey in 1114, which David’s niece and her husband, King Stephen, continued to support into the 1140s.165 David’s decision to settle monks from La Charité was probably also influenced by his sister and brother-in-law’s interest in the abbey of La Charité-surLoire. Mary and Eustache were important patrons of the Cluniac Bermondsey Abbey, founded c. 1082, which was also colonized with monks from La Charité, and Mary felt a special connection with Bermondsey, where she later retired and died.166 This gift of Bermondsey Abbey to La Charité must be understood within the context of the Boulonnais territorial lordship in Somerset. The couple made this grant to bind the Boulonnais patronage networks on the Continent to those in England. This aspect of their lordship in the region did not go unnoticed by Henry for Mary and her husband were also granted land at Martock in Somerset by Henry before 1125, which further embedded the family within the cross-Channel political structure designed to commit men to King Henry.167

163 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 15, 53, 65, 82; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, p. 158. The grant in alms to the priories was probably based on David’s lordship of the honour of Huntingdon in accordance with his recent marriage to the heiress. Cf. Annales Monastici, ed. by Luard, iii: Monasterii de Bermundeseia, 432; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, p. 155 about Bermondsey. 164  Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp.  149–70. Eudo de Porhoët, Alain ‘le Noir’ and Geoffrey Plantagenet affiliated themselves with ancient centres of power in Brittany for just this reason. La Charité was also where Simon I de Senlis was buried. 165  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 155, 223, 227, 230, 249, 320, 322, 327; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 120, 165. 166  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 146, 147, 155, 156, 165, 166, 233, 258, 260, 320, 322. 167  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, p. 339.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

95

Map 1. Landholdings and/or location in Somerset of Matilda de Chandos, the Coloummiers, the Louvels, Robert de Berkeley, counts of Boulogne and Edmund of Scotland. Map by the author, after a template from http://d-maps.com/carte.php?num_car=2723&lang=en.

Chapter 2

96

The grant of Martock to the Count signifies this agenda. Martock was strategically important for several reasons. It was not only geographically situated in the midst of familial networks that spread into Dorset and Devon but also into Brittany, Boulogne and Flanders. Furthermore, the Scottish royal family had some contact with the area because that was where Mary and David’s brother, Edmund, may have taken up residence in c. 1100 when he entered the Cluniac priory of Montacute.168 It may have been because of his brother’s influence that David patronized Montacute, and he brought at least one man to Scotland from Montacute as a member of his court by c. 1128.169 Montacute was also noteworthy for another reason. It was linked with ‘rebel’ movements for it had originally been founded by Count Robert of Mortain, Earl of Cornwall and half-uncle of King Henry I, in 1068.170 Robert’s son, William, was one of the men who supported Henry’s brother, Robert of Normandy, and who rebelled against the King between 1103 and 1106 until he was captured at Tinchebrai. William was stripped of Mortain and Cornwall and was imprisoned until he was released by King Stephen and entered the Boulonnais patronized Bermondsey abbey where Stephen could keep a close watch over the man from whom he had made his early career.171 Although the Count and Countess of Boulogne never made any known direct endowments to the priory of Montacute,172 Martock was only four kilometres to the northwest of Montacute. Mary had possibly even visited her brother at Montacute in 1114 when she and her husband were in England.173 This visit also coincided with her brother, David’s, marriage to Maud de Senlis, 168 

Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, i, 55. William of Malmesbury says he was imprisoned for life until his death: William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. and trans. by Mynors, Thomson, and Winterbottom, i, 726–27. 169  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 71, 125; Oram, David I, p. 48; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 100. Robert de Montagu (Montacute) began to appear in Scotland by c. 1128. 170  ‘Rebel or ‘rebellion’ is in quotes because whether someone is a rebel is fairly subjective at times. Many of the opposition movements in this period were led by legitimate rivals. Edmund had rebelled against his brother, and after his defeat supposedly took the habit. Count Robert also rebelled against his nephew, William Rufus. 171  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 12. Stephen had actually been the main recipient of William’s lands after he was defeated. 172  Britnell, ‘English Markets and Royal Administration’, p. 184. Their son-in-law as King of England did, however, confirm the priory’s market with toll in 1138. 173  The date of Edmund’s death is unknown, though he was born c. 1070. He may still have been alive, but it is difficult to say with certainty that the siblings met at this time.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

97

the cousin of Mary’s husband.174 Mary had helped arrange the marriage so might have attended the wedding. The relationship David built with the counts of Boulogne continued even after Mary’s death in c. 1120 mainly because his niece, Matilda, daughter and heir of Mary and Eustache III, was married to King Henry’s nephew, Stephen of Blois, who succeeded to Boulogne through his wife. However, the Succession War that followed Henry’s death in 1135 pitted Stephen against Empress Matilda, Henry I’s daughter, and territorially divided families in England and Normandy in their support between the two rivals. Somerset became one of the territories caught between the rival parties because it was dominated by King Stephen’s Boulonnais/Blésois networks following the election of Henry of Blois, Abbot of Glastonbury Abbey, to the bishopric of Winchester.175 Henry of Blois was the brother of King Stephen and brother-in-law of David’s niece, Countess Matilda of Boulogne, Queen of England. The Bishop may already have come into contact with Mary and David’s brother, Edmund, at Montacute because he was probably Abbot of Montacute before taking up his position at Glastonbury.176 Over time, Henry established his authority in Somerset and built Taunton castle near Martock and Montacute in the period after King Henry’s death in order to protect his position in Somerset during the succession crisis. He used this same means of developing the image of his power in building works at Farnham in Surrey, and at Waltham (Kent) and Downton (Wiltshire).177 Bishop Henry’s authority in Somerset was important to Stephen’s crossChannel networks. The war against his Angevin rival after 1135 meant that Stephen needed to exploit his brother’s position in the county by obtaining the support of families who held land in Normandy and Somerset. This agenda is evident in his patronage of families like the Roumares who held in Somerset at Queen Camel and who were important Norman lords at Roumare in Upper Normandy.178 This style of royal lordship meant that he could theoretically rely on these families to fight for him on both sides of the Channel. 174 

Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 178, 290–91. Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’. Glastonbury became famous at this time because of its link with the Arthurian legends. 176  Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, p. 5. 177  Riall, ‘The New Castles of Henry of Blois’. Riall has doubts about the chronology of the building works at Farnham and suggests it had been built under his predecessor or even before. 178  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 33, 70, 128, 138–39, 144–45, 179, 198, 283, 286. William de Roumare, half-brother of Earl Ranulf IV of Chester, was made Earl of Lincoln under Stephen. He was also Lord of Bolingbroke in Lincolnshire and Lord of Neufmarché, 175 

98

Chapter 2

One of the problems with understanding the Scottish position during the Succession War is that some contemporaries interpreted David’s later loyalty to his niece, Empress Matilda, as taking precedence over all of his dealings with his other niece and her husband, King Stephen.179 This was not the case.180 For example, patronage to the Austin nuns of Arrouaise occurred when David was supposedly deeply entrenched in supporting his other niece, Empress Matilda, against Queen Matilda’s husband, King Stephen.181 Moreover, Queen Matilda felt a strong enough bond with David to protect his son from the earl of Chester, who may have planned to kidnap Henry in late September 1140, just months before the Battle of Lincoln, where David fought against them.182 David was a political pragmatist. Although he did usually favour the Empress, he also recognized when it was useful to pressure and to cajole King Stephen and his wife in order to receive concessions. He put pressure on Queen Matilda and her husband by encouraging Somerset families to fight for the Empress while at the same flattering Stephen by also patronising Stephen’s favoured houses. The Scottish-Somerset contact provided a significant area of support for Empress Matilda and her son during the 1140s, despite that Somerset should have been loyally supporting their overlord Stephen. The Berkeleys and Robert of Bampton, son of the Fleming Walter of Douai, coalesced against Stephen and encouraged King David to attack into Cumbria and Northumberland in 1136. Robert’s fees were scattered in Somerset, Devonshire and Cumbria, and he had been a friend of David since the 1120s. It was because of this friendship that he had found refuge with David in 1135 after the failure of his first rebellion against the King,183 and he and his kinsman, Ralph Louvel, continued to in the Norman Vexin. Stephen’s plan failed because he fell out with Roumare’s half-brother, the Earl of Chester, and both earls can be found with the Empress by late 1140. See Chapter 4 about Scottish contact with one of Chester/Roumare’s men at Colombières (Coloummiers) and Chapter 3 about the Earl of Chester. 179  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, p. 706; Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 146; Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, p. 52; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 39–41, 77, 123 180  William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, p. 16; Stringer, The Reign of Stephen, pp. 28–37. Malmesbury explicitly suggested that David was initially undecided in his support until he met with Stephen in 1135 and openly declared for him. 181  The Brus and Quincy families were also patrons of Harrold priory: Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 120, 165; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 181–84; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 158; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 231, 249. 182  John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 306. 183  Green, ‘Family Matters’, pp. 159–60.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

99

be involved with David in 1136/37 during the King’s attack on Bampton.184 Likewise, the Berkeleys, who later settled in Scotland, were also from Gloucester and Somerset and they fought against Stephen during the war.185 David’s exposure to families in these regions before he was king was strengthened during the war because they were fighting on the same side. More will be said about specific involvement of Somerset men with King David in the next chapter but it is important to realize that David’s later involvement with Somerset was originally based on contact encouraged by his sister, Mary.

Brittany A different network of alliances influenced other forms of princely piety and patronage originating from a Chartrain-Breton Continental nexus. In the same period as his Cluniac foundations in Northamptonshire, David also introduced into Scotland another Continental order that had recently formed near Chartres — the Tironensian Order.186 The Tironensian Order seems to have fallen under the protection of the dukes of Brittany from early on in its inception in 1109 and it received patronage from families who had married natural children of King Henry I, like the count of Perche and king of Scots.187 The founder of the order, Bernard of Abbeville (Ponthieu), had retreated for some time near to Saint-Malo in Brittany (across from the Cotentin) before establishing his monastery at Thiron in Perche, thirty-five kilometres southwest of 184 

Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, pp. 15–16; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 518–21. Ralph joined Stephen after the attack when he was rewarded by Stephen with Bampton but he was soon fighting again for the Empress. Ralph might have been a half-brother of Robert of Bampton. 185  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 50, 139, 377. 186  See Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, i–xviii for the general spread of the order. The original charter for the foundation was generated from Scotland in c. 1120: Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 58–59; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 3–4; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 158–59. David’s wife and son along with his brother, King Alexander, and Bishop John of Glasgow appeared as witnesses on the charter so the date would have been between 1118 and 1124. 187  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 54, 173. As mentioned earlier in the chapter, Duke Conan III had married Maud, a natural daughter of Henry I. Rotrou, Count of Perche, also married a natural daughter, Matilda, and their daughters appeared as witnesses with their aunt, Julianne, another natural daughter of Henry I who had married Eustache de Breteuil. She witnessed a grant to the abbey of Thiron along with William Talvas, future Count of Ponthieu.

100

Chapter 2

Chartres.188 Saint-Malo is also only twenty-three kilometres from Dol, the patrimonial locus of the fitzAlain (Stewart) family who became important to the Scottish court at this time. Bernard of Abbeville was a very influential man because of the relationships he developed in this period. For example, one of the men who accompanied Bernard to Saint-Malo was the Breton, Robert d’Arbrissel, who founded his controversial rule for the abbey of Fontevrault on the Loire River in Anjou in c. 1100.189 Robert was a well-known personage in his day and was present at the grand ceremony at Lohéac, south of Rennes, in 1101 when a piece of the true cross was presented at the new foundation of the church of Saint-Sauveur.190 Breton ecclesiastics moved freely back and forth between Chartres and Brittany in the twelfth century, which helped these new orders spread outside of the two regions.191 For example, one of Robert d’Arbrissel’s companions founded the abbey of Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt, near Rennes and Fougères.192 Duke Conan IV’s sister, Ennoguent, was an abbess of Saint-Sulpice and was joined at the abbey by a possible Scot, Amelina d’Escosse, who died in 1210.193 Saint188 

J. Smith, ‘Oral and Written’, pp. 332–34. Saint Malo is one of the seven founding saints of Brittany and was reportedly a follower of Saint Brendan. He lived in the late sixth, early seventh century and is attributed with converting the ‘Scoti’ in the Northern Isles and Orkney. The Mauvoisin family discussed in Chapters 6, 7 and 8 brought the tradition about Saint Malo to the Pontoise region in the twelfth century when the abbey of Pontoise was dedicated to him. Their patronage of Saint Malo was probably based on the family’s kinship with the Breton Porhoëts earlier in the century. 189  Chroniques des églises d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Mabille, pp. 32, 143, 420; Robert of Arbrissel, ed. and trans. by Venarde, pp. xxiv–xxvi, passim; Bourges, ‘Robert Arbrissel’. He had regular contact with Breton men and women. He communicated with Ermengarde of Anjou, wife of Duke Alain IV of Brittany, and with Baudri, Archbishop of Dol, and Marbode of Rennes. He died in 1116. 190  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 505–06. 191  Bourges, ‘Robert Arbrissel’, pp. 9–19. See Chapter 5. Several families and their extended kin held fees simultaneously in Anjou, Maine, Brittany, Chartres and Normandy. 192  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 597–98; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 15; Ecclesia Redonensis, in Gallia Christiana, xiv: Ubi de provincia Turonensi agitur, ed. by de Sainte-Marthe and Hauréau, pp. 787–88. 193  Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 31; Quilgars, Dictionnaire topographique du depar­ te­­ment de la Loire-inferieure, p. 82. Ennoguen had obviously died before Amelina’s appointment. Her cousin, a daughter of Hoël, Duke Conan IV of Brittany’s uncle, was also a nun at Saint-Sulpice. Judith Everard suggests Amelina came from the priory of Les Couëts also known as S. Maria in Scotia, located just south of Nantes. This is the only time ‘Escosse’ is used in reference to an abbess and it seems odd that her place of origin was called ‘Escosse’, a term begin-

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

101

Sulpice was also linked to an English priory in Kent established in c. 1150 by David’s niece and her husband, King Stephen, for their daughter, Mary.194 Another Breton-Chartrain ecclesiastic who followed the path of Arbrissel and Bernard was Geoffrey Brito, Dean of Le Mans and Archbishop of Rouen (1111–28). Geoffrey knew Robert d’Arbrissel and was in contact with men in the Chartrain through Ivo, Bishop of Chartres.195 After he was advanced at Henry’s court in Normandy, he retained and fostered contacts in Brittany through his brother, who remained in Brittany as Bishop of Saint-Malo.196 Geoffrey may even have met David of Scotland at least twice in his career, in 1115 at St Albans and in 1126 at Woodstock, when both men appear as witnesses for Henry I.197 David’s encouragement of contact with the Tironensian order was clearly encouraged not only for religious reasons but also for the purpose of involving the Scots in a wider political and intellectual forum that was to continue under David’s descendants. David’s son, Earl Henry of Huntingdon, later reconfirmed and conceded the same gifts made by his father to the church of Saint-Trinité de Thiron in about 1140 at Jedburgh.198 Patronage to the order continued in the ning to be applied to Scotland but as ‘Escoce’, ‘Eschoche’ or ‘Escos’. Conan IV was married to Margaret of Scotland when Ennoguen would have been abbess of Saint-Sulpice. It is possible Amelina came across with Margaret, but there is no direct proof. Cf. Robert Wace’s Roman de Rou, L’Histoire de Guillaume Maréchal and Marie de France’s Lai de Lanval for reference to Scots as ‘Escos’ or Escoce’: Robert Wace, Roman de Rou, ed. by Holden, i, 92, l. 2312; History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 68, l. 1319; ii, 234, l. 14655; Marie de France, Lais, ed. and trans. by Burgess and Busby, ll. 5–8; Continuations of the Old French ‘Perceval’ of Chrétien de Troyes, i: The First Continuation, ed. by Roach, p. 117, l. 4291; p. 199, l. 7299. 194  Everard, ‘The Abbey of Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt’. This became known as Higham Priory. Mary was probably named after her Scottish grandmother. Mary was not a common name in the Boulogne family. She was to be pulled out of the convent and, as the sole surviving heir, married by King Henry II of England to Matthew of Alsace, whom she later divorced. 195  Spear, ‘Geoffrey Brito’. 196  Spear, ‘Geoffrey Brito’, pp.  126–37. Geoffrey was greatly favoured by Henry  I and attested several royal charters. He also received several manors from the king at Bentworth and Kingsclere in Hampshire and he was given lordship of Douvrend near Dieppe. He was also the man entrusted with the secret negotiations for Empress Matilda’s marriage to Count Geoffrey V of Anjou in 1128. Henry’s pattern of patronage towards Geoffrey is reflective of how territorial disparate royal grants could be. 197  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 127–28, 201–02. 198  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 14. This was petitioned by John, Bishop of Glasgow and witnessed by Countess Ada de Warenne, Hugh de Moreville, Robert and Gilbert de Umfraville, Gervase Ridel, William de Somerville, William Maule, and Hugh de Broi at Jedburgh.

102

Chapter 2

royal Scottish family with Earl Henry’s wife, Ada de Warenne, and his cousin, Empress Matilda, who both patronized Thiron between 1139 and 1167.199 The abbey of Roxburgh was also listed as one of the abbey of Saint-Trinité de Thiron’s possessions in 1147 and again in 1175/76.200 The Tironensian order made an enduring impact on immigration into Scotland. As late as the 1160s men from Chartres can still be found witnessing for the king of Scots.201 David’s interest in the Tironensians was probably based on his involvement with men like Stephen of Blois (the future King Stephen) early in his career. Stephen grew up in the midst of these Chartrain-Breton networks. One of the reasons for the early communication between Chartres and northern Brittany, in particular, was the close attachment that the mother of Stephen of Blois and sister of King Henry I, Adelaide, had formed with the Archbishop of Dol, Baudri de Bourgueil. Baudri was well-known as a chronicler of the First Crusade in his Historia Hierosolymitana and he also wrote a biography, La Vie de Robert d’Arbrissel, about his friend, Robert d’Arbrissel, but his most famous work was his allegorical poem to Stephen’s mother, Adelaide, in which he describes her imaginary bedroom as a site of philosophical learning.202 Stephen was raised at his mother’s courts in Blois and Chartres until c. 1107, when he was sent to his uncle, King Henry, for further training and to provide lands and titles to him as the youngest of three sons. It was at this point that he was able to spread knowledge of the Tironensians in Britain.203 He and his mother may even have personally known Robert d’Arbrissel, the founder of Fontevrault Abbey, which was also strategically important. The abbey of Fontevrault, by virtue of its geographical position near the Loire River, represents a natural flow of exchange in the Mançeau frontier. Loire 199  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 109. The charter was mistakenly dated to c. 1127 by the editor of the cartulary, Lucien Merlet. Ada was called Queen of Scotland in the charter but she did not marry Henry until 1139 so the date assigned must be incorrect. Another problem is that Ada was never Queen of Scotland but this mistake could have been made by a French clerk who knew she was married to the son and heir of the king. This clerk would not know that Earl Henry would die before his father. Cf. Chronica de Mailros, p. 71; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 149, 199 about Henry. Duke Conan III of Brittany was also a benefactor of the abbey of Thiron in c. 1132: Recueil d’actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne, ed. by de la Borderie, pp. 75–76. 200  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 60, 66, 101. 201  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 168–69, 178–79, 363, 374, 403. 202  Dales, The Intellectual Life of Western Europe, p. 158. He also wrote a Vita of Saint Samson of Dol. Flobert, ‘Le Remaniement Carolingien’. 203  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 12, 19.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

103

trade played a significant role in communication between the different regions in the west of France. Like Fontevrault, the abbey of Thiron was also located on a river route. It stood about thirty kilometres from the Eure River, and had access to communication and trade in the Chartrain. These were networks that the King of Scots used to his advantage as can be seen in his charters. David’s original agreement with the Tironensian Order concerning his foundation at Selkirk explicitly encouraged trade between Scotland and Thiron abbey.204 He and his brother, Alexander, further strengthened their relationship with the abbey by recruiting one of Bernard of Abbeville’s monks, John Capellanus, as Bishop of Glasgow in c. 1118. Bishop John’s subsequent thirty-year episcopacy introduced new ideas about reform developing on the Continent into Scotland through a steady flow of monks from Thiron, initially because of this Selkirk foundation.205 John Capellanus’ relationship with Bernard of Abbeville and with Robert d’Arbrissel drew an interesting array of younger sons from Maine to Scotland for there was a soft border between the eastern edge of Brittany and the western limit of Maine and families in this region often intermarried. For example, Robert’s hometown, Arbrissel, is in the midst of territories held by the La Guerche (in Brittany) and the Craon (western frontier of Maine) families, and it may have been specifically because of Craon contact with the Chartrain-Breton nexus that a member of the Craon kin group, Robert ‘the Burgundian’, appeared in Scotland and was granted land in Fife at about the same time as David’s grant of Selkirk to the Tironensian Order.206 The Craon-Burgundian family had already been important in rallying support for Robert d’Arbrissel’s reform program 204 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 80–81 for the grant to Holy Trinity of Thiron of rights for trade in Scotland signed at Clunie in Aberdeenshire in c. 1140 and witnessed by Ranulf de Soules, Robert the Burgundian, Robert Avenel, Earl Duncan, Edward of Northumberland, and Roger, nephew of the bishop of Saint Andrews. 205  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 56–57, 59–60, 86, 97, 102, 116–17, 126, 143; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 145, 260–61. John came into conflict with Thurstan, Bishop of York, who demanded John’s submission in lieu of his election to Glasgow by 1118. This conflict was part of a wider argument between the Scottish and English Church over whether York had metropolitan status over the Scottish bishops. 206  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 71–72, 96–97, 101; Bannerman, ‘MacDuff of Fife’, pp. 23–24; Liber cartarum prioratus Sancti Andree in Scotia, ed. by Thomson, pp. 117–18, 183. Robert first appeared in Scotland in c. 1128, when he appeared in witness lists concerning endowments to Dunfermline Abbey. Bannerman addresses the diplomatic finesse required of the King of Scots in recognising the tensions between his native nobility in Fife and the new settlers, like Robert the Burgundian, when the king’s court ruled in favour of the Culdees of Loch Leven against Robert.

104

Chapter 2

since the late eleventh century, as had the counts of Anjou.207 They were in the midst of Chartrain-Breton patronage networks.208 Robert ‘the Burgundian’ was possibly the third son of Robert ‘the Burgun­ dian’ the elder, the Lord of Sablé and Craon in Maine and an important military lord of the counts of Anjou, or it may be suggested, more probably, the son of Robert’s son, Robert Vestrol, Lord of Sablé, or of Vestrol’s brother, Renaud de Nevers, Lord of Craon.209 Robert Vestrol’s brother, Renaud, was married to Eunogena from the house of Vitré and they did have a son called Robert ‘the Burgundian’, who, as the second master of the Knights Templar, was also involved with the Angevin King of Jerusalem, Fulk of Anjou.210 The marital links between the courts of Brittany and Anjou were strong.211 Fulk was also the brother-in-law of Alain ‘Fergant’, Count of Brittany.212 The involvement of Renaud’s son, Robert, in the crusading movement was probably not only influ-

207 

Ménage, Histoire de Sable, pp. 148–49, 164–68, 335–39; Jessee, Robert the Burgundian, pp. 30–52, 167, 175–79; Jessee, ‘The Family of Robert the Burgundian’; Barton, ‘Lordship in Maine’, pp. 50–51. Silvestre, Bishop of Rennes and Chancellor of Duke Conan II of Brittany, witnessed for Robert ‘the Burgundian’ de Nevers the elder along with the bishop of Anjou and archbishop of Tours. Silvestre was from the Pouancé-La Guerche family, overlords of Robert d’Arbrissel’s hometown: Recueil d’actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne, ed. by de la Borderie, pp. 76–77, 83–84. 208  Jessee, ‘Robert d’Arbrissel’. Robert, Lord of Sablé and Craon, and his son, Robert, were close to and patronized the Breton, Robert d’Arbrissel, who was forced out of Rennes in 1093 after supporting Silvestre de La Guerche, Bishop of Rennes, in his reform efforts: Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, ii, 269–70. 209  Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, i, 110, 271 n. 345, 337 n. 269; ii, 107, 128, 170–75, 185, 188, 201, 204, 233, 250–55, 264, 298–300; Jessee, ‘The Family of Robert the Burgundian’. 210  Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, i, 337–38; ii, 253; Jessee, Robert the Burgundian, pp. 73–74, 167, 170; Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 26–29, 738–44, 759, 761–82; Mayer, ‘Angevin versus Normans’, pp. 5–9. Robert ‘the Burgundian’ the elder’s son Renaud took on the nomenclature of the lordship at Sablé while his son, Robert II, bore the same title and name as his father. Angot does not say there was a third son of Robert the elder named Robert but if there were it would be difficult to distinguish him from his older brother with the same name. At any rate, I suggest it would make more sense based on Robert’s appearance in c. 1128 in Scotland that he was a grandson of Robert the elder not a son and that he may even have been illegitimate. Renaud also had three other sons, Maurice, Henry, and Aymer: Cartulaire de l’abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme, ed. by Métais, ii, 88, 144. 211  Jessee, ‘Robert d’Arbrissel’, pp. 221–35. The Burgundian family continued to be involved in Breton affairs. 212  Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, i, 122.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

105

enced by service to his Angevin overlord but his grandfather, Robert the elder, had also taken the cross.213 The Sablé-Craon family were extremely well-connected throughout France. Robert ‘the Burgundian’ the elder was a younger son of the count of Nevers and of a daughter of the Capetian King, Robert II, and he was part of a vast kin-network extending into Anjou, Brittany, Maine, Burgundy and the Vendôme.214 He married Avice, from the powerful Sablé family in the Sarthe region, and his nephew by marriage, Hubert, was the acting Viscount de Beaumont-surSarthe.215 Hubert’s son, Ralph, continued building the family’s power in Maine and married the daughter of Guy II de Laval, another important family in the Maine-Brittany frontier.216 It was Ralph’s son, Roscelin, who also married an ille­­ gitimate daughter of King Henry I as part of another arrangement engineered to extend Henry’s political scope in the frontiers of western France. The Sablé-Craon family also encouraged relations with their Burgundian kin. Robert ‘the Burgundian’ the elder’ was related to the house of Burgundy through his grandmother. It may be that Robert’s son or grandson who appears in Scotland as Robert ‘the Burgundian’ was fostered in Burgundy thus maintaining the family’s close relationship with the duchy.217 Robert ‘the Burgundian’ probably entered Scotland in the late 1120s through his family’s involvement 213 

Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, ii, 246, 250–51, 266. Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, i, 27 n. 139, 109 n. 482, 110 n. 485; ii, 107, 128, 170–75, 185, 188, 204. These networks are apparent in Robert’s pattern of patronage and involvement with the Angevin court. He may also have held his lordship at Sablé of the Count of Anjou. It is interesting that some place-names appear in Angers and Burgundy in connection with Robert in the eleventh century perhaps because of the marital union between the two territories e.g. Brion and Saint-Malo (which also extended into Brittany because of rivalry over the bishopric). 215  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 49; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de SaintVincent du Mans, ed. by Charles and Menjot d’Elbenne, p. 32 — Hubert married Ermengarde, a daughter of Robert’s brother, Count Guillaume de Nevers. See also Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 47. 216  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Vincent du Mans, ed. by Charles and Menjot d’Elbenne, p. 361. The charter says Ralph married the sister of Guy de Laval ‘Wido de Valle’. 217  He would have been fostered not only because of his family’s Burgundian roots but also perhaps through a Mayenne connection. The Mayennes were neighbours of the Craon/ Sablés and Hugh II, Duke of Burgundy had married a Mayenne (Matilda) in c. 1115: Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 266–67. The Craon family would have viewed sending a younger son to the court of Burgundy as prestigious. It was also a very politically moti­ vated move since they were interested in tightening these networks. The connection to the house of Burgundy would also have involved the Craons with the Duke of Aquitaine, William IX, whose mother, Hildegarde, was the daughter of Robert, Duke of Burgundy. 214 

106

Chapter 2

with the reform movement that had been cemented by a series of marriages between Breton and Mançeaux families. This contact across counties was common and illuminates the fluidity of alliances in medieval society that crossed secular and ecclesiastical boundaries. King David was interested in what these extended networks could do for him and for his kingdom. He had possibly even spent some time in France between 1108 and 1121,218 which may have put him into direct contact with the intellectual movements at Chartres and its extended reach into Brittany, Maine, and the Yvelines and drew men like Robert ‘the Burgundian’, the knight Aymer ‘the Frenchman’, Robert de Bourneville (Bourneville is thirty-three kilo­­metres west of Rouen) and Roger de Coignières to Scotland in 1127.219 The forging of ties with men on the Continent put the Scottish court in close con­­tact with the French, lasting well over a century, for men with particularly Con­tinental names, like ‘Helias’ (a Manceau name), continued to appear in Scottish charters.220 David’s encouragement of men to settle in Scotland created a new tier in the aristocratic structure in Scotland, which continued into the next generation. For example, Aymer the Frenchman had a son, Edmund, who settled in southern Scotland and witnessed for the King in c. 1141.221 Robert de Bourneville, another migrant, also settled in the south of Scotland and his son of the same name was sheriff of Berwick by about 1195.222 Robert may also have been the son, or a relative, of Osbert de Bourneville who was in the mouvance of the Beaumont family at Meulan; a relationship that is certainly believable considering that Scots had contact with the Beaumonts at Henry’s court and that men from the Leicester lordship witnessed for David with Robert de Bourneville

218 

Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 22–23. There isn’t definitive proof he was in France at this time. Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 59, 68–70. 220  Liber S. Thome de Aberbrothoc Registrorum Abbacie de Aberbrothoc, ed. by Innes and Chalmers, i, 5. ‘Helias’ is a Mançeau name which suggests he came across with Ermengarde de Beaumont when she married King William in 1186. 221  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 68, 109. Aymer is called a knight of Scotland in the witness list concerning the consecration of Robert of Scone as Bishop of St Andrews. 222  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 59–60, 78, 108, 125, 129; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 40, 64, 378. It must have been his son or grandson who was sheriff of Berwick in 1195 considering that Robert began witnessing for David I in the 1120s. Robert may also have been the same Robert de Bourneville who conceded the pertinences of the church of St Peter of Bourneville to Saint-Trinité-de-Beaumont in 1199: Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, p. 239. 219 

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

107

before David was king.223 Earl Robert II of Leicester even made a point of naming David’s sister, Queen Matilda, as one of the reasons for his grant to SaintTrinité-de-Beaumont in 1131.224 Roger de Coignières, who originated from Coignières, was also a member of the Beaumont-Yvelines networks.225 His family’s lordship was only nine kilometres from Montfort l’Amaury in the Yvelines. His family settled in Durham between 1101 and 1107 after which they witnessed throughout the twelfth century for King William of Scotland and he, or his son of the same name, held Scarborough for Henry II in 1175.226 He also held fees of the Merlays at Caldwell in north Yorkshire and Clifton just south of Morpeth along with a fee at Hutton, Norton, Home and Howgrave,227 and he was probably related to William de Coignières who, with another kinsman, Henry de Coignières, witnessed for the Merlays of Morpeth throughout the twelfth century.228 William 223 

Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 59; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 250; Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, pp. 9, 15, 22, 23, 44, 239. 224  Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, p. 7. 225  Yvelines families like Montfort l’Amaury and Mauvoisin can be found regularly in Chartrain charters and it is clear that Roger was part of this network. Roger de Coignières (Conyers) was witnessing for King Henry I between 1101 and 1107 alongside Count Robert of Meulan, Earl Henry of Warwick and Richard de Revières: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 13, 274. The Coisnerie fee of Courvaudon in Calvados associated with Coignières may be separate from the Yvelines branch or of a collateral line: ii, 354. We know from the Regesta that Roger had emigrated directly from across the sea: ii, 274. See Chapter 6 about Yvelines-Chartrain contacts. 226  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 177–78; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 25–26; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 20; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 82–83; ii, 3, 7, 53, 64, 109, 274, 278, 280, 283–89, 306, 308. Roger de Coignières (or Conyers) was one of the men who refused to do homage to William Cumin at Durham in 1143: Lawrence of Durham, Dialogi, ed. by Raine, pp. xvi, xix, xxiv–xxv; Symeon of Durham, Historia regum, ed. by Arnold, i, 158–60. Roger died in c. 1175 when Henry II held an inquest into the lands he held of the bishop of Durham, so that his son, Roger, might succeed to them. 227  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 82–83; ii, 274, 278, 280, 283–89, 306, 308. He also gained several other fees that he held of Peter du Hommet, who was probably related to the Norman branch. Constable Richard du Hommet also appeared in charters relating to Durham including the inquisition into Roger de Coignières’ inheritance so the families were in contact in England: ii, 201–02, 284. 228  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 644; Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, iv, 45–46, 49–52, 55, 65. He was probably the same man who witnessed for Bishop Hugh du Puiset of Durham: Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 3, 290.

108

Chapter 2

de Coignières can also be found witnessing for Conan IV on both sides of the Channel between 1156 and 1171 by virtue of his position in the earldom of Richmond and he and Roger also witnessed for Robert II de Brus in mid-century.229 William, or perhaps a son or kinsman of the same name, may have been the same man granted land in Carcagny (near Bayeux) by Constable Richard du Hommet, another man in contact with the Scottish court.230

The Reasons for the Anglo-French Penetration of Scotland The years that David spent ‘abroad’ in the Anglo-French court may have created difficulties for him when he took up the kingship as a ‘foreigner’. He had not been expected to succeed his brother and as such he had established his life as an Anglo-French lord. When he did succeed to the kingship, his friends and allies were Anglo-French. These were the men he introduced into Scotland and these were the men who formed the core of his political court.231 The new king was astute though. He did not ignore his native aristocracy. He continued to advance native lords as his local representatives,232 and he also ensured support from the native community even before he became king by encouraging the symbols of their local traditions. For example, in the early 1120s, he held an inquest into the possessions of the church of St Kentigern in Glasgow.233 229 

Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Fowler, pp. 267–68, 270–73; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 3, 290. 230  Caen, Arch. Dpt du Calvados, MS H 820 [L’Abbaye de Notre-Dame d’Aunay]. William de Coignières also witnessed for Richard du Hommet in 1174: Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 193. 231  R.  V.  Turner, ‘Changing Perceptions’. A similar attitude appeared in the courts of William I and Henry I in that they raised up ‘new’ men, who would be loyal to them, rather than relying on men from established families. These were the ‘ignobiles’ and ‘ex plebeio genere’ mentioned by Richard of Hexham and by the anonymous Gesta Stephani. There were various responses to newcomers — some writers spoke favourably about this royally backed phenomenon while others were critical. However, it may be debatable how ‘base-born’ these men were and it could not have escaped the notice of contemporaries that all families at one time or another came from humble origins, including William ‘the Conqueror’. ‘Ignobiles’ was a term often used to discredit one’s rivals, which helps to explain the divergence between claims of ‘base-birth’ against men known to have been of noble blood. 232  See Grant, ‘Thanes and Thanages’ about the role that these local men played in his administration on the ground. 233  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 60; Oram, David I, pp. 73–77.

The Scottish Marriage Market and the Continent

109

David did not want to repeat the mistakes of his predecessors by alienating a large segment of his population and their traditional networks of authority, especially while he was still only the brother of the King, and while there were other rivals to the throne. He faced opposition in Moray and the Western Isles from Wimund, Bishop of the Isles (possibly son of William fitzDuncan, a nephew of David); Óengus, Earl of Moray (descended from King Lulach); and ‘Melcolf ’, a rebel in 1124 and in the 1130s.234 Many of these families in the Isles, Moray and Ross had already proven to be difficult for his brother, Alexander, to control during his reign.235 It might even be suggested that David had previously encouraged men from these regions to rebel against his brother when he was accused of inciting trouble in the kingdom against Alexander.236 After all, David’s name invoked a very old and prestigious tradition based on the Old Testament figure, King David, which was of particular significance to the Dál Riatans of Argyll going back to the eighth century.237 Nonetheless, although David recognized the importance of not alienating his native nobility when he succeeded Alexander, there was a noticeable shift in his attitude towards the composition of his court. His witness lists after 1124 clearly favoured his Anglo-French companions, which sat uneasily with his native lords.238 During campaigns native discontent at the King’s preference for 234 

Oram, David I, pp. 77, 84–87, 90–97, 113–18, 179–86, 189; Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 67–74, 96, 165–66. William fitzDuncan was the son of King Duncan. He was rarely involved in Moray and there is even some disagreement as to whether he held the earldom but the evidence is fairly convincing that he did have authority in the region. His claim to Moray may have been through his father, called ‘comes de Murrayse’ in the Cronicon Cumbriae, dating to the early twelfth century: Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iii, 585. In any case, he did not appear to make a bid for the throne though his uncle, King Alexander, may have favoured his succession before his death. William was content with his position in northern England but the case may have been different for Wimund, who, if he was William’s son as argued by Richard Oram, would have seen his status very differently particularly when David bypassed his claim to Skipton and Craven despite that he was the elder son of an earlier match. ‘Melcolf ’ may have been David’s illegitimate nephew, a son of Alexander I. 235  Annals of Ulster, ed. by Hennessy and MacCarthy, ii, 95; Andrew of Wyntoun, The Original Chronicle, ed. by Amours, Brown, and Neilson, i, cxxvii; ii, 174–75. According to the early fifteenth-century chronicler, Wyntoun, men from Ross had planned to assassinate him and they fled over the Mounth when the king discovered the plot. 236  The Triumph Tree, ed. by Clancy and others, p. 84. 237  Gondek, ‘Investing in Sculpture’, pp. 120–25. Stone sculptures of the ‘David Cycle’ were royal manifestations of power reflecting the changing political structure in the west during this period and they date to about the eighth century. 238  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 19–21, passim.

110

Chapter 2

his French nobility in battle was voiced. The Galwegians, under the command of Fergus of Galloway and Earl Malise I of Strathearn, were particularly vocal before the Battle of the Standard in 1138 about the King’s favouritism, which did win them the more prized vanguard position.239 It may also be telling that the King’s brother, Alexander, who was not interested in patronising the Anglo-French nobility in his kingdom, faced only one known rebellion during his seventeen-year reign, while David faced rebellions in 1124, between 1130 and 1134, and in c. 1147. However, dissatisfaction from his native nobility did not overly strain his reign for these campaigns were intermittent and accomplished very little.240 The native lords did occasionally appear at court for specific endowments involving their territories, which would have been important for ruling their earldoms effectively, and it may be that they only appeared sporadically at court because they could not afford to be absent from their territories for long. These men also showed enough royal support to participate in costly campaigns into England and the King was sensitive to their sense of authority often taking their advice even to his detriment.241 Ultimately, David’s style of rule and his introduction of cross-Channel Anglo-French lords into Scotland made him more successful as a king than his predecessors. He was able to extend royal power further north and west and he received more recognition from abroad. A lot of his success was based on how he conducted himself during the Succession War that erupted after King Henry I’s death in 1136, which will be examined in the following chapter.

239 

Ailred of Rieveaulx, Relatio de Standardo, ed. by Howlett, iii, 189–90. Earl Malise was the father of the 1160 rebel against David’s grandson, Malcolm. 240  Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 64–73, 77–79. 241  Oram, David I, pp. 118, 126, 132–44.

Chapter 3

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

The Anglo-French in 1135 The political situation in Western Europe dramatically changed with the death of Henry I in 1135. The King of Scots quickly discovered that relations he and his brother fostered earlier in the century were soon to be challenged by the subsequent succession crisis that tore the cross-Channel community apart and weakened the previous infrastructure of patronage and advancement implemented under Henry I. The fragility of this structure was quickly exposed as families who had been sidelined by Henry during his reign chose to support Henry’s nephew, Stephen of Blois, against Henry’s daughter and designated heir, Empress Matilda. The competing claims for the throne were further championed by residual discontent over the disenfranchisement of families who had supported Henry’s brother, Robert, and nephew, William ‘Clito’, against Henry over the previous twenty years. Ultimately, though, the issue over the succession had been made acute well before Henry’s death when Henry’s firstborn son, William, died in the White Ship debacle of 1120. William’s death introduced a deep divide in the succession — a succession that had not known a woman ruler (and only briefly in the kingdom of Mercia) since the ninth century. 1

1 

See Bailey, ‘Ælfwynn, Second Lady of the Mercians’ about Aelfwynn, an early female ruler in England.

112

Chapter 3

Although Henry tried to overcome the reluctance of his political community to accept a female heir by obtaining their sworn support in 1127, these measures proved inadequate. Civil war erupted as the King’s body was barely cold after eating a dodgy plate of lampreys. Stephen of Blois, upon hearing of his uncle’s death, immediately crossed to England and was crowned before Matilda and her second husband, Count Geoffrey V of Anjou, had set sail. For nearly twenty years, Stephen vied for the throne against Henry’s daughter and her son, the future Henry II, and it was a struggle exacerbated by the political divides still inherent in the composition of this cross-Channel nobility. The civil unrest that lasted from 1135 until 1153 divided loyalties in all three kingdoms (England, France, and Scotland) and in frontier territories in dispute between the three crowns — namely Cumbria, Northumbria, Maine, Yvelines, and the Ornois and Bellêmois.2 This cross-Channel world inextricably bound the three kingdoms together into a triangular relationship of conflict and negotiation over the same territories. The nobility of England faced the difficult task of choosing which overlord to support in the struggle for the crown; it was no longer simply an issue of owing support to one overlord in England and to one in France. These men and women also had to take into account from whom and where they held lands on the Continent and the position of their allies and kin in this grand political scheme. They were both restricted, in that they had to negotiate very carefully between overlords, but more independent, in that if they lost lands, they still held fees of another lord. Despite that David was responsible for the introduction of cross-Channel families into Scotland, which put him into contact with men who supported the King of France’s intermittent support of Stephen and his family, David’s political agenda more often followed the Angevin claim of Empress Matilda, and her son, Henry of Anjou. Although Scottish involvement in Continental politics was rarely direct (neither David nor his son, Henry, led armies to Normandy to help their allies), their involvement with the Angevin camp not only gave 2 

W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 32. The Beaumonts were principle actors in the conflict between Stephen and Matilda in England and France. The Beaumont twins were one of many examples of the territorial interests of a family in England and Normandy who divided their support between the rival parties. For example, Waleran de Beaumont, Count of Meulan and Earl of Worcester, his twin brother Robert, Earl of Leicester, and their younger brother, the earl of Bedford chose to support different sides in the Succession War. Although Earl Robert was Stephen’s lieutenant in Normandy, after Stephen was captured in 1141, Robert’s brother, Waleran, changed his support to Matilda. They also had a half-brother who was another cross-Channel lord, William de Warenne, Earl of Surrey. For more detail see Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 51–57.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

113

them access to knowledge about campaigns abroad but created a bond with men whose land interests on the other side of the Channel influenced their and their men’s decisions to support Matilda over Stephen. David’s support of Matilda was not unwavering, however, despite that, he, among many, had confirmed Henry’s designation of Matilda as his successor in January 1127.3 The ultimate focus for David after Henry’s death was less about who was ruling England and more about how he could expand his territorial lordship in Northumbria, Cumberland and Huntingdon.4 As such, the King of Scots was initially slow to declare support for either contender and he swiftly campaigned in the north of England and seized the castles of Carlisle, Wark, Alnwick, Norham and Newcastle.5 He then successfully pressured Stephen to formally recognize his son’s rights to Huntingdon in the first Treaty of Durham in February 1136 though he failed to gain the earldom of Northumbria.6 The recognition of Canmore authority in England by King Stephen was extremely important to David. David’s claims to the earldoms of Northumbria and Huntingdon were made on behalf of his son and heir, Henry, whose right to Huntingdon/Northampton in particular derived from his mother, Maud, daughter of Earl Waltheof of Northumbria.7 Furthermore, Henry was not the 3  Anglo-Saxon Chronicle E-Text, ed. by Susan Irvine, in Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. by Dumville and Keynes, vii, 127–28 — written in c. 1127; William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 112–13; John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 178. Henry of Huntingdon gave David credit for not performing homage to Stephen because of his oath to Matilda though he did: Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 700, 706, 710. 4  W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 36; Oram, David I, p. 187. David I later knighted the future King Henry II at Carlisle in 1149 in return for recognising Scottish possession of Northumbria and Newcastle. 5  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 706–07; Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 145–46; Stringer, The Reign of Stephen, pp. 28–37; G. Barrow, ‘The Scots and the North of England’, pp. 246–47; Green, ‘David I and Henry I’, pp. 16–17. William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 30, 98, 102, 112. Malmesbury explains that David initially supported Stephen because he wanted peace in his old age. When David joined the Empress in 1141, he was depicted as one of her staunchest defenders alongside her half-brother. However, David’s oath to Henry in 1126/27 does not necessarily mean that he was ‘loyal’ to Henry’s daughter. David was a political player and opportunist. A necessity for any king to be an effective ruler. 6  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 706–07; John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 287–95; Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 146; G. Barrow, ‘The Scots and the North of England’, pp. 246–47. 7  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 276–78; Scottish Annals from

114

Chapter 3

only or even the closest in line to the succession since his mother had other sons by her first marriage named Simon II and Waldef de Senlis, who were her legitimate sons by Simon I de Senlis.8 David was relying heavily on Stephen’s generosity concerning the grant of Huntingdon in the 1136 treaty but he was willing to jeopardize everything because neither he nor his son had been recognized as Earl of Northumbria. As long as David and his son were not recognized in Northumbria or in Huntingdon, and the legitimate heirs continued to be a threat to them, peace with Stephen was perhaps doomed to fail, but the issue over the Senlis inheritance was only one of several possible reasons as to why the 1136 agreement quickly faltered. Another reason given for David’s change of heart, as expressed by the chroniclers Henry of Huntingdon and Richard of Hexham, and by the author of Gesta Stephani, was that David felt a true sense of loyalty to Matilda’s cause because of the commitment he had made to her father and thus he, in the end, abandoned King Stephen.9 However, this view should not be accepted in its entirety. Other contemporaries said nothing about a sense of loyalty to Matilda and even Henry of Huntingdon cast some doubt on David’s position when he also noted that David’s son, Henry, had no such qualms and became Stephen’s man for the earldom of Huntingdon.10 Like the Beaumonts and many other families, the Canmores were willing to divide their support between rival parties in order to improve their chances of political and territorial survival, which ulti­­mately weakened Stephen’s position. Allegiances were so divided that Stephen lost at the Battle of Lincoln in 1141, and he was abandoned by men he thought he could trust.11

English Chroniclers, ed. and trans. by Anderson and Anderson, ii, 132–33; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 145–47; Oram, David I, pp. 31–33, 64–65. Orderic also claims that Henry had a brother, who was murdered by a man with a claw that had been given refuge by David. David may also have had two daughters, Clarice and Hodierna. 8  Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 222–23. David’s stepson had the better claim by primogeniture. J. Hudson, Land, Law, and Lordship, p. 117. 9  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, p. 706; Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 52–55; Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 146; G. Barrow, ‘The Scots and the North of England’, pp. 245–47; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 41; Stringer, The Reign of Stephen, pp. 28–37. 10  William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp.  15–16, 64–65; John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 236–37. 11  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 542–43; Dalton, ‘Allegiance and Intelligence’, p. 91.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

115

Fundamentally, the breakdown in relations between Stephen and David probably occurred for several reasons. The King of Scots’ position in the north of England and in Scotland was complicated by pressure applied from within the Scottish court by families who supported different parties in the succession based on their own kin-networks and loyalties. Further south in England, outside of his son’s lordship base in the honour of Huntingdon, David faced difficulties concerning the fidelity of his nobility. For example, the King’s contact with families in Somerset may have contributed to his shift in loyalty to Empress Matilda in late 1137 because of pressure from within his court and because he had already built relationships with men in the region before he was king. Furthermore, his contact with men in Somerset put him in the midst of an important network of Angevin support based around Earl Robert of Gloucester’s lordship. Despite Stephen and his brother, Bishop Henry of Blois’ personal and political ties in Somerset, Matilda’s half-brother, Earl Robert of Gloucester, won enough backing to supersede Stephen’s own base of support.12 Robert was subsequently able to orchestrate a military campaign against Stephen contemporaneous to that which was led by David in the north.13 However, as mentioned, family loyalties did not always fall in line with that of only one overlord even when the overlords were on the same side. For example, the Earl of Gloucester could depend on one of his men, William II de Cahaignes, to fight for him, but Cahaignes’ brother, Hugh, joined Stephen. Hugh’s position as sheriff of Northamptonshire was complicated by the fact that Earl Henry, King David’s son, had very recently been disseized of Northamp­­ton because he had joined his father and Earl Robert of Gloucester in 1138, and the rival legitimate lord, Simon II de Senlis, had subsequently been granted the honour by Stephen. Hugh de Cahaignes must have decided not to gamble on fighting against the King’s appointee and thus remained with the royal party. Somerset, Scotland, and northern England were not the only areas beset with rival allegiances. This was the case throughout Britain and it spilled over across the Channel. It is known that even within the same familial group, as can 12 

Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’. John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 250–51; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 82–83, 86–90; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 k, 617 e, 618 f, 700 e, 715 f. Robert of Gloucester had recently been defeated by Count Waleran de Beaumont in Normandy, who was already a threat because of Waleran’s recent betrothal to King Stephen’s daughter through whom he gained control of Worcester to the north of Gloucester’s power-base in England. Geoffrey of Anjou had put Robert in charge of protecting Caen and Bayeux, where his Norman lordships were located. 13 

116

Chapter 3

be seen with the Beaumonts, men tried to protect their interests by dividing their loyalty between the two rivals to improve their chances of retaining control of lordships and fees on one or the other side of the Channel.14 Divisions in allegiance within counties have partly been why the succession period has been characterized as anarchic and decentralized and why contemporaries have seen Stephen’s reign as a failure, but more recent scholarship disputes this stance for several reasons.15 The majority of sources were pro-Angevin and/ or writing after the Angevins had won the throne thereby affecting their view of a king who failed to retain the throne for his heirs.16 Moreover, the reality may have been that warfare was not endemic and therefore judicial and fiscal regimes continued to function during most of Stephen’s reign.17 The next few pages will examine how Stephen tried to retain the loyalty of men and in particular the fidelity of the King of Scots. Probably one of the most important acts of reconciliation in Stephen’s reign was with the King of Scots although the peace agreement did not last. The first of these treaties, the 1136 agreement, was probably doomed to fail from the start because David lost the earl­­dom of Northumbria though he still held Cumbria (including Carlisle and Don­­caster) while his son was granted a portion of the honour of NorthamptonHuntingdon. By January 1138, after the truce had expired and David had attempted to renegotiate the status of Northumbria with Stephen, he, his son, 14  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 146–53. Not enough work has been done to see if the same holds true among the baronage partly because the assumption has been that the lower nobility in England no longer held land in Normandy. Crouch and others failed to recognize that there was a trickling down of cross-Channel lordships to the baronage because they focused only on great magnates. This also led to the assumption that lordships in Normandy were divided into great territorial blocks unlike in England where earldoms were divided among several men. In England, the title of Earl indicated that fees were extensive but not en bloc. The truth was, as can be seen in this present work, that fees were also spread far and wide in Normandy particularly among the baronage. W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 74–76; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 181–215; Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, pp. 68–72; Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, pp. 53–55, 121–27; Guillotel, ‘Les origines de Guingamp’. Some studies have shown that divided loyalties originating on the Continent, particularly in Brittany between the rival houses of Penthièvre and Richmond, affected support to Stephen and Matilda in England. 15  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 1–7, 146–55; King, ‘The Anarchy of King Stephen’s Reign’. Cf. Thomas, ‘Violent Disorder in King Stephen’s England’; Burton, ‘English Monasteries and the Conquest’ for a rival revisionist approach. 16  Dalton, ‘Allegiance and Intelligence’. 17  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 320–42; White, ‘Royal Income and Regional Trends’. Evidence does indicate that attempts were made at reconciliation throughout the wars and campaigning seasons were brief.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

117

and his nephew, William fitzDuncan, led an army to Wark. Unfortunately for David his army was defeated at the Battle of Northallerton, or the Standard, in August but he did regain Nor­thumbria because of pressure applied on Stephen by David’s allies in England.18 Although the subsequent Treaty of Durham in April 1139 was a celebration of Stephen’s victory in the north, men had been abandoning the King particularly in the southwest of England, and he was also facing problems in Normandy. Stephen’s trouble with the Scots was compounded even before the Battle of Northallerton by the disaffection of Earl Robert of Gloucester.19 Robert had absented himself from court as early as late 1137 and had been fomenting support against Stephen in Normandy and in England.20 Furthermore, Henry of Huntingdon specifically says that the military diversion in the south of England led by Earl Robert encouraged the Scots to raid the north again in 1138.21 There­ fore, Stephen needed to form a suitable arrangement with the King of Scots concerning the northern frontier to Scotland in order to attend to the southwest of England and Normandy despite that he would risk alienating David’s stepson, Simon II de Senlis, who had been exercising authority for him in the honour of Northampton-Huntingdon during David’s ‘rebellion’.22 In the interest of peace, Stephen enlisted the aid of his wife, Queen Matilda, to mediate favourable terms with her uncle, David, in May 1139. Subsequent to the negotiations, David’s son was reconfirmed in possession of the earldom of Northampton-Huntingdon and he was granted the earldom of Northumbria (except Bamburgh and Newcastle) including territory around Norham and Hex­­ 18 

Ailred of Rieveaulx, Relatio de Standardo, ed. by Howlett, pp.  181–99; Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 151–67; John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 288–95; John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 250–55; G. Barrow, ‘The Scots and the North of England’, pp. 246–50. 19  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 712–13; William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 40–42;Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 77–83; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’. Gloucester brought with him the allegiance of much of the southwest of England including several Penthièvre Bretons because of the support of Reginald Boterel and the earl of Devon. Reginald may have descended from a natural son of Geoffrey Boterel II: Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, p. 185. 20  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 68; Patterson, ‘William of Malmesbury’s Robert of Gloucester’, pp. 990–92. 21  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 712–13. 22  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 707, 730–31, 736–37, 768–69.

118

Chapter 3

ham, and he was also confirmed as lord of Doncaster, Carlisle, and Cumberland.23 However, David was still under pressure from Durham, where Stephen’s agent and Lord Chancellor, Bishop Geoffrey Rufus, with backing from Alain ‘le Noir’, repelled Scottish advances. This competition in the north was the reason for David’s interest in inserting his own candidate, William Comyn, into the bishopric of Durham after Bishop Geoffrey Rufus’ death in 1141.24 The second peace negotiated between David and Stephen did not last long and Simon II was able to regain the honour of Huntingdon-Northampton in 1141 until his death in 1153.25 The only recourse David had concerning his stake to Northampton after 1141 was to enlist the support of his other nephew, Simon’s brother, Waldef de Senlis, whom David began to advance in his own court by trying to obtain for him the archbishopric of York in 1140 and by granting him the abbacy of Melrose in 1148.26 David’s patronage of Waldef was intended to retain Waldef ’s loyalty while his brother, Simon II, remained loyal to Stephen.27 It is a mystery as to why the second peace made with David failed. The 1138 treaty not only gave David everything he wanted but Stephen and especially his wife, Queen Matilda, further cemented the agreement by arranging an illustrious marriage for David’s son, Henry, to Ada de Warenne. From Stephen’s perspective, the regrant of Cumbria and especially Carlisle came at a high cost. The pride of place that the King of Scots and his son held in the King’s northern designs in 1138 alienated another important cross-Channel magnate, Earl Ranulf ‘de Gernon’ IV of Chester, Viscount of Bayeux and Lord of Bricquessart, who within the year may have plotted to kidnap David’s son, 23 

Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 323. Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 176–78; John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 299. 25  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp.  706–07; John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 300–01; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 102; Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 150; Stringer, ‘Senlis, Simon (II) de, Earl of Northampton’. 26  Jocelin of Furness, Vita sancti Waldeni, ed. by Bolland, pp. 241–47; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 145–47; D. Baker, ‘Waldef, Abbot of Melrose’. Attempts were made to canonize Waldef in 1170 and in 1206 in order to elevate the status of Melrose abbey and to glorify the royal Scottish family. 27  Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp.  706–07, 736–37; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 175, 264; R. Davis, King Stephen, pp. 112, 135. Simon also campaigned for Stephen’s wife after the king’s capture at Lincoln in 1141: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 546–47; John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 300–01. 24 

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

119

Henry.28 Henry had been given the former Chester castle at Carlisle as part of the peace agreement, which may have been perceived as a threat to Chester’s position in Lancaster.29 Alienating Ranulf had been a bold move on Stephen’s part because the Earl was also the son-in-law of his greatest opponent, Earl Robert of Gloucester. An alliance between these men could unite the northwest and southwest of England, which did indeed seem to be on the cards in 1140 when Gloucester gave Chipping Campden (east of Evesham) to his daughter, the Earl of Chester’s wife.30 It would be another year and a half before the King of England realized his mistake and compensated Earl Ranulf handsomely with Chester’s half-brother’s earldom of Lincoln and other lands at Derby and in southern Yorkshire (Tickhill and Blyth) but by then King David and his son had abandoned Stephen again.31

The Warenne Marriage The marriage alliance arranged between Ada de Warenne and Earl Henry was intended to not only bind Henry and David’s loyalties more closely to the 28 

John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 306; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 137–39. Earl Ranulf of Chester plotted to kidnap and possibly kill Henry. However, John of Hexham’s account of the plot was not written until c. 1160 and from a Durham vantage point so it may have been fabricated to justify Henry’s refusal to acknowledge Chester’s son, Hugh, as Earl of Stafford or of Lincoln in the early 1160s: W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 365. 29  See Green, ‘Earl Ranulf II and Lancashire’; G. Barrow, ‘The Pattern of Lordship and Feudal Settlement’, pp. 120–38; Oram, ‘A Family Business?, pp. 116–31 about Carlisle and the Scots. Ranulf ’s father had relinquished Carlisle in c. 1120 to Henry I so Ranulf may have been reacting more to Earl Henry’s new position in Cumbria not just Carlisle. Henry’s hold over the region threatened Ranulf ’s position as Earl of Chester and more specifically as a lord in Lancashire. 30  Davis, ‘Geoffrey and the Lure of Charters’, p. 33. Cf. William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 80–85; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 137, 144 about the marriage. They were married by late 1139 when Earl Robert’s wife was besieged at Lincoln castle while helping his son-in-law and daughter. Despite Ranulf ’s marriage to the Earl’s daughter, he did not join his father-in-law in 1139 or 1140. The two families had been in contact at the Norman court as early as 1130 at Rouen, when Chester’s half-brother, William de Roumare, witnessed a grant to the Angevin abbey of Grand Beaulieu alongside Earl Robert of Gloucester and Robert’s son, Richard: Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 1. 31  See Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp.  138–39; Thacker, ‘The Earls and their Earldom of Chester’, pp. 10–15 and Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 118–26; Dalton, ‘The Armed Neutrality of Ranulf II’ about Ranulf ’s campaigns in Lancashire and Lincolnshire.

120

Chapter 3

English crown because the Warennes were staunch royalists, but the Warennes also held land on both sides of the Channel.32 They were lords of Bellencombre and of Mortemer-sur-Eaulne in Upper Normandy and earls of Surrey in the south of England. Ada’s mother, Isabel, was also from the powerful Capetian house of Vermandois, and she was the widow of Count Robert I de Beaumont, and thus the mother of Count Waleran of Meulan and of Worcester and of Earl Robert II of Leicester.33 Immediately after Henry I’s death, Ada’s father, Earl William II de Warenne (d. c. 1138), had been particularly important to securing Stephen’s position in Rouen and the pays de Caux, key ports of entry and trade into Normandy. His son, William III de Warenne, also remained a staunch defender of Stephen’s cause, which made the family ideal for cementing Scottish support to the King in 1139. In the previous year, Stephen had already used the Warennes as marital moors to try to bind other enemies to his cause when he married Ada’s brother, Willaim III de Warenne, to Ela of Ponthieu, the daughter of William Talvas, Count of Sées/Alençon and of Ponthieu, with the express purpose of enticing Talvas out of the Angevin camp.34 The Norman dimension of the Scottish royal marriage to the Warennes was certainly at the forefront of Stephen’s mind in early 1139 when he was already relying heavily on Waleran, Count of Meulan (Ada’s half-brother), and Waleran’s networks to bolster support in the Vexin against Talvas and the Earl of Gloucester.35 Talvas’ control of Alençon, the Saosnois and Hiémois, doorways into the Loire valley from Normandy, made him one of the most powerful men in western France aside from Count Waleran of Meulan. Talvas was in fact the antithesis to Meulan, whose primary lordship in the French Vexin lay in a 32 

Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 207, 223. Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 4–5, 12, 198. The strength of these ties between the families on both sides of the Channel can be seen in the Warenne and Meulan decision to exercise their lordship in France concerning a dispute over Tour-Renier when the rivalry between King Stephen and the Angevins had erupted in 1138: Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, i, 157–61. 34  Thompson, ‘Note de Recherche: Arnoul de Montgommery’. Talvas was the son of King Henry I’s enemy, Robert de Bellême. William Talvas’ wife was also the widow of Bertrand, Count of Toulouse and of Tripoli, half-brother of Alphonse Jourdain, Count of Toulouse, formerly espoused to Ermengarde of Narbonne. 35  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 43–44, 90, 93–103. Waleran was very high in Stephen’s regard over Christmas 1138 for he was placed in charge of the negotiation for the marriage of Stephen’s son, Eustache, to Louis VII’s sister. Gloucester also held land at SaintScolasse-sur-Sarthe in the Ornois, near Alençon. 33 

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

121

great territorial bloc southeast of Sées on the Seine River.36 Alliances like that between the earls of Sées and Warenne were engineered to protect Norman fees of families, whose exercise of lordship was vulnerable to political change, but clearly this policy did not always work since Talvas continued to support Stephen’s rival, Count Geoffrey of Anjou.37 There were times that Ada’s brother must have been under great pressure to join his father-in-law, William Talvas, but he nonetheless held out for Stephen.38 It was not uncommon for extended families to be divided in their support across the Channel. For example, Waleran and Robert de Beaumont’s cousin, Earl Roger of Warwick, was also married to Ada’s sister, Gundred de Warenne, but despite his kinship with the Warennes he remained in Empress Matilda’s camp except for briefly after the Battle of Lincoln in 1141.39 It was probably for this reason that Stephen struggled to yield adequate returns in the county of Warwick during his reign.40 Although the Canmore-Warenne marriage did not unite King David and his son, it did bring the Scottish crown into more direct contact with the Capetian crown,41 and with the well-connected Talvas family through Ada’s extended kin.42 36 

They patronized the same foundations in the area. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de la Trappe, ed. by Hommey, pp. 442–43, 447, 448. 37  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 454–57, 466–75, 478–81, 486–87; Thompson, ‘William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu’, pp. 176–77. 38  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p.  219. Although William  III de Warenne lost his garrison at Rouen to Geoffrey of Anjou in early 1145, William seems to have held out for another year and a half before joining Matilda. 39  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 128, 131, 147; Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 116–18, 128–29, 234–35; Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 278–79. 40  White, ‘Royal Income and Regional Trends’, pp. 38–43. 41  Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, xiii, 1, 3, 15, 16, 26, 81; Chandler, ‘Ada de Warenne’. Louis VI was a first cousin of Ada’s mother. 42  Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp.  519–21, 566–69; Power, The Norman Fron­tier, pp. 69, 208, 215, 225, 273, 319–22; Thompson, ‘William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu’, pp. 172–77; Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 310–14, 316–17, 349–50, 368–76, 387–426. The Talvas counts of Ponthieu had been intermarried with the Mançeau Viscounts de Beaumont in the eleventh century and had added to their power-base in Maine and Alençon over the eleventh and twelfth centuries through further marriages including that between Juhel de Mayenne and another of Talvas’ daughters. As a protective measure against the counts of Anjou, the counts of Rennes also intermarried and allied with the counts of Blois. Contacts between Maine, Blois, and Rennes had not disappeared by the twelfth century. Cf. Barton, Lordship in

122

Chapter 3

Ponthevin influence in Scotland was limited at this early stage but Ada’s niece, Countess Ela of Fife, might have been named after Ela of Ponthieu, daughter of William Talvas, by virtue of their kinship by marriage.43 It must also be mentioned that the Scots may already have been coming into contact with Talvas’ affiliates in England through their northern lordship in Northumberland. Ela of Ponthieu’s half-brother was Hugh de Merlay, who may have been related to the Merlays of Morpeth. The Merlays of Morpeth originated from familial stems in Normandy at Grandmesnil in Calvados near the Ornois border and at Mortagne-au-Perche in the Ornois.44 Ralph, or ‘Ranulf ’, de Merlay (d. 1160), who was lord of Morpeth in Northumberland, was probably the grandson of William I de Merlay from the Manche.45 He succeeded his father, Roger de Merlay, by 1129,46 and married a Scot, Juliana de Dunbar, daughter of Earl Gospatrick II of Dunbar, from whom he gained Witton, Wingates, Horsley, Stanton, Ritton and Lever Childe in Northumberland.47 This marriage had the County of Maine, pp. 29–32, 47–50, 85–100; Barton, ‘Lordship in Maine’, pp. 41–63, and Le comté d’Anjou au xie Siècle, ed. by Halphen, pp. 17–53 for eleventh-century Blois/Anjou/ Rennes animosities. 43  Liber cartarum prioratus Sancti Andree in Scotia, ed. by Thomson, pp. 207–08. See years 1160–65. Also see Chapter 1 for particulars about Ela of Fife. Ela of Ponthieu’s mother was also Burgundian. Her mother, Helie, was the daughter of Eudo I of Burgundy and sister of Duke Hugh II of Burgundy (d. 1143), the latter who had married Matilda de Mayenne, daughter of Walter, in c. 1115 as mentioned in Chapter 2. These connections became important in the 1160s to movements against Henry II led by the Beaumonts, Meulans, Mayennes, and Scots as will be discussed in Chapter 4. 44  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 91–92, 103, 135; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 138–39, 146–47, 152–53; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 124; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 154; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 176; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, xc. Randulph, or Ralph, de Merlay, and Eustache fitzJohn witnessed for Henry in 1139 a confirmation of land to St Mary of the Isle in Norfolk. Ralph was probably in the Warenne mouvance and was often found alongside Ada and Earl Henry after their marriage. Roger II de Merlay, who also witnessed for Ada and William in the 1150s, was probably the son of Ralph and Juliana. A Hugh and Hamon de Merlay were also witnessing for William de Briouze in c. 1160 but it is unclear what their relationship was to the Merlays of Morpeth: Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, ii, 151–52. 45  Sanders, English Baronies, p. 65. William was the first of the Merlays to settle in England. 46  Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Fowler, pp. 267, 299. The charters intimate he was the son of Roger I de Merlay. 47  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 278; Pipe Roll of 34 Henry II, p. 100; Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I, p. 20; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 27, 30, 316–17. Ralph and Juliana’s son, Roger, witnessed for Earl Henry of

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

123

been arranged by King Henry as part of Henry’s attempt to control the north of England through David.48 The exact kinship between Ralph and Hugh de Merlay is unknown, but the appearance of a John and Richard de Plessay in the Merlay fee at Shotton between 1130 and 1150 suggests that the English and Norman Merlay bran­ ches were related and still in contact.49 Plessay is only seven kilometres west of Moulins-la-Marche in the midst of Talvas’ Ornois territory and sixteen kilometres north of Mortagne. Hugh de Merlay was still active in the Ornois in the 1140s when he witnessed for his father, Count William Talvas of Ponthieu and Sées, but the Merlay family already had a long history of service to the counts before Talvas fathered Hugh by a Merlay woman.50 Since the Merlays continued to hold their lands in the Ornois to the end of the century under the lordship of another Randulph, or Ralph, de Merlay, and William de Merlay,51 it may be suggested that Hugh was related to the family through his mother and that he took her last name since he was illegitimate.52 Ascertaining the lines of descent on both sides of the Channel with this family is extremely difficult since they favoured the same names. However, whichever branch succeeded in the Ornois, ‘Randulph’ and William de Merlay, who were the main descendants of the Ornois branch, chose to support their overlord, Duke Robert of Alençon, Huntingdon in the early 1150s: Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 123–24. They were married before 1133. 48  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 278; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, iii, 249. 49  Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Fowler, pp. 268, 270–73; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 123–24. Other French families appear with the Merlays in England like William de l’Arche from Pont de l’Arche in the Evrecin just south of the abbey of Bonport: Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Fowler, p. 269. 50  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 156. See note 41. Considering the Merlay family’s affiliation with the earl of Bellême, Morinus de Merlay who witnessed for Robert de Bellême in 1092, was probably related to William I de Merlay: Cartulaire de Marmoutier pour le Perche, ed. by Barret, p. 31. 51  See Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, p. 15; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 235, 521 about Randulph and William de Merlay in Alençon in the late twelfth century. 52  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 235, 521. Hugh was an illegitimate son of William Talvas. The descent of Hugh’s mother is unknown other than that she was probably a Merlay based on her son’s name. The future King William of Scotland had taken his mother’s Warenne name when he was only the younger brother of the king so even a legitimate son may prefer associating his lineage with his mother’s family.

124

Chapter 3

and King Philip Augustus of France in 1203 against King John, by which point the English branch had removed themselves from Continental interests.53 The Merlay family were important to the Scottish wars against Stephen. Earl Henry of Huntingdon was already familiar with the Merlay family in England because of his lordship of Northumberland but marital alliances introduced another potentially more intimate connection. It was probably not only Earl Henry’s status as lord but also Ralph’s wife’s family in Lothian that influenced Ralph to support King David in 1138 despite that he held several fees in capite of the King of England.54 Ralph’s father-in-law was Earl Gospatrick II of Dunbar, who was responsible for leading the ‘men of Lothian’ for King David at the Battle of Northallerton where he died.55 Familial ties may have convinced Ralph to support the Scots in the war. Although it may appear that military support was defined by David and his son’s immediate lordship in Northumberland, other families like the Bertrams of Mitford supported Stephen and thus did not appear at David or Henry’s side in the campaigns. This was despite the proximity of their fees to supporters of the King of Scots. Ralph de Merlay and William Bertram, Lord of Mitford, held their patrimonies less than three kilometres apart north of Newcastle.56 They both appeared in Earl Henry’s administration and they witnessed the restoration of Eustache fitzJohn, father of William de Vescy, to his Northumberland lands (probably Malton and Alnwick) in c. 1138.57 53 

Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 634 g; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 439; Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 100. The family still held land of the counts of Alençon at Mortagne-au-Perche. 54  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 278; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 316–17; Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Fowler, pp. 269–70; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 89. These fees included Hepscott, Shilington, Twysil, Saltwick, Dudden East and West, Clifton, Cauldwell, Stannington, Shotton, Black Heddon, Wetslade North and South, Killingworth, Benton, and Walker. The majority of his fees were in Northumberland near Newcastle and Durham. Cf. Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 153 for fees held in capite. 55  Ailred of Rieveaulx, Relatio de Standardo, ed. by Howlett, iii, 191; Henry of Hunting­ don, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, p. 716. 56  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 135. 57  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 92. Other fees that the King granted to him were at Paxton (near Berwick), Earls Barton (near Northampton), Potton and Great Stukeley (near Huntingdon). Cf. Dalton, ‘Eustace Fitz John and the Politics of Anglo-Norman England’ for Eustache’s significance in these campaigns. Eustache’s brother, Payn, was sheriff of Shropshire and Hereford and he married Sibylla, granddaughter of Hugh de Lacy of Weobley and of

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

125

Eustache fitzJohn had joined Stephen’s party in 1136 when the King of Scots was with the new King, but when David joined Matilda in 1137, his former ally and vassal was slow to follow.58 Probably for this reason, Eustache was disseized by Earl Henry and he was joined by William Bertram, who was attacked by David during the 1138 campaigns.59 Bertram may have decided, like his Merlay neighbour at Morpeth, to ally with his wife’s family in the wars. Bertram was married to Hawise, daughter of Guy de Bailleul, Lord of Bywell (original founder of the Bailleuls in Scotland), probably before the Succession War erupted.60 Hawise brought as her dower the socage of Stainton, three kilometres from Barnard castle (Co. Durham), which bound her husband’s service very closely to that of her cousin, Bernard I, who had succeeded to the Bailleul estates in England and Picardy after her father’s death in c. 1133.61 Bernard I de Bailleul came from a family well entrenched on both sides of the Channel and he continued promoting his family’s links with northern France by marrying his son, Bernard II, to Agnes de Picquigny, most likely from the Picquigny family, who held an important position in Picardy as the Vidame of Amiens.62 It was this Picardian dimension to the family’s lordship that may have influenced Bernard’s decision to change his allegiance to King Stephen, whose St Pol ally was proving more successful against William Talvas in northern France.63 Bernard had initially sworn fealty to King David, but he must have changed his mind shortly thereafter. He, along with Robert de Brus, were Ludlow. The fitzJohn family rose in the ranks under Henry I. Eustache married the daughter and heiress of Ivo de Vescy, lord of Alnwick. Eustache’s second marriage to Agnes, sister and coheir of William fitzWilliam, Constable of Chester, brought him more fees in East Riding by 1130. 58  Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 44, 158; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 80–82. Eustache’s brother, William, was supporting Matilda as a tenant of her half-brother, Robert of Gloucester, and both brothers were in Matilda’s forces by 1138. 59  Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 158. 60  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 91–92; Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, i, 467, 581–82; Sanders, English Baronies, p. 131. 61  See Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 513. Bernard I was presumably the patron of Cluny abbey in c. 1140. His wife was Matilda, and they had sons Enguerrand, Guy, Eustache, and Bernard and a daughter ‘Atuidis’. Reid, ‘The Mote of Urr’; Stell, ‘The Balliol Family’, p. 153; Belleval, Jean de Bailleul, pp. 47–65; Scott, The Norman Balliols in England, pp. 255, 346. 62  See Chapter 4 and upcoming work by Jean Goosens and Brigitte Meijns, The Lords of Picquigny, vidames of Amiens, c. 1190–1250. 63  See Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 187–98 about the campaigns in northern France.

126

Chapter 3

among the men sent by Stephen to negotiate with David after the Battle of Northallerton, and he was also one of the men captured with Stephen in 1141 along with David’s brother-in-law, William de Warenne.64 Despite his change in loyalties, Bernard appeared to remain friends with David after Northallerton and was witnessing for David’s son within a few months of the King’s defeat.65 Moreover, his involvement with the King of Scots continued to put David and his son into contact with Picardian families, like the Airaines, well into the twelfth century.66 The interesting facet about these various loyalties in the north of England is that the King’s overlordship alone did not always bind men’s interests together. Despite the physical threat of aggression from one’s overlord, kinship and the proximity of fees could at times outweigh other concerns.

The fitzAlain Stewards and the Scots Intermarriage between families who held lands scattered in France played an important role in the formation of alliances in England. Often communication between families actually preceded marital agreements. One example has already been noted concerning Scottish contact with Surrey families, which was occurring well before Henry’s marriage to Ada de Warenne. Contact with the Surrey earls further extended pre-existing communication and gave the Scottish royal house access to French networks in places like the Ornois through families like the Briouzes, despite that members of these families did not always settle in Scotland.67 Another example is the Stewart family, who later became very famous in Scotland as kings of Scotland and England. They were probably introduced to 64 

John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 256–57; Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 736–43. Other men who were captured with the King were Earl Alain ‘le Noir’ of Richmond, Roger de Moubray, Richard de Courcy, William Peverel, Ilbert de Lacy, Gilbert de Gant, and Enguerrand de Sai. Ilbert de Lacy was a witness for the earls of Chester and the brother of Hugh de Lacy, another important AngloFrench family: Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 28, 81–89; Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’, pp. 1–19. 65  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 89. 66  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 89, 131, 135, 156. The Bailleul and Airaines family lands were within ten kilometres of each other in Picardy and their overlord was William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu. 67  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 288, no. 1896. Philip de Briouze/Braose and Earl William de Warenne witnessed for Henry in 1134 in Rouen.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

127

the Scottish court through contact with Anglo-Breton families in Somerset during the war. However, David was probably already familiar with the family because of his relationship with his sister and her Boulonnais husband earlier in the century. The fitzAlain family originated from Brittany at Dol where they served as household stewards (dapifers or seneschals) of the lords of Dol from at least the eleventh century. The first notable member of the family was Alain fitzFlaald, who over the course of his career, beginning in c. 1098, rose to prominence in the service of Henry I.68 Alain’s service in Henry’s wars against Henry’s older brothers introduced him to families who were prominent in northern France, resulting in his marriage to Avelina, daughter of Arnulf I de Hesdin. The marriage between the Breton seneschal of Dol and the Hesdins provides an interesting case study of how contact between families across the Chan­­­nel informed political and marital alliances. The Hesdins were tenants of the counts of Flanders, which also put them into contact with the Warenne and Boulogne families. In 1070, Arnulf ’s overlord, the count of Hesdin, had joined forces with the count of Boulogne in supporting Count Arnulph III of Flanders against William ‘the Conqueror’ and William’s ally, Count Arnulph’s uncle, Robert the Frisian, who were attempting to wrest the county from Count Arnulf III.69 Count Eustache II of Boulogne had also been made responsible for obtaining support from the Guines, Hesdin and St Pol families for Arnulph III during these campaigns.70 Politics in the north changed rapidly following the death of Arnulph III in the 1070s. Traditionally, the count of Boulogne’s lordship was in the frontier region near St Pol. The counts often struggled to hold their territories against the counts of Flanders because the counts of Flanders were trying to expand their power to the west, which was why the count of Boulogne had chosen to sup­­port Arnulph III against Robert the Frisian in the first place. 71 This was, however, not the case in the late 1090s when the marriage of Alain fitzFlaald of Dol and Hesdin’s daughter was probably negotiated. By that point, Duke Robert ‘the Frisian’ of Flanders and Count Eustache III of Boulogne were more concerned with the upcoming crusade and with campaigns being led to the east by the son of Emperor Henry IV.72 However, the relationship between Robert 68 

Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 492. Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 102–03. 70  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 102–04, 115–16. 71  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 173–76, 182. 72  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 131–44. The 1095 plot was also supported by 69 

128

Chapter 3

‘the Frisian’ and Eustache III changed again in 1101 when Eustache and Robert supported Duke Robert of Normandy’s claim to the English throne against his brother, King Henry.73 Eustache, William and Reginald de Warenne, and Arnulph II de Hesdin crossed from Wissant to Portsmouth where they met an army that had been assembled by King Henry I.74 At this time, the Warennes served with the Count of Boulogne because of political manoeuvring spilling over from the struggle between the Anglo-Norman brothers and because of campaigns led in the north of France against rival contenders for Flanders.75 King Henry I was successful at Portsmouth and negotiated a peace settlement with the Count of Boulogne and his allies, the Warennes and Hesdins. As part of this new arrangement, he was able to win over Count Eustache by granting his sister-in-law, Mary of Scotland, in marriage to the Count as discussed in the previous chapter.76 He also united Arnulf II de Hesdin to his cause by granting him land in Wiltshire at Keevil.77 It may also have been at this time that Alain fitzFlaald was introduced to King Henry. Alain may have already known Arnulph I, Arnulph II’s father, through the First Crusade. His uncle, Alain, and perhaps even he, was at the siege of Nicaea alongside Duke Robert of Normandy, Bernard II de Saint-Valéry, Ralph de Gaël de Montfort and Count Stephen-Henry of Blois.78

the Count of Eu. The plan was to remove Rufus and his brothers from the succession and replace them with Stephen, Count of Aumale, son of the sister of William ‘the Conqueror’. 73  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, p. 143. 74  Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, pp. 280–81. Peace was not made with Robert and his allies until the succession of Henry I and this peace also did not last long. 75  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 7–8, 102–03, 173–76. Ada and William III de Warenne’s grandmother, Gundreda, was Fleming through her father. William I de Warenne had divided the Fleming and English estates between his sons so the family was still directly involved with and held land in Flanders. Cf. Van Houts, ‘The Warenne View of the Past’, pp. 103–21. 76  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 143–45. 77  Pipe Roll of 11 Henry II, p. 74; Holt, Colonial England, pp. 88–90. Arnulf also held at Barton Hartshorn and at Lenborough in Buckinghamshire of the bishop of Bayeux. Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xiii: Buckinghamshire, 4. 34 and 4. 37. The Hesdin lands passed to the fitzAlains, the sons of Alain and Avelina, following the demise of the male line of the Hesdins by mid-century. Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, p. 73; Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 124–25; Holt, ‘Feudal Society and the Family’, p. 14. 78  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, v, 59; Chronica monasterii de Hyda, ed. by Edwards, pp. 301–02. Arnulf I died at Antioch. It is only known that Alain the ‘dapifer’ was at Nicaea so it could have been either Alain fitzFlaald or his uncle, Alain.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

129

Map 2. Landholdings of the Breton Families of FitzAlain, Montfort/Beaumont of Leicester, FitzBaderon lords of Monmouth, Saint-Jean, Aubigny Belvoir. Map by the author, after a template from http://d-maps.com/carte.php?num_car=16427&lang=en.

130

Chapter 3

What is interesting about the Dol-Hesdin marriage arrangement is that the Warennes seem to have been the point of contact between the two families. William de Warenne not only served with both families but by c. 1100 the Warennes held land near the Breton fitzAlains in Norfolk and in Surrey.79 If the Warennes were responsible for negotiating the marriage, the Hesdins broke their ties with the Warennes in the next generation when the Surrey Warennes had lost interest in the Flemish dimension of their extended kin-networks. By the time the Succession War broke out, the fitzAlains and Hesdins did not support the Warenne affinity and the latter’s quest to protect King Stephen’s succession; rather, both families led the campaigns in the southwest of the kingdom for the Earl of Gloucester, which was probably how the youngest of Alain’s sons, Walter, entered Scottish service as a steward, the same position his older brother, Jordan, held at Dol.80 The Dol-Hesdin marriage was politically significant because it united inter­ ests extending from Brittany and Flanders to England and Scotland. For example, Alain fitzFlaald through his position at Dol may even have influenced the count of Brittany’s decision to marry his daughter to the future count of Flanders, Baudouin VII, in the early twelfth century. There is no other obvious motivation for bringing these two powers together since Brittany had very little known contact with either other than through the fitzAlain-Dol networks.81 The political alliances of the 1090s had disappeared by the end of the second decade of the twelfth century as a restructuring took place in the north of France based on a succession crisis in Flanders. It was at this time that the coun­­ties of Boulogne, St Pol, Guines and Ponthieu became a serious zone of conflict in the north of France fought over between the counts of Boulogne and Flanders and their allies. The kings of France and England recognized the internal weaknesses posed by subsequent divisions in loyalties among lords holding land in the northern territories and were quick to exploit some of these affinities particularly following the assassination of Charles, Count of Flanders, in 1127. 79 

Van Houts, ‘The Warenne View of the Past’, pp. 103–21; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 13–15, 64–70. The fitzAlains also held Mileham manor that was lost and regained during the Succession War. 80  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 79, 81–82. Walter begins to appear for David in c. 1136. 81  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 37, 538; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, p. 149. Count Alain IV’s daughter, Hawise, was married to Count Robert II of Flander’s son, Baudouin, in 1107 but the marriage was annulled on grounds of consanguinity by c. 1108. Cf. Vercauteren, Actes des Comtes de Flandre, p. xviii; Genealogia comitum Flandriae, ed. by Pertz and Bethmann, p. 323.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

131

A situation that might have been confined to the county of Flanders quickly became an international stage for war. The Count had died without male heirs leaving the county with several possible claimants — William of Ypres, the illegitimate cousin of Charles, Count of Flanders; Baudouin IV of Hainault, the great-grandson of Baudouin VI of Flanders; Thierry of Alsace, a legitimate cousin of Charles; and William ‘Clito’, grandson of Matilda of Flanders and son of Duke Robert Curthose of Normandy. These rivals became the focal point for other powers to fight out their own petty differences. For example, King Henry I sent money and knights to support the claim of William of Ypres in order to prevent his nephew and enemy, William ‘Clito’, from taking the county.82 Henry’s other nephew, the future King of England, Stephen of Blois and Boulogne, was also extremely important in negotiating support for Henry’s can­­didate in Flanders and he was sent to bribe support away from ‘Clito’.83 It is during this peak in aggression in northern France that families from these regions began to appear more often in England and Scotland.84 The added rivalry between the claims of Stephen of Blois and Empress Matilda after 1135 further exacerbated the political stability in these northern French territories unsettling kin-networks that extended into England and it brought former rivals, like William of Ypres, into King Stephen’s camp.85 Furthermore, the conflict in the northern Continental counties set families like the St Pols and their Boulonnais allies against other powerful Anglo-French lords. For example, William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu and Sées, decided to join the Empress’ party partially because of attacks led against him at Alençon that had left his northern position in Ponthieu vulnerable.86 It also did not help that Stephen’s very powerful favourite, Count Waleran of Meulan, was at the head of these attacks and made other encroachments against the Talvas lordship.87 Meanwhile, in 82 

Green, Henry I, pp. 196–200. Green, Henry I, p. 198; Green, ‘Henry I and the Origins of the Civil War’, p. 19. 84  See Oram, ‘David I and the Conquest of Moray’, pp. 7–19; Toorians, ‘Twelfth-Century Flemish Settlement in Scotland’; Grant, ‘Lordship and Society’. The majority of the Fleming immigration into Scotland occurred during the reigns of Malcolm IV and William I as extensively discussed by Sandy Grant but there was some earlier settlement in Moray during the reign of David. 85  Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 5, 9, 181–243; Schlight, Monarchs and Mer­ cenaries, pp. 43–49. 86  Thompson, ‘William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu’, pp. 172–73. 87  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 444–47. According to Orderic, Talvas had already found refuge at Geoffrey of Anjou’s court in 1135 when King Henry I was 83 

132

Chapter 3

the north, the count of St Pol, an ally of Stephen’s family in Boulogne, was able to advance into Ponthevin and Amiènois territory thus convincing William Talvas to remain with the opposition party in England and Normandy. 88 Although the Hesdins had been familiares of the counts of Boulogne, they had, over the years, changed their political focus and concentrated on their English lands and affinities. By the time the war broke out, they no longer had any ties with the north of France.89 The family’s marital union with the Anglo-Breton fitzAlains took precedence and aligned them with the politics of Scotland, the Welsh marches, and southern England. Subsequently, both the Hesdins and fitzAlains were prominent in the campaigns in the southwest of England led by Empress Matilda’s brother, Earl Robert of Gloucester, that were planned in concert with David and his son’s attacks on the north in 1138.90 The Earl of Gloucester granted the strategically important town and castle of Shrewsbury to Arnulf II de Hesdin and to William fitzAlain, son of Alain FitzFlaald, to defend against King Stephen. They were so loyal to the Empress’ cause that Arnulf bravely refused to relinquish the castle even after hearing about the Scottish defeat at Northallerton.91 Arnulf II de Hesdin was subsequently hung by Stephen for supporting Empress Matilda in 1138 while Arnulf ’s nephew, William fitzAlain, Lord of Oswestry, who had campaigned alongside Arnulf in Somerset, escaped the same fate and fled to Normandy where he joined Matilda and her brother. Arnulf III de Hesdin carried on his father’s allegiance to Matilda and provided hospitality to Roger de Berkeley, Lord of Dursley (Gloucestershire), an Angevin supporter, in 1148/49 at Keevil just shortly before Berkeley’s fall from favour with

still alive because Henry had launched an attack against Talvas’ lands in the Saosnois. Crouch, ‘King Stephen and Northern France’, pp. 46–53. 88  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 454–57. Talvas began fighting for Geoffrey and Matilda immediately after Henry’s death. Thompson, ‘William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu’; Crouch, ‘King Stephen and Northern France’, p. 56. 89  Pollock, ‘Frontier Patronage and Politics: The fitzAlains of Dol in the Twelfth Century.’ Paper delivered at the Leeds International Medieval Congress 2009. 90  Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 56–61, 67–70, 84–85; Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, p. 73; Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, pp. 100, 123, 132; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 80–81. 91  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 520–23; John of Worcester, Chronicles, ed. by Darlington and McGurk, iii, 250–51. Shrewsbury was only briefly in Stephen’s hands before falling back under Angevin influence in 1141.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

133

Henry of Anjou.92 Walter de Berkeley, who was advanced in the administration of King David’s grandson, King William, was probably related to this family.93 The fitzAlains managed to eclipse their Hesdin kin and rose under the Angevins and the Canmores. Subsequent to the 1138 campaign, Matilda re­warded William fitzAlain and his brother, Walter, by patronising the family’s Augustinian foundation at Haughmond Abbey at which proceedings King David was also present.94 Walter also accompanied his brother, William, when Matilda agreed to protect the foundation of Lilleshall Abbey, another Arrouaisian/Augustinian establishment, in the late 1140s.95 William fitzAlain was very intimately bound to Empress Matilda’s struggle for the throne and he married one of Matilda’s nieces, later entering Lilleshall towards the end of his life.96 His brother, Walter’s, standing at the court of the King of Scots was significant and probably convinced the King to found Cambuskenneth Abbey as a dependency of the abbey of Arrouaise in c. 1147.97 Scottish interest in Shrewsbury Abbey may also have originated from contact with the fitzAlains and Hesdins during the 1138 campaign,98 when in c. 1141, King David granted the church of Kirkstead and the land of Bispham to the abbey.99 The campaigns of 1138 convinced Walter fitzAlain to emigrate to Scotland where he was advanced at the Scottish court as David’s steward. Over the course 92 

Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, p. 13. See Chapter 4. 94  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 145–46. 95  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 173. 96  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 520–21. William held in Wiltshire at Keevil through his wife, Christiana, and was sheriff of Shropshire and castellan of Shrewsbury. Christiana was a niece of Earl Robert of Gloucester: Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, pp. 123, 132. He was witnessing for Earl Ranulf of Chester between 1147 and 1148 at Chester: Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 97–98. 97  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 129–30. Walter was not a witness of the grant but he may have been absent from the kingdom at the time. He does appear in most of the king’s other charters dealing with Cambuskenneth Abbey (p. 157). The fitzAlain Stewards continued to patronize Cambuskenneth throughout the twelfth century: Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 161, 189, 228, 259. 98  See Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 131, 273, 320–23 about William Talvas’ protection of the abbey of Saint-Martin in Sées and his conflict with the bishop because of his support of Geoffrey of Anjou in the mid-1130s. The abbey of Saint-Martin de Sées claimed their right to the grants made by King David because of its status over Shrewsbury but the reality was that this dispute reflected wider political ramifications caused by the succession dispute. 99  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 107. 93 

134

Chapter 3

of his career in the north, Walter fitzAlain was able to gain fees at Birkenside, Legerwood, Mow, Renfrew, Paisley, Pollok, Hassendean, Innerwick and Stenton — lands scattered in the south and west of the Scottish kingdom.100 In addition to his brother William’s lordship of Oswestry and Shrewsbury, and his own extensive lands in Scotland, his older brother, Jordan, Seneschal of Dol, also held fees west of Lincoln at Burton, Tuxford, and Warsop, close to those of Richard de la Hai and to those of Constable Richard du Hommet of Normandy, who also soon had contact with Scotland.101 Furthermore, Jordan’s English fees were only about thirty kilometres north of Carlton Scroop, held by the earl of Surrey.102 By mid-century, the fitzAlain family had built an impressive territorial base that spanned three kingdoms. Their Scottish contacts are also worth exploring in more detail because they expanded on a new Breton focus at the Scottish court. For example, another prominent Angevin supporter, Brian ‘fitzCount’, Lord of Wallingford, was the natural son of Count Alain ‘Fergant’ of Brittany and the half-brother of the ruling Duke of Brittany, Conan III. Brian had befriended David at Henry I’s court where he too was educated when they were young.103 Like David, Brian owed his high position in England initially to King Henry, whom Gilbert Foliot, Abbot of Gloucester in 1139, said ‘reared you from boyhood, educated, knighted and enriched you’.104 Brian remained famously resolute in his support of Henry’s daughter and as lord of the honour of Wallingford he had fees scattered in Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, Buckinghamshire, Gloucestershire and Middlesex.105 He along with his cousin, Geoffrey Boterel II, who was lord of Penthièvre and of Lamballe, were extremely important to the Empress’ cause.106 She, and her son Henry, relied on the Dol100 

G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, p. 275; Registrum Episcopatus Glasguensis, ed. by Innes, pp. 19, 60; Round, Studies in Peerage and Family History, pp. 115–30. 101  For Jordan’s fees see The Pipe Rolls of 2–3–4 Henry II, pp. 25–26; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, pp. 195, 166, 175, 547; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, i, 10. 102  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 185–86, 195, 197, 359, 616–17, 625; ii, 1038. The earls of Surrey held a number of fees in Lincolnshire. 103  H. W. C. Davis, ‘Henry of Blois and Brian FitzCount’; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 133. Alain ‘Fergant’ of Brittany was the great-grandfather of Duke Conan IV of Brittany who married Margaret of Scotland in 1160. 104  Letters and Charters of Gilbert Foliot, ed. by Morey and Brooke, p. 61. 105  Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, p. 68. 106  Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 102–03, 116–17, 128–29; William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 54–55, 84–85; Henry of Huntingdon, Historia

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

135

Lamballe Bretons, who had settled in the southwest of England with their Penthièvre lord, to fight in their campaigns.107 Brian and the fitzAlains could demand service from knights who held fees that sliced down the west of England to Devonshire. These men, unswerving in their loyalty to the Angevin party, formed the core of the ‘rebel’ movement behind the queen’s half-brother, Earl Robert of Gloucester, with whom Brian had already been involved in 1126 alongside King David and David’s brothers-in-law by marriage, Rotrou, Count of Perche and Duke Conan III of Brittany.108 Like Somerset and Gloucestershire, Devonshire was an important centre of Angevin support primarily because Stephen had alienated its lord, Baldwin de Revières (Redvers), Earl of Devon, in 1136.109 After his removal, Baldwin had successfully made his way to the Cotentin and Avranchin to rally support for the Angevin cause.110 Professor Crouch has noted Stephen’s failure to adequately address the royal position in Normandy that proved so fatal to his control of the Anglo-French community, but the King did attempt to appoint men abroad he believed capable of safeguarding his interests.111 For example, Stephen’s aggrandizement of Count Waleran of Meulan and William III de Warenne was specifically engineered for this purpose, and these men were initially successful. Waleran was able to win support for the King in key areas like Maine through families like Anglorum, ed. by Greenway, pp. 728–29, 736–37; John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 310–11. 107  Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, pp. 68–69. Geoffrey Boterel II also continued as an active lord in Brittany. He patronized new foundations in Brittany on his estates at Bégard. Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 562–63. 108  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 201–02; Hugh the Chantor: The History of the Church of York, ed. and trans. by Johnson,p. 129 — Conan and David were at Henry’s Windsor Christmas court in 1126. Schmolke-Hasselmann, ‘Henry II Plantagenêt’. Brian and Matilda’s son and heir, the future Henry II, became close friends over the course of the wars. Henry II’s later interest in the Breton lais may have even been influenced by both his uncle, Robert of Gloucester, and by Brian. 109  R. Davis, King Stephen, pp. 24–25; Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, p. 42. Baldwin lost control of his castle at Exeter in the honour of Plympton when he rebelled in 1136 so when he returned with Matilda in 1139, he began campaigning from his other territories on the Isle of Wight and on his estates in Hampshire. 110 

Dugdale, Monasticon, VI, p. 304. Baldwin’s sister, Hawise, married William de Roumare, shortly after this and William was granted the earldom of Lincoln. 111  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 59–71.

136

Chapter 3

the viscounts de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe. The problem was that when Stephen lost the support of Waleran in 1141, the Beaumonts also changed sides.112 The King also tried to advance other men who could raise an army in England and in key areas of western France. After he removed Earl Baldwin from Devonshire, he advanced the Anglo-Breton Alain ‘le Noir’, Earl of Richmond, to fill Baldwin’s shoes.113 Alain ‘le Noir’s marriage in 1138 to Duke Conan III of Brittany’s daughter and his lordship on both sides of the Channel reflect a recognition on Stephen’s part that Alain could be used against Alain’s brother and rival, Geoffrey Boterel II, who was fomenting support for Matilda in the southwest of England. Alain’s value to the King was determined not only by his Breton marriage but also by his alliances with cross-Channel Breton families in Devonshire like the Fougères (in the northern border to Maine), the fitzAlains (Dol) and the Dinans (southwest of Dol).114 The threat Alain ‘le Noir’ and his allies posed in England alone was sufficient to earn the Bretons a tarnished reputation from the pro-Angevin chronicler, William of Malmesbury,115 but Alain was also used to strike these same families at their Continental lordships in the frontier of Brittany and Normandy exactly where Baldwin was rallying support for Empress Matilda. The hope may have been that Alain’s success in Brittany would provide a foothold in the north of Brittany from which Stephen could launch an attack into Normandy.116 112 

White, ‘The Career of Waleran’. Roscelin was also a benefactor of the Meulan-Beaumont foundation of Saint-Trinité in 1131 and 1142. Roscelin is the grandfather of Ermengarde de Beaumont who married King William of Scotland in 1186. See Chapter 6. Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, pp. 8, 14, 25. 113  Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, p.  185; Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 67, 84; Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, pp. 53–56, 76–77, 84, 790–92, 100–01, 113–17, 122, 131, 149–51, 175. 114  Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’; Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, p. 273. The Boterels held a rival claim to Dol and Lamballe against Conan III by blood and by marriage. Geoffrey Boterel II had married Hawise, a daughter of John I of Dol in 1119, which strengthened his claim to the area. Alain ‘le Noir’s’ marriage to Conan’s daughter brought these two families together into an alliance against Alain’s brother. As a sweetener, Alain may also have been promised the lordship of Tréguier, held by Alain’s other brother, Henry. The marriages made by the two Penthièvre brothers tore the family apart politically. Cf. Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, iv, 27, 31, 70, 90; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 595 about Alain’s claim to Tréguier. 115  William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 41–42. Malmesbury accused the Bretons and Flemings of serving Stephen in England for plunder and booty. 116  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 61, 67. Alain was fighting with Stephen’s brother, Count Theobald, and Count Waleran de Meulan in the Vexin in mid-1136 so the French

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

137

Alain had already been demonstrating his willingness to campaign in the Vexin and he had also begun to refer to himself in his Breton charters as ‘indigenous’ Count of Brittany in order to stress his Breton identity and lineage.117 This was necessary to his new image as a Breton leader. Although he was the son of Stephen, Count of Penthièvre and of Richmond, he had been raised in Eng­­land to prepare him for the administration of Richmond as opposed to his brother, Geoffrey Boterel II, who had inherited the lordship of Penthièvre and spent most of his time in Brittany. Alain’s marriage to the daughter of Conan III, Bertha of Brittany, gave him more access to Breton lords but he needed an official title to complement his drive to raise forces for King Stephen on the Continent. He may also have been receiving some encouragement from his father-in-law, Conan III. Conan did not appear to openly support the Angevins during the Succession War, and he did nothing to prevent his son-in-law from fighting with Breton forces in the north of England.118 From a Scottish perspective, it is noteworthy that King David did not appear swayed by his contact with tenants of the honour of Richmond though many of these lands were close to his son’s in England; rather, he and his wife were involved with networks in the southwest even before the war because of his involvement with Henry’s court. Such southern interests are exemplified by David’s patronage to Llanthony priory near Gloucester (c. 1124), which was also the recipient of favour by David’s sister, Queen Maud, along with other important Welsh border barons like the Lacys and the earls of Hereford.119 David’s contact with men in the southwest outweighed any influence from the Anglo-Breton nobility near his English estates. Ultimately, David’s decision to support Matilda pitted him alongside Alain’s rival and cousin, Brian ‘fitzCount’ of Wallingford, and Alain’s brother, Geoffrey Boterel II, Count of Penthièvre and Lord of Nettlestead (Suffolk), along with Baldwin, Earl of Devon, and William fitzAlain. These men were all at Oxford in 1141 when David was probably rewarded with the honour of Lancaster.120 These were also dimension of his political influence was recognized. 117  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 580. 118  Bachman, ‘The Origin of Armorican Chivalry’. Conan was married to an illegitimate daughter of King Henry but this did not seem to affect his loyalties. 119  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 90; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 127–37. 120  Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 69, 79, 84–85; William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 50–51, 56–57; G. Barrow, ‘King David I and the Honour of Lancaster’; Cronne, ‘The Honour of Lancaster’.

138

Chapter 3

all men who remained resolutely loyal to the Angevin cause from 1141 until Henry II’s accession to the throne in 1154.

The Giffard-Clare Impact As mentioned in the previous chapter, some of the families who witnessed for David I originated from the Warenne fees in Normandy. For example, the Giffard family held Longueville-la-Gifart (Longueville-sur-Scie) of the earls,121 and they were probably also related to the Giffards in Buckinghamshire based on Earl Walter III Giffard of Buckingham, and his wife, Countess Ermengarde’s, patronage of the Warenne priory at Longueville.122 The Buckinghamshire Giffards were familiar with the Scottish court as mentioned in the previous chapter and they were affiliated with the Bolebecs who originated from Bolbec held by the Clare family. The Clares, in turn, were intermarried with the Giffard earls of Buckingham (see Figure 3).123 Walter I de Bolebec, son of Hugh, witnessed for ‘Earl’ David in 1123, and David’s contact with the Bolebecs and Clares may have paved the way for other Bolebec neighbours to enter the Scottish court by mid-century.124 For example, Richard de Lanquetôt began witnessing for Ralph II de Clère (Clare) of Calder during the reign of David’s grandson, King Malcolm IV.125 Lanquetôt is four 121  Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, p. 120; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 20, 132–34. 122  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 75–77. 123  Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ii, 386–87. Rohese Giffard, daughter of Earl Walter Giffard of Buckingham, married Richard de Brionne, also known as Richard fitzGilbert de Clare, the founder of the Clare line. 124  Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 225; Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Fowler, pp. 31–32, 69, 95, 273, 278, 286–89; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 201. The Bolebecs appeared in Northumberland after Malcolm IV had relinquished Northumberland to Henry II. Wood Walton (Cambridgeshire) was held in chief by the earls of Warenne and in turn held by Hugh de Bolbec, a Norman undertenant of Walter Giffard in Buckinghamshire. Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xiii: Buckinghamshire, 14. 1–2, 26. 1–11. In 1134, Hugh’s successor, Walter de Bolbec, gave the manor of Wood Walton to Ramsay Abbey. Walter de Bolbec’s appearance from c. 1118 as a witness for David was possibly due to a Huntingdon connection through David’s wife. Walter’s son of the same name continued to have contact with the Scottish court: Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, p. 9. 125  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 59, 66, 103–04. See Chapter 5. C. P. Lewis, ‘The Earldom of Surrey’, pp. 334–35.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

139

kilometres from Bolbec in Normandy, held by Malcolm’s cousin, Richard de Clare ‘Strongbow’, Earl of Pembroke, who also held the lordships of Bienfaite and Orbec in the frontier of Calvados.126 Because of the Clare territorial lordship in Monmouthshire, the Clares also had early contact with another family who settled in Scotland, the fitzAlains, and with the fitzBaderons. Richard’s aunt, Rohese de Clare, married the Welsh-Breton Lord of Monmouth, Boussac and Epiniac, called Baderon, in c. 1130.127 Baderon’s family moved in the same affinal circles as that of the fitzAlains at Dol and Oswestry because the original lordships of the two families in Brittany were only about eight kilometres apart and they continued to patronize the same religious foundations on both sides of the Channel into the twelfth century.128 In c. 1113, David may also have helped negotiate the marriage of his stepdaughter, Maud de Senlis, to another member of the Clare family, Robert fitzRichard, the Lord of Little Dunmow (Essex) and of Baynard, the great-uncle of Earl Richard ‘Strongbow’ of Pembroke (see Figure 3).129 David appeared in a charter for the Clare family at about the time of their marriage and it would

126 

Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 642 d. Richard’s great-grandmother had also been a member of the Giffard kin group as the daughter of Walter I Giffard, Lord of Longueville. Earl Richard of Pembroke’s mother, Isabel de Beaumont, was the half-sister of Ada de Warenne (and full sister of Earl Robert of Leicester and Count Waleran of Meulan) but Richard was not born until c. 1130 so he did not begin to impact these networks until c. 1150. Orbec, Études sur la généalogie des seigneurs, pp. 36–41. William Marshal would gain the lordship by marriage to Richard’s daughter, Isabel, in 1189. 127  See Figure 3 about the Clare family. Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 270–71; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iv, 596–97. Baderon used a separate ethnic address in his charters: ‘to his French, English and Welsh men’. Rohese was Walter de Bolebec’s second cousin. Rohese’s aunt, Avice de Clare, married a Breton, Raoul de Fougères, grandfather of the Ralph de Fougères who raised the rebellion against Henry II to be discussed in Chapter 4. Ralph’s grandfather had been granted land in Buckinghamshire at Twyford by King William I, which he later succeeded to, so these families were territorially already in contact in Buckinghamshire. Twyford was within thirty kilometres of the centre of the Giffard patrimony: Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by Morris and others, xiii: Buckinghamshire, 37. 1–3. 128  Marchegay, ‘Les prieurés anglais de Saint-Florent’, pp. 177–78; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 433–34; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 408, 415, 416; Histoire feodale des marais, territoire, et eglise de Dol, trans. by Allenou, pp. 66–67. 129 

Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 1; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 178; vi.1, 147. The Giffard territorial base in Normandy was near Dieppe and the family continued to make marriages with families as far north as Picardy. Walter II Giffard married the Picardian, Agnes de Ribemont, before 1101.

* This table only presents family members who made alliances that spilled over into Scottish networks or who were involved with other Scottish landowners. For example, Gilbert fitzRichard and Adelise de Clermont had several more children.

Figure 3. Clare family tree.

Richard

William, Lord of Cargill and Kincardine

Rohese = Hugh I de Lacy, Lord of Meath (d. 1186)

Margaret = William de Munfichet

Gilbert (Stansted and Menteith and Perthshire) Avelina de Lucy

Gilbert Lord of Monmouth

Rohese = Baderon of Monmouth

Maud = William II d’Aubigny ‘le Bret’

Richard de Munfichet (lands in Essex and Hertfordshire, and Cussy) = fl .1180-95

Richard ‘Strongbow’, Lord of Leinster (d. 1176) = Aoife of Leinster

Roger (succ. brother in 1153; d. 1173) = Maud de St. Hilaire (2=William d’Aubigny Earl of Arundel)

Richard (d. 1217) = Amicia of Gloucester, niece of Earl Robert III de Beaumont

Gilbert, Earl of Pembroke (d. c. 1149) = Isabel de Beaumont Sister of Earl Robert II de Beaumont

Walter fitzRobert, Lord of Dunmow

Robert fitzRichard, Lord of Dunmow & of Baynard (d. 1136) = Maud de Senlis, stepdaughter of King David I King of the Scots

Richard fitzGilbert, Earl of Hertford (k.1136) = Maud of Chester, Sister of Earl Ranulf IV ‘de Gernon’

Gilbert fitzRichard, Earl of Hertford, Lord of Clare and Tonbridge (d. c. 1117) = Adelise de Clermont

Richard de Brionne = Rohese Giffard, d. of Walter Giffard

140 Chapter 3

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

141

have been within his remit to arrange for a suitable mate for his stepdaughter.130 Marital alliances were important to creating bonds of mutual interest between different families, but in this case when war erupted after Henry I’s death, Maud and her husband supported King Stephen and the kin group was rewarded. The Clares were already earls of Hertford and lords of Ceredigion, and they held lands scattered throughout England, but Gilbert de Clare, Maud’s nephew by marriage, was granted an earldom at Pembroke and the rape of Pevensey in East Suffolk for his loyal service to King Stephen. Maud’s husband, Robert fitzRichard de Clare, was already Lord of Little Dunmow but he was also made sheriff of Yorkshire but he died shortly after war had broken out.131 The family was important to Stephen’s strategy in the west and in Wales but they, like many, defected to the Angevin cause in c. 1147.132 It was probably at this time that Maud arranged for the marriage of her daughter by Robert to the proAngevin William II d’Aubigny ‘le Bret’, Lord of Belvoir.133 William II ‘le Bret’ fit easily into the cross-Channel networks that spread from Brittany. His most wealthy estates and positions were in England where he held lands scattered in Lincolnshire, Essex, Buckinghamshire, Leicestershire, Oxfordshire, Nottingham, Yorkshire and Northamptonshire and he continued to settle some of his Breton compatriots in his Leicestershire fees.134 However, his family originally came from Saint-Aubin d’Aubigné, five kilometres north of the abbey of Saint-Sulpice in the heart of the Fougères networks near Rennes. Saint-Aubin was also only about twenty-six kilometres south of Le Tronchet held by the fitzAlains.135 William and his father continued to administer their 130 

Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 194–99. See Figure 3. Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 40. Robert’s nephew, Walter de Clare, also fought against Geoffrey of Anjou and for Stephen at Le Sap in Normandy: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 470–71. 132  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 40, 56–57, 129, 143, 194, 223. Earl Walter III de Clare of Buckingham was more involved with his Norman fees and had returned to Longueville in 1143 to protect his lands from Count Geoffrey of Anjou and he may have relied on others of his kin group to continue the family’s position in England during his absence. 133  Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 63. 134  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 461; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 30, 31, 39, 328; ii, 673, 700, 702; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 18, 103, 152, 155, 178, 182, 184–85, 188, 191, 230, 284, 372, 448, 454, 462, 465, 468, 471, 484, 489, 496–97, 500, 503, 517–18, 522–23, 531, 537, 547, 549, 550–51, 634, 650. William’s brother, Robert, held the Bedfordshire fees. 135  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Redon en Bretagne, ed. by de Courson, p. 459. The family’s 131 

142

Chapter 3

lands in Brittany and were politically active on the Continent. Accompanied by his pincern, William I ‘le Bret’ appeared in 1121 as a witness to the concord between the monks of Le Mont Saint-Michel and Thomas de Saint-Jean.136 The Belvoir Aubignys continued their contact with the Fougères throughout the twelfth century. One member of the family, Thomas de Belvoir, held a fee in c. 1172 in the Avranchin beside Ralph de Fougères, and William II d’Aubigny, like his father, seemed to preserve the family’s position in Brittany throughout the twelfth century.137 William was probably the Guillaume d’Aubigny who appeared as a witness for Ralph de Fougères in 1162 concerning a gift made by Guillaume de Vire to the abbey of Savigny. He also appeared in 1151 as a witness at Combour for Gautier d’Erthac concerning concessions to Savigny and in 1183 his son, William III, appeared as the faithful friend of the Lord of Dol, Hasculf de Subligny.138 William lost the lordship of Belvoir in c. 1141 when Earl Ranulf IV of Chester confiscated it following the chaos of the defeat of King Stephen at Lincoln but he later regained it.139 The family continued to extend their influence and power in England under the Angevin kings and they also took an interest in the Scots. Later in the century, a daughter of William II may have married Earl Gilbert of Strathearn.140

priory at Saint-Aubin was a dependency of Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt. Cf. Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 665 about Le Tronchet. 136  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 544, 611. William d’Aubigny also witnessed for John of Dol in 1151 with Hamo Spina, father of Guillaume Spina, who married Alicia, one of the last heirs of the Stewards at Dol. 137  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 703 h. Thomas’ relationship with William is unclear. Thomas may have been a younger brother or cousin who made his way back to France through his father’s contact with the Fougères family. 138  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 611, 692. Although this was in the jurisdiction of the fitzAlain stewards, Alain fitzJordan did not appear as a witness to this concession. 139  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 461; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 646; Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 63–67; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 328. 140  Charters, Bulls and Other Documents Relating to the Abbey of Inchaffray, ed. by Lindsay, Dowden, and Thomson, pp. 11, 23, 25; See Chapter 6.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

143

The Giffards in Scotland A final word must be said about the Giffard family in Scotland. Despite contact between David and the Giffard-Clares from early in the century, the Giffards did not directly settle in Scotland until the reigns of David’s grandsons, Malcolm and William.141 Although it is possible that the Scottish branch emigrated directly from Normandy, it is more likely that they were related to the Giffards of Buckingham and Lords of Longueville.142 The first Giffard to appear in the service of David was ‘brother’ William, who handled the boundary limits of Rhynd in Perthshire when it was being granted to Reading Abbey in c. 1148.143 William was probably the son of King Henry I’s marshal, Gilbert, and he was Empress Matilda’s chancellor from c.  1141, but he had begun his career in Somerset between 1123 and 1135.144 The involvement of William Giffard with Somerset men suggests he was moving in the same circles if not related to the Giffard earls of Buckingham and to the Chandos family.145 It was probably his early career in Somerset that put him into contact with the Scottish King and paved the way for his kin to enter into Scottish politics during the reign of David’s grandsons, but it may have been the Kings’ mother, Ada de Warenne, who actually convinced the first of the family, Hugh, to move to Scotland. Hugh Giffard of Yester was able to establish himself in terra Scotorum by the end of the century when King William confirmed the grant of Lethington, which had probably originally been granted to Hugh by Ada de Warenne.146 Hugh’s son, 141 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 124, 125, 138, 154–55, 157, 158, 176, 177, 182–83, 190, 204, 206, 210, 220, 222, 223, 233, 235, 253, 255, 256, 262, 268, 270, 280, 285, 298, 300, 315–16, 351, 354, 398, 423, 432–33. 142  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 132–33; C. P. Lewis, ‘The Earldom of Surrey’, pp. 334–35. William Giffard was probably related to the family of Walter II Earl of Buckingham and Lord of Longueville, who was important in leading forces for the Norman kings in the Vexin against the King of France and against Robert of Normandy: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 182; v, 296, 308. See Chapter 4 about Giffard involvement with other Scottish affiliated families. 143  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 133. This grant was also brought to the attention of the King’s friend the Anglo-Breton Brian fitzCount, Lord of Wallingford. 144  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 133; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 183. 145  See Chapter 4 on Chandos family. 146  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 423–24; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, p. 63; Calendar of the Laing Charters, 854–1837, ed. by Anderson, p. 1; Chartulary of the Priory of St. Pancras of Lewes, ed. by Salzman, pp. 146–47; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 259, 261, 267, 289, 291; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 61, 127.

144

Chapter 3

William, added to the lands at Lethington and gained further fees at Tealing and Powgavie.147 The family were also in contact with other Warenne affiliated families, like the Bosvilles and Bellencombres, who also settled in Scotland.148 The Bosvilles, who were another Giffard-Clare affiliated family, had been appearing with the Warennes since c. 1088. The first of the family, Robert de Bosville, continued after the 1066 conquest to hold in head Beuzeville-laGiffard, within an eight-kilometre radius of Bolbec and Lanquetôt.149 The family settled in Scotland during the reign of King William,150 and one member of the family in particular, Robert de Bosville, may have followed William back to Scotland following the Treaty of Falaise. He may have been the same ‘Robert’ who held Aliquienvilla (Aliquerville twenty-five kilometres northeast of Bolbec and in Clare territory) before 1204.151 It would make sense that this Robert was a descendant, perhaps a grandson, of Robert at Beuzeville. Both men held fees in Clare territory.152 Furthermore, Clare-Giffard men can be found moving frequently in the Scottish court.153 147 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 398, 423–24. Also see Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 84, 85; Charters of the Abbey of Coupar Angus, ed. by Easson, i, 16–17 about William, Hugh’s son. 148  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 423–24. Robert de Ros was a witness to a reconfirmation between 1205 and 1207 of all Lethington to William Giffard, son of Hugh Giffard of Yester (east Lothian), as Hugh held it in the time of Countess Ada de Warenne, King William’s mother. The charter states that Lethington was partly held by Ralph de Bosville, possibly Robert’s son, and by William de Bellencombre, who may have emigrated directly from Bellencombre, one of the Warenne lordships in France. 149  Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, 70, 147. 150  The Bosvilles (future Boswells) began to appear in charters generated by the Scottish overlords of Northumbria as early as c. 1148 and they had moved into Scotland under King William by the mid-1160s under Payn Bosville. They held land near Roxburgh. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 123, 167, 168, 210, 238, 243, 247, 248–49, 256, 269, 270, 274, 305, 328; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 12, 19, 111, 303; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 97. 151  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 210, 238, 243, 247, 248–49, 256, 269, 270, 274, 305; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 645 e. Cf. Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 19 about the Bosville fees and family. Robert de Bosville did not appear in Scottish records until c. 1173, but it is unclear what his relationship was to Payn de Bosville. 152  There are very few members of the Bosville family mentioned in England. Only Ralph mentioned above and a Helias, Thomas and William in Yorkshire: Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 158, 165, 336; iii, 135. 153  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 642 b–f. Also see

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

145

Although the Warenne marriage has been seen as the foundation for the move­­ment of several families into Scotland, contact with Surrey men had been occurring well before the marriage and more importantly, many of the Warenne ‘affiliates’ did not actually move into Scotland until well after the death of David I and Earl Henry. Part of the reason for this delay may have been due to Ada’s brother’s loyalty to Stephen’s cause through most of the war while her husband had primarily been an Angevin man. Although Ada may have had more influence over her sons after their father’s death, which was not uncommon for a widow,154 she remained aloof of her kin, including of her niece, Isabel de Warenne, who had married King Stephen’s son, William of Blois, Count of Boulogne and of Surrey.155 This may have been because of the political situation in England. Shortly after the death of King Stephen, Stephen’s son, William of Blois, was implicated in a plot to assassinate Henry of Anjou at Canterbury in 1154, which may have alienated Queen Ada from her niece’s family.156 It would not have been wise for Ada to ally with a murderer and ‘traitor’ so she did not appear to send support or to be in contact with her nephew by marriage. Her sons, Malcolm and William, would later reconnect with their cousin’s husband at Carlisle in 1158 when Malcolm was snubbed by King Henry II in a knighting ceremony, and they were at Toulouse in 1159 when William of Blois died.157

Chapter 2 about the Clare-Giffards and Warennes in France. 154  There are several examples of how women became very powerful in widowhood. Adèle of Champagne was regent for Stephen-Henry when he went on the crusades and she and her family were important to securing her son’s control of his Hainault wife’s dowry. She was also regent for her son, Thibault II, Count of Blois and Chartres, during his minority. Ermengarde of Anjou had a strong influence over her son, Conan III, until her death in c. 1146. 155  Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 158. Besides being the son of Stephen and thus her former husband’s enemy, William of Blois was also making politically dangerous decisions in the early 1150s. 156  Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 158. He may not have been responsible for the plot or even involved. Gervase even mentioned it was only a rumour but Henry of Anjou assumed his guilt. 157  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 217; Chronicon angliae petriburgense, ed. by Giles, p. 97. It is unclear whether Malcolm and William actually met with William of Blois but they were at Toulouse at about the same time serving Henry II, and Malcolm was probably at William’s knighting ceremony in 1158 at Carlisle. Malcolm was humiliated at the meeting because Henry did not knight him on this occasion and he was forced to concede lands granted to his grandfather and father. See Chapter 4.

146

Chapter 3

Scottish contact with Surrey was to change within a few years of William of Blois’ death when the earldom fell by marriage to Henry II’s natural son, Hamelin. Subsequently Scottish-Surrey relations weakened over the following gen­­eration as Kings Malcolm and especially William seemed to direct their atten­­tion to relations with France. The years leading up to Henry II’s reign redefined the political community that spanned the Channel as it became clear that Stephen and his sons were not going to continue as kings of England. Although Henry had submitted to King Louis VII of France in August 1151 for control of Normandy, within a year he secretly married Louis’ recently divorced wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine, which provided Henry with a formidable position in the south of France. Louis had for the past sixteen years favoured Henry’s rivals and forged alliances with Stephen and his son, Count Eustache IV of Boulogne, whom he had named Duke of Normandy in 1137. In 1140, Queen Matilda also arranged for the marriage of her son, Eustache, age ten, to the King of France’s sister, Constance, in order to seal a Franco-Boulonnais alliance. This arrangement did not win Eustache or Louis VII of France the victory against the Angevins that they had hoped for but it did provide them with allies outside their immediate networks on both sides of the Channel, which was useful to Louis following his ex-wife’s remarriage to his Angevin competitor.158 Louis had every reason to be wary of Henry of Anjou, whose authority had been extended greatly by his father Geoffrey’s conquest of Normandy in 1144 and by Henry’s marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine in 1152. Henry and his parents had within a short time built an empire that threatened the Capetian balance of power by defeating their rival’s allies and by advancing men who had been undeclared in their support. Angevin success was finally confirmed in November 1153 with the Treaty of Winchester, or Wallingford, which had followed the death of Eustache IV, Stephen’s eldest son and heir. Stephen’s surviving son, William of Blois, Earl of Warenne, was promised confirmation of the earldom of Surrey and the honours of Eye, Boulogne and Lancaster, and the county of Mortain in Normandy in recompense for his loss of the throne but this was to prove an uneasy settlement. Unlike the situation later in the century, the French and Scots were at opposite ends of the spectrum during the Succession War. David’s focus was not on 158  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 165; Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, p. 149. Louis responded to the news of the marriage by plotting with Henry, Count of Champagne, the nephew of King Stephen, with Stephen’s son, Eustache, who was given control of the Norman Vexin. He also allied with Henry’s own brother, Geoffrey of Anjou. The campaigns failed.

The Scots and the War of Succession, 1135–53

147

harbouring an alliance with the crown of France and its agents directly. His interest was in expanding his kingdom into northern England, which he accomplished. He gained significant recognition of his authority in Cumberland, where he died just months before the Treaty of Wallingford,159 and he ensured his successors’ rights before his death in 1153 by granting Northumberland to his grandson, William, and by recognising William’s older brother, Malcolm, as King.160 King David’s legacy was far-reaching. His struggle to continue holding Cum­­­ berland and Carlisle was well recognized from as far away as Hautafort in Péri­ gord as late as c. 1183.161 He was remembered as an extremely pious man and as ‘the civilized king of an uncivilized people’ but the turmoil in England was still far from resolved.162 An alliance between Scotland and France would not be pursued as a viable possibility until after David’s death, but it was because of David’s interest in colonising Scotland with French and Anglo-French families that made the later Franco-Scottish alliance so personal.

159 

Aird, ‘Northern England or Southern Scotland?’; Oram, David I, pp. 20–22. These territories may have recognized Scottish rule, not English, in the late eleventh century but they were detached from Scottish rule after Malcolm III’s death. 160  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 3–4. Malcolm IV and William’s father, Henry, had died in 1152, the year before their grandfather. 161  Bertrand de Born, L’Amour et la guerre, ed. and trans. by Gouiran, Sirventes 14, pp. 208–09, ll. 17–20. Bertrand de Born wrote a political tract about Henry II’s struggle in Cumberland, Ireland, Angers, Montsoreau (Maine), Candes (Maine), Poitiers, Bordeaux, Bazas, and Gascony following Henry’s demand that Young Henry give his lands to Richard leaving the Young Henry a ‘king of mediocrity’. 162  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 72. Newburgh was writing from a pro-English and Yorkshire point of view and so was often not favourable towards the Scots though this did not apply to King David, who had espoused an Anglo-French identity.

Chapter 4

Identity Challenged: Restructuring and Change in the Three Kingdoms, 1154–73

The Accession of Henry II The accession of Henry of Anjou to the throne of England in 1154 marked a new stage in relations between the three kingdoms. Unlike his grandfather, Henry was Angevin first and Norman second.1 He spent his early life in Anjou while his father, Count Geoffrey of Anjou, led campaigns into Normandy against Henry I and, after 1135, against his wife’s rival to the English throne, Stephen of Blois. By the age of twelve, Henry’s experience of Normandy had been clouded by warfare and by his father’s protracted struggle to take and hold a region with long-held animosities against his Angevin origins.2 These ani1 

W.  L.  Warren, Henry  II, pp.  11–53; Chibnall, ‘L’Avènement au poivoir d’Henri  II’; Poole, ‘Henry Plantagenet’s Early Visits to England’. He spent the first nine years of his life in Anjou followed by ten years of travelling back and forth between England and Normandy. His early experiences were formed within an Angevin world without foreknowledge of success in Normandy or England. Henry did subsequently have a more active role in Normandy after his father seized the duchy but this was necessary to controlling the region. Power, The Norman Frontier, passim. 2  W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 29–32; Beem, The Lioness Roared, pp. 48–49; Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, pp. 70–73, 94–96, 102–04; Poole, ‘Henry Plantagenet’s Early Visits to England’, pp. 273–81. Although Henry rarely held court in Anjou after 1154, there may not have been a need. His Angevin subjects were loyal to him throughout most of his career. His

150

Chapter 4

mosities hindered Geoffrey’s progress from early on in his campaigns and they only abated after the political community divided against itself in reaction to Stephen’s advancement of particular men at the expense of others.3 Attaining control of Normandy was fundamental to Angevin success on both sides of the Channel. Normandy was politically the backdoor to England and, as such, Geoffrey of Anjou’s victory in Normandy in 1144 drastically improved his son’s chance of seizing the English throne and of restoring the Norman Empire to its former glory. The achievement of Geoffrey and of Henry’s halfuncles, the earls of Cornwall and Gloucester, meant that Henry II was able to succeed to the throne of England in 1154 and to unite two of the most important rival powers in France — Anjou and Normandy. He also extended the former Anglo-Norman community of his grandfather to include men whose territories spread from Picardy to Aquitaine. A restructuring of alliances quickly followed the Angevin victory and shifted loyalties as the political community adjusted to a new lord on both sides of the Channel. A war-weary nobility was financially and psychologically ready to accept a new lineage rather than to continue campaigning, but Henry still needed to be particularly astute in his dealings with families who had supported Stephen during the wars.4 For this reason, he used the benchmark of his grandfather’s reign as a barometer for determining territorial claims, but his overzealous execution of this policy quickly alienated men in both camps.5 Cracks began to appear in attitudes towards his rule when he seized territories

brother, Geoffrey, who had been bequeathed Anjou by their father on his deathbed, had even failed to rally support in the county against his brother and instead had to campaign from the Touraine in 1156. Cf. Tonnerre, ‘Henri I et L’Anjou’. 3  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 474–77, 514–17, 546–47; Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, pp.  72–81, 107, 112–13; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 34–57. 4  Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 155–59; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 172–75; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 262–89. The earls of Chester, Gloucester, Salisbury, Lincoln, Arundel, Hereford, Leicester and Cornwall stood by Henry. Ada de Warenne’s sister, Gundreda, betrayed her husband, Earl Roger de Beaumont, and handed Warwick over to Henry during Earl Roger’s absence at Stephen’s court in mid-1153. It was said Roger went into shock and died upon hearing the news. 5  Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 275–80. In some cases, Henry seemed impartial and fair in his decisions. He demanded his own loyal adherent, Earl Patrick of Salisbury, to tear down fortifications he had built without royal consent during the wars.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

151

like those belonging to Count Waleran of Meulan and the recently deceased Earl Ranulf of Chester, Henry’s former ally.6 King Henry’s impartiality towards territorial gains on both sides of the for­­­mer political divide hit men who had been loyal to him hardest.7 Powerful men, who had played a major role in attaining the throne for Henry, were not only left unrewarded for their service during the wars but even punished by the removal of key fortresses from their control.8 It was for this reason that men like Count William Talvas of Alençon and of Sées, whose son was the King’s cousin by marriage, soon rallied men to fight against Henry.9 Cases involving the confiscation of lands that were part of rightful inheritances threw into relief the King’s tendency to overreach his prerogatives. He set a precedent that weak­­ ened personal ties to land and lordship and unwittingly reshaped the issue of identity. Although the threat to territorial lordship was nothing new in western Europe, the volume of men affected by royal interference in praedial assets had substantially increased during Henry’s early reign.10 Within a few years,

6  W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 32, 55, 61–63, 122–23. Davis gives more credit to Henry and argues that Henry introduced new, more strict rules governing inheritance. R. Davis, King Stephen, pp. 122–28; R. Davis, ‘King Stephen and the Earl of Chester Revised’. In late 1153, Meulan lost the earldom of Worcester that he had gained during the wars and the honour of Montfort-sur-Risle, leaving him with a small estate in Dorset and the lordship of Meulan, which was still strategically substantial. Chester’s son, Hugh, did not gain the lands his father had been granted in Lancashire, Lincolnshire, Staffordshire and the Trent Valley during the war despite that Ranulf had supported Henry from 1140 until his death. 7  See Billoré, ‘Y a-t-il une “Oppression” des Plantagenêt’ about Henry’s ongoing problems with his nobility because of his drive to centralize and push crown and ducal rights beyond the former ‘feudal’ envelope. Under Henry, the former rights of lords to rescind their loyalty if their overlord did not protect their rights was disregarded and even became grounds for treason and a crime against God. 8  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 350–53, 389–98. 9  Thompson, ‘Dowry and Inheritance Patterns’, pp. 54–61. William Talvas’ son, John of Sées, married Beatrix, the niece of Henry’s father, Geoffrey, through his brother, Helias. She brought dower lands at Aldburne (Berks.) and Wanborough (Wilts.) to the marriage in the early 1140s. Wanborough was also about thirty-seven kilometres northeast of Keevil held by William fitzAlain, Walter fitzAlain’s brother. Both families supported the Angevin cause. See Chapter 3. 10  During the Succession War, ties to land had been weakened because of Stephen and Matilda’s jockeying for the support of families but that was to be expected. Henry’s case was different because there was no opposition. He should have been maintaining the rights of men who had remained loyal or been consistent in awarding men, whose families had held titles and fees under his grandfather, as he had promised.

152

Chapter 4

the new King faced a powerful body of ‘disinherited’ men on both sides of the Channel, who were disgruntled and willing to fight if the opportunity arose.11 To worsen matters, Henry forced preferred candidates into bishoprics and earldoms as he saw fit. An example of this type of interference can be seen in the Boulonnais succession following the death in 1159 of William III of Boulogne, Stephen’s last surviving son and heir. Henry, like his grandfather, used marriage as a means of inserting his own men into territories, but unlike his grandfather he sometimes used questionable methods. Whereas his grandfather often gave his own illegitimate children in marriage to foster relations with his nobility, in the case of Boulogne Henry II forced the marriage of the heiress, Mary, sister of William III, to Matthew of Alsace, brother of Philip of Flanders.12 He even removed Mary, a professed nun, from Romsey Abbey in order for the marriage to take place, which did not enhance the King’s image with the church.13 Henry then remarried William of Boulogne’s widow, Isabel de Warenne, to his own illegitimate half-brother, Hamelin.14 The King met with criticism in the first case because Mary had taken a religious vow and in the second case because Hamelin and Isabel were within the prohibited degree of consanguinity.15 These two marriages brought all the titles and lands pertaining to the honours of Warenne and Boulogne (Surrey, Eye, Mortain, Lancaster, Essex, East Anglia, Somerset and Norfolk) on both sides of the Channel under his influence, but what may have been perceived as high-handedness did not end there. The young King of Scots, Malcolm IV, also found himself at the receiving end of Henry’s acquisitiveness. He was under threat of losing the fees his grandfa11 

Keefe, ‘Geoffrey Plantagenet’s Will’. Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 182, 200–03, 218, 229–30, 257, 278, 282, 291, 293, 313. Mary gave Matthew two daughters, Ida and Matilda, before she became abbess of Lillechurch. This marriage was arranged without Matthew’s father’s permission, which caused his father to lead campaigns against King Henry’s allies in the north. In reality, Henry still struggled to control the French counties against Louis VII of France. 13  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 207; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 201–03; Pacaut, Louis VII et son royaume, pp. 189, 196–97. Henry was trying to pre­­­vent William’s brother’s widow, Constance of France, from successfully holding Boulogne. Her brother was Louis VII of France, who was probably behind her claim to the county. Mary was also a half-sister of Stephen’s natural daughter, who married Hervé de Léon by 1141. See pp. 181–82 about Hervé. 14  Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, 14, 18–24. Isabel was King Malcolm IV’s cousin. 15  ‘Herbert of Bosham’, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iii, 328 and iv, 332; ‘William fitzStephen’, iii, 142; Stephen of Rouen, Draco Normannicus, ed. by Howlett, ii, 676. 12 

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

153

ther, David I, had gained in northern England for loyal service during the war and in particular the earldom of Northumbria. The root of the problem was that many of the lands that the King was confiscating were taken from families who had made him King. King Malcolm IV did initially try to fight against Henry’s demand for these English fees, but he was not of the same mettle as his grandfather and still young.16 In 1157, he resigned his lordship in northern England to Henry II at Chester, including his brother William’s lands in Northumberland, Westmoreland, and Cumberland, and in return he was regranted the earldom of Huntingdon, lost in 1141, along with lands in Northamptonshire, Lincolnshire and Yorkshire.17 In the following year, Malcolm tried again to negotiate with Henry to no avail. The meeting ended with Malcolm unsettled about not receiving a knighthood, which Malcolm coveted even at the expense of his claim to Northumbria.18 For this reason, he decided to follow Henry to the Continent in 1159 where he agreed to fight for the King of England against the count of Toulouse and King Louis VII of France.19 Malcolm’s brother, William, probably also attended Henry at Toulouse in return for service he owed concerning his Tynedale lands.20 The King and his entourage left Scotland and travelled to Les Andelys 16 

S.  Duffy, ‘Henry  II and England’s Insular Neighbours’. The Orkneyinga Saga says Malcolm was still a child in 1153 when Earl Rögnvald of Orkney asked for Caithness as his father had held it. Malcolm was probably about sixteen years old in 1157. Orkneyinga Saga, ed. and trans. by Pálsson and Edwards, pp. 164–65. 17  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 105; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 32; Chronica de Mailros, p. 76; Pipe Roll of 5 Henry II, pp. 13, 30; Pipe Roll of 6 Henry II, pp. 15, 34, 37–38, 56. William was already holding Tynedale prior to September 1159: Pipe Roll of 6 Henry II, p. 56; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 3, 20–21. The lands in Tynedale were forfeited by William in 1174 because of his involvement in the rebellion against Henry but he regained them in 1175. 18  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 216. Malcolm was knighted at Périgueux for his service to the King. See below. 19  Chronica de Mailros, p. 76; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 33; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 216–17; Cf. Cheyette, Ermengard of Narbonne, pp. 256–73 for a recent rendering of the various alliances at play in the south of France and Catalonia between 1153 and 1177. Martindale, ‘“An Unfinished Business”’, p. 127; Sassier, ‘Reverentia Regis Henri II’. The campaign was far from successful for Henry II. 20  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 94–95, l. 1259. Jordan Fantosme insinuates that William was with his brother, King Malcolm, at Toulouse: ‘El cuer me tient la rage e ire si hisduse | Mielz volsisse estre pris tut vif devant Tuluse.’ (‘My heart is so full of terrifying rage I would prefer to be captured alive before Toulouse.’)

154

Chapter 4

in the Vexin where they met with other nobles in King Henry’s Norman court before resuming the journey south to Périgueux. What is striking about the Scottish King’s journey to the Continent is that he was attended by several men who were still members of the cross-Channel nobility. For example, the noblemen who accompanied or witnessed for the young King of Scots in the Norman Vexin were Walter fitzAlain, Gilbert de Umfraville, William de Colville, Walter fitzRobert, Philip de Coloummiers (Colombières) and John Malherbe.21 One family which does not seem to have been present with the Scottish King, despite their territorial position in the Vexin and kinship with the Canmores, were the Tosnys. The Canmores were not only related to the Tosnys by marriage through David’s wife, Maud de Senlis, but also through Malcolm’s Beaumont cousin, Margaret, who had married Ralph IV de Tosny in c. 1138 (see Figure 19).22 The Tosny stronghold at Tosny was only five kilometres from Les Andelys and the Tosnys were fighting for Henry II against Louis VII within the year.23

Les Andelys: An Early Case Study of Franco-Scottish Contact It would be useful to examine the men at Les Andelys and their cross-Channel affinities to gain a better understanding of how the kings of Scots were involved with the Anglo-French nobility prior to King William’s succession to the Scottish throne in 1165. William’s succession drastically altered the relationship between the three kingdoms because William, unlike his brother and grandfather, fought against the Norman King and negotiated alliances directly with the French crown in an effort to undermine the King of England’s position in England and Normandy. In particular, William’s early contact on the Continent with the Anglo-French nobility opened up future avenues of support for him when he succeeded his brother in 1165.

21 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 208. Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 274–75, Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 214. Margaret and Ralph  IV were still alive in 1157. See Chapter 5 for details about the Tosnys and their role in Anglo-French politics. These marriages were intended to end the long-standing feud between the Tosnys and Beaumonts. For this same reason, Earl Robert II of Leicester married another daughter, Hawise, to Earl Robert of Gloucester’s son, William. Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 225. 23  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp.  93, 296, 346–47; Musset, ‘Origines d’une classe dirigeante’. Also see Chapter 5. 22 

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

155

The families from which the Les Andelys witnesses originated were typical examples of the cross-Channel elite who were soon involved in the royal courts of all three kings. For example, Philip de Coloummiers (d. c. 1185) provides an interesting case study of how men on both sides of the Channel maintained their connections and put Malcolm and William into contact with kin-networks in France — networks that had been based on loyalty to Stephen’s cause in the 1140s.24 In many cases, men who had fought against the Angevin claims prior to 1145 had changed sides following a shift in alliance patterns because of Geoffrey of Anjou’s successful campaigning in Normandy. Philip de Coloummiers was one of these men. He had been involved in the Norman administration alongside other men who would shortly also have Scottish connections, like Constable Richard I du Hommet of Normandy. Philip was probably from Colombières in Calvados, twenty kilometres west of Bayeux and only nine kilometres south of Hommet’s castle, Beaumont-leRichard. Both of their fees were also very near to the earl of Chester’s chief seat at Briquessart, and only about twenty kilometres northeast of Tribéhou, where possibly another Scottish affiliate, Richard Comyn, Lord of Northallerton castle,25 or a son of the same name, may have appeared as a witness in 1184 for a grant to the church at Tribéhou.26 24 

Recueil des actes d’Henri  II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 287–88, 291–92, 325–26, 486–87; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cl; Cf. Cartulaire de la Manche: abbaye de la Luzerne, ed. by du Bosc, pp. 14–17; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 44, 54, 63. Philip de Coloummiers also held substantial estates in Somerset (at Nether Stowey through his Chandos wife), East Anglia and other lands that he held of the count of Perche. He fought for King Stephen in 1141 at the siege of Winchester: History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 10, ll. 179–80; Thompson, Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France, pp. 175–76. 25  Liber vitae ecclesiae Dunelmensis, ed. by Stevenson, p. 100; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 226. Richard Comyn’s wife was Hextilda, daughter of Uchtred of Tynedale and of Bethoc, the daughter of Donald Bane (King David I’s uncle). Round, ‘The Origins of the Comyns’. 26  Cartulaire de la Manche: abbaye de la Luzerne, ed. by du Bosc, pp. 14–17. Richard Comyn, who appears in Normandy, witnessed at least two charters: one for William de Insula and one for Thomas de Piris in 1184 concerning grants to the church of Tribéhou, two kilometres south of Saint-André-de-Bohon in the Manche. Richard also appeared with William de Insula in 1174, the final year of the war against Henry II. The Anglo-Scottish Richard Comyn’s wife, Hextilda, remarried to Earl Malcolm of Atholl, in c. 1182, so this Richard could have been from a different family, which has been the assumption thus far, or he, or possibly a son of the same name, was the one involved with Continental networks affiliated with the church at Tribéhou. See Chapter 5 about dating Richard’s death to 1189 rather than 1182. The Richard who appears as a landowner in Lincolnshire at Humby in c. 1210 may have been a grandson. This suggestion makes sense since Humby is in the midst of fees that were part of the Scottish held honour of Huntingdon and the Hommets also held in Lincolnshire at Great

156

Chapter 4

Richard Hommet also held a fee in Great Limber, Lincolnshire.27 The Lin­ colnshire dimension of the Hommet lordship probably contributed to the family’s relationship with the Earl of Chester for Earl Ranulf had been fighting for control of Lincolnshire between 1140 and 1145 along with his half-brother, William de Roumare, Lord of Roumare (northwest of Rouen), Lord of Kendal (in Cumbria near Chester territory) and Lord of Bolingbroke (Lincolnshire).28 It may have been on Ranulf ’s behalf that both Richard du Hommet and Philip de Coloummiers despoiled the church of Bayeux in the early 1140s.29 They were reacting against Philip de Harcourt’s appointment to the see of Bayeux in 1142, which had been engineered by Philip’s patron and King Stephen’s man, Waleran de Beaumont.30 Richard’s decision to attack the church directly affected his own loyalties because his overlord in Calvados was the bishop of Limber and Stamford. Stamford is c. thirty-eight kilometres from Humby. The Hommets were very engaged with networks spilling over into Scotland and they were also patrons of the church at Tribéhou — see Chapter 5. Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 56, 78; Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 37; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 63; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 67; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 136–37, ll. 1841–45; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 285, 343. 27  Registrum Antiquissimum of the Cathedral Church of Lincoln, ed. by Major, pp. 181–86. 28  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 380; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 45, 53, 57, 70, 128, 136, 147, 211; Holt, ‘Feudal Society and the Family’, pp. 7–8. William de Roumare changed sides in 1143 to preserve the family’s territorial integrity and the King made him earl of Lincoln. 29  The Hommets held Langrune-sur-Mer and Beaumont-le-Richard and several other fees scattered throughout lower Normandy: Caen, Arch. Dpt du Calvados, MS H 912; Bates, ‘Notes sur l’Aristocratie Normande’, pp. 33–38. They had held their lands at Beaumont-le-Richard of the bishop of Bayeux, to whom they were related in the early twelfth century. Van Houts, ‘Wace as Historian’, p. 121; Lally, ‘Secular Patronage at the Court of Henry II’, pp. 176–77; History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 10, ll. 179–80. Richard du Hommet swore an oath of loy­­­alty to the bishop and handed over his customs in Luchon in c. 1144: Regesta Regum AngloNormannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 23. Philip’s family also held land at Asnières, only eight kilometres north of Colombières. The lords of Asnières had probably intermarried with the lords of Colombières in the late eleventh, early twelfth century. Both Lords fought alongside one another for Duke William of Normandy at Hastings according to Robert Wace. Robert Wace, Roman de Rou, ed. by Holden, p. 187, l. 8532. The abbey of Asnières was a recent Tironensian establishment and located in Maine just west of Nantes: Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 131–35; ii, 60, 65. 30  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, x, 69, 93, 157, 170–71, 195–96, 201, 237–38, 289–90; Bates, ‘Notes sur l’Aristocratie Normande’, pp. 34–35; White, ‘The Career of Waleran’, p. 30.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

157

Bayeux.31 Philip de Coloummier’s decision to join Richard in what may have been a pro-Angevin move was also fraught with difficulties. The Bayeux campaign coincided with the recent arrival of the Earl Walter III Giffard of Buckingham, who had crossed to Normandy to protect his own and King Stephen’s position against Count Geoffrey of Anjou in the Pays de Caux and the Cotentin.32 The arrival of Walter Giffard in Normandy complicated bonds of loyalty for both Philip and Richard since they both held fees of or near the Buckinghamshire Giffards in England. Philip de Coloummiers was even related to the Giffards through his wife, Matilda de Chandos, whose family held the castellany of Gisors and land at Flancourt-Catelon (less than six kilometres northeast of Montfort-sur-Risle in the Evrecin).33 Matilda and her son, Philip II de Coloummiers, even had a stake in the Giffard inheritance through her grandmother’s lineage and she was able to help her son extend the family’s interests into Somerset.34 Her daughter-in-law, another Matilda, owed service to the English King by c. 1167 for fees she held in Somerset at Puriton and Stawley.35 The Chandos/Giffard involvement in Somerset probably put these 31 

Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 22; ii, 881; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 608 b, 609 j, k, 612 f: The majority of the Hommet fees in Normandy (Le Hommet d’Arthenay), were in the Coutances where they held the honours of Hommet and Rumilly. Philip de Coloummiers’ family originated from Colombières in Calvados where they held Colombières and fees at Saint-Scolasse. Their overlords at Saint-Scolasse were Earl Robert of Gloucester and the bishop of Bayeux. 32  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 182; v, 296, 308; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 194. 33  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 342–45. Her grandfather was Henry I’s castellan of Gisors and Vicomte de Rouen, Robert de Chandos. They were undertenants of Hugh de Montfort. 34  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 97; Power, ‘The French Interests of the Marshal Earls’, p. 205. The claim to Giffard lands was made against the Marshal earl of Pembroke. Matilda’s grandmother, Isabel, was probably a sister of Walter III Giffard, Earl of Buckingham and Lord of Longueville. Isabel’s husband was probably also related to the Chandos Lords of Snodhill in Herefordshire. For Robert de Chandos probable grandson of the castellan of Gisors: Cf. Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 41, 86; Pipe Roll of Richard 9, pp. 195–96. Matilda is said to have been the daughter of Walter de Chandos and the wife of Philip de Coloummiers. Walter was a son of Robert and Isabel as appears in the grant to the priory at Goldcliffe: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 343; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 83; Power, ‘The French Interests of the Marshal Earls’, pp. 205–06. 35  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 44, 54, 63; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 403, 427, 429; ii, 914–15, 1465; Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, pp. 60–61. Matilda de Coloummiers also held in Suffolk.

158

Chapter 4

families into contact with the Scottish court before the Les Andelys charter.36 Robert de Chandos and Robert de Berkeley probably fought for the Angevins during the Succession War, and as already discussed, Somerset was an important centre of activity between the Scottish court and Anglo-French families even before David had become King.37 The Chandos kin group was very well-connected throughout Britain and in Lower Normandy. They also held land in the marches of Wales, at Caerleon and Goldcliff, which represented a nexus of support networks that spilled over into Somerset partially because of the lordship of the earl of Gloucester.38 An example of the family’s increasing interest in an Angevin-Gloucester alliance is evident in the patronage patterns of the family after 1147. Matilda’s grandparents, Isabel Giffard and Robert de Chandos, Vicomte de Rouen, and her uncle and father, Robert and Walter, made gifts to the priory of Sainte-MarieMadeleine of Goldcliff (Newport, Wales), a dependency of the abbey of Bec, as late as 1153, when the Earl of Gloucester, William, son of Earl Robert of Gloucester and King Malcolm’s cousin by marriage, also appeared as a witness for the Chandos family by virtue of Gloucester’s standing in Monmouthshire as Lord of Glamorgan.39 The Chandos family also held land of Glastonbury abbey from the early twelfth century, which brought them into a Lincolnshire orbit involving the abbey itself.40 36 

See Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 83; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 44, 231 about the knight-service Philip owed in Somerset. G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 101–03, 184–85. Puriton was about thirty kilometres from Castle Cary, which was held by an English branch of the Scottish Louvels at Hawick. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 163–66. 37  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 150–51; Earldom of Gloucester Charters, ed. by Patterson, p. 97; Charters of the Earldom of Hereford, ed. by Walker, pp. 22, 32–33. They were in the Earl of Gloucester’s mouvance so it is likely but not provable that they fought for him in the war. 38  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 342–44; Power, ‘The French Interests of the Marshal earls’, 205. The family had gained land at Caerleon and Goldcliffe in 1066. Robert Chandos may have known the famous pseudo-chronicler, Geoffrey of Monmouth, who was not only involved with Earl Robert’s court but he also had an interest in Caerleon. 39  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 53–55; Regesta Regum AngloNormannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, pp. 106–07; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 236–37. Earl Robert of Gloucester, Earl William’s father, had died in 1147. William decided not to support his Angevin cousin in the succession and by early 1149 he married the daughter of Earl Robert II of Leicester in order to end rivalry between the families. The abbey of Bec was a recipient of Norman patronage from several of these families in the Welsh borders and in the northeast frontier of Normandy. Chibnall, Piety, Power, and History, p. 279 on the Chandos family. 40  Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, p. 30.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

159

Cross-Channel pressure experienced by the Coloummier, Hommet and Chandos families was not uncommon. Philip de Coloummiers and Richard du Hommet were in a difficult position during the Succession War because they held lands of and near men who were on opposing sides. This was the case as can be seen not only in England but also in Normandy and not only because their lands were near those of the earl of Chester. Besides his wife’s family’s lordship in the marches of Wales near Gloucester, Philip de Coloummiers’ territorial position in Normandy at Colombiers-sur-Seulles was also only two kilometres from the earl of Gloucester’s fee at Creully and he owed fealty to the earl for fees he held at Saint-Scolasse.41 Furthermore, Richard du Hommet held land directly of the honour of Giffard (Buckingham family) at Long Crendon near Oxford, but this was also only about twenty kilometres from the Oxfordshire fees held by Earl Robert of Gloucester’s mother’s family.42 He had also gained lands in the honour of Say (Kirtlington in Oxfordshire, Aunay and Remilly) and the honour of Remilly in the Manche by c. 1140 through his wife, Agnes, daughter of Jordan de Say.43 Through his wife, he was also distantly related to William fitzDuncan of Moray, nephew of King David I.44 41 

Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 k, 617 e, 618 f, 700 e, 715 f. Earl Robert of Gloucester also held Évrecy and Gouvix near Bretteville-sur-Laise, in Calvados. Colombiers-sur-Seulles was also near the Soules family fees in the Manche (about sixty kilometres apart). Earl Robert’s second surviving son, Richard, inherited the Norman fees while an illegitimate son, Richard, became bishop of Bayeux probably through the influence of his uncle, the former bishop. The latter Richard’s mother’s family was from Douvres in Calvados and they brought more influence to Earl Robert’s ambitions through the family’s position at Bayeux as bishops. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 29–30. The Coloummiers held land in Wiltshire, Berkshire, Kent, Oxfordshire, Devon, Suffolk and Somerset by the thirteenth century: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 82, 403, 418–19, 427, 429; ii, 657, 660, 676–77, 707–08, 712, 714, 717, 722, 727, 745, 747, 751, 754, 782, 806, 815, 842, 846, 856, 881, 914–15, 1465. 42  Registrum Antiquissimum of the Cathedral Church of Lincoln, ed. by Major, vi, 185; Crouch, ‘Robert, First Earl of Gloucester’; Crouch, ‘Robert, Earl of Gloucester and the Daughter of Zelophehad’; Crouch, ‘Robert of Gloucester’s Mother’. Earl Robert’s mother was from the Gayt family at Hampton and Northbrook. 43  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxxxv; ii, xxxv; Early Yorkshire Charters, Hon­ our of Skipton, vii, 31–35; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 185; Power, ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans’, p. 110; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 609 j, k. Richard and Agnes’ son, William, succeeded to the honour after his father’s death. The Say family are another cross-Channel family who held land in Normandy and Scotland in the same generation. 44  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honour of Skipton, vii, v–ix, xi–xiii, 6, 8–13, 17, 19, 21–22, 24, 25, 31–35, 38–44, 58, 60–72, 74–79, 86–90, 103–04, 116, 146, 150–53, 158, 176, 181, 183,

160

Chapter 4

Loyalties were rapidly changing between 1141 and 1144 because of Angevin success on the Continent and in England. Victory against one man quickly spread to other members of the kin group and shifted support to different parties. For example, in 1143 the King’s attack on Earl Geoffrey de Mandeville of Essex and William de Say, who was the uncle of Richard du Hommet’s wife, probably contributed to Hommet’s decision to openly swear an oath of fealty to the bishop of Bayeux that was negotiated by Count Geoffrey of Anjou.45 The repercussion of this oath was that Richard found himself as one of the most high ranking officers in the Angevin court by the early 1150s.46 Richard’s overlord at Long Crendon, Earl Walter III Giffard, also abandoned his territories in England as early as 1142 with the express purpose of saving those he held in Normandy from the Count of Anjou, but before the end of 1143 he openly joined the Angevin cause.47 Geoffrey of Anjou’s success in Nor­ mandy also brought several men in the Cotentin into his camp. Certainly by the reign of Henry II, these families attended Henry’s court and Richard du Hommet in particular was advanced as Henry’s Constable of Normandy even

189, 192, 196, 202, 206, 222, 231–32, 234, 245, 248, 254, 263–65, 272–73, 277, 284, 288, 292–93; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, i, 352–53. They would have been loosely related by intermarriage with the Remilly family. William fitzDuncan married Alice de Remilly, lady of Skipton. Alice and Agnes were both granddaughters of Robert de Remilly. This was how Richard du Hommet probably gained land in Huntingdonshire — through his wife’s mother, Lucy de Remilly, sister of Cecily de Remilly, while William fitzDuncan gained the honour of Copeland through Cecily. Alice de Remilly’s sister, Avice, also married William II de Courcy and Avice and William gained lands in Lincolnshire through Avice’s father, William ‘le Meschin’. Alice and Avice also had a sister, Maud, who married Hugh de Mortemer of Wigmore, whose son, Roger, succeeded. Maud probably gained land in Kimbolton in Huntingdonshire held by her grandfather that was added to her husband’s fees in the frontier of Wales. 45  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 23. 46  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 145; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 209–10; Waltham Chronicle, ed. by Warkiss and Chibnall, pp. 78–80. Walter Giffard also held of the bishop of Bayeux at Maisy in the Bessin that fell to Richard du Hommet in c. 1164: Van Houts, ‘Wace as Historian’, p. 121; Power, ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans’, p. 111. 47  Norfolk Portion of the Cartulary of the Priory of St. Pancras of Lewes, ed. by Bullock, p. 17; Reading Abbey Cartularies, ed. by Kemp, i, 48, 209–10; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 194, 205–09, 224. Stephen confiscated the earldom of Buckingham and granted wardship to Earl Gilbert de Clare of Pembroke in c. 1143 after Walter’s defection but Gilbert also fell out with the King in 1147. Henry II then confiscated Walter Giffard’s honour at Longueville-surScie in 1164 because of a failure in the male line. Some of these lands were given to Richard du Hommet: Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, civ–cv, cvii, 59–60.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

161

before Henry became King.48 Furthermore, Richard du Hommet was one of the main recipients of the Giffard inheritance that was divided after the death of Walter III Giffard in c. 1164.49 At the beginning of Henry’s reign he was also granted Stamford, which he held of the earl of Huntingdon, along with the manor of Ketton in Lincolnshire.50 Connections between families in particular areas either through familial networks, like that of the Giffards, or through lordship patterns are illuminating and capture some of the reasons for why families chose to support one overlord over another when war threatened the kin group. Another witness of the Les Andelys charter, William de Colville, also had Lincolnshire, Bayeux and Scottish contacts. In 1157, William de Colville and Richard de la Hai, the Hayedu-Puits Lord in Lincolnshire and Sussex,51 appeared for pardons granted in Lincolnshire concerning murders committed in Scotland.52 It is possible that these murders were linked to the ongoing battle over the earldom of Lincoln headed by the Angevin appointed Earl, William de Roumare, and his brother, Earl Ranulf of Chester, against King Stephen’s formerly appointed candidate to the earldom, Gilbert de Gant.53 Colville may have been involved because he not only held Colleville-sur-Mer (northwest of Bayeux) of Earl Ranulf and appeared as a witness for Ranulf in England in the 1140s,54 but he may also 48 

Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, xxxvii, 22; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 82, 111, 541; Reading Abbey Cartularies, ed. by Kemp, i, 54–55, 57, 452; ii, 233; Power, ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans’, pp. 108–15. Richard du Hommet was in so many of Henry’s charters as Constable of Normandy that I have listed only a few. 49  Recueil des actes d’Henri  II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 29–30; ii, 16–17; Power, ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans’, pp. 110–16. This inheritance was added to land he held in Northamptonshire at Doddington. 50  Pipe Rolls of 2–4 Henry II, pp. 24, 40–41; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 195–96; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 15–17. King William’s brother, David, held the earldom from 1190. 51  Boussard, Le gouvernement d’Henri II Plantagenêt, p. 59. See Chapter 5 about Lin­ colnshire contacts and alliance patterns with Anglo-French Scots in the 1160s. 52  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 8; Levison, ‘A Combined Manuscript’, pp. 45–47. This was about the same time Malcolm IV returned Maiden’s castle at Bamburgh and his other rights in Northumberland to Henry II. 53  Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 121–25, 128. 54  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 702 e; Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 66–70, 79, 82–83, 91, 95, 119. William de Colville’s fee in Calvados was also only two kilometres from the Hommet castle of

162

Chapter 4

have held land in Yorkshire, where much of the conflict spilled over particularly in the 1150s. He was possibly the same William de Colville who witnessed in c. 1158 the grant of Coxwold, Oulston and Everley in York to his kinsmen, Thomas de Colville and Philip de Colville, the latter who was an Anglo-French Scottish lord.55 The Colvilles also soon became important to familial networks in Scotland through the Moubray family. The Yorkshire fees that William de Colville gained were previously held by Roger de Moubray.56 The relationship between the Colvilles and Moubrays led to further advancement for the Colvilles when Roger de Moubray’s son, Nigel, granted a carucate of land to Thomas de Colville at Melton Mowbray (Leicestershire) between 1166 and 1190.57 William de Colville, who witnessed at Les Andelys, was probably related to Philip de Colville, who first appeared in Scottish records in the reign of Malcolm IV. Philip may already have come into contact with Malcolm’s grandfather, King David, during the Succession War since he was holding Drax castle in Yorkshire for the Empress.58 After David’s death, Philip was given land in Harrold, Bedfordshire by King Malcolm and he also gained land in Carrick from Malcolm’s brother, King William, after 1165. He also held land at Heiton in Roxburghshire to which he had succeeded through the Percy family.59

Beaumont-le-Richard. He also witnessed with Radulph (Ralph) de Hai — see Chapter 5. I have been unable to prove with certainty that the Norman William de Colville is the same as the William de Colville who was Lord of Bytham in Lincolnshire but it certainly would make sense since both fees were in Chester territory. 55  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 191–92. Philip, Thomas and William all held fees near each other of the bishop of Durham which suggests some kind of a familial connection at least in England though the charters, not uncharacteristically, did not define the relationship: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 24–25, 30. 56  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 22, 23, 25, 38, 41, 44–45, 50, 69, 90, 101, 106–07, 143–44, 148, 163, 167–68, 177, 198, 203–04, 208, 211, 222, 227–28, 231, 234–35, 248, 253; Welby, ‘Bytham Castle’, Thomas de Colville witnessed for the Moubrays. 57  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 15–16, 135–37, 229. 58  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 185, 199, 219, 226, 229, 232, 235, 271, 273, 287; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 38, 41, 44–45, 50, 69, 90, 101, 106–07, 143–44, 148, 163, 167–68, 177, 198, 203–04, 208, 211, 222, 227–28, 231, 234–35, 248, 253; Bartlett, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, p. 81; G. Barrow, The AngloNorman Era, p. 177. Bartlett and Barrow note the same familial connection between William and Philip. 59  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 185, 199, 219, 226, 229, 232, 235, 271, 273, 287; English, The Lords of Holderness, p. 43; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 177.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

163

As can be seen, the Colville family were not strangers to the Anglo-French and Scottish courts. Prior to 1153, William de Colville witnessed for Earl Ranulf IV of Chester and for Henry, as Duke of Normandy, alongside Joscelin de Bailleul (brother of Bernard I de Bailleul, Lord of Barnard Castle),60 Radulph de la Hai,61 Hugh Bardulf, Manasser Bisset,62 William de Vescy, and Richard du Hommet.63 All of these men and their extended families were involved with the Scottish court or were developing such contacts at this stage, partially because of their involvement in Angevin politics. Furthermore, Scottish interest in fostering relations with Calvados lords may have been filtered through their own continuing contact with the earls of Chester, whose fees were scattered amongst their own in England and against whom they had intermittently fought for control of Lancashire and Lincolnshire.64 These contacts continued throughout the century. William Malherbe of the Ornois ? William (fl. 1180)

Ewen (fl. 1159)

Hugh of Rossie late 12th century Hugh of Rossie c. 1212

Thomas of Balneaves Figure 4. Malherbe family tree.

60 

See Chapter 3 about Bernard I Wagner, ‘The Origin of the Hays of Erroll’. See Chapter 5 about Hais. 62  Lally, ‘Secular Patronage at the Court of Henry II’, pp. 181–82; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 319, 394, 491. Like Coloummiers and Hommet, Manasser Bisset, also a Norman by birth, held a fee of the honour of Giffard in England. He also held several fees in Hampshire and a fee in Buckinghamshire (Preston Bisset). These men with land in the honour of Giffard were loyal to King Henry II after 1153. Manasser was the first Bisset to settle in England. See Chapter 5 about Bissets. 63  Welby, ‘Bytham Castle’; Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 66, 68–69, 78–79, 80–83, 90–91, 94–95, 118–19; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 78. 64  C.  P.  Lewis, ‘The Formation of the Honor of Chester’; Green, ‘Earl Ranulf  II and Lancashire’. Contact between David I and Earl Ranulf was particularly frequent as each strove for control of Lancashire and Lincolnshire between the 1130s and 1153. 61 

164

Chapter 4

The last witness at Les Andelys, John Malherbe, represents another example of how families may have moved from lordships in Normandy into England and Scotland.65 The Malherbes probably entered Scotland both by virtue of their interaction with Malcolm IV and because they held fees of the Anglo-French Moubrays in lower Normandy. The Moubrays will be discussed in the following chapter but they were a very influential family in England and Normandy who settled in Scotland in the 1180s. It is reasonable to suggest that the first mentioned Anglo-French Scottish Malherbe, William, may have been the same who held Neuvy-au-Houlme and lands at Bazoches-en-Houlme of the Lords of Moubray in the honour of Montbray in c. 1180.66 He may also have been related to (son of ?) the ‘Willelmus’ Malherbe who witnessed in 1126 for the family’s overlord in the Ornois, the count of Perche.67 ‘Willelmus’ Malherbe, who settled in Scotland, did have a brother, called ‘Ewen’, anglicized ‘John’, to whom William had given his lands at Balneaves (see Figure 4 above).68 This Ewen may have been the witness at Les Andelys who also appears in Mortain as a witness for Count William of Blois and for Henry II in c. 1160 and in c. 1175.69 The family can still be found in Scotland as late as 1211 when William’s descendant, Hugh Malherbe, gave some of the family’s land in Angus at Rossie to Arbroath Abbey.70 Further evidence for William Malherbe’s kinship to the Norman Malherbes, if even they were not the same men with the same names, can be found in the naming practices of the family across the Channel and in their involvement 65 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 208. This charter of Malcolm IV is the first surviving mention of the Malherbes in relation to the King of Scotland. The Malherbes were Lords of Morham in East Lothian. 66  G.  Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p.  177; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619 k. 67  Cartulaire de Marmoutier pour le Perche, ed. by Barret, p. 43. The count of Perche only held the lordship until William Talvas was able to regain it during the Succession War. 68  See Liber S. Thome de Aberbrothoc, ed. by Innes and Chalmers, i, 6, 42, 43, 68–69, 146; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 65–68, 74, 77, 78–79 about Malherbes and especially pp. 68–69 about ‘Ewen’, uncle of William’s son, Thomas. Ewen had sons, Richard and John. Cf. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 352; Liber S. Thome de Aberbrothoc, ed. by Innes and Chalmers, i, 65 about William Malherbe’s Scottish lands that were in Angus at Kinnell. 69  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 275, 285; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 52. 70  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 455–56, 464. The King’s natural son, Robert, and his nephew, Henry of Huntingdon, also witnessed the confirmation of the grant in 1211. Hugh’s father was also called Hugh.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

165

with cross-Channel families. There was already a steady stream of communication between Scottish affiliated families, who held fees in lower Normandy, that was centred around service and patronage to Le Mont Saint-Michel and to the abbey of Savigny.71 There is no definitive proof of the Moubray connection with the Malherbes but it is a suggestion for the origins of this family, which is very convincing considering consistent participation of the Moubrays and Malherbes in Normandy until 1204 and the near simultaneous appearance of the Malherbes and Moubrays in Scotland by 1180.72

Malcolm and his Native Nobility For Malcolm IV, the prestige offered by his involvement with the Anglo-French court was the key to elevating the status of Scotland with her noble peers. The Les Andelys charter offers only one brief glimpse at how intercommunication between cross-Channel families and the Scottish court may have occurred. Malcolm’s journey to France was from his standpoint a success. He had created new bonds with the Anglo-French nobility while on his travels, which were particularly important after such a long estrangement from the AngloFrench court. The Scottish kings had become more insular over the past fifteen years because King David had spent the final years of his reign focused on consolidating his authority in Scotland, which continued as a royal policy during his grandson Malcolm’s minority. It was not until Malcolm assumed the reins of government in c. 1157 that this inward looking policy began to change. Alliance patterns and the very structure of the Anglo-French world had drastically changed in the years between David’s death and Malcolm’s assumption of power. A new unified Angevin-Norman empire was upsetting the political balance of Western France, particularly as Henry II began to assert his authority in territories where his rights were questionable.

71  This interaction will be discussed in the following chapter but involved families like the Hommets, Soules, Hais, Roses, Colvilles, and Fougères. 72  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 618–19; Charters of the Honour of Mow­ bray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 240, 256–57. An earlier Hugh Malherbe was given fees by Roger de Moubray in mid-century and he was one of Roger’s men along with Thomas de Colville and Robert de Busci. He may also have been the Hugh, who performed service for Henry at Le Mont Saint-Michel in 1154. See Chapter 5 about the Moubrays. The family favoured the names William, John, and Hugh on both sides of the Channel.

Chapter 4

166

It was with an astute eye that the Scottish court recognized the increasing need to be more directly involved with France, and in this regard Malcolm successfully drew attention to his position as a royal peer. For his service at Toulouse in 1159, Henry knighted Malcolm at Périgueux and Malcolm was able to return to his kingdom as a European potentate.73 For Malcolm, receiving the knighthood was not just about prestige. The role and understanding of knighthood was evolving in the latter twelfth century and was becoming increasingly formalized. For a king, there was a new legalistic and authoritative sense affiliated with knighthood.74 This can be seen in a few years by the royal claim to have the sole right to make knights: Il aime miols cevax a acater Et bieles armes por vallés adober Quie il ne face tresors, a amasser En iretage le volt enfin clamer Que qui volra le roi desireter Qu’il doit en ost ensamble o lui aller Porter ses armes et son cheval mener Et soi conbatre sans lui desordener.75

Knighting also signalled a crossing over into maturity and coming of age, which Malcolm needed to be able to take up the kingship after his minority.76 However, there was a cost to building up his Anglo-French courtly image. After the relinquishment of crown lands in 1157, his native nobility may have had reserva-

73  Chronica de Mailros, p.  76; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p.  33; Geoffrey of Vigeois, Chronica, in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xii, 439; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 217. 74  By the early thirteenth century, this formalization was complete and could be seen not only in legal documents but also in literature. The romance of Li Chevaliers as deus espees referred explicitly to the knight’s duty to attend the king or risk disseisment: Schmolke-Hasselmann, The Evolution of Arthurian Romance, pp. 57–59. 75  La Chanson d’Aspremont, ed. by Brandin, i, ll. 108–15: ‘Let no man henceforth consider that he may make knights in his own land. They should come to the royal court when it is assembled. The king will give to each a sword and a shield, arms and horses, weapons and money in return for their chief allegiance [specifically to not depose the king].’ Cf. Crouch, The Birth of Nobility, p. 244 on quote and pp. 7–86 on the development of chivalry and the knight. Cf. Barthélemy, ‘Modern Mythologies of Medieval Chivalry’ for an excellent reassesment of the development of chivalry and the knight in the Middle Ages. 76  Crouch, The Birth of Nobility, p. 246.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

167

tions about the King’s apparent need for Henry’s approval.77 Malcolm’s involvement on the Continent may have even been viewed as an act of submission or at the very least a lack of concern for the native interests of his kingdom particularly when the men who accompanied him were primarily Anglo-French.78 Upon Malcolm’s return to Scotland, Ferteth, Earl of Strathearn, besieged the King at Perth Castle with six earls who were ‘enraged against the King because he had gone to Toulouse’.79 After the Perth incident, Malcolm then had to lead three large expeditions into Galloway to put down another revolt, which may not have been linked to the earl’s rebellion.80 A joint campaign between Earl Ferteth, Somerled of the Isles, and Fergus of Galloway seems odd initially because Ferteth appeared as a royal witness at Edinburgh concerning the royal grant of the church at Perth and its appurtenances to Dunfermline Abbey before the King’s departure for Toulouse.81 However, Earl Ferteth may have per­­ceived the King’s interference in the Earl’s church and castle at Perth as a personal threat to his position once he had time to reconsider the grant.82 The tendency by more recent historians has been to see the rising at Perth as separate from the campaign into Galloway mainly because it appears odd that Ferteth and his allies would flee as far as Galloway from Perth.83 The distances that most members of the nobility travelled during the Succession War, or even in the Western Isles to fulfill service to their Norwegian overlord, makes this argument less convincing but only as long as Fergus of Galloway was seen as a viable ally of the rebels. The chronicles have further confused the matter by 77  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 105. Malcolm relinquished Cumberland, Westmoreland, and Northumberland to Henry II in 1157. Although these were English lands, they constituted a measure of control over the southern border with England so were important in terms of defence. 78  Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 80–81; D. Brooke, ‘Fergus of Galloway’. The force at Perth may have more specifically been directed against the King’s willingness to serve the King of England abroad. The exact reasons for the revolt are not explained by the sources. 79  Chronica de Mailros, p. 77: ‘[…] irati contra regem quia perrexit Tolosam […]’. 80  Chronica de Mailros, p. 77; Sir Thomas Gray of Heton, Scalacronica, p. 39. 81  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 209. 82  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 21, 71, 75, 81, 95–96. These were charters in which the native earls appeared because they involved the most significant foundations in Scotland — Glasgow, Dunfermline, and Haddington. Earl Ferteth’s father had never become a prominent member of the King’s court, appearing only a handful of times in royal charters. 83  D. Brooke, ‘Fergus of Galloway’; Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 80–81; Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 118–22.

168

Chapter 4

only mentioning that the King took a force three times into Galloway after he was besieged at Perth.84 Without further evidence, it is difficult to understand what was behind these risings, but it would be reasonable to suggest that Fergus and Somerled were at least believed by the King to be involved together in the 1160 rebellion in Galloway. Fergus retired from public life about this time and Somerled was apparently ‘received back into favour’ shortly thereafter.85 Another reason to believe that an alliance was negotiated against the King among western magnates is based on known conflicts in Galloway even before the King’s departure for Toulouse. Fergus of Galloway’s son, Uchtred, was witnessing at Roxburgh in 1159 for King Malcolm alongside his cousin, Godred, King of Man and of the Isles, and Uchtred did not appear to be supporting his father’s rebellion in 1160.86 In fact, this charter, which was made before the King’s departure, may represent a confederation between King Malcolm, Uchtred and Godred, each wishing to protect their interests against Fergus and Somerled during the King’s absence. However, the King’s decision to go abroad when the west was still so unsettled was impractical especially when the King’s steward in Renfrewshire, Walter fitzAlain, accompanied the King to Toulouse.87 It was only by leading several campaigns upon his return that he was able to reassert his authority in the western and south-western reaches of his kingdom, but his journey to the Continent was not a complete loss. He was ultimately able to prove himself militarily and he was also able to forge closer ties with western France through a series of marital alliances.

84 

Chronica de Mailros, p.  77; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 33. 85  Chronica de Mailros, p.  77; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 33; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 239 n. 2. Fergus was not always an enemy of the King of Scots. He did serve King David against Stephen’s army in the 1130s. Oram, ‘Fergus, Galloway, and the Scots’. 86  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 192–95. 87  As far as is known Walter fitzAlain made it to Toulouse with the King. He was mentioned in the Les Andelys charter. His lands were strategic in the royal defence of the western reaches of the kingdom. He held in demesne Renfrew and Paisley, and Dundonald, Prestwick, Mauchline, and Auchinleke in Ayrshire and lands in East Lothian, Berwickshire, and Roxburghshire. G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 315–26.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

169

Brittany and Holland — Royal Alliance The King’s journey to the Continent was a success from one particular point of view. His preoccupation with forging foreign alliances while abroad led to two royal Scottish marriages with powerful and influential families on the Continent. It was probably while campaigning with Henry  II at Toulouse that a betrothal was contracted between Malcolm’s sister, Margaret, and Duke Conan IV of Brittany, Earl of Richmond, and son of Count Alain ‘le Noir’.88 Evidence for the negotiation of the Breton marriage at Toulouse is convincing considering that several Bretons were numbered among the lords serving Henry in the campaign.89 Henry may very well have allowed the Breton marriage, hoping initially to secure the Duke of Brittany’s and the King of Scots’ continuing amity, though both parties would be less accommodating by 1165. Another discussion may also have occurred during the Toulouse campaign concerning the marriage of Malcolm’s other sister, Ada, to Florence III, Count of Holland, which was finalized in 1162.90 The marriage of Conan and Margaret has been assumed to have been brokered by Henry II but there are reasons to believe that Henry may not have been the only or even the prime mover of the negotiations.91 One of the men who crossed to Normandy with Malcolm in 1159 was Walter fitzAlain, who as discussed, had intimate contact with Brittany through his brother, Jordan and Jordan’s son, Alain. Walter had entered Scotland with David I in c. 1136 after which he became an important royal agent in the western frontier of Scotland. His brother, Jordan, and nephew, Alain, were the dapifers of Dol and they continued holding the family’s Breton and English estates, near Dol and in Lincolnshire, respectively.92 88 

Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 636, 638. Alain ‘le Noir’ is the same who supported King Stephen during the Succession War as discussed in Chapter 3. Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, p. 66. 89  ‘William fitzStephen’s Chronicle’, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iii, 33, 142; Jaeger, Ennobling Love, pp. 104–05. 90  Kossmann-Putto, ‘Florence V, Count of Holland’. Dr Kossmann-Putto suggests that the marriage was arranged by Frederick Barbarossa but there is no recorded direct contact with Frederick and the Scottish court. 91  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 48. Conan may have gained fees in Huntingdon through this marriage. 92  M. Jones, The Creation of Brittany, pp. 87–89; M. Jones, The Family of Dinan, pp. 20, 30; M. Jones, ‘Les branches anglaises des seigneurs de Dinan’, pp. 221–22; M. Jones, ‘Notes sur

170

Chapter 4

Scottish-Breton contact was ensured because families, like the fitzAlains, had settled in Scotland and brought patronage networks with them, binding the two communities together across the Channel. Such interaction also reinvigorated the Tironensian movement simultaneously in Brittany and in Scotland. Duke Conan  IV’s father, Conan  III, began to patronize the Tironensians by making a donation of land near Nantes between 1132 and 1146, and at about the same time (in 1144), King David founded Lesmahagow church in Lanarkshire as a cell of Kelso at the urging of Bishop John Capellanus of Glasgow, the Tironensian monk recruited by Bernard of Abbeville discussed in Chapter 2.93 Breton fitzAlain influence in Scotland is also evident in the decision to dedicate Lesmahagow to one of the seven founding saints of Brittany, Saint-Malo, whose abbey in Brittany was very important to networks around Dol.94 These networks were strong on both sides of the Channel. Between 1164 and 1172, Walter’s nephew at Dol, Alain, founded a church at Tronchet from his English and Breton fees, which was also attached to SainteTrinité de Thiron.95 Scottish contact with Bretons through the fitzAlains and through the King’s sister was important. This communication gave the King of Scots access to frontier networks with lower Normandy and in particular with men important to the Duke of Brittany’s struggle against Henry from 1163 onward. Walter’s nephew, Alain, was in the mouvance of John of Dol as his dapifer and he was an ally of the man who was appointed guardian of John’s daughter — Ralph de Fougères. Ralph was one of the men in rebellion against Henry II by c. 1163,

quelques familles bretonnes en Angleterre’, pp. 80–81; Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, p. 282; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, i, 10; G. Barrow, ‘Wales and Scotland in the Middle Ages’, p. 303. Jordan’s English estates were in Lincolnshire, which went to his younger son. The older son, Alain, continued as seneschal of Dol. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p.  441; Round, Studies in Peerage and Family History, pp. 115–31; Ellis, ‘Fleance’. 93  Recueil d’actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne, ed. by de la Borderie, pp. 75–76; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 116. Walter was not present at the Lesmahagow grant but another Anglo-French lord involved with the Breton-Norman families on the Continent, Richard Comyn, also made a gift of West Linton church to the Tironensian Kelso Abbey in c. 1165. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 168, 190, 202, 245. 94  Charters of King David  I, ed. by Barrow, p.  116; Grant, ‘Lordship and Society’, pp. 113–14; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 71–72. 95  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 90; M. Jones, ‘Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes en Angleterre’, pp. 91–92. Tronchet is near Rennes.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

171

and he was also a close friend and ally of Duke Conan IV, who was in turn the brother-in-law of Malcolm IV and William I of Scotland.96 Scottish interest in aligning with the Breton court also led to negotiations for a projected marriage between the sister of Conan IV, Constance, and Malcolm IV, in 1160, but the marriage never took place because of Constance’s reluctance to marry a Scot when she was in love with Louis VII.97 Constance was married instead to Alain III, Viscount de Rohan, sometime before 1167,98 and she received dower lands in the honour of Richmond, which meant she was still interacting with men familiar with the Scottish court.99 Conan’s other sister, Ennoguent, was never offered to Malcolm because she had joined the religious house at Saint Sulpice-la-Forêt alongside her cousin, a daughter of Conan’s dispossessed uncle, Hoël.100 The marriages negotiated by Malcolm IV in 1160 and 1162 provided the King of Scotland with direct contact with the Continent, but may also have been intended to deal with some of the problems within Scotland and along the western seaboard. For example, the 1162 marriage of Ada of Scotland to Florence III, Count of Holland, may have been specifically associated with a dower in Scottish territory. According to the late thirteenth-century document known as the ‘Appeal of the Seven Earls’, the Count of Holland was offered the earldom of Ross as

96 

Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 567–68, 597, 632–33. Jordan’s son, Alain, can be found possibly as early as 1133 with John, Lord of Dol, when John negotiated the resolution to the conflict between the monks of Marmoutier and Combour in 1133. He was certainly with John when he made a grant in 1145 to the church of Saint Salvator. The Breton fitzAlains were part of these frontier networks and thus not necessarily always advocates of the ducal cause but Alain did appear witnessing for Conan IV alongside Reginald, Earl of Cornwall (half-brother of Empress Matilda), Ralph de Fougères and the Dinans and Vitrés in the late 1150s and in 1162. Alain also witnessed for the archdeacon of Dol concerning concessions to the church of Saint Magloire de Lehon. 97  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xvi, 23. 98  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 653–55: Alain was from a collateral branch of the main Porhoët line at Josselin and he was a cousin of Eudo de Porhoët, who will shortly be discussed in detail. Alain III called Eudo his ‘cognato meo’. 99  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 662, 696–98; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp.  18, 84–85; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 46, 62; Chédeville and Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale, p. 158 100  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 663. By the tone of this charter, Conan seemed to be fond of this sister. He conceded to his sister and to Saint-Sulpice her lands at Merle in remission of his sins.

172

Chapter 4

his marriage portion.101 The problem with this claim is that it derives from an account given in 1290/91 that was intended to prove and to elevate a claim made by the counts of Holland to the throne of Scotland.102 That lands were given in dower is certainly believable but the lands granted were not necessarily an entire earldom or even in Ross.103 If the claim in the ‘Appeal’ is considered within its historical context, how­­­ever, there is reason to believe that lands in Ross were given to Florence. Malcolm IV was struggling to control the earldom of Ross against Malcolm MacHeth, a local lord who was released from Roxburgh in 1157.104 Malcolm MacHeth was probably the son of Aed, Earl of Ross, a son of Donald and grandson of Malcolm III and possibly of Ingeborg of Orkney, which would explain his reasons for rebelling and why he was believed to have royal lineage. It would also explain why it was deemed necessary to incarcerate him rather than just kill him.105 Malcolm was stirring trouble against the crown in the mid-twelfth century, and it is certainly conceivable that he was involved with other rebels who also appeared in the west and in Galloway at the same time.106

101 

John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 256; Documents and Records Illustrating the History of Scotland, ed. by Palgrave, p. 20–21. A century later Florence’s descendant pushed his claim to the earldom. Florence VII of Holland complained that the counts of Holland held only the title to the earldom of Ross, had never been forfeited, and yet the issues of the earldom had for long been withheld. G. Barrow, Robert Bruce, pp. 44–45. 102  G. Barrow, Robert Bruce, pp. 39–49. 103  Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, p. 204; Kossmann-Putto, ‘Florence V, Count of Holland’, pp. 15, 17, 19. 104  Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 38; Chronica de Mailros, p. 76; McDonald, ‘Soldiers Most Unfortunate’, pp. 97–98; McDonald, ‘Treachery in the Remotest Territories of Scotland’, pp. 3–4; Woolf, ‘The “Moray Question”’, p. 150. 105  Grant, ‘The Province of Ross and the Kingdom of Alba’, pp. 108–09. It may have been more difficult to justify murdering a member of the royal lineage to a native population. The kings of Scots would alter this policy and try to annihilate another rival, the MacWilliams, in the thirteenth century but this was because they had been forced to lead expeditions against them several times between c. 1185 and 1230. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 70–72; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 71–72: Aed witnessed for King David I. 106  Chronica de Mailros, pp. 70–71, 79, Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p.  31; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 276–77; McDonald, ‘Treachery in the Remotest Territories of Scotland’, pp. 3, 7; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, p. 166.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

173

As early as 1153, Somerled of the Isles led an uprising against the King on behalf of his nephews, whose cause he was supporting,107 and he also made advances in the Western Isles, taking much of what was held by his brother-inlaw, Godred, King of Man and of the Hebrides, whom he drove out of Man in 1158 (which may be why the confederation between King Malcolm, Godred, and Uchtred was necessary in 1159).108 The King of Scotland’s authority in the north was under serious threat as the Norwegian overlord of the Isles, King Eystein of Norway, also attacked Aberdeen and some eastern towns in 1151.109 Clearly, discontent was brewing in the west and in Galloway well before the rebellion of 1160 and it was tied to networks in Ross.110 It is important to stress that disturbances in the west and north were occurring well before King Malcolm’s submission to Henry II in 1157. These problems existed as far back as his grandfather’s reign, which led to a restructuring of the northern and western approaches to David’s kingdom immediately following the defeat of Óengus, Earl of Moray, and ‘Melcolf ’, an illegitimate son of Alexander I.111 The extension of royal authority by the introduction of the centralizing organization of ecclesiastical foundations at Urquhart and Kinloss in Moray (c. 1135) and the advancement of men loyal to the King in the north, like Maddad, Earl of Atholl (possibly the King’s cousin) and his son Harald, had been central to the extension of royal authority.112 The King had also advanced his half-nephew, William fitzDuncan, and men like the Bruses, Avenels, Soules, fitzAlains and Morevilles in the west and southwest to further safeguard the royal position.113 107 

Chronica de Mailros, p. 69; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 31. 108  Chronica Regum Manniae, ed. by Munch, pp. 10–12; S. Duffy, ‘Irishmen and Islemen’. Somerled was asked in 1156 by the nobility of Man to establish his son, Dugald, in the Isles against Godred. Godred was also King of Dublin very briefly. 109  Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 139–40, 181–82; Oram, David I, pp. 100–01, 198–99. 110  D. Brooke, ‘Fergus of Galloway’, pp. 54–55. Brooke suggests that Fergus may have begun raiding into Nithsdale and Clydesdale in 1159, which, if this was the case, called for Malcolm’s immediate attention when he returned. 111  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 276–77; Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, pp. 66–67; Oram, Domination and Lordship, pp. 66, 70–72, 86–88, 106, 112, 120–21, 148, 303, 367. 112  Oram, David I, pp. 97, 233. 113  Oram, David I, pp. 89–119; G. Barrow, ‘The Pattern of Lordship and Feudal Settlement’,

174

Chapter 4

Although peace was made with Somerled and Fergus by 1160, Malcolm IV may have thought that lands in Ross in the hands of the Count of Holland could be a safeguard against further insurrections. Flemings had come to the aid of King David in Moray, perhaps men from Holland could do the same in Ross and certainly colonization had been a continuing policy of the Kings of Scots.114 However, Florence III of Holland never pushed his claim to Ross if it had existed. Florence was experiencing his own problems with Thierry, Count of Flanders, between 1158 and 1166, and so did not have the resources at that time to make good any claims from afar. As such, the northern territories continued to be problematic. King Malcolm was still experiencing trouble in Moray in 1163 when he returned from Woodstock where he had once again submitted to Henry II alongside the princes of Wales.115 Ultimately the King must have given into Malcolm MacHeth’s demands since MacHeth had taken the title ‘Earl’ of Ross by 1168.116 The Hollandais’ claim to Ross lay dormant for another one hundred and thirty years.117 Despite the failure of a successful settlement of Hollandais families in the north of Scotland, the marriage of Ada to Florence did affect Scotland’s continuing relations with key political figures in northern France particularly in the thirteenth century. Ada and Florence’s sons, Dirk, William and Florence, pp. 131–36. The construction of royal castles at Elgin, Forres, Auldearn, and Inverness complemented the King’s royal presence in the north. He also created bishoprics in the north at Moray, Ross, and Caithness to introduce less aggressive agents into these rebellious regions, which could theoretically be protected by the umbrella of spiritual, God-given authority. The Ottonians had built their dynasty on this system of government in the tenth century. 114  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 18; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, pp. 46, 51–53, 63. King Henry I of England had probably introduced David to the idea of colonizing the north with men from Flanders. Henry I also used Fleming settlers to integrate parts of Wales, especially in the south, into the Anglo-French feudal structure. Cf. Gerald of Wales, Itinerarium Kambriae, ed. by John Brewer and others, vi, 83, 87. 115  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 311; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 218. Malcolm IV had made earlier attempts to curb activities in Moray when he granted lands to Berowald the Fleming in 1160. He also moved the men of Moray out of the region, possibly following another outbreak of violence in 1163: Monachi Anonymi Scoti Chronicon Anglo-Scoticum, ed. by Bouterwek, p. 40; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 251. Also see John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 256; Toorians, ‘Twelfth-Century Flemish Settlement in Scotland’; G. Barrow, ‘Scotland, Wales, and Ireland’. 116  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 8; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 151. 117  Documents and Records Illustrating the History of Scotland, ed. by Palgrave, pp. 20–21.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

175

were to continue communicating with their Scottish uncle and in particular, the youngest son, Florence, was offered a key position in Scotland as Bishopelect of Glasgow between 1202 and 1207.118 Ada and Florence’s children and grandchildren made further marriages that potentially opened up involvement with the courts at Clèves, Guelders, Loos, Brabant, Thuringia, Brunswick, and Brandenburg.119 In particular, the marriage of their son, William, to Aleida of Guelders was directly intended to end a long-standing dispute with the count of Guelders over territories between the two counties.120 The importance that the counts of Holland placed on marital contacts was significant and sometimes bordered on the incestuous. William and Aleida’s son, Florence IV of Holland, married Mathilda of Brabant, whose great-greatgrandmother was Mary of Scotland. Mary had married Eustache of Boulogne and was therefore the great-great aunt of Florence. Furthermore, Florence’s father, Count William I of Holland, had also married in 1220 as his second wife the sister of Florence IV’s own wife, Marie of Brabant, making William of Holland 118 

Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 354–55; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, p. 209; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 30–31, 33, 60–61, 85, 89, 113–14, 409, 424, 427, 430, 435–36, 440, 532. Professor Barrow is perhaps too dismissive of Florence’s role in Scotland because he did not arrive to accept the post until as late as 1205 although he may have made a brief visit to Scotland between February 1202 and November 1203 when he possibly fathered a child by the Mortemer family. Pollock, ‘The Lion Rampant’; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’ , Chapter 1. 119  See Appendix, Figure 20: Counts of Holland. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 30, 60–61. Dirk VII (or Thierry) married Adelheid of Clèves and his brother, William, married Aleida of Guelders (died 1218) and Maria of Brabant (died 1260). Dirk’s daughter, Ada, married Louis, Count of Loos: Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, ii, 103, 194, 231, 261, 299, 307, 383, 469, 470, 507, 550. William, Florence, and Dirk’s uncle was also Dirk, Bishop of Utrecht (d. 1197), who was probably responsible for helping Florence gain his position at Utrecht in 1196: ‘Beka’s Egmondscii Necrologium’ in Fontes Egmundenses, ed. by Oppermann, p. 110. Another sister, Agnes, was Abbess of Rijnsburg, near Leiden, a position she probably gained because of her aunt, Sophia, who was the former abbess. William of Holland also had a son and daughter, Otto and Ada, who filled both posts at Utrecht and Rijnsburg after their great-aunt, Sophia, Aunt Agnes, and great-uncle, Dirk’s deaths: Chronographia Johannis de Beke, ed. by Bruch, pp. 141, 197. Rijnsburg in particular had a special place in the Holland family’s patronage networks. Gertrude (Petronilla) of Lorraine married Count Florence II of Holland and founded the abbey of Rijnsberg in 1133 and died in 1144 (pp. 93, 99). Cf. Annales Egmundani, ed. by Pertz, p. 456, year 1144; p. 470, year 1186 about Sophia and Gertrude. Cf. Chronographia Johannis de Beke, ed. by Bruch, p. 101; Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, ii, 232, 299, 303, 372, 376. Sophia was Abbess of Rijnsberg in 1186. 120  Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, ii, 193.

176

Chapter 4

not only father but also brother-in-law of Florence IV.121 Another marriage was also contracted between Florence IV’s son, King William II, and Elisabeth, the daughter of Otto of Lüneberg and Matilda of Brandenburg.122 Elisabeth was the great-granddaughter of Ada, sister of William I, Count of Holland, or Ada’s great-niece by marriage.123 The marriages of Ada and Florence’s daughters were also of equal importance to the family. Margaret was married to Thierry  IV, Count of Clèves (d. 1193) in c. 1182, and they had one son, Thierry V, who succeeded to Clèves after his father’s death.124 Thierry V’s children later intermarried with the house of Brabant and Guelders.125 Ada and Florence’s second daughter, Ada (or Adelheid) also made an important marriage in 1176, when she married Otto I, margrave of Brandenburg (d. 1205), son of Albert ‘the Bear’,126 and their only 121  Chronographia Johannis de Beke, ed. by Bruch, p. 163; Genealogia Ducum Brabantiæ Heredum Franciæ, p. 390; Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland, ed. by Van den Bergh, i, 187. William and his second wife did not have issue though. 122  Chronicon Sancti Michaelis Luneburgensis, ed. by Pertz and Weiland, p. 397; Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Pertz, p. 476. She married William, King of Germany and Count of Holland, in 1252: Annales Erphordenses, ed. by Pertz, pp. 38–39; Chronographia Johannis de Beke, ed. by Bruch, p. 185. Florence IV had also been betrothed to Mathilde, daughter of the duke of Lotharingia in 1214: Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, ii, 412. 123  See Appendix, Figure 20: Counts of Holland; Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Pertz, pp. 476–78. The marriage of Otto II of Brandenburg to Count William I’s sister, Ada, is not certain but likely based on the chronology, but the official interpretation of the evidence is that Ada had married Otto I and was thus the great-grandmother of Elisabeth. Cf. Codex diplomaticus Brandenburgensis, ed. by Riedel, i, 2. 124  Annales Egmundani, ed. by Pertz, p. 469, year 1182. 125  Genealogia Ducum Brabantiæ Heredum Franciæ, pp. 7, 390; Ernst, Histoire de Limbourg, pp. 247, 250, 253, 255–56. Thierry V’s son, Thierry, Lord of Dinslaken, married Elisabeth, daughter of Henry I, Duke of Brabant, and of Marie de France, the latter who was negotiated in marriage to King William of Scotland’s son, Alexander, c. 1201. Elisabeth and Thierry’s daughter, Marguerite de Clèves, married Otto II, count of Guelders, who remarried after the death of Marguerite de Clèves and had a daughter by this marriage also called Marguerite who married Thierry VII of Clèves, but they were not related by blood. The latter Marguerite (second wife after Marguerite de Clèves) and Otto’s daughter, Marguerite of Guelders, married Enguerrand IV de Coucy, uncle of King Alexander III of Scotland. Elisabeth of Brabant’s sister, Alix, also married Louis III, Count of Loos, after the death of his first wife, Ada of Holland, daughter of Dirk VII, son of Ada of Scotland and Florence, so Louis III had married two cousins descended from Ada and Florence III. 126  Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland, ed. by Van den Bergh, i, 122; Chronographia

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

177

son, Albert II, succeeded as margrave of Brandenburg in 1205 after the death of his half-brother.127 Albert’s sons, John I and Otto III, also succeeded him after which Brandenburg was divided between the two lines.128 The marriage networks fostered by the counts of Holland were astutely designed to augment the county’s image and position in European politics, which was immensely successful. The family’s status reached its apex when Florence and Ada’s great-grandson, William II, became King of Germany in 1247.129 Although it is dangerous to read history backwards, families were well aware of the future potential that such alliances could have as their bloodline became inserted into other successions. The Scottish royal family proved to be a chink in the political scheme of

Johannis de Beke, ed. by Bruch, p. 117; Codex diplomaticus Brandenburgensis, ed. by Riedel, i, 2–3; Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Pertz, pp. 477–78; Jordan, Henry the Lion, p. 166. They had one son together, Albert. Only a year after their marriage, Otto was fighting for Henry of Saxony near Pomerania. Albert ‘the Bear’ fought against Henry for years to retain and expand his territories against the Saxon Duke. Baudouin, Count of Bentheim in Lower Saxony, acted as William, Count of Holland’s regent in c. 1222 by virtue of his kinship with the Count based on the earlier Saxon/Salm-Holland marriage which produced Florence III of Holland, Ada of Scotland’s husband. Baudouin was William’s first-cousin. Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, ii, 586. Florence III’s grandmother was also the half-sister of Lothair, elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1125. Albert ‘the Bear’s founding of a market at Stendal between 1155 and 1168, represents his interest in expanding against Henry of Saxony before political tides changed after the marriage of Ada to his son: Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, i, 496. 127  Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Pertz, pp.  476, 478; Chronicon Sancti Michaelis Luneburgensis, ed. by Pertz and Weiland, p. 397. Albert II’s daughter, Mathilde, married Otto of Brunswick/Brandenburg, grandson of Henry ‘the Lion’ of Saxony, and he became Duke of Saxony in 1235. They had ten children. The Brandenburg marriage opened up a long list of possible contacts from Germany to Holland. Otto of Brandenburg also had twelve brothers and sisters who held lands and ruled throughout Germany, Thuringia, and Poland. 128  Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Pertz, p.  478; Chronicon Sancti Michaelis Luneburgensis, ed. by Pertz and Weiland, p. 397. Otto of Brandenburg’s brother, John, married as his first wife the daughter of King Valdemar of Denmark in c. 1233: Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Pertz, pp. 476, 479. John’s second wife was Jutta, daughter of Albrecht Duke of Saxony and of Agnes of Thuringia. The margraves of Thuringia were heavily involved with the Teutonic Order by the 1220s and they transferred some of their properties previously held by the Knights Hospitaller to the Teutonic Order in 1234. H. Nicholson, ‘Margaret de Lacy’, p. 642. 129  It was because of such marital decisions that the counts were able to make alliances that eventually unified and extended their powers in the northern European counties. Cf. Lucas, ‘John of Avesnes and Richard of Cornwall’.

178

Chapter 4

the counts of Holland that led to a claim to the Scottish throne in the 1290s, a hundred and thirty years after the original marriage between the families.

The Breton Alliance Brittany and Scotland had similar experiences with the English crown, which politically aligned the two kingdoms when war broke out in 1173 between Henry II and King Louis VII and Henry’s sons. The Scottish-Breton marriage was to be of significant merit to the Scottish kings in their subsequent struggle against the crown of England as will be examined in detail in the next chapter, but the foundations for their political alliance in 1173 can be found from events in the 1160s. Only a year before the negotiations for the marriage took place, Conan was at the receiving end of Henry’s II’s policy of exploitation and expansion into regions at the fringe of his territorial power.130 The King was able to advance his brother, Geoffrey of Anjou, at Nantes during the succession crisis following the death of Conan III in 1148.131 He then used his brother’s death in 1158 to claim rights over ducal affairs during the minority of Conan IV. Geoffrey of Anjou’s death should have restored control of Nantes to Conan IV, but instead Henry demanded that Conan hand over Nantes to him or face invasion.132 Conan

130 

Lally, ‘Secular Patronage at the Court of Henry II’; W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 139, 364–68; Amt, The Accession of Henry II in England, pp. 2, 26–27, 182–85. Henry’s attitude towards Brittany does not reflect the ‘leniency’ some historians have argued. The case that Henry II used disinheritance and confiscation any less than his grandfather as claimed by Lally is debatable. His status as heir may have been uncontested following the Treaty of Winchester but acceptance of his rule did not necessarily follow. He won in England but he was constantly fighting against factions on the Continent throughout his life (often fuelled by his sons). One of the problems is that the main biographies of the King by W. L. Warren and Emilie Amt are centred on the King’s position in England, which was more stable. Cf. Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 205–35; Power, The Norman Frontier, passim especially pp. 46–80 for limits and range of ducal power in the French counties. 131  Haut-Jussé, ‘Les Plantagenêts et la Bretagne’, pp. 4–5. Nantes had a more recent connection to Anjou because Conan III’s mother was Ermengarde of Anjou, daughter of Count Fulk IV ‘le Réchin’. The citizens of Nantes preferred Angevin rule to that of Conan IV’s halfuncle and requested that Geoffrey rule the duchy. 132  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 196–97; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 114; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 302; Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 166.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

179

responded by asking for aid from Louis VII who, because of the recent betrothal between Louis’ daughter and Henry’s eldest son, chose not to send aid.133 The means by which Conan had claimed his rights to the duchy was the cause for his subsequent difficulties with Henry. The problem was that Conan was probably still very young when his grandfather died in 1148 and he was reliant upon a mother who was not willing to uphold her son’s rights over that of her second husband, Eudo II de Porhoët, who had been trying to take the duchy into his own hands. If Conan had been able to seize the duchy on his own against his mother’s husband in 1156,134 then he would not have approached Henry for aid and thus he would not have introduced into the duchy an external Norman-Angevin claim that had lain dormant since the eleventh century.135 He had established a precedence in the same way that the kings of Scots had done with respect to the Scottish throne when Henry’s ancestor, William Rufus, helped Edgar and Duncan remove their uncle, Donald, from power.136 In both cases, a relationship of dependency was established. Henry had been trying to extend the Norman frontier and not only into Brittany. His intentions towards the frontier lordships in the Sarthe and Avre valleys were made obvious in 1158 when he seized the castles of Moulins and Bonsmoulins from Richer II de l’Aigle and Rotrou, Count of Perche, which was followed by the seizure of the county of Mortain in the northern frontier to Brittany in 1159.137 Richer and Rotrou would join the rebels in 1173 because of these confiscations,138 but Richer may also have been influenced personally 133 

Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 196–97; Diggelmann, ‘Marriage as Tactical Response’. The marriage was partially intended to restore Henry’s control of the Norman Vexin. 134  W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 76. Eudo II de Porhoët was the son of Geoffrey, Count de Porhoët. Eudo married Bertha, widow of Alain II ‘le Noir’ (d. 1146) and daughter and heiress of Conan III, Duke of Brittany. Eudo II claimed the duchy of Brittany through his wife, but lost to Conan IV by the end of 1156. 135  There may have been a claim of Norman suzerainty during the minority of Count Alain III of Brittany but the claim to overlordship of Brittany under King Henry I is not clearly established as mentioned in Chapter 2. Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 180–81; Van Houts, ‘The Adaptation of the Gesta Normannorum Ducum’, ii, 250–51. 136  Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp. 157–61. 137  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 199; Daniel Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 29, 354, 365. Moulins and Bonsmoulins were strategically important because they bridged the Sarthe and Avre valleys that marked an area traditionally semi-independent from ducal control. 138  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 44.

180

Chapter 4

by Henry’s role in the murder of his friend’s son, Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterbury, in 1170. Thomas had spent some time with Richer in the l’Aigle household when he was young.139 Between 1152 and 1160, Henry also shifted Angevin power past the eastern reaches of his father’s patrimony by seizing the chief castles in the Vexin and Passais.140 The new King of England/Duke of Normandy’s increased interest in these frontier regions caused unrest, and as a result alliances in these areas were forged among prominent families, particularly while the Vexin, NormanBreton, and Passais borders were still so fluid.141 Passais (Ornois) territory associated with the lordship of William Talvas, Count of Sées, was particularly volatile since the boundaries had not been established south of Domfront, which included the Mayenne castle at Ambrières.142 It also included the region south and west of Beauvais, the seriousness of which may be reflected in Walter Map’s story about a local agent, Eudo, who was attacked and lost land to his neighbours, after which he made a pact with the devil to become his liege man in order to redeem them.143 These were lean years for frontier magnates in Western France and many began to cast about for new networks and alliances as Henry increasingly made clear which families he was willing to support. It was probably for this very purpose that Richer II’s son, Richer III de l’Aigle, married Richard de Beaumont’s half-sister, Odeline, in order to protect his position in Maine and the Ornois.144 139 

Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iv, 6 Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’, pp. 186–87. 141  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 251–53; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 127, 131–33, 368–70, 396–98, 448–49, 469–70; Boussard, Le gouvernement d’Henri II Plantagenêt, pp. 428–35. 142  Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’, pp. 186–87; Cf. Renoux, ‘Le roi Jean’ about the significance of the Mayenne position in the Angevin Empire. 143  Walter Map, De nugis curialium, ed. by Brooke and Mynors, pp. 328–29: ‘when they reached the scene of their plotted crimes, the district of Beauvais, they had as advisor, a scout, encourager, and egger-on to cruelty, and to wickedness […] Insensibly the fount of guile contrived that many squadrons should be added to his [Odo’s lord’s] servants. Sons conspired against fathers, youths against old men, friends against friends, and with complete freedom malice hurled the innocent to the ground. Wholly and utterly the province passed into their hands […].’ 144  Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 33–34, 82, 85; Power, Norman Frontier, pp. 482, 487; Thompson, ‘lords de L’Aigle’, p. 196. Based on a reinterpretation of a tomb inscription, Power and Thompson cast doubt on Odeline’s descent from Roscelin de Beaumont because she gained lands in dower at Crépon. However, the inscription is clear in saying that she was the daughter of the viscount of Saint-Suzanne, who was also the viscount de Beaumont so 140 

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

181

Maine was to be particularly problematic for Henry because of alliances made between the powerful Mayenne family and their kin, the counts of Sées, and the Anglo-Breton Lord, Ralph de Fougères. Ralph de Fougères, and probably Geoffrey de Mayenne, coalesced enough support by mid-1166 to lead a rebellion, with Conan IV’s support, but Henry II besieged and defeated them at Fougères.145 When examining the Breton response to Henry II in the 1160s, relation­ ships and alliances in lower Normandy and Maine have to be taken into account and many of these men still held land or had contacts in England and in Scot­ land that could pose a threat.146 Growing discontent with Henry’s style of rule in these regions was to culminate in a serious offensive against him that involved the Scots, the King of France, and several magnates on both sides of the Channel in 1173 but the revolt against Henry began with events dating back to 1158 in the case of Brittany. When the marriage was negotiated with the King of Scots, Duke Conan IV was in a weakened position. Although he had come into Henry’s peace and served Henry in his battle against the count of Toulouse, he needed to form alliances, particularly in the north running from Dol to Fougères, that could potentially be used against the King if another attempt was made to take more of the duchy. Since Henry already held the south of the duchy at Nantes, if the King’s intentions were to take all of Brittany, which would have secured him the entire western seaboard, then the next logical step would have been to seize Dol and the ancient seat of power in the west of the duchy at Cornouaille. This was exactly what the King was to attempt to do after 1163. Conan was already actively involved with men in the northeast of his territory, like Ralph de Fougères, who had been campaigning on Conan’s behalf against his stepfather and rival for the ducal title, Eudo de Porhoët, as early as 1156.147 The Duke also began to protect his position in the west of the duchy by providing support to the Léon family. The Léons may have been perceived by Henry II as a threat since Hervé de Léon’s wife was a natural daughter of she probably was related to the family. 145  Cf. Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 170–73, 349; ii, 30, 48, 194, 228–29 for a more recent study on the position of the viscounts de Beaumont in relation to the house of Bellême/ Counts of Sées. Geoffrey de Mayenne was probably responsible for the support given to Ralph from Maine based on his connections and on his involvement in other rebellions. 146  Crouch, ‘From Stenton to MacFarlane’. 147  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 302. Eudo was captured by Ralph during this campaign.

182

Chapter 4

King Stephen by 1140 and they may have had a daughter, Eleanor, whose marriage had probably not been determined yet.148 Hervé had been a major player in King Stephen’s campaigns in the southwest of England as Earl of Wiltshire, but he lost Devizes castle and the earldom in 1140.149 He may have been interested in restoring the family’s prestige through his daughter, whose descent from King Stephen could be used against Henry. With this in mind, Henry II probably encouraged lords to cause trouble in the west of the duchy in Cornouaille in order to weaken ducal authority. The struggle for control of Cornouaille had deep roots in the comté based on a power struggle between the rival families of Poher, Faou, and Léon.150 In particular, he may have been encouraging Eudo de Porhoët and the viscount of Faou against Conan. The territory of Faou represented one of the main powerbases in Cornouaille, which explains why Conan could not ignore the 1163 attack made by the viscount of Faou on Hervé de Léon, particularly if Faou was involved with Henry. Joëlle Quaghebeur has suggested that the viscounts de Faou and de Poher performed homage to Henry II at Thouars with Eudo in 1166, and there is sufficient evidence to suggest that an alliance with Henry existed before the campaign.151 It may have been such an alliance that encouraged the viscount de Faou to capture his rival and cousin, Count Hervé of Léon and his son, Guihomar, at Châteaulin in 1163. Faou’s plans quickly unravelled though when Duke Conan successfully led an army to free Léon and the viscount de Faou was subsequently starved to death by Léon in his castle at Daoulas.152 Conan’s success against Faou would have been a blow to Henry’s designs in the duchy if Faou was an ally. 148  Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 70, 76; Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, p. 62. Eudo II de Porhoët married Eleanor de Léon, Hervé’s daughter, after the death of Bertha of Brittany. It is not certain that Hervé’s Blésois wife was Eleanor’s mother which is why it is suggested as a possibility. The marriage of Eudo and Eleanor did not occur until 1167, according to Torigny; I would suggest because Eudo and Conan IV were bitter rivals. It is unlikely that Conan would have helped Léon in 1163 if this marriage had already taken place. Cf. Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 232. 149  William of Malmesbury, Historia novella, ed. by King, pp. 50n, 54–55; Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Potter, pp. 70–72, 76–77, 116–17. Malmesbury confused the names. Although Eleanor had two brothers, it is unclear that they were also sons of Sibilla of Blois. Eleanor’s husband could also make a claim to the title to Wiltshire. 150  Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp. 368–89, 392–94; Quaghebeur, ‘La maison d’Alfred’. 151  Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp.  374–79, 387–88; Chédeville and Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale, pp. 88–89, 174–75. 152 

William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, i, 178; Guillotel, ‘Les vicomtes de

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

183

Within the year, Henry interfered even more seriously in ducal affairs by seizing the guardianship of the heiress of John of Dol from Ralph de Fougères, probably while Ralph was on crusade.153 Not only had Ralph made a previous arrangement with John of Dol to hold the barony and heiress in wardship, but this was an issue that should have been determined solely by the right­­ful Duke.154 The problem for Ralph was that his position on the other side of the Channel was also under threat. He held several fees in England of Henry II, which included Ipplepen and Glampton in Devonshire, Headley and Westcott in Surrey, Osmundiston and Stuston in East Anglia, and Twyford and Charndon in Buckinghamshire, and he was related to Earl Richard de Clare and distantly to the King of Scots through Richard.155 Ralph also held fees in the vale of Mortain and the Avranchin in lower Normandy of the King as Duke of Normandy.156 Although Fougères had seemingly chosen to stay out of the Succession War, probably because his lands were spread over territories held by both rivals, neutrality became untenable when the Angevin King of England was directly interfering in his rights at Dol. Also between 1163 and 1166, Henry alienated key men in Maine by seizing three castles in the Passais belonging to the chief Lord of Maine, Geoffrey III de Mayenne, which, by virtue of his grandfather, William Talvas’ support of the Angevins during the Succession War, could have been perceived as particularly Léon’, pp. 2–3. Daoulas, held by Léon, in the northern frontier of Cornouaille had been in the hands of the viscounts of Faou in the early twelfth century, which was part of the reason for the continuing conflict between the families. Despite attempts at marital contracts intended to end the dispute, the Léon and Faou families had become bitter rivals: Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp. 346–52, 375–79. 153 

W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 101; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 97, 612–13; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 196–99; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 305; Vincent, ‘Twyford under the Bretons’, pp. 82, 85; Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp. 157–61. 154  Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, pp. 273, 276. Ralph’s greataunt, Godehilde, was John of Dol’s grandmother so there was a blood relationship between the families. 155  Vincent, ‘Twyford under the Bretons’, pp. 80–81; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, p.  186. The Buckinghamshire and Devonshire fees were held by the Fougères family since the eleventh century which they continued to hold after the revolt of Ralph de Gaël in 1075. Earl Richard de Clare ‘Strongbow’s aunt, Avice, was Ralph de Fougères’ grandmother. KeatsRohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, pp. 49–50; Van Houts, ‘Robert of Torigni as Genealogist’, p. 224. 156  Pouëssel, ‘Les structures militaires’, pp. 86–94; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 703.

184

Chapter 4

unjust.157 Henry may have had even more reason to be suspicious of Geoffrey, because Geoffrey had married his former enemy, Count Waleran of Meulan’s, daughter in 1161.158 Waleran, Count of Meulan, had been very instrumental to Stephen’s cause in the early years of the wars and had not been compensated by Henry after 1154.159 Since his accession, the King had even implemented a more intense program of attacking Waleran’s territories. Waleran responded by allying with Louis VII between 1160 and 1162 after which Henry confiscated the earldom of Worcester and the lordship of Montfort-sur-Risle (the latter which Waleran had taken from his nephew).160 Waleran lost several of his Norman fees as a result of his alliance with the French crown and he deferred the fight to his son, Robert de Beaumont, Count of Meulan, and to his son-in-law, Geoffrey de Mayenne.161 The King’s confiscation of territories in Brittany, Maine, and the Passais united some very powerful men against him but the final straw for Geoffrey’s family was when his grandfather, William Talvas, was removed from power at Alençon in 1166 because of malus consuetudines.162 Geoffrey de Mayenne’s uncles, Earl Patrick of Salisbury and Count John of Sées (Talvas’ son),163 along with Count John of Ponthieu (Talvas’ grandson) joined the ‘rebel’ faction and 157 

Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 211–12; Les Seigneurs de Mayenne, ed. by de Martonne, pp. 10–12. Geoffrey’s grandfather was William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu and Sées, discussed in the previous chapter. 158 

RAHe, II, p. 238; ‘Ex Chronico Savigniacensis Monasterii’, RHF, XVIII, p. 352. Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 76–79. Waleran had also supported Henry I’s rival, William Clito, in 1122. From a royal standpoint, the problem with Waleran was that he switched allegiances more often than many and could not be trusted. White claimed Waleran was loyal to Stephen and then loyal to the Angevins but that view is no longer accepted: White, ‘The Career of Waleran’, pp. 45–48. 160  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 209, 211–12. 161  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 209, 211–12, 227–28; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 39, 75–76; Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, pp. 257–58. 162  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 299. Geoffrey’s first wife may have been Constance of Brittany, daughter of Conan III. 163  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 80–97; Crouch, William Marshal, pp. 37–39. Salisbury was Geoffrey’s uncle by marriage and also the uncle of William Marshal. Salisbury was killed by the Lusignan brothers in 1168. Count John of Sées was the acting Count of Sées before his father’s death. It was not unusual for sons to take over lordship before their father’s death. This custom was also practised in Anjou and allowed for sons to be groomed for leadership. 159 

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

185

it was not long before they were receiving encouragement from the French King.164 They were also joined by Ralph de Fougères and the Viscount de Thouars.165 It was probably no coincidence that rumours of a rebellion in Sées coincided with the rebellion led by Ralph de Fougères in Brittany. 166 Duke Conan of Brittany was probably also involved or at the least he was suspected of such involvement, and King Henry seized the duchy of Brittany from him when the campaign failed in mid-1166.167 Count John escaped the worst of the campaigning in 1166 but he and his allies, the counts of Perche, Flanders, and Boulogne, all faced King Henry’s army within a few years.168 164 

Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 227, 251; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 397–98, 508, 520; Thompson, ‘William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu’, p. 183. King Louis’ involvement with Count John of Ponthieu and the Bretons convinced Henry to try to seize control of Vimeu from John in 1168. 165  Chronicae Sancti Albini Andegavensis, in Chroniques des églises d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Mabille, p. 40; Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’, p. 186; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 69, 299, 397, 520–21. The Count’s rebellion may have had something to do with judicial interference by Henry II in the Saosnois against the Count’s court. This is not clear though because the court case can only be dated between 1154 and 1171. Talvas lost Alençon and Roche-Mabile to the King about this time and Henry had possibly overstepped his rights by taking the castle and partitioning the lands of Geoffrey IV, viscount de Thouars, which may have also caused him to join the rebels: Hajdu, ‘Castles, Castellans and the Structure of Politics’. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 319–20; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 152–53. Orderic saw the Talvas family as a great threat to the region earlier in the century. 166  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 227–28; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 350–51, 397; Crouch, William Marshal, pp. 32–33. There may have been an agreement of some sort between Talvas and Mayenne since these men were known to pursue alliances based on kin-networks and regional interests. It has also been suggested that Geoffrey de Mayenne had a sister who married Ralph de Fougères to further cement their alliance: Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 499. 167  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 97, 612–13; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 196–99. William and Ralph de Fougères were both sons of Olivia, daughter of Stephen, Count of Penthièvre. Olivia was also the sister of Alain II ‘le Noir’, Duke of Brittany, of Henry I Count of Tréguier, and of Geoffrey Boterel, Count of Penthièvre. King Henry II was warned by Hamo, a monk at Savigny, that he should attack the Bretons on a less holy day than the feast day of Saint Peter and Paul (29 June) and he would ‘meritis impleretur’ to which the King did listen: Vitae B. Petri Abrincensis et B. Hamonis, ed. by Sauvage; Vincent, ‘The Pilgrimages of the Angevin King’, p. 25; W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 101. As already mentioned Savigny already had a number of benefactors from Brittany and lower Normandy. 168  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 236–39; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica,

186

Chapter 4

Recognising that frontier politics were delicate, Henry was often demanding as a lord, but in many ways he tried to ease his own men into new appointments. After his success at Fougéres in 1166, he granted the wardship of Isolde, the daughter of John of Dol, to John de Subligny, the newly made Lord of Combour, whose patrimonial lordship was, like that of Ralph de Fougères, in the Norman frontier near Avranches (the heiress was married to John’s son c. 1167).169 These frontier relationships were strong and Henry may have hoped that Subligny, as a member of this group, would have appeared less intrusive than introducing someone without any Breton contact from the duchy of Normandy. For this same reason, Henry also relied upon his Constable, Richard du Hommet, as one of his chief advisors and representatives, to lead the negotiations with the rebels in 1166 at Fougères. Richard had contact with Dol through his kinsman, Roger du Hommet, the former Bishop of Dol, who had recently died in 1163,170 and Richard had also been given Ralph de Fougères’ manor of Twyford in the previous year.171 Richard was dispatched to take the keep of Dol and barony of Combour in 1166 from the dapifer of Dol and nephew of Walter fitzAlain, Alain. Alain may have been supporting Ralph de Fougères’ rebellion at this time since he had been a loyal vassal of John of Dol and Henry II had no jurisdiction in northern Brittany.172 It was also at this time that the new King of Scots, William, appeared with Henry II during the negotiations with the rebels at Genêts from where he was forced to witness the removal of his sister and her husband, Conan IV, from power. The events of the summer of 1166 were important to maintaining Scottish contact with the Bretons and their allies in Maine and lower Normandy, which proved useful in 1173.

ed. by Stubbs, i, 330–31; Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 203; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 397–99. 169  Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 41–42, 83–85. 170  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 137. 171  Vincent, ‘Twyford under the Bretons’, p. 82. Not long after the end of the 1165 rebellion, Ralph’s son, William, married Agatha du Hommet, a member of the Hommet family. Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 499. 172  Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 41; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 223. I disagree with Round that the seneschal was necessarily serving Henry II. Henry II was not the accepted lord and the seneschal and his family had been serving the Lords of Dol for almost a century. They may have viewed Henry as a threat to their interests in Brittany. Ellis, ‘Fleance’, pp. 402–03; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 41; Round, Studies in Peerage and Family History, p. 124.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

187

The Breton Nexus Communication and intermarriage among the Anglo-Breton and Norman nobles between c. 1150 and 1174 established relationships with men in the Angevin court who also had contact with the Scots. These contacts would become the platform upon which a more serious rebellion would be engineered in 1173. For example, William de Saint-Jean was married to Olivia, daughter of Stephen, Count of Penthièvre, and widow of Henry de Fougères (d. c. 1150).173 Olivia was also the aunt of the King of Scots’ brother-in-law, Conan IV of Brittany, and her second husband, William, was the nephew of Richard de la Hai of Lincolnshire, who has already been mentioned concerning his involvement with William de Colville and the Scots in 1157.174 The Saint-Jean family was important to the Scottish-Breton networks because of their involvement on both sides of the Channel. The Saint-Jean castle of Saint-Jean-le-Thomas lay on the coast of the Gulf of Saint-Malo between Granville and Avranches.175 It was already an important site at the time of Rollo’s invasion of Normandy in 911 and continued as such with close ties to the abbey of Le Mont Saint-Michel, which had previously been part of Brittany. Thomas, after whom the castle was named, was involved in the foundation of the abbey of Savigny with the Fougères in c. 1112/13, which was also heavily patronized by King Stephen as Count of Mortain.176 The Saint-Jean family was to remain loyal to the Breton cause of their Fougères kin in the 1170s and again in the 1190s though William de Saint173  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 303; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, xc, xcviii; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 281, 305, 306; Boussard, Le gouvernement d’Henri II Plantagenêt, p. 59; Lebreton, ‘Le château de Saint-Jean-le-Thomas’, pp. 190–91; Vincent, ‘Twyford under the Bretons’, p. 83; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 499. Ralph de Fougères received Long Bennington and Foston in Lincolnshire through his mother, Olivia. 174  Lebreton, ‘Le château de Saint-Jean-le-Thomas’, pp. 196, 209–10. Richard de la Hai witnessed for his nephew, William de Saint-Jean, a grant of land at Beauvais to the abbey of Le Mont Saint-Michel. 175  Lebreton, ‘Le château de Saint-Jean-le-Thomas’. The castle stood on the old Roman route between Valognes and Rennes. 176  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 107; Lebreton, ‘Le château de Saint-Jean-le-Thomas’, p. 184; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 51–55. Savigny patronage was representative of the extensive networks of the Fougères lordship in Brittany, England, and lower Normandy. Savigny is in Mortain. King Stephen established Furness abbey in Lancaster as a daughter-house of Savigny in 1127.

188

Chapter 4

Jean may actually have attended Henry II at the meeting with King William in July 1166. It was at this time that William can be found witnessing with Eudo de Porhoët, Richard du Hommet, and ‘magister’ John Comyn (probably the future Bishop of Dublin) at Genêts and Fougères.177 His son, also called William, continued witnessing with his Fougères half-brothers, or their sons, into the 1190s,178 and as early as 1160s one of these half-brothers or half-neph­ ews, Guillaume de Fougères, personally had contact with men moving in the Scottish court through his English fees.179 These men were Roger de Moubray, William de Vescy, Everard de Ros, Earl Conan of Richmond (the former Duke Conan IV), and Robert II de Brus; all men with Scottish fees and/or contacts.180 William de Saint-Jean maintained a presence in Scottish-Breton circles as late as 1201 for he was witnessing with Guillaume ‘the Angevin’ de Fougères,181 along with Henry de Bohun, the son of Humphrey de Bohun and his wife, Margaret (sister of King William of Scotland and former duchess of Brittany).182 It might even be suggested that William played an important role in convincing King Henry’s eldest son, Henry, to commit to the war against his father in 1173 since 177 

Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 42; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 271–72; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 403–04. Archbishop John Comyn of Dublin was probably the same John Comyn who appears in Henry’s charters: i, 402; ii, 116, 141, 390 (?); Robinson, ‘Early Somerset Archdeacons’, pp. 80, 89–99. If this was the case, John began his career as an emissary to the court of Emperor Frederick I: Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, pp. 75, 83, 88, 96, 101–03, 105–06, 117, 122, 149, 153, 176, 212, 227–28, 230, 236, 241–44, 247. 178  Cartulaire de la Manche: abbaye de la Luzerne, ed. by du Bosc, pp. 4, 9, 10, 18–19, 28. It is difficult to tell whether they were the half-brothers or sons or a mixture of both because there was a William ‘Guillaume’ de Fougères, who was a brother of Ralph, and Ralph also had a son by the same name. Ralph de Fougères and ‘Guillaume’ II de Saint-Jean were both sons of Olivia, the sister of Alain ‘le Noir’ of Richmond. Members of the Fougères family also tended to live long lives, so assumptions cannot be made about dating ‘typical’ generations. 179  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 66; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cxcix–cc; Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, p. 301; ChenayeDesbois and Badier, Dictionnaire de la Noblesse, 3rd edn, vii, 243–44. Ralph de Fougères succeeded to Long Bennington later. His brother, Guillaume ‘the Angevin’ de Fougères, succeeded to Merrow until he was disseized for his support of the Bretons against Richard I in the 1190s. Some of William’s fees were in the midst of fees in the honour of Huntingdon. 180  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 40–41. 181  Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, p. 276; Chédeville and Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale, pp. 130–31. 182  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 283, 304, 305. Henry de Bohun was a son through her second husband whom she married after Conan’s death.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

189

Young Henry was under his tutelage after his coronation in 1170,183 and the Saint-Jean family was immortalized for their role in the war against Henry II.184 The Saint-Jean landholdings in Normandy were strategically important to contact with the Bretons but, like the Fougères, William’s English lands gave him access to other networks. He was granted and confirmed Long Bennington manor in Lincolnshire in the honour of Richmond.185 This grant was made by Conan in the same year as the Fougères campaign.186 Lordships held by AngloFrench Scots in England meant that men of these rulers were in regular contact in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire as well as in Brittany. Families like the Multons still held land in Brittany a century after they had settled in Richmondshire.187 In William de Saint-Jean’s case, his lordship of Long Bennington placed him only eleven kilometres west of Caythorpe held by the de Vescy family, and William de Vescy was in attendance at King Malcolm and King William of Scotland’s court between 1157 and 1166. Vescy also held Brignall in Durham alongside Roger de Moubray; and these fees were held of the honour of Richmond.188 William de Vescy’s relationship with the Moubrays and other Lincolnshire families was quite close. Vescy held a fee directly of Roger de Moubray, the latter who was also intermarried with a member of the Richmond-Penthièvre fami183 

Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry  II, p.  151; T.  Jones, ‘The Generation Gap’. William du Hommet, son of Constable Richard, was also in the Young King’s entourage by 1172. 184  Bertrand de Born, L’Amour et la guerre, ed. and trans. by Gouiran, pp. 821–25. Gouiran suggests the reference to St Thomas was to St Thomas of Canterbury but the saint had no reason to be mentioned in connection with Brocéliande whereas the Saint Jean family did. Bertran described the Count of Saint-Thomas’ visit to Brocéliande when the Bretons were reclaiming Arthur ‘avec faiblesse’. Bertran was among the allies of Geoffrey, Duke of Brittany, and his brother Young Henry in 1182; the same year that Geoffrey was extending his fortifications at Nantes against his father. Recueil d’actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne, ed. by de la Borderie, pp. 117–18; Everard, ‘The “Justiciarship” in Brittany and Ireland’, pp. 100–05. This was probably a violent affair at Nantes because Geoffrey had to compensate the nuns at Saint-Cyr for the damage done during the extension of the fortification walls at Nantes: Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 1–37, GE28. 185  Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 105–06, R13– R16. This was a dowry from his wife. 186  Poulle, ‘Savigny and England’, p. 161; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 186; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 407–09. The Saint-Jeans probably also held a fee at Guingamp of their Penthièvre/Richmond overlord. 187  Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v.1, 35. 188  Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v.2, 332–38.

190

Chapter 4

ly.189 William’s half-brother, Richard, was also the father of John I, Constable of Chester (grandfather of the future John, Earl of Lincoln), through the remarriage of his father, Eustache fitzJohn, to the daughter of William fitzNigel, Constable of Chester.190 It was probably through this kinship that William de Vescy can be found witnessing directly for Earl Ranulf of Chester in the 1140s and 1150s,191 which also meant that he was truly in the midst of families who served and/or who held land in the Norman and Breton frontier. Contact between Chester and lower Normandy was still important in this period because the earls of Chester also held land in the Avranchin, which put them into contact with several families who held land on both sides of the Channel, including in Scotland. For example, the Chester fee at Saint-Sever was only six kilometres southeast of the Moubray fee at Montbray, which the Moubray family were still actively administering as the King’s praepositura, or chamberlain, at Vire (only eleven kilometres east of Saint-Sever). The family’s involvement in the region with the Earl of Chester and Ralph de Fougères contributed to Roger de Moubray’s decision to back the opposition in 1173 not to mention that he also held land of the King of Scots in Northumberland and of the Duke of Brittany (King Henry’s second son, Geoffrey) in Richmond.192

189  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 253–54; Regesta Regum AngloNormannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 332. Roger had married Alice de Gant, whose mother was Matilda de Penthièvre, daughter of Count Stephen of Penthièvre. See Figure 5. 190  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.2, pp. 867–68; Stringer, ‘Nobility and Identity in Medieval Britain and Ireland’, p. 223; Dalton, ‘Eustace Fitz John and the Politics of Anglo-Norman England’. Eustache fitzJohn was one of the first patrons of the Praemonstratensians in his establishment of Alnwick Abbey in 1147–48. He was involved in the royal administration of Gloucester and Northampton along with Milo, Earl of Hereford, whose son, Roger, married Eustache’s niece, Cecily: Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, vi, 454–55; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 262. The Vescys were also related to William de Briouze through the marriage to Eustache’s niece. Earl Roger of Hereford’s sister, Bertha, married William II de Briouze: Chartes normandes de l’abbaye de Saint-Florent près Saumur, ed. by Marchegay, pp. 689–90; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 134; Gerald of Wales, Itinerarium Kambriae, ed. by John Brewer and others, p. 19. 191  Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 68–69, 85–87, 119–21, 185–88. See Chapter 5 for more depth about the Moubray and Vescy involvement with the Scottish and English court. 192  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 124, 155. Earl Ranulf ’s capture of Roger de Moubray in 1141 and Moubray’s subsequent alliance with Ranulf probably contributed to his marriage to Alice de Gant, daughter of Matilda de Penthièvre, the sister of Alain ‘le Noir’:

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

191

Furthermore, patronage of Savigny Abbey brought many of the families in lower Normandy and Brittany together. It may even have been through such networks that a manuscript of the Life of Saint-Tugdual appeared at the abbey of Savigny in the late twelfth century since the Penthièvre and Moubray families were intermarried.193 Patterns in religious endowments did not mean that eccle­­siastically connected families were necessarily related but families who shared interests in certain foundations often did move in the same circles. This can be seen particularly with families who spanned the Channel. For example, William de Saint-Jean the elder and his brother, Robert, and wife Olivia, were benefactors of the church of Holy Trinity of La Lucerne in the Manche like the Hommet family.194 William and his wife were also, as men­tioned, benefactors of the abbey of Savigny in lower Normandy along with the Vieuxponts,195 who had a branch settled in Scotland under William Vieuxpont, Lord of Carriden. Many other Breton, Anglo-French, and Norman nobles like Hervé de Vitré; James de Saint-Hilaire;196 Geoffrey de Mayenne; Geoffrey’s father, Juhel; Clemencia (daughter of William Talvas, count of Sées and Ponthieu); Alain de Dinan; William de Munfichet; and Robert III, Earl of Leicester, also made gifts to the abbey.197 By the end of the century, Bretons were still witnessing for Anglo-French Scots, like William de Vieuxpont, probably because the King of Scot’s niece, Constance, was the Duchess of Brittany and because these men were already familiar with each other through kin-networks,

Green, ‘Earl Ranulf II and Lancashire’, pp. 118–19. See next chapter for a full accounting of the Moubray fees and family in Normandy and England. 193  Guillotel, ‘Le dossier hagiographique’, pp. 214–15. Saint Tugdual was affiliated with the bishopric of Tréguier held by the Penthièvre-Boterel family. 194  Bibliothèque de l’Ordre de Prémontré, ed. by Bondéelle-Souchier, i, 179. La Lucerne was a Prémontré community and daughter-house of Dommartin. Richard’s son, William du Hommet, and his family made donations to a dependency of La Lucerne at Tribéhou. 195  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 76. King David’s niece, Matilda of Boulogne, was also a patron of the Savignac foundation at Coggeshall. Savigny was an extremely important foundation and had several dependencies throughout England, Ireland (notably St Mary’s Dublin) and Wales but the house was forced to merge with the Cistercian order in 1148 and they finally lost their English lands in 1204 following the loss of Normandy. 196  Poulle, ‘Savigny and England’, p. 162. Savigny also held Ingleby in Yorkshire, which was granted to the abbey in c. 1140 by Count Alain ‘le Noir’ of Brittany. 197  Les Seigneurs de Mayenne, ed. by de Martonne, pp. 1–24; Poulle, ‘Savigny and England’, pp. 159–68. Earl Robert of Leicester gave a virgate to the abbey.

192

Chapter 4

war, and patronage patterns.198 Moreover, a number of these men fought for the opposition in 1173. These cross-Channel families encouraged the continuation of patronage patterns and marital ties to protect their positions in multiple regions. For example, the Saint-Hilaires held their Norman fees alongside the Fougères in the vale of Mortain, which was probably the reason for their initial interest in Savigny Abbey.199 Savignac patronage also extended to their lorship in England where they were benefactors of the church at Field Dalling in Norfolk, a dependency of Savigny.200 The Saint-Hilaires, like many families involved with Savigny, were also pulled into the Talvas Count’s networks in the Ornois, which may have influenced the volume of men from this region who joined the rebellion in 1173. James de Saint-Hilaire may also have had the additional impetus to join the revolt because he was married to Aveline de Hesdin, probably related to the fitzAlain-Hesdins, and he had contacts in Rennes.201 Another family which also seemed to be pulled into the Talvas’ Ornois network was the Hai-Soules family.202 The point of tracing all of these relationships is to demonstrate that Kings Malcolm and William I of Scotland not only had contact with Bretons through their sister, but also through lords in their own court. The death of his brother, Malcolm IV, in 1165 resurrected William’s claim to Northumbria and set the stage for Scotland’s involvement in the 1173 to 1174 war against Henry II because of William’s experience of the King at Genêts in 1166. William may have thought the timing for approaching Henry concerning Northumbria was in his favour because of multiple theatres of military activity in the Passais and Brittany in 1166. According to Bishop Arnulf of Lisieux, in March 1165, a year before the Mançeau-Breton revolt erupted, Henry II was confronting antagonistic factions of Scots, Welsh and Bretons.203 It was probably for this reason that William appeared at the King’s court at Genêts ‘in Brittany’ in mid-1166, where he was also in attendance with the 198 

Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 35. See Chapter 6 on Vieuxpont. 199  Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, p. 7. See Chapter 5 for Saint-Hilaire family. 200  Poulle, ‘Savigny and England’, p. 162. 201  M. Jones, ‘Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes en Angleterre’, pp. 80–82. See Chap­ ter 4. Their daughter, Matilda, later married into the de Clare and then Arundel families. 202  See Chapter 5 about Hai involvement in the Ornois and with the Hommet family. 203  Letters of Arnulf of Lisieux, ed. by Barlow, pp. 77–78.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

193

bishop of Man and the king of the Isles.204 The new King of Scots probably also met Abbot Robert of Torigni of Le Mont Saint-Michel at this time.205 Torigni as a pro-Angevin writer and close friend of Henry II,206 used the opportunity to cast a shadow over the King of Scot’s image when he directly mentioned in his chronicle that the Scots had been subdued and converted by the legendary King Arthur thereby highlighting William’s failure in pressing his rights to Northumbria.207 The reason for this depiction of the King suggests that Torigni chose to filter the material in his chronicle to enhance the image of the Plantagenet King by recontextualising the materials of Geoffrey of Monmouth.208 By comparison, the Melrose chronicler was more favourable in his description of the Scottish King and mentioned that William ‘quibusdam militiarum probitatibus attemtatis’ while he was in France.209 These ‘honourable’ deeds may have been alluding to attending Henry at the negotiations with the Bretons at Fougères particularly since William did not discuss Northumbria with Henry until he followed the King to Caen after the campaign.210 William would have been an ideal ambassador at Fougéres from Henry’s point of view because of his vulnerability concerning Northumbria. Henry could pressure William to 204 

Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 114–15; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 96; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 253; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 228–29; Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, pp. 92–93, 97. According to Torigni, William and the bishop of Man went to Henry at Genêts. Genêts was a dependency of Le Mont Saint-Michel and in lower Normandy, south of Avranches so it seems odd initially to think of it being in Brittany. However, Le Mont and this area had been in Breton hands before the eleventh century. 205  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 271–72: Torigni was at Genêts witnessing for the King at this time. Van Houts, ‘Le roi et son historien’; Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 97; Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v.2, 224. Duke Conan was already a benefactor of Le Mont Saint-Michel in 1170 and granted his church at Wath to the abbey between 1159 and 1170. Robert de Torigni, abbot and chronicler, made a further grant in 1184. Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 662–63. 206  Van Houts, ‘Le roi et son historien’, pp. 115–18. 207  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 73. This section of the Chronicle may have been written as late as 1186 so after William’s failure in 1174. 208  Van Houts, ‘Le roi et son historien’, pp. 114–18. Torigni may also have been influenced in this account by Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia. 209  Chronica de Mailros, p. 80: ‘attempted certain honourable deeds of war’. 210  If one is to follow the account of this meeting given to Becket, it is unlikely that William would have continued to serve Henry if the incident at Caen where he was denied Northumberland and humiliated by the King had occurred before the meeting at Genêts.

194

Chapter 4

put aside any misgivings he might have felt about witnessing the removal of his brother-in-law, Conan IV, and sister from power by dangling the carrot of Northumbria. William may even have had a hand in negotiating Conan’s withdrawal from Brittany in favour of Conan’s daughter, Constance, who was betrothed to King Henry’s son, Geoffrey.211 Ultimately, the negotiations did not go well for William or Conan. Conan lost his duchy and was confined to his lordship at Guingamp until his death and William was not granted Northumbria. Henry’s treatment of the Bretons was particularly harsh in 1166 and contributed to continuing animosities in the duchy. He treated the Bretons in 1166 in the same way that his future great-grandson, Edward I, handled the Scots in 1296. In the midst of the Breton campaign in July 1166, Henry II attended the translation of the relics of the Breton saint, St Brieuc, at Angers. Although the relics had already been removed,212 the timing of this translation was very much in the interest of making the political statement that the Angevin King controlled this ancient symbol of Breton identity.213 Edward I would do the same in 1296 after the battle of Dunbar by seizing the Black Rood of St Margaret and the Stone of Destiny.214 Henry II and Edward I’s perceived dominance over these rulers and their peoples was intended to exploit and psychologically manipulate these quasi-sacred and national symbols of territorial lordship.215 Although Henry was successful and defeated the rebels in 1166,216 within another year, the Bretons rebelled again, this time under the leadership of 211 

William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 146; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 42–43. 212  Lot, ‘Date de l’exode des corps saints hors de Bretagne’. The ‘translation’ of Breton saints was not uncommon during the raids of the Northmen in the ninth and tenth centuries. 213  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 404–05; Chroniques des églises d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Mabille, p. 149. The tradition was that Erispoë, King of Brittany, translated Saint Brieuc’s tomb and body in 851 to Saint Serge of Angers, two centuries after the saint’s death. However, some of the saint’s body parts had apparently been doled out to the monastery of Léhon by Nominoë, Erispoë’s father. Vie inédite de Saint-Brieuc, ed. by Plaine, pp. xiv–xvii, 29–30; Vita S. Brioci, ed. by Plaine, pp. 188–90. 214  G. Barrow, Robert Bruce, p. 73. 215  See de Vos, ‘Conflict, Dominance, and Exploitation’ for an interesting examination of the role of sacred symbols in building power. 216  Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 8; M. Jones, ‘The Capetians and Brittany’; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 146. Professor Jones has argued that Norman control of Brittany had traditionally been relatively well accepted by the Bretons since the early eleventh century. Continual resistance from major political lords and barons in Brittany, Lower Normandy, and Maine from the 1150s until its loss to the crown of France in

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

195

Eudo II de Porhoët and his new father-in-law, Hervé, Viscount de Léon, and the latter’s son Guihomar.217 Rebellion was to occur again nearly every year until war erupted in 1173. Meanwhile, although the King of Scots had failed to regain Northumbria, the King of Scots had found some support among Henry’s men while in Nor­mandy. In a letter to Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, it was reported that when Henry II was discussing the negotiations with the King of Scots at Caen, he broke out in a rage against Richard du Hommet, Constable of Normandy, who was defending King William.218 Richard’s act of friendship was not to go unrewarded. Shortly thereafter, King William may have helped arrange the marriage of Richard’s kinswoman, Emma, to Geoffrey de Valognes, Lord of Burton, the brother of one of William’s favourites, Philip de Valognes.219 There seemed to be a lot of Scottish contact with the Hommets, not only because of military campaigns but also through marriage, landholdings and religious endowments among Anglo-French families,220 and this contact con1204 indicates otherwise. Even a significant portion of the 1173–74 campaigns against Henry occurred in Brittany and Maine with Breton support. 217  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 232; Guillotel, ‘Les vicomtes de Léon’, pp. 29–33. Bertha had died by this date. Torigni as an Abbot of Le Mont Saint-Michel is a valuable source. 218  Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, vi, 71–72; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 263–64. Henry’s rage was quite serious by this account. He called Richard a traitor, tore off his clothes, and sat in a corner sulking. 219  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 23–24, 136, 185. Cf. Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, clxxxiv for marriage of Emma and Geoffrey de Valognes. Cf. Round, ‘Comyn and Valoignes’. Richard du Hommet’s daughter, Emma, married first Geoffrey de Neville and was the mother of Henry de Neville, who held Raskelf and Sutton in Yorkshire. She secondly married Geoffrey de Valognes. Geoffrey de Neville was probably the same man who held Berwick against King William for King Henry II following Falaise in 1174. Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, clxxxv; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ix, 476, 491; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 8, 311. 220  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, pp. 221–22; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 242–43, 362, 439. Hommet also witnessed with Alexander de Bohun, brother of Ingelger (cousins of Humphrey III of Hereford), and with Nicholas de Stuteville of Valmont (the uncle of Nicholas de Stuteville, Lord of Liddel, and of Burga, mother of Eustache de Vescy) in the early 1150s. Hugh de Moreville, brother of Richard de Moreville, Constable of Scotland, figured prominently with Richard du Hommet in charters issued in France by Henry II between 1166 and 1170. The Morevilles were granted the lordship of Cunningham, south of Renfrewshire. Hugh fell out of favour with King Henry for his role in the murder of Becket.

196

Chapter 4

tinued into the next generation. Richard’s son, William du Hommet, was still holding land of the Huntingdon-Rutland fees in 1197 at Ketton (twentyeight kilometres south of the Moubrays), and in Stanford, which would have also put him in contact with the Soules family, who were their neighbours at Doddington. The Soules held Doddington of David of Huntingdon, the King’s younger brother;221 and the family also held other land in Oxfordshire and Lincolnshire, including in the honour of Huntingdon.222 It may have been such contact that also brought about a possible marriage between William du Hommet and the Brus family.223 Interaction between lords in Scotland, Brittany, England, and Normandy strengthened cross-Channel relations. King Henry asserted his authority with the Bretons and Scots but at a cost. His actions in 1166 alienated men on both sides of the Channel and paved the way for alliances with the King of France. Scots had already served Owain ap Gruffudd, Prince of Gwynedd, against Henry when Owain was in alliance with Louis VII in 1165.224 By 1168, King William and Owain were again negotiating an alliance against the King of England with King Louis VII of France and 221 

Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 195–96, 618. The Hommet fee at Ketton in Rutland was lost to the earls of Warenne probably in 1204. Earl David also held in Stanford through the honour of Huntingdon which the Hommet’s held in chief though David’s fees were directly held of the King. 222  Pipe Roll of 9 Richard I, pp. 83, 89; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 165; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 122; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 150–51. The honour of Huntingdon’s fees were scattered across eight counties — Huntingdon, Cambridge, Bedford, Buckingham, Northampton, Lincoln, Leicester, and Rutland. 223  Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 7, 107. One of William’s kinswomen, Emma, married the Lincolnshire lord, Geoffrey de Valognes as mentioned, and his sister, Agatha, married Fulk II Paynel, Lord of Hambye and of Bréhal, as her second husband but it is conjectural that William himself married a Brus. If this was the case, his wife might have been the granddaughter of Robert I de Brus of Annandale and of Agnes Paynel, a daughter of Fulk Paynel of Dudley. Ruth suggests this unnamed wife of William (we do know her name was Lucie) was the granddaughter of Adam I de Brus, son of Robert I, but she would have probably been too young to have been married to William du Hommet. Her parents did not marry until after 1167 and William probably married in the 1180s. He died in c. 1199. She could, however, have been a daughter of Adam I. See Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, pp. 463, 522 about Agatha du Hommet and Adam de Brus. William did have interests at Luthumière, a Brus endowment, but it is unclear how it came to the family. Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 127. 224  G. Barrow, ‘Wales and Scotland in the Middle Ages’, p. 309; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 18–19; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 251 taken from the Chronicle of Holyrood. Malcolm IV had done homage to Henry II in 1159 as already discussed and again in 1163 along with Rhys and Owain ap Gruffudd.

restructuring and change in the three kingdoms, 1154–73

197

his new ally, Young Henry, the eldest son of King Henry II of England,225 and they, along with the Bretons, Welsh and Poitevins, attended the negotiations between Young Henry and Louis in July 1168 near Le Mans.226 In these negotiations, Owain ap Gruffudd promised to be a vassal of Louis VII and offered hostages as surety for the bond.227 It would take another seven months before peace was restored between Henry II, the Bretons and the Poitevins, but only after Henry defeated the Bretons at Dol and Nantes and then had his son, Young Henry, swear an oath of homage as Duke of Normandy to the French King at Montmirail.228 The Bretons then had to do homage to Henry’s son, Geoffrey, and a year later Geoffrey’s older brother, Young Henry, was crowned King of England.229 The 1168 Franco-Scottish negotiations unravelled. The vicissitudes of political fortunes were shifting rapidly in these years. Although King William was in attendance at King Henry II’s Easter court in 1170, where his brother, David, was knighted by Henry II and William did homage to Young Henry for his English lands, within another three years William, David, and Young Henry were at war with Henry II.230 Henry’s failure to recognize William’s claim to Northumbria and his failure to allow his sons to have access to revenues in their designated territories in England, Brittany, and Anjou left the King in a vulnerable position. 225 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 4; Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp.  116–17; Pryce, ‘Owain Gwynedd and Louis  VII’; R. R. Davies, Conquest, Coexistence, and Change, p. 49. Owain died in the following year though so was obviously not involved in the 1173 rebellion. Young Henry was also Louis’ son-in-law. Henry had married Louis’ daughter, Marguerite, in 1172: Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 511. 226  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 237–38; John of Salisbury, Letters, ed. by Millor and Butler, ii, 554–55, 602–03, 606–07. Only a couple months previously, King William had, according to John of Salisbury, entered into negotiations for the marriage of his unnamed sister to the son of an Italian Marquis who was in alliance with Henry II. 227  S. Duffy, ‘The 1169 Invasion’, pp. 104–05. Owain’s grandmother was Hiberno-Norse — a granddaughter of the king of Dublin. Owain also still held land in Fingal, near Dublin, called Cloghran either through his mother or by conquest. Owain’s son, Rhirid, also held Cloghran after his father. Rhirid’s brother Rhodri, held Balrothery, north of Dublin, in the early thirteenth century. Also see Flanagan, Irish Society, pp. 137–64. 228  John of Salisbury, Letters, ed. by Millor and Butler, ii, 636–38. Henry had to subjugate the Bretons first in a two-pronged attack on the south at Vannes and the west in Cornouaille, and then in the north at Hédé. Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 236–241. 229  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 158–59. 230  Chronica de Mailros, p. 82; John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 261.

Chapter 4

198

Under Angevin custom, the association of joint-rule between father and son or sons had been the accepted practice, but Henry was not allowing them this freedom despite having granted them their territories.231 Henry, himself, had even been allowed to rule Normandy while his father, Geoffrey, ruled Anjou, Maine, and the Touraine in 1150. If Henry had recognized the legitimacy of some of these complaints and those made by others in his realm against similar disenfranchisements, then the 1173 war might have been avoided. King William had even tried to negotiate with Henry concerning Northumbria before he joined the cross-Channel rebellion in 1173.232 The coalition headed by Henry’s sons, his wife and her former husband, Louis VII of France, and the King of Scots presented a serious threat to the King of England’s position on both sides of the Channel and threatened the stability of the Anglo-French realm. Furthermore, Henry had lost the trust of his nobility by flouting the rules of patronage and rights of succession at his court. Men and women slowly began to identify less with particular lands and more with a particular lord but not necessarily out of a sense of duty or loyalty; it was rather out of a sense of self-preservation. Lands were mutable and as such new lands could always replace the old as long as families found favour. This subtle shift in attitude towards land and lordship became essential to the development of a ‘national’ identity after the loss of Normandy in 1204 when king and land became the central focus of political identity.

231  232 

Le Patourel, The Norman Empire, p. 114. Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 20–21, ll. 260–63.

Chapter 5

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

The First Franco-Scottish Alliance Henry II’s ambition to assimilate new territories into his dominion by removing legitimate authorities in favour of some of his own men caused a backlash in the Anglo-French polity that nearly toppled the King’s position in 1173.1 In other regions besides Brittany, the king had also forced many lords to accept his overlordship and these men joined those who had been removed from power, but there were other developments that also contributed to the war of 1173. To better understand the challenges Henry faced, it is important to appreciate the composition and nature of power in Europe at the time. Henry’s vulnerability in the early 1170s was caused not only by his secular policies but also by a more widespread debate concerning the division of power between Church and State. This debate dominated relations between the papacy and 1 

W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 301–16. Henry relied on his familiares throughout his reign. Many of these men were given positions of prominence at court and had the ear of the King more than the magnates and they were often not landholders in the region or territory that they were given. For example, Henry advanced lords who had not held land in Brittany at the expense of native lords, which alienated local support and caused other men in other parts of the empire, who also felt alienated by the King’s failure to recognize their rights by inheritance, to ally with those who were displaced in Brittany. This style of rule inevitably increased the number of alliances against the crown. Cf. Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 76–92 about Henry and Brittany.

200

Chapter 5

western rulers since the Investiture Controversy of the eleventh century, and caused rifts within the kingdoms of Germany, France, and England. Between 1163 and 1170, Henry embroiled himself in this very controversial issue about royal prerogatives in ecclesiastical matters, which stoked the fires of discontent throughout his empire and alienated secular support.2 Furthermore, within ten years of his accession to the throne, Henry also managed to antagonize a large segment of the political community because of a series of controls, assizes and inquisitions that he issued in England and Nor­ mandy. His reasoning was sound in that he was implementing more systematic methods of accounting in his kingdom that were intended to protect crown rights and to provide a more fair justice system. However, royal centralization soon became the battleground between Church and State when the King’s former friend and chancellor, Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterbury, openly defied the King’s promulgation of clauses in the Constitutions of Clarendon that gave the State the right to judge ‘criminous clerics’ in court.3 Although many secular authorities agreed that the Church was stepping on civil rights by protecting its own in cases of murder, the assassination of Becket on 29 December 1170 seriously damaged the reputation of the King, who was believed to have urged the removal of Becket, ‘Inertes ac miseros homines enutrivi et erexi in regno meo, qui nec fidem ferunt domino suo, quem a plebeo quodam cleric tam probrose patiuntur illudi.’4 Attempts by Henry to 2  Epistolae, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, v, 71–79; English Historical Documents, ed. by Douglas and others, ii, 718–22. The murder of Thomas Becket added to an already volatile political situation. Many of the men who supported the Constitutions of Clarendon in 1164 were the same who revolted in 1173. Among this group were Earl Robert of Leicester, Count John of Eu, Earl Roger de Clare (Roger did not rebel but some of his men did and joined the Scots), Earl Hugh ‘de Kevelioc’ of Chester, Earl Patrick of Dunbar, Richer II de l’Aigle, and Nigel de Moubray. 3  Epistolae, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, v, 71–79; English Historical Documents, ed. by Douglas and others, ii, 718–22; W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 97–98, 410–26, 476–85, 512–17, 524–31, 538–40; C. Duggan, ‘The Becket Dispute and the Criminous Clerks’; Halphen, ‘Les entrevues des rois Louis VII et Henri II’. 4  Edward Grim, Vita Sancti Thomae, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, ii, 429: ‘What deplorable and cowardly men have I nurtured and elevated in my kingdom, who in his lordship have no faith, and allowed to suffer such a low-born criminous clerk.’ W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 214–20, 518–23, 532–37, 550–55. Cf. Staunton, Thomas Becket and his Biographers, pp.  184–215 about the murder and aftermath. Edward Grim’s account directly addressed the King’s guilt for Becket’s death and that it was this guilt that caused the 1173 war. Other chroniclers also noted that the King’s culpability in Becket’s murder

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

201

claw back his standing in the political community by denying his guilt in the murder of Becket failed. Within a few months of the canonization of Becket on 21 February 1173, men throughout the Angevin empire voiced their various grievances about Henry’s rule by banding together with Henry’s own sons and wife and King Louis VII of France.5 One of the first territories to unite against Henry was the duchy of Brit­­­ tany. Henry’s claim over the duchy, following his removal of Duke Conan from power in 1166, had not been accepted by a faction of the Breton nobility since 1167. The former Duke’s stepfather, Eudo de Porhoët, continued to fight against Henry II and he was soon joined by several other Anglo-Breton lords also disenchanted with the King’s style of rule. The Breton movement fuelled the out­­break of the 1173 war and represented a psychologically important attack on the King. Without the Breton campaign at Dol in 1173, other men would not have joined the coalition of Henry’s sons, wife and her ex-husband, the King of France. The Scots in particular may have joined the war effort after the failure of the Breton campaign because the Scottish King’s sister was the Duchess of Brittany. Scottish involvement in the Great War of 1173 and 1174 war was significant and in the long-term further intensified Scottish involvement with the Anglo-French and French nobility. Many families in England still held lands in France and their cousins from collateral branches were settled and married into lands and families in Scotland. Although some of these earlier familial ties have been explored, it is worthwhile examining further some of these relationships in order to demonstrate the strength of these networks between Scotland, England, and France. It was often through earlier networks that new allies were pulled into the cross-Channel conflict in 1173, and as will be demonstrated, some of this influence was determined by Anglo-French Scottish contact with extended kin in particular areas of France like the Ornois and Brittany. Furthermore, these networks complicated the issue of loyalty tied to territorial power when the war erupted.

nearly cost him his empire: William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 187–88; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 62–63. 5  See Labande, ‘Les filles d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine:étude Comparative’ about the impact of Becket’s murder on Henry’s political position. He had carved up his kingdom between 1169 and 1172 among his sons in order to safeguard his possessions during the conflict with Becket but his failure to allow his sons any access to revenues or real governing power caused a rift. It was not long before Henry’s sons and their ally, Louis VII, found themselves at the head of an army represented by a large number of men alienated from the King’s court. Young Henry even applied to the papacy to recognize him as King of England in return for justice for Becket’s murder.

Chapter 5

202

Nigel d’Aubigny (d. 1129) = (1) Maud de l’Aigle = (2) Gundred de Gournay Walter de Gant = Matilda Penthièvre Roger, fl. 1146-1187 = Alice de Gant (d. 1176) Lord of Ecouché

Robert de Gant = (1) Gunnora d’Aubigny = (2) Nicholas de Stuteville, Lord of Liddel

Nigel, fl. 1172-80 (d. 1191) = Mabel

Robert

William, Lord of Montbray, fl. 1190-1220 = Avice

Philip, Lord of Dalmeny fl. 1190-1220 = Galiene, dau. of Waltheof of Moncrieffe

Nigel

Roger

X. = Enguerrand du Hommet, Lord of Ecouché

Figure 5. Aubigny/Moubray family tree.

One example of the impact of land- and familial-based networks is founded on the marital and territorial assets of the Anglo-Norman Moubray family. The Moubrays were an important Continental family holding lands throughout lower Normandy, the Ornois, and Mayenne and their marriage interests reflected their regional ties. The head of the family during the 1173 war was Roger de Moubray, who was not only a close friend of the King of Scots and his younger brother, but he was also very involved with Breton and Ornois net­­ works that spanned the Channel.6 The 1160 marriage of the Scottish King’s sis­­ ter to the Duke of Brittany strengthened ties like that between Roger and the King of Scots and encouraged lasting contact between the Breton and Scottish courts that extended via familial interaction into lower Normandy. The cornerstone of Roger de Moubray’s contribution to cross-Channel communication was his territorial and marital assets throughout the Angevin Empire. Roger held land in the Norman fee of Montbray, which included the towns of Beaumesnil, Beslon, Étouvy, Coulonces, Margueray, and possibly Lan­ delles, Saint-Vigor, and Pontfarcy, and he also held fees in Bazoches-en-Houlme in the Ornois while his son, Nigel, held Château-Gontier in Mayenne.7 Nigel’s 6  7 

Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 25–27. Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, lxxx; ii, xcv; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules,

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

203

service at Château-Gontier placed him in a key military position in the centre of Mançeaux networks, the importance of which has been discussed in reference to the Mayenne/Sées families in the previous chapter.8 Furthermore, the Moubray family also held the castle of Ecouché, near the Beaumont lordship of Asnebec (Saint-Georges-d’Annebecq) in the Ornois,9 and properties at SaintBrice, Neuvy-au-Houlme, Rabodanges, Villers-Canivet, Proussy, and possibly inter­­est at Ménil-Hermei, Bellou-en-Houlme, Boucé, and Crêvecœur.10 The Moubray family were well placed militarily throughout the Ornois, Mayenne, and lower Normandy and many of these territorial possessions fell to the family because of various marital contracts with other Continental families earlier in the century. For example, Roger’s father, Nigel d’Aubigny, had previously been married to Maud de l’Aigle, daughter of Richer I de l’Aigle of the l’Aigle family in the Ornois, who also held a fee at Crépon (Calvados) and ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 a–b, 707 b–c; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. xviii–xix, xxvii, xxxviii, 20, 70, 258. The eleventh-century lords of ChateauGontier had also held rights to the castle of Segré but it was in the hands of the Pouancé-La Guerche family in c. 1201 based on the latter family’s eleventh-century stake to hold ChateauGontier before it had passed to the Moubrays: Guillot, Le Comté d’Anjou, i, 290, 294–96. 8  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, lxxx; Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, p. 22; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 b, 707 b–c; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 185; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. xix. Nigel may have been holding Gontier during the absence of its lord, Renaud IV de Château Gontier in the Holy Land, who also happened to be related to Count John of Alençon by marriage: Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 158–61. The Moubrays were involved with this important Mayenne network through their position at Gontier. The stepmother, Mathilde, of Renaud’s wife, Beatrix, was the illegitimate daughter of Henry I who married Rotrou I of Perche. John of Alençon had married the granddaughter of Mathilde. Beatrix’s half-brother was also Rotrou II of Perche. Mançeau-Scottish interaction continued into the next century when Renaud (also called Alard) IV’s great-great-great granddaughter, Jeanne de la Guerche, married the brother, Jean, of Henry de Beaumont, titular Earl of Buchan. Jean and Henry were both sons of Queen Ermengarde of Scotland’s niece and of Louis de Brienne. Therefore, Château-Gontier fell into the hands of another French family, the viscounts de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, who were still in contact with Scots at the end of the thirteenth century. Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 166–68, 483–84. See also Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapters 4 and 5, about the importance of the viscounts de Beaumont in Scotland. 9  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, lxxx; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 b, 707 b–c; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 185; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. xix; Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 379–85, 394. Asnebec was held by the Meulan-Leicester Beaumonts, not to be confused with the Beaumonts in Sarthe. The Moubrays were also close to the Briouze (Braose) Continental lordship. 10  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. xix.

204

Chapter 5

in Sussex. This earlier marriage had bound the families together and formed the basis for shared political and territorial interests. So, just as the Moubrays joined the opposition in 1173 so too did the l’Aigles, who had already witnessed the confiscation of their castle at Moulins-La-Marche by Henry II. Likewise, the l’Aigle fees in the Ornois were near the Moubray fees at Ecouché and at Bazoches-au-Houlme so the two families also shared territorial concerns outside Mayenne.11 Roger de Moubray’s son, Nigel, was very interested in continuing the family’s presence in Normandy where he owed the service of five knights for the fee at Montbray by mid-century,12 and he was groomed to administer the family’s Norman and English fees from early on.13 By 1180, Nigel was the praepositura of the castle of Vire, which was at the head of his honour in Normandy and located thirty-two kilometres north of Saint-Hilaire-du-Harcouët from where the Saint-Hilaire family issued, who also joined the opposition party at Dol in 1173. Furthermore, Nigel held Stanton-under-Barton in Leicestershire, only about twelve kilometres from Ashby-de-la-Zouche held by Alain, the brother of the 1173 opposition leader, Eudo de Porhoët, and Stanton was also in the fees held by the 1173 opposition lord, Earl Robert of Leicester.14 11 

Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xv, 39; xxiii, 619  k (Bazoches), 695 a and 698 g (Crépon); Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 282–85; Van Houts, ‘Robert of Torigni as Genealogist’, p. 221. Maud de l’Aigle’s first husband had been Robert de Moubray, Earl of Northumberland, and her mother, Judith d’Avranches, was also a sister of Hugh, Earl of Chester. In an unusual series of events, it seems that Roger took on the name of his father’s first wife’s husband probably to strengthen the family’s claims in Northumberland. It has been suggested that an earlier collateral branch was even related to the dukes of Normandy: Cf. Chibnall, Piety, Power, and History. Also see Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ix, 367–69 for genealogy. Robert de Moubray was infamously attributed with the murder of King Malcolm III in 1093: Geoffrey Gaimar, Lestorie des Engles, ed. by Hardy and Martin, pp. 260–61, ll. 6111–28. See previous chapter about the effect of the confiscations of lands from Richer II de l’Aigle by Henry II. 12  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, xcv; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 a. Nigel was listed for this service the year before the outbreak of the war against Henry II and his father, Roger, left him and his brother in charge while he went to negotiate with King William in 1173: Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 98–99, ll. 1320–25. 13  See especially Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 119–22 for the Norman administration. 14  Guillotel, ‘De la vicomté de Rennes à la vicomté de Porhoët’, pp. 22–23. Geoffrey III de Mayenne’s lands were later given to Roger de la Zouche, descended from Alain, brother of Eudo II de Porhoët. Alain became lord of Ashby-de-la-Zouche in Leicestershire because of these

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

205

Nigel’s increasing dedication to administering the family’s Norman fees coincided with William, his eldest son’s, involvement in the Moubray fees in England and with the introduction of Nigel’s younger son, Philip, to the Scottish court. Nigel was clearly intent on preserving and augmenting the family’s territorial position in all three kingdoms. His contact with the Scottish court in 1173 was probably at least partly why his younger son, Philip, became Lord of Dalmeny and of Inverkeithing in the Forth estuary and Lord of Moncrieffe in Perth.15 The Moubrays also strengthened their ties with the Continent when Philip’s sister was married before c. 1185 to Enguerrand, a grandson of Constable Richard I du Hommet,16 and Enguerrand gained the Moubray fee at Écouché (seventeen kilometres from the honour of Briouze (Braose) also in the Ornois held by the Anglo-Irish and French lord, William de Briouze).17 Breton networks. These lands were part of the fees granted from the lordship of Geoffrey de la Guerche to the Moubrays in the eleventh century. Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 99, 265, 612–13, 616; ii, 1369–70, 1427: Some of the la Zouche fees (Swavesey) were inherited from the Breton lord, Alain de Rohan, husband of Conan IV’s sister. Roger de la Zouche held his Devonshire fees through his family going back to the reign of Henry I except Nympton, which he inherited through the Mayennes. He succeeded his brother, William de Belmeis, in c. 1200: Curia regis Rolls, i, 191. 15  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 383, 385, 387, 389, 395, 414, 417, 420–22, 429, 434–35, 448, 450, 455, 457–58, 460, 468–69, 472; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 185. Philip began to appear prominently in King William’s charters in the 1180s. 16  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, xcv; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 609 j–k, 619 m; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. 258. He was possibly the son of Constable William I du Hommet. William du Hommet handled the gifts to the abbey of Caen in c. 1179 and Roger de Moubray, Nigel’s father, was one of the benefactors: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 199–201. Philip de Moubray began witnessing for the King of Scots between 1189 and 1191, an indication of his coming of age as a new lord in Scotland: Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 383, 385, 387, 389. Their father was not born until c. 1145 so could not have married until c. 1165. Nigel died on the crusade in 1191and may have campaigned alongside Robert de Quincy, who also fought for King Richard. Philip’s brother, William, took over the English and French fees and was a hostage for King Richard in 1194. 17  See Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, xcv; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619  m for Enguerrand holding land in the honour of Moubray at Ecouché for his wife. The Hommets remained loyal to Henry in 1173 so the marriage probably happened after the war. Écouché passed from the Gournays to the Moubrays and then to the Hommets. The Moubrays had gained Ecouché by marriage in 1118 when Nigel d’Aubigny, father of Roger, married Gundred de Gournay, sister of Hugh de Gournay: Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. xix; Van Houts, History and Family Traditions, pp. 221–24. It is known that a younger Hommet branch had gravitated to Brittany as chancery

206

Chapter 5

The Moubray family’s Ornois base was particularly important throughout the twelfth century for it was a frontier region often in dispute between the dukes of Normandy, counts of Alençon, and kings of France.18 For example, the Moubray fees at Neuvy and Bazoches-en-Houlme were spe­­cifically in the midst of disputed territories near Argentan, where the kings of France were interfering by supporting local barons against the Angevin King.19 This struggle between the kings of France and England has already been addressed in reference to the counts of Perche and counts of Alençon, or Sées, to whom Louis VI, Louis VII, and later Philip Augustus all gave support at various points against the Dukes of Normandy.20 The Moubrays were also used in a similar manner. Roger and his family had much to lose in Normandy and in England by siding with the opposition in 1173, and for this service it seems they found advancement in the Scottish court.21 Other than the Moubray affinity for the Scots, they also had extensive contact with Breton families. In fact, part of the Aubigny/Moubray cross-Channel status was founded upon earlier territorial gains from a powerful Anglo-Breton family from La Guerche, near the Mançeau border. Nigel d’Aubigny’s fee at clerks of the dukes of Normandy so some of the members of the family may have originated from this branch: R. V. Turner, ‘Richard Lionheart’. Another Enguerrand du Hommet, who died in 1181, was the son of Constable Richard I du Hommet, and he married a daughter of Guillaume de Semilly: Cf. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 608 b; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 289, 291; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, lxxix, lxxxii, clxxvii, clxxxiii; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 187. Enguerrand’s nephew, Richard II, succeeded after Enguerrand’s death in 1181. The connections between the Semilly family and Aunay Abbey were strong by c. 1181 when other men and their families, like Richard de Ros and William de Colville, were introduced into the Hommet nexus under the auspices of salvatory gifts to the abbey. The Giffards, Saher de Quincy, and Hugh de Morville also patronized the abbey: Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 289, 291, 355; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 381–82; Le Hardy, Étude sur la baronnie et l’abbaye d’Aunay-sur-Odon, pp. 18–45. 18  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 31, 49, 76, 208–09, 339–42, 348, 350–53, 397, 434–35, 442–43; Green, The Aristocracy of Norman England, p. 134; Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 379–85. 19  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 137–38, 572–73; ii, 60, 201, 450–51. 20  Decaëns, ‘Les Châteaux de la vallée de l’Huisne dans le Perche’; Neveux, ‘La ville de Sées du haut Moyen Âge’, pp. 151–59; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, pp. 66, 191–96; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 84, 101–02, 113–17, 125, 239, 281, 360–64, 394–98, 461–64. 21  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 58, 383, 385, 387, 389, 395, 414, 417, 420, 421, 422, 429, 434, 435, 448, 450, 455, 457, 458, 460, 468, 469, 472.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

207

Map 3. Landholdings of the Ornois Families of Moubray, Briouze, William de la Hai, Vieuxpont. Map by the author, after a template from http://d-maps.com/carte.php?num_car=2865&lang=en.

208

Chapter 5

Welford in Northamptonshire and Melton Mowbray in Leicestershire had been held by the Breton lord, Geoffrey de la Guerche, until c. 1093 but even after 1093 the Aubigny/Moubrays continued to make marital alliances with Anglo-Breton families and to serve in person for their French fees, which ensured a sustainable presence of the family in Continental politics in successive generations.22 Roger de Moubray was part of an elite class of men who held lands on both sides of the Channel and his contact with Brittany was particularly important in 1173. Roger’s prominence as a member of Anglo-Breton networks was informed by his marriage to Alice de Gant, whose familial ties with Brittany strengthened the family’s territorial lordship. In dower, she gave him a territorial stake in the honour of Richmond at Masham, which brought him into direct contact with the Earl of Richmond, Duke Conan IV, who was her cousin.23 Her father, Walter de Gant, had already been in contact with the Scottish court as a witness in 1127 for King David, 24 and she and her husband may have helped foster relations between the Bretons and Scots throughout this period.25 Through his wife, Roger de Moubray was also related to Olivia, the sister 22 

Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. xx–xxi, xxiv, xxxiii, 5, 15–16, 135–37, 139, 189, 206, 210; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 192–93; M. Jones, ‘Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes en Angleterre’, p. 78. Cf. Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, pp. 102–04, 127–28, 166, 177–79, 185. Geoffrey was the younger brother of Guillaume, lord of La Guerche. They were probably related to the La Guerche family in the Touraine. Both families not only had lordships with the same names in these territories but also others with the same name, like Availles, and they both patronized Saint-Pierre. For the Touraine family at Preuilly see Carré de Busserolle, ‘Recherches historiques’, pp. 73–75, 85–87, 89–94. Roger de Moubray’s aunt by marriage was also Melisende de Coucy of the great crusading family who would marry into the Scottish royal family in the thirteenth century. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 359, 504; Gurney, The Record of the House of Gournay, p. 126. 23  Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v.1, xxii, xxv, 11–12, 20–22, 24–25, 34, 38, 118; v.2, 5, 17, 42, 49, 64, 66–67, 180, 186, 197, 332, 334–35, 347; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ix, 371–72; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 433; Sainte-Marie and others, Histoire de la Maison Royale de France, iii, 52–53; Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes, ed. by Wauters, Bormans, and Halkin, ii, 381, 558, 566; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. xxviii and n. 1; Cf. Burton, The Monastic Order in Yorkshire, pp. 204–05 about Moubray patronage in Yorkshire. Alice was the granddaughter of Stephen, Count of Penthièvre. 24  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 68. 25 

Alice’s brother was Earl Gilbert de Gant of Lincoln, Lord of Folkingham (Lincolnshire) and Hunmanby (Yorkshire). Dalton, ‘Gant, Gilbert de, Earl of Lincoln’. She did not die until 1176. It is interesting that before he was King, Stephen founded Furness Abbey as a daughter-

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

209

of Alain ‘le Noir’ of Richmond and aunt of Conan IV of Brittany. Olivia had married two Norman-Breton lords, Henry de Fougères and William de SaintJean, over the space of her lifetime, and her offspring by her first marriage were among those who joined the opposition in 1173.26 Roger’s ties with important Breton barons along with his own fees in the Manche at Montbray and in the Ornois probably informed his ecclesiastical patronage and further strengthened communication with Anglo-Breton lords. Before 1146, he was a benefactor of Savigny Abbey and founded the abbey of Jorevalle at York under the patronage of Earl Alain ‘le Noir’ of Richmond and Alain’s father-in law, Duke Conan III.27 Conan III’s grandson, Duke Conan IV, also continued patronising the new abbey at Jorevalle along with his Scottish wife, Duchess Margaret.28 The Moubray networks in Brittany were also nurtured by further marriages between the Gant and Aubigny families. Roger de Moubray’s brother-in-law, Robert de Gant, provided important links by marriage to Gunnora d’Aubigny, daughter of Ralph d’Aubigny and of Sibilla de Valognes, the latter who was possibly an aunt of Philip de Valognes, the chamberlain of King William who also fought in the 1173 war.29 Gunnora’s family were from Saint Aubin d’Aubigny (held by the Belvoir family), located fifteen kilometres east of Hédé. The Aubigny marriage put Robert de Gant into territorial networks in Brittany involving the opposition leader, Earl Robert III de Leicester (from the Beaumont-le-Roger family), for Hédé was held by Robert III’s cousin.30 house of Savigny in the same year that Walter appeared in the Scottish witness list. This interest in Savigny Abbey may have been influenced by familiarity with Bretons at Henry I’s court. 26  Sainte-Marie and others, Histoire de la Maison Royale de France, iii, 52–53. See Chapter 4 about marriage to Saint-Jean. 27  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 19–20; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, v.2, 5, 17, 49, 64, 100, 180, 186, 197, 205, 244. 28  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 568–72. 29  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 461; J. Moore, ‘Prosopographical Problems’, p. 179; Green, ‘Family Matters’, p. 155. Philip de Valognes witnessed a grant by William de Vescy to the monks on Farne Island with Helewise de Stuteville and her son by Robert III de Stuteville, called Osmund, in 1183. Sibilla’s son-in-law, Robert de Gant, was related to the Moubrays by marriage: Raine, The History and Antiquities of North Durham, p. 122. 30  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 461; Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, pp. 7–8; Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 2, 26, 33, 44, 146. This Aubigny family was also probably distantly related to the Aubignys at Saint-Martin who founded the Aubigny Earl of Arundel line, the latter whose English fees were centred in Sussex and Lincolnshire (amidst the Hai-du-Puit family). Gunnora’s uncle was William II d’Aubigny ‘le

210

Chapter 5

Gunnora, through the Scottish interaction offered by her husband and possibly through a Valognes mother, continued to favour her contact with northern lords for she made a second marriage after the death of her first husband (d. c. 1191) to the Anglo-French lord, Nicholas de Stuteville, Lord of Liddel.31 By the time of this second marriage, Nicholas’ political interests had focused on relations with the northern kingdom because his territorial position in Cumberland was better served by forming alliances in the southwest of Scotland.32 For this reason, he also married his second son, Nicholas, to the Galwegian heiress, Devorguilla, in c. 1205.33 The Moubray family was a significant player in cross-Channel communication not only because of their contact with Bretons. Their kinship with the Norman family of Gournay was also important because of the Gournay family’s territorial position in England and Normandy. Roger de Moubray’s mother was Gundred de Gournay, whose family held an important frontier lordship near Beauvais, a region which was also in dispute between Henry II and the kings of France.34 They also had lands scattered in Norfolk, Sussex, Buckinghamshire, Gloucestershire, Leicestershire and Lincolnshire, 35 the latter fees which were held of the Breton honour of Richmond. The Gournays could, like the Moubrays, be a threat to both the King of England and the King of France because they had sufficient territories from which to draw support on either side of the Channel, including from lands held by their extended kin group. Sometimes marriage unified families and other times it complicated and undermined existing alliances. For example, Roger de Moubray’s cousin, Edeva de Gournay, married Nicholas de Stuteville of Kimberley from the Valmont line, who was in turn a

Breton’, who married into the Clare family mentioned in Chapter 3. 31  Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 1, 15, 46. 32  Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 14–15, 176. Nicholas also held Cottingham (East Riding) and land in Kettleby Thorpe and Bigby (Lincolnshire) along with land in the honour of Mowbray. 33  Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 18–21; Calendar of the Charter Rolls of Henry III, ed. by Maxwell Lyte and others, ii, 342. Nicholas II gained by inheritance several more fees and manors at Brinklow (Warwickshire) and in Yorkshire, East Riding, and Lincolnshire. Through his wife he also gained an interest in Whissenden in Rutland. Devorguilla was probably the sister of Constable Alan of Galloway of Scotland: Clay, ‘Two Devorguillas’. 34  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 355–59. 35  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 280–84, 377, 491, 618; ii, 875–76.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

211

first cousin of Nicholas de Stuteville, Lord of Liddel.36 The Stutevilles did not support the rebellion and, in fact, brought other men into their camp through further marital contracts. For example, Nicholas de Stuteville of Valmont’s niece, Burga, married William de Vescy, who was heavily involved with the Scottish court through his lordship of Alnwick castle.37 Vescy held lands scattered throughout territories that supported the opposition in 1173 but he probably chose to fight for Henry II because of pressure applied by his wife’s family.38 Burga’s father, Robert, remained loyal to Henry II in 1173 and he was rewarded with custody of Lions-la-Foret, about twenty-five kilometres east of Rouen;39 and her brothers, William and Nicholas of Liddel, and her uncle, Roger (constable of Wark and sheriff of Northumberland), also supported Henry II during the war.40 Lordship patterns bound by marital ties represented only one dimension of loyalties, which often complicated rather than solved regional problems. For example, William de Vescy’s position in England was challenged by rivalry between his wife’s family and his overlord, Roger de Moubray. The English Stutevilles were overlords of some of the English honour of Moubray and they came to a settlement with Roger de Moubray, partially based on the Gournay36 

Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 45–46; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.2, 632–33. It is unclear that this marriage had occurred by 1173. It may have been negotiated because of communication during the war. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 504–05; Van Houts, History and Family Traditions, pp. 221–24. Roger de Moubray’s mother, Gundred de Gournay, was also related to the Warennes through her mother. Gundred’s mother was Edith, sister of William II, Earl of Warenne. Hugh II de Gournay, Gundred’s brother, can be seen witnessing with his cousins, William III de Warenne and Count Waleran of Meulan, at Rouen shortly after his father’s death in 1138. Gilbert de l’Aigle, Robert de Newburgh, and William de Ferrières (Saint-Hilaire in Eure) also witnessed with them as judges concerning a dispute over Tour-Renier that was held by the church of Jumièges: Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, i, 157–61. Gundred’s property in North Riding and in Leicestershire passed on to her son and grandson: Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. xlv, 161–72, 190. 37  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 124, 155. Alnwick was one of King William’s lordships before he was even king. 38  Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 1, 8, 13–15, 178–79. See Chapter 4 about Vescy fees. 39  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxiii. 40  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 36–41, ll. 482–508; pp. 86–99, ll. 1143–1319; pp. 114–15, ll. 1545–49; pp. 128–29, ll. 1709–15; pp. 140–41, ll. 1889–92; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 184; Benedict of Peter­ borough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 65; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 60–61.

Robert III = Helewise

William Roger ? Sheriff ? Osmund

*This table does not show all lines of descent or family members, only those who had contact or alliances with Scottish landowners.

Eustache = Margaret, nat. d. of King William the Lion of Scotland

Burga = William de Vescy

John of Warwickshire

Alice de Stuteville = Roger de Merlay, son of Ralph de Merlay and Juliana of Dunbar

Helewise = (1) William of Lancaster Lord of Kendal (d. 1184) = (2) Hugh de Moreville, Lord of Burgh-by-Sands (d. 1202)

John II = Matilda Basset

Roger sons

? Sheriff Roger, Lord of Agnes Burton

Nicholas II (d. 1233) = Devorguilla of Galloway

Figure 6. Stuteville family tree.

Robert (d. 1213) = Sibilla de Valognes, d. of Philip de Valognes

? Sheriff Roger William = Bertha niece of Ranulph de Glanville Nicholas I Lord of Liddel (d. 1217) = Gunnora d’Aubigny Eustache

Nicholas of Kimberley = Edeva de Gournay

Nicholas of Valmont (d. 1177)

Robert II = 1) Jeanne Talbot =2) Erneburg

212 Chapter 5

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

213

Stuteville marriage, but the two families were enemies for much of the twelfth century.41 In a later turn of fortune, Nicholas of Valmont’s son, Robert, would continue the Valmont line in France, while his son, Nicholas, who married Edeva de Gournay, settled in England at Kimberley and at Bedingham in Norfolk, but he would be disseized in 1204 for supporting King Philip of France. His decision to support the King of France was determined by kinship rather than by his territorial fortunes in England for he was willing to forsake his more prominent position in England for the sake of his family.42 Likewise, the Gournays were also under a lot of pressure during the 1173 war because of their landholdings and kin-networks and they may have changed sides a few times in the interest of preserving their position in the Anglo-French realm. Hugh II de Gournay and his son and heir, Hugh III, were captured by the opposition in 1173 and their castle at Gournay was burnt to the ground,43 but they must have joined Young Henry after this for their English estates were confiscated in the aftermath of the war.44 By contrast, the Moubrays remained loyal to Young Henry and his allies probably because their territorial interests on both sides of the Channel were in key areas of support to the opposition and because of the strength of their kinnetworks. These are only a few examples of how complicated fealty was among these families who held land or had bonds of friendship with multiple overlords in different regions. The 1173 war threw into relief the complex nature of sworn loyalties that families faced when their political identity was tied to territories and kinships that spanned Scotland, France, and England.

War The outbreak of war in 1173 was caused by several factors from the murder of Becket to the King’s interest in expanding and tightening his control over the Angevin empire. Part of his plan for extending his authority has already been discussed in reference to his seizure of lands and territories from families in frontier areas, but Henry II was also concerned about increasing the 41  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp.  xxviii–xxx, xxxiv; Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 5–7. 42  Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 45–46. His son of the same name would regain Bedingham and Kimberley in Norfolk in c. 1206. 43  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 369. 44  Pipe Rolls of 21 Henry II, pp. 108, 110; Pipe Rolls of 20 Henry II, pp. 39, 86.

214

Chapter 5

centralization of the Norman administration. In 1171, in order to raise revenue, Henry issued an inquest into ducal lands that had been alienated from the royal demesne, and this was followed in 1172 by the Infeudationes Militum, which recorded all knight-service in Normandy from bishoprics to baronages.45 He had already experienced resistance to other inquisitions, like the Assize of Clarendon in 1166 and the Inquisitio Vicecomitum in 1170 in England, so it is clear that there were some men in his demesne who were opposed to royal interference in what had become considered ancient custumal rights.46 Therefore, while Henry’s wife and sons were concerned about their access to revenues from lands and titles that they had already received nominally, other men were alienated at the King’s court and/or feared further encroachments against their perceived rights as lords. These anxieties were only worsened by the failure of Henry to reprimand the men who had killed the canonized Thomas Becket, which made the political community even more apprehensive about the King’s sense of justice. King Louis VII of France was quick to capitalize on this discontent and he provided the impetus and wherewithal for a concerted campaign against Henry that spanned the Channel. At the beginning of the war, there were three main geographical arenas for the conflict between Henry II, his oldest sons (Henry, Geoffrey, and Richard) and their allies. These areas were Picardy, Brittany, and northern England. One of the most striking features of the war was how close some families were on one side of the Channel, both in landholding patterns and in marriage, and yet because of lordships held abroad or for other reasons they chose to support a rival lord. This was especially prevalent in northern France, where the first campaign of the war was initiated. Beginning in June 1173, Count Philip of Flanders led forces from Aumale to Drincourt in Picardy while King Louis VII attacked Verneuil after passing through Blois held by the Anglo-Norman castellans, Hugh I de Lacy and Hugh de Beauchamp.47 The Count of Flanders suc45 

Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, ii, 624–47; Schlight, Monarchs and Mercenaries, pp. 59–64. 46  W. L. Warren, Henry II, p. 368; Beauroy, ‘Centralisation et histoire sociale’; J. Hudson, Land, Law, and Lordship, pp. 258–71. Contemporaries viewed these inquisitions with scepticism because it was perceived that many men were dislocated from their territorial rights: Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 3–5; Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 216–19. 47  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. vi–ix; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 49; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 372–75; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 173; Magni

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

215

cessfully seized Aumale and besieged Drincourt with the aid of the Counts of Ponthieu and Boulogne and Bernard III, Lord of Saint-Valery (Picardy) and of Beckley (Oxfordshire).48 Some of the northern French families, like the Fontaines, Picquignys and Saint-Valerys, probably supported the King of France in the 1173 conflict because the majority of their lands were held in service to the Count of Ponthieu, who had joined the opposition party.49 Although some of these men were not listed as specifically fighting for King Louis, their overlord, Count John of Ponthieu, did.50 Furthermore, Henry had no jurisdiction in the north of France and could not demand Picardian support as part of his rights as lord. Even from men he could demand rights, he struggled to obtain and trust their aid and was forced to rely heavily on Brabantine mercenaries.51 Nonetheless, it was obvious that even in the north, because so many of these families also held land in England, Henry was able to successfully apply pressure, and loyalties sometimes shifted in his favour. An example of the difficulties men faced who held land in northern France and in England can be seen in the position adopted by Count William ‘le Gros’ of Aumale. The Count attempted to remain as neutral as possible in the hope that he might be treated more leniently by both kings. The majority of his lands in Normandy (Aumale) and in England (East Riding and Lincolnshire) were Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxx. The Anglo-Irish lord, Hugh de Lacy, was the father of Hugh and Walter de Lacy and he would later be rewarded with the lordship of Meath for his loyal service during the wars. 48  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 173; Jordan Fantosme, Chronicle, ed. by Michel, pp. vi–ix; History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 42–44, ll.  815–37; Lob-Barton, Les comtes de Saint-Valéry, p.  53. Matthew was Count of Boulogne through his wife, Mary, daughter of King Stephen. This marriage was briefly discussed in the previous chapter. Matthew struggled throughout his career to gain his wife’s English lands that had been withheld by Henry: W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 123–27. 49  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp.  vi–ix; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 173; W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 123–27; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 47. 50  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 45–46. 51  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 47; Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, pp. 163–64; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 45–46; Geoffrey of Vigeois, Chronica, in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xii, 443; W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 123–27. Gerald of Wales and Howden stated that Henry II had very little backing. However, the list of his supporters seems to indicate an even divide. Henry did still have a fair amount of support in England. It was mainly his Norman, Angevin, Breton, and Gascon vassals who fought for Louis and Young Henry.

216

Chapter 5

held of Henry II but the county of Aumale was in a soft frontier, contiguous to the powerful lordship of Count John of Ponthieu, and he also held land in the Beauvasis, which was in French territory held directly of the crown of France. Furthermore, Count William’s sister, Mathilde, was married to one of Count John’s men, Gerard de Picquigny, Vidames d’Amiens, and the two Counts moved in the same circles.52 Count William and Count John of Ponthieu were both benefactors of the church of St Pierre of Sélincourt in Picardy,53 and their men, the Bailleuls,54 the Picquignys,55 and the Bissets followed suit and also patronized Sélincourt in the twelfth century.56 These northern lords formed a tightly knit group of support bound by territorial and familial concerns based around their overlords’ interests which also spread to England. Manasser Bisset, who originated from northern France, was able to find service with his family’s overlord in England, the Count of Aumale, after which he was able to rise quickly at the court of Henry II and Henry’s wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine.57 Manasser’s decision to enter royal service was probably determined by his Anglo-Norman lord’s loyalties. Count William of Aumale was not always a staunch supporter of the Angevin King, though during the Succession War he had been involved with the pro-Angevin candidate to the earldom of Lincoln — Earl Ranulf of Chester.58 In 1173, King Henry was not sure of the Count’s loyalty because of his lordships in France. Manasser was not under the same pressure as the Count. His lands were in England, though he did take a French wife, Alix de Cany, to retain a link with

52 

Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, xxvii. The Vidames’ function was mainly military so he would have been involved in the campaigns. 53  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, ed. by Beaurain, pp. 127–31, 357. The Fontaines, another family intermarried with the Bailleuls, also witnessed grants to St Peter de Sélincourt in 1160 for the Count of Ponthieu. 54  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, ed. by Beaurain, pp. 11, 64, 189, 190, 335, 337. 55  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, ed. by Beaurain, pp. 35, 59, 73, 102, 146, 36, 249. 56  English, The Lords of Holderness, p. 62. The brothers William, Ansold, and Arnulf Bisset, witnessed the Count’s grants to St Peter of Sélincourt in Picardy between 1164 and 1189: Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, ed. by Beaurain, pp. 2, 27, 68, 76, 127–29, 177–78. 57  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, iii, 93, 97; Power, The Norman Frontier, p.  394; Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, pp.  15–16; Vincent, ‘Patronage, Politics and Piety’, p. 22. Manasser witnessed Count William of Aumale’s grants to the abbey of Meaux between 1154 and c. 1170. Cf. English, The Lords of Holderness, pp. 62, 146. 58  Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 124–26.

Robert

Figure 7. Bisset family tree.

Agnes = Geoffrey de Bois Ld. of Brétizel

Henry Bisset of Scotland

?

?

William Carpentarius

Arnulf (de Brétizel?) (c. 1164–80)

Ansold

Henry (c. 1154)

Henry

William (d. c. 1140)

Ansold (c. 1205–18) (England)

Ansold

[English Branch]

Henry = Aubrey

William

Manasser (d. c. 1178) = Alix de Cany

William (de Brétizel?)

Henry Bisset (11th c.) = Bertha

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173 217

218

Chapter 5

his family’s position in France.59 He remained loyal to the King in 1173, and his gamble paid off. He was made Henry’s steward and granted Kidderminster in Worcestershire, Rockbourne and Nether Burgate in Hampshire, and a fee in the honour of Giffard for loyal service to the King.60 His son, Henry (probably named after his royal master), succeeded in c. 1178 to the estates and married Aubrey, daughter of Richard, Constable of Chester.61 However, capturing the Bisset family’s exact lines of descent on both sides of the Channel is problematic. The cross-Channel Bisset kin group continued to use the same names making it difficult to ascertain which was being referred to in charters. For example, it is unclear which Henry Bisset witnessed the donation to the convent of Saint-Saëns near the lordship of Longueville in the pays de Caux between 1182 and 1189, but based on territorial obligations he was probably the same Henry who also held fees of the honour of Mortemer along with William de Mortemer, who joined the opposition in 1173.62 The relationship is unclear between the English and Norman lines but the Henry Bisset who appears in Scotland in c. 1195 does not seem to have been directly from the English line, which suggests that he was from the Norman line and that they were separate by this point.63 He may have been from the col59 

Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 13 [Cartularium monasterii Saint Marie que Johannis de Fulcardimonte], 84v–85r; Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, i, 178–80; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, intro, p. 403; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 491. Alix de Cany’s family held at Cany-Barville in Caux, about twenty-six kilometres east of the Stuteville lordship of Valmont. 60  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 141; Lally, ‘Secular Patronage at the Court of Henry II’, pp. 181–82. 61  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 634; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 394, 491; Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges, ed. by Vernier, i, 179. Manasser had married Alix by 1150. Manasser’s son, Henry, first witnessed a grant to the abbey of Meaux in 1154 with his father and he died in c. 1213: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 213–14. 62  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 642 b–d; Orbec, Études sur la généalogie des seigneurs, pp. 9–11. Saint-Saëns was originally an Orbec/Plessis foundation lying just south of Bellencombre held by the Warenne family. The Warenne family also held the lordship of Mortemer. Henry Bisset, who appeared in the charter for SaintSaëns, witnessed with Richard and Geoffrey Talbot for Landri d’Orbec. The Anglo-French lord, William Briwerre, who would become prominent in the administration of King John of England, also witnessed this grant. 63  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 491; ‘Histoire et cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de Lannoy’, ed. by Deladreue, pp. 406–09, 411, 422, 629–30, 645–46. This will have to remain an open question. It is possible that the Scottish Henry Bisset is the Henry who appeared in

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

219

lateral line of the Bisset English branch that held land at Brétizel near Aumale. The family had taken the name Bois from about 1189 because of a failure in the male line, descending from Arnulf Bisset, and thus the lordship fell to the Bois family by marriage.64 A change in fortunes for the family could have convinced Henry Bisset to emigrate directly from the north of France to Scotland by 1195.65 Ecclesiastical patronage also argues in favour of Henry Bisset’s kinship with the Brétizel line based on the Cistercian houses at Byland and Lannoy. The Brétizel Bissets were already important benefactors of the abbey of Lannoy in the Oise when Henry Bisset emigrated to Scotland. His emigration coincided with the abbot of Lannoy’s move to Byland Abbey in Yorkshire, and Byland

c. 1154 as a younger son of Ansold Bisset, Lord of Brétizel (near Vaudricourt, south of St Valéry, Somme). His brother, Arnulf, succeeded to Brétizel in c. 1164 and his uncle may have been Manasser Bisset as Daniel Power suggests. This line was one of the most powerful in the region. They were vassals of the Vidames of Gerberoy in the Oise, which influenced them to patronize the abbey of Beaubec and Lannoy, the former which was founded by Hugh de Gournay in c. 1128. See ‘Histoire et cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de Lannoy’, ed. by Deladreue. The Scottish Henry only appeared in a handful of charters dated c. 1195 to 1198 so he might have been quite young when he appeared in the 1154 charter and in his fifties when he appeared in Scotland. However, he could also have been a son of the earlier Henry or of one of Henry’s many brothers. His emigration would have coincided with the peak in hostilities between Richard I and Philip Augustus in the Beauvasis. Cf. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 376, 388, 417 about the Scottish Henry. One of the Henry Bissets held at Cléville northeast of Bolbec and at Eblebont (?) until c. 1204, which was part of the honour of Clare. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 642 d. 64  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 491. It would make more sense if the Scottish Henry was a brother of Arnulf or a son of Henry otherwise he would have succeeded to Brétival after the failure of the male line. 65  G. Barrow, Scotland and its Neighbours, p. 73; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 375–76, 388, 416–17. The Scottish Bissets initially appeared to gravitate around the Carrick/ Galloway kin group as can be seen in the witness lists. By the third decade of the thirteenth century their power-bases moved north into the earldoms of Angus, Mar, and Atholl because of the Galwegian Atholl inheritance. Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 430–31; English, The Lords of Holderness, pp. 62, 146: It is difficult to be sure what the connection is but the branches of English Bissets did originate from the Norman family. Cf. S. Duffy, ‘The Lords of Galloway’ on Irish and Scottish Bissets. King William’s father, Henry, had also come into contact with another Bisset. Robert Bisset, prior of Hexham, witnessed in c. 1139 for Earl Henry a confirmation of a grant to Llanthony priory, the foundation of which has already been mentioned under his father, King David. Priory of Hexham, i, 7, 55, 107, 116, 139; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 90.

220

Chapter 5

had ties with the Cistercians in Scotland through the abbey of Rievaulx.66 Byland Abbey was a Cistercian house founded by the Anglo-Norman Roger de Moubray in c. 1143, and it was said Roger had been sent to a Norman kinsman, Robert de l’Aunay, for safety during the Succession War.67 Robert was also related to Roger de Moubray’s kinsman, Hugh de Gournay, who founded Lannoy Abbey in 1147, and he was a benefactor of Hugh’s abbey at Beaubec-laRosière in the Pays de Bray.68 Gournay patronage of Byland was based on their kinship with the Moubray/Aubignys. Moreover, the Aunays, were also witnessing for the Moubrays in England probably because they accompanied their Ornois neighbours to England after the conquest.69 It is striking how important extended kin-networks could be not only to secular but also to ecclesiastical patronage that spread from France and England to Scotland. This interaction between families played a vital role in patterns of loyalty during the war particularly in northern France because so many of these men and their families also held land in England. Ultimately, Count William of Aumale’s attempts to appear uncommitted to Henry II during the war failed. The King of France assumed his loyalties stood with the King of England and thus his lands were attacked in 1173.70 One of the reasons for King Louis of France’s lack of confidence in the Count of Aumale may have been due to the adherence to Henry II of key men in Count William’s affinity in England like Everard de Ros, Geoffrey Trussebut and Robert II de Brus.71 The Ros fam66  ‘Histoire et cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de Lannoy’, ed. by Deladreue, p. 439; Burton, ‘English Monasteries and the Conquest’, pp.  106–07, 110; Keith, An Historical Catalogue of Scottish Bishops, pp. 416–17. The first abbot of Dundrennan Abbey on the Solway Firth was said to have died at Byland Abbey in 1189. Dundrennan may also have been a daughter-house of Rievaulx. 67  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 343; Gurney, The Record of the House of Gournay, pp. 82–83. 68  ‘Histoire et cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de Lannoy’, ed. by Deladreue, p. 439; Gurney, The Record of the House of Gournay, pp. 82–83. 69  Cartulary of Byland Abbey, ed. by Burton, pp. lvi, 44, 137, 141–42, 238–39, 250–51, 374–76. 70  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 47. 71  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 51; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 1–112; The Trussebut Fee, x, 5–7, 11; English, The Lords of Holderness, pp. 67, 68, 151–53; Blakely, The Brus Family, pp. 36–38. Everard de Ros was the steward of the Count of Aumale and Lord of Helmsley in North Riding and of Wark in Northumberland. His brother-in-law, Geoffrey Trussebut, also held in East Riding and in Northamptonshire, and Robert de Brus held in East Riding, North Yorkshire, Northumberland,

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

221

ily were also among those who held land on both sides of the Channel and in this case they may have chosen to support Henry because of their kin-networks and land-base in England and in Normandy. Everard de Ros held a fee in the bailie of Peter de Tilly in Upper Normandy as did his wife, Rohese Trussebut (Agatha), who also held in ferme (rent) the sergenterie of Honfleur.72 Rohese’s brother, Geoffrey Trussebut, also owed knight-service in Normandy.73 The Ros family had not yet moved into Scottish circles and at this point were motivated primarily by the extensive lands they held of Henry II on both sides of the Channel. Geoffrey Trussebut and Robert de Brus also opted to support their English overlord, Henry II, in 1173, but Count William of Aumale was not like Brus and Trussebut in that he held extensive lands of both the English and French kings and his allegiance must have seemed far less clear-cut. His position was also unlike that of the Count of Ponthieu and other Picardian lords, who owed fealty and service mainly to the King of France even if they also held small fees in England. Gradations of land-ownership, kin-networks, and a family’s chosen region for their main residence exerted the greatest influence over loyalties during the war. Another example of a northern family who also held land in England is the Anglo-Picardian family of Bailleul. The Bailleul family were in the midst of lands held by the Picquignys and Fontaines who fought for the opposition and yet they chose to support Henry II in 1173. This could not have been an easy decision considering that one of their close neighbours and kinsmen in the north of France, Bernard III de Saint-Valery, was a leader of the French army in 1173, and Bernard’s daughter, Loretta, had been married to John I, Count of Ponthieu,74 before she remarried to Aléaume de Fontaines, Vidames d’Amiens.75 and Cleveland. Cf. Blakely, The Brus Family, p. 7 about Brus. 72  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Martainville, MS  Y.  94 [Collection Martainville, État de Domaine royal les viscounts de Rouen, Pont-Audemer, Bernat], fol. 200. 73  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619  b and d; Antiquités anglo-normandes de Ducarel, ed. by Léchaudé d’Anisy, pp. 231–32; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 526–29. William Trussebut, Rohese’s father, was castellan of Bonneville and bravely tried to defend the town against Geoffrey of Anjou in 1138. The castellany eventually fell to Rohese’s son, Robert de Ros, in the late twelfth century. 74  Darsy, ‘Gamaches et ses Seigneurs’, pp. 132, 152–53. John’s son, called William, by his second wife, Beatrix de St Pol, was born in about 1176 so his remarriage probably occurred before this date. 75  Darsy, ‘Gamaches et ses Seigneurs’, pp.  122–157; Chenaye-Desbois and Badier, Dictionnaire de la Noblesse, 3rd edn, vii, 242–43. Loretta and Aléaume de Fontaine founded Longpré-les-Corps-Saint, four kilometres southeast of Fontaines and ten kilometres southeast

222

Chapter 5

The Bailleuls were thus under immense territorial pressure in France. Their Continental lordship at Bailleul-en-Vimeu was within a thirty-five kilometre radius of the Picquignys, Fontaines, and Saint-Valerys who fought for the opposition in 1173. All four families had developed strong bonds of friendship and kinship over the years, and had fought together in the early Crusades.76 Bernard II de Bailleul, the head of the Anglo-French family, held Tours-enVimeu of his brother, Eustache de Bailleul, Lord of Hélicourt, and his wife was a Picquigny.77 In fact, it may have been this marital alliance that saved her family’s lands in Hampshire from being confiscated by the King just after the war since her brother-in-law remained loyal to Henry.78 Bernard II de Bailleul was also under pressure in England. His English lands were scattered throughout northern Yorkshire, from where a lot of support originated during the war, and he was also familiar with the Scottish King, who joined Young King Henry’s campaign. Although the Bailleul family did not hold land in Scotland yet, they had witnessed for the Canmores and were involved with Scottish tenants in northern England during the Succession War. William had even witnessed for Bernard II de Bailleul or his father by the same name in 1152/53.79 Despite these affinities, Bernard was one of the men who campaigned against King William, even aiding in his capture at Alnwick in 1174.80 Divided loyalties complicated service and meant that many territories, like Aumale and Ponthieu, were not united behind one royal overlord. For this reason, Henry II was successful in his campaigns in the north of France. He of Bailleul-en-Vimeu. Aléaume’s kinsman, Enguerrand, was steward of Ponthieu and held lands at Gomshall Netley in Surrey alongside William Mauvoisin: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 66; Pipe Roll of 1 John, p. 56. 76  William of Tyre, A History of Deeds, ed. and trans. by Babcock and Krey, pp. 524, 535, 550, 553, 556; Olivier LeBlanc, ‘Picardie, Croisades, et Sires de Boves’. One member of the Picquigny kin group, Guermond de Picquigny, became Patriarch of Jerusalem in 1118. Bernard II de SaintValery’s son, Renauld, was a crusader who settled near Antioch as Lord of Harenc. Bernard also made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem: Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Delisle, i, 316 also citing Cartulaire de l’abbaye Notre-Dame de Cercamp, p. 81. 77  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, ed. by Beaurain, pp. 189–90; Reid, ‘The Mote of Urr’; Stell, ‘The Balliol Family’, p. 153; Belleval, Jean de Bailleul, pp. 47–65; Scott, The Norman Balliols in England, pp. 255, 346. 78  Pipe Roll of 21 Henry II, p. 193. 79  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 156; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 43. 80  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 130–31, ll. 1757–1917; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 184.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

223

did not face a solid bloc of opposition,81 and he capitalized on the disunity of the opposition by implementing a two-pronged attack led by William de Mandeville, Earl of Essex and Lord of Tancarville, at Drincourt,82 while a second force led by Hugh de Lacy and Hugh de Beauchamp defeated Louis and Young Henry at Verneuil.83 Henry’s rivals were being defeated on every front and the war seemed nearly over while King William of Scotland remained undecided despite overtures from both Young Henry and Louis to join them. His decision to finally join the opposition must have been quite difficult. Efforts to diplomatically resolve the issue over Northumberland failed, and he was probably receiving pressure from his nobility who wanted to support their Norman, Breton and Picardian kin and make gains in Northumberland and Cumberland while Henry II’s forces were diverted to the Continent. In the meantime, his sister, Duchess Margaret of Brittany, and her allies, led by Earl Hugh of Chester, had risen against their Angevin overlord, which may have influenced King William’s change of heart. Earl Hugh was in charge of leading the Breton contingents at Dol against Henry, but Dol fell quickly to Henry’s Brabantine mercenaries under the leadership of William du Hommet, Constable of Normandy.84 The chronicler,

81 

English, The Lords of Holderness, p. 25. Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 373; Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 262; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 49. William de Mandeville had close ties with the counts of Flanders even though they were on opposite sides in the war. He was in the count’s service at the time of his brother’s death in 1166. He also helped the count against Baudouin V, Count of Hainault, in 1184 and served regularly as an ambassador to France for the kings of England. His lands at Tancarville were strategically in the midst of trade along the Seine River. William would marry Hawise, the daughter of William ‘le Gros’ in 1179/80 and become Count of Aumale through her: Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 154, 159, 287, 321, 353; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 132; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, v, 118. 83  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 49–50; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxx. 84  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 12–19, ll. 131–240; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 175–76; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 703 h–j. King Henry relied on Brabantine mercenaries because he did not trust his barons nor could he rely on them to fight for him: William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 172. William du Hommet’s father, Constable Richard, had been with the army in Brittany led against Conan IV in 1166: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 419–22. 82 

Chapter 5

224

Jordan Fantosme, seems to directly blame the Earl of Chester for playing a role in King William’s decision to join Young Henry when he stated: A, Deu! Quel duel del gentil rei Guillame! Del Rei Henri aura si mortel blasme; Co peise mei, par le barun saint Jacme! Kar plus franc ne guverna unc realme.85

Hugh of Chester was an important player in these cross-Channel networks and in particular he had close bonds with other Breton families. Besides his English earldom of Chester, Hugh was also Count of Avranches, Viscount of the Bessin, and he held in chief Briquessart, Saint-James-de-Beuvron and the honour of Saint-Sever in lower Normandy,86 and a scattering of lands in the Saosnois at Exmes, which were part of the goods held by the abbey of SaintSever that the earls of Chester had founded during the reign of William I.87 Most importantly for the campaigns, their Avranchin and Bessin fees put them in the midst of other Breton networks that spilled over into lower Normandy.88 It is impressive how quickly the political relationship between the Kings of Scots and Earls of Chester had changed. Whereas they had vied against 85 

History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 93, l. 1820; 397, l. 7799; 399, l. 7850; 427, l. 8414; 429, l. 8443; 477, l. 9367; Poem of the Cid, trans. by Hamilton and Perry, p. 93, l. 1342; p. 121, l. 1867; 179, l. 3028; p. 203, l. 3509. It was common in medieval literature to curse by a saint or God. Often the saint’s name chosen by the author had a place in local traditions linked to either the area in which the action took place or to the author’s own local ‘hero-saint’. For example, in the Roman de Fergus, curses were made by Saint-Mungo and in Béroul’s Tristan different characters were cursed by Saint Martin, Saint Thomas, Saint Stephen, Saint Richier, and Saint Trechmor of Carhaix (St Treveur was an obscure Breton saint and son of King Conomer who was decapitated). In this case, a secular lord, the baron of Saint James, or Earl Hugh, was the cursed. Cf. Béroul, The Romance of Tristan, ed. by Gregory, p. 31, l. 476; p. 59, l. 1126; p. 139, l. 3070; p. 141, l. 3076; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 50–51, ll. 670–73:  Oh! God! What sorrow for gentle King William!   From King Henry he will have such mortal blame;   This grieves me, by the baron Saint James!   For a nobler man never governed a realm. 86  Thacker, ‘The Earls and their Earldom of Chester’, p. 22; Musset, ‘Les Origines et le patrimoine de l’abbaye de Saint-Sever’. The Chester family were originally Scandinavian. 87  Musset, ‘Les Origines et le patrimoine de l’abbaye de Saint-Sever’. Cf. Crouch, ‘The Admini­ stration of the Norman Earldom’ about some of theNorman influence on their English county. 88  Musset, ‘Les Origines et le patrimoine de l’abbaye de Saint-Sever’. Hugh’s failure at Dol cost him his earldom of Chester which Henry II took between 1174 and 1177, but he did regain it. Thacker, ‘The Earls and their Earldom of Chester’, p. 14.

*Amicia’s brother, William de Montfort was also married to Eudo de Porhoët’s daughter

Amicia = Simon ct. of Evreux m. by 1170

Robert III de Beaumont (d. 1190) = Petronilla de Grantmesnil

Figure 8. Twelfth-century Scoto-Breton marriages.

Margaret = Saher de Quincy, later Earl of Winchester m. 1170–90

Hawise de Beaumont = Earl William of Gloucester (d. 1183)

David Earl of Huntingdon

Earl Hugh (d. 1181) = Bertrade de Montfort, sister of Simon de Montfort l’Amaury

Maud = Richard (d. 1175) = X. _sister* of Robert de Earl Ranulph Montfort -sur-Risle IV of Chester = c. 1141

Earl Robert of Gloucester = Mabel de Montgomery

William I king 1165–1214

Ada de Warenne = Henry, son of King David I of Scotland

Robert II de Beaumont (d. 1168) Adeline = Hugh de Montfort = Amicia*, d. of Raoul de sur-Risle Gaël de Montfort Robert* X = Anne de Fougères, sister of Raoul Malcolm IV king 1153–65

= (2) William de Warenne, Earl of Surrey (d. 1138)

Robert de Beaumont I (d. 1118) = (1) Isabel of Vermandois (d. c. 1147) Earl of Leicester

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173 225

226

Chapter 5

each other in the northwest of England between the 1130s and 1153, they had become allies twenty years later because of the drastic shift in loyalties during the reign of Henry II. This can also be seen in the resolution of former conflicts between the Warennes, Beaumonts, Roger de Moubray, William de Roumare (half-brother of Earl Ranulf of Chester), and William de Vescy.89 A number of new familial alliances that crossed the Channel made former enemies into friends often through a series of marital contracts. The earls of Chester, Leicester, Gloucester, the lord de Montfort-sur-Risle and the King of Scotland were all related by marriage or descent (see Figure 8 above). These marriages not only united families in England but also introduced members of the kin group into extended networks that spilled over into Brittany.90 For example, Earl Hugh of Chester’s uncle, Richard, married the sister of Robert de Montfort-sur-Risle,91 the latter who was married to Clemencia de Fougères, sister of Ralph and Guillaume de Fougères, who, as mentioned in the previous chapter, had been at the receiving end of the attacks made by Henry’s forces in the 1160s.92 Earl Hugh’s maternal uncle, Earl William fitzRobert of Gloucester, 89  Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp.  118–26. The conflict between Chester and Moubray had mainly been resolved earlier during the reign of Stephen. William de Roumare’s son succeeded his father in c. 1151 and became Earl of Lincoln and Lord of Neufmarché. Cf. Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 102 for the latter lordship in the 1170s. 90  Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, vii, 526; xii.1, 496; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 10, 15–16, 42, 85, 212 n. 92. Earl Hugh’s aunt was the sister of Earl Robert III of Leicester. Hugh’s wife, Bertrade de Montfort, was the daughter of Simon III de Montfort l’Amaury, Count of Evreux: Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 15; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 247. Bertrada’s brother, Simon, Lord of Montfort and Rochefort, was married to Amicia de Beaumont, daughter of Robert III Earl of Leicester, by 1170. 91  Torigni says that Robert Earl of Gloucester’s son, Richard, was married to the sister of Robert de Montfort-sur-Risle: Torigni, Chronicle, p. 269. Torigni is quite reliable about matters pertaining to Brittany and he had firsthand access to information about Torigni-sur-Vire, his birthplace, which was a fief of the earls of Gloucester: RHF, xxiii, p. 611 k; Van Houts (ed.), Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ii, p. 248. Cf. Torigni, Chronicle, pp. 177-78, 279; Round (ed.), Rotuli de Dominabus, p. 15; Complete Peerage, vii, pp. 526, 529; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 13, 16, 32, 88, 120-21, 193, 220 about Gloucester, the Montforts and the Beaumonts. Earl Hugh of Chester’s mother was a daughter of Earl Robert of Gloucester: Torigni, Chronicle, p. 177. 92  Torigni, Chronicle, p. 279; RRAN, ii, p. 107; Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et Châteaux de Rennes, p. 276. Ralph was attacked by King Henry in 1164, 1166 and 1168. Anne, Clemencia, Ralph and William’s grandfather, Ralph I de Fougères was granted by Henry I a confirmation for the monks of Savigny at Avranches in 1113. Ralph II’s daughter, Marguerite, also married into the rebel family at Meulan. She married Waleran of Meulan, son of Count Robert and of Maud of Cornwall: Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum historicorum, dogmaticorum, moralium, amplissima collectio, ed. Edmond Martène, 9 vols (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France,

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

227

further cemented the Beaumont/Montfort kin-base by marrying Earl Robert III of Leicester’s sister, Hawise, in about 1150, and Hawise was half-Breton through her mother.93 Earl William’s brother, Richard, also married the opposition lord, Robert de Montfort-sur-Risle’s sister.94 These marriages united several of these families behind the same cause when war erupted. Robert de Montfort-sur-Risle, Earl Hugh and Earl Robert all joined Young Henry’s faction in 1173.95 These networks may also have pulled other men into the war who were members of the Scottish and Anglo-French courts. Saher de Quincy, the son of Robert de Quincy, Lord of Leuchars in Fife, married Earl Robert III de Beaumont’s daughter, Margaret, sometime between about 1174 and 1180.96 Young Saher, who later became Earl of Winchester, may have been groomed on the Continent by his father or uncle from a young age and he was most likely the Saher de Quincy who fought with the opposition party in 1173.97 The elder 1724-33), i (1724), p. 986. Clemencia, Ralph, and William’s sister, Anne, probably married Robert de Montfort-de-Gaël. William’s daughter, Clemencia, also made gifts to Savigny and was to marry Earl Ranulf of Chester in 1199: Monasticon, vi. 2, p. 1102 and see pp. 1024, 1051 for the abbey’s connection to Long Bennington in Lincolnshire and Field Dalling in Norfolk. Ranulf of Chester took over the English Fougères fees for his wife in c. 1200. Everard and Jones (eds), Charters of Constance, pp. 105-06; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 149, 171, 199. Clemencia was the granddaughter of Ralph II de Fougères, who led the rebellion in 1166. 93  Monasticon, ii, p. 61; Barraclough (ed.), Charters of the Earls of Chester, pp. 123-26. 94  Torigni says that Robert Earl of Gloucester’s son, Richard, was married to the sister of Robert de Montfort-sur-Risle: Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 269. Torigni is quite reliable about matters pertaining to Brittany and he had firsthand access to information about Torigni-sur-Vire, his birthplace, which was a fief of the earls of Gloucester: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 k; Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 248. Cf. Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 177–78; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, vii, 526, 529; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 13, 16, 32, 88, 120–21, 193, 220 about Gloucester, the Montforts and the Beaumonts. Earl Hugh of Chester’s mother was a daughter of Earl Robert of Gloucester: Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 177. 95  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 257; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 371. 96  Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, xii.2, 750; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 462. Saher was born about 1154 so he might have married as early as c. 1174. Margaret and Saher’s son, Robert, was married before 1208 when his daughter Margaret was born so he was probably alive by c. 1180. 97  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 46; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 118. He is called Saher de Quincy juvenis or juniori, the young or younger. This could be either Saher son of Saher or Saher son of Saher’s brother, Robert.

228

Chapter 5

Saher, Robert’s brother, who was also alive during the war, was a staunch royalist and did not join the opposition. There is no evidence that his living son of the same name chose to fight on the opposite side to his father as assumed by Sidney Painter in 1957 and others following.98 Furthermore, the elder Saher’s nephew, Young Saher, was seemingly politically active by this point for he had been witnessing for the King of Scots alongside his father as early as 1166.99 The Quincy family were prominent members of the Anglo-French courts on both sides of the Channel throughout the late twelfth century.100 Young Saher’s uncle, Saher, was the castellan of Nonancourt and in Lieuvin between 1180 and 1184,101 and he, his son, or his young nephew (the future Earl of Win­­chester) Robert’s son would have been of age to fight in 1173 as a young knight and he did have an illustrious career on the Continent so it seems more likely he was the 1173 Saher who fought for Young Henry. Saher the elder’s son, Saher II, was not involved on the Continent as far as is known. 98  Oram, ‘Quincy, Saer de, Earl of Winchester’; Painter, ‘The House of Quency’. Other than service owed to Henry II at Nonancourt and Lieuvin, the elder Saher also held Long Buckby through his father and Eynesbury in Huntingdonshire through his mother, Maud de Senlis. Maud was also a half-sister of King William’s father, Henry of Huntingdon. Maud had been married before to Robert, Lord of Dunmow and Baynard. 99  Charters of the Abbey of Coupar Angus, ed. by Easson, i, 1–4: The charter does not explicitly say that this Saher was Robert’s son. There is an argument that this Saher was the elder Saher, brother of Robert, or his son Saher II who fought for Henry II in 1173 but they never showed an interest in Scotland: Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, xii.2, 747; Oram, ‘Quincy, Saer de, Earl of Winchester’. It would make more sense that this Saher was the son of Robert considering that he would be very involved on the Continent and in the Angevin administration. Young Saher’s loyalties in 1173 would have been to his overlord, King William of Scotland, which explains his involvement with the opposition at the outbreak of the war whereas Saher, son of Saher the elder, would have most likely followed his father’s loyalties which were staunchly in favour of Henry II. Saher de Quincy the elder and his son were not great landowners and there is no evidence that they would have deemed it necessary to divide their lands and side with opposite royal lords as families like the Beaumonts did earlier in the century. The Scottish Saher’s mother was Orabilia, daughter of Ness, son of William of Leuchars. His parents had divorced by c. 1178. Orabilia remarried to Adam, son of Earl Duncan of Fife. It certainly cannot be proven nor should it be assumed that the future Earl of Winchester was not on the political scene as early as 1173. 100  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 104, 458, 533, 554, 561, 572; ii, 21, 31, 37, 38, 47, 68, 70, 82, 85, 87–88, 90, 95, 149, 181, 187, 192–93, 195, 210, 215, 261, 269, 279–88, 303, 326, 370, 373, 375, 391, 396–97, 399, 400, 408, 410, 416, 428, 457. 101  Rotuli litterarum patentium, ed. by Hardy, p. 31; Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, pp. 55–56, 59, 65, 89; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 162, 287. The previous castellan of Nonancourt, a generation earlier, had been William Louvel of Ivry whose family were also part of the Mauvoisin networks: Regesta Regum AngloNormannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 106. See Chapter 6 about Louvels and Mauvoisins.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

229

was a witness for the church of Sainte Marie in Rouen in the late twelfth century along with several other members of the cross-Channel elite like Earl William de Mandeville of Essex, Earl Robert III of Leicester, Constable William du Hommet, William son of Radulph, Seneschal Alured de St Martin (possibly related to the Scottish St Martins)102 and William de Mara.103 Young Saher was also a benefactor of the church of Evreux probably because of his wife’s family.104 His father, Robert, was an important cross-Channel lord and handled the accounting for King Henry at Domfront by 1180.105 What is clear about the Quincy family is that they do not seem to have been necessarily from Béthune in the Pas de Calais, as argued by L. C. Loyd and more recently by Geoffrey Barrow and Grant Simpson, particularly since there is no evidence that the family still had any contacts there.106 Their Continental The Louvels had probably lost their position at Nonancourt because they tended to side with the kings of France. Nonancourt was extremely important militarily to King Henry’s position in the Evrecin. 102  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 202–03. The St Martins were in the Warenne affinity and moved into Scotland during the reign of King David (See Chapter 3). Alexander was the first in Scotland and his brother Adulph accidentally killed a Moreville for which his brother made a gift to Dryburgh Abbey between 1170 and 1174. 103  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 13 [Cartularium Monasterii Saint Marie que Johannis de Fulcardimonte], fol. 33. William de Mandeville also constructed the castle at Chambois in Perche while he was the husband of Hawise de Forz, Countess of Aumale. 104  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 463 g. It is possible that this was also Saher, the uncle of Young Saher, but it would perhaps make more sense if it were for the nephew. Saher was married to a Beaumont. The Beaumonts were heavily involved with and held a lot of land in the Evrecin and they were benefactors of this church. 105  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, ccxiv. Robert de Quincy from at least 1180 if not earlier had been involved in the accounting at Domfront, thirty-three kilometres northeast of the border of Brittany. 106  See Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 84; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 281–82; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 23; Toorians, ‘Twelfth-Century Flemish Settlement in Scotland’, pp. 6–7; Simpson, ‘The Familia of Roger de Quncy’, p. 102; Painter, ‘The House of Quency’. There is no evidence that the Quincys had any lands or family members in northern France particularly at such a late date. The assumption has been that they were settled on the lands of Anselm de Chocques in England in c. 1124 and that they had come across with Anselm from near Béthune. That may have been the case originally, though there is no direct proof, but there does not seem to have been any footprint of the Quincys in Béthune by the 1160s. The men who appeared with the Quincys after 1170, listed by Geoffrey Barrow, may have come directly from Béthune, Lens, Carvin, and Orchies in the Pas de Calais, which was under the control of the count of Flanders and count of Boulogne. The counts had been fighting over this area after Henry II had interfered and granted the heiress, Mary of Boulogne,

230

Chapter 5

careers were firmly in terra Normannorum, despite that men from the Pas de Calais witnessed for them in Scotland.107 The appearance of men with names from northern France with Robert de Quincy in c. 1170 may only suggest that they had emigrated to England and Scotland because of a threat posed to their families on the Continent by the counts of Flanders and Boulogne.108 This was also probably why the Vermelles appeared in Scotland in the early 1160s.109 Moreover, the Countess of Boulogne, Mary, was King William of Scotland’s cousin. Mary may have arranged for some of these men to be settled at the court of her cousin, who in turn put them in royal territory which had an ancestral connection to their homeland through families like the Choques (or Chokes).110 The close bonds of kinship among the men who joined the opposition party on both sides of the Channel is striking. For example, the Breton dimension of Anglo-French identity was not confined to contact with the King of Scots’ sister, Roger de Moubray, and Earl Hugh of Chester. Earl Robert of Leicester’s involvement in the rebellion was also influenced by his kinship with the Breton lords of Montfort and with the Scots.111 Robert, like Hugh of Chester, held in marriage to Matthew of Alsace. Although Henry II and Matthew’s father, Thierry, came to terms with Henry in 1163, Matthew was excluded and continued to fight for his claim to Lens and Boulogne until his wife returned to Romsey Abbey in 1173. 107  G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 281–82; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 23. 108  These men probably emigrated to Fife during the activities in the north because they had either backed the losing side, that of Matthew of Alsace, or their estates were devastated by over ten years of conflict. Furthermore, the Count of Holland was struggling to maintain his territories in Holland against Matthew’s father, Thierry, in the 1160s so King William may have harboured these men because they were allies of his brother-in-law, Florence III of Holland, who may have been in turn providing support to Matthew, who was at odds with his father. Cf. Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 202–03, 227 about the conflict in the north between Matthew and his father. 109  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 147–48, 281; Registrum S.  Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 19, 29, 52, 57, 94–95, 97–99, 181, 316. Vermelles is about ten kilometres southeast of Béthune. 110  In other words, the connection with Pas-de-Calais came through Quincy interaction with the Choques family and others who had originated from the north of France. Even if the family did originate from near Béthune, they did not still have interests there in 1170 so there must have been a different reason for the appearance of these new families in Scotland in the late twelfth century. 111  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.2, 1113; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp.  211–12; Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp.  161–63. Robert de Beaumont, Duchess Margaret of Brittany, and King William shared the same grandmother, Isabel de Vermandois. Isabel de Vermandois had been married to Robert de Beaumont, Count

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

231

land on both sides of the Channel that included the earldom of Leicester in the Midlands, the honour of Breteuil through his wife Petronilla, and Pacysur-Eure in the Evrecin.112 Their Norman lands were located in an area of conflict between the two crowns and in the midst of networks in the Yvelines that involved families, like the Mauvoisins, who soon had a branch settle in Scotland. Furthermore, Robert’s position in England made him a considerable threat to King Henry. He was able to recruit men from Buckingham, Essex, Hertford, Northampton, Oxford, Rutland and Wiltshire.113 The Beaumont relationship with the King of Scots is notable and partially based on kinship to the same grandmother, but the true strength of these ties can be seen throughout the twelfth century. Simon de Tosny, called a ‘kinsman’ of King William was probably Robert’s nephew through his sister, Margaret (see Figure 19).114 Margaret (also known as Idonea) had married Ralph IV de Tosny, Baron of Flamstead in Hertfordshire and Lord of Tosny, Acquigny, and of the honour of Conches in the Evrecin. This marriage clearly reflected the Beaumont family’s interest in strengthening relations with other families in the Evrecin.115 Ralph IV had died in c. 1162 after which his son, Roger, owed serof Meulan. The families can be seen patronising the same foundation at Beaumont-le-Roger. Robert, by the gift of Isabel, and King Henry I founded a collegiate church at Saint-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger in 1131 for the souls of William the Conqueror and his wife, Matilda of Flanders, for Henry’s brother, William Rufus, and for Henry’s wife, Maud of Scotland, and their son, William, and for many others of both families: Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, p. 7. 112  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, ii, 627; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 229–31; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 29, 254–55; Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 35. Robert III Earl of Leicester and his wife made concessions to Grand-Beaulieu in 1168 witnessed by Philip d’Aubigny and their son, Robert of Bréteuil. 113  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 14–15, 19–20, 381, 471–72, 448, 453, 456, 490, 505–06; ii, 714, 718, 730, 876, 880, 894–95, 939–40, 1288–90, 1450 114  Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 117–18; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 15, 125. Simon may have been a younger son of Margaret de Beaumont and Ralph IV de Tosny. There was a son of Ralph III and of Adelise of Huntingdon called Simon, but he would have been too old to be the same Simon who was Bishop of Moray: Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 152. 115  Bauduin, ‘Autour de la dos d’Adelize de Tosny’; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 93–94, 225, 524–25; Lefèvre, Documents historiques, p. 407; Musset, ‘Origines d’une classe dirigeante’, p. 64 for marriage and pp. 45–80 about the family; Curia regis Rolls, iv, 122; v, 19; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 98, 387; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 214. Roger de Tosny was the brother of Ralph IV (d. 1162). Ralph IV was the father of Roger IV

232

Chapter 5

vice in Normandy and in Sussex along with another important Anglo-Breton family, the Dinans, who were also supporting the campaigns from their estates in Brittany in 1173.116 Roger’s possible brother, Simon, was introduced into Scotland as a monk at Melrose and then made Bishop of Moray in 1172, just a year before the outbreak of war.117 The Tosny family had already come into contact with the crown of Scotland earlier in the twelfth century through rival claims to the Senlis inheritance of Northamptonshire and through Boulogne kin-networks. King David I and Ralph de Tosny, grandfather of the above Ralph IV, were married to sisters, both daughters of Earl Waltheof of Northumbria and of Judith of Lens, the latter who was a cousin of David’s brother-in-law, Eustache III of Boulogne.118 The Tosnys were also related by marriage to the Belvoir Aubignys,119 and they may have been involved in negotiating a marriage between the Belvoir Aubignys and the Earl of Strathearn later in the century.120 The Belvoir Aubigny contact who married Constance de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe. Constance’s sister was Queen Ermengarde of Scotland. Ralph IV’s brother, Roger, married Adela de Chaumont in the early to mid-twelfth century: Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 51. Roger de Tosny was the castellan of Nogentle-Roi, who was removed briefly by Louis VII for his support of Henry II’s rebellion against Louis in 1160. The family also held Fontaine-sous-Jouy, Cailly-sur-Eure, and Planches in the Eure Valley, and Villers-sur-le-Rouleand Bernières-sur-Seine in the Seine valley, and Vesly, Guerny, Villers-en-Vexin, Hacqueville, Heuqueville, Val de Pîtres in the Norman Vexin. Finally, in the Pays de Caux, they held land near Blainville-Crevon, Mortemer, Dieppe, and Yerville. See Appendix, Figure 19: Tosny. 116  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 47, 58. 117  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 6, 12, 208, 212, 214–15, 253, 257, 261, 302. Cf. Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 275–76. The Tosny family had crossed with William the Conqueror and settled in the marches of Wales in Hertfordshire in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries. They were long-held enemies of the Beaumont Earls of Leicester in Normandy for which reason a marriage between Ralph IV de Tosny and Margaret de Beaumont was probably negotiated — to unite the families and end the quarrel. R. R. Davies, The Age of Conquest, pp. 29, 37, 82. Simon de Tosny was a monk at Melrose before he became Abbot of Coggeshall and then Bishop of Moray: Duncan, ‘Sources and Uses of the Chronicle of Melrose’, p. 160. 118  Musset, ‘Origines d’une classe dirigeante’, p. 63; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, p. 291; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 145, 178, 290–91. 119  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 461; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 145, 178, 290–91; Green, ‘The Descent of Belvoir’. William II d’Aubigny of Belvoir married Maud de Clare, whose uncle by marriage was Ralph III de Tosny. The family advanced under Kings Henry and Stephen and gained Belvoir and the manor of Bottesford in Leicestershire. 120  Charters, Bulls and Other Documents Relating to the Abbey of Inchaffray, ed. by Lindsay,

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

233

with Scots began as early as c. 1122 when the family was favoured by Henry I, and the family may also have continued having an active interest in their Breton fees into the thirteenth century.121 These various alliances provided the means for the involvement of Robert, Earl of Leicester, in heading the opposition forces against Henry  II, but Robert’s reasons for committing to the war may have been more personal. His mother was Amicia de Montfort, daughter of Ralph, Lord of Montfort-deGaël and granddaughter of Ralph, the rebel Earl of Norfolk in 1075.122 Earl Robert’s maternal uncle, William de Montfort, Lord of Montfort-de-Gaël, was married to Amicia de Porhoët, the daughter of Eudo, the latter who had been rebelling against Henry II intermittently since the 1150s.123 The Montforts had Dowden, and Thomson, p. 25; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, viii, 242. Earl Gilbert of Strathearn may have married Maud, a daughter of William II d’Aubigny ‘le Breton’. See Chapter 1. 121  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 604, 611, 646, 692; Brand’Honneur, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, pp. 127, 167, 178, 193, 266, 268–77. This suggestion is difficult to prove based only on a name but Guillaume de ‘Albinneio’ did continue to witness gifts to the abbey of Savigny with other Bretons like the Fougères into the 1170s and it was probably his son, Guillaume, who continued to serve the dukes of Brittany. If my supposition is correct then Guillaume de ‘Albinneio’ would have been William II d’Aubigny who married the daughter of Robert fitzRichard de Clare and Maud de Senlis. He died c. 1185, which does match when the new lord, John d’Aubigny appeared, and it was probably John’s son or nephew, Guillaume d’Aubigny, who appears in the ducal charters in the late twelfth and early thirteenth century: Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 48–49, 106, 146–48, 160–61; Rotuli chartarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, p. 104 (in reference to Donnington previously held by the Count of Brittany). Brand’Honneur did not account for John’s relationship to the family in his genealogy, but he was ‘lord’ d’Aubigny in the late twelfth century. Also see Chapter 3 about the Aubignys. 122  Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 16, 45, 120–21, 220; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, vii, 529–30; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 181–215. Ralph began revolting in 1075 against William I because he was only given Norfolk, a shadow of the former earldom of East Anglia, and he was certainly allied with Earl Waltheof of Northumbria and his half-brother Roger of Hereford. King Malcolm III would have been aware of this revolt and Malcolm was allied with men, like Earl Waltheof, in 1070 who joined Ralph in 1075. Ralph’s lands were mainly in East Anglia, in Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk and part of Lincolnshire. For 1070 and 1075 events: John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 190–92, 205–08; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 118–19. 123  Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ix, 572. It is unclear whether Bertha of Brittany was the mother of Amicia de Porhoët, but it seems unlikely if this daughter was married to Robert III’s uncle. She must have been from an earlier match and of marriageable age before mid-century. Bertha’s only known daughter by Eudo was Adelaide. Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 46. Amicia and William had several grandchildren through their

234

Chapter 5

recognized Eudo’s authority as Duke in the mid-1150s and again in 1164.124 Earl Robert also continued to have contact with the Breton court even after Eudo lost his claim to the duchy.125 Moreover, his cousin’s castle at Hédé was specifically attacked in 1168 by the King because William and Amicia’s son, Geoffrey de Montfort, was believed to be supporting Eudo de Porhoët’s campaigns against Henry.126 The Breton distaste for Henry II’s lordship was evident in the level of Breton involvement in the 1173 war. The problem for Henry was that so many of the Bretons in the opposition party had powerful contacts in lower Normandy and they had extensive lands and allies throughout England, which could fragment support among Henry’s own men. For example, Roland de Dinan, had recently been disseized of lands in Somerset, in Northamptonshire at Burton, Hartland manor in Nutwell (Doncaster), and in Dorset at Gussage.127 The family held estates scattered throughout Devonshire, Cornwall, Sussex, Cambridgeshire (Long Stanton), Huntingdon, Berkshire (Ginge), and Hertfordshire. They were very well-connected in England and in Brittany and continued to stir trouble against the Angevin kings to the end of the century. Alain de Dinan, nephew of Roland, would cause problems for Henry’s successor, Richard, by 1190 when he attacked Burton,128 and Alain may have pulled other men into this conflict. Alain’s Northamptonshire neighbour, Saher de Quincy (probably

son, Geoffrey, who bore names from both sides of their families including that of Amicia’s father Eudo, which was an uncommon name in the Montfort family. The Montforts also became benefactors of the abbey of Savigny probably originally through their Fougères kin: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 130–31. Geoffrey and his wife, Gervasia de Sai, daughter of Roland, named their children: William, Roland, Radulph, Eudo, Amicia, and Mathilde. 124  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 654. William’s son, Geoffrey de Montfort, was listed as one of Eudo’s ‘socios’ along with Alain de Tintiniac. This charter was witnessed by Alain de Rohan, Eudo’s brother Stephen, Guihomar de Léon, and Ralph de Fougères. 125  Recueil d’actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne, ed. by de la Borderie, pp. 96–97, 111. Earl Robert witnessed for Duke Conan IV lands given at Wath to the monks of Le Mont Saint-Michel before Conan’s death in 1171. 126  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 237; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 45–46. 127  Jankulak, The Medieval Cult of St Petroc, pp. 164–74; M. Jones, The Family of Dinan, pp. 25–27; M. Jones, ‘Les branches anglaises des seigneurs de Dinan’, pp. 221–26, 229–35. 128  Pipe Roll of 2 Richard, p. 30; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 23, 51–52–54, 57, 66, 68–69, 155, 197–98.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

235

the uncle or cousin of Young Saher), was also in trouble with Richard in 1190 when his lands were taken into the King’s hands.129 The strength of support from Bretons in the war because of the Porhoëts and Dinans was also noted by Robert of Torigny and John of Salisbury. They both stated that the complaints of the Bretons to Louis VII in 1168 prevented a French settlement with Henry II, and these complaints were based on Henry’s violation of Adelaide de Porhoët. Adelaide’s father, Eudo de Porhoët and Oliver de Dinan accused the King of impregnating Adelaide whilst a hostage under Henry’s care and even more shocking she was related to Henry through her mother making this a serious case of incest.130 Furthermore, Adelaide was Geoffrey de Montfort’s aunt (the younger half-sister of his mother),131 so both Earl Robert of Leicester and his cousin, Geoffrey de Montfort, had reason to join the opposition in 1173 on personal grounds.132 Kin relationships were important to political alliances and soon spilled over into Scotland. Interrelationships between the Montforts, Beaumonts, Dinans, Fougères and Chester all gravitated towards one individual who was not only related to the Beaumonts but also able to unify the Bretons — Duchess Margaret of Brittany. Conan IV had died in 1171 leaving Geoffrey, the third son of Henry II, tenuously entitled to Brittany by virtue of his betrothal to the heiress, Constance, but Geoffrey and his fiancée were still minors in 1173.133 It may have been Geoffrey’s future mother-in-law, Margaret of Scotland, who had rallied support behind Porhoët, Louis VII, Geoffrey, Young King Henry and Earl Hugh of Chester.134 Margaret was captured and shortly after the end to hostilities in 1174 forced to marry Humphrey de Bohun, Constable of England, in order to remove her as a threat from the duchy. The defeat of the Bretons and of Margaret may have struck a deep chord with the King of Scots who had already failed once to help his sister and her husband in 1166. The 129 

Pipe Roll of 2 Richard, p. 30. Saher also held land in Northamptonshire at Long Buckby. Cf. Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 139–40; and Pipe Roll of 4 Henry II, p. 142; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 334, 349 for Northamptonshire and Essex. 130  John of Salisbury, Letters, ed. by Millor and Butler, ii, 603; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 45–46. 131  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 291; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 45–46; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ix, 572. 132  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 371; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 45–47; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 52–53. 133  Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp. 163–64. 134  Pipe Roll of 19–20 Henry II, pp. 135–36.

236

Chapter 5

defeat at Dol caused William to reconsider his position and it was not long before he joined the opposition party.

Dol In order to further understand the strength of these ties between the Bretons, Scots and other cross-Channel families during the war, it is necessary to examine those who were actively involved in the Breton campaign. Among the list of prisoners taken at Dol on 20 August 1173 were Hugh, Earl of Chester; Ralph II de Fougères, his brother Guillaume, and his son Juhel; Juhel de Mayenne; William de Gorron; Philip de Landivy; William de Bois-Bérenger; William de Orenge; Hascuil de Saint-Hilaire,135 and Hascuil’s brothers, Philip and Henry de Saint-Hilaire;136 Ralph de Sens; William and John de Loge;137 William de la Mote; Hervé de Vitré; Henry de Gray; Hugh Avenel; Alain de Tintiniac; Radulph (Ralph) de la Hai; and Geoffrey Carloël.138 Other men listed at Dol were from families like Gorron, Landivy, de Orenge, and Bois-Berenger, but they were not Breton or Norman. They were probably providing service owed to their overlord in Mayenne, Juhel II de Mayenne.139

135 

Green, The Government of England under Henry I, p. 147. The Saint-Hilaires (also known as Saint-James) also held fees in Northamptonshire. Cf. Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 10, 22–23, 107, 159. It was probably Hascuil’s father who was witnessing at Windsor with another Anglo-Breton lord, Alain, the dapifer of Dol and father of Walter, steward of Scotland: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 93. The Saint-Hilaire family was originally Breton and related to the Constables of Richmond. Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 199, 212. 136  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 516–17. These men were sons of Peter, Lord de SaintHilaire, and nephews of James de Saint-Hilaire, Lord of Dalling (Norfolk). The importance of the Saint-Hilaire family in cross-Channel networks can be seen in the marriages they arranged with families in England. James’ daughter, Matilda, was married to Earl Roger de Clare of Hertford and then to William II earl of Arundel. 137  C. P. Lewis, ‘The Formation of the Honor of Chester’, p. 60. The Loge family had been under tenants of the earls of Chester since the eleventh century. 138  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 259–60; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 51–53; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 56–58; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 378; Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v, 320, 356, 362; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 95–96, 106–07; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 97, 612–13. 139  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 399; Renoux, ‘Le roi Jean’, pp. 242–44.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

237

Some of the men who appeared in the list were probably landholders in Devonshire and in the Norman-Breton frontier. For example, Hugh Avenel probably originated from the Avenel family at Les Biards in Mortain, seven kilo­­metres west of Saint-Hilaire-du-Harcouët and six kilometres north of the border of Brittany. Some fees of this branch were in England and some in Scotland under Robert Avenel of Eskdale.140 In England, the Avenels held in Dev­­onshire along with several families involved in the 1173 coalition like the Dinans, Fougères, Porhoëts141 and the Mayennes.142 The Fougères family in particular influenced a core of contacts between Devonshire, Buckinghamshire, Norfolk, and Suffolk originally spilling over from their cross-border lordship in northeast Brittany and lower Normandy. Their influence in these regions probably convinced men like Alain de Tintiniac to join them because their families were in contact in both Suffolk and in northern Brittany.143 Other families who joined the Breton campaign, like the Avenels, were also from the NormanBreton frontier and still owed service to the abbey of Le Mont Saint-Michel,

140 

Desroches, Annales civiles, pp. 86–87; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 62, 123. Pipe Roll of 31 Henry I, Michaelmas 1130, p. 155. Eudo de Porhoët’s father, Geoffrey, certainly held land in Devonshire but Eudo may have lost these fees by 1173. 142  See Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 96, 432; ii, 774, 780 about Avenels in Devonshire. Another branch of Avenels held the manor of Cambes in Stowe: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 390. The ‘Norman’ Ranulf Avenel lost the manor. The Mayennes were not strictly Breton but made several marriage alliances and were politically involved with Bretons throughout this period: M. Jones, ‘Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes en Angleterre’, pp. 73–97. 143  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 134, 593, 619. The Tintiniacs were from Tintiniac only four and a half kilometres north of Hédé in Montfort-de-Gaël territory. So, the Tintiniac family in Brittany was probably serving their Montfort overlord in 1173. Oliver de Tintiniac, who held a fee in Worlingham in Suffolk near the Tosnys and other Bretons, was related to the Breton Alain de Tintiniac, but the exact relationship is unknown although it might be suggested they were brothers. Oliver made a grant to the abbey of St Melaine and to Vieuville for his father, Guillaume, mother Eremburge, and sister, Theophanie. He also had a sister, Stephanie. The Oliver de Tintiniac named in the thirteenth century may be a nephew or son of the older Oliver: Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 678, 772, 784, 817, 854, 858. Stephanie may also have appeared owing for her father’s Suffolk fees in dotage in the 1170s: Pipe Roll of 18 Henry II, p. 28; Pipe Roll of 20 Henry II, p. 42. It was probably also Alain’s sons or nephews, William and Geoffrey, who appear in Brittany in 1182: Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 694–95, 701. The Tintiniacs continued to appear in Brittany in the early thirteenth century: Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 158–59, 160–61, 167, 169–71. 141 

238

Chapter 5

which was a staunch pro-Angevin institution.144 These families must have faced notable opposition within their territories and yet still chose to join the opposition party. Hugh Avenel was not only holding land near the Fougères in Normandy and in England but he was also probably a member of the Fougères family’s extended kin group. He was probably related to Ranulf Avenel (d. 1128-29), whose daughter, Matilda, married Robert of Avranches, who had previously been married to Hawise of Dol, the sister of John of Dol.145 Ranulf ’s wife was probably the daughter of Baldwin the Sheriff, brother of Raoul I de Fougères’s father-in-law, Richard de Clare.146 What is striking about the Avenels and other families who held land in the Norman-Breton frontier is that they appeared in the opposition party against the Angevins throughout the twelfth century. The Avenels fought for King Stephen as the King’s seneschals in Mortain against the Angevins. By 1166, they had forged long-term relations with their neighbours, the Saint-Hilaires and Saint-Jeans, and these families were involved in the rebellion of 1166 with Ralph de Fougères.147 Hugh Avenel, like Ralph de Fougères, had a lot to lose not only because of his family’s position in lower Normandy but also because of his Devonshire relations. These relations may also have put him into contact with the Scottish court. Hugh was probably related to Robert Avenel of Eskdale, who was introduced into the Scottish court by David I.148 Robert’s son, Gervase Avenel, carried on the family’s lordship in Scotland in the late twelfth century and may have been the same who held land in Nottinghamshire at Bassetlaw.149 Hugh and Robert were probably also related to William Avenel, who appeared on both sides of the Channel in a Devonshire-Clare context. During the reign of Malcolm IV, William Avenel witnessed on behalf of Ralph II de Clère, Lord 144 

Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, pp. 51–53; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 618–19. 145  Pipe Roll 31 Henry I, p. 155; Barraclough, Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, p. 15; Moss (ed.), Pipe Rolls of Normandy of Henry II, p. 7. Robert held a fee in Mortain at ‘Lorice’ in 1180 through his father. 146  Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans’, 50-51. His daughter, Matilda, issued from a different wife otherwise Robert of Avranches and Matilda would have been half-brother and sister. Baldwin’s niece was married to Raoul I de Fougères. It is also possible that Ranulf ’s wife was the daughter of Baldwin’s daughter, Adelise: Monasticon, v, p. 378. 147  Desroches, Annales civiles, p. 133. Norman-Breton kin-networks were geographically fluid. 148  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 6, 50, 97, 151, 165, 185, 283, 296. 149  Pipe Roll of 39 Henry II, pp. 90, 159.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

239

of Calder in Scotland, alongside Richard de Lanquetôt from the Clare fee near Bolbec.150 Ralph de Clère also appeared as a witness alongside Robert Avenel from c. 1166, which again suggests that William and Robert Avenel were related and moving in the same circles.151 Avenel contact with the Clares also involved them with the Revières in the Manche. William appears as a witness for Adelise de Revières concerning gifts to the abbey of Montebourg in c. 1142,152 and he served in the Breton-Norman frontier for the abbey of Le Mont Saint-Michel in 1154, when he was listed as owing knight-service at Pontorson in the Manche.153 William’s involvement in the Manche suggests he continued contact on both sides of the Channel with the Revières-Giffard Clare familial nexus of which he was a part. The Scottish Clères originated from a different familial network from the Devonshire Clares but they were pulled into the Avenel networks by intermarriage. They probably initially emigrated from the Belvoir Tosny Continental fee at Clères, sixteen kilometres north of Rouen, and they held Brompton in north Yorkshire and fees in Sussex and North Riding which Ralph de Clère inherited in c. 1185 from his brother.154 The Tosnys also had contact with the

150 

Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 16, 61–62, 225; ii, 280, 326, 346. Liber de Kelso called Ralph, or Radulph, the ‘son of Radulph de Clere’ and the grant was to his heir Roger de Clere. It may have been this same William Avenel, who witnessed a concord between Richard de Rivières and the monks of Saint Père de Chartres in mid-century with Peter de Courville and Robert de Valognes: Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, pp. 612–13. 151  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 151, 181; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 42–43, 108–11, 123, 176. 152  Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, pp. 61, 180–82. The Redvers, or Revières, were patrons and founders of Montebourg Abbey just southeast of Valognes and Huberville. The abbey was the focus of patronage by the nearby Moreville family, who probably originated from the canton of Bricquebec near Valognes, and the Morevilles figure prominently in the charters of the Revières family throughout the twelfth century: Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, pp. 38–39, 54–57, 66–68, 73–74, 80, 84–87, 89–90, 97, 121, 135, 137, 142–43, 183. Cf. G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 70–71 about Norman origination of the Morevilles. 153  Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 618–19. 154  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 108–11, 123, 176; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 468–69, 478, 480–81, 484; Loyd, The Origins of Some AngloNorman Families, pp. 18–19, 29. G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 110. The Clares probably had a connection to the Warennes through their Sussex fees but this was not necessarily how they ended up in Scotland. Isabel of Vermandois’ marriages created a vast network between the Beaumonts, Clare earls of Pembroke, the earls of Gloucester, Ponthieu and Warenne, and the kings of Scotland.

240

Chapter 5

Scottish family as discussed in the previous chapters, but the Belvoir Tosnys were from a younger branch of the lords of Tosny and Conches.155 As can be seen from the list at Dol, many of these men came from Brittany or the marches of Brittany yet also held lands in England.156 Devonshire had been an important centre for Angevin support in 1136 under the leadership of Baldwin II de Revières, the future Earl of Devon, but it became a centre of activity against Henry II in 1173.157 The main reason for Devonshire support of the ‘rebellion’was based on Henry’s ill-treatment of these families mainly in Normandy and Brittany but reactions spilled over to England because of crossChannel lordships. The Fougères, Dinans and Mayennes, had been sidelined and attacked on the Continent by Henry II between 1163 and 1173 and they were able to draw support from their fees in Devonshire. One of the most important aspects of the Breton rebellion was that it was from the frontier regions of north-eastern Brittany, lower Normandy and Mayenne that the majority of disgruntlement with King Henry’s policies seemed to originate. The danger for Henry was that these men were able to incite support from different territorial lordships and to foster alliances with other families that spilled back over into England as was the case with the Fougères. The Fougères family was central to these cross-Channel alliances and networks. As mentioned in the previous chapter, patronage of Savigny Abbey reflected a focal point of contact between Anglo-French and Breton families throughout the twelfth century.158 For example, the Fougères, Dinans and Munfichets made gifts to Savigny witnessed by the Saint-Hilaires, who had also gained Corfton (twenty-six kilometres south of Shrewsbury) through a marital alliance with the Dinans.159 All of these families held land in upper Brittany/ 155 

Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, pp. 18–19. Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 66, 97, 187; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 40. Guillaume de Fougères also held land in Surrey and Lincolnshire (the latter from the honour of Richmond) and in York so some of these familial networks spread far beyond the Welsh Border. M. Jones, ‘Brittany and Wales in the Middle Ages’, pp. 36–38. 157  Green, ‘Family Matters’, pp. 157–64. 158  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 107. 159  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 201, fols 81–83; Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 15, 28, 219; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 287–90. Peter II de Saint-Hilaire, son of Peter I, brother of the Saint-Hilaires captured in 1173, married the heiress of Corfton, Gunnora. They were disseized of Corfton for supporting King Philip in 1204. Their son regained it but lost it again in the 1246 disseize of terra Normannorum 156 

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

241

lower Normandy and in the southwest of England, which also put them into contact with Scots during the Succession War. However, despite ongoing communication with the Scottish court, the Munfichets were the only family in the region to settle permanently in Scotland in the late twelfth century. The first notable member of the Munfichet kin group who was involved in cross-Channel networks was William de Munfichet.160 He began his career in England in the service of King Stephen, probably because of territorial pressure he faced in Essex where the majority of his fees were located.161 He had already appeared as early as 1128 in Earl Robert of Gloucester’s following concerning the abbey of Fécamp and he decided to transfer his loyalty to the Angevin cause in c. 1138.162 The Munfichets continued to patronize Savigny and to administer their lands in lower Normandy throughout the century. William’s son, Richard, made gifts to the abbey, and in 1180 and 1195 he held in ferme the forest of Montfiquet in Calvados, which was twenty-nine kilometres southeast of Carentan, held by another Anglo-French lord, Humphrey de Bohun of Hereford.163 Richard succeeded his father to the Essex and Hertfordshire estates and began to appear as a regular witness for the King of Scots from as early as 1177.164 In c. 1189, King William rewarded Richard with land at Cargill and Kincardine in Menteith and Perthshire to which his son, William, succeeded by the first decade of the thirteenth century.165 Richard de Munfichet had probably made his fortune in Scotland after the Treaty of Falaise because of support he and his brother, Gilbert, had given the opposition party during the war. His brother, Gilbert, had played a particularly important role in 1174 by leading the men of Clare against Henry’s forcunder King Henry III. Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 126; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, ii, 1156; Calendar of the Charter Rolls of Henry III, ed. by Maxwell Lyte and others, i, 305. 160  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 14–15, 27–28, 218–19. 161  The counts of Boulogne held several fees in Essex not to mention that the Munfichet’s Clare kin at Hertford also supported King Stephen: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 121, 132, 236–43, 276, 487, 489–90, 580; ii, 900, 1329, 1359, 1411. 162  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 521. 163  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, clxxiv, clxxvii; ii, viii; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, ii, 900, 902, 1140. William de Munfichet, the counts of Meulan and of Gloucester, and William d’Aubigny witnessed for Stephen in 1136 at Evreux just after Stephen’s accession to the throne: Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 5. 164  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 125, 476, 479, 486, 489–90, 571. 165  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 254, 339, 368, 371–72; Charters of the Abbey of Coupar Angus, ed. by Easson, i, 37–38.

242

Chapter 5

es.166 Presumably, Richard and Gilbert chose to fight against Henry because of their territorial position on both sides of the Channel partially informed by their mother Margaret’s kinship with the Clare family.167 Through his mother, Gilbert held land in Essex at Stanstead along with lands at Cussy near Bayeux.168 Gilbert and his cousin, Earl Roger de Clare of Hertford, also held estates near the fees of Vere in the Breton honour of Richmond.169 Both Richard de Clare, Roger’s father, and the Clare Lord of Dunmow in Essex had supported King Stephen during the Succession War but neither Roger or his cousin, Lord Walter of Dunmow, joined the opposition in 1173.170 This kinship between the Clares and Munfichets was important because it brought them into the extended networks of the royal Scottish family since the Clares were also distant cousins of King William.171 However, unlike their Clare cousins, the Munfichets joined the opposition and may also have been responsible for introducing men like Adam de Port, Lord of the barony of Kington near Hereford, to the Scottish court. Adam had been accused of treason by Henry in 1172 and was in exile at the time the war broke out, and so he also joined the Scots in 1174.172 These various relationships fostered by territorial and marital 166 

Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 120–21, ll. 1615–16. Cf. Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 184, 502; ii, 409 about Gilbert at Henry’s court as early as c. 1156 and into the 1180s. 167  Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 85; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, x, 351–52. Their uncle held the Munfichet fee in ward during the Succession War. Margaret was the sister of Earl Gilbert de Clare of Pembroke and of Earl Richard de Clare of Hertford. See Figure 3. 168  See Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 409 about Gilbert’s lands at Cussy. 169  Minois, ‘Les possessions bretonnes dans le comté d’Essex’, pp. 528–36; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 37–38; Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, p. 26. Roger’s father held the estates before him. 170  James Grace of Kilkenny, Annales Hiberniae, ed. by Butler, p. 13; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, x, 350–52; Tanner, Families, Friends, and Allies, pp. 194, 209, 213–14, 316. Roger and Walter were first cousins once removed. Walter’s sister, Maud, was married to William II d’Aubigny. 171  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 270; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, x, 351–52. See Figure 3. Margaret de Clare’s brother, Gilbert de Clare, Earl of Pembroke, was married to Isabel de Beaumont, half-sister of King William’s mother. So the Countess of Pembroke was William’s aunt. DeAragon, ‘In Pursuit of Aristocratic Women’, p. 265. This Munfichet/Clare marriage also advanced Clare interests in London. 172  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 35. There is no explanation as to why he was accused of treason. He also made a grant of the church of ‘Wibaldingtun’

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

243

networks unified the opposition across the Channel particularly after the first campaigns failed. It was not long before the King of England faced a very serious threat to his kingship in England and France. This threat was particularly problematic in England because of King William of Scotland’s decision to join the opposition. The men who joined the King of Scots in 1173 were part of this AngloFrench world. They held land or owed service to King William and also held fees or were intermarried with families in England and France. The involvement of their kin in the war made a lasting impact on Scottish relations with France.

The Wooing of the King The fall of Dol in August 1173 marked the end of the first stage of the war against Henry II. The Young King Henry’s position looked weak by the end of the first campaign especially since he had not obtained enough backing in England to strike at the core of his father’s kingdom. It was at this point that Young Henry and Louis VII decided to reapply to the King of Scots for aid in order to open up a second front. They had already approached William before the campaigns had begun when they sent a letter to the King of Scots enclosed with a ring, promising William tenure of Carlisle and Westmoreland if William campaigned in the north.173 At the time, William decided not to join the opposition but informed Henry of his son’s and Louis’ plot.174 Henry II once again alienated possible support by responding ill-favourably to William. In the exchange with Henry, William pushed his claim to Northumberland promising to hold back from campaigning if Henry would give the county to him, which Henry once again refused.175 William retaliated within months.

near Bromsash in Herefordshire to Kelso Abbey about this time: Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, ii, 286; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 22. Cf. Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, p. 101 ll. 1334–43; p. 102, l. 1353; p. 136, ll. 1840–47 about Adam’s involvement in 1174. 173  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 18–21, ll. 246–353. They must have approached him before the war had begun otherwise there would have been no sense in William notifying the King of a rebellion already underway. 174  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 18–21, ll. 246–353; Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, i, 215; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 45. 175  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 26–33, ll. 337–424.

244

Chapter 5

He responded to Louis’ second overture and rallied his men to join him in an offensive against Henry’s forces in England.176 King William’s decision to join the opposition was not solely influenced by interaction with the crowns of France and England. He was also motivated by communication with the Count of Flanders. It was probably around the time of the 1173 negotiations with Louis that Count Philip of Flanders decided to make a concession to Melrose Abbey for the monks to pass freely and securely through his lands while there was dissent between the Flemish and English merchants.177 Philip obviously wanted to keep the lines of trade open during the war and it was probably for this reason that he encouraged Louis to reapply to the King of Scots for aid. He even offered to send aid directly from Flanders to Scotland.178 According to Fantosme, King William responded to the Count of Flander’s overtures by sending two of his Norman messengers, William de Saint Michel and Robert de Huseville, to discuss the service of the Count’s mercenaries in the Scottish army,179 and both of these men, Saint Michel and Huseville (Houesville), originated from lower Normandy where frontier support was so fundamental to the military offensive. From William’s perspective, Henry II’s position had become precarious because so many barons and counts had joined the opposition armies even if they had initially suffered defeat. Henry was facing an impressive array of noblemen from some of the most influential families in England and in France. The time seemed propitious for joining the war; however, the King of Scots was hampered by men who held land of Henry II in England. Jordan Fantosme 176 

Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 32–35, ll. 434–59. Fantosme was usually positive towards the Scots and may have been a Norman Scot himself. Line 456 of the Chronicle mentioned that the message from King Louis to the Scots was given to ‘our’ messengers (of Scotland). 177  Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 13–14. The most likely timeframe for this concession was during the 1173–74 war. Philip of Flanders was a close friend and ally of Young Henry between 1174 and 1179, after the Young King had patched his differences with his father. In 1179, Philip of Flanders’ interests shifted towards the French crown but relations with France only lasted for two years before Philip fell out with Louis’ successor, Philip Augustus. Henry II stepped in to mediate the differences between Count Philip and Philip Augustus. Count Philip had no interest in war against Henry II after 1174: W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 147–48, 224, 560, 582, 596, 609. 178  Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, p. 131; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 32–35, ll. 433–58. 179  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 30–33, ll. 406–24; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 453, 479.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

245

specifically stated that the King met with resistance when he convened a council to discuss joining Louis and Young Henry.180 At the head of this opposition was Earl Waltheof of Dunbar, who held land in Northumberland at Beanley in addition to his Scottish earldom. The Earl probably perceived war against Henry as a threat to his English holdings, though it must also be mentioned that Fantosme may have embellished his account based on his knowledge that the King would be humiliated and lose to Henry in 1174.181 In the end, the King won the council’s consent mainly because of the support of his native lords, who supplied men from Ross, Moray, Buchan, and Angus. He also had the backing of his brother, David. By the time William entered the field he had a significant contingent of men not only from Scotland but also from Poitou and Flanders that had been sent by his Continental allies.182 Despite support and aid from several different quarters, William’s initial campaigns were indecisive and again the reason for the problems the King faced on the field may very well have been caused by the nature of multiple lordships. The Earl of Dunbar, who had spoken against joining the opposition, was in contact with the Stuteville affinity through his lordship in Northumberland. He may also have been related to the Stutevilles by the marriage of his cousin, Roger de Merlay, to Alice de Stuteville, daughter of Roger de Stuteville, Lord of Burton Agnes, who was in turn related to, if not the same defender of Wark Castle and sheriff of Northumberland.183 Sheriff Roger was, like other mem180 

Flanagan, ‘Irish and Anglo-Norman Warfare’, pp.  52–53. The twelfth-century Irish kings also convened councils to discuss whether they should go to war. King William could not declare war without the support of his political community, unlike King Henry II, who did not seem to have to obtain permission. 181  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp.  28–29, ll.  384–94; Stringer, ‘Identities in Thirteenth-Century England’, pp. 47–48; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 200, 598. Fantosme wrote his chronicle after the war had finished. 182  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 36–37, ll. 472–77; pp. 44–45, ll. 587–90; pp. 46–47, ll. 603–05; pp. 126–27, l. 1696. King William was able to exact service from Ross and Moray at this stage, but within five years Moray and Ross would be encouraging Donald MacWilliam to attack Scotland with aid from either Ireland or Norway: Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 277–78. Donald was possibly the grandson (through his mother) of Óengus, Earl of Moray, who led an army against David I in the early 1130s. The risks were high for families that supported Donald in 1187. Gillecolm the marshal was disseized for joining the King’s enemies in c. 1185: Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 291–92; Oram, David I, pp. 92–96. 183  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp.  36–37, ll.  482–86; Doherty, ‘Robert de Vaux and Roger de Stuteville’. The marriage connection came through Juliana of

246

Chapter 5

bers of his family, confronted with the same problem of trusting men under his command who faced their kin and allies on the other side of the battle line, but he was able to negotiate a forty-day truce with the King of Scots, which may have saved King Henry’s defence of the north.184 King William left Wark and travelled north to Alnwick where he then besieged another Stuteville affiliate, William de Vescy, who was Nicholas de Stuteville’s brother-in-law.185 Vescy also refused to relinquish his castle-guard and so King William faced a stalemate in the north.186 The Stutevilles and Vescy were territorially in a strategic position in the north of England which was why they were so heavily targeted, and their lands in Cumberland, Northumberland and Yorkshire placed them in the midst of men who were serving in and familiar with the Scottish court. These lordships complicated loyalty and service for both King William and King Henry as they battled for control of the north. An even clearer case of how difficult divided loyalties could be for the King and his men involves the Vaux family (see Figure 9 below). The Vaux were also an important cross-Channel family. They had already been witnessing the Revières family’s patronage of the Tironensians at Newport and of the Cluniacs at Montacute.187 The first main members of the family mentioned in records were Hubert, Godard, and Robert. Hubert’s brother, Godard, still held land in Nor­ mandy in the mid-twelfth century, and he witnessed a grant at Rouen made by Empress Matilda to the Prémonstratensian abbey of St Mary de Silly-en-Gouffern

Dunbar’s marriage to Ralph de Merlay, Lord of Morpeth, whose son, Roger, married Alice de Stuteville. It is not certain that Alice and Roger were married by 1173 but the families were already in contact through their lordships in northern England. Doherty, ‘Robert de Vaux and Roger de Stuteville’, pp. 69–79, 90–102. Roger, sheriff of Northumberland, was probably Roger, Lord of Agnes Burton, son of Robert II and father of Alice, or Roger, younger son of Robert III de Stuteville. Also see Figure 6: Stuteville; Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 30, 134. See Chapter 3 about Merlay-Dunbar marriage. ‘R. de Merlay’ witnessed grants to Coldstream Priory for Earl Waltheof. This was probably Waltheof ’s uncle or cousin, Ralph or Roger: Chartulary of the Cistercian Priory of Coldstream, ed. by Rogers, p. 18. 184  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, p. 40, ll. 520–24. Roger was rewarded in 1177 with custody of Edinburgh Castle: Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 133. 185  Nicholas was the son of Robert III de Stuteville. 186  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 36–37, ll. 477–85; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 65; Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v, 335–37. William de Vescy held a manor at Newsholme in the East Riding and it was only three and a half kilometres from Roger of Howden, who probably wrote the Gesta Henrici so Howden was well-placed to comment on these events. Nicholas de Stuteville was Roger de Stuteville’s nephew. 187  Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, pp. 70–71.

William, fl .1165

Robert (1173 defender of Carlisle) = Ada Engaine (widow of Simon de Moreville)

Hugh, fl .1137

Figure 9. Branches of the Vaux family tree.

Robert

Robert (mouvance Beaumont-le-Roger), fl. 1171-95

Hubert of Gilsland, fl, 1120-67 = Gracie

?

Robert, fl .1130

Godard (Caux and Clare) fl. 1137= Adela

Anglo-Norman branch

William, fl. 1190-c. 1198

John of Dirleton, fl. 1165-c. 1212

?

John of Chediston

Scottish branch

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173 247

248

Chapter 5

(Ornois) between 1158 and 1167.188 On this occasion he was also present with a Scot, Eustache of Scotland. The family was involved with the Scottish court by this time so might have brought Eustache with them or introduced him to the Norman court.189 Godard and Hubert’s brother, Robert, also maintained his position on the Continent. He was probably the Robert de Vaux who appeared in mid-century as a witness for the Beaumont-le-Roger lords of Meulan and Leicester.190 All three brothers were probably sons or grandsons of Robert de Vaux, who settled in co. Suffolk by 1086.191 Their ancestor’s fees were near those held by the earls of Chester, which was probably how Hubert and another kinsman, John de Vaux, held land affiliated with the Chester lordship. John de Vaux succeeded to the estates at Chediston and Halesworth held by Robert de Vaux,192 and Hubert and his son, Robert, became involved with the Scottish court because of contact with the earls of Chester who had granted Gilsland to them.193 Hubert appeared as a witness to King David’s inquest into the possessions of

188 

Antiquités anglo-normandes de Ducarel, ed. by Léchaudé d’Anisy, pp. 231–32; Cartulaire chronique du prieuré Saint-Georges d’Hesdin, ed. by Fossier, pp. 124–25. Godard de Vaux with his wife, Adela, and their son, Hugh, granted donations from the church of Saint-George de Hesdin in 1137. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 696 a, 708 f–g: Godard de Vaux held two knights’ fees in the bailie of Richard de Bléville of Caux and one knight’s fee of the honour of Clare. His lands were at Goderville, twelve kilometres north of Le Havre in the diocese of Rouen, and at Petra Sicca also near the Stuteville fees and the Warenne fee at Bellencombre. 189  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 304–05. Gouffern was one of the territories that received special interest from Empress Matilda until her death. It was part of her original dowry: Chibnall, ‘The Empress Matilda and Church Reform’, pp.  112–13. In 1150 at Rouen, Godard also witnessed a confirmation for the Empress: Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 13. 190  Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, pp. 3–6; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iii, 584; Burke, A General and Heral­ dic Dictionary, pp. 531–33: There was supposedly a Robert, brother of Hubert and uncle of Hubert’s son, Robert. The uncle, Robert, is said to have had a son William, who continued the line in Normandy. 191  Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law, pp. 393–94. 192  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 134. John de Vaux of Chediston held land near the earls of Chester. It would make sense that if John was related to Hubert and the older Robert de Vaux they would have found patronage within the Chester/Bayeux family nexus. 193  Hubert had originally been enfeoffed in his lands at Gilsland by Ranulf Meschin. Lanercost Cartulary, ed. by Todd, pp. 1–2, 85; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 197.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

249

Glasgow in c. 1120, and it may have been this early contact that introduced younger members of the family or a junior branch into Scotland.194 The first of the family to appear as a Scottish landowner, John de Vaux, was made Lord of Dirleton in the 1160s and he served the King of Scotland until his death in about 1180. He was succeeded by William de Vaux, who was probably his son.195 This ‘William de Vaux’ was possibly the same who also held land in Normandy of the Moubrays at Montchaton near fees held by Enguerrand du Hommet and William Corbet. This argument is convincing considering that Enguerrand’s brother-in-law, Philip de Moubray, was the Lord of Dalmeny and that William de Vaux’s kinsman, Godard, continued witnessing in Normandy until the 1160s when William would have been a young boy.196 The Vaux family, like many cross-Channel lords, was split in its support during the 1173 war. While John of Dirleton was probably serving with the King of Scots in the north, Robert de Vaux, son of Hubert de Vaux of Gilsland, was defending Carlisle against the King’s army.197 Robert was under additional pressure during these campaigns because he had also been reared by Earl Henry of Huntingdon, King William’s father, and the King and Robert had spent their formative years together.198 The King of Scots’ army was weakened by these divided loyalties as his Anglo-French lords faced their own kin on the battle line in 1173. As such, these early campaigns in England did not gain the King or Young Henry’s party an advantage, and a third front was opened on 29 September by King William’s 194 

Early Scottish Charters, ed. by Lawrie, p. 46. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 239, 247–48, 252, 254, 271; ii, 152, 199, 239, 245, 256, 278, 459. John de Vaux first appeared in Scottish records towards the end of Malcolm IV’s reign. He witnessed alongside William de la Hai, Ranulf de Soules, and Walter and William de Lindsay. William de Vaux of Scotland (probably son of John of Dirleton) bore the same name as the son of Hubert and Godard’s brother, Robert. Cf. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 314, 317, 329, 384, 387, 400 about William de Vaux of Dirleton. 196  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 267–86; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 610  f, 619  l–m. See above about MoubrayHommet marriage. 197  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 196. Jordan Fantosme said that the father of Robert was Godard. However, he was confused because Henry II gave Hubert de Vaux the land at Gilsland. Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 50–51, ll. 664–65. 195 

198 

Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 44–47, ll. 581–620; pp. 102–23, ll. 1360–1642. King William was at the walls of Carlisle twice in the campaign. He and his men, including his brother David and the Flemings, travelled throughout Northumberland and Cumberland, looting and pillaging.

250

Chapter 5

cousin, Earl Robert  III of Leicester, and by Earl Hugh Bigod of Norfolk. This phase of the war was meant to pressure Henry II’s forces in the south of England while William continued his progress in the north.199 Leicester landed at Sandwich and he led his army against the King’s chamberlain, Earl William de Mandeville of Essex, who was facing troubles of his own.200 The Earl of Essex was leading a force also compromised by multiple lordships. Essex was another territory that was very divided in its support because of Breton contact in the county through fees held by the honour of Richmond.201 For example, the Vere, Gikel, Mascle, and Espagne families continued holding fees and serving in castle-guards in Essex for the dukes of Brittany as earls of Richmond as late as 1171. Loyalties were divided not only between families but also within territories because of the disparate nature of honours and earldoms established after the Norman conquest, which undermined support on a local level. Earl Robert of Leicester’s campaigns in the south of England were initi­ally successful. Henry II’s lieutenants, Richard de Lucy and Humphrey IV de Bohun, were forced to make a truce with the Scots in the north in order to take their forces to meet Leicester at Fornham.202 Leicester’s wife, Petronilla de Grandmesnil, who held in her own right the honour of Grandmesnil near Falaise, and Leicester’s brother-in-law, Earl William fitzRobert of Gloucester, also joined him,203 but Beaumont and his wife were taken prisoner while Leicester’s Fleming 199  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 70–71, ll. 941–51; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 177–78; Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 275. Hugh Bigod also held lands in the honour of Conches and Tosny (in Eure, near Evreux). The Bigod lands in Normandy were given in 1204 to Jean de Rouvray by Philip Augustus. Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 264. 200  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 371; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 177–79. 201  Minois, ‘Les possessions bretonnes dans le comté d’Essex’; Powell, ‘The Essex Fees of the Honour of Richmond’. 202  Gillingham, ‘Henry of Huntingdon’, p. 86. Richard de Lucy and his brother, Walter, came from Lucé near Domfront. Richard was a Norman advanced in the household of Henry II. He was also one of the men sent to deal with the Breton theft of the relic of St Petroc in 1177. Jankulak, The Medieval Cult of St Petroc, p. 25. 203  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 72–73, ll. 984–90; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, ii, 61; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 705–06, 714, 715. Earl William’s wife, Hawise, was the daughter of Amicia de Montfort-de-Gaël and of Earl Robert II of Leicester so he was also pulled into the conflict because of matrimonial politics. Initially, William had joined Henry but he had changed sides by this time to support his wife’s Beaumont brother and was forced to submit to Henry II in 1174.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

251

mercenaries were defeated at Fornham in October 1173.204 The King of England was astute in how he handled his military appointments. Richard de Lucy was chosen to lead the King’s army at Fornham probably because he held lands in Lincolnshire in the midst of fees held by members of the opposition, which meant he could draw men away from the opposition army.205 This plan worked. Lucy effectively helped to fragment support meant for the Earl of Leicester. Despite the defeat of Leicester at Fornham, the war did not end. Attempts were made to reorganize the opposition forces as Earl Hugh of Chester renewed the attacks at the beginning of 1174. More Fleming mercenaries were sent to England by the Count of Flanders, some of whom joined Earl Hugh in his attack on Norwich. Another Fleming force was sent to fight for the Scots in a planned raid on Northumberland,206 while additional support was sent from Galloway.207 On the Continent, Young Henry and the Count of Flanders also planned to cross from Gravelines to England in order to lead another front in England but unfavourable winds prevented their crossing. In the meantime, Henry II was successfully able to shut down the allied attempt to seize Sées.208 Although Leicester had been captured, David of Huntingdon, the King of Scots’ younger brother, took Beaumont’s place in the north for ‘[…] they [Beaumont’s men] chose as leader and prince, Earl David, brother of the King’.209 204 

William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 179; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 55; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 21–26, and 280 n. 117. 205  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 69, 197–98, 239, 243, 266; ii, 1431. Richard was probably the uncle of Richard II de Lucy, who was the son of Reginald de Lucy and of Amabilia de Remilly. Reginald also held land in Surrey of the honour of Boulogne. Amabilia’s other sister, Cecily, married William ‘le Gros’ Count of Aumale discussed earlier. His kinship with the Remilly family made him related by marriage to the King of Scots through William fitzDuncan (see Chapter 4). Richard de Lucy’s sisters married Eudo de Dammartin and Roger de Saint-John. His probable nephew of the same name married Ada de Moreville, daughter of Hugh and kinswoman..of Scotland. 206  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 124–25, ll. 1658–64. 207  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 126–27, ll. 1687–94; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 64; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 376; Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, i, 225, 227. The account in Gesta Henrici of the atrocities committed by the Galwegians in England is reminiscent of those claimed to have occurred in 1138: Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani, ed. by Howlett, iii, 155–59. 208  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 61–63; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 60; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 379. The citizens of Sées repelled the attack. 209  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 180: ‘[…] com-

252

Chapter 5

David led these Leicester men along with several Scottish landowners including Hugh Giffard, Lord of Yester in East Lothian, and Walter and William Giffard (Hugh’s brothers);210 Walter de Lindsay, sheriff of Lothian;211 Ralph Ridel and his son or nephew, Hugh Ridel; Richard de Moreville, Constable of Scotland; William de Vieuxpont; and Roger de Moubray.212 Roger de Moubray held the castle of Axholme in North Lincolnshire for the ‘rebels’ but was forced to submit on 5 May 1174.213 There were at least twenty-nine ‘rebels’ associated with the Huntingdon honour who joined the army of Lord David in 1174, which was probably why Henry II had attempted to bribe David with land at the outbreak of the war.214 He had feared from the outset that Lord David could draw a formidable army together from his territories.

item David, fratrem Regis Scottorum, ducem sibi ac principem delegerunt’. Newburgh was probably writing this account after 1190. David was not given the title of Earl until then. 210  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 30, 96–97, 260, 285; ii, 50, 213, 220–21; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p.  83. The Giffards originated from Longueville and Hugh may have been related to Walter Giffard, Earl of Buckingham and Lord of Longueville. Hugh Giffard entered Scotland probably through contact with the Scots in Somerset via the Buckingham Giffards or perhaps through the Warennes. He first appeared in Scotland during the reign of Malcolm IV. He was made Lord of Yester and his son, William Giffard, also gained Tealing in Angus and Powgavie in Inchture. See Chapter 2. 211  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 43, 44, 45, 64, 65, 278, 291, 305, 317, 441, 478, 154–55, 213. 212  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 64–65; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 180; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 289; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 70–71, ll. 952–68; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p. 27; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 42. 213  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 379. 214  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 26–27, ll. 349–52. In Fantosme’s account, King Henry was showing favour and offering lands to David to buy his aid and support at an early stage. Henry, like his grandfather, was determined to undermine the ruling King of Scots through his brother. Henry II’s son, Richard, was particularly successful in wooing the King’s brother into his camp. Richard granted the earldom of Huntingdon to David and David subsequently served as one of the King’s foremost leaders on the Continent. In addition, if Fantosme was correct in his account, King William would have been further offended in 1173 if Henry refused his request for Northumberland when his brother was offered more land in England. Cf. Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 160–66, 128–29, 145, 200–01 about Huntingdonshire lords with David.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

253

Huntingdon and the War The Huntingdonshire tenants proved to be invaluable to the strength of Lord David’s campaigns. In early 1174, the Anglo-French contingents led by the King’s brother took centre-stage. The hope was that David could resuscitate the English campaign and divert Henry and his forces away from Normandy. It was for this reason that the tenants of David’s and William’s lordships in England were so important to the opposition army and they were joined by Earl Robert’s men from Leicestershire. One of the first families to join David and his brother in the 1174 campaign was the Lindsays. Walter II de Lindsay served as steward in Huntingdonshire under Malcolm IV, and he still owed service to David as Malcolm’s successor in Huntingdon.215 Walter’s son, William II de Lindsay, was also high up in the Scottish administration.216 He was the justiciar of Lothian and Lord of Crawford in south Lanarkshire, and he was one of the men sent as a hostage for King William’s release in 1175.217

215  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 145, 348, 374, 376–79; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 154–55; Lindsay, Lives of the Lindsays, i, 18. The Essebys also probably arrived in Scotland from a Huntingdonshire connection. 216  See Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 100, 134, 136, 158–59, 178, 180, 185–87, 202–05, 212, 214–15, 226–27, 231, 247–49, 262, 265, 271, 273; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp.  18, 41, 62, 98; Registrum Episcopatus Glasguensis, ed. by Innes, i, 5, 11; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.2, 829; Liber S. Marie de Dryburgh, ed. by Spottiswoode, p. 79, 83; Cartularium monasterii de Rameseia, ed. by Hart, Lyon, and Gent, i, 155; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 13–14; Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 4 about Walter I de Lindsay and his brother William I. They can seen witnessing alongside Walter I Bolebec mentioned in Chapter 3. Cf. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 43–45, 64, 65, 152, 154–55, 183, 199, 212–13, 220, 223, 234, 247, 252, 254, 257, 260, 263, 268, 272–73, 277–78, 289, 290–92, 298–99, 302, 305, 307–08, 314–15, 317–19, 322, 324–27, 329, 331–35, 337–38, 341, 345, 352, 359, 361, 365–66, 368, 376, 387–88, 390–91, 402, 407, 430, 441, 456, 459–60, 469–70, 478; Liber S. Marie de Dryburgh, ed. by Spottiswoode, p. 83; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, iii, 2–3; Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 11, 85; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 102 — date charter after 1190 when David made Earl of Huntingdon; Chartulary of the Abbey of Lindores, ed. by Dowden, pp. 2, 91–92; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 160, 309n about Walter, son of William I de Lindsay and William, son of Walter II. William Burdet also acted as steward in Huntingdonshire for the King and held several fees in Leicestershire. 217  Documents and Records Illustrating the History of Scotland, ed. by Palgrave, p. 64; Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31.

Chapter 5

254

Walter (fl. 1119)

William (fl. 1134–47)

Walter II (fl. c. 1130–64), steward of Huntingdon

William II (fl. 1165–1200), justiciar of Lothian & Lord of Crawford = 1. _X. 2. Eleanor de Limesey Walter

David

William

Figure 10. Lindsay family tree.

Another of David’s followers from the honour of Huntingdon, called Hugh Ridel of Abbotsley, was probably the son of Gervase. Gervase was arguably an unnamed son of Geoffrey Ridel and of Geva, which also made Richard Basset of Weldon, Gervase’s brother-in-law.218 At the least, Gervase must have been related to Geoffrey in some way based on the dates and landholdings of the family and he was said to be the son of a ‘G.’ Ridel.219 Gervase was well-connected through his Ridel/Basset kin. Richard Basset of Weldon held land in Nottinghamshire/Derbyshire, Essex/Hertfordshire, Hun­ ting­­donshire, and Staffordshire as well as at Montreuil-au-Houlme near the Moubrays.220 His known sons were Geoffrey II Ridel, Ralph and William, and his daughters were Sibyl and Matilda.221 Sibyl married Robert II de Cauz (see Chapter 218 

Basset Charters, ed. by Reedy, p. 24; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 136; G.  Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp.  170–71. G.  Barrow, ‘The Charters of David  I of Scotland’, p. 92. Richard married Geoffrey and Geva’s daughter. 219  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 170–71. 220  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 16, 468; Pipe Roll of 31 Henry I, Michaelmas 1130, pp. 10, 43, 52, 76. 221  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 332; Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 7; See Ancient Charters, ed. by Round, p. 61; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 397 for William Basset in Norfolk.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

255

8) and Robert’s brother, Geoffrey, married Aubrey de Lisours through whom the family gained lands in Northamptonshire.222 This marriage also brought the Bassets into contact with other cross-Channel lords through the Cauz family. In c. 1160, Sibyl’s sister, Matilda, also married an Anglo-French lord — John II de Stuteville, the grandson of Robert II de Stuteville.223 John gained lands in Leicester, Northampton and Rutland from Matilda’s brother, Geoffrey II Ridel, at the time of the marriage, which further united the families territorially.224 In particular, the Bassets were brought closer to networks in Yorkshire where Roger de Stuteville, Lord of Burton Agnes, held fees of Adam de Brus, the nephew of Robert II de Brus.225 The Bassets and Stutevilles saw themselves as members of the cross-Channel society and used separate addresses to their French and English vassals and allies.226 They held land and positions on both sides of the Channel and were very well connected throughout northern England alongside other Anglo-French Scottish lords. The main line of Basset/Ridels continued in the next generation under Richard Basset’s son, Geoffrey, who married twice and passed on his lands in Northamptonshire at Weldon (in the midst of the honour of Huntingdon) to his son by his first wife named Richard.227 It is interesting that the name Ralph was common to both the Scottish and English Ridels.228 Based on Gervase’s 222 

Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 333, 343; ii, 598; Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 13. 223  Documents Illustrative of the Social and Economic History of the Danelaw, ed. by Stenton, pp. 336–38; Basset Charters, ed. by Reedy, pp. 113–14; Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, p. 723; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 331. 224  Documents Illustrative of the Social and Economic History of the Danelaw, ed. by Stenton, p. 336–38. 225  Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 28; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 34–36; Keats-Rohan, Domesday Descendants, p. 355; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 53; Pipe Roll of 18 Henry II, p. 62. Adam was the son of Adam I de Brus, brother of Robert II de Brus. They were both sons of Robert I de Brus, probably by different mothers: Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 267–68. 226  Documents Illustrative of the Social and Economic History of the Danelaw, ed. by Stenton, p. 336–38. The grant was witnessed by Matilda’s father and her brothers, Ralph and William, and Hugh Ridel, who was probably Hugh Ridel of Abbotsley, possibly her cousin. It was also witnessed by Robert and Nicholas de Stuteville, possibly John’s uncle and cousin, and Robert and Thomas, sons of Nicholas. Also see the Basset Charters about separate ethnic address. 227  Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, pp. 13, 15. This son was also named Richard. 228  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 170–71; ‘The Staffordshire Chartulary’, ed. by Wrottesley, p. 189 for Ralph, brother of Geoffrey. Gervase also had a brother called Ralph, who

256

Chapter 5

landholdings in Huntingdonshire and that he was said to be the son of a ‘G.’ Ridel, Gervase was probably related to these Ridel/Bassets. If this was the case then Hugh Ridel, Gervase’s son, was also related to the opposition leader at Dol through his grandmother.229 Hugh’s father, Gervase, had risen in the Scottish court earlier in the century. He witnessed for Earl David’s grandfather, David, before he was King,230 and he became an important officer in the King of Scots’ court as sheriff of Roxburgh and dapifer of the King’s Northumberland fees.231 He divided his Scottish and English lands and titles between his sons, Hugh and Geoffrey.232 While Hugh inherited Abbotsley in Cambridgeshire and Cranstoun in Huntingdonshire and was the King’s steward of Huntingdon, Geoffrey became Lord of Primside (Roxburghshire) and held lands in Northumberland at Shotton and Kilham.233 If Geoffrey of Primside and Hugh of Abbotsley were cousins of Geoffrey Ridel of Weldon, which would explain why Hugh appears witnessing for

Barrow suggested was Gervase’s twin brother. Geoffrey II Basset/Ridel’s son Richard also had a son named Ralph, and Geoffrey also had a brother, Ralph. 229  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 184; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 310; Chibnall, The Empress Matilda, p. 146. Geoffrey, son of Richard, also held land on both sides of the Channel. Cf. Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 54–55 about kinship to earls of Chester. Gervase’s mother, Geva, was an illegitimate daughter of Earl Hugh of Chester. She married Geoffrey Ridel receiving Drayton Basset near Leicestershire as her marriage portion. Her legacy as a member of the Chester kin group was important. Gervase’s father died on the White Ship in 1120 with King Henry I’s son. The choice of name for Gervase’s son, Hugh, may have been based on his kinship to Earl Hugh of Chester. Cf. DeAragon, ‘In Pursuit of Aristocratic Women’, pp. 264–65 about contact with David. Gervase would also have been related to the Breton d’Aubignys if he was related to this line of Basset/Ridels. 230  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 60, 85–86, 91, 102, 111–12, 125, 131 (?), 134, 152; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 92, 135. 231  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 37, 60, 89, 134. 232  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 170–71; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, ii, 294. 233  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 101–02, 110, 136, 216, 226, 232, 235, 239–40, 256, 273, 277; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 25–26, 128, 232, 256–57, 266; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 125, 127, 132, 134, 136, 138, 144, 155–57, 159, 171–72, 177, 187, 216, 219, 224, 239–41, 249, 256, 264, 274, 296–97; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 255–56, 287; Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 265–66; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 9–10. Geoffrey of Primside was still alive in 1204: Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 413; Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 138–39.

Geoffrey d. by 1203

S.

Geoffrey (d. c. 1180)

Roger (Epineville Blosseville )

daughter

?

Ralph

Figure 11. Ridel/Basset family tree.

Ralph

Richard Basset, heir of Weldon

= 1. Amicia 2. Sibilla Mauduit, sister of William Mauduit Lord of Hanslope, Rockingham, and Blosseville

Thomas

William

Richard Basset, justiciar of England (c. 1120–44) = Maud Ridel (d.c. 1160)

Hugh

Hugh, fl. 1165 Ld. of Abbotsley

Ralph

Sibyl = Robert II de Cauz

Thurstan

Geva = Geoffrey Ridel, d. 1120 (Drayton Basset)

Ralph Basset, justiciar of England fl. c. 1100–20

Ralph

Geoffrey, fl. 1165–1204 Ld. of Primside

Gervase Lord of Abbotsley fl. 1120–65 = Christiana

Matilda = John II de Stuteville

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173 257

258

Chapter 5

Geoffrey Ridel in c. 1160,234 they would have been part of a cross-Channel family who held land in the Ornois and Caux. Geoffrey Ridel not only succeeded to the lands at Montreuil-au-Houlme,235 but he married into another family with lands in Caux. His second wife, Sibilla, was the sister of William III Mauduit, Lord of Hanslope and of Rockingham (d.  c.  1194). 236 William Mauduit had already been in contact with the Scottish court not only because of his territorial interests but he also married the daughter of King David’s stepson, Simon II de Senlis.237 Both families were involved with the Beaumont and Canmore lordships, and prior to 1207, they shared common political interests in Normandy. William III Mauduit held land in Northamptonshire as well as manors in Leicestershire (south of Northampton in Buckinghamshire and in Hampshire) and in Winchester and he was the chamberlain of Henry II, as his father of the same name had been before him. William’s Norman lands were at SaintMartin-au-Bosc, only about sixty kilometres from the Ridel fees in Caux. They passed to his son of the same name, but the family were disseized of the fee by Philip Augustus by 1207.238 The marriage of William’s sister, Sibilla Mauduit, 234 

Documents Illustrative of the Social and Economic History of the Danelaw, ed. by Stenton, pp. 336–37. 235  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, vi, 16, 468. 236  Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, pp. 13, 15, 24–25, 28. 237  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 91, 212–13, 247, 267, 277; Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, pp. 180, 229, 230, 241, 258–59; Hollister, ‘The Origins of the English Treasury’, pp. 264–69, 274; H. G. Richardson, ‘The Chamber of Henry II’, pp. 598–602; Mason, ‘The Mauduits’; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, iv, 641. William’s father, William Mauduit, appears with the King in Normandy. The family originally held in Hampshire at Porchester but lost these lands for about twenty years to William de Pont de l’Arche. William de Pont de l’Arche had married the daughter of Robert Mauduit, elder brother of William II Mauduit. The Mauduits regained the lands and the treasury chamberlainship in 1153. William II Mauduit had spent the majority of his early career running his father’s Norman and his mother’s English fees. It was his role in Henry’s administration in Normandy that led the King to advance him in England and he was one of the men who supported the Constitutions of Clarendon in 1164. He gained Hanslope through his wife, Maud, daughter of Michael of Hanslope: H. G. Richardson, ‘William of Ely’, pp. 73–75. 238  Beauchamp Cartulary Charters, ed. by Mason, pp.  102–03; Catalogue des Actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delisle, p. 243. Stringer, ‘Senlis, Simon (II) de, Earl of Northampton’; Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 62; H. G. Richardson, ‘William of Ely’, pp. 62–63, 71–77, 84–87. William III’s son, Robert II, had gained the chamberlainship by 1199. Robert was also mentioned as no longer possessing Saint-Martin in 1207: Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 48–50. Cf. Mason, ‘The Mauduits’, p. 21

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

259

and Geoffrey Ridel may have led to their son, Geoffrey’s, advancement to the castle-guard of Blosseville-en-Caux in 1180, 1195 and 1198.239 Geoffrey Ridel (d. 1189), archdeacon of Canterbury, was probably also related to the Ridels in Cambridgeshire and in Scotland. The archdeacon was with Robert III, Earl of Leicester, and Saher de Quincy at Le Mans before the outbreak of the war in 1173, but he remained in the King’s party during the war.240 He may have been rewarded with the bishopric of Ely in this year for his loyalty to Henry and it was also in this year that he gave his cousin, Galiene, daughter of William Blund, in marriage to Robert de L’Isle at Argentan.241 Bishop Geoffrey would also be involved in brokering King William’s marriage to the Mançeau noblewoman, Ermengarde de Beaumont, in 1186. As can be seen, the family was divided in its support during the war. While Hugh and Geoffrey Ridel of Primside remained loyal to the Scots in 1174 and served David because of personal ties of affection and loyalty to their Hun­ tingdon lord, the archdeacon remained in the King of England’s camp. The Roxburgh Ridels were rewarded for their service, and Geoffrey Ridel’s son, Ralph, continued to receive patronage from Lord David of Huntingdon and witnessed for him at his brother’s court.242 Another cross-Channel nobleman who was involved with the Scots in 1174 was Radulph, or Ralph, de la Hai. Radulph brought men with him from Nor­­ mandy to aid Lord David of Huntingdon’s operations in the Midwest. 243 about William Mauduit, son of Robert and Isabel Basset. William joined the rebels in 1215. 239  Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 13; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxix, cl; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 707 l. It is unclear that the Geoffrey who held the castle-guard was the son of Geoffrey Ridel and of Sibilla. If this is the case then he had a brother Roger, who held tenements of him at Epineville, Blosseville, and Veulles (just north of Blosseville). Roger was not mentioned in English sources unless he was mistaken for ‘S. Ridell’ who succeeded Geoffrey in 1203. It is also possible that there was a third son of Geoffrey and Sibilla, Roger, who was not mentioned at all in the English sources because he stayed in Normandy: Rotuli de liberate, ed. by Hardy, 4 John, p. 57. 240  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 493, 554, 562–64. 241  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 10–11. 242  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 127, 132, 156, 177, 241, 249, 256, 264, 274, 296–97. Hugh and Geoffrey were also witnessing alongside the Vieuxponts and Robert de Quincy. Hugh witnessed no less than fourteen times for Robert de Quincy in Scottish records out of a total of twenty-seven times. This phenomenon is not surprising considering the marriage of Saher de Quincy to Margaret Beaumont, daughter of the Earl of Leicester, and the Ridel connection to the Beaumonts in France and England. 243  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 381, 385.

William, Lord of Errol (fl. 1180–1200) butler of King William of Scotland

X. _de la Hai = Juliana de Soules

Hai-Hues

Figure 12. Hai family trees.

Ranulf II, Lord of Soulles and Carantilly, Liddesdale Nisbet and Doddington (d. c. 1207)

Ralph of Saint Gilles

Hugh

Ranulf, butler of King William of Scotland Lord of Liddesdale, Nisbet, Doddington (d.c. 1170)

Robert of Moyon

William, Lord of Soulles and Carantilly = X._ de Tesson, sister of Ralph Tesson Lord of Saint-Sauveur and Thury-Harcourt

Scottish Hais/Soules

Robert

Guillaume

Robert of Plessis = Alienora

Egidia 1. = Richard II du Hommet of Normandy = 2. Alienora, widow of Robert de la Hai

Robert

Cecily = Roger de Saint Jean

Radulph (Ralph) = Olivia d’Aubigny fl, 1142–1174 Sussex Lincolnshire, Créances and Plessis

Hugh (fl. 1156–59) – (founder of Hai-Hues?)

Richard of Lincoln (d. 1169) = Matilda de Vernon

Robert of Plessis (c. 1150) = 1. Gundred 2. Muriel

Radulph (Ralph), seneschal of Mortain

260 Chapter 5

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

261

Although Radulph probably held his primary lordship in Normandy, he may also have been active in England. He may have been the same Radulph de la Hai who made a gift of one virgate in Hampton to Roger of Arden that was confirmed by Roger de Moubray and witnessed by William de Soules and Robert de Busci between 1166 and 1177.244 If this was the case, Radulph’s participation in the 1174 campaign may have been influenced by his contact with the Chester and Moubray lordships. He was probably related to the same Ralph and his brother, Richard, who were tenants of the earls of Chester in England and witnessed with the Bailleuls, Colvilles, Hommets and Vescys.245 The Hai family still held land on both sides of the Channel but it is unclear what Radulph’s place in the Hai kin group was. If we try to place Radulph within a Norman framework from which he probably originated there are two possibilities. There was a Radulph de la Hai, who appears as a landholder at SaintGilles, ten kilometres north of Soulles.246 This Radulph had a brother, Robert, who held fees in the honour of Moyon at Beaucoudray and Villebaudon, about six kilometres southeast of Soulles, held by the Anglo-Scottish Soules family, and he may have been the son of a Hugh de la Hai.247 Robert also owed service at Saint-Scolasse partially held by the earl of Gloucester.248 The brothers are descended from the Hai family often referred to as the Hai-Hues, which is recognized as separate from another Norman branch nearby, called Hai-du-Puits. The Hai-du-Puits held English fees centred in Lincolnshire at Burwell where they were tenants of the earls of Chester, but they also held Plessis and other lands in lower Normandy.249 It is possible that the opposition leader, Radulph de la Hai, was Radulph, or Ralph, de la Hai from the Hai-du-Puits line. The problem is that both the HaiHue and Hai-du-Puit families still had a strong Continental presence in the 244 

Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. 214–16. The Hais and Moubrays also witnessed together in Scotland: Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 383, 389. 245  Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 128–29; R. Davis, ‘King Stephen and the Earl of Chester Revised’, pp. 656–57. Radulph de la Hai also held land at Walmsgate in Lincolnshire. 246  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 505 k. 247  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 g, j; Wagner, ‘The Origin of the Hays of Erroll’, pp. 4–5. 248  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 611 k. 249  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 166, 175, 477, 606, 608; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, ccxxxix; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 342; Wagner, ‘The Origin of the Hays of Erroll’, pp. 1–6; Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 128–29; R. Davis, ‘King Stephen and the Earl of Chester Revised’, pp. 656–57.

262

Chapter 5

Manche. The Norman lands and networks of both Hai lines were very close to each other in lower Normandy, which indicates that the lines were related.250 In fact, it seems that the Hai-Hue line probably originated from either Hugh, the brother of Robert de la Hai of Plessis, the founder of the Hai-du-Puits, or a son of Robert called Hugh mentioned above.251 Hugh would have been the head of the Hai-Hue line and his nephews, or brothers, were Ralph de la Hai of Sussex and Richard de la Hai of Lincolnshire,252 the latter already mentioned as having contact with the Colvilles.253 Ralph and his brother, Richard, were part of the Chester networks. They fought for King Stephen in the Cotentin before 1142 until Geoffrey of Anjou overran the region.254 Their grandfather was Ralph, 250 

Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 128–29; R. Davis, ‘King Stephen and the Earl of Chester Revised’, pp. 656–57. The descent and connection between the Hai-Hue and Haidu-Puits of Lincolnshire and Sussex are very difficult to unweave. Robert de la Haye of Plessis (Hai-du-Puits) also held in Lincolnshire at Burwell and all of the Norman Hai fees between the two families were not far apart. 251  This suggested son of Robert of Plessis called Hugh is unrecorded as such but there is a branch under a Hugh, father of Robert of Moyon and of Ralph of Saint-Gilles mentioned above, and this branch does seem to have been connected to the Hai-du-Puits. The Hommets gained Moyon briefly through this connection. See below. Robert did have a brother called Hugh though and this Hugh may have been the founder of the Hai-Hues that settled in Scotland. It is difficult to ascertain whether the Hugh, founder of the Hai-Hues, was the brother or son, by the name of Hugh, of Robert of Plessis, who married Muriel: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 210. 252  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 154. Richard de la Hai (du-Puits) was Constable of Lincoln Castle and his brother, Ralph, succeeded to Milton in Arlington and Burwell, Muckton and Carlton in Lincolnshire: Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 355, 361, 365, 380; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 166, 175, 547; ii, 1004, 1054, 1087. Cf. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 282, 285, 324, 347, 449 about their involvement with ecclesiastical endowments in Normandy.They were sons of Robert and Muriel: Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 329, 372. Robert was elevated in the royal administration of Henry I. Cartulaire de la Manche: abbaye de la Luzerne, ed. by du Bosc, p. 4. Ralph owed knight-service from the fee of Créances in the honour of Mortain. He also owed service from fees in Coutances and from the honour of Plessis. He held in caput the honour of Plessis as of 1172: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 g; Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, ii, 632. Ralph’s son, Robert, succeeded to the Lincolnshire estates: i, 171, 355, 361, 365. Hugh de la Hai is not to be confused with another near contemporary, Hugh de la Hai, who held fees in Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, and Northamptonshire. This Hai line seems to have had no connection to the Hai-du-Puits: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 477, 578, 606; ii, 655, 673, 939, 1410, 1430, 1434, 1463. 253  See Chapter 4 and Colvilles. 254  Dalton, ‘Aiming at the Impossible’, pp. 128–29.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

263

seneschal of Mortain, and the family’s lands at Plessis were about thirty-seven kilometres from Moyon in the Manche.255 This descent was claimed by a later Robert de la Hai of Plessis, grandson of Ralph de la Hai of Sussex, through his rights to the abbey of Lessay (in the Manche).256 Even more significantly, the Hai family in Lincolnshire and Sussex was related to the Hommet Constables of Normandy (see Figure 13 below). In c. 1176, Richard de la Hai of Lincolnshire’s daughter, Egidia, also called Gisla, married Richard II du Hommet, the grandson of the Constable of the same name who appeared with King William in 1166.257 Their marriage coincided with a dispute the two families had with the monks of Le Mont Saint-Michel in c. 1175 so certainly the two families were functioning in the same circles at the time of the war.258 It was probably also this Hai-Hommet communication that in the next generation informed the marriage of Richard de la Hai’s nephew, Richard II de Vernon, Lord of Néhou, to Lucy du Hommet.259 After the loss of Normandy in 1204, the Hai-Hommet marriage gave the Hommets the former 255 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 43; Desroches, Annales civiles, p. 133. Robert de la Hai of Plessis witnessed Henry I’s gift to the monks of Thiron abbey before c. 1126 at Caen along with Nigel d’Aubigny, progenitor of the Moubrays and the husband of Mathilde, daughter of Richer de l’Aigle and of Judith of Avranches. His two sons, Richard and Ralph, were mentioned by Empress Matilda: Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Lat. 5480 [Extrait de l’abbaye de Fontevraud], fol. 267. Cf. Green, The Government of England under Henry I, pp. 123, 146–47, 151, 170, 258 for Hai-du-Puits; Cf. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 59, 527 on Hais. The Hais also had Breton interests. Robert de la Hai of Plessis’ daughter, Cecily, married Roger de Saint Jean and their son was William de Saint-Jean. 256  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, xxxiii, ccxxxvii–ccxxxviii, clxxxiv, ccxxxix. Ralph de la Hai married Oliva d’Aubigny, sister of Earl William I of Arundel. Ralph and his wife were benefactors of Bilsington in Kent, which church they gave to the abbey of Lessay. Ralph de la Hai and Earl William I d’Aubigny’s brother, Oliver, also witnessed a grant by Earl William to Saint-Père de Chartres: Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, ii, 611–12. Ralph’s grandson, Robert, was the son of Robert de la Hai and of Alienora. Cf. Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, clxxvi–clxxvii. The Hai-du-Puits had held Plessis since at least 1080. Plessis was a gift from the abbey of Lessay: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: William I, ed. by Bates, pp. 577–84; Herval, ‘L’abbaye de Lessay’, pp. 297, 300–01. 257  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17, fol. 117; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxlv; ii, clxxx, clxxxii, clxxxiv. Richard de la Hai’s wife was Maud de Vernon from the Vernon family at Néhou: Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 347; Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 12. See Chapter 4 about Constable Richard I du Hommet. 258  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 274–75. 259  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 527. It is unclear what Lucy’s relationship was to the Hommet constables of Normandy.

Richard II, fl. 1175–1200 = 1. Egidia de la Hai 2. Alienora, widow of Robert de la Hai of Plessis

Jordan Agatha = 1. William de Fougères 2. Fulk II Paynel, Lord of Hamby and Bréhal

Agnes (fl. 1220) = 1. Baldwin Wake 2. Ranulph de Vernay

Henry

Figure 13. Hommet family tree.

Enguerrand = X._ de Moubray

William

Enguerrand (d. 1181) = Cecilia de Remilly

Jordan, Bishop of Lisieux

William, fl. c. 1181-1200 =Lucé (? de Brus) Constable

Richard I, fl. c. 1150-81 = Agnes de Say Constable of Normandy

Emma = Geoffrey de Valognes, Lord of Burton

264 Chapter 5

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

265

Norman fees of the Hai-du-Puits including Varanguebecq, and Poupeville and Warreville in the Cotentin.260 It also seems to have briefly given them the honour of Moyon, which Richard II du Hommet probably held through his second wife, Alienora, the widow of Robert de la Hai of Plessis.261 Tracing the Hai family is important because it was about this time that the Hais appeared in Scotland (see Figure 12). The second member of the family in Scotland, William de la Hai, Lord of Errol in Perthshire, was probably related to the Hais who held land in Coutances and Mortain. William’s mother, Juliana de Soules, sister of Ranulf and William de Soules, had married a member of the Hai kin group, thereby uniting the Anglo-Norman Scottish Soules and Anglo-Norman Hais across the Channel.262 Juliana’s brother, William de Soules, in particular, was important to these cross-Channel contacts for he continued to administer the lands and extend the family’s patronage networks on the Continent. His appearance with the above-named Robert of Plessis and Hugh de la Hai and that he also witnessed with Radulph de la Hai represents close links between the Hai and Soules lines. It is also significant that the Soules appear in connection with the ecclesiastical patronage of the Hommet family at the abbey of Aunay (near Vire), a daughter-house of the abbey of Savigny that had been founded in c. 1131 by Jordan de Say and Lucia.263 Between 1156 and 1159, William de Soules made a gift at BonFossati (Saint-Martin-de-Bonfossé is only three kilometres from Soulles) to Aunay with Robert de la Hai and his brother, Hugh, which was

260  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 188; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxlv. 261  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, ix–x, clxxxiv, ccxxxix. Alienora may have been quite young when she married Robert and her remarriage may have been decided on political grounds to keep the two families united. 262  See Figure 12. Rental Book of the Cistercian Abbey of Cupar-Angus, ed. by Rogers, i, 336; Wagner, ‘The Origin of the Hays of Erroll’, pp. 535–37; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 37, 256, 260, 307, 346, 376–77, 398, 402, 409–10, 479. It is clear that William and Ranulf ’s sister did marry a Hai but it is unclear which one. The Hai genealogy is very fragmented and difficult to recreate. Juliana held the rights to the ville of Wakerley in Northamptonshire near Doddington in 1192: Pipe Roll of 4 Richard I, p. 261. There is an earlier named William de Hai who witnessed a grant of Buiville (Biéville?), Noville (Neuville-au-Plain), and Saint-Colombe in the Cotentin to the abbey of Fécamp for King Henry II between 1155–58, but it is not clear that this was the future Lord of Errol: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 147–48. 263  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, xcv, cxxxv; ii, lxxxii, clxxxiii, clxxxvii. Jordan and Lucia’s daughter married Constable Richard I du Hommet.

266

Chapter 5

witnessed by the abbey’s second founder, Constable Richard I du Hommet.264 William also furthered his fortunes in the area by marrying the sister of Ralph Tesson, Lord of Saint-Sauveur and of Thury-Harcourt, and he owed service from Cérences in Mortain, only twenty-two kilometres northeast of Soulles.265 William’s father-in-law, Jordan Tesson, was also a regular witness for Richard I du Hommet and his son, William, and by virtue of his relationship with the Hommets and as a royal agent, he witnessed with the Haye-du-Puits.266 The Soules family was pulled into the Hommet orbit not only because they were related to the Hai family but also because of their proximity to the Hommet lordship in lower Normandy and in the honour of Huntingdon where the Hommets held land at Doddington.267 In Normandy, the Soules, Hai, and Hommet fees in the Manche were close to each other which suggests that they may have moved across the Channel together and brought other families with them. For example, the Carantilly family in Scotland was probably brought directly over from the Manche by Ranulf I de Soules (Carantilly is only about six kilometres north of Soulles).268 The Aunays may also have been introduced 264  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 209–11. This is Robert de la Hai of Plessis and his brother, Hugh, the uncle of Richard, Ralph, Cecily, and Hugh. Robert also held land in Criquetot and Gillerville (possibly Giverville two and a half kilometres southeast of Épreville near Richard de Harcourt). Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxxix, cxxxiv, clxiii; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 134; Green, The Government of England under Henry I, pp. 123, 146, 258; Wagner, ‘The Origin of the Hays of Erroll’, pp. 1–6. Richard du Hommet refounded the abbey as a Cistercian foundation in 1157. 265  Antiquités anglo-normandes de Ducarel, ed. by Léchaudé d’Anisy, pp. 231–32; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, clxiii; ii, ccxxxvii; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 500 e, 696 g; Reid, ‘Some Early de Soulis Charters’; M’Michael, ‘The Feudal Family of de Soulis’. 266  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 27, 36, 47–48, 84, 188, 210, 228, 253, 267, 286, 402, 404, 417, 456, 535, 539, 569, 571, 577, 580; ii, 16, 23, 74, 79, 180, 184; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, clxxxiii, lvi. 267  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, ii, 673. See Chapter 4. 268  I would suggest that Robert Carantilly made his way into the Valognes familia via the Valognes/Hommet marriage and through contacts in lower Normandy. The Hommets were intermarried and involved with the Hai/Soules crowd (See Chapter 4): Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 433–34; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, p. 31; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 294–95; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, ci, cxxviii,cxxix, cxxxiv. Ranulf II de Soules also held the villa of Neuby in Appleby until he lost it to King John probably in about 1204. Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 265: Robert de Vieuxpont of Westmoreland was the bailie of Appleby at the time. The Vieuxponts are also an important family to consider when examining Franco-Scottish ties in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

267

into Scotland by the Soules family based on their interaction with the Aunays on the Continent.269 Ranulf I de Soules, uncle of William de la Hai, was the first of the Soules family in Scotland. He witnessed for King David probably as a young man and he was butler to King William of Scotland before c. 1170 and Lord of Liddesdale (Castleton), Nisbet and Great Doddington (a Northampton­shire fee of the honour of Huntingdon).270 Ranulf advanced his nephew, William de la Hai of Errol, at the Scottish court so that William succeeded as the King’s butler after Ranulf ’s death.271 It is also possible that William’s other uncle, William de Soules, was able to advance his nephew’s interests in the Evrecin at Beaumont-le-Roger because of his service to Henry II after 1180 for a William de la Hai was holding a fee of Baudry de Lonchamp, nephew of Bishop William Longchamp, near the Mauvoisins at Saint-André-de-l’Eure in the Evrecin (Beaumont territory).272 The Rosny Mauvoisins were patrons of the church of St Père de Chartres along with the Aubigny, Avenel, and Hai families and William de la Hai of Errol can also be found witnessing in Scotland with William Mauvoisin, a member of the Rosny kin group, between c. 1185 and 1202. William Mauvoisin first appeared in Scotland about the time of William de Soules’ appointment as the King’s agent in the Evrecin and these families appeared together on the Continent even before Mauvoisin’s emigration.273 269 

The Aunays appear in Scotland in c. 1200: G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 172. Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 13–14, 31, 123–24; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 165; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 122. 271  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 158–59; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 96; Liber ecclesie de Scon, ed. by Innes, pp. 8, 12, 22, 29; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 12–13; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 294–95. Ranulf ’s descendant, William, continued patronising Carantilly well into the thirteenth century and also became Lord de Normanville through his mother. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 500, 735. Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapter 5. 272  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 615 a–b, 717 c. This service is dated after 1204. The Lord of Errol died in c. 1202 so it may not have been him though it may also have taken time for the news of the lord of Errol’s death in c. 1202 to reach Philip Augustus’ court. This fee was vulnerable to the restructuring that occurred just after 1204: Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 335. Baudry also gained the lordship of fees near Vernon through his grandfather, Osbert de Cailly. William de Longchamp had a lot of contact with the Scottish court throughout the 1190s. See Chapter 7. 273  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, i, 180; ii, 421, 611; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 299, 334, 400, 402, 479. It could very well be a coincidence that Soules took up service in the Evrecin when William Mauvoisin emigrated to 270 

268

Chapter 5

William de Soules was the key to the Errol branch’s attainment of a crossChannel territorial position that extended from Normandy to Scotland. Though their Hai nephew became the King of Scots’ butler, William’s son, Ranulf II de Soules, succeeded to the Scottish lands of his uncle, Ranulf I, who died childless in c. 1170, and he also succeeded to Soulles and Carantilly (seven kilometres north of Soulles), which he held until his death in c. 1207.274 The high status that William de Soules brought to the Hai-Soules kin group was based on his loyal service to the King of England. William was not confined territorially to the Manche. He was also given custody of the important castle of Moulins-la-Marche in the Ornois before 1180,275 and even brought his English attendant, ‘Gautier’ the Englishman, to serve by his side.276 Henry II’s decision to place William at Moulins attests to the King’s trust in him despite that William’s son was a member of King William of Scotland’s court.277 Moulins, Bonsmoulins, and Bellême were strategic to the King’s ability to protect Normandy from Louis VII, and the counts of Perche and Alençon, particularly since his seizure of Moulins from Richer II de l’Aigle had driven Richer to join the 1173 campaigns against Henry.278 Moulins lay near the head of the fertile Huisne valley that cut southwest retreating down to Nogent-leRotrou held by the counts of Perche — an area often resistant to the King’s authority. A lot of support came from this area during the 1174 campaigns.279

The Final Campaign and Capture of the King of Scots The Perche-Blésois frontier had proved difficult for the dukes/kings of Nor­ mandy to control. The Huisne valley was the location of an aggressive program of castle-building in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries as the count Scotland but the importance of the Mauvoisins in the Beaumont familia is without doubt as discussed in Chapter 7. 274  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 158–59; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, p. 30; Early Scottish Charters, ed. by Lawrie, p. 309. 275  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxxix. 276  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de la Trappe, ed. by Hommey, p. 223. 277  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 162, 163, 165, 185, 216, 257, 259–60, 271, 277, 292, 295, 307, 314, 324, 346, 365–66, 398, 402, 479. 278  Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’, pp.  189, 191; Lemarignier, Recherche sur l’hommage en marche, pp. 60–72. 279  Decaëns, ‘Les Châteaux de la vallée de l’Huisne dans le Perche’.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

269

and countess of Blois and their vassal, the Viscount of Chartres, Hugh du Puiset, constructed a line of defensive castles opposite to those of the count of Perche.280 Instability in the region continued to align families into different camps as they struggled to protect their positions, but the marriage of Rotrou II, Count of Perche, to the sister of the counts of Blois and Champagne in 1173 ended some of the hostilities and simplified loyalties in the Blésois and Perche territories until the 1190s.281 By the time war broke out in 1173, Rotrou, Thibault of Blois, Count Henry of Champagne, and Count John of Alençon all committed to fighting for Young Henry and Louis VII.282 Vassals of these great lords also aligned with the opposition party because of service and loyalty owed to their overlords and kinsmen. For example, the Puiset family, led by Count Hugh du Puiset and his uncle, Bishop Hugh of Durham, were among those who joined the opposition in 1174. Count Hugh’s overlord as Viscount de Chartres was Count Thibault of Blois but he was also related to Thibault through his grandmother, Agnes of Blois, daughter of Count Stephen of Blois and of Adela of Normandy (daughter of William the Conqueror).283 Earlier marriages and overlordship brought the two families together politically. Intermarriage and the structure of lordships promoted continuing relations between the Vieuxpont (lords of Courville), Puiset (overlords 280  LoPrete, ‘Adela of Blois and Ivo of Chartres’, pp. 148–52. There was a brief break in this policy under Countess Adelaide of Blois and Chartres because as the Norman daughter of William the Conqueror, she initially had a vested interest in supporting Rotrou, Count of Perche, while also trying to retain the loyalty of Rotrou’s rivals, the Puisets and Courvilles. This political agenda changed during her second regency when she was less concerned with her brother, Henry I’s relationship with Louis VI: LoPrete, Adela of Blois: Countess and Lord, pp. 312–14. 281  Decaëns, ‘Les Châteaux de la vallée de l’Huisne dans le Perche’, pp. 3–20; Evergates, ‘Louis VII and the Counts of Champagne’. Royal-comital relations had already shifted in 1153 when the Blois-Champagne brothers, Henry and Thibault, were betrothed to Louis VII and Eleanor of Aquitaine’s daughters, Alix and Marie. Marie had married Henry ‘the Liberal’ by 1159. 282  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 170. It has been suggested that Eleanor and her daughter, Marie, were able to become better acquainted during this period: McCash, ‘Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine’, pp. 708–09. 283  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 127; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, ii, 412. Agnes married Viscount Hugh III du Puiset. King Stephen would have been Count Hugh’s great-uncle. The Puisets also made a marital alliance witht the house of Bellême through a second marriage of Roger II de Montgommery, grandfather of William Talvas, Count of Alençon and of Ponthieu, to the sister of Hugh, Lord of Puiset (d. 1096). Their only child seems to have entered the church though: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iii, 138–39; Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 359, 396; ii, 160, 166–68.

270

Chapter 5

of Courville),284 Tosny,285 and Moubray families as can be seen in landholding patterns that stretched from the Chartrain to the Ornois (see Map 3).286 These families all supported the crown of France in 1173.287 Some of the contact in the Chartrain and Ornois also carried over into Scotland. The Scottish Vieuxponts and Moubrays witnessed together in Scot­ land and in the Ornois, where their fees were only about eighteen kilometres apart.288 Communication between these families in the Ornois and Chartrain probably facilitated the negotiation for aid that was sent to King William of Scotland in 1174 though the King was already in contact with the Vieuxpont family’s overlord, the Puisets, through Bishop Hugh du Puiset of Durham. By early 1174, Bishop Hugh allied with King William of Scotland and supported William’s campaigns into Westmoreland. The Bishop’s ability to protect William’s eastern front probably contributed to William’s successful seizure of Appleby and Brough.289 During this campaign, William also tried to take Carlisle, Prudhoe, and Wark, while Gilbert de Munfichet, father of Richard 284 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 32–35 for the twelfth-century succession of the Puisets and the close ties between the Puisets and Vieuxponts. Hugh III du Puiset witnessed and confirmed the grant of Ivo de Courville in c. 1118. This Ivo was a progenitor of the Vieuxponts but not a Vieuxpont himself. The Puiset family provides a good example of how succession laws were not consistent yet. Hugh ‘le Jeune’s uncle succeeded him to Puiset and Chartres and Hugh did not succeed until his uncle died without heirs. 285  Musset, ‘Origines d’une classe dirigeante’. Tosny involvement in their Continental holdings was primarily influenced by their marital ties with the Counts of Evreux, the Montfort l’Amaurys, and with the Leicester-Beaumonts who were also related to the Montforts. Their land-base was mainly in the Evrecin. 286  Power, ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’, pp. 193–201; Dion, Le Château de Montfort-l’Amaury, pp. 6–7. The counts of Meulan and Evreux and lords of Montfort l’Amaury also held multiple interests in the Norman-French frontier. 287  Thompson, Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France, pp. 69, 124. The Courvilles were supporting the counts of Perche. 288  Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 35. They both also had a vested interest in Savigny. 289  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 181–82; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 65; Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, i, 225. Bishop Hugh was also a nephew of King Stephen through his parents, Hugh III du Puiset and Agnes of Blois. As a Puiset, Bishop Hugh clearly understood the merits of a frontier position and had already built a donjon at Norham castle in c. 1160. It is unclear exactly how the bishop helped King William but William was far more successful in these campaigns than in the previous year and it is known the bishop was interested in martial matters. Dixon, ‘From Hall to Tower’, pp. 87, 101.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

271

Munfichet of Cargill, joined him with support from the men of Clare.290 The Clare knights were acting against their overlord, Richard de Clare, a loyal adher­­ ent of King Henry who had served the King at Verneuil in the previous year.291 Choosing sides in the war was difficult. Lordship in itself did not always determine loyalties. Despite increasing support from different quarters, the campaigns in England ground to a halt. Bishop Hugh du Puiset had summoned his nephew Hugh du Puiset, Count of Bar-sur-Seine and the Lord of Puiset,292 to come to England with five hundred Flemings and forty French knights but King William was captured near Alnwick while waiting for Waltheof, Earl of Dunbar, to join him.293 Count Hugh and his knights were forced to return immediately to France while Ranulf de Glanville and the men of Surrey escorted the King to Richmond castle.294 The insult was clear. Richmond Castle was under the lordship of the dukes of Brittany, or in this case the soon to be disseized Duchess Margaret of Scotland and her future son-in-law, Geoffrey Plantagenet.295 The King of Scots and his sister had been vanquished and disgraced.

290 

Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 120–21, ll. 1609–12. Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 375; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 51 292  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 120–21, ll. 1596–1619; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 67; ii, 92; Strickland, ‘Securing the North’, p. 180; Scammell, Hugh de Puiset Bishop of Durham, pp. 36–42, 58–59. King William’s relationship with Bishop Hugh Puiset would sour in the 1190s. For the Puiset family and the significance of their connections see Chapter 6. 293  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 66–67; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 63; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 181; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 130–41, ll. 1746–1904; Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 247, 249. Professor Bartlett points out the similarity in which the English and Scots were accoutred. Based on William of Newburgh’s account of Alnwick, King William was briefly confused between his own and the English men. Newburgh mentioned that after a dense fog lifted, King William thought a nearby troop was his own men returning. Fantosme said in the mouth of Roger d’Estuteville: ‘They (the Scottish forces) […]. are rich in arms and in fleet steeds.’ Most of William’s men were Anglo-French and were dressed the same as their counterparts in the south: Robert Bartlett, The Making of Europe, pp. 81–82; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 183–85; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 92–93, ll. 1227–30. 294  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 384. 295  Margaret did not hold the lordship of Richmond directly but it was part of her daughter, Constance’s, inheritance. 291 

272

Chapter 5

Among those captured with the King of Scots were Richard Comyn, William de Mortemer, William de Insula, Henry Revel,296 Randolph de Vere, Jordan of Flanders, Waldev de Bicre, Richard de Moreville, Adam de Porz, Alain I de Lascelles, William de Vieuxpont, Roger de Moubray, and Richard Malluvel.297 Many of these men continued to patronize their Continental contacts and were advanced for their loyal service to the King of Scots after the war. Some of these families found themselves alienated from Henry II’s court and were inclined to find service elsewhere until they could be restored.298 One of the most striking aspects of the war was the impact that cross-Channel families had in Scotland. Many Anglo-French and Anglo-French Scottish families were able to make new marital alliances and gain more fees on both sides of the Channel after the war. For example, Richard Comyn, who was a regular witness of King William’s charters and who held land in Peeblesshire and Northallerton through his wife,299 may have witnessed at least two charters one for William de Insula and one for Thomas de Piris in 1184 concerning grants to the church of Tribéhou.300 296 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 219–20, 222–23, 335–36, 389, 398, 406, 409, 439, 452. Henry Revel held estates at Balmerino in Fife and left these lands to his nephew, Richard Revel. Richard later left these estates to his elder brother, Adam de Stawell, who was a freeholder in Somerset: G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 10; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 78–79. The Revel lands in Somerset were Cury Rivel and Ilchester. 297  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 63; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 185; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 67; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 136–41, ll. 1835–93. According to Newburgh and Fantosme, Roger de Moubray fled to Scotland and was not captured at Alnwick. 298  Vincent, ‘William Marshal’, pp. 2–3, 6–12. 299  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 168, 219, 248–49, 263–64, 310–11, 132, 134, 136, 138, 146, 149, 151, 152, 160, 174, 176, 177, 190, 196, 198, 199, 202, 204, 208, 211, 212, 216, 218, 219, 220, 225, 238, 245, 246. 300  Cartulaire de la Manche: abbaye de la Luzerne, ed. by du Bosc, pp. 14–17. In 1184, William du Hommet and his wife, Lucie, and son Richard also made donations to the church of Saint-Martin-de-Tribéhou, which was a dependency of the church of Holy Trinity of Lucerne (sixteen kilometres apart). Although Balfour-Paul has suggested that Richard Comyn died before 1182, the date of his wife’s marriage is uncertain and there is no proof that her designation as widow of Richard Comyn and wife of Malcolm, Earl of Atholl, fell before 1184. It could have occurred as late as 1189 based on the Earl’s grant to Dunfermline which has been dated between 1182 and 1189: Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, i, 417, 504; Liber vitae ecclesiae Dunelmensis, ed. by Stevenson, p. 100; Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, ed. by Innes and Thomson, p. 387. Richard may have returned to France about this time, which was the reason for his disappearance from Scottish records.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

273

Tribéhou is two kilometres south of Saint-André-de-Bohon in the Manche, which was in the territory of Duchess Margaret of Brittany’s second husband, Humphrey IV de Bohun, to whom she was married shortly after the conclusion of the war in 1174. Richard Comyn probably became involved with Tribéhou because of contact with other Continental lords in 1173 and 1174, and because his family probably originated from Bayeux and/or from southwest of Rouen at Bosc-Bénard-Commin.301 He was probably also related to Bernard Comin, whose wife Hawise, and firstborn son, ‘William’, were regular patrons to the church of Saint Marie de Rouen. In the 1170s, Bernard can also be found witnessing with the Quincys and Lacys at Quevilly and both of these families also had contact or served in the Scottish court.302 Moreover, both the AngloScottish and Norman Comyns/Comins continued to use the name ‘William’ in their naming practices; it is just unclear how close the two branches were by the end of the century. It is notable, however, that another Scottish affiliated family, the Vaux, witnessed for Empress Matilda at Rouen with Bernard Comin between 1152 and 1164.303 Richard Comyn’s uncle, William Comyn, was the first of the family to appear at the Scottish court as King David I’s chancellor. David tried to place William in the bishopric at Durham between 1141 and 1143 with Empress Matilda’s aid as a means to preventing King Stephen from controlling northern England.304 It was shortly after William failed to retain his bishopric that his nephew and namesake ‘trained in arms’ and died fighting in Durham, leaving Richard to handle the lordship of Northallerton in the vale of Mowbray. Richard was then 301 

G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 175. Barrow suggests they originated from BoscBénard-Commin. It is possible the family held land in both areas. Many families, like the Moubrays, did hold lands in multiple regions. The Vaux family held fees spread over different regions and they also held land of the earls of Chester in the Avranches. See Chapter 5 about the Vaux family. 302  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS  Y.  44 [Cartulaire de la Cathédrale de Rouen], fols  62–65, 74–75, 108. The document spells the name ‘Comin’. Bernard was a regular in Rouen charters: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 412; ii, 88, 209–10. Saher de Quincy also witnessed a petition made by Bernard in 1180. This Saher was either the brother or son of Robert de Quincy, Lord of Leuchars. Quevilly is only about eighteen kilometres from BoscBénard-Commin. 303  Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 246. 304  Liber vitae ecclesiae Dunelmensis, ed. by Stevenson, p.  100; John of Hexham, Con­ tinuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, i, 143–60, 162–66, 312, 316; Young, William Cumin, pp. 9–26; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, i, 504; Young, Robert the Bruce’s Rivals, pp. x, 15; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 14, 16; ii, 302, 305, 315. The family continued in Scotland as benefactors of Kelso Abbey.

274

Chapter 5

rewarded with the justiciarship of Lothian by King David and he also held land at Alverton in Nottinghamshire of his uncle, Bishop William.305 The importance of intercommunication between Anglo-French families cannot be overstated. Contact between William Comyn, Manasser Bisset, and Richard du Hommet may have paved the way for the emigration of other AngloFrench lords into Scotland after the war. For example, Walter de Berkeley may have been introduced to the Scottish court through the Hommets. Richard du Hommet witnessed a regrant of the manor at Berkeley to Robert de Berkeley between c. 1148 and 1154.306 Robert was probably related to Walter, Lord of Inverkeilor, who entered Scotland following his family’s interaction with the Scottish court.307 Richard du Hommet appeared alongside other Anglo-French and Scottish lords like Earl Patrick of Dunbar, Manasser and Henry Bisset, Eustache fitzJohn, and Earl Robert III of Leicester from 1155 onward.308 It was probably continuing contact between families like the Comyns and the Hommets that facilitated the negotiation of the marriage of Richard du Hommet’s kinswoman, possibly a daughter called Emma, to Geoffrey de Valognes, Lord of Burton, the brother of King William of Scotland’s Constable, Philip (see Figure 13).309 Although the Valognes family were originally from Valognes (c. forty kilometres from Tribéhou) they do not appear to have maintained any links with their original fees in Normandy but they came into contact with the Hommets in France through service with the King of Scotland. They may also have come

305 

John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum, ed. by Arnold, ii, 316. J.  Smyth, The Berkeley Manuscripts, pp.  22–25. The Berkeleys in Somerset and Gloucestershire and their role in the Succession War have been mentioned in the previous chapters. It is probable that Walter originated from this family considering the strength of Scottish contact with families in these regions during the wars but Walter’s origins are not explicitly mentioned in charters. Walter de Berkeley’s territorial position in Dumfriesshire may also have involved his kin in Somerset with the Norman Morevilles, who had a familial stem settled in the south of Scotland near the Berkeleys. Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 3. 307  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 6; Reid, ‘The Mote of Urr’, p. 16; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, xii.2, 748. 308  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 74, 145–46, 281, 354; ii, 30, 179, 284, 445; iii, 97, 151–52, 155. 309  Pipe Roll of 9 Richard I, p. 58. Emma was still alive and holding in Yorkshire of King Richard in 1197. 306 

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

275

into contact in England, where the Hommets held lands in and near the honour of Huntingdon.310 Other men also gained by their involvement in the war and were granted lands in Scotland. Richard Malluvel (probably from Malleville in the Evrecin) appeared at the Scottish court by c. 1189 when he was granted lands in Angus.311 Jordan ‘the Fleming’, who probably came across with the mercenaries in 1174, was granted land by King William at Woolmet in Newton that passed to Jordan’s son, Michael.312 Randolph de Vere was also a landowner in Roxburghshire by 1189, but his exact origins are unknown. 313 One possibility is that he came over directly from Normandy with the Moubrays since the latter were the praeposituras, or bailies, of the castle of Vire. Otherwise, it might be suggested that he came from an Essex offshoot of the important family of Vere that held the earldom of Oxford and who were given the castle-guard of Richmond by Count Alain III and by his son, Conan IV.314 The Oxford Vere family held land in the Breton honour of Richmond, which would help explain Randolph de Vere’s involvement in the war as a supporter of Duchess Margaret. 315 Furthermore, 310 

See Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 17, 20, 59, 118, 123, 158, 198, 210, 219, 221, 479, 485–86, 490, 571, 574, 578–79; ii, 900, 902, 919; Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v.2, 234–38, 293 about Valognes. The Valognes fees were scattered in Lancaster, Essex, Cam­ bridgeshire, Hertforshire, Norfolk, and Suffolk some of which were near the Hommets. The Valognes fees at Burton-on-Trent (Staffordshire) and at Parham in Suffolk were also near the Giffards. Theobald and Geoffrey de Valognes were descended from Earl Walter Giffard of Longueville and of Buckingham through their father. It is not clear though how the different branches were related. There was still a member of the Valognes kin group, Peter de Valognes, in Normandy in the late twelfth century: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 696 e. See Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 22, 195–96, 614, 618; ii, 1397, 1400, 1404, 1474; Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 134; Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 28 about Hommets. Richard held fifteen librates at Doddington to which his son succeeded. See below about Hommet/Valognes marriage. 311  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp.  138–41, ll.  1872–85; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 337–38. 312  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 477. 313  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 321, 364, 212, 256, 257, 268, 304, 305, 347. Randolph did not begin witnessing for King William until 1172 or 1174. 314  Minois, ‘Les possessions bretonnes dans le comté d’Essex’, p. 529. 315  Minois, ‘Les possessions bretonnes dans le comté d’Essex’, pp. 525–36. The family also held extensive lands in Berkshire. They held at Finchingfield, Great Yeldham, Saffron Walden, Great Bentley, Ashdon (though not of the Earl of Richmond), the manor of Canfield and Beauchamp Roding. Aubrey II de Vere sided with Stephen during the Succession War but his

276

Chapter 5

the Vere lands in Essex and Somerset and in the Manche were very close to those held by Richard de Clare ‘Strongbow’ and by Gilbert de Munfichet, who also had contact with the Scottish court.316 Other families like the Berkeleys and Mortemers also either migrated to Scotland or helped new families migrate to Scotland because of their involvement in the war. Walter de Berkeley, King William’s chamberlain and William de Mortemer were with the King during his campaign into northern Eng­ land.317 Although Walter was not mentioned in the campaign at Alnwick, he had served King William at Carlisle and he was captured and listed as a hostage in the Treaty of Falaise.318 Berkeley’s contact with the Picardian Bailleuls led to a marriage alliance and the introduction of the Bailleuls permanently into Scotland although the two families were already interacting earlier in the century in England.319 Walter de Berkeley figures prominently in King William’s charters until his death in c. 1194 and, as mentioned, he was granted land at Newton and Inverkeilor shortly after the war.320 He married Eva, through whom he gained land at Ardoyne and Inverkeilor.321 Their daughter, Eva, married Enguerrand de son, Aubrey III, succeeded him in 1141 and joined the Empress’ party: Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, p. 31. 316  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 123–25, 233, 236, 476–79, 483, 486, 489–90, 571, 577, 580; ii, 900, 902, 1162, 1348, 1349, 1462, 1465. In lower Normandy, the three families held within a thirty-five kilometre radius: the Veres at Vire, the earl of Gloucester at Torigni, and the Munfichets at Montfiquet. 317  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 102–03, ll. 1355–57; pp. 138–39, ll. 1858–71. 318  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 102–03, ll. 1355–57; Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31. 319  G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 174–75. See Chapter 7 about the Bailleuls who settled in Scotland as a result of this marriage. During the Succession War, the Somerset Lord, Roger de Berkeley, who was probably a progenitor of Walter, had been promised aid and counsel at the King’s court by another Picardian and Bailleul ally, Bernard de Saint-Valery, in return for forty acres of land: Stacy, ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, pp. 13, 30. It is likely that Walter either issued from the Somerset Berkeleys who had intermarried with the fitzHardings in the 1150s or he was from a collateral branch of the Berkeley family before the fitzHarding marriage had taken place. Roger de Berkeley also owed the service of two and a half knights in Gloucestershire in c. 1160: Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 24. 320  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 133, 139, 142, 144, 149, 151–52, 174, 180–82, 198, 199, 202, 204, 207–14, 216, 219, 223, 227, 230, 233–34, 242–43, 248–49, 256, 260, 261, 263, 272–74, 284, 290–91, 358, 397, 463. 321  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 6, 361.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

277

Bailleul, son of Eustache de Hélicourt or of Bernard II de Bailleul and of Agnes de Picquigny.322 The Mortemers were another Anglo-French family who migrated to Scot­ land possibly through the Warennes with whom they were related. The head of the line in England and Normandy in the later twelfth century was Hugh de Mortemer and his son Roger.323 They were Lords of Saint-Victor-en-Caux and of Saint-Riquier-en-Rivière in the honour of Mortemer and Lords of Wigmore in the marches of Wales.324 Roger held the vill of St Riquer between Eu and Foucarmont and Mers-le-Bain in Le Vimeu through his wife, Isabella 322 

Liber vitae ecclesiae Dunelmensis, ed. by Stevenson, p. 103; Stell, ‘Balliol, Bernard de’; Reid, ‘The Mote of Urr’, pp. 11–19; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 174–75; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, xii.1, 748. There is a great debate about Enguerrand’s descent and the Bailleul succession. Whether Enguerrand was the son of Bernard or of Eustache is not particularly important. He was a member of the cross-Channel family who held land in Picardy and in England. Enguerrand de Bailleul did not appear in Scottish records until about 1204. Walter gained a number of estates in Kirkcudbrightshire, including the lordship of Urr, a ploughgate in St Boswell’s, Plenmellar in Northumberland, the thanage of Inverkeilor in Angus, and Ardoyne in Garioch. Eva must have married Walter de Berkeley first. She is mentioned as the widow of Robert de Quincy, probable father of Saher de Quincy the future Earl of Winchester (Eva was not Saher’s mother though — see Chapter 7 about Quincys). Robert died in about 1197. Walter de Berkeley had died by 1194. Walter’s other daughter and heiress, Agatha, married Humphrey, son of Theobald de ‘Adeville’, who was arguably a Norman lord. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 6, 346, 432; G. Barrow, The Kingdom of the Scots, pp. 292–93. The only mention of a Humphrey de Adeville indicates that he may have been an Aubigny rather than Adeville: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, ii, ed. by Johnson and Cronne, 246. However, the fees of the Adevilles (Audouville) were in the midst of lands held by William d’Aubigny in lower Normandy. William d’Aubigny may have been the same who was involved in the charter of Henry I concerning a gift of the land of Morsalines in the Manche north of Valognes made by Humphrey. Members of the Aubigny family and of a Norman stem of the Bailleuls also continued to hold land near Hugh de Montfort at Coquainvilliers in the honour of Bonneville-sur-Touques where Robert de Ros’ mother’s side of the family held the castle for the Angevins: see Chapter 7 about Ros and Bonneville. Cf. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 634 h, 711 c for Bailleuls as tenants of Hugh de Montfort. 323  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iii, 236–37; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 184; Guillaume de Jumièges, Histoire des Normands, ed. by Guizot, pp. 303–04; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.1, 349–50; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, ix, Appendix A, p. 3. There is some argument concerning the exact relationship of William de Warenne to Roger I de Mortemer. Torigni and Jumièges suggest Roger was the brother of William I de Warenne but the chronology does not quite work. Roger was probably William’s uncle 324  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cxx; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 56; Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iv, 3–4.

Hugh

Hugh II = Maud ‘le Meschin’ (d. c. 1180/81)

Ralph

Robert

Philip

Ralph

William

Hugh (d. 1180) = Felicia de Saint-Saens

Roger, Lord of Fowlis Easter = Cristina, dau. of William de Maule

William (died across seas)

William, nephew of Hugh II de Mortemer

?

Roger (d. by 1175)

Figure 14. Branches of the Mortemer family tree.

Joan

Roger (d. 1214/15) = 1. Millicent de Ferrières (dau. of Earl William of Derby) 2. Isabel de Ferrières (dau. Of Walkelin)

Hawise = Count Stephen of Aumale (d. by 1130)

Hugh

William (d. c. 1181), Lord of Aberdour

Roger (d. c. 1076–86) = Hawise

Ralph (d. 1115–30) = 1. Melisende = 2. Mabel

Scottish branch

Caux-Wigmore branch

278 Chapter 5

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

279

de Ferrières, sister of Hugh de Ferrières, Lord of Oakham and of Lechelade. He also held half a knight’s fee at Sainte-Beuve-la-Rivière, two kilometres northwest of the honour of Mortemer held by the earls of Warenne.325 The other half of the fee at Saint-Beuve was held by William de Bellencombre, who may have been the same who appeared in Scotland in the late twelfth century and who was a witness for Isabel de Warenne, Ada de Warenne’s niece.326 The CauxWigmore Mortemers were benefactors of the church of Saint-Marie de Séry, and held Bouillancourt-en-Séry, only ten kilometres south of Tours-en-Vimeu, the latter which was held by Bernard II de Bailleul.327 The Scottish Mortemers were related to the Caux-Wigmore branch or to another branch that was also affiliated with the Warenne family at Attle­ borough in Norfolk. The only problem with understanding the appearance of the Mortemers in Scotland in relation to the Warenne family was that the Warennes did not seem to have as much contact with the Scots by the 1170s, when William de Mortemer, Lord of Aberdour, first appeared as a witness for the King of Scots.328 The weakening of ties with Surrey may partially have been the result of the failure of the main Surrey line in male descent, causing the earldom to fall into the hands of an illegitimate brother of Henry II, called Hamelin, who had married the heiress.329 Hamelin was loyal to Henry throughout the Anglo-Scottish conflict so the Warennes who remained in England may have needed to distance themselves 325 

Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 641 a–b; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 347, 353. 326  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 423–24; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 641 a–b; Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, 101. 327  Paris, Bibl. de Sainte-Geneviève, MS 1850 (MS 962) [Cartulaire de Séry, l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de Séry, 1127–1612], fols 60, 33, 61, 63. 328  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 151, 177, 179–81, 183, 195, 206, 211, 220, 221–23, 233–34, 249, 252, 259, 277, 281; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, p. 95. Records of the Priory of the Isle of May, ed. by Stuart, pp. 9–10. Professor Duncan claimed that William de Mortemer was still sheriff of Perth in 1209, but I have been unable to find the source. It seems likely anyway that it would have been a mistake for Roger de Mortemer, probably William’s son, who was sheriff of Perth from c. 1189 until at least 1214. Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, p. 242. William de Mortemer was a patron of the abbey of Inchcolm in the 1180s: Charters of the Abbey of Inchcolm, ed. by Easson and MacDonald, pp. 6–7; Cf. Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, 12, 174 for more about Warennes after 1165. Ada died in 1178. However, at least one Scot, Robert, found service in the Warenne fee at Kirk Sandal but the fee was also in Yorkshire, an area already in contact with Scottish lords. 329  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, iii, 385.

280

Chapter 5

from the Scots to retain their position in the south; nonetheless, Reginald de Warenne, brother of Ada of Scotland, the mother of King William, still held the castle of Mortemer-sur-Eaulne, which had been taken from the Caux-Wigmore Mortemers in the late eleventh century, and he had also gained Wormegay in Norfolk through his wife, Alice de Wormegay, but there was still Warenne contact with both Mortemer branches.330 In particular, Robert de Mortemer of Attleborough appeared between 1178 and 1200 as a witness for Earl Hamelin de Warenne concerning a sale of land at Louvetot (near Bellencombre) so the heir by marriage of the main Warenne line was also active with the Mortemers in the same circles in Normandy.331 However, the Attleborough Mortemer line did not seem to share kinship with the Mortemers at Wigmore and Caux other than that they were both contacts of the Warennes. There is also no suggestion based on naming patterns that there was any relationship between the Scottish branch and the one in Norfolk. It seems more likely that Lord William de Mortemer of Aberdour was related to the Caux/Wigmore branch. ‘William’ was a common name in the CauxWigmore family as was ‘Roger’, the name that William gave to his probable son and heir.332 Hugh II de Mortemer had a son called William, who died while fighting abroad leaving his lands in the Welsh borders to his nephew, Roger. He also had a brother and a nephew called William. It is possible, based on the existing chronology, that William, Lord of Aberdour, was Hugh II’s brother or nephew called William.333 William, Lord of Aberdour, witnessed in Scotland from c. 1170–89 and perhaps disappeared as early as 1181, after which, his heir, Roger can be found in the service of the King of Scots at Perth castle.334 About the same time as William’s disappearance from Scottish records, another ‘Guillaume’ de Mortemer, ‘brother of Henry’, who was probably related 330 

Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, xiii, 1, 3, 15, 16, 26, 81; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, vi.2, 171; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 347. 331  Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, 125–26. 332  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 319, 339, 341–45, 350–51, 354, 370, 372, 381–82, 390, 393, 397–98, 410, 423, 431, 435, 438, 440, 442, 469. It is not certain that Roger was William’s son but he was William’s heir to Aberdour. 333  Recueil des chartes concernant l’abbaye de Saint-Victor-en-Caux, ed. by de  Robillard de Beaurepaire, p. 412. Hugh II lived a very long life. There is some debate concerning his longevity. Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, iv, 200–06; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 105: Roger was also advanced in age when he died. 334  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 319, 339, 341–45, 350–51, 354, 370, 372, 381–82, 390, 393, 397–98, 410, 423, 431, 435, 438, 440, 442, 469. Roger married Christina, daughter of William Maule.

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

281

to the Mortemers in Caux, began to serve in Normandy and appeared in royal service at Verneuil in 1194 and at Arques in 1203.335 ‘Guillaume’, or William, ‘brother of Henry’ translated his support to the King of France after 1203 and was still alive in 1217 serving Philip Augustus.336 He was the only Mortemer who seems to have survived the disseisments of 1204 following the Wigmore branch’s loss of their French fees, but it is unclear what his exact relationship was to the Scottish or to the Caux-Wigmore Mortemers.337 The case for a link between the Norman and Scottish Mortemers is made stronger when patronage networks are examined. The Caux Mortemers were also tenants in France of the Montforts and of the earls of Leicester.338 The Norman ‘Guillaume’ de Mortemer, ‘brother of Henry’, held land in Caux in addition to land in Breteuil and in the honour of Montfort.339 Moreover, Guillaume and the Caux-Wigmores were in the midst of Continental networks with Scottish contact. An ancestor of the Wigmores, Isabella de Mortemer, married Walter de St Martin, a benefactor of the abbey of Fécamp along with Renauld de SaintValery,340 Godard de Vaux,341 Hugh de Normanville, William de la Hai, and Richard de Lucy.342 Walter may even have been related to the St Martins who settled in Scotland at Haddington during the reign of King David.343 335 

Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclx; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 644 m, 645 l, 710 e, 714 f. 336  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 347. 337  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 335; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cxxii–iii; Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 229–30; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 264, 347, 353. 338  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 644 m, 645 a, l, 684 b, 705 f, 710 e, 714 f; History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, iii, 24, l. 10476; 102, l. 12052 see 1194; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclx. Mortemer was also made bailiff of La Lande and of Caux at this time. 339  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclx; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 644 m, 645 a, l, 684 b, 705 f, 710 e, 714 f. 340  Renauld and Saint-Valerys discussed above. 341  See pp. 246–49 about the Vaux family. 342  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 51 [Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Fécamp], fols 7, 9, 53–54, 59, 73. 343  Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 141; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, p. 127. Professor Barrow suggests they came from St Martin near Bellencombre, which makes sense since the family was witnessing for the Warennes in England. Alexander de St Martin was sheriff of Haddington under King William: Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, pp. 7, 15–16, 55, 66, 74, 76, 82, 95; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 23, 40–41, 64, 130, 138, 173, 175, 176, 189, 190, 203–03, 207, 234, 274, 280, 281, 287, 296, 297, 298, 316, 432–33.

282

Chapter 5

The benefactors of Fécamp Abbey represent a network of patronage and shared interests in northern France that extended into Scotland. For example, Richard de Lucy, who was mentioned as a patron of Fécamp, was probably the same Richard II de Lucy who married Ada de Moreville, cousin of William de Moreville, Constable of Scotland, or possibly his uncle or first cousin of the same name.344 If he was Richard II de Lucy then he would also have been the son of Reginald de Lucy and of Amabilia fitzWilliam, daughter of William fitzDuncan of Moray and of Alice de Remilly, Lady of Skipton.345 Richard’s Norman fees were located in Mortain near those of the Saint-Hilaires and other members of the opposition.346 His father was probably related to Richard de Lucy, justiciar of Essex (d. 1179), who led King Henry’s forces in 1173.347 It may have been about this time that a marriage was negotiated between Richard the justiciar’s daughter, Aveline, and Gilbert de Munfichet, probably the brother of Richard de Munfichet of Cargill.348 Some of the other patrons of Fécamp may also have been related to or members of the Scottish nobility. The benefactor of the abbey of Fécamp, William de la Hai, may have been the same who was Lord of Errol while Hugh de Normanville may also have been the same who appeared in Scotland during King William’s reign.349 Hugh de Normanville was another cross-Channel lord and he witnessed 344 

Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 69, 197–98; Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS  Y.  44 [Cartulaire de la Cathédrale de Rouen], fol. 24. Richard de Lucy and Alain de Moreville witnessed together grants to the church of Rouen. William de Moreville was the son of Richard de Moreville, Constable of Malcolm IV and of William I of Scotland. They held lands in Lothian but also made gifts to the Bishop of Glasgow. Registrum Episcopatus Glasguensis, ed. by Innes, pp. 38–40. 345  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honour of Skipton, vii, 14–15, 17–19, 24–25, 40; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, viii, 245–48. Richard de Lucy, justiciar of Essex, was most likely not the Fécamp patron because he died in 1179 and his grandson, Richard, succeeded him but his kinsman, Reginald, also had a son, Richard, who was contemporary. The exact relationship between Richard the justiciar and Reginald is unknown but it seems fairly close — perhaps brothers. The justiciar’s family originated from Lucé in the Ornois so it is also unclear if they also held in Mortain or if Reginald’s line had perhaps gained these fees separately. The justiciar Richard de Lucy led some of the forces against King William in 1173. 346  Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, p. 7. These may have been at Gorron in Maine. Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 239. He and his father appeared as witnesses for the King at Ivry in March 1181 (pp. 238–39). 347  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honour of Skipton, vii, 15, 69. 348  Amt, ‘Lucy, Richard de’; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 234, 237. 349  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 360, 432; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle,

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

283

a grant to Fécamp with Eustache de Stuteville, probably the son of Robert III and brother of Nicholas, Lord of Liddel in Cumberland.350 The Normanvilles continued to be involved on both sides of the Channel and intermarried with the Soules-Hai family, which would allow for the Scottish Soules to reclaim a position in Normandy in the 1240s.351 These families were involved in the same religious and social networks across the Channel. The final family that should be discussed who was involved in the Great War and found permanent advancement in Scotland were the Lascelles. Alain de Lascelles was the first of the family in Scotland and he was mentioned by Jordan Fantosme as one of the men captured in 1174 who had fought bravely to defend William ‘though he had not jousted for thirty years’.352 Alain probably came from a younger branch of the Lascelles in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, and Richmond­ shire, which meant that his family’s holdings of the Duke of Brittany and Earl of Richmond probably influenced his decision to support the opposition.353 The Lascelles were originally tenants and officers of the earls of Richmond, but they probably originated from Loucelles in Calvados, only ten kilometres southeast of Bayeux held by the Earl of Chester.354 The family’s position on both sides of the Channel continued until the loss of Normandy when Ralph de Lascelles, who was a follower of Juhel II de Mayenne, lost his lands in the bailiwick of Falaise for providing support against King John,355 and he may have

ed. by Innes, pp. 145–46; Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 79–81, 85, 91, 93, 94; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, iii, 1; Liber S. Marie de Dryburgh, ed. by Spottiswoode, p. 144; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, p. 222. 350  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 51 [Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Fécamp], fols 53–54. Eustache, William and Ansel de Stuteville were active together on the Continent concerning the family’s abbey at Valmont: Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 347–50. See Chronica monasterii de Melsa, i, 99 for Eustache as son of Robert III. 351  Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapter 5. 352  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 136–39, ll. 1850–57; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, p. 150; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 138, 211. 353  Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, v, 182–85. 354  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 176; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 115–16, 182. 355  Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 72; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 176. It is unclear what Ralph’s exact relationship was to Alain. Ralph de Lascelles was disinherited by King John in January 1203 most likely because he supported Arthur and King Philip. If Juhel had abandoned John at the same time he was back in the King’s favour by 1212 for he still held land in Devonshire that Henry I had given to his father: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 97, 612–13; ii, 1369, 1427.

284

Chapter 5

been the same who witnessed with Roger de Lascelles, between 1186 and 1202, concerning his fee at Downholme in Yorkshire.356 Although Alain witnessed for King David in c. 1150, he did not seem to settle in Scotland at Perth until c. 1173.357 His son, Duncan de Lascelles, continued in service to the King of Scots and held land at Seggie in Fife after his father’s death in c. 1188.358 Duncan tried to remain neutral in the Anglo-French and Scottish conflict since he held land in Scotland and in England at a time when the French and Scottish courts were intermittently negotiating against the King of England. He decided to pay scutage rather than personally to provide service for his English fees in Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Surrey, and Cumberland during the wars against Philip Augustus in the early thirteenth century.359 His choice of marriages reflects his standing as an Anglo-Scottish lord though his first concern was probably with his position in England. He married as his first wife, Christiana, daughter of Uchtred son of Halden, lord of Catterlen in Cumberland, and as his second wife, Christina, probably the daughter of Waltheof, son of Gospatrick, Lord of Inverkeithing.360 The Lascelles family never forgot the Breton roots of their English lordship for they also formed relationships with other families, like the Briwerres, who were part of the Breton-Devonshire networks. It was because of this relationship that both families took an interest in promoting the kin group’s common interests by patronising the same Cornish-Breton saint. For example, William de Briwerre founded Torre Abbey, dedicated to the Cornish-Breton St Petroc,361 and the 356 

Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, i, 27–28. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 211. Alain did not witness a charter concerning Perth until this date. His previous two appearances were concerning Dunfermline and Holm Cultram in Cumberland. 358  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 259, 308–09, 377, 380; Liber cartarum prioratus Sancti Andree in Scotia, ed. by Thomson, pp. 340–41. 359  Pipe Rolls of 8 John, pp. 41–42, 44, 117, 237. 360  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 72; Lanercost Cartulary, ed. by Todd, pp. 76–79, 130. Duncan was also a witness for Robert II de Vaux in the early thirteenth century: ‘Notes on the family of Lascelles, lords of Forgan or Naughton’ Glasgow Prosopography project: . 361  Church, ‘Brewer, William’. William de Briwerre married Beatrix de Vaux (Valle), possibly related to Robert de Vaux. William still held land in Normandy at Gonneville and at Fauville near Yvetot in France of the fee of Mortemer until 1204: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 642 c. William de Briwerre even paid Duncan’s debt that he had incurred through his wife’s family in c. 1211: G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 115–16; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 84, 154. 357 

William the Lion and the Great War of 1173

285

Lascelles also patronized Saint Petroc at Petton and Dunkeswell. The BriwerreLascelles interest in Petroc must be contextualized as part of a renewed interest in the saint following the theft of the saint’s relics in 1177 from Bodmin Abbey.362 One of the most interesting aspects of the involvement of all of these men is that they were somehow connected to the crown of Scotland and held lands of the Earl of Chester, of the earldom of Huntingdon, of Leicester, of the Duke of Brittany in Richmond, or their families still held land directly on the Continent. Despite the number of men involved in the rebellion in England and on the Continent, the opposition party was unsuccessful. Henry II was ultimately able to subdue the combined forces of his enemies in 1174 once he had restored the royal image by performing penance at the tomb of Archbishop Thomas Becket on 12 July. Henry II averted a near disaster and saved the Angevin empire but his sons would not be so fortunate. The viability of a Franco-Scottish alliance would not be forgotten. The Great War of 1173 and 1174 laid the foundation for an active alliance between these two powers that would continue for several centuries and cause the kings of England repeated aggravation. Furthermore, interaction between cross-Channel families during the war introduced new families into Scotland and strengthened ties between the Scots and the French despite that the kings of Scotland aligned themselves with the crown of England between 1175 and 1199. Franco-Scottish communication strengthened over the last decades of the twelfth century.

362 

Jankulak, The Medieval Cult of St Petroc, pp. 145–47.

Chapter 6

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

The Aftermath of the Rebellion Although the war officially brought the royal crown of Scotland closer to the crown of France, these two powers did not reopen negotiations or form an alliance for another twenty-five years. The treatment of King William of Scotland after the war left a deep, humiliating wound that prevented him from openly defying King Henry even after the harsh treatment of his extended family in Brittany. The intent of this chapter is both to discuss William’s relationship with Henry until Henry’s death in 1189 and to examine the influence that crossChannel families, originating from the frontier zones of the Ornois, Chartrain, and Maine, had on the Scottish court between 1173 and 1204. Despite the King of Scots reluctance to engage directly with the crown of France, Scottish contact with the Continent continued to rely on families whose lands and marital contracts spanned the Channel. After the capture of William at Alnwick on 12 July 1174, William’s brother, Lord David, was besieged at Huntingdon Castle and forced to surrender.1 The two Scottish brothers soon found themselves accompanying Henry to Rouen where they witnessed the hasty retreat of their former ally, Louis VII, who was pushed back by the superiority of Henry’s forces.2 King William and his men 1  2 

William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 195. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 195; Ralf de

288

Chapter 6

were subsequently imprisoned for five months until their release was agreed following the Treaty of Falaise.3 Led bound in chains and paraded on a horse with his legs tied below the horse’s belly, the King of Scots was forced to undergo a humiliating and public display of his military failure.4 But this was only the beginning of the indignity he was to suffer. Henry II’s terms in the 1174 treaty were extraordinarily harsh towards the King of Scots. William was required to provide hostages as surety for his oath and his good faith, and on both sides, refugees of the other king were not to be harboured but handed over for justice.5 William was also forced to hand over five Scottish castles and the Scottish church was to be made subject to the English church, though William was able to reverse the latter claim in the following year;6 but the most oppressive facet of the treaty was the new definition of fealty that the King and his men had to bear. King William and his nobles were forced to personally give fealty and homage to the King of England in such a way that William had to uphold his loyalty to Henry even against his own men and the same was expected of his nobility.7 Henry successfully drove a wedge between the King of Scots and his lords by legally forcing each party to recognize his overlordship above all else. This new state of affairs was theoretically to make it easier for families who held land in both kingdoms to support their English overlord while their territorial rights in Scotland were still protected if war erupted once again. The agreement may have shifted the interpretation of lordship between the kingdoms and even affected the number of men with land in both kingdoms who were willing to fight for Henry II’s son, John, between 1199 and 1203. Men like Saher de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 385–87, 396; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 264–65; Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 249; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 74–76; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 65–66. 3  Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, i, 249. 4  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 396. 5  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 19–20; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 22–23; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 95–99. This treaty was signed at Valognes in the Cotentin. 6  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 19, 21; Sir Thomas Gray of Heton, Scalacronica, p. 41. Refugees seeking aid in Scotland and England was problematic in wartime and undermined royal authority. 7  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 198; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 95–99; Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31; Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 281–84.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

289

Quincy, Bishop Roger de Beaumont of St Andrews, and even the King’s own brother, David, did not support King William against John when John succeeded his brother, Richard, to the English throne. Despite the severe tone of the Treaty of Falaise, this bond of fealty and homage may still have been personal and based on lands that William and his men held of Henry in England. The wording is unclear about the position of the Scottish lands but the treaty seems to imply that all lands would be held as they had been before the war.8 In fact, there is no mention in the treaty that Henry held the kingdom of Scotland directly, despite that historians have made such an assumption, and it may be suggested that such ambiguity was a planned diplomatic ploy that appeased both kings.9 Henry could claim superiority and he had publicly humiliated William for ‘rebelling’, and yet William could also argue that personal service and fealty owed by himself and his men and the surety of five castles did not equate to control of the entire kingdom. Such homage and fealty would have been sufficiently humiliating and it required military service and associated monetary commitments. The other issue concerning the war that is rarely discussed is that William and his lords, and the lords in England had not legally ‘rebelled’ as it were. They had given their oath of fealty to Henry II’s son, Young Henry, at his cor­ o­­nation in 1170 so arguably they owed service to Young Henry and not to Henry II even if this was a hard pill for Henry II to swallow. This was an argument even presented by Young Henry and Louis to protect their right to lead the opposition during the war and to gain support from other powers, like the papacy. Henry was well aware of the difficulties posed by his son’s legal right to 8 

Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31: ‘Praeterea homines domini Regis habebunt terras suas, quas habebant, & habere debent de domino Rege, & de Rege Scotiae, & de hominibus suis; & homines Regis Scotiae habebunt terras suas, quas habebant, & habere debent de domino Rege, & de hominibus suis.’ (‘Thereafter the men of the lord King hold their lands, and ought to hold of the lord King, and of the King of Scots, and of his men; and the men of the King of Scots have their lands, which they have and ought to have of the lord King, and of his men.’) Anderson, ‘Anglo-Scottish Relations’, pp. 3–11. It must be noted that Stones translated from the Great Rolls in Rymer’s Foedera that William became the liegeman of King Henry for Scotland. However, the Latin text states, ‘devenit homo ligius domini regis contra omnem hominem de Scocia et de omnibus aliis terris suis et fidelitatem ei fecit, ut ligio domino suo, sicut alii homines sui ipsi facere solent’, which clearly says, ‘he became the liege man of the lord King against all men from Scotland and all men on his other lands (referring to his lands in England) and he gave fidelity to him, as his liege lord as other men were accustomed to do to him.’ There is no mention that William held or did homage for Scotland. This is a treaty about personal lordship, homage, and fealty owed between men. Cf. Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, pp. 100–02. 9  W. L. Warren, Henry II, pp. 138–39, 184–85.

290

Chapter 6

England, which was probably why he also made a separate agreement with his sons as subordinates and then arranged for homage to be performed to Young Henry as part of the service owed by William and his men at Falaise. The only description of the treaty that deviates from the original copy was in the Gesta Henrici, written in c. 1192 probably by Roger of Howden, which does explicitly state that King William and his brother, David, became the men in faith and in liege homage to Henry for all their lands ‘nominatim de Scotia et Galveia’.10 However, Howden was writing from a royal-centric stance twenty years on and in the end a status quo was reinstated concerning the lands men held of each king. This soft approach to peace between the kings made sound political sense. Several of the men from Scotland who did homage to Henry came from families who held lands throughout his demesne. Henry did not need to antagonize extended kin groups any further than he had, as he had learned from the 1173 war. Although there is no evidence that the native Scottish lords held land in France, some of the Scottish King’s nobility, like Gilbert, Earl of Strathearn, were with him at Falaise,11 and the earls of Strathearn did show an increasing interest in adopting some of the Continental fashions following Earl Gilbert’s marriage to a woman whose father was probably Breton.12 However, the majority of lords who gave their fealty at Falaise were Anglo-French and either still held lands in Normandy or more commonly had connections with France through England. The families who relied primarily on contact with France through the English branch of their families and through fees they still held in England were the Giffards,13 Morevilles,14 Colvilles, Vaux, Corbets,15 Lindsays, Valognes, Ridels, Berkeleys, and Lascelles. 10 

Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 95–99: ‘namely of Scotland and Galloway’. 11  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 30–31. 12  Liber insule missarum, ed. by Innes, pp. 3, 10; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, viii, 241–42; Neville, Native Lordship in Medieval Scotland, p. 23. Robert and Saher de Quincy witnessed for Gilbert in 1203 alongside several members of Gilbert’s family. Robert was Saher IV’s son. 13  See Chapter 5 about Hugh Giffard of Yester who fought for Earl David in 1174. 14  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 34–35; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 620 m. William de Moreville, probably kin of the Morevilles of Cumberland, was escheated in 1204 of a portion of a fee he held at ‘Ambliam’ of the earl of Chester and the fee was given to Richard de Argences. ‘Ambliam’ was probably Amblie in Calvados, situated only one and half kilometres from Colombièrs-sur-Seulles. Richard de Moreville has already been discussed and was from a collateral branch to the Cumberland family. 15  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 134, 136. The Corbets first appeared in

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

291

Those men who still held lands directly in France and who appeared at Falaise were William de la Hai, Ranulf de Soules, Roger de Moubray,16 possibly Robert de Bourneville17 and possibly William de Mortemer. Others who fought for Young Henry on the Continent and had Scottish connections were: Saher de Quincy and Hascuil de Saint-Hilaire. Hascuil may have been a cousin or relation of Emma de Saint-Hilaire who was married to William I de Vieuxpont, Lord of Carriden (Firth of Forth), Alston and Bolton (Cumbria-Tynedale), and of Hardingstone (Northampton).18 Many of these men have already been discussed except for William de Vieuxpont, who came from a family very wellconnected throughout France and England. William de Vieuxpont of Carriden fought for Lord David in 1174 during the peak of the campaigns. He was possibly related to the knight named William de Vieuxpont, who held two knights’ fees in Normandy in 1172 along with Fulk, a brother.19 William’s other brothers or kinsmen were Ivo, Lord of Courville, and Robert de Vieuxpont, Lord of Vieux-Pont-en-Auge (Calvados), who later succeeded his brother to the lordship of Courville. 20 William de Scottish records under David I. 16  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 68–69, ll. 1475–76. 17  Vincent, ‘Patronage, Politics and Piety’, p. 31. Bourneville was only about thirty kilometres west of Rouen and a Henry de Bourneville, possibly related to Robert, was Queen Eleanor of England’s steward. Vincent suggests Henry was Norman. 18  Edinburgh, Nat. Libr. of Scotland, MS Adv. 15. 1. 18 [Charter witnessed by William de Vieuxpont], fol. 1; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 46–47; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 107–08, 110; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, pp. 28, 33, 35; G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 73, 76. 19  Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Lat. Nouv. Acq. 2380 [Chartes concernant Le Prieuré de la Saute Cochère], pièces 5; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, clxxii; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 b. Nowhere does it say William de Vieuxpont was Fulk’s brother but the charter does mention Fulk’s kinship with Ivo de Vieuxpont. William of Carriden might be a son of William the knight, Lord of Courville. It is impossible to unweave the descent of this family with any exactitude. 20  Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS 68, fols 26–28; Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17, fol. 113; Chartres, Arch. Dpt de l’Eure et Loir, MS H 2310, nos 1–4; H 5207. It is certain, based on Duchesne’s copy of a charter from 1190, that their father was a William de Vieuxpont and that Ivo remarried to a Petronilla by about 1190. Ivo was confirming with his brother, Robert, a grant by one of his vassals to the Templars in c. 1180 witnessed by men of Courville and an Englishman called Arnaud. He also gave a gift to the Templars in 1191 with his brother: Les Templiers en Eure-et-Loir, ed. by Métais, pp. 13, 24. Ivo de Vieuxpont was related to ‘nepotes eius’ Hugh d’Anet (Alneto) and Ivo witnessed with Hugh in 1181 at Chartres along with Count Rotrou II of Perche. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-

292

Chapter 6

Vieuxpont of Carriden’s kinship with the Chartrain Vieuxponts is certain but the exact descent pattern is less clear. The French Vieuxponts were territorially very important to the frontier networks in western France and evidence suggests that they also still maintained contact with their English and Scottish brethren. Their fees in France included the lordship of Courville in the Chartrain and Vieux-Pont-en-Auge, and they also acquired Nonant (Calvados, arr. Caen), Sarceaux and Chailloué (Ornois — see Map 3), in addition to lands they held in Devonshire, by the end of the century. By virtue of their Continental fees, the Vieuxponts were in the midst of networks that extended into Scotland and once again it is clear that men with lands in close proximity in France appear fighting on the same side during the 1173 war.21 For example, the Vieuxpont fee at Sarceaux was only six kilometres east of Ecouché in the Ornois, held by the Moubrays, who were fighting for the opposition.22 Contact between the Vieuxpont and Moubray families extended into Scotland for as late as 1206 one of William de Vieuxpont of Carriden’s sons, Ivo, pledged for Duncan de Lascelles and his wife, Christiana, the sister-in-law of Philip de Moubray, Lord of Dalmeny, Inverkeithing and Moncrieffe.23 The Vieuxpont family is particularly interesting because they held land of all three kings. The strain the family faced because they held land of multiple lords is apparent in the way that the succession was handled concerning their Norman fees in the early thirteenth century. However, the territorial crisis that the family faced was based on relations developed much earlier and was rooted in the affinities that the family had developed in Scotland, the Chartrain and the Ornois. lès-Chartres, ed. by Merlet, i, 56. Hugh d’Anet also witnessed for Thibault, Count of Blois, along with Viscount Hugh (du Puiset), and Henry du Puiset in 1181: Les Templiers en Eure-et-Loir, ed. by Métais, p. 15. Power says Ivo was married to Albreda d’Anet, daughter of Simon II, Lord of Brétival. Her parents were Isabel, daughter of William Louvel, Lord of Ivry and Bréval, and of Matilda de Meulan: Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 254–55, 483, 529. The Anets were vassals of the Beaumont Counts of Meulan in the mid-twelfth century: Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, p. 31; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 24, 54, 72. 21  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 311; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 431, 406, 528–31. 22  Alençon, Arch. Dpt de l’Orne, MS  H  1517/1 and H  1482/1. The Vieuxpont family even became prévôtés, provosts, of Écouché by 1302. Robert de Vieuxpont, seigneur de Chailloué, paid for the honour. 23  Rotuli de oblatis et finibus, ed. by Hardy, pp. 346, 459; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 64–65; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, iii, 244. Ivo also pledged for Geoffrey de Lucy in 1207 and offered a sum for the King’s favour.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

293

The Vieuxpont Family and its Affinity In the previous chapters, Scottish links with Bretons and Normans have been examined. The Vieuxpont family network represented a similar socio-political nexus in the Chartrain, Calvados, and the Ornois. The family’s lordship of Courville was particularly important because of its location on the ancient route between Chartres and Le Mans and between Chartres and Bayeux through Sées.24 The vast networks created by families who held lands throughout France like the Vieuxponts, Puisets, and Mauvoisins made a lasting impact on relations between the three kingdoms, and introduced younger members of kin groups into northern England and Scotland.25 For example, in the mid-twelfth century, the Vieuxpont family’s overlord at Courville was Everard IV du Puiset, the nephew of King Stephen and the Lord du Puiset and Viscount of Chartres.26 The Puiset family owed fealty to the counts of Blois from whom they held their position in the Chartrain but they were also involved in English politics probably initially through the advancement of Everard’s brother, Hugh du Puiset, to the bishopric of Durham.27 Everard and his son and heir, Hugh, remained mainly in France where their lordships were, but Everard also visited his brother in England at least once before the war.28 On the other side of the Channel, the Bishop’s son, Henry, remained in England and married Dionysia, who held the village of Carleton in Lincolnshire by the beginning of the thirteenth century.29 24 

Pelé, Courville, pp. 16–21. Pelé’s information about the region is useful for understanding the position of Courville in the Chartrain. 25  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 18–21. 26  See Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, pp. 22, 42, 44 about Everard and his son Henry’s grant of tithes from Moinville-la-Jeulin (east of Chartres) to Grand-Beaulieu in 1159. Everard was still alive during the 1173 war though his son, Count Hugh, was the one to lead forces to England. Dion, Les seigneurs de Breteuil en Beauvaisis, pp. 45–46. 27  LoPrete, Adela of Blois: Countess and Lord, pp. 264–78; Cuissard, Les seigneurs du Puiset, pp. 327, 353, 355–68; Dion, Le Puiset aux xie et au xiie siècle, pp. 1–2, 6, 15: The abbey of Marmoutier had several establishments in the diocese of Chartres that both the Puisets and Courvilles patronized. These interests were based on Blésois networks: Lefèvre, Documents historiques, i, 26–30, 36–58; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 110. Ivo de Vieuxpont was a benefactor of the Tironensian Saint-Trinité. He held the lordship of Courville by 1185 until c. 1197 when his brother Robert succeeded him. 28  Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 290–91, 301. 29  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 186; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and

294

Chapter 6

The Vieuxponts were part of this political nexus based at Chartres. Their main lordship at Courville was only seventeen kilometres west of Chartres, which was held by the very powerful and well-connected count of Blois and in turn by the Puiset family. William, Ivo, and Robert, Lord de Vieux-Pont, and their father, William, witnessed for Count Thibault of Blois from as early as 1168 along with Everard du Puiset and Radulph de Ver;30 the latter who was possibly the same Radulph de Vere who was captured in 1174 with King William and William de Vieuxpont of Hardingstone and Carriden.31 The Vieuxpont brothers also witnessed charters for Thibault’s son, Count Louis of Blois and Clermont, and Louis’ sisters, Marguerite, Isabel, and Adelise. Robert, Lord de Vieux-Pont, witnessed twice in 1196 for Louis, once concerning the commune of Romorantin and a second time for gifts to the abbey of Notre-Dame des Vaux-de-Cernay.32 Robert’s brother, Ivo, attended the court of Count Thibault and confirmed gifts to the abbey of Grand-Beaulieu in 1188 and 1189 alongside Henry du Puiset (brother of the 1174 opposition leader, Count Hugh du Puiset), Geoffrey de Lèves and Reginald de Crespin.33 The Vieuxponts like many families initially held their main lordships in one county but were also politically nubile because of the continuing spread of their lordships some of which were, as can be seen, very disparate.34 This complex Knights’ Fees, i, 234, 380–81; ii, 252, 287–88, 295, 308, 310–11, 313, 324, 336, 426; iii, 249, 283, 286, 340, 356. Henry held Yokefleet on the Humber. Henry and his uncle also appeared with the Coignières family a number of times. See Chapter 2 about Coignières. 30  Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 34. There was possibly also a Hervé, who was a member of the Courville-Vieuxpont family living in 1181. Cf. Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Chartres, ed. by de Lépinois and Merlet, i, 207; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 92. 31  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 63; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 67. 32  Chartes octroyées par Louis ier Comte de Blois, ed. by Poulain de Bossay, pp. 18–23, 42–47; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 125. 33  Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, pp. 54–55; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 135. Ivo also witnessed a grant to the abbey of Saint-Martin de Pontoise in 1176 with Robert de Newburgh, Walter de Saint-Valery, and other Anglo-French lords. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, i, 145–46; Scammell, Hugh de Puiset Bishop of Durham, pp. 310–11. 34  See A. Livingstone, ‘Kith and Kin’, pp. 440–58 for these local structures in the Chartrain. The Lords of Courville were in a rank below that of the Lords of Montigny, who were themselves vassals of the Counts of Chartres and Blois.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

295

organization of territorial power and its associated affinities is captured in the relationship between the Vieuxponts and the Puiset Viscounts of Chartres.35 In addition to their lordship at Chartres, the Puiset kin group had also held at Bréteuil, which lordship had passed to the Beaumonts in c. 1121,36 and by 1168 they had also gained control of the county of Bar-sur-Seine by the marriage of Hugh du Puiset to the heiress, Petronilla.37 Furthermore, their former involvement with Bréteuil in the Evrecin placed them only about twenty-seven kilometres west of the Mauvoisin and Louvel fee at Saint-André de l’Eure, which reinforced patronage networks with the Meulan-Beaumont, Anet, Mauvoisin, and Vieuxpont families.38 The Puiset family owed service to the kings of France in the Chartrain and Champagne, so it is not surprising that they and their Vieuxpont vassals supported Young King Henry and Louis VII during the 1173 war. Furthermore, loyalties in France also spread to England because of political influences going back to the Succession War. Hugh du Puiset, uncle of Count Hugh of Bar-surSeine, had probably gained his controversial position as Bishop of Durham in 1153 because of his kinship to Bishop Henry of Blois and King Stephen.39 He was also at least partly responsible for introducing some of the ideas spread35 

A. Livingstone, ‘Noblewomen’s Control of Property’, pp. 58–59; Boussard, ‘L’Origine des familles seigneurials’, pp. 313–14; Cuissard, Les seigneurs du Puiset, pp. 319–89; Dion, Le Puiset aux xie et au xiie siècle, pp. 1–34; Dion, Les seigneurs de Breteuil en Beauvaisis, pp. 1–22, 42–52. 36  Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 13–14, 104–14, 175: Bréteuil was gained through Robert III, Earl of Leicester’s Breton mother. Boussard, ‘L’Origine des familles seigneurials’, pp. 313–14, 318–19; A. Livingstone, ‘Aristocratic Women in the Chartrain’. Cf. La Monte, ‘The Lords of Le Puiset’ about the Puiset family’s famous exploits in the Middle East. By the late twelfth century, the Counts of Blois were overlords of the Viscounts of Chartres, Châteaudun, Blois and of the Lords of Saumur and Chinon: Dion, Les seigneurs de Breteuil en Beauvaisis, pp. 1–7, 42–52; Dion, Le Puiset aux xie et au xiie siècle, pp. 4–9; Cuissard, Les seigneurs du Puiset, pp. 329–30, 335–36. 37  Evergates, The Aristocracy in the County of Champagne, pp. 214–16. 38  See Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 483 about Anet and Louvel; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 34, 45, 52, 64, 75, 180. Count Waleran de Beaumont of Meulan was granted a position of power in the county during the reign of Stephen and then he married Agnes, sister of Count Simon III de Montfort, which secured a position for his family in Evreux though they were not granted the county. His nephew by marriage, Simon IV de Montfort de l’Amaury, Count of Evreux, would marry his niece, Amicia de Beaumont, daughter of the ‘rebel’ Earl of Leicester and of Petronilla de Grandmesnil. Cf. Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, p. 278; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, vii, 533–34, 537–41. 39  Lawrence-Mathers, Manuscripts in Northumbria, pp. 142–45. Bishop Hugh was the nephew of King Stephen and Henry of Blois.

296

Chapter 6

ing from the cathedral school at Chartres to Durham in the twelfth century.40 Ongoing communication between Bishop Hugh and his family was important. It meant that his nephew, Count Hugh, was willing to bring forces to his aid in England in 1174. Scottish contact with the Puisets at Durham complemented pre-existing communication with cross-Channel families like the Vieuxponts, Mauvoisins, Beaumonts, and Montforts.41 Although King David of Scotland’s control of Durham was never established, Bishop Hugh du Puiset was to form a working relationship with David’s grandson, King William, and Hugh’s communication with his Chartrain kin had obviously continued for he received military support from his Puiset nephew for William’s campaigns into England in 1174.42 Vieuxpont and Puiset commitment to the opposition party was informed by a number of factors. They held lordships of the King of France and, as in the case of the Vieuxponts, of the King of Scotland. They also had familial links with kin groups in the Evrecin at a time when Evreux was held by the brother-inlaw, Count Simon IV de Montfort, of the ‘rebel’ Earl Robert III de Beaumont. These relationships bound by marriage and blood made a lasting impact on cross-Channel communication. Both Earl Robert III of Leicester’s son, Roger, and William Mauvoisin, an affiliate of the Leicester family, found service at the Scottish King’s court by the end of the century.43 Scottish inter­­action with these kin groups also extended into Blésois territories. Two of King William’s natural children emigrated to Picardy in the late twelfth to early thirteenth century,44 and Louis of Blois’ sister, Isabel of Blois, Countess of Chartres and Lady of Romorantin, was the mother of the future wife of Queen Ermengarde 40 

Lawrence-Mathers, Manuscripts in Northumbria, pp. 160–62 Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 622 g, 623 h; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 267–68. Another example of how convoluted these networks were can be seen in the case of Simon du ValComtat. In c. 1220, Simon held land simultaneously in the Norman castelry of Pacy (a Leicester holding until 1205) and in the French castelry of Bréval and he also received profits at Courville, held by the Vieuxponts. However, his overlord at Courville was Amaury de Maintenon, whose father had been the guardian of Count Simon d’Evreux, a member of the Montfort de l’Amaury family: Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, iii, ed. by Cronne and Davis, 21–22. Simon was, therefore, in the midst of several different interest groups. 42  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 65; Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, i, 225. 43  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 10, 11, 30, 33, 53, 308. See below and Chapter 7 for more detail about the Mauvoisins and the Beaumonts. Roger became the King’s chancellor by 1189 and William became Bishop of Glasgow and then Bishop of St Andrews. 44  Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium Fontium, ed. by Pertz, pp. 911, 925. 41 

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

297

of Scotland’s nephew, Richard de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe.45 Richard’s marriage shifted the Beaumont-sur-Sarthe family’s interests beyond Maine into the Chartrain because his wife, Mathilde, was also the Countess of Chartres, and a member of the comital family of Blois and Champagne.46 Extended kin-networks strengthened alliances among different families in western France. For example, before 1187, Ivo de Vieuxpont, William and Robert’s brother, had married Albreda, daughter of Simon II d’Anet (see Figure 15 below).47 The Anets were vassals of Earl Robert of Leicester’s cousin, Count Robert of Meulan, who had supported Young Henry’s cause on the Continent in 1173 and it seems some members of the family settled on the Beaumont fee in England.48 Albreda’s mother was probably also the sister of the Louvel Lords of Ivry and Bréval and of William II Louvel, Lord of Docking (in Norfolk), Minster Lovel, and Elcombe (Oxfordshire).49 These kin-networks bound families together during the war. 45 

Layettes de Trésor des chartes, ed. by Teulet and others, i, 464, 469–70, 474, 487; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapter 4. 46  Baldwin, ‘The Image of the Jongleur’; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapter 4. There was a lot of contact through marital alliances and affinities between Champagne and Picardy. Baldwin’s article demonstrates the artistic impact of communication among jongleurs, romance writers, and other clerics throughout northern France. Gace Brulée was one of the most famous poets from Champagne in the late twelfth century and he travelled and served in the court of Young Henry and Geoffrey. It was probably through the burgeoning interest in putting music to poetry in the Paris school at Notre-Dame that Bishop William Mauvoision of Glasgow and St Andrews began to also write music: Everist, ‘From Paris to St Andrews’. 47  Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Lat. 5480 [Extrait de l’Abbaye de Fontevraud] (nineteenth century), i, fol. 248. Albreda’s mother, Isabel, and Simon II d’Anet must have been married no later than 1173 for their daughter to be of a marriageable age by 1187. 48  See Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, ii, 552 for Hugh d’Anet a Leicestershire knight. Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, pp. 31–32; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 256; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 45–49, 56–58; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 371, 379; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 333. Count Robert of Meulan’s aunt was also William II Louvel’s mother. She was the sister of Count Waleran of Meulan and of Earl Robert II of Leicester. 49  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 207, 483; Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Chartres, ed. by de Lépinois and Merlet, i, 252–53; Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Saint-Germain-des-Près, ed. by Poupardin, Vidier, and Levillain, ii, 54–55; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, viii, 208–14; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, p. 60; Boussard, Le Comté d’Anjou, p. 57. Simon II d’Anet was also a vassal of Count Waleran of Meulan in 1155. The Louvels of Docking should not be confused with the Louvels at Hawick in Scotland. Although they may have been related there is no evidence this was the case. However, there is evidence that

298

Chapter 6

William II Louvel’s brother, Waleran d’Ivry, fought with the rebels in 1173, probably because of the vulnerability of the family’s lands in the Evrecin.50 The family lost the castle of Ivry to Henry II because of this support and Waleran’s son, Robert IV, subsequently sided with King Philip for which he was regranted Ivry and given the castle of Avrilly and the honour of Evreux.51 Loyalties changed for other members of the kin group because of conflict within the Angevin family after the war. Robert’s cousin, Roger de Saint-André (de l’Eure), owed knight-service in the bailie of Argentan (Orne) alongside other Scottish affiliated families like Ralph de la Hai of Sussex (see Chapter 5), William de Briouze, and ‘Guillaume’ de Vieuxpont.52 In 1194, Roger lost his French fees for supporting King Richard against Richard’s brother, John, and King Philip, and his cousin, William II Louvel, granted a payment to Roger from his lands in Norfolk for loyal service to his family’s overlord in England.53 The Vieuxponts were important to all of these networks. The formation of alliances between families in the Chartrain and Evrecin endured throughout the century and spilled over into the Yvelines. For example, the French Vieuxponts and the Mauvoisins of Rosny (in the Yvelines) were distantly related through the marriage of Ivo de Vieuxpont, Lord of Courville, to Albreda d’Anet, daughRalph Louvel of Hawick may have been the grandson of Walter of Douai: G. Barrow, The AngloNorman Era, pp. 174, 184–85; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, viii, 200. This family connection is based loosely on the transfer of the Cary lands from Walter of Douai to the Louvels. Ralph’s son, Henry, continued managing the family’s Somerset lands and the lands he gained in Scotland at Hawick probably through his mother, Margaret. He also appeared with Henry II at Caen in 1182: Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 145; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 80. 50  Boussard, Le gouvernement d’Henri II Plantagenêt, pp. 477, 525. The Ivry family may have held land in England in Oxfordshire at Beckley in the early twelfth century but the barony passed into the hands of Renauld (or Reginald), Lord de Saint-Valery (Ponthieu), in c. 1146. Renauld’s son Bernard, Lord de Saint-Valery, still held Beckley at the time of the 1173 war and he also supported the rebels. See Chapter 5. Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 9–10. Loyd is cautious about any connection of the Ivry family to the Saint-Valery family because there is no direct mention of the relationship though the lands were given to them: Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 55. 51  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 421–22. 52  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 695 g–k; Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17, fol. 137; MS Y. 16, fol. 11. Roger de SaintAndré (de l’Eure) was probably a cousin of William Louvel II and of Waleran, Lord of Ivry (d. c. 1177), and he was related to Ivo de Vieuxpont, Lord of Courville, by marriage and to the Rosny Mauvoisin family. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 54, 422, 483, 528–29. 53  Pipe Roll of 6 Richard I, p. 23; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 422.

Ivo, archd. of Rouen (fl. 1170-87)

Ivo, Lord of Courville

Robert

Robert (d. 1202) = Marie de Chastillon

Fulk (fl. 1170)

William ?

William

William

Richard, Lord de Vieux-Pont

William

Robert of Ivo of Westmoreland Alston = Idonea de Builli

William

William II (d.c. 1203) Lord of Hardingstone and Carriden = 1. Emma de Saint-Hilaire = 2. Maud de Moreville

William I (fl. 1153–70) Ld. of Hardingstone

Scottish branch

Figure 15. Branches of the Vieuxpont family tree.

* It is not clear that William II, Ld. of Courville, is not the same man as William I, Ld. of Hardingstone (see Barrow, RRS, II, pp. 181-82) therefore making William’s son, William II, Ld. of Hardingstone, Carriden, Horndean, Elrington, Kirkhaugh and Alston, the successor to Robert de Vieux-Pont, Ld. of Courville, in 1202. This would also suggest that William de Vieuxpont ‘miles’ who succeeded to Vieux-Pont by 1205 may have been one of William II of Hardingstone’s sons or grandson.

Ivo I (d. by c. 1201) = Albreda d’Anet

William II * Lord of Courville (d. by 1185)

French Courville branch

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War 299

300

Chapter 6

ter of Simon II d’Anet and granddaughter of William I Louvel and of Matilda de Meulan.54 Matilda was the sister of Earl Robert II of Leicester. The Louvels of Ivry were also related to the Mauvoisins through the marriage of Regina Mauvoisin to Waleran I, Lord of Ivry, son of William I Louvel and brother of William II.55 Guy Mauvoisin, Lord of Rosny’s uncle, Peter, gained the lordship of Saint-André (de l’Eure) in the early thirteenth century by virtue of his sister, Regina’s marriage to Waleran.56 These families remained loyal to the kings of France throughout this period and they formed bonds of surety to protect the kin group. In 1200, Guy Mauvoisin and his uncles, Manasser and Peter, acted as surety for Robert IV d’Ivry, William II Louvel’s nephew;57 and Manasser Mauvoisin fought for King Philip in 1184 at the siege of Chastillon-sur-Seine despite that he also held land at Stokenham in Devon through his wife (see Figure 17 about Mauvoisins).58 The Mauvoisins were part of the networks in the Chartrain. They already had interests at Chartres through the abbey of Coulombs near Muzy,59 and 54 

See Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Lat. 5480 [Extrait de l’Abbaye de Fontevraud], i, fol. 248; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 237–38, 483 about marriage. 55  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, ii, 255–56, 272; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 254–55, 483, 507. Regina was married to Peter III de Maule. It is unclear if Regina had also been married to Waleran but there is little doubt that the Mauvoisins were intermarried with the Louvels. 56  Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, p. 36; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, i, 255–56, 263, 272; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 254–55. 57  Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Chartres, ed. by de Lépinois and Merlet, i, 252–53; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 254–55. 58  William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, ii, 34; Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 163; Dion, Note sur de l’architecture militaire, p. 9. 59  Muzy was a little over one kilometre from the main lordship of the Tosny family at Nogent-le-Roi. Léonard Sahuguet-d’Espagnac, Les seigneurs de Nogent-le-Roi, pp. 8–23; Cf. Gesta Normannorum Ducum, ed. by Van Houts, ii, 96–98 about the early Tosnys. Nogent-leRoi had been a fee of the Montforts descended from a daughter of Hugh Bardulf (d. 1059). Another descendant of Hugh Bardulf can also be found in Scotland possibly because of the family’s relationship with the Tosnys. He was also called Hugh Bardulf and he handled the accounts for King William’s lands in Tynedale in 1200 and he was also a witness to King Richard’s grant of liberties to King William in April 1194: Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 62. Simon de Montfort’s daughter, Isabel, passed Nogent onto her husband, Ralph II de Tosny of Conches in 1077, which was how the Tosnys gained the lordship of Nogent-le-Roi. Isabel gave lands near Chartres to the abbey of Coulombs that she had gained after her father’s death. The successive Lords of Nogent-le-Roi were also regular benefactors of the abbey of Coulombs, and this included Idonea (also called Margaret) de Beaumont, sister of Earl Robert III of Leicester.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

301

with the abbeys of Saint-Marie de Josaphat,60 Notre Dame de Chartres,61 and Saint-Père de Chartres.62 Patterns of patronage that linked the Mauvoisins with the Chartrain can be seen through the Muzy (Donjon) family, who stood as surety for the Mauvoisins in the thirteenth century, and the Mauvoisin lordship at Mantes, held by Manasser, was in the diocese of Chartres which served to strengthen these ties.63 The Mauvoisin kin-network is important in a Scottish context because a younger member of the kin-group, William Mauvoisin, emi­­ grated to Scotland by 1185 probably because of interaction with the Beaumonts, Montforts and Tosnys on the Continent.64 He and his family were also involved with Anglo-Irish lords like William de Briouze and the de Lacys, but more will be said about William in the following chapter.65 The types of alliances formed between families in the Chartrain capture just how important marriage was to binding families together into territorially and politically motivated interest groups that extended far beyond the Chartrain border. Bishop Geoffrey de Lèves of Chartres Cathedral, who introduced the Templars into the diocese and led the reform movement at Chartres, is also representative of how important these familial units were to political developments across territories. Geoffrey was the son of a Puiset mother and Lèves father. Nogent fell under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Chartres, who held the nearby abbey of Coulombs and the priory of Houdan that was attached to the Montfort l’Amaury fortress in Yvelines: Lefèvre, Documents historiques, pp. 280–83, 387–412; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 309–17. 60  Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Josaphat, ed. by Métais, i, 30, 61–62, 162–63, 292–94, 351. The lands of the Tosnys, Montforts, and Beaumonts were all within a thirty-five kilometre radius of the Mauvoisin family holdings in Yvelines. The Mauvoisins and Tosnys were in contact through trade along the Seine River: Sahuguet-d’Espagnac, Les seigneurs de Nogent-le-Roi, pp. 37–39. 61  Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Chartres, ed. by de Lépinois and Merlet, i, cxxxviiii, clxiii, 252–53. The counts of Champagne/Blois were also benefactors as overlords in the region. 62  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, i, 185, 200; ii, 421. The Mauvoisins appear as witnesses for St Père as early as 1055 and in 1066 alongside Simon de Montfort and Nivard de Montfort. 63  Chédeville, Chartres et ses campagnes, p. 494. 64  The Beaumonts, cousins of the King of Scots, may have introduced the future bishop of Glasgow, William Mauvoisin, to the Scottish court. Cf. Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 21, 58–60 for Beaumont-Montfort relationship. Cf. Bauduin, ‘Autour de la dos d’Adelize de Tosny’ for a recent study of the Leicester marital and land ties to the Tosnys and Breteuils. 65  Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’. The Briouze family were also related to the Beaumonts through the Harcourts: Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, p. 45.

302

Chapter 6

The Puiset-Lèves union allied two different ‘interest groups’, one based in the Chartrain and the other in the Evrecin, that was also promoted in the next generation when Geoffrey’s sister married into another Evrecin family, the Muzys.66 The Lèves family continued as regular benefactors of the abbeys of Thiron, Grand-Beaulieu, and Josaphat and witnessed charters with the Mauvoisins for the Cistercian abbeys of Notre-Dame des Vaux-de-Cernay and Saint-Pères de Chartres.67 The Puisets and Lèves, along with the lords of Montfort l’Amaury and counts of Evreux and Auneau, built a vast network of castles during the reign of Louis VI that ran from Paris to Chartres and Paris to Orléans, and they were all significant donors to Chartres Cathedral.68 It was probably because of this interaction between the Beaumonts/Montforts and Chartres that the Mauvoisins, who were feudally dependant on the counts of Meulan for some of their fees, also patronized several abbeys in the Chartrain.69 The Montforts and Beaumonts were so interested in Chartrain patronage that they were even immortalized in the south-facing clerestory rose windows at Chartres Cathedral.70 However, these frontier relationships were not always amicable for as events occurred abroad and at home a shift inevitably happened that redrew lines of defence locally among kin groups and their allies. For example, in 1133 William 66 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 1; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 271. His kinsman, Josslin de Lèves, was also the Bishop of Chartres: Chédeville, Chartres et ses campagnes, pp. 259, 309, 462. 67  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, pp. 154–57, 185–88, 254; Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, pp.  15, 17; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 107, 170, 189; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, i, 203, 215, 252; ii, 264, 267, 270, 276–80, 286, 294, 306, 313, 326, 334–36, 344, 365, 376, 401, 561. This is only a brief list of the charters involving Josslin and Geoffrey as bishops. They were very active as bishops of Chartres. Count Conan III also made a gift of the péage, or tolls, of Pont-Rousseau in Nantes to the abbey in 1132. Breton interest in Chartres continued well into the twelfth century. Cf. Aubert, L’Abbaye des Vaux de Cernay, pp. 7–8, 12 for the abbey’s foundation. The abbey of Vaux was also the recipient of Mauvoisin and Montfort patronage. 68  Cuissard, Les seigneurs du Puiset, pp. 319, 337–42, 355–81; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, p. 60. Cuissard stressed the infidelity of the Puisets to Kings Philip I and Louis VI though this changed during the reign of Louis VII because of the dissipation of the ties between the Norman and Blésois lords after the death of Adela of Blois. 69  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, i, 250–57; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 712 j; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 21, 58–60, 62, 78. This dependency on the counts of Meulan continued into the thirteenth century. 70  Frankl, ‘The Chronology of the Stained Glass in Chartres Cathedral’, pp. 304–05, 313–14.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

303

Mauvoisin, brother of Samson, Archbishop of Reims, and of Ralph IV, was injured fighting with the lord of Châteauneuf against Roger de Tosny, Lord of Conches and Nogent.71 This skirmish was part of a wider conflict occurring in the region because of the fighting between Empress Matilda and her husband, Count Geoffrey of Anjou, against King Henry I.72 However, it was not long before the Tosnys and Mauvoisins were fighting on the same side against the King of France. The interaction between families was not confined to patronage and intermarriage in different regions of France. Vieuxpont communication with families in the Chartrain carried over into the Ornois and to England and Scotland. For example, the Busci family (Boucé, Buissi, Busci, Boceio) at Old Wardon (Bedfordshire) witnessed for and were men of the Moubrays, and all three families (Busci, Moubray, and Vieuxpont) originated from and/or were still lords in the Ornois. These relations also extended into Scotland because of the nature of lordship and communication between these families in England. For example, the Buscis appeared in King David’s lordship of Northumberland by c. 1127.73 William de Vieuxpont of Carriden and Hardingstone was in contact with the Busci family in England and witnessed with Robert de Busci and his brother, Oliver, and with William de Soules for Nigel de Moubray concerning a sale of land by Radulph de la Hai (probably the same man who led the opposition forces in 1174) between 1160 and 1179.74 This early contact between the Vieuxponts and Buscis in England brought about the marriage of William’s son, Robert de Vieuxpont of Westmoreland, to Idonea de Builli (Buisli,

71 

Sahuguet-d’Espagnac, Les seigneurs de Nogent-le-Roi, pp. 25–26. Lefèvre, Documents historiques, pp. 405–06. William Mauvoisin, Lord of Rosny, was injured and taken to the abbey of Coulombs where he died of wounds and was buried. His brother, Samson, was provost of Chartres at the time. 73  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, pp. lxi, 20, 22–24, 50, 52, 55, 61, 69, 77, 79–80, 83–85, 87–88, 90–92, 99, 100, 117, 119, 122, 129–30, 135, 137, 143, 150, 163, 165, 167–71, 174–77, 181, 184, 193, 196, 201–04, 211–13, 216–19, 221, 224–25, 229–31, 234–35, 238, 240–42, 247–48, 253, 257; Charters of King David I, ed. by Barrow, pp. 11, 13, 66. 74  Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. 216. At least some of the witnesses were French. The Moubrays only used the separate ethnic address intermittently probably depending on what men were present when the charter was written. Cf. ‘Sussex Fines: 1–5 John (nos. 15–93)’, ed. by Salzmann, no. 19 about Robert de Busci and his service for Kingston. Oliver de Busci also witnessed for Nigel de Moubray’s father: Cartulary of Byland Abbey, ed. by Burton, pp. 120, 151, 266–67, 283, 289–90, 308. Furthermore, the Buscis patronized the Moubray foundation at Byland. 72 

304

Chapter 6

Bully),75 whose family was intermarried with the Busci family.76 Furthermore, the Buscis, Vieuxponts, Soules, Moubrays, and Hais, as already discussed, were members of kin groups that extended into Scotland or who had extensive contact with the Scottish court. The Ornois base of these families was important. It provided the foundation for interaction between several Vieuxpont affiliates on both sides of the Channel. For example, the Moubrays advanced the Buscis in their lordship probably because of their common ties in the Ornois,77 and the Buscis also held Kingston-by-Shoreham, or Bowsey, in Sussex in the rape of Bramber, which was in the lordship of another Ornois neighbour, William de Briouze.78 The Moubrays also held land in Northamptonshire at Great Weldon that they lost in the early twelfth century to the Basset/Ridels, who had a branch settled at Abbotsley mentioned in the previous chapter.79 The Bassets also originated from the Ornois at Montreuil-au-Houlme, thirteen kilometres northwest of Boucé and Vieux-Pont, and at least one member of the kin group, Richard Basset, can be found still owing receipts at Argentan in 1184.80 All of these 75 

Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Saint-Germain-des-Près, ed. by Poupardin, Vidier, and Levillain, i, 310. There is a Hugh de Bullis who owed ‘modios’, ‘corn’, to Saint-Germain. The Builli family originally came from Bully near Drincourt (Neufchatel-en-Bray): Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 21; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 277. 76  Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 133, 147. Idonea was descended from Roger de Builli, who was a cousin of the 1106 rebel, Earl Robert I de Bellême of Shrewsbury. Earl Robert held lands in Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire around Tickhill and Blyth. The Buillis gained Tickhill following the disseisment of Earl Robert. Roger de Builli also gained Sandford in Devonshire through his wife and he held Hallam near Sheffield of Earl Waltheof of Northumbria and his wife, Judith of Lens (southeast of Béthune), daughter of Adelaide, Countess of Aumale and sister or half-sister of King William I of England. Adelaide was also King William of Scotland’s great-great-grandmother. Roger also had a brother, Arnold, and a son named after him. Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, v, 224–26; Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 395; Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p. 21; Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 133, 147; Chibnall, ‘Robert de Bellême and the Castle of Tickhill’, pp. 152–55; Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, p. 144. Idonea’s father, John de Builli, was a great baron in the honour of Tickhill at the end of the century. 77  Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p.  21; Charters of the Honour of Mowbray, ed. by Greenway, p. xix. 78  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, ii, 689–90; Pipe Roll of 2 Henry III, p. 21. The family may not have gained this fee until the thirteenth century. 79  Sanders, English Baronies, pp. 49–50. 80  Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, p.  12. This might have been Richard II Basset of Weldon.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

305

contacts explain why the Scot, Torel ‘de Escocie’, settled in the Ornois.81 The involvement of these men with each other is not surprising considering how close their fees were in the Ornois and that they were still members of the same patronage networks.82 Daniel Power has previously held that the Vieuxpont lines in Scotland and at Chartres were not closely linked but it may be argued that they were related since the Anglo-Scottish branch gained the Vieux-Pont lands in Calvados in c. 1203 and they regularly used the same names as the Continental branch.83 Furthermore, men from the Chartrain began to appear at the Scottish court just when the Vieuxponts seemed to reconnect with their family on the other side of the Channel. Thomas de Chartres, who appeared as a Brus tenant in Dumfriesshire in 1215 and who witnessed for King William in c. 1201, may have accompanied the Vieuxponts following the latter’s renewal of their Calvados and Ornois claims. Thomas was not the only Chartrain affiliate to appear in Scotland at this time for a Robert de Chartres also appeared in King William’s charters in c. 1200 and he may have been the same who made gifts to the Templars.84 Daniel Power bases his suggestion that the Scottish line was separate on the claim that William de Vieuxpont, brother of Robert de Vieuxpont, Lord of Courville, was still alive in a charter dated 1207 so could not have been William of Carriden who died in 1203.85 The problem is that nowhere does the charter explicitly say that the Norman William de Vieuxpont died in 1207 but only that a grant was made in 1211/12 to Raoul de ‘Buxiis’ from lands previously held by William at Queron.86 It also seems odd that the Vieux-Pont lordship 81 

Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, ed. by Moss, p. 90. Torel was murdered but there is no explanation as to why. 82  See Chapter 5 about Soules, Hai, Moubray, and Vieuxpont fees and service in the Ornois. 83  Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 49, 55, 91. King John’s mandate clearly said that William, Robert’s brother, be given seisin of the land in Normandy at Vieux-Pont (no mention of Courville) in July 1202, which Robert had held of the King. William of Hardingstone’s son, Robert de Vieuxpont of Tickhill, certainly held Vieux-Pont as of May 1203, but he was disseized by Philip Augustus for his support to the English crown in 1204. 84  Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, ii, 305; Stringer, ‘Kingship, Conflict, and State-Making’, p. 134. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 403; Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 376. 85  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 528–31. 86  He cites Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, p. 299 no. 1107; Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 320–21, which says nothing other than that lands at

306

Chapter 6

would not, like the Courville lordship, pass to Robert de Courville’s heirs after 1204 since he had held the Vieux-Pont lordship for most of his career. In fact, it seems that at least some of the family’s lands, possibly in the Ornois, did pass to his heirs for Robert’s wife, Marie de Chastillon, held wardship of their sons, William and Ivo, between 1202 and 1217, while they were under age. It is mentioned in the Norman register that while living in ‘Francia’ she provided service to King Philip Augustus for lands in Normandy that had escheated to the King but the reasons for why or where these lands specifically were is not given, 87 and in another statement dating from 1204 to 1207/08, Philip explicitly said that Vieux-Pont was to be held in service by the ‘heirs of W. De Vieux-Pont’.88 It also seems odd that Marie would provide service for Vieux-Pont if she had a brother-in-law still alive to perform that service who held the lordship anyway unless, as Powicke suggests, the brother William had died.89 Furthermore, her former husband’s career must be taken into account to fully appreciate how important the lordship at Vieux-Pont was to his line. Robert de Vieuxpont was Lord of Vieux-Pont-en-Auge for much of his career, which explains why he used the name ‘de Vieuxpont’ rather than ‘de Courville’.90 Even his wife referred to him as Robert ‘de Vieuxpont’ as late as Quercu, or Cairon/Queron (about thirteen kilometres east of Nonant), that had been held by William de Vieuxpont were being given to the Buxi family. He also cites Cartulaire de NotreDame de Josaphat, ed. by Métais, i, 378. There was no date offered and Métais guessed the date for this charter by William was about 1213. Cf. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS 68, fols 26–28; Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 91, 107 for grant to Robert after the death of his brother, William. 87  Robert seems to have died about 1202: Chartres, Arch. Dpt de l’Eure et Loir, MS H 2310; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 132–33. His widow Marie de Chastillon was holding the Courville lordship in wardship by c. 1202 until her sons were of age in c. 1217. Layettes de Trésor des chartes, ed. by Teulet and others, i, 377; Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS 68, fol. 26; Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Josaphat, ed. by Métais, i, 107, 129–30; Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 101; Obituaires de la Province de Sens, ed. by Longnon, Molinier, and others, ii, 464; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclxvi–vii; André Du Chesne, Histoire genealogique des maisons de Guines, pp. 219–21. Marie de Chastillon was still alive in 1242. For Vieuxpont recognition in the honour of Vieux-Pont between 1204 and c. 1210 see: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619 j. 88  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 311. ‘W.’ must be referring to the Latin-Anglicized name of William. This section of King Philip’s register is dated between 1204 and 1207/08. 89  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 357–58. 90  Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 68.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

307

1225 despite that she and her son took the name of Courville.91 The reasons for this are clear. It was not until Robert’s brother, Ivo, died, sometime before c. 1197, that he succeeded to Courville so the majority of Robert’s political and territorial career was based at Vieux-Pont.92 Furthermore, his early position at Vieux-Pont is important to understanding why this lordship became so important to the Anglo-Scottish branch. As a Norman lord holding lands in Calvados and the Ornois, Robert was a vassal of the English King (as duke of Normandy) and he had contact for most of his early life with other Anglo-Norman families like the Briouzes (Braoses) and Moubrays. His position in Calvados and the Ornois placed his loyalties theoretically more in line with the English king except that his brother’s mouvance at Courville made his brother a man of the King of France and of the count of Blois. The two lordships were divided again in 1202 only it was not Robert’s sons and heirs, William and Ivo, who retained their father’s patrimony at Vieux-Pont, rather they continued at Courville probably due to the influence of their mother, Marie de Chastillon.93 The Chastillons were loyal to the King of France and Marie’s family’s interests were better served by focusing on Courville and thus vassalage to the French cause during the wars between King Philip Augustus of France and King John of England. The problem with placing the Anglo-Scottish Vieuxponts into a Continental context is based on confusion about the lines of descent in the family. Relying on the edited volumes of undated charters is fraught with difficulties. The Cartulaire de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée is a case in point. For example, the early charters relating to the family name Fulk as Lord of Courville in the 1120s, but the editors ignored the internal dating of other charters pertaining to the lords.94 The original agreement with the countess of Blois and her sons concerning the succession in the Vieuxpont kin group was laid out by the family’s predecessor, 91  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-lès-Chartres, ed. by Merlet, i, 107, 129–30; Les Templiers en Eure-et-Loir, ed. by Métais, pp. 24–25. However, Marie’s son went by Ivo de Vieuxpont, Lord of Courville. 92  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 135. The dating of this charter is more trustworthy, having been based on an actual date given in the charter. It seems the two brothers of William, Ivo and Robert, had divided the inheritance of Courville and Vieux-Pont. 93  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclxvi–vii; Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS 68, fol. 26; Layettes de Trésor des chartes, ed. by Teulet and others, i, 377; Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Josaphat, ed. by Métais, ii, 5–6. 94  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-lès-Chartres, ed. by Merlet, i, 16–17.

308

Chapter 6

Ivo II, Lord of Courville, in the charters of the abbey of Tiron.95 The charter at Thiron that has been dated by Merlet as c. 1127 indicates that Ivo had given Courville to a Robert de Vieuxpont rather than Fulk.96 The two groups of charters are clearly contradictory.97 Robert did eventually succeed Fulk but the dating, which appears to be guesswork by the editors, confuses matters.98 The same holds true for the later source materials about the Vieuxponts not the least because there were also two Norman Vieuxpont lines functioning at the same time. The first was bound to the Lords of Courville and located in Calvados and the Ornois and the second was located at Vieux-Pont in the Ornois, but these two lines may also have been related. Evidence suggests that the Scottish Vieuxponts were perhaps more closely related to the Ornois Courville branch based on patterns of patronage but this is not certain. What is clearly stated in the Rotuli Normanniae is that the late twelfth-century successor to Courville, Robert de Vieuxpont, died fighting in France in 1202 after which King John gave Vieux-Pont, without mentioning Courville, to Robert’s brother or half-brother, William de Vieuxpont, ‘as his brother’s heir’.99 The lordship of Courville was outside of the English King’s jurisdiction and so King John didn’t address any rights to the Chartrain lordship. What is unclear is whether William de Vieuxpont of Carriden and Hardingstone was Robert de Courville’s brother, called William. However, what may be a clue to the relationship is that William of Carriden’s son, Robert de Vieuxpont of Westmoreland, a strong supporter of King John, was granted Vieux-Pont in

95 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 71, 104–06; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 528–29. René Merlet put Robert de Vieuxpont’s succession in about 1128. However, he also made a mistake later about the timing of the marriage and death of Robert de Vieuxpont who married Marie de Chastillon: Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Guérard, ii, 418, 567. 96  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, ii, 104–06, 128. Ivo seemed to be holding the lands by c. 1129. Kimberley LoPrete has recently suggested an earlier date, between 1116 and 1120, for the agreement with Robert. LoPrete, Adela of Blois: Countess and Lord, pp. 521–22. 97  Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, pp. 3, 9. The gift to Grand-Beaulieu was made by Ivo de Courville but the charter does not say when and he was certainly dead by the date of the second mention of a gift in c. 1146. 98  Durand, ‘Chronologie des premiers seigneurs de Courville’, p. 246. 99  Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 49, 55. The mandate does not actually state which Vieux-Pont but since service was owed by Robert of Westmoreland to Caen then it must have been the fee at Vieux-Pont-en-Auge in Calvados.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

309

1203 by the English King though he lost it in 1204.100 Such a grant suggests that Robert of Westmoreland was related to the French Vieuxponts but he too lost the lordship because of his English affinity, and Philip Augustus confiscated the lordship and granted it to the ‘heirs of William de Vieuxpont’.101 Furthermore, in c. 1201 Robert de Courville mentioned his brother in a grant to the priory of Courville and he Anglicized his brother’s name as ‘Willelmo’, which may indicate that his brother William was Anglo-French.102 Another suggestion about the Vieuxpont lordship is that one of William of Carriden’s sons named William may have emigrated to France after 1204 to take up some of the newly divided lordship.103 It is evident that the William de Vieuxpont, miles, who appeared in donations to the abbey of Silly-en-Gouffern in c. 1212 must have been different than the former William de Vieuxpont of 1202,104 and it may be that William ‘the knight’ took over the family’s lordship in the Ornois but was not a son or brother of Robert the former Lord of Courville (for nowhere does it say this);105 rather, William ‘the knight’ was one of William of Carriden’s sons. Carriden had at least two living sons through his first wife, Emma de Saint-Hilaire, and a grandson by the name of William.106 100 

Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 91. Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 311: Philip Augustus granted these lands to the heirs of William de Vieuxpont in 1204, who could not have been Robert, Lord of Courville’s, sons since they were still underage. Also see Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclxiv–cclxvii; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 357–58. 102  The use of ‘Willelmo’ rather than ‘Guillelmo’ does not necessarily mean that he was Anglo-French. ‘Willelmo’ is also the Latin form of the name but very often when used in France it does indicate that the bearer was of mixed descent. ‘Willelmo’ was certainly the predominant form used in England. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-lès-Chartres, ed. by Merlet, i, 64. 103  Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 107–12; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, pp. 28, 33, 35. 104  Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS  Lat.  11059 [Cartulary de l’abbaye de Silly-en-Gouffern], fols  142–144, 146. These donations involved the church of Saint-Hilaire-de Briouze near Argentan and Silly-en-Gouffern. This Vieuxpont member probably held Vieux-Pont near Argentan. Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, pp. 42–43. 105  See Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 166 for William ‘the knight’ or a son of the same name who attended the King’s inquest concerning Ferté-Macé in the Ornois in 1224. 106  See Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 107–08, 110; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, pp. 28, 33, 35 for the mention of William and his younger brothers by the same name and also sons of Emma de Saint-Hilaire and William de Vieuxpont. G. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era, pp. 75, 94. The Vieuxponts also brought men 101 

310

Chapter 6

Furthermore, William de Vieuxpont ‘the knight’ appeared with the Busci family regularly in charters concerning Saint-Hilaire beginning in c. 1212 and the two families also appeared together in c. 1220 concerning an exchange of fees held of the honour of Ecouché by the heirs of Count Robert of Alençon.107 These charters reinforce that contact continued between the Vieuxponts and the Norman branch of the Busci family. This William, miles, also had a son named Richard by 1212 who gained a fee of the King of France at Vieux-Pont.108 If Vieux-Pont was given to William, Lord of Carriden and Hardingstone’s son, Robert, in 1203 then it makes sense why he also lost it following John’s loss of Normandy in the following year. This would also explain why any of Carriden’s other sons by the name of William may have gained fees held by the family but under the patronage of King Philip once Philip was firmly in control of Normandy. William of Carriden and his younger sons and grandsons by the name of William were men of Scotland, which would have made them part of the kin group but politically more suited to take up the French lands on behalf of King Philip particularly since Robert of Westmoreland and his brother, Ivo, served King John on the Continent.109 Further evidence of the Scottish Vieuxpont ties to the Norman Vieuxpont family is also reflected in their choice of religious benefactions. The Scottish Vieuxpont family’s interest in the Tironensian order at Kelso mirrored the family’s interests at the abbey of Thiron in the Chartrain.110 with them from Auge and had at least one Breton, Ralph, who witnessed for them. Professor Barrow convincingly suggests that William was the half-brother of Robert of Westmoreland sharing the same father, William. 107  Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS  Lat.  11059 [Cartulary de l’abbaye de Silly-en-Gouffern], fols 142–144, 146; Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, pp. 42–43. Ralph de Busci gained William de Vieuxpont’s lands at Quercu in late 1211 or early 1212: Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 320–21. 108  Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Lat. 11059 [Cartulary de l’abbaye de Silly-en-Gouffern], fol. 144. 109  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclxvi. The former Lord of Courville, Ivo, was dead and the son of Robert de Vieuxpont of Courville by the name of Ivo was still a minor in 1203 (and he was usually not called Ivo de Vieuxpont but Ivo de Courville) so this was most likely Ivo, son of William of Carriden. Ivo took over their father’s lands in Tynedale at Elrington, Alston, and Kirkhaugh. Ivo, like his brother, Robert, would have been eliminated as a candidate to the lordship because he served John at the siege of Alençon (at the head of the Ornois administrative base) in 1203 and paid tallage to King John in October 1203 for the bailiwick of Caen. Robert of Westmoreland was already involved at Caen and in the Roumois as bailiff for King John in 1203 so both brothers were serving on the Continent just before John lost Normandy. 110  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Merlet, i, 31–34. Grants were made by an earlier Ivo de Courville (d. c. 1119)

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

311

It is hard to believe that it was pure coincidence that the exact same four names for the Vieuxpont family appear in records on both sides of the Channel in the late twelfth century — Fulk, Ivo, William, and Robert. It is also puzzling that the lords of Courville did not appear confirming or witnessing charters that were directly linked to their lordship very often; for example, they were not present at donations to the chapel for lepers in Chartres founded by the family in the early twelfth century.111 Their continued absence in charters directly linked with the family’s lordship at Courville implies that the family’s main interests lay elsewhere, probably in Normandy. For example, one of the few cases where the lord of Courville appears in conjunction with the lordship was in c. 1201 when Robert de Vieuxpont, Lord of Courville, made a grant to the priory of Courville.112 The Courville family may have been forced to shift the focus of their lordship to their Norman lands because these lands were in territories threatened more by the crossfire between the Angevins and Capetians. The bottom line is that the exact relationship between the Anglo-Scottish and the Norman Vieuxponts is unknown but close enough for Carriden’s sons, Robert and possibly William, to hold part of the lordship of Vieux-Pont in Normandy. Communication and alliances between families across regions is important to understanding how fluid relationships were and how political events could in turn affect migratory movements and patterns of allegiance. The Great War brought several families together who held lands not only in Normandy, England, and Scotland but also in territories controlled by the King of France. Interaction in the Ornois and Chartrain, in particular, introduced new men to the Scottish court at a time when King William was fighting to regain his credibility as king.

Image and Identity The Treaty of Falaise had a significant impact on the Scottish King’s image abroad and at home. English claims of overlordship had been accentuated in the treaty when Henry successfully capitalized on William’s weakness and redrew 111 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-lès-Chartres, ed. by Merlet, i, 53, 55. Their failure to continue patronising the abbey of Saint-Jean is also surprising considering Saint-Jean was a Courville establishment and a prebend of Notre-Dame de Chartres. Cartulaire de NotreDame de Chartres, ed. by de Lépinois and Merlet, i, lxxix–lxxx, 225. 112  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-lès-Chartres, ed. by Merlet, i, 64; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 135.

312

Chapter 6

the line concerning bonds of service. Furthermore, William was forced to capitulate the strategic castles of Edinburgh, Stirling, Jedburgh, Roxburgh, and Berwick to Henry as further assurance of his observance of the treaty. However, Henry may also have shown some sensitivity towards the Scottish plight when he appointed Alain, son of Roald FitzAlain, constable of Richmond, to hold Edinburgh castle for him. Roald was a pacific choice in lieu of his role in Richmond as the Duke and Duchess of Brittany’s principal officer. He was familiar with the King’s sister, Duchess Margaret, who had after all probably encouraged Breton involvement in the war, and he would already have come into contact with Anglo-French Scots who held land in or near estates in the Breton honour of Richmond, par­­ticularly those in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.113 Furthermore, he may still have had contact with Margaret after the war because she continued to hold the dower lands given to her from Richmond at Bassingbourn.114 The King of England may have won but he needed to encourage a relationship with the King of Scots that was less militant in order to sustain long-term peace. At the end of the day though, the damage to the status of the Scottish kingdom was difficult to rectify.115 King William was suddenly faced with an alternative basis of power within his borders, which meant that disgruntlement among his lords could find a formidable avenue of support from the King of England. It was only because of ongoing troubles in Henry’s kingdom that the English King did not become overly concerned with his Scottish neighbour. In the meantime, the King of Scots tried to combat the English King’s victory by asserting his authority and independence. According to the contemporary Gerald of Wales, the Scots claimed that they only did homage for Lothian in 1174 and that Scotland had always been separate from England prior to Alnwick.116 He went even further to say that the Bretons and Scots had long before submitted to the French King, Charlemagne,

113 

Hunter-Marshall, ‘Two Early English Occupations in Scotland’, pp. 21–22. Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, pp. 62, 84. Roald fitzAlain may have been related to Brian fitzAlain, also called ‘fitzCount’, son of Count Alain IV of Brittany. Alain’s descendants continued at Wallingford which would suggest that Alain fitzRoald succeeded Brian fitzCount after he was disseized in 1153. Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, iv.2, 90, 94–95. 115  W.  L.  Warren, Henry  II, pp.  138–39. All hostages had been released by 1177 and Edinburgh was returned in 1186 to the Scots. 116  Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, pp. 138–39, 156–57. 114 

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

313

progenitor of the Capetian King Philip Augustus,117 which was a direct snub to Henry since King Philip was already successfully enhancing the Capetian image by stressing the Carolingian legacy of his forebears.118 However, Gerald of Wales was writing his account in the early 1190s shortly after the Quitclaim of Canterbury.119 The Quitclaim restored the kingdom of Scotland to what it had been before 1174, and the King and his men no longer owed personal allegiance outside of what they owed in service for their lands in England. It is possible that Gerald was basing his description of Falaise on the arguments used with King Richard I in 1189, which would explain why his description of Falaise was so different from other writers. On the other hand, other chroniclers were writing for the old King, who was interested in undermining the Scottish image.120 For example, Ralph of Diceto wrote that Henry II had taken Scotland into his control so that he ‘[…] rex Anglorum Henricus regnum suum tam late diffusum, a tam barbaris nationibus Scotis videlicet et Walensis inhabitatum, ex ultima parte pacifice gubernaret’.121 Another courtier, Walter Map, called Henry ‘lord (dominus) of Scotland, Galloway and all the English Isle’.122 Although Henry did not push the issue of homage and fealty for diplomatic reasons, he wanted his contemporaries to understand that England’s hold over Scotland had existed from time immemorial. For this reason, Henry II commissioned works that elevated his status over the various people he claimed to rule. In c. 1175, he hired the poet of Roman de Troie, Benoît de Sainte-Maure, to glorify his ancestors in the Chronique des Ducs de Normandie, which was based on works written by and for Henry’s predecessors in Anjou and Normandy.123 117 

Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, p. 74. Spiegel, ‘The Reditus Regni ad Stirpem Karoli Magni’. 119  Anglo-Scottish Relations, ed. and trans. by Stones, pp. 13–17. Roxburgh and Berwick were restored in this agreement. Jedburgh and Stirling were probably returned sometime between 1186 and 1189. 120  Bradbury, ‘Fulk le Réchin’, p. 28; Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings, i, 196. 121  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii: Abbreviationes Chronicorum, p. 8: ‘[…] might govern his kingdom peacefully in all its parts, then wide in extent and inhabited by some very barbarous natives, the Scots and the Welsh.’ 122  Walter Map, De nugis curialium, ed. by Brooke and Mynors, p. 472. 123  Baumgartner, ‘Écrire et penser l’histoire’; Van  Houts, ‘The Adaptation of the Gesta Normannorum Ducum’; Bezzola, Les origines et la Formation de la Littérature Courtoise, i, 190–98; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 22, 148, 153, 190, 231, 291; Chroniques des comtes d’Anjou, ed. by Halphen and Poupardin, pp. 9–11; Chauou, L’Idéologie Plantagenêt, pp. 55–61, 118 

314

Chapter 6

In order to please the King, Benoît used the negotiation of 1067/68 between William I of England and Malcolm III to claim that ‘Scotland was always subject to England’.124 In Roman de Brut, Robert Wace, Benoît’s predecessor at Henry’s court, glorified King Arthur, as a true knight and bold warrior, which he dedicated to Henry’s wife, Eleanor. He clearly favoured an Anglo-centric point of view concerning the legacy of Henry’s kingdom and he focused on Scottish treachery against the English/British king.125 But Roman de Brut was written in c. 1155, only a few years after the Succession War had ended, when Henry did represent a new Arthur — a king who could bring peace and justice back to the land.126 This image of the King changed over the following twenty years. Several families had found Henry’s lordship overbearing and, in their eyes, unjust. Wace was probably affected by the faction that headed the war effort in lower Normandy when he wrote his second work, Roman de Rou, between 1173 and 1175.127 He was a Norman originally from Jersey, who was educated at Caen. He subsequently became a canon at Bayeux where he was in contact with several families who fought against the King in 1173 and 1174, like the Soules, Lacys, Coloummiers, Asnières, Cahaignes, Munfichets, Moubrays,

78–83, 89–93, 99, 109, 199–200, 270; Duby, Women of the Twelfth Century, pp. 43–45. 124  Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 21; Benoît de SaintMaure, Chronique, ed. by Michel, iii, 251, ll. 38533–40. 125  Robert Wace, Roman de Brut, trans. by Weiss, pp.  136–39, ll.  5445–74; p.  178, ll. 7045–51; Geoffrey of Monmouth, Historia regum Britannie, ed. by Wright and Crick, ii, 62–63, 66–68. Wace and the author of the first variant of The Historia Regum Britannie were, unlike Monmouth, less interested in the origin myths of the Scots and Picts because they came from a different point of view. Geoffrey of Monmouth and his sources, Gildas and the pseudoNennius, focused on the Briton struggle against the Anglo-Saxons and thus glorified a different source of English identity tied more to the Scots, Welsh, and Irish. 126  Chauou, L’Idéologie Plantagenêt, pp. 41–52, 63, 76–78, 99, 103–09, 128, 144–48, 150–61, 165–67, 171–72, 176–87, 199, 228–29; Robert Wace, Roman de Brut, trans. by Weiss, pp. 222–34. Bringing justice and peace was represented by the round table and the king’s court. Wace was the first to mention a round table in the Arthurian tradition. 127  M. Bennett, ‘Poetry as History?’; Van Houts, ‘The Memory of 1066’, pp. 167–79; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 114–15; Chauou, L’Idéologie Plantagenêt, pp. 55–61, 78–83, 89–93, 99, 109, 199–200, 270; Bachrach, ‘Some Observations on the Origins of the Angevin Dynasty’; Damien-Grint, The New Historians of the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, pp. 110–11, 115–16, 154–56, 132–43, 150–87, 202–04, 214–16, 222–23, 228, 232, 237, 245, 261. Wace was less panegyric in his treatment of the history of Henry’s predecessors than Benoît.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

315

Warennes, and St Martins.128 It was probably because he was too favourable towards these families in Roman de Rou that he was decommissioned in 1175 by Henry II.129 Other men, however, found patronage at King Henry’s court and praised the King indirectly following the war. In the romance, De Ortu Waluuanii Nepotis Arturi, the author, possibly Robert de Torigni, may have specifically been recounting the King of England’s success in taking Edinburgh in 1174 when the hero, Gawain, came to the rescue of ‘castellum puellarum’ and its lady and saved her from the pagan king of the north.130 As already mentioned, Torigni had probably met King William in 1166. One of the problems with understanding King William’s position in 1174 is that nearly all of the contemporary chroniclers were writing about William after he had been defeated and they were hoping for Henry II’s favour.131 This included men who had contact with the Scots. Jordan Fantosme was less than favourable in his depiction of the King of Scots calling him ‘[…] like a great child’,132 and concerning the campaign in 1173 ‘[…] all is done by the king of

128 

Robert Wace, Roman de Rou, ed. by Holden, pp. 195–206, ll. 8329–8602; Van Houts, ‘Wace as Historian’, pp. 103–32; M. Bennett, ‘Poetry as History?’; Van Houts, ‘The Memory of 1066’, pp. 167–79. As Van Houts and Bennett point out several of the 1173 rebels claimed that their families were with William the Conqueror in 1066. The rebels clearly saw it to their advantage to claim they were descendants of the Conqueror’s comrades, which gave them more authority and status in the realm. Henry probably decided to dismiss Wace from the project because Wace was expressing favouritism towards families that Henry viewed as traitors and rebels. See Chapter 2 about the Brus family’s image in the Roman de Rou. 129  M. Bennett, ‘Poetry as History?’; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, p. 153; Van Houts, ‘The Memory of 1066’, pp. 167–79; Van Houts, ‘Wace as Historian’, pp. 103–32; Keats-Rohan, ‘Le rôle des Bretons’, pp. 191–98; Douglas, ‘Companions of the Conqueror’. Van Houts puts more credence in the list of rebels as compared to Bennett who calls the list into question. Although Keats-Rohan takes the list at face value, she also notes discrepancies between Wace’s period and that of William the Conqueror. 130  Morriss, ‘The Authorship of the De Ortu Waluuanii’; Rise of Gawain, ed. and trans. by Leake Day, pp. 112–21. Gawain presented the head of this king to King Arthur in order to win his favour at court. There is some debate as to whether Torigni was the author of this work. Torigni had used this motif of the defeat of the pagans in the north in his chronicle as well. Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, pp. 162, 168; See Chapter 4. 131  The court was filled with men hoping for royal largesse as can be seen in the letters of Peter of Blois: Dronke, ‘Peter of Blois and Poetry at the court of Henry II’, pp. 194–96, 210–15. 132  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 28–29, ll. 365–67; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, p. 101.

316

Chapter 6

Albany, by his counsel and by his great folly’.133 However, he also defended the King, which may have had something to do with his Scottish connections.134 The Chronicle of Melrose also commented that William’s decision to war against Henry, his kinsman and lord, was based on listening to ‘wicked coun­ sel’,135 which was also reiterated by Fantosme as a slur against the young noblemen at court.136 Roger of Howden blamed William and his brother for ‘[…] this wicked treachery in England’.137 Howden’s criticism is particularly interesting since he was in the familia of Bishop Hugh du Puiset, acting as the Bishop’s agent in the north, and he may even have been Scottish.138 However, despite such censure of the Scottish King’s character, the Scots did meet with success in some of their campaigns. King William had devastated Westmoreland, Cumberland, and Northumberland.139 The English were forced to drink spring water rather than beer and they were short on food.140 Gerald of 133 

Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 52–53, ll. 700–01; Damien-Grint, The New Historians of the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, pp. 74–76, 130. Fantosme may not only have been writing for Henry II but he personally knew the King. 134  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 134–35, ll. 1811–16; Strickland, ‘Arms and the Men’, pp. 216–20. 135  Chronica de Mailros, p.  86: ‘[…] per consilia iniqua contra cognatum et dominum suum’. The Melrose account was generally very favourable to Henry II and the clerks writing the chronicle may have been English. Broun, ‘Melrose Abbey and its World’; Broun, ‘Recovering the Chronicle of Melrose’; and Harrison, ‘The Original Codex’. 136  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp.  28–29, ll.  373–82; Chauou, L’Idéologie Plantagenêt, pp. 84–85. Chauou also suggests that Fantosme was more critical of Henry, which has formed the basis for arguing that Henry did not commission this chronicle though other chroniclers were not always kind in their comments about royal patrons. 137  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 47–48. 138  Corner, ‘The Gesta Regis Henrici Secundi and Chronica’; Gillingham, ‘The Travels of Roger of Howden’; Duncan, ‘Roger of Howden and Scotland’. 139  See Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 54–55, ll. 717–34. These hardships were great but soon the tides would turn. In the northern campaign in 1173, the King was warned by a messenger that if he continued he would face his own relations of Surrey (the earls de Warenne were his cousins) and he might lose. The King initially refused to retreat to Roxburgh for ‘A brave man must surely conquer his inheritance […] and as long as I live I will not lose a foot of it’ but his own counsel advised him to flee. Fantosme saw the King’s obstinacy as selfish, which placed William’s image as King in a negative light. Cf. Lawrence-Mathers, Manuscripts in Northumbria, pp. 134–46 for the anti-Scottish account during the civil wars particularly from Durham. 140  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 177–78. The weakness of the English position is revealed by the Earl of Hereford and Richard de Lucy’s deci-

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

317

Wales remarked that Henry had been deserted by almost all his kinsmen, who had assembled powerful supporters both overseas and in England. He was in a desperate position for ‘[…] no hope of his restoration was entertained either by himself or by any other […]’.141 Robert de Torigni in his chronicle said that after William was captured at Alnwick, Henry II left England, ‘[…] which land, almost lost, he recovered in thirty days’.142 Particularly in England, the threat to Henry II was quite severe. Gerald and others saw Henry II’s fortunes dictated by his murder of Becket. Herbert of Bosham, a clerk and confidante in Becket’s household, also stated that Henry’s family, the King of France and several ‘alieni’, or foreigners, had coalesced against him.143 Ralph Niger, not without his own prejudices as an intimate of John of Salisbury (friend of Becket),144 commented on the seriousness of Henry’s plight: ‘[…] totam Angliam ita turbatam cum exercitu magno de Normannia transfretavit in Angliam VII idus Julii.’145 According to Niger, Henry realized his misfortunes were caused by what he had done to Becket and when he did penance at the grave: ‘[…] unde miraculose contigit ut eadem die caperetur Willelmus rex Scotiae apud Appelbi a militibus praefati regis.’146 Henry’s previous attempts at public reconciliation for the murder of sion to withhold news of Leicester’s arrival from the King of Scots in order to exact a truce from King William. They could not face both armies at the same time in the north and south. Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 118–21, ll. 1570–1600: King William was successful in taking Appleby, Brough in Cumberland and had overrun much of Northumberland. Robert de Vaux in Carlisle had been cut off from supplies by the summer of 1174. 141  Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, pp. 163–64. 142  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 265. 143  ‘Herbert of Bosham’, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iii, 544: It was a ‘[…] bellum nimis intestinum […]’ (‘[…] war from within […]’). 144  John of Salisbury, Policraticus, ed. by Nederman, pp. 4–5, 17, 180–82, 230. Salisbury and Becket were close friends. John of Salisbury even dedicated Policraticus to Becket. 145  Radulphus Niger, Chronica, ed. by Anstruther, p. 176: ‘[…] all England was in such confusion when a great army of Normans crossed to England on 7 July.’ 146  Radulphus Niger, Chronica, ed. by Anstruther, p. 176: ‘[…] a miracle happened so that the very same day William, King of Scotland, was captured at Appleby by the King’s men.’ Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, ed. by Brewer and others, pp. 163–64; Gerald of Wales, Expugnatio Hibernica, ed. by Scott and Martin, pp. 299–300; ‘Herbert of Bosham’, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iii, 547; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 264; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 72; Vincent, ‘The Pilgrimages of the Angevin King’, p. 26; Chronicles of Saint-Aubin of Angers, in Chroniques des églises d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Mabille, pp. 42–43; Geoffrey of Vigeois, Chronica,

318

Chapter 6

Becket had failed. In 1172, he had gone to Avranches to perform penance but in the following year he faced a formidable army even backed by men from the Avranchin.147 Nothing short of visiting the tomb of the martyr and meeting his victim face to face was going to restore the image of the King and bring him success against his enemies.

Peace between the Kingdoms Despite that the Scottish King’s reputation was seriously damaged at Falaise, William remained on the Continent and took part in the feat of arms at Le Mans. The tournament at Le Mans was attended by the nobility of France, Scotland, England, and Flanders. It was a great event designed to test the strength of its participants and to settle old scores from the battlefield.148 The King of Scots’ chamberlain, Philip de Valognes,149 described as ‘[…] Sire Felip in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xii, 443; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, p. 27. Howden did not stress the weakness of Henry’s position before the pilgrimage but he looked more at Henry’s campaigns in Poitou in June. 147  Cf. A. Duggan, ‘Ne in Dubium’ for the dating of the papal reconciliation. 148  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 62–70, ll 1201–1380; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 263; Painter, William Marshal, pp. 19–23; Crouch, William Marshal, pp. 31–37. There seems to be some confusion concerning this tournament. Painter seems to place its date about 1166–68, followed by Georges Duby, but the explanation of events preceding the tournament in Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal coincides better with the period following the end of the 1173–74 rebellion. The action at Drincourt during the events of 1173 was described just before this tournament. The poet may not have been following the chronology of events accurately, but to jump from 1173 at Drincourt to 1166 would have been disruptive to the audience who would have known the dates of these events. Part of this confusion may be due to a misinterpretation of the Chronicle of Melrose from the events of 1166, which merely said that William was involved in military exploits while on the Continent and which were referring to the Breton campaign at Fougéres. Chronica de Mailros, p. 80. David Crouch offers an entirely different interpretation and argues that the action at Drincourt occurred in 1166 but this is at variance with Fantosme and Torigni. Torigni specifically dates Drincourt to 1173. Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 258. John Gillingham agrees with an 1173 dating: Gillingham, ‘War and Chivalry’, pp. 1–2. 149  Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. by Hall, i, 78. I have tried to find a link between the Valognes family in Normandy and England to little avail but they may have been related. Philip de Valognes held land in Essex but he did not owe knight-service to the kings of England until c. 1190. He was also Lord of Benvie and Panmure in Angus before 1200. He gained Stonehaven east of Angus by c. 1213. Syllabus of Scottish Cartularies, ed. by Cunningham and Rogers, Appendix II, p. 13 (Coupar Angus); Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 390.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

319

de Valoingnes | Fu armez si très cointement | & si très acesméement | E sus toz les autres plus beals’, took centre stage in the tournament and was, according to a later source, captured by William Marshal in the company of the young King of England.150 Out of all the possible fights of the day, this one against the Anglo-Scottish Philip de Valognes, was chosen to glorify Marshal.151 The Scottish presence on the Continent during the war had made a positive impact on the image of the Anglo-French Scots abroad but at home King William’s defeat had exposed a vulnerability that his enemies were hoping to manipulate. William was unable to remain at Le Mans for long before he had to return to Scotland because a rebellion had erupted in Galloway. This rebellion was representative of local, native sentiment against the recent settlement of English and French lords ‘Anglicos et Francigenas’ in the region.152 The instigators of the uprising were the Galwegian half-brothers, Uchtred and Gilbert (sons of the former rebel, Fergus of Galloway), who were fighting over control of the lordship.153 Uchtred had been a loyal member of the Scottish kings’ entourage since the late 1150s and he had advanced foreigners in Galloway partly because he was Norman through his mother.154 He may also have attracted criticism to his lordship by providing a Galwegian army for King William’s campaigns in 1173 and 1174 and thus his men would have witnessed the King’s final humiliation and defeat.155 He probably even sent men to serve in the Earl of Chester’s army 150 

History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 68, ll. 1324–27: ‘[…] Sir Philip deValognes | was adorned very elegantly, richly, and better than all the others.’ 151  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 70, ll. 1381–82; Santina, The Tournament and Litterature, p. 69. William Marshal and Young Henry spent a year hunting and jousting in Vimeu-en-Ponthieu, which was also the locality of the Bailleul French lands. Tournaments were commonplace in this area during the twelfth century. 152  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 186–87; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 67–68, 79–80; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 63. Cf. Grant, ‘Lordship and Society’ about the extent of Normanization in parts of the southwest of Scotland under Malcolm IV and William I. 153  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 79–80; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 186–87; Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 87–99. 154  See Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 93–99 about the difficulty with accurately assessing the timeline and interpretation of the events surrounding this rebellion. See Chapter 2 about Uchtred’s mother, who was probably a daughter of Henry I. 155  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 186; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 64; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 57; Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 52, 685. Newburgh says that

320

Chapter 6

since the knights of Galloway owed service to Chester and they were still called to perform this service in 1186 and 1187 for Henry II.156 It would certainly have made sense for him to have been involved in these campaigns as an active member of the King’s court, particularly since his marriage to Gunnilda, the daughter of Waltheof of Allerdale, had strengthened ties in the southwest.157 Uchtred subsequently used the connections this marriage offered to advance men from Cumbria in his lordship,158 and he also had intimate knowledge of the campaigns in Scotland through his wife’s cousin, Earl Waltheof of Dunbar; the man who had warned the King against joining the war in 1173.159 both brothers were in the army but Uchtred may have been blamed after the campaign failed since he was the one who was probably identified more with the Anglo-French settlers. 156  Pipe Roll of 33 Henry II, p. 28; Early Yorkshire Charters, Richmond, iv, x, 30–31, 34, 36, 40, 45, 48–50, 52, 54–55, 57–58, 63–64, 67–68, 70, 91, 112, 117, 121; v, 90–98. Chester was in the King’s wardship because the heir and successor was underage. Uchtred’s grandson, Alan of Galloway, was the nephew of Alan son of Roald, whose family was Breton and related to the constables of Richmond who had been given the wardship of Edinburgh castle in 1174 as discussed above. Roald the constable and the Rollos both held the constableship of Richmondshire, and Roald held land of the earls of Chester. He may, as mentioned, have been related to Brian fitzCount. Both families retained contacts on the Continent — in lower Normandy and Brittany. Roald witnessed in Brittany for Duke Conan and William Rollos held a fee near Vire. This service was probably founded on the Chester lordship of Carlisle earlier in the century and they were also related to the earls: Oram, ‘A Family Business?, pp. 111–31. The lordship of Carlisle had been held by Ranulf Meschin, grandfather of Earl Hugh of Chester, who became Earl of Chester by relinquishing Carlisle in the early twelfth century. There did seem to be colonization in Galloway that originated from Cumbria but it is difficult to say how strong the connection with Chester still was. Also see Butler, ‘The Origins of the Honour of Richmond and its Castles’ about Roald and the Rollo family’s position in the honour of Richmond. 157  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 184–85, 179, 290–91, 474; Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, pp. 38–40; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iii, 585; Liber cartarum sancte crucis, ed. by Innes, p. 19; Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, pp. 67, 90–91, 194–201. Gunnilda brought into the marriage an estate at Torpenhow in west Cumberland as part of her dower. Her father, Waltheof, was the greatgrandfather of Christina and of Galiene of Inverkeithing who married Alain de Lascelles and Philip de Moubray, respectively. 158  Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis, ed. by Pitcairn, p. 18; Oram, ‘A Family Business?, pp. 117–18. 159  Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iii, 584–85; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, i, 59; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, ii, 15; Early Scottish Charters, ed. by Lawrie, p. 46; Liber de S. Marie de Calchou, ed. by Innes, i, 234; Chronicle of Melrose Abbey, i: Introduction and Facsimile, ed. by Broun and Harrison, 8; Chartulary of the Cistercian Priory of Coldstream, ed. by Rogers, pp. 6, 18. They were cousins once removed.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

321

The colonization of Galloway and Uchtred’s continuing support of AngloFrench families in the region had become problematic by the end of the war.160 Uchtred had been advancing Anglo-French lords in the region to the detriment of traditional claims as can be seen with his adamant support of a grant of land at Kirkgunzeon to Walter de Berkeley against a former grant of the land to Holm Cultram Abbey.161 By 1175, relations had broken down between the Galwegian brothers, which forced the King of Scots to return after the tournament to put down the rebellion, but not before Gilbert was able to kill his brother. As a result of the murder, Gilbert was forced to do homage to Henry II in 1176 and the King of England took the opportunity to weaken the Scottish King’s position when he upheld Gilbert’s complaint and ordered that the foreigners in Galloway go into exile or face capital punishment.162 Henry II humiliatingly undermined William in Scotland, but if William was disturbed by the King of England’s conduct he hid it well. King William returned to the King’s court at Winchester in 1177 under a military summons for service in Normandy, the intent of which was to seize Berry from the French King.163 He may even have accompanied the King to Normandy and served against his old ally, Louis VII, as a show of faith in recognition of the new state of political affairs.164 Likewise, Henry’s demand that the King of Scots fight for him on the Continent against Louis exposed a vulnerability in Henry’s position. Despite the outward display of superiority, from 1173 onward the kings of England were to have an entirely new respect for the seriousness of the threat that the kings of Scots posed if allied with France. For this reason, it would have made a powerful statement to Louis if he saw his former Scottish ally on the other side of the battlefield. This new attitude towards the Scots was to form the basis for a more amicable relationship between the English and Scottish crowns as Henry II’s problems with his sons became more acute.

160 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 147–48, 179, 184–85, 192, 214, 291, 417, 443–44, 474. King William protected the Galwegian inheritance for Uchtred’s son, Roland, after Uchtred died. 161  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 290–91, 474. 162  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 126. 163  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 167, 178. In 1177, Henry II was trying to obtain control of Berry, which Louis VII had taken into his hands after the death of its lord. 164  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 178; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 97.

322

Chapter 6

The Fate of Duchess Margaret Although Henry II had in many ways strengthened his overlordship in western France over the previous three decades, the duchy of Brittany was to remain a threat. Henry’s inability to tame the Bretons was not only to remain a thorn in his side but also that of his sons and successors, Richard and John. In fact, one of the key reasons John lost Normandy and Anjou in 1204 was because of the Breton situation but none of John’s predecessors had been able to completely control the territory either. Time and again Henry faced opposition in the duchy and the conclusion of the war in 1174 proved no different from previous attempts to pacify the native Breton lords. Cracks in Henry’s overlordship of Brittany based on his son’s betrothal to the heiress began to appear within three years of Falaise.165 Immediately after Falaise, the King had tried to limit Breton patriotism by remarrying his rebel son’s future mother-in-law, Duchess Margaret, to Humphrey IV de Bohun, Lord of Carentan in the Cotentin and constable of England.166 Margaret had probably been active in rallying support against Henry during the war so the King could not trust leaving her in charge of his son and the heiress of Brittany, Constance. After the Bohun marriage, Margaret either chose not or was not allowed to visit her daughter until sometime between 1187 and 1199, at least six years after the death of her second husband and possibly during the divorce of her daughter from her second husband Earl Ranulf III of Chester. Mother and daughter did not appear to meet again for at least another thirteen years and when they did encounter each other it was on Breton soil at Jugon-les-Lacs, southeast of Saint-Brieuc.167 Henry had been clever in his dealing with Margaret. Imprisoning Margaret indefinitely would have threatened the fragile peace he had negotiated with her Scottish brother. His decision to marry her to Humphrey de Bohun united her with one of the most loyal and highly regarded men in his kingdom, and as such Humphrey was entrusted with ‘controlling’ Margaret and her influence at 165 

Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 19–20. Pipe Roll of 20 Henry II, pp. 135–36; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 19; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 444–45, 476. A grant was made by William I of Scotland to his sister, Duchess Margaret of Brittany, of 100 librates of land and twenty infeft knights as ‘tocher’ for her second marriage to Humphrey de Bohun, which included the estate of Ratho in West Lothian. 167  Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 66–67; M. Jones, ‘La vie familiale de la Duchesse Constance’, pp. 350–52. 166 

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

323

the Scottish and Breton courts. He was keeping her close to the Angevin cause while not completely divorcing her from her family. Humphrey was no stranger to the Scots. Between 1167 and 1181, he witnessed for the King with several prominent Anglo-French lords who were involved with the Scots.168 He was part of the Anglo-French networks that extended into Scotland and his family also had several Breton contacts in England by virtue of the Dol settlements in Herefordshire and Gloucestershire where he held his English fees.169 For Margaret, although her second marriage did not bring her more impressive titles, she produced children who were favoured because of her husband. Their daughter, Maud, was betrothed to Juhel II de Mayenne, one of the men who rebelled in 1173 and who can be found serving Henry in the 1180s when the marriage was negotiated. The hope would have been that the union of these families would ensure Mayenne support of the King particularly since Juhel’s lordship was in Maine, an area like Brittany that the King found challenging to control.170 The marriage of Humphrey and Margaret’s second daughter, Margaret, also had the potential to be politically advantageous. In 1183, Henry II promised Margaret to Pedro de Lara of Castile in marriage. This betrothal was probably influenced and even encouraged by Henry’s daughter, Eleanor, and her 168 

Chartes originales de Henri II, ed. by Salter, p. 29; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 7, 15, 57, 73, 254, 541, 542, 576; ii, 12, 23, 70, 85, 114, 120, 131, 162, 205, 207–08, 215; Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, ed. by Barraclough, pp. 68–69, 85–87, 119–21. Humphrey witnessed for the King alongside men who held lands or had familial stems in Scotland like Saher de Quincy the elder, Constable Richard du Hommet, and his son, William, Richard de Lucy, William de Vescy, Robert de Stuteville, and his son William, and once alongside Geoffrey, Duke of Brittany. He also witnessed for Earl Ranulf IV of Chester in the 1140s and 1150s with William de Colville, Hugh de Longchamp, Hugh de St Pol, Gilbert de l’Aigle, and William de Percy. 169  Keats-Rohan, ‘The Bretons and Normans of England’, pp. 66–69. 170  Feet of Fines of the Reign of Henry  II, pp.  99–100; London, Public Record Office, MS C 115/77 [Magnum Registrum of Lanthony Secunda], fol. 25; D. Richardson, ‘New Light on the Family of Margaret of Scotland’; Evans, ‘Margaret of Scotland’, p. 188. The Feet of Fines, which describes a transaction concerning Newington for Matilda, or Maud, de Bohun, and her husband ‘Juhell de Mee’ is a damaged copy so it is uncertain but likely that ‘Juhell de Mee’ was Juhel de Mayenne. Juhel, son of the 1166 rebel, Geoffrey de Mayenne, was mainly loyal to Henry II in the 1180s but he would turn against Richard I and support the Breton rebels in the mid-1190s. If he did marry Maud, she must have died soon thereafter for he had married Gervasia de Dinan-Vitré by c. 1189. Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 97, 612–13, ii, 1369, 1427: He held lands in Devonshire at Blaketort and Nymet. His half-sister, Matilda, also may have married a Vitré: La Maison de Laval, ed. by de Broussillon, i, 120.

324

Chapter 6

husband Alfonso VIII of Castile for Alfonso was Pedro’s overlord.171 Henry had already been instrumental in arranging a peace settlement between the kings of Castile and Navarre in 1177, which was witnessed by his son, Count Geoffrey of Brittany, and by King William of Scotland’s cousin, Earl Robert III of Leicester.172 This contact between Henry, the Bohuns, and the Beaumonts probably also paved the way for another marital union involving the Scots. The men involved in the 1177 and 1183 negotiations with Navarre and Castile were also familiar with the King of Scots and with Ermengarde de Beaumont (-sur-Sarthe), King William’s future wife. As well as being King Henry’s kinswoman, Ermengarde, was related to the l’Aigle family, who had already made a marital alliance with the royal house of Navarre.173 The l’AigleNavarre match was important because the son of this match, King Sancho VI of Navarre, married a sister of Alfonso VIII of Castile in 1157 as part of a movement to end hostilities between the two Iberian rulers. It is possible that the l’Aigle kinship with the house of Navarre and with King Henry II’s cousin, Richard de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe (Ermengarde’s father), influenced the subsequent Scottish marriage with the Beaumonts-sur Sarthe in 1186 particularly since Richard’s brother, Bishop Ralph de Beaumont of Angers, witnessed the marriage agreement in 1183 between Margaret de Bohun and Count Pedro. The reasons for Henry’s interest in brokering the Bohun-Castilian marriage were political. By c. 1186, Margaret, ‘sanguinee’ of King Henry of England, was 171 

R.  Walker, ‘Leonor of England’; Labande, ‘Les filles d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine:étude Comparative’, pp. 107–09. 172  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 58–60; Cf. Corral, ‘Alfonso VIII of Castile’s Territorial Litigation’ about negotiations. 173  See Chapter 7 about Lucy of Quelaines, mother of Ermengarde, and the daughter of Richer III de l’Aigle. Daniel Power has some doubts about Lucy’s lineage and suggests that Odeline, Richer  III de l’Aigle’s wife, was a half-sister of Richard de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe. Odeline could not have been the wife of Richer III and her half-brother the husband of their niece so only one of these marriages must have taken place but in either case the two families were related. Thompson, ‘The Lords of l’Aigle’, pp. 177–99; Power, Norman Frontier, pp. 482, 487. Marguerite de l’Aigle married Garcia Ramirez of Navarre (the grandson of the legendary El Cid, Roderigo Diaz) after 1130 and their son, Sancho VI, subsequently became King of Navarre. Sancho VI married, Sancha, a daughter of King Alfonso VII of Castile and of Léon in 1157. Sancho and Alfonso fought against each other, despite the marital alliance between them, until Henry II arbitrated this peace settlement in 1177. Henry’s success with the two families meant that the 1180s marked a period of amicable relations between the two kings and Henry was still in the midst of the Navarre-Castilian networks because of the 1170 marriage of his daughter to Alfonso VIII of Castile.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

325

officially married to Count Pedro de Lara of Castile.174 The original prenuptial arrangement had been made in January 1183, only days within the decision of Henry’s sons, Young Henry and Geoffrey, to detach themselves from Henry’s court.175 The two brothers were plotting a rebellion against their father and their brother, Richard, and they allied with King Philip Augustus of France, who had succeeded his father in 1179. Raymond V, Count of Toulouse, also joined Henry’s sons in response to Henry II and Richard’s interference in his territories and their meddling in the networks that he had formed with families in southern France, of which the Bohun-Castile marriage was just another example. Meanwhile, King Philip had managed to alienate several leading families in the south, like the Trencavels and Ermengarde of Narbonne, by either openly granting their lands to others or by failing to protect them from their enemies.176 It was for this reason that Henry was able to arrange the marriage of Pedro de Lara, who also happened to be Ermengarde of Narbonne’s nephew, to Margaret de Bohun in 1183 for Ermengarde had been a staunch Capetian loyalist before this date. 174 

Llanos Salazar y Castro, Historia genealogica de la casa de Lara, iii, 15–17. London, Public Record Office, MS  C  115/77 [Magnum Registrum of Lanthony Secunda], fol. 25; D. Richardson, ‘New Light on the Family of Margaret of Scotland’; Evans, ‘Margaret of Scotland’, pp. 188–91. My special thanks to Judith Everard for sharing this information with me and for putting me into contact with Douglas Richardson, who allowed me to see his unpublished argument. Richardson convincingly argues that it was the daughter Margaret not mother, Margaret, who had married Pedro. Cf. Evans about the significance of Pedro’s background and former marriages to a daughter of King Garcia Ramirez of Navarre and of Marguerite de l’Aigle. Margaret de Bohun was given dower lands at Andaluz, Molina and Agusin (Agustines?) to hold if she died after him. The charter was dated 1221 in Anjou but this was a mistake. The kings of England no longer held Anjou and the witnesses date the charter to no later than 1186. Among the witnesses of this marriage arrangement were also the young Margaret’s future great-uncle by marriage, Ralph de Beaumont (sur-Sarthe) Bishop of Angers. Ralph’s niece would marry the King of Scotland in 1186. 176  Cheyette, Ermengard of Narbonne, pp. 333–35; Ex Chronico Gaufredi prioris Vosiensis, in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xviii, 211–18. The main source from the south about these events was Geoffrey of Vigeois, who was from Limousin. A lot of fighting in the south occurred between King Henry and the Count of Toulouse in the 1180s so the marriage of Constance’s half-sister, Margaret de Bohun, was probably negotiated to clinch Narbonnaise support for Henry. Also see Monumenta Vizeliacensia, ed. by Huygens, pp. 235–39 on Hugh of Poitier, a monk of Vezelay, who provided a description of the house of the count of Nevers. This is the same house as that of Robert the Burgundian. Robert’s great-aunt was Countess of Poitou. His grandson may have been the Robert the Burgundian in Scottish witness lists mentioned in Chapter 2. 175 

326

Chapter 6

Count Pedro was well-connected not only to the royal family of Castile but also to families in southern France. His brother, Aimery de Lara, had been adopted by their aunt, Ermengarde of Narbonne, as her son and heir,177 and Pedro himself briefly flirted with taking over control of Narbonne for his aunt, which he did do against her will in 1193.178 The date of 1193 is also interesting for another reason. Ermengarde’s reputation had extended into the Orkneys for she was the recipient of love poetry written to her by ‘Prince’ Rögnvald Kali when he was invited to visit the ‘queen’ at Narbonne on his way to Jerusalem in the 1150s.179 Rögnvald was known for introducing a new Europeanized courtly style into scaldic poetry, and may have been influenced by contact with Ermengarde and her court. Ermengarde was one of the three most recognized women in France for promoting love poetry.180 This twelfth-century fascination with the relationship between Narbonne and Scandinavia appeared in the 1180s in an altered state in Robert of Torigni’s De Ortu Waluuanii nepotis Arturi when Gawain, the son of the King of Norway’s nephew, was shipwrecked as a child near Narbonne.181 Somehow these different 177  D. Richardson, ‘New Light on the Family of Margaret of Scotland’; Evans, ‘Margaret of Scotland’, pp. 188–91; Bezzola, Les origines et la Formation de la Littérature Courtoise, ii, 334–35. Pedro’s brother was Ermengarde of Narbonne’s adopted son and both were her nephews through her sister. 178  Cheyette, Ermengard of Narbonne, pp. 23–24, 274–76, 338–41. 179  Caille, ‘Une idylle entre la viscountess Ermengarde de Narbonne’; Bibire, ‘The Poetry of Earl Rognvald’s Court’; La Saga des Orcadiens, ed. by Renaud, pp. 199–204, 206; Orkneyinga Saga, ed. and trans. by Pálsson and Edwards, pp. 147–53, 190, 194. The Orkneying account was based on an eye-witness account from Rögnvald and his retinue of poets but the work was not written until c. 1192 to 1200. Rögnvald was an enemy of the King of Scots because of support he was receiving in the Isles from King Eystein of Norway against King David’s agent in the north, Earl Maddad of Atholl, who was married to Margaret, daughter of Håkon Paulsson, Earl of Orkney. This struggle continued later in the century under their son, Harald Maddadson, who was also a source of trouble for the King of Scots. 180  La Saga des Orcadiens, ed. by Renaud, pp. 199–02, 206; Caille, ‘Une idylle entre la viscountess Ermengarde de Narbonne’, pp. 229–33. Andreas Capellanus named Ermengarde as one of the three judges on courtly love along with Marie de Champagne and her mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine: Andreas Capellanus, De Amore Libri Tres, ed. by Trojel, Chaps VII–XXI, pp. 270–95; McCash, ‘Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine’, pp. 708–11. Evidence also indicates that French romances were known in the Isles through contact with Europe and through the crusades by the beginning of the thirteenth century. 181  Rise of Gawain, ed. and trans. by Leake Day, pp. xiii–xxii, 5. There is still a debate as to whether Torigni was the author of this work but the argument does seem to favour that he was. Torigni had openly altered the genealogy of Gawain in De Ortu from that of the earlier Scottish

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

327

accounts of the meeting gestated separately since the Orkney account, written c. 1192 to 1200, was probably the product of Norwegian and local Orkneyan interest in canonizing the Earl in 1192.182 The timing may be coincidental but Ermengarde’s own status was under serious threat from her nephew, Pedro de Lara, in 1192/93 and there is an episode in the Sagas in which Rögnvald besieged and fought a tyrant in Galicia in order to protect Ermengarde.183

Geoffrey, Duke of Brittany, and the Scots Henry II’s attempts throughout his life to use the marriage market as a means of controlling the political community failed in the case of Brittany probably because he underestimated his son’s character and the continuing support of families in the duchy. The marriage of Margaret to Humphrey resolved only one factional cluster in Brittany and didn’t address the issue of Henry’s son’s interests. It has been assumed that Brittany’s support in the 1173 rebellion was part of the general movement stemming from Louis VII’s encouragement of Henry II’s sons against him. Although this may partly be true, it is also very possible that Geoffrey of Brittany was also involved on behalf of his wife, Constance, and his wife’s uncle, William I of Scotland. Geoffrey was fifteen years old in 1173, a year older than his father had been when he led his first campaign against King Stephen. Although father and son patched their differences after the war, Henry’s failure to recognize his son’s coming of age continued to cause problems.184 As late as 1183, at age twentyfour and two years after he had married the heiress, Geoffrey was still not origin of the hero found in William of Malmesbury. 182  McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, pp. 73–78. There was certainly Icelandic interest in the 1190s in promoting the image of Rögnvald Kali, who had been canonized in 1192. The decision by the author of the poem, who was probably from the Southern Isles, may have been informed by Rögnvald’s rival and successor’s fall from favour in the Norwegian court in 1193. The Orkneyan claim of a negotiated marriage between Ermengarde and Rögnvald was, however, unlikely since Ermengarde was still married to Bernard of Anduze in the 1150s: Caille, ‘Une idylle entre la viscountess Ermengarde de Narbonne’, pp. 229–33. 183  Orkneyinga Saga, ed. and trans. by Pálsson and Edwards, pp. 149–55; Cheyette, Ermen­ gard of Narbonne, pp. 338–43. 184  Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 50. Judith Everard asserts that there was no evidence of Geoffrey’s involvement in the 1173 revolt other than his presence at King Louis’ court. Contemporary chroniclers mention that he was involved and he was forced to submit to his father in 1174. He was not mentioned as leading the rebellion though. Louis was granted that honour.

328

Chapter 6

granted the honour of Richmond and he was not given control of Nantes until 1185.185 Even within Brittany, Geoffrey was only allowed to exercise jurisdiction in the counties of Rennes, Cornuaille, Broërec and Léon as of 1181.186 Geoffrey was frustrated with his position. He had spent most of his time after 1175 in Brittany among his Breton lords, albeit under the watchful eyes of his father’s administrators.187 As Duke of Brittany, he had to identify his interests with those of his Breton lords. His independence and future livelihood depended on the acceptance of his lordship. Therefore, the period from 1181 to 1186 was perhaps less about Angevin rule in the duchy and more about Duke Geoffrey’s drive to rule independently and to win the loyalty of its fiercely nationalistic inhabitants. For this reason, Geoffrey exhibited a penchant for revolt whenever the opportunity presented itself and he did not lose sight of his wife’s Scottish family. Before Geoffrey married Constance in July 1181, King Henry had summoned King William of Scotland and his brother, Lord David, to his court in Normandy in order to discuss the election dispute over the bishopric of St Andrews.188 David and William attended the King of England in April or May 1181 in Normandy,189 and they were at Gisors in July with Henry.190 In the summer of 1181, while the negotiations were taking place about the St Andrew’s appointment, King William may also have attended his niece’s wedding to Geoffrey before returning with Henry to England.191 In order to 185 

Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 24. Records refer to Duke Conan as the Lord of the honour of Richmond in Yorkshire as late as 1183, over ten years after his death and two years after Geoffrey was made Duke of Brittany. 186  Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 128. 187  Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 7–10; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 95, 99–122. The itinerary of Geoffrey, insofar as we know it, indicates that Geoffrey spent nearly all of his time in Brittany between 1166 and 1187 except for the equivalent of two years. 188  Chronica de Mailros, pp. 88–91. The conflict had been continuing since 1178 between the pope’s candidate, John the Scot, and King William’s choice, his chaplain Hugh. 189  Chronica de Mailros, p. 91; Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 240. 190  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 97; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 277. William returned with Henry to England in late July. 191  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 276–77; Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 238–39, 241–42. King William had to return home because news had probably reached him about Donald MacWilliam’s rebellion in Moray. According to Howden, King William returned with Henry from Cherbourg to

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

329

honour his guests and the half-Scottish, half-Breton bride, Henry may even have hired Chrétien de Troyes to write or rework his romance Erec and Enide.192 The romance was intended to glorify the Scots and Bretons in a mythic past, and Chrétien enveloped the image of the Scots in a romantic ideal, which his Continental and Breton audience would have appreciated.193 Erec was, after all, another version of the name of the celebrated Breton chief, Waroc.194 It might even be suggested that Henry II’s interest in building his own image alongside the Arthurian literature at his court influenced his daughter-in-law to make her own claim to the mythical hero of Britain’s past. Constance flagrantly named her son by Geoffrey ‘Arthur’, a name that had no precedent in Brittany.195 Portsmouth on 26 July. William was also not mentioned as having been present at the tournament at Lagny with his brother. 192  It has been argued that Erec and Enide was written for the 1169 Christmas court at Nantes when Geoffrey received the homage of the Breton barons but if one is to try to argue from historical events 1169 is too early. I would suggest that Chrétien conflated events that included the 1169 Christmas feast at Nantes and the marriage of 1181, which would explain the differences listed by Carroll and would account for not only the prominent presence of Scots in the poem but would elucidate why the French were considered the enemy in the poem (in January 1169 Louis and Henry had made peace that held until 1173). Scholarly research suggests that many of Chrétien’s works were indeed written in the 1180s not the 1160s. Luttrell, The Creation of the First Arthurian Romance, pp. 26–46; Hunt, ‘Redating Chrétien de Troyes’; Jaeger, The Origins of Courtliness, p. 206. See recent study by Andrew Taylor, ‘Was There a Song of Roland’, pp. 56–65 concerning the intent and performance of Romances in wedding celebrations. Taylor’s argument that Chanson de Geste and Romances were broken up into short pieces and performed as segments supports the idea that these works were probably ever evolving over time in much the same way that earlier poetry like Y Gododdin went through an evolutionary process: Evans, The Heroic Poetry of Dark-Age Britain, pp. 31–34. Therefore, the manuscript as it survives represents only one spatial-time snapshot of the work. Misrahi, ‘More Light on the Chronology of Chrétien de Troyes?’, pp. 89–101; Dronke, ‘Peter of Blois and Poetry at the court of Henry II’, p. 188. 193  Pollock, ‘The Lion Rampant’; Owen, William the Lion, pp. 114–53; Rickard, Britain in Medieval French Literature, pp. 66, 112–15, 130–31, 137, 206–21, 247. Anne Sutton also discusses wealth and imagery in romances briefly but argues the mythical mantle was based on the wedding mantle of Henry II’s daughter, Joan, whereas I suggest it could also refer to the marriage of Geoffrey and Constance especially because of the Scottish focus in this section of the poem. Sutton, ‘Mercery through Four Centuries’, pp. 105–06. Also see Chrétien’s Cliges. Cliges is possibly later than Erec and also has Scottish references: Les Romans de Chrétien de Troyes: Cligés, ed. by Micha, p. 45, l. 1463; p. 73, l. 2390; Bezzola, Les origines et la Formation de la Littérature Courtoise, ii, 387–90. 194  Lot, ‘Études sur la provenance du cycle arthurien’, pp. 11–12. 195  Pollock, ‘Duchesses and Devils’, pp. 166–69.

330

Chapter 6

After the wedding celebration, a jousting tournament was held at Lagnysur-Marne, which was attended by King William’s brother, Lord David, and his household knights, William Revel,196 John de St Michael, and Walter of Ely (Ely was part of the honour of Huntingdon), and possibly by his nephew, Robert de Londres, and Robert de Quincy, justiciar of Scotland.197 Some of the men who accompanied David to Lagny were Anglo-French, particularly William Revel and John de St Michael. William Revel was probably a brother of the Scottish Lord, Henry Revel, who held estates at Balmerino and Coultra.198 William’s early career in the Scottish court won him a toft in Montrose before 1195 and he witnessed a charter for William de Felstede between 1174 and 1188 concerning lands in Pendebury.199 The St Michaels did not appear in Scotland until the reign of William and they may have come directly from Bayeux. William de St Michael appeared as a witness in Lord David of Huntingdon’s grant of Monorgan to the nephew of the Bishop of Caithness in 1172 at Markinch and in other charters in Scotland until 1174.200 He was also one of the men sent on the embassy to the French royal court in 1173 by King William and he continued to witness charters for the Scottish King.201 He was probably the same Leicestershire landowner who owed debts to Saher de Quincy in the 1190s.202 The tournament at Lagny, which was immortalized by the famous trouvère, Huon d’Oisy, presented David with the opportunity to mingle with 196 

Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 167, 235, 237–39, 281 n. 32. History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 234–36, ll. 4607–44; Painter, William Marshal, pp. 44–46; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 202, 453, 479. It is unclear if the ‘Sire Robert de Wancy’ named at the tournament was a misspelling for Quincy. Young Henry had a great number of knights with him for the festivities and his brother Geoffrey performed well in the tournament: History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 250, ll. 4919–23. 198  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 219–20, 222–23. 199  Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 167, 235, 237–39, 281 n. 32. He appears alongside Richard, Bishop of Winchester, John de Vaux, and Thomas de St Michael, the latter who was probably related to John, Roger, and William de St Michael. 200  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, i, 147. The Norman St Michaels were settled within the diocese of Bayeux in the late twelfth century. 201  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 453, 479; Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Innes, p. 6. 202  Pipe Rolls of 5 Richard, p. 161; Pipe Rolls of 6 Richard, pp. 179, 182; Pipe Rolls of 7 Richard, pp. 115, 117, 185; Pipe Rolls of 8 Richard, pp. 48, 292; Pipe Rolls of 9 Richard, p. 161. He later owed King Richard ‘pro defectu’, for defecting, in 1198 in Leicestershire: Pipe Rolls of 10 Richard, pp. 153, 168. 197 

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

331

other Anglo-French lords like Geoffrey Plantagenet and his brother, Count Richard of Poitou.203 He may also have met his niece, Constance of Brittany, William de Tinteniac and Harduins de Fougères from Brittany, and Robert de Dreux, Baldwin de Béthune, William de Cayeux, Enguerrand de Fiennes, William Marshal, and Robert de Stuteville.204 David was impressed enough by the Anglo-French and French scene to stay longer in France. After the tournament finished, he attended an inquest into the dispute over the rights that Marmoutier Abbey claimed over the priory of Léhon, located just south of Dinan, that his niece’s husband, Geoffrey of Brittany, tried to resolve at Chinon in 1182.205 Other important men were also with David at Chinon including Henry, Duke of Saxony,206 Gervase Paynel, and Stephen, seneschal of Anjou.207 David was interested in developing his status abroad. He was already familiar with Gervase Paynel because Gervase had married Isabel de Beaumont, the sister of Earl Robert III of Leicester, and she was the widow of Simon  II de Senlis, David’s half-brother.208 His involvement with other members of Henry’s entourage brought him further prestige and provided new contacts at court; but while David was experiencing the life of a nobleman in

203 

Dyggvy, ‘Personnages historiques firgurant’. History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 234–36, ll. 4607–44. 205  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 225; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 441; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 689. This dispute was about Saint-Magloire’s rights to the priory at Léhon. 206  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 441. Henry is the father of the future Imperial candidate, Otto, who will be discussed in a marriage arrangement with Margaret of Scotland, daughter of King William, in 1195. See Chapter 7. Henry of Saxony did not go into exile to King Henry’s court and leave Saxony until August 1182, meaning that the Chinon charter must be dated to late 1182: Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 248. 207  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 441; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, iv, 191. Gervase’s father was Ralph Paynel of Dudley and his mother may have been a daughter of Robert de Ferrières, Earl of Derby. The reason for this supposition was that Ralph and his son, Gervase, held Greenham of the Earls of Derby in maritagium: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, ii, 864. Ralph’s sister, Agnes, had also been married to Robert I de Brus: Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, iv, 268. Their cousin, Fulk II of Hambye, married Agatha du Hommet, sister of Constable William du Hommet, and Fulk II of Hambye and Bréhal’s brother, William, may have married Eleanor de Vitré: Ex Chronico Savigniacensis Monasterii, in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xviii, 351; Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, iii, 21–24. 208  Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, vii, 530. 204 

332

Chapter 6

France, King William was forced to return to Scotland because of the outbreak of a rebellion against him led by the MacWilliam family.209 The King of Scots’ hasty departure cut short his intention to resolve the dispute over the bishopric of St Andrews so before he left France he appointed an embassy led by Bishop Joscelin of Glasgow, Abbot Arnold of Melrose, and Abbot Osbert of Kelso to go to Rome to lift the interdict and excommunication against him.210 His kingdom had been laid under interdict by Pope Alexander III for his refusal to support the papal candidate, John the Scot, at St Andrews but Pope Alexander’s death in 1181 had presented the King with an opportunity to apply to the new pope, Lucius III, for leniency. The request was successful. The interdict and excommunication were lifted and Pope Lucius sent Roland, Bishopelect of Dol, and Silvan, Abbot of Rievaulx, to settle the dispute between Hugh and John the Scot over the bishopric of St Andrews.211 The Pope also sent the golden rose to King William in March 1183 as an act of good faith.212 King William was being honourably received by his Continental peers. Although he did not hold land in Normandy, the King of Scots was recognized as a member of the European elite, a position that Henry II had learned to help foster at his own court to sweeten relations with the northern kingdom. Henry’s change in policy worked to his advantage in the 1180s and kept the 209  Chronica de Mailros, pp. 89–90, 95–96; Oram, ‘David I and the Conquest of Moray’, p. 10. William and his brother had led an army into Ross in 1179 and strengthened two castles: Redcastle and Dunscath. Donald MacWilliam may not have had any trouble within two years finding allies as the King of Scots asserted his position in Ross. This rebellion was the first led by the MacWilliams descended from King Malcolm III’s offspring from his first marriage to Ingeborg of Orkney. Donald was the son of William fitzDuncan mentioned in Chapter 2. Donald may have felt he had a claim to the earldom of Moray through his father and perhaps even a claim to the throne. His grandfather had been King of Scotland in 1094. William’s son, Donald, led a rebellion in 1181 that was quite serious and took six years for the King to put down. Roland of Galloway’s role in the capture and beheading of Donald demonstrated the degree to which the Lord of Galloway was trusted by the King of Scots. Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 277–78. Cf. Crawford and Taylor, ‘The Southern Frontier of Norse Settlement’ for an interesting examination of the tension between the Norse, Gaels, and Anglo-French in Ross and Sutherland. Ross, ‘Moray, Ulster, and the MacWilliams’, pp. 30–34. 210  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 286–87. 211  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 286–87, 289–90; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 268. It is interesting that a Breton bishop was sent and also that he was the Bishop-elect of Dol. The seneschal of Dol was related by marriage to King William’s steward, Alan, son of Walter. Alan’s cousin, Alan, had died in c. 1180 leaving only a daughter. The seneschalship was passed to her husband, Guillaume Spina. 212  Chronica de Mailros, p. 92.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

333

King of Scots out of the rebellions led by King Philip of France and Henry’s sons despite that William’s Breton niece and her husband were often at the forefront of opposition to the King. Breton politics once again took centre stage in the animosities fostered against Henry II after the wedding of Geoffrey and Constance. Within months of marrying Constance and acceding to the comté of Brittany, Geoffrey alienated his father’s counsellors at Rennes. Although he made peace with his father within a year, Geoffrey allied with his brother Henry in January 1183 against their brother, Richard, and their father. They may also have been aided by their old friend, King William’s cousin, Earl Robert de Beaumont, whose lands were confiscated in the spring of 1183, and by Robert’s brother-in-law, the Earl of Gloucester.213 Gloucester’s lands at Saint-Scolasse and Beaumont’s lands in the honour of Bréteuil were attacked by Henry II in 1183 possibly because of support they were giving Young Henry and Geoffrey.214 Although Lord David of Huntingdon was witnessing with Gervase Paynel, Beaumont’s brother-in-law, in late 1182 at Chinon, within months or even weeks of the rebellion, the signs were already there that the Scottish brothers had become wary of taking up arms against the 1174 victor. They did not openly declare for Geoffrey and Young Henry when relations broke down with Henry II in 1183. Presumably if they had considered an alliance, they probably prudently waited to see in which direction the advantage lay and they made the right decision. This revolt was quite serious but it ended abruptly with Young Henry’s death on 11 June 1183.215 It must be noted that one of the reasons why the revolt was so serious was because of the military support the brothers were receiving in the south, which was reinforced by Young Henry’s patronage of writers. His advancement of southern writers undermined his father’s image during the rebellion for at least one of his supporters, Bertrand de Born, claimed that Henry II was even still struggling in the early 1180s to hold Cumberland.216 213 

Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 294. Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 294; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 402. I suggest that they were attacked because of support they gave to the rebels. Power suggests it was because of a dispute over Bristol castle. I would suggest that if the conflict was just about Bristol, Bristol would have been the primary target not the Continental lands. 215  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 233; Annales de Aqui­­ cinctensis Monasterii, in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xviii, 536. 216  Bertrand de Born, L’Amour et la guerre, ed. and trans. by Gouiran, Sirventes 14, pp. 208–09, ll. 17–20. 214 

334

Chapter 6

The Scottish King, however, had found Henry to be amenable over the past decade. Rather than aligning himself with the rebels, William remained loyal to Henry, which changed his own agenda concerning Continental networks. He looked to Henry to arrange his marriage, and in the summer of 1184, he met with Henry in England to discuss a possible marriage with Maud of Saxony, daughter of Henry of Saxony and granddaughter of Henry II.217 This marriage may have been discussed between Henry, and King William’s brother, David, as early as 1182 at Chinon when the two men were together at Henry’s court but in the end the marriage never took place. Henry II preferred a marriage alliance with his Mançeau cousin’s daughter, Ermengarde de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, and once again the Scots found themselves part of a kin group that extended into Brittany. Ermengarde’s uncle, William, was married to the heiress of Roland de Rieux before 1168 and he gained the important barony of Rieux, formerly separated from the comital domain of the Vannetais held by Alain the Great.218 King William’s marriage to Ermengarde strengthened relations between the kingdoms. Ermengarde de Beaumont was from a family who had proven to be extraordinarily loyal to Henry II. In the midst of the 1183 attacks, Ermengarde’s uncle, Bishop Ralph de Beaumont of Angers, was responsible for informing on those in his diocese who had joined the attack;219 indeed, Ralph had specifically been elevated to this strategically important bishopric because of his family’s loyalty and kinship to the King. In 1173, Ralph’s mother or sister-in-law, the viscountess de Beaumont, had fulfilled her obligations to Henry II from her Devonshire lands.220 Henry II 217  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, i, 322; Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 268. The marriage was denied on the grounds of consanguinity. The grandfather of King William, David I, was the brother of Matilda, Maud of Saxony’s great-great-grandmother. André Du Chesne, Histoire genealogique des maisons de Guines, pp. 219–20: In about 1203, Maud would later marry Enguerrand III de Coucy, father of Queen Marie de Coucy of Scotland. Maud of Saxony was the sister of Otto of Saxony, who will be discussed in the following chapter in the negotiations for a Scottish marriage alliance with King William’s daughter. 218  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 235, 348–49; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 52; Tonnerre, Naissance de la Bretagne, pp. 9, 156, 191, 312, 317, 355–56, 498–500. The barony was just north of the Vilaine river on the route to Redon and was strategically important for communication between Vannes and Nantes. 219  Ecclesia Andegavensis, in Gallia Christiana, xiv: Ubi de provincia Turonensi agitur, ed. by de Sainte-Marthe and Hauréau, 571. 220  Pipe Roll of 20 Henry II, p. 65. The Pipe Roll only mentions the viscountess de Beaumont fulfilled her obligations, not whether she was Ralph’s sister-in-law or mother.

William, Henry, and the End of the Great War

335

would also seek refuge with his Beaumont cousin, Richard, during the crisis with his eldest son, Count Richard of Poitou in 1189, three years after he had arranged the marriage of Richard’s daughter, Ermengarde, to the King of Scots. The Scottish King had made a very striking political decision by choosing a wife so embroiled in Angevin loyalties. It is clear that the King of Scots’ policy towards Henry II had changed by 1183, and he did not support Henry’s sons on the Continent. With peace having been made with his father by 1184, Geoffrey made his only known trip to England to administer his lands in Richmond and to meet with his father though his wife did not appear to accompany him.221 During this trip, Geoffrey came into contact once again with William’s brother, David ‘the Scot’, but Geoffrey was not interested in making an alliance with the Scots at this time. By 1185, Geoffrey was exercising lordship in Brittany and consolidating his administration more stringently than his predecessors. He was also vying against his brother, Richard, to succeed to the English throne. All of Geoffrey’s hopes for his succession were demolished in March 1186 when Henry acknowledged his son, Richard, as his heir. Henry II had, in the meantime, further neutralized any threat of alliance between the Scots and Bretons by handing back to King William the earldom of Huntingdon at the same time that Geoffrey began to plot another rebellion with King Philip of France against Richard and Henry.222 This time it was Geoffrey’s death that ended the war before it had begun.223 Throughout the conflict between Geoffrey, Richard, and Henry II, Henry decisively maintained good relations with the King of Scots. The timing of the wedding arrangement between William and Ermengarde was important. Geoffrey of Brittany had died only three weeks before while planning another rebellion. William’s marriage to Ermengarde ensured William’s neutrality and prevented William from entertaining any ideas about interfering in Breton affairs on behalf of his niece. The King and his bride were honoured by the gift of Woodstock as the venue for their wedding and Henry II even personally attended the festivities.224 This marriage was also accompanied by several 221 

Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 16–17. Geoffrey confirmed a grant to the abbey of St Mary in Kirkstead Lincolnshire in November/December 1184 at Winchester. 222  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 235. 223  Chronica de Mailros, p.  94; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 41; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 235. 224  Owen, William the Lion, p. 72.

336

Chapter 6

gifts from Henry II including the resumption of tenureship of Edinburgh castle along with land worth one hundred merks and forty knights’ fees, which the King of Scots in turn may have granted to Ermengarde.225 At this point, Scottish-Breton relations waned despite ongoing prob­­lems Constance faced in the duchy because of Henry’s acquisitiveness. Geoffrey’s death arguably should have spelled the independence of the region, but Henry II was not willing to relinquish control and he seized the territory in wardship. He gave the Breton widow, Constance, in marriage to the son of the former opposition leader, Earl Hugh of Chester, in 1189, just seven months before his own death.226 This marriage was intended not only to win over the young Earl of Chester’s loyalty, but also to assert a firm hold over this traditionally rebellious region. In addition, Henry acknowledged Arthur, Geoffrey’s son born posthumously on 29 March 1187, as his father’s heir.227 Henry’s less aggressive approach with the Scots marked a new era in AngloScottish relations that lasted beyond his reign and into that of his son, Richard. The Beaumont marriage not only gave the King of Scots a stake in territories abroad, if the Beaumont succession failed, but it also gave William direct contact with the French nobility. Furthermore, the nobility serving the royal court of Scotland was already intimately involved on the Continent because of the very nature of the familial and land-based tenures of the Scottish, English, and French polity before 1204. Many men and women holding lands in Scotland were still holding fees and making marital alliances in England and in France. These relationships were directly informed by the structure of the Angevin empire under Henry II, which by its very nature had a limited period of viability. It was not long before the new King of France, Philip Augustus, began to break apart systematically and slowly the Angevin domains, which laid the foundations for reopening negotiations with the court of Scotland.

225 

Owen, William the Lion, p. 72. Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 29. Earl Hugh had died in 1181. 227  Chronica de Mailros, p. 95. 226 

Chapter 7

King William and King Richard

The Marriage of King William Henry’s need to retain the King of Scots’ goodwill had intensified after 1174 as he continued to experience problems with his sons and their allies. For this reason, Henry bound the King of Scots closer to his own support networks in France and in England by marrying the King to his cousin, Ermengarde de Beaumont, and his plan worked. The marriage ensured William’s neutrality during Henry’s wars against his sons and their ally, Philip Augustus of France. The reasons for why this marriage was such a success on the diplomatic front are twofold: King William regained the strategically important castle at Edinburgh, and his new wife introduced the King into a new kin-network abroad that spread from the Yvelines to Chartres. Information about Ermengarde’s family and her marriage to King William originates from three contemporary Scottish sources, the Chronicles of Holyrood, Melrose and Carlisle, which state that she was the ‘daughter of the Viscount de Beaumont, who was the son of the elder daughter of a son of William the Bastard’,1 and from the English chronicler, Roger of Howden, who explicitly said that she was the daughter of Richard, Viscount de Beaumont-sur Sarthe.2 Other sources provide more information about the family from a Continental 1  Chronica de Mailros, p. 94; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 310–11: ‘[…] filiam videlicet vicecomitis de Bello Monte, qui erat filius filie priori filii Willelmi Bastard […].’ 2  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 309.

Richard d. 1202

Ermengarde = King William, of Scots

Figure 16. Family tree of the Viscounts de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe.

*This is not a complete rendering of the genealogy of the family

Marie = Henry III d’Avaugour Lord Mayenne

Petronilla = Alain, Ct. Treguier and Penthièvre

Bishop Guillaume of Angers d. 1240

Agnes = Louis de Brienne, son of Jean de Brienne, King of Jerusalem and of Berenguela of Castile Marie de Coucy’s 2nd husband, fl. 1246-80

Raoul, Bishop of Angers d. 1197

William = X._ daughter of Roland de Rieux

Isabel = John de Vescy Margaret = Bohemond VII Henry, Lord Beaumont Prince of Antioch, Ct. of Tripoli Lord of Alnwick Earl of Buchan (m. c. 1280) fl .1297-1340, = Alicia Comyn, niece of John Comyn, Earl of Buchan Jean = 1) Jeanne de la Guerche 2) Mathilde Berthout, widow of Louis, Bishop of Durham Maurice de Craon

Richard II d. 1253 = Mathilde d’Amboise Countess of Chartres, dghter. of Sulpice III and Isabel de Bois = 2) Jean II, Ct. Soisson (m. c. 1224)

Raoul d. 1235 on crusade

Richard = x._ ? sister of Gilbert de L’Aigle

Roscelin, Viscount de Beaumont = Constance, nat. daughter of Henry I of England

338 Chapter 7

King William and King Richard

339

perspective and show that the Beaumonts were extremely well-connected in Maine, a territory that was vital to Angevin power in Western France.3 The family had been loyal to the Angevins since the marriage of Ermengarde’s grandfather, Roscelin, to Henry I’s daughter.4 Their loyalty and their kinship to the Norman kings of England made them trusted members of the Angevin court, which was why Ermengarde’s father, Viscount Richard, was also with King Henry at Falaise, where he witnessed the agreement between the King and his sons in 1174.5 Ermengarde’s Mançeaux heritage was not the only point of contact that was of significance to King William. Ermengarde’s mother, Lucy de l’Aigle, was possibly the daughter of Richer III, Lord de l’Aigle, which meant her brother was, Gilbert II de l’Aigle, who became an important Lord at Pevensey in England as well as holding a lordship in the Ornois.6 Lucy was also the sister-in-law

3  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iv, 146; Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny, ed. by Bruel, v, 552–53; Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 81–83; cf. pp. 29–105 for the best explanation and charter evidence for the genealogy of this and other families of Mayenne. Depoin, Les vicomtes du Mans et la maison de Bellême, pp. 21–25; SainteMarie and others, Histoire de la Maison Royale de France, v, 581–83; Dictionnaire généalogique, ed. by Saillot, Saliou, and Taillandier, vi, 433. 4  Constance’s husband Roscelin, Viscount de Beaumont, lived a long life, dying between 1175 and 1180. 5  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 18–21, 360. Between 1180 and 1189 at La Flèche, Richard, Viscount de Beaumont, witnessed an act by Henry II concerning the abolition of bad customs at the abbey of Charroux. Constable William du Hommet and Maurice de Craon were also at La Flèche. Richard also witnessed in 1185 for Henry II the determination of customs and rights of the count of Vendôme and of the monastery of Trinité: Cartulaire de l’abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme, ed. by Métais, ii, 445–48. The early seventeenth-century genealogist, André du Chesne, also believed that Ermengarde’s father was Richard: Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS 80, fol. 164. 6  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp.  225–26; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Aubin d’Angers, ed. by de  Broussillon and Lelong, ii, 307–08, 315; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de la Trappe, ed. by Hommey, pp.  327–28; Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp.  33–34, 46, 85. The name Lucy also appears earlier in the family. Another Lucy de l’Aigle was the sister of Richer II and of Marguerite, the latter who married Garcia Ramirez of Navarre in 1130: Thompson, ‘The Lords of l’Aigle’. See Chapter 6 for more details about this marriage. If Power is correct and Richard de Beaumont’s wife, Lucy, was not a l’Aigle then Ermengarde’s aunt, Odeline, was still the wife of Richer III de l’Aigle so the two families were related. See Chapter 4 about Odeline and Lucy.

340

Chapter 7

of William II de Courcy, Lord of Courcy and of Écajeul, who was either the brother or cousin of John de Courcy, Earl of Ulster.7 All of these contacts brought the Scottish court closer to other crossChannel families but the Anglo-French Scots were already familiar with the Beaumont-sur-Sarthe family. As early as 1135, Ermengarde’s grandmother, Constance, had attended a meeting at Sées with men who were even related to the Canmores, like Renaud (Reginald) de Warenne, the uncle of King William’s mother. 8 Furthermore, Constance was the sister-in-law of Alexander  I of Scotland and probably of Fergus of Galloway. She was also the sister-in-law of Conan III, Duke of Brittany, Rotrou, Count of Perche, and the lords of Breteuil, Montmirail and Montmorency. 9 Moreover, as mentioned in the previous chapter, in 1183 Ermengarde’s uncle, Bishop Ralph of Angers,10 had witnessed the marital contract between King William’s niece, Margaret de Bohun, and Pedro de Lara,11 and in 1179, William may even have met his future father-inlaw, Richard de Beaumont, at the Lateran council that the Scots had attended

7  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 271; Flanders, De Courcy, pp. 47–69, 118–30. This is the same John de Courcy mentioned in the Introductory Chapter. Flanders assumes the Norman and English families divided but the evidence he offers is not clear nor does he account for the marriage of either a ‘Norman’ or ‘English’ William de Courcy to the daughter of Richer de l’Aigle (see Torigni above). If William III de Courcy, who appears in England and Normandy, is the same man then he may have married twice. His first wife, Juliana de l’Aigle, entered the monastery of La Chaise Dieu in c. 1155. He then married Gundred de Warenne. Gundred herself married three times. Cf. Early Yorkshire Charters, Warenne, viii, 28–29 about the marriage to Gundred de Warenne. It was only at this point that the Norman and English fees were divided between William III’s sons: Robert IV and William. William II, father of William III, may have succeeded his brother, Robert III, in Normandy after his brother’s death in 1157 in Wales. Robert III’s sons may have entered the church while others died before their father. The point is that the evidence is not clear either way but it is interesting that William of Normandy and of Stogursey were both seneschals of Henry II. 8  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 345. 9  See Chapter 2 about marriages. The Lord of Montmirail, William Gouët III, was the progenitor of the family who relinquished the castle of Montmirail after a failure in the male line to rival candidates one of whom was Isabel of Chartres, mother of Mathilde, Countess of Chartres who married Ermengarde de Beaumont’s nephew. 10  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, lxiii. Ralph held a fief at Chemillé in the pays de Maugé in Maine. 11  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 356–58. Ermengarde’s uncle, Bishop Ralph, was involved in at least two charters by Henry II between 1178 and 1189. Her brother, Guillaume, followed his uncle’s footsteps and became Bishop of Angers in 1203.

King William and King Richard

341

to resolve the dispute over the bishopric of St Andrews.12 The royal family of Scotland was already in contact with the Beaumont-sur-Sarthe family well before the 1186 marriage because of diplomatic exchanges and because of the extended kin group created by the marriages of Henry I’s illegitimate offspring. King William also knew of the family because of the marital union of his kinsman, Roger IV de Tosny, to Ermengarde’s sister, Constance, in 1175. The Tosnys were advanced in Scotland just before the marriage probably because of their kinship with the Beaumonts of Meulan and Leicester, but after the 1173 war the Tosnys distanced themselves from the Beaumonts.13 The 1175 marriage was significant because it represented an open declaration of Tosny loyalty to Henry II’s cause and their rebuke of Henry’s opponent and their kinsman, Earl Robert III of Leicester. King William had been brought into this Tosny-Beaumont (sur-Sarthe) nexus in 1186 because Henry hoped to win over and control William through these extended networks, and it worked, even past his own reign. When relations broke down again between the English and Scottish crowns in 1199, William found it difficult to obtain support from his extended kin. In fact, his sister-in-law and her Tosny husband were so loyal to the Angevin kings that they lost their lands in Normandy to Philip Augustus though Constance was allowed to retire across the sea after her husband’s death in c. 1208.14 These extended networks should not be seen as politically neutral or as unremarkable. The intermarriage between the Tosnys, Canmores, and Beaumontsur-Sarthes visibly introduced new members of the kin group to other Scottish families. For example, Constance and Roger’s daughter, Margaret de Tosny, 12 

Depoin, Les vicomtes du Mans et la maison de Bellême, pp. 21–25. Richard also attended the council. 13  See Chapter 5 about Simon de Tosny, who was made Bishop of Moray in 1172. Roger IV was the son of Margaret de Beaumont, sister of the rebel Earl Robert III of Leicester, and of Ralph IV de Tosny and he was Lord of Tosny and Conches in the Evrecin, and of Saham Toney in Norfolk and South Tawton in Devonshire, the latter fee which he gained in maritagium through his wife: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 15, 98, 125, 128, 140, 387, 394, 437, 510, 514, 526–28, 609–10; ii, 647–48, 811, 951, 960, 1370, 1426; Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 37–38, 46, 84, 86–87; R. A. Brown, ‘Magnates, Curiales, and the Wheels of Fortune’, pp. 124–29. The Devonshire fee had been given initially to the Viscount de Beaumont through the marriage of Roscelin to Henry I’s daughter, Constance. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 376–77; Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 235. Margaret and Ralph were married not long after 1155. The Tosnys also held Clifford in Hereford in the border of Wales following the conquest of England: R. R. Davies, The Age of Conquest, pp. 29, 37, 82. 14  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 387.

342

Chapter 7

probably married the earl of Fife in the early thirteenth century.15 After 1204, the Tosny family increasingly played a role in Scottish affairs and by the late thirteenth century they were prominent in the Wars of Independence on the side of the English King, Edward I. In other ways, the marriage of William to Ermengarde also benefited the Beaumont-sur-Sarthe family. Although Ermengarde’s marriage was not mentioned by the French chroniclers, her nephew was granted land in Crail in the 1230s and her niece became the ‘Lady’ of Fife.16 These marriages benefited both families.

The Mauvoisin Family and the Scots One of the great misconceptions about William and Ermengarde’s marriage is based on the appearance of William Mauvoisin in Scotland in the 1180s. It has been argued that Ermengarde brought an entourage of men with her when she emigrated to Scotland, one of whom was William Mauvoisin.17 Mauvoisin was probably a member of the Mauvoisin family mentioned in the previous chap­ 15 

Chartularies of Balmerino and Lindores, p. 10; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapters 1 and 4. Edinburgh, Nat. Libr. of Scotland, MS ACC 8487 [Grant by Richard de Beaumont in favour of David, son of Hugh of Haddington of lands in the neighbourhood of Crail, 1235–39]. King Alexander confirmed a grant of lands near Crail made by Richard de Beaumont to David, son of Hugh, for the latter to defend his territories for Richard and his heirs. The witnesses were William Mauvoisin, Bishop of Glasgow and chancellor of the king; Roger de Quincy, Earl of Winchester; Patrick, Earl of Dunbar; Walter Comyn; Walter Stewart; Walter Olifard deacon; Roger de Moubray; Roger Avenel; and Brother Bernard. The grant must be dated to about 1235 when Richard was given a safe conduct in July 1235 to visit the king of England. In the safe conduct he was not given the title of viscount. He did not become viscount until shortly after this. The charter could not have been granted before 1233 or after 1241 because William Bondington, another witness, did not become Bishop of Glasgow until 1233 after William Mauvoisin’s death, and Walter Stewart, another witness, died in 1241. For safe conduct see Calendar of the Patent Rolls, iii: Henry III, a.d. 1232–1247, p. 114. For Margaret de Tosny, Lady of Fife, and Countess of Fife see: Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Fr. 22329, [Extraits de Cartulaires de la Bretagne] (nineteenth century), fol. 523; Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS Lat. 17048 [Extrait de Cartulaire de Saint Laurent de Charnie] (nineteenth century), fols 261, 269–275; Gallia Christiana, xiv: Ubi de provincia Turonensi agitur, ed. by de Sainte-Marthe and Hauréau, 733; Archives historiques du Maine, ii, ed. by Busson and Ledru, 489. The source for this Charnie grant was a contemporary of the Lady of Fife, Bishop Geoffrey of Loudun, son of Geoffrey, Lord of Trèves, and of Beatrix. Angot and Depoin have Margaret, Lady of Fife and grantor to Charnie, the daughter of Constance and Roger de Tosny: Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, pp. 37–38, 98–100, 103–04, 673, 677; Depoin, Les vicomtes du Mans et la maison de Bellême, p. 23; Chartularies of Balmerino and Lindores, p. 10; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapters 1 and 4. 17  Owen, William the Lion, p. 72; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, p. 209. 16 

William (k. 1133)

William, Ld. of Serquigny

William, Ld. of Hussburn and Cosham fl. 1190–1201 Descent ?

Roger

Robert d'Ivry

Ralph fl. 1222–34

Bishop William Mauvoisin of St. Andrews, fl. 1199–1238

Robert = Elisabeth de Morhier

Peter, fl. 1170–1224 Regina, fl. 1146 Ld. of Saint-André = 1. Peter de Maule = ? 2. Waleran, Ld. of Ivry

Robert

Figure 17. Mauvoisin family tree.

* This is not a complete genealogical table. Only pertinent members of the kin group appear. See Power, Norman Frontier, p. 507 for a more complete rendering.

Raol

Manasser, Ld. of Mantes and Ld. of Stokenham (d. c. 1204) = Mabel

Samson, provost of Chartres Archbishop of Reims (1140–61)

William ‘the knight’ (d. c. 1185) = Adelina ‘nepos’ Eudo de Porhoët

Guy II claimant to Porhoët (c. 1235) = Juliana de Tillières

Guy = Alice de Vétheuil fl. 1190–1201

Ralph V (d. by 1167)

Ralph IV (d. c. 1146–48) = Brita

Ralph III (fl. 1117-29) = Amelina

King William and King Richard 343

344

Chapter 7

ter and he became not only Bishop of Glasgow (1199–1202), and Bishop of St Andrews (1202–38), but he was also chamberlain of Scotland. He was an im­­portant royal servant, who appeared on the 1212 treaty between King John of England and King William of Scotland and on the Anglo-Scottish treaty of 1237.18 There is no indication, however, that William Mauvoisin knew the Beaumontsur-Sarthes before he entered the Scottish court. He, nor any other members of his family, appear to have witnessed for the Beaumonts-sur-Sarthes. The first time we see William Mauvoisin, or probably his kinsman of the same name, was as a witness to the Treaty of Falaise.19 This William, possibly the Bishop’s father, appears to have died shortly after this date. The next time we see the name William Mauvoisin was at Reading in 1178 when he witnessed a grant made by Henry II to the monks of Mellifont.20 Considering William’s future career and involvement with Irish lords, it seems probable that the William at Reading was the future Bishop. The appearance of William at Reading probably laid the foundations for him to find service initially in Anglo-French circles in Ireland after which he then migrated to Scotland. The reason for suggesting this early phase in his career is based on the witness list at Reading. Mauvoisin had attended the proceedings concerning Mellifont Abbey alongside Hugh I de Lacy, Lord of Meath and bailiff of Dublin,21 a man whose family continued to have contact with Mauvoisin well after Hugh I’s death.22 Furthermore, Mauvoisin’s involvement with the Anglo-Irish appeared to be personal for he may have left illegitimate sons in Ireland before moving to Scotland.23 This 18 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 445–46. Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 21. 20  Calendar of Documents Relating to Ireland, ed. by Sweetman, i, 9. 21  It is not certain that this William is the future Bishop because William the knight discussed below may still have been alive, but the Bishop had contacts in Ireland throughout his later career so he may have been introduced into these networks by this kinsman, possibly his father: Calendar of Documents Relating to Ireland, ed. by Sweetman, i, 9; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 21, 37, 85; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 101, 118. William may have witnessed at least another three times with Saher de Quincy and Hugh de Lacy. Cf. Flanagan, ‘Angevin Royal Agents in Ireland’ about Hugh I de Lacy. 22  Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’, pp. 1–19. Hugh I de Lacy served King Henry in Normandy in 1173 during the war against Henry’s sons for which he was given land in Meath. 23  Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers, ed. by Bliss, i, 67, 70. There was a Master Ralph Mauvoisin, another common name in the French Mauvoisin family, who was a canon at Glasgow in 1220. ‘P.’ and Ralph Mauvoisin, who appeared in Scotland, may both have been sons of William. William was not intended for the Church. Cf. Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’, p. 21 about the illegitimate sons and Chapter Eight about his early career and education. 19 

King William and King Richard

345

early interaction between Lacy and Mauvoisin introduced Mauvoisin into Lacy’s cross-Channel networks, which also put him into contact with men, like the Quincys, who appeared at the Scottish court.24 Saher de Quincy was the most prominent member of the kin group to wit­­ness alongside Hugh de Lacy.25 However, it is uncertain which Saher witnessed with William. There were three Saher de Quincys living at the time, as discussed in Chapter 5 — the brother of Robert de Quincy and his son, and Robert’s son, Young Saher.26 Based on the loyal service of Robert’s brother at the Angevin court, it is most likely that the Saher at Rouen was the brother of Robert. Robert was an Anglo-French Scottish knight, who settled in Fife at Leuchars near St Andrews because of his marriage to Orabilia, the heiress of Leuchars, and he also gained lands in Strathearn and Lothian because of his service to the Scottish crown.27 He was handling the King of England’s accounts at Domfront before 1180,28 and he also succeeded to Long Buckby in 1192 and fought in Normandy in 1194 and 1196 for King Richard.29 Robert held a prominent position on the Continent and was considered by his peers to be a ‘French’ knight. He and his brother, Saher’s, service at the Anglo-French court put him into contact with the de Lacys and with the Mauvoisins.30 Saher was, like his brother, also an important player in Norman affairs and he may have come into contact with the Mauvoisins through patronage 24 

Everist, ‘From Paris to St Andrews’, pp. 11–12. The Quincys and Mauvoisin would be politically intertwined in Fife in the early thirteenth century. 25  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 21, 85; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 101. 26  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17, fol. 107. 27  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 195, 280, 387, 439, 479. 28  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, ccxiv. Robert de Quincy from at least 1180, if not earlier, had been involved in the accounting at Domfront, thirty-three kilometres northeast of the border of Brittany. 29  Oram, ‘Quincy, Saer de, Earl of Winchester’. Oram says Saher’s son, Saher, succeeded him in England by 1190 and died in 1192 and his English fees passed to Saher II’s brother, Robert, who died in 1197. The Pipe Rolls do not say which Saher was holding the Northamptonshire fees in 1190 although Saher II had certainly died by this point: Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I, pp. 29–30; Pipe Roll of 4 Richard I, p. 262 — Robert de Quincy was on the crusade with Richard I when his son or nephew, Saher, succeeded. He had been sent by Richard with a message for Conrad of Montferrat, a claimant to the throne of Jerusalem: Ambroise, L’Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, ed. by Paris, p. 146, ll. 5453–86. 30  Ambroise called Robert ‘a French knight’: Ambroise, L’Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, ed. by Paris, p. 146, ll. 5453–86; Painter, ‘The House of Quency’, pp. 3–9. See Chapter 5.

346

Chapter 7

networks at the abbey of Jumièges based especially on the lordship of the Beaumonts of Meulan and Leicester.31 The abbey was a great centre of learning favoured by families who encouraged trade along the Seine River like the Vernons, Mauvoisins, Tosnys, Beaumonts of Meulan,32 and the Montfort counts of Evreux and lords of Montfort L’Amaury.33 However, after the conclusion of the 1173 war, Saher rarely appeared alongside the Beaumonts or Lacys because the Beaumonts were out of favour and Hugh de Lacy had moved to Ireland. Saher continued to serve Henry II on the Continent but with a new set of allies. An important point to be made here is that evidence does not seem to indicate that William Mauvoisin was involved with Ermengarde or her family before 1186 for he nor his family appeared alongside the Beaumont-sur-Sarthes or in Mançeaux networks. They were part of an axis aligning with Yvelines, Evrecin, Breton, and Chartrain kin groups. Mauvoisin probably made his way to Scotland as a younger brother, son, or cousin of Guy Mauvoisin, Lord of Rosny. His exact relationship with Guy is not clear, for there is some confusion with the Mauvoisin family genealogy, but an attempt will be made here 31 

Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17, fols 106–107. Saher II de Quincy’s wife, Asceline, was the widow of Geoffrey de Watteville, possibly related to the Wattevilles who settled in Scotland: Pipe Roll of 8 Henry II, p. 19; Pipe Roll of 9 Henry II, p. 40; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 183. Asceline held part of two knights’ fees in Lincolnshire. Her portion of the fee at Corby in Northamptonshire was about thirty kilometres from Saher II’s lordship at Long Buckby: Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 139–40, no. 293. Ascelina and Saher II’s son, Saher III, held these lands in 1190: Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I, p. 29. The Wattevilles were also still patronising the abbey of Jumièges like the Quincys, which may have been informed by Quincy’s wife’s former marriage. See Chapter 2 about Wattevilles. However, the Watteville favour towards Jumièges Abbey would not have been the only influence on the Quincy family’s networks. The Beaumonts and Montforts can also be found regularly witnessing alongside Quincy and as will shortly be discussed the Mauvoisins were in the familia of the counts of Meulan. Cf. Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, ii, 37, 82, 85, 87–88, 90, 95, 269 for the appearance of Quincy with the Mauvoisins, Lacys and/or Beaumonts. 32  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 460–62. 33  Merlet and Moutié (eds), Cartulaire de Notre-Dame des Vaux-de-Cernay, i, pp. v-vii, 72, 85, 92-95, 100-01, 140, 160-61, 162, 163, 164, 168-69, 179, 186, 188, 189, 190, 197. Some of this patronage extended to other abbeys under Montfort patronage. Richard de Vernon of Nehou, members of the Mauvoisin family, and the Montforts were involved with the abbey of Notre-Dame in the Yvelines. Richard continued to owe service to Philip Augustus during the war against John: Baldwin (ed.), Registres de Philippe Auguste, p. 331. Cf. Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 87, 96-97 about the significance of the Seine trade.

King William and King Richard

347

to reconstruct the family’s position on the Continent and William’s possible position within the familial structure since it is significant to understanding his contribution to Franco-Scottish relations. Daniel Power has recently suggested that Guy Mauvoisin, Lord of Rosny, was the nephew of Manasser34 and of Pierre (Peter) Mauvoisin, and the son of William the knight,35 but this account is at complete odds with the early seventeenth-century geneaologist, André du Chesne, who places Guy as a son of Ralph not of William the knight.36 It is known that Guy had brothers alive in 1190 by the names of William, Raoul (Ralph), and Robert,37 and it was prob­­ably their father, Sir William Mauvoisin, mentioned below, who fought at the tournament at Lagny in 1181, which was also attended by Lord David of Scotland. 38 It may even have been interaction between Lord David of Huntingdon and William at Lagny that brought the future Bishop to the attention of the Scottish court. Sir William was a cross-Channel lord. He was granted land in Wiltshire, Hampshire, and Surrey (at Gomshall) for his support of Henry II in 1173 and in 1174, and he also succeeded to the lordship of Rosny following his brother, Ralph V’s death in c. 1167.39 Both William and Saher de Quincy owed money 34 

Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Saint-Germain-des-Près, ed. by Poupardin, Vidier, and Levillain, ii, 105–06. He certainly was the nephew if ‘nepote’ means nephew in this charter but that is not always the case. Cf. Goody, The Development of the Family, pp. 266–78 for the use of ‘nepotes’ for grandchildren, cousins, and nephews. The charter does not say who Guy’s father was. Cf. Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Saint-Germain-des-Près, ed. by Poupardin, Vidier, and Levillain, ii, 149–50 for Manasser and Peter as brothers. 35  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, i, 255–58, 263–64. 36  Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS  37, fols  9–15; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 254–55, 507. Du Chesne had access to manuscripts that have since been lost so it is difficult to know how accurate he was. 37  Cartulaire de l’abbaye royale de Notre-Dame de Bonport, ed. by Andrieux, pp.  7–8; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 189. Guy’s uncle, Peter, may have been alive as late as 1224 and seen witnessing with probably his nephew, William, in the early thirteenth century. 38  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 256, ll. 5019–39. 39  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 65–66; Pipe Roll of 20 Henry II, pp. 3, 29, 125; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 404. For William the knight’s wife see Pipe Roll of 30 Henry II, p. 152; Pipe Roll of 33 Henry II, pp. 173, 211; Pipe Roll of 34 Henry II, p. 23. His lands were in the King’s hands by 1188 following his death in c. 1184. His son, William Mauvoisin, succeeded to Hussburn (Hurstbourne) in Hampshire and to Cosham in Wiltshire by 1197: Pipe Roll of 9 Richard I, pp. 19, 214. Cf. Pipe Roll of 20 Henry II, pp. 3, 29, 125; Pipe Roll of 31 Henry I,

348

Chapter 7

on behalf of Richard de Lucy just after the war,40 and the Quincy transac­­tions with Richard de Lucy continued into the next generation. By 1220, Saher IV, Earl of Winchester’s son, Robert de Quincy (named after his grandfather), gained La Baroche-sous-Lucé,41 one of Richard de Lucy’s escheated fiefs near Domfront. He held the fee from Philip Augustus and was one of the few Anglo-French nobles to retain lands in Normandy after 1204 probably because of his Scottish background and because he was a younger son.42 William the knight’s decision to support Henry in 1173 is striking because his main lordship was not only in territory controlled by King Louis but also because his geopolitical and kin-based networks extended to men who were among the leaders against Henry. For example, William was the nephew, ‘nepos’, of Eudo de Porhoët of Brittany, the 1173 ‘rebel’.43 Through his father’s marMichaelmas 1130, p. 189; Pipe Roll of 34 Henry II, pp. 23–24, 136, 142, 171; Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 65–66 about William the knight’s lands in England. He and his wife held land in Surrey at Gomshall and in Wiltshire at Gastard. 40  Pipe Roll of 20 Henry II, pp. 3, 29, 125; Pipe Roll of 21 Henry II, pp. 100, 126, 187, 193, 196, 203. Richard was probably the same who defeated the Earl of Leicester at Fornham in 1173. 41  It is unclear whether this was La Baroche-sous-Lucé or Bazoches-au-Houlme but both are in the bailiwick of Domfront. The spelling is different for Bazoches-au-Houlme, and appears as ‘Basoches’ held by ‘William’ Malherbe from the honour of Montbrai (Moubray) compared to the fee held by Robert de Quincy at ‘Basocam’. Since Basocam is in the Lucy fee it would make sense this was referring to Baroche-sous-Lucé. Cf. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619 h, k. 42  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, lxxix; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619 h. The description in the register of Philip Augustus is for ‘Robert de Quincy’ and his parentage is not explained but the Robert who appears in Scotland in the early thirteenth century was the son of Earl Saher of Winchester, who had spent a lot of his career on the Continent. It would make sense for a younger son, who would not be so bound by the primary lordship, in this case in England, to advance the family’s fortunes abroad. The only confusion is which son of Saher’s by the name of Robert succeeded. His older son by the name of Robert married the heiress of Chester and died in 1217. The younger son by the name of Robert married a daughter of Llywelyn of Wales and did not die until 1257. I also cannot explain why the Quincy’s gained this fee formerly held by the Lucys, but there may have been a marriage between junior members of the families that is unrecorded. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 383, 385, 387, 389; Rental Book of the Cistercian Abbey of Cupar-Angus, ed. by Rogers, i, 322: Philip de Moubray and Saher de Quincy also witness together in Scotland and Moubray held land in the Ornois near Domfront. Moreover, Robert de Quincy owed a debt at the time to Melrose abbey probably because of a loan meant to finance the campaigns abroad: Pipe Roll of 7 John, p. 257. 43 

‘William fitzStephen’, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iii,

King William and King Richard

349

riage to a Porhoët, William the knight held fees in Brittany at Chantepie in Rennes and at Apremont and La Ferrière, and it may have been through these Breton interests that his brother, Manasser, Lord of Mantes, also held land at Stokenham in Devonshire in 1189.44 The family’s landholdings in Brittany and the Val d’Oise may also explain why they held a lordship at Saint-Lubin near Pontoise that was named after Saint-Lubin in the Côtes d’Armor, about fiftyfive kilometres from their lands at La Ferrière.45 The Breton ties with Chartres were also important in this period because of the reform movement underway along the Loire and because of support from the Chartrain and the Yvelines for Thomas Becket in the 1160s which became so damaging to Henry II in 1173.46 Alliances and ecclesiastical patronage between these two counties had been strengthened in the previous century by the marriage of King Henry I’s sister, Adelaide, to Stephen-Henry, Count of Chartres and Blois.47 Adelaide of Blois regularly supported her brother, King Henry I’s campaigns against their brother, Robert, and she encouraged ties with Brittany even while the Angevin Duchess of Brittany, Ermengarde, held sway over the duchy through her husband, Alain, and youthful son, Conan III. As a result of some of this influence, Adelaide was able to obtain the bishopric of Dol for one of her own men, Baudri de Bourgueil, in 1107. Kimberley LoPrete has recently demonstrated the contribution of Adelaide’s networks in 129; Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Redon en Bretagne, ed. by de Courson, pp. 323–24; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 582–83. The Breton Mauvoisins disappeared from record after this. Guy’s ancestor may have been Guethenoc Mauvoisin who was called to defend and uphold at Redon the grant made to Saint Sauveur by Alain IV Fergant and his sons, Count Conan and Geoffrey, in 1112, and it may have been another relation, Joscelin Mauvoisin, who became a monk at St Aubin of Angers in c. 1141. 44  Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny, ed. by Bruel, pp. 577–79; Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 163, no. 561. 45  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 623 f. 46  ‘William fitzStephen’ and ‘Herbert of Bosham’, in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. by Robertson, iii, xviii–xix, 129, 418–19, 430–37. While under the protection of Louis VII, Becket was moving in the Chartrain/Yvelines circle particularly during the negotiations between Henry II and Louis in the late 1160s. There was a popular response of support for Becket at Chartres. John of Salisbury, when made bishop of Chartres in 1176, reunited Becket’s circle of friends, which helped promote Thomas as a saint in France and Canterbury as a pilgrimage site: Foreville, ‘Thomas Becket’, pp. 117–24. Thomas’ Chartrain interests also involved intercommunication during his lifetime that probably contributed to the preservation of important classical manuscripts that were copied and held for centuries at Chartres: L. Barker, ‘MS Bodl. Canon. Pat. Lat. 131’; Benton, ‘The Court of Champagne’. 47  Lieberman, ‘The Family of William the Conqueror’.

350

Chapter 7

Dol to Henry I’s success in Normandy and these networks were still active later in the century.48 Communication between Brittany and the Chartrain not only impacted secular politics but it also influenced the spread of ideas across Western Europe during the twelfth-century Renaissance. The German chronicler and Bishop, Otto of Freising, commented in mid-century on the Breton influence at the school of Chartres because of the two brothers, Thierry and Bernard of Chartres, and because of the famous theologian and writer, Abelard. Abelard was originally from near Vannes before he went to study at Chartres Cathedral.49 Archbishop Samson Mauvoisin, Sir William’s uncle, was also involved in Breton affairs when he led the movement against the Breton heretic, Eon de l’Étoile, in 1148.50 Another Breton, Bernard of Moëlan, was chancellor of Chartres after the death of Samson Mauvoisin (great-uncle of Guy I and possibly of William the future Bishop of St Andrews), and in c. 1159 Bernard returned to Brittany and became Bishop of Cornouaille.51 The Chartrain political interests and contacts in Brittany that had begun in the late tenth century continued well into the twelfth century and spilled over into the Yvelines mainly because of marital alliances between families with land in all three regions.52 For example, Sir William’s grandson, Guy II, made a claim 48 

LoPrete, Adela of Blois: Countess and Lord, pp. 183–205, 278–80. Adelaide of Blois fostered links with Brittany as her father had done before her. The Blésois interest in Brittany was informed by their struggle against the counts of Anjou dating back to the tenth century: Jeulin, ‘L’Hommage de la Bretagne’. 49  Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp. 299–300. 50  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 156–57; Continuatio Gemblacensis, ed. by Pertz, p. 390; Otto of Freising, Gesta Friderici, ed. by Waitz, p. 81; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 60–64. Eon was from Loudéac, near SaintCaradec. Archbishop Samson held custody of Eon after he was condemned. 51  Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp.  299–300. There is some confusion as to whether Bernard, Thierry of Chartres’ brother, was the same man as Bernard de Moëlan. 52  Quaghebeur, La Cornouaille, pp. 86, 103–05, 296–307. These interests were originally further north in Rennes but had shifted south into Cornouaille. It was during the time of the Mauvoisin-Breton marriage that the Breton, Bernard de Moëlan, chancellor at Chartres was also made Bishop of Quimper, about forty kilometres northwest of his birthplace. He was possibly from a collateral line of the Viscounts de Poher though Quaghebeur notes the difficulties with locating his lineage. Bernard was one of the men responsible for the confirmation of Conan and Duchess Margaret’s (sister of King William of Scotland) donation to Sainte-Croix de Guingamp. It may be suggested that the Saint-Père Chartrain interests at Saint-Melaine in Rennes may have come from some continuing contact between Rennes and Chartres into the thirteenth century: J. Smith, ‘Oral and Written’, p. 337.

King William and King Richard

351

to the lordship of Porhoët in 1235 based on his lineage.53 Guy’s uncle, Robert, married Elisabeth de Morhier, sister of William Morhier, Lord of Villiers-leMorhier (on the Eure River north of Chartres).54 This latter marriage is important in demonstrating the strength of Yvelines relationships with the Chartrain for the Morhiers were an illustrious Chartrain family that deemed an alliance with the equally powerful Mauvoisins to their advantage. The Mauvoisins had built an impressive portfolio of territorial and marital assets. The bulk of their lands in the Yvelines was in a strategic position on the Seine River in the frontier to the Vexin — a territory that put them at the centre of activity between the kings of England and of France.55 The territorial position of their lordship also put them at the centre of the tournament scene. Tournaments were regularly held in the region and were attended by prominent families and their knights.56 These tournaments represented occasions when men from the area could not only prove their military worth but also strengthen bonds of friendship. For example, in c. 1179, one of Count Simon de Montfort l’Amaury’s men, Simon de Neauphlé, fought hard on the French side in the tournament at Anet (Anet was just southwest of the Mauvoisin fees). Years later, Simon de Neauphlé can be founding fighting in the Fourth Crusade for Simon de Montfort and his brother, Guy de Montfort, along with Robert Mauvoisin, brother of Guy, Lord of Rosny.57 Interaction between these three families probably also paved the 53  Layettes de Trésor des chartes, ed. by Teulet and others, ii, 294–97; Le cartulaire de la seigneurie de Fougères, ed. by Auberge, pp. 150–51; Mémoires pour servir de preuves, ed. by Morice, i, 890–91, 901–02, 904, 907, 973. 54  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 179–80, 197, 203. William had married Cecilia, sister of Guy, Lord of Chevreuse, before 1208 through whom he gained Barra in Franconville: i, 162–64. William Morhier confirmed to his brother, John, the transfer of Thiverval-Grignon, twenty kilometres south of Mantes (and eight miles south of Maule), from Odo of Thiverval. The Morhiers were in the midst of the Mauvoisin networks at Mantes. 55  Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, i, 9; appendix, pp. 250–67. The family was well-established on the Seine by 1080 under Ralph I Mauvoisin, Lord de Rosny. 56  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 140–47, ll. 2773–2874; Crouch, William Marshal, pp. 195–97, 199; Gillingham, ‘War and Chivalry’, pp. 5–6. Cf. History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 394–98, ll. 7763–7852 for fighting at Ivry and Mantes between the two kings of France and England in 1188. 57  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 144, ll.  2827–28, 2841; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 98, 290; Geoffrey de Villehardouin, De la Conquête de Constantinople, in Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xviii, 445.

352

Chapter 7

way for Gervais and Galfrid Neauphlé to find service in Scotland as clerici, or clerics, of Bishop William Mauvoisin in the early thirteenth century. Gervais and Galfrid were most likely from this Neauphlé family, whose lands were located in the Yvelines south of the Rosny lordship.58 The Montfort l’Amaurys became important allies of the Mauvoisins but early contact between the families was probably based on the Beaumont-leRoger and Montfort lordships and the marriage of the daughter of the ‘rebel’ leader Earl Robert III of Leicester to Simon de Montfort. These families were involved because of the proximity of their fees in the Yvelines and the Evrecin and because of communication on the Seine River. This interaction is evident in Guy I Mauvoisin’s marriage to Alice de Vétheuil.59 The Vétheuil family were involved with the Beaumont and Montfort lordships. Alice’s family was from north of Mantes and they were benefactors of the abbey of Bonport (Evreux) in 1190, which was patronized by the Beaumonts, Mauvoisins, and Montforts.60 Vétheuil, like Mantes, was on the Seine and benefited from the river traffic. This traffic was so important militarily and for commerce that Mantes was given a position of prominence by King Louis when he sanctioned a monopoly on trade between Mantes and Corbeil to a guild of shipping merchants in 1170.61 Guy I’s uncle, Peter Mauvoisin, maintained the family’s trade interests by granting proceeds from the customs owed by their shipping trade at Mantes and Rosny to Bonport Abbey, which was witnessed by another Seine family,

58 

Everist, ‘From Paris to St Andrews’, p. 19; Ash, ‘The Administration of the Diocese of St. Andrews’, pp. 136–37. 59  Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 507. The Mauvoisins were already well connected with other families that dominated the river trade. Hugh Mauvoisin witnessed for men like Robert de Montfort-sur-Risle in 1150. Hugh would have been acting in his capacity as a member of the network of the Counts of Evreux since Waleran, Count of Meulan, was married to a daughter of Amaury III, Lord de Montfort, and Waleran’s sister, Adeline, had married Hugh de Montfortsur-Risle, who were in turn Robert de Montfort’s parents: Guillaume de Jumièges, Histoire des Normands, ed. by Guizot, p. 232. Amaury’s son, Simon III, Count of Evreux, was also a benefactor of Grand-Beaulieu in 1158: Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu, ed. by Merlet and Jusselin, p. 21. 60  Cartulaire de l’abbaye royale de Notre-Dame de Bonport, ed. by Andrieux, pp. 7–14, 21–22, 29–30, 87–88, 161–63, 277–78. 61  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, v, 226; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 95–97, 160–61, 169, 420–21, 424–34. Cf. Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 51 [Cartulaire de l’Abbaye de Fécamp], fols 10, 20 about the involvement of these families in the same patronage networks.

King William and King Richard

353

the Ivrys, who were also intermarried with the Mauvoisins.62 Peter also found favour at the French court after 1204 when King Philip granted custody of Lyons-la-Forêt to him along with Nonancourt, which the King had gifted to him shortly before 1200.63 Lyons-la-Forêt was, like Mantes and Rosny, strategically important for it was only twenty-eight kilometres east of Rouen and protected the eastern approach to the city. Thus, the Mauvoisin position in the Yvelines and the Evrecin was important not only politically but also economically and the Mauvoisin union with the Vétheuil family complemented these interests. As already mentioned, the Mauvoisins were important because of their political and territorial ties to the powerful Beaumont family. They had been in the service of the Beaumont Counts of Meulan since c. 1122.64 The two families were only sixteen kilometres apart on the Seine River, and the Mauvoisins held some of their fees of the counts of Meulan. The Mauvoisins also became further entrenched in the Beaumont networks because of the marital choices the family continued to make. For example, Guy’s aunt, Regina, had married Peter de Maule, who held the lordship of Maule just southeast of Mantes, and she may also have married a second time to Waleran d’Ivry whose lordship was southwest of Mantes in Beaumont territory. If Regina’s marriages are accurate, Guy’s cousins were Regina’s sons, Roger de Maule and Robert d’Ivry, and Guy’s uncle, Peter Mauvoisin, may have gained the lordship of Saint-André-de-l’Eure from his nephew, Robert d’Ivry, after the latter’s death.65 62 

Cartulaire de l’abbaye royale de Notre-Dame de Bonport, ed. by Andrieux, p. 8. Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, pp. 167–71. Guy was certainly in the service of King Philip Augustus during the wars against King John: Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 318. Also see Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 254 about Peter Mauvoisin. 64  Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, pp. xx, 33–34: William Mauvoisin, Lord of Serquigny, was in dispute with the Beaumont foundation at Saint-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger in 1235. Bur, ‘De quelques champenois dans l’entourage français’, p. 232. Serquigny had been a Beaumont fee. William Mauvoisin, Lord of Serquigny, was possibly Guy’s brother, or, as favoured by Daniel Power, Guy’s son: Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 507. 65  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 254–55, 507; Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, pp. 21, 58–60. The Ivry/Brévals, Maules and Mauvoisins can be seen moving in the same circles for over a century. Orderic has an interesting story concerning a young knight from Cravent near Mantes travelling to Maule and how this knight’s actions caused a flurry of endowments to the abbey of Saint-Evroult led by Ralph de Mauvoisin, brother of William the knight: Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iii, 241–47: Based on Orderic Vitalis, Depoin also asserted that there was another marriage alliance in the early twelfth century between the Maules, progenitor of the Scottish Maules, and the Mauvoisins: Cartulaire de l’abbaye de SaintMartin de Pontoise, ed. by Depoin, i, 253; Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, 63 

354

Chapter 7

Although the Maule family did settle in Scotland in the twelfth century, Roger de Maule was from a different branch. He was French and did not seem to have any contact with the English Maules from whom the Scottish Maules were descended.66 Nonetheless, he and his Mauvoisin kin were all involved in the Beaumont-Montfort networks. Saint-André-de-l’Eure was in the Evrecin only fourteen kilometres north of Pacy-sur-Eure, held by the Beaumont earls of Leicester.67 The Beaumonts, like the Mauvoisins, took advantage of their position on the Seine River on behalf of Count Robert II of Meulan, who had controlled some of the traffic rights going through Mantes held by the Mauvoisins as early as 1166.68 Throughout their territories, the Mauvoisins were dependants of the Beaumonts, which carried over into politics on the other side of the Channel. The strength of relations between the Beaumonts and Mauvoisins had poli­­ tical repercussions in the 1209 to 1210 struggle between King John and the Anglo-Irish Lacy and Briouze families. It was probably not a coincidence that the Lacys found refuge with Bishop William at St Andrews before fleeing to another Mauvoisin affiliate in the Evrecin, Simon de Montfort, the son of Simon IV de Montfort and of Amicia de Beaumont.69 The Mauvoisin lordship was within close proximity to the lordship of Montfort L’Amaury (twentyfour kilometres apart),70 held by Simon de Montfort, and the Montforts were intermarried with the Beaumonts. Interrelations between these families helped Hugh II de Lacy, son of Hugh I, forge a new career in Simon’s army in the south of France where Hugh remained for ten years.71 William Mauvoisin, as Bishop of St Andrews, was also by this point serving the King of Scots in the heart of the Quincy lordship at Leuchars. William never forgot his family’s interaction with the Lacys in the late twelfth century as he launched his career in Scotland iii, 180–81, 184–85. The Scottish and English branches were a collateral line to the French branch. They split in the early twelfth century. 66  Orderic Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History, ed. by Chibnall, iii, 180–81, 184–85; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 124, 222, 319, 341–42. William Maule was the first to settle in Scotland as Lord of Fowlis Easter in the 1150s and he was possibly the great-grandson of Guerin Maule, whose brother, Ansold de Maule, married Odeline Mauvoisin. 67  Power, The Norman Frontier, pp.  209, 254–55. Peter Mauvoisin also fought with William Marshal in c. 1189: History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 438, l. 8628. 68  Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Deville, p. 25. 69  Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapters 1 and 2. 70  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 50–52; Dion, Recherches sur les Anciens Chemins de L’Iveline, passim. 71  Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapters 1 and 2.

King William and King Richard

355

Map 4. Landholdings of the Evrecin and Yvelines Families of Mauvoisin, William de Soules, Beaumont of Leicester, Tosny, Neauphlé, Watteville, Cahaignes, earls of Devon. Map by the author, after a template from http://d-maps.com/carte.php?num_car=12991&lang=en.

356

Chapter 7

nor did Hugh forget the refuge Mauvoisin had provided to him in 1210. In September 1237, only about ten months before Bishop Mauvoisin died, Hugh endowed St Andrews with the churches of Ruskath and Carlingford in Louth.72 Although Bishop William Mauvoisin’s exact kinship to the Rosny branch is not spelled out in the charters, there is evidence to suggest that he was a son, or a grandson, of William the knight, and thus possibly a brother, son, or nephew of Guy I Mauvoisin. The Mauvoisins were avid supporters of the church. They granted alms to the abbey of Saint-Marie de Josaphat and were regular benefactors of ecclesiastical institutions throughout the Yvelines and Chartrain.73 It would make sense that one of their members chose to carve out an illustrious career in the church. Whatever the exact relationship to the Rosnys, the Bishop of St Andrews was a younger member of the kin group who sought his fortune in Scotland and never lost contact with his French roots. He made several trips to France during his career.74

King Richard: Friend and Ally By mid-1189, Henry II again faced a coalition of his sons, Count Richard of Poitou and Lord John, and the King of France.75 The campaigns began in Anjou but it was not long before the allies had crossed into Maine, an area that was still vulnerable because of the leadership of men who were able to rally others to 72 

Calendar of Documents Relating to Ireland, ed. by Sweetman, i, 359; Chronica de Mailros, p. 149. 73  Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Josaphat, ed. by Métais, i, 30. There was also a Richard Mauvoisin in the family at this time but the relationship is unclear: Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay, ed. by Merlet and Moutié, i, 150. Also see Recueil des actes de Louis VI, ed. by Bautier and Dufour, ii, 384–85. The Mauvoisin family also held Nogent (iii, 91–92). Ralph Mauvoisin confirmed grants by William Mauvoisin, Viscount de Mantes and Lord of Nogent, and others to the monastery of Holy Mary of Josaphat near Chartres in the twelfth century. Samson Mauvoisin, brother of William, was praepositus of the church of Chartres before he was Archbishop of Reims in the early twelfth century. LoPrete, ‘Adela of Blois and Ivo of Chartres’, pp. 133–34. 74  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 473; Chronica de Mailros, p. 106. In 1207 and 1212, Bishop William went to France to visit his relatives and possibly also to see his old friend and benefactor, Hugh. On the second visit, Bishop William attended the Fourth Lateran Council. See Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iii, 158–59. He was also in France during the worst of the civil war in England. 75  Painter, William Marshal, p. 70.

King William and King Richard

357

fight against Henry. In particular, Count John of Alençon, the son of William Talvas, had proven to be a thorn in the King’s side, and Henry responded to the threat by relying on men like Ermengarde’s father, Richard de Beaumont-surSarthe, who was given custody of the important fortified town of Bourg-le-Roi, just south of Alençon, between 1183 and 1189.76 The advancement of Richard was partially successful. Richard played a pivotal role in Henry’s drive to prevent support being provided to his sons in northern Maine, which proved to be of use in 1189 when Geoffrey and his grandfather, Ralph II de Fougères, also joined Philip Augustus and Count Richard against him.77 Henry, along with William Marshal, even found refuge with Richard de Beaumont during his sons’ attacks against him. 78 However, Henry was losing the struggle against his sons and their allies and he finally died on 6 July 1189 after humiliatingly giving homage to King Philip for all of his French lands and after officially recognising Richard as his heir.79 This change in leadership presented the King of Scots with an opportunity. Although there was no confusion concerning the succession after Henry’s death, there may have been concern about how the new King would view old arrangements. King William of Scotland’s marriage to Ermengarde de Beaumont had bound William to a new kin group but it was unclear whether King Richard intended to continue his relationship with the King of Scots on the same footing as his father or whether he wanted to renegotiate the terms between them. Richard’s plans were soon public knowledge. He had agreed to take the Cross in 1187 and he was committed to fulfilling this obligation even after he had become King. For this reason, in an effort to raise funds and maintain peace with his northern neighbour during his absence, Richard restored Scotland to its pre-1173 76 

Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 402. Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 62–64. However, Richard believed Geoffrey and Ralph partly responsible for his father’s death so disseized them although they later regained their lands. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 52; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 62–64; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 72. 78  Painter, William Marshal, p.  70; History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, ll. 8907–10; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 68. Howden only mentioned that Henry went to Maine, whereas l’Histoire was more explicit about where he stayed — Saint Suzanne, which was held by Richard, Viscount de Beaumont. 79  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 70–71; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 365–66. 77 

358

Chapter 7

status in the Quitclaim of Canterbury. The Quitclaim returned Roxburgh and Berwick castles to the Scottish crown on 5 December 1189 for ten thousand marks.80 However, William was still the liegeman of Richard in the same way his ancestors had been. He still owed fealty to Richard for his English lands. The only difference was that William’s men were released from personal homage to the English King. This difference is important for it suggests, as already argued, that William did not necessarily hold Scotland of Henry in 1174, but that he and his men were personally sworn to the King of England and thus not free to take action that broke their faith. In the Quitclaim negotiations, another Anglo-French lord became prominent. The man chosen to head the mediation between Richard and William in 1189 was one of Richard’s most trusted servants, William de Longchamp, Bishop-elect of Ely. William de Longchamp was suited to manage the relationship between the two kings because of his territorial status as Bishop of Ely in England and because he was a member of an eminent cross-Channel family well-recognized throughout France. Moreover, the King of Scots was probably already familiar with William’s father, Hugh de Longchamp. Through his wife, Hugh held land in Herefordshire where he was a tenant of Hugh de Lacy, and he was also a fermor, or tax collector, at Conches that was held by King William’s kin, the lords of Tosny.81 Furthermore, Hugh had been in the opposition party in 1173 and 1174. After Hugh’s death in c. 1187, Bishop William’s brother, Stephen, succeeded to the family’s estates at Longchamp in the French-held territory of Beauvasis and he married into a family that was also well-connected in France. His wife, Petronilla, was a daughter of Hildeburgh de Baudemont (from Bus-St-Rémy just north of Vernon) and of Osbert de Cailly (from the Roumois).82 Another brother, Henry, succeeded to the Herefordshire lands and became sheriff for King Richard. 80  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 50; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 28–29; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 98, 102–03. 81  R. V. Turner, ‘Longchamp, William de’. 82  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cxi–cxiii. Hildeburgh remarried after the death of Osbert to Robert de Picquigny in c. 1211. Robert was a member of the Picquigny family in Picardy mentioned in Chapter 5. Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 696 j, 711 g, 714 b. Robert was escheated by Philip Augustus of the fees at Basquevillam and Baudemont in Vernon that he had gained through his wife. The Picardian Picquignys were probably related originally to the English branch for they both favoured the name ‘Robert’ as did the branch that settled in Scotland under the name Pinkeney. The English branch held land in Buckinghamshire, Essex, and Northamptonshire: Liber feodorum, ed. by

King William and King Richard

359

William de Longchamp began his career in the service of Geoffrey and Constance of Brittany before he joined Richard’s court in Aquitaine. When Richard became King, Longchamp followed his master to England and was given the bishopric of Ely after the death of Bishop Geoffrey Ridel in 1189. Geoffrey Ridel also had several contacts in Scotland and France, and he had met William’s father, Hugh de Longchamp, when Geoffrey was Archdeacon of Canterbury.83 Longchamp’s position at Ely familiarized him with families in Scottish circles. Selecting a man who was knowledgeable about the Scottish court ensured that the negotiations went smoothly in 1189 and Longchamp continued to figure prominently in communication between the crowns throughout the 1190s. The new king proved to be astute in his dealings with the Scots in another way as well. King Richard’s decision to improve relations between the kingdoms included the Scottish King’s brother, David. Richard adopted a similar method of dealing with the Scottish crown as that used by his great-grandfather, Henry I. By granting favours and giving the King of Scots’ brother a role in his own court, Richard opened a second avenue for support in Scotland in case relations went sour with King William. This policy had worked well between Henry I and David I and it worked equally well for Richard and Lord David. From the moment of Richard’s accession to the throne, David was given a prominent role in the English court. He attended the new King of England’s coronation along with other eminent Anglo-French lords like Nigel de Moubray, Robert de Lacy, Reginald de Lucy, Constable William du Hommet,84 Ranulf de Glanville, Gilbert Basset, and most of the earls of England.85 Most of these men still held land and served abroad for the King. Furthermore, David was given a special status in the coronation ceremony on 13 September 1189 when he, Earl Robert III of Leicester, and the English King’s brother, John, Count of Mortain and Earl of Gloucester, carried the swords of state. Then, ten months later in the Touraine, King Richard confirmed to David the earldom of Huntingdon with ‘all liberties, quittances, and free customs’ that his grandfather had held under King Henry I.86 Maxwell Lyte, i, 16–19, 579; ii, 931, 943, 1432. Cf. Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.2, 775 about a later Robert de Picquigny’s claim to the Scottish throne in 1292. 83  Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i, 261–86, 297. 84  Pipe Roll of 9 Richard I, pp. 22, 38, 83, 89, 93. William du Hommet also owed service in Hampshire, Oxfordshire, Northamptonshire (Doddington), and Rutland. 85  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 80–81. 86  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 31; Foedera, conventiones, litte-

360

Chapter 7

Philip II de Coloummiers, Constable William du Hommet of Normandy, and Hugh Bardulf figured among those who witnessed the King’s grant of Huntingdon to David. These men came from families involved with the Scottish court well before 1190, and, as in the case with William du Hommet, had even witnessed with David before Richard’s reign.87 Philip de Coloummiers may not have had traceable interaction with the Scottish court but his father was probably the man of the same name who witnessed for King Malcolm IV at Les Andelys in 1159.88 He owed service to King Richard in Dorset and Suffolk,89 and he fought for Richard on the Continent in 1189.90 Hugh Bardulf had also had previous contact with the Scottish court. He witnessed the restoration of Berwick and Roxburgh to King William on 5 December 1189, and he had attended Duke Geoffrey of Brittany’s court in late 1184.91 He may have been related to Thomas Bardulf and his brothers, Radulphus, Peter, and William Oliver, who received confirmation of their settlement with the abbey of St-Sulpice-la-Forêt from Duchess Constance of Brittany in 1187.92 Between 1189 and 1204, Hugh was in regular contact with the King of Scots and Earl David through his landholdings in Northumberland and he also held land in Lincolnshire, in the midst of lands in the honour of Richmond.93 rae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 48. Foedera has a misdated copy of this grant. It is dated for 24 June 1189 and says that Henry II died on 6 June 1189 but Henry didn’t die until 6 July 1189 and Richard was not in Tours until June 1190: Itinerary of King Richard I, ed. by Landon, p. 35. 87  Eyton, Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 285. Saher de Quincy (unclear which one but probably the elder Saher), Hommet, and David witnessed a charter for the King to Bungay Nunnery (in Suffolk) in February 1188 at Geddington. Bungay had been founded by Roger de Glanville in c. 1160: W. Page, ‘Houses of Benedictine Nuns’, pp. 81–83. A member of the Hommet kin group seems to have settled in Scotland and was a witness for Robert IV de Brus of Annandale: Macquarrie, ‘Notes on Some Charters of the Bruces of Annandale’, p. 73 88  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, i, 208. 89  Pipe Roll of 9 Richard I, pp. 36, 229. 90  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 446, ll.  8803–12; 450, ll.  8866–69. Philip II de Coloummiers was one of Richard’s trusted followers even before he became king. 91  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 32, 34, 36–39, 41, 45, 48, 52, 54–56; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 17–18. 92  Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 48–49. 93  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxxxix. Hugh Bardulf was joint-castellan of Drincourt with Hugh de Moreville in 1180. The Bardulfs later also gained fees of the Warennes in dower: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 362, 529–30, 533, 535, 604; ii, 920, 942, 946, 982, 990–91, 1012, 1024–25, 1040, 1063, 1073, 1084, 1475. They were also tenants of the Percys in the honour of Moubray: Early Yorkshire Charters, Percy, xi, 216–17.

King William and King Richard

361

Earl David was prominent in King Richard’s following. He may have been with the king when three days after the earldom of Huntingdon was confirmed to him Richard met with Duchess Constance at Tours to confirm the sale of lands in Vendelais to André II de Vitré.94 Although David did not appear on the witness list, he may have met with his niece, Constance, at this time and he would marry Maud, the sister of Constance’s second husband, Earl Ranulf V de Blundeville of Chester, two months later.95 Earl David’s marriage to Maud of Chester complemented Richard’s desire to align the Scottish and Breton courts with his own interests. Richard’s father had already shown special favour to Maud’s brother when he gave the widowed Duchess Constance in marriage to the Earl of Chester in order to bind her more closely to his court, but Constance proved a reluctant bride and avoided her husband throughout their marriage until they were divorced in c. 1199.96 It may have been Richard’s intention to bring Constance to heel through her uncle, David. Won over by having gained Huntingdon and a wife from the powerful family of Chester, David proved to be a valuable ally. Richard’s series of measures to appease the Scottish brothers was motivated by his desire to take the Cross and to fight on the Third Crusade. If he was to leave his kingdom for a protracted length of time, it was necessary that he ensured peace with his northern neighbour and that he made arrangements concerning his succession particularly since he was still unmarried and thus did not have a legitimate heir. Leaving his kingdom without a designated heir was particularly important because he was having problems with his brother, John, who proved a threat to Richard. The choice of heir and circumstances surrounding the arrangement for the succession are very interesting and reveal the problems that Richard was facing early on in his reign. Richard left England in early 1190. By November, he named his nephew Arthur, son of Duchess Constance and of his brother, Geoffrey, as his heir. The succession was made clear in a treaty with Tancred of Sicily in which Arthur 94 

Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, pp. 56–57; Everard, Brit­­ tany and the Angevins, p. 158. Mathilde de Mayenne, André’s former wife, sold these lands to him. 95  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 146. 96  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 7; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 159–61. Judith Everard makes the case that Richard was trying to reunite the estranged Ranulf and Constance in 1195 to help Ranulf assert his ducal rights through his wife. She states that the Bretons revolted against Ranulf, which led to his and Richard’s decision to capture Constance and to use her as a bargaining chip in order to force his claim and obtain possession of her son and heir, Arthur. Constance did not recognize her husband in Brittany nor did he convincingly claim any rights in Brittany through her.

362

Chapter 7

was betrothed to Tancred’s daughter and the marital agreement was sealed with the gift of the famous sword, ‘Caliburn’, or Excalibur, said to have belonged to the legendary King Arthur.97 In return, Tancred paid Richard two instalments of 40,000 ounces of gold, and Richard secured the alliance by informing Pope Clement of the succession of Arthur.98 Richard also entrusted his justiciar, Bishop William de Longchamp of Ely, with making a secret treaty with the King of Scots, the great-uncle of Arthur, to obtain his support for Arthur.99 In this secret treaty, King William promised to aid Arthur as Richard’s heir against Richard’s brother, John, if Richard died on the crusade.100 Another issue that might have influenced Richard to approach King William concerning the succession was that he was already having problems in the north of England. Richard had been forced to send William de Longchamp into York in May 1190 to put down a serious attack led against Jews in the city, whom the citizens believed were being shown preference by the King of England.101 The leaders of these rebels had fled to Scotland where Richard probably hoped they would stay.102 Although he could not force the King of Scots to hand the rebels over, he could prod the King to prevent them from returning to England, especially if Richard was entrusting William with the succession. 97 

Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 106; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 63, 97, 100; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 85–86; Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 52–53; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 133, 135–36, 138, 159; Ambroise, L’Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, ed. by Paris, p. 27, ll. 976–1002; M. Warren, ‘Roger of Howden Strikes Back’. Arthur was to receive Angers at the death of Richard as part of this treaty as well. Gilbert de Vascoeuil acted as surety for Richard in this treaty and his family may have been related to the Warennes and Mortemers. Cf. Keats-Rohan, ‘Aspects of Robert of Torigny’s Genealogies Revisited’. 98  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 65; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 135, 137; Aurell, L’Empire des Plantagenêt, p. 166; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p. 45. 99  Chronica de Mailros, p. 100: ‘[…] constituit Arturum ducem Britannie heredem suum, tam de Anglia quam de ceteris terris suis, si ipse sine prole decesserit; et hoc sacramento episcoporum et comitum et baronum suorum fecit confirmari.’ (‘[…] He established Arthur, Duke of Brittany, his heir, even of England of all his other lands, if he died without an heir; and this was confirmed by the sacrament of his bishops, counts, and barons.’) 100  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 335–36. 101  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 317; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 83–84, 107–08; M. J. Kennedy, ‘“Faith in the One God Flowed”’. 102  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 323.

King William and King Richard

363

Despite all the preparations, the arrangement concerning the succession did little to stave off, and perhaps even provoked, his brother’s acquisitiveness. With good reason, Richard had doubted his brother’s intentions, but his plan was not without flaws for Arthur was a mere three years old in 1190 and faced an uncle who was twenty-three, determined to have the throne, and soon in negotiations with King Philip of France.103 Despite Richard’s attempts to keep the succession and marriage of Arthur a secret, John discovered the plot, which set the stage for trouble pending Richard’s departure on the crusade.104 King Philip also had his own axe to grind with Richard. Richard had for twenty years refused to finalize his betrothal to Philip’s sister, Alix, Countess of the Vexin, because of John’s father’s alleged affair with her.105 Recognizing that Philip was agitated about the treatment of Alix and her dower, particularly since Richard had already seized lands in the Vexin that he only had a right to by marriage to Alix, Richard tried to reach an agreement with the French King in the treaty of Messina in March 1191. In this treaty, Richard was released from his obligation to marry Alix and clearer boundaries were established in the Vexin, Berry, and Aquitaine.106 Furthermore, Richard also convinced Philip to name Arthur, Duke of Brittany, a vassal of the Duke of Normandy in order to justify his interference in the duchy. Clearly, the question of overlordship of Brittany was still unsettled despite previous acknowledgement of Breton vassalage to Young Henry, Duke of Normandy, in 1169. The Messina treaty was ultimately a failure.107 Philip returned to France cutting short his expedition to the Holy Land, and Richard followed suit when he learned about Philip’s hasty withdrawal. However, in a stroke of luck for Philip, 103  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 106; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 214; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 335. By the terms of the letter to William, Arthur would not succeed until he was at least five years old. 104  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 336: ‘[…] qui conceptum rancorum subtili pro tempore cautela dissimulans…artemque arte eludere studuit’ (‘[…] who dissembling with caution having perceived foul-play subtly at the time […] [ John] took pains to delude cunning with cunning’). 105  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 240; John of Salisbury, Letters, ed. by Millor and Butler, ii, 648–49. 106  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 84–86. Richard was making arrangements for his own marriage to Berengaria of Navarre in the hopes of producing an heir. 107  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 84–85. Richard was meant to return Alix and pay Philip for retention of the Vexin which had been Alix’s dowry, which he failed to do.

364

Chapter 7

Richard was apprehended on 20 December 1192 by the Duke of Austria, and handed over to Richard’s enemy, Emperor Henry VI.108 At this time, both King Philip and John offered money for Henry VI not to release Richard so that they could each take advantage of Richard’s absence and seize his territories.109 John had been stewing over Richard’s arrangement in favour of Arthur, and he returned to England and attempted to remove William de Longchamp from office in September 1191. His brother’s capture in December 1192 should have given John an advantage, but he failed to obtain support for a rebellion.110 He was rebuffed by both the Normans and the Scots,111 and the King of Scots explicitly stated that he was intent on honouring his arrangement with Richard concerning the succession of Arthur. He even sent two thousand merks through Richard’s royal servant and chronicler, Roger of Howden, as a gift and as part of a levy on his English estates to help obtain the release of Richard.112 John’s failure to obtain support from the Scots and Normans drove him into the camp of the King of France. John accepted Philip’s offer of his support and agreed to marry Alix Capet and perform homage to Philip.113 By March, Philip invaded Normandy, and he was initially successful, seizing control of the Vexin, Aumale, and Eu but he needed more support if he was going to win. For this reason, he made a marriage alliance in early 1193 with Ingeborg, sister of Cnut, King of Denmark, in the hope of obtaining aid for an invasion of England and as a counter to Imperial power in the north.114 As part of his new wife’s dowry, Philip received 10,000 marks of silver in August and a promise of ships for

108 

Mayer, ‘A Ghost Ship Called Frankenef ’. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 229. 110  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 384. 111  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 37; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, i, 390, 403. 112  Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 515; John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 274; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 361; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 328–30. Anderson argued that the amount given exceeded what would have been required from Tynedale and Huntingdon so this grant was partially a gift. 113  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 57. Philip granted Poitou, Anjou, Touraine, and Maine to John in January 1193. 114  Bradbury, Philip Augustus, p. 177. 109 

King William and King Richard

365

a seaborne invasion of England.115 However, the plan collapsed when Philip repudiated his wife after their wedding night on grounds of consanguinity.116 Meanwhile, still in captivity, Richard was able to improve his relationship with the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry VI, whose family had been an enemy of the Angevins for some time because they had supported the rival imperial line in Saxony. Within a few short years the balance of power in Western Europe shifted to the north of France partially because of Richard’s ability to charm Henry VI and partially because of the death of Philip of Alsace, Count of Flanders, in August 1191. Philip’s death greatly changed the structure of the King of France’s domains. King Philip’s former wife, Isabella of Hainault, had been the daughter of Count Philip’s brother-in-law, Baudouin VIII of Hainault, the great-great-grandson of Robert the Frisian’s brother, Count Baudouin I of Hainault.117 When Count Philip died without heirs, Baudouin succeeded to the county with Philip’s blessing, which gave King Philip access to direct control of Flanders, part of which was also held by the Holy Roman Emperor. Therefore, Richard and Henry VI suddenly shared a common threat and a common enemy. Alliances had changed for other reasons as well. During Richard’s imprisonment in Germany, some of Richard’s former enemies also became allies, which included the Duke of Brabant and Dirk VII, Count of Holland, the nephew of King William of Scotland. These men agreed to give homage to Richard 115 

Bibl. Nat., Germain, Gr. Chartrier, Arm. F, Cass. 111, no. 4. This same plan is seen just over one hundred and fifty years later between Dauphin Charles of France, Waldemar IV of Denmark, and the Scots in 1359. In 1359, the invasion was dependent upon payment by the French of King David II’s ransom and the French also agreed to send men-at-arms to invade England with the Scots. In addition, four hundred thousand florins were to be paid by the Dauphin to the King of Denmark, who would also send ships for the attack. 116  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp.  553–54; Roger de Wendover, Flores historiarum, ed. by Hewlett, ii, 142; Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 124; William le Breton, Chronique, ed. by Delaborde, i, 210; Riis, ‘Autour du mariage de 1193’; Bradbury, Philip Augustus, pp. 177–83. Philip’s alienation of Ingeborg lasted twenty years but the reasons for his change of heart after the wedding are still confounding historians. 117  Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, pp. 278–79. Count Philip held Flanders of his own and had a claim to Vermandois through his wife, Elisabeth of Vermandois. Vermandois was comprised of much of northern France and included key areas such as Laon, Soissons, Noyon, and Amiens. Philip Augustus seized Vermandois after the death of his first wife, Isabella of Hainault, in 1182. Isabella’s mother, Marguerite, had been married to Elisabeth of Vermandois’s brother before she married Isabel’s father. Philip also gained as a dowry through his wife: Artois, Arras, Bapaume, Saint-Omer, Aire, Hesdin, Béthune, Lens, Ardres, Saint-Pol, Guines, and Richebourg.

366

Chapter 7

and to support him against Philip Augustus. Facing a coalition of some of the most powerful lords who neighboured the county of Hainault, Count Baudouin VIII of Hainault and Flanders pulled away from his alliance with the French crown.118 Richard had surrounded the King of France from the north and from the south of France where he still held the duchy of Aquitaine. Philip Augustus quickly found himself in a very vulnerable position and by July 1193, William de Longchamp obtained peace-terms with Philip that were to further bar any aid from Philip to John. It was even agreed that John and Philip send money for Richard’s ransom.119 This ploy partially worked and Richard was successfully released on 4 February 1194, after which he immediately returned to England where he rallied men against his brother.120 Although the King of Scots had been loyal to Richard during his captivity, Richard’s position was still precarious. He had staved off a French invasion for the moment but the threat of an alliance between the King of France and his brother was still very real. William recognized that Richard was in a weakened position and he may have sought to use this to his advantage. On 2  April 1194, the chronicler Roger of Howden described the first exchange between the two kings just after Richard’s release in which he said that Richard advanced ‘contra’ King William of Scotland to Clipstone and demanded that all those captured in the four castles of Nottingham, Tickhill, Marlborough, and Lancaster, attend him at Winchester.121 It is possible that Howden meant that Richard approached from the south ‘contra’, or opposite, William, but in the same sentence Richard ‘commanded’ William’s presence at Winchester, and when the King of Scots failed to appear Richard moved his army north towards Scotland. The threat of Richard’s army approaching from the south convinced William to change his stance and he met Richard at Malton where he ‘petuit’, or beseeched, Richard to give Northumberland, Cumberland, and Westmoreland to him by the right of his predecessors. 122 There is no evidence that King 118  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 90–94. Richard had been supporting his nephew, Otto of Saxony, against Emperor Henry VI. The counts of Hainault, Holland, and Brabant were feudally dependent on the Emperor while the counts of Flanders primarily fell under the jurisdiction of the kings of France. 119  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 61. For a recent account of revenues for the ransom see Moss, ‘Reprise et innovations’. 120  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 233. 121  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 243–44. 122  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 243–44.

King William and King Richard

367

William was openly supporting John or his rebels but the time was ripe for William to reclaim the past glory of the Scottish crown’s hold over the northern English counties as long as it did not mean war. He was not willing to fight Richard and Richard called the King’s bluff. He told William that he would hold a council with his nobles to discuss the matter, and after the two armies had parted, he refused William’s petition, saying he could see no reason to give the counties to him. He even chastised William for pushing the issue when the princes of France had become his enemies.123 Within a week of these negotiations, Richard faced another dilemma with William when the Bishop of Durham handed Northumberland with its castles to King Richard. The King of Scots approached Richard again and offered 15,000 marks for the restoration of the county to the Scottish crown, but Richard refused a second time to hand over the castles and the King of Scots lost interest in the deal.124 In other ways, Richard sought to peaceably deflate the situation with the Scots. He doubled the stipend for William’s visits to the English court and he arranged for an honourable escort for the King on 11 April.125 Despite setbacks, the two kings remained friendly and Richard honoured William in his second coronation held on 17 April 1194. William was chosen to hold one of the swords of state for Richard along with Richard’s uncle, Earl Hamelin of Surrey, and Earl Ranulf V of Chester.126 If King Richard did not understand the politics of Anjou, Maine, and Brittany, he was astute in his dealings with the Scots. He acknowledged their independence in 1189, and he included William in the succession plans for his nephew Arthur in 1191. He also doubled funds for the Scottish embassies and he was also probably behind the marriage alliance made between Earl Ranulf of Chester’s sister and Earl David of Huntingdon. King Richard had ensured that the King of Scots and his brother would remain loyal to him. Furthermore, King William recognized that maintaining an amicable relationship with Richard improved his chances 123 

Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 244. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 249–50; Chronica de Mailros, pp. 100–01. 125  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 34–35; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 244. 126  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 114; Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, i, 373; Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 80. Compare this coronation to that of 1189 when he was attended by Count John of Mortain, David, Earl of Huntingdon, and Robert Beaumont, Earl of Leicester. 124 

368

Chapter 7

of regaining the northern counties. As a result, the two royal masters were on terms that had not been equalled since the reigns of Henry I and David I. However, political instability still reigned on the Continent. The truce between Philip and Richard was short-lived and it was not long before Anglo-French families were forced to decide between their two royal overlords once again. For example, in early 1194, Earl Robert IV de Beaumont, son of the 1173 rebel and the brother of Bishop Roger of St Andrews (elect from 1189), defended Rouen for King Richard but he was captured in June by Philip.127 Beaumont’s cousin, Count Robert II of Meulan, on the other hand, was fighting for King Philip during these campaigns because his primary lordship was in French territory although he was married to the Earl of Cornwall’s daughter.128 The Count’s brother, however, remained loyal to Richard. Also, Robert of Leicester’s brother-in-law by marriage was Count Amaury de Montfort of Evreux, who had recently died leaving a son, Amaury, in a minority. Evreux was subsequently taken into Philip’s hands, and Philip placed Lord John, King Richard’s brother, in charge of the garrison, but Leicester also had a tenuous claim to the county and he could have at any time pressured Philip for this very important and wealthy region in return for his support.129 In the end, Robert remained loyal to Richard, probably because he favoured his English county, and he lost his castelry at Pacy, which Philip demanded in return for his release from captivity. This arrangement was presided over by Robert’s brother, Bishop-elect Roger de Beaumont of St Andrews, by his sister, Amicia and by his nephew, Simon V de Montfort, who had all maintained contact with both kings.130 Their presence probably smoothed the negotiations on both sides. Even after the negotiations between Earl Robert and King Philip had concluded, the county of Evreux proved problematic. Philip made a disastrous 127 

Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 103. Charters of the Redvers Family, ed. by Bearman, pp. 202–03. The earldom of Cornwall was in crown hands by this point but Robert’s wife was also a granddaughter of King Henry I. 129  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 98; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 63, 230, 259–61. His claim was through his great-aunt. His cousin, Count Robert of Meulan, had a better claim through his mother, who was the aunt of the former Count. Philip had only recently seized the county. See Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 61–66, 167–71, 216–18, 267–69, 288–95, 416–18, 472, 501 about importance of the county of Evreux. 130  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 253–54; Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 127; Catalogue des Actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delisle, pp. 110–12, nos 466–68, 496, 470–71; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 259–61, 343–44, 359, 418, 423. 128 

King William and King Richard

369

judgement in 1194 when he entrusted John with the county of Evreux. Shortly after he was given the county, John quickly made peace with his brother and treacherously massacred the garrison.131 This act of villainy, which struck at the very cord of the medieval sense of honour and propriety, was never forgotten by John’s peers. It proved to be an omen of John’s character as King. Meanwhile, Emperor Henry VI had not made any progress with the King of France concerning Flanders so continued to urge Richard to fight the French. Richard moved to occupy Vaudreuil burning the city and its ships in July 1195, but a month later he opened negotiations for peace with Philip.132 Emperor Henry’s response to these discussions was to refuse to support a suggested marriage of Philip’s son and heir, Louis, to Constance of Brittany’s daughter, Eleanor, who had been in Richard’s custody since c. 1190.133 Although the marriage negotiations fell through and Henry refused to ratify a treaty, Philip and Richard signed a settlement on 15 January 1196.134 Just as one fire was put out another started. Richard’s failure to support the Franco-Breton marriage against Emperor Henry VI caused the disintegration of an illustrious alliance for the duchy of Brittany and may have contributed to the breakdown in relations between a faction in Brittany and Richard.135 Meanwhile, in the midst of these campaigns in France, King William still did not open negotiations with Philip Augustus or send aid to his niece in Brittany, again, probably because he hoped for more concessions from Richard concerning the northern counties. He also had his own troubles brewing in the north of his kingdom under the leadership of Harald Maddadson, Earl of Caithness and Orkney.136 131 

Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 101. William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, ii, 131. 133  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 302. If the marriage succeeded, Richard would regain Aumale and Eu. Eu and Arques had been given to Alix, Philip’s sister, as a dowry for her marriage to William II of Ponthieu in August 1195. Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I, pp. 2, 137; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 30–32. Eleanor was in Richard’s hands by 1190. According to the Pipe Rolls, Geoffrey ‘Duke of Brittany’s daughter’ was travelling in Hampshire with ‘the Queen’ in 1190/91. This daughter was Eleanor, who was travelling with her namesake and grandmother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. 134  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 107; Archives Nationales, J 394 no. 1, no. 2 b. 135  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 7; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, ii, 463; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 159–61. The Bretons were shortly in revolt following the capture of Duchess Constance. 136  Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, ed. by Howlett, iv, 10–12; Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 303–09. Earl Harald was related to and supported 132 

370

Chapter 7

The King’s Brother The treaty of 1196 like that in 1193 was short-lived. Within months, King Richard began to campaign against Constance of Brittany and her son, who were receiving support from Philip of France.137 Despite King William’s kinship with Constance and Arthur and despite other alliances between his vassals and men who moved in Breton circles, the Scots did not send aid or support Constance against Richard mainly because Richard had been able to secure the loyalty of several men in the Scottish court. Richard won men to his side because he showed favour to them elsewhere in his realm. For example, Earl David of Huntingdon became a prominent member of Richard’s court. In April 1194, David and Robert de Quincy, Lord of Leuchars, were with Richard at Winchester, where King Richard gave Godmanchester in Huntingdonshire and lands at Nessington and Yarwell in Northamptonshire, and the manor of Tottenham in Middlesex to David.138 David was also with the King three months later commanding the royal army in Normandy when the first of a series of truces was agreed on 23 July 1194.139 Richard had been successful in his campaigning in Poitou and the Touraine though his forces suffered at Vaudreuil, where his brother, John, Earl William III d’Aubigny of Arundel, and Earl David of Huntingdon negotiated a truce with the King of France.140 This truce was very unwelcome and Richard expressed his displeas-

the MacWilliam rebels. He had been a threat to the crown of Scotland since 1179. King William relied on Ragnvald of the Isles and an army supplied from the Hebrides, Kintyre, and Ireland to subdue Earl Harald in 1197. King William also led his army against Earl Harald in 1201. 137  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 7; Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 159–61; Hillion, ‘La Bretagne et la rivalité Capetiens-Plantagenets’; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, ii, 463; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 172. 138  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 495; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 115–16. 139  William le Breton, Chronique, ed. by Delaborde, i, 197; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 39–40. Keith Stringer suggests that David may have been on the crusades with King Richard. The only possible contemporary evidence comes from The Gesta Annalia. This is based on manuscript D that claims that David was the older brother but he did not succeed to the throne in 1165 because he was across the sea fighting the Saracens. It seems strange that David, if he was older, never seemed to push any serious claim to the kingdom nor was his right by primogeniture mentioned in the 1195 succession discussion: John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by Skene, i, 257 n. 11, 315 n. 7. 140  Earl David and Earl William of Arundel were brothers-in-law; both married sisters of Earl Ranulf V of Chester.

King William and King Richard

371

ure by temporarily depriving the man who had arranged the treaty, William de Longchamp, of the great seal.141 Earl David, on the other hand, rapidly became one of Richard’s favourites. He continued to appear on the Continent throughout the 1190s, and he was possibly present at the Anglo-French peace treaty of July 1195 that was sealed by a marriage agreement between Philip’s son, Prince Louis, and David’s greatniece, Eleanor, sister of Arthur of Brittany.142 He became Richard’s man, and his relationship with his brother may have suffered. While David was abroad, relations between the two Scottish brothers deteriorated. In mid-1195, William was trying to negotiate with Richard for a rival succession to that of his brother. These negotiations were instigated by the sudden illness of the King, who, at the behest of King Richard, tried to name Richard’s nephew, Otto of Saxony (Otto of Brunswick), as William’s heir sealed by a marriage alliance with William’s eldest daughter, Margaret. Northumberland, Cumberland and Lothian were to be the couple’s maritagium, while Lothian and its castles were to be held by Richard and the northern English counties were to be under William’s control.143 There is some confusion about the identity of Margaret because the King had several daughters, legitimate and illegitimate, by that name. This confusion is exacerbated by the claim that William’s daughter was not the eldest daughter by Ermengarde called Margaret but a daughter he had with a former wife, who was the daughter of Adam de Hythus.144 The fifteenth-century chronicler, Walter Bower, mentioned this Margaret, granddaughter of Adam, in two different accounts, but he probably confused Margaret with her younger half-sister.145 The contemporary Chronicle of Melrose explicitly states that Eustache de Vescy married Margaret, whose mother was a daughter of Adam de Hythus.146 141 

Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 267. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 302; Seabourne, ‘Eleanor of Brittany’, p. 77. By this agreement, Richard was also to regain Aumale and Eu. This negotiation began after the failure of the marriage to the son of the Duke of Austria: Guilloreau, ‘Aliénor de Bretagne’, pp. 259–61. 143  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 298–99, 308. 144  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 410–11, 368–69; Stringer, ‘Nobility and Identity in Medieval Britain and Ireland’, p. 203. Keith Stringer suggests that this Adam is the Berwickshire laird Adam of Whitsome. 145  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 367–69, 410–11; Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, p. 105. 146  Chronica de Mailros, p. 100. Eustache de Vescy was an important baron of northern England and he married William’s natural daughter Margaret in 1194. 142 

372

Chapter 7

Roger of Howden, another contemporary, also supports this lineage for he calls Eustache de Vescy and Robert de Ros ‘generos’ of King William of Scotland. Ros had also married another natural daughter of William by the name of Isabel in c. 1191 after her first husband, Robert III de Brus, died.147 Robert de Ros had probably been raised at the King’s court so was well acquainted with the royal family. He was the son of the 1173 ‘rebel’, Everard de Ros, and he was also steward of the Count of Aumale in addition to holding the lordships of Wark, Helmsley and Bonneville-sur-Touques.148 The descendants of Ros, Vescy, and Dunbar were later named as competitors to the Scottish crown in the 1291 Great Cause but the families’ claims are generally accepted as having been through illegitimate lines of King William otherwise their claims would have taken precedence as descended from daughters of King William over the descendants of daughters of King William’s younger brother, Earl David.149 The basis for the illegitimacy of Ros in particular comes solely from the arguments posed in the Great Cause in 1291. It was this consideration that led the Paris lawyers to state explicitly that Ros’ claim was not accepted despite the alleged legitimation of Isabel as the ‘antecessoris’ of the candidate, William de Ros.150 Another point to be made about the Margaret named in the 1195 negotiations was that she was called the firstborn daughter of William.151 The illegitimate daughter of William called Margaret, who married Eustache de Vescy, was probably not the firstborn daughter of William. Isabel or Ada, who married Robert de Brus and Earl Patrick of Dunbar, respectively, was more likely to have been the eldest.152 William also had several other natural children, like 147 

Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 140. ‘Generos’ meaning ‘related to’. Stringer, ‘Nobility and Identity in Medieval Britain and Ireland’, p. 227. 148  English, The Lords of Holderness, pp. 37–38, 67, 151–52, 161–62, 165–66, 170–71. 149  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, ii.1, 775; Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. by Luard, ii, 666; Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, pp. 241–42, 262, 264, 294, 314; Complete Peerage of England, ed. by Cokayne and Gibbs, xii.2, 276; xi, 93. 150  Stones and Simpson, Edward I and the Throne of Scotland, ii, 362; M. Brown, The Wars of Scotland, pp. 166–68, 170, 275. 151  Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 89: ‘[…] filiam suam primogenitam’. Coventry’s account came from the contemporary Barnwell chronicler so is relatively trustworthy. 152  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 368–69, 424–25. Ada died in 1200. Bower was confused in general about the genealogy of this period. He believed Ermengarde was a granddaughter of the daughter of William the Bastard’s eldest son, Robert Curthose. He also

King William and King Richard

373

Mathilde and Alexander of Lappion, but they emigrated to France and entered holy orders.153 Whichever Margaret was intended for Otto, William met with resistance from his own nobility despite that this union would have brought William the long coveted northern counties. There were probably several reasons for their refusal but the most prominent reason given was based on ancient Scottish and more recent European customs. In the negotiations with the King, Earl Patrick of Dunbar, ‘Earl of Lothian’, stated that the Scottish nobility ‘would not accept his [William’s] daughter as queen for she was not nearest in line to the King when a brother or nephew was able to rule the kingdom’.154 As had happened a century earlier, a brother succeeded over the sons based on ancient rights of succession that had preserved the kingdom between rival lines, but by contemporary customs in Europe, a nephew could succeed.155 In either case, a male descendant of the bloodline was preferred. Earl David was obviously the brother mentioned but the nephew could have been Earl David’s son Henry;156 Arthur of Brittany, grandson of Duchess Margaret of Brittany; Henry de Bohun, son of Duchess Margaret; or Dirk VII or William I of Holland, both sons of William and David’s sister, Ada, who were also alive and of age in 1195. It might be conjectured that if William I, future Count of Holland, was considered an heir in 1195 then there may have been some truth in the 1291 ‘Appeal of the Seven Earls’, a propagandistic document that was intended to rally support against John de Bailleul, one of the two main contenders for the Scottish throne following the death of Margaret ‘the further confused the illegitimate daughters of King William. He mentioned the daughter by a daughter of Robert Avenel who married Robert Bruce (she later married Robert de Ros), but did not mention her name, which was Isabel, and he named another daughter as Margaret, who married Earl Patrick of Dunbar, who was actually named Ada. However, he did name Ada as wife of Patrick on two other occasions; Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 348–49, 476–77. 153  Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. by Luard, ii, 666; Chronica de Mailros, pp. 92, 99–100, 123; Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium Fontium, ed. by Pertz, pp. 911, 925; Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 444, 470. Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapter 3. 154  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 308. Howden gave two renditions of the story. In the second account he stated that William’s wife was pregnant at the time and he hoped for a son to succeed. If Ermengarde was pregnant she must have lost the baby or had a girl, because she did not have Alexander until 24 August 1198: Chronica de Mailros, p. 103. 155  Woolf, ‘The “Moray Question”’, pp. 145–64. 156  Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 239–40, 291, n. 6. Henry was mentioned in several charters of Earl David’s dating from 1190. He was dead by 1209 when John, David’s youngest son, was named heir.

374

Chapter 7

Maid of Norway’.157 Perhaps, to late thirteenth-century eyes, Earl David might have been willing to relinquish his own claims and prefer the succession of a nephew rather than that of Otto of Brunswick/Saxony.158 The argument against Otto demonstrated the Scots’ preference for a male heir through consanguinity. Earl Patrick of Dunbar openly denied the legitimacy of the arrangement with Otto when male heirs were available but he did not make a claim based on his own status as a son-in-law of the King nor did he make a claim based on his own bloodline going back to the eleventh century.159 Earl Patrick was speaking in favour of a Scottish descended male successor, rather than a Saxon nephew of the King of England who was not of the Scottish bloodline.160 The Earl of Dunbar and others were voicing a ‘national’ interest.161 In the end, King William was unable to secure Scottish support for the succession of Otto and thus he had to abandon the plan. As was the case during his grandfather’s reign in 1138, and in 1173 and 1188 for William, the Scottish prelates, nobles and barons had a political voice that checked and balanced crown power.162 Although the concept of the ‘community of the realm’ has been assumed to have not developed until the period of the Succession Wars in the late thirteenth-century, it is clear that this was not the case. The term ‘community of the realm’, derived from the 1215 Magna Carta of England, but the concept itself existed much earlier. In particular, the events of 1174 had a lasting detrimental impact on King William’s power. The King had declared war against the advice of his nobility and he suffered.163 The nobility would be more forthcoming and less malleable throughout the remainder of his reign.

157 

G. Barrow, Robert Bruce, pp. 44–46; M. Brown, The Wars of Scotland, pp. 165–66. Simpson, ‘The Claim of Florence’; Documents and Records Illustrating the History of Scotland, ed. by Palgrave, i, 20–21. 159  Chronica de Mailros, p. 92; Scots Peerage, ed. by Balfour Paul, iii, 253–55. Patrick was descended from a daughter of King Aethelred II of England and from King Malcolm II. 160  Norse Romance 1: The Tristan Legend, ed. by Kalinke, p. 91. Misgivings about a foreignborn nephew ruling a kingdom appear in contemporary literature of the day. This was not a new issue though the argument in this case was slightly different since Otto was not a nephew of the King of Scots. 161  Macdonald, ‘King’s of the Wild Frontier?’. 162  Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 44–45. William was also unable to collect tithes in Scotland in 1188 for the crusades because his nobility refused. 163  Jordan Fantosme, Versification, ed. by Johnstone, pp. 19–20, ll. 396–407. 158 

King William and King Richard

375

The unravelling of the Saxon-Scottish negotiations also came as a blow to King Richard. While King William was trying to name Otto his heir, Richard was negotiating with Emperor Henry VI, Otto’s rival to the Imperial throne.164 Richard had not paid his ransom to Henry VI that was owed from the 1193 terms for his release and Henry still held some of Richard’s men as hostages. Richard may have hoped to win over Henry VI’s support if he appeared to be removing support for the Imperial title from his brother-in-law and Otto’s father, Henry ‘the Lion’, Duke of Saxony. Henry  VI would certainly have encouraged Otto’s succession to the Scottish throne for if King William died, Otto would have been diverted to the Scottish kingdom and less likely to interfere in the Imperial succession.165 Although our only source for the marital negotiations, Roger of Howden, did not name who led the discussion, it might be suggested that William de Longchamp would have been the most likely candidate since he was well-familiar with the Imperial court having led the negotiations for Richard’s release in 1194 and he was at the Imperial court in July 1195 and in England earlier in the year.166 He was placed in charge of the embassy that went to the Emperor to discuss the continuation of the war with Philip and was detained briefly by Philip in transit.167 He was also trusted by all three courts and had developed a rapport with the Scots to the extent that by May 1196 or 1197 one of Bishop William’s men had established himself as an important burgess in Scotland with recognition from the Scottish crown.168 By the end of the summer of 1195, the Saxon-Scottish succession arrangement collapsed and William recovered from his illness, but these negotiations 164  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 300–01; William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, ii, 131. 165  R. V. Turner and Heiser, The Reign of Richard Lionheart, pp. 203–04. Henry VI was elected Holy Roman Emperor and Otto was in exile in England with his father by this point but his father had continued his claims to the Imperial title intermittently until his death in August 1195. Henry VI would have been all too aware of the support to the Guelfs against him and his son and successor, the future Frederick II. Otto was not given the county of Poitou until 1196, which was the same year that his brothers were restored to their lands in Brunswick and Lüneburg, all with the support of their uncle, King Richard. 166  Itinerary of King Richard I, ed. by Landon, p. 218; Gillingham, Richard I, p. 239. 167  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 300–01. 168  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 379–80; Barlow, ‘Roger of Howden’. Geoffrey Blundus, who had served in Bishop William’s household in 1190, was granted, as burgess of Inverness, exemption from trial by combat by King William.

376

Chapter 7

may have left his brother, David, with a bitter taste in his mouth. He had been sidelined and publicly rebuked by his own brother, who had failed to recognize his right in the succession over a female. It may have been for this reason that he was absent from his brother’s charters from mid-1195 onward,169 and chose to serve Richard in Normandy or on his English estates.170 It is unknown exactly where David was between late 1195 and mid-1197, but David arrived in Normandy by July 1197 and witnessed at Rouen the alliance between Baudouin IX, Count of Flanders, and King Richard.171 He was also serving in Richard’s army in 1197. David’s diplomatic and military service on the Continent in 1197 gave him access to several networks in northern France. The campaigns had shifted further north because of the continuing conflict over Flanders, and the King of France was losing support. Philip failed to safeguard Saint-Valery-surSomme held by Bernard IV de Saint-Valery (the 1173 ‘rebel’ with the Count of Flanders) against the devastating campaigns led by Richard,172 and Richard’s success in the north of France and his embargo on trade with the northern counties caused not only Baudouin, Count of Flanders and Hainault, but also Renaud de Dammartin, Count of Boulogne, the Duke of Louvain, the Counts

169 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 302–79. It is difficult to say with any certainty that Earl David did or did not witness in mid- to late 1195. King William’s charters rarely have an internal date and therefore an estimate of the date must be based on witness lists, which are not entirely reliable. 170  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 357–59, 361; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p. 241. 171  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 67–68; Pipe Roll of 9 Richard I, p. 166; Itinerary of King Richard  I, ed. by Landon, p.  121; Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 40–41. Earl David probably left France, or at least was not attending Richard, in mid-October for he did not appear on the witness list concerning grants to the church of Rouen, nor was he present at the sixteen-month truce between Philip, Richard, and the Count of Flanders. Rouen, Bibl. Mun., MS Y. 44 [Cartulaire de la Cathedrale de Rouen], fols 98–99. This alliance was negotiated by William de Longchamp. David was at Elgin in May 1196 or 1197. It is unclear whether he was there on official business with his brother or not but Keith Stringer suggests he was taking part in the campaign against Earl Harold of Orkney: Cf. Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p. 41 for David serving with William in Caithness in 1196. 172  William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, ii, 492; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 152. Bernard III de Saint-Valery’s niece, Cecilia de Fontaines, married Hugh de Bailleul before 1210. See below. Bernard IV, Lord of Saint-Valery, died between 1191 and 1196. His son, Thomas, succeeded him. Lob-Barton, Les comtes de Saint-Valéry, p. 53.

King William and King Richard

377

of Guines and Namur, and the Counts of Blois and Perche to ally with him.173 These alliances were significant for Richard for he had managed again to pull the Count of Flanders and several key men in the north away from Philip Augustus’ camp. The list of witnesses to this alliance between Richard and the Count of Flanders in 1197 is startling in its depiction of Franco-Scottish connections and deserves some comment. King William of Scotland’s nephew, Earl Henry de Bohun of Hereford, who was also the half-brother of Constance of Brittany, witnessed the treaty along with his brother-in-law, Earl Ranulf V of Chester, Viscount of Avranches and second husband of Constance. Duchess Constance of Brittany was already in open revolt against Richard but obviously her halfbrother sided with his English lord under whom he held the majority of his lands. Baldwin de Béthune, Count of Aumale and Lord of Holderness, also witnessed the treaty and he was the overlord of Robert de Ros, the son-in-law of King William. Robert was serving King Richard as châtelain of Bonneville-surTouques from 1191,174 a position his Trussebut mother had held before him, but he did not appear to continue serving abroad after 1204 though he was not officially disseized by Philip Augustus after the loss of Normandy.175 The Ros family’s position at Bonneville was important. Bonneville was one of the dower

173 

R. V. Turner and Heiser, The Reign of Richard Lionheart, p. 236; Power, The Norman Frontier, pp. 361–62. Despite that Geoffrey, Count of Perche, was married to Richard I’s niece, Geoffrey supported King Philip in the early 1190s until Geoffrey was bribed with Moulins and Bonsmoulins in 1197. Thibault V, Count of Blois, was the father of Isabel de Blois, who married Sulpice III, who became Count of Chartres through his wife. Their daughter married Queen Ermengarde of Scotland’s nephew, Richard de Beaumont (sur-Sarthe). See Chapter 6. 174  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, cxi, clxiv, cxl; ii, lxxvi; Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 1; Bouard, ‘Fouilles au Château de Bonneville-sur-Tocques’, p. 355; Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 409–10, 476–77. Robert’s mother, Rohese, was the daughter of William Trussebut and sister of Geoffrey Trussebut. Robert de Ros’ uncle was also a cleric in the church at Neuville-sur-Authou before 1186. Neuville is located about thirteen kilometres west of Harcourt. Cf. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 99 for Robert’s marriage. 175  Early Yorkshire Charters, The Trussebut Fee, x, 5–7, 11; English, The Lords of Holderness, p. 151. By this point Robert had also probably been confirmed in the portion of Walter Espec’s inheritance at Old Wardon in addition to Warn and Helmsley: Cf. Holt, ‘Feudal Society and the Family’, p. 16. It may be that Philip’s remark on Ros’ failure to serve or to send knights may have been because of Robert’s death. The entry for this register is c. 1220 which would have been after Robert’s death: Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 698 g.

378

Chapter 7

lands of King Richard’s mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, and she celebrated her Christmas court there in 1191, which Robert would have arranged.176 Other men who appeared with David in the 1197 treaty were Richard II du Hommet, whose kinswoman was probably married to Philip de Valognes’ brother, Geoffrey, Lord of Burton;177 ‘William’ de Mortemer; Roger de Tosny; William de Moubray; Otto of Saxony, Count of Poitou, who had been suggested for the Scottish marriage in 1195; and Henry de Bailleul, future chamberlain of Scotland.178 Henry de Bailleul was related to Enguerrand de Bailleul, Lord of Tours-enVimeu in Picardy, whose wife was the daughter of Walter de Berkeley, chamberlain of Scotland.179 Berkeley’s lands of Ardoyne were within Earl David’s lordship of Garioch so David was already familiar with Berkeley.180 Henry de Bailleul would join the Valognes networks. He would marry Lora, the daughter of Philip de Valognes, chamberlain of Scotland in c. 1210, and he was probably the knight of Ponthieu and possibly the knight-banneret mentioned in Philip Augustus’ register from c. 1204.181 Henry’s brother, or possibly cousin, Hugh, held the ancestral lands of Bailleul-en-Vimeu and the lordship of Bailleul including Hornoy, Dompierre and Hélicourt in Picardy by 1198 so it would make sense if Henry also served for the lands the family held of the Count of Ponthieu.182 176 

Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 469–70; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, i, clxiv, 234; ii, 369; Power, ‘The Stripping of a Queen’, pp. 117–18. 177  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, clxxxiv–v; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 116; Round, ‘Comyn and Valoignes’, pp. 129–35. Robert fitzWalter plaintiff called Robert du Hommet to warrant. Robert du Hommet was most likely Emma and Geoffrey’s son who held a claim to the Valognes inheritance after the death of Geoffrey’s brother, Philip, in 1214. Robert fitzWalter’s claim came through his wife, Gunnora de Valognes, daughter of Robert de Valognes, another brother of Philip and Geoffrey. 178  See Chapter 5 about Mortemer, Tosny, Moubray, and Bailleul families. 179  Reid, ‘The Mote of Urr’; Stell, ‘The Balliol Family’, p. 153; Belleval, Jean de Bailleul, pp. 47–65; Scott, The Norman Balliols in England, pp. 255, 346. 180  Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p. 81. Walter de Berkeley’s daughter Agatha later exchanged Ardoyne for Laurencekirk in Mearns. 181  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 685 k, 744 g; Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 305, 315. It is difficult to ascertain if it is the same Henry de Bailleul since these lands were held in Flanders near Dunkerque but it is possible. However, it is more certain he held lands of Ponthieu. Henry acquired lands in the Valognes fief in Essex through his wife in 1234 and he became chamberlain of the King of Scots through his wife. 182  Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, ed. by Beaurain, pp. 64–65, 190–91.

King William and King Richard

379

Hugh and Henry de Bailleul probably received their education and military training abroad in France to prepare them as cross-Channel lords and it was perhaps during a sojourn in Picardy that a marriage was negotiated between Hugh and a daughter of Loretta de Saint-Valery, daughter of Bernard III, Lord de Saint-Valery, and of Aléaume de Fontaines, Vidames d’Amiens. Aléaume and Loretta’s son, Hugh de Fontaines, also married a Bailleul, Aenor, and Eustache de Bailleul, Lord of Hélicourt, father of Hugh de Bailleul, had also married a Fontaines, Ada, but her exact relationship to Aléaume is unknown.183 These French families tended to repeatedly intermarry in order to maintain their base of power in the north. Although they were related to the Picardian families of Saint-Valery, Fon­ taines and Picquigny, Henry, Hugh and their cousin, Enguerrand de Bailleul did not seem to support Philip Augustus at any stage of their careers as their extended kin did.184 In Henry’s case, this was even true when his Scottish lord was actively seeking a French alliance as happened in 1216. The family tried to stay as neutral as possible in the Anglo-French and Anglo-Scottish conflicts, which was successful for they were not disseized in England, Scotland or France until the fourteenth century. All of these northern French families were involved with Earl David throughout the 1190s because of his service on the Continent. David would never be as prominent again in Scotland, but his loyalty to Richard stood him in good stead with Richard’s successor, John. David was with John at Château Gaillard in October 1199 when a charter was granted to the burgesses of Dundee.185 Furthermore, although Earl David’s name did not appear on the treaty between John and the Count of Flanders in August 1199 at Château Gaillard, there were other Scots or men with Scottish connections whose names did appear on the treaty. These men were Saher de Quincy; Constable Roger de Lacy of Chester and Lord of Clitheroe in Lancashire and Pontefract in Yorkshire; Earl Ranulf V of Chester; Count Baldwin de Béthune of Aumale; Robert de Ros; 183 

Stell, ‘The Balliol Family’, pp. 150–54; Reid, ‘The Mote of Urr’, pp. 11–19. Enguerrand de Bailleul, Lord of Tours-en-Vimeu, who married the daughter of Walter de Berkeley, chamberlain of Scotland, was probably a cousin not brother of Hugh and Henry. Eustache and Bernard II were brothers and both sons of Bernard I de Bailleul. Enguerrand was probably the son of Bernard II while Hugh, and probably Henry, was the son of Eustache. Cf. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 513 and Chapters 5 and 8. 184  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 316, 319, 329. They were fighting in the service of the Count of Boulogne. 185  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 43.

380

Chapter 7

Eustache de Vescy; Earl William III d’Aubigny of Arundel; Count Robert of Meulan; Earl Robert IV of Leicester; Peter de Brus; and Henry de Bailleul.186 David’s presence on the Continent in the 1190s might even have been the inspiration for setting some of the plot of the romance, Meraugis de Portlesgauz, at ‘Lindesores’, or Lindores, in Scotland.187 Lindores was one of the Scottish territories that William had given to his brother in c. 1178,188 and David had founded an abbey at Lindores between 1191 and 1195.189 The author of Meraugis, Raoul de Houdenc, must have come into contact with David or with men who knew intimate details about affairs in Scotland. Besides Lindores, Raoul used other Scottish inspired place-names in his romance like Haddington and the Firth of Forth, or ‘Isle sans Nom’, and Lammermuir.190 In fact, the majority of the romance was set in Scotland. Raoul also made the hero a Breton from Saint-Brieuc, which was in the midst of the territories that fell to David’s former brother-in-law, Conan IV.191 The romance was probably written

186 

Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17, fol. 197. This manuscript is undated. It was made between John, Count of Mortain, and Philip, Count of Namur, brother of the Count of Flanders. In this treaty there is also a Philip, son of Earl Saher, witnessing. Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 77; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 29–30, 495–96; Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Martainville, MS Y. 94, fols 200, 216, 221. 187  Raoul de Houdenc, Meraugis de Portlesguez (roman arthurienne du XIIIe siècle), ed. Michelle Sczilnik (Paris, 2004), pp. 82, 83, ll. 129; pp. 84, 85, l. 179: ‘Lindesores’ is first mentioned in the early thirteenth-century Merlin Vulgate, where it is located in the forest of Broceliande. Raoul was probably slightly earlier than the Vulgate cycle so ‘Lindesores’ may first have appeared in Meraugis. 188  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 257. 189  Chartulary of the Abbey of Lindores, ed. by Dowden, pp. 2–7, 102–07, 181–83, 284–85; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 357–59, 361, 475. Earl David’s whereabouts during this time are difficult to ascertain. He was in Scotland in March 1195 at Lindores in Fife though he had been serving Richard in Normandy the year before. Cf. Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, p. 241. 190  Raoul de Houdenc, Meraugis de Portlesguez, ed. by Sczilnik, pp. 84, 85, ll. 130, 139; pp. 284, 285, l. 3380; pp. 286, 287, l. 3384; pp. 394, 395, l. 5128; pp. 392, 393, l. 5083. The lady of Lammermuir was juxtaposed to the main heroine, Queen Lidoine. It might be suggested that even the name ‘Lidoine’ was a play on Lothian, and though she was the daughter of the king of Escavalon, she was clearly French: ‘...Lidoine rose e flor de lis’. Meraugis, pp. 88, 89, l. 233. Lidoine agreed that the tourney be held at Lindesore but under the condition that the lady of Lammermuir be her equal. Scotland is also directly mentioned as protecting one side of the coast of Britain: Meraugis, pp. 338, 339, l. 4238. 191  Saint-Brieuc was in Conan’s lordship of Lamballe where he had retired after 1166.

King William and King Richard

381

between 1190 and 1215,192 when the Bretons were at the forefront of politics between England and France.193 It is very possible that Raoul, who was from Houdain, just south of Béthune, came across David or other Anglo-French Scots during the various negotiations with Count Baudouin IX of Flanders.194 These were important years in the development of Earl David’s career. He had aligned his political interests with those of the kings of England at the risk of alienating his brother and he rose in prominence as an English lord. While Earl David was making a career for himself in England and France, King William’s relationship with Continental lords changed. He did not appear interested in supporting a French alliance. He was having trouble in the north of his kingdom and did not regain control until 1197 with the help of Ragnvald, King of the Isles and Man.195 By that point, Richard had sufficiently smoothed relations with Philip and with Constance of Brittany. Furthermore, William and Richard had established a stable relationship. It was not until the death of Richard in 1199 that the Scots’ political agenda fell in line with the French and therefore more so with the Bretons. The repercussions from the alliance with France in 1173 had not faded from the memory of those who had been involved in the war. These memories had acted as a deterrent and prevented families from allying against the Angevin King. This was a sentiment voiced as late as c. 1199.196 However, Richard’s sudden death in 1199 was to dramatically and swiftly change relations between the three kingdoms as men began to abandon the new king, John, and his questionable methods of winning the succession. Although David continued to serve the new King of England, King William reopened negotiations with France and pulled away from the English alliance. It was not long before another Franco-Scottish alliance was under discussion. 192 

Raoul de Houdenc, Meraugis de Portlesguez, ed. by Sczilnik, pp. 32–36. Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, p. 160; William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. by Howlett, ii, 463. 194  He was probably from Houdain, just south of Béthune. David may have met Raoul de Houdenc during the writing of the 1197 treaty. 195  Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. and trans. by Anderson, ii, 350–51; Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 25; Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 418–19; Sellar, ‘Hebridean Sea-Kings’, pp. 197–99. Sellar offers another equally plausible point of view that Ragnvald of the Isles, a son of Raghnild, daughter of Ingeborg of Orkney and of Olafr of Man, led this expedition through his mother’s right to Orkney. Ragnvald or his cousin, Ranald, was granted Caithness by King William for this aid in 1197. 196  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 44–48. 193 

Chapter 8

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

Succession Crisis and Scottish Diplomacy The death of King Richard on 6 April 1199 triggered a division in loyalties only three days after an uneasy peace had been concluded once again between Richard and Philip.1 Although Richard named John his heir just before his death, he had already designated Arthur as his successor in 1190.2 A precedent, therefore, had been established for Arthur to challenge John’s claim to Richard’s inheritance.3 Territories that had been so instrumental in the 1180s in rallying support for Young Henry and his brother, Geoffrey, proved to be the same areas that immediately caused problems for John in 1199. Men from Anjou, Maine, Brittany, and the Touraine all supported Arthur’s claim to the inheritance and declared fealty to him.4 Furthermore, the King of France, Philip Augustus, also supported Arthur, who was placed in his custody shortly after Richard’s death. Custody of Arthur, who was only age twelve at the time and thus a minor, pro1 

Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 73. Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 74. 3  Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 145. Rigord even stated that in 1199 Arthur was still a boy, age twelve, but Duke of Brittany in name. Cf. Robert-Barzman, ‘La conquête de la Normandie’ for a recent study on the importance of Guillaume le Breton’s interpretation of the campaigns between Philip and the kings of England. 4  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 86–87. 2 

384

Chapter 8

vided Philip with a legitimate right to remove John and to elevate Arthur over the French territories and perhaps even over England. Philip and Arthur also had another issue that worked in their favour. Suc­ cession laws were still vague and continued to be for over a century, which allowed for claimants from different stems of a kin group to legitimately step forward for consideration.5 Rivalry over succession was commonplace as has already been proven in the case of the Succession War in England between Matilda and Stephen. One can see a similar problem in the succession in Scotland in 1195 when Otto of Saxony was being considered as a viable successor, iure uxoris, as opposed to the claim of Earl David of Huntingdon and the King’s nephews. Rivalry also occurred in France though not concerning the French crown because there had been no disruption in direct descent since 987. The Capetian ability to generate sons stabilized the royal succession and created a fervent belief in the sanctity of their bloodline. The twelfth-century French kings, in particular, were adept at developing their image by recreating their past and claiming descent from the Merovingians.6 This esteem for the royal lineage was to persist until the fourteenth century when the Capetian succession failed in the male line sparking a fierce struggle between the crowns of France and England.7 King John, however, faced a very different set of problems. By Norman law, the father’s patrimony often fell to the eldest, or to a specifically designated son, and the lands were impartible as part of droit d’aînesse. Conquered lands or lands acquired through marriage, like Aquitaine and Poitou, were open to question but they often fell to the younger sons who held them as an apanage of the chosen successor.8 This interpretation of succession may have been part of the 5 

Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 71. Richard may have also considered naming Otto his heir in 1198. He made Otto Duke of Aquitaine and Count of Poitou on 29 December 1198, just months before his election to replace Emperor Henry VI. Richard favoured Otto with important fiefs at the expense of his brother. Even on his deathbed, he left all his jewels to Otto. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 83. Succession laws were still developing at varying rates throughout Western Europe. In some places, like Wales, partible inheritance still predominated into the 1270s, which created problems for men like Llywelyn ap Gruffydd. Cf. Carr, ‘The Last and Weakest of his Line’. 6  Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, pp. 20–57, 66–69, 155, 188–91, 201–10. 7  A. Lewis, ‘Anticipatory Association of the Heir’. As long as a direct male heir existed, succession was more stable in the Capetian realm because of a long tradition of associating the heir with the father’s reign before his death. 8  Holt, ‘Politics and Property in Early Medieval England’, pp.  9–13; Keefe, ‘Geoffrey Plantagenet’s Will’.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

385

reason for William ‘the Conquerors’ decision to leave Normandy to his eldest son while his second son succeeded to the newly acquired territory of England. The failure in male heirs under Henry I stalled the development of a clear and legally stated succession law in England, which was further compounded later in the century by Henry II’s lack of a consistent policy concerning the inheritance of the Angevin territories.9 Henry II’s distrust of his sons confused the issue of succession as he promised pieces of his kingdom to one son only to change his mind. It was with such a legacy that Richard also confused matters at the time of his death and on his deathbed named his brother rather than his nephew as his successor. Two men had been named over the course of his rule and thus the succession was once again open to question. Another issue complicated the succession. Henry II and his sons descended from two traditions — Norman and Angevin. According to Powicke, by Angevin law the son of the elder brother succeeded a younger brother.10 Thus, most of the Angevins accepted that Arthur’s right through his father took precedence over his uncle, while the Normans and Anglo-Normans, supported the younger brother, John, for their own political reasons.11 Sir James Holt recently pointed out that, though Anjou, Maine, and the Touraine did favour Arthur in 1199, the contemporary chronicler, Roger of Howden, did not say explicitly that the reason was because of a firm understanding of the Angevin succession laws.12 Henry himself had problems with the Angevin succession because of his brother, Geoffrey VI of Anjou, who had been named his father’s heir to Anjou on his deathbed.13 Count Geoffrey V of Anjou also struggled against his brother, Helias, so succession was still an open question and usually determined simply by who was the victor.14 By the time of Richard’s death, John had made many enemies. He had rebelled against his brother, Richard, and allied with the King of France when 9 

Le Patourel, ‘The Norman Succession’. Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 130–31. 11  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 86–87; History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, ii, 92–97, ll. 11861–11908; William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, ii, 149. The Norman succession law was probably less a law about ancient custom than a decision determined by the fact that many of the Norman barons were also feudal dependants in England. 12  Holt, ‘King John and Arthur of Brittany’, p. 86. 13  Keefe, ‘Geoffrey Plantagenet’s Will’, pp. 266–74. 14  Dunbabin, France in the Making, pp. 189, 338; Barton, Lordship in the County of Maine, pp. 92–93; Bradbury, ‘Fulk le Réchin’. Cf. Le Patourel, ‘The Norman Conquest’ for earlier discussion of succession in Normandy and Anjou. The Angevin succession problems have a long history. 10 

386

Chapter 8

Richard was under the protection of God as a crusader.15 John’s alliance with Philip was not only an affront to the moral principles of the day because Richard was on a holy crusade but he also threatened the stability of his brother’s realm in the name of self-interest.16 John had exposed his true character.17 Immediately following Richard’s death in 1199, even John recognized the threat that his nephew posed to his succession. His first reaction was to seize the royal treasury at Chinon to finance the campaigns he knew would be necessary to win the throne. He also began to legitimate his position in the realm by officially claiming his position as rectus heres, rightful heir.18 The term rectus heres was also used by King Stephen against Empress Matilda during the Succession War so John was resurrecting a pre-existing concept about lawful succession.19 The claim of a son of the older brother was a viable threat particularly since Arthur’s base of power in Brittany had intermittently been a hotbed of discontent directed against the Angevin kings for the past thirty-five years. John and Richard’s actions towards Arthur and his sister, Eleanor, who were each imprisoned or held captive by their uncles, in the case of Eleanor for nearly all her life, indicate the seriousness of the Breton claim to the Angevin inheritance.20 Neither King could afford to allow these two heirs to exercise any independence particularly since there were factions at work in the duchy that were always willing to fight against the Norman claim of overlordship. In fact, Breton distaste of Richard’s interference in the duchy between 1189 and 1199 immediately aligned much of the nobility with King Philip when John succeeded.21 15  Annals of Margan, in Annales Monastici, ed. by Luard, i, 24; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 63, 65; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 85–86, 106. 16  Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 106. 17  See Richard of Devizes, De Rebus Gestis Ricardi Primi, ed. by Howlett, pp.  60–63; Cf. Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, ed. by Stubbs, pp. 333, 359. 18  See Vincent, ‘Jean, Comte de Mortain’ for a recent assessment of John’s early career. W. L. Warren, King John, p. 48. 19  Holt, ‘King John and Arthur of Brittany’, pp. 88–89. 20  Guilloreau, ‘Aliénor de Bretagne’, pp. 257–75, 326–36; William le Breton, Philippidos, ed. by Delaborde, ii, 162–64; William le Breton, Chronique, ed. by Delaborde, i, 255, 293; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, p. 164. Eleanor was to be held in captivity from 1189 at the age of seven until her death in 1241. Her case is rather sad for she was named after her grandmother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, who never protected her claim or her freedom from her sons, Richard and John, especially after 1199. 21  Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Stevenson, p. 99: ‘[…] qui unanimiter contra ducem rebellantes’ (‘[…] who unanimously were rebelling against the Duke’).

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

387

Understanding the weakness of John’s position during the succession crisis is important to framing King William of Scotland’s renewed claim to the northern counties in 1199. William recognized that John’s troubles abroad could influence the new King to grant Northumberland and Cumberland in return for the King of Scot’s loyalty. Despite harsh criticism directed at the King of Scots by contemporary pro-English writers, King William was not foolhardy or blinded by greed for the northern counties.22 He had a legitimate claim to Northumberland and he had even held the title ‘Earl of Northumbria’ between 1152 and 1157. It was his driving ambition to regain this inheritance. The problem that William faced in 1199 was that his court was still full of men who also held land and contracted marriages with families in England and in Normandy and who were therefore loyal to ‘Norman interests’. In particular, William met with resistance from men close to him like his son-in-law, Eustache de Vescy, and his brother, Earl David. William was forced to negotiate with the King of England through men who were ‘intimates’. For example, when he sent word to John requesting the restoration of Northumberland and Cumberland ‘as his ancestors had held it’, Eustache and David were placed in charge of the negotiations and they were instructed to tell William to wait until John’s return to England.23 William was forced to take instructions from men who arguably should have been defending his rights. From an early stage, it was evident that William did not share the same rela­­tionship with John that he had been able to develop with Richard. He had attended Richard’s coronation a decade earlier, but he was noticeably absent from John’s on 27 May 1199. In his stead, he sent two relatively minor members of his court — Prior Hugh de Mortemer of May, Prior Walter of Saint Columba (Inchcolm), along with William de la Hai, Lord of Errol — whose mission was not to congratulate the King on his accession to the throne but to demand once again the counties of Northumberland and Cumberland.24 John’s response to William’s embassy was to summon William to Not­ tingham to do homage to him in early June, but the King of Scots was not in a mood to accede to John’s demand. He raised an army to lead into England, but the campaign faltered.25 On 24 June 1199, within a month of the failed 22  Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 240–41; G. Barrow, Kingship and Unity, pp. 48–56; G. Barrow, Scotland and its Neighbours, p. 74. See Chapter 6 about the historiographical problems with King William’s image following Alnwick. 23  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 89. 24  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 89–91. 25  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 91. John did prepare for war with

388

Chapter 8

campaign, John and Philip made a truce at Rouen to last until 15 August,26 but even before the truce had expired Eustache de Vescy and other men at William’s court followed King John back to the Continent (to Verneuil and to La Flèche in Maine), presumably to make clear whose side they would choose if war broke out.27 Another Anglo-French Scot, Richard de Munfichet, Lord of Cargill, also left Scotland at this time and travelled abroad, possibly to avoid making a difficult choice between his royal overlords.28 Despite John’s success in negotiating a brief truce with Philip, Anglo-Scottish relations continued to deteriorate. During John’s absence in Normandy, the bridge at Berwick had been swept away by flooding, and Earl Patrick of Dunbar and King William sought to rebuild the bridge but the Bishop of Durham, Philip of Poitou, refused. It was finally agreed it could be rebuilt in the autumn but only as it was before, with no additions.29 Distrust between the Bishop and the King had developed from previous relations with Philip’s predecessor, Bishop Hugh du Puiset. The relationship between William and Hugh seriously changed from what it had been during the 1174 campaigns when they were allies. King William began to experience problems with Hugh when Hugh fought against the King’s candidate at St Andrews between 1178 and 1183. The Bishop had even held Northumberland against him and denied him a lodging at Brackley as an insult.30 Much of the subsequent tension between the Kings of Scots and the Bishops of Durham was based on a struggle for power in northern England. As a result, Philip of Poitou, like Hugh, had concerns about the motives of the Scots in the north of England particularly while William was defying John. William. He placed William de Stuteville over Northumberland and Cumberland and restored Pomfret to Constable Roger de Lacy of Chester and then left for Normandy. Stephen Turnham was also ordered by John to turn over the lands of the see of York to Geoffrey Plantagenet, Archbishop of York, a natural son of Henry II. Cf. Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 39. 26  Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 92. 27  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 91; Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 67, 77. 28  Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 67. 29  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 98. 30  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iii, 244–46. The Bishops of Durham had been preventing William from taking possession of Northumbria in the early 1190s. Hugh was the son of the Vicomtes de Chartres as mentioned in Chapters 5 and 6, and he had two illegitimate sons, Henry and Hugh. Hugh was a chancellor to both Louis VII and Philip Augustus. Loyalties were divided within the family.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

389

Although King William was resurrecting a bid for Northumberland, there is no evidence that he was directly supporting his great-nephew, Arthur, on the Continent, but there were concerns on John’s part about William’s policy towards France. For this reason, John issued a writ in December 1199 ordering that no one should forfeit or seize the lands of Eustache de Vescy, King William’s son-in-law, until the King could ascertain the King of Scots intentions towards him.31 These concerns were justified for William was discussing a marriage alliance with King Philip, and he was planning to lead an army into England before November 1199.32 The threat against William’s son-in-law is less easy to explain and may be one of several examples of John’s paranoia, but it is also possible that Vescy had abandoned John’s cause. King John’s position was deteriorating rapidly on the Continent. On 24 August 1200, he married Isabella of Angoulême, age twelve, but Isabella was already betrothed to Hugh IX de Lusignan, Count of La Marche. John’s mistake was not only in marrying the betrothed of one of his own vassals (a violation of the code of ethics between a lord and his man), but Hugh was also an extremely powerful and important count in the Touraine.33 Hugh’s projected marriage had been intended to end a longstanding dispute between the Count of Angoulême and the Count of La Marche. Furthermore, this marriage promised Hugh the inheritance of half of Aquitaine since Isabella was the daughter and heiress of Ademar, Count of Angoulême. John’s interference in the marital agreement, with the approval of the bride’s father, alienated a lot of support in the Touraine and ultimately won John the distrust of lords throughout the Angevin realm. The couple’s coronation ceremony was held on 8 October 1200 in London, on which occasion King William again did not attend the festivities.34 He had already avoided performing homage at John’s first coronation in May 1199 and he continued to avoid giving his fealty throughout the spring of 1200 during John’s peregrination through northern England and with good reason.35 The King of Scots was in the midst of negotiations with the King of France. 31 

Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 44. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 100. Howden gave no explanation for this army. The only reason the campaign was cancelled was reputedly because William was warned in a vision before the tomb of Queen Margaret not to invade. 33  H. G. Richardson, ‘The Marriage and Coronation of Isabella of Angoulême’; Painter, ‘The Marriage of Isabelle of Angoulême’. 34  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 139, 156. 35  Duncan, ‘John King of England’, pp. 251–52. 32 

390

Chapter 8

Philip Augustus was facing problems with his domestic arrangements, which were spilling over into the political arena and working to William’s advantage. By 7 September 1200, a sentence of interdict that the papacy had promulgated against Philip had been relaxed but at a high cost. Philip was forced to put aside his pregnant wife, Agnes de Méran, thereby publicly denying the legitimacy of their children, and he was forced to restore to his side his former wife, Ingeborg of Denmark, whom he had been trying to divorce without avail since 1193.36 Despite having surrendered to Pope Innocent III’s demands, Philip had no intention of fulfilling either of these obligations and he began to cast about for support. It was in the midst of these problems that the chronicler, Roger of Howden, mentioned that Alexander, son of King William of Scotland, was betrothed to Marie, the daughter of Philip Augustus and Agnes de Méran.37 Howden treated this matter alongside the raising of the interdict in France and birth of Philip Hurepel, Marie’s brother.38 Archibald Duncan dated the marriage negotiations between Alexander and Marie before the peace of Le Goulet in May 1200 and as early as 1199.39 Based on Howden’s chronology, the marriage may have still been in place at least as late as 1201 when he again mentioned the marriage alliance when discussing Agnes de Méran’s death. Howden was personally involved in the negotiations between John and William from April 1199 until Easter 1201, and he was possibly with the papal court between 17 August 1199 and 22 May 1200, which means he would have had intimate knowledge of Philip Augustus’ case concerning the legitimacy of his children with Agnes.40 It would also have been hard for him to not be privy to the negotiations for Marie’s marriage to Lord Alexander considering his contact with the Scots. 36 

Bradbury, Philip Augustus, pp. 177–85. He married Agnes in 1196. She was related to the Hohenstaufens, who were rivals to the Plantagenet’s preferred imperial claimant, Henry VI and his son, Otto of Saxony. 37  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 138, 174. 38  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, p. 86. The time-scale does not work. If Agnes were pregnant by Philip before the Pope relaxed the interdict in September 1200 then she would have had her baby, Philip Hurepel, no later than May 1201; but, Agnes died in July 1201 giving birth to her son. Philip must not have put Agnes aside until October. 39  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 138, 174. Philip of Poitiers, Bishop of Durham, may very well have been Howden’s source for these negotiations as convincingly argued by John Gillingham. Gillingham, ‘Historians Without Hindsight’, p. 17; Duncan, ‘John King of England’, p. 253. 40  Gillingham, ‘Historians Without Hindsight’, pp. 19–20.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

391

There were other reasons why a Franco-Scottish marriage was under discussion at this time. On 18 September 1199, King William’s great-nephew, Arthur, was taken from Philip Augustus’ custody and handed over to King John by Guillaume des Roches, seneschal of Anjou. Within a few weeks, John’s harsh treatment of Arthur and his mother, Constance, caused Aimery and Guy de Thouars and others to help Arthur and Constance escape from John,41 and according to Howden, Constance and Guy were married after the entire party fled in October 1199.42 Although the pull of kinship between Arthur and Constance and King William was probably not very strong by this point, the threat to William’s niece and her son would not have harmed Philip’s case for a Franco-Scottish union. King William’s position was, at the time, already difficult because men in his court held land and owed service to King John in England and France. For example, on the same day that Arthur was handed to John and within months of King William’s planned invasion of England, Bishop Roger de Beaumont of St Andrews was at Rouen witnessing for John.43 Bishop Roger remained with John at the height of the Franco-Scottish negotiations from late 1199 until February 1201.44 Besides his attendance at John’s court on the Continent, Bishop Roger also had direct ties with France through his family. Between 1198 and 1201, he witnessed his brother’s benefaction to the Savignac abbey at Saint-André-en-Gouffern, which was also patronized by Ermengarde de Beaumont’s family.45 41 

Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, pp. 171–73. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 97; Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany, ed. by Everard and Jones, p. 124; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 418. 43  Rouen, Bibl. Mun., Coll. Coquebert de Montbret, MS Y. 17 [Chartes octroyées à la Normandie par des papes, rois, ducs, archevêques, depuis le ve siècle jusqu’au xviii], fol. 137; Norgate, John Lackland, pp. 70–71. 44  Chronica de Mailros, pp. 97, 103. Roger died in 1202. Duncan, ‘John King of England’, p. 253. 45  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp.  211–12; Power, The Norman Frontier, p. 169. St André was founded by William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu, in 1130 and was an important abbey receiving benefactions from several families. Abbaye de St-Andreen-Gouffern, ed. by Musset, pp. 4–7. Gouffern and the Passais were territories important to the Norman frontier: Louise, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême’, i, 32–35, 109–10. Cf. Caen, Arch. Dpt du Calvados, MS H 6609 [Acts of Richard, viscount de Beaumont and the family of La Porte] about Ermengarde’s father’s gifts to the abbey. The Saint-Hilaires gained Saint-André after 1204: Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, iv, 4–6. 42 

392

Chapter 8

It is possible that King William felt compelled to exile his kinsman because Bishop Roger’s loyalty was questionable. This would explain Roger’s long absence from Scotland and why he can be found serving at King John’s court and also why he was considered for the bishopric of Lincoln in 1200. 46 Although the Bishop may have fallen out of favour, other members of the kin group were able to settle in Scotland. One Beaumont even became Bishop of Dunkeld in c. 1211.47 It was because of shifts in loyalties that younger branches of the Beaumonts and their vassals were able to establish commercial centres at Berwick and Perth and they even brought other men from their fees at la Bataille in Ivry to England and then Scotland in the early thirteenth century.48 Despite Roger de Beaumont’s decision to serve John, other men in the Scottish court, who were even part of the Beaumont patronage networks in France, remained resolutely loyal to the King of Scots. For example, William Mauvoisin was named Bishop of Glasgow and chancellor of the King of Scots for his service. He was also in France in September 1200 to be ordained a priest by the Archbishop of Lyons so that he could take up his new role as bishop and it was also at this time that he might have met with men skilled in canon and civil law.49 Mauvoisin was a secular cleric with, it would seem, little in the way of an education. He had to be ordained a priest as late as 1200, after years as the Archdeacon of Lothian and as the King’s own cleric, before he could be given the bishopric.50 While in France, William Mauvoisin may also have been given the task of leading the negotiations for the marriage between William’s son, Alexander, and Philip Augustus’ daughter, Marie. William’s family may even have come into contact with Marie de France’s family because of Marie’s mother’s ties in the Yvelines that probably came to her through her dower.51 The strength of Agnes’ ties with the region informed her decision to be buried at the abbey of 46 

Duncan, ‘John King of England’, pp. 251–53. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 457, 474; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, p. 492 48  Liber ecclesie de Scon, ed. by Smyth, pp. 49, 55–56; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 321, 492–94, 503, 506. 49  Chisholm-Batten, ‘Historical Notices and Charters of the Priory of Beauly’, pp. 1–7. This advice was suggested in a letter to him written by the Archbishop. 50  Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 296, 297, 299, 334, 366. 51  Genealogica Wettinensis, ed. by Pertz, p. 229; Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium Fontium, ed. by Pertz, pp. 872, 878; Notæ Diessenses, ed. by Jaffé, anno 1195, pp. 325, 330. Marie’s mother, Agnes, was daughter of Berthold III duke of Méran in northern Italy, and of Agnes von Wettin. 47 

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

393

Saint-Corentin in Rosay, which was only eight kilometres south of Mantes held by the Mauvoisins.52 Despite such familiarity between the families, William Mauvoisin’s place in the negotiations was cut short when King Philip’s position improved and he was able to secure a treaty with Count Baudouin IX of Flanders on 2 January 1200.53 During the spring of 1200, negotiations also continued for a permanent peace between France and England though nothing was decided. King William was left facing increasing pressure from King John without his French ally. William tried again to delay giving homage, probably because he still hoped to continue negotiating with France, but his position quickly became untenable. On 23 May 1200 John and Philip made a peace treaty at Le Goulet.54 The terms of the treaty stated that Philip would recognize John as King Richard’s legitimate heir.55 Furthermore, to secure the treaty, John’s niece, Blanche of Castile, married Philip’s son, Louis, and the couple were given Evreux in maritagium. On the same day, King William’s great-nephew, Arthur, also performed homage to John for Brittany and his other lands though he remained in the custody of Philip.56 Arthur’s claim to Richard’s inheritance had become obsolete and he was, according to one contemporary source, bitter. A month after Le Goulet, Bishop Hugh of Lincoln advised Arthur to show love and peace towards his uncle, King John, but Arthur refused.57 52 

Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium Fontium, ed. by Pertz, p.  878. In 1201, Agnes de Méran was buried at the abbatial church of Saint-Corentin, in the midst of the Mauvoisin’s Yvelines lands. It may also be suggested that Saint-Corentin was named after the much older foundation of the saint at Quimper in Cornouaille. This would make sense since we do know that the Mauvoisins had married into the Porhoët family and may have brought the tradition back with them from Brittany earlier in the century. 53  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 482–83. King Philip retained all the lands in dispute except Saint-Omer, Aire, the fief of the count de Guines, the fief of Ardres, Lilles, Richebourg, La Gorgue and the guardianship of Béthune. If Prince Louis died without an heir all the lands of Flanders and Artois would revert to the Count of Flanders and after the death of Mathilda of Protugal, widow of Philip of Alsace, her dower lands would also return to the Count of Flanders. 54  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 178–85. King John also had to agree not to send any further aid to Otto of Brunswick/Saxony, King of the Romans, his nephew. 55  Foedera, conventiones, litterae, ed. by Rymer, i.1, 79–80. 56  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 115. 57  Magna vita S. Hugonis episcopi Lincolniensis, ed. by Dimock, p. 305. Arthur lost his claim to Touraine, Maine, Anjou, and Poitou in this peace. The meeting with Bishop Hugh occurred in Paris and Prince Louis was also present.

394

Chapter 8

Although King William withheld giving homage for seven months after Le Goulet, he was forced to meet with John to discuss terms. He had probably been hoping that, like every other Anglo-French treaty over the previous decade, Le Goulet would fail but pressure exerted by John and his agents in Scotland became too much to endure without any continuation of the French war. On 22 November 1200, the King of Scots finally gave fealty to John for his lands in England, which was witnessed by several of his kinsmen and lords.58 These men were Bishop Roger de Beaumont of St Andrews; Earl Henry de Bohun of Hereford (William’s nephew); Earl William of Ferrers (brother-inlaw of Earl David); Earl David of Huntingdon; Lord Roland of Galloway; Earl Patrick of Dunbar (King William’s son-in-law); Roger de Lacy, constable of Chester; Eustache de Vescy and Robert de Ros (also sons-in-law of King William); William de Stuteville (brother of Nicholas de Stuteville, Lord of Liddel castle); and Saher IV de Quincy, Lord of Leuchars. Others who witnessed the agreement were Earl Geoffrey fitzPiers of Essex; Earl Roger Bigot of Norfolk; Earl Hamelin Plantaganet of Warenne (husband of King William’s cousin Isabel); Count Baldwin de Béthune of Aumale; Earl William of Salisbury; Earl Richard of Clare; and William de Hastangs. Out of this list only two men, Roland of Galloway and Earl Patrick of Dunbar, could be said to have been loyal adherents of the King of Scots. Although Roger de Beaumont, Earl David, Hamelin, Henry de Bohun, Saher de Quincy, Eustache de Vescy, Robert de Ros, and William de Stuteville all had Scottish lands or family with Scottish lands, none of these men could be relied upon by King William to serve his cause. Saher de Quincy, Earl David, Bishop Roger, and Robert de Ros had been serving the kings of England in Normandy since c. 1190. Saher, Hugh de Moreville, and Bishop Roger of St Andrews were even sent by John to negotiate with King William in 1200, openly flouting their Anglo-centric loyalty.59 Robert de Ros and Eustache de Vescy’s positions were less clear. Eustache was witnessing the treaty with the Count of Flanders for King John in 1199 at Château Gaillard, but he was also facing the threat of the confiscation of his English lands in December 1199. Although Robert de Ros was an agent

58 

Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 141; Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 47. 59  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 46–47. Hugh de Moreville was probably related to Roland of Galloway’s wife, Helen, and to the Moreville Constables of Scotland.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

395

of John’s from 1199, he was also disseized briefly in 1205.60 King John engineered the meeting at Lincoln in November 1200 to show William how weak his position had become. William was once again thrust into a difficult position and, according to Howden, he left the meeting angrily at daybreak on 23 November.61 The reason for William’s anger was probably due to his claim to Northumberland being forestalled again. As a result, he ignored the Lincoln agreement and he continued to be a thorn in John’s side by harbouring John’s enemies. He provided refuge to Philip of Worcester, who held a rival claim in Tipperary against John’s new agent, William de Briouze.62 The King of Scots encouraged John’s enemies if for no other reason than to assert his independence and to apply pressure on John for the northern counties. Likewise, such antagonism on William’s part led John to encourage William’s men to revolt. On 6  January 1201, John approached Earl Harald Maddadson to rebel against King William, but William was able to appease Harald by restoring the earldom of Caithness to him.63 An uneasy peace had been concluded between John and William, but John’s position in France was once again under serious threat. It was not long before the King of England faced a movement en masse to divest him of Western France.

The End of Arthur King John’s position deteriorated for a number of reasons between 1200 and 1201. The first serious offense occurred only three months after Le Goulet, when, in August 1200 John married Isabella of Angoulême.64 As a result of 60 

Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, lxxv–vii, cxl–cxli; Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 18, 22, 24, 31, 49, 51, 99. 61  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 141. William may have attended the funeral of Bishop Hugh of Lincoln before he left. Cf.  Magna vita S.  Hugonis episcopi Lincolniensis, ed. by Dimock, pp. 370–71; Gerald of Wales, The Life of St. Hugh of Avalon, p. 40; Ralf de Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 171. 62  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 152–53; S. Duffy, ‘John and Ireland’, p. 240. 63  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 427–29. Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 338–41. Duncan, ‘John King of England’, p. 254; Duncan, Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, pp. 194–96. Earl Harald did not ally with John for long and he made his peace with William, buying Caithness from the King for £2000 in the spring of 1202. 64  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 119; Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Angli­

396

Chapter 8

the marriage, the Lusignans approached King Philip with the complaint that John had abused his lordship of the Lusignans by marrying the girl who was already betrothed to Hugh IX de Lusignan. Philip was only too willing to support another military venture against John, and by March 1201, war broke out in Normandy led by Hugh IX and his brother, Count Raoul de Lusignan of Eu. Suspicions about a king who could violate the rights of a vassal forced his nobility to question the character and reliability of John. His duty as lord was to protect his vassals’ rights, which was symbolized by the sword carried in the King’s inauguration ceremony. This symbol had been commented on within John’s lifetime by Walter Map who saw the sword as a sacred symbol of peace and order when in the hands of merciful lords.65 As such, several barons used John’s treatment of the Lusignans to declare their support of the family and their ally, King Philip, which enabled Philip to confiscate Poitou with some legal justification.66 Back in England, John was also coming under fire for his style of rule. The English earls met at Leicester and mandated to the King that they would not go with him across the sea unless he ‘[…] reddiderit eis iura sua’.67 John did not respond to his nobility very diplomatically for, though in a difficult position throughout his kingdom and abroad, he demanded that these men hand over their castles to him. In the north, King William of Scotland recognized that his position had just become stronger and he travelled to Carlisle in March to pressure John again about Northumberland. Although he was not granted the earldom, his appearance at Carlisle did aid the cause of others and undermined John’s plans. It was not long before John realized that he would have to scale back on the demands that he was making on the political community for he was not in a position to face Continental forces, his own men and the King of Scots. By 14 May 1201, he came to an arrangement with some of his English lords that they would send aid and money to Normandy with Constable Roger de Lacy of Chester and

canum, ed. by Stevenson, p. 103; W. L. Warren, King John, pp. 67–69, 73–76; Vincent, ‘Isabella of Angoulême’; H. G. Richardson, ‘The Marriage and Coronation of Isabella of Angoulême’. 65  Walter Map, De nugis curialium, ed. by Brooke and Mynors, pp. 12–14, 118 66  See E. Brown, ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine Reconsidered’, pp. 15–18 and R. V. Turner, ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine’; Martindale, ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine’. John’s mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, was able to claw back some support by winning over Aimery, Viscount of Thouars, and Isabella’s father, Count Ademar of Angoulême. Eleanor was extremely important to John’s success on the Continent. 67  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 161: ‘[…] restored to them the law’.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

397

Earl William Marshal of Pembroke, but in return he was forced to hand over the finances to them. The King was no longer trusted with his own coffers.68 Having obtained the necessary support for his Continental campaigns, John turned his attention to Scotland. He sent a delegation led by Bishop Geoffrey of Chester, Richard de Malebisse, and Henry du Puiset to King William that delayed giving a response about Northumberland until 29 September.69 King William had missed his opportunity. John strengthened his position on the Continent by coming to an arrangement with Count Raoul de Lusignan and then he came to terms with King Philip in July 1201.70 But this peace was also short-lived. Constance of Brittany died within a month of the peace,71 which gave Philip Augustus a legitimate reason as Arthur’s overlord and ward to intensify the war effort on behalf of Arthur’s claim to Anjou, Maine, and the Touraine. King William and King Philip could have capitalized on John’s struggle to maintain the loyalty of his men had they united and had William initiated campaigns in the north of England; however, John’s success in delaying the Scottish request for Northumberland meant that he was able to divert his energies to dealing with his position on the Continent. The time for a Franco-Scottish alliance was coming to an end. The negotiations for the marriage of Alexander to Marie de France had failed to progress and by July 1202 Marie was promised to Arthur of Brittany.72 Lord Alexander of Scotland had lost his French bride. September 1201 should have been the time when Philip and William united. The Anglo-French truce had failed and William was still awaiting John’s decision about Northumberland, but Philip was engrossed with justifying his right to make war on John. Within the parameters of ‘feudal’ law, Philip could only legally fight John if it could be maintained that John had overstepped his rights as a vassal. As such, John played easily into Philip’s hands by vigorously campaigning for support against Arthur and Philip in Normandy, Poitou, Maine, and Anjou. 68 

Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 163; Annales de Burton, in Annales Monastici, ed. by Luard, i, 208. 69  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 163–64. 70  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 149; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 144. 71  Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 173–74. Constance’s mother, Duchess Margaret of Scotland, and Agnes de Méran also died in 1201. 72  Paris, Arch. Nat., MS J 362, no. 2; Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 490–91; Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 278–79; Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Stevenson, p. 137; Chroniques des églises d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Mabille, p. 51; Petit-Dutaillis, The Feudal Monarchy in France and England, p. 209.

398

Chapter 8

Subsequently, a great divide in loyalties in England and France threatened the stability of the cross-Channel realm as the two kings struggled for hegemony, but one faction in particular tipped the scales briefly in John’s favour. The centre of political activity suddenly hinged on networks surrounding the duchy of Brittany. Bereft of their Duchess and afraid of Philip’s increasing power at their expense, some of the nobles in the marches of Brittany joined John’s campaigns. On 14 October 1201, Juhel de Mayenne, son of the 1173 opposition leader, Geoffrey, swore fealty to John at Chinon.73 John also successfully bribed Constance’s Poitevin widower, Guy de Thouars, with the earldom of Richmond at the end of 1201 and the custodianship of Angers in August 1202.74 Meanwhile, between April and May 1202, Arthur now age fifteen, began to personally lead the campaigns against John. He successfully seized control of the castles of Mortemer and Gournai and met Philip at Le Mans where he did homage to the French King.75 At this stage more men switched allegiances causing a restructuring of lordships on both sides of the Channel. For example, following Arthur’s campaigns, Mortemer was granted by King Philip to Renaud de Dammartin, Count of Boulogne, and in compensation to the Earl of Warenne, who had held the lordship, King John granted to him the lands that had belonged to Renaud de Boulogne at Lillebonne.76 Despite John’s early successes in 1202, the campaigns seemed to be swinging in Philip Augustus’ favour particularly because Arthur represented a legit­imate rival claim. Philip used his wardship of Arthur and Arthur’s rights as the son of the older brother to successfully foment support. He knighted Arthur in July 1202 and officially gave Brittany, Maine, Anjou, Poitou, and the Touraine to him along with two hundred knights and a large sum of money.77 Unfortu­

73 

Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 146–47. On the same day, John also lost one of his most important supporters, Raoul de Lusignan, who renounced his homage to John and swore fealty to Philip. 74  Rotuli litterarum patentium, ed. by Hardy, pp. 4, 27. 75  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 423; Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 151. 76  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p.  347. Mortemer castle was held by William de Warenne, son of Hamelin Plantaganet and of Isabel de Warenne, a kinswoman of the King of Scots through the King’s mother. 77  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 292–93; Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, ed. by Delaborde, i, 151.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

399

nately for Arthur, within a few weeks, while besieging his grandmother, Queen Eleanor, at Mirebeau, he was captured and taken to Rouen.78 It was at this point that the Vieuxpont family appeared prominently in King John’s Continental designs. John handed the custody of his nephew over to Robert de Vieuxpont, the half-brother of the Anglo-French Scottish lord, William de Vieuxpont,79 while Robert’s brother, Ivo, was also serving the King by March 1203.80 The grant of the Vieuxpont Norman lands to Robert de Vieuxpont on 6 May 1203, when he was already in custody of Arthur and acting in John’s service as bailiff of Roumois and of Caen, was significant.81 John needed to establish men he could trust in the Roumois because this was an area dominated by the powerful Count Robert of Alençon/Sées especially when John was losing more and more of his lords to Philip. By early 1203, Guillaume des Roches, seneschal of Anjou and Maine, Count Robert of Alençon, and Aimery, Viscount of Thouars, abandoned King John, specifically in the case of des Roches, because of the King’s mistreatment of Arthur and disregard for the seneschal’s authority.82 The King failed to appreci78 

Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 94–95. Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Stevenson, p. 143. Rouen was lost in June 1204. 80  Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 107; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cclxvi. 81  Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Duchesne, MS 68, fols 26–28; Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 49, 55, 91, 107. 82  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 126–29, ll.  12521–44; 130–31, ll. 12610–19; 130–35, ll. 12620–72; Chronicae Sancti Albini Andegavensis, in Chroniques des églises d’Anjou, ed. by Marchegay and Mabille, p. 51; Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, pp. 259–65; Power, ‘The End of Angevin Normandy’; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 153, 158 and 352–53; Albert-Bruno, ‘L’Abbaye de Saint-Sauveur-Le-Vicomte’. Richard and John barely held onto the eastern frontier of Normandy between 1193 and 1204: Power, ‘Angevin Normandy’, pp. 66–67. Fighting centred in the valleys of Eure, Epte, Avre, and Seine. John’s decision to put his own men in key positions in frontier areas demonstrates the concern he must have had and he was clearly already worried about the loyalty of the Count of Alençon. For example, John made Guérin de Glapion seneschal of Normandy in 1199. Guérin was Lord of Saint-Scolasse near Sées in the Ornois frontier to Perche but he was soon succeeded by Ralph Tesson, Lord of Thury (Falaise-Calvados) and of Saint-Sauveur (Manche). Unlike Glapion, Ralph’s territories were firmly under Norman ducal control so this decision probably had more to do with Ralph’s vast connections in Normandy and abroad at a time when John needed to expand into these networks. Ralph was also probably the brother of William de Soules’ wife mentioned in Chapter 4. Ralph’s daughter, Petronilla, later married William Paynel, son of Fulk II, lord of Hambye and of Bréhal, and of Agatha du Hommet: Rotuli chartarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, p. 207. Fulk II had also been married to Ralph’s sister, Letitia, or 79 

400

Chapter 8

ate the delicacy of the situation with the Bretons and with other lords in the neighbouring districts, which was not improved by a thinly veiled threat to his nephew, who was still in his custody.83 Annie Renoux has recently argued that the defection of Juhel II de Mayenne and Count Robert d’Alençon, men who were related and had grievances against the Angevin kings that went back to the reign of Henry II, was particularly damaging to the King’s position in Normandy. She suggests that had John been able to capture these two men, whose political and military power was based on networks spanning Brittany, Maine, and Ponthieu, then he would have prevented the loss of Normandy in 1204.84 Ultimately, John’s failure to lead his Norman forces effectively and to retain the loyalty of his men damaged his position on both sides of the Channel. By March 1203, King Philip received the homage of Maurice de Craon, Juhel II de Mayenne, Guillaume des Roches, Bernard de La Ferté, Rotrou de Montfort, the count of Vendôme, Guillaume de Mauléon, and Geoffrey de Lusignan.85 Within the same month, as an incentive to keeping the peace in the north of England, John mandated to the constable of Chester that the King of Scots be allowed in perpetuity to receive shipments of wine from France.86 King John needed to encourage peace with the Scots, particularly since rumours were rife about the fate of his nephew. Although there is no evidence that King William was particularly interested at this point in his great-nephew, John may have feared that William, who had been negotiating with the King of France previously, would, like Philip, use Arthur as an excuse to wage war against him particularly since the rumours about Arthur were becoming serious. Across Europe, heads of state were calling for an investigation into Arthur’s whereabouts. The concern was that Arthur had been murdered. Gervase of Canterbury mentioned that in 1203 the Pope sent the abbot of Casamari to mediate peace between the French and English and to ascertain what had been Cecily, before he married Agatha du Hommet: Histoire du château et des sires de S. Sauveur-leVicomte, ed. by Delisle, p. 35. 83  Rotuli litterarum patentium, ed. by Hardy, pp. 17a–17b. 84  Renoux, ‘Le roi Jean’. 85  Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, pp. 492–93; Sainte-Marie and others, Histoire de la Maison Royale de France, iii, 52–53. The counts of Vendôme were also related to the rulers of Brittany and counts of Penthièvre. Maurice de Craon was a Mançeau baron advanced in Brittany under Henry II. He also held land in Surrey at Ewell and at Walton and he held the barony of Craon in Lincolnshire: Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 68, 186, 193. 86  Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 81.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

401

done to Arthur.87 Certainly among John’s contemporaries there was a consummate belief that he had orchestrated Arthur’s ‘disappearance’.88 There were even rumours circulating in England at the time that the Bretons would exterminate, ‘internecionem’, the English race, summoning the auguries and resuscitating the ancient King Arthur to champion the cause of his namesake.89 By 24 August 1203, King John issued a warning to the Bretons that his pos­­session of their Duke at Chinon was his security for their good behaviour but he still had not presented evidence that his young nephew was alive,90 and his handling of the situation alienated another important lord, Guy de Thouars, Duchess Constance’s widowed husband. Guy abandoned the King in September 1203 and many others also followed suit presuming Arthur was dead at John’s hands. Guy was subsequently rewarded by King Philip for his change of allegiance and named regent, and his daughter by Duchess Constance, called Alice, was named the heiress of Brittany. Meanwhile, the rest of Europe waited for John to prove his innocence by presenting his nephew alive.91 Robert de Vieuxpont and William de Briouze, who had held Arthur in custody for the King and who must have known of his fate, remained loyal to the King probably because they held the majority of their lands in England. On 7 September 1203, it may have been out of a sense of guilt that King John made a grant of perpetual alms to the church of Hereford witnessed at Susa by several men who had a connection with William de Briouze. Later events involving Briouze’s wife, Maud de St Valery, daughter of Bernard  III, suggest that she knew of John’s guilt in the disappearance of Arthur. She publicly accused the King of Arthur’s murder, and in response John instigated a manhunt for Briouze, his wife and family, and his allies. Several of the men at Susa who witnessed John’s grant also came to Briouze’s defence and rebelled in 1210.92 The near contemporary Margam Annalist even noted that Briouze was 87 

Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 95. Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 196. This account came from the contemporary Barnwell chronicler. He said there was uncertainty about the fall, ‘[…] dubium quo casu […]’, of Arthur. 89  Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 196. 90  Rotuli litterarum patentium, ed. by Hardy, i, 17 b. 91  Arthur’s sister Eleanor was still held captive by John. 92  Calendar of the Charter Rolls of Henry III, ed. by Maxwell Lyte and others, pp. 256–57. The witnesses were William de Briouze; Briouze’s son-in-law Earl Robert IV of Leicester; Robert fitzWalter; Saher de Quincy, and Eustache de Vescy among others. It was obvious by this time what had happened to Arthur. 88 

402

Chapter 8

initially loyal to John and was among those who sinned grievously by supporting his coronation. The annalist also stated that William was among those who believed Arthur of Brittany had the better right ‘as the son of the older brother, Geoffrey, Count of Brittany’.93 For many, Arthur’s disappearance was the last straw. Before the year had ended, John had lost control of Anjou, Maine, and the Touraine.

The Loss of Normandy A reshuffling of native lordships quickly followed the break down in John’s position in France. Families were forced to choose sides with the full knowledge that they might be disseized permanently abroad. For example, by 19 October 1203, John confiscated the honour of Richmond from Guy de Thouars and granted all but the castles of Richmond and Bowes to the Earl of Leicester.94 In compensation, Philip granted lands in Anjou to Guy de Thouars. The King of England also confiscated lands in the honour of Boulogne in England held by Constable Baldwin of Boulogne by 20 July 1203 and Henry de Stuteville’s lands at Kirkby were granted away in May 1203.95 Bereft of support from most of his leading men, John fled from the Continent at the end of 1203, leaving many with the prospect that he would not return. It was noted in Scottish sources that, as of 2 May 1204, while the King of Scots and King of England still quarrelled, King Philip entered Normandy 93 

Annales de Margan, in Annales Monastici, ed. by Luard, i, 24–25: ‘In qua coronation omnes graviter peccaverunt; tum, quia idem Johannes nullum jus in regno habuit, vivente Arthuro filio senioris fratris sui Gaufredi comitis Britannia; tum quia licet aliquando haeres regni fuisset, propter memoratam tamen proditionem abjudicatus fuit et exhaeredatus.’ Cf. Legge, ‘William the Marshal’; Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’. The reasons for William de Briouze’s fall from favour are far more complex than represented here but there is no doubt that his knowledge of John’s role in Arthur’s disappearance played a role. The Margam Annalist even suggests that Briouze felt the weight of his sin for not upholding Arthur’s claim: ‘Et quia omnes gravissime Deum offenderunt, omnes postea per eum tanquam instrtumento suae offensionis puniti sunt et afflicti.’ It must be noted, however, that the annalist wrote after the Briouze family was hunted down and persecuted by King John in 1209. 94  Rotuli de liberate, ed. by Hardy, pp. 63–64; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 166. Robert de Vieuxpont was given Bowes. 95  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 174–77. Henry de Stuteville was also the Lord of Valmont and son of Robert, Lord of Valmont, and of Leonia: Early Yorkshire Charters, Stuteville, ix, 51.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

403

and took Falaise, Domfront, Caen, and Le Mont Saint-Michel.96 This single comment is the only indication that relations had not been smoothed between England and Scotland. Families who held land in Scotland and France had a different decision to make to those whose primary lordship was in England. They would have been influenced by where their fees or those of their extended kin were located abroad, the loyalties of their kin, and the political stance of their overlord. For example, one of King John’s loyal adherents was Payn Mesnil, a vassal of the Queen of Scotland’s brother. Mesnil’s lands were at Bretteville in the bailiwick of Falaise, which he lost in 1203 to the French crown because of his loyalty to his overlord, Ralph, Viscount de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, who had remained loyal to King John.97 The relationship between the Queen of Scots and her Beaumont kin appeared to have no bearing on her birth family’s allegiances despite pressure they must have been facing in France. Based on a seventeenth-century copy of a manuscript, it is claimed that Richard II de Beaumont, Ermengarde’s nephew, received a letter from King John in 1203 asking him not to think badly nor say anything bad of him.98 In the same year, in another letter, Richard was asked by John to give fealty and become his liegeman.99 The context seems to point to the accusations about John’s murder of his nephew and certainly shows a vulnerability in John’s perceived position in 1203. John must have recognized the pressure that his Beaumont kin faced territorially and because of their extended kin-networks, but they remained loyal to John until 1209, when King William was once again entertaining an alliance with King Philip.100 Meanwhile, John tried to salvage his position on the Continent. He had left some men behind to protect his remaining garrisons but to no avail. In May 1204, his knights faced a Breton-Poitevin army led by Guy de Thouars and Count Renaud of Boulogne, who seized Le Mont Saint-Michel and reached the western border of Normandy.101 Earl Ranulf of Chester was placed in charge of defending Avranches against Guy, who had married Ranulf ’s first wife in 1199, 96 

Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 435. King John’s concerns with the north of England support that there was still some tension. 97  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 176; Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 73. 98  Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, p. 88. Ermengarde’s father and her brother by the name of Richard were dead by 1203. Cf. Ménage, Histoire de Sable, p. 328 about John’s letter: ‘comme on lui avoit voulu faire croire’. 99  Angot, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises, p. 88; Ménage, Histoire de Sable, p. 328. 100  Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’, pp. 1–13; Pollock, ‘Auld Amitie’, Chapter 1. 101  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 258.

404

Chapter 8

but he was unsuccessful.102 Subsequently, some of Ranulf ’s knights from lower Normandy, like William de St John and William d’Avranches, were probably forced to emigrate to England because Philip had seized their lands for supporting Ranulf.103 By 24 June 1204, the Anglo-French lords left behind on the Continent gave up hope of John sending aid and they surrendered to Philip after the capitulation of Rouen.104 Despite the pressures these men had encountered and the lack of royal support, John became increasingly paranoid and questioned the loyalty of men like Earl Ranulf of Chester and Roger de Montbegon in December 1204.105 He seemed to fear that they might be involved with Philip, who was again negotiating with the Scots, and Ranulf in particular was soon to be supporting the uprising in Wales under Gwenwynwyn.106 King John only avoided a war in Wales by acquiescing and returning Ranulf ’s lands by the end of January 1205, and Roger de Montbegon also regained his fees before the end of March 1205. Another man who was a victim of John’s paranoia was the Anglo-French Scot, Robert de Ros, who was also disseized in March 1205 and didn’t regain his status until May.107 It was perhaps out of suspicion that John with good reason also turned his attention back to his northern neighbour. In February 1205, King Philip of France announced a planned invasion of England with the aid of Count Renaud of Boulogne, and Renaud’s brother-in-law, Duke Henry of Brabant.108 It would have been hard to imagine that Philip would have planned to directly attack 102  Ranulf and Duchess Constance did not have a happy marriage. One can only guess at the relationship between these two former husbands of Constance. 103  Vincent, Peter des Roches, p. 142. 104  Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 435. 105  Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 16. John seized their estates. 106  Painter, The Reign of King John, p. 25. Ranulf had still not been endowed with the honour of Richmond and lordship of Roumare, which he had held claims to through Duchess Constance and through his paternal family. Instead, Hubert de Burgh was granted Roumare. 107  Holt, The Northerners, p. 206; Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i, 18, 22, 24, 31, 49, 51, 99. 108  Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Stevenson, pp. 148–49; Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 209; Genealogiae Comitum Flandriae (Continuatio Bruxellensis), ed. by Bethmann, p. 325; Gisleberti Chronicon Hanoniense, ed. by Arndt, pp. 515–16. The Count of Boulogne and Duke of Brabant had married sisters. Renaud gained Domfront from Philip in exchange for Mortemer. Renaud’s brother, Simon, obtained Ranulf Earl of Chester’s castle at Saint-James-de-Beuvron. Simon de Dammartin had already won the heiress of Ponthieu in marriage.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

405

England without either the aid of the nobility in England or in Scotland. So, in the spring of 1205, King John fortified Carlisle and other castles in the north. He also pardoned scutage due from Northumberland, Yorkshire, and Lincolnshire in April and swore at Oxford to maintain law and order by the counsel of the magnates.109 The King was trying to regain the trust and loyalty of the nobility in England. He had used this tactic earlier in the campaigns when he discharged the debts of scutage owed by Earl David, Earl Ranulf, Eustache de Bailleul, Hugh de Bailleul, Saher de Quincy, and William de Brus in order to retain their support not only on the Continent but also possibly against King William if it became necessary.110 Despite the King’s attempts to appease his men, he still struggled to win their support for a campaign to recover Normandy. The King was forced to con­­­cede, cajole and bribe the north to remain loyal in case the Scots planned an invasion. Furthermore, just months before, rumours asserted that Arthur was dead at the hands of John. He was declared guilty in absentia after he had been summoned to Philip’s court to stand trial for Arthur’s disappearance.111 The failure of the 1203 campaigns was not immediately obvious or necessarily permanent at the time. King Philip’s success in taking Normandy could only last if he restructured the lordships in the duchy. As such, Philip removed families who had fought for John, and he granted these fees to men who were loyal to him. Many of the families who benefited from the reorganization of the fees did have a claim by marriage or as extended kin but some were ‘new men’ without any previous stake in the lordships. The effect that this restructuring in Normandy had is paramount to understanding the subsequent disintegration of cross-Channel networks. The most prominent lordships that Philip confiscated were held by families who had held their fees since before the Norman Conquest in 1066. For example, the honour of Gravenchon was seized from the Montfort l’Amaurys,112 and Bellencombre and the honour of Breteuil were taken from William de

109 

p. 207. 110 

Gervase of Canterbury, Historical Works, ed. by Stubbs, ii, 97–98; Holt, The Northerners,

Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 45–48, 52–53. Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Stevenson, p. 143. 112  Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 167–75, 340–42. Amaury, Count of Evreux, had resigned Evreux to Philip in 1200 and had been made Earl of Gloucester by King John. He also gained lands through his wife, the daughter of Hugh de Gournay, in Mapledurham, Oxfordshire and Petersfield, Hampshire. 111 

406

Chapter 8

Warenne.113 Earl Robert IV of Leicester had also died before early 1204 and his Norman lands were granted to men loyal to the French King; however, Robert’s sister Amicia obtained possession of the castle of Saint-Leger-en-Yvelines, all the forest of Yvelines, the fief of Bordes and La Fouilleuse, and the forest of Gazeran in exchange for the key fortress of Breteuil in November or December of 1204.114 The significance of this latter arrangement was that Amicia was the mother of Simon V de Montfort, Lord of Montfort and Rochefort, a lord whose family became important to cross-Channel networks in the thirteenth century. Simon obtained recognition in the earldom of Leicester in 1204 from John, who saw the Earl as a worthy ally on the Continent, but Philip eventually won the Earl’s loyalty. Also in 1204, King Philip confiscated the lands of Earl Richard de Clare of Hertford and of Gloucester (from 1217) at Harfleur and Monstrevilliers.115 Other men who lost their lands in France were Count Robert of Meulan, who was married to the daughter of the Earl of Cornwall;116 Geoffrey de Sai who held fees in Arques; Hugh de Montfort who held the honour of Montfort; William de Saint Jean, Robert III Bertrand, and Ingelger II de Bohun who held land at Roncheville-le-Bertrand near Bricquebec.117 The latter two men also had connections with Brittany. 113 

Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, p.  33; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 643 a, 714 h; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 340–42, 347, 351, 355; Painter, William Marshal, p. 129. Bellencombre is south of Dieppe near Longueville. The Earl of Hertford, Richard de Clare, brother-in-law of Constable Roger of Chester, held lands in Longueville that he in turn held of the Lord of Longueville, William Marshal, until 1204. Warenne gained lands in Kent from King John in compensation. See Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. by Dugdale and Dodsworth, v, 534 about Roger’s marriage to Matilda de Clare. 114  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 448–49. 115  Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, p. 120. 116  Rotuli chartarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, p. 105; Rotuli Normanniae, ed. by Hardy, i, 93, 140; Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, pp. 20–21; pp. 96–97; Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, cci–ii. Count Robert was also the cousin of Earl Robert IV de Beaumont. He was unlucky enough to also lose the lands he held in England, which King John confiscated in 1204. He had tried to make his peace with John in 1203 but his son, Peter, abandoned John and joined Philip very shortly after and their lands were seized. Count Robert tried to give all his lands in England, France, and Normandy to his daughter, Mabilia, and her husband but both Kings refused to accept the arrangement. King Philip later granted other lands in Normandy to Robert’s grandson, Ralph. 117  Cartulaire normand, ed. by Delisle, pp. 20–21; Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 491–92; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round,

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

407

Robert III Bertrand’s uncle was William de Bohun, and both were distant cousins of Earl Henry de Bohun of Hereford, the son of Margaret of Scotland, former Duchess of Brittany.118 Bertrand III not only lost his French fees in 1204 but also his English lands in Norfolk and Essex because he was a minor and was in the wardship of one of King Philip’s men. King John assumed that since Bertrand was in the hands of a man loyal to Philip then Bertrand’s vassals would be fighting for King Philip. Philip later reinstalled Robert to his lands but the uncertainty of the times must have been very hard on families who relied for their livelihood on their lordships. Others within the kin group fared better. Robert’s step-father, Ingelger de Bohun, and his son of the same name Ingelger II, held their seat at St-Georges de Bohun, south of Carentan, while his distant cousin, Earl Henry de Bohun of Hereford, was able to retain his lands in Carentan near those of Ingelger, and his half-brothers and their heirs.119 Ingelger had maintained his relationship with the Hereford Bohuns over the years and he witnessed a charter by Humphrey de Bohun, Henry’s father, for his soul and the soul of his wife Margaret, the mother of Constance of Brittany, between 1175 and 1181.120 However, most English lords were less fortunate and their fees fell victim to Philip’s ambition to reward the men who had fought for him during the war. By May 1204, Philip granted Earl Roger Bigot of Norfolk’s lands in Nor­ mandy to Jean de Rouvray.121 He also made a series of grants to Guillaume des Roches,122 and gave to Count Renaud de Dammartin the county of Aumale.123 Philip Augustus’ expulsion of several leading Anglo-French families in 1204 pp. 346–47; Musset, Quelques problèmes posés par l’annexion de la Normandie’. Robert III Bertrand was a grandson of Adelise, the daughter of Count Stephen of Aumale and Hawise de Mortemer. Adelise had married Robert I Bertrand after her first husband, Ingelger I de Bohun, had died. Ingelger II was probably a son of Ingelger and Adelise. Ingelger I de Bohun also witnessed for his relative, Richard de Bohun, Bishop of Coutances from 1159 to 1179. Ingelger I and Humphrey III de Bohun were first cousins. 118  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, pp. 101, 275, 301, 325, 378, 417, 438, 515, 522, 528; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, p. 333. 119  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 694 h. 120  Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 440. 121  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 374–75; Power, ‘King John and the Norman Aristocracy’, pp. 134–36. 122  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 407–09, 411, 417–20. Guillaume became seneschal of Anjou, Maine, and Touraine. 123  Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, ii, 450–51.

408

Chapter 8

was France’s equivalent of the Cambuskenneth Parliament of 1314.124 At this point nearly all men holding lands in England and France were forced to choose sides and submit to the King of France or face forfeiture. Spoken or written bonds of fealty and homage were necessary for King Philip to know which men were willing to serve him and not the King of England, and this included men who also held land in Scotland. However, the Anglo-French Scots for the most part did not want to lose their English territories and probably hoped that the loss of Normandy was not permanent. Therefore, families like the Moubrays, Vaux, and Malherbes, did not submit to Philip and were consequently forfeited of their French lands.125 The result was similar in 1204 as in 1314 when King Robert of Scotland faced the problem of determining the loyalty of his Anglo-Scottish lords.126 How­­ever, there was one fundamental difference between the events of 1204 and those of 1314. Geographical distance and other problems posed by a crossChannel social structure complicated the conditions of feudal service. By 1212, most of the nobles and barons who held land in England had amassed great debts under their King in England. Fighting abroad was a costly affair and they could ill-afford to fund the King’s ongoing venture to regain control of Nor­ mandy. That is not to say, however, that they were all willing to abandon the hope of regaining their Norman fees, which may explain some of the support for the invasion of England in 1216 led by Louis, King Philip’s son. The new King of Scots, Alexander, was to follow in his father’s footsteps and not only 124 

Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Delaborde and others, v, 184–85, 188–89; vi, 167–68; Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, ed. by Round, p. 528; Nortier, ‘Un rôle des biens tombés’; Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, p. 263; Power, ‘L’Établissement du régime capétien en Normandie’; Power, ‘L’Aristocratie Plantagenêt’. 125  Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 619 k–m. Moubray’s fees in the Ornois held by ‘William’ Malherbe, ‘William’ Corbet and ‘William’ de Vaux were all taken into the King’s hands after 1204. A William de Vaux and William Malherbe appear in Scotland contemporaneously to the men of the same name mentioned at Montbrai. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 352, 314, 317, 329, 384, 387, 400. There was also a ‘William’ Malherbe in Norfolk who owed service to John during the 1203 campaigns but it is unclear that this was the same man: Pipe Roll of 6 John, p. 237. See Chapter 4 about Malherbes. A William Corbet held land in Yorkshire in the first half of the twelfth century: Early Yorkshire Charters, Honours and Knights’ Fees, ii, 288. 126  Musset, Quelques problèmes posés par l’annexion de la Normandie’, pp.  295–96; Le Patourel, The Norman Empire, pp. 103–05, 107–09. This problem with having two royal overlords can also be compared to the 1140s during the conflict between Matilda, Henry, and Stephen; however, the nobility was not forced into such a stark position in the 1140s and most families continued holding their cross-Channel estates.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

409

encourage the rebels but also ally with the French. The Franco-Scottish alliance was to continue despite that far fewer men held land in France after 1204.

Earl David and the Loss of Normandy Earl David of Huntingdon’s position was very different from that of his brother during the Anglo-French wars. While William struggled to assert his rights and his independence from the English King, Earl David was advanced at the English court. William’s decision to favour the succession of a foreigner over his own brother may have driven David into the arms of the kings of England where he found ready advancement not just in England but also in Normandy. Between June 1199 and late 1200, he stood on the opposite side of the negotiating table from his brother. He was King John’s man.127 For his loyalty, John reconfirmed to David the lands of Nessington and Yarwell in June 1199, and David was also granted in 1202 the manors of Alconbury and Brampton in Huntingdonshire.128 In October 1199, King John had also confirmed to the burgesses of Earl David freedom from tolls except in London.129 David served in Normandy from July 1199 and attended the King at Château Gaillard, Rouen, and Lire in August and September. 130 He was also with the King at Chinon and may have been present when Arthur and Constance, David’s niece, were handed over and submitted to John at Le Goulet in May 1200. Furthermore, he was in attendance at Le Mans in August 1202 just after John’s capture of Arthur at Mirebeau,131 and he continued to serve John in Rouen in November 1203 just before Philip Augustus’ victory and only a few months after Arthur, his great nephew’s, disappearance.132 David 127  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 46. Eustache de Vescy also accompanied David in 1199. The assembly in October 1200 included Robert de Ros, Philip, Bishop of Durham, Roger Bigot, Earl of Norfolk, Henry de Bohun, Earl of Hereford, and William’s nephew, Roger de Lacy, constable of Chester, and Eustache de Vescy. Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. by Stubbs, iv, 140. 128  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 42. 129  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 43. 130  Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 46n, 284; Cartae antiquae Rolls, ed. by Landon and Davies, i, 70. Earl David witnessed John’s confirmation to the Hospitallers in 1199 along with his kinsman Roger de Tosny. 131  Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 46n, 284. 132  Stringer, Earl David of Huntingdon, pp. 46n, 284; Rotuli chartarum in Turri Londinensi, ed. by Hardy, i.1, 113.

410

Chapter 8

was John’s man throughout the period that his brother was negotiating with the King of France. After 1200, David witnessed only one surviving charter of the King of Scots until his death.133 Part of the reason may have been because his brother had a son, Alexander, in 1198, who had displaced him by 1201 in Scottish politics, but he had already begun to withdraw from Scottish politics by the mid1190s.134 Furthermore, he did not give homage to Alexander until October 1205, four years after the other Scottish magnates, which certainly suggests that he was not interested in his brother’s kingdom or his nephew.135 Earl David had risen at the Anglo-French court and had made a new career for himself on the Continent. David’s interest in retaining links with cross-Channel families is evident in his choice of wife for his son, Henry. By 1203, he turned his attention to arranging a suitable match for Henry with Mathilda de Cauz (Caux), who was probably the daughter of Robert II de Cauz and of Sibyl Basset, sister of Geoffrey and William Basset mentioned in Chapter 5.136 Though this marriage never took place, the baron of Cauz was an important lord with lands in Lincolnshire in the wapentake of Lovedon, in Northamptonshire at Midelton and Colintron, in Nottinghamshire at Lessington, and in Flaxwell.137 Flaxwell was also where David’s niece, Margaret de Vescy, held land.138 Robert de Cauz was a Norman 133 

Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 431; Chronica de Mailros, p. 104. Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by Barrow, ii, 379, 399, 431; Liber S. Marie de Melros, ed. by Innes, i, 91–94. 135  Chronica de Mailros, pp. 105–06; Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Watt, iv, 437; Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, ed. by Campbell Lawrie, pp. 330–31, 348. On 3 October 1201, the magnates of Scotland swore fealty to Alexander. Earl David’s tardiness in performing homage to his nephew was partly due to his absence on the Continent where he was fighting for John. 136  Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 55–56, 58; Pipe Roll of 6 John, p. 116. This son, Henry, was probably his legitimate son, Henry, who died before 1209. Earl David had two illegitimate sons as well also called Henry: Henry of Brechin and Henry of Stirling. Henry of Stirling received Monorgan at Longforgan and Inchmartin in Gowrie and Henry of Brechin, possibly the oldest, obtained the entire lordship of Brechin so he apparently gave his illegitimate sons the Scottish lands. See Rotuli de dominabus, ed. by Round, p. 7 137  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 286, 496, 502, 504, 534; ii, 976, 997, 1039–40. Mathilda owed scutage from Nottingham in 1203, which indicates a familial link to Robert but there is no firm evidence of the exact nature of the relationship. Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 56. 138  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 286. 134 

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

411

lord, who changed his allegiance to Philip in 1203/1204, which would explain why the marriage was cancelled by June 1205 when King John was arranging with Geoffrey fitzPiers for Henry to marry and have the lands of the daughter and heiress of Ralf de Cornhulle.139 Earl David’s involvement with lords in northern France probably contributed to his initial decision to open negotiations with the Cauz family, who held land on both sides of the Channel. Robert de Cauz (or Kaeu) was probably related to William de Caieu (Cauz, or Kaeu, originally relating to Cayeux in Pas de Calais), who may have been the son of Robert’s brother, Eustache, Lord of Caieu/Cayeux.140 This latter relationship would explain William de Caieu’s decision to name his own son ‘Eustache’. William was an important northern lord. In 1201, he provided a pledge to the King of France with Hugh de Bailleul and Thomas de Saint-Valery,141 and in 1209 both William and his son, Eustache, acted as pledges for Thomas de SaintValery in a peace agreement with Count William of Ponthieu.142 Thomas de Saint-Valery was married to the Count’s sister, but he still held lands in England and was related to Hugh de Bailleul, whose brother, Henry de Bailleul, became chamberlain of Scotland.143 William’s exact kinship with Robert de Cauz is not clear but his lands in England place him within the kin group. Besides his position in northern France, William de Caieu also held Guilden Morden in Cambridgeshire, twenty-seven kilometres south of Huntingdon, which was also near Fen Stanton held by the Queen of Scotland, and he held Clapton in Northampton along with lands in Norfolk and in Hertfordshire.144 The Cambridgeshire and Northampton 139 

Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Bain, i, 61; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules, ed. by Bouquet and others, xxiii, 640 d, 643 e, 696 a, 708 h. Caletot is Caux but usually refers to Caltot, in Saint-Laurent-en-Caux. Robert de Cauz held a fourth part of the fee at Saint-Laurent, about eight kilometres northeast of Doudeville, and a sixth part of a fee near the Stuteville fees. 140  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 124, 130, 239, 388, 402, 616, 619; ii, 902, 1431, 1434. 141  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, ccxxi. 142  Ambroise, L’Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, ed. by Paris, p. 195, ll. 7285–92; pp. 231–32, ll. 8650–64. William de Caieu was famous for his involvement in the Third Crusade with King Richard and he fought at Bouvines in 1214. 143  Lob-Barton, Les comtes de Saint-Valéry, p.  57; Paris, Arch. Nat., Coll. de Picardie, MS J 235, fols 3–5, 11; MS J 236, fol. 78. 144  Liber feodorum, ed. by Maxwell Lyte, i, 124, 130, 239, 286, 388, 402, 496, 502, 504, 616, 619; ii, 902, 912, 1024–25, 1151–52, 1431, 1434. It is not clear but since William de Caieu

412

Chapter 8

lands in particular suggest that Robert and William de Caieu were related and that they were familiar with Earl David due to regional interests. Furthermore, William was also one of the witnesses to the treaty with the Count of Flanders in 1197 along with Roger de Tosny and Henry de Bohun (both nephews of King William), Ralph Tesson, Philip de Coloummiers, William de Mortemer, Earl Ranulf of Chester, and William de Moubray, all men who had Scottish connections by land or marriage.145 Even though the Huntingdon-Cauz marriage was never finalized, the northern networks were important on both sides of the Channel, and most of them were based around successful marital contracts. Most of the Norman and English nobles fought in the interest of protecting their lands and rights from two powerful lords and kings but they also had obligations through their marriages to heiresses across the sea and across borders. Many of these heiresses carried dowries of land to their husbands that could give them claims in several kingdoms. Although marital alliances between the English and French were far more common, Scottish marriages with English and French baronial families pulled them into the Anglo-French conflict. The connections between the French and Scots are difficult to unweave for records and charters rarely mention direct ownership of French lands and the identity of men and women as members of the cross-Channel elite was assumed and thus not directly stated by contemporaries.146 They were not aware that someone would be looking at these records eight hundred years later. Their purpose was to note ownership and service among the present and living, whose situation was often common knowledge. and the Cauz family in Nottingham, whose head was Robert, also held in Northamptonshire, it would seem the two branches were related. The difference in spelling could just be a different transcription of the place-name. 145  Magni Rotuli Scaccarii, ed. by Stapleton, ii, lxxiv, clxxviii, ccxxv, ccxxvii. Roger de Tosny was married to King William’s wife’s sister. Henry de Bohun was King William’s nephew. Ralph Tesson’s sister was married to William de Soules, brother of Ranulf, Lord of Liddesdale. Philip de Coloummiers was the son of the man of the same name who appeared at Les Andelys and he fought for Richard and King Philip against Henry in 1189: History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, i, 446–48, ll. 8802–16; 450, ll. 8866–68. William de Moubray was the brother of Philip de Moubray, Lord of Dalmeny, Inverkeithing, and Moncrieffe. Earl Ranulf ’s sister was married to Earl David of Huntingdon. 146  Eustache de Vescy’s mother, Burga de Stuteville, was witnessing in France in the 1150s, and Eustache’s father, William de Vescy, witnessed several charters for King Henry II with Richard de Lucy, Robert Marmion, Hugh de Cressi, William de Stuteville, and William du Hommet, Constable of Normandy, and once alongside Geoffrey, Duke of Brittany. Cf. Chartes originales de Henri II, ed. by Salter, passim; Recueil des actes d’Henri II, ed. by Delisle and Berger, i and ii, passim; Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Baldwin, passim.

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

413

The families that can be seen as having made French marriages or that still held land and contacts in France before 1204 were the Valognes/Hommets, Vaux, Moubrays, Morevilles, Beaumonts, Mauvoisins, Quincys, Hais, Soules, Roses, Vieuxponts, Munfichets, Vescys, Colvilles, Stutevilles, Percys, Bailleuls, Comyns, Ridels, and Tosnys. Many Scots served on the Continent in these wars and frequented the tournament scene, as in the case of Philip de Valognes, Robert de Ros, Eustache de Vescy, Earl David, and the Quincys. Their presence was largely understated particularly after the break between England and France severed the Anglo-French barons from their French counterparts in 1204. In addition, a trend is apparent in the marchlands of Brittany, Maine, Anjou, and the Touraine. These frontiers were the centre of military activity against the kings of England. Louis VII and to a much greater extent Philip Augustus of France capitalized on the disaffection of these nobles from their overlords, the kings of England. King Richard’s absence from his Continental holdings allowed Brittany, in particular, to try to fight for independence by allying with the King of France. By the time John succeeded to the throne, Arthur and his Bretons had been in alliance with King Philip for four years so the level of French support for Arthur was no surprise. The King of France’s success was the result of not only capitalising on King John’s overburdened and disenchanted English nobility, particularly after the murder of his nephew, but also of keeping the lines of communication open with the King of Scots even if the Scots did not openly declare war. King Philip successfully focused on a more localized level of support with the barons and lords of Brittany, Maine, and Anjou by sending aid and promising rewards particularly because these men were often related in one way or another to the English kings’ subjects in Britain. Philip advanced new men in these acquired territories who remained loyal to his interests in a new Capetian structure of lordship.

Conclusion

A

s late as 1198, Richard fitzNigel, treasurer of England for King Henry II and Bishop of London under King Richard I, remarked that the intermarriage of English and Normans was so proliferate ‘[…] sic permixte sunt nationes ut vix decerni possit hodie’.1 It was not until the late thirteenth century that the term ‘Anglo-Norman’ indicated the status of an elite class of individuals living in England, who had little or no ties with France.2 The loss of Normandy in 1204 had an irreversible effect on the cross-Channel structure but this was not immediately evident to contemporaries.3 As Professor Holt has noted, a Norman scribe at Pont-Audemer writing as late as c. 1234 still did not view Philip Augustus as Duke of Normandy: ‘It was as if the events of 1204 had not mattered.’4 However, in the early thirteenth century, landholdings and marital ties within and between England and France had become strained. Much had changed between 1174 and 1234. In 1174, France was still very much divided into principalities under the control and authority of dukes and counts who challenged royal power, but by 1214 King Philip Augustus had successfully consolidated his territories and brought many of the nobles to heel. The relationship between the King and his vassals had become more clearly defined and the crown of France had proven its strength by driving John of England out of Normandy, Anjou, Maine, and Brittany. 1 

Richard fitzNigel, Dialogus de scaccario, ed. and trans. by Johnson and others, p. 53: ‘that only with great difficulty could they be distinguished today’. 2  Short, ‘Tam Angli Quam Franci’. See Ian Short’s article for the development of selfdefinition of the English nobility in the twelfth century, insular versus Continental Norman. 3  W. L. Warren, King John, pp. 145–53; Powicke, The Loss of Normandy, pp. 251–307; Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, pp. 238–54, 259–65. 4  Holt, ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, pp. 223–26.

416

Conclusion

John had been a rebellious vassal in 1191 when his brother went on crusade and a weak and over demanding King from the time of his accession in 1199 until his death in 1216. He managed to alienate his leading Poitevin vassals, the Lusignans, and to incur the wrath of the King of France by marrying Isabella, the daughter and heiress of Count Ademar of Angoulême, in August 1200. His financial demands became burdensome, which in addition to his personality, made him increasingly unattractive as an overlord.5 In the eyes of many of his subjects, John had alienated most of his vassals by overextending his demands on feudal dues in his quest to regain control of Normandy, Anjou, Maine, Brittany, and the Touraine. By 1215, the English nobles were in open revolt. England’s relationship with France had a direct impact on Scotland’s relationship with both kingdoms. King William continued to be rebuffed by John concerning the northern counties so that by 1209 he was preparing for war. As long as he had not regained what he believed was rightfully his, he entertained negotiations with France as can be seen from 1199 onward. King John was aware of the danger of leaving William’s claims unsatisfied and played a volatile game of skirting the issue. William continued to harbour John’s enemies and he negotiated with King Philip intermittently to apply pressure on the King of England. However, he did not commit himself fully to a French alliance (or aid his great-nephew in Brittany) as his son would in 1216. Although the King of Scots did not adequately capitalize on the weakness of John’s position between 1199 and 1204, which could have gained him the northern counties, he did earn the sobriquet William ‘Garbh’, ‘Garm’, or ‘the rough’, by the end of his reign probably because of his proclivity for war.6 The loss of Normandy in 1204 marks the point at which relations between Britain and the Continent fundamentally and irrevocably changed. From 1204 onward, the aristocracy in Scotland, England, and France evolved from familial units sharing customs and a common language into polities much more independent and separate from one another. The loss of Normandy allowed for national identity to truly begin to develop in Scotland, France, and England without the fetter of cross-Channel lordships. A new sense of the Anglo-Norman divide comes to the fore by c. 1226 when looking back twenty-seven years the author of the History of William Marshal 5 

R. V. Turner, ‘The Problems of Survival’. Annals of Ulster, ed. by Hennessy and MacCarthy, ii, 256; Annals of Loch Cé, ed. and trans. by Hennessy, i, 250. 6 

Conclusion

417

explained that the Anglo-French fought for King John in 1199 because his rival, Arthur, ‘car il n’aime pas les Anglais’.7 The French identity of the Anglo-French gradually waned, but that is not to say that a unitary sense of ‘Englishness’ and ‘Frenchness’ did not exist even before 1204; it was merely diluted because of the cross-Channel structure of lordship and kinship. The same occurred in Scotland but the Scots had to wait another century before they could begin to contemplate a single national identity. Too many families still held land in England though the loss of Normandy did gradually affect their sense of a French identity. Socio-anthropological studies on conflict and social organization confirm that the reorganization of communities can have a powerful effect on political stability. A more committed sense of national identity was able to develop, despite that royal centralization and a new focus on ‘the homeland’ created friction between the King and his subjects. In England, King John faced a civil war that caused his death in 1216. In France, King Philip faced an increasing divide between north and south as men in the south, parts of which were still nominally under English control, began to fight against each other for ideological reasons. This divide led to a different type of Christian war, politically and religiously motivated, which came to the fore in the ‘Albigensian crusade’. It may be argued that an ‘unceasing flow of propaganda and continuous indoc­­trination’ of identity was the result of the accelerated social changes after 1204 particularly in Britain.8 By 1215, John faced opposition in England partially because of the service of men at his court who were not seen as ‘English’.9 These ‘foreigners’ had been given lands and positions of power at the expense of ‘native’, or territorially established lords, many of whom had lost lands in France in 1204. The French identity of families was no longer stressed because it was seen as undesirable, if not dangerous, to be equated with the foreigners, who had been elevated at court by King John, and then by his son, King Henry III.10 7  History of William Marshal, ed. by Holden, ii, 92–97, ll. 11836–11908: ‘had no love for the English’. 8  Van Doorn, ‘Conflict in Formal Organizations’, p. 125. 9  Church, The Household Knights of King John; Church, ‘The Rewards of Royal Service’. 10  King Henry fell into the same trap as his father and advanced men not born in England into high offices, many of whom were related to him by marriage or blood: Roger de Wendover, Flores historiarum, ed. by Hewlett, ii, 134, 147; Vincent, Peter des Roches, p. 119; Carpenter, The Minority of Henry III, p. 29; Dunstable, in Annales Monastici, ed. by Luard, iii, 46; Waverly, in Annales Monastici, ed. by Luard, ii, 283–84, 287; Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Stevenson, p. 185; G. J. Turner, ‘The Minority of Henry III’; Documents of the Baronial

418

Conclusion

An important reason as to why the loss of Normandy made such an impact on Anglo-French society was the increasing insularity of the kings of England and of their nobility after 1204. The thirteenth-century kings of England had not given up the hope that they would regain northern France, which can be attested by the numerous campaigns planned to retake Normandy, but overall they spent the majority of their reigns in England not in Normandy, unlike their predecessors. They took a greater interest in centralizing their power not only in England but also in Wales and Ireland. In response, the Welsh, Irish, and Anglo-Irish resisted royal attempts to integrate them as more fully part of the English kingdom, and they made various alliances with each other that extended into Scotland and France. This can be seen during the reign of King John between 1209 and 1216 and during the reign of King Henry III between 1221 and 1226, between 1231 and 1234, and in the 1250s and 1260s during the baronial conflict led by Simon de Montfort.11 It also continued during the reign of King Edward I, Henry’s son. Even more significantly, the former Anglo-French nobility had lost their French lands and thus their identity as French lords. There has not been sufficient work done on how these families interpreted their identity following the loss of Normandy but it must have redefined them over time. Certainly by the second generation, they would no longer have seen themselves as ‘French’ or ‘Norman’ unless they still held lands in northern France, which some did. As late as 1244, King Henry III and King Louis of France demanded that any lords still holding lands of the other King relinquish such lands or be forfeited.12 Overall, the majority of families in England concentrated their energies Movement, ed. by Treharne and Sanders, pp. 274–75; Maddicott, ‘Magna Carta and the Local Community’; Church, ‘The Rewards of Royal Service’; Church, ‘The Knights of King John’; Snellgrove, The Lusignans in England, pp. 16–32. 11  Frame, ‘Overlordship and Reaction’; Frame, ‘King Henry III and Ireland’; G. Barrow, ‘Wales and Scotland in the Middle Ages’; R. R. Davies, Conquest, Coexistence, and Change, pp. 213–355; R. R. Davies, The Age of Conquest, pp. 82–107, 213–50, 289–307; R. R. Davies, Domination and Conquest, passim; R.  Walker, ‘The Supporters of Richard Marshal’; W. L. Warren, ‘King John and Ireland’; S. Duffy, ‘John and Ireland’; S. Duffy, ‘King John’s Expedition to Ireland’; S. Duffy, ‘The Bruce Brothers’; Frame, Ireland and Britain, pp. 15–69; Pollock, ‘Rebels of the West’; Pollock, ‘Auld Alliance’, Chapter 4. 12  Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. by Luard, iv, 288; Calendar of the Charter Rolls of Henry III, ed. by Maxwell Lyte and others, pp. 138, 162–65, 167, 176, 180, 182, 185–86, 188, 189, 191–92, 193, 195, 200, 204, 210–12, 218, 220, 231, 238–40, 264, 281, 291, 303, 313, 408, 411, 417–18, 437, 444, 522; Power, “‘Terra Regis Anglie et Terra Normannorum sibi Invicem Adversantur”’.

Conclusion

419

on administering their lands and preserving their political positions in Britain. Some even took on the customs, language, and identities prevalent among their native subjects.13 Scotland did not experience the same social shock caused by the loss of Nor­ mandy. The Scottish experience of France had always been more dependent on the spilling over of relations between England and France. Few Anglo-French Scots served or held land directly in France and most of the men who did were there as vassals of the English crown. However, the Kings of Scots continued negotiating with the French as a means to applying pressure on the King of England and a handful of men were able to retain their territories in France. By the end of the thirteenth century, territorial and marital ties with families in France had declined. The kin-structure that had bound families intimately across the Channel no longer existed. The Scots and English could no longer identify themselves as French, and the French and Scots no longer shared the same blood and the same historical consciousness. By the time of the first official Franco-Scottish alliance in 1295, a new bond was created that called forth an ‘old amity’. This ‘amity’ was purely between the crowns and did not involve cross-Channel interests. However, one thing that the two kingdoms nearly always had in common was their shared enmity with the kings of England.

13 

Lydon, ‘The Gaelic Revival’; Lydon, ‘The Gaelic Revival’.

* 

Duncan II = Uchtreda

Edward

Edmund

Alexander III = 1) Margaret, d. of Henry III of England = 2) Yolande de Dreux in 1186

Alexander I = Sybilla, nat. dghter. Henry I David I = Maud de Senlis

Eleanor in English captivity most of life

Constance, Cts. of Brittany = 1) Geoffrey of Brittany = 2) Ranulph, earl Chester = 3) Guy de Thouars

Figure 18. Scottish succession.

Mary = Ct. Eustache III de Boulogne

Alix = Pierre de Dreux Ct. of Brittany (1st cousin of Marie de Coucy’s father)

Henry de Bohun Earl of Hereford = Maud de Mandeville sister of earls of Essex

Constance

Ada = Florence III Count of Holland

Mary = King Stephen

Bertha, d. and h. Conan III, Duke of Brittany = Alain II, Ct. of Richmond

Edith/Maud = King Henry I of England

Margaret = 1) Conan IV Duke of Brittany = 2) Humphrey, Earl of Hereford

Arthur of Brittany d. 1203/4

Margaret = Gilbert Marshal Earl of Pembroke

David, Earl of Huntingdon = Maud, sister of Ranulph Earl of Chester

Henry of Huntingdon = Ada de Warenne

Edgar

Isabella = Roger Earl of Norfolk

William I, succ. 1165 = Ermengarde de Beaumont

Margaret Alexander II = Hubert = 1) Joan, de Burgh sister of Henry III = 2) Marie de Coucy = Earl of Kent 2) Jean de Brienne

Malcolm IV d. 1165

Kind Henry II of England

Empress Matilda = Geoffrey V of Anjou

Donald

1) Ingeborg =Malcolm III = 2) Margaret

Appendix*

Natural children of King William I have not been included because they are so numerous.

Roger III (d.c. 1160) = Ida of Hainault

Ralph III, Lord of Conches (d.c. 1126) Adelise of Huntingdon, sister-in-law of King David I of Scotland

Roger

Figure 19. Tosny family tree.

* This table is an abbreviated genealogical family tree. Not all descendants are listed.

Ralph V ( d. 1239) = Petronilla de Lacy

Isabel

Hugh

Godehild = ? 1. Count Robert I of Meulan 2. King Baldwin of Jerusalem

?

Margaret = ? 1. Earl Malcolm of Fife

Bishop Simon of Moray (fl. 1172–84)

Roger, castellan of Nogent-le-Roi (d. by 1185) = Ada de Chaumont

Simon

Roger IV (d. 1208–09)= Constance de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, sis. of Queen Ermengarde of Scotland

Ralph IV, Ld. of Tosny and Flamstead (d. 1162) = Margaret de Beaumont, sis. of Earl Robert III

Roger II (d.c. 1091) Lord of Conches

Isabella de Montfort = Raoul II (d.c. 1102)

422 Chapter 8

423

Figure 20. Counts of Holland

The Loss of Normandy and the Three Kingdoms

Bibliography

Manuscripts and Archival Sources Alençon, Archives Départementales de l’Orne, Fonds de l’Abbaye de Silli, MS H 1482/1 —— , MS H 1517/1 Caen, Archives Départementales du Calvados, MS  H  820 [L’Abbaye de Notre-Dame d’Aunay] —— , MS H 912 —— , MS H 958 —— , MS H 6609 [Acts of Richard, Viscount de Beaumont and the Family of La Porte] Chartres, Archives Départmentales de l’Eure et Loir, MS H 2310 [L’Histoire de la famille de Vieux-Pont] —— , MS H 5207 Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Archives des missions scientifiques et litteraires, MS Ottobon 2796 Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, MS ACC 8487 [Grant by Richard de Beaumont in Favour of David, Son of Hugh of Haddington of Lands in the Neighbourhood of Crail, 1235–39] —— , MS Adv. 15. 1. 18 [Charter Witness William de Vieuxpont] —— , MS Adv. 33. 2. 30 [List of Scottish Records from Thirteenth Century] —— , MS CH. 15531 [Fleming of Wigtown] Glasgow, Glasgow University Library, GB 0247 MS Hunter 279, U. 5. 19 [Boethius, De Consolatione Philosophiae] London, British Library, MS Arundel 220 London, Public Record Office, MS C 115/77 [Magnum Registrum of Lanthony Secunda] Paris, Archives Nationales, Collection de Picardie, MS J 235 —— , Collection de Picardie, MSS J 394–96 —— , Collection de Picardie, MSS K 236–98

426

Bibliography

—— , Collection de Picardie, MS K 531 [La dot de Marguerite des Flandres le mariage avec Seigneur Alexander] —— , Franco-Écossais Traités, MS J 677 —— , Franco-Écossais Traités, MS J 680 —— , Franco-Norvégien Traité, MS J 457 —— , Ponthieu, MS J 235–36 —— , Traités avec England, MS J 633 —— , Traités de France avec les autres royaumes, MS J 387 Paris, Bibliothèque de Sainte-Geneviève, MS 1850 (MS 962) [Cartulaire de Séry, l’Abbaye de Notre-Dame de Séry, 1127–1612] Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, MS Lat. 5480 [Extrait de l’Abbaye de Fontevraud] —— , MS Anc. Fond. Lat. 5993 [Cartulaire de la Comtesse Blanche] —— , MS Anc. Fond. Lat. 9778 [Feodum Philippe Auguste militum servicium] —— , MS Fr. 1553 [Le Romance d’Aventure de Fergus] —— , MS Fr. 9687 [Dicoviencent les cronicles Frère Nichol Trivet escrit a ma dame Marie la fille mounseignour le roi d’Engleterre Edward le Filtz Henri] —— , MS Fr. 22329 [Extraits de Cartulaires de la Bretagne] —— , MS Lat. 11056 [Cartulaire de Saint-Evroul] —— , MS Lat. 11059 [Cartulary de l’abbaye de Silly-en-Gouffern] —— , MS Lat. 17048 [Extrait de Cartulaire de Saint Laurent de Charnie] —— , MS Lat. Nouv. Acq. 2380 [Chartes concernant Le Prieuré de la Saute Cochère] —— , Collection de Colbert Cinq Cents, MS  298 [Obituary of Margaret Queen of Norway and Daughter of the King of Scots] —— , Collection Duchesne, MS 37 —— , Collection Duchesne, MS 59 —— , Collection Duchesne, MS 68 —— , Collection Duchesne, MS 80 Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale, Collection Coquebert de Montbret, MSS  Y.  16–17 [Char­­tes octroyées à la Normandie par des papes, rois, ducs, archevêques, depuis le ve siècle jusqu’au xviii] —— , Collection Martainville, MS Y. 94 [État de Domaine royal les vicomtes de Rouen, Pont-Audemer, Bernat, Auge] —— , MS Y. 13 [Cartularium Monasterii Saint Marie que Johannis de Fulcardimonte] —— , MS Y. 44 [Cartulaire de la Cathédrale de Rouen] —— , MS Y. 51 [Cartulaire de l’Abbaye de Fécamp] —— , MS Y. 53 [Inventaire Chartrier de l’Abbaye de Saint-Amand de Rouen] —— , MS Y. 200 [Cartulaire Lepers de Saint-Gilles de Pont-Audemar] —— , MS Y. 201 [Chartes de le Duc de Normandie]

Bibliography

427

Primary Sources Abbacie Cisterciensis beate virginis de Neubotle Chartarium Vetus, ed. by Cosmo Innes (Edin­­burgh: Bannatyne Club, 1849) Abbaye de St-Andre-en-Gouffern, ed. by Lucien Musset, Année des abbayes normandes, 30 (Rouen: CRDP, 1980) Actes des princes-évêque de Liége: Hugues de Pierrepont, 1200–1229, ed. by Edouard Poncelet (Bruxelles: Hayez, 1941) Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, ed. by Cosmo Innes and Thomas Thomson, 12 vols (Edinburgh: Record Commission, 1814–75) Ailred of Rieveaulx, Relatio de Standardo, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89), iii, 181–201 —— , Vita S. Edwardi Regis et Confessoris, ed. by Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologia Latina, 195 (Paris: Impr. Catholique, 1855), cols 737–90 Ambroise, L’Estoire de la Guerre Sainte: histoire en vers de la troisième croisade (1190– 1192), ed. by Gaston Paris (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1897) Anchoritic Spirituality: Ancren Wisse and Associated Works, ed. and trans. by Anne Savage and Nicholas Watson, preface by Benedicta Ward (New York: Paulist Press, 1991) Ancient Charters, Royal and Private, Prior to a.d. 1200, ed. by John Horace Round, Pipe Roll Society, 10 (London: Pipe Roll Society, 1888) The Ancren Riwle: Rules and Duties of Monastic Life, ed. by James Morton, Camden, old ser., 57 (London: Camden Society, 1853) André Du Chesne, Histoire de la maison de Chastillon sur Marne avec les genealogies et armes des illustres familles de France and des Pays-Bas, lesquelles y ont esté allies, le tout divisé en xii livres, et justifié par chartes, titres, arrêts et autorités des plus fidèles historiens (Paris: Cramoisy, 1621) —— , Histoire genealogique de la maison de Bethune (Paris: Cramoisy, 1639) —— , Histoire genealogique de la maison de Dreux et de quelques autres familles illustres qui en sont descendues par femmes (Paris: Cramoisy, 1631) —— , Histoire genealogique des maisons de Guines, d’Ardres, de Gand, et de Coucy, et de quelques autres familles illustres qui y ont été alliées (Paris: Cramoisy, 1631) —— , Historia normannorum scriptores antiqui: res ab illis per Galliam, Angliam, Apuliam, Capuae, principatum, Siciliam, and Orientem gestas explicantes, 838–1220 (Paris: Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1619) —— , Les antiquitez et recherches des villes, chasteaux, et places plus remarquables de toute la France (Paris: Petit-Pas, 1624) Andreas Capellanus, De Amore Libri Tres, ed. by E. Trojel (Havniae, 1892; 2nd edn: München: Eidos, 1964) Andrew of Wyntoun, The Original Chronicle of Andrew of Wyntoun Printed on Parallel Pages from the Cottonian and Wemyss MSS with the Variants of the Other Texts, ed. by François J. Amours, John T. Brown, and George Neilson, 6 vols (Edinburgh and Lon­ don: Scottish Text Society, 1903–08)

428

Bibliography

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: A Collaborative Edition, ed. by David Dumville and Simon Keynes, 8 vols (Cambridge: Brewer, 1983–2006) Anglo-Scottish Relations, 1174–1328, Some Selected Documents, ed. and trans. by Edward L. G. Stones (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965) Annales Egmundani, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xvi (Hannover: Hahn, 1859), pp. 442–79 Annales Erphordenses, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xvi (Hannover: Hahn, 1859), pp. 26–40 Annales Monastici, ed. by Henry R. Luard, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 36, 5 vols (London: Longman, 1864–69) Annals of Clonmacnoise from the Earliest Period to ad  1408, ed. by Denis Murphy and trans. by Conell Mageoghagan [in 1627] (Dublin: Dublin University Press, 1896) Annals of Inisfallen-MS Rawlinson B 503, ed. and trans. by Seán MacAirt (Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1951) Annals of Loch Cé: A Chronicle of Irish Affairs from ad 1014 to ad 1590, ed. and trans. by William M. Hennessy, Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 54, 2 vols (Lon­ don: Longman, 1871) Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters, ed. and trans. by John O’Donovan, 7 vols (Dublin: Hodges and Smith and Co., 1848–51; 2nd edn: 1856) Annals of the Reigns of Malcolm and William, Kings of Scotland, ad 1153–1214, ed. by Sir Archibald Campbell Lawrie (Glasgow: MacLehose, 1910) Annals of Ulster, ed. by William Hennessy and Bartholomew MacCarthy, 4 vols (Dublin: Alexander Thom & Co., 1887–95) Antiquités anglo-normandes de Ducarel, ed. by Amédée-Louis Léchaudé d’Anisy (Caen: Mancel, 1823) Archives du Cogner: cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint Sauveur de Villeloin, ed. by Louis-Jean Denis (Paris: Champion, 1911) Archives historiques du Maine, ii: Actus Pontificum Cenomannis in urbe Degentium, ed. by Abbé G. Busson and Abbé A. Ledru (Maine: Société des Archives Historiques du Maine, 1902) Basset Charters, c. 1120–1250, ed. by William T. Reedy, Pipe Roll Society, new ser., 50 (London: Pipe Roll Society, 1995) Beauchamp Cartulary Charters, 1100–1268, ed. by Emma Mason, Pipe Roll Society, 81 (London: Pipe Roll Society, 1980) Bede, Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, ed. by Bertram Colgrave and Roger A.  B. Mynors (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969) Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici Secundi Benedicti Abbatis. The Chronicle of the Reigns of Henry II and Richard I ad 1169–1192, ed. by William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 49, 2 vols (London: Longman, 1867) Benoît de Saint-Maure, Chronique des ducs de Normandie, ed. by Francisque Michel, 3 vols (Paris: Impr. royale, 1836–44) Béroul, The Romance of Tristan, ed. by Stewart Gregory (Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 1992)

Bibliography

429

Bertrand de Born, L’Amour et la guerre: l’oeuvre de Bertran de Born, ed. and trans. by Gérard Gouiran, 2 vols (Aix-en-Provence: Université de Provence, 1985) Bibliothèque de l’Ordre de Prémontré dans la France d’Ancien Régime, Repertoire des abbayes, ed. by Anna Bondéelle-Souchier, 2 vols (Paris: CNRS, 2000–06) Breuis Relatio de Guillelmo nobilissimo comite Normannorum, Written by a Monk of Battle Abbey, ed. by Elisabeth M.  C. Van Houts, in Chronology, Conquest and Conflict in Medi­eval England, Camden Miscellany, 34 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) Brut Y Tywysogion, ed. by John Williams Ab Ithel (London, 1860) Calendar of Documents Preserved in France ad 918–1206, ed. by John H. Round (Lon­ don: Stationery Office, 1899) Calendar of Documents Relating to Ireland, 1171–1251, ed. by Henry S. Sweetman, 5 vols (London: Longman, 1875–86) Calendar of Documents Relating to Scotland, ed. by Joseph Bain, 5 vols (London: Scottish Record Office, 1881–88; suppl. vol. 1986) Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers Relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Petitions to the Pope, ed. by William H. Bliss (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1896) Calendar of Papal Letters to Scotland of Clement  VII of Avignon, 1378–1394, ed. by Charles Burns (Edinburgh: Constable, 1976) Calendar of the Charter Rolls of Henry  III, ed. by Henry C. Maxwell Lyte, Charles G. Crump, and others, 6 vols (London: HMO, 1903–27) Calendar of the Laing Charters, 854–1837, ed. by John Anderson (Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 1899) Calendar of the Patent Rolls, iii: Henry III, a.d. 1232–1247 (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1906) Cartae antiquae Rolls 1–20, ed. by Lionel Landon and James C. Davies, Pipe Roll Society, new ser., 17, 33, 2 vols (London: Pipe Roll Society, 1939 and 1960) Cartulaire chronique du prieuré Saint-Georges d’Hesdin (1095–1185), ed. by Robert Fossier (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1988) Cartulaire de l’abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme, ed. by Charles Métais, 6 vols (Paris: Picard, 1893–1904) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Beaulieu (en Limousin), ed. by Maximin Deloche (Paris: Impr. impériale, 1859) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, ed. by Lucien Merlet, 2 vols (Chartres: Garnier, 1882–83) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de la Trappe, ed. by Louis Pierre Hommey (Alençon: de Broise, 1889) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame des Vaux de Cernay de l’Ordre de Citeaux au diocèse de Paris, ed. by Lucien Merlet and Auguste Moutié, 2 vols (Paris: Plon, 1857–58) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Aubin d’Angers, ed. by Bertrand de Broussillon and Eugène Lelong, 3 vols (Paris: Germain et Grassin 1903) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée-lès-Chartres, ed. by René Merlet (Chartres: Garnier, 1906)

430

Bibliography

Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin de Pontoise, ed. by Joseph Depoin, 3 vols (Pontoise: Société historique, 1895–1909) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres, ed. by Benjamin Guérard, Collection des cartulaires de France, 1–2, 2 vols (Paris: Crapelet, 1840) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Vincent du Mans, 572–1188, ed. by Robert Charles and Vicomte Samuel Menjot d’Elbenne (Le Mans: de Saint-Denis, 1886) Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Savigny suivi de petit cartulaire de l’abbaye d’Ainay, ed. by Auguste Bernard (Paris: Impr. impériale, 1853) Cartulaire de l’abbaye du Ronceray (1028–1124), ed. by Bertrand de Broussillon (Paris: Picard, 1900) Cartulaire de l’abbaye royale de Notre-Dame de Bonport (1190–1467), ed. by Jules Andrieux (Evreux: Hérissey, 1862) Cartulaire de l’église de la Sainte-Trinité de Beaumont-le-Roger, ed. by Étienne Deville (Paris: Champion, 1912) Cartulaire de la léproserie du Grand-Beaulieu et du prieuré de Notre-Dame de la Bourdinière, ed. by René Merlet and Maurice Jusselin (Chartres: Garnier, 1909) Cartulaire de la Manche: abbaye de la Luzerne, ed. by François du Bosc (Saint-Lo: SIND, 1878) Cartulaire de Marmoutier pour le Perche: N-D. du Vieux-Château, collégiale de St-Léonard de Bellême et prieuré de St-Martin-du-Vieux-Bellême, ed. by Abbé P. Barret (Mortagne: Meaux, 1894) Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Chartres, ed. by E. de Lépinois and Lucien Merlet, 3 vols (Chartres: Impr. de Garnier, 1862–65) Cartulaire de Notre-Dame de Josaphat, ed. by Charles Métais, 2 vols (Chartres: Garnier, 1911–12) Cartulaire de Saint-Victeur au Mans: prieuré de l’abbaye du Mont-Saint-Michel (994– 1400), ed. by Bertrand de Broussillon (Paris: Picard, 1895) Cartulaire normand de Philippe Auguste, Louis VIII, Saint Louis, et Philippe-le-Hardi, ed. by Léopold Delisle (Caen: Hardel, 1852) Cartularium Abbathiae de Whiteby Ordinis S Benedicti, ed. by John C. Atkinson, Publi­ cations of Surtees Society 69 and 72, 2 vols (Durham: Surtees Society, 1879) Cartularium Comitatus de Levenax, ed. by James Dennistoun (Edinburgh: Maitland Club, 1833) Cartularium monasterii de Rameseia, ed. by William H. Hart, Ponsonby Lyon and Richard E. Gent, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 79, 3 vols (London: Longman, 1884–93) Cartulary of Byland Abbey, ed. by Janet Burton (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2004) Castro, Llanos Salazar y, Historia genealogica de la casa de Lara, 4 vols (Madrid, 1694–97) Catalogue des Actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Léopold Delisle (Paris: Durand, 1856) Charters of Duchess Constance of Brittany and her Family, 1171–1221, ed. by Judith Everard and Michael Jones (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999) Charters of King David I: The Written Acts of David I, King of Scots, 1124–53 and of his Son Henry Earl of Northumberland, 1139–1152, ed. by G. W. S. Barrow (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999)

Bibliography

431

Charters of the Abbey of Coupar Angus, ed. by David E. Easson, Scottish History Society, 3rd ser., 40 and 41, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Constable, 1947) Charters of the Abbey of Inchcolm, ed. by David E. Easson and Angus MacDonald, Scottish History Society, 3rd ser., 32 (Edinburgh: University Press, 1938) Charters of the Anglo-Norman Earls of Chester, c. 1071–1237, ed. by Geoffrey Barraclough, 126 (Gloucester: Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 1988) Charters of the Earldom of Hereford, 1095–1201, ed. by David Walker, Camden Miscellany, 4th ser., 22 (London: Royal Historical Society, 1964) Charters of the Honour of Mowbray 1107–1191, ed. by Diane E. Greenway, Records of Social and Economic History, new ser., 1 (London: Oxford University Press, 1972) Charters of the Redvers Family and the Earldom of Devon, 1090–1217, ed. by Robert Bearman (Exeter: Devon and Cornwall Record Society, 1994) Charters, Bulls and Other Documents Relating to the Abbey of Inchaffray Chiefly from the Originals in the Charter Chest of the Earl of Kinnoull, ed. by William Alexander Lindsay, John Dowden, and John M. Thomson (Edinburgh: Scottish History Society, 1908) ‘Chartes de Fontevraud concernant l’Aunis et La Rochelle’, ed. by Paul Marchegay, in Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des chartes, 19 (1858), 132–70, 321–47 Chartes de l’abbaye de Jumièges (v. 825–1204), ed. by Jules-Joseph Vernier, 2 vols (Rouen: Lestringant, 1916) Chartes du Forez antérieures au xive siècle, ed. by Jean.-E Dufour and others (Mâcon: Protat frères, 1950) Chartes et documents de l’abbaye de Saint-Magloire, Fin du xe siècle–1280, ed. by Anne Teroine and Lucien Fossier (Paris: CNRS; Turnhout: Brepols, 1998) Chartes octroyées par Louis ier Comte de Blois, de Chartres, et de Clermont, 1193–1197, ed. by Prosper A. Poulain de Bossay (Châteaudun: Lucesne, 1875) Chartes originales de Henri II roi d’Angletere et duc de Normandie, ed. by H. Salter, notes by Léopold Delisle (Nogent-le-Rotrou: de Daupeley-Gouverneur, 1908) Chartularies of Balmerino and Lindores (Edinburgh: Abbotsford Club, 1841) Chartularium abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, ed. by Joseph T. Fowler, Surtees Society, 66 (Durham: Surtees Society, 1878) Chartularium insignis ecclesiae Cenomanensis: Liber albus capituli, ed. by René-JeanFrançois Lottin, 2 vols (Le Mans: Institut des provinces de France, 1869) Chartulary of the Abbey of Lindores (1195–1479), ed. by John Dowden, Scottish History Society, 42 (Edinburgh: Constable, 1903) Chartulary of the Cistercian Priory of Coldstream, ed. by C. Rogers (London: Grampian Club, 1879) Chartulary of the Priory of St. Pancras of Lewes, ed. by Louis F. Salzman, Sussex Record Society, 38. 1 (Lewes: Sussex Record Society, 1933) Chrétien de Troyes, Les romans de Chrétien de Troyes: Érec and Énide, ed. by Mario Roques, Les classiques français du Moyen Âge, 80 (Paris: Champion, 1953) —— , Perceval: The Story of the Grail, trans. by Nigel Bryant, Arthurian studies, 58 (Cam­ bridge: Brewer, 2006)

432

Bibliography

Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium Fontium, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xxiii (Hannover: Hahn, 1874) Chronica de Mailros Ab anno 735 ad annum 1270 (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1835) Chronica monasterii de Hyda juxta Wintoniam ab anno 1035 ad annum 1121, Liber monasterii de Hyde, ed. by Edward Edwards, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 45 (London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1866) Chronica monasterii de Melsa a fundatione usque ad annum 1396, Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 43, 3 vols (London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1866–68) Chronica Regum Manniae et Insularum, ed. by Peter Andreas Munch (Christiania, 1860) Chronicle of Battle Abbey, ed. by Eleanor Searle (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981) Chronicle of Melrose Abbey: A Stratigraphic Edition, i: Introduction and Facsimile, ed. by Dauvit Broun and Julian Harrison (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2007) Chronicle of Pierre de Langtoft: From the Earliest Period to the Death of King Edward I, ed. by Thomas Wright, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 47, 2 vols (London: Longmans, 1866–68) Chronicle of the Picts and Scots, ed. by William F. Skene (Edinburgh: General Register House, 1867) Chronicles of John of Worcester, ed. by Reginald Darlington and Paul McGurk, 3 vols (Oxford: Clarendon, 1995–98) Chronicles of the Atholl and Tullibardine Families, ed. by John Atholl Seventh Duke of Atholl (Edinburgh: privately printed, 1908) Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89) Chronicon angliae petriburgense, ed. by John A. Giles (London: Nutt, 1845) Chronicon coenobii Sanctae Crucis Edinburgensis: Chronicle of Holyrood, ed. by Robert Pitcairn (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1828) Chronicon de Lanercost, 1201–1346 E codice Cottoniano nunc primum typis mandatum, ed. by Joseph Stevenson (Edinburgh: Maitland Club, 1839) Chronicon Sancti Michaelis Luneburgensis, ed. by Georg H. Pertz and L. Weiland, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xxiii (Hannover: Hahn, 1874), pp. 390–97 Chronicum Scotorum, ed. and trans. by William M. Hennessey, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 46 (London: Longman, 1866) Chronique de Morée, 1204–1305, ed. by Jean Longnon (Paris: Laurens, 1911) Chronique de Saint-Pierre-le Vif de Sens [= Chronicon Sancti Petri Vivi Senonensis], ed. by Robert-Henri Bautier and Marie Gilles (Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1979) Chroniques des comtes d’Anjou et des seigneurs d’Amboise, ed. by Louis Halphen and René Poupardin (Paris: Picard 1913) Chroniques des comtes d’Anjou, ed. by Paul Marchegay and André Salmon, intro. by Émile Mabille (Paris: Renouard, 1856–71) Chronographia Johannis de Beke, ed. by Hans Bruch, Rijks geschiedkundige publicatiën Grote, 143 (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1973)

Bibliography

433

Codex diplomaticus Brandenburgensis, ed. by Adolph F. Riedel, 41 vols (Berlin: FHM, 1838–69) Collin’s Peerage of England: Geographical, Historical and Biographical, ed. by Egerton Brydges, 9 vols (London: Rivington, 1812) Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the United Kingdom Extant, Extinct or Dormant: A History of the House of Lords and All its Members from the Earliest Times, ed. by George Edward Cokayne, 2nd edn ed. and rev. by Vicary Gibbs, 13 vols (London: St Catherine Press, 1910–59) Comptes de l’argenterie des rois de France au xive siècle, ed. by Louis Douët-d’Arcq (Paris: Renouard, 1851) Continuatio Gemblacensis, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, vi (Hannover and Stuttgart: Hahn, 1844; repr. Kraus, 1968), pp. 385–90 Continuations of the Old French ‘Perceval’ of Chrétien de Troyes, i: The First Continuation, ed. by William Roach (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1949) Court of the Lord Lyon: List of his Majesty’s Officers of Arms and Other Officials, with Gen­ ea­logical Notes, 1318–1945, ed. by Francis J. Grant, Scottish Record Society. Publi­ cations, 148 (Edinburgh: Great Britain Court of the Lord Lyon, 1945) Cronica Principum Saxonie, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xxv (Hannover and Stuttgart: Hahn, 1884; repr. Kraus 1974) Curia regis Rolls of the Reigns of Richard I, and John, 7 vols (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1922–31) De Expugnatione Lyxbonensi: The Conquest of Lisbon, ed. and trans. by Charles W. David (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936; repr. 2001) Dictionnaire généalogique des familles illustres de l’Anjou, ed. by Jacques Saillot, Claudine Saliou, and Michèle Taillandier, 67 vols (Paris; Angers: Saillot; Association pour le dictionnaire des familles de l’Anjou, 1985–2011) Diplomatic Documents Preserved in the Public Record Office 1101–1272, ed. by Pierre Chaplais (London: HMSO, 1964) Documents and Records Illustrating the History of Scotland and the Transactions between the Crowns of Scotland and England, ed. by Francis Palgrave (London: Record Commission, 1837) Documents Illustrative of Sir William Wallace: His Life and Times, ed. by Jospeh Stevenson (Glasgow: Maitland Club, 1841) Documents Illustrative of the Social and Economic History of the Danelaw from Various Collections, ed. by Frank M. Stenton (London: Oxford University Press, 1920) Documents inédits sur l’histoire de Bretagne: Chartes du prieuré de la Saint-Trinité de Fougères, ed. by Arthur de La Borderie and Delabigne Villeneuve, Bulletin archéo­ logique de l’Association bretonne (Nantes: Société des Bibliophiles Bretons, 1851) Documents of the Baronial Movement of Reform and Rebellion, 1258–1267, ed. by Reginald L. Treharne and Ivor J. Sanders (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973) Documents relatifs au comté de Champagne et de Brie, 1171–1361, ed. by Auguste Longnon and Élie Berger, Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France, 3 vols (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1901–14)

434

Bibliography

Domesday Book, ed. and trans. by John Morris, 35 vols (Chichester: Phillimore, 1975–92) Doon and Tyolet: Two Old French Narrative Lays, ed. by Glyn S. Burgess and Leslie C. Brook, Medium Aevum, 75 (Liverpool: Society for the Study of Mediaeval Languages and Literature, 2005) Dudo of St Quentin, History of the Normans, ed. and trans. by Eric Chistiansen (Wood­ bridge: Boydell, 1998) Eadmer, Eadmeri Historia Novorum in Anglia, et opuscula duo de vita Sancti Anselmi et quibusdam miraculis ejus, ed. by Martin Rule, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 81 (London: Longman, 1884) Earldom of Gloucester Charters: The Charters and Scribes of the Earls and Countesses of Gloucester to ad 1217, ed. by Robert Patterson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973) Early Scottish Charters prior to ad 1153, ed. by Archibald C. Lawrie (Glasgow: MacLehose & Sons, 1905) Early Sources of Scottish History, ad 500 to 1286, ed. and trans. by Alan O. Anderson, 2 vols (Stamford: Watkins, 1990) Early Yorkshire Charters, ed. by William Farrer and Charles T. Clay, 12 vols (York: Yorkshire Archaeological Society, 1914–65) Einhard, Vie de Charlemagne, ed. and trans. by Louis Halphen (Paris: Champion, 1947) —— , Vita Karoli Magni, ed. by Georg Waitz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi, 48 (Hannover and Leipsig: Hahn, 2001) Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. and trans. by Alastair Campbell, Camden 3rd ser., 72 (Cambridge: Royal Historical Society, 1998) English Episcopal Acta, ed. by David Smith and others, 28 vols (London and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980–) English Historical Documents, 1042–1189, ed. by David Douglas and others, 10 vols (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1953–77) Études sur la généalogie des seigneurs d’Orbec et de Bienfaite: Chartes inédites des xiie et xiiie siècles relatives à des donations au couvent de Saint-Saëns-en-Caux, ed. by Marcel Orbec, Bulletin de la Société d’études historiques d’Orbec, 2. 7 (Bernay: Impr. Claudin, 1940) Eustache Deschamps, Oeuvres complètes de Eustache Deschamps, ed. by Gaston Raynaud, 11 vols (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1878–1903) Exchequer Rolls of Scotland, 1264–1359, ed. by John Stuart and George Burnett, 12 vols (Edinburgh: H. M. General Register House, 1878–89) Eynsham Cartulary, ed. by H. C. Salter, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907–08) Feet of Fines of the Reign of Henry II and the First Seven Years of the Reign of Richard I, 1182 to 1196 (London: Wyman & Sons, 1894) Feodarium Prioratus Dunelmensis: A Survey of the Estates of the Prior and Convent of Durham, Compiled in the Fifteenth Century, ed. by William Greenwell, Surtees Soci­ ety, 58 (Durham: Andrews, 1872) Florence of Worcester, Chronicon ex Chronicis ab adventu Hengesti et Horsi in Britanniam usque ad annum mcxvii Cui accesserunt continuationes duae, quarum una ad annum mcxli, altera, nunc primum typis vulgata, ad annum mccxcv perducata, ed. by Benjamin Thorpe, 2 vols (London: English Historical Society, 1848–49)

Bibliography

435

Foedera, conventiones, litterae, et cujuscunque generis Acta publica, inter Reges Angliae, et alios quosvis Imperatores, Reges, Pontifices, Principes, vel Communitates, ab anno 1101, ad nostra usque tempora, habita aut tractata, ed. by Thomas Rymer, 2nd edn, 20 vols (London: Tonson, 1704–32) Fontes Egmundenses, ed. by Otto Oppermann, Werken uitgegeven door het Historisch Genootschap, 3rd ser., 61 (Utrecht: Benedictine Abbey of St Albert, 1933) Gallia Christiana, ix: In provincia ecclesiasticas distribute: De Provincia Remensi: ejusque metro­poli ac suffraganeis, Suessionensi, Laudunensi, Bellovacensi, Catalaunensi ac Nov­ io­mensi ecclesiis, ed. by Denise de Sainte-Marthe and Barthélemy Hauréau (Farn­ borough: Gregg, 1970) Gallia Christiana, xiv: Ubi de provincia Turonensi agitur [Evêchés d’Angers, S. Brieuc, Le Mans, Quimper, Dol, S. Paul-de-Léon, S. Malo, Nantes, Rennes, Tréguier, Vannes], ed. by Denise de Sainte-Marthe and Barthélemy Hauréau (Farnborough: Gregg, 1970) Genealogia comitum Flandriae, ed. by Georg H. Pertz and D. L. C. Bethmann, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, ix (Hannover: Hahn, 1851), pp. 302–36 Genealogia Ducum Brabantiæ Heredum Franciæ, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xxv (Hannover and Stuttgart: Hahn, 1884; repr. Kraus 1974), pp. 385–91 Genealogica Wettinensis, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xxiii (Hannover: Hahn, 1874) Geoffrey Gaimar, Lestorie des Engles, ed. by Thomas Duffus Hardy and Charles T. Martin, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 91, 2 vols (London: Her Majesty’s Sta­ tion­ery Office, 1888–89) —— , L’Estoire des Engleis by Geffrei Gaimar, ed. by Alexander Bell, Anglo-Norman Text Society, 14–15 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1960) Geoffrey of Monmouth, Historia regum Britannie, ed. by Neil Wright and Julia C. Crick, 5 vols (Cambridge: Brewer, 1984–91) —— , The History of the Kings of Britain, trans. by Lewis Thorpe (Harmondsworth: Folio Society, 1966) Geoffrey Villehardouin and Jean de Joinville, Chronicles of the Crusades, trans. by Sir Frank Marzials (London, Dent; New York, Dutton [introd. 1908], 1965) Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, in Opera, ed. by John Brewer and others, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores 21, 8 vols (London: Longman, 1861–91), viii (1891) —— , Expugnatio Hibernica, ed. by Alexander B. Scott and Francis X. Martin (Dublin: Royal Irish Academy, 1978) —— , Itinerarium Kambriae, in Opera, ed. by John Brewer and others, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores 21, 8 vols (London: Longman, 1861–91), vi (1868) —— , Opera, ed. by John Brewer and others, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores 21, 8 vols (London: Longman, 1861–91) —— , The Life of St. Hugh of Avalon, Bishop of Lincoln 1186–1200, ed and trans. by Richard M. Loomis (New York: Garland, 1985) Gervase of Canterbury, The Historical Works of Gervase of Canterbury, ed. by William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi Scriptores, 73, 2 vols (London: Longman, 1879–80)

436

Bibliography

Gesta Normannorum Ducum of William of Jumièges, Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of Torigni, ed. by Elisabeth M. C. Van Houts, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995) Gesta Stephani, ed. and trans. by Kenneth R. Potter, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976 and 2004) Girart d’Amiens, Escanor: roman arthurien en vers de la fin du xiiie siècle, ed. by Richard Trachsler, Textes littéraires francais, 449, 2 vols (Genève: Droz, 1994) Gododdin: The Oldest Scottish Poem, ed. and trans. by Kenneth J. Jackson (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1969) Great Roll of the Pipe for Kings Henry II, Richard I, John I, 75 vols (London: Pipe Roll Society, 1844–) Guibert de Nogent, Dei gesta per Francos, ed. by Robert B.  C. Huygens, Corpus christianorum: continuatio mediaevalis, 127. 1 (Turnholt: Brepols, 1946) Guillaume de Jumièges, Histoire des Normands, ed. by François Guizot (Paris: Brière, 1826) Guillaume de Normandie, Fergus of Galloway: Knight of King Arthur, ed. and trans. David D. R. Owen (London: Dent, 1991) Guillaume le Clerc, The Romance of Fergus, ed. by Wilson Frescoln (Philadelphia: Allen, 1983) Guillaume Machaut, Oeuvres, ed. by Ernest Hoepffner, 3 vols (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1908–21) Handlist of the Acts of Alexander II, 1214–49, ed. by James Scoular (Edinburgh, 1958) Harry Maule of Kelly, Registrum de Panmure: Records of the Families of Maule, de Valoniis, Brechin, and Brechin-Barclay United in the Line of the Barons and Earls of Panmure, ed. by John Stuart, 2 vols (Edinburgh, 1874) Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, ed. by Diana Greenway (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996) Histoire de la croisade contre les hérétiques albigeois écrite en vers provençaux par un poëte contemporain, ed. and trans. by Claude Fauriel (Paris: Impr. royale, 1837) ‘Histoire et cartulaire de l’abbaye de Notre-Dame de Lannoy’, ed. by Louis E. Deladreue, in Mémoires de la société academique d’archéologie, sciences, et arts du department de l’Oise, 10 (1877), pp. 405–84, 569–696, and 11 (1880), pp. 156–236, 289–448 Histoire du château et des sires de S. Sauveur-le-Vicomte suivie de pièces justificatives, ed. by Léopold Delisle (Paris: Durand, 1867) Histoire feodale des marais, territoire, et eglise de Dol: Enquete par tourbe ordonnée par Henri II, roi d’Angleterre, trans. by Jean Allenou, intro. by F. Duine, La Bretagne et les pays celtiques, 13 (Paris: Champion, 1917) Historia et cartularium monasterii Sancti Petri Gloucestriae, ed. by William H. Hart, 3 vols, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 33 (London: Longman, 1863–67) Historic and Municipal Documents of Ireland, ad  1172–1320, ed. by John T. Gilbert, Rerum Britannicarum medii œvi Scriptores (London: Longman, 1870) Histoire des ducs de Normandie et des rois d’Angleterre publiée en entier, pour la première fois, d’après deux manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du roi suivie de la rélation du tournoi de Ham par Sarrazin trouvère du xiiie siècle, ed. by Françisque Michel (Paris, 1840)

Bibliography

437

History of William Marshal, ed. by Anthony J. Holden, trans. Stewart Gregory, notes by David Crouch, Anglo-Norman Text Society Occasional Publications Series, 4–6, 3 vols (London: Anglo-Norman Text Society, 2002–06) Hugh the Chantor: The History of the Church of York, 1066–1127, ed. and trans. by Charles Johnson (London: Nelson & Sons, 1961) Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, ed. by William Stubbs, Rolls Series, 38 (London, 1864) Itinerary of King Richard I with Studies on Certain Matters of Interest Connected with his Reign, ed. by Lionel Landon, Pipe Roll Society, new ser., 13 (London: Ruddock & Sons, 1935) James Grace of Kilkenny, Annales Hiberniae, ed. by Richard Butler (Dublin: Irish Archeo­ logical Society, 1842) Jocelin of Furness, Vita sancti Waldeni, ed. by John Bolland, Acta sanctorum: Augustus, 1 (Antwerp: Robyns, 1733), pp. 241–77 John of Fordun, Chronica gentis Scotorum, ed. by William F. Skene, The Historians of Scotland, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1871; repr. 1993) John of Hexham, Continuation in Historia Regum de Symeonis Monachi [Symeon of Dur­ ham], ed. by Thomas Arnold, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 75, 2 vols (London, 1882–85) John of Salisbury, Policraticus of the Frivolities of Courtiers and the Footprints of Philosophers, ed. by Cary J. Nederman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) —— , The Letters of John of Salisbury, ed. by W. J. Millor and Harold Butler, and rev. by Christopher N. L. Brooke, 2 vols (London: Nelson, 1955–79) Jordan Fantosme, Chronicle of the War between the English and the Scots in 1173 and 1174, ed. by Francisque Michel (Paris: Maulde and Renou, 1839) —— , The Versification of Jordan Fantosme, ed. by Ronald C. Johnstone (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1974) Joufrois, allfranzösisches Rittergedicht zum ersten Mal Herausgegeben, ed. by Konrad Hofmann and Franz Muncker (Halle: Niemeyer, 1880) Juvénal des Ursins, Histoire de Charles VI, roy de France, ed. by Joseph-François Michaud and Jean-Joseph-François Poujoulat, in Nouvelle Collection des Mémoires pour server a l’Histoire de France depuis le xiiie siècle jusqu’a la fin du xviiie (Paris: Proux, 1836), ii, 339–570 La Chanson d’Aspremont: chanson du Geste xii siècle, ed. by Louis Brandin, Classique français du Moyen Âge, 2 vols (Paris: Champion, 1919) La Maison de Laval, 1020–1605: étude historique, accompagnée du cartulaire de Laval et de Vitré, 1020–1605, ed. by Bertrand de Broussillon, 5 vols (Paris: Picard et fils, 1895–1903) La Saga des Orcadiens, ed. by Jean Renaud (Paris: Aubier, 1990) La Vie d’Edouard le Confesseur: poème anglo-normand du xii siècle, ed. by Östen Södergård (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells boktr, 1948) Lais inédits: des xiie et xiiie siècles, ed. by Françisque Michel (Paris: Techener, 1836)

438

Bibliography

Lanercost Cartulary, Cumbria County Record Office MS DZ/1, ed. by John M. Todd, Surtees Society, 203 (Gateshead: Athenaeum Press, 1997) Lawrence of Durham, Dialogi Laurentii Dunelmensis monachis ac prioris, ed. by James Raine, Surtees Society, 70 (London: Andrews, 1880) Lay Taxes in England and Wales, 1188–1688, ed. by Maureen Jurkowski and others, Public Record Office Handbook, 31 (Kew: Public Record Office, 1998) Layettes de Trésor des chartes, ed. by Alexandre Teulet and others, 5 vols (Paris: Plon, 1863–1909) Lays of Desiré, Graelent and Melion, ed. by Evie Margaret Grimes (New York: Institute of French Studies, 1928) Le Cartulaire communal de Falaise, ed. by René-Norbert Sauvage (Rouen: Impr. Lainé, 1938) Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Redon en Bretagne 832–1124, ed. by Aurélien de Courson (Paris: Impr. impériale, 1863) Le cartulaire de l’abbaye de Selincourt, 1131–1513, ed. by Georges Beaurain, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie, 40 (Paris: Picard; Amiens: Yvert & Tellier, 1925) Le cartulaire de la seigneurie de Fougères connu sous le nom de cartulaire d’Alençon, ed. by Jacques Auberge (Rennes: Oberthür, 1913) Le comté d’Anjou au xie Siècle, ed. by Louis Halphen (Paris: Picard, 1906) Le premier registre de Philippe-Auguste: reproduction héliotypique du manuscrit du Vatican, ed. by A. Martelli (Paris: Champion, 1883) Les grandes chroniques de France, ed. by Jules Viard, 10 vols (Paris: Champion, 1920–53) Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. by John W. Baldwin, Recueil des historiens de la France: Documents financiers et administratifs (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1942) Les Romans de Chrétien de Troyes: Cligés, ed. by Alexandre Micha, Les classiques français du Moyen Âge, 84, no. 2 (Paris: Champion, 1957) Les Romans de Chrétien de Troyes: Erec and Enide, ed. by Mario Roques (Paris: Champion, 1952) Les Seigneurs de Mayenne et le cartulaire de Savigny, ed. by Alfred de Martonne (Paris: Prévôt, 1883) Les Templiers en Eure-et-Loir, ed. by Charles Métais (Chartres: Lafolye frères, 1902) L’Estoire des ducs de Normandie et des rois d’ Angleterre publiée en entier, pour la première fois, d’après deux manuscrits de la Bibliothèque du roi. suivie de la Rélation du tournoi de Ham par Sarrazin trouvère du xiiie siècle, ed. by Françisque Michel, 3 vols (Paris: Renouard, 1836–44) Letters and Charters of Gilbert Foliot, Abbot of Gloucester, Bishop of Hereford and London, ed. by Adrian Morey and Christopher N.  L. Brooke (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­ versity Press, 1967) Letters of Arnulf of Lisieux, ed. by Frank Barlow, Camden Third Series, 61 (London: Royal Historical Series, 1939) Letters of Saint Anselm of Canterbury, ed. and trans. by Walter Fröhlich, Cistercian Studies Series, 97, 3 vols (Kalamazoo: Cistercian, 1993–94)

Bibliography

439

Lettres de rois, reines, et autres personages des cours de France et d’Angleterre depuis Louis VII jusqu’a Henry IV, ed. by Louis Georges Oudart Feudrix de Brequigny, 2 vols (Paris: Impr. royale, 1839–47) L’Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, ed. by Paul Meyer, 3 vols (Paris: Laurens, 1891– 1901) Liber cartarum prioratus Sancti Andree in Scotia E registro ipso in archivis baronum de Pan­ mure hodie asservato, ed. by Thomas Thomson, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1841) Liber cartarum sancte crucis, munimenta ecclesie sancte crucis de Edwinesburg de Edwines­ burg, ed. by Cosmo Innes (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1840) Liber de S.  Marie de Calchou, Registrum Cartarum Abbacie Tironensis de Kelso, 1113– 1567, ed. by Cosmo Innes, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1846) Liber ecclesie de Scon (c.  1114–1586), ed. by William Smyth (Tanner Ritchie and St Andrews, 2007) Liber ecclesie de Scon munimenta vetustiora Monasterii Sancte Trinitatis et Sancti Michaelis de Scon, ed. by Cosmo Innes, Maitland Club, 62 (Edinburgh: Maitland Club, 1843) Liber feodorum: The Book of Fees, Commonly called Testa de Nevill, ad 1198–1293, ed. by H. C. Maxwell Lyte, 3 vols (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1920–31) Liber insule missarum: Abbacie canonicorum regularium B.  Virginis et S.  Johannis de Inchaffery registrum vetus. Premissis quibusdam comitatus antiqui de Stratherne reliquiis, ed. by Cosmo Innes (Edinburgh: Bannatyne and Hughes, 1847) Liber monasterii de Hyde: Comprising a Chronicle of the Affairs of England, from the Settlement of the Saxons to the Reign of King Cnut; and a Chartulary of the Abbey of Hyde, in Hampshire, ad 455–1023, ed. by Edward Edwards, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 45 (London: Longman, 1866) Liber Pluscardensis, ed. by Felix Skene, The Historians of Scotland, 7 and 10, 2 vols (Edinburgh: W. Paterson, 1877) Liber S. Marie de Melros: munimenta vetustiora Monasterii Cisterciensis de Melros, ed. by Cosmo Innes, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1837) Liber S.  Marie de Balmorinach et Lindores, ed. by William B. Turnbull (Edinburgh: Abbotsford Club, 1841) Liber S. Marie de Dryburgh: Registrum Cartarum Abbacie Premonstratensis de Dryburgh, ed. by John Spottiswoode (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1847) Liber S. Thome de Aberbrothoc Registrorum Abbacie de Aberbrothoc Pas prior, registrum vetus, munimentaque eidem coetanea complectens 1178–1329 (Pars altera, registrum ni­grum, necnon libros cartarum recentiores complectens 1329–1536), ed. by Cosmo Innes and Patrick Chalmers, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1848–56) Liber vitae ecclesiae Dunelmensis, ed. by Joseph Stevenson, Surtees Society, 13 (London: Surtees Society, 1841) Magna vita S. Hugonis episcopi Lincolniensis, ed. by James Dimock, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 37 (London: Longman, 1864) Magni Rotuli Scaccarii Normanniae sub Regibus Angliae, ed. by Thomas Stapleton, 2 vols (London, 1840–44)

440

Bibliography

Marie de France, The Lais of Marie de France, ed. and trans. by Glyn Burgess and Keith Busby (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1986) Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, ed. by James C. Robertson, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 67, 7 vols (London: Long­ man, 1875–85) Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. by Henry Richards Luard, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 57, 7 vols (London: Longman, 1872–83) —— , English History from the Year 1235 to 1273, trans. by Rev. John A. Giles, 3 vols (London: Bohn, 1852–54) —— , Flores historiarum, ad  1067–1264, ed. by Henry Richards Luard, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 95, 3 vols (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1890) Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l’histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne, ed. by PierreHyacinthe Morice, 3 vols (Paris: Osmont, 1742–46, repr. 1974) Memorials of Bury St.  Edmund’s Abbey, ed. by Thomas Arnold, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 96, 3 vols (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1890–96) Monachi Anonymi Scoti Chronicon Anglo-Scoticum e codice durlacensi, ed. by Carolus Willelmus Bouterwek (Elberfeld: Sam Lucas, 1863) Monasticon Anglicanum: A History of the Abbies and Other Monasteries, Hospitals, Frieries in England and Wales, ed. by William Dugdale and Roger Dodsworth, 6 vols in 8 (London: Keble and Rhodes, 1817; repr. 1846–49) Monumenta Vizeliacensia: Textes relatifs à l’histoire de Vezelay, ed. by Robert B. C. Huy­ gens, Corpus christianorum: continuatio mediaevalis, 42 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1976) Nicholas Trivet, Annales sex Regum Angliae E codice Glastoniensi, ed. by Anthony Hall (Oxford: Theatro Sheldoniano, 1719) Norfolk Portion of the Cartulary of the Priory of St. Pancras of Lewes, ed. by J. H. Bullock, 12 (Norwich: Norfolk Record Society, 1939) Norse Romance 1: The Tristan Legend, ed. by Marianne E. Kalinke, Arthurian Archives, 3 (Woodbridge: Brewer, 1999) Notæ Diessenses, ed. by Georg H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xvii (Hannover: Hahn, 1861) Notae Diessensis a. 1122–1432, ed. by Philipp Jaffé, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores, xvii (Hannover: Hahn, 1861), pp. 323–31 Obituaires de la Province de Sens: Diocèse de Chartres, ed. by Auguste Longnon, Auguste Molinier, and others, Recueil des historiens de la France: Obituaires, 1–4, 4 vols (Paris: Impr. Nationale; Librarie C. Klincksieck, 1902–23) Oeuvres de Rigord et de Guillaume le Breton, historiens de Philippe-Auguste, ed. by HenriFrançois Delaborde, 2 vols (Paris: Libr. Renouard, 1882–85) Oorkondenboek van Holland en Zeeland, ed. by Laurent Ph. C. Van den Bergh, 2 vols (Amsterdam: Gravenhage, 1866–73) Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History of England and Normandy, ed. by Marjorie Chibnall, 6 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969–80) Orient et Occident ixe–xve siècles: histoire et archéologie, ed. by Georges Jehel, Histoire médiévale et archéologie, 9 (Amiens: Université de Picardie Jules Verne, 2000)

Bibliography

441

Orkneyinga Saga: The History of the Earls of Orkney, ed. and trans. by Hermann Pálsson and Paul Edwards (London, 1978 and 1981) Otto of Freising, Gesta Friderici Imperatoris, ed. by Georg Waitz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi, 46 (Han­nover and Leipsig: Hahn, 1912) Philippe de Reims, Roman de la Manekine, ed. by Françisque Michel (Paris: Bannatyne Club, 1840) Pipe Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy for the Reign of Henry II, 1180 and 1184, ed. by Vincent Moss (London: Pipe Roll Society, 2004) Poem of the Cid, trans. by Rita Hamilton and Janet Perry, with intro. by Ian Michael (Man­ chester: University Press, 1975; repr. Hamondsworth: Penguin, 1984) Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden monachi Cestrensis: Together with the English Translations of John Trevisa and of an Unknown Writer of the Fifteenth Century, ed. by Joseph Lumby, 9 vols (London: Longman, 1879–86) Priory of Hexham, 2 vols (Durham: Andrews, 1864–65) Radulphus Niger, Chronica, ed. by Robert Anstruther (London: Caxton Society, 1851) Ralf de Diceto, Radulfi de Diceto Decani Lundoniensis Opera Historica, ed. by William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 68, 2 vols (London: Longman, 1876) Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. by Joseph Stevenson, Rerum Britanni­ carum medii aevi scriptores, 66 (London: Longman, 1875) Ralph of Diceto, Opera Historica, ed. by William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 68, 2 vols (London: Longman, 1876) Raoul de Houdenc, Meraugis de Portlesguez (roman arthurienne du xiiie siècle), ed. by Michelle Sczilnik (Paris: Champion, 2004) Reading Abbey Cartularies, ed. by Brian R. Kemp, Camden 4th ser., 31, 2 vols (London: Royal Historical Society, 1986–87) Records of the Priory of the Isle of May, ed. by J. Stuart (Edinburgh, 1868) Recueil d’actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne (xie, xiie, xiiie siècles), ed. by Arthur de la Borderie (Rennes: Impr. De C. Catel, 1888) Recueil des actes d’Henri II roi d’Angleterre et duc de Normandie, concernant les provinces françaises et les affaires de France, ed. by Léopold Delisle and M.  Élie Berger, 3 vols (Paris: Klincksieck, 1916–27) Recueil des actes de Louis VI, 1108–1137, ed. by Robert-Henri Bautier and Jean Dufour, Chartes et diplômes relatifs à l’histoire de France, 4 vols (Paris: Boccard, 1992–94) Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, ed. by Henri-François Delaborde and others, 6 vols (Paris: Impr. Nationale: Klincsieck, 1916–2005) Recueil des chartes concernant l’abbaye de Saint-Victor-en-Caux, ed. by Charles de Robillard de Beaurepaire (Rouen: Lestringant; Paris: Picard, 1898) Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny, ed. by Alexander Bruel, Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France, 6 vols (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1876–1903) Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Saint-Germain-des-Près des origines au début du xiiie siècle, ed. by René Poupardin, Alexandre Vidier, and Léon Levillain, 2 vols (Paris: Champion, 1909; Renouard, 1932)

442

Bibliography

Recueil des documents inédits concernant la Picardie, ed. by Victor de Beauvillé (Paris: Impr. impériale, 1860) Recueil des Historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. by Martin Bouquet and others, 24 vols (Paris: Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 1738–1904) Recueil des pancartes de l’abbaye de La Ferté-sur-Grosne, 1113–1178, ed. by Georges Duby, Bibliothèque du Moyen Âge, 17 (Bruxelles: De Boeck Université; Paris: Belin, 2000) Red Book of The Exchequer, ed. by Hubert Hall, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi Scriptores, 99, 2 vols (London: Stationary Office, 1896) Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum, 1066–1154, 4 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913–69), i, ed. by H. W. C. Davis; ii, ed. by Charles Johnson and H. A. Cronne; iii, ed. by H. A. Cronne and R. H. C. Davis; iv, ed. by H. A. Cronne and R. H. C. Davis Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: The Acta of William I (1066–1087), ed. by David Bates (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) Regesta Regum Scottorum, ed. by G. W. S. Barrow, 4 vols (Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univer­ sity Press, 1960–) Registrum Antiquissimum of the Cathedral Church of Lincoln, ed. by Kathleen Major, Lincoln Record Society, 6, no. 41 (Hereford: Chadwyck-Healey, 1950) Registrum de Dunfermelyn Liber Cartarum Abbatie Benedictine SS Trinitatis et B Margarite Regine de Dunfermelyn, ed. by Cosmo Innes (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1842) Registrum Episcopatus Glasguensis Munimenta Ecclesie Metropolitane Glasguensis, a sede restaurata seculo ineunte xii ad reformatam religionem, ed. by Cosmo Innes, 2 vols (Edinburgh: Maitland Club, 1843) Registrum S. Marie de Neubotle, ed. by Cosmo Innes (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1849) Rental Book of the Cistercian Abbey of Cupar-Angus, ed. by Charles Rogers, 2 vols (London, Topographical Society, 1879–80) Richard de Devizes, Chronicon Richardi Divisensis de rebis gestis Ricardi Primi Regis Angliae, ed. by Joseph Stevenson (London: Sumptibus societatis, 1838) Richard fitzNigel, Dialogus de scaccario, ed. and trans. by Charles Johnson and others (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983) Richard Holland, The Buke of the Howlat, ed. by David Laing (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club, 1823) Richard of Devizes, De Rebus Gestis Ricardi Primi, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry  II and Richard  I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89), iii, 381–454 Richard of Hexham, De Gestis Regis Stephani et de Bello Standardii, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry  II and Richard  I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britan­ nicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89), iii, 139–80 Richard of St Victor, The Twelve Patriarchs, The Mystical Ark, Book Three of the Trinity, trans. and ed. by Grover A. Zinn, preface by Jean Chatillon (London: SPCK, 1979) Rigord, Gesta Philii Augusti, in Oeuvres de Rigord et de Guillaume le Breton, historiens de Philippe-Auguste, ed. by Henri-François Delaborde, 2 vols (Paris: Libr. Renouard, 1882–85)

Bibliography

443

Rise of Gawain, Nephew of Arthur: De ortu Waluuanii nepotis Arturi, ed. and trans. by Mildred Leake Day, Garland Library of Medieval Literature, 15, series A (New York and London: Garland, 1984) Robert of Arbrissel: A Medieval Religious Life, ed. and trans. by Bruce L. Venarde (Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press; London: Eurospan, 2003) Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89), iv, 3–316 —— , Chronique de Robert de Torigni, abbé du Mont-Saint-Michel; suivie de divers opuscules historiques de cet auteur et de plusieurs religieux de la même abbaye, ed. by Léopold Delisle, 2 vols (Rouen: Le Brument et Métérie, 1872–73) Robert Wace, Roman de Brut a History of the British, ed. and trans. by Judith Weiss (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1999) —— , Roman de Rou, ed. by Anthony J. Holden, 3 vols (Paris: Picard, 1970–73) —— , The History of the Norman People: Wace’s Roman de Rou, trans. by Glyn S. Burgess (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2004) Roger de Wendover, Chronica, sive Flores historiarum, ed. by Henry Coxe, 5 vols (London: English Historical Society, 1841–44) —— , Flores historiarum ab Anno Domini mcliv Annoque Henrici Anglorum Regis Secundi Primo, The Flowers of History from the Year of Our Lord 1154, and the First Year of Henry the Second, King of the English, ed. by Henry G. Hewlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 84, 3 vols (London: Longman, 1886–89) Roger of Howden, Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Howdene, ed. by William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 51, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1868–71) Rôles Gascons, 1273–1317, ed. by Charles Bémont, Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France. Première série, Histoire politique, 5 vols (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1885–1962) Rotuli chartarum in Turri Londinensi asservati Accurante, 1199–1216, ed. by Thomas D. Hardy (London: Great Britain Record Commission, 1837) Rotuli de dominabus et pueris et puellis de xii comitatibus: 1185, ed. by John H. Round, Pipe Roll Society, 35 (London: St Catherine Press, 1913) Rotuli de liberate ac de misis et praesitis, regnante Johanne, ed. by Thomas D. Hardy (London: Great Britain Record Commission, 1844) Rotuli de oblatis et finibus in Turri Londinensis, ed. by Thomas D. Hardy (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1835) Rotuli litterarum clausarum in Turri Londinensi asservati, ed. by Thomas D. Hardy, 2 vols (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1833–44) Rotuli litterarum patentium, ed. by Thomas D. Hardy (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1835) Rotuli Normanniae in Turri Londinensi asservati Johanne et Henrico quinto Angliae Regibus, ed. by Thomas D. Hardy (London: Great Britain Record Commission, 1835) Rotuli Scotiae in Turri Londinensi et in domo capitulari Westmonasteriensi asservati, ed. by John Caley and others (London: Record Commission, 1814–19)

444

Bibliography

Sacri et Canonici Ordinis Praemonstratensis Annales, ed. by Charles-Louis Hugo, 2 vols (Nancy: Cusson et Cusson, 1734–35) Sainte-Marie, Anselme de, Honoré Caille du Fourny, Potier de Courcy, and others, His­ toire de la Maison Royale de France et des Grands Officiers de la Couronne, 9 vols (Paris: La compagnie des libraires; Éditions du Palais-Royal, 1625–1759; 4th edn, 1968) Scots Peerage: Founded on Wood’s Edition of Sir Robert Douglas’s Peerage of Scotland; Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, ed. by James Balfour Paul, 9 vols (Edinburgh: Douglas, 1904–14) Scottish Annals from English Chroniclers ad 854–1837, ed. and trans. by Alan O. Anderson and Marjorie Anderson, 2 vols (Stamford: Watkins, 1991) Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III Concerning England, 1198–1216, ed. by Christopher R. Cheney and William H. Semple (London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1953) Sir Thomas Gray of Heton, Scalacronica: A Chronicle of England and Scotland, 1066– 1362 (Edinburgh: Maitland Club, 1836) Sone de Nansay et le roman d’aventures en vers au xiiie siècle, ed. by Claude Lachet, Nouvelle bibliothèque du Moyen Âge, 19 (Paris: Champion, 1992) Sone von Nansay, ed. by Moritz Goldschmidt (Tübingen: Litterarischer verein in Stutt­ gart, 1899) Stephen of Rouen, Draco Normannicus, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89), ii, 589–782 Suger, Vie de Louis VI le Gros, ed. by Henri Waquet (Paris: Champion, 1929) ‘Sussex Fines: 1–5 John (nos. 15–93)’, ed. by Louis F. Salzmann, in An Abstract of Feet of Fines for the County of Sussex: 1190–1248 (Lewes: Sussex Record Society, 1903– 16), i (1903), 5–22, no. 19 [accessed 1 October 2011] Syllabus of Scottish Cartularies: Small Cartularies, ed. by I. C. Cunningham and C. Rogers, Appendix ii (1879) Symeon of Durham, Historia regum de Symeonis Monachi, ed. by Thomas Arnold, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 75, 2 vols (London: Longman, 1882–85) Table chronologique de chartes et diplômes imprimés concernant l’histoire de la Belgique, ed. by Alphonse Wauters, Stanislas Bormans and Joseph Halkin, 11 vols (Bruxelles: Hayez; Kiessling: Imbreghts, 1866–1919) ‘The Staffordshire Chartulary’, ed. by G. Wrottesley, Collections for the History of Staf­f ord­shire, original ser. 1, 3 (London: William Salt Archaeological Society, 1882), pp. 178–231 The Triumph Tree: Scotland’s Earliest Poetry ad 550–1350, ed. by Thomas O. Clancy and others (Edinburgh: Canongate, 1998) Thomas of Walsingham, Historia anglicana, ed. by Henry T. Riley, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 28, 2 vols (London: Longman, 1863) Treaty Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office, ed. by Pierre Chaplais, 2 vols (London: HMSO, 1955) Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, historiam illustrantia quae ex Vaticani, Nea­ polis ac Florentiae tabulariis deprompsit et ordine chronologico disposuit 1216–1547, ed. by Augustinus Theiner (Rome: Vatican, 1864)

Bibliography

445

Vie inédite de Saint-Brieuc évêque et confesseur (420–515), ed. by François Plaine (SaintBrieuc: Conor-Grenier, 1883) Vincent de Beauvais, Speculum maiorus Vincentii Burgundi, 4 vols (Venice: Nicolinum, 1591) Vita S. Brioci episcopi et confessoris ab anonymo suppari conscripta, ed. by François Plaine, in Analecta Bollandiana, 2 (Paris; Bruxelles: Société des Bollandistes, 1883), pp. 161–90 Vitae B. Petri Abrincensis et B. Hamonis monachorum coenobii Saviniacensis in Normannia, ed. by Eugène P. Sauvage, in Analecta Bollandiana, 2 (Paris; Bruxelles: Société des Bollandistes, 1883), pp. 475–560 Walter Bower, Scotichronicon, ed. by Donald E. R. Watt, 9 vols (Edinburgh: Mercat Press, 1987–98; previously publ. by Aberdeen University Press) Walter Daniel, Vita Ailredi Abbatis Rievall: The Life of Ailred of Rievaulx, ed. and trans. by Frederick M. Powicke, Medieval Classics (London: Nelson, 1950) Walter Map, De nugis curialium = Courtiers’ Trifles, trans. by Montague James, ed. by Christopher Brooke and Roger A. B. Mynors (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983) Walter of Coventry, Memoriale fratris Walteri de Coventria, ed. by William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 58, 2 vols (London: Longmans, 1872–73) Walter of Guisborough, Chronicon Domini Walteri de Hemingburgh, ed. by Hans Claude Hamilton, English Historical Society Publications, 14 (London: English Historical Society, 1848–49) —— , The Chronicle of Walter of Guisborough: Previously Edited as the Chronicle of Walter of Hemingford or Hemingburgh, ed. by Harry Rothwell, Camden Third Series, 89 (London: Royal Historical Society, 1957) Waltham Chronicle: An Account of the Discovery of Our Holy Cross at Montacute and its Conveyance to Waltham, ed. by Leslie Warkiss and Marjorie Chibnall (Oxford: Claren­don Press, 1994) Watt, Donald E. R., A Biographical Dictionary of Scottish Graduates to ad 1410 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977) William le Breton, Chronique, in Oeuvres de Rigord et de Guillaume le Breton, historiens de Philippe-Auguste, ed. by Henri-François Delaborde, 2 vols (Paris: Libr. Renouard, 1882–85) —— , Philippidos, in Oeuvres de Rigord et de Guillaume le Breton, historiens de PhilippeAuguste, ed. by Henri-François Delaborde, 2 vols (Paris: Libr. Renouard, 1882–85) William le clerc, Le Roman des aventures de Fregus, par Guillaume le Clerc, trouvère du xiiie siècle, ed. by Françisque Michel (Edinburgh: Abbotsford Club, 1841) William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum: The History of the English Kings, ed. and trans. by Roger A.  B. Mynors, R.  M. Thomson, and M.  Winterbottom, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998–99) —— , Historia novella: The Contemporary History, ed. by Edmund King, trans. by Kenneth R. Potter (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) —— , Willelmi Malmesbiriensis monachi De gestis regum Anglorum libri quinque, Historiae novellae libri tres, ed. William Stubbs, Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, 90, 2 vols (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1887–89)

446

Bibliography

William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry  II and Richard  I, ed. by Richard Howlett, Rerum Britannicarum medii ævi scriptores, 82, 4 vols (London: Longman, 1884–89), i–ii William of Poitiers, Gesta Guillelmi of William of Poitiers, ed. by R.  H.  C. Davis and M. Chibnall (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) William of Tyre, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, ed. and trans. by Emily Babcock and A. C. Krey, Records of Civilization, Sources and Studies, 35, 2 vols (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943; repr. 1976)

Secondary Studies Aird, William M., ‘Gospatric, Earl of Northumbria (d. 1073×5)’, Oxford Dictionary of Na­­t­ ional Biography (2004) [accessed June 2009] —— , ‘Northern England or Southern Scotland? The Anglo-Scottish Border in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries and the Problem of Perspective’, in Government, Religion, and Society in Northern England, 1000–1700, ed. by John C. Appleby and Paul Dalton (Stroud: Sutton, 1997), pp. 27–39 —— , Robert Curthose Duke of Normandy (c. 1050–1134) (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008) Albert-Bruno, Frère, ‘L’Abbaye de Saint-Sauveur-Le-Vicomte’, in La Normandie bénédictine au temps de Guillaume le Conquérant (Lille: Faculté Catholiques de Lille, 1967 [=1969]), pp. 323–56 Alexander, James W., Ranulph of Chester: A Relic of the Conquest (Georgia: University of Georgia Press, 1983) Allmand, Christopher, The Hundred Years War: England and France at War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988) Allott, Stephen, Alcuin of York (York: Ebor, 1974) Alouëte, François de l’, Traité des nobles et des vertus don’t ils sont formés: leur charge, vocation, rang, et degree: des marques, genealogies et diverses especes d’iceus de l’origine des fiefs et des armoiries (Paris: Le Mangnier, 1577) Altschul, Michael, ‘Celtic Fringe or Celtic Center? Rethinking Medieval Welsh and Irish History’, Medievalia et Humanistica, 17 (1991), 121–26 Amt, Emilie, ‘Lucy, Richard de (d. 1179)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed 4 April 2009] —— , The Accession of Henry  II in England: Royal Government Restored 1149–1159 (Wood­bridge: Boydell, 1993) Anderson, Alan O., ‘Anglo-Scottish Relations from Constantine II to William’, Scottish Historical Review, 42 (1963), 1–20 Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, rev. edn (London: Verso, 1991) Angot, Alphonse, Généalogies féodales Mayennaises du xie au xiiie siècles (Laval: Goupil, 1942)

Bibliography

447

Arnoux, Mathieu, and Christophe Maneuvrier, ‘Deux abbayes de Basse-Normandie: Notre-Dame du Val et le Val Richer (xiie–xiiie siècles)’, Le Pays Bas-Normand, 93 (2000), 1–111 Ascoli, Georges, La Grande-Bretagne devant l’opinion française, depuis la guerre de Cent ans, jusqu’à la fin du xvie siècle, Travaux et mémoires de l’Université de Lille: nouvelle série. droit, lettres, 11 (Paris: Librairie Universitaire J. Gamber, 1927) Ash, Marinell, ‘The Administration of the Diocese of St. Andrews, 1202–1238’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1972) —— , ‘William Lamberton, Bishop of St. Andrews, 1297–1328’, in The Scottish Tradition, ed. by Geoffrey W. S. Barrow (Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1974), pp. 44–55 Aubert, Marcel, L’Abbaye des Vaux de Cernay (Paris: Laurens, 1934) Aurell, Martin, ed., La cour Plantagenêt, 1154–1204: actes du colloque tenu à Thouars du 30 avril au 2 mai 1999, Centre d’études supérieures de civilisation médiévale, 8 (Poitiers: Impr. Lavauzelle, 2000) —— , La noblesse en Occident, ve–xve siècle (Paris: Colin, 1996) —— , L’Empire des Plantagenêt, 1154–1224, Collection Tempus, 81 (Paris: Perrin, 2004) Aurell, Martin, and Noël-Yves Tonnerre, eds, Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de famille la parenté au Moyen Âge, 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006) Autrand, Françoise, ‘Aux origines de l’Europe moderne: l’alliance France-Ecosse au xive siècle’, in The Auld Alliance: France and Scotland over 700 Years, ed. by James Laidlaw (Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 1999), pp. 33–46 Babcock, Robert S., ‘Imbeciles and Normans: The Ynfydion of Gruffudd ap Rhys Recon­ sidered’, Haskins Society Journal, 4 (1992), 1–9 Bachrach, Bernard S., ‘Henry II and the Angevin Tradition of Family Hostility’, Albion, 16 (1984), 111–30 ——  , ‘Some Observations on the Origins of the Angevin Dynasty’, Medieval Prosopography, 10 (1989), 1–24 —— , ‘The Origin of Armorican Chivalry’, Technology and Culture, 10 (1969), 166–71 Bagge, Sverre, ‘Ideologies and Mentalities’, in The Cambridge History of Scandinavia, i: Pre-History to 1520, ed. by Knut Helle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 465–86 —— , ‘The Individual in Medieval Historiography’, in The Individual in Political Theory and Practice, ed. by Janet Coleman (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), pp. 35–58 —— , ‘The Individual in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance’, The European Legacy Toward New Paradigms, 2/8 (1997), 1305–12 Bailey, Maggie, ‘Ælfwynn, Second Lady of the Mercians’, in Edward the Elder 899–924, ed. by Nick J. Higham and David H. Hill (London: Routledge, 2001), pp. 112–27 Baker, Derek, ‘A Nursery of Saints: St. Margaret of Scotland Reconsidered’, in Medieval Women Dedicated and Presented to Rosalind M. T. Hill, ed. by Derek Baker, Studies in Church History, Subsidia, 1 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1978, 1989), pp. 119–41 Baldwin, John W., The Government of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages (Berkeley, London: University of California Press, 1986)

448

Bibliography

—— , ‘The Image of the Jongleur in Northern France around 1200’, Speculum, 72 (1997), 635–63 —— , ‘Qu’est-ce que les Capétiens ont appris des Plantegenêt?’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 29 (1986), 3–8 Bannerman, John, ‘MacDuff of Fife’, in Medieval Scotland: Crown, Lordship and Commu­ nity, Essays Presented to G.  W.  S. Barrow, ed. by A. Grant K. Stringer (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993), pp. 20–38 —— , ‘Notes on the Scottish Entries in the Early Irish Annals’, Scottish Gaelic Studies, 11 (1968), pp. 149–70 —— , ‘The King’s Poet and the Inauguration of Alexander III’, Scottish Historical Review, 68 (1989), 120–49 Baker, Derek, ‘Waldef, Abbot of Melrose’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed 8 April 2008] Barker, Lynn K., ‘MS Bodl. Canon. Pat. Lat. 131 and a Lost Lactantius of John of Salisbury: Evidence in Search of a French Critic of Thomas Becket’, Albion, 22 (1990), 21–37 Barlett, Robert, and Angus Mackay, eds, Medieval Frontier Societies (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989) Barlow, Frank, Edward the Confessor (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1970) —— , ‘Roger of Howden’, English Historical Review, 65/256 (1950), 352–60 Barraclough, Geoffrey, The Origins of Modern Germany (Oxford: Blackwell, 1962) Barrow, Geoffrey, ‘Frontier and Settlement: Which Influenced Which? England and Scot­ land, 1100–1300’, in Medieval Frontier Societies, ed. by Robert Bartlett and Angus MacKay (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), pp. 3–21 —— , ‘King David  I and the Honour of Lancaster’, English Historical Review, 70/274 (1955), 85–90 —— , Kingship and Unity: Scotland 1000–1306 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2003) —— , The Anglo-Norman Era in Scottish History (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980) —— , ‘The Charters of David I of Scotland: Additions and Corrections’, Scottish Historical Review, 80 (2001), 90–92 —— , ‘The Earls of Fife in the 12th Century’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (1952–53), 51–62 —— , The Kingdom of the Scots: Government, Church and Society from the Eleventh to the Fourteenth Century (Edinburgh: Edward Arnold and Edinburgh University Press, 2nd edn 1973 and 2003) —— , ‘The Pattern of Lordship and Feudal Settlement in Cumbria’, Journal of Medieval History, 1 (1975), 117–38 —— , ‘The Scots and the North of England’, in The Anarchy of Stephen’s Reign, ed. by Edmund King (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), pp. 231–54 —— , Robert Bruce and the Community of the Realm of Scotland (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1988) —— , Scotland and its Neighbours in the Middle Ages (London: Hambledon, 1992)

Bibliography

449

—— , ‘Scotland, Wales, and Ireland in the Twelfth Century’, in The New Cambridge Medieval History, c. 1024–1198, ed. by David Luscombe and John Riley-Smith, 4/2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 581–610 —— , ‘Wales and Scotland in the Middle Ages’, The Welsh History Review, 10 (1980), 302–19 —— , ‘William of Malmesbury’s Use of Charters’, in Narrative and History in the Early Medieval West, ed. by Elizabeth M. Tyler and Ross Balzaretti, Studies in the Early Middle Ages, 16 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 67–89 Barth, Fredrik, ed., Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1969) —— , Introduction to Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference (Boston, MA: Waveland, 1969) Barthélemy, Dominique, ‘Deux Mutations du “Feudalism”’, in Les Pouvoirs locaux dans la France du centre et de l’ouest (viiie–xie siècles): implantation et moyens d’action, ed. by Dominique Barthélemy and Olivier Bruand (Rennes: Université Rennes, 2004), pp. 233–48 —— , La société dans le comté de Vendôme de l’an mil au xive siècle (Paris: Fayard, 1993) —— , Les deux ages de la seigneurie banale: pouvoir et société dans la terre des sires de Coucy: milieu xie-milieu xiiie siècle, Série Histoire ancienne et médiévale (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2000) —— , ‘Modern Mythologies of Medieval Chivalry’, in The Medieval World, ed. by Peter Line­han and Janet L. Nelson (London, New York: Routledge, 2001 and 2004), pp. 214–28 —— , ‘Noblesse, chevalerie et lignage dans le Vendômois et les régions voisines aux xie et xiie siècles’, in Georges Duby: l’écriture de l’histoire, ed. by Claudie Duhamel-Amado and Guy Lobrichon, Bibliothèque du Moyen Âge, 6 (Bruxelles: De Boeck Université, 1996), pp. 121–39 Barthélemy, Dominique, and Olivier Bruand, eds, Les pouvoirs locaux dans la France du centre et de l’ouest (viiie–xie siècles): implantation et moyens d’action (Rennes: Université Rennes, 2004) Barthélemy, Dominique, and Stephen White, ‘The Feudal Revolution’, Past and Present, 152 (1996), 196–223 Bartlett, Robert, ‘Cults of Irish, Scottish, and Welsh Saints in Twelfth-Century England’, in Britain and Ireland, 900–1300: Insular Responses to Medieval European Change, ed. by Brendan Smith (Cambridge, 1999), pp. 67–86 —— , England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075–1225 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999) —— , Gerald of Wales (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982) —— , The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization and Cultural Change 950–1350 (London: Allen Lane, 1993) Barton, Richard E., ‘Lordship in Maine: Transformation, Service, and Anger’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 17 (1995), 41–63 —— , Lordship in the County of Maine, c. 890–1160 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2004)

450

Bibliography

Bates, David, ‘1066 – Does the Date Still Matter?’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 78/202 (2005), 443–64 —— , ‘Normandy and England after 1066’, English Historical Review, 104/413 (1989), 851–80 —— , ‘Notes sur l’Aristocratie Normande 1. Hugues, évêque de Bayeux 2. Herluin de Conteville et sa famille’, Annales de Normandie, 23 (1973), 7–38 —— , ‘The Earliest Norman Writs’, English Historical Review, 100/385 (1985), 266–84 —— , The Normans: The History of a Dynasty (Hambledon and London: Continuum, 2002 and repr. 2007) —— , ‘The Prosopographical Study of Anglo-French Royal Charters’, in Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. by Katherine Keats-Rohan (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997), pp. 89–102 Bates, David, and Anne Curry, eds, England and Normandy in the Middle Ages (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994) Baudry, Paul, Entrée de Saint-Ouen Chartreuse de Saint-Julien et Église de Saint-Sauveur de Rouen quatre desseins inédits de Robert Pigeon gravés à l’eau forte par E.  Nicolle (Rouen: Métérie, 1878) Bauduin, Pierre, ‘Autour de la dos d’Adelize de Tosny: mariage et contrôle du territoire en Normandie (xie–xiie siècles)’, in Le Pouvoirs Locaux dans la France du centre et de l’ouest (viiie–xie siècles): Implantation et moyens d’action, ed. by Dominique Barthélemy and Olivier Bruand (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2004), pp. 157–73 Baumgartner, Emmanuelle, ‘Écrire et penser l’histoire selon l’Histoire des ducs de Normandie de Benoît de Sainte-Maure’, Le Travail sur le modèle, ed. by Danielle Busch­ inger, Médiévales, 16 (Amiens: Presses du Centre d’Études Médiévales de l’Université de Picardie, 2002), pp. 41–49 —— , ‘Figures de destinateur: Salomon, Arthur, le Roi d’Angleterre’ in Anglo-Norman Anniversary Essays, ed. by Ian Short, Anglo-Norman Text Society, 2 (London: AngloNorman Text Scoiety, 1993), pp. 1–10 Beaune, Colette, The Birth of an Ideology: Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval France, trans. by Susan Ross Huston and ed. by Fredric L. Cheyette (Berkeley and Oxford: University of California Press, 1991) Beaurepaire, Eugène de Robillard de, ‘Introductio monachorum et miracula insigniora per beatum Michaelem archangelem patrata in ecclesia quae dicitur Tumba’, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de Normandie, 29 (1877), 880–82 Beauroy, Jacques, ‘Centralisation et histoire sociale: remarques sur l’Inquisitio Vice­comi­ tum de 1170’, in Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 37 (1994), 3–24 Beem, Charles, The Lioness Roared: The Problems of Female Rule in English History (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2006) Belleval, René de, Jean de Bailleul Roi d’Écosse et Sire de Bailleul-en-Vimeu (Paris: Du­moulin, 1866) Bennett, Matthew, ‘Poetry as History? The “Roman de Rou” of Wace as a Source for the Norman Conquest’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 5 (1982), 19–39

Bibliography

451

Bennett, R. E., ‘Arthur and Gorlagen, the Dutch Lancelot, and St. Kentigern’, Speculum, 13/1 (1938), 68–75 Benton, John F., ‘The Court of Champagne as a Literary Centre’, Speculum, 36/ 4 (1961), 551–91 Bezzola, Reto, Les origines et la formation de la littérature courtoise en Occident (500– 1200), Bibliothèque de L’École des Hautes Études ive Section – Sciences Historiques et Philologiques, 2 vols (Paris: Champion, 1958–63) Bibire, Paul, ‘The Poetry of Earl Rognvald’s Court’, in St Magnus Cathedral and Orkney’s Twelfth-Century Renaissance, ed. by Barbara E. Crawford (Aberdeen: Aberdeen Uni­ versity Press, 1988), pp. 208–40 Billoré, Maïté, ‘Y a-t-il une “Oppression” des Plantagenêt sur l’Aristocratie en Normandie’, in Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de Famille la Parenté au Moyen Âge, ed. by Martin Aurell and Noël-Yves Tonnerre (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 145–62 Bisson, Thomas, ‘Nobility and Family in Medieval France: A Review Essay’, in French Historical Studies, 16 (1990), 597–613 —— , ‘The Feudal Revolution’, Past and Present, 142 (1994), 6–42 Blacker, Jean, The Faces of Time: Portrayal of the Past in Old French and Latin Historical Nar­­­­rative of the Anglo-Norman Regnum (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1994) Blair, John, ‘The Surrey Endowments of Lewes Priory’, Sussex Archaeological Collections, 72 (1980), 97–126 Blakely, Ruth M., The Brus Family in England and Scotland, 1100–1295 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2005) Bloch, Marc, La Société Féodale (Paris: Michel, 1989) Boardman, Steve, and Alasdair Ross, eds, The Exercise of Power in Medieval Scotland, c. 1200–1500 (Dublin: Four Courts, 2003) Bonner, Elizabeth, ‘Scotland’s “Auld Alliance” with France, 1295–1560’, History, 84/273 (1999), 5–30 Bouard, Michel de, ‘Fouilles au Château de Bonneville-sur-Tocques’, Annales de Nor­ mandie, 16. 4 (1966), 352–72 Bouchard, Constance B., ‘Family Structure and Family Consciousness among the Aristo­ cracy in the Ninth to Eleventh Centuries’, Francia, 14 (1986), 639–58 Boudon, Georges, ‘Robert de Clari en Aminois, chevalier auteur d’une chronique de la ive croisade (1200–1216)’, Bulletin de la Société des Antiquares de Picardie, 29 (1897), 700–34 Bouet, Pierre, and Véronique Gazeau, eds, La Normandie et l’Angleterre au Moyen Âge (Caen: CRAHM, 2003) Bourges, Yves-André, ‘Robert Arbrissel, Raoul de la Fûtaie, et Robert de Locunan: la trinité érémitique bretonne de la fin du xie siècle’, Britannia Monastica, 10 (2006), 9–19 Boussard, Jacques, Le Comté d’Anjou sous Henri Plantegenêt et ses fils (1151–1204) (Geneva and Paris: Champion, 1977) —— , Le gouvernement d’Henri II Plantagenêt (Paris: Librairie d’Argences, 1956) —— , ‘L’Origine des familles seigneurials dans la région de la Loire moyenne’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 5 (1962), 303–22 Bowers, Roger, ‘Scotland’s Early Church Music’, Early Music, 29. 4 (2001), 644–46

452

Bibliography

Bradbury, Jim, ‘Fulk le Réchin and the Origin of the Plantagenets’, in Studies in Medieval History Presented to R. Allen Brown, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill, Christopher J. Holdsworth, and Janet L. Nelson (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989), pp. 27–41 —— , Philip Augustus: King of France, 1180–1223 (London: Longman, 1998) Brand’Honneur, Michel, Manoirs et châteaux dans le comté de Rennes, habitat à motte et société chevaleresque (xie–xiie siècles) (Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2001) Brandsma, Frank, ‘The Presentation of Direct Discourse in Arthurian Romances: Changing Modes of Performance and Reception?’, in The Medieval Opus: Imitation, Rewriting and Transmission in the French Tradition, ed. by Douglas Kelly, Faux Titre, 116 (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1996), pp. 245–60 Breese, W., ‘The Persistence of Scandinavian Connections in Normandy in the Tenth and Early Eleventh Centuries’, Viator, 8 (1977), 47–61 Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (SaintBrieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992) Britnell, R. H., ‘English Markets and Royal Administration before 1200’, The Economic History Review New Series, 31/2 (1978), 183–96 Brockington, Mary, ‘Discovery in the Morrois: Antecedents and Analogues’, The Modern Language Review, 93/1 (1998), 1–15 Bromwich, Rachel, ‘Scotland and the Earliest Arthurian Legend’, Bulletin Bibliographique de la Société Internationale Arthurienne, 15 (1963), 85–95 Brooke, C. N. L., ‘Foliot, Gilbert (c. 1110–1187)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed May 2007] Brooke, Daphne, ‘Fergus of Galloway: Miscellaneous Notes for a Revised Portrait’, Tran­ sactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 66 (1991), 47–58 —— , ‘The Northumbrian Settlements in Galloway and Carrick: An Historical Assess­ ment’, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 121 (1991), 295–327 Broun, Dauvit, ‘A New Look at Gesta Annalia Attributed to John of Fordun’, Church, Chronicle and Learning in Medieval and Early Renaissance Scotland: Essays Presented to Donald Watt on the Occasion of the Completion of the Publication of Bower’s Scotichronicon, ed. by Barbara E. Crawford (Edinburgh: Mercat, 1999), pp. 9–30 —— , ‘Alba: Pictish Homeland or Irish Offshoot?’, in Exile and Homecoming: Papers from the Fifth Australian Conference of Celtic Studies, ed. by Pamela O’Neill (Sydney: Sydney University Press, 2005), pp. 234–75 —— , ‘Gaelic Literacy in Eastern Scotland between 1124 and 1249’, in Literacy in Medieval Celtic Societies, ed. by Huw Pryce, Medieval Literature, 33 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 183–201 —— , ‘Melrose Abbey and its World’, in The Chronicle of Melrose Abbey: A Stratigraphic Edi­tion, i: Introduction and Facsimile, ed. by Dauvit Broun and Julian Harrison (Wood­bridge: Boydell Press, 2007), pp. 1–12 —— , ‘Pictish Kings 761–839: Integration with Dál Riata or Separate Development’, in The St  Andrews Sarcophagus, ed. by Sally Foster (Dublin: Four Courts, 1998), pp. 71–83

Bibliography

453

—— , ‘Recovering the Chronicle of Melrose’, in The Chronicle of Melrose Abbey: A Stratigraphic Edition, i: Introduction and Facsimile, ed. by Dauvit Broun and Julian Harrison (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2007), pp. 40–55 —— , Scottish Independence and the Idea of Britain: From the Picts to Alexander  III (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007) —— , ‘The Absence of Regnal Years from the Dating Clause of Charters of Kings of Scots, 1195–1222’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 25 (2002), 47–64 —— , The Charters of Gaelic Scotland and Ireland in the Early and Central Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) —— , The Irish Identity of the Kingdom of the Scots in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999) —— , ‘The Seven Kingdoms in De Situ Albanie: A Record of Pictish Political Geography or Imaginary Map of Ancient Alba?’, in Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Medieval Era, ed. by E. J. Cowan and R. Andrew McDonald (East Linton: Tuckwell, 2000), pp. 24–42 Brown, Elizabeth A. R., ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine Reconsidered: The Woman and her Seasons’, in Eleanor of Aquitaine, Lord and Lady, ed. by John Parsons and Bonnie Wheeler (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 1–54 Brown, Michael, James I (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1994 and 2000) —— , The Black Douglases: War and Lordship in Late Medieval Scotland 1300–1455 (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1998) —— , ‘The Development of Scottish Border Lordship, 1332–1358’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 70/171 (1997), 1–22 —— , The Wars of Scotland, 1214–1371 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004) Brown, Reginald Allen, ‘Magnates, Curiales, and the Wheels of Fortune’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 2 (1979), 118–40 Bruckner, Matilda, ‘Rewriting Chrétien’s Conte du Graal – Mothers and Sons: Questions, Contradictions, and Connections’, in The Medieval Opus: Imitation, Rewriting and Transmission in the French Tradition, ed. by Douglas Kelly, Faux Titre, 116 (Amster­ dam: Rodopi, 1996), pp. 213–44 Brugger, Ernst, ‘Almain and Ermonie as Tristan’s Home’, Modern Philology, 25/3 (1928), 269–90 —— , ‘Almain and Ermonie as Tristan’s Home II (Continued)’, Modern Philology, 26/1 (1928), 1–12 —— , ‘“Pellande”, “Galvoie”, and “Arragoce” in the Romance of Fergus’, in A Miscellany of Studies in Romance Languages and Literatures Presented to Leon E. Kastner, ed. by Mary Williams and James A. Rothschild (Cambridge: Heffer, 1932), pp. 94–107 Bry, Gilles, Histoire des Pays et Comté du Perche et Duché d’Alençon où est traité des anciens seigneurs de Bellesme ensemble des princes de la maison royale qui ont tenu lesdites Prouinces depuis S Louys iusques a present (Paris: Pierre Le-Mur, 1620) Bur, Michael, ‘De quelques champenois dans l’entourage français des rois d’Angleterre aux xie et xiie siècles’, in Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. by Katherine KeatsRohan (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997), pp. 333–48

454

Bibliography

—— , La Champagne médiévale: recueil d’article (Langres: D. Guéniot, 2005) —— , La formation du comté de Champagne, v. 950–v. 1150 (Nancy: Université de Nancy-II, 1977) Burke, John, A General and Heraldic Dictionary of the Peerages of England, Ireland, and Scotland: Extinct, Dormant and in Abeyance (London: Colburn and Bentley, 1831) Burt, Austin, and Robert Trivers, Genes in Conflict: The Biology and Selfish Genetic Elements (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2006) Burton, Janet, ‘English Monasteries and the Conquest’, in King Stephen’s Reign (1135– 1154), ed. by Paul Dalton and Graeme (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008), pp. 98–114 —— , The Monastic Order in Yorkshire, 1069–1215, Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought, 4th ser., 40 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) Butler, L., ‘The Origins of the Honour of Richmond and its Castles’, in Chateau Gaillard: Etudes de Castellologie medievale, Actes du Colloque International tenu à Luxembourg, 23–29 août 1992, 16 (Caen: Centre de recherches archéologiques médiévales, 1994), pp. 69–80 Caball, Marc, and Kaarina Hollo, ‘The Literature of Later Medieval Ireland, 1200–1600: From the Normans to the Tudors’, in The Cambridge History of Irish Literature, ed. by Margaret Kelleher and Philip O’Leary, 2 vols (Cambridge: Cambride University Press, 2006), i, 74–139 Caille, Jacqueline, ‘Une idylle entre la viscountess Ermengarde de Narbonne et le prince Rognvald Kali des Orcades au milieu du xiie siècle?’, in Art et histoire dans le Midi languedocien et rhodanien xe–xixe siècle: hommage à Robert Saint-Jean, ed. by Guy Romestan, Mémoires de la Société archéologique de Montpellier, 21 (Montpellier: Société archéologique de Montpellier 1993), pp. 229–33 Cam, Helen, ‘The English Lands of the Abbey of St. Riquier’, English Historical Review, 31/123 (1916), 443–47 Campbell, James, ‘England, Scotland, and the Hundred Years War in the FourteenthCentury’, in Europe in the Late Middle Ages, ed. by John R. Hale, John Roger L. Highfield, and B. Smalley (London: Faber, 1965), pp. 184–216 Carolus-Barré, Louis, ‘Le service militaire en Beauvais au temps de Philippe de Beaumanoir. L’Estaige à Gerberoy et à Beauvais (1271–7). L’Ost de Navarre (1276)’, in La Guerre et la Paix: frontières et violences au Moyen Âge. Actes du 101e Congrès national des sociétés savantes, Lille, 1976 (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1978), pp. 73–93 —— , ‘Un prieuré breton de l’abbaye de Saint-Valery: Saint Galery, près Matignon, au diocèse de Saint-Brieuc (1208–1353)’, Bulletins de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie, 40 (Amiens: Yvert et Cie, 1943), 35–48 Carpenter, David, The Minority of Henry III (London: Methuen, 1990) Carr, A. D., ‘The Last and Weakest of his Line: Dafydd ap Gruffydd, The Last Prince of Wales’, Welsh History Review, 19 (1998), pp. 373–99 Carré de Busserolle, Jacques-Xavier, ‘Recherches historiques sur l’ancienne vicomté de la Guerche, en ouraine, et sur les fiefs qui en relevaient Availles, Barrou, La Butelaye, Buxeuil, Méré, etc.’, Mémoires de la Société archéologique de Touraine, 13 (1861), 73–131

Bibliography

455

Chandler, Victoria, ‘Ada de Warenne, Queen Mother of Scotland (c. 1123–1178)’, Scottish Historical Review, 60 (1981), 119–39 —— , ‘The Last of the Montgomerys: Roger the Poitevin and Arnulf ’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 62/147 (1989), 1–14 Chappell, David, ‘Ethnogenesis and Frontiers’, Journal of World History, 4/2 (1993), 267–75 Chauou, Amaury, L’Idéologie Plantagenêt: royauté arthurienne et monarchie politique dans l’espace Plantagenêt (xiie–xiiie siècles) (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2001) Chédeville, André, Chartres et ses campagnes, xie–xiiie s. (Paris: Klincksieck, 1973) —— , Histoire de chartres et du pays chartrain (Toulouse: Privat, 1983) Chédeville, André and Noël-Yves Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale xie–xiie siècle (Rennes: Ouest-France Université, 1987) Cheney, Christopher R., The Papacy and England 12th–14th Centuries (London: Vario­ rum Reprints, 1982) Chenon, Émile, ‘Les marches separantes d’Anjou, Bretagne et Poitou’, Nouvelle Revue Historique du Droit Francais et Etranger, 16 (1892), 18–62, 165–211 —— , ‘Les marches separantes d’Anjou, Bretagne, et Poitou: note additionnelle’, in Nou­ velle Revue Historique du Droit Francais et Etranger, 21 (1897), 62–80 Chenaye-Desbois, Aubert de la, and Jacques Badier, Dictionnaire de la Noblesse, 3rd edn, 19 vols (Paris, 1863–76; repr. Nendeln: Kraus, 1969) Cheyette, Fredric L., Ermengard of Narbonne and the World of the Troubadours (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001) —— , ‘Some Reflections on Violence, Reconciliation, and the “Feudal Revolution”’, in Conflict in Medieval Europe: Changing Perspectives on Society and Culture, ed. by Warren C. Brown and Piotr Górecki (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003), pp. 243–64 —— , ‘Suum cuique tribuere’, French Historical Studies, 6/3 (1970), 287–99 Chibnall, Marjorie, ‘Anglo-French Relations in the Work of Orderic Vitalis’, in Docu­ menting the Past: Essays in Medieval History Presented to George Peddy Cuttino, ed. by J. S. Hamilton and Patricia J. Bradley (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989), pp. 5–19 —— , ‘Feudalism and Lordship’, in A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Elisabeth Van Houts (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 123–34 —— , ‘John of Salisbury as Historian’, in Piety, Power, and History in Medieval England and Normandy, Variorum Collected Studies Series, 683 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), pp. 169–77 —— , ‘L’Avènement au poivoir d’Henri II’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 37 (1994), 41–48 —— , ‘Mercenaries and the Familia Regis under Henry I’, History, 62/204 (1977), 15–23 —— , ‘Monastic Foundations in England and Normandy, 1066–1189’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. by David Bates and Anne Curry (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994), pp. 37–49

456

Bibliography

—— , Piety, Power, and History in Medieval England and Normandy (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000) —— , ‘Robert de Bellême and the Castle of Tickhill’, in Droit privé et institutions régionales: Études historiques offertes à Jean Yver (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1976), pp. 151–56 —— , ‘The Empress Matilda and Church Reform’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Soci­ ety, 5th ser., 38 (1988), 107–30 —— , The Empress Matilda: Queen Consort, Queen Mother and Lady of the English (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991) Chinca, Mark, and Christopher Young, ‘Orality and Literacy in the Middle Ages: A Conjunction and its Consequences’, in Orality and Literacy in the Middle Ages: Essays on a Conjunction and its Consequences in Honour of D. H. Green, ed. by Mark Chinca and Christopher Young (Turnhout: Brepols, 2005), pp. 1–11 Chisholm-Batten, Edmund, ‘Historical Notices and Charters of the Priory of Beauly’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4 (1876), 1–74 Church, Stephen D., ‘Brewer, William (d. 1226)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed 4 April 2009] —— , ed., King John: New Interpretations (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999) —— , The Household Knights of King John, Cambridge Studies in Medieval life and Thought, 4th ser., 44 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) —— , ‘The Knights of King John: A Question of Numbers’, Thirteenth-Century England, 4 (1992), 151–65 —— , ‘The Rewards of Royal Service in the Household of King John: A Dissenting Opinion’, English Historical Review, 110/436 (1995), 277–302 Clanchy, Michael T., From Memory to Written Record, England 1066–1307 (London: Blackwell, 1979) Clancy, Thomas O., ‘Philosopher-King: Nechtan mac Dar-llei’, Scottish Historical Review, 83 (2004), 125–49 Clarke, Cecily, ‘Women’s Names in Post-Conquest England: Observations and Specu­ lations’, Speculum, 53. 2 (1978), 223–51 Clay, Charles Travis, ‘Two Devorguillas’, English Historical Review, 65/254 (1950), 89–91 Condamine, Pierre de La, ‘Les Stuarts et la Bretagne’, Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne, 58 (1981), 163–81 Corner, David, ‘The Gesta Regis Henrici Secundi and Chronica of Roger, Parson of Howden’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 56/134 (1983), 126–44 Corral, Fernando Luis, ‘Alfonso  VIII of Castile’s Territorial Litigation at Henry  II of England’s Court: An Effective and Valid Arbitration?’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 50 (2006), 22–42 Coulson, Charles, ‘The French Matrix of the Castle-Provisions of the Chester-Leicester Conventio’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 17 (1994), 65–86 Cowan, Edward, and R. Andrew McDonald, eds, Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Medieval Era (East Linton: Tuckwell, 2000) Cownie, Emma, ‘Religious Patronage and Lordship: The Debate on the Nature of the Honor’, in Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and

Bibliography

457

France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. by K. S. B. Keats-Rohan (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997), pp. 133–46 Crawford, Barbara E., ‘The Earldom of Caithness and the Kingdom of Scotland, 1150–1266’, in Essays on the Nobility of Medieval Scotland, ed. by Keith J. Stringer (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 1985), pp. 25–43 Crawford, Barbara E., and Simon Taylor, ‘The Southern Frontier of Norse Settlement in North Scotland Place-Names and History’, Northern Scotland, 23 (2003), 1–76 Cronne, A.  H., ‘The Honour of Lancaster during Stephen’s Reign’, English Historical Review, 50/200 (1935), 670–80 Crouch, David, ‘Biography as Propaganda in the “History of William Marshall”’, in Con­ vaincre et persuader: Communication et propagande aux xiie et xiiie siècles, ed. by Martin Aurell (Poitiers: Université de Poitiers-centre d’études supérieures de civilisation médiévale, 2007), pp. 503–12 —— , ‘From Stenton to MacFarlane: Models of Societies of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th ser., 5 (1995), 179–200 —— , ‘King Stephen and Northern France’, in King Stephen’s Reign (1135–1154), ed. by Paul Dalton and Graeme (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008), pp. 44–57 —— , ‘Normans and Anglo-Normans: A Divided Aristocracy’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. by David Bates and Anne Curry (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994), pp. 51–67 —— , ‘Robert, Earl of Gloucester and the Daughter of Zelophehad’, Journal of Medieval History, 11 (1985), 227–43 —— , ‘Robert, First Earl of Gloucester (b.  before 1100, d.  1147)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004) [accessed 9 September 2008] —— , ‘Robert of Gloucester’s Mother and Sexual Politics in Norman Oxfordshire’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 72/179 (1999), 323–33 —— , ‘Strategies of Lordship in Angevin England and the Career of William Marshal’, in The Ideals and Practice of Medieval Knighthood, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Ruth Harvey, 2 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1988), pp. 1–25 —— , ‘The Administration of the Norman Earldom’, in The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barraclough (1988), ed. by A.  T. Thacker, Journal of the Chester Archeological Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archeological Society, 1991), pp. 69–95 —— , The Beaumont Twins: The Roots and Branches of Power in the Twelfth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986) —— , The Birth of Nobility: Constructing Aristocracy in England and France, 900–1300 (London: Longman, 2005) —— , The Reign of King Stephen, 1135–1154 (Essex: Longman, 2000) —— , Tournament (London and New York: Hambledon, 2005) —— , William Marshal: Court, Career, and Chivalry in the Angevin Empire, 1147–1219 (Harlow: Longman, 1990) Cuissard, Charles, Les seigneurs du Puiset (980–1789), Extrait du Bulletin de la Société dunoise, 3 (Châteaudun: Lecesne, 1881)

458

Bibliography

Dales, R.  C., The Intellectual Life of Western Europe in the Middle Ages (Leiden: Brill, 1995) Dalton, Paul, ‘Aiming at the Impossible: Ranulf II Earl of Chester and Lincolnshire in the Reign of King Stephen’, in The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barraclough (1988), ed. by A. T. Thacker, Journal of the Chester Archeological Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archeological Society, 1991), pp. 109–34 —— , ‘Allegiance and Intelligence in King Stephen’s Reign’, in King Stephen’s Reign (1135– 1154), ed. by Paul Dalton and Graeme (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008), pp. 80–97 —— , ‘Eustace Fitz John and the Politics of Anglo-Norman England: The Rise and Survival of a Twelfth-Century Royal Servant’, Speculum, 71. 2 (1996), 358–83 —— , ‘Gant, Gilbert de, Earl of Lincoln (c.  1123–1155/6)’, in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed 27 January 2013] —— , ‘Geffrei Gaimar’s Estoire des Engleis, Peacemaking, and the “Twelfth-Century Revival of the English Nation”’, Studies in Philology, 104. 4 (2007), 427–54 —— , ‘The Armed Neutrality of Ranulf II Earl of Chester in King Stephen’s Reign’, AngloNorman Studies, 14 (1992), 39–59 Dalton, Paul, and Graeme White, eds, King Stephen’s Reign (1135–1154) (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008) Damien-Grint, Peter, The New Historians of the Twelfth-Century Renaissance: Inventing Vernacular Authority (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999) Dance, Richard, ‘The AB Language: The Recluse, the Gossip and the Language Historian’, in A Companion to Ancrene Wisse, ed. by Yoko Wada (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 57–82 Daoust, J., and L. Gaillard, eds, La Normandie bénédictine au temps de Guillaume le Conquérant (Lille: Faculté Catholiques de Lille, 1967 [=1969]) Darsy, M., ‘Gamaches et ses Seigneurs’, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie, 13 (1854), 99–189 —— , ‘La terre et seigneurie de Hélicourt-en-Vimeu’, Bulletins de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie, 19 (1895), 413–33 David, Charles Wendell, Robert Curthose: Duke of Normandy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1920) Davies, Robert Rees, Conquest, Coexistence, and Change: Wales 1063–1415 (Oxford: Claren­don Press, 1987) —— , Domination and Conquest: The Experience of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, 1100– 1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) —— , ‘Frontier Arrangements in Fragmented Societies: Ireland and Wales’, in Medieval Frontier Societies, ed. by Robert Bartlett and Angus MacKay (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), pp. 77–100 —— , Lordship and Society in the March of Wales, 1282–1400 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978) —— , The Age of Conquest: Wales, 1063–1415 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) —— , ‘The Law of the March’, Welsh History Review, 5 (1971), 1–30

Bibliography

459

Davies, Wendy, ‘Celtic Kingships in the Early Middle Ages’, in Kings and Kingship in Medieval Europe, ed. by Anne Duggan (London: King’s College London Centre for Late Antique and Medieval Studies, 1993), pp. 101–24 Davis, H.  W.  C., ‘Henry of Blois and Brian FitzCount’, English Historical Review, 24 (1910), 303–06 Davis, Ralph H. C., ‘Geoffrey and the Lure of Charters’, in The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barraclough (1988), ed. by A. T. Thacker, Journal of the Chester Archeological Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archeological Society, 1991), pp. 23–34 —— , King Stephen, 1135–1154 (London: Longmans, 1967) —— , ‘King Stephen and the Earl of Chester Revised’, English Historical Review, 75/297 (1960), 654–60 Dean, Ruth J., ‘The Manuscripts of Nicholas Trevet’s Anglo-French Chronicles’, Medi­ evalia et Humanistica, 14 (1962), 95–105 DeAragon, RaGena C., ‘In Pursuit of Aristocratic Women: A Key to Success in Norman England’, Albion, 14 (1982), 258–67 Decaëns, Joseph, ‘Les Châteaux de la vallée de l’Huisne dans le Perche’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 17 (1994), 3–20 Deister, John L., ‘Bernart de Ventadour’s Reference to the Tristan Story’, Modern Philology, 19. 3 (1922), 287–96 Delbouille, Maurice, ‘Des origines du personnage et du nom de Gauvain’, in Mélanges de Linguistique Française et de Philologie et Litterature Medievales Strasbourg offerts à Paul Imbs (Strasbourg, 1973), pp. 549–59 Delisle, M. Léopold, ‘Notice sur le cartulaire du comté de Rethel’, Annuaire Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire de France, 5. 2 (1867), 5–160 Depoin, Joseph, Les vicomtes du Mans et la maison de Bellême (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1910) Desroches, Jean-Jacques, Annales civiles, militaires et généalogiques du Pays d’Avranches ou de la toute Basse-Normandie (Caen: Hardel, 1856) Diggelmann, L., ‘Marriage as Tactical Response: Henry  II and the Royal Wedding of 1160’, English Historical Review, 119/483 (2004), 954–64 Dion, Adolphe de, Le Château de Montfort-l’Amaury (Rambouillet: Raynal, 1869) —— , Le prieuré Saint-Laurent de Montfort-L’Amaury (Rambouillet: Douchin, 1888) —— , Le Puiset aux xie et au xiie siècle, chatellenie et prieuré, Extrait des Mémoires de la société archéologique d’Eure et Loir (Chartres: Garnier, 1886) —— , Les seigneurs de Breteuil en Beauvaisis, Mélanges extrait des Mémoires de la société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Ile de France, 10 (Nogent-le-Rotrou: Daupeley-Gouverneur, 1884) —— , Note sur de l’architecture militaire sous le regne de Philippe Auguste (Rambouillet: Raynal, 1871) —— , Recherches sur les Anciens Chemins de L’Iveline et du Comté de Montfort (Chartres: Garuier, 1871) Dijkhof, Eef, ‘Goatskin and Growing Literacy: The Penetration of Writing in the Former Counties of Holland and Zeeland in the Thirteenth Century in Relation to the Changes

460

Bibliography

of the Internal and External Features of the Charters Issued’, in Charters and the Use of the Written Word in Medieval Society, ed. by Karl Heidecker (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000), pp. 101–12 Dixon, Philip, ‘From Hall to Tower: The Change in Seigneurial Houses on the AngloScottish Border after c. 1250’, Thirteenth-Century England, 4 (1992), 85–107 Doherty, Hugh, ‘Robert de Vaux and Roger de Stuteville, Sheriffs of Cumberland and North­umberland, 1170–85’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 28 (2005), 65–102 Donaldson, Gordon, The Auld Alliance: The Franco-Scottish Connection (Edinburgh: The Saltire Society, 1985) —— , The Scots Abroad (London: Hale, 1966) Dor, Juliette, ‘Langues française et anglaise, et multilinguisme à l’époque d’Henri II Plan­ tagenêt’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 37 (1994), 61–72 Douglas, David C., ‘Companions of the Conqueror’, History, 28/108 (1943), 129–47 Drell, Joanna H., Kinship and Conquest: Family Strategies in the Principality of Salerno during the Norman Period, 1077–1194 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2002) Dronke, Peter, ‘Peter of Blois and Poetry at the court of Henry II’, Medieval Studies, 38 (1976), 185–235 Duby, Georges, La société aux xie et xiie siècles dans la région mâconnaise (Paris: Colin, 1953) —— , ‘Lignage, noblesse et chevalerie au xiie siècle dans la région mâconnaise. Une révision’, Annales Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations, 27 (1972), 803–23 —— , ‘Moral Obligations and Peer Pressure’, in L’Écriture de l’Histoire, ed. by Claudie Duhamel-Abado and Guy Lobrichron (Bruxelles: De Boeck Université, 1996), pp. 217–22 —— , The Chivalrous Society, trans. by Cynthia Postan (London: Arnold, 1977) —— , Women of the Twelfth Century, trans. by Jean Birrell, Remembering the Dead, 2 (Cambridge: Polity, 1998) Duchein, Michel, Histoire de L’Ecosse (Paris: Fayard, 1998) —— , ‘Le traité Franco-Écossais de 1295 dans son Contexte International’, in The Auld Alli­ance: France and Scotland over 700 Years, ed. by James Laidlaw (Edinburgh, 1999), pp. 23–32 Duffy, Patrick M., ‘The Nature of the Medieval Frontier in Ireland’, Studia Hibernica, 22 (1982–83), 21–38 Duffy, Séan, ‘Emerging from the Mist: Ireland and Man in the Eleventh Century’, in Mannin Revisited: Twelve Essays on Manx Culture and Environment, ed. by Peter Davey and David Finlayson (Edinburgh: Scottish Society for Northern Studies, 2002), pp. 53–61 —— , ‘Henry II and England’s Insular Neighbours’, in Henry II: New Interpretations. Survey of the Reign of Henry II, Offering a Range of New Evaluations and Interpretations, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Nicholas Vincent (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), pp. 130–32 —— , ‘Irishmen and Islemen in the Kingdoms of Dublin and Man, 1052–1171’, Ériu, 43 (1992), 93–133

Bibliography

461

—— , ‘John and Ireland’, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. by Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999), pp. 221–45 —— , ‘John de Courcy’, in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004) [accessed 1 July 2008] —— , ‘King John’s Expedition to Ireland, 1210: The Evidence Reconsidered’, Irish Historical Studies, 30/117 (1996), 1–24 —— , ‘The 1169 Invasion as a Turning-Point in Irish-Welsh Relations’, in Britain and Ire­ land, 900–1300: Insular Responses to European Change, ed. by Brendan Smith (Cam­ bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 98–113 —— , ‘The Anglo-Norman Era in Scotland’, in Celebrating Columba: Irish Scottish Connections, 597–1997, ed. by T. M. Devine and J. F. McMillan (Edinburgh: Donald, 1999), pp. 15–34 —— , ‘The Bruce Brothers and the Irish Sea World, 1306–29’, Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies (1991), 55–86 —— , ‘The First Ulster Plantation: John de Courcy and the Men of Cumbria’, in Colony and Frontier in Medieval Ireland: Essays Presented to J. F. Lydon, ed. by T. B. Barry, Robin Frame, and Katharine Simms (London and Rio Grande, Hambledon 1995), pp. 154–78 —— , ‘The Lords of Galloway, Earls of Carrick, and the Bissets of the Glens: Scottish Settlement in Thirteenth-Century Ulster’, in Regions and Rulers in Ireland, 1100– 1650: Essays for Kenneth Nicholls, ed. by David Edwards (Dublin: Four Courts, 2004), pp. 37–50 Duggan, Anne, ‘Ne in Dubium: The Official Record of Henry  II’s Reconciliation at Avranches, 21 May 1172’, English Historical Review, 115/462 (2000), 643–58 —— , ed., Nobles and Nobility in Medieval Europe: Concepts, Origins, Transformations (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2000) Duggan, C., ‘The Becket Dispute and the Criminous Clerks’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 35/91 (1962), 1–28 Dumville, David, ‘Early Welsh Poetry: Problems of Historicity’, in Early Welsh Poetry: Studies in the Book of Aneirin, ed. by Brynley F. Roberts (Aberystwyth: National Lib­ rary of Wales, 1988), pp. 1–16 —— , ‘Gildas and Maelgwn: Problems of Dating’, in Gildas: New Approaches, ed. by M. Lappidge and D. Dumville (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1984), pp. 51–60 Dunbabin, Jean, France in the Making, 843–1180 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985) Duncan, A. A. M., ‘Honi soit qui mal y pense: David II and Edward III, 1346–52’, Scottish Historical Review, 67 (1988), 113–41 —— , ‘John King of England and the Kings of Scots’, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. by Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999), pp. 247–71 —— , ‘Roger of Howden and Scotland, 1187–1201’, in Church, Chronicle, and Learning in Medieval and Early Renaissance Scotland, ed. by Barbara E. Crawford (Edinburgh: Mercat, 1999), pp. 135–59

462

Bibliography

—— , Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, The Edinburgh History of Scotland, 1 (Edinburgh: Mercat, 1975 and 1978; repr. 1989, 1996) —— , ‘Sources and Uses of the Chronicle of Melrose, 1165–1297’, in Kings, Clerics and Chronicles in Scotland, 500–1297, ed. by Simon Taylor (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2000), pp. 146–85 —— , ‘The Bruces of Annandale, 1100–1304’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 69 (1994), 89–102 —— , ‘The Early Parliaments of Scotland’, Scottish Historical Review, 45 (1966), 36–58 —— , ‘The Earliest Scottish Charters’, Scottish Historical Review, 37 (1958), 103–35 —— , The Kingship of the Scots 842–1292: Succession and Independence (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2002) —— , ‘Yes, The Earliest Scottish Charters’, Scottish Historical Review, 78 (1999), 1–38 Duncan, A. A. M., and A. L. Brown, ‘Argyll and the Isles in the Earlier Middle Ages’, Pro­ ceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 90 (1957), 192–203 Durand, Roger, ‘Chronologie des premiers seigneurs de Courville’, Mémoires de la Société Archeologique d’Eure et Loire, 12 (1899–1900), 243–93 Dyggvy, Holger Petersen, ‘Personnages historiques firgurant dans la poésie lyrique fran­ çaise des xiie et xiiie siècles: Les dames du “Tournoiement” de Huon d’Oisi’, Neu­ philologische Mitteilungen, 25 (1935), 65–84 Easson, D. E., Medieval Religious Houses: Scotland (London: Longman, 1957) Eckhardt, Caroline D., and Meer, Bryan A., ‘Constructing a Medieval Genealogy: Roland the Father of Tristan in “Castleford’s Chronicle”’, Modern Language Notes, Com­ parative Literature Issue, 115. 5 (2000), 1085–1111 Ellis, A. S., ‘Fleance’, Oxford Notes and Queries, 5th ser., 10 (1878), 402–03 English, Barbara, The Lords of Holderness, 1086–1260: A Study in Feudal Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979) Ernst, Simon P., Histoire de Limbourg, 7 vols (Liège: Librairie de Collardin, 1847) Estaintot, Robert d’, Recherches historiques, archéologiques et féodales sur les sires et le duché d’Estouteville (Caen: Hardel, 1861) Evans, Charles, ‘Margaret of Scotland, Duchess of Brittany’, in Mélanges offerts à Szabolcs de Vajay à l’occasion de son cinquantième anniversaire (Braga: Cruz, 1971), pp. 187–91 Evans, Stephen S., The Heroic Poetry of Dark-Age Britain: An Introduction to its Dating, Composition, and Use as a Historical Source (Lanham, MD; London: University Press of America, 1997) Everard, Judith, Brittany and the Angevins (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) —— , ‘Sworn Testimony and Memory of the Past in Brittany, c. 1100–1250’, in Medieval Memories: Men, Women, and the Past, 700–1300, ed. by Elisabeth van Houts (London: Longman, 2001), pp. 72–91 —— , ‘The Abbey of Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt and Royal Patronage in England, c.  1150– 1259’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 47 (2003), 107–47 —— , ‘The “Justiciarship” in Brittany and Ireland under Henry II’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 20 (1997), 87–105

Bibliography

463

Everard, Judith, and Holt, James Clarke, Jersey 1204: The Forging of an Island Community (London: Thames & Hudson, 2004) Evergates, Theodore, ‘Louis VII and the Counts of Champagne’, in The Second Crusade and the Cistercians, ed. by Michael Gervers (New York: St  Martin’s Press, 1992), pp. 109–17 —— , The Aristocracy in the County of Champagne, 1100–1300 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007) Everist, Mark, ‘From Paris to St Andrews: The Origins of W1’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 43. 1 (1990), 1–42 Eyton, Robert W., Antiquities of Shropshire, 12 vols (London: Smith, 1854–60) —— , Court, Household, and Itinerary of King Henry II (London: Taylor, 1878; repr. New York, 1974) Fellows-Jensen, G., ‘Scandinavians in Dumfriesshire and Galloway: The Place-Name Evidence’, in Galloway: Land and Lordship, ed. by Richard D. Oram and Geoffrey P. Stell (Edinburgh: Scottish Society for Northern Studies, 1991), pp. 77–95 Fentress, James, and Chris Wickham, Social Memory (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992) Fenwick, Hubert, The Auld Alliance (Kineton: Roundwood, 1971) Field, Rosalind, ‘Waldef and the Matter of/with England’, in Medieval Insular Romance: Translation and Innovation, ed. by Judith Weiss, Jennifer Fellows, and Morgan Dickson (Cambridge: Brewer, 2000), pp. 25–39 Flambard-Héricher, A. M., and Véronique Gazeau, eds, 1204: La Normandie entre Plan­ tagenêts et Capétiens (Caen: CRAHM, 2007) Flanagan, Marie Therese, ‘Angevin Royal Agents in Ireland under Henry II and John’, in Seanchas: Studies in Early and Medieval Irish Archaeology, History and Literature in Honour of Francis J. Byrne, ed. by Alfred J. Smyth (Dublin: Four Courts, 2000) —— , ‘Irish and Anglo-Norman Warfare in Twelfth-Century Ireland’, in A Military History of Ireland, ed. by Thomas Bartlett and Keith Jeffery (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 52–75 —— , Irish Society, Anglo-Norman Settlers, Angevin Kingship: Interactions in Ireland in the Late Twelfth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989) Flanders, Steve, De Courcy: Anglo-Normans in Ireland, England, and France in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Dublin: Four Courts, 2008) Fleming, Robin, Domesday Book and the Law: Society and Legal Custom in Early Medieval England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004) —— , The Arthurian Material in the Chronicles, Especially Those of Great Britain and France (New York: Haskell House, 1958; repr. 1965) Flobert, Pierre, ‘Le Remaniement Carolingien de la Vie ancienne de Saint Samson’, Britannia Monastica, 9 (2005), 45–54 —— , ‘Le témoignage du rédacteur de la Vie Ancienne de Saint Samson sur sa date relative’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (SaintBrieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 161–66

464

Bibliography

Foot, Sarah, ‘Reading Anglo-Saxon Charters: Memory, Record, or Story?’, in Narrative and History in the Early Medieval West, ed. by M. Tyler and Ross Balzaretti, Studies in the Early Middle Ages, 16 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 39–66 —— , ‘The Making of Angelcynn: English Identity before the Norman Conquest’, Trans­ actions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th ser., 6 (1996), 25–49 Forbes, Alexander P., Kalendars of Scottish Saints (Edinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1872) Foreville, Raymonde, ‘Thomas Becket et La France Capétienne’, in Studies in Medieval History Presented to R. Allen Brown, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill, Christopher J. Holdsworth, and Janet L. Nelson (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989), pp. 117–28 Forsyth, K., ‘Literacy in Pictland’, in Literacy in Medieval Celtic Societies, ed. by Huw Pryce, Medieval Literature, 33 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 39–61 Fossier, Robert, Histoire de la Picardie (Toulouse: Privat, 1974) Frame, Robin, Ireland and Britain, 1170–1450 (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1998) —— , ‘King Henry  III and Ireland: The Shaping of a Peripheral Lordship’, Thirteenth Century England, 4 (1991), pp. 179–202 —— , ‘Overlordship and Reaction, c. 1200–c. 1450’, in Uniting the Kingdom? The Making of British History, ed. by Alexander Grant and Keith J. Stringer (London and New York: Taylor and Francis, 1995), pp. 65–84 Frankl, Paul, ‘The Chronology of the Stained Glass in Chartres Cathedral’, The Art Bulletin, 45. 4 (1963), 304–22 Fresne, Charles du, Sieur du Cange, Histoire de l’état de la ville d’Amiens et de ses comtes (Amiens: Duval et Herment, 1840) Gazeau, Veronique, ‘The Effect of the Conquest of 1066 on Monasticism in Normandy: The Abbeys of the Risle Valley’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. by David Bates and Anne Curry (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994), pp. 131–42 Geary, Patrick, ‘Ethnic Identity as a Situational Construct in the Early Middle Ages’, Mit­ teilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 113 (1983), 15–26 —— , ‘Living with the Conflicts in Stateless France, 1050–1200’, in Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages (Ithaca, New York; London: Cornell University Press, 1994), pp. 125–62 —— , ‘Moral Obligations and Peer Pressure’, in Georges Duby: l’écriture de l’histoire, ed. by Claudie Duhamel-Amado and Guy Lobrichon (Bruxelles, 1996), pp. 217–22 —— , The Myth of Nations: The Medieval Origins of Europe (Princeton, NJ; Oxford: Prince­ton University Press, 2003) Geltin, Michael H., ‘Predatory Kinship Revisited’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 25 (2002), 107–20 Genicot, Léopold, ‘Recent Research on the Medieval Nobility’, in The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling Classes of France and Germany from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century, ed. and trans. by Timothy Reuter, Europe in the Middle Ages Selected Studies, 14 (Amsterdam; New York; Oxford: North-Holland, 1979), pp. 17–36 —— , Rural Communities in the Medieval West (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990)

Bibliography

465

Gerald, Henry, ‘A Norman Lawsuit’, Speculum, 7 (1932), 383–92 Gildea, Joseph, Durmart le Galois: roman arthurien du treizième siècle, 2 vols (Villanova: Villanova Press, 1965–66) Gillingham, John, ‘Henry of Huntingdon and the Twelfth-Century Revival of the English Nation’, in Concepts of National Identity in the Middle Ages, ed. by Simon Forde, Lesley Johnson, and Alan V. Murray (Leeds: University of Leeds, 1995), pp. 75–101 —— , ‘Historians Without Hindsight: Coggeshall, Diceto, and Howden on the Early Years of King John’s Reign’, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. by Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999), pp. 1–26 —— , ‘Kingship, Chivalry and Love. Political and Cultural Values in the Earliest History written in French: Geoffrey Gaimar’s Estoire des Engleis’, in Anglo-French Political Culture and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, ed. by Charles Warren Hollister (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997), pp. 33–58 —— , Richard I (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1999, 2002) —— , The Angevin Empire, 2nd edn (London: Arnold, 2001) —— , The English in the Twelfth Century: Imperialism, National Identity and Political Values (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 2000) —— , ‘The Travels of Roger of Howden and his Views of the Irish, Scots, and Welsh’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 20 (1998), 151–69 —— , ‘War and Chivalry in the History of William the Marshal’, Thirteenth-Century Eng­ land, 2 (1987), 1–13 Giot, Pierre-Roland, Philippe Guigon, and Bernard Merdrignac, The British Settlement of Brittany: The First Bretons in Armorica (Stroud: Tempus, 2003) Gondek, Meggen, ‘Investing in Sculpture: Power in Early Historic Scotland’, Medieval Archaeology, 50 (2006), 105–41 Goody, Jack, The Development of the Family and Marriage in Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983) Görlach, Manfred, Studies in Middle English Saints’ Legends (Heidelberg: Winter, 1998) Gouttebroze, Jean-Guy, Qui perd gagne: le ‘Perceval’ de Chrétien de Troyes comme représentation de l’Œdipe inversé (Nice: Centre d’études médiévales, 1983) Gransden, Antonia, Historical Writing in England, 2 vols (London: Routledge, 1996) Grant, Alexander, ‘Auld Inemie and Auld Alliance’, in Independence and Nationhood: Scotland, 1306–1469 (Edinburgh, 1984), pp. 32–60 —— , ‘Lordship and Society in Twelfth-Century Clydesdale’, in Power and Identity in the Middle Ages: Essays in Memory of Rees Davies, ed. by Huw Pryce and John Watts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 98–124 —— , ‘Thanes and Thanages, from the Eleventh to the Fourteenth Centuries’, in Medieval Scotland: Crown, Lordship and Community, Essays Presented to G. W. S. Barrow, ed. by Alexander Grant and Keith Stringer (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993), pp. 39–81 —— , ‘The Province of Ross and the Kingdom of Alba’, in Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Medieval Era, ed. by E. J. Cowan and R. Andrew McDonald (East Linton: Tuckwell, 2000), pp. 88–126

466

Bibliography

Grant, Alexander, and Keith Stringer, eds, Medieval Scotland: Crown, Lordship and Com­ munity, Essays Presented to G. W. S. Barrow (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993) —— , Uniting the Kingdom? The Making of British History (London and New York: Taylor and Francis, 1995) Green, Judith, ‘Aristocratic Women in Early Twelfth-Century England’, in Anglo-Norman Political Culture and the 12th-Century Renaissance: Proceedings of the Borchard Conference 1995, ed. by C. Warren Hollister (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997) —— , ‘David I and Henry I’, Scottish Historical Review, 75 (1996), 1–19 —— , ‘Earl Ranulf II and Lancashire’, in The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barraclough (1988), ed. by A. T. Thacker, Journal of the Chester Archeo­ logical Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archaeological Society, 1991), pp. 97–108 —— , ‘Family Matters’, in Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. by K. S. B. Keats-Rohan (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997), pp. 157–64 —— , ‘Henry I and the Origins of the Civil War’, in King Stephen’s Reign (1135–1154), ed. by Paul Dalton and Graeme (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008), pp. 11–26 —— , Henry  I: King of England and Duke of Normandy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006) —— , ‘King Henry I and Northern England’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th ser., 17 (2007), 35–55 —— , ‘King Henry I and the Aristocracy of Normandy’, in La ‘France Anglaise’ au Moyen Âge, Actes du 111e Congrès national des société savantes (Paris: Editions du CTHS, 1988), pp. 161–73 —— , ‘Kinship, Marriage, and Family’, in The Aristocracy of Norman England (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 329–60 —— , ‘Lords of the Norman Vexin’, in War and Government in the Middle Ages: Essays in Honour of J. O. Prestwich, ed. by John Gillingham and James C. Holt (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1984), pp. 47–61 —— , ‘Robert Curthose Reassessed’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 22 (1999), 95–116 —— , The Aristocracy of Norman England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) —— , ‘The Descent of Belvoir’, Prosopon Newsletter, 10 (1999), 1–6 —— , The Government of England under Henry I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986) —— , ‘Unity and Disunity in the Anglo-Norman State’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 62/148 (1989), 115–34 Greeves, Ronald, ‘The Galloway Lands in Ulster’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser, 36 (1957–58) Guilloreau, Léon, ‘Aliénor de Bretagne: Quelques Détails relatifs a sa captivité (1203– 1241)’, Revue de Bretagne, 37 (1907), 257–75, 326–36 Guillot, Olivier, ‘A propos de la qualite litteraire de certaines chartes angevines au ixe siècle’ in La littérature Angevine médiévale: actes du colloque du samedi 22 mars 1980 (Maulévrier: Hérault, 1981), pp. 25–39

Bibliography

467

—— , Le Comté d’Anjou et son Entourage au xie siècle, 2 vols (Paris: Picard, 1972) Guillotel, Hubert, ‘De la vicomté de Rennes à la vicomté de Porhoët (fin du xe-milieu du xiie siècle)’, Mémoires de la société de l’histoire et archéologique de Bretagne, 73 (1995), 5–30 —— , ‘Le dossier hagiographique de l’érection du siège de Tréguier’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (Saint-Brieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 213–26 —— , ‘Les origines de Guingamp: Sa place dans la géographie féodale bretonne’, Mémoires de la société d’histoire et d’archéologie de Bretagne, 56 (1979), 81–100 —— , ‘Les vicomtes de Léon aux ixe et xiie siècles’, Mémoires de la société de l’histoire et archéologique de Bretagne, 51 (1971), 29–51 Gurney, Daniel, The Record of the House of Gournay, Compiled from Original Documents (London: Private, 1848–58) Hajdu, Robert, ‘Castles, Castellans and the Structure of Politics in Poitou, 1152–1271’, Journal of Medieval History, 4 (1978), 27–53 —— , ‘Family and Feudal Ties in Poitou, 1100–1300’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 7 (1977), 117–39 Halphen, Louis, ‘Les entrevues des rois Louis  VII et Henri  II durant l’exil de Thomas Becket en France’, in Mélanges d’Histoire offerts à M. Charles Bémont (Paris: Alcan, 1913), pp. 151–62 Hammond, Matthew, ‘A Prosopographical Analysis of Society in East Central Scotland, circa 1100 to 1260, with Special Reference to Ethnicity’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Glasgow, 2005) Harper-Bill, Christopher, Christopher J. Holdsworth, Janet L. Nelson, eds, Studies in Medieval History Presented to R. Allen Brown (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989) Harper-Bill, Christopher, and Elisabeth van Houts, eds, A Companion to the AngloNorman World (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003) Harris, Stephen J., Race and Ethnicity in Anglo-Saxon Literature, ed. by Francis Gentry (New York; London: Routledge, 2003) Harrison, J., ‘The Original Codex’, in The Chronicle of Melrose Abbey: A Stratigraphic Edi­ tion, i: Introduction and Facsimile, ed. by Dauvit Broun and Julian Harrison (Wood­ bridge: Boydell Press, 2007), pp. 56–67 Haut-Jussé, B. A. Pocquet du, ‘Les Plantagenêts et la Bretagne’, Annales de Bretagne, 53 (1946), 1–27 Hedley, William P., Northumberland Families, 2 vols (Newcastle: Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle upon Tyne, 1968–70) Helmerichs, Robert, ‘Princeps, Comes, Dux Normannorum: Early Rollonid Designators and their Significance’, Haskins Society Journal, 9 (1997), 57–77 Herlihy, David, ‘Family Solidarity in Medieval Italian History’, in Economy, Society, and Government in Medieval Italy: Essays in Memory of Robert L. Reynolds (Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1969), pp. 173–84 —— , ‘The Medieval Marriage Market’, Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 6 (1976), 3–27

468

Bibliography

Herval, René, ‘L’abbaye de Lessay’, in La Normandie bénédictine au temps de Guillaume le Conquérant, ed. by J. Daoust (Lille: Facultés catholiques, 1969), pp. 287–303 Hicks, Sandy Burton, ‘The Impact of William Clito upon the Continental Policies of Henry I of England’, Viator, 10 (1979), 1–21 Hillers, B., ‘Poet or Magician: Mac Mhuirich Mór in Oral Tradition’, in Poets and Poetic Heroes in Celtic Tradition A Festschrift for Patrick K. Ford, ed. by Joseph Falaky Nagy and Leslie Ellen Jones, Csana Yearbook, 3–4 (Dublin: Four Courts, 2005), pp. 141–57 Hillion, Yannick, ‘La Bretagne et la rivalité Capetiens-Plantagenets: un exemple – La Duchesse Constance (1186–1202)’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, 92. 2 (1985), 111–44 Hilmo, Maidie, ‘The Revival of the Vernacular and the Illustrated Caligula, Auchenleck and Vernon Manuscripts’, in Medieval Images, Icons, and Illustrated English Literary Texts: From the Ruthwell Cross to the Ellesmere Chaucer (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004), pp. 97–137 Hilton, Rodney, ‘Were the English English?’, in Patriotism: The Making and Unmaking of National Identity, ed. by Raphael Samuel, 3 vols (London: Routledge, 1989), i, 39–43 Holdsworth, Christopher J., ‘The Cistercians in Devon’, in Studies in Medieval History Presented to R. Allen Brown, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill, Christopher J. Holds­ worth, and Janet L. Nelson (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989), pp. 179–91 Holland, Richard, The Buke of the Howlat, ed. by David Laing (Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club: 1823) Hollister, C. Warren, ‘Anglo-French Political Culture’, in Anglo-French Political Culture and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, ed. by Charles Warren Hollister (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997), pp. 1–16 —— , ed., Anglo-Norman Political Culture and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, Pro­ ceed­ings of the Borchard Conference on Anglo-Norman History, 1995 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997) —— , ‘Magnates and Curiales in Early Norman England’, Viator, 8 (1977), 63–81 ——  , ‘Normandy, France and the Anglo-Norman Regnum’, Speculum, 51. 2 (1976), 202–42 —— , ‘The Anglo-Norman Civil War: 1101’, English Historical Review, 88/347 (1973), 315–34 —— , ‘The Origins of the English Treasury’, English Historical Review, 93/367 (1978), 262–75 Hollister, C.  Warren, and John W. Baldwin, ‘The Rise of Administrative Kingship: Henry I and Philip Augustus’, The American Historical Review, 83/4 (1978), 867–905 Holt, James C., Colonial England, 1066–1215 (London: Hambledon, 1997) —— , ‘Feudal Society and the Family in Early Medieval England: The Heiress and the Alien’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 35 (1985), 1–28 —— , ‘King John and Arthur of Brittany’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 44 (2000), 82–103 —— , ‘Politics and Property in Early Medieval England’, Past and Present, 57 (1972), 3–52 —— , ‘The End of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 61 (1975), 223–65 —— , The Northerners: A Study in the Reign of King John (Oxford: Clarendon, 1961; repr. 1992)

Bibliography

469

Hudson, Benjamin T., ‘The Scottish Gaze’, in History, Literature, and Music in Scotland, 700–1560, ed. R. A. Macdonald (Toronto; London: University of Toronto Press, 2002), pp. 29–59 Hudson, John, ‘Kings and Crime: Ideology and Practice in the Tenth and Twelfth Centuries’, in Droit et société en France et en Grande-Bretagne (xiiie–xxe siècles), ed. by Philippe Chassaigne and Jean-Philippe Genet (Paris, 2003), pp. 15–38 —— , Land, Law, and Lordship in Anglo-Norman England (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 and 1997) —— , ‘Legal Aspects of Scottish Charter Diplomatic in the Twelfth Century: A Com­ parative Approach’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 25 (2003), 121–38 Hughes, Kathleen, ‘Where are the Writings of Early Scotland?’, in Celtic Britain in the Early Middle Ages: Studies in Welsh and Scottish Sources, ed. by David Dumville, Studies in Celtic History, 2 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1980), pp. 1–21 Hunt, Tony, ‘Redating Chrétien de Troyes’, Bulletin bibliographique de la société internationale arthurienne, 30 (1978), 209–37 Hunter-Marshall, D.  W., ‘A Proposed Marriage Alliance between Scotland and Champagne’, Scottish Notes and Queries, 3rd ser., 7 (1929), 207–09 —— , ‘Two Early English Occupations in Scotland – Their Administrative Organization’, Scottish Historical Review, 25 (1927), 20–40 Ingledew, Francis, ‘The Book of Troy and the Genealogical Construction of History: The Case of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia Regum Britannie’, Speculum, 69. 3 (1994), 665–704 Innes, M., ‘Memory, Orality and Literacy in an Early Medieval Society’, Past and Present, 158 (1998), 3–36 Innes-Parker, Catherine, ‘The Legacy of Ancrene Wisse: Translations, Adaptations, Influ­ ences, and Audience, with sSpecial Attention to Women Readers’, in A Companion to Ancrene Wisse, ed. by Yoko Wada (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 145–73 Isaac, G. R., ‘Gweith Gwen Ystrat and the Northern Heroic Age of the Sixth Century’, Cam­brian Medieval Celtic Studies, 36 (1999), 61–70 Jaeger, Stephen C., Ennobling Love: In Search of a Lost Sensibility (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999) —— , The Origins of Courtliness: Civilizing Trends and the Formation of Courtly Ideals, 939–1210 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985) Jankulak, Karen, The Medieval Cult of St Petroc (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2000) Jessee, W. Scott, ‘Robert d’Arbrissel: Aristocratic Patronage and the Question of Heresy’, Journal of Medieval History, 20 (1994), 221–35 —— , Robert the Burgundian and the Counts of Anjou, ca.  1025–1098 (Washington: Catholic University Press of America, 2000) —— , ‘The Family of Robert the Burgundian and the Creation of the Angevin March of Sablé and Craon’, Medieval Prosopography, 16 (1995), 31–67 Jeulin, Paul, ‘L’Hommage de la Bretagne en droit et dans les faits’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, 41. 2 (1934), 380–418

470

Bibliography

—— , ‘Un grand ‘Honneur’ anglais: aperçus sur le ‘Comte’ de Richmond en Angleterre, possession des Ducs de Bretagne (1069/71–1398)’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, 42. 4 (1935), 265–302 Johnstone, Ronald C., The Versification of Jordan Fantosme (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974) Jones, Michael, Between France and England: Politics, Power and Society in Late Medieval Brittany (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003) —— , ‘Brittany and Wales in the Middle Ages: Contacts and Comparisons’, Transactions of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, 11 (2005), 19–49 —— , ‘La vie familiale de la Duchesse Constance: le témoignage des chartes’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (Saint-Brieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 349–60 —— , ‘Les branches anglaises des seigneurs de Dinan’, in Dinan au Moyen Âge, ed. by LoïcRené Vilbert (Dinan: le Pays de Dinan, 1986), pp. 221–35 —— , ‘Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes en Angleterre après la conquête normande’, Mémoires de la Société de l’Histoire et archéologique de Bretagne, 58 (1981), 73–97 —— , ‘The Capetians and Brittany’, The Bulletin of Historical Research, 63 (1990), 1–16 —— , The Creation of Brittany: A Late Medieval State (London: Hambledon, 1988) —— , The Family of Dinan in England in the Middle Ages (Dinan: Bibliothèque municipale, 1987) Jones, Thomas M., ‘The Generation Gap of 1173–1174: The War between the Two Henry’s’, Albion, 5 (1973), 24–40 Jordan, Karl, Henry the Lion: A Biography, trans. P. S. Falla (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986) Karl, Raimund, and David Stifter, eds, The Celtic World: Critical Concepts in Historical Studies, Critical Concepts in Historical Studies, 4 vols (London and New York: Routledge, 2007) Keats-Rohan, Katherine, ‘Aspects of Robert of Torigny’s Genealogies Revisited’, Notting­ ham Medieval Studies, 37 (1993), 21–27 —— , ‘Domesday Book and the Malets: Patrimony and the Private Histories of Public Lives’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 41 (1997), 13–55 —— , ed., Domesday Descendants: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents 1066–1166, Pipe Rolls to Cartae Baronum (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999) —— , ed., Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997) —— , ‘Le rôle des Bretons dans la politique de colonisation normande de l’Angleterre (vers 1042–1135)’, Mémoires de la société de l’histoire et archéologique de Bretagne, 74 (1996), 181–215 —— , ‘The Bretons and Normans of England, 1066–1154: The Family, the Fief and the Feudal Monarchy’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 36 (1992), 42–78 —— , ‘Two Studies in North French Prosopography’, Journal of Medieval History, 20 (1994), 3–37

Bibliography

471

Keefe, Thomas K., ‘Geoffrey Plantagenet’s Will and the Angevin Succession’, Albion, 6 (1974), 266–74 —— , ‘Place-Date Distribution of Royal Charters and the Historical Geography of Patronage Strategies at the Court of King Henry  II Plantagenêt’, Haskins Society Journal, 2 (1990), 179–88 Keith, Robert, An Historical Catalogue of Scottish Bishops Down to the Year 1688 (Edin­ burgh: Rivington, 1824) Kennedy, M.  J., ‘“Faith in the One God Flowed over You from the Jews, the Sons of the Patriarchs and the Prophets”: William of Newburgh’s Writings on Anti-Jewish Violence’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 25 (2002), 139–52 Kennedy, Elspeth, ‘The Quest for Identity and the Importance of Lineage in ThirteenthCentury French Prose Romance’, in The Ideals and Practice of Medieval Knighthood, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Ruth Harvey, 2 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1988), pp. 70–86 Kettering, Sharon, ‘Patronage and Kinship in Early Modern France’, French Historical Studies, 16 (1989), 408–35 King, Edmund, ‘The Anarchy of King Stephen’s Reign’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 34 (1984), 133–53 Knowles, M.  D., Anne Duggan, and C.  N.  L. Brooke, ‘Henry II’s Supplement to the Constitutions of Clarenden’, English Historical Review, 87/345 (1972), 757–71 Koch, J., ‘Why Was Welsh Literature First Written Down?’, in Medieval Celtic Literature and Society, ed. by Helen Fulton (Dublin: Four Courts, 2005), pp. 15–31 Kossmann-Putto, Johanna A., ‘Florence V, Count of Holland: Claimant to the Scottish Throne in 1291–2: His Personal and Political Background’, in Scotland and the Low Countries, 1124–1994, ed. by Grant G. Simpson (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1996), pp. 15–27 Krey, August C., The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants (Prince­ ton: [s. n.], 1921) Kroll, Jerome, and Bernard S. Bachrach, ‘Medieval Dynastic Decisions: Evolutionary Biol­ogy and Historical Explanation’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 21 (1990), 1–28 Labande, Edmond-René, ‘Les filles d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine:étude Comparative’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 29/113 (1986), 101–12 Lacy, Norris, J., ‘Naming and the Construction of Identity in Li chevaliers as deus espees’, Romance Philology, 56 (2003), 203–26 Lally, J. E., ‘Secular Patronage at the Court of Henry II’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 49/120 (1976), 159–84 Lawrence-Mathers, Anne, Manuscripts in Northumbria in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Woodbridge: Brewer, 2003) LeBlanc, Olivier, ‘Picardie, Croisades, et Sires de Boves’, Occident et Orient (ixe–xve siècles), histoire et archéologie, actes du colloque international des 8, 9 et 10 octobre 1998 à l’Université d’Amiens, ed. by R. H. Bautier, Centre d’archéologie et d’histoire médiévale des établissements religieux, 11 (2000), 37–57

472

Bibliography

Lebreton, Charles, ‘Le château de Saint-Jean-le-Thomas’, Mémoires de la Société d’arché­ ologie, de littérature, sciences, et arts d’Avranches, Mortain et Granville, 4 (Avranches, 1873), 171–211 Lefèvre, Edouard, Documents historiques et statistiques sur les communes du canton de Courville, Extrait de l’Annuaire d’Eure-et-Loir, 2 vols (Chartres: Garnier, 1864–66) Legge, Dominica, Anglo-Norman Literature and its Background (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963) —— , ‘Place-Names and the date of Beroul’, Medium Aevum, 38 (1969), 171–74 —— , ‘Some Notes on the Roman de Fergus’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Gallo­ way Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 27 (1948–49), 163–72 —— , ‘The Father of Fergus of Galloway’, Scottish Historical Review, 43 (1964), 86–97 —— , ‘William the Marshal and Arthur of Brittany’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 55/131 (1982), 18–24 Léglu, Catherine, ‘Moral and Satirical Poetry’, in The Troubadours: An Introduction, ed. by Simon Grant and Sarah Kay (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 47–65 Le Hardy, Gaston, Étude sur la baronnie et l’abbaye d’Aunay-sur-Odon (Caen, 1897) Lemarignier, Jean-François, ‘La dislocation du pagus et la problème des consuetudines (xe–xie)’, in Mélanges d’histoire du Moyen Âge dédiés à la mémoires de Louis Halphen (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1951), pp. 401–10 —— , La France médiévale: institiutions et société (Paris: Colin, 1970) —— , Recherche sur l’hommage en marche et les frontières féodales (Lille: Bibliothèque universitaire, 1945) Lemesle, Bruno, La société aristocratique dans le Haute-Maine, xie–xiie siècles, intro. by Dominique Barthélemy (Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 1999) Le Moing, Jean-Yves, ‘Saint Winniau et Saint-Uniac’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (Saint-Brieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 237–47 Levison, W., ‘A Combined Manuscript of Geoffrey of Monmouth and Henry of Huntingdon’, English Historical Review, 58/ 229 (1943), 41–51 Lewis, Andrew, ‘Anticipatory Association of the Heir in Early Capetian France’, The American Historical Review, 83 (1978), 906–27 Lewis, C.  P., ‘The Earldom of Surrey and the Date of Domesday Book’, Bulletin of the Insti­tute of Historical Research, 63/150 (1990), 329–36 —— , ‘The Early Earls of Anglo-Norman England’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 13 (1990), 207–23 —— , ‘The Formation of the Honor of Chester, 1066–1100’, in The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barraclough (1988), ed. by A. T. Thacker, Jour­ nal of the Chester Archeological Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archeological Society, 1991), pp. 37–68 —— , ‘The French in England before the Norman Conquest’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 17 (1994), 123–44

Bibliography

473

—— , ‘The King and Eye: A Study in Anglo-Norman Politics’, English Historical Review, 104/112 (1989), 569–87 —— , ‘Waltheof, Earl of Northumbria (c.  1050–1076)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biog­­raphy (2004) [accessed June 2009] Lieberman, F., ‘The Family of William the Conqueror and Chartres’, English Historical Review, 16/63 (1901), 498–99 Lifshitz, Felice, The Norman Conquest of Pious Neustria: Historiographic Discourse and Saintly Relics (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1995) —— , ‘Translating “Feudal” Vocabulary: Dudo of Saint Quentin’, The Haskins Society Journal, 9 (2001 for 1997), 39–56 Lindsay, Alexander W. C., Lives of the Lindsays; or a Memoir of the Houses of Crawford and Balcarres, 4 vols (Wigan: Privately Pub., 1840–58) Livingstone, Amy, ‘Aristocratic Women in the Chartrain’, in Aristocratic Women in Medieval France, ed. by Theodore Evergates (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), pp. 44–73 —— , ‘Kith and Kin: Kinship and Family Structure of the Nobility of Eleventh- and Twelfth-Century Blois-Chartres’, French Historical Studies, 20. 3 (1997), 419–58 —— , ‘Noblewomen’s Control of Property in Early Twelfth-Century Blois-Chartres’, Medieval Prosopography, 18 (1997), 55–72 Livingstone, Matthew, A Guide to the Public Records of Scotland Deposited in H.  M. General Register House, Edinburgh (Edinburgh: General Register House, 1905) Lob-Barton, Claudine, Les comtes de Saint-Valéry et l’abbaye de Bertaucourt (Bertaucourtles-Dames: Lob-Barton, 2000) Lodge, R. A., ‘Language Attitudes and Linguistic Norms in France and England in the Thirteenth Century’, Thirteenth-Century England, 4 (1991), 73–84 Loomis, C., ‘The Ring of Polycrates in the Legends of the Saints’, The Journal of American Folklore, 54/211 (1941), 44–47 Loomis, Roger Sherman, Arthurian Tradition and Chrétien de Troyes (New York: Colum­ bia University Press, 1949) LoPrete, Kimberley, Adela of Blois: Countess and Lord, 1067–1137 (Dublin: Four Courts, 2007) —— , ‘Adela of Blois and Ivo of Chartres: Piety, Politics, and the Peace in the Diocese of Chartres’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 14 (1991), 131–52 —— , ‘Le conflit Plantagenêt-Capétien vu des frontières’, in Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de Famille la Parenté au Moyen Âge, ed. by Martin Aurell and Noël-Yves Tonnerre, Histoire de famille la parenté au Moyen Âge, 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 359–74 —— , ‘The Anglo-Norman Card of Adela of Blois’, Albion, 22 (1990), 569–89 Lot, Ferdinand, ‘Date de l’exode des corps saints hors de Bretagne’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, 15 (1899), 60–76 —— , ‘Études sur la provenance du cycle arthurien’, Romania, 25 (1896), 1–32 —— , ‘Nouvelles études sur la provenance du cycle arthurien’, Romania, 28 (1899), 1–48

474

Bibliography

Louise, Gérard, ‘La Seigneurie de Bellême, xe–xiie siècles dévolution des pouvoirs territoriaux et construction d’une seigneurie de frontière aux confins de la Normandie et du Maine, à la charnière de l’an mil’, Le Pays Bas-Normand, 199–202 (1990–93), 199 and 200, pp. 70–279; 201 and 202, pp. 121–29 Loyd, Christopher Lewis, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, ed. by Charles Travis Clay and David C. Douglas, Harleian Society, 103 (Leeds: Harleian Society, 1951) Lucas, Henry S., ‘John of Avesnes and Richard of Cornwall’, Speculum, 23. 1 (1948), 81–101 Luttrell, Claude, The Creation of the First Arthurian Romance: A Quest (London: Arnold, 1974) Lydon, James, ‘Ireland and the English Crown, 1171–1541’, Irish Historical Studies, 29/115 (1995), 281–94 —— , ‘The Gaelic Revival’, in The Lordship of Ireland in the Middle Ages (Dublin: Gill & Macmillan, 1972), pp. 150–90 —— , ‘The Middle Nation’, in The English in Medieval Ireland: Proceedings of the First Joint Meeting of the Royal Irish Academy and the British Academy, Dublin, 1982, ed. by James Lydon (Dublin: Royal Irish Academy, 1984), pp. 1–26 —— , ‘The Problem of the Frontier in Medieval Ireland’, Topic, 13 (1967), 5–22 Macdonald, Alastair, ‘Gospatric, First Earl of Lothian (d.  1138)’, Oxford Dictionary of Nat­ional Biography (2004) [accessed June 2009] —— , ‘King’s of the Wild Frontier? The Earls of Dunbar or March, c. 1070–1435’, in The Exercise of Power in Medieval Scotland, ed. by Steve Boardman and Alasdair Ross (Dublin: Four Courts, 2003), pp. 139–58 Macdougall, Norman, An Antidote to the English: The Auld Alliance, 1295–1560 (East Lothian: Tuckwell, 2000) MacKay, Angus, Spain in the Middle Ages From Frontier to Empire, 1000–1500 (London: Macmillan, 1977) —— , ‘The Lesser Nobility in the Kingdom of Castile’, in Society, Economy and Religion in Late Medieval Castile, ed. by Angus Mackay (London: Variorum repr., 1987), pp. 159–80 Mackenzie, Deborah, ‘Slow Copies Make Deadlier Viruses’, New Scientist, 2529 (2005), 16–17 MacQuarrie, Alan, ‘Notes on Some Charters of the Bruces of Annandale, 1215–1295’, Trans­actions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 58 (1983), 72–79 —— , Scotland and the Crusades, 1095–1560 (Edinburgh: Donald, 1985) —— , ‘The Career of St  Kentigern of Glasgow: Vitae, Lectiones and Glimpses of Fact’, Innes Review, 37 (1986), 3–24 —— , The Saints of Scotland: Essays in Scottish Church History, AD 450–1093 (Edinburgh, 1997) Maddicott, John R., ‘Magna Carta and the Local Community, 1215–1259’, Past and Pres­ ent, 102. 1 (1984), 25–65 Mahieu, Bernard, and Noëlle Gand de Vernon, France-Écosse exposition organisée par les Archives nationales avec le concours du British council (Paris: Tournon, 1956)

Bibliography

475

Marchegay, Paul, ‘Les prieurés anglais de Saint-Florent près Saumur, notice et documents inédits tirés des archives de Maine-et-Loire’, Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes, 40 (1879), 154–84 Martin, Corneille and Pierre Balthasar, Les généalogies et anciennes descentes des Forestiers et comtes de Flandre (Anvers: Vrints, 1598) Martin, Xavier, ‘Note sur la “litterature” coutumiere Angevine au Moyen Âge’, in La litté­ rature Angevine médiévale: actes du colloque du samedi 22 mars 1980 (Maulévrier: Hérault, 1981), pp. 40–49 Martindale, Jane, ‘“An Unfinished Business”: Angevin Politics and the Siege of Toulouse, 1159’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 23 (2000), 115–54 —— , ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine: The Last Years’, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. by Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999), pp. 137–64 Mason, J. F. A., ‘Roger de Montgomery and His Sons (1067–1102)’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 13 (1963), 1–28 Mason, Emma, ‘The Mauduits and their Chamberlainship of the Exchequer’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 49/119 (1976), 1–23 Matthew, D. J. A., ‘The English Cultivation of Norman History’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. by David Bates and Anne Curry (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994), pp. 1–18 Mayer, Hans Eberhard, ‘A Ghost Ship Called Frankenef: King Richard  I’s German Itinerary’, English Historical Review, 115/460 (2000), 134–44 —— , ‘Angevin versus Normans: The New Men of King Fulk of Jerusalem’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133 (1989), 1–25 McCash, June Hall, ‘Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine: A Relationship Reexamined’, Speculum, 54. 4 (1979), 698–711 —— , ‘Negotiating the Text: Women Patrons in the Poetic Process’, Romance Philology, 57. 1 (2003), 27–44 McDonald, R. Andrew, ‘Matrimonial Politics and Core-Periphery Interactions in Twelfthand Early Thirteenth-Century Scotland’, Journal of Medieval History, 21 (1995), 227–47 —— , ‘Rebels without a Cause? The Relations of Fergus of Galloway and Somerled of Argyll with the Scottish Kings, 1153–1164’, in Alba:Celtic Scotland in the Middle Ages, ed. by E. J Cowan and R. A. McDonald (East Linton, 2000), pp. 166–86 —— , ‘Soldiers Most Unfortunate: Gaelic and Scoto-Norse Opponents of the Canmore Dynasty, c. 1100–c. 1230’, in History, Literature, and Music in Scotland, 700–1560, ed. by R. Andrew McDonald (Toronto; London: University of Toronto Press, 2002), pp. 93–119 —— , The Kingdom of the Isles: Scotland’s Western Seaboard, c. 1100–c. 1336 (East Lothian: Tuckwell, 1997) —— , ‘Treachery in the Remotest Territories of Scotland: Northern Resistance to the Canmore Dynasty, 1130–1230’, Canadian Journal of History, 34. 2 (1999), 1–19 Meazy, Peter, Dinan au temps des seigneurs (Guingamp: Éd. de la Plomée, 1997) Melletier, Jean le, Les seigneurs de Bohon: illustre famille Anglo-Normande originaire du Cotentin (Coutances: Arnaud-Bellée, 1978)

476

Bibliography

Ménage, Gilles, Histoire de Sable (Paris: le Petit, 1683) Merdrignac, Bernard, ‘Henoc, les Philosophi et Pental: remarques sur la Vita Ia Samsoni’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mé­ moire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (Saint-Brieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 167–80 Michel, Francisque. Les Ecossais en France, Les Français en Écosse, 2 vols (London: Trübner, 1862) Miller, David Harry, ‘Ethnogenesis and Religious Revitalization beyond the Roman Frontier: The Case of Frankish Origins’, Journal of World History, 4. 2 (1993), 277–85 Minois, G., ‘Les possessions bretonnes dans le comté d’Essex du xie au xve siècle’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, 85. 4 (1978), 525–42 Misrahi, Jean, ‘More Light on the Chronology of Chrétien de Troyes?’, Bulletin biblio­ graphique de la Societe internationale arthurienne, 11 (1959), 89–120 Mitchell, Emily, ‘Patrons and Politics at Twelfth-Century Barking Abbey’, Revue Bénédictine, 113 (2003), 347–64 Miyamatsu, Hironori, ‘A-t-il existé une commune à Angers au xiie siècle’, Journal of Medieval History, 21 (1995), 117–52 M’Michael, Thomas, ‘The Feudal Family of de Soulis’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 26 (1949), 163–93 Monte, John L. la, ‘The Lords of Le Puiset on the Crusades’, Speculum, 17. 1 (1942), 100–18 Moody, Theodore, and others, eds, A New History of Ireland, 9 vols (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976–) Mooers, Stephanie, ‘“Backers and Stabbers”: Problems of Loyalty in Robert Curthose’s Entourage’, Journal of British Studies, 21 (1981), 1–17 —— , ‘Familial Clout and Financial Gain in Henry I’s Reign’, Albion, 14 (1982), 267–92 Moore, Arthur W., A History of the Isle of Man (London: Unwin, 1900 and 1977) Moore, John S., ‘Prosopographical Problems of English libri vitae’, in Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. by Katharine Keats-Rohan (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997), pp. 165–88 Morelle, L., ‘The Metamorphosis of Three Monastic Charter Collections’, in Charters and the Use of the Written Word in Medieval Society, ed. by Karl Heidecker (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000), pp. 171–211 Morey, Adrian and Christopher N. L. Brooke, Gilbert Foliot and his Letters, Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought, new ser., 11 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965) Morlière, Adrian de la, Le premier livre des antiquitez histoires et choses plus remarquables de la ville d’Amiens, 3rd edn (Paris: Moreau, 1627) Morris, Christopher, Marriage and Murder in Eleventh-Century Northumbria: A Study of De Obsessione Dunelmi, Borthwick Papers, 82 (York: Borthwick Institute of Historical Research, 1992) Morriss, Margaret Shove, ‘Land and Service: The Tenants of the Honour of Clare’, AngloNorman Studies, 8 (1986), 177–97

Bibliography

477

—— , ‘The Authorship of the De Ortu Waluuanii and the Historia Meriadoci’, Transactions and Proceedings of the Modern Language Association of America, 23. 4 (1908), 599–645 —— , ‘The Beginnings of the Honour of Clare’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 3 (1980), 119–41 Mortimer, Richard, ‘The Family of Rannulf de Glanville’, Bulletin of the Institute of His­ torical Research, 54/129 (1981), 1–16 Moss, Vincent, ‘Reprise et innovations: Les rôles normands et anglais de l’année 1194– 1195 et la perte de la Normandie’, in La Normandie et l’Angleterre au Moyen Âge, Actes du colloque de Cerisy-la-Salle 94–7 oct. 2001), ed. by Pierre Bouët et Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2003), pp. 89–97 Musset, Lucien, ‘Aperçus sur la colonisation scandinave dans le nord du Cotentin’, Annuaire des cinq départements de la Normandie, 111 (1953), 34–37 —— , ‘Les Origines et le patrimoine de l’abbaye de Saint-Sever’, in La Normandie bénédictine au temps de Guillaume le Conquérant, ed. by J. Daoust and Gaillard (Lille: Faculté Catholiques de Lille, 1967 [=1969]), pp. 357–67 —— , ‘Origines d’une classe dirigeante: les Tosny, grands barons normands du xe au xiiie siècle’, Francia, 5 (1977), 45–80 —— , ‘Quelques problèmes posés par l’annexion de la Normandie au domaine royal Français’, in La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations, ed. by Robert-Henri Bautier, Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique 602 (Paris: CNRS, 1982), pp. 291–307 Nassiet, Michel, ‘La littérature orale bretonne et l’histoire’, Annales de Bretagne et de le pays de l’Ouest, 106. 3 (1999), 35–64 Nelson, Janet L., ‘Gender and Genre in Women Historians of the Early Middle Ages’, in L’Historiographie médiévale en Europe: actes du colloque organisé par la Fondation européenne de la science, du 29 mars au 1er avril 1989, ed. by Jean-Philippe Genet (Paris: CNRS, 1991), pp. 149–63 —— , ‘Gender, Memory, and Social Power’, Gender and History, 12. 3 (2000), 722–34 Neveux, François, ‘La ville de Sées du haut Moyen Âge a l’epoque ducale’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 17 (1994), 145–64 Neville, Cynthia, ‘A Celtic Enclave in Norman Scotland: Earl Gilbert and the Earldom of Strathearn 1171–1223’, in Freedom and Authority: Scotland, c. 1050–c. 1650, Essays Presented to Grant G. Simpson, ed. by Terry Brotherstone and David Ditchburn (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1997), pp. 75–92 —— , ‘Keeping the Peace on the Northern Marches in the Later Middle Ages’, English Historical Review, 109/430 (1994), 1–25 —— , Native Lordship in Medieval Scotland: The Earldoms of Strathearn and Lennox, c. 1140–1365 (Dublin: Four Courts, 2005) —— , ‘Scottish Influences on the Medieval Laws of the Anglo-Scottish Marches’, Scottish Historical Review, 81 (2002), 161–82 Newman, William Mendel, Les seigneurs de Nesle en Picardie (xiie–xiiie siècle) leurs chartes et leur histoire: étude sur la Noblesse régionale ecclésiastique et laïque, Bibliothèque de la Société d’histoire du droit des pays flamands, picards et wallons, 27, 2 vols (Paris: Picard, 1971)

478

Bibliography

Nicholson, Helen, ‘Margaret de Lacy and the Hospital of St  John at Aconbury, Here­ fordshire’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 50. 4 (1999), 629–51 Nicholson, Ranald, Scotland in the Later Middle Ages, ed. by Gordon Donaldon, The Edinburgh History of Scotland (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1978) Nitze, William A., ‘On the Chronology of the Grail Romances. I. The Date of “Perlesvaus” (Concluded)’, Modern Philology, 17/11 (1920), 605–18 Ní  Úrdail, Meidhbhín, ‘Two Poems Attributed to Muireadhach Albanach Ó’ Dálaigh’, Ériu, 53 (2003), 19–52 Norgate, Kate, England under the Angevin Kings, 2 vols (London: Macmillan, 1887) —— , John Lackland (London; New York: Macmillan, 1902) Nortier, Michel, ‘Un rôle des biens tombés en la main du Roi en la baillie de Lisieux après la conquête de la Normandie par Philippe Auguste’, Annales de Normandie, 45. 1 (1995), 55–68 O’Donoghue, Heather, Old Norse-Icelandic Literature: A Short Introduction (Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell, 2004) O’Donovan, Oliver, and Joan Lockwood O’Donovan, eds, From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought, 100–1625 (Grand Rapids and Cambridge: Eerdmans, 1999) Ohler, Norbert, The Medieval Traveller, trans. by Caroline Hillier (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989) Ó Mainnín, Mícheál B., ‘The Same in Origin and in Blood: Bardic Windows on the Rela­ tion­ship between Irish and Scottish Gaels, c. 1200–1650’, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 38 (1999), 1–51 Oram, Richard, ‘A Family Business? Colonisation and Settlement in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Galloway’, Scottish Historical Review, 72 (1994), 111–46 —— , ‘Bruce, Balliol and the Lordship of Galloway: South-West Scotland and the Wars of Independence’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 67 (1991), 21–47 —— , ‘Continuity, Adaptation and Integration: The Earls and Earldom of Mar, c. 1150– c.  1300’, in The Exercise of Power in Medieval Scotland, c.  1200–1500, ed. by Steve Boardman and Alasdair Ross (Dublin: Four Courts, 2003), pp. 46–66 —— , David I: The King Who Made Scotland (Stroud: Tempus, 2004) —— , ‘David I and the Conquest of Moray’, Northern Scotland, 19 (1999), 1–19 —— , ‘Devorguilla: The Balliols and Buittle’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 73 (1999), 165–81 —— , Domination and Lordship: Scotland 1070–1230, The New Edinburgh History of Scotland, 3 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011) —— , ‘Fergus, Galloway, and the Scots’, in Galloway: Land and Lordship, ed. by Richard D. Oram and Geoffrey P. Stell (Edinburgh: Scottish Society for Northern Studies, 1991), pp. 117–30 —— , The Canmores: Kings and Queens of the Scots, 1058–1290 (Stroud: Tempus, 2002) —— , The Lordship of Galloway (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 2000)

Bibliography

479

—— , ‘Quincy, Saer de, Earl of Winchester (d.  1219)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Bio­graphy (2004) [accessed 16 August 2009] Oram, Richard, and Geoffrey Stell, eds, Galloway: Land and Lordship (Edinburgh: Scottish Society for Northern Studies, 1991) Orbec, Marcel, Études sur la généalogie des seigneurs d’Orbec et de Bienfaite: chartes inédites des xiie et xiiie siècles, Bulletin de la Société d’Etudes Historiques d’Orbec, 2/7 (Bernay: Claudin, 1940) Owen, D.  D.  R., William the Lion 1143–1214, Kingship and Culture (East Lothian: Tuckwell, 1997) Pacaut, Marcel, Louis VII et son royaume, préface by Robert Fawtier (Paris: Impr. nationale, 1964) Padel, Oliver, ‘A New Study of the Gododdin’, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 35 (1998), 45–55 Page, Christopher, ‘Listening to the Trouvères’, Early Music, 25. 4 (1997), 39–60 —— , ‘Music and Chivalric Fiction in France, 1150–1300’, Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association, 111 (1984), 1–27 Page, William, ‘Houses of Benedictine Nuns: Priory of Bungay’, A History of the County of Suffolk, 2 (1907), 81–83 Painter, Sidney, ‘The Houses of Lusignan and Chatellerault, 1150–1250’, Speculum, 30. 3 (1955), 374–84 —— , ‘The House of Quency, 1136–1264’, Medievalia et Humanistica, 11 (1957), 3–9 —— , ‘The Marriage of Isabelle of Angoulême’, in Feudalism and Liberty: Articles and Ad­dresses, ed. by Fred A. Cazel Jr (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1961), 165– 77 —— , The Reign of King John (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1949) —— , William Marshal: Knight-Errant, Baron, and Regent of England (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1932) Patourel, John Le, Feudal Empires: Norman and Plantaganet (London: Hambledon, 1984) —— , ‘Henri II Plantagenêt et la Bretagne’, Mémoires de la société de l’histoire et archéologique de Bretagne, 58 (1981), 99–116 —— , ‘The Norman Conquest, 1066, 1106, 1154’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 1 (1978), 103–20 —— , The Norman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976) —— , ‘The Norman Succession, 935–1135’, English Historical Review, 86/339 (1971), 225–50 Patterson, R. B., ‘William of Malmesbury’s Robert of Gloucester: A Re-Evaluation of the Historia Novella’, The American Historical Review, 70 (1965), 983–97 Pelé, Armand, Courville: Essais Historiques (Vannes: Lafolye, 1900) Penman, Michael, ‘David  II’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of St  Andrews, 1998) Petit-Dutaillis, Charles, The Feudal Monarchy in France and England from the Tenth to the Thirteenth Century, trans. by E. D. Hunt (London: Kegan Paul, 1936) Piriou, Yann-Ber, ‘Quelques remarques à propos de l’ancien mystère de Saint-Gwénolé’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire

480

Bibliography

de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (Saint-Brieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 193–211 Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, B. A., ‘Les Plantagenets et la Bretagne’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, 53. 2 (1946), 1–27 Pollock, Melissa, ‘Duchesses and Devils: The Breton Succession Crisis, 1148–1189’, French History, 23. 2 (2009), 149–70 —— , ‘Auld Amitie’: Scotland, England, and France after the Loss of Normandy, 1204–1296 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2015) —— , ‘The Lion Rampant: Royal Marriage Alliances and Politics between Scotland and the Continent, 1160–1217’, in A Panorama of Scottish History: Contemporary Con­ siderations, ed. by S. K. Kehoe and Iain H. MacPhail (Glasgow, 2004), pp. 23–43 —— , ‘Rebels of the West, 1209–1216’, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 50 (2005), 1–30 Poole, A.  L., From Domesday Book to Magna Carta, 1087–1216 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951) —— , ‘Henry Plantagenet’s Early Visits to England’, English Historical Review, 47 (1932), 273–81 Port, M. Célestin, Dictionnaire historique geographique et biographique de Maine-et-Loire, 3 vols (Paris: Dumoulin; Angers: Lachèse et Dolbeau, 1874–80) Postles, David, ‘Country Clerici and the Composition of English Twelfth- and ThirteenthCentury Charters’, in Charters and the Use of the Written Word in Medieval Society, ed. by Karl Heidecker (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000), pp. 27–42 Potts, Cassandra, Monastic Revival and Regional Identity in Early Normandy (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997) —— , ‘Normandy or Brittany? A Conflict of Interests at Mont-Saint-Michel (966–1035)’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 12 (1989), 135–56 Pouchelle, M.-C., ‘Le sang et ses pouvoirs au Moyen Âge’, in Affaires du Sang, ed. by Arlette Farge (Paris: Imago, 1988), pp. 17–41 Pouëssel, J., ‘Les structures militaires du comté de Mortain (xie–xiie) siècles)’, Revue de l’Avranchin et du Pays de Granville, 58 (1981), 11–74 et 81–156 Poulle, Béatrice, ‘Savigny and England’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. by David Bates and Anne Curry (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994), pp. 159–68 Powell, W.  R., ‘The Essex Fees of the Honour of Richmond’, Transactions of the Essex Archaeological Society, 3rd ser. 1, part 3 (1964), 179–89 Power, Daniel, ‘Angevin Normandy’, in A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Elisabeth Van Houts (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 63–85 —— , ‘Cross-Channel Communication and the End of the “Anglo-Norman realm”: Robert fitzWalter and the Valognes Inheritance’ [accessed 12 July 2012] —— , ‘French and Norman Frontiers in the Central Middle Ages’, in Frontiers in Ques­ tion: Eurasian Borderlands, 700–1700, ed. by Daniel Power and Naomi Standen (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999), pp. 105–23

Bibliography

481

—— , ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans (1149/50–1189)’, in Henry II: New Interpretations. Survey of the Reign of Henry II, Offering a Range of New Evaluations and Interpretations, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Nicholas Vincent (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), pp. 85–128 —— , ‘King John and the Norman Aristocracy’, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. by Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999), pp. 117–36 —— , ‘L’Aristocratie Plantagenêt face aux conflits capétiens-angevins: l’exemple du traité de Louviers’, in Noblesses de l’espace Plantagenêt (1154–1224), ed. by Martin Aurell, Centre d’études supérieures de civilisation medieval, 11 (Poitiers: Impr. Lavauzelle, 2001), pp. 121–39 —— , ‘L’Établissement du régime capétien en Normandie’, in 1204: La Normandie entre Plantagenêts et Capétiens, ed. by A.-M. Flambard-Héricher and Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2007), pp. 319–43 —— , “‘Terra Regis Anglie et Terra Normannorum sibi Invicem Adversantur”: Les Héritages Anglo-Normands entre 1204 et 1244’, in La Normandie et l’Angleterre au Moyen Âge, Actes du colloque de Cerisy-la-Salle 94–7 oct. 2001), ed. by Pierre Bouët et Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2003), pp. 189–209 —— , ‘The End of Angevin Normandy: The Revolt at Alençon (1203)’, Bulletin of the Insti­tute of Historical Research, 74/186 (2001), 444–64 —— , ‘The French Interests of the Marshal Earls of Striguil and Pembroke, 1189–1234’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 25 (2003), 199–225 —— , The Norman Frontier in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries (Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 2005) —— , ‘The Stripping of a Queen: Eleanor of Aquitaine in Thirteenth-Century Norman Tradition’, in The World of Eleanor of Aquitaine: Literature and Society in Southern France between the Eleventh and Thirteenth Centuries, ed. by Marcus Bull and Catherine Léglu (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2005), pp. 115–35 —— , ‘What Did the Frontier of Angevin Normandy Comprise?’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 17 (1994), 181–201 Powicke, Frederic M., ‘The Angevin Administration of Normandy’, English Historical Review, 22/85 (1907), 15–42 —— , The Loss of Normandy (1189–1204): Studies in the History of the Angevin Empire, 2nd edn (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1960) Pryce, Huw, ‘Owain Gwynedd and Louis VII: the Franco-Welsh diplomacy of the First Prince of Wales’, Welsh History Review, 19 (1998), 1–28 Pryce, Huw, ‘Lawbooks and Literacy in Medieval Wales’, Speculum, 75. 1 (2000), 29–67 Purdie, Rhiannon, and Nicola Royan, eds, The Scots and Medieval Arthurian Legend, Arthurian Studies, 61 (Cambridge: Brewer, 2005) Quaghebeur, Joëlle, La Cornouaille du ixe au xiie siècle: memoire, pouvoirs, noblesse, 2nd edn (Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2002) —— , ‘La maison d’Alfred: un lignage noble du sud de la Bretagne (ixe–xiie siècles)’, in Les Pouvoirs locaux dans la France du centre et de l’ouest (viiie–xie siècles): implantation et moyens d’action, ed. by Dominique Barthélemy and Olivier Bruand (Rennes: Université Rennes, 2004), pp. 137–56

482

Bibliography

Quilgars, Henri, Dictionnaire topographique du departement de la Loire-inferieure (Paris: Durance, 1906) Raby, Frederick J. E., A History of Secular Latin Poetry in the Middle Ages, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon, 1943; repr. 1957, 1997) Racinet, Philippe, ‘Le Départ et la Retour du Croise: Arrangements matériels et spirituals avec les moines’, in Occident et Orient ixe–xve siècles: histoire et archéologie actes du colloque d’Amiens 8, 9 et 10 Octobre 1998, ed. by Robert-Henri Bautier, Histoire médiévale et archéologie, 11 (Amiens: Éd. du Temps, 2000), pp. 11–24 Raine, James, The History and Antiquities of North Durham (London: Nichols, 1852) Rauer, Christine, Beowulf and the Dragon: Parallels and Analogues (Cambridge: Brewer, 2000) Reid, R. C., ‘De Veteripont’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural His­ tory and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 33 (1956), 91–106 —— , ‘Some Early de Soulis Charters’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 26 (1949), 150–62 —— , ‘The Baronie of Enoch and Durisdeer’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Gallo­ way Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 8 (1920–21), 153–71 —— , ‘The Mote of Urr’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 21 (1939), 11–27 Renaud, Jacob G.  N., Le Comte Florent  V, constructeur de châteaux forts (La  Haye: [n. publ.], 1958) Renoux, Annie, ‘Le roi Jean, “s’il avait capturé le comte Robert d’alençon et le sire Juhel de Mayenne, il l’aurait gagnée sa guerre” (1203)!’, in Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de Famille la Parenté au Moyen Âge, ed. by Martin Aurell and Noël-Yves Tonnerre (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 227–65 Reuter, Timothy, ‘Assembly Politics in Western Europe from the Eighth Century to the Twelfth’, in The Medieval World, ed. by Peter Linehan and Janet L. Nelson (London, New York: Routledge, 2001 and 2004), pp. 432–50 —— , ed., The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling Classes of France and Germany from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century, Europe in the Middle Ages Selected Studies, 14 (Amsterdam; New York; Oxford: North-Holland, 1979) Reynolds, Susan, ‘Afterthought on Fiefs and Vassals’, The Haskins Society Journal, 9 (1997), 1–16 —— , ‘Fiefs and Vassals in Scotland: A View from Outside’, Scottish Historical Review, 82 (2003), 176–93 —— , Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reconsidered (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994) Riall, Nicholas, ‘The New Castles of Henry of Blois as Bishop of Winchester: The Case against Farnham, Surrey’, Medieval Archaeology, 46 (2003), 115–29 Richardson, Douglas, ‘New Light on the Family of Margaret of Scotland (c. 1145–1201), Duchess of Brittany, Countess of Richmond’ (unpublished article) Richardson, H. G., ‘The Chamber of Henry II’, English Historical Review, 69/273 (1954), 596–611

Bibliography

483

—— , ‘The Marriage and Coronation of Isabella of Angoulême’, English Historical Review, 61/241 (1946), 289–314 —— , ‘William of Ely, the King’s Treasurer (? 1195–1215)’, Transactions of the Royal His­ torical Society, 4th ser, 15 (1932), 45–90 Richter, Michael, ‘The European Dimension of Irish History in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries’, Peritia, 4 (1985), 328–45 Rickard, Peter, Britain in Medieval French Literature, 1100–1500 (Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 1956) Ridgeway, Huw, ‘Foreign Favourites and Henry  III’s Problems of Patronage, 1247–58’, English Historical Review, 104/412 (1989), 590–610 Riddy, Felicity J., ‘Dating the Book of the Howlat’, The Review of English Studies, new ser., 37/145 (1986), 1–10 Rigg, A.  G., A History of Anglo-Latin Literature, 1066–1422 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) Riis, T., ‘Autour du mariage de 1193: l’épouse, son pays et les relations françoises-danoises’, in La France de Philippe-Auguste, le Temps des Mutations, ed. by Robert-Henri Bautier, Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique (Paris, 29 septembre–4 octobre 1980), 602 (Paris: CNRS, 1982), pp. 341–61 Robert-Barzman, Élisabeth, ‘La conquête de la Normandie dans la Philippide de Guillaume le Breton’, in 1204: La Normandie entre Plantagenêts et Capétiens, ed. by A.-M. FlambardHéricher and Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2007), pp. 153–88 Robinson, Joseph A., ‘Early Somerset Archdeacons’, Somerset Historical Essays (London, 1921), pp. 73–99 Ross, Alasdair, ‘Moray, Ulster, and the MacWilliams’, in The World of the Galloglass: Kings, Warlords and Warriors in Ireland and Scotland, 1200–1600, ed. by Seán Duffy (Dublin: Four Courts, 2007), pp. 24–44 Round, John H., ‘Comyn and Valoignes’, The Ancestor: A Quarterly Review of County and Family History, Heraldry and Antiquities, 11 (1904), 129–35 —— , ‘King John and Robert fitzWalter’, English Historical Review, 19/76 (1904), 707–11 —— , Studies in Peerage and Family History (London: Constable, 1901) —— , ‘The Origins of the Comyns’, The Ancestor, 10 (1904), 104–19 St John Brooks, Eric, ‘The Family of Marisco’, The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 7th ser., 1. 1 (1931), 22–38 —— , ‘The Family of Marisco’, The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 7th ser., 1. 2 (1931), 89–112 Sahuguet-d’Espagnac, Léonard, Les seigneurs de Nogent-le-Roi et les abbés de Coulombs sous la dynastie Capétienne et les abbés de Coulombs sous la dynastie capétienne, d’après un manuscrit inédit de l’abbé de Sahuguet d’Espagnac, ed. by M. Marre (Dreux: Lacroix et Lallemant, 1861) Sanders, Ivor J., English Baronies: A Study of Their Origin and Descent, 1086–1327 (Lon­ don: Clarendon Press, 1960) Santina, Mary Arlene, The Tournament and Litterature: Literary Representations of the Medieval Tournament in Old French Works, Studies in the Humanities: Literature, Politics, Society, 49 (New York: Lang, 1999)

484

Bibliography

Sassier, Yves, ‘Reverentia Regis Henri II face à Louis VII’, in 1204: La Normandie entre Plantagenêts et Capétiens, ed. by A.-M. Flambard-Héricher and Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2007), pp. 23–35 Scammell, G. V., Hugh de Puiset Bishop of Durham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956) Schlight, John, Monarchs and Mercenaries: A Reappraisal of the Importance of Knight Service in Norman and Early Angevin England, Studies in British History and Culture, 1 (Connecticut: New York University Press, 1968) Schmid, Karl, ‘Geschlechtsbewusstsein am Beispiel ausgewählter karolingischer (Bild-) Stem­mata aus dem hohen Mittelalter’ in Georges Duby: l’écriture de l’histoire, ed. by Claudie Duhamel and Guy Lobrichon, Bibliothèque du Moyen Âge, 6 (Bruxelles: De Boeck Université, 1996), pp. 141–59 —— , ‘Zur Problematik von Familie, Sippe, und Geschlecht, Haus, und Dynastie beim mittel­alterlichen Adel: Vortragen zum Thema “Adel und Herrschaft im Mittelalter”’, Zeit­schrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins, 105 (1957), 1–62 Schmolke-Hasselmann, Beate, ‘Henry II Plantagenêt, roi d’Angleterre, et la genèse d’Erec et Enide’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 34 (1981), 241–46 —— , The Evolution of Arthurian Romance: The Verse Tradition from Chrétien to Froissart, trans. by Margaret and Roger Middleton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) Scholz, Bernard, ‘The Canonization of Edward the Confessor’, Speculum, 36. 1 (1961), 38–60 Scott, Benjamin J., The Norman Balliols in England (London: Scott, 1914) Seabourne, Gwen, ‘Eleanor of Brittany and her Treatment by King John and Henry III’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 51 (2007), 73–110 Searle, Eleanor, Predatory Kinship and the Creation of Norman Power, 840–1066 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) Sellar, W. D. H., ‘Hebridean Sea-Kings: The Successors of Somerled, 1164–1316’, in Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Middle Ages, ed. by E. J Cowan and R. A. McDonald (East Linton, 2000), pp. 187–218 Selmer, C., ‘The Beginnings of the Saint Brendan Legend on the Continent’, Catholic Historical Review, 29 (1943), 169–76 Sharpe, Richard, Medieval Irish Saints’ Lives: An Introduction to Vitae Sanctorum Hiber­ niae (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991; repr. 2001) Sheehan, Michael, Marriage, Family, and Law in Medieval Europe: Collected Studies, ed. by James K. Farge, intro. by Joel Rosenthal (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996) Short, Ian, ‘Gaimar et les débuts de l’historiographie en langue français’, in Chroniques Nationales et Chroniques Universelles, actes du colloque d’Amiens, 16–17 janvier 1988, ed. by Danielle Buschinger, Goppingen arbeiten zur germanistiki, 508 (Göppingen: Kümmerle, 1990), pp. 155–63 —— , ‘Gaimar’s Epilogue and Goeffrey of Monmouth’s Liber vetustissimus’, Speculum, 69. 2 (1994), 323–43

Bibliography

485

—— , ‘Language and Literature’, in A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Elisabeth Van Houts (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 191–213 —— , ‘Patrons and Polyglots: French Literature in Twelfth-Century England’, AngloNorman Studies, 14 (1991), 229–49 —— , ‘Tam Angli Quam Franci: Self-Definition in Anglo-Norman England’, AngloNorman Studies, 18 (1995), 153–75 Simon, M., ‘Les hagiographes de Landevennec au ixe siècle témoins de leur temps’, in Bretagne et pays celtiques: Langues, Histoire, Civilisation, Mélanges offerts à la Mémoire de Léon Fleuriot, 1923–1987, ed. by Gwennolé le Menn and Jean-Yves le Moing (Saint-Brieuc; Rennes: Presses universitaires Rennes, 1992), pp. 181–92 Simpson, Grant G., ed., Scotland and the Low Countries, 1124–1994 (East Linton: Tuck­ well, 1996) —— , ‘The Claim of Florence, Count of Holland, to the Scottish Throne, 1291–2’, Scottish Historical Review, 37 (1957), 111–24 —— , ‘The Familia of Roger de Quncy, Earl of Winchester and Constable of Scotland’, in Essays on the Nobility of Scotland, K. J. Stringer (Edinburgh: Donald, 1985) Sims-Williams, Patrick, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 36 (1998), 1–36 Skene, William F., ed., Celtic Scotland (Edinburgh, 1880) Smith, Brendan, ed., Britain and Ireland, 900–1300: Insular Responses to Medieval European Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) —— , ‘The Medieval Border: Anglo-Irish and Gaelic-Irish in late Thirteenth and Four­ teenth Century Uriel’, in The Borderlands: Studies in the History of the UlsterLeinster Border, ed. by Raymond Gillespie and Harold O’Sullivan (Belfast: Institute of Irish Studies, Queen’s University of Belfast, 1989), pp. 41–54 Smith, Julia, ‘Oral and Written: Saints, Miracles, and Relics in Brittany, c.  850–1250’, Speculum, 65. 2 (1990), 309–43 Smith, Llinos Beverley, ‘Fosterage, Adoption, and God-Parenthood: Ritual and Fictive Kinship in Medieval Wales’, The Welsh History Review, 16 (1992), 1–35 Smyth, Alfred, ‘The Effect of Scandinavian Raiders on the English and Irish Churches: A Preliminary Reassessment’, in Britain and Ireland 900–1300: Insular Responses to Medieval European Change, ed. by Brendan Smith (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 1–38 Smyth, John, The Berkeley Manuscripts: The Lives of the Berkeleys, from 1066 to 1618, ed. by J. Maclean, 3 vols (Gloucester, 1883–85) Snellgrove, Harold, The Lusignans in England, 1247–1258 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1950) Southern, R. W., Saint Anselm: A Portrait in a Landscape (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­ versity Pres, 1990) Spear, David S., ‘Geoffrey Brito, Archbishop of Rouen (1111–28)’, Haskins Society Journal, 2 (1990), 123–37 Spiegel, Gabrielle, The Past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore, MD; London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997)

486

Bibliography

Spiegel, Gabrielle M., ‘The Reditus Regni ad Stirpem Karoli Magni: A New Look’, French Historical Studies, 7 (1971), 145–74 Stacy, N. E., ‘Henry of Blois and the Lordship of Glastonbury’, English Historical Review, 114/455 (1999), 1–33 Stafford, Pauline, ‘La mutation Familiale: A Suitable Case for Caution’, in The Community, The Family, and the Saint: Patterns of Power in Early Medieval Europe, ed. by Joyce Hill and Mary Swan (Turnhout: Brepols, 1998), pp. 103–25 —— , ‘The King’s Wife in Wessex, 800–1066’, Past and Present, 91 (1981), 3–27 Starkey, Kathryn, ‘Traversing the Boundaries of Language: Multilingualism and Linguistic Difference in Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Willehalm’, The German Quarterly, 75.  1 (2002), 20–34 Staunton, Michael, Thomas Becket and his Biographers (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2006) Stell, Geoffrey P., ‘Balliol, Bernard de (d.  1154×62)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biblio­graphy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004) [accessed 1 Novermber 2008] —— , ‘The Balliol Family and the Great Cause of 1291–2’, in Essays on the Nobility of Medieval Scotland, ed. by Keith J. Stringer (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 1985), pp. 150–65 Stevenson, A. W. K., ‘Trade between Scotland and the Low Countries in the Later Middle Ages’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Aberdeen, 1982) Stewart, M., ‘Holland’s Howlat and the Fall of the Livingstones’, The Innes Review, 26 (1975), 67–79 Strickland, Matthew, ‘Arms and the Men: War, Loyalty and Lordship in Jordan Fantosme’s Chronicle’, in Ideals and Practice of Medieval Knighthood: Papers from the Fifth Strawberry Hill Conference 1990, ed. by Chris Harper-Bill and R. Harvey, 4 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1992), pp. 187–220 —— , ‘Securing the North: Invasion and the Strategy of Defence in Twelfth-Century Anglo-Scottish Warfare’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 12 (1989), 177–98 —— , War and Chivalry: The Conduct and Perception of War in England and Normandy, 1066–1217 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) Stringer, Keith, ‘A New Wife for Alan of Galloway’, Transactions of the Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society, 3rd ser., 49 (1972), 49–55 —— , Earl David of Huntingdon, 1152–1219: A Study in Anglo-Scottish History (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1985) —— , ‘Identities in Thirteenth-Century England: Frontier Society the Far North of Eng­ land’, in Social and Political Identities in Western History, ed. by Claus Bjørn, Alexander Grant, and Keith J. Stringer (Copenhagen: Academic Press, 1994), pp. 28–66 —— , ‘Kingship, Conflict, and State-Making in the Reign of Alexander  II: The War of 1215–17 and its Context’, in The Reign of Alexander II, 1214–49, ed. by Richard D. Oram (Leiden: Brill, 2005), pp. 99–156 —— , ‘Nobility and Identity in Medieval Britain and Ireland: The de Vescy Family, c. 1120– 1314’, in Britain and Ireland, 900–1300: Insular Responses to Medieval Change, ed. by Brendan Smith (Cambridge, 1999), pp. 199–239

Bibliography

487

—— , ‘Scottish Foundations: Thirteenth-Century Perspectives’, in Uniting the Kingdom? The Making of British History, ed. by Alexander Grant and Keith J. Stringer (London and New York: Taylor and Francis, 1995), pp. 85–96 —— , ‘Senlis, Simon (II) de, Earl of Northampton and earl of Huntingdon (d.  1153)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) [accessed 5 June 2006] —— , The Reign of Stephen (London; New York: Routledge, 1993) Stones, Edward L.  G., and Grant Simpson, eds, Edward  I and the Throne of Scotland, 1290–1296, 2 vols (Oxford; New York: Published for the University of Glasgow by the Oxford University Press, 1978) Sutton, Anne F., ‘Mercery through Four Centuries, 1130s–c. 1500’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 41 (1997), 100–25 Symes, Carol, ‘The Appearance of Early Vernacular Plays: Forms, Functions, and the Future of Medieval Theater’, Speculum, 77. 3 (2002), 778–831 Synnott, J., ‘Notes on the Family of de Lacy in Ireland’, Journal of the Royal Society of Anti­ quarians of Ireland, 6th ser., 49 (1919), 113–31 Tanner, Heather, Families, Friends, and Allies: Boulogne and Politics in Northern France and England, c. 879–1160 (Leiden: Brill, 2004) —— , ‘The Expansion of the Power and Influence of the counts of Boulogne under Eustache II’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 14 (1991), 251–77 Taylor, Alice, ‘Historical Writing in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Scotland: The Dun­ fermline Compilation’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 83/220 (2010), 228–52 —— , ‘Leges Scocie and the Law Codes of David I, William the Lion, and Alexander II’, Scottish Historical Review, 88. 2 (2009), 207–88 Taylor, Andrew, ‘Manual to Miscellany: Stages in the Commercial Copying of Vernacular Literature in England’, The Yearbook of English Studies, Medieval and Early Modern Miscellanies and Anthologies, 33 (2003), 1–17 —— , ‘Was There a Song of Roland’, Speculum, 76/1 (2001), 28–65 Taylor, Simon, ed., Kings, Clerics, and Chronicles in Scotland, 500–1297: Essays in Honour of Marjorie Igilvie Anderson on the Occasion of her Ninetieth Birthday (Dublin: Four Courts, 2000) Teske, Raymond H.  C.  Jr, and Nelson, Bardin H., ‘Acculturation and Assimilation: A Clarification’, American Ethnologist, 1. 2 (1974), 351–67 Thacker, A. T., ed., The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barra­ clough (1988), Journal of the Chester Archeological Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archeological Society, 1991) —— , ‘The Earls and their Earldom of Chester’, in The Earldom of Chester and its Charters: A Tribute to Geoffrey Barraclough (1988), ed. by A. T. Thacker, Journal of the Chester Archeological Society, 71 (Chester: Chester Archeological Society, 1991), pp. 7–22 Theilmann, John, ‘Political Canonization and Political Symbolism in Medieval England’, Journal of British Studies, 29. 3 (1990), 241–66 Thomas, Hugh M., The English and the Normans: Ethnic Hostility, Assimilation, and Iden­ tity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)

488

Bibliography

—— , ‘Violent Disorder in King Stephen’s England: A Maximum Argument’, in King Stephen’s Reign (1135–1154), ed. by Paul Dalton and Graeme (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008), pp. 139–70 Thompson, Kathleen, ‘Affairs of State: The Illegitimate Children of Henry I’, Journal of Medieval History, 29 (2003), 129–51 —— , ‘Dowry and Inheritance Patterns: Some Examples from the Descendants of King Henry I of England’, Medieval Prosopography, 17 (1996), 45–61 —— , ‘Note de Recherche: Arnoul de Montgommery’, Annales de Normandie, 45 (1995), 49–53 —— , Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France: The County of the Perche, 1000– 1226 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2002) —— , ‘Robert of Bellême Reconsidered’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 13 (1991), 263–84 —— , ‘The Lords of l’Aigle: Ambition and Insecurity on the Borders of Normandy’, AngloNorman Studies, 18 (1995), 177–99 —— , ‘William Talvas, Count of Ponthieu, and the Politics of the Anglo-Norman Realm’, in England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. by David Bates and Anne Curry (London and Rio Grande: Hambledon, 1994), pp. 169–84 Tischler, Hans, ‘English Traits in the Early Thirteenth-Century Motet’, The Musical Quarterly, 30. 4 (1944), 458–76 Tonnerre, Noël-Yves, ‘Henri I et L’Anjou’, in Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de Famille la Parenté au Moyen Âge, ed. by Martin Aurell and NoëlYves Tonnerre, Histoire de famille la parenté au Moyen Âge, 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 211–223 —— , Naissance de la Bretagne: géographie historique et structures sociales de la Bretagne méridionale (Nantais et Vannetais) de la fin du viiie à la fin du xiie siècle (Angers: Presses de l’Université d’Angers, 1994) Toorians, L., ‘Twelfth-Century Flemish Settlement in Scotland’, in Scotland and the Low Coun­tries, 1124–1994, ed. by Grant G. Simpson (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1996), pp. 1–14 Tourtier, Chantal de, Les seigneurs de Picquigny, vidames d’Amiens et leur famille des origines a la fin du xive siècle (Paris, 1954) Treharne, Elaine, and Mary Swan, eds, Rewriting Old English in the Twelfth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) Treharne, Reginald F., ‘The Franco-Welsh Treaty of Alliance in 1212’, Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies, 18 (1958–60), 60–75 Trotter, David A., Multilingualism in Later Medieval Britain (Cambridge: Brewer, 2000) —— , ‘The Anglo-French Lexis of Ancrene Wisse: A Re-Evaluation’, in A Companion to Ancrene Wisse, ed. by Yoko Wada (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 83–101 Tuck, Anthony, and Anthony Goodman, eds, War and Border Societies in the Middle Ages (London and New York: Routledge, 1992) Turner, G.  J., ‘The Minority of Henry  III: Part  I’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 18 (1904), pp. 245–95

Bibliography

489

Turner, Ralph V., ‘Changing Perceptions in the New Administrative Class in AngloNorman and Angevin England: The Curiales and their Conservative Critics’, Journal of British Studies, 29. 2 (1990), 93–117 —— , ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine in the Governments of Her Sons Richard and John’, in Eleanor of Aquitaine, Lord and Lady, ed. by John Parsons and Bonnie Wheeler (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002), pp. 77–95 —— , King John (London: Longman, 1994) —— , ‘Longchamp, William de (d. 1197)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2014) [accessed May 2007] —— , ‘Richard Lionheart and the Episcopate in his French Domains’, French Historical Studies, 21. 4 (1998), 517–42 —— , ‘The Problems of Survival of the Angevin ‘Empire’: Henry II’s and his Sons’ Vision Versus Late Twelfth-Century Realities’, American Historical Review, 100. 1 (1996), 78–96 Turner, Ralph V., and Richard R. Heiser, The Reign of Richard Lionheart: Ruler of the Angevin Empire, 1189–1199 (Harlow: Pearson, 2000) Van  Doorn, J.  A.  A., ‘Conflict in Formal Organizations’, in Conflict in Society, ed. by Anthony Reuck, and Julie Knight (London: Churchill, 1966), pp. 111–32 Van Eickels, Klaus, ‘L’hommage des rois anglais et de leurs héritiers aux rois français au xiie siècle: subordination imposée ou reconnaissance souhaitée?’, in Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de Famille la Parenté au Moyen Âge, ed. by Martin Aurell and Noël-Yves Tonnerre, Histoire de famille la parenté au Moyen Âge, 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 377–85 Van  Houts, Elisabeth M.  C., ‘Historical Writing’, in A Companion to the Anglo-French World, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Elisabeth Van Houts (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003), pp. 103–22 —— , History and Family Traditions in England and the Continent, 1000–1200 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999) —— , ‘Le roi et son historien: Henri II Plantagenêt et Robert de Torigni, abbé du MontSaint-Michel’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 37 (1994), 115–18 —— , ed., Medieval Memories: Men, Women, and the Past, 700–1300 (New York, Long­ man, 2001) —— , Memory and Gender in Medieval Europe, 900–1200 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999) —— , ‘The Adaptation of the Gesta Normannorum Ducum by Wace and Benoît’, Non nova, sed nove: Mélanges de civilisation mediévale dediés à W. Noomen, ed. by Martin Gosman et Jaap van Os (Groningen: Bouma, 1984), pp. 115–24 —— , ‘The Memory of 1066 in Written and Oral Traditions’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 19 (1996), 167–79 —— , ‘The Norman Conquest through European Eyes’, English Historical Review, 110/438 (1995), 832–53 ——  , ‘The Warenne View of the Past, 1066–1203’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 26 (2003), 103–21 —— , ‘Robert of Torigni as Genealogist’, in Studies in Medieval History Presented to R. Allen Brown, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill, Christopher J. Holdsworth, and Janet L. Nelson (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1989), pp. 215–33

490

Bibliography

—— , ‘Wace as Historian’, in Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. by Katharine KeatsRohan (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997), pp. 103–32 Varin, Pierre, Archives Administratives de la Ville de Reims, i (Paris, 1839) Vaughan, Richard, Matthew Paris (Cambridge, 1958) Venarde, Bruce, ed. and trans., Robert of Arbrissel: A Medieval Religious Life (Washington, 2003) Vercauteren, Fernand, Actes des Comtes de Flandre, 1071–1128 (Bruxelles: Palais des Aca­ démies, 1938) Vincent, Nicholas, ‘Henry, Duke of the Normans (1149/50–1189)’, in Henry  II: New Interpretations. Survey of the Reign of Henry II, Offering a Range of New Evaluations and Interpretations (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), pp. 278–334 —— , ‘Isabella of Angoulême: John’s Jezebel’, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. by Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1999), pp. 165–219 —— , ‘Jean, Comte de Mortain: Le Futur roi et ses domains en Normandie 1183–1199’, in 1204: La Normandie entre Plantagenêts et Capétiens, ed. by A.-M. Flambard-Héricher and Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2007), pp. 37–59 —— , ‘Les Normands de l’entourage d’Henri II Plantagenêt’, in La Normandie et l’Angleterre au Moyen Âge, Actes du colloque de Cerisy-la-Salle 94–7 oct. 2001), ed. by Pierre Bouët et Véronique Gazeau (Caen: CRAHM, 2003), pp. 75–88 —— , ‘Notes and Documents: The Origins of the Chancellorship of the Exchequer’, English Historical Review, 108/426 (1993), 105–21 —— , ‘Patronage, Politics and Piety in the Charters of Aleanor of Aquitaine’, in Plantagenêts et Capétiens: confrontations et héritages, Histoire de Famille la Parenté au Moyen Âge, ed. by Martin Aurell and Noël-Yves Tonnerre (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), pp. 17–60 —— , Peter des Roches: An Alien in English Politics, 1205–1238 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) —— , ‘The Court of Henry  II’, in Henry  II: New Interpretations. Survey of the Reign of Henry II, Offering a Range of New Evaluations and Interpretations, ed. by Christopher Harper-Bill and Nicholas Vincent (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), pp. 278–334 —— , ‘The Pilgrimages of the Angevin Kings of England, 1154–1272’, in Pilgrimage: The English Experience from Becket to Bunyan, ed. by Colin Morris and Peter Roberts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 12–45 —— , ‘Twyford under the Bretons 1066–1250’, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 41 (1997), 80–99 —— , ‘William Marshal, King Henry  II and the Honour of Châteauroux’, Archives, 25 (2000), 1–15 Vos, George de, ‘Conflict, Dominance, and Exploitation in Human Systems of Social Seg­ regation: Some Theoretical Perspectives from the Study of Personality in Culture’, in Conflict in Society, ed. by Anthony Reuck and Julie Knight (London: Churchill, 1966), pp. 60–81 Wada, Yoko, ed., A Companion to Ancrene Wisse (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003) Wagner, Anthony R., ‘The Origin of the Hays of Erroll’, The Genealogists’ Magazine, 11 (1954), 535–40; 12 (1955), 1–6

Bibliography

491

Walker, David, ‘Cultural Survival in an Age of Conquest’, in Welsh Society and Nation­ hood: Historical Essays Presented to Glanmor Williams, ed. by R.  R. Davies, Ieuan Gynedd Jones, and Kenneth O. Morgan (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1984), pp. 35–50 —— , Medieval Wales (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) Walker, Rose F., ‘Leonor of England, Plantagenet Queen of King Alfonso  VIII of Castile, and her Foundation of the Cistercian Abbey of Las Huelgas. In Imitation of Fontevraud?’, Journal of Medieval History, 31 (2005), 346–68 —— , ‘The Supporters of Richard Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, in the Rebellion of 1233– 1234’, The Welsh History Review, 17 (1994), pp. 41–66 Ward, Jennifer, Women of the English Gentry and Nobility, 1066–1500 (Manchester: Manchester University Pres, 1995) Warren, Michelle, History on the Edge: Excalibur and the Borders of Britain, 1100–1300 (Minneapolis; London: University of Minnesota Press, 2000) —— , ‘Roger of Howden Strikes Back: Investing Arthur of Brittany with the AngloNorman Future’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 21 (1998), 261–72 Warren, W. L., Henry II (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2000; originally pub. London: Eyre Methuen, 1973) —— , King John, 2nd edn (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1997; orig. publ. London: Eyre Methuen, 1978) —— , ‘King John and Ireland’, in England and Ireland in The Later Middle Ages: Essays in Honour of Jocelyn Otway-Ruthven, ed. by James Lydon (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 1981), pp. 26–42 Watson, G. W., ‘The Families of Lacy, Geneva, Joinville and la Marche’, The Genealogist, new ser., 21 (1904), 1–16, 73–82, 163–72, 234–43 Watt, D.  E.  R., ‘A National Treasure? The Scotichronicon of Walter Bower’, Scottish Historical Review, 76 (1997), 44–53 Webber, Nick, The Evolution of Norman Identity, 911–1154 (Rochester: Boydell, 2005) Webster, Bruce, Scotland from the Eleventh Century to 1603 (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­versity Press, 1975) Webster, K. G. T., ‘Galloway and the Romances’, Modern Language Notes, 55. 5 (1940), 363–66 Weiler, Björn, ‘William of Malmesbury on Kingship’, History, 90/297 (2005), 3–22 Welby, A. C. E., ‘Bytham Castle and the Coleville Family’, Lincolnshire Notes and Queries, 15 (1919), 18–26 Werner, Karl Ferdinand, ‘Important Noble Families in the Kingdom of Charlemagne: A Prosopographical Study on the Relationship between King and Nobility in the Early Middle Ages’, in The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling Classes of France and Germany from the Sixth to the Twelfth Centuries, ed. by Timothy Reuter (Amsterdam, 1979), pp. 137–202 —— , ‘Royaume et regna: le pouvoir en France comme enjeu entre le roi et les grands’, in Pouvoirs et libertés au temps des premiers Capétiens, ed. by Elisabeth Magnou-Nortier and Pierre Desports (Maulévrier: Hérault, 1992), pp. 25–62

492

Bibliography

White, G. H., ‘Royal Income and Regional Trends’, in King Stephen’s Reign (1135–1154), ed. by Paul Dalton and Graeme (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2008), pp. 27–43 —— , ‘The Career of Waleran, Count of Meulan and Earl of Worcester (1104–1166)’, Trans­actions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th ser., 17 (1934), 19–48 Whitman, Jon, ‘The Body and the Struggle for the Soul of Romance: La Queste del Saint Graal’, in The Body and the Soul in Medieval Literature, ed. by Piero Boitani and Anna Torti (Woodbridge; Rochester, NY: Brewer, 1999), pp. 31–61 Wilkinson, Alexander, Mary Queen of Scots and French Public Opinion, 1542–1600 (London and New York: Palgrave, 2004) Williams, Ann, The English and the Norman Conquest (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 1995) Williams, Ifor, ed., The Poems of Taliesin, Mediaeval and Modern Welsh Series, 3 (Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1968) Wilson, R. M., ‘English and French in England, 1100–1300’, History, 28/107 (1943), 37–60 Wmffre, I., ‘Mynydawc – Ruler of Edinburgh?’, Studi Celtici, 112 (2002), 83–105 Wood, Charles T., The French Apanages and the Capetian Monarchy, 1224–1328, Harvard Historical Monographs, 59 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966) Woolf, Alex, ‘AU 729.2 and the Last Years of Nechtan mac Der-Ilei’, Scottish Historical Review, 85 (2006), 182–201 —— , From Pictland to Alba, 789–1070 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007) —— , ‘The Age of Sea-Kings: 900–1300’, in The Argyll Book, ed. by Donald Omand (Edinburgh: Birlinn, 2004), pp. 94–109 —— , ‘The Diocese of Sudreyar’, in Ecclesia Nidrosiensis 1153–1537: Søkelys på Nidaro­ skirkens og Nidarosprovinsens historie, ed. by Steinar Imsen (Trondheim: Tapir, 2003), pp. 171–82 —— , ‘The “Moray Question” and the Kingship of Alba in the Tenth and Eleventh Cen­ turies’, Scottish Historical Review, 79 (2000), 145–64 Young, Alan, Robert the Bruce’s Rivals: The Comyns, 1212–1314 (East Lothian: Tuckwell, 1997) —— , William Cumin: Border Politics and the Bishopric of Durham, 1141–1144 (York: Borthwick Institute of Historical Research, 1978)

Index Entries are alphabetized within each generation for genealogical descent. Where a relationship is known but not the name, an italicized X is given. Where the relationship between indi­viduals is uncertain, a question mark is used. Page numbers in italics indicate a speculative identification. This index does not incorporate all individuals in the book, only those of the upper nobility or those who are referred to more than once. Please consult https://st-andrews.academia. edu/melissapollock under ‘books’ for a complete index of all names and places.

Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire: 103, 173 Adam de Hythus, or Whitsome: 371 Adam de Port, or Porz, lord of Kington: 242, 243, 272 Airaines, family of: 126 Alan Durward: 28–29 Marjorie, wife of Alan, see Alexander II: 28–29 Alençon: 49, 93, 120, 121, 123, 131, 184, 185, 357 siege of: 310 Alexander I, King of Scotland: 2, 59, 63–65, 69–70, 82, 90, 99, 103, 109–10, 173, 340 Sybilla of Domfront, wife of Alexander, see Henry I: 2 Alexander II, King of Scotland: 17, 28, 176, 342, 373, 390, 392, 397, 408, 410, 421 Marie de Coucy, second wife of Alexander, see Coucy: 14, 334, 338, 421 Marie de France, betrothed, see Philip II Augustus Marjorie, natural daughter of Alexander, see Alan Durward Alexander III, King of Scotland, son of Alexander II and Marie de Coucy: 17, 28, 176, 421

Alnwick: 113, 124, 222, 246, 271–72, 276, 287, 312, 317, 387 abbey of: 190 castle of: 211 Amboise, family of Sulpice: 338, 377 Isabel of Blois, lady of Chartres, wife of Sulpice, see Montmirail and Blois: 294, 296, 338, 340, 377 Mathilde, countess of Chartres, daughter of Sulpice, see Beaumont-sur-Sarthe Amelina d’Escosse: 100–01 Les Andelys: 153–55, 158, 161, 162, 164, 165, 168, 360, 412 Anet, family of: 291–92, 295, 297–300 Anglo-Irish lords, see John de Courcy, Hugh I de Lacy, and William de Briouze: 42, 205, 215, 301, 344, 354, 418 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: 37, 38, 58, 63 history: 37, 38, 39, 40 language: 36, 37, 39 people: 19, 23, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 60–61, 64, 89, 314 Angoulême, family of/counts of: 389, 396, 416 Anjou, counts of, see Jerusalem and Normandy: 104, 105, 121, 122, 350

494

Ermengarde, daughter of Fulk IV ‘le Rechin’, see Brittany and Aquitaine: 178 Fulk V, half-brother of Ermengarde, also King of Jerusalem: 86, 104 Geoffrey V Plantagenet, son of Fulk V, see Empress Matilda: 69, 79, 101, 112, 115, 121, 131, 132, 133, 141, 146, 149, 150, 155, 157, 160, 198, 221, 262, 303, 385, 421 Geoffrey VI, son of Geoffrey V: 146, 149–50, 178, 385 Hamelin, natural son of Geoffrey V, see Warenne Henry, son of Geoffrey V, see Henry II Helias, son of Fulk V: 151 Beatrix, daughter of Helias, see Sées Anjou, county of: 3, 16, 51, 57, 100, 104, 105, 149, 150, 178, 184, 197, 198, 313, 322, 325, 356, 364, 367, 383, 385, 393, 397, 398, 402, 413, 416 ‘Appeal of the Seven Earls’: 171, 373 Aquitaine, duchy of: 3, 8, 57, 150, 359, 363, 366, 384, 389 Aquitaine, dukes of William VIII: 105 Hildegarde, wife of William VIII, see Burgundy: 105 William IX, son of William VIII: 105 Ermengarde of Anjou, wife of William IX, see Brittany Eleanor, granddaughter of William IX, see Louis VII and Henry II Arden, family of: 26, 71, 73, 81, 82, 261 Argentan: 81, 206, 259, 298, 304, 309 Arthur, King of Britannia, legendary: 6, 8, 9, 24, 189, 193, 314, 315, 362, 401 Arthurian Materials: 7, 15, 28, 38, 97, 314, 329 Arundel (Aubigny), earls of (Sussex): 85, 209, 267, 277 William I d’Aubigny: 263, 277 Adelise de Louvain, widow of Henry I of England, wife of William I William II d’Aubigny, son of William I: 140, 236 Matilda de Saint-Hilaire, wife of William II, see Saint-Hilaire and Hertford: 140, 192, 236

INDEX William III d’Aubigny, son of William II: 370, 380 Oliva d’Aubigny, sister of William I, see Hai Oliver d’Aubigny, brother of William I: 263 Asnières, lordship of: 85, 156, 314 abbey of: 156 Atholl, earldom of: 219 Atholl, earls of: 52 Maddad: 173, 326 Margaret of Orkney, wife of Maddad: 326 Harald, son of Maddad, or Maddadson: 173, 326, 369, 370, 376, 395 Malcolm: 52, 155, 272 Hextilda, wife of Malcolm, widow of Richard Comyn, see Comyn: 52, 155, 272 Aubigny (Brittany), lords of Belvoir, family of: 85, 129, 142, 209, 232–33, 256 John: 233 William I ‘le Breton’: 76, 142 Ralph, son of William I: 209, 212 Sibilla de Valognes, wife of Ralph: 209, 212 Gunnora, daughter of Ralph, see Gant and Stuteville Robert, son of William I: 141 William II, son of William I: 53, 76, 140, 141, 142, 209–10, 232, 233, 242 Maud de Clare, wife of William II, see Clare: 76, 140, 141, 232, 233, 242 Maud, daughter of William II, see Strathearn William III, son of William II: 142 Aubigny (Norfolk), family of: 206, 208, 209, 220 Nigel, son of Roger: 202, 203, 205, 206–07, 263 Maud de L’Aigle, first wife of Nigel, see L’Aigle and Moubray: 202, 203, 263 Gundreda de Gournay, second wife of Nigel, see Gournay: 202, 205, 210, 211 Roger, son of Nigel and Maud, see Moubray: 202, 203, 205 William ‘pincern’, son of Roger: 142 William, son of William, see Arundel Auld Alliance: 1, 3, 12–13, 31 Aumale, county of: 214, 215, 216, 219, 222, 364, 369, 371, 407

INDEX Aumale, counts of: 28, 72, 85, 128, 372 Adelaide of Normandy: 128, 304 Stephen, son of Adelaide and nephew of King William I of England: 128, 278, 407 Hawise de Mortemer, wife of Stephen: 278, 407 daughters of sTephen, see Bohun, Brus, and Picquigny Euphemia, niece of William ‘le Gros’, see Brus William ‘le Gros’, son of Stephen: 215–16, 220, 221, 223, 251 Cecily de Remilly, wife of William ‘le Gros’, see Duncan II: 251 Hawise, daughter of William ‘le Gros’, see Essex: 229 Baldwin de Béthune, count of Aumale, third husband of Hawise: 377, 379, 394 Aunay: 159 abbey of: 206, 265 family of: 220, 266–67 Avenel, family of: 85, 103, 173, 236–39, 267, 373 Avranches: 83, 186, 187, 193, 226, 273, 318, 403 Bailleul, family of: 28, 29, 61, 84, 126, 216, 221–22, 261, 276–77, 319, 378, 413 Guy de: 125 Hawise de, daughter of Guy, see William Bertram Bernard I de, cousin of Hawise: 61, 84, 125, 163, 222, 379 Bernard II de, son of Bernard I: 61, 125, 222, 277, 279, 379 Agnes de Picquigny, wife of Bernard II, see Picquigny: 125, 222, 277 Enguerrand de, son of Bernard I: 125 Eustache de, lord of Hélicourt, son of Bernard I: 125, 222, 277, 379, 405 Ada de Fontaines, wife of Eustache: 379 Henry de, chamberlain of Scotland, son (?) of Eustache: 378–79, 380, 411 Lora de Valognes, wife of Henry: 378–79 Hugh de, lord of Bywell, Barnard castle and of Picardian estates, son of Eustache: 376, 378–79, 405, 411

495

Cecilia de Fontaines, wife of Hugh: 376 Guy de, son of Bernard I: 125 Joscelin de, brother of Bernard I: 163 John de, King of Scotland: 28, 373 Enguerrand de, lord of Tours-en-Vimeu and of Inverkeilor, son of Bernard II or of Eustache: 276–77, 378–79 Eva de Berkeley, wife of Enguerrand of Tours, see Berkeley: 276–77, 378 Bailleul-en-Vimeu: 222, 378 Bardulf, family of: 360 Barrow, Geoffrey: 4, 42, 71, 72, 86, 175, 229, 256, 273, 281, 310 Bartlett, Robert: 47, 162, 271 Basset/Ridel, family of, see Ridel: 82, 254–59, 290, 304, 410 Bates, David: 41, 43 Baudri de Bourgueil, archbishop of Dol: 100, 102, 349 Bayeux: 58, 108, 115, 118, 155, 156, 157, 159, 160, 161, 242, 273, 283, 293, 314, 330 bishops of: 156–57, 159, 160 Beaumont-le-Richard: 155, 156, 162 Beaumont-le-Roger, family of, see Meulan, Leicester, and Warwick: 209, 231, 247, 248, 267, 352 Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, castle of: 69 Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, viscount, family of: 67, 69, 135–36, 181, 203, 336, 338, 339, 340–42, 344, 346, 391, 403 Hubert de: 105 Ermengarde de Nevers, wife of Hubert, see Nevers: 105 Ralph, son of Hubert: 105 X, daughter of Guy II de Laval, wife of Ralph: 105 Roscelin de, son of Ralph: 68–69, 136, 180, 338, 339, 341 Constance, wife of Roscelin, see Henry I: 68, 334, 338, 339, 340, 341 Odeline, daughter (?) of Roscelin, see L’Aigle Bishop Ralph of Angers, son of Roscelin: 324, 325, 334, 338, 340 Richard de, son of Roscelin: 180, 297, 324, 335, 337, 338, 339, 340–41, 357, 377, 391

496

Lucy de Quelaines or de l’Aigle (?), wife of Richard, see L’Aigle: 324, 334, 338, 339 Constance, daughter of Richard, see Tosny Ermengarde, daughter of Richard, see William I, King of Scotland Petronilla, daughter of Richard, see Penthièvre Raoul (or Ralph) de, son of Richard: 338, 403 Agnes, daughter of Raoul: 203, 338 Louis de Brienne, husband of Agnes, viscount de Beaumont: 203, 338 Henry, titular earl of Buchan, son of Agnes and Louis: 203, 338 Alicia Comyn, wife of Henry: 338 Jean, son of Agnes and Louis: 203, 338 Jeanne de la Guerche, wife of Jean: 203, 338 Richard II, son of Raoul: 296–97, 338, 340, 342, 403 Mathilde d’Amboise, wife of Richard II, see Amboise: 296–97, 338, 340 William de (or Guillaume), son of Roscelin: 334, 338, 340 X, heiress of Roland de Rieux, wife of William: 334, 338 Bec, abbey of: 47, 72, 158 Bede: 19 Bedford, county of: 91, 94, 141, 162, 196, 284, 303 earls of (Beaumont-le-Roger): Hugh de Beaumont, son of Robert I, see Meulan: 112 Bellencombre, honour of, see Warenne: 144, 218, 248, 280, 281, 405–06 Benoît de Sainte-Maure: 9, 313–14 Berkeley, family of: 95, 274, 378 Robert de: 158, 274 Roger de, lord of Dursley: 132–33, 276, 277 Walter de, lord of Inverkeilor: 133, 274, 276, 277, 321, 378, 379 Eva of Ardoyne, wife of Walter, see Quincy: 276, 277 Agatha de, daughter of Walter, see Humphrey de Adeville Eva de, daughter of Walter, see Bailleul Bernard of Abbeville: 99, 100, 103, 170

INDEX Bernard of Chartres: 350 Bernard de Moëlan, bishop of Cornouaille and of Quimper: 350 Bertrand de Born: 147, 333 Bisset, family of: 163, 216–20, 274, Blois: 40, 121, 122, 214 Blois, counts of, and of Chartres, see Champagne/Troyes: 50, 67, 102, 121, 145, 269, 293, 294, 295, 297, 301, 307, 377 Stephen-Henry: 128, 145, 269, 349 Adelaide (or Adela) of Normandy, wife of Stephen-Henry, see Normandy: 102, 145, 269, 302, 307–08, 349–50 Agnes, daughter of Stephen-Henry, see Puiset Henry of Blois, bishop of Winchester, son of Stephen-Henry: 97, 115, 295 Stephen, son of Stephen-Henry, see Stephen, king of England Thibault IV (or Theobald), Thibault II of Champagne, son of Stephen-Henry: 136, 145 Alix, daughter of Thibault IV, see Louis VII Henry I ‘the Liberal’, son of Thibault IV, see Champagne: 269 Marie de France, wife of Henry I, see Louis VII: 38, 269, 326 Matilda, daughter of Thibault IV, see Perche Thibault V, son of Thibault IV: 269, 292, 294, 377 Alix de France, wife of Thibault V, see Louis VII: 269 Adelise, daughter of Thibault V: 294 Isabel, daughter of Thibault V, see Ambroise and Montmirail Louis, son of Thibault V: 294, 296 Marguerite, daughter of Thibault V: 294 Bohun, family of: 324, 325, 407 Humphrey III de: 195, 407 Humphrey IV de, son of Humphrey III: 188, 235, 241, 250, 273, 322, 323, 327, 407, 421 Margaret of Scotland, wife of Humphrey IV, see Brittany and Huntingdon: 188, 235, 273, 322, 323, 327, 397, 407, 421

INDEX Henry de, son of Humphrey IV, see Hereford Margaret de, daughter of Humphrey IV, see Lara Maud de, daughter of Humphrey IV, see Mayenne Alexander de, cousin of Humphrey III: 195 Ingelger de, cousin of Humphrey III: 195, 407 Adelise of Aumale, wife of Ingelger, see Aumale: 406–07 Ingleger II de, son (?) of Ingelger: 406–07 Richard de, bishop of Coutances: 407 William de: 407 Bolebec, family of: 138–39, 253 Bonneville-sur-Touques: 221, 277, 372, 377–78 Bonsmoulins: 179, 268, 377 Bosville, family of: 144 Boulogne county of: 61, 90, 92, 96, 97, 130, 146, 152, 230 honour of: 251, 402 Boulogne, counts of: 49, 61, 89, 90, 91, 95, 96, 127–28, 132, 152, 185, 215, 229, 230, 232, 241, 379 Eustache II: 61, 89–90, 92, 127 Goda, wife of Eustache II, sister of Edward the Confessor: 61 Ida of Lotharingia, second wife of Eustache II: 22 Baldwin, son of Eustache II, see Jerusalem: 91 Eustache III, son of Eustache II and of Ida: 81, 89–91, 92, 93–94, 96, 97, 127–28, 175, 232, 421 Mary of Scotland, wife of Eustache III, see Malcolm III: 81, 89–91, 92, 93–94, 96, 97, 128, 175, 421 Matilda, daughter of Eustache III, see Stephen I Mary, daughter of Matilda and Stephen, countess of Boulogne: 101, 152, 215, 229–30 Matthew of Alsace, husband of Mary, see Flanders: 101, 152, 215, 229–30 Ida, countess of Boulogne, daughter of Mary and Matthew of Flanders: 152

497

Renaud de Dammartin, count of Boulogne, husband of Ida, also count of Aumale: 376, 398, 403, 404, 407 Matilda, daughter of Mary and Matthew of Flanders, see Brabant Bourneville, family of: 106–07, 291 Brabant, dukes of: 175, 176, 365, 366 Henry: 176, 365, 404 Matilda of Flanders, first wife of Henry, see Flanders: 152, 404 Marie de France, second wife of Henry, see Philip II Augustus: 176, 397 Alix, daughter of Henry, see Louis, count of Loos Elisabeth, daughter of Henry, see Clèves Brabant, mercenaries of: 215, 223 Brandenburg, margraves of: 175–77 Breteuil, family of: 68, 99, 340 honour of: 68, 92–93, 231, 281, 333, 405 lordship of: 92–93, 295 Briouze (Braose), family of: 42, 81, 126, 301, 307, 354 Philip de: 126 William II de, son of Philip: 122, 190 Bertha of Hereford, wife of William II, see Hereford: 190 William III de, son of William II: 205, 298, 301, 304, 395, 401–02 Maud de Saint-Valery, wife of William III, see St. Valery: 401–02 Payn de: 71, 81 Robert de, son of Payn: 71 Briouze (Braose), honour of: 81, 203, 205, 207 Brittany, Counts/Dukes of (Rennes): 50, 59, 67, 69, 71, 130, 134, 137, 169, 170, 190, 201, 202, 233, 250, 271, 283, 285, 312, 328, 383, 400 Conan I: 86 Ermengarde of Anjou, daughter of Geoffrey Grisegonelle, wife of Conan I: 86 Geoffrey, son of Conan I: 86 Hawise of Normandy, wife of Geoffrey, see Normandy: 86 Alain III, son of Geoffrey and Hawise: 86, 87, 179 Conan II, son of Alain III: 51, 104 Eudo, son of Geoffrey and Hawise, see Penthièvre

498

Judith, daughter of Conan I, see Normandy Alain IV ‘Fergant’, son of Hawise of Rennes and of Count Hoël of Nantes: 59–60, 100, 104, 130, 134, 312, 349 Ermengarde of Anjou, wife of Alain IV, see Anjou: 100, 145, 178, 349 Brian ‘fitzCount’ of Wallingford, natural son of Alain IV: 134, 135, 137, 143, 312, 320 Conan III, son of Alain IV: 59–60, 68, 69, 86, 87, 102, 134, 135, 136, 137, 145, 170, 178, 179, 184, 209, 302, 340, 349, 421 Maud, wife of Conan III, see Henry I: 59–60, 68, 87, 137 Hoël, son of Conan III: 100, 171, 178 Bertha, daughter of Conan III, see Richmond and Porhoët Constance, daughter of Conan III, see Mayenne Hawise, daughter of Alain IV, see Flanders Conan IV, son of Bertha and of Alain ‘le Noir’: 100–01, 108, 134, 169, 170, 171, 178, 179, 182, 185, 186–89, 193, 194, 201, 205, 208–09, 223, 234, 235, 275, 320, 328, 350, 380 Margaret of Scotland, wife of Conan IV, see Scotland and Bohun: 101, 134, 169, 188, 209, 223, 230, 235, 271, 273, 275, 312, 322–23, 327, 350, 373, 397, 407, 421 Constance, duchess, daughter of Conan IV: 171, 191, 194, 235, 271, 322, 325, 327, 328, 329, 331, 333, 336, 359, 360, 361, 369, 370, 377, 381, 391, 397, 398, 401, 404, 407, 409, 421 Geoffrey Plantagenet, first husband of Duchess Constance, see Henry II: 8, 185, 189, 190, 194, 197, 214, 235, 271, 297, 322, 323, 324, 325, 327–28, 329, 330, 331, 333, 335, 336, 359, 360, 361, 369, 383, 402, 412, 421 Arthur, duke of, son of Constance and Geoffrey: 8, 283, 314, 329, 336, 361–64, 367, 370, 371, 373, 383–84,

INDEX 385, 386, 389, 391, 393, 395, 397–02, 405, 409, 413, 417, 421 Eleanor, daughter of Constance and Geoffrey: 369, 371, 386, 401, 421 Ranulph, earl of Chester, second husband of Constance, see Chester Guy de Thouars, third husband of Constance, see Thouars Alice, daughter of Guy and Constance: 401 Brittany, duchy of: 13, 16, 18, 47, 49, 50, 53, 56, 59, 60, 69, 88, 94, 96, 99–106, 116, 127, 130, 135, 136, 137, 139, 141–42, 169–71, 178–79, 181–82, 184, 185–95, 196–97, 199, 201, 205, 208, 209, 214, 223, 226, 227, 229, 232, 234, 235, 237, 240–41, 287, 320, 322, 323, 327–29, 331, 333, 334, 335, 345, 349, 350, 361, 363, 367, 369, 383, 386, 393, 398, 400–02, 406, 413, 415, 416 Brus (Brix), family of (Cumberland and Annandale): 58, 71, 85–87, 98, 173, 196, 305, 315 Robert I de: 86–87, 125–26, 196, 255, 331 Agnes Paynel, wife of Robert, see Paynel: 196, 331 Adam de, son of Robert I: 87, 196, 255 Agnes of Aumale, wife (?) of Adam, see Aumale: 196 Adam II de, son of Adam: 255 Lucie, daughter (?) of Adam, see Hommet Agatha de, daughter of Robert I, see Penthièvre Robert II de, son of Robert I: 87, 108, 188, 220, 221, 255 Euphemia of Aumale, wife of Robert II, see Aumale Robert III de, son of Robert II: 372, 373 Isabel of Scotland, wife of Robert III, see William I of Scotland: 372 Robert IV de, grandson of Robert II: 360 Robert VII de, King of Scotland, greatgrandson of Robert IV: 408 Buckingham, county of: 75, 80, 83, 128, 134, 138, 139, 141, 157, 159, 160, 163, 183, 196, 210, 231, 237, 252, 258, 284, 358 Buckingham, earls of (Giffard), lords of Longueville: 143, 159 Walter I (Gautier): 76, 138, 275 Rohese, daughter of Walter I, see Clare

INDEX Walter II, son of Walter I: 76, 84, 143 Agnes de Ribemont, wife of Walter II: 76 Isabel, daughter of Walter II, see Chandos Walter III, son of Walter II: 138, 141, 157, 252 Ermengarde, wife of Walter III: 138 Builli (Bully, Neufchatel-en-Bray, and Tickhill), family of: 72, 304 Burgundy, duchy of: 49, 63, 84, 105 dukes of: 105, 122 Busci, family of: 165, 261, 303–04, 310 Byland, abbey of: 219–20, 303 Caen: 115, 193, 195, 263, 292, 298, 308, 310, 399, 403 abbey of: 205, 314 Cahaignes (Chesney), lands of: 74–75, 80 family of: 74–75, 77, 79, 80, 84–85, 115 Calvados: 27, 66, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 80, 84, 107, 122, 139, 155, 156, 157, 159, 161, 163, 203, 241, 283, 290, 291, 292, 293, 305, 307, 308, 399 Cambridgeshire: 71, 74, 75, 79, 80, 84, 87, 91, 138, 234, 256, 259, 275, 411 Canterbury: 145 Quitclaim of: 313, 358 Carantilly, family of: 266, 267 lands of: 260, 266, 267, 268 Carlisle: 65, 113, 116, 118, 119, 145, 147, 243, 247, 249, 270, 276, 317, 320, 396, 405 chronicle of: 337 Cartulaire de Saint-Jean-en-Vallée: 307 Cary, castle of: see Louvel: 91, 158, 298 Capet, house of: see Louis VI, Louis VII, Philip I, Philip II Castile, kings of: 53, 323–24, 326, 393 Caux, lands of: 40, 85, 120, 157, 218, 232, 248, 258–59, 277, 278–81, 410, 411 Cauz, family of: 254–55, 257, 410–12 Champagne/Troyes, see Blois: 16, 49, 295, 297, 301 counts of: 146, 269 Chandos, family of: 143, 157–59 Charlemagne: 13, 14 Chartres: 13, 29, 99, 100, 102, 106, 291, 293, 294, 295, 296, 300, 301, 302, 303, 305, 311, 337, 349, 350, 351, 356 Chester, constables of

499

William fitzNigel: 125, 190 Agnes, daughter of William: 125, 190 Eustache fitzJohn, husband of Agnes, see Vescy/fitzJohn: 125, 190 Richard, son of Eustache and Agnes: 190, 218 Aubrey, daughter of Richard, see Bisset John I, son of Richard: 190 Roger, son of John: 379, 388, 394, 396–97, 400, 406, 409 Matilda de Clare, wife of Roger, see Hertford: 406 John II, earl of Lincoln, son of Roger: 190 William, son of William fitzNigel: 125 Chester, earls of, also viscounts d’Avranches: 256 Hugh d’Avranches: 204, 256 Geva, natural daughter of Hugh, see Ridel Judith d’Avranches, sister of Hugh, see L’Aigle Chester, earls of, and viscounts d’Avranches, Bayeux and Lords of Bricquessart: 45, 47, 75, 98, 119, 126, 150, 155, 159, 162, 163, 190, 224, 226, 235, 236, 248, 256, 261, 262, 273, 283, 285, 290, 320 Gerbod ‘the Fleming’: 71 Gundreda, sister of Gerbod, see Warenne Ranulf III ‘le Meschin’, vicomte du Bessin: 248, 320, 322 Alice, daughter of Ranulf III, see Hertford Ranulf IV ‘de Gernon’, son of Ranulph III: 77, 97, 98, 118–19, 133, 140, 142, 151, 156, 159, 161, 163, 190, 216, 225, 226, 323 Matilda of Gloucester, wife of Ranulf IV, see Gloucester: 225, 226 Hugh ‘de Kevelioc’, son of Ranulf IV: 119, 151, 155, 200, 204, 223–24, 225, 226, 230–31, 235, 236, 251, 319–20, 336 Bertrade de Montfort, wife of Hugh, see Montfort-l’Amaury: 225, 226 Maud, daughter of Hugh, see Huntingdon Ranulf V de ‘Blundeville’, son of Hugh: 227, 320, 322, 336, 361, 367, 370, 377, 379, 403–04, 405, 412, 421 Duchess Constance of Brittany, first wife of Ranulf V, see Brittany

500

Clemencia de Fougères, second wife of Ranulf V, see Fougères: 227 William de Roumare, half-brother of Ranulf IV, see Lincoln William ‘le Meschin’, brother of Ranulf III: 27, 160 Cecily de Remilly, wife of William: 27 Alice de, daughter of William, see Duncan II Avice de, daughter of William, see Courcy Maud de, daughter of William, see Mortemer Chinon: 295, 331, 333, 334, 386, 398, 401, 409 Choques, family of: 230 Chrétien de Troyes: 25, 28, 38, 329 Chronicle of Melrose: 23, 58, 62, 316, 318, 371 Chronicon Cumbriae: 109 Chronique des Ducs de Normandie: 313 Clare (Giffard), family of: 75, 76–78, 80, 83, 138–41, 143, 144, 145, 192, 210, 219, 241–42, 271 Richard fitzGilbert de: 76, 138, 140, 238–39, 242 Rohese Giffard, wife of Richard: 76, 138, 140 Avice de, daughter of Richard, see Fougères Gilbert fitzRichard de, son of Richard, see Hertford Adelise de Clermont, wife of Gilbert Gilbert de, son of Gilbert fitzRichard, see Pembroke Margaret de, daughter of Gilbert fitzRichard, see Munfichet Rohese de, daughter of Gilbert fitzRichard, see fitzBaderon Walter de, son of Gilbert fitzrichard: 141 Robert fitzRichard de, lord of Dunmow, son of Richard: 76, 139, 140, 141, 228, 233, 242 Maud de Senlis, wife of Robert, see Senlis and Quincy: 74, 76, 139, 140, 141, 228, 233 Maud de, daughter of Robert, see Aubigny Walter de, lord of Dunmow, son of Robert and Maud: 242 Walter fitzRichard de, son of Richard Isabel de Tosny, wife of Walter, see Tosny

INDEX Baldwin the Sheriff, brother of Richard fitzGilbert: 238 X, de Clare, daughter of Baldwin, see Avenel Clare (Giffard), honour of: 74, 78, 79, 80, 144, 238–39, 248 Clarendon, constitutions of: 200, 258 Clèves, counts of: 175–76 Coignières (Conyers), lands of: 78, 107 family of: 78, 85, 106–08, 294 Coloummiers, family of: 91, 95, 98, 154–59, 163, 314, 360, 412 Colville, family of: 154, 161–63, 165, 187, 206, 261, 262, 290, 323, 413 Comyn, family of: 52, 107, 118, 155, 170, 187–88, 272–74, 413 Corbet, family of: 64–65, 290–91 Cornouaille: 181, 182, 197, 350, 393 Cornwall, county of: 234, 368 Cornwall, earls of: 150 Robert of Mortain: 96 William, son of Robert: 96 Reginald de Dunstanville, see Henry I: 65, 150, 171 Maud, daughter of Reginald, see Meulan Cotentin: 67, 82–87, 99, 135, 157, 160, 262, 265, 288, 322 Coucy, family of: 15, 28, 29, 84 Enguerrand III de: 334, 421 Maud of Saxony, second wife of Enguerrand III, see Henry II: 334 Enguerrand IV de, son of Enguerrand III and of third wife, Marie de Montmirail: 176 Marie de, daughter of Enguerrand III and of Marie de Montmirail, see Alexander II of Scotland Melisende de: 208 Courcy, family of: 27, 42, 85 Robert III de: 340 William II de, brother of Robert III: 27–28, 160, 339–40 Avice de Remilly, wife of William II, see Remilly: 27–28, 160 John de, Earl of Ulster, son (?) of William II: 26–28, 339–40 Affrica of Man, wife of John: 27 William III de, son of William II: 27, 340

INDEX Juliana de l’Aigle, first wife (?) of William III: 340 Gundred de Warenne, second wife of William III, see Warenne: 27, 340 Robert IV de, son of William III: 340 William de, son of William III: 340 Craon, see Sablé: 103–05 Maurice de: 338, 339, 400 Crouch, David: 5, 47, 74–75, 76, 135, 318 Cumberland: 85, 113, 118, 147, 153, 167, 210, 223, 246, 249, 283, 284, 290, 316, 317, 320, 333, 366, 371, 387–88 Cumbria: 19, 65–66, 67, 69, 70, 98, 112, 116, 118, 119, 156, 291, 320 David I, King of Scotland, also briefly earl of Northampton and Huntingdon: 2, 10, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 55, 56, 64, 65, 67, 69, 70–74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83–84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91–92, 93–94, 96, 97, 98–99, 100–01, 102, 103, 106–07, 108–10, 112–15, 116–19, 121, 123, 124–27, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 137–38, 139, 140, 143, 145, 146–47, 153, 154, 155, 158, 159, 162, 163, 165, 168, 169, 170, 172, 173, 174, 191, 208, 225, 229, 232, 238, 245, 248, 254, 256, 258, 267, 273–74, 284, 290–91, 296, 303, 326, 334, 359, 368, 421, 422 Maud de Senlis, wife of David, see Huntingdon: 67, 70, 91–92, 93–94, 96–97, 113–14, 138, 154, 421 Clarice, daughter of David: 114 Hodierna, daughter of David: 114 David ‘Scottus’: 29 De Ortu Waluuanii nepotis Arturi: 6, 61–62, 315, 326–27 Derby (Ferrières), county of: 66, 119, 254 earls of: 278, 331 Devizes, castle of: 66, 182 Devon, county of: 68, 77, 81, 96, 98, 135, 136, 159, 183, 205, 234, 237–40, 283, 284, 292, 300, 304, 323, 334, 341, 349, 355, Devon, earls of: 83, 117, 239, 246 Baldwin I de Revières, see Vernon: 73–74, 83, 135, 136, 137, 240

501

Adelise, first wife of Baldwin I: 239 Lucy de Clare, second wife of Baldwin I, see Hertford Baldwin II, grandson of Baldwin I: 240 Hawise, sister of Baldwin I, see Lincoln Dinan, family of: 51, 81, 136, 171, 191, 232, 234–35, 237, 240–41, 331 Dol, see fitzAlain and Steward: 53, 71, 100, 127, 130, 134–35, 136, 139, 142, 169, 170, 181, 183, 186, 197, 201, 204, 223, 224, 236–43, 256, 323, 349–50 Dol, lords of John I: 136 Hawise, daughter of John I, see Penthièvre John II of Dol, grandson of John I: 142, 170, 171, 183, 185–86, 238 Isolde, daughter of John II, see Subligny Domfront, castle of: 66, 83, 180, 229, 250, 345, 348, 403, 404 Donald, brother of Malcolm III, see Ross: 50, 62, 155, 172, 179 Doncaster, lordship of: 72, 73, 116, 118, 234 Drincourt (Neufchatel-en-Bray): 214–15, 223, 304, 318, 360 Dunbar (Lothian), battle of: 194 Dunbar (Lothian), earls of: 52, 62, 245, 372, 374 Gospatrick I, earl of Northumbria (1067–72), Lord of Allerdale: 62 Dolfin, son of Gospatrick I: 65 Ethelreda, daughter of Gospatrick I, see Duncan II Gospatrick II, son of Gospatrick I: 62, 65, 122, 124 Juliana, daughter of Gospatrick II, see Merlay Patrick, son of Gospatrick II: 274 Waltheof, son of Gospatrick II: 245, 246, 271, 320 Patrick, son of Waltheof: 52, 200, 372–73, 374, 388, 394 Ada of Scotland, wife of Patrick: 372–73 Waltheof, of Allerdale, natural son of Gospatrick I: 320 Gunnilda, daughter of Waltheof of Allerdale, see Galloway Waltheof, of Inverkeithing and Moncrieffe, grandson of Waltheof of Allerdale: 202, 284

502

Christina, daughter of Waltheof of Inverkeithing, see Lascelles Galiene, daughter of Waltheof of Inverkeithing, see Moubray Duncan, Archibald A. M.: 279, 390 Duncan II, King of Scots: 27, 59, 61, 62, 179, 421 Ethelreda, or Uchtreda, of Northumbria, wife of Duncan II, see Dunbar: 62, 421 William ‘fitzDuncan’, earl of Moray, son of Duncan II: 27–28, 62, 109, 117, 159–60, 173, 251, 282, 332 Alice de Remilly, wife of William, see Chester: 27–28, 160, 251, 282 Amabilia, daughter of William, see Lucy Cecily, daughter of William, see Aumale Donald, son of William, see fitzWilliam Dunfermline, abbey of: 30, 103, 167, 272, 284 Dunstanville, family of: 65 Durham: 79, 107, 118, 124, 125, 189, 273, 316 bishopric of: 107, 118, 162, 273, 293, 295, 296, 367, 388 treaty of: 113, 117 Écouché: 202, 203, 204, 205, 292, 310 Edgar I, King of Scots: 59, 61–62, 63, 64, 90, 179, 421 Edgar Aetheling: 61 Edward the Confessor, King of England: 1, 24, 59, 61, 89–90 Edward I, King of England: 14, 17, 28, 194, 342, 418 Edward Grim, chronicler: 200–01 Einhard: 13–14 Empress Matilda: 10, 68, 73, 83, 84, 88, 91, 93, 97, 98, 101, 102, 107, 111, 112–13, 114, 115, 116, 121, 125, 131, 132, 133, 135, 136, 137, 143, 151, 171, 246, 248, 273, 384, 386, 421 Geoffrey Plantagenet, V Count of Anjou, husband of, see Anjou Engaines, family of: 71, 81, 84, 91 England: 1–5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20–21, 22, 24, 24, 27, 30–31, 34, 35–37, 41–47, 48, 51, 52, 53, 55, 57–59, 61, 63, 64–67, 69, 70, 71, 72,

INDEX 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80–81, 83–89, 90, 91–92, 93–94, 96, 97, 107, 109, 110, 111, 112–13, 115–17, 119–20, 122–27, 130, 131, 132, 134, 135–37, 141, 142, 144, 146, 147, 149, 150, 153, 154, 157, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 167, 178, 181, 182, 183, 187, 189, 191, 192, 196, 197, 200, 201, 205, 206, 210, 211, 213–14, 215, 216, 220–21, 222, 226, 229, 230–31, 234, 25–35, 236, 237, 238, 240–41, 243, 244, 246, 249–51, 252, 253, 255, 258, 261, 268, 271, 273, 275, 276, 277, 279, 281, 284, 285, 288–90, 291, 293, 295–96, 297, 298, 303, 309, 311, 312–13, 314, 316, 317, 318, 322, 323, 328, 334, 335, 336, 337, 339, 340, 341, 345, 348, 351, 356, 358, 361, 362, 364–65, 366, 372, 375, 379, 381, 384–85, 387, 388, 389, 391, 392, 393, 394, 396, 397, 398, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404–05, 406, 407–08, 409, 411, 413, 415, 416, 417, 418–19 conquest of: 1, 15, 341 kings of, see William I, William II, Henry I, Stephen I, Henry II, Richard I, John I: 3, 35, 45, 57, 58, 59, 63, 66, 69, 73, 90, 93, 146, 223, 285, 318, 321, 325, 351, 381, 383, 394, 409, 413, 418 Ermengarde of Narbonne: 120, 325–27 Essex: 66, 74, 76, 77, 78, 91, 139, 140, 141, 152, 231, 233, 235, 241–42, 250, 254, 262, 275–76, 282, 318, 358, 378, 407 earls of: 223, 229, 250, 394, 407, 411 Eu, counts of, see Tickhill and La Marche: 47, 72–73, 127–28, 200 county of: 277, 364, 369, 371 Eustache of Scotland 248 Everard, Judith: 47, 100, 325, 327, 361 Evreux, counts of (Montfort l‘Amaury): 97, 225, 270, 301, 302, 346, 352, 354, 405 Amaury III de: 352 Agnes de, daughter of Amaury III, see Meulan Simon III de, son of Amaury III: 226, 295, 352 Amaury IV, son of Simon III: 368 Amaury V, son of Amaury IV: 368, 405

INDEX Bertrade de, daughter of Simon III, see Chester Simon IV de, count of Evreux, son of Simon III: 225, 226, 295, 296, 351, 352, 354 Amicia de Beaumont, wife of Simon IV, see Beaumont-le-Roger: 225, 226, 295, 352, 354, 368 Guy, son of Simon IV: 351 Simon, Lord de Montfort, son of Simon IV: 351, 354, 368, 406 Simon, son of Simon: 418 Isabel de, sister of Amaury III, see Tosny Evreux, county of: 241, 250, 295, 296, 298, 352, 368–69, 393 Falaise: 27, 250, 399, 403 treaty of: 144, 195, 241, 276, 283, 288–91, 311, 313, 318, 322, 339, 344 Faou, viscounts de: 182 Fécamp: 77 Holy Trinity, abbey of: 24, 241, 265, 281–83 Fife: 52, 103, 227, 230, 272, 284, 345, 380 Fife, earls of: 52, 53, 69, 342 Duncan: 103, 228 Adam, son of Duncan: 228 Orabilia of Leuchars, wife of Adam, see Quincy: 228 Duncan II, son of Duncan: 27, 52, 69 Ela, wife of Duncan II: 27, 52, 69, 122 Malcolm, son of Duncan II: 341–42, 422 Margaret de Tosny, lady of Fife, wife of Malcolm: 341–42, 422 fitzAlain, see Steward, family of: 71, 100, 126–31, 132, 133–36, 139, 141, 142, 170, 171, 173, 192 Alain fitzFlaald: 127, 128, 130, 236 Avelina de Hesdin, wife of Alain, see Hesdin: 127, 128, 192 Jordan fitzAlain (Dol), son of Alain fitzFlaald: 71, 130, 134, 169, 170, 171 Alain, son of Jordan: 142, 169, 170, 171 Alicia, daughter of Alain, see Guillaume Spina Jordan, son of Jordan: 170 Simon fitzAlain (Norfolk), son of Alain fitzFlaald: 71

503

Walter fitzAlain, son of Alain fitzFlaald, see Steward William fitzAlain (Shropshire), son of Alain fitzFlaald: 71, 132, 133–34, 137, 151 Christiana, wife of William, niece of Earl Robert of Gloucester: 133, 134 fitzBaderon, family of: 129, 139, 140 fitzGilbert, family of: 37–39 fitzHarding, family of: 91, 276 fitzWilliam, family of: 245, 328, 332 Flanders: 61, 89, 96, 128, 130, 131, 244, 245, 251, 318, 365–66, 376, 378, 393 Flanders, counts of: 35, 49, 61, 89, 90, 91, 127, 130, 131, 185, 223, 229, 230, 366, 369 Baldwin V: 89 Baudouin VI of Flanders and I of Hainault, son of Baldwin V, see Hainault: 131, 365 Arnulph III, son of Baudouin VI: 127 Matilda, daughter of Baldwin V, see William I ‘the Conqueror’ Robert I the Frisian, son of Baldwin V: 127, 365 Baudouin VII, grandson of Robert I: 66, 130 Hawise, wife of Baudouin VII, see Brittany: 130 Thierry I of Alsace, grandson of Robert I: 174 Marguerite, daughter of Thierry I, see Hainault Matthew of Alsace, son of Thierry I, see Boulogne Philip I, of Alsace, son of Thierry I: 152, 214–15, 244, 251, 365, 376, 393 Elisabeth of Vermandois, first wife of Philip I: 365 Mathilda of Portugal, second wife of Philip I: 393 Baudouin IX, son of Baudouin VIII, see Hainault: 376–77, 379, 380, 381, 393, 394, 412 younger sons from: 174 Foliot, family of: 80, 83–85, 134 Fontaines, family of (vidames d’Amiens): 28, 215,216, 221–22, 379 Fontevrault, abbey of: 100, 102–03

504

Fornham: 250–51, 348 fosterage: 9–10 Fougères: 100, 181, 185, 186, 188, 189, 193, 318 Fougères: family of: 136, 141, 142, 165, 183, 187, 188, 189, 192, 193, 227, 233, 234, 235, 237, 238, 240 Raoul I de: 139, 226, 238 Avice de Clare, wife of Raoul I, see Clare: 139, 183, 238 Henry I de, son of Raoul I: 185, 187, 209 Olivia de Penthièvre, wife of Henry I, see Penthièvre and Saint-Jean: 185, 187, 209 Clemencia de, daughter of Henry I, see Montfort-sur-Risle Guillaume, or William, ‘the Angevin’ de, son of Henry I: 185, 188, 226, 227, 236 Ralph II de, son of Henry I: 139, 142, 170–71, 180–81, 183, 184–86, 187, 190, 225, 226, 227, 234, 236, 238, 357 Guillaume (or William) de, son of Ralph II: 186, 188, 264 Agatha du Hommet, wife of Guillaume, see Hommet and Paynel: 186, 264 Clemencia de, daughter of Guillaume, see Chester and Vitré Geoffrey de, son of Guillaume: 357 Matilda de Porhoët, wife of Geoffrey, see Porhoët Juhel de, son of Ralph II: 236 Marguerite de, daughter of Ralph II, see Meulan France: 3–4, 12, 13–15, 16, 17, 20–21, 24, 26, 30, 31, 34, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 55, 58, 61, 69, 72, 73, 74, 76, 81, 84, 89, 90, 91, 103, 105, 106, 112, 120, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, 136, 142, 144, 145, 146, 147, 150, 153, 155, 165, 166, 168, 174, 180, 193, 194–95, 200, 201, 213, 214, 215, 216, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 229–30, 243, 244, 259, 271, 272, 274, 281, 282, 284, 290–92, 293, 295, 297, 300, 303, 308, 309, 318, 321, 322, 325, 326, 331–32, 336, 337, 339, 349, 354, 356, 358, 359, 363, 365, 366, 369, 373, 376,

INDEX 379, 381, 384, 389, 390, 391–93, 395, 398, 400, 402, 403, 406–09, 411, 412, 413, 415–19 kings of, see Louis VI, Louis VII, Philip I, Philip II Augustus, Louis VIII: 2, 10, 27, 35, 57–58, 73, 112, 130, 206, 210, 229, 295, 300, 351, 366 Furness, abbey of: 27, 187, 208–09 Galloway: 7, 65, 167–68, 172, 173, 251, 290, 313, 319–21 Galloway, lords of: 52, 219 Fergus: 68, 110, 167, 168, 319, 340 X, natural daughter of King Henry I of England, wife of Fergus: 68, 319, 340 Gilbert, son of Fergus: 321 Duncan of Carrick/Galloway, son of Gilbert: 27 Uchtred, son of Fergus: 68, 168, 320–21 Gunnilda of Allerdale, wife of Uchtred, see Dunbar: 320 Roland, son of Uchtred: 321, 332, 394 Helen de Moreville, wife of Roland: 394 Alan, son of Roland: 210, 320 Devorguilla, daughter of Roland, see Stuteville Affrica, daughter of Fergus, see Man Gant, family of: 190, 202, 208–10 Gawain: 6, 8–9, 315, 326–27 Gazeau, Véronique: 46–47 Genêts: 186, 188, 192–93 Geoffrey Gaimar: 35, 37 Geoffrey of Monmouth, historian: 21, 25, 38, 59, 158, 193, 314 Gerald of Wales: 6–7, 13, 215, 312–13 Giffard, lands of: 72, 76, 83, 139–40, 143–44, 218 family of, see Buckingham: 57, 75–81, 138–40, 143–44, 145, 157–58, 161, 163, 206, 239, 252, 275, 290 Gilbert de Umfraville: 102, 154 Gillingham, John: 35, 41, 43, 318 Gisors: 157, 328 Glasgow: 108, 167, 249 Gloucester, city of: 137 county of: 99, 132, 134, 135, 159, 190, 210, 274, 276, 323 Gloucester, earls of: 74, 75, 91, 226, 227, 239, 261, 276, 333, 359

INDEX Robert, natural son of King Henry I of England: 74, 115, 117, 119, 120, 125, 130, 132, 133, 135, 150, 154, 157, 158, 159, 225, 226, 227, 241 Matilda/Maud of Gloucester, daughter of Robert, see Chester: 225 Richard, son of Robert, sire de Creully: 225, 226, 227 X, de Montfort, wife of Richard, see Montfort-sur-Risle: 225, 226, 227 Richard, bishop of Bayeux, natural son of Robert: 159 William, son of Robert: 154, 158, 225, 226–27, 250, 333 Hawise de Beaumont-le-Roger, wife of William, see Leicester: 154, 158, 225, 227, 250 Amicia, daughter of William, see Hertford Isabella, countess of, daughter of William, see John I Godred, King of Man: 27 Affrica, daughter of, see Courcy Goldcliffe: 157, 158 Le Goulet, peace of: 390, 393–94, 395, 409 Gournay, castle of: 213 family of: 205, 210–13, 219, 220 Green, Judith: 42, 43, 71 Guelders, counts of: 175–76 La Guerche, lords of (also held Pouancé): 51, 103–04, 203, 205–08 Guillaume des Roches, seneschal of Anjou: 10, 391, 399, 400, 407 Guingamp: 189, 194 Hai, family of: 85, 192, 209, 260–65, 282–83, 305 Ralph de la, seneschal of Mortain: 260, 262–63 Robert I de la, of Plessis, son of Ralph: 260, 262, 263 Muriel, wife of Robert: 260, 262 Cecily de la, daughter of Robert I, see Saint-Jean Hugh de la, son of Robert I: 260–62 Ralph (Radulph), of Saint-Gilles, son of Hugh: 260–62, 265, 303 Robert, of Moyon, son of Hugh: 260, 261, 265 Ralph (Radulph) de la (Sussex), son of

505

Robert I: 162, 163, 236, 260–62, 263, 298, 303 Oliva d’Aubigny, wife of Ralph, see Arundel: 260, 263 Robert de la, of Plessis, son of Ralph: 260, 262, 263, 264, 265 Alienora, wife of Robert, see Hommet: 260, 263, 264, 265 Robert de la, son of Robert of Plessis: 260, 263 Richard de la (Haye-du-Puits), son of Robert I: 134, 161, 187, 260–62 Maud (or Matilda) de Vernon, wife of Richard: 260, 263 Egidia (Gisla) de la, daughter of Richard, see Hommet X, de la: 260, 265 Juliana de Soules, wife of: 260, 265 William de la, lord of Errol, son (?) of de la Hai and Juliana de soules: 207, 249, 260, 265–68, 282, 291, 387 Hainault, counts of: 366 Baudouin I, brother of Robert the Frisian, also count of Flanders: 131, 365 Baudouin IV, great-grandson of Baudouin I: 131 Baudouin V, son of Baudouin IV, VIII count of Flanders: 223, 365, 366 Marguerite of Flanders, wife of Baudouin V, see Flanders: 365 Baudouin VI, son of Baudouin V, IX of Flanders, see Flanders Isabella of Hainault, daughter of Baudouin V, see Philip I Augustus: 365 Philip, son of Baudouin V, see Namur Henry I Beauclerc, King of England, Duke of Normandy: 2, 10, 21, 42, 59–60, 62, 63, 64–65, 66–69, 70–71, 72, 73, 74, 82–83, 85, 86, 87–88, 89, 90, 91–92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 98, 99, 101, 102, 105, 106, 107, 108, 110, 111–13, 119, 120, 122–23, 125, 126, 127–28, 131–32, 134, 135, 137, 141, 143, 157, 174, 179, 184, 203, 205, 209, 226, 231, 232–33, 252, 256, 262, 263, 269, 277, 283, 303, 319, 338, 339, 341, 349–50, 359, 368, 385, 421 Maud, or Edith, wife of Henry I, see Malcolm III: 2, 22, 64, 69, 87–88, 89, 91, 137, 231, 421

506

Matilda fitzEmpress, daughter and heiress of Henry I, see Empress Matilda William, son of Henry I: 111, 231 natural daughters of Constance, see Beaumont-sur-Sarthe Julianne, see Eustache de Pacy/Breteuil Mabel, see Montmirail Matilda, see Perche Maud, see Brittany Sybilla, see Alexander I of Scotland and Corbet natural sons of: see Gloucester and Cornwall Henry II, King of England, Duke of Nor­ mandy (Plantagenet), count of Anjou: 3, 6–7, 8, 10, 24, 27, 36–37, 42, 43, 44–46, 48, 56, 60, 62, 68, 69, 74, 79, 85, 91, 101, 107, 112–13, 119, 122, 132–33, 134–35, 138, 139, 145–46, 147, 149–54, 155, 160–61, 163, 164, 165–67, 169, 170, 173, 174, 178–86, 187, 188–90, 192–95, 196–98, 199–201, 204, 205, 210, 211, 213–16, 218, 220–24, 226, 227, 228, 229–30, 231, 232, 233–35, 240, 241–42, 243–46, 249, 250–52, 253, 258, 259, 265, 267, 268, 271, 272, 279, 282, 285, 287–90, 298, 311–15, 316–18, 319–21, 322–25, 327–29, 331, 332–36, 337, 339, 340, 341, 344, 346, 347, 348, 349, 356, 357, 358, 360, 385, 388, 400, 408, 412, 415 Eleanor of Aquitaine, wife of Henry II, see Louis VII and Aquitaine: 3, 8, 146, 216, 269, 291, 314, 326, 369, 378, 386, 396, 399 sons of, see Young Henry, Richard I, Geoffrey, and John I Eleanor, daughter of Henry II, see Castile Archbishop Geoffrey of York, natural son of Henry II: 388 Maud, daughter of Henry II, see Saxony William ‘Longespee’, natural son of Henry II, see Salisbury Henry VI, great-great grandson of Henry IV: 364, 365, 366, 369, 375, 384, 390 Henry of Huntingdon, historian: 10, 35–36, 40, 59, 113, 114, 134–35 Hereford: 29, 124–25, 157, 242, 243, 323, 341, 358

INDEX Hereford, earls of, see Bohun: 91, 137, 150, 316, 407 Milo of Gloucester, also sheriff of Gloucester: 190 Bertha, daughter of Milo, see Briouze Roger, son of Milo: 190 Cecily, wife of Roger, see Vescy/fitzJohn: 190 Henry I, son of Humphrey IV de Bohun and of Margaret of Scotland, see Bohun: 188, 373, 377, 394, 407, 409, 412, 421 Hertford, earls of (Clare), also lords of Tonbridge and Longueville: 141 Richard fitzGilbert de Clare, son of Gilbert fitzRichard, see Clare: 140, 242 Alice of Chester, wife of Richard, see Chester: 140 Lucy de, daughter of Richard, see Devon Roger de Clare, son of Richard: 140, 200, 236, 242, 406 Matilda de Saint-Hilaire, wife of Roger, see Saint-Hilaire and Arundel: 140, 192, 236, 406 Matilda de Clare, daughter of Roger, see Chester Richard de Clare, earl of Hertford and Gloucester, son of Roger: 140, 271, 394, 406 Amicia of Gloucester, wife of Richard, see Gloucester: 140 Hesdin, family of: 71, 81, 127–30, 132, 133, 192 Holland: 174, 177, 230 Holland, counts of: 169, 171–72, 174, 175, 177, 230, 366 Florence II: 175 Gertrude, or Petronilla, of Lorraine: 175 Florence III, grandson of Florence II: 169, 171, 172, 174–75, 176, 177, 230, 421, 423 Ada of Scotland, wife of Florence III, see Huntingdon: 169, 171, 174–75, 176, 177, 373, 421, 423 Ada, daughter of Florence III, see Brandenburg Agnes, abbess of Rijnsburg, daughter of Florence III: 175, 423

INDEX Dirk VII (Thierry), son of Florence III: 174, 175, 176, 365, 373, 423 Adelheid of Cleves, wife of Dirk VII, see Clèves: 175, 423 Ada, daughter of Dirk VII, see Louis, count of Loos Florence, bishop-elect of Glasgow, son of Florence III: 174–75, 423 Margaret, daughter of Florence III, see Clèves William I, son of Florence III: 174, 175–76, 177, 373, 423 Aleida of Guelders, first wife of William I: 175, 423 Marie of Brabant, second wife of William I: 175–76, 423 Ada, abbess of Rijnsburg, daughter of William I: 175, 423 Florence IV, son of William I: 175, 176, 423 Mathilda of Brabant, wife of Florence IV: 175, 423 William II, also King of Germany, son of Florence IV: 176, 177, 423 Elisabeth von Lüneberg/Braunschweig, wife of William II: 176, 423 Florence VII, son of William II: 171–72, 423 Otto, bishop of Utrecht, son of William I: 175, 423 Dirk, bishop of Utrecht, brother of Florence III: 175, 423 Sophia, abbess of Rijnsburg, sister of Florence III: 175, 423 Hollister, C. Warren: 39, 43, 46–47 Holt, James C.: 11, 42, 43–44, 385, 415 Holy Roman Emperors: 29, 127 Hommet, family of, constables of Normandy: 45, 85, 155–56, 157, 159, 165, 186, 191, 192, 195–96, 205–06, 261, 262–66, 274–75, 360, 413 Emma du, see Valognes Richard I du: 107, 108, 134, 155–56, 159, 160–61, 163, 186, 187, 195, 196, 223, 263, 264, 265, 266, 274, 323 Agnes de Say, wife of Richard I, see Say: 159, 160, 264 Agatha du, daughter of Richard I, see Paynel

507

Emma du, daughter (?) of Richard I, see Neville and Valognes Enguerrand du, son of Richard I: 206, 264 Cecily de Semilly, wife of Enguerrand: 206, 264 William du, son of Richard I: 159, 189, 191, 196, 205, 223, 229, 264, 266, 272, 331, 339, 359, 360, 412 Lucie, wife of William, see Brus: 196, 264, 272 Enguerrand du, son of William: 202, 205, 249, 264 X, de Moubray, wife of Enguerrand, see Moubray: 202, 205, 249, 264 Richard II du, son of William: 260, 263, 264, 265, 378 Egidia de la Hai, first wife of Richard II, see Hai: 260, 263, 264 Alienora, second wife of Richard II, see Hai: 260, 264, 265 Roger du, bishop of Dol, kinsman of Richard: 186 Hugh Bardulf: 163, 300, 360 Hugh de Normanville, Lord of Maxton: 281, 282–83 Huntingdon, earldom of: 67, 70–72, 77, 78, 80–81, 83, 84, 91, 94, 113–15, 116–18, 124, 153, 155–56, 160, 169, 188, 196, 234, 252, 253–56, 266, 267, 275, 285, 330, 335, 359, 360, 361, 364, 370, 409, 411, 412 Huntingdon, earls of: 161 Waltheof of Northumbria, succeeded as earl, see Dunbar: 24, 61, 84, 90, 92, 232, 233, 113, 304 Judith of Lens, wife of Waltheof: 92, 232, 304 Maud of Huntingdon, daughter of Waltheof, see Senlis and David I Adelise (or Judith) of Huntingdon, daughter of Waltheof, see Tosny Henry, son of David I, King of Scotland and of Maud, also earl of Northumberland: 27, 71, 80, 83, 98, 99, 101, 112–14, 115, 116–17, 119, 121, 122–23, 124–26, 132, 145, 164, 228, 249 Ada de Warenne, wife of Henry, see Warenne: 27, 52, 80, 81, 101, 102,

508

118, 119, 121, 122, 126, 128, 139, 143–45, 150, 225, 279–80, 421 Ada, daughter of Henry, see Holland David, earl of Huntingdon, son of Henry: 161, 196, 197, 225, 245, 249, 251–54, 256, 259, 287, 289, 290, 291, 328, 330, 331, 333, 334, 335, 347, 359–61, 367, 370–71, 372–74, 376, 378, 379–81, 384, 387, 394, 405, 409–13, 421 Maud of Chester, wife of David, see Chester, earls of: 361, 367, 421 Henry, son of David, betrothed to Mathilda of Cauz: 373, 410 Henry of Brechin, natural son of David: 410 Henry of Stirling, natural son of David: 410 John, earl of Huntingdon, son of David: 373 Malcolm, son of Henry, see Malcolm IV Margaret, daughter of Henry, see Brittany and Bohun William, son of Henry, see William I ‘the Lion’ identity Anglo-French, or Anglo-Norman: 4, 33–53, 55–56, 147, 230, 412, 417–18 ancestral, or familial: 7–8, 44–45, 55, 92, 213 English, Anglo-Saxon: 36–43, 314 in frontiers: 47–50 land and lordship: 33, 35–36, 41–47, 55–56, 151, 213 language: 36–39 national: 33–53, 198, 416, 417 native: 35–41 Scottish: 22, 42, 51–53, 55–56 Ireland: 3, 5, 9–10, 13–14, 17, 18, 19, 25, 27, 30, 41, 42, 49, 58, 86, 147, 191, 245, 344, 346, 370, 418 Isles, lords/kings of the, see Man: 26 Somerled of the Isles: 167, 173 Dugald, son of Somerled: 173 lordship of: 14, 26, 49, 86, 100, 109, 167, 173, 193, 326, 327

INDEX Jean de Rouvray: 250, 407 Jerusalem: 222, 426 kings of: 345 Baldwin of Boulogne, see Boulogne: 91, 422 Fulk V of Anjou, see Anjou: 86, 104 Jocelyn, Bishop of Glasgow: 23, 29, 332 John I, ‘Lackland’, King of England and earl of Gloucester through first wife: 6, 124, 218, 266, 283, 288–89, 298, 307, 308, 310, 322, 344, 346, 353, 354, 356, 359, 361–64, 366–70, 379–81, 383–410, 411, 413, 415, 416–18 Alix of France, betrothed to John, see Richard I, Ponthieu, and Louis VII 363, 364 Isabella of Angoulême, second wife of John: 389, 395, 396, 416 Henry III, king of England, son of John: 240–41, 417–18 John Capellanus, bishop of Glasgow: 99, 101, 103, 170 John the Scot: 328, 332 John of Salisbury: 70, 197, 235, 317, 349 Jordan Fantosme, chronicler: 51, 153, 224, 244, 249, 283, 315 Jordan ‘the Fleming’: 272, 275 Michael, son of: Jordan: 275 Josaphat, abbeys of: 301, 302, 356 Joscelin of Furness: 26–27 Jumièges, abbey of: 77, 79, 80, 346 Lacy, family of (Weobley and Ludlow): 27, 42, 81, 85, 126, 137, 140, 214–15, 223, 273, 301, 314, 344–45, 346, 354–56, 358 Lagny-sur-Marne: 329–30, 347 l’Aigle, family of: 67, 68, 85, 203–04, 263, 324 Richer I de 67, 203, 263 Judith d’Avranches, wife of Richer I: 204, 263 Maud (Mathilde) de, daughter of Richer I, see Moubray and Aubigny Gilbert de, son of Richer I: 67 Juliane of Perche, wife of Gilbert: 67 Gilbert de, son of Gilbert 211, 323 Lucy de, daughter of Gilbert 339 Marguerite de, daughter of Gilbert, see Navarre

INDEX Richer II de, son of Gilbert: 179, 200, 204, 268 Richer III de, son of Richer II: 180, 324, 339 Odeline de, wife (?) of Richer III: 180, 324, 339 Gilbert II de, son of Richer III: 339 Lucy of Quelaines, daughter (?) of Richer III, see Beaumont-sur-Sarthe Juliana de, daughter of Richer III, see Courcy Lancaster: 119, 137, 146, 152, 187, 275, 366 Lannoy, abbey of: 219–20 Lanquetôt, family of: 84, 138–39, 144, 239 Lara, counts of: 323–27, 340 Lascelles, family of: 52, 272, 283–85, 290, 292, 320 Leicester, county of: 74, 78, 79, 106, 129, 141, 162, 196, 204, 208, 210, 211, 232, 253, 255, 256, 258, 267, 297, 330, 406 Leicester, family of (Beaumont-le-Roger): 47, 57, 74, 75, 82, 83, 93, 106, 107, 112, 114, 120, 122, 136, 154, 203, 209, 226, 227, 228, 229, 231, 232, 235, 239, 248, 259, 268, 270, 281, 285, 295, 296, 301, 302, 324, 341, 346, 352, 353, 354, 355, 392, 413 Robert II ‘le Bossu’, son of Robert I, see Beaumont-le-Roger and Meulan: 68, 81, 93, 107, 112, 120, 139, 150, 154, 225, 250, 297, 300 Amicia de Gaël (Montfort), wife of Robert II, see Montfort-de-Gaël: 225, 233, 250 Daughters of Robert II, see Gloucester, Senlis, Paynel, and Tosny Robert III ‘Blanchemains’, son of Robert II: 68, 74, 191, 200, 204, 209, 225, 226, 227, 229, 230, 231, 233, 235, 250, 251–52, 259, 274, 295, 296, 297, 300, 317, 324, 331, 341, 348, 352, 359, 367, 368 Petronilla de Grandmesnil, wife of Robert III: 225, 231, 250, 295 Amicia, daughter of Robert III, see Montfort l’Amaury Margaret, daughter of Robert III, see Winchester Robert IV, de Breteuil, son of Robert III: 231, 380, 401, 402, 406

509

Bishop Roger of St. Andrews, son of Robert III: 289, 296, 368, 391, 392, 394 Léon, viscounts de: 152, 181–82, 195, 234 Lèves, family of: 294, 301–02 Liddel, castle of: 28, 394 Life of St. Kentigern: 23, 24, 25, 26–27 Life of St. Waltheof: 23, 24, 37 Life of Saint-Tugdual: 191 Lincoln battle of: 74, 98, 114, 118, 121, 142 bishops of: 75, 392, 393, 395 castle of: 119, 262 county of: 26, 38, 66, 84, 87, 97, 119, 134, 135, 141, 153, 155, 156, 158, 160, 161, 162, 163, 169, 170, 187, 189, 196, 208, 209, 210, 215, 227, 233, 240, 251, 252, 260, 261, 262, 263, 283, 293, 312, 335, 346, 360, 400, 405, 410 Lincoln, earls of: 150 William de Roumare, also baron of Kendal and ld. of Neufmarché and Bolingbroke, see Chester: 97, 119, 135, 156, 161, 226 Hawise de Revières, wife of William, see Devon: 135 Gilbert de Gant: 126, 161, 208–09 meeting with Scots at: 395 Lindsay, family of: 249, 252–54, 290 London: 242, 389, 409 bishops of Gilbert Foliot, see Foliot Richard fitzNigel: 415 Robert Belmeis: 84–85 Robert Chesney: 85 Longchamp, family of: 36, 267, 323, 358–59, 362, 364, 366, 371, 375, 376 Lothian: 56, 59, 62, 63, 64, 71, 124, 144, 164, 168, 252, 253, 274, 282, 312, 322, 345, 371, 373, 380 Louis VI, King of France: 59, 60, 66, 121, 206, 269, 302 Constance, daughter of, see Stephen I, King of England Louis VII, King of France, son of Louis VI: 3, 120, 146, 152, 153, 154, 171, 178, 184–85, 196–97, 198, 201, 206, 214, 215, 220, 232, 235, 243, 244, 268, 269,

510

287, 295, 302, 321, 327, 348, 349, 352, 388, 413 Eleanor of Aquitaine, first wife of Louis, see Aquitaine and Henry II of England: 146, 269, 326, 369, 378, 386, 396 Alix, daughter of Louis VII and Eleanor, see Blois Marie de France, daughter of Louis VII and Eleanor: 38, 269, 326 Alix, daughter of Louis VII, see Richard I and John I and Ponthieu Marguerite, daughter of Louis VII, see Young Henry Philip, son of Louis VII, see Philip II Augustus Louis, count of Loos: 175, 176 Ada of Holland, first wife of Louis: 175, 176, 423 Alix de Brabant, second wife of Louis, see Brabant: 176 Louvel, family of (Castle Cary): 91, 95, 98–99, 158, 297–98 Louvel, family of (Ivry and Bréval): 228–29, 295, 297, 300, 343, 353 William I: 228, 292, 300 Matilda de Meulan, wife of William I, see Meulan 292, 300 Isabel (Elizabeth), daughter of William I, see Anet Waleran d’Ivry, son of William I: 298, 300, 343, 353 Regina Mauvoisin, wife of Waleran, see Mauvoisin and Maule: 300, 343, 353 Robert IV d’Ivry, son of Waleran: 298, 300, 343, 353 William II (Docking), son of William I: 297, 298, 300 Roger de Saint-André (de l’Eure), nephew (?) of William I: 298 Lucy, family of: 250–51, 281–82, 316, 323, 348, 359, 412 MacWilliam, family of, see Duncan II: 50, 172, 332, 369–70 Maine: 3, 16, 49, 57, 59, 67, 100, 103–06, 112, 121, 135, 136, 147, 156, 180–81, 183–84, 186, 194–95, 198, 282, 287, 297, 323, 338–39, 340, 356–57, 364,

INDEX 367, 383, 385, 388, 393, 397, 398–400, 402, 407, 413, 415, 416 nobles of, see Mayenne, Beaumont-surSarthe, Craon, Guillaume des Roches Malcolm III, King of Scots (Canmore): 17, 23, 50, 58–59, 60–62, 63, 64, 65, 87, 88, 89, 90, 147, 172, 204, 233, 314, 332, 421 Ingeborg of Orkney, first wife of Malcolm III: 62, 172, 332, 421 Margaret, second wife of Malcolm III: 22, 23, 59, 60–61, 64, 90, 194, 421 sons of, see Alexander I, David I, Duncan II, Edgar I Mary, daughter of Malcolm III, see Boulogne Maud, daughter of Malcolm III, see Henry I Beauclerc Malcolm IV, King of Scots (Canmore): 16, 69, 91, 111, 131, 138–39, 143, 145–46, 147, 152–54, 155, 158, 161, 162, 164, 165–74, 189, 192, 196, 225, 238–39, 249, 252, 253, 282, 319, 360, 421 Malherbe, family of: 154, 163–64 Man, bishop of: 192–93 Man, kings of: 68, 173 Olafr: 68 Affrica, wife of Olafr, see Galloway: 68 Godred, son of Olafr: 27, 68, 168, 173 Affrica, daughter of Godred, see Courcy Ragnvald, King of the Isles and Man: 370, 381 Mantes: 301, 343, 349, 351, 352–53, 354, 356, 393 Mar, earldom of: 219 earls of: 51, 53 La Marche (Lusignan), counts of: 184, 389, 396–98 Margam Annalist: 401–02 Margaret ‘the Maid of Norway’, granddaughter of Alexander III of Scotland: 373–74 Marie de France, French poet: 101 Marmoutier, abbey of: 171, 293, 331 Mauduit, family of: 257–59 Maule, family of: 101, 278, 280, 300, 343 353–54 Mauvoisin (Rosny), family of: 73, 74, 100, 107, 228, 231, 267–68, 293, 295, 296, 298, 300–03, 342–56, 392–93

INDEX Archbishop Samson of Reims: 302–03, 343, 350, 356 William, brother of Samson: 302–03, 343 Ralph IV, brother of Samson: 302–03, 343 Brita, wife of Ralph IV: 343 Manasser, son of Ralph IV: 300, 343, 347, 349 Peter, lord of Saint-André, son of Ralph IV: 300, 343, 347, 352–53, 354 Ralph V, son of Ralph IV: 343, 347, 353 Regina, daughter (?) of Ralph IV, see Louvel and Maule William, son of Ralph IV: 222, 343, 347–49, 353, 356 Adeline de Porhoët, wife of William, see Porhoët: 343, 347, 348–49 Guy, son of William: 300, 343, 346–47, 350, 351–52, 353, 356 Alice de Vétheuil, wife of Guy: 343, 352, 353 Guy II, son of Guy: 343 William, son of Guy: 353 Ralph, or Raoul, son of William: 343, 347 Robert, son of William: 343, 347, 351–52 Elisabeth de Morhier, wife of Robert: 343, 351 William, of Hussburn and Cosham, son of William: 343, 347, 353 William, Bishop of Glasgow and of St. Andrews: 29, 267–68, 296, 301, 342–47, 350, 352, 354–56, 392–93, 413 P., son (?) of William: 344 Ralph, son (?) of William: 344 Mayenne: 105, 180, 202, 204, 236, 240 family of: 105, 122, 180, 202–03, 205, 237, 240, 339 Juhel I de: 121, 191, 236 Clemencia, wife of Juhel I, see Ponthieu: 121, 191 Geoffrey III de, son of Juhel I: 180–81, 183–84, 185, 191, 204, 323, 398 Constance of Brittany, first wife (?) of Geoffrey III, see Brittany: 184 Isabel de Meulan, second wife of Geoffrey III, see Meulan Juhel II de, son of Geoffrey III 236, 283, 323, 398, 400 Maud de Bohun, first wife (?) of Juhel II, see Bohun: 323

511

Gervasia de Dinan-Vitré, second wife of Juhel II, see Vitré: 323 Matilda de, daughter of Geoffrey III, see Vitré Matilda de, sister of Juhel I, see Burgundy Melcolf, natural son of Alexander I: 109, 173 Melville, family of: 72 Méran, dukes of: 392–93 Meraugis de Portlesgauz: 380 Merlay, family of: 122–24, 212, 245–46 Meulan,, counts of/family of, see Beaumont-le-Roger and Leicester: 47, 74, 81–82, 93, 106, 122, 136, 203, 226, 241, 248, 268, 270, 292, 295, 302, 341, 346, 353, 354 Robert I: 81, 93, 107, 225, 230–31, 422 Godehilde de Tosny, first wife of Robert I: 93, 422 Isabel de Vermandois, second wife of Robert I, see Warenne: 27, 120, 225, 230–31, 239 Adeline, daughter of Robert I, see Monfort-sur-Risle Hugh, son of Robert I, see Bedford Isabel, daughter of Robert I, see Pembroke Matilda de Meulan, daughter of Robert I, see Louvel Robert II, son of Robert I, see Leicester Waleran, son of Robert I, also earl of Worcester and Montfort-sur-Risle: 40, 74, 78, 79, 93, 112, 115, 120, 121, 131, 135, 136, 139, 151, 156, 184, 211, 226, 295, 297, 352 Agnes de Montfort l’Amaury, wife of Waleran, see Evreux: 352 Isabel, daughter of Waleran, see Mayenne Robert II, son of Waleran: 184, 226, 297, 354, 368, 380, 406 Maud of Cornwall, wife of Robert II: 226, 406 Peter, son of Robert II: 406 Waleran II, son of Robert II: 226 Marguerite de Fougères, wife of Waleran II: 226 Meulan, earldom of: 83 Le Mont Saint-Michel: 83, 142, 165, 187, 193, 195, 234, 237, 239, 263, 403 Montacute Abbey: 83, 96–97, 246 Montfort-de-Gaël (Brittany), family of: 230, 234, 237

512

Ralph I, earl of Norfolk: 26, 71, 87, 128, 233 Ralph II de, son of Ralph I: 92, 233 Amicia de, daughter of Ralph II, see Leicester William de, son of Ralph II: 225, 233–34 Amicia de Porhoët, wife of William, see Porhoët: 225, 233–34 Geoffrey de, son of William: 234, 235 Gervasia de Sai, wife of Geoffrey: 234 Montfort-sur-Risle, family of: 226 Hugh de: 157, 225, 277, 352 Adeline de Beaumont-le-Roger, wife of Hugh, see Beaumont-le-Roger: 225, 352 Robert de, son of Hugh: 225, 226, 227, 352 Clemencia de Fougères, wife of Robert, see Fougères: 225, 226, 227 Hugh de, son of Robert: 406 X, sister of Robert, see Gloucester Montfort-sur-Risle, honour of: 151, 157, 184 Montmirail, family of: 294, 296–97, 338, 340 Montreuil-au-Houlme: 254, 258, 304 Moray: 19, 109, 131, 173–74, 245, 332 earls of: 52, 109, 173, 245 Moreville, family of: 71, 173, 195, 239, 274, 290, 413 Hugh de: 101, 195, 212, 251, 360, 394 Helewise de Stuteville, wife of Hugh: 212 Ada de, daughter of Hugh, see Lucy Richard de, constable of Scotland: 195, 251, 252, 272, 282, 290 Helen de, daughter of Richard, see Galloway William de, son of Richard: 282 Morhier, family of: 351 Mortain: 146, 152, 164, 179, 183, 187, 192, 237, 238, 262, 265, 266, 282 seneschal of, see Hai Mortain: counts of, see John I: 187 Robert, half-brother of William I, King of England: 96 William, son of Robert and nephew of William I ‘the Conqueror’ and of Roger de Montgomery, see Shrewsbury: 66, 88, 96 Mortemer, see Warenne: 72, 120, 175, 218, 232, 276–77, 279, 280, 284, 398, 404 family of: 160, 218, 272, 276–81, 291, 362, 378

INDEX Moubray, honour of: 205, 211, 360 Moubray, family of: 45, 81, 85, 162, 164, 165, 189, 190, 191, 196, 202–08, 209, 210, 211, 213, 220, 226, 249, 254, 261, 263, 270, 273, 275, 292, 303, 304, 305, 307, 314, 348, 378, 408, 413 Robert de, earl of Northumberland: 204 Maud de L’Aigle, wife of Robert, see L’Aigle and Aubigny: 202, 204 Roger de, son of Maud, see Aubigny: 45, 126, 162, 165, 188, 189, 190, 202, 204, 205–06, 208, 209, 210, 211, 220, 226, 230, 252, 261, 272, 291 Alice de Gant, wife of Roger, see Penthièvre: 190, 191, 202, 208 Nigel de, son of Roger: 45, 162, 200, 202, 204, 205, 206, 303, 359 Philip de, lord of Dalmeny, son of Nigel: 202, 205, 249, 292, 320, 348, 412 Galiene of Inverkeithing, wife of Philip, see Dunbar: 202, 320 William de, son of Nigel: 202, 205, 378, 412 X, daughter of Nigel, see Hommet Moulins-la-Marche: 123, 179, 204, 268, 377 Munfichet, family of: 85, 140–41, 191, 240, 241–42, 270–71, 276, 282, 314, 388, 413 Muzy, family of: 300, 301, 302 Namur, counts of: 376–77 Philip, son of Baudouin VIII of Flanders: 380 Navarre, kings of: 324–25, 339, Neauphlé, family of: 351–52, 355 Nevers, counts of: 105 Neville, family of: 195 Newcastle: 113, 117, 124 Nogent-le-Roi: 232, 268, 300–01, 303, 356 Norfolk: 71, 87–88, 91, 122, 130, 152, 192, 210, 213, 227, 233, 236, 237, 254, 275, 279, 280, 297, 298, 341, 407, 408, 411 Norfolk, earls of, see Montfort-de-Gäel Hugh Bigod: 249–50, 394 Roger Bigod, son of Hugh: 407, 409 Normandy: 1–3, 16, 27, 34, 41–46, 48, 57, 61, 65, 66, 68, 69,70, 72, 73, 78, 80, 82, 85, 93, 97, 100, 101, 112, 115, 116, 117, 120, 122, 132, 134, 135, 136,

INDEX 138, 139, 141, 143, 146, 149–50, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160–61, 164, 165, 169, 170, 180, 181, 183, 185, 186, 187, 189–90, 191, 193, 194, 195, 196, 198, 200, 202, 203, 204, 206, 210, 214, 215, 221, 223, 224, 232, 234, 237, 238, 240–41, 244, 246, 248, 249, 250, 253, 258, 259, 261–62, 263, 266, 268, 269, 274, 275, 276, 277, 280, 281, 283, 284, 290, 291, 305, 306, 310, 311, 313, 314, 318, 320, 321, 328, 332, 340, 341, 344, 345, 348, 350, 360, 365, 370, 376, 377, 380, 385, 387, 388, 394, 396–97, 399, 400, 402, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408, 409, 412, 415, 416, 418 loss of: 15, 30, 41, 53, 191, 194–95, 198, 263, 283, 310, 322, 377, 408, 409, 415–19 Normandy, counts/dukes of, see William I, Henry I, Henry II, Richard, and John I: 34–35, 45–46, 48, 52, 56–57, 58–59, 60, 69, 91, 146, 163, 183, 197, 204, 205–06, 307, 363, 415 Richard I: 83, 86 Gunnora, wife of Richard I: 83, 86 Emma, daughter of Richard I, see Aethelred Richard II, son of Richard I: 58, 86 Judith of Brittany, wife of Richard II, see Brittany: 86 Hawise, daughter of Richard II, see Brittany Robert ‘Curthose’, duke of Normandy, son of William I, king of England: 65, 66, 82, 88, 90, 91, 96, 128, 131, 143, 372 William Clito, son of Robert Curthose, briefly count of Flanders: 65, 66, 111, 131, 184 Northallerton, battle of (Standard): 87, 117, 124, 126, 132 lordship of: 155, 272, 273 Northamptonshire, see Huntingdon: 67, 71, 74–75, 80, 84, 92, 94, 99, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 124, 141, 153, 161, 190, 196, 208, 220–21, 231, 232, 234, 235, 236, 255, 258, 262, 265, 267, 291, 304, 345, 346, 358, 359, 370, 410, 411–12 Northumbria: 62, 112, 113–14, 116–17,

513

144, 153, 192, 193–94, 195, 197, 198, 387, 388 Northumbria, earls of: 74, 92, 113–14, 116 Gospatrick, earl of Northumbria, see Dunbar Waltheof of, earl of Huntingdon and Northamptonshire, see Huntingdon Notre-Dame de Chartres, abbey of: 302, 311 Notre-Dame des Vaux-de-Cernay, abbey of: 294, 302 Nottingham: 66, 141, 238, 254, 274, 304, 366, 387, 410, 412 Oram, Richard: 51, 64, 65, 88, 109, 345 Orderic Vitalis, historian: 59, 353 Orkney: 100, 326–27, 381 earls of 153, 326–27 Orkneyinga Saga: 153, 326, 327 De Ortu Waluuanii Nepotis Arturi: 315, 326 Owain ap Gruffudd, Prince of Gwynedd: 196–97 Passais (Ornois): 180, 183, 184, 192, 391 le Patourel, John: 43–44 Paynel, family of: 45 Fulk I (Dudley): 196 Agnes, daughter of Fulk I, see Brus Ralph, son of Fulk I (Dudley): 331 X, de Ferrières, wife (?) of Ralph, see Derby: 331 Gervase, son of Ralph: 331–32, 333 Isabel de Beaumont, wife of Gervase, widow of Simon II de Senlis, see Leicester: 331–32 Fulk I (Hambye and Bréhal), nephew of Fulk I (Dudley) Fulk II, son of Fulk I (Hambye): 196, 264, 331 Letitia, or Cecily, Tesson, first wife of Fulk II, see Tesson: 399–400 Agatha du Hommet, second wife of Fulk II, see Hommet and Fougères: 196, 264, 331, 399–400 William, son of Fulk II: 399–400 Petronilla de Tesson, wife of William, see Tesson: 399–400 William, son of Fulk I (Hambye): 331 Eleanor de Vitré, wife of William, see Vitré: 331

514

Pembroke, earls of: 239 Gilbert de Clare, also lord of Bienfaite and Orbec: 140, 141, 160, 242 Isabel de Beaumont-le-Roger, wife of Gilbert, see Leicester and Meulan: 139, 140, 242 Richard ‘Strongbow’ de Clare, son of Gilbert: 139, 140, 183, 276 Aoife of Leinster, wife of Richard: 140 Isabel, daughter of Richard: 139 William Marshal, husband of Isabel: 139, 184 Penthièvre, see Brittany and Richmond men of: 117 Penthièvre, counts of: 86–87, 116, 136, 189, 191, 400 Eudo (or Eudes), son of Count Geoffrey of Brittany, see Brittany: 51, 86–87 Alain ‘le Roux’, son of Eudo, see Richmond Stephen, son of Eudo, see Richmond: 137, 185, 187, 190, 208 Alain ‘le Noir’, son of Stephen, see Richmond Conan IV, son of Alain ‘le Noir’, and other children, see Brittany Geoffrey Boterel II, son of Stephen, also lord of Nettlestead: 117, 134–35, 136, 137, 185 Hawise de Dol, wife of Geoffrey Boterel II, see Dol: 136 Reginald Boterel, natural son (?) of Geoffrey Boterel II: 117 Henry of Tréguier, son of Stephen: 136, 185 Alain of Tréguier, son of Henry: 338 Petronilla de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, wife of Alain of Tréguier, see Beaumontsur-Sarthe: 338 Matilda, daughter of Stephen, see Gant Olivia, daughter of Stephen, see Fougères and St. John Ribald, natural son of Eudo: 87 Ralph, son of Ribald: 87 Agatha de Brus, wife of Ralph, see Brus: 87 Perceval: 7, 8–9 Perche: 99–100, 122, 124, 229, 268–69, 399

INDEX Perche, counts of: 67, 68, 99, 155, 164, 185, 206, 268, 270, 340, 377 Juliane, sister of Rotrou I, see L’Aigle Rotrou I: 67, 99, 135, 179, 203, 269 Matilda (Mathilde), second wife of Rotrou I, see Henry I: 67, 99, 203 Beatrix, daughter of Rotrou I, see Renaud: 99, 203 Rotrou II, son of Rotrou I: 179, 203, 269, 292 Matilda of Blois, wife of Rotrou II, see Blois: 269 Geoffrey, son of Rotrou II: 377 Percy, lords of: 45, 162, 360 Périgueux: 153–54, 166 Perth: 167–68, 205, 279, 280, 284, 392 Perthshire: 140, 143, 241, 265 Philip I, King of France: 61, 302 Margaret, daughter of, see Flanders Philip II Augustus, King of France: 3, 15–16, 53, 57, 123–24, 145, 206, 213, 219, 240, 244, 250, 258, 267, 281, 283, 284, 298, 300, 305, 306, 307, 309, 310, 313, 325, 333, 335, 336, 337, 341, 346, 348, 353, 357, 358, 363–66, 368–69, 370, 371, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 381, 383–84, 386, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392–93, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 401, 402, 403, 404–05, 406, 407–08, 409, 411, 412, 413, 415, 416, 417 Isabella of Hainault, first wife of Philip, see Hainault: 145, 365 Ingeborg of Denmark, second wife of Philip: 364, 365, 390 Agnes de Méran, third wife of Philip: 390, 392, 393, 397 Louis VIII, son of Philip II: 369, 371, 393, 408 Blanche of Castile, wife of Louis VIII: 393 Louis IX, son of Louis VIII: 418 Marie de France, daughter of Philip II, see Alexander II and Brabant: 176, 392, 397 Philip Hurepel, son of Philip II: 390 Philip of Poitou, Bishop of Durham: 388, 390, 409 Picardy: 28, 84, 125, 126, 139, 150, 214–15, 216, 277, 296, 297, 358, 378, 379 Picquigny, family of, vidames d’Amiens: 28, 125, 215, 216, 221, 222, 358, 379

INDEX Plessay, family of: 123 Poher, viscounts de: 180, 352 Poitou: 3, 5, 27, 245, 318, 325, 364, 370, 375, 384, 393, 396, 397, 398 Ponthieu: 66, 99, 130, 131, 239, 298, 319, 378, 400 Ponthieu, counts of: 61, 72, 121, 215, 216, 221, 222–23, 378, 404 William Talvas, son of Robert de Bellême, see Sées and also Shrewsbury: 93, 99, 120–22, 123, 125, 126, 131–32, 133, 151, 164, 180, 183, 184, 185, 191, 192, 269, 357, 391 Helie, wife of William Talvas, see Burgundy: 122 Clemencia, daughter of Talvas, see Mayenne Ela, daughter of Talvas, see Warenne John, grandson of Talvas: 184, 185, 215, 216, 221 Loretta de St. Valery, first wife of John, see St. Valery and Fontaines: 221 Beatrix de St. Pol, second wife of John: 221 Adela, daughter of John, see Saint-Valéry William II Talvas, son of John: 221, 369, 411 Alix de France, wife of William II, see Louis VII, John I, Richard I 369 Marie, daughter of William II Talvas: 404 Simon de Dammartin, count of Ponthieu, husband of Marie and brother of Renaud, count of Boulogne: 404 John, son of Talvas, see Sées/Alençon Porhoët, counts of Geoffrey de: 179, 237 Alain de la Zouche, son of Geoffrey: 204–05 Adelise de Belmeis, wife of Alain: 205 Roger de la Zouche, son of Alain de la Zouche: 204–05 William de Belmeis, son of Alain de la Zouche: 205 Eudo II de, son of Geoffrey: 94, 171, 179, 181–82, 187, 195, 201, 204, 224, 233, 233–34, 235, 237, 343, 348 Bertha of Brittany, first wife of Eudo II, see Brittany and Penthièvre: 179, 181–82, 195, 233, 421 Eleanor de Léon, second wife of Eudo II,

515

see Léon: 181–82 Adelaide de, daughter of Eudo II: 233, 235 Amicia de, daughter of Eudo II, see Montfort-de-Gaël Matilda de, granddaughter of Eudo II, see Fougères Stephen de, son of Geoffrey: 234 Porhoët, family of: 50, 51, 171, 348–49, 351, 393 Power, Daniel: 11, 47, 48–49, 180, 219, 292, 305, 324, 333, 339, 347, 353 Praemonstratensian: 27, 190 Puiset, lordship of: 72, 268–70, 293, 388 Puiset, family of, viscounts 67, 72, 269–70, 293–95, 296, 301, 302, 388 Adelaise du, great-aunt of Hugh III, see Shrewsbury Hugh III du, viscount of Chartres: 269, 270 Agnes of Blois, wife of Hugh III, see Blois: 269, 270 Everard IV du, son of Hugh III: 293, 294 Henry du, son of Everard IV: 292, 294 Hugh du, count of Bar, son of Everard IV: 269, 271, 292, 293, 295 Petronilla de Bar-sur-Seine, wife of Hugh, count of Bar: 295 Hugh du, bishop of Durham, son of Hugh III: 107, 269–70, 271, 293, 295, 296, 316, 388 Henry du, son of Bishop Hugh: 293, 397 Dionysia of Carleton, wife of Henry: 293 Hugh du, chancellor of France, son of Bishop Hugh: 388 Quincy, family of: 52, 73, 98, 227–30, 277, 345–46, 354, 413 Saher I de: 228 Maud de Senlis, wife of Saher I, see Clare and Senlis: 74, 228 Robert de, lord of Leuchars, son of Saher I: 78, 79, 205, 227–29, 230, 259, 273, 277, 330, 345, 370 Orabilia of Leuchars, wife of Robert, see Fife: 228, 345 Eva of Ardoyne, second wife of Robert, see Berkeley: 277 Saher IV de, son of Robert, see Winchester

516

Saher II de, castellan of Nonancourt, son of Saher I: 78, 79, 206, 227–28, 234–35, 273, 323, 330, 344, 345, 346, 347–48, 360 Ascelina Peverel, wife of Saher II, see Watteville: 79, 346 Saher III de, son of Saher II: 227–28, 234–35, 345, 360 Ralph II de Clère (Clare), lord of Calder: 138, 238–39 Ranulf de Glanville: 271, 359 Raoul de Houdenc: 380, 381 Remilly: 27, 159 –60, 251 Rennes: 86, 100, 104, 121, 141, 170, 187, 192, 328, 333, 349, 350 counts of, see Brittany: 50, 86, 121–22 Revel, family of: 272, 330 Richard I the Lionhearted, King of England and Duke of Normandy: 6, 8, 16, 21, 37, 147, 188, 205, 214, 219, 234, 235, 252, 274, 289, 298, 300, 313, 322, 323, 325, 330, 331, 333, 335, 336, 345, 356, 357–58, 359–71, 375, 376–78, 379, 380, 381, 383–86, 387, 393, 399, 411, 412, 413, 415 Alix of France, betrothed Richard: 363, 369 Berengaria of Navarre, wife of Richard: 8, 363 Richard Malluvel: 272, 275 Richmond, castle of: 271, 275, 402 honour of: 108, 137, 171, 189, 190, 208, 210, 240, 242, 250, 271, 275, 283, 285, 312, 320, 328, 335, 360, 398, 402, 404 Richmond, earls of: 45, 86, 116, 250, 275, 283 Alain ‘le’Roux’, son of Eudo of Brittany: 87–88 Stephen, son of Eudo of Brittany, also count of Tréguier, see Penthièvre Alain ‘le Noir’, son of Stephen: 68, 87, 93, 94, 118, 126, 136, 137, 169, 179, 185, 188, 208–09, 275, 421 Bertha of Brittany, wife of Alain ‘le Noir’, see Brittany and Porhoët: 136, 137, 179, 185, 188, 190, 191, 209, 421 Conan IV, son of Bertha and Alain ‘le Noir’, see Brittany

INDEX Constance, daughter of Bertha and Alain ‘le Noir’ (Penthièvre), see Rohan Ennoguent, daughter of Bertha and Alain ‘le Noir’: 100–01, 171 Richmond, constables of Roald, son of Alain: 312, 320 Alain, son of Roald, uncle of Alan of Galloway: 312, 320 Ridel, family of: 76, 290, 255–59, 304, 413 Geoffrey, archdeacon of Canterbury and bishop of Ely: 259, 359 Geoffrey, of Drayton Basset: 76, 254, 256, 257 Geva of Chester, wife of Geoffrey of Drayton Basset, see Chester, earls of: 254, 256, 257 Gervase, sheriff of Roxburgh, son (?) of Geoffrey of Drayton: 101, 254, 255–56, 257 Geoffrey, of Primside, son (?) of Gervase of Roxburgh: 256, 257–58 Ralph, son of Geoffrey of Primside: 257, 259 Hugh, of Abbotsley, son (?) of Gervase of Roxburgh: 252, 254, 255, 256, 257–58 Maud, daughter of Geoffrey of Drayton Basset, see Basset Ralph, brother of Gervase of Roxburgh: 252, 255–56, 257 Robert d’Arbrissel: 100–01, 102, 103–04 Robert de Torigni, abbot of Le Mont Saint Michel: 22, 62, 68, 193, 195, 226, 227, 276, 277, 315, 317, 318, 326–27, 340 Robert Wace: 20, 25, 37, 38, 85, 156, 314, 315, Roger of Howden: 68, 215, 246, 290, 316, 318, 328, 337, 357, 364, 366, 373, 375, 385, 389, 390, 391, 395 Rohan, viscounts de: 171, 205, 234 Roman de Brut: 38, 314 Roman de Fergus: 7, 28–29, 224 Roman de Rou: 85, 314–15 romances: 7–9, 15, 17, 20, 24–25, 28–29, 37–39, 85, 166, 224, 297, 314–15, 326, 329, 380 Rollos, family of: 320 Ros, family of: 220–21, 372, 377 Everard de: 188, 220–21, 372

INDEX Rohese (Agatha) de Trussebut, wife of Everard, see Trussebut: 221, 277, 377 Robert de, son of Everard: 144, 221, 277, 372, 373, 377, 379, 394, 404, 409, 413 Isabel of Scotland, wife of Robert, see William I of Scotland and Brus: 372, 373, 377, 394 Ross, earldom of: 109, 171–73, 174, 245, 332 earls of: 52, 172, 174 Roxburgh, abbey of: 102 castle of: 28, 144, 168, 172, 256, 259, 312, 313, 316, 358, 360 St Brieuc: 18, 194 place of: 322, 380 St Kentigern (St. Mungo): 23–25, 26 church of: 82, 108 St Martin, family of: 229, 281 St Michael, family of: 330 St Petroc: 250, 284–85 St Waltheof (or Waldef de Senlis), abbot of Melrose Abbey: 23, 24, 113–14, 118 Sablé (and Craon), family of: 103–06, 325 Saint-Hilaire, family of (lords of Dalling and St. Hilaire), also known as Saint-James: 191–92, 204, 236, 238, 240, 282, 291, 310, 391 Saint-Jean: 187 family of: 85, 129, 142, 187–89, 191–92, 209, 251, 263, 404 Saint-Malo: 25, 170 place of: 99–100, 105, 187 Saint-Marie de Josaphat, abbey of: 301, 356 Sainte-Marie-Madeleine of Goldcliff, priory of: 158 Saint Marie de Rouen, church of: 229, 273 Saint-Martin-de-Tribéhou, church of: 272 Saint-Père de Chartres, abbey of: 239, 263, 267, 301, 302 Saint-Scolasse-sur-Sarthe: 120, 157, 159, 261, 333, 399 Saint-Sauveur (Finistère), abbey of: 100, 349 Saint-Sauveur-le-Vicomte, abbey of: 87, 399 Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt, abbey of: 100–01, 141, 142, 171, 360 Saint-Trinité-de-Beaumont, abbey of: 106–07, 136, 231, 353 Sainte-Trinité de Thiron, abbey of: 99–100, 101–03, 170, 263, 302, 308, 310

517

Saint-Valery: 219 Saint-Valery, family of: 28, 215, 222, 298, 379 Bernard II de: 128, 222 Renauld de, son of Bernard II: 76, 222, 281, 298 Bernard III de, son of Renauld: 76, 215, 221, 276, 298, 376, 379, 401 Bernard IV de, son of Bernard III: 376 Maud de, daughter of Bernard III, see Briouze Thomas de, son of Bernard III: 376, 411 Adela de Ponthieu, wife of Thomas, see Ponthieu: 411 Loretta de, daughter (?) of Bernard III or of Renauld, see Ponthieu and Fontaines Salisbury (Wiltshire): 67, 70, 77, 97, 128, 133, 134, 159, 231, 347, 348 earls of: 150, 182, 184, 394 Savigny, abbey of: 142, 165, 185, 187, 191–92, 209, 226, 227, 233, 234, 240, 241, 265, 270 Say, honour of: 159 family of: 159–60, 265 Saxony, dukes of: 365 Henry ‘the Lion’: 177, 331, 334, 375, 390 Maud, wife of Henry, see Henry II: 334 Maud, daughter of Henry, see King William I of Scotland and Coucy: 334 Otto, of Brunswick or Saxony, son of Henry: 331, 334, 366, 371, 373–75, 378, 384, 390, 393 Scotland: 2–5, 9–10, 12–31, 35, 42, 48–53, 55, 58–59, 60–63, 64, 65, 69–73, 78, 79, 80–82, 84, 87, 90, 91, 93, 96, 99, 101–03, 104, 105–06, 108–10, 112, 115–16, 117, 122, 125, 126–27, 130, 131, 132, 133–34, 139, 143–45, 147, 153, 156, 159, 161, 162, 164, 165, 167, 169, 170, 171, 174–75, 178, 181, 190, 191, 192, 195, 196, 201, 203, 205, 210, 213, 218, 219–20, 222, 223, 226, 228, 229–30, 231, 232, 235, 237, 238–39, 241, 244, 245, 249, 252, 253, 259, 261, 262, 265, 266, 267–70, 272, 273, 274–80, 281, 282–84, 285, 288–90, 292, 293, 296, 297, 298, 300, 301,

518

303, 304, 305, 310, 311, 312, 313–14, 318–21, 323, 330, 332, 336, 341, 342, 344, 346, 348, 352, 354, 356, 357–58, 359, 360, 362, 366, 374, 375, 378, 379, 380, 384, 388, 392, 394, 397, 403, 405, 408, 410, 411, 416–19 kings of, see Malcolm III, Edgar, Duncan, Alexander I, David I, Malcolm IV, William I, Alexander II, Alexander III: 2–3, 10, 12–15, 20, 25, 56, 58, 59, 63, 72, 75, 78, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 99, 102–03, 111, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 124, 125, 126, 133, 154, 164, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 172, 173, 174, 179, 181, 183, 187, 190, 192, 193, 195, 198, 202, 205, 224, 228, 230, 231, 235, 239, 241, 243, 244, 246, 249, 251, 252, 256, 268, 271, 272, 274, 279, 280, 284, 285, 287–89, 296, 301, 312, 315, 317, 318, 321, 324, 325, 326, 329, 332–33, 335–36, 337, 341, 354, 357, 358, 359, 360, 362, 364, 366–67, 370, 375, 378, 387–90, 392, 394–95, 397, 398, 400, 402, 408, 410, 413, 416, 419 Sées: 68, 121, 133, 185, 251, 293, 340, 399 Sées/Alençon, counts of: 61, 121, 124, 180, 181, 184, 203, 206, 268, 399 William Talvas, see Ponthieu: 93, 99, 120–22, 123, 125, 126, 131–32, 133, 151, 164, 180, 183, 184, 185, 191, 192, 269, 357, 391 John, son of William Talvas: 151, 184, 203, 269, 357 Beatrix, wife of John, see Anjou 151, 203 Robert, son of John: 10, 123, 310, 399, 400 Seine River, trade: 73, 121, 223, 301, 346, 351, 352, 353, 354 Senlis, family of (earls of Huntingdon): 72, 92, 113–14, 232 Simon I de: 70–71, 76, 94, 113–14 Maud de, wife of Simon I, daughter of Waltheof, see David I and Huntingdon: 67, 70, 113–14 Maud de, daughter of Simon I, see Clare and Quincy Simon II de, son of Simon I: 113–14, 115, 117, 258, 331

INDEX Isabel de Beaumont, wife of Simon II, see Leicester and Paynel: 258 Isabel de, daughter of Simon II, see Mauduit Waldef de, abbot of Melrose, son of Simon I, see St. Waltheof Shrewsbury, abbey of: 133 castle of: 132, 133, 134 Shrewsbury, earls of Roger II de Montgomery: 66, 269 Mabel d’Alençon or Bellême, first wife of Roger II Adelaise du Puiset, second wife of Roger II, see Puiset: 269 Arnulf of Montgomery, son of Roger II: 66 Robert I de Bellême, count of Ponthieu and of Bellême, son of Roger II: 66, 67, 72, 304 Agnes de Ponthieu, wife of Robert I, see Ponthieu William ‘Talvas’, son of Robert I, see Sées Roger the Poitevin, son of Roger II: 66 Shropshire: 65, 71, 124, 133 Somerset: 71, 91, 94, 95, 97–99, 115, 127, 132, 135, 143, 152, 155, 157–58, 159, 234, 252, 272, 274, 276, 298 Soules, family of: 265–68 Ranulf I de, lord of Liddesdale: 103, 249, 260, 265, 266, 267, 268, 291, 412 William de, brother of Ranulf I: 260, 265, 266, 268, 399 X, Tesson, wife of William, see Tesson: 260, 266, 399, 412 Ranulf II de, son of William: 260, 266, 267, 268 William II de, great-grandson of Ranulf II: 28, 267 Juliana de, sister of Ranulf I and William, see Hai Stephen I (of Blois), King of England, and count of Mortain: 10, 23, 42, 47, 68, 73, 74, 77, 83, 84,85, 87, 88, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 98–99, 101, 102, 111, 112–13, 114–19, 120–21, 124, 125–26, 130, 131–32, 135, 136, 137, 141, 142, 145, 146, 149–50, 151, 152, 155, 156, 157, 160, 161, 168, 169, 181, 182, 184, 187, 208, 215, 226, 232, 238,

INDEX 241, 242, 261, 262, 269, 270, 273, 275, 293, 295, 327, 384, 386, 408, 421 Matilda de Boulogne, wife of Stephen, see Boulogne: 92, 97, 98, 107, 117, 118, 146, 191 Mary, daughter of Stephen, countess of Boulogne, see Flanders and Boulogne Eustache, son of Stephen: 120, 146 Constance, wife of Eustache, see Louis VI: 120, 146, 152 William III, count of Boulogne, son of Stephen: 145, 146, 152, 164 Isabel de Warenne, wife of William III, see Warenne: 145, 152, 279, 398 Sibilla, natural daughter (?) of Stephen, see Léon Steward, family of in Scotland (fitzAlain): 170 Walter fitzAlain: 53, 71, 126, 133–34, 151, 154, 168, 169, 186 Alain, son of Walter: 53 X, daughter of Earl Morgrund of Mar, wife of Alain: 53 Strathearn, earls of: 51, 232, 290 Malise I: 110 Ferteth, son of Malise: 167 Gilbert, son of Ferteth: 52–53, 142, 233, 290 Maud, wife of Gilbert, see Aubigny: 52–53, 142, 233 Stuteville, family of: 209–13, 245, 246, 248, 255, 411, 413 Robert II de: 212, 255 John de, son of Robert II: 212 John II de, son of John: 212, 255, 257 Matilda Basset, wife of John II: 212, 255, 257 Nicholas de, lord of Valmont, son of Robert II: 195, 211, 212 Nicholas of Kimberley, son of Nicholas: 210–11, 212, 213 Edeva de Gournay, wife of Nicholas of Kimberley, see Gournay: 210–11, 212, 213 Robert of Valmont, son of Nicholas of Valmont: 213, 402 Henry of Valmont and Kirkby, son of Robert of Valmont: 402 Robert III de, son of Robert II: 209, 212, 246, 255, 283, 323, 331 Helewise, wife of Robert III: 209, 212

519

Ansel de, son of Robert III: 283 Burga de, daughter of Robert III, see Vescy Eustache de, son (?) of Robert III: 283 Helewise de, daughter (?) of Robert III, see Moreville Nicholas de, lord of Liddel, son of Robert III: 195, 202, 210–11, 212, 246, 255, 283, 394 Gunnora d’Aubigny, wife of Nicholas of Liddel, see Aubigny and Gant: 202, 209–10, 212 Robert de, son of Nicholas of Liddel: 212, 255 Sibilla de Valognes, wife of Robert, see Valognes: 212 Nicholas II de, son of Nicholas of Liddel: 212 Devorguilla of Galloway, wife of Nicholas II: 212 Osmund de, son of Robert III: 209, 212 William de, son of Robert III: 211, 212, 323, 388, 394, 412 Bertha, wife of William: 212 Roger de, sheriff of Northumberland, lord of Burton Agnes (?), son of Robert II: 212, 245, 246, 255, 271 Alice de, daughter (?) of Roger, see Merlay Subligny, family of: 142, 185–86 Suffolk: 66, 74, 77, 88, 91, 137, 141, 157, 159, 233, 237, 248, 275, 360 Surrey, lands of, see Warenne: 68, 76–78, 79, 80–82, 91, 97, 112, 120, 126, 130, 134, 145, 146, 152, 183, 222, 240, 251, 271, 279, 284, 347, 348, 400 Sussex: 71, 74, 75, 81, 161, 204, 209, 210, 232, 234, 239, 260, 262, 263, 298, 304 Tancred of Sicily: 361–62 Tesson, family of: 260, 266, 399, 412 Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury: 179, 189, 193, 195, 200–01, 213, 214, 285, 317–18, 349 Thomas, Hugh: 35, 44 Thomas de Piris: 155, 272 Thouars, viscounts de: 184–85 Geoffrey IV: 185 Aimery, son of Geoffrey IV: 391, 396, 399 Guy, son of Geoffrey IV: 391, 398, 401, 402, 403, 421

520

Constance of Brittany, wife of Guy, see Brittany Alice, daughter and heiress of Guy and Constance, see Brittany Tickhill, honour of: 72, 119, 304, 305, 366 Tinchebrai, battle of: 90, 91, 96 Tintiniac, family of: 234, 236–37 Thiron, abbey of: 99, 101–02, 103, 170, 263, 302, 308, 310 Tironensian Order: 67, 99, 101–03, 156, 170, 246, 293, 307–08, 310 Torigni-sur-Vire: 74, 226, 227 Tosny, family of, lords of Tosny and Flam­ stead: 47, 68, 81, 92–93, 154, 231–32, 237, 239–40, 270, 300, 301, 303, 341–42, 346, 355, 358, 378, 413, 422 Ralph II de: 300, 422 Isabel de Montfort, wife of Ralph II, see Montfort l-Amaury: 300, 422 Ralph III de, son of Ralph II: 92–93, 231, 232, 422 Adelise, or Judith, wife of Ralph III, see Huntingdon: 92, 231, 232, 422 Roger III de, son of Ralph III: 93, 303, 422 Ralph IV de, son of Roger III: 93, 154, 231–32, 300, 341, 422 Margaret de Beaumont, wife of Ralph IV, see Leicester: 93, 154, 231, 232, 300, 341, 422 Simon de, bishop of Moray, son (?) of Ralph IV: 231, 232, 341, 422 Roger IV, son of Ralph IV: 231–32, 341, 342, 358, 409, 412, 422 Constance, wife of Roger IV, see Beaumont-sur-Sarthe: 231–32, 341, 342, 412, 422 Margaret, daughter of Roger IV, see Fife Roger, castellan of Nogent-le-Roi, son of Roger III: 231–32, 422 Adela, or Ada, de Chaumont, wife of Roger: 231–32, 422 Tosny, honour of: 250 Toulouse: 145, 153, 166, 167, 168, 169 counts of: 120, 153, 181, 325 Touraine: 3, 150, 198, 208, 359, 364, 370, 383, 385, 389, 393, 397, 398, 402, 407, 413, 416 Tribéhou: 155–56, 191, 272–73, 274 Trussebut, family of: 85, 220–21, 377

INDEX Valognes: 187, 239, 274, 277, 288 Valognes, family of: 210, 266, 274, 275, 290, 318, 378, 413 Peter de: 275 Philip de: 195, 209, 318–19, 378, 413 Lora de, daughter of Philip, see Bailleul Sibilla de, daughter of Philip, see Stuteville Geoffrey de, lord of Burton, brother of Philip: 195, 196, 264, 274, 275, 378 Emma du Hommet, wife of Geoffrey, see Hommet and Neville: 195, 196, 264, 274, 378 Robert du Hommet, son (?) of Geoffrey: 378 Agatha de, sister of Philip, see Paynel Robert de, brother of Philip: 378 Gunnora, daughter of Robert, see Robert fitzWalter Vatteville, lordship of, see Beaumont-leRoger: 73–74, 76, 77 Vaux, family of: 10, 246–49, 273, 281, 284, 290, 317, 330, 408, 413 Vere, family of: 242, 250, 272, 275–76, 294 Vermelles, family of: 230 Verneuil: 214, 223, 271, 281, 388 Vernon, lands of: 73, 83, 267, 358 family of: 73–74, 83, 263, 346 Vescy/fitzJohn, lords of Alnwick: 188–90, 211, 261, 323, 413 Ivo de: 125 Beatrix de, daughter and heir of Ivo: 125 Eustache fitzJohn, husband of Beatrix, see Chester, constables of: 122, 124, 125, 190, 274 Agnes, second wife of Eustache fitzJohn, see Chester, constables of: 125 William de, son of Eustache fitzJohn and Beatrix: 124, 163, 188, 189–90, 209, 211, 212, 226, 246, 412 Burga de Stuteville, wife of William, see Stuteville: 195, 196, 211, 212, 412 Eustache de, son of William: 195, 196, 212, 371–73, 380, 387, 388, 389, 394, 401, 412, 413 Margaret, wife of Eustache, see King William of Scotland: 212, 371–73, 410 Payn de, brother of Eustache fitzJohn: 124–25

INDEX Sibylla de Lacy, wife of Payn, see Lacy: 124–25 Cecily de, daughter of Payn, see Hereford Vexin: 43, 49, 61, 66, 73, 75, 76, 78, 80, 98, 120–21, 136–37, 143, 146, 154, 178, 180, 232, 251, 363, 364 Vieuxpont, family of (Vieux-pont-en-Auge and Courville): 5, 80, 191, 192, 207, 259, 266, 269, 270, 291–99, 303, 305–11 Fulk de Courville: 307–08 Ivo II de Courville: 308 William II ‘the knight’: 85, 291, 299 Ivo de, lord of Courville, son of William II: 5, 291, 292, 293, 294, 297–99, 307 Albreda d’Anet, first wife of Ivo, see Anet: 292, 297, 298–300 Petronilla, second wife of Ivo: 291 Robert III de, lord of Vieux-Pont-enAuge, son of William II: 5, 291, 292–94, 297, 299, 305–09, 311 Marie de Chastillon, wife of Robert III: 299, 306–08 Ivo de, son of Robert III: 299, 306, 307, 310 William de, son of Robert III: 299, 306, 307, 310 William de, son of William II: 5, 291, 292, 294, 297, 299, 305, 308 Fulk de, brother of William II: 291, 299 Vieuxpont family of (Hardingstone and Carriden): 5, 80, 191, 192, 207, 259, 266, 270, 291–94, 296, 299, 303–11, 399, 413 William de, son (?) of William II ‘the knight’: 191, 252, 272, 291–92, 294, 299, 303, 305, 308–10, 399 Emma de Saint-Hilaire, first wife of William: 291, 299, 309 Maud de Moreville, second wife of William: 299 Ivo de, son of William: 292, 299, 310, 399 Robert de, of Westmoreland, son of William: 266, 299, 303, 305, 308, 310, 399, 401, 402 Idonea de Builli, wife of Robert: 299, 303 William de, son of William: 309–10, 299 William de, grandson of William: 299, 309–10

521

Vire: 190, 204, 265, 275, 276, 320 Vitré, family of: 51, 85, 104, 171 Hervé de: 191, 236 Robert III de: 323 Alain de, son of Robert III: 323 Clemencia de Fougères, wife of Alain, see Fougères and Chester: 227 Gervasia de Dinan-Vitré, daughter of Alain, see Mayenne André II de, son of Robert III: 323, 361 Matilda de Mayenne, wife of André, see Mayenne: 323 Eleanor de, daughter of Robert III, see Paynel Wales: 3, 9, 10, 18–19, 35, 42, 48, 49, 67, 81, 141, 158, 159, 160, 174, 191, 232, 277, 340, 341, 384, 404, 418 Walter Map: 7, 88, 180, 313, 396 War of Succession, or Succession War: 62, 73, 77, 79, 83, 85, 87, 91, 93, 97, 98, 110, 111–48, 151, 158, 159, 162, 164, 167, 169, 183, 216, 220, 222, 241, 242, 274, 275, 276, 295, 314, 374, 384, 386 of 1173–74, or The Great War: 199–336 Warenne (also held Bellencombre and Mortemer-sur-Eaulne): 120, 134, 144, 218, 248, 280, 281, 405–06 earls of (Surrey): 134, 138, 145, 146, 196, 279, 316 William I de: 128 Gundreda of Chester, wife of William I, see Chester: 128 Edith de, daughter of William I, see Gournay William II de, son of William I: 66, 69, 120, 126, 128, 130, 211, 225 Isabel de Vermandois, wife of William II, see Meulan and Leicester: 27, 120, 225, 230–31, 239 William III de, son of William II: 112, 120, 122, 126, 128, 135, 211 Ela of Ponthieu, wife of William III, see Ponthieu: 120, 122 Isabel de, daughter of William III, see Stephen I: 145, 152, 279, 394, 398 Hamelin, earl of Warenne, second husband of Isabel, see Anjou: 146, 152, 279, 280, 367, 394, 398

522

William IV de, son of Hamelin and Isabel: 398 Ada de, daughter of William II, see Huntingdon Gundred de, daughter of William II, see Warwick Reginald de (Wormegay), son of William II: 52, 69, 128, 280, 340 Alice de Wormegay, wife of Reginald: 280 Ela de, daughter of Reginald, see Fife Gundreda de, daughter of Reginald, see Courcy Wark, castle of: 113, 117, 211, 220, 245, 246, 270 Warwick, county of: 210 Warwick, earls of/family of (Beaumont-leRoger): 26, 81, 82, 121 Henry, brother of Robert I, see Leicester and Meulan: 81, 107 Roger, son of Henry: 81, 121, 150 Gundred de Warenne, wife of Roger, see Warenne: 81, 121, 150 Watteville, lands of: 76–80 family of: 76–80, 346 William I ‘the Conqueror’, duke of Normandy, King of England: 1–2, 10, 21, 45, 46, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61–62, 63, 75, 82, 85, 89–90, 108, 127, 128, 139, 156, 224, 231, 232, 269, 270, 271, 304, 314, 315, 337, 372, 385 sons of, see William II, Henry I, Normandy (Robert Curthose) Matilda of Flanders, wife of William I: 89, 131, 231 Adelaide, daughter of William I, see Blois William I ‘the Lion’, King of Scotland: 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23–25, 26, 30, 51, 56, 69, 81, 84, 85, 91, 106, 107, 123, 131, 133, 136, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 153, 154, 155, 161, 162, 171, 176, 186, 187, 188, 189, 192–94, 195, 197, 198, 204, 205, 209, 211, 219, 222, 223, 224, 225, 228, 230, 231, 236, 241, 242, 243–46, 249, 250, 252, 253, 259, 263, 267, 268, 272, 274, 275, 276, 280, 281, 282, 287–90, 296, 300, 304, 305, 311–12, 315–18, 319–20, 321, 322, 324, 327, 328–29, 330, 331, 332–33, 334, 335–36, 337, 338, 341–42, 344, 349,

INDEX 350, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363, 365, 366–69, 370, 371–75, 376, 377, 379, 380, 381, 387–94, 395, 396, 397, 400, 403, 405, 409, 416, 421 Ermengarde de Beaumont-sur-Sarthe, wife of William, see Beaumont-surSarthe: 69, 106, 203, 136, 203, 232, 259, 296–97, 324, 334, 335–36, 337–39, 340, 341, 342, 346, 349, 357, 371, 372, 373, 377, 391, 403, 421, 422 Ada, natural daughter of William, see Dunbar Alexander, natural son of William: 373 Alexander, son of William, see Alexander II Isabel, natural daughter of William, see Brus and Ros Margaret, eldest daughter of William: 331, 371–73, 421 Margaret, natural daughter of William, see Vescy Mathilde of Lappion, natural daughter of William: 373 William II ‘Rufus’, King of England: 2, 56, 59, 62–63, 64, 65, 82, 88, 96, 179, 231 William de Bellencombre: 144, 279 William de Briwerre: 218, 284–85 Beatrix de Vaux, wife of William: 284 William of Malmesbury: 13, 22, 96, 136 William de Pont l’Arche: 123, 258–59 Constance Mauduit, wife of William: 258–59 Winchester: 258, 321, 335, 366, 370 bishopric of: 97 siege of: 155 Treaty of (Wallingford): 146, 178 Winchester, earls of, see Quincy: 227, 228, 277 Saher IV de: 225, 227–29, 259, 273, 277, 288–89, 290, 291, 345, 348, 379, 394, 401, 405 Margaret de Beaumont, wife of Saher IV, see Leicester: 225, 227, 259 Robert, eldest son of Saher IV: 227, 290, 348 Hawise of Chester, wife of Robert: 348 Margaret de, daughter of Robert: 227 Robert de, younger son of Saher IV: 348

INDEX Helen, daughter of Llywelyn of Wales, wife of Robert: 348 Roger de, son of Saher IV: 342 Young Henry, or Henry the Young King, son of Henry II: 7, 147, 178, 188–89, 196–97, 201, 213, 214, 215, 222, 223, 224, 227, 228, 235, 243, 244, 245, 249, 251, 269, 289, 290, 291, 295, 297, 319, 325, 330, 333, 363, 383 Marguerite, wife of Young Henry, see Louis VII: 197 Yvelines: 78, 106, 107, 112, 231, 298, 301, 337, 346, 349–53, 355, 356, 392, 393, 406

523

Medieval Identities: Socio-Cultural Spaces

All volumes in this series are evaluated by an Editorial Board, strictly on academic grounds, based on reports prepared by referees who have been commissioned by virtue of their specialism in the appropriate field. The Board ensures that the screening is done independently and without conflicts of interest. The definitive texts supplied by authors are also subject to review by the Board before being approved for publication. Further, the volumes are copyedited to conform to the publisher’s stylebook and to the best international academic standards in the field. Titles in Series Robin Hood in Greenwood Stood: Alterity and Context in the English Outlaw Tradition, ed. by Stephen Knight (2011) The Performance of Christian and Pagan Storyworlds: Non-Canonical Chapters of the History of Nordic Medieval Literature, ed. by Lars Boje Mortensen and Tuomas M. S. Lehtonen, with Alexandra Bergholm (2013) Speaking to the Eye: Sight and Insight through Text and Image (1150–), ed. by Thérèse de Hemptinne, Veerle Fraeters, and María Eugenia Góngora (2013) Conversion and Identity in the Viking Age, ed. by Ildar Garipzanov, with the assistance of Rosalind Bonté (2014)