Marie of France: Countess of Champagne, 1145-1198 9780812295672

Citation preview

Marie of France

THE MIDDLE AGES SERIES Ruth Mazo Karras, Series Editor Edward Peters, Founding Editor A complete list of books in the series is available from the publisher.

M AR IE OF FR ANCE Countess of Champagne, 1145−1198

Theodore Evergates

u n i v e r s i t y of pe n ns y lva n i a pr e s s p h i l a de l p h i a

Copyright © 2019 University of Pennsylvania Press All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations used for purposes of review or scholarly citation, none of this book may be reproduced in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher. Published by University of Pennsylvania Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ­19104-​­4112 www.upenn.edu/pennpress Printed in the United States of America on a­ cid-​­free paper 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2

Library of Congress ­Cataloging-​­­in-​­Publication Data Names: Evergates, Theodore, author. Title: Marie of France : Countess of Champagne, 1145–1198 / Theodore Evergates. Other titles: Middle Ages series. Description: 1st edition. | Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press, [2019] | Series: Middle Ages series | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018019187 | ISBN 978-0-8122-5077-0 (hardcover : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Marie, de Champagne, 1145–1198. | Countesses—France—Champagne-Ardenne—Biography. | Champagne-Ardenne (France)—History—To 1500. Classification: LCC DC89.7.M37 E94 2019 | DDC 944/.31021092 [B]—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018019187

Contents

Preface vii Chapter 1. Marie of France, 1145−1164  1 Chapter 2. Countess of Troyes, 1165−1181  11 Chapter 3. Regent Countess, 1181−1187  37 Chapter 4. Retirement, 1187−1190  63 Chapter 5. A Condominium Lordship, 1190−1198  74 Chapter 6. Images of Countess Marie  94 Appendix 1. Countess Marie’s Court Officers  103 Appendix 2. Andreas Capellanus as Witness to Countess Marie’s Acts  106 Appendix 3. The Regional Bishops  107 Genealogy of Countess Marie and Her Relatives  109 Chronology 111 List of Abbreviations  115 Notes 117 Bibliography 159 Index 175

Preface

Countess Marie of Champagne is known today primarily as a literary patron, notably of Chrétien de Troyes, who famously announced in his prologue to Lancelot, that since she “wished” him to tell the tale, he complied with her “command.” From that and several other mentions by contemporary writers, Marie has been cast as the animator of a “court of Champagne.” It is indeed ironic that, with few explicit references to her patronage, Marie is now cited more frequently than her husband, Count Henry the Liberal (1152−81), a commanding figure in his time who made the county of Champagne one of the premier principalities of northern France and whose intellectual interests are amply attested.1 Marie in fact was more than a cultural patron. She was ruling countess of Champagne for almost two decades in the 1180s and 1190s, initially during Count Henry’s absence overseas, then as regent for her son Henry II and as ­co-​­lord with him during the Third Crusade and his subsequent residence in Acre. From the age of t­hirty-​­four until her death at fi ­ fty-​ three she ruled almost continuously, presiding at the High Court of ­ Champagne and attending to the many practical matters arising in a vibrant principality of the late twelfth century. She acted with the advice of her court officers but without limitation by either the king or a regency council. If Henry the Liberal’s crowning achievement was to create the county of Champagne as a dynamic, prosperous state, Marie’s was to preserve it in the face of several existential threats. Historians of Capetian France have yet to appreciate the frequency and significance of wives acting in the absence of their husbands and during the minority of inheriting sons. That was a common family practice; only in a wife’s absence was a guardian or regency council appointed. During Countess Marie’s lifetime two royal regencies were necessitated by the absence of a resident queen while the king traveled overseas: when her mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, accompanied Louis VII on the Second Crusade, and when Queen Isabelle died in childbirth shortly before Philip II left on the Third Crusade.2

viii Pre fa c e

In each case the king designated regents as guardians of the realm. Louis appointed Abbot Suger of ­St‑Denis and the seneschal Ralph of Vermandois “for the custody of the realm” (de regni custodia), said Odo of Deuil, while Philip enacted an ordinance (ordinationem) granting his uncle William, archbishop of Reims, and his mother, Adele, the dowager queen, limited authority during his absence.3 Countess Marie, however, like most wives of princes, barons, and knights, was not burdened by a regency council.4 Her decisions at court and her letters patent carried the same authority as those of her husband and son, without mention of any provisional standing. Although she often associated her underage son with her in letters patent, she alone exercised the full plenitude of the comital office, even during Count Henry II’s extended stay in Palestine, and she sealed in her own name as countess of Troyes (her only title). Marie’s life beyond her role as literary patron and ruling countess encompassed an extensive network of family relationships, for she was connected by birth and marriage to two of the most prominent royal families of ­twelfth-​­century Europe. As the daughter of Louis VII and Eleanor of Aquitaine, Marie acquired through their second marriages numerous royal h ­ alf-​ ­siblings whom she regarded as brothers and sisters: Louis’s children Margaret of France and King Philip II, and Eleanor’s sons Henry, Geoffroy, and Richard. Even more directly important in providing a nexus of personal support for her rule in Champagne were Henry the Liberal’s ­well-​­placed siblings: the royal seneschal Count Thibaut V of Blois (1152–91), Archbishop William of Sens and Reims (1168–1202), and Queen Adele (1160–79, d. 1206). Marie’s seal inscribed her dual identity: “Daughter of the King of the Franks, Countess of Troyes.” We know very little about Marie before her cohabitation with Count Henry, and little thereafter during their s­ixteen-​­year marriage. Only during the 1180s and 1190s do we get to know her as regent and ­co-​­lord of Champagne, primarily through her letters patent. Beyond those ­chancery-​­produced records and brief mentions by chroniclers, prelates, and poets, there is scant documentary evidence for recovering a rounded picture of her life and works. This study is consequentially highly contextual in that it situates Marie within her extended families, regional institutions, and the contingent events that influenced her life from the very beginning. Had Bernard of Clairvaux not objected, she might have been betrothed shortly after her birth to Henry of Anjou. As it was, seven years later her mother, Eleanor, married the young



Pre fa c e

ix

count of Anjou and became queen of England. Although Marie did not cast as great a spell over the political affairs of Western Europe in the second half of the twelfth century, she was by all accounts an active and conscientious ruler of a wealthy and powerful northern French principality in the last two decades of the century.5

Episcopal city Episcopal principality ARTOIS County or duchy FLANDERS

BRABANT Liège

ARTOIS

HAINAUT Valenciennes

Arras

Cambrai er

ve Ri se i O

R

r

iv er

Mar

ne Ri

Châlons Bar-le-Duc

iver

r

Troyes Sens Villeneuvesur-Yonne

eR

iv e

River

BAR-LE-

Marn DUC

A eR ub

ne

Provins

e R Yonn

BLOIS Loir eR i ve r 0 0

Verdun

CHAMPAGNE

Sei

ROYAL DOMAIN

ChâteauThierry

ver

Brie-Comte-Robert Chartres

Reims Mareuil

Meaux St-Denis Paris

RETHEL e River sn

Ai

Gisors e

Soissons

er use Riv Me

Se in

Laon

Noyon Beauvais Compiègne

ive r

NORMANDY Rouen

LUXEMBOURG

VERMANDOIS eR

Riv

Mos ell

So mm e

NAMUR

25 25

50 Miles

ive r

Auxerre

Langres

NEVERS

50 Kilometers

Map 1. Northern France in the late twelfth century.

Metz

Chapter 1

Marie of France, 1145−1164

On 11 June 1144 the newly reconstructed abbey church of ­St‑Denis, just outside Paris, was dedicated with great fanfare. In his memoirs Abbot Suger names a few of the important lay and religious leaders of northern France he had invited to attended the ceremonies: five archbishops (Reims, Sens, Rouen, Bordeaux, Canterbury), thirteen bishops, and many prominent laymen, including the two most consequential personages of northern France, King Louis VII and his nemesis, Count Thibaut of Blois.1 On display were Suger’s abundant works in the church remodeled in the architectural style now known as Gothic: a luxurious great gold cross, stone carvings and l­ife-​­size portal sculptures, stained glass panels, and magnificent bronze doors, not to mention the rebuilt monastic compound. Between 1137 and 1144 an army of craftsmen had labored on what was to be a monument to the abbot, whose image or name was inscribed on virtually every object. A high point of the occasion was the presentation of gifts on the new altar of ­St‑Denis. As Suger described it, the bishops laid their pontifical rings as offerings on the altar while the laymen presented precious ­stones—​­emeralds from King Louis VII, hyacinths and rubies from Count Thibaut, and pearls from the other optimates. The king and the count also presented personal gifts to the abbot. Louis r­e-​­gifted a r­ock-​­crystal vase, now known as the “Eleanor Vase,” that he had received from Eleanor of Aquitaine on their marriage in 1137. It was an heirloom from her grandfather William IX of Aquitaine, who had received it from Mitadolus, the last Muslim king of Saragossa. For Suger, it was such a prized possession that he had a base crafted for it with an inscription describing its provenance.2 Thibaut, too, ­re-​­gifted an exquisite vase, a ­rock-​­crystal ewer sent by King Roger II of Sicily on the occasion of his son’s

2

Ch a p t e r 1

marriage to Thibaut’s daughter. Suger especially appreciated that it came “in the same box in which the king of Sicily sent it.”3 The success of that festive occasion was made possible by a “surreptitious summit” of prelates and princes who met at ­St‑Denis several weeks earlier, on 22 April.4 At issue was a simmering conflict that threatened to destabilize the realm, provoked most recently by the king’s ­heavy-​­handed intrusion into the episcopal election in Bourges and his wanton destruction of Count Thibaut’s ­castle-​­town of Vitry (spring–fall 1142).5 Of the many informal discussions, the most consequential was Queen Eleanor’s private meeting with Bernard of Clairvaux, the charismatic Cistercian abbot who was credited with performing miracles. According to the abbot’s traveling companion and secretary, Geoffroy of Auxerre, who made notes of their meeting, Queen Eleanor, then twenty years old, sought Bernard’s help because, she is quoted as saying, she had lived with the king for nine (sic) years and except for an early miscarriage had failed to bear a child and was despairing of her fertility. To which the abbot replied: “Diligently seek out a peaceful accord,” that is, convince Louis to make peace with Thibaut, “and I promise you a child through divine intervention.” 6 That was one of Bernard’s many anecdotes and deeds that Geoffroy recorded, from either witnessing or hearing about them from Bernard. On being informed of Bernard’s promise, Geoffroy continued, Louis agreed to reconcile with Thibaut, and the queen finally conceived and delivered a child. From that time, Geoffroy added, peaceful conditions prevailed in the realm. By this reading, it was Bernard’s intervention in the matter of Eleanor’s pregnancy that ultimately reset relations between Louis and Thibaut, making possible Suger’s triumphant performance at ­ St‑Denis on 11 June. Eleanor’s daughter Marie, named after the intercession of the Virgin Mary, was born the next spring, perhaps in March or April 1145.7

The Second Crusade About the time of Marie’s birth, news arrived in France of the destruction of Edessa and its Christian community by Turkish forces under Zengi (23 December 1144).8 Edessa was particularly vulnerable owing to its distance from the Mediterranean coast, and its destruction revealed the inherent weakness of the Frankish occupation of the Levant. The overseas Franks appealed for military support, but with the arrival of a new pope, the Cistercian Eugenius III (18 February 1145), the curia was slow in formulating a response to the first



Ma r i e o f Fr a n c e

3

existential threat to the crusader states since their establishment four decades earlier. Meanwhile, probably during the summer or fall of 1145, Louis decided to undertake a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. His motives, however, were not transparent. He may have been moved by the accounts of Edessa’s fall, or he may have envisioned a penitential journey to expiate his recent misdeeds, especially the destruction of Vitry with its considerable loss of innocent life.9 At his Christmas council in Bourges, where he announced his plan to go to Jerusalem, Bishop Geoffroy of Langres, an intimate of Bernard of Clairvaux, gave an impassioned sermon on the atrocities suffered by the Christians of Edessa. Yet the king’s barons were not inclined to join what seemed to be a personal quest to expunge his unseemly deeds. They did not yet know that on 1 December 1145 Pope Eugenius had called for a new crusade in the spirit of the First Crusade declared fifty years earlier at Clermont (1095). The prospect of a Second Crusade took hold in the early months of 1146. The pope reissued his bull Quantam praedecessores (1 March 1146), calling on the king of France and the great lords to continue the work of their ancestors in defending Christendom in the East. At Vézelay on Easter (31 March) the king and barons of France took the cross after a reading of the papal bull and agreed to leave on crusade from S­ t‑Denis the next year. It was at that point, in the summer or fall of 1146, while crusaders were preparing for their journey, that Count Geoffroy of Anjou sought to betroth his ­thirteen-​­­year-​­old son Henry to the infant Marie, at that time the king’s only child. Bernard of Clairvaux strenuously opposed it. In a letter to the king, Bernard reported that he had learned from reliable sources that Queen Eleanor and the count of Anjou were related in the third degree and therefore the marriage of their children was barred by the canonical impediment of consanguinity.10 Nothing came of that marriage proposal, but the prospect of Marie’s marriage would resurface during the crusade. The crusade army formed at ­St‑Denis on 11 June 1147, precisely three years after the dedication of the abbey church. Although the pope made no mention of women in his call for armed combatants to fight the infidel, Queen Eleanor and a number of highborn wives joined their husbands on the crusade. Marie was just two years old when her parents left, and four and a half years old when they returned in the fall of 1149.11 Two related events in the intervening years would determine the course of her life. The first was the bond formed on the crusade between Louis, then in his late twenties, and Count Thibaut’s son Henry, who was in his early twenties. It was an improbable relationship. Henry was born and spent his earliest years in Vitry, which

4

Ch a p t e r 1

the king’s forces had destroyed only five years earlier. But the peace arranged between the king and the count at ­St‑Denis tempered r­oyal-​­comital relations, allowing Louis and Henry to develop a close rapport during the overland march from Paris to Constantinople. Their bond was strengthened by Henry’s loyalty to the king during the difficult weeks in Asia Minor where Louis lost control of his army, which suffered devastating loses in the ascent of Mount Cadmus in early January 1148. By the time the French forces reached Acre, Louis had decided to betroth Marie to his steadfast companion from Champagne. That seems to be the import of William of Tyre’s description of Henry at the Council of Palmarea (24 June 1148), where the French barons decided to attack Damascus. Among the participants, according to William, was “Lord Henry, eldest son of lord Thibaut, count of Troyes, and ­son-​­­in-​­law ( gener) of the king, a young man of fine character.”12 In light of later events, it seems that t­hree-​­­year-​­old Marie was only promised in marriage, not yet formally betrothed to Henry. Even so, Henry was regarded as the king’s future ­son-​­­in-​­­law—​­and potential successor in the event that Louis failed to produce a son. When Henry returned to France in the summer of 1148 ahead of the royal couple, he carried with him a letter of appreciation from Louis addressed to Count Thibaut. Louis spoke of his close friendship (amor) with Henry, who had displayed “devotion at all times” and whose “loyal service” had earned the king’s gratitude and affection.13 Louis did not mention a betrothal, but he left no doubt that he had formed a special relationship with Henry. The second consequential event in Marie’s early life was the collapse of her parents’ marriage. According to John of Salisbury, who was in Rome at the time and must have heard reports from the East, Eleanor’s intimate talks with her uncle Raymond of Toulouse, prince of Antioch, had generated malicious rumors in the army, prompting an angry Louis to leave Antioch suddenly, with Eleanor in tow. That followed Eleanor’s announcement that their marriage was not valid, since she and Louis were related within the prohibited canonical degrees of kinship, and therefore she would seek a divorce.14 But Louis and Eleanor remained in the East another year and a half while they toured the holy sites. On returning in the fall of 1149, they stopped in Sicily, where they were entertained by King Roger II, and passed through Rome, where they met Pope Eugenius, who had seen them off at ­St‑Denis two years earlier. Eugenius prohibited any talk of divorce, and in order to foster a marital reconciliation, according to John of Salisbury, he tucked them in bed.15



Ma r i e o f Fr a n c e

5

Marie’s sister, Alice, arrived in 1150, probably in the summer months, another product of a Cistercian intervention in Eleanor’s marriage, if we accept John of Salisbury’s tale. We know nothing about Marie and Alice before 21 March 1152, when the Council of Beaugency under Archbishop Hugh of Sens heard a number of prelates and relatives of the king and queen swear that the couple was too closely related for a canonical marriage. And so Queen Eleanor was granted the divorce she had sought three years earlier while on the crusade. Leaving her two daughters in Paris, ­seven-​­­year-​­old Marie and ­two-​­­year-​­old Alice, Eleanor joined and then married (18 May) young Henry of Anjou, with whom she was rumored to have had a liaison.16 The girls may have come under the care of the queen mother, Adelaide, until she entered the convent of ­St‑Pierre of Montmartre in 1153.17 Within a year Louis had a new queen, Constance of Castile, and the girls were sent away.18 Exporting the children of a first marriage in order to make space for a new family was an entirely conventional practice. If Marie, between her fifth and seventh year, had developed any intimacy with Eleanor, there is no evidence of it, and it seems unlikely that she ever saw her mother again.19 Marie may still have been in Paris when she was formally betrothed to Count Henry of Champagne. The count’s notary quoted Henry, who in making a grant to the priory of Coincy said that he did it “in the year [1153] in which I betrothed (affiduciavi) the daughter of the king.” 20 Nothing further is known about the place and circumstances of that betrothal or whether ­eight-​­­year-​­old Marie gave her provisional “future consent” on that occasion to marry Henry. Just where she spent the next eleven years is not entirely clear. It may have been at the Benedictine convent of Avenay, just north of Count Henry’s ­castle-​­towns along the Marne and not far from the king’s friend Samson, archbishop of Reims (see Map 2).21 More likely she was placed in the household of the recently widowed Viscountess Elizabeth of ­Mareuil-​­­sur-​­Aÿ, a fortified town located only three kilometers from Avenay, where she could enjoy the company and educational opportunities of an old aristocratic convent while living with the viscountess.22 Guarding the road between Reims and Troyes, Mareuil was staffed by a garrison of seven knights supported by t­hirty-​­four knights who rendered annual castleguard, ranging from one to six months, under the command of the count’s viscount.23 The nuns of Avenay had a parish church just outside Mareuil’s walls, and so they were closely connected with the town by the time Marie arrived either in the

6

Ch a p t e r 1

convent or in the household of the viscountess.24 When Henry and Marie formally met in 1159, ostensibly for ­fourteen-​­­year-​­old Marie to confirm her betrothal, she was accompanied only by her tutor (magistra) Alice of Mareuil, not by the abbess or any nun from Avenay, suggesting that Marie and her tutor did not live in the abbey.25 Whether she lived in Mareuil or in Avenay, Marie apparently received a traditional ­Latin-​­based education in the decade she spent in Champagne, between her eighth and nineteenth years. She also must have acquired the regional vernacular and had become a fully acculturated Champenoise by the time she began to cohabit with Count Henry in late 1164 or early 1165.

Count Henry Count Henry, at t­hirty-​­seven, was eighteen years older than Marie and an experienced ruler when she arrived in Troyes. As a young man of twenty he had led the barons and knights of Champagne on the Second Crusade across central Europe and Asia Minor to the Holy Land. He had befriended King Louis, was knighted by Emperor Manuel Komnenos in Constantinople, and had visited the holy sites in Jerusalem. On his return he received two of his father’s counties, Vitry and ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube (1149–52), before succeeding at ­twenty-​­five to all his father’s lands east of the royal ­domain—​­the counties of Meaux (Brie), Troyes, Vitry, ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube, and a host of smaller lordships (10 January 1152).26 One of his first acts was to construct a new primary residence in the episcopal city of Troyes, making it, rather than his father’s preferred and more commercially developed city of Provins, the center of his principality (he always called himself “count palatine of Troyes”). The creation of a new comital compound in Troyes marked him as an ambitious prince. With his residence, attached chapel built in the latest Gothic style, and houses for ­twenty-​­five resident canons who served him at court and in his chancery, the count’s campus rose from the ground in the 1150s as an entirely new quarter of Troyes.27 At the same time Henry organized his lands into a cohesive polity consisting of thirty walled towns and fortresses linked by a network of secure roads, and he promoted the trade fairs that his father had developed, making them regional and ultimately international centers of commercial exchange. By the time of his death three decades later, Henry’s principality ranked as one of the most dynamic regions of northern France. While developing his own lands, Henry remained a close ally of the king,



Ma r i e o f Fr a n c e

7

who faced the prospect of becoming a “small king” in his own kingdom after the count of Anjou conquered Normandy, acquired Aquitaine through marriage to Eleanor, and was on the verge of taking the throne of England. The Angevin expansion certainly reinforced Louis’s embrace of Count Henry and his younger brother Thibaut V, count of Blois, who became royal seneschal in the fall of 1154.28 Count Thibaut witnessed virtually all of the king’s acts and consequently was intimately familiar with royal affairs until his death t­hirty-​ ­five years later on the Third Crusade. The ­brother-​­counts Henry and Thibaut proved loyal vassals of the king, with their lands on either side of the royal domain serving as a counterweight to the formidable block of lands controlled by the Angevins in Normandy and western France, especially after Henry of Anjou was crowned king of England (19 December 1154). It is not known when Count Henry first saw Marie. He might have seen her as a ­two-​­­year-​­old when the crusade assembled at ­St‑Denis in June 1147, and he probably met her as a young girl during one of his passages through Paris on the king’s military ventures in 1152 or 1153. They likely met when Henry betrothed her in 1153, but they are first attested together only in 1159, the year Marie turned fourteen and was of age, according to canon law, to give her “present consent” to marriage. It is unclear where they met. Marie’s tutor, Alice of Mareuil, may have brought her to Troyes to see the count’s newly constructed residence and chapel. But more likely the couple met in the count’s residence in Vertus, close to Avenay and Mareuil, where Henry arrived with a small riding party consisting of his butler Anselm of Traînel, marshal William of Provins, and notary William, who recorded the event.29 We know of that meeting only because Marie’s tutor asked Henry to give the nuns of Avenay a gift in appreciation of their hospitality, which he did, granting them eight setiers of ­grain-​­rent from his nearby mills at Auberive. Henry spoke of Marie as “the countess, my betrothed (comitisse sponse mee).”30 The scribe of his letters patent placed her name in the witness list before the count’s three companions and identified her as “Marie, countess of Troyes” (Maria Trecensis comitissa), which in a canonical sense she was, if she had given her consent to marriage. Marie then returned to the Mareuil household or to the convent at Avenay for another five years, until she was nineteen, perhaps because the ­thirty-​­­two-​­­year-​­old count considered her not ready to cohabit with him.31 The next year Queen Constance died in childbirth (4 October 1160). Louis was inconsolable, but the barons and prelates close to him urged him to remarry, for his own health as much as for the good of the realm. A ­well-​­informed

8

Ch a p t e r 1

chronicler in Sens noted that Louis acted on the advice of his barons (proceres), suggesting that the brothers Thibaut and Henry, two of the king’s closest supporters since the Second Crusade, counseled that he marry their youngest sister, Adele, who was about fifteen or sixteen.32 “It was especially feared that the kingdom might lack an heir,” which is to say a male heir of Louis’s body, since Count Henry’s betrothal to Marie promised a continuation of the royal lineage through her. Adele was said to be praiseworthy by nature, radiating good sense, and possessed of an elegant, virtuous body.33 Since Archbishop Samson of Reims refused to marry the couple on the grounds that they were too closely related, Archbishop Hugh of Sens, a longtime friend of the comital family, performed the wedding ceremony in the old ­Notre-​­Dame cathedral in Paris (13 November 1160) shortly before Maurice of Sully, the new bishop of Paris, undertook to rebuild the church.34 There is no evidence that Marie attended that event, but three canons who participated in the liturgy would become part of her life. Stephen of La ­Chapelle-​­­en-​­Brie, chanter of the cathedral of Meaux, who read from the epistle, later became bishop of Meaux (1162–71). William of Toucy, archdeacon of Sens, who read from the gospel, became bishop of Auxerre (1167–81). And Mathieu of Provins, precentor of Meaux and dean of ­St‑Quiriace of Provins, who led the choir in procession, became bishop of Troyes (1169–80). Two cardinal legates, Henry of Pisa and Odo of Brescia, witnessed as Archbishop Hugh crowned Adele. Louis’s remarriage had one predictable consequence: it upset Henry Plantagenet, who the previous May had signed a contract for the marriage of his son Henry, “the Young King,” with Louis’s ­two-​­­year-​­old daughter Margaret.35 When Henry’s chancellor Thomas Becket negotiated the marriage in 1158, it seemed that in the absence of male heir in France, Henry the Young King might inherit the French throne. But Louis’s quick remarriage after Queen Constance’s death jeopardized that possibility, and the English king immediately saw the implications of a powerful family block coalescing around Louis. The writer of the History of Glorious Louis VII (ca. 1171/73) understood that, too. In noting Louis’s marriage to Adele, he listed her four ­brothers—​­the counts of Troyes, Blois, and Sancerre, and the archbishop of ­Sens—​­and her four s­isters—​­the duchesses of Burgundy and Apulia, and the countesses of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc and ­Perche—​­as if to underline the extent of the family network behind Adele.36 King Henry II advanced his son’s marriage to 2 November, eleven days before Louis’s scheduled remarriage, and seized Margaret’s dowry of the Vexin, which the Templars were holding until the wedding.37 It is



Ma r i e o f Fr a n c e

9

unlikely that Marie, still in Avenay or Mareuil, knew about these maneuvers or even had met her infant h ­ alf-​­sister Margaret of France or future s­ister-​­­in-​ ­law Adele of Champagne. Two decades later Margaret and Adele, as dowager queens of England and France, would join the newly widowed Countess Marie in Troyes.

Noyon

Oise Riv

er

Comital castellany center

Château-Porcien

Laon

Aisne Riv er

Soissons

Braine

Compiègne

Fismes

Grandpré

Roucy Ves le

Reims iver Aisne R

River

Oulchy Neuilly

Châtillon-sur-Marne

Château-Thierry

iver Marne R

Avenay Mareuil-sur-Ay

Épernay

Dampierre-le-Château

Bussy

Vertus

Montmirail

Lagny Coulommiers

Arzillières Aube Riv er

Méry-sur-Seine

Nogent-sur-Seine

e River Yonn

Chacenay

Chaumont

Châteauvillain

Nogent

iver

Molesme

Arman ç

Reynel

R rce

ver Ri

Chablis

Lafauche

Ou

Se i

Tonnerre

Vaucouleurs Gondrecourt

Vignory Larrivour Bar-sur-Aube Vendeuvre LafertéClairvaux sur-Aube Chappes

ne

Auxerre

Bar-sur-Seine Ervy

R

Joinville

e Riv on

30 Miles 30 Kilometers

Aulnay Brienne

Isle-Aumont

Villeneuve-sur-Yonne SaintFlorentin Joigny

Trois-Fontaines Cheminon

Wassy

Villehardouin

Vauluisant TROYES Foissy Villemaur Montiéramey

Sens

15

Dampierre Ramerupt

Pougy Rosnay

Payns

Paraclete

Bray-sur- Traînel Seine

Bar-le-Duc

Marne

Plancy

Baudement

Pontigny

15

Vitry

r ive

Preuilly

0

Aulnay-l’Aître

Broyes

Provins Pont-sur-Seine

r

Possesse

Châlons

Sézanne Chantemerle

Jouy

Montereau

re Riv e

Ai

Nogent-l’Artaud

ver Ri

Montfélix

Meaux

0

Verdun e us Me

Fontaines

Baronial castle Episcopal city Monastery

Rethel

r

Mailly

Map 2. The County of Champagne in 1181.

Langres

Choiseul

Chapter 2

Countess of Troyes, 1165–1181

Marie was living in Troyes by April 1165, when her cleric Laurent (clericus comitisse) sat at Count Henry’s court.1 She may have arrived the previous fall, about the time that Henry’s brother William was elected bishop of Chartres (September 1164) and his brother Count Thibaut of Blois married Marie’s sister Alice, then about fourteen.2 Those family milestones coincided with the arrival in Sens of Thomas Becket (29 November), the exiled archbishop of Canterbury, who with his erudite entourage would be a regional presence for the next six years. We have no information about the date and place of Marie’s marriage, if a formal wedding was celebrated at all, since her consent to marry Henry, given in 1159 at fourteen, was sufficient in canon law to constitute a legitimate marriage.3 From that point on, Henry regarded Marie as his wife and countess, although he noted in 1166 that they only recently had begun to cohabit.4 Yet in a curious way their lives had been entwined ever since her birth in 1145, if the story of Abbot Suger’s promise to Queen Eleanor is to be believed. Offered in marriage to Henry during the Second Crusade and formally betrothed at eight in 1153, Marie had spent the next eleven years not far from Épernay, perhaps in the Benedictine monastery of Avenay but more probably in the nearby household of the viscountess of ­Mareuil-​­­sur-​­Äy.5 Marie was nineteen or twenty when she joined Henry in Troyes as the first countess to live in the new residence constructed shortly after he succeeded his father in January 1152. It was a multifunctional building complex containing a great hall (aula) for public events, residential chambers (camera), and an attached chapel (capella). It would be Marie’s home for the rest of her life. The location of her chambers within the building is unknown, but the windows of all the private chambers looked directly across the canal running along the rear of the residence, offering an unobstructed view of the old

12

Ch a p t e r 2

Figure 1. Count Henry’s residence and chapel of St-Étienne of Troyes, from Arnaud, Voyage archéologique, 25.

Benedictine convent of ­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains (Figure 1).6 The chapel of ­St‑Étienne, constructed in the latest Gothic style, and the count’s residence faced ­twenty-​­five newly built canons’ houses, each with a garden, giving the air of a pleasant open campus in what had been an undeveloped suburb fifteen years earlier (Figure 2). Just opposite the new campus was the old walled city of Troyes with the cathedral of S­ t‑Pierre and episcopal residence, the Augustinian monastery of ­St‑Loup, the Benedictine priory of S­ t‑­Jean-​­­en-​­Châtel, and the abandoned fortified compound of earlier counts of Troyes (Figure 3). Adjacent to both the enclosed cité and the open comital campus was the large commercial quarter of Troyes. Located on recovered marshland and enclosed ca. 1125, it had developed into a vibrant commercial and industrial center with an array of parish churches, merchant halls, lodges, and artisanal shops. By the 1160s three trade ­fairs—​­the m ­ id-​­July (“hot”) Fair of Saint Jean, the November (“cold”) Fair of



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

13

Figure 2. The comital campus with canons’ houses in Troyes, based on Roserot, Dictionnaire historique de la Champagne méridionale, 1598.

Saint Remi, and the ­mid-​­January Fair of the ­Close—​­attracted a steady stream of merchants to what was becoming a venue of international commercial exchange. Since Troyes was located directly on the trunk road between northern Europe and the Mediterranean, it also became a road stop for pilgrims on their way to Rome and Jerusalem, and for ecclesiastics dealing with an increasingly assertive papal curia. Adding to the mix of human traffic passing through Troyes was the flow of petitioners and litigants to Count Henry’s court held in the great hall of his residence (Figure 4, A). As the count’s capital city, as a commercial hub, and as a convenient stopover for travelers, Troyes in 1165 was a city in motion. Marie entered Henry’s social world as well as his residential campus and the built environment of Troyes. His uncle Henry of Carinthia was bishop of Troyes (1145–69), and his younger brother William was provost of the cathedral, b­ ishop-​­elect of Chartres, and soon to be archbishop of Sens (1168–75). Henry’s court was staffed with his crusade companions, and his chancery and chapel’s chapter, both newly formed institutions, were filled with his ap-

Figure 3. Plan of Troyes, ca. 1165, based on Chapin, Les villes de foires de Champagne, illustration 2.



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

15

Figure 4. Ground plan of the comital residence and chapel, based on Arnaud, Voyage archéologique, 25.

pointed secular canons. Marie played no evident role in the governance of the county during her fifteen years of marriage before Henry left on crusade in May 1179. Henry’s ­officials—​­his crusade companions and his father’s technical e­ xperts—​­had been working together since their initial appointments in 1152, and the secular canons in S­ t‑Étienne of Troyes and ­St‑Quiriace of Provins furnished his administrative and secretarial staff. Since Marie arrived without household personnel, Henry provided her with a cleric, Laurent, who served her secretarial needs for the next decade, writing and presenting her letters patent in the same manner that Henry’s chancellor prepared and presented his letters.7 Henry also tasked one of his knights, Nevel of Aulnay/Ramerupt, to be her personal escort, which he was for the next two decades.8 Her household included at least one ­lady-​­­in-​­waiting, a certain Nigra, for whom Marie later expressed a “sincere affection.” 9 It is not clear whether Marie brought a dowry in marriage, but Henry

16

Ch a p t e r 2

dowered her with lands and revenues in and around Provins and in the castellany of ­Jouy-​­­le-​­Châtel in addition to revenues collected from merchants at the Coulommiers toll station. Those were very likely the same properties and rents that his mother, Countess Mathilda, had enjoyed, with the exception of her private residence in Provins, which Henry gave to the sisters of the hospital in Provins after her death in 1160.10 Marie paid close attention to her dower revenues, which funded her household expenses. Soon after coming to Troyes, learning that toll evaders had reduced revenues at Coulommiers to less than ­one-​­third of their customary annual revenue of 7l. to 10l., she had the merchants of ­St‑Denis seized for circumventing the tolls. The abbot of ­St‑Denis complained to the king, but Marie reminded Louis that the tolls “are mine,” and she asked him not to trouble Henry with this matter.11 She was equally assertive in two other letters to Louis around the same time, in one defending her husband’s tenant who had angered the king.12 Marie never forgot that she was royal by birth and countess by marriage, as her seal declared (see below). Marie also entered Henry’s cultural world. For the past fifteen years his chaplain Nicholas of Montiéramey had nourished the count’s intellectual life by compiling anthologies of classical texts and, more recently, copying historical works to the count’s liking.13 Henry was noted for his inquisitive mind (his ingenium) and was reputed a serious reader, someone who withdrew from the business of practical affairs (negotium) to bury himself in a book, either sacred or secular, where he soaked up the “liberal waters” of the ancients. His personal collection of books included Josephus’s Jewish Antiquities and The Jewish War, Quintus Curtius Rufus’s History of Alexander of Macedon, Freculf ’s universal History, and perhaps Hugh of Fleury’s History of the Franks and Baudri of Bourgueil’s History of the First Crusade. All were copies of earlier works in Latin and reflected his interest in history. He possessed only one original work, a Latin verse adaptation of the Aeneid that he commissioned from the esteemed poet Simon Aurea Capra, at that time prior of ­St‑Ayoul of Provins (1148–54).14 Although Marie in all probability had learned to read Latin, there is no evidence that she was attracted to Henry’s historical works, which he seems to have kept as a personal library in his en suite chambers (Figure 4, D). Henry and Marie’s personal relationship remains obscure. They were eighteen years apart in age and had radically different formative experiences. Henry grew up the eldest of four boys and six girls. He accompanied his parents on their journeys and from an early age was groomed in the arts of governance. At the time of his marriage he enjoyed an extensive network of w ­ ell-​­placed



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

17

s­iblings—​­Queen Adele, Counts Thibaut of Blois (royal seneschal) and Stephen of Sancerre, Duchess Marie of Burgundy, and Countesses Agnes of ­Bar-​ ­­le-​­Duc and Mathilda of Perche. Their youngest brother William, provost of the cathedral of Troyes and S­ t‑Quiriace of Provins, was poised for a brilliant career in the church and soon became archbishop of Sens. Henry’s strong ties with his siblings made for a thick family network that lasted through his entire life and later supported Marie after his death. Marie’s early years, by contrast, lacked a secure grounding. Left in Paris as an infant of two during the Second Crusade, she was seven when her mother abandoned her and her younger sister Alice after the royal divorce of 1152. Marie seems not to have met her mother again, but even if she did, it is unlikely that they developed lasting emotional ties.15 Shortly after Louis remarried, the girls were sent away to the lands of their future husbands, Marie to Champagne and Alice to a convent or aristocratic household in western France. In 1164 f­ ourteen-​­­year-​­old Alice became the second wife of Count Thibaut, then in his ­mid-​­thirties, who complained to the king that Henry did not attend his wedding.16 But in 1166 Alice and Thibaut came to Troyes for the Christmas holidays, which may have been the first time the sisters met since their separation in 1153.17 Although Marie once referred to her “dearest” sister Alice, they seem to have led entirely separate lives, both in their formative years as young women and even later as regents and widows. Marie developed compensatory attachments to her younger ­half-​­siblings: Louis VII’s daughter Margaret (born 1158) and Eleanor of Aquitaine’s sons Henry the Young King (born 1155), Richard (born 1157), and Geoffroy (born 1158). She had even closer and ­long-​­lasting ties with Count Henry’s slightly older siblings, especially Queen Adele (born ca. 1145) and Archbishop William (born 1135).

1166–70 Marie’s first child was born on 29 July 1166, one year after Count Henry’s sister Queen Adele delivered the future Philip II (21 August 1165). Marie’s son was named Henry after his father, rather than according to the traditional practice of naming a fi ­ rst-​­born son after his grandfather (Thibaut). In honor of his son’s birth on the feast day of Saint Loup, Count Henry commissioned a luxurious gospel of John for the canons of S­ t‑Loup of Troyes, the Augustinian house located in the old town opposite the cathedral.18 Abbot Guitier (1153–94) later wrote that the count had been most generous in his benefactions, and that “he

18

Ch a p t e r 2

also gave this very gospel book which I have in my hands and in which I am writing, and [he] stipulated that it never be alienated from our church for any reason, at any time; young Henry, his son, is depicted in it presenting the book, as it were, to Saint Loup in commemoration of his birth, for which the book was given to the same Saint Loup.”19 The volume was bound with a cover of precious stones and a silver engraving of a boy offering the book to the saint.20 On that same occasion, “when my son Henry was born,” the count gave a 10l. revenue to the nuns at the nearby Fontevrist priory of N ­ otre-​­Dame of Foissy, just east of Troyes, where his father and mother had been benefactors since its foundation (ca. 1134) and where Helissent of Traînel, mother of Henry’s butler Anselm, had been prioress.21 Marie sealed her first letters patent as countess of Troyes in 1166. At court in Sézanne she gave the canons of ­St‑Quiriace of Provins two mills on the Vanne River in exchange for the grain rent they had received from Peter Bristaud, viscount of Provins. Peter had given the revenue for the burial of his first wife, Halvide, in ­St‑Quiriace, where her brother Mathieu was dean. Marie’s letter states that she acted with “the license and consent and approval of my lord and husband, illustrious prince Count Henry,” and that she had her letter sealed with her seal “because they [the mills] are from my dower (de dotalitio).” 22 Henry himself (ipse) witnessed, along with his court officers and Nevel, Marie’s knight escort (miles comitisse). In that same year in Provins, Marie transferred her lordship over several tenants to Milo Breban (of Provins) in homage (sub hominio), again with Henry’s explicit consent in the presence of the count’s council and her escort Nevel of Ramerupt.23 Marie also witnessed as Henry exempted the monks of Jouy from all taxes on the sales and purchases of goods at his markets and fairs for their own use.24 Since Jouy fell within her dower lands, Marie’s presence at court constituted her implicit consent. Four years later, when Henry granted use of the woods at Jouy to the canons of S­ t‑Quiriace and exempted all immigrants there from castleguard at the walls of Provins, Marie not only gave her consent, she had her seal affixed to the document next to Henry’s seal because, he is quoted as saying, “these things belong to her dower.”25 Her seal, typical of highborn women, depicts Marie standing in a long robe with a large belt, long sleeves hanging from her outstretched arms, and her hair falling to her shoulders. In her right hand she holds a large ­fleur-​­­de-​­lis between her thumb and index finger, and in her left hand she holds a bird of indeterminate species. The inscription reads: “Seal of Marie, daughter of the king of the Franks, countess of Troyes” (Figure 5).26 Marie’s first trip beyond the county was to Sens, where on 22 December



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

19

Figure 5. Seal of Marie of France, countess of Champagne, ca. 1192. Archives Départementales de l’Aube, Collection of Detached Seals, 42 Fi 97.

1168 she and Henry witnessed his brother William’s consecration as archbishop of Sens. Archbishops Henry of Sanglier (1122–42) and Hugh of Toucy (1142–68) had guided the transformation of the cathedral into the earliest Gothic cathedral in France, where the emphasis was placed on the size of the central space in what has been called “the conquest of space in width (not in height).”27 Pope Alexander III consecrated the altar on 9 April 1162, and six years later William became the first archbishop to be consecrated in the imposing new cathedral, which had served as a model for Count Henry’s chapel of ­St‑Étienne in Troyes. Also present on that occasion was Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, who had come to Sens in November 1164 to escape the wrath of Henry II of England in their clash over the proper role of the church in the kingdom. Becket and his company of learned clerics had spent two years of ascetic living at the nearby Cistercian monastery of Pontigny before moving to more agreeable lodgings at S­ te‑Colombe, the old Benedictine monastery in suburban Sens, in November 1166. Herbert of Bosham, Becket’s chief theological advisor, voiced the relief of his fellow clerics in singing the praises of Sens for its bountiful countryside and its hospitable townsmen.28 Archbishop William’s consecration in one of the largest and most impressive cathedrals in France must have been a satisfying moment for Becket, who had known William as a young man in England more than two decades earlier in the household of William’s uncle Henry, bishop of Winchester (1129–71).29

20

Ch a p t e r 2

Beyond being a celebratory event for Count Henry and his siblings, William’s consecration was an opportunity for Countess Marie, then ­twenty-​­two years old with a ­two-​­­year-​­old son, to see her father again, perhaps for the first time since she left Paris in 1153, and also to meet Henry’s sister Queen Adele, who attended with Louis.30 That marked the beginning of a l­ong-​­term relationship between Marie and Adele, a relationship that became closer in the 1180s after they were widowed. They were about the same age, both with young sons who promised to continue the lineages of their much older husbands. And they were intimately related, Adele having married Marie’s father, Louis, and Marie having married Adele’s brother Henry. The family gathering at Sens surely included Adele’s brothers Count Thibaut, the royal seneschal, and Count Stephen of Sancerre, who together with the queen, the new archbishop, and Count Henry represented a powerful block of siblings surrounding the king and his t­ hree-​­­year-​­old heir Philip. Several other encounters with the regional prelates in the late 1160s were more troubling for Count Henry.31 The bishop of Meaux confronted him over the counterfeiting of the bishop’s coin, which Henry apparently authorized in a clumsy attempt to establish his own coin, the provinois, as the exclusive currency of his trade fairs. The bishop of Langres challenged him over the homages Henry had accepted from the bishop’s own castle lords, in what appears to have been a policy of granting ­fief-​­rents for contingent homages, thus undercutting the exclusive loyalty of the bishop’s barons and expanding comital influence in the southeastern borderlands with Burgundy. The archbishop of Reims, the king’s belligerent brother Henry of France, unleashed an open border war over robbers harbored in the count’s lands who, he claimed, were harassing travelers to Reims. And finally Bishop Mathieu of Troyes asserted episcopal jurisdiction over the canons of ­St‑Étienne of Troyes, the count’s chapel, which Henry had envisioned as a private foundation and future family mausoleum free of episcopal interference. Henry was incensed that the bishop, the former dean of ­St‑Quiriace of Provins, who had cooperated with him in restoring the secular chapter there, would openly challenge Henry’s control over his “chapel,” which was larger and more imposing than the bishop’s antiquated cathedral, and modeled as it was on the new cathedral in Sens. But Pope Alexander III and Thomas Becket, who was in Sens until late 1170, and even the count’s brother William, by then archbishop of Sens, came down hard on Henry for presuming to appoint a chapter of perhaps forty secular canons independent of episcopal jurisdiction.32 The presence of a determined archbishop of Canterbury in exile close by in Sens stiffened the resolve of the



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

21

regional prelates to resist Henry’s hitherto easy ways regarding ­church-​­state matters. After the principle of the bishop’s jurisdiction over the count’s chapel was affirmed, but not enforced, that conflict died down. The count and the archbishop, both close neighbors in the s­ mall-​­town environment of Troyes in the 1170s, reached a working accommodation. At the same time in the late 1160s, the English exiles with Becket in Sens and their colleagues in Reims, including John of Salisbury, exercised a fruitful cultural influence in Troyes. Since the English had arrived in France without their books, they copied or commissioned copies of basic texts from exemplars in the libraries of the region’s monasteries and cathedrals. Becket’s theological mentor Herbert of Bosham worked with Count Henry’s chaplain Nicholas in locating and copying books, often in multiple copies, since Henry’s historical bent coincided with the interests of the English. During Becket’s six years in France, Henry acquired copies of such basic works as Geoffrey of Monmouth’s History of the Kings of England, Vegetius’s De re militari, Valerius Maximus’s Memorable Deeds and Sayings, Aulus Gelius’s Attic Nights, Livy’s Third Decade, the poems of Claudian, and no doubt many others.33 How Marie reacted to Henry’s ­book-​­related activities in the late 1160s is unknown, but his book collecting, at least of classical authors, ended after Thomas Becket and his clerics returned to England in the fall of 1170. It was in 1170 that an otherwise unknown poet who identified himself as “Chrétien (Chrestïens) of Troyes” completed Erec and Enide, the first Arthurian romance. A delightful tale of a young man negotiating his knightly and marital roles as he is about to be crowned king in a distant land, it is filled with references to the great men and places in the Plantagenet lands, with which the author was familiar, and is notable in depicting the coronation of the newly married Erec, king of Lac, in a scene modeled on Henry II’s Christmas festivities at Nantes in 1169.34 If Chrétien was a canon from Troyes with a genius for writing vernacular verse narrative, he might have been inspired by the tales of King Arthur in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s History of the Kings of Britain, perhaps from Count Henry’s own copy made from an exemplar in Pontigny, where Becket’s clerics were copying books for the archbishop.35 Although Erec and Enide is acclaimed as the first Arthurian romance, it lacks any evident connection to Countess Marie or to Champagne. The tale clearly depicts the Britain of King Arthur as if it were the realm of Henry II of England.36

22

Ch a p t e r 2

1171–75 In the spring of 1171 the ­twenty-​­­six-​­­year-​­old countess gave birth to her second child, a daughter, named Marie after herself rather than her mother or grandmother. Within months Count Henry negotiated a double marriage contract with Count Philip of Flanders (1168–91), son of his crusade companion Count Thierry. Since Count Philip lacked children, he acted on behalf of his sister Margaret and her husband, Count Baldwin V of Hainaut (1171–95). According to Gislebert of Mons, Baldwin’s chancellor who likely drafted the agreement, Countess Marie’s infant daughter would marry Baldwin’s infant son (Baldwin VI, born in July 1171), and Marie’s fi ­ ve-​­­year-​­old son Henry would marry Baldwin’s ­year-​­old daughter Elizabeth. The unions would occur when the principals reached “a marriageable age” (ad annos nubiles).37 Oaths were given, and the prospect of a double marriage joining the houses of Champagne and Flanders, the two most economically advanced principalities of northern France, lasted through the 1170s. Marie is rarely visible in the early 1170s. She is known to have sealed only a handful of letters patent, mostly as small benefactions from her dower revenues to women’s priories. To ­Notre-​­Dame of Voulton she gave a 10l. annual revenue from her tolls at Coulommiers and 10l. from her fair revenues at Lagny.38 To the Paraclete’s priory of Noëfort she gave 5 muids from the wine she received at Lagny.39 She enhanced her cleric Laurent’s prebend at ­St‑Quiriace by adding an annual 2l. rent owed by her tenants at Jouy (on her dower lands), and she confirmed her servant Nigra’s donation to N ­ otre-​­Dame 40 of Vertus for an anniversary after her death. The variety and circumstances of her letters, while few in number, suggest that she favored those who were close to her. In one case, she and Henry sealed separate but identical documents confirming the dower that the count’s treasurer Artaud of Nogent settled on his wife, Hodierne. Her dower included his lordship of N ­ ogent-​­­sur-​­Marne and all his possessions in the castellanies of C ­ hâteau-​­Thierry and Sézanne, but excluded his properties in Troyes and Provins, which he left to his children. In effect, Artaud formalized his wife’s right to live in their primary residence with her prescribed dower for the rest of her life. Artaud brought fifteen fief holders and servants to witness his act in the presence of the abbot of ­Val-​ ­secret and the count’s major officers. Marie’s letter differs from Henry’s on only one point: it identifies her as having been “joined by divine intervention in legitimate marriage to Henry, count of Troyes.”41 Those were strictly per-



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

23

sonal acts; none is concerned with governance, which remained entirely in Henry’s hand. Yet if Peter of Celle’s comment is any indication, Marie may have played a role in private, entertaining visiting dignitaries. It is not clear how well Peter knew Marie. He had been in Count Henry’s circle of learned prelates as abbot of ­Montier-​­­la-​­Celle (1145–62) near Troyes, and although he had transferred to Reims as abbot of S­ t‑Remi (1162–81) before Marie came to Troyes, he no doubt was kept informed of the count’s activities. Peter chided Abbot Bernerendus of ­St‑Crépin of Soissons for succumbing to Marie’s flattery at table in her private chamber (cubiculum) and for failing to broker a peace between the difficult archbishop of Reims and “his adversaries.”42 Peter was alluding to Count Henry’s conflict with the archbishop over the trespass of borders, which resulted in armed clashes between the count’s and the archbishop’s men in 1171 and 1172. That conflict was still unresolved when it was overtaken by the revolt of Henry Plantagenet’s sons (1173–74). It is likely that Marie accompanied Count Henry to Paris in 1173 to attend Louis’s Easter court, where the English king’s ­sons—​­Henry the Young King, Richard, and ­Geoffroy—​­took oaths not to make peace with their father without the consent of Louis VII and his barons, understood to include Count Henry and his brothers Thibaut and Stephen, who declared their support.43 Marie may have met her ­half-​ ­brothers for the first time on that occasion, and renewed her acquaintance with Queen Adele in what may have been the first time she returned to Paris since 1153.44 But the rebellion did not go well, and by July 1174 the English king had defeated his sons and their French allies. Queen Eleanor, who was deeply implicated in their revolt, was captured and sent back to England in the king’s custody along with the Young King’s wife, Margaret. The next year, when the Young King swore his loyalty and did homage to his father (May 1175), he offered Counts Henry and Thibaut as pledges to his good conduct.45 It is impossible to capture Marie’s involvement with her h ­ alf-​­brothers at that time, but her emotional reaction to Henry the Young King’s death in 1183 suggests that she had formed a genuine attachment to him and to Margaret, her ­half-​­sister. About the same time in the ­mid-​­1170s, two of Marie’s ­sisters-​­­in-​­law entered Fontevraud, where their youngest and ­never-​­married sister Margaret later was remembered as an “inimitable” nun, exemplary in comportment and conversation.46 Duchess Marie of Burgundy, widow of Odo III (1143–62), was in her m ­ id-​­forties when she entered Fontevraud in 1174.47 She is best known for having written to Louis VII, while regent for her eldest son Hugh III

24

Ch a p t e r 2

(September 1162–April 1165). She asked Louis to find her son a suitable wife “in your kingdom,” since Hugh was “your liegeman and relative,” and she inquired specifically about the sister of Ralph of Vermandois.48 When Hugh left on a private crusade to Jerusalem in 1171, she returned to rule in his stead and mediated an accord between the monks at Cîteaux and Odo of Marigny, who had damaged their grange.49 Later, after being driven out of Burgundy by her “malign son” and the barons in his company, Duchess Marie asked Louis to retrieve her dower, since she had no means of support.50 Following her entry in Fontevraud, Count Henry granted his “dearest sister” a lifetime rent of 10l. from two ­money-​­changing tables in Troyes, to be collected for her use by the prior of Foissy.51 Countess Marie witnessed Henry’s grant, made at court in Provins. Duchess Marie’s epitaph at Fontevraud remembered her as a widow who later devoted “her mind and body to God alone” and became abbess.52 Duchess Marie’s ­ twice-​­ married sister Isabelle/Elizabeth entered Fontevraud about the same time. After the death of her first husband, Roger of Apulia, son of Roger II of Sicily, in 1148, she returned to France and married William IV of P ­ erche-​­Goüet (1150/55). After his death in Palestine in 1168, Isabelle decided to join her sisters Margaret and Marie in Fontevraud.53 At that point Archbishop William urged Count Henry to increase his initial grant to Fontevraud by 10l. “because our sisters are nuns there.”54 The fact that three of Count Henry’s sisters were nuns in Fontevraud might account for Countess Marie’s later support of Fontevraud’s two priories in Champagne, Foissy and ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnains, where she may have spent her last days. Those religious conversions came against the backdrop of two other events that fostered thoughts of last things in the comital family. The first was the canonization of Thomas Becket (21 February 1173) and Bernard of Clairvaux (18 January 1174). Archbishop William, who had known Becket since his youthful years in England, led a highly visible campaign against Henry Plantagenet in reaction to the archbishop’s murder in Canterbury cathedral on 29 December 1170. In January 1171 he interdicted all the king’s lands in France and prepared a dossier for Becket’s sanctification.55 Count Henry had known Bernard since his earliest years as a close friend of the comital family, and Marie must have heard the story of the abbot’s interview with her mother at ­St‑Denis that resulted in her own (miraculous) birth.56 Those canonizations were highly personal events for Marie as well as for Henry and William. The other ­death-​­related event in those same years of the early 1170s was Count Henry’s commission of his own tomb for his chapel. It was an exquisite, even



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

25

extravagant, metalwork tomb, the first of its kind. Constructed by Mosan craftsmen in metal and enamel, it was decorated with sets of enamel plaques of Old and New Testament scenes.57 Work on the tomb was substantially completed by the time Henry responded to the pope’s appeal for military aid to support the crusader settlements in the east.58

Count Henry’s Crusade In January 1176 Pope Alexander III invited the French barons to undertake an expedition to Jerusalem to stem the rising Muslim tide and eroding position of the Franks in the east.59 The great lords and knights traveling to Jerusalem and the Levantine coastal cities in the 1170s returned with stories of the perilous conditions for the western settlers, an image reinforced by the pope’s letter, which drew vivid scenes of the Turks burning down cities and castles.60 Several prominent French princes, including Philip of Flanders, and a number of barons left for Jerusalem on 11 April 1177.61 Even the kings of France and England signed a truce (21 September) and planned a joint expedition to the east.62 Count Henry had resisted earlier appeals in 1165 and 1169, but this time he responded. Just before Christmas 1177, he took the cross from the hand of the papal legate. Promising to lead an expedition of Champenois overseas, he placed his lands under the pope’s protection.63 He was about to turn fifty and looked forward to revisiting the lands of his youthful exploits thirty years earlier, but this time without the king, who was too ill to travel. It was precisely during the ­run-​­up to Count Henry’s overseas expedition that Chrétien de Troyes wrote his second Arthurian romance, Cligés (ca. 1176), a complex narrative of a Byzantine family drama joined to an a­nti-​­Tristan themed story of magic potions and adultery.64 It begins with a quest for knightly fame by Alexander, oldest son of the emperor of Constantinople, who seeks his father’s permission to travel to Britain to be knighted by King Arthur and to serve at Arthur’s court with barons reputed for their courtesy and prowess. The emperor advises his son to show good manners and to be courteous and generous, for generosity (largece), says the poet, is the queen and lady who brightens all virtues: it alone makes a man worthy, far surpassing all other virtues.65 Those are unmistakable allusions to the young Count Henry, who during the Second Crusade a quarter century earlier had crossed the Mediterranean in the other direction, seeking to be knighted by Emperor Manuel Komnenos in Constantinople because, as Bernard of Clairvaux wrote

26

Ch a p t e r 2

in his letter of introduction for Henry, the emperor’s court was the most prestigious and it would be a memorable occasion for the young count.66 Chrétien clearly knew of Henry’s crusade experience, his upright character (which Bernard stressed in his letter), and his renown for largesse, having been dubbed “the liberal” (largus). Just as notable in Cligés are the many specific references to places in England, as in Erec and Enide, demonstrating once again Chrétien’s direct knowledge and use of the English landscape to depict the realm of King Arthur.67 Chrétien had invented a perfect double translatio, of ancient literary culture passing from east to west, and of chivalrous practices being mastered by a Greek prince at the court of King Arthur.68 The novel scenario in Cligés, a fusion of Arthurian materials within an interplay between East and West, would have resonated with an audience in the ­mid-​­1170s, when the emperor of Constantinople, Manuel Komnenos, was known to esteem the Franks and Western chivalry. Chrétien’s audience certainly recognized the Greek emperor who had married the daughter of Prince Raymond of Antioch and who admired ­Westerners—​­Latinos dilexerat, reported Robert of Auxerre.69 A generation of Second Crusade veterans associated with Count Henry, men in their fifties, would have been intrigued by Chrétien’s references to Constantinople and the Byzantine royal family, as they recalled their visit to Constantinople and their own war stories of three decades earlier. They certainly saw the young Count Henry as an Alexander figure. They may not have known, as Chrétien did, of another Alexander narrative being written concurrently by Walter of Châtillon, a canon in Reims. Walter’s Alexandreis, a Latin verse adaptation of the f­ourth-​­century History of Alexander by Quintus Curtius Rufus, soon became widely read in the schools.70 The Alexandreis and Cligés shared another association: Walter was working under Archbishop Henry of Reims (1162–75), a reputed collector of fine books and former bishop of Beauvais (1149–62), whose cathedral library, claimed Chrétien, had furnished him the book with the story of Cligés.71 During the next seventeen months, January 1178 to May 1179, Count Henry put his affairs in order, raised money and materiel for an overseas trip expected to last several years, and arranged for Marie to rule in his absence. For Henry, the peace of his realm was of critical importance, not only for the viability of his trade fairs, which had become his primary source of revenue, but also because his only son was a minor of twelve. Countess Marie would rule the county until he returned or, in the event of his death overseas, until their son attained his majority of t­ wenty-​­one on 29 May 1187. Marie wrote to Pope Alexander III announcing Henry’s planned expedition and seeking papal



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

27

protection during his absence; the pope responded by placing Henry’s lands “and you [Marie] and all that pertains to you” under papal protection until his return.72 That was a necessary precaution. But Henry had to provide a more concrete defense of his principality in his absence, since the county of Champagne as constituted in 1178 was a recent creation. From the several counties and lordships that he inherited from his father in 1152, Henry had established castellanies as new administrative and military districts around his thirty walled towns and fortresses. All who held fiefs from him, whether great lords or knights, were classified administratively according to the castellany in which their fiefs were located and where many of them owed annual castleguard. In order to leave Countess Marie an accurate record of the disposition of his fiefs and their military service, Henry had his chancellor conduct an inquest of his fiefholders in the fall of 1178. The resultant rolls of fiefs, one rolled parchment per castellany, provided Marie with a template of the count’s feudal tenants and their service obligations, critical information at risk of being lost in the event that Henry and his chief officers, including the marshal, who monitored the count’s military affairs, failed to return.73 Henry may have planned to leave for the East in the early spring of 1179, but by February, Marie was six months pregnant with their fourth child (a second daughter, Scholastique, was born at an undetermined date in the 1170s), and so Henry postponed his departure. Those were hectic months, not only for Henry and Marie. In the early weeks of 1179 a stream of northern European prelates passed through Troyes on their way to Rome for the Third Lateran Council (5–19 March).74 Most of the region’s prelates attended the Council, including Henry’s brother William, now Archbishop of Reims (1176–1202), Archbishop Guy of Sens, Bishops Mathieu of Troyes and Simon of Meaux, and a large number of abbots from Champagne. Among the northern Europeans who stopped in Troyes that spring was the Welsh cleric Walter Map, sent by Henry II of England to observe the Council’s proceedings. Walter later recounted his reception by Count Henry in Troyes and their repartee over the meaning and practice of generosity, for Walter knew of the count’s reputation for being so generous as to be prodigal (prodigus): “to everyone who asked, he gave.”75 Walter contrasts Count Henry’s defining trait of generosity (largitatem) with Louis VII’s “mildness” (mansuetudinem), which he had observed during a long stay in Paris with the king. As Walter quoted him, Louis compared himself with Walter’s own king, Henry II, who was fabulously wealthy in all material things. “We in France,” said Louis, “have nothing but bread and wine and gaiety.” That, comments Walter, “was merrily said and truly.”76

28

Ch a p t e r 2

Walter later gathered his exempla, short stories, history, and fiction, in effect, interesting anecdotes, in his Courtiers’ Trifles, a miscellany in the manner of Valerius Maximus’s ­first-​­century Sayings and Doings. Walter does not mention Countess Marie, who surely was at table and heard him relate not only his inventive tales but reports on her mother, who was still held in confinement by Henry II, and her father, and ­sister-​­­in-​­law Queen Adele, whom Walter had met in Paris. If Margaret of France already had arrived in Troyes for Countess Marie’s ­lying-​­in, she too would have been interested in Walter’s tales, especially of the doings of her father, Louis, and her husband, Henry the Young King, who seemed to be leading a separate life. And if Chrétien de Troyes actually was living in Troyes, he would have listened with much interest to Walter’s diverting conversation.77 But Walter’s brief visit in Troyes furnished him nothing more memorable than an anecdote of Count Henry’s witty remark. Continuing on to the Lateran, Walter witnessed as Archbishop William of Reims was named c­ ardinal-​­priest of Santa Sabina on 14 March 1179.78 William would become the pope’s most powerful voice in French royal affairs and a pillar of support for Countess Marie in the absence of her husband and later of her son overseas. It was at this point, in the last months before Henry’s departure, that Marie became active at court, joining Henry in his acts, as if confirming them in anticipation of his absence and asserting herself as a public figure with comital authority. In one case, she added her seal to Henry’s substantial grant enlarging the endowment of St‑Nicholas of Sézanne, a chapter he largely funded.79 But her most consequential appearance was in Henry’s grant of a communal charter to the residents of Meaux, the first of its kind in Champagne.80 It was a radical act in that it applied to all the townsmen of Meaux, including the bishop’s men, and was granted while Bishop Simon of Lizy was still in Rome at the Third Lateran Council. The charter’s first clause required all “men of Meaux” to swear faithful service to Henry and to “my wife Countess Marie and my son Henry (II)” and their successors.81 The townsmen owed the count military service, essentially as a communal militia, and received a number of liberties typical of other franchised ­communities—​­freedom to marry at will and from seizure except by the mayor, and commutation of the taille and personal t­axes—​­all in return for a 140l. annual communal payment. Henry took under his protection all foreign merchants doing business in Meaux and established a notary public (scriptor), to be appointed by his chancellor, thus providing an alternative to the bishop’s chancery for drawing up legal documents and commercial transactions. Meaux was the only town in the count’s



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

29

lands to enjoy such privileges. The communal charter, which Henry said that he granted “with the consent of my wife Marie,” brought under his direct control the most important town in the county after the fair towns of Troyes, Provins, and ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube. On Sunday, 13 May 1179, the ­thirty-​­­four-​­­year-​­old countess gave birth to her second son, Thibaut. We know that because Count Baldwin V of Hainaut, perhaps in anticipation of Count Henry’s journey overseas, had arrived in Troyes to confirm the marriage contract that his b­ rother-​­­in-​­law, Philip of Flanders, had signed with Henry in 1171 According to Gislebert of Mons, who recorded the event, Baldwin reaffirmed the double marriage contract for their children, his ­nine-​­­year-​­old daughter Elizabeth/Isabelle with ­thirteen-​­­year-​­old Henry of Champagne, and his son Baldwin with Marie of Champagne, both eight years old. On that very day, reports Gislebert, Marie gave birth to a boy, named Thibaut after his grandfather.82 Attending Marie’s l­ying-​­in was her ­twenty-​­­one-​­­year-​­old ­half-​­sister Margaret of France, the only child of Queen Constance, Louis’s second queen. Margaret had been betrothed as an infant in 1158, married at two years of age to fi ­ ve-​­­year-​­old Henry the Young King of England, and raised in the household of Robert of Neubourg, seneschal of Normandy, until she was crowned as future queen of England in 1172 and began to cohabit with Young King Henry. It is likely that she had accompanied the Young King to Paris in the spring of 1173 during the Plantagenet rebellion, and met Marie there. She returned to Paris in 1177 to deliver a boy, who died within three days, and remained in France while her husband followed the tournament circuit. At some point, perhaps in 1177 and certainly by 1179, she came to Troyes to be with Countess Marie.83 Count Henry provided her with a 10l. lifetime income, payable at the fairs of Troyes, half in July and half in November, transferable at her death to ­Notre-​­Dame of Foissy.84 It was a modest sum but enough to support Margaret’s minor expenses if she stayed with Marie in Troyes or in the visitor’s residence in Foissy. Shortly after Thibaut’s birth, ­toward the end of May 1179, Count Henry, ­fifty-​­two years old, left for Jerusalem with his great officers and a small army of barons and knights. Marie could not have foreseen that she would rule the county for most of the next two decades.

Countess of Champagne Countess Marie, at ­thirty-​­four, was left with four underage children: ­thirteen-​ ­­year-​­old Henry, ­eight-​­­year-​­old Marie, a somewhat younger Scholastique, and

30

Ch a p t e r 2

infant Thibaut. It is likely that Margaret remained with her in Troyes or took up temporary residence in Foissy while Henry the Young King was engaged in his military pursuits.85 In the weeks following Count Henry’s departure, Marie was presented with several of his letters for her confirmation, a sign of her new role as ruling countess. The canons of S­ t‑­Martin-​­­ès-​­Aires of Troyes asked her to confirm Henry’s grant of a 100s. revenue from the gate of ­St‑­Martin, collectible at the two fairs in Troyes. Since all the count’s high officers had left with him, several knights, including Marie’s escort Nevel of Aulnay, and canons from S­ t‑Étienne witnessed her confirmation. Also witnessing was Brother Mathieu, a Templar serving as Marie’s almoner in the absence of Count Henry’s almoner, Brother William, who left with the count.86 Marie said that she was acting for herself and for her son Henry.87 If Marie received any personal letters from Henry during his outbound journey via the Rhône to Marseille, Brindisi, and Acre, none has survived.88 We know of only one of his benefactions given en route to Jerusalem. In Beaune, where he met his nephew Hugh III, duke of Burgundy, Henry assigned a 20l. revenue from the toll at P ­ ont-​­­sur-​­Seine to support the Cistercian abbots attending their General Chapter meeting at Cîteaux. The notary Alberic, who drafted the letter, quoted the count as saying that he made the grant “while I am on the road to Jerusalem.” 89 The count’s letter was sent to the abbot of Larrivour, who presented it to Marie in Troyes for her confirmation; she directed that the revenue be collected “from whoever holds the tolls.”90 Marie’s ­brothers-​­­in-​­law stood ready to assist her in the absence of Henry’s officers and companions, if Count Thibaut’s ­letter-​­mandate to Henry’s “justices” is indicative. Identifying himself as the “seneschal of France,” he warned them not to seize Clairvaux’s goods, on risk of being brought to justice “by me or my brothers.” 91 His concern for Marie was unnecessary. The handful of her letters patent from 1179 and 1180 that survive suggest that she was a forceful ruler, as does Alexander III’s letter of 17 June 1180 to Marie. “In your anger,” he wrote, she had injured the cleric L. without reasonable cause, and therefore he could not honor her unspecified request; he asked that she stop persecuting said cleric.92 We know neither the name of the cleric nor the matter at hand, but the pope’s letter, like Marie’s earlier letters to her father, reveals a securely confident countess. The most important matter confronting Marie was her strained relationship with her h ­ alf-​­brother Philip. Since Louis VII had fallen ill and became paralyzed after his pilgrimage to Canterbury (22 August 1179), Archbishop William crowned Philip in Reims on 1 November 1179, in accordance with



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

31

Louis’s wishes.93 Rigord, who wrote an entire book on the deeds of Philip II, had little to say about the coronation, noting only that Henry the Young King of England carried the crown and held it over Philip’s head.94 The Young King was accompanied by his brothers Richard and Geoffroy, who had grown close to Philip in the past few years.95 Gislebert of Mons, who witnessed the coronation, reports that Philip of Flanders, a “most powerful” count who came fully armed with many knights, “claimed” the right to carry the king’s sword, and that his ­brother-​­­in-​­law Baldwin V, count of Hainaut, brought eighty knights at his own expense despite not having ties with the king, either by homage or by treaty or “familiarity.” 96 As Count Baldwin’s chancellor, Gislebert hints that something was at play in the background. Knowing what came next, we can infer that the count of Flanders already was plotting the new king’s marriage to Baldwin’s daughter Elizabeth, who twice had been promised to Countess Marie’s son Henry (II), most recently in June, just before Henry the Liberal left on his overseas trip.97 It is not surprising that no contemporary observer or writer mentions Marie’s presence at the coronation.98 Neither she nor Queen Adele and her brothers, the seneschal Count Thibaut and Count Stephen of Sancerre, would have attended the coronation of a ­boy-​­king who was planning to abrogate a quarter century of ­Capetian-​­Champenois alliance. Shortly after his coronation, ­fourteen-​­­year-​­old Philip acted on his dislike of his Champenois relatives by confiscating his mother’s dower lands and dismissing Count Thibaut as royal seneschal. Count Philip of Flanders emerged as the young king’s chief advisor. Maneuvering to his own advantage, he suggested that the new king marry t­en-​­­year-​­old Elizabeth of Hainaut. That was by all accounts a dastardly act. The girl’s father, Count Baldwin, was reluctant to break the contract he had sworn to observe. But her marriage to King Philip would be mutually advantageous, to the count for the royal connection, and to the king for acquiring “a very beautiful” wife and her dowry of the prosperous and strategically located Artois.99 A royal marriage not only strengthened Count Philip’s influence over the young king at the expense of what Philip II regarded as his overbearing Champenois relatives, it had the further advantage of preempting the girl’s marriage to the future count of Champagne, whose combined lands would have overshadowed the royal domain. The king’s close relatives favored an alliance with the house of Hainaut, and the matter was discussed with the old king at S­ t‑Denis, where Count Baldwin and Countess Margaret of Hainaut celebrated Christmas in 1179. The new king had sworn to marry the count of Hainaut’s daughter, remarked

32

Ch a p t e r 2

Robert of Torigni, but “by whose advice, I do not know.”100 A powerful convergence of interests between the two Philips led to a sudden reversal of familial and political alliances. Count Baldwin finally yielded to the blandishments of the royal party, and early in 1180 the count of Flanders sealed a contract for Elizabeth’s marriage to the new king. On 28 April 1180 the bishop of Laon celebrated the marriage of ­fifteen-​­­year-​­old Philip II with ­ten-​­­year-​­old Elizabeth of Hainaut in Arrouaise abbey.101 One month later at ­St‑Denis (29 May 1180), Isabelle, as she was called thereafter, was crowned queen by Archbishop Guy of Sens and married a second time, in the unseemly absence of the queen mother.102 The king acted “against the wishes of his mother and her friends,” observed one chronicler, “and mostly against the wish of his uncle Archbishop William, brother of his mother the queen,” who had crowned him only months earlier.103 Queen Adele already had left the royal residence for the lands of her brother Thibaut, who likewise had fallen from Philip’s favor. With the crowning of the new queen at ­St‑Denis instead of Reims, the palace revolution was complete. Queen Adele and her b­ rothers—​­the entire Champenois clan that had been Louis VII’s most loyal supporters for the last three ­decades—​­was dislodged. Needless to say, the queen mother, her Champenois relatives, and a good number of the northern princes and barons were more than displeased. Gervase of Canterbury, writing at some distance a decade later, reports that by his marriage Philip “incurred the indignation of his uncles and of almost all the nobles of France because he scorned their advice, believing only the count of Flanders, and because of the count’s advice he wished to have as queen a woman of such humble origins.”104 Not only was the marriage an affront to Queen Adele, it preempted a regency for her ­fifteen-​ ­­year-​­old son, a role she might well have anticipated during Louis’s last days, when she held court in Paris and confirmed Louis’s acts in the presence of her brother, the royal seneschal.105 For Countess Marie, the issue was different. The king, her h ­ alf-​­brother, had stolen her son’s ­twice-​­promised betrothed. Taking the betrothed of one’s own vassal was exactly the violation of a lord’s trust for which the king’s court later convicted King John of England. Henry the Liberal might have salvaged an agreeable arrangement with his royal nephew, who knew and respected him, but Marie found it extremely difficult to navigate through conflicting family loyalties and interests in Henry’s absence. No doubt Marie and Adele saw Philip as a ­boy-​­king, unready to rule, while he revolted against two experienced and domineering women in their m ­ id-​­thirties. Marie had good reason



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

33

to be angry for the jilting of her son, but it is not clear whether she actively opposed Philip or simply remained neutral in his quarrel with his mother. Rigord reports that certain “princes of the realm” ( principes regni), whom he discreetly fails to name, “conspired” against Philip and devastated his lands, to which the king reacted with great fury.106 William of Nangis, writing much later, accused Adele’s r­elatives—​­the duke of Burgundy, the archbishop of Reims, and Counts Thibaut of Blois and Stephen of ­Sancerre—​­of conspiring against Philip and “troubling” the entire realm, to which Philip responded by hiring Brabantine mercenaries to devastate the county of Sancerre.107 At that point Henry II of England was asked to mediate a restoration of amicable relations between Adele and Philip.108 The two kings met on 28 June 1180 at the traditional meeting place, halfway between Gisors and Trie, where they made peace between themselves.109 In a side agreement Queen Adele reconciled with her son and recovered her dower lands (without their castles) with the promise of 7l. per diem as living expenses until Louis VII died.110 It was a curious twist in ­Capetian-​­Plantagenet relations, coming only a few years after Louis had encouraged Henry II’s sons to revolt against him. Marie presumably knew nothing about Henry’s adventures overseas and his circuitous return trip in 1180. Captured by Turks in Anatolia and ransomed by the Byzantine emperor, Henry proceeded to Constantinople, where he met his sister Adele’s ­nine-​­­year-​­old daughter Agnes, newly married to the emperor’s son Alexis Komnenos. Returning to France via Palermo and Rome, Henry reached Sens by December 1180, where he gave Philip II sober advice on dealing with Emperor Frederick of Germany. He finally arrived in Troyes on 8 March 1181 in ill health after an arduous, yearlong trip from Jerusalem and almost two years after his departure from Troyes.111 Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, writing a half century later, states that Henry became ill on entering his lands.112 During the next eight days he confirmed several benefactions and commitments he had made earlier. His last act, made while “gravely ill,” as he said, was to exempt the bishop’s tenants from arbitrary taxes during an episcopal vacancy. Bishop Mathieu, who had been a thorn in Henry’s side, died the previous September while Henry was in Constantinople, and the bishopric was still vacant.113 Henry said that he acted with the approval of “my brother William, archbishop of Reims and cardinal,” who apparently had come to Henry’s deathbed, and “my dearest wife Countess Marie and my devoted son Henry.”114 Count Henry died in the evening of 16 March 1181. Countess Marie immediately became regent for her fi ­ fteen-​­­year-​­old son, Henry (II).

34

Ch a p t e r 2

Marie’s Cultural Patronage Of Chrétien de Troyes’s four Arthurian romances written in the ­1170s—​­Erec and Enide (1170), Cligés (1176), The Knight of the Cart (Lancelot, ca. 1177), and The Knight with the Lion (Yvain, 1177/81)—​­only Lancelot relates directly to Marie.115 It begins: “Since my lady of Champagne wishes me to begin a romance, I shall do so most willingly, like one who is entirely at her service.”116 The poet goes on to praise the countess: “She is the lady who surpasses all women who are alive,” and compares her to a gem of a person who eclipses queens (think Queen Eleanor, who at the time was being held prisoner by Henry II for supporting their sons’ rebellion).117 Chrétien concludes his prologue by stating that the countess furnished the book’s subject matter (matière) and its meaning (san), and that he “adds nothing but his effort and careful attention,” that is, his literary craftsmanship.118 That single mention has established Marie’s reputation as patron of the arts and, by extension, the repute of a “court of Champagne.” Just what Marie gave Chrétien, if anything, remains a mystery, and we are left to wonder whether she actually conceived a dramatic tale of adultery by King Arthur’s queen, in bed with Lancelot, at a time when the queen of England was none other than Marie’s mother, whose infidelities while queen of France were widely rumored. Chrétien himself was conflicted by such an episode, which runs counter to his other works, and by claiming that he brought only his artistry to the tale, he carefully distances himself from the matter of the tale.119 In essence, Chrétien crafted Marie’s narrative in verse just as earlier, he claimed, he refashioned a tale from a book in the Beauvais cathedral library (for Cligés) and later reworked a story from a book supplied by Count Philip of Flanders (for Perceval ). Chrétien is thought to have written The Knight with the Lion (Yvain) concurrently with Lancelot, without accounting for the story’s provenance. It is generally accepted that the two tales were written in counterpoint with one another in the years 1177–81, that is, during Henry the Liberal’s last years in Champagne and absence overseas, just as Marie was transitioning from countess consort to ruling countess of Champagne in Henry’s stead.120 Interpreting Lancelot and Yvain and their relationship to Marie remains a challenging quest, given the elusive identity of Chrétien himself. He may have been the canon Christianus of ­St‑Loup of Troyes who was listed in 1163 among the sixteen canons consenting to their chapter’s exchange of land for the fifth vacant prebend in the count’s chapel.121 That Christianus witnessed an act of the



Co u n t e ss o f Troyes

35

bishop of Troyes in 1173, and later was remembered as a priest of the cathedral chapter.122 Another Christianus was chaplain (capellanus) of ­St‑Maclou, the chapter of secular canons established by Count Henry in 1159 in his palace in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube.123 This chaplain witnessed nine acts of the bishop of Langres between 1172 and 1189, all dealing with property passing to Clairvaux.124 This Christianus apparently joined the Cistercians there, where he was identified as a monk in 1190.125 It is possible that a single ­Chrétien—​­a pluralist canon of ­St‑Loup, the cathedral of Troyes, and S­ t‑­Maclou—​­wrote the Arthurian romances and left the Story of the Grail (Perceval) unfinished before retiring to Clairvaux at the time of the Third Crusade. It is also possible that there were two canons named Christian, one in Troyes, the other in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube. Whether either one, or someone else, wrote the brilliantly inventive Arthurian romances in the 1170s cannot be determined. Nor is it clear how the writer was related to Henry and Marie. Another poet often connected with Countess Marie is Gautier d’Arras, whose verse Eracle is an adventure story of ancient Rome and Constantinople very much in vogue at the time and in the mode of Chrétien’s Cligés, with which Gautier was familiar.126 Gautier states that he wrote Eracle for Count Thibaut (V of Blois, the royal seneschal) “and for the other countess, Marie, daughter of [King] Louis.”127 Marie may well have made an encouraging remark, but Gautier’s casual mention of Marie scarcely qualifies her as a patron.128 In fact, Eracle ends with a dedication to Count Baldwin of Hainaut, who had urged Gautier to finish it, perhaps after Count Thibaut’s death in 1191: “Count Baldwin, I present you this work.”129 Although only one of Chrétien’s works can be explicitly connected to Marie, it would be naive to claim that she was unaware of the multiple vernacular works composed within her own lifetime: lyrics, Breton tales, recast romances of antiquity, and the entirely new imaginative narratives that comprised an alternative cultural world to the “academic” learning taught in the schools and savored by Count Henry.130 But with the exception of Lancelot, whose author disavowed its most distinguishing episode of an adulterous queen and her subservient knight, no other original work written in the 1170s, in either Latin or French, can be positively attributed to the patronage of Henry or Marie.131 Henry collected copies of ancient works of a historical nature but is not known to have commissioned new works of history; nor is Marie known to have commissioned any original work besides Lancelot. Even if Chrétien de Troyes lived and composed his romances in Troyes, there is no evidence that he, in all likelihood a secular cleric, performed his brilliantly

36

Ch a p t e r 2

crafted tales “at court.” The “court of Champagne” is more properly understood as the occasion and place where Henry the Liberal and Countess Marie conducted the business of their principality in the halls of their residences in their thriving towns.

* * * Countess Marie was ­thirty-​­six when widowed in March 1181. She had come to Troyes seventeen years earlier as the first countess to live in the new comital residence at a time when Troyes was experiencing explosive demographic and economic growth and becoming a center of international commercial exchange. Beyond the merchants, monastic purchasing agents, and retail buyers coming to the trade fairs, a steady flow of pilgrims and churchmen passed through Troyes on their way to Rome, pilgrimage sites, and Jerusalem, and a constant stream of petitioners and litigants came to court held in the count’s Great Hall. Marie witnessed that surge of human activity in Troyes during the late 1160s and through the 1170s. But she rarely appeared with Henry at court and did not share in governance with him. Only after Henry left on crusade in May 1179 did she preside at court, surrounded by a small coterie of loyal knights and clerics in the absence of Henry’s great officers, with her personal escort Nevel listed first among the witnesses to her confirmations of Henry’s recent acts.132 She did not undertake any new initiatives in Henry’s absence; hers was a regime of preservation, which she prudently displayed by associating her ­thirteen-​­­year-​­old son Henry in many of her confirmations. We know very little about Marie’s married years, between nineteen and ­thirty-​­six, while her four children apparently remained with her in Troyes. She sealed few letters, mostly for close friends and associates, and her known benefactions drew from her dower properties and revenues. The most intriguing question relates to her literary patronage, or at least her interest in written vernacular texts. The fact that Chrétien de Troyes’s reference in Lancelot in the ­mid-​­1170s is the only mention of Marie as literary patron does not mean that she was not actively involved in the local cultural scene, even if she did not sponsor the production of literary works. Later evidence suggests that she was more comfortable with vernacular texts, unlike Count Henry, who swam in the sea of historical works in Latin. It would indeed be ironic if Chrétien de Troyes actually was a canon in one of the count’s collegiate chapters in the 1170s while writing his Arthurian romances, for the unsung patron of those works ultimately would be Count Henry, who funded the canons’ prebends.

Chapter 3

Regent Countess, 1181–1187

Count Henry’s death on 16 March 1181 left Marie with four children, ranging in age from two to fifteen, and the prospect of a s­ ix-​­year regency for her eldest son, Henry, who would succeed to the comital office on his t­ wenty-​­first birthday, 29 July 1187.1 Marie, at ­thirty-​­six, was an experienced countess, having witnessed and occasionally participated in Henry’s acts while married, and ruling alone in his absence overseas from late May 1179 until his return on 8 March 1181. What she could not have anticipated at the time was that she would rule Champagne continuously, except for a brief retirement, until her death in March 1198 at ­fifty-​­three. Her primary responsibility, and her ultimate achievement, was to preserve Henry’s principality for her sons, which she did with vigor.

The Early Regency, 1181–1184 The transition from countess in Henry’s absence to regent countess for her oldest son was seamless. On the day after Henry’s death Marie gave the Templars a grain rent (terrage) from her dower lands in Payns, site of the first Templar commandery just north of Troyes, perhaps in thanks for their aid to Henry overseas and for acting as intermediaries in obtaining his ransom by Emperor Manuel Komnenos.2 That dramatic event occurred most likely in the spring of 1180, when Henry and his men were captured by Turks in Anatolia.3 On his deathbed he directed his chancellor Haice to prepare a formal letter fulfilling the vow he took on that occasion to Saint Mammes, but in the commotion following his death, the chancellor forgot to draft it. When Bishop Manasses of Langres later inquired about it, Marie was unsure how to

38

Ch a p t e r 3

proceed, and so she presented his request to her court in the presence of her ­brothers-​­­in-​­law Archbishop William and Count Stephen of Sancerre. They heard Henry’s two treasurers, Artaud of Nogent and Milo (Breban) of Provins, testify to being with the count when he was captured in a violent encounter while returning from Jerusalem. If freed, he vowed, he would grant the church of ­St‑Mammès of Langres a 30l. revenue from the 300l. paid annually by the townsmen of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube. On returning to Troyes, they continued, the count invested Bishop Manasses with that revenue and directed Chancellor Haice to draft a letter recording it, which he failed to do. Being satisfied about the facts affirmed by the two treasurers and unnamed others, Marie declared: “I accepted the responsibility to carry out Henry’s wish and have sealed this letter confirming it.” 4 Archbishop William sealed a similar letter, confirming Marie’s act but adding several details. On returning from overseas Henry carried through with his vow in the presence of his barons (magni viri) and invested the bishop of Langres with the revenue, said William, who may have witnessed the scene; but in the commotion and grief following the count’s death, the chancellor forgot to have the letter drawn up, and consequently it was left to Countess Marie to assign the revenue. First she ordered an inquest to confirm the facts (inquisitio et recognitio veritatis) and then, on the advice of the archbishop and Count Stephen and the other barons (barones) present, she assigned the revenue. The archbishop also noted that the canons of Langres would sing one Mass weekly for Henry, and would solemnly commemorate his anniversary and inscribe his name in their missal books.5 Several other items of unfinished business required Marie’s immediate attention. The nuns of F ­ ontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes asked her to confirm the bequest that the knight Bisolus of Forfory made before leaving with Count Henry in 1179. Bisolus, nephew of Viscountess Ada of Meaux, had given the nuns half of the fief he held from the count, and later in Brindisi, after falling ill en route to Jerusalem, he confirmed his bequest in the presence of six of the count’s companions. Bisolus’s three brothers affirmed at Marie’s court that they had consented to his gift, and six witnesses who had been with Bisolus in Brindisi testified that he had confirmed his bequest there. Then, in the presence of her officers and with the consent of her son Henry, Marie confirmed the alienation of that fief to the nuns.6 The nuns of ­Notre-​­Dame of Foissy asked Marie to confirm Henry’s deathbed letter exempting sixteen of their urban houses from his sales ­taxes—​­six houses in Troyes and ten in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube, including one where Flemish cloth was sold.7 The Cistercians



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

39

at Boulan­court, where Henry’s uncle Henry, bishop of Troyes, was buried, asked about the land and woods at Wassy that Henry had promised but failed to assign; Marie sent her almoner, the Templar Brother William, to walk off the property lines.8 The canons of ­St‑Remi of Reims asked her to confirm that they had redeemed the advocacy of two of their villages that the count’s advocate, Josbert of Chaumont, had mortgaged to Count Henry for 140l. The villagers, they said, wished the advocacy to remain in the count’s hand, and so Marie and her son Henry promised never to alienate it; henceforth her provost would exercise comital authority there jointly with the abbey’s agents.9 In each case the petitioners sought to validate their rights under a new ruler. The chancery continued to title Marie “countess of Troyes” and to seal her letters patent with her seal, engraved “Seal of Marie, daughter of the king of the Franks, countess of Troyes.” Another pending issue was the episcopal election in Troyes. Bishop Mathieu had died the previous September, and the cathedral canons apparently were waiting for Henry’s return (and guidance) before proceeding to the election of a new bishop. One of Henry’s last acts on his deathbed was to promise not to exact more than 200l. from the bishop’s men during an episcopal vacancy.10 Archbishop William, who remained with Marie after the funeral, approved of Henry’s promise, as did Marie (et me ipse), as if the court stenographer (notarius) copied her very words.11 It is likely that Archbishop William had a hand in the election of Manasses of Pougy, brother of the count’s constable Odo, who was among the count’s closest companions since the Second Crusade. Manasses had been educated at the cathedral, where he became a canon and later colleague of William, who was provost of both the cathedral chapter and the count’s chapel, making Manasses an intimate of both William and Henry.12 Bishop Manasses’s installation as bishop of Troyes most likely repeated a tradition from the time when the convent of ­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains was located at the gate of the old city next to the cathedral and episcopal residence. On the eve of his consecration, the ­bishop-​­elect rode on a mule to the convent, where he slept that night. The next day the abbess dressed him with his cape, mitre, and cross before escorting him to the cathedral, where she announced to the chapter: “Voilà, I present you your bishop!”13 That implausible ritual was proved by inquest ca. 1300 as having existed “for such a long time that the convent’s right to the bishop’s horse [sic] could be considered established custom.”14 The details vary, with some versions of the tale having the bishop’s horse taken to the convent’s stables. The bishop also promised to

40

Ch a p t e r 3

respect the convent’s privileges, especially to observe its immunity from episcopal agents. Since “very old men” testified at the inquest, it is likely that the inaugural custom was observed in some form in 1181, and according to Edmond Martène it was still performed in the early eighteenth century. Bishop Manasses, a familiar face in Troyes since the 1150s, would be Marie’s bishop through the 1180s. At some point Marie commissioned Simon Aurea Capra, a distinguished poet known for his concise Latin verses, to compose inscriptions for Henry’s tomb, which either had been completed or was nearing completion in the chapel. Thirty years earlier, while prior of S­t‑Ayoul of Provins (1148–54), Simon had composed epitaphs for Henry of six prominent persons who died around the time of Henry’s accession.15 Now, as abbot of ­St‑Remi of Reims (1181–98), Simon wrote an epitaph for Henry himself; inscribed on bronze and enamel bands encircling the count’s tomb at eye level, it spoke of the count’s faith, generosity, and eloquence, and of his death that deprived his lands of his sun.16 Henry’s spectacular tomb, located centrally in the choir of ­St‑Étienne, would have been marked by tour books as “worth a visit.” For Marie, Henry in death remained a constant presence, with his tomb visible from the balcony in the comital apartments directly overlooking the nave of the chapel. The canons of S­ t‑Étienne, too, honored the count in recognition of his benefactions. As Marie described it: The canons of ­St‑Étienne by common consent established for the honor of God and his martyr [Stephen], and in memory of the benefactions of my illustrious lord, Count Henry, the founder of this church, swore on the holy gospel that from this year every canon, whether resident ­full-​­time or ­half-​­time, whether senior or young, should have a cope made according to his means to wear on the feast of Saint Stephen. Whoever is not now present will swear to have one made within seven days of being notified. This year no canon will be regarded as ­non-​­resident. If any canon dies before fulfilling this requirement, the revenue from his prebend, after his debts are paid, will be used to purchase a cope; if he leaves a testament and bequeaths his cope, the revenue from his prebend may be disposed of freely. Every new canon must swear to this before being invested [with his prebend]. If anyone swears to this but fails to carry it out, the revenues from his prebend will be used to purchase a cope.17



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

41

Only one incident marred Marie’s first few months as regent. Abbot Guitier of S­ t‑Loup complained that after the count’s death some of his knights, claiming the right of hospitality ( gistium), had quartered in the abbey’s village of Lusigny, to the detriment of the villagers. The abbot convened several “barons” and proved through the testimony of old men, in the presence of Marie’s ­fifteen-​­­year-​­old son Henry, that the count did not in fact enjoy hospitality there. Assuming responsibility for that “excess,” Marie presented her ring as a fine and memento (memoriale). Abbot Guitier wrote in ­St‑Loup’s cartulary that her antique ring was attached to the very Bible that Count Henry had presented to the abbey on the birth of his first son in 1166. The ring’s exquisite garnet, later inserted into the volume’s richly worked cover, survived to the fifteenth century as testimony to Marie’s infraction and compensation.18

The Politics of Marriage On 14 May 1181, two months after Henry’s death, Countess Marie and her ­brothers-​­­in-​­law reconciled with Count Baldwin of Hainaut over his breach of the marriage contract he made in 1171, reaffirmed in 1179, and broke in 1180. Baldwin came to ­Provins—​­a “most wealthy town,” observed Gislebert of ­Mons—​­to offer his second daughter, Yolande, in marriage to young Henry of Champagne in place of Isabelle, who had married the king the previous year (28 April 1180). Gislebert, who as Baldwin’s chancellor no doubt drafted the new marriage contract in Troyes, reports that Baldwin and many of his nobles swore to it, including his b­ rother-​­­in-​­law Philip of Flanders, who had brokered the original contract. Countess Marie and those on her side, including the queen mother, Adele, and her brothers Thibaut of Blois and Stephen of Sancerre, their nephews Duke Hugh of Burgundy and Count Henry of B ­ ar-​ ­­le-​­Duc, and “many other nobles” also swore to the new contract. Archbishop William vouched for both parties.19 In effect, the double marriage contract of August 1171 was renewed with a new principal, just as it allowed, with Yolande replacing her sister Queen Isabelle as the future wife of fi ­ fteen-​­­year-​­old Henry. It repaired the ­long-​­standing alliance between Hainaut and Champagne that the new king had disrupted by marrying Isabelle, and it was another twist in the rapidly shifting alliances in northern France after the deaths of Louis VII and Count Henry. The significance of the new treaty is suggested by the presence of the queen mother, her three brothers, and their two nephews from

42

Ch a p t e r 3

neighboring Burgundy and B ­ ar-​­­le-​­Duc, representing a block of Champenois princes (and one prince of the Church) allied with Hainaut and Flanders. The meeting in Provins of the entire Champenois clan expelled from the royal circle was the occasion for plotting against the s­ixteen-​­­year-​­old king, who had unraveled a t­ hree-​­­decades-​­old meshing of the royal and comital families and their interests. By the summer of 1181 an open rebellion of the princes and barons on the northern, eastern, and southern borders of the royal domain virtually encircled the king’s lands. According to André of Marchiennes, Countess Marie, the duke of Burgundy, and count of Flanders conducted a war against the king (debellebant regem).20 Robert of Auxerre reports that a “confederation” of Champenois “conspired” against Philip, in a replay of events with the same cast of characters as in 1180.21 Ralph of Diceto blamed the revolt on the count of Flanders, who resented the recent peace made between the kings of France and England. But it was the collective resentment of the Champenois that undergirded the opposition to the new king. While the royal seneschal Thibaut and his brother Stephen of Sancerre attacked Philip’s lands, Henry the Young King, who had become close to Philip II during the Plantagenet revolt, invaded Sancerre, Burgundy, and the lands of Countess Marie.22 Hostilities were finally suspended in December, and a truce was set to last until 13 January 1182. Archbishop William and Count Thibaut tried to resolve that murky event, but ultimately it was the king of England and the papal legate, Bishop Henry of Albano, who succeeded in reaching terms with the ambassadors of Marie and the duke of Burgundy at Gerberoy (4 April). A final accord was signed at C ­ répy-​­­en-​­Valois on 11 April 1182.23 That reconciliation brought to a close three challenging years for Marie. Count Thibaut was restored as royal seneschal, and Archbishop William emerged as the king’s de facto m ­ inister-​­­in-​­chief who would go on to play a large role in royal affairs under Philip II, just as Suger had under Louis VII. The year ended well with the election of Count Henry’s nephew Renaud of B ­ ar-​­­le-​­Duc to succeed Peter of Celle as bishop of Chartres (1182–1217). Thereafter Bishop Renaud and his uncle Archbishop William became staunch supporters of Philip II. Having resumed good relations with the count of Hainaut and the king, Marie turned to two other marriage projects. She betrothed her daughter Scholastique to Count William V of Mâcon and Vienne, grandson of William IV, who had acquired renown with Count Henry on the Second Crusade. Scholastique may have owed her unusual name to Peter Comestor’s Scholastic History (Historia Scholastica), the biblical history that became an instant classic when it was completed ca. 1170.24 Apparently Count Henry was responsi-



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

43

ble for naming Scholastique after Peter’s innovative work. He had known Master Peter as dean of the cathedral in Troyes since 1147, and appointed him as one of the earliest canons of ­St‑Étienne. Although Peter left Troyes in 1158/60 to teach at the cathedral school of ­Notre-​­Dame of Paris, he dedicated the Scholastic History to Archbishop William of Sens, in honor of his former cathedral provost. It has been suggested that, to celebrate Scholastique’s marriage, the poet Bertrand of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube composed Girart de Vienne, a “poem of revolt” that recounts the injustices inflicted by Charlemagne on his great men, including the ancestors of Girart, count of Vienne and Mâcon (1156– 84).25 Bertrand tells us that he was a cleric, enjoying a pleasant May day in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube, when he heard the story from a pilgrim. If a date of ca. 1180/1184 is accepted for both the poem and Scholastique’s betrothal or marriage, Girart de Vienne might be read against the background of the recent revolts against Philip II, and as a justification of resistance to an arbitrary, s­trong-​­willed king.26 If the poem actually was written for the new “lady of Vienne,” it offered her a somewhat fanciful history of her ­in-​­laws. Marie herself considered remarrying about the same time, to none other than Philip of Flanders, whose wife Elizabeth of Vermandois died on 26 March 1182.27 Despite his earlier maneuvers against the Champenois at the royal court, Philip was still well regarded in Champagne as the son of Count Thierry of Flanders, who forty years earlier, during the troubles between Louis VII and Count Thibaut, had promised his daughter Laureta in marriage to prince Henry and then became Henry’s close companion on the Second Crusade. Marie had met Count Philip in Troyes in 1171, when he came to negotiate the marriage between his sister Margaret’s children and Marie’s children, and again in 1179 when he reaffirmed the marriage contract, and most recently in May 1181 in Provins, where they revised the initial contract. In the spring of 1183, when Count Philip and the king arranged for the disposition of his wife’s lands in the absence of children, the agreement was reached under the auspices of Henry II of England and, according to Gislebert of Mons, approved by Baldwin V of Hainaut and the entire Champenois c­ lan—​­Archbishop William, Counts Thibaut of Blois and Stephen of Sancerre, and their nephew Duke Hugh III of Burgundy.28 It was natural for Count Philip to continue the ­four-​­­decades-​­long relationship between Flanders and Champagne by courting Marie. They were about the same ­age—​­he was ­forty-​­one, she was ­thirty-​­­eight—​­and both recently widowed. As her consort, Count Philip would become in effect joint regent in Champagne, and with the eventual marriage of Marie’s children

44

Ch a p t e r 3

with his sister’s children, Champagne and ­Flanders—​­the two wealthiest and most dynamic principalities in northern ­France—​­would be brought into a powerful regional convergence. Exercising due diligence, the count consulted with Archbishop William about a possible marriage and sent envoys to Rome to obtain the necessary dispensation for a consanguineous alliance. Then abruptly, without explanation, he recalled his envoys and sent them instead to Spain to inquire about a marriage with Therese/Mathilda of Portugal, sister of King Sancho I. With Count Philip’s marriage to Therese in August 1184, Marie, at ­thirty-​­nine, ended any hope of remarrying.29

Governance Marie held court primarily in Troyes and Provins, and occasionally in Meaux, Sézanne, and C ­ hâteau-​­Thierry, in the same comital residences where Henry the Liberal most often held court, and like him she relied on a small core of officials and councilors to vet her acts (see Appendix 1).30 The Traînel brothers, veterans of the Second Crusade, continued to serve as they had since the beginning of Henry’s rule, Anselm II as butler and Garnier without portfolio. Their b­ rother-​­­in-​­law Hugh II of Plancy, another of Henry’s crusade companions, also sat periodically without portfolio at Marie’s court, while his younger brother Haice, one of the original canons of ­St‑Étienne and master of its school, became chancellor during the count’s last days, replacing Chancellor Stephen, who retired after returning from overseas.31 Like the Traînel, the Plancy were critical players in the construction of Henry’s principality and a reservoir of institutional memory for Marie. Henry’s longtime treasurers, Artaud of Nogent and Milo of Provins, also continued to serve under Marie.32 Henry’s almoner, the Templar Brother William, who returned with Henry from overseas, became Marie’s almoner.33 But the composition of the court began to evolve, as an entire cohort of Henry’s companions and officials was replaced through attrition, and several new faces appeared. Three of Henry’s officials were missing. His constable William of Dampierre had died in 1174 and was not replaced, although his son, Guy II of Dampierre, often appeared without title at Marie’s court.34 The seneschal Geoffroy III of Joinville, who was in his sixties, stayed on his lands after Henry’s departure in 1179 and rarely appeared thereafter. Since William rex of Provins, the marshal who had served Henry for two decades, did not return from overseas, Marie appointed two knights to succeed him: Lucas



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

45

(1181–82), a garrison knight in Troyes and son of the provost of Ervy, then Erard of Aulnay (1183–85), a garrison knight in Vitry who descended from the old Arzillières/Villehardouin lineage.35 Marie also brought several members of her household to court, notably the knight Nevel of Aulnay, her personal escort since her arrival in Troyes; several knights who had served Count Henry, including the brothers Geoffroy and Girard Eventat of Égligny; and her chaplains, including Andreas Capellanus, who is first attested in 1182. So Marie’s court was a blend of her husband’s trusted, experienced officials with her own, younger appointees from lesser lineages. Count Henry’s ­well-​­oiled administrative machinery continued to function without perceptible change. Marie followed the same procedures for vetting her acts at court, and the chancery prepared her letters patent in the same manner as Henry’s. Although she often stated that she acted with the consent of “my dearest son Henry” or associated him with her as joint author, as in “I, Marie, countess of Troyes, and my son Henry,” she alone sealed those letters, since he lacked a seal before he succeeded as count.36 Like Count Henry, Marie dealt with a host of minor transactions between laymen and religious at court (in curia mea, in presentia mea). Many were simple pro forma recognitions of property transactions. Bencelina of ­Pont-​­­sur-​­Seine, for example, appeared in Sézanne to register her gift (a house) to the Paraclete for her to be received as a nun. Her husband, Guerric, and her brothers and other relatives gave their consent in court, as duly noted by the letters patent that Marie sealed in testimony.37 The abbot of Essomes came to court in Provins to register his purchase of woods at ­Château-​­Thierry from Mathieu of Monastery for 160l. The seller’s family and feudal lord approved in the presence of many witnesses.38 In Provins, Marie and young Henry confirmed the promise made by the chapter of S­ t‑Quiriace, that Canon Philip’s prebend would pass after his death to the hospital located at the base of the cliff under ­St‑Quiriace. Philip himself appeared at court and agreed to pay the hospital 5s. annually for as long as he held the prebend, in effect establishing its right to the prebend.39 Marie’s letters patent certified those private transactions made public in the highest court in the principality. Marie also mediated settlements and delivered her own judgments at court. She ordered an inquest in the suit brought by the canons of S­ t‑Loup against the mayor of I­sle-​­Aumont, whose mills were impeding the flow of water to their mills. After ten aged men confirmed that water should flow unimpeded to S­ t‑Loup’s mills, the parties reached a settlement in Marie’s presence “through the mediation of discreet men.” 40 The Cistercians from Vauluisant

46

Ch a p t e r 3

appeared at court with Milo II, lord of N ­ ogent-​­­sur-​­Seine, in a dispute over their acquisition of his fiefs; since neither Milo nor his brother had children, they quit all their rights over the fiefs that their men had given or sold to the abbey. The scribe of Marie’s letter quoted her as saying that the quarrels, aired “in my presence, God willing, are ended.” 41 If Marie facilitated those ­face-​ ­saving compromises between monastics and laymen, she alone decided two cases involving inheritances. In the first, she determined that Milo of Provins was not entitled to the entire estate of his brother Jean, who died without children, and that Jean’s remarried widow should retain both her dower from that marriage and half of their community property, that is, property purchased during marriage.42 In the second case she ruled that Bishop Mathieu of Troyes had erred in bequeathing several tithe revenues and a house in front of ­St‑Quiriace, where he had been dean for many years, to the chapter; those were his personal properties, she declared, and should have passed to his closest relatives, in this instance his nephews.43 More difficult was the suit brought by the abbots of S­t‑Denis and ­Ste‑Geneviève of Paris, who complained that the commune of Meaux, which Marie and Count Henry had granted in 1179, was injurious to them because their tenants living in villages within the commune’s hinterland were claiming exemptions from their jurisdiction and the payment of tailles.44 Unsure about the matter, Marie asked Archbishop William to come to Meaux to sit at court with Bishop Simon of Meaux and her “barons and faithful men.” In applying a strict interpretation of clause 17 of Henry’s 1179 charter, the court decided that the villagers did not enjoy the commune’s privileges and therefore were still liable to their monastic lords for five customary taxes.45 In essence, the court upheld the property rights of the two Parisian abbeys. But the decision also implicitly affirmed the privileged status of the commune itself, consisting of all the residents of Meaux, including the bishop’s men. Bishop Simon did not challenge the legitimacy of the commune granted by Henry and Marie during his absence in Rome.46 Marie’s most unusual act in these years was to franchise her men living in her border town of Ervy. She claimed that she copied Louis VII’s Charter of Lorris for her men residing in the castellany of Ervy and all newcomers (albani) there except the tenants of local lords. She exempted them from the sales tax on food, from the corvée, and from military service beyond one day’s distance from home, and she licensed them to sell their property and leave at will. Four of Marie’s knights, including her marshal Lucas, swore on her behalf that she and her son Henry would abide by the new customs.47 Why



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

47

Marie would grant a rural community franchise to a relatively modest frontier town is a mystery. Perhaps she was influenced by Archbishop William, who in the same year formalized the customs of ­Beaumont-​­­en-​­Argonne, which became a model for rural franchises in eastern France through the next century.48 Or it might have been a favor to her new marshal, Lucas, who was listed as the first witness to her charter, and his father, Girard Manducator, her provost in Ervy. Marie also attended to matters of feudal tenure. Most troublesome, as she complained to the pope in 1182, was the fact that some fiefholders were taking their disputes involving fiefs to ecclesiastical courts, ostensibly to circumvent her court. At her request, Pope Lucius III prohibited ecclesiastical courts from hearing disputes between laymen regarding their fiefs so long as justice was done in a “secular court.”49 It is not clear why fiefholders were circumventing Marie’s court, for she continued Henry’s policy of readily consenting to the alienation of feudal property, at least when comital fiefs were involved. Robert of Milly, for example, came to her court in Meaux seeking approval of his gift to Faremoutiers (a mill on the Marne) for the soul of his wife Regine, since it was a comital fief.50 Peter Rigauz likewise sought approval for giving a grain rent to ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes for the soul of his wife buried in its church.51 Marie consented to both feudal alienations. It appears that homage was not routinely done at court for comital fiefs that passed directly within a fiefholder’s family, and therefore the chancery did not register those transfers. Yet homages were done on occasion. The best documented case is for Peter of Courtenay, count of Nevers through marriage, who did homage in 1184 for the castellany of Mailly, which he purchased from his ­mother-​­­in-​­law, Countess Mathilda of Tonnerre, who held it in dower. Since Peter was unsure about the lord from whom that fief moved, he consulted his knights at Mailly, who informed him that it moved from the countess of Champagne. So he did homage to Marie, who happened to be his cousin, and subsequently did homage to her three successors without objection from the bishop of Auxerre, as Peter noted ­twenty-​­three years later in 1207.52 Peter makes several points. In the absence of a written record about the fief ’s mouvance, that is, about the person or institution from whom the property was held in tenure, Peter had to ask local knights about it, that is, he consulted oral memory. He subsequently did homage three times without obtaining any document of record. The bishop of Auxerre, from whom the castle had been held in feudal tenure, raised no objection to the de facto transfer of tenure to the countess or, it might be said more accurately, he acceded to the

48

Ch a p t e r 3

transfer of mouvance just as other ecclesiastical lords did in cooperation with Count Henry in the 1170s.53 That Peter left any record at all of his homages in Champagne was due the arrival in 1207 of William of Seignelay, the new bishop of Auxerre, who reversed his predecessor’s policy of accommodation with the count and attempted to recover direct lordship over Mailly.54 Sorting out the mouvance of fiefs was a messy affair, especially along Champagne’s fragmented southern border, where the mouvance of castles might be ambiguous and not remembered precisely, and where castle lords played a sharp game of homage and contingent homage in order to preserve their freedom of maneuver. On one occasion Marie herself misappropriated a castle’s mouvance, forcing Count William of Joigny to hold La F ­ erté-​­Loupière directly from her (in capite) rather than from Count Peter of Nevers. On being informed by four of her knights that she did not have that right, Marie released that fief to Count Peter so that William could hold it directly from him, and Peter in turn from her.55 As the Vergy war of 1186 would demonstrate, the great game of mouvance could be risky, especially when played against powerful lords like the king. In what might be termed religious policy, Marie continued the tolerant practices of Count Henry. Despite Archbishop William’s growing influence in northern France, Marie was not touched by his virulent campaign against the heretical publicani in his diocese that culminated on Christmas 1183, when he and Count Philip of Flanders convened a secret inquisition in Arras: “many were accused in the presence of the archbishop and the count, [including] nobles, nonnobles, clerics, knights, peasants, young girls, widows, and married women” who were duly examined, condemned to be burned, and handed over to the count of Flanders.56 Nor did Marie allow the king’s ­anti-​­Judaic campaign to infect her county; in fact she continued Count Henry’s policies ­toward Jewish communities in Champagne.57 As Archbishop William became increasingly preoccupied with the greater matters of the realm after ­1184—​­the king called William “my vigilant eyes in counsel and my right hand in the business of government”—​­he seldom returned to Troyes or Provins.58

Three Royal Widows In late 1183 or 1184 Marie was joined in Troyes by her ­half-​­sister Margaret of France and her ­sister-​­­in-​­law Queen Adele, both recently widowed. Margaret, about ­twenty-​­six, had spent little time with Henry the Young King of England,



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

49

Marie’s h ­ alf-​­brother, who followed the tournament circuit in northern France in the company of William Marshal.59 Young Henry was known for his good looks, luxurious lifestyle, and generosity, but mostly for his knightly prowess. He turned in a memorable performance with his team of 560 accomplished knights, recruited at 20s. per diem to participate in the mêlée at King Philip II’s ­post-​­coronation tournament in November 1179.60 The celebratory nature of the event, which drew about three thousand knights, was captured in a tournament roll drawn up as a souvenir with the names of all the participants and cited by the ­poet-​­biographer of William Marshal almost a half century later.61 It was “a tournament on such a scale,” the author remarked, “that there was never such before or since.”62 Knightly teams came from every region of northern France except Champagne, which had been emptied of its barons and knights four months earlier by Count’s Henry’s expedition to Jerusalem. Passing seamlessly between tournaments and open war, the Young King had the misfortune of being struck by dysentery while fighting against his brother Richard and died on 11 June 1183.63 Robert of Torigni, abbot of ­Mont-​­­Saint-​­Michel, later penned a moving epitaph: everyone mourned, he said, not only because young Henry was the king’s eldest son, but also because he was the most handsome, honest, and generous to all, despite not having received an inheritance and being limited by his father to an income of only 15,000l., money of Anjou. Moreover, “he had no equal in the matter of arms, and princes, counts, even kings feared him.”64 Gervase of Canterbury, writing around 1190, noted his “amiability to all, his handsome appearance, and his knightly skills, which were second to none; he was humble, easy, and affable.”65 It is not known whether Marie attended the Young King’s funeral on 22 June 1183 in the cathedral of Rouen, where he wished to be buried. But the next year in Rouen she witnessed as Margaret established an anniversary Mass for her husband in order, she said, “to maintain the same union of minds with him when dead as when alive.”66 Margaret promised to place an endowment of 300 marks in the hand of the abbot of Clairvaux as soon as she received it from King Bela III of Hungary, who had asked her brother, King Philip, for her hand in marriage. Witnessing in Rouen with Countess Marie were the abbot of Clairvaux, his fellow monk Jean (former lord) of Possesse, and the recently widowed Countess Hawise of Gloucester.67 Also at the memorial service was the Young King’s brother Geoffroy of Brittany, who founded a chaplaincy in his memory, and Geoffroy’s wife, Constance of Brittany.68 Margaret apparently returned with Marie to Troyes and was still there in December 1184, when Queen Adele joined them at ­Notre-​­Dame of Foissy, the

50

Ch a p t e r 3

Fontevrist priory just east of Troyes. Adele, at ­thirty-​­nine, was about Marie’s age and widowed in September 1180, six months before Marie herself was widowed.69 They had met in Sens at Archbishop William’s consecration in December 1168, at Louis’s Easter court in Paris in 1173 during the Plantagenet revolt, and most recently in Provins in May 1181 with the entire Champenois clan at the betrothal of Henry (II) of Champagne and Yolande of Hainaut. Adele would spend the rest of her life as dowager queen of France (1180–1202), while Margaret, the youngest of the three widows, would remarry and become queen of Hungary (1186–97). The three related and recently widowed royals would have found a restorative environment in Foissy, a priory founded fifty years earlier (ca. 1134) by Adele’s father and filled with ­noble-​­born women of the region. Count Thibaut had given the grounds for the construction of the earliest chapel and hermitage, and provided funds for building a monastic compound with a church.70 In the 1150s the prioress was Helissent, mother of Anselm of Traînel, Count Henry’s butler and most constant companion.71 In 1175 Henry gave the nuns a house in Troyes next to the house of Manasses of Pougy, provost of his chapel, and by 1181 Foissy possessed major commercial assets in his fair towns.72 Henry’s deathbed exemption of the priory’s six houses in Troyes and ten in B ­ ar-​­­sur-​­Aube from all of his taxes was a substantial benefaction at a time when his fair towns were thriving.73 By then, the convent grounds were serving as a virtual conference center beyond the bustle of Troyes and ­Bar-​­­sur-​ ­Aube. When the abbots of Larrivour and Vauluisant sought to formalize the sale of property between them, they met at Foissy, halfway between their two monasteries, and concluded their transaction in the nuns’ chapel. Witnesses included Bishop Mathieu of Troyes and Count Henry; the abbots of Larrivour, ­Montier-​­­la-​­Celle, ­St‑Loup, and ­St‑Martin of Troyes; John (former lord) of Possesse, monk of Clairvaux; and three of Count Henry’s ­officials—​ ­Anselm of Traînel (butler), his brother Garnier, and Artaud (treasurer)—​­who may have stayed in Foissy’s visitors lodge.74 The three widows at Foissy in 1184 witnessed Bishop Manasses of Troyes offer a benediction for several young women who took the veil on the feast day of the apostle Thomas (21 December). To mark the occasion, Marie made a donation to the priory (the use of two waterways), which she and her ­eighteen-​­­year-​­old son Henry placed symbolically on the priory’s altar. “Present and attesting,” besides the two widowed queens, were the archdeacon of Troyes and a small group of Marie’s officials, including Brother William, her Templar almoner, the provost of Troyes, two knights, and her treasurer Ar-



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

51

taud, who earlier had witnessed the transaction between Larrivour and Vauluisant at Foissy.75 Marie’s gift was about right as a token of appreciation on the occasion of a visit. Earlier that year, while in the comital residence in Meaux, she had exempted the nuns at ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes, the other important Fontevrist priory in Champagne, from a small customary payment they owed her, presumably after a visit to their compound.76 Similarly she gave the Cluniac monks of ­Reuil-​­­en-​­Brie a chalice in thanks for having spent a night (with her retinue) at their priory, and assured them that she did not claim any right to their hospitality.77 If these few known gifts in appreciation are indicative, they suggest that Marie was just as generous as Count Henry for small favors, although it might fairly be said that Henry also made significant benefactions to religious houses that should have sustained them for many years. It appears that the three royals spending the Christmas holidays at Foissy witnessed a liturgical performance of Psalm 44 (Eructavit) for their benefit.78 Psalm 44 (as numbered in the Vulgate Bible) was part of the Christmas liturgy and also sung at royal marriage ceremonies. Here a ­poet-​­performer sings a verse rendition addressed to “my lady of Champagne” (Dirai ma dame de Champaigne), in which he warns her against “largesse and high expenditures” (Largecë et li huaz despans).79 The poet honors the “daughters of kings” (Marie, Margaret) and praises those who produced the “princes over the entire earth.”80 The verse purports to retell the Old Testament narrative through a ­minstrel-​­king David, who celebrates the wedding of the king and queen in heaven, and renders the Latin of the (Vulgate) Bible into “romance” for a lay audience.81 But the chançon is not a simple translation; it is an allegorical gloss, “a masterful example of the recasting of exegesis as vernacular poetic performance.”82 Passing from the celebration of a wedding as consolation for three widows, the poet turns to praising fine amor within marriage in terms familiar to listeners of Chrétien de Troyes.83 Eructavit was crafted as a reduplication of David’s song, a performance within a performance, and ultimately an explication of the Psalm text as announced in Latin subtitles. The poet captured the occasion perfectly: the carefree days of Lancelot’s adulterous dalliance with Arthur’s q­ ueen—​­a theme suggested by the countess herself, if Chrétien de Troyes is to be b­ elieved—​­are over. The three years following Count Henry’s death in fact had been sober ones for Marie. For the first time she encountered the burdens and perils of rulership. Her royal companions had endured similar reverses in the power politics of the day, Adele having had her dower lands confiscated and Margaret having been deprived of her promised dower. Addressing Marie directly,

52

Ch a p t e r 3

the poet artfully shifts a celebration of the court (la joie de la cort) to the sacred celebration found in the Psalms through a linguistic translatio from the Latin to the vernacular. A sacred fine amor displaces a secular one, just as a spiritual “joy of the court” displaces the secular joy depicted in Chrétien’s Erec and Enide. The poet concludes his chançon de chambre by addressing “the gentle sister of the king of France” (La jantis suer le roi de France) with a lengthy encouragement to faith in God.84 He then turns to address her companions (Et vos, dame) with a similar call to religion.85 As an early example of vernacular exegesis, the Eructavit is a tour de force.86 The identity of the Eructavit author is not firmly established. The most cited candidate, Abbot Adam of Perseigne (1188–1221), is often identified as Countess Marie’s chaplain and confessor, but he was neither. Abbot Adam shared only a name with Marie’s chaplain, who remained a canon at ­St‑Étienne until 1222.87 Abbot Adam had an entirely different life beyond Champagne, not only as abbot but also as a powerful sermonizer, papal diplomat, and participant in the Fourth Crusade.88 As a “Cistercian humanist,” the tone and deep spirituality of his letters, sermons, and tracts do accord with the subject and style of the Eructavit, yet not a single contemporary mention connects him to Countess Marie.89 Not one of his s­ ixty-​­six extant letters is addressed to her, although he wrote letters to her sister Alice, countess of ­Blois-​­Chartres (ca. 1191), thanking her for her recent hospitality in entertaining him for two whole days, and he responded to Blanche, countess of Champagne (ca. 1201), who requested a copy of his sermons. He would have written to Alice in the vernacular, he said, but he knew that she had learned some Latin and could consult with her chaplain for help with the difficult passages, and he apologized to Blanche for writing in Latin by explaining that a translation from one language to another (de lingua in linguam translata) resulted in a distortion and loss of subtlety.90 Even though functionally bilingual, Abbot Adam is not known to have written any letter, sermon, or treatise in the vernacular, much less lyric.91 In fact, the only specific, and malicious, link between Abbot Adam to Countess Marie came sixty years after her death.92 A more likely author of Eructavit is a still unidentified canon of ­St‑Étienne, someone who was familiar enough with Marie and her royal companions to address them directly with advice on coping as widows, just as Evrat, another canon of ­St‑Étienne, exhibited the same familiarity several years later in celebrating Marie and Henry in his vernacular verse rendition of Genesis. Whether at this Christmas event or earlier, Marie and Adele talked of tombs. Henry’s tomb seems to have inspired his sister Adele to commission a



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

53

similar one for Louis, who was buried at the Cistercian monastery of Barbeau. It was a sumptuous stone tomb, says Rigord, encrusted with precious stones, gold, silver, and bronze, all of subtle design and so fine that nothing like it had been seen since the time of Solomon.93 According to Rigord’s description and later drawings, it was an effigy tomb whose t­hree-​­dimensional figure of ­Louis—​­crowned, bearded, wearing simple draped clothing and carrying a royal s­cepter—​­was remarkably similar to Henry’s tomb effigy. But the king’s tomb was constructed of stone, which was more appropriate in a Cistercian church than Henry’s lavish metalwork tomb with its ­self-​­serving inscriptions in his own chapel.94 Adele also may have followed Marie in commissioning a tomb inscription. Marie had asked Abbot Simon Aurea Capra, the abbot of ­St‑Remi of Reims, to compose an epitaph for Henry as worthy as the ones he had written three decades earlier to commemorate those especially esteemed by Henry. Simon, noted for his terse phrasing, wrote: “Marie reveals [revelat] the deeds of the distinguished prince while she covers [velat] her husband’s ashes with this excellent shroud.”95 Queen Adele’s epitaph for Louis likewise refers to his deeds but is quite different in tone and substance and is addressed to her son Philip: “You who succeed the deceased in honor, will demean it if you fail to attain his renown.” 96 It was as much an admonition to a disrespectful son as a commemoration of her husband.

The Late Regency, 1185–87 Margaret of France was still with Marie in 1185 when Marie endowed a chapel in ­St‑Étienne of Troyes. According to her foundation charter, enacted “solemnly in my chapel in Provins,” that is, in the small chapel attached to the comital residence in Provins, “I founded an altar in honor of God and the mother of God, the Virgin Mary, and Saint Catherine in the church of ­St‑Étienne of Troyes, and I endowed a chaplain to celebrate Mass there. . . . ​I directed the priest of the altar to celebrate a Mass for the holy spirit while I am alive, and after my death to celebrate a Mass for the soul of my lord Count Henry and for me and for all the deceased faithful.” Witnessing were Margaret (“junior queen of England”), Marie’s chaplains Peter (of Hebron) and Andreas (Capellanus), her almoner Brother William, and three prominent barons: Garnier of Traînel, André of Ramerupt, and Guy of Châtillon.97 The year was marked by two dramatic events. The first was the death of Marie’s marshal Erard of Aulnay, who died excommunicate (1 July 1185) after

54

Ch a p t e r 3

tangling with the cathedral canons of Châlons. Erard had witnessed Count Henry’s acts since 1153 and was well known in Troyes, being related maternally to Countess Marie’s personal escort, Nevel of Aulnay, and his brother Roric, a canon in the count’s chapel and one of Count Henry’s intimate councilors.98 But Erard had a history of molesting the tenants of religious communities, and this time his widow had to make amends for him and provide for his soul.99 She gathered his relatives, friends (amici), and his uncle Geoffroy of Villehardouin in the cathedral at Châlons, where she made peace with the canons. Bishop Guy (of Joinville) witnessed the accord, by which all Erard’s property and revenues in the village he had harassed were transferred to the cathedral canons.100 The witnessing party took Bishop Guy’s letter recording the settlement to Archbishop William of Reims for his confirmation, which they then presented at Marie’s court for her confirmation because, as she noted, the property was a comital fief.101 Among the many witnesses at Marie’s court was Geoffroy of Villehardouin, who is identified as her new marshal. She had known the Villehardouin brothers since her arrival in Troyes, Roscelin as a cathedral canon and subdeacon in the count’s chapel, and Geoffroy as a knight rendering castleguard in Troyes. While their brother Jean remained in Villehardouin as lord of the village, Roscelin and Geoffroy made their careers in service to the count in Troyes.102 Like Marie’s personal escort Nevel and her marshals Lucas and Erard, Geoffroy was from a knightly family and typical of the “new” men she appointed. Marie must have seen in Geoffroy the same expertise and leadership qualities that her mother saw in William Marshal when she brought him into the Plantagenet household. Geoffroy would be Marie’s marshal for the rest of her life. The second important event of 1185 was the king’s intervention in the matter of the double marriage contract that Count Baldwin of Hainaut had sworn to in 1181 but was procrastinating in fulfilling. For Marie, the marriage of her two oldest children was of some urgency in view of her expected retirement. At her request, the king summoned Baldwin to Sens for a meeting (colloquium) on 1 December. According to Gislebert of Mons, who likely witnessed the event, Marie and her ­brothers-​­­in-​­­law—​­the archbishop of Reims and the counts of Blois and S­ ancerre—​­and their nephew Duke Hugh III of Burgundy pressed Baldwin to carry out the marriages between his children and Marie’s children, as stipulated in their contract, “since his eldest son [Baldwin] and the daughter [Marie] of the countess had reached a sufficient age for marriage.”103 Both were about fourteen.104 So as not to violate his oath (again), Count Baldwin came to Troyes on 13 January 1186 and agreed to proceed with the marriage. Within



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

55

days young Baldwin (VI) and Marie of Champagne were married in C ­ hâteau-​ ­Thierry, no doubt in the presence of Countess Marie, who also attended the wedding festivities held at Valenciennes, the capital of Hainaut. The entire episode suggests that Countess Marie and her brothers feared that Count Baldwin would renege on the marriage, as he had with his daughter’s marriage to the king in 1179. In any case, it turned out well. The couple became so devoted to each other, observed Gislebert in a much quoted remark, that it was rare to find a man who displayed such a fervent love t­ oward his wife that he was content with her alone, meaning of course that they lived an ideal Christian marriage, unlike the groom’s ancestors.105 Regarding the second marriage contracted in May 1181, between Baldwin’s younger daughter Yolande and prince Henry of Champagne, Baldwin asked for a delay until Yolande was sufficiently mature for marriage; Countess Marie and t­ wenty-​­­year-​­old Henry agreed and swore to it, as did many of their great men.106 Politics and dynastic marriages continued to occupy Marie in the spring of 1186. On 10 March she and Margaret met with the kings of England and France and the count of Flanders at the border between Gisors and Trie to resolve the issue of Margaret’s dower and dowry.107 Her marriage contract negotiated during Thomas Becket’s festive stay in Paris shortly after her birth in 1158 provided her with a dower, assigned in Normandy and England, and a dowry of several castles and the Norman Vexin, which were handed over to the Templars until her marriage. But when Margaret was barely three, Henry II obtained a papal dispensation for an irregular marriage with his fi ­ ve-​­­year-​­old son on 2 November 1160 and immediately took possession of her dowry. At Gisors, on 11 March 1186, the parties agreed that Henry II would keep both Margaret’s dowry and her dower in return for an annual payment of 2750l., money of Anjou, delivered to her through the Templars in Paris, who would bring the cash from England. After the king promised in the hand of the archbishop of Reims to make the annual payments, Margaret, then ­twenty-​­eight, transferred her rights over the Norman Vexin.108 Countess Marie is not named among the witnesses to the final accord drawn up in Margaret’s name, but Philip II was present along with a heavy contingent of Champenois and their allies who witnessed on Margaret’s behalf (ex parte mea), including Archbishop William and the bishops of Beauvais, Soissons, and Orléans; Counts Thibaut of Blois, Stephen of Sancerre, Philip of Flanders, and Robert of Dreux; and the most important comital officials from Champagne, including Marie’s chancellor Haice and her treasurers Artaud of Nogent and Robert of Milly. The rest of 1186 was exceptionally busy for Marie. In late March or April

56

Ch a p t e r 3

she received King Philip, Count Thibaut, and Archbishop William in Provins.109 The king was on his way to subdue Duke Hugh III of Burgundy, whose claim to the mouvance of the castle and lordship of Vergy had inflamed the borderlands between Champagne and Burgundy.110 When Guy of Vergy refused to make his castle renderable at the duke’s need, instead seeking aid from his lord and relative Garnier of Traînel, the ensuing hostilities spilled over into neighboring lordships. Given Hugh’s ­well-​­known bellicosity and failure to carry out his commitments, the king was sympathetic to the charges brought by Guy of Vergy and the Burgundian abbeys. With Hugh’s capture at C ­ hâtillon-​ ­­sur-​­Seine, the duchy of Burgundy was brought directly under the royal hand.111 Shortly after appearing with Marie in Provins, Archbishop William dedicated the reconstructed abbey church of Avenay (16 May). The work was personally financed by Abbess Helisende (1170–97), daughter of Jean, count of Roucy and viscount of Mareuil, who furnished the church with many cloths and hangings and even a silver vase for wine and water.112 Although there is no record of Marie’s presence at the dedication, if she had spent her teen years in or near the convent, she might well have returned on that occasion. The summer of 1186 ended badly, with the death of another of Marie’s ­half-​­brothers, Geoffroy Plantagenet, count of Brittany (1171–86), who died on 19 August after falling ill in Paris in the king’s absence.113 Philip was deeply moved, says Rigord, and on returning to Paris with his seneschal Thibaut, he had Geoffroy buried in front of the high altar of ­Notre-​­Dame cathedral. Rigord reports that Countess Marie attended the funeral with her son Henry, her ­brother-​­­in-​­law Count Thibaut, and her sister Margaret, “formerly queen of England.”114 After the service they all met privately with Philip in the royal palace, where they decided to establish four chaplaincies in N ­ otre-​­Dame, two funded by the king, the third by Marie, and the fourth by the cathedral chapter itself. Countess Marie endowed a 15l. revenue for a chaplain to celebrate an anniversary in perpetuity for “my brother” Geoffroy, count of Brittany. She confirmed it at ­Château-​­Thierry on her return to Champagne in the company of her chaplains Peter (of Hebron) and Andreas Capellanus, her cleric Odo of Sézanne, and her almoner Brother William. She did that, she said, with “the consent of my dearest son Henry.”115 For Marie, the loss of a ­half-​­brother with whom she felt close was entirely personal. She first met ­fifteen-​­­year-​­old Geoffroy and his brother Henry the Young King at Louis’s Easter court in 1173, when they plotted their rebellion against Henry II in the company of the entire Champenois family, and thereafter Marie must have been informed of the acts of the two brothers.116 For



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

57

the king, Geoffroy’s death was a political setback as well as personal loss, since Geoffroy’s planned invasion of his father’s lands in France might have altered the political landscape of western France and the very nature of Philip’s realm. Margaret, who apparently had stayed with Marie during the three years since her husband’s death, left Paris within a week of Geoffroy’s funeral to marry King Bela III of Hungary.117 Bela constructed a new palace at Estergom for his new queen, who promoted a Becket cult in her new kingdom.118 Back in Troyes, Marie endowed a perpetually burning lamp in the cathedral “for the souls of Count Henry, myself, and my sons.”119 The fall months of 1186 and first half of 1187 saw a reduction in Marie’s acts at court in anticipation of her retirement on Henry II’s succession in July. But two acts are noteworthy. The first was a benefaction for the leper house in Troyes, one of the oldest and largest leper colonies in France. Count Hugh had founded it in 1123 beyond the gate of Croncels and endowed it with a revenue from the gate’s tolls.120 In 1184 Marie granted it the right to hold an annual fair on 1 May, and extended her protection (conductum) over those coming to it with their goods.121 In 1186 she promised a prebend in the comital chapel of ­St‑Étienne, with the consent of the entire chapter.122 But the canons objected to the assignment of future prebends, a practice prohibited by the Third Lateran Council (1179), and so Marie promised that “henceforth I will not give prebends to any church or religious community; all the prebends at ­St‑Étienne are for the use of the canons, just as was instituted at the foundation of the chapel by my lord Henry, its founder.” Exception was made for the prebend that Count Henry had promised to a canon from Hebron, who had become her chaplain Peter.123 Perhaps on the same occasion she renewed Count Henry’s establishment of two guardians of the treasury in ­St‑Étienne, which her son promised to confirm “when I have a seal.”124 Marie’s second act was more dramatic. Elizabeth of ­Nogent-​­­sur-​­Seine, an only child, had inherited her father’s castle lordship after he died on the Second Crusade. Her husband, Girard of Châlons, and then their son Milo II had acted as lords of Nogent until 1186, when both Milo and his younger brother John, a bachelor knight, died. Still grieving at the death of all the men in her ­family—​­her father, her husband, and her two s­ons—​­Elizabeth brought her childless ­daughter-​­­in-​­law to Provins to obtain Marie’s confirmation of her bequest to the nuns at the Paraclete. She did this, she said, for the remission of all their sins.125 On that occasion Marie also confirmed Milo II’s earlier bequests to the Cistercians at Vauluisant (land) and to the Templars (­one-​­third of the castellany of ­Nogent-​­­sur-​­Seine).126 Elizabeth, in her sixties

58

Ch a p t e r 3

and knowing that as the sole surviving heiress of Nogent, her lineage was at an end, entered the Paraclete.127 When Countess Marie visited the Paraclete in the spring of 1187, she approved of Elizabeth’s gift to ­St‑Denis, the overlord of Nogent castle and its lordship.128 That was Marie’s last known act before retiring.

Marie’s Cultural Interests Chrétien de Troyes is thought to have written only one work in the 1180s, The Story of the Grail (Perceval ), which he claims was requested by Count Philip of Flanders, who even furnished a book relating the story. Whether Perceval was written in Troyes or in Flanders is unknown, but it lacks any discernible connection to Countess Marie.129 Two other writers were associated with Marie in that decade. Gace Brulé, perhaps the most prolific and best known lyric poet at the turn of the century, apparently was born in Champagne.130 In Les oxelés de mon païx, he reminisced about what seemed an earlier, idyllic time: The little birds of my pays I have heard in Brittany. Hearing their song, I well remember that in douce Champagne I heard them long ago, if I am not mistaken.131 He credits another song, Bien cuidai tout me vie, to the “command” of the “countess of Brie.” That was a clever play on Chrétien de Troyes’ claim that he composed Lancelot at the “wish” of “the lady of Champagne.” Gace could not refuse, he says, “because it pleases her to command”: I thought I would forget joy and song for the rest of my life, but the countess of Brie, whose command I dare not refuse, has commanded me to sing; now it is right that I should sing, since it pleases her to command.132



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

59

Marie was known as countess of Troyes and as countess of Champagne, never of Brie, but since her dower lands were located in Brie (Coulommiers, ­Jouy-​ ­­le-​­Châtel, Provins)—​­the very dower lands of Mathilda, “countess of Brie”—​­a poet might well ascribe that title to her, especially if he needed a rhyme for his first line ending in vie and sixth line ending in die. Brie fit better than Troyes or Champagne. Gace’s poems were highly esteemed in the thirteenth century, when several were incorporated in Jean Renart’s musical Le Roman de la rose ou Guillaume de Dole (ca. 1209–28), and even were compared with Count Thibaut IV’s songs for their brilliance.133 Indirect evidence from Gace’s poems suggest that they were composed in the 1180s and 1190s.134 He speaks of his affection for Count Geoffroy of Brittany, “the count whom I always loved,” as if Geoffroy had died recently.135 He offers advice on true loving to Huon, castellan of Cambrai (1171–89) and viscount of Meaux.136 He addresses Count Henry of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc (1173–91), and Count Thibaut V of Blois (1152–91), both of whom died on the Third Crusade.137 The song he sings for the countess of Brie seems to refer to that crusade, when he affirms his loyalty to his love despite her duplicity, and protests that she interrupts him, when he speaks or cries out for her mercy, with “When will you go overseas?”138 Whether Gace actually performed for Marie, either in Champagne or elsewhere, is unknown.139 The most notable author working in Troyes in the 1180s and associated with Marie was Andreas Capellanus, whose De Amore has come to be recognized for its humor, sophistication, and intellectual complexity.140 Despite strained attempts to place Andreas at the “royal court” ca. ­1190—​­when the ­twenty-​­­five-​­­year-​­old widowed king known for his sobriety was on ­crusade—​ ­the simplest and most reasonable reading of the evidence locates Chrétien securely in Troyes as one of Countess Marie’s chaplains.141 Between 1182 and 1186 he witnessed ten of her acts as Andreas capellanus (see Appendix 2). That he was close to Marie is suggested by the fact that in eight of those letters he is listed first, even before the aged Garnier of Traînel and other regular members of the court. Five times he witnessed with her bursar Artaud, four times with her almoner Brother William, and two times each with her personal escort Nevel of Aulnay, her marshal Geoffroy of Villehardouin, and her treasurer Milo of Provins (see Appendix 2). Even more persuasive is the fact that Andreas accompanied Marie on three very personal occasions in 1185 and 1186. He was present with Margaret of France when Marie founded a chapel in ­St‑Étienne of Troyes and appointed a chaplain to say daily Masses for her and Count Henry.142 He accompanied Marie to Paris with her almoner William

60

Ch a p t e r 3

and her cleric Master Odo of Sézanne for the funeral of Geoffroy of Brittany in ­Notre-​­Dame cathedral, and witnessed Marie’s endowment of a memorial service for Geoffroy.143 Andreas also was present when Marie endowed a perpetually burning lamp for her late husband at the altar of Saint Sauveur in the cathedral in Troyes.144 Although the identity of Andreas Capellanus is elusive, he is well attested within Marie’s inner circle.145 In the aftermath of Marie’s own failed prospect of remarrying, it was entirely appropriate for Andreas to divert the royal widows with witty, allusive conundrums involving prominent women of the time, especially Eleanor of Aquitaine, whose conduct was widely reported. As someone who had attended Marie’s court sessions in Troyes, Andreas was eminently qualified to evoke an imagined “court of love” (curia amoris), a court composed not of men probing the details of disputes over property and rights, but of women equally committed to unraveling the rules of amatory conduct.146 In an ostensibly sober treatise written in Latin, the language of the church and of Countess Marie’s chancery in Troyes, Andreas inserts t­wenty-​­ one judgments respecting love (ad amoris iudicia) rendered by great ladies as if at courts of love. Countess Marie announced seven decisions, Eleanor six, Viscountess Ermengarde of Narbonne five, and Elizabeth of Vermandois, the recently deceased countess of Flanders, two.147 Queen Eleanor had the honor of deciding that it was better to love a mature man of character rather than a younger man lacking it.148 Eleanor’s niece Elizabeth of Vermandois, who was rumored to have been caught in flagrante with a knight and whose husband had the knight hanged by his feet over a cesspit until he died, was allowed to judge the case of “a certain knight, utterly without human worth,” who having sought a lady’s love, which raised his moral character, left her for another woman.149 But the most memorable judgment was in Countess Marie’s letter to a noblewoman A(enor = Eleanor), announcing a decision ( judicium) reached with the advice (concilium) of many ladies, that love cannot exist within marriage.150 Queen Eleanor, not wishing to contradict the countess, concurred in a separate opinion.151 Marie’s letter was cleverly dated 1 May 1174, that is, May Day, the day of love, while Queen Eleanor was being held captive in Chinon castle for having incited her sons’ revolt against Henry II. It was a double irony, for Margaret of France was among those captured with Eleanor and sent back across the channel on 7 July 1174. Eleanor was confined to Salisbury castle and Margaret placed at Devizes and later at Winchester.152 Margaret certainly knew many details of Eleanor’s troubled marriage when she came to Troyes, and it certainly looks as if Andreas was alluding to them.153 Andreas



Re ge n t Co u n t e s s

61

also must have known that Chrétien de Troyes was composing Lancelot, the story of the adulterous encounter of King Arthur’s queen with the young knight Lancelot at that very time in the ­mid-​­1170s. Although De Amore was written in Latin, as if intended for fellow canons, it was not inaccessible to those more comfortable with vernacular. Canons, whether regular or secular, were functionally bilingual, and especially chaplains, who counseled and even heard the confessions of their patrons, were quite capable of translating Latin by sight into the vernacular. It is not surprising that De Amore assumed a knowledge of Chrétien’s romances, particularly of Lancelot and Perceval. Marie’s prominent role in De Amore as the author/ judge of her court’s amatory judgments plays directly to her sponsorship of the Lancelot story, which Chrétien had explicitly disclaimed as his invention. If De Amore was written as a takeoff on Lancelot, and of Marie’s apparent condoning of a queen’s adultery, it was cleverly placed at her “court of love” a decade earlier, precisely when Eleanor was held in captivity and at the very moment that Chrétien was writing Lancelot. After describing the various disputes and judgments rendered by the “courts of love,” Andreas spins an Arthurian tale in which a knight from Britain undertakes a quest to obtain a hawk at King Arthur’s court.154 The knight successfully retrieves a document inscribed with the Rules of Love (regulae amoris), which Arthur himself had authenticated. Located on a perch and tied with a golden chain, that text is Andreas’s version of Chrétien’s grail, a holy grail of love as it were. Andreas closes his Book 2 by listing the Rules of Love, in effect offering bullet points recapitulating the judgments of the courts of love. If the three royal widows in 1184 were not consoled by the Eructavit’s call to a spiritual fine amor, perhaps they would have found the earthly humor of Andreas’s curia amoris more diverting as a play on Marie’s actual court, which he was attending in precisely these years. Evrat, a canon of S­ t‑Étienne at the time, states that Marie, who “knew well how to read and understand,” possessed a cabinet (armoire) with books, although we do not know exactly what it contained in the absence of a catalogue like the one for Count Henry’s library.155 We can only guess that by the time of her retirement in 1187 her collection contained at least Chrétien’s Lancelot and his earlier romances in addition to the Eructavit, the De Amore, and a Latin Genesis from which Evrat would make a translation in the 1190s. It is not known whether Count Henry’s anthologies and volumes of ancient history remained in his chamber after his death or were removed to the chapel’s treasury, but in either case there is no evidence that Marie or her sons were

62

Ch a p t e r 3

drawn to his collection of scholarly works in Latin. Marie may well have commissioned other vernacular works and translations, but Lancelot (late 1170s) and Eructavit (ca. 1184) are the only original works for which there is a claim to her commissions before 1187.156 Despite her close association with Andreas Capellanus in the ­mid-​­1180s, nothing suggests that Marie commissioned De Amore, in which she figures so prominently. She may well have enjoyed hearing it read, but the work is entirely his invention. It is more than coincidental, however, that Andreas last appears in Troyes in 1186, just as Marie was preparing to go into retirement. In one of her last acts, she endowed a perpetually burning lamp in the cathedral of Troyes for the souls of Henry the Liberal, herself, and her two sons. There were only two witnesses to that intensely private a­ ct—​­Master Odo of Sézanne and Andreas Capellanus.157

Chapter 4

Retirement, 1187–1190

Sometime after Easter (29 March) and before 29 July 1187, Marie and her son Henry visited Heloise’s convent of the Paraclete. The purpose of their visit, the first Marie is known to have made to the Paraclete, is not clear. Beyond her routine confirmations of the abbey’s acquisitions, there is nothing to indicate that she had any particular attachment to the convent where Heloise had been abbess since its foundation (1130–64). The most likely explanation for her visit is the Paraclete’s location, not far from the main road between Troyes and Meaux, which provided a convenient stopover for the ­forty-​­­two-​­­year-​­old countess and her son on their journey to Meaux, where she intended to retire after leaving her home of two decades in Troyes. While at the Paraclete, Marie met Elizabeth, heiress of the castle of ­Nogent-​­­sur-​­Seine, who had entered the convent after her emotional appearance at Marie’s court in Provins the previous year, grieving the deaths of her husband and two sons without direct descendants.1 On this occasion Elizabeth asked Marie to confirm her recent act in which she returned to ­St‑Denis the land that her son had held in fief from the monks but had alienated without their consent to the Cistercians at Vauluisant.2 The fact that Marie’s confirmation was witnessed by only one of her regular councilors, Garnier of Traînel, whose castle at Marigny was close by, suggests that she and Henry were traveling on a personal mission, and that Henry was accompanying his mother to her retirement home. Marie had visited the comital residence in Meaux periodically in the 1180s, just as Henry the Liberal before her had held court in Meaux in castello meo, as he said.3 Located within the walls of the old cité along the Marne, it must have resembled the old, abandoned comital quarters in the cité of Troyes and was not nearly as comfortable as the “modern” comital campus in Troyes, with its attractive Gothic chapel, which Henry had constructed in the 1150s.

64

Ch a p t e r 4

The weight of the evidence, however, suggests that Marie did not settle in Meaux but instead entered the convent of F ­ ontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes, located just beyond Meaux in the royal domain.4 Fontaines was one of the first generation of priories affiliated with Fontevraud under its founding abbess, Petronilla of Chemillé, and long associated with the comital family.5 Count Thibaut had supported it materially in the late 1120s and 1130s, and even asked Abbot Suger of S­ t‑Denis to contribute to the building of the priory’s church, still under construction in the late 1140s.6 Countess Mathilda, too, supported the nuns, for which she was remembered in the priory’s necrology.7 In 1156 Count Henry confirmed his father’s benefactions (land, fiefs, a mill), his mother’s gift from her dower lands at Jouy (a mill), and a long list of donations by local proprietors, including Hubert the toll collector at Provins (a vineyard), Bartholomew the provost of Meaux (an oven and a mill), and Arnulph of Jouy (a house in front of the meat stalls in Provins). Several were entry gifts for the reception of daughters as nuns. Count Henry, for his part, licensed the nuns to acquire his fiefs at will.8 On a visit to the convent in 1170, accompanied by his chief officers but not by Marie, who may have been pregnant at the time, Henry endowed anniversary Masses for himself and for Marie with 26 setiers of wheat from his mill in Meaux.9 After returning to Provins, he exempted the priory’s house in the fairgrounds of ­St‑Ayoul from his sales taxes during the fairs, in effect, allowing the nuns to keep any taxes they collected.10 Marie appears to have envisioned Fontaines as a retirement community in 1184, when she made her first benefaction to the nuns, remitting the wine tax they owed for their vineyard near Meaux.11 The location of Fontaines made it an attractive choice. If she was considering only Fontevrist communities, she would have found Fontevraud too distant from the land where she had lived for the past thirty years, despite the fact that Henry the Liberal’s three ­sisters—​­Margaret, Marie of Burgundy, and Elizabeth of A ­ pulia—​­were nuns there and Marie’s mother, Eleanor, was making large gifts to the community.12 Marie also might have considered ­Notre-​­Dame of Foissy, a prosperous Fontevrist community near Troyes, which Count Thibaut had supported since its foundation (ca. 1134) with substantial benefactions, including three ovens in Troyes, each with eight bakers, and exemption from his sales taxes from the priory’s (commercial) houses during the fairs.13 By 1181, Foissy had acquired ten houses in Troyes and six in B ­ ar-​­­sur-​­Aube, all exempt from the count’s taxes and rents, an altogether substantial exposure to the commercial ­ alf-​­sister economy.14 Marie was familiar with Foissy from her visit with her h Margaret and s­ ister-​­­in-​­law Queen Adele in 1184. But the priory was too close



Re t i re m e n t

65

to Troyes; in fact, it was virtually a suburb of Troyes, where her son would rule from the comital residence. Fontaines was a better choice as a retirement community. It had a ­long-​­standing association with the comital family, but its location on the royal domain meant that Marie did not infringe on her son’s authority within the county. Yet it was within easy access to Troyes, allowing Marie to monitor the affairs of Henry II, who was caught up in the dangerous political and military conflicts in northern France. If Marie did enter Fontaines with her younger son, Thibaut, she might have stayed in the guest house within the priory’s walled compound, where distinguished personages resided with their household staffs apart from the professed nuns and lay sisters, who lived under a relaxed monastic regime.15 She would have found Fontaines a virtual Fontevraud in the east, with a community of about one hundred nuns supported by five priests, one deacon, and one subdeacon, as Louis VII mandated in 1176 while staying at the royal residence (palatium) in Meaux.16 As a great lady residing within the monastic compound, Marie would have shared a spiritual life with the nuns without taking monastic vows at that time.17 That she took a personal interest in their material ­well-​­being is suggested by her request of Henry II, on the point of leaving for the Third Crusade in 1190, to give Fontevraud a 100l. annual revenue, payable from the gate taxes during the fairs in Provins and restricted to the purchase of garments for the nuns.18 It was the largest monetary benefaction known at the time in Champagne and came a few years after Eleanor had given the nuns a similar revenue.19 Marie later endowed anniversaries for herself and her sons at Fontaines, and she gave a personal lifetime rent to Prioress Edna, “whether she is prioress or not,” with the stipulation that it pass after her death to her three nieces, who likely were nuns there.20 Count Thibaut III later confirmed that his mother had a “special affection” for Prioress Edna.21 All of which indicates that Marie had lived with the nuns, at least within their compound, during her ­three-​­year retirement.22 Most likely Marie ventured beyond Fontaines to Meaux, much like Eleanor, who spent the last decade of her life with a considerable household in Fontevraud, which served as “a base of operations” for her numerous sorties beyond the monastic compound.23 In Fontaines, Marie was in her father’­s—​ ­now her h ­ alf-​­brother’­s—​­domain, while in Meaux she remained in her husband’s lands, where she still was the only countess of Champagne and continued to enjoy her dower lands and revenues. Certainly the townsmen of Meaux would have welcomed her in thanks for the communal franchise that she and Count Henry had granted eight years earlier (1179).24 Her confirmation of a

66

Ch a p t e r 4

sale in Meaux in 1188, with the mayor and provost of Meaux in attendance, suggests that she spent some time in the city.25 She had good relations with Bishop Simon of Meaux and especially with Archdeacon Roric, whom she had known since she first came to Troyes as the brother of her personal escort Nevel and one Henry’s closest advisers.26 She would have found a warm friendship in her sister Alice’s daughter, Margaret of Blois, who in 1186 became the second wife of Hugh (Huon) III of Oisy, viscount of Meaux and a reputed poet.27 Queen Adele, too, was a frequent visitor to the royal residence in Meaux in the 1180s, as she divided her time between Meaux and her primary residence at ­Villeneuve-​­­sur-​­Yonne, and sealed letters patent in both places.28 It is likely that Marie witnessed Hugh of Oisy’s presentation of his Tournament of Ladies, a delightful parody depicting highborn and immediately recognizable women participating in a l­adies-​­only tournament at Lagny, a traditional tournament site not far from Meaux, where a decade earlier Philip II had sponsored a spectacular p ­ ost-​­coronation tournament.29 “The countess of Champagne” (la contesse de Canpaigne) figures prominently in the Tournament, riding her dappled Spanish mount directly into the fray, while her niece Margaret “was eager to joust.” The combatants shouted their war cries as they charged their opponents. Countess Marie was a high prize, attacked by one hundred mounted ladies, says the poet, before she was captured by Alice of Montfort, who grabbed the reins of her horse. At the fall of day the most successful combatant, unlike her knightly counterparts, gave away all her booty. The ladies held their tournament, explains the poet, because noteworthy feats of arms were lacking that year in the absence of knights (preparing for the Third Crusade) but also because they “wanted to experience the sort of strokes that their lovers gave out for their sake.”30 The names of the women combatants were recorded for posterity, just as the names of the knightly participants were recorded in tournament rolls as souvenirs.31 Hugh composed the Tournament of Ladies between 1186 (he placed his new wife, Margaret, among the first combatants on the field) and 1188/89.32 Staged as a light theatrical review, it was accompanied by background music and a speaker to guide the audience.33 Like Andreas Capellanus in his “courts of love,” Hugh names distinguished women engaged in an iconic knightly activity.34 Both performances, at court and in tournament, involved role reversals in imagined scenes, and both named prominent living women in entirely fictive moments. In a sense both Andreas and Hugh turned the Arthurian world on its head. But of course Countess Marie and her compan-



Re t i re m e n t

67

ions actually had held court and had exercised the same authority as their husbands, and so it was doubly good fun to imagine a court where high ladies rather than male poets expounded the principles of love, and a tournament where women engaged the sport on the field rather than in the stands. Marie’s peaceful life in retirement was brief. Within weeks of her leaving Troyes, news from the East announced a cataclysmic change in the Holy Land. Saladin had decisively defeated the Westerners at the battle of Hattin (4 July 1187). With the capture of Jerusalem (2 October), he controlled all of Egypt, Syria, and Palestine beyond a narrow strip of coastal cities, mainly Antioch, Tyre, and Tripoli, and several isolated inland fortresses. After almost a century of free access to the holy places, Westerners were barred from Jerusalem, and the “true cross,” discovered by the First Crusaders in 1099, was captured by Saladin and sent to Damascus. Conditions were desperate. Even the Templars appealed for aid.35 The new count of Champagne, the same age as his father on the Second Crusade, was caught up by the fever of an expedition to recover Jerusalem. By the late fall of 1187 it was clear that Marie would return to Troyes to rule during her son’s absence on crusade, just as she had during her husband’s overseas venture a decade earlier. The Third Crusade and its aftermath would cast a shadow over the rest of her life.

Count Henry II Very little is known about Henry II’s p ­ re-​­accession years. Like his father, he seems to have been tutored privately rather than placed in a local religious institution for instruction. With all the accomplished canons available in Troyes, he would have had ample opportunity to acquire a solid intellectual foundation, but he did not share his father’s inquisitiveness or benefit from his father’s library or literati friends. He was thirteen when his father left on crusade, but there is no evidence that he was mentored in rulership, as Henry the Liberal had been by Count Thibaut. Although young Henry occasionally sat at court with his mother in his late teens and was inscribed in several of her letters as “my dearest son Henry” who approved of her acts, he did not seal any document before he succeeded at ­twenty-​­one. He still did not possess a seal in 1186, when he confirmed his mother’s appointment of her cleric Odo of Sézanne as guardian of ­St‑Étienne’s treasury; he promised only that “when I have a seal, I will confirm by my seal what is in this letter.” 36 Marie retained full control of the comital office until Henry came of age at ­twenty-​­one.

68

Ch a p t e r 4

Henry II spent his late teen years in the tangled political world of northern France where war, marriage alliances, and economic interests all intersected in a great game played by the king and the princes of Flanders, Hainaut, and Namur. He already was familiar with the lay of the land as a fast companion of Arnold of Ardres, who traveled the tournament circuit in the county of Guines in the early 1180s with a band of wellborn young men and a personal trainer in the martial arts, much like Henry the Young King of England did with his mentor William Marshal. The future count of Troyes was only fifteen years old when he joined Arnold, who had just been knighted by his father, in a feast of tournaments in 1181–83.37 Henry’s most audacious act was to extricate himself from betrothal to Yolande of Hainaut, whom he had sworn on 13 January 1186 to accept in marriage when she reached a marriageable age.38 On 29 March 1187, four months before succeeding to Champagne, Henry contracted a marriage with Ermesinde, the e­ ight-​­­month-​­old heiress of Namur and Luxembourg, and in July he went to Namur to formalize the alliance.39 Ermesinde was placed in the custody of Count Manasses of Rethel until the wedding, and Count Henry the Blind of Namur (1139–96) ordered his knights, townsmen, and sergeants to do homage to Henry and swear oaths accepting him as his successor.40 In a curious way Henry was repeating his father’s experience, of a young man betrothing an infant two decades younger. It was a bold move on Henry’s part, since it violated his oath to marry Queen Isabelle’s sister Yolande; but in a sense it was payback to the count of Hainaut for having jilted him of his promised Isabelle.41 If the new count did not share his father’s personality, he did possess a spirited energy and assertiveness that became apparent from several symbolic and institutional changes that announced the beginning of a new regime in the county. He assumed his father’s palatine title, which Marie never adopted, but displayed a larger seal than his father’s (75 mm vs. 62 mm). Its contemporary figuration depicted the count mounted on a horse galloping to the right, wearing a cylindrical helmet, and holding a sword in his right hand and a shield in his left, with both the sword and the helmet extending into the inscription, which reads: “Seal of Henry, count palatine of Troyes.” An oval intaglio in the counter ­seal—​­the first by a count of ­Champagne—​­portrays him standing, with the same inscription.42 At the same time Chancellor Guy introduced a new chancery practice of omitting from the count’s letters patent the names of witnesses and councilors who vetted his acts.43 Whether the vetting process itself was suspended is not clear, but from 1188 the chancery’s letters patent become less records of events (enactments in the presence of witnesses)



Re t i re m e n t

69

than notifications of actions taken on the count’s authority alone.44 In fact, many of Henry II’s letters simply register or confirm earlier ones, as the chancery increasingly recopied original letters and validated them with the count’s seal, in essence reauthorizing written documents instead of recording oral acts.45 The Cistercians at Cheminon, for example, asked him to confirm their acquisition of some property from Ermengarde of Le Plessis, as described in her letter sealed by her lord Henry, castellan of Vitry. The chancery recopied her letter (without referring to it) and affixed the count’s seal, as if he had enacted it.46 The chancery might have taken a page from practices in the archiepiscopal chancery of Reims, which was drafting letters confirming written documents (sicut in scripto continentur) under Archbishop William’s seal.47 In the resolution of disputes, too, Henry’s court increasingly decided cases from a reading of the relevant documents rather than by listening to oral testimony. When the monks of Cheminon brought suit against the tenants at Sermaise over the use of certain woods located between their settlements, the count examined the charters submitted by both parties, including very old documents from the time of Count Hugh of Troyes (1093–1125), before deciding the case.48 Similarly, when the monks of Signy complained about the brothers Geoffrey of ­Château-​­Porcien and Renaud of ­Chaumont-​­Porcien, the count and his uncle Archbishop William examined the letters presented in evidence by the monks pertaining to the disputed properties and fiefs. In ruling for the monks, the count and the archbishop had a long letter drafted spelling out the limits of the advocacy exercised by the two lords, and further licensed the monks to acquire the count’s fiefs within the county of C ­ hâteau-​ ­Porcien.49 Like his father and mother, Henry II freely consented to the alienation of his fiefs to religious institutions.50 And like his father, he was sensitive to the increasing demand for prebends, especially of prestigious ones in the count’s chapters.51 When asked by eight canons, including his own chaplain Adam, to create new prebends, Henry established a chapter in the comital chapel at Vertus with an endowment to support t­wenty-​­four canons.52 To judge from the variety of his extant acts, Henry II appears to have been remarkably conscientious in dealing with the internal affairs of his county. Political events in northern France were extremely fluid in the late 1180s, complicated by the interminable war between Henry II of England and Philip II of France, and by conflicts over successions in the northern principalities in which Count Henry II was deeply involved. But on 21 January 1188, on the field between Trie and Gisors, the count and a large assemblage of barons and prelates witnessed as the kings of France and England agreed to a truce,

70

Ch a p t e r 4

publicly embraced in a kiss of peace, and promised to liberate Jerusalem. The archbishops of Canterbury and Rouen were present, as were many of the count’s relatives: the bishops of Beauvais (Philip of Dreux) and Chartres (Renaud of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc), the duke of Burgundy (Hugh III), and the counts of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc (Henry I), Blois (Thibaut V), Dreux (Robert II), Flanders (Philip I), and Perche (Rotrou III). The next day, 22 January, the archbishops of Tyre and Reims preached crusade. The two monarchs took the cross, the king of England from the archbishops of Tyre and Rouen, and the king of France from the archbishops of Tyre and Reims. Count Henry II was among the great princes and barons who followed their lead in taking the cross. It was agreed that those from lands in France should wear red crosses, those from England white crosses, and those from Flanders green crosses.53 Perhaps on his way back from Gisors, Henry met Marie at Lagny, where they visited the tomb of his grandfather Thibaut before confirming the endowment of Archdeacon Roric of Meaux and bidding him adieu as he prepared to enter Clairvaux. Roric was one of the original canons of S­ t‑Étienne of Troyes more than thirty years earlier and an intimate of Henry the Liberal. In the count’s memory, Roric endowed a memorial service in the cathedral of Meaux, funded by the 70s. revenue that Henry had given him decades earlier. The confirming document was drawn up in the joint names of “I, Marie, countess of Troyes, and I, Henry, count palatine of Troyes.”54 Sensing the perilous times ahead, with her oldest and unmarried son about to embark on a voyage overseas while she was left with ­nine-​­­year-​­old Thibaut, Marie made her own gift to ­St‑Féréol of Essomes in return for perpetual daily Masses for her deceased husband and father, and for her sons, (­half-​­) brothers, and herself.55 It is not certain where Marie was in the spring of 1188, when the envoys from Count Henry the Blind, the ill and aged count of Namur, came in search of Henry II, his future s­ on-​­­in-​­law, for aid against an imminent attack by Baldwin of Hainaut. But, reports Gislebert of Mons, the envoys “found only the countess,” since Count Henry had joined King Philip in countering the latest maneuvers of the king of England, despite their truce. Marie replied on her son’s behalf.56 Count Henry apparently was still away on 23 July when a great fire broke out in Troyes during the Fair of Saint Jean. According to Robert of Auxerre, who may have witnessed it, the fire consumed merchant goods in the new town and destroyed much of the cathedral and the convent of ­Notre-​ ­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains across from the comital residence.57 Robert suggests that the heat of the fire melted liturgical objects and fabrics in ­St‑Étienne as well, but does not mention Henry’s metalwork tomb located centrally within



Re t i re m e n t

71

the choir which, given its spectacular workmanship, would have elicited comment had it been damaged.58 On the eve of 23 July the overcrowded city of Troyes, crammed to the roofs with goods, burned down almost to the ground. It was the time of the fair [of Saint Jean] at which merchants from diverse parts had brought their wares to sell. Suddenly at night, a voracious fire rose out of control, fanned every which way by turbulent winds, so that those who tried to save themselves and others were overtaken by flames, while even those who tried to flee also were consumed. There was an incalculable loss of goods, and many people perished in the flames. The cathedral church [of ­St‑Pierre], covered with fine lead roof tiles, was destroyed by fire. And the basilica of ­St‑Étienne, which Count Henry [the Liberal] had founded and endowed with rents and adorned with gold and silver and variegated cloth furnishings, also burned, and all those remarkable objects collected there perished with it. In those same days the rich and populous towns of Provins, Beauvais, and Poitiers, then Chartres, were ravaged by fire and devastation.59 Robert states that the fire began in the market area of the new town and destroyed the cathedral.60 Adjacent houses in the old town were destroyed, including those of the cathedral canons, the hospital, and most likely the nearby “house of the [count’s] chancellor,” where the count’s chancery was located.61 Robert does not suggest a cause of the fire, but by a curious coincidence Bishop Manasses had just been suspended of his functions by papal judges following Pope Clement III’s directive. One of those judges was Stephen, abbot of S­ te‑Geneviève of Paris (future bishop of Tournai), who earlier had opposed Henry the Liberal’s grant of a commune to Meaux and who now complained to the pope about the bishop of Troyes.62 According to the pope’s directive, Bishop Manasses had refused, not once but twice, to install regular canons from S­ t‑Loup in the church at Marigny. The bishop, brother of the count’s former constable Odo of Pougy, was one of a generation of secular canons appointed by Henry the Liberal and first provost of the count’s chapel. He refused to back down. The pope’s letter of 15 June 1188 included a mandate to suspend the bishop unless he retracted within thirty days. According to Robert of Auxerre, the fire in Troyes broke out on 23 July. Whether the bishop’s suspension and the fire were related remains an intriguing question.

72

Ch a p t e r 4

The next summer Henry II suffered a major setback. Gislebert of Mons describes how Philip II ended the war between his f­ather-​­­in-​­law, Count Baldwin of Hainaut, and Count Henry II, who was allied with the count of Namur. In August 1189 at Pontoise, the king and Henry’s uncles, Archbishop William and the royal seneschal Count Thibaut, agreed that Count Baldwin would inherit the entire county of Namur, including fiefs as well as allods, while Henry would have only two lordships within that county. In announcing that accord on 1 September 1189, the king effectively deprived Count Henry of the fruits of his new marriage contract with the count of Namur.63 It was a humiliating end to his attempt to circumvent the oath he had taken to marry Baldwin’s daughter Yolande by marrying the infant heiress of Namur. Once again, as in 1179, Henry had been outmaneuvered by the king, and it was a portent of difficult relations between Henry and Philip on the Third Crusade. Marie returned to Troyes most likely in the fall of 1189 or spring of 1190, as Henry was making his final preparations for his expedition. Beyond making a number of routine confirmations for religious institutions, the count had to arrange for the good order of the county in his absence and in the event that he did not return. Like his father a decade earlier, he had the chancery prepare an inventory of his current fiefholders for the benefit of Countess Marie.64 Chancery clerics updated the original rolls of fiefs stored in S­ t‑Étienne’s ­treasury—​ ­correcting, deleting, and adding ­information—​­then made fair copies on a new set of rolls, one for each castellany. Before the new rolls were deposited in ­St‑Étienne’s treasury, they were copied in a codex volume for Henry to take with him overseas.65 Then, in a standard practice for every crusading prince, he arranged for a succession in the event of his death. For Henry, still unmarried at ­twenty-​­four, that was a critical concern, since his younger brother, Thibaut, was only eleven years old. In the spring of 1190, probably in April, the count’s barons and knights were convened at the centrally located town of Sézanne, where they swore to accept Thibaut as Henry’s successor if he failed to return from overseas.66 No record of the o­ath-​­taking was made at the time, but ­twenty-​­three years later, in October 1213, a papal inquest collected depositions about the swearing from the barons and comital officers, by then mature men, who had survived the Third and Fourth Crusades. Guy of Chappes said that he swore at Sézanne, as did Count William of Joigny, Robert of Milly, and Roger of ­St‑Chéron. Peter of Touquin said that he “believed that he had sworn.” Guy II of Dampierre said that he had heard about the swearing but was not present, and the marshal Oudard of Aulnay said the same, perhaps because they were in an advance party that left for Acre before the ­oath-​­taking took place.67



Re t i re m e n t

73

Henry’s final preparations included raising cash for his journey. Philip II had issued two ordinances in late March 1188 in support of the crusade. One dealt with crusader debts. The other announced the Saladin tithe, requiring all persons, lay and ecclesiastic alike, who did not take the cross to pay 10 percent of their annual revenues and 10 percent of the value of their movable possessions to support the expedition.68 The tax collectors in Champagne must have been efficient, for the cathedral chapter of Sens sought Henry’s written promise that taxes collected from their lands “within my county,” as he said, did not set a precedent.69 The burghers of Chablis contributed 300l., the same amount they had given Henry the Liberal for his expedition in 1179, with the same proviso, that the crusade tax did not constitute a “custom.” 70 More lucrative in the long term were the taille commutations that Henry II granted to the townsmen of Provins and Épernay, which yielded annual payments of 600l. and 120l. respectively.71 Henry swore on holy objects to abide by each charter, and promised that his mother and brother would swear to observe their provisions. Those commutations were among the count’s last financial dispositions before he left on crusade. As was expected before a lord undertook a perilous journey, Henry made a number of benefactions. He granted the hospital of Provins a 10l. revenue from the entry tax on wine imported from Auxerre, and he confirmed his father’s grant of land to the brothers of Boulancourt for their forges at Wassy.72 At the same time Henry confirmed all the possessions of his chapel of ­St‑Étienne as described in “any authentic document of my father Count Henry and my mother Marie, countess of Troyes.” 73 But his singular charitable act before leaving was to save the abbey of Sellières from dissolution. The brothers had incurred so many debts that they considered abandoning the abbey. Henry took the abbey in receivership, provided for the annual delivery of grain and wine, and assigned a 10l. rent from the entry fee on wine at Provins to provide for the brothers’ clothing.74 Just as Henry was about to depart, his uncle Archbishop William came to Troyes, perhaps to bid him a safe journey. With him came several cathedral canons from Reims to complain about the count’s agents in his town of Vertus who had damaged their interests. Preoccupied with his impending journey, Henry left the matter to his uncle and “my dearest mother,” accepting in advance any just settlement they reached in his absence.75 In late May 1190, Count Henry and his crusade companions left Troyes, one month before the king set out from Paris.

Chapter 5

A Condominium Lordship, 1190–1198

In May 1190 Marie, then ­forty-​­five, saw her ­twenty-​­­four-​­­year-​­old son leave Troyes at the head of a large contingent of Champenois barons and knights, exactly eleven years after Henry the Liberal left on a similar venture. As earlier, she assumed the lordship of the county in what was expected to be an interlude of two to three years, but since Henry II remained overseas after the Third Crusade, her rule ultimately extended to seven years. And this time, her position was different. During her husband’s absence and during the regency for her son, she had ruled alone; now she would share the countship with her son, who continued to send her mandates and seal letters patent from abroad as “Count Palatine of Troyes.” Marie’s first task was to complete matters that Henry left pending, and soon she was confirming his acts made en route to Marseille. He had authorized but not assigned a 10l. revenue to establish a chapel in S­ t‑Étienne, and so, on receipt of his mandate sent “while traveling to Jerusalem,” Marie encumbered the duty on wine imported into Troyes (intragium) and appointed the first chaplain, Lambert, with the responsibility of celebrating Mass for Henry.1 At Vézelay, “while I am on the road to Jerusalem,” Henry made two grants to the Cistercians at Pontigny. He licensed the monks to sell 200 modii of wine annually in Troyes exempt from the entry tax and all other customary taxes. On presentation of his letter in Troyes, Marie confirmed it, as did “my son [­eleven-​­­year-​­old] Thibaut, who in my presence conceded and approved what his brother wished.”2 The dean of ­St‑Étienne also confirmed the exemption, since the chapter’s endowment charter included the right to collect a tax on all casks of wine brought into Troyes during the fairs.3 Henry promised Pontigny in addition a 10l. revenue for which the monks would say a Mass for his safety while living and for his soul after death. Marie ordered the wardens



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

75

of the fairs to dispense half of that sum at each of the two major fairs in Troyes.4 At Corbigny, Henry wrote to Marie that he had taken ­St‑Germain of Auxerre under his protection and warned her about any attempt by Count Peter of Nevers to exact taxes from the monks. He asked her, “my dearest mother Marie, countess of Troyes,” to give S­ t‑Germain the next building in Troyes that he acquired, “since I am on the road to Jerusalem.” 5 At some point during that march southward, the count promised a 10l. revenue to the canons of S­ t‑Quiriace of Provins; on receipt of his mandate, Marie assigned the revenue on the tax collected from wine imported into Provins.6 Henry and his troop reached Marseille by early June. While waiting for transport, he was approached by the grand prior of the Hospitallers in Arles, who sought to establish a Hospitaller house in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube. The count offered land sufficient for a chapel and a cemetery next to one of the town gates, whichever one the prior preferred, and he asked his mother to assign the specific property in consultation with the prior.7 In a mandate to his bailiffs he announced that he had authorized the poor of the H ­ ôtel-​­Dieu of Provins to gather wood in his forests around Provins.8 Those letters and Marie’s confirmations opened a new stage of shared governance, in which she acted as countess of Champagne while implementing his mandates and transactional letters sent from afar. That dynamic characterized her rule through the 1190s, although Henry gradually paid less attention to matters at home as he assumed heavier responsibilities in Acre as leader of the overseas French. While Henry was still in Marseille, Bishop Manasses of Troyes died (11 June 1190). It must have been a personal loss for Marie. She had known Manasses as provost of the comital chapel since she arrived in Troyes ­twenty-​ ­five years earlier, and as bishop during the last decade. On hearing the news in Marseille, Henry dispatched his chancellor, Haice of Plancy, to Troyes. As the younger brother of Hugh II of Plancy, one of Henry the Liberal’s close companions since the Second Crusade, Haice became a pluralist canon from an early age and experienced a rapid rise as a canon of S­ t‑Étienne, dean of both ­St‑Étienne and the cathedral, provost of ­St‑Quiriace of Provins, and finally chancellor of the count (1181). Not surprisingly, Haice was elected bishop. Since by custom in Champagne the offices of bishop and comital chancellor were not held concurrently, he resigned as chancellor.9 As her new chancellor, Marie appointed Walter of Chappes (June 1190–February 1207), who, like Haice, had deep roots in southern Champagne as a younger son of Clarembaud III of Chappes, another Second Crusade companion of Henry the Liberal.10 Walter had been subdeacon of the cathedral chapter of Troyes,

76

Ch a p t e r 5

archdeacon of Sézanne, and provost of ­St‑Étienne. He would seal and present almost all of Marie’s letters patent through the rest of her life. Together with Bishop Haice, Walter provided critical institutional stability at home in the absence of the count and his chief officers overseas. In those same months of 1190, Marie’s younger sister Alice became ruling countess of Blois for Count Thibaut, whose forces joined Henry’s in forming a combined expedition of crusaders from Blois and Champagne.11 The s­ ister-​ ­countesses wielded plenary rights in their counties, unlike their s­ister-​­­in-​­law Adele, the queen mother, and her brother Archbishop William of Reims, who were appointed royal regents in June 1190 but with limited authority at court.12 Even so, it must have been a savory moment for the three related women in their forties, who were brought to the fore by the Third Crusade. Yet a crusade was a risky venture. For Philip II, who was recently widowed with a ­four-​­­year-​­old son, the possibility of his death overseas made a long regency by Queen Adele and Archbishop William an unenviable prospect, one that might have weighed in his decision to return early from the crusade. For Marie and Alice, too, the crusade was fraught with uncertainties. Thibaut’s death soon after his arrival in Acre (16 January 1191) made Alice, at ­forty-​­one, regent for her son Louis for the next five years.13 Although Henry II survived the siege of Acre, he did not return to Champagne, and Marie would rule in his absence until his death in September 1197.

Count Henry II Overseas It is not clear how much Marie learned of Henry’s overseas adventures after he sailed from Marseille on 20 June 1190, but she often alluded to his absence and the dangers he courted.14 On 28 July Henry and his forces landed at Acre and immediately joined the siege of the city begun a year earlier by Guy of Lusignan, king of Jerusalem. ­Ibn-​­Shaddād, intimate friend and biographer of Saladin, observed that Henry, one of the greatest Frankish princes, arrived at Acre with several ships full of men, provisions, ­weapons—​­and ­treasure—​­and that his presence inspired the besiegers, giving them new courage.15 But the siege was difficult, and the French sustained heavy casualties.16 On 15 November both Henry and Conrad of Montferrat were wounded, and on 20 January 1191 Henry fell seriously ill.17 By the spring of 1191 the losses at Acre were staggering. Among the prominent who perished were Henry’s uncles Stephen of Sancerre and Thibaut of Blois, both in their late fifties; Count Philip of Flanders, about



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

77

f­orty-​­eight; Henry’s uncle Rotrou III, count of Perche; and his cousin Henry, count of B ­ ar-​­­le-​­Duc. A whole generation of Champenois barons, too, left their bones at Acre: Erard of Chacenay, Guy III of Châtillon, Bartholomew of Vignory and his son Guy, the seneschal Geoffrey IV of Joinville and his uncle Bishop Guy of Châlons, and many others of lesser lineages.18 The poet Guiot of Provins later remembered them, one by one, in a funeral dirge: Oï! Champagne, quens barons / avez perdu en po de tens! 19 It was all the more poignant in that Guiot himself had witnessed the carnage. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines reported, seemingly from the account of Guy of Bazoches, another eyewitness from Champagne, that the cemetery of S­ t‑Nicholas of Acre was so full of b­ odies—​­of men and women, of the poor and the g­ reat—​­that it ran out of space.20 The arrival of Philip II (20 April 1191) and Richard I (7 June) with their substantial fleets of fresh troops and supplies ultimately sealed the fate of Acre, which fell on 12 July 1191. I­ bn-​­Shaddād reports that Henry tried to convince the two monarchs to remain overseas, but both were eager to return home.21 Philip was the first to leave, on 2 August, having concluded that the recovery of Jerusalem was highly problematic and the deaths of an entire cohort of French princes might facilitate his expansionist plans for northern France and Normandy in the absence of Richard.22 Richard remained another year, sparring with Saladin in arms and in diplomacy. On 25 August 1191 Henry and his Champenois accompanied Richard’s forces in the march from Acre along the coast to Arsuf, Jaffa, Ramlah, and Ascalon.23 If Henry admired Richard’s generalship and his gambits with Saladin, Richard in turn appreciated Henry’s leadership qualities and entrusted him with a number of critical missions to shore up the defenses of the Frankish port cities. By the spring of 1192 Richard had arranged for Henry to succeed him as leader of the overseas Franks after his own departure. The crystallizing event for H ­ enry—​­and for Countess Marie, as w ­ ell—​­was his marriage to Queen Isabelle of Jerusalem on 5 May 1192, eight days after the assassination of her consort, Conrad of Montferrat, and several weeks after a conference of crusade leaders at Ascalon had decided that Conrad, the victorious defender of Tyre against Saladin, should be king of Jerusalem in the event that it was reconquered. Conrad’s murder by the Assassins, under contract by either Richard or Saladin, compromised Count Henry.24 The Itinerarium states that Henry was in Acre when he learned of Conrad’s death, and that on arriving in Tyre he was acclaimed as Conrad’s successor. By this account, Richard counseled Henry not to marry Conrad’s widow, against the insistence of Henry’s barons and the Franks in Tyre.25 The Continuation of William of Tyre’s

78

Ch a p t e r 5

history reports instead that Richard, then in Jaffa, brought Henry with him to Tyre with the very intention of having him marry Isabelle. But Henry was reluctant, according to an imagined conversation with Richard, fearing that he would be “encumbered” by the lady and not able to return to Champagne.26 Only after Richard promised to bring a large army to conquer the “empire of Constantinople” as well as the entire kingdom of Jerusalem, did Henry agree to the marriage.27 With that fateful decision, to be the consort of a titular queen of Jerusalem, Henry assumed the mantle of leadership in anticipation of Richard’s eventual departure.28 In the next few months Henry established his control over Tyre, Acre, and Arsuf and was closely involved in Richard’s negotiations with Saladin over the status of Jerusalem. Richard proposed that crusaders be allowed to visit Jerusalem only with his or Henry’s personal letter of authorization; Saladin objected, preferring to have as many Franks as possible visit the city to fulfill their vows and return home without delay.29 ­Ibn-​­Shaddād describes the scene in which Henry swore to observe the t­hree-​­year truce concluded between Richard and Saladin (Treaty of Jaffa, 2 September 1192).30 On 9 October 1192 Richard departed, leaving Henry in charge of the overseas Franks. During the next five years, until his death on 10 September 1197, Henry led a rearguard action defending a handful of coastal cities, Acre being the most important. His chancery, staffed by clerics from Champagne, titled him “count of Troyes and lord (dominus) of the kingdom of Jerusalem,” but in dealing with overseas affairs, he acted with Isabelle, by her “wish and consent.”31 Despite his deferential t­itle—​­he did not assume the title king of ­Jerusalem—​­Henry was a forceful leader.32 Yet he continued to monitor events in Champagne, sealing letters in his name alone and sending regular instructions to his mother. His letters dealing with very local matters in Champagne reflect his continuing presence from afar. In responding to a request from the monks of Preuilly, for example, he agreed to forego using wood from their forest to repair the bridge of his castle at Montereau, accepting instead their 40l. contribution ­toward the construction of a stone bridge.33 He promised the hospital of Provins the next available prebend in his palace chapel in Provins.34 At the same time he acted to preserve comital rights in Champagne. In confirming the grants of his father and grandfather to the Templars there, he did so with a view to what he saw in Palestine, prohibiting the order from acquiring “the lordship of any city or castle in my land.”35 Templar castles might be appropriate in Palestine, but not in Champagne, where they might become an independent political force, as they were in the East. Life in Acre must have seemed far more interesting to Henry than living



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

79

in Champagne under the watchful eye of an assertive Philip II. Their recent relations were not cordial, especially after the king refused to lend Henry funds unless he surrendered his county as collateral.36 Henry nursed other grievances as well. When Philip intervened in the ongoing war between Brabant and Hainaut by awarding the county of Namur to the count of Hainaut (1 September 1189), he effectively dispossessed Henry of his anticipated succession to Namur, as provided in Henry’s marriage contract with its heiress.37 Henry must have bitterly resented the fact that, once again, Philip had undone his marriage plans and political prospects. After witnessing Philip’s interactions with Richard in the East, Henry might have concluded that his life as count of Champagne under Philip would not accord with his own understanding of the count as an independent prince; returning to France to deal with a difficult king of the same age for the rest of his life (Philip and Henry II were one year apart, ­twenty-​­five versus ­twenty-​­four) was not an appealing prospect. His decision to marry Queen Isabelle and remain in the East might have been affected as much by the changing political scene in France as by the excitement of a life overseas, where he enjoyed a modus vivendi with local Turkish chiefs.38 Ibn ­al-​­Athīr, secretary of ­Nur-​­­ad-​­Din and then of Saladin, describes Count Henry as “a capable man, pleasant and tolerant,” who wrote a conciliatory letter to Saladin after Richard left, promising to wear any robes that Saladin might send him. Saladin sent several “robes of honor,” which Henry sported in Acre.39 All the while Countess Marie was ruling Champagne in her own name, with an occasional mention of her “dearest son Henry,” who gave no indication of ever returning home.

Countess Marie in Champagne Relatively few of Marie’s acts survive from the two years following Henry’s departure (May 1190–May 1192). Those were years of hiatus in the absence of many lords and knights of the county and the experienced staff of the count’s court. Marie herself seems to have been changed by her experience at Fontaines, but after Henry’s marriage to Queen Isabelle of Jerusalem (5 May 1192) was known in France, she became more active, as she settled into what was expected to be an extended rule. She acquired a new seal or had her seal matrix reworked.40 She had Henry’s betrothed, ­six-​­­year-​­old Ermesinde of Namur, returned to her family.41 She commissioned Canon Evrat to translate Genesis into the vernacular (see below). And she established anniversary Masses for

80

Ch a p t e r 5

herself and her two sons at Fontaines, and for Henry the ­Liberal—​­ten years after his ­death—​­in the cathedral of Meaux.42 Troubled by her son’s precarious life overseas and the prospect that he might not return, she frequently alluded both to the indefinite nature of her rule and to the fact that she ruled for her ­son—​­“while I hold the land of my dearest son Henry.”43 In the event that Henry II died abroad, the oaths taken by the count’s barons and knights in 1190 would assure a smooth collateral succession to her younger son, Thibaut, who would attain his majority in 1200. At that point Marie would be ­fifty-​ ­five, still relatively young, given that her mother was vigorous at ­sixty-​­seven on returning from Cyprus in 1191.44 The 1190s proved to be a markedly quieter period for Marie than the 1180s, when she was drawn into entanglements beyond the county.45 Immersing herself in the business of governance, she left the larger political arena to Philip II, by then a powerful monarch in his late twenties, energized by his crusade experience, strongly supported by his uncle the archbishop of Reims, and unencumbered by the seasoned princes and barons of northern France who had perished abroad. Marie executed a stream of Henry’s mandates sent from overseas, mostly to dispense revenues and privileges, and also, according the Chronicle of Ernoul, to send money to pay his debts contracted in Acre.46 Although his letters to her requesting funds have not been preserved, and the actual letters of debt must have been destroyed on redemption, several debts that she incurred on Henry’s behalf were still outstanding at her death in 1198.47 The variety of Henry’s mandates and letters for beneficiaries in Champagne point to a substantial flow of documents between Acre and Champagne through the 1190s.48 Not long after Marie heard about Henry’s marriage, Bishop Haice of Troyes died (20 February 1193) and was succeeded by Garnier of Traînel, another scion of an old aristocratic family from southern Champagne and well known to Marie.49 Although qualified by ancestry, Garnier was not from a comital chapter like ­St‑Étienne or ­St‑Quiriace, whose reservoir of capable canons traditionally had been favored by Henry the Liberal. As a cathedral canon since the 1160s and archdeacon since 1182, Garnier was counted among the “associates” (socii) of Archbishop William of Reims, former provost of the cathedral chapter in Troyes.50 Archbishop William had actively promoted his and the king’s interests during Philip II’s absence overseas, much like what Suger did for Louis VII during the Second Crusade. William had arranged the succession of Baldwin V of Hainaut to Flanders (October 1191) after Count Philip died in Acre without direct heirs (1 June 1191), and intruded in several



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

81

episcopal elections, most notably in promoting the election of his nephew Rotrou of Perche as bishop of Châlons (1191) and his confidant Stephen as bishop of Tournai (February 1192).51 As a necrology put it, Archbishop William “was counselor to kings and queens, almost a second king (quasi secundus rex), and he filled many vacant sees with bishops.”52 Bishop Garnier of Troyes (1193–14 April 1205) was among William’s protégés. Marie’s movements are difficult to follow in the 1190s. It is possible that she met with her mother, Eleanor, her h ­ alf-​­brother Richard I, her sister Alice, and her s­ ister-​­­in-​­law Queen Adele in these years. If she did meet Eleanor, for which there is no explicit evidence, it was just before Christmas 1193, when Eleanor passed through Champagne on her way to Germany to obtain Richard’s release from captivity.53 The previous summer Richard had addressed his ­well-​­known song, Ja nuns hons pris, to Marie, “countess, my [­half-​­]sister.” He laments his state, complains about the slow collection of his ransom money, and criticizes the barons of Anjou and Touraine for abandoning him after returning from the crusade to their pleasant lives.54 Marie may have met Richard earlier at the Easter meeting in Paris in 1173 during the revolt against Henry II, and perhaps again at the funerals of Henry the Young King in 1183 and Geoffroy in 1186. But beyond Richard’s poem, there is no evidence of her special affection for Richard, unless it was an appreciation for his favored treatment of Henry II overseas. If she responded to Richard’s appeal for money, there is no record of it. It is not known how often Marie traveled beyond the county, either to Reims to see her ­brother-​­­in-​­law Archbishop William or to Paris to visit her ­half-​­brother Philip II. She is attested only once in the royal domain, at Compiègne in June 1196, when she and William witnessed her s­on-​­­in-​­law, Count Baldwin (VI) of Hainaut and Flanders, do homage to the king.55 It is not clear whether her ­twenty-​­­five-​­­year-​­old daughter Marie, countess of Flanders, was present, since in March she had taken a pilgrimage to S­ t‑­Gilles-​­­du-​­Gard with Duchess Mathilda of Brabant and might not have returned by June.56 It does not appear that Marie saw her daughter again.57 It is possible that Marie traveled from Compiègne to Blois to witness her nephew Louis, count of Blois, grant a charter of franchise to the townsmen of Blois after his mother, Countess Alice, retired.58 Marie sealed a confirmation of that charter because the county of Blois moved feudally from the count of Champagne and, as she explained, “I hold the land of my dearest son Count Henry,” which is to say that she acted as guardian of his lands.59 But since her confirmation was drawn up in Provins, it is unlikely that she actually visited Blois at that time; her chancery

82

Ch a p t e r 5

apparently drafted her confirmation from a copy of Louis’s charter sent to Provins. There is no evidence that Marie and Alice met as widows in the 1190s.60 It is more likely that Marie met with Queen Adele, continuing a relationship that began in 1168 at Archbishop William’s consecration in Sens and was renewed during Adele’s visit to Provins in 1181 and to Foissy in 1184. Adele’s primary dower residence in ­Villeneuve-​­­sur-​­Yonne was not far from Troyes, and she often stayed in the royal residence in Meaux, where Marie periodically held court. During Philip’s absence on crusade (June 1190–­December 1191), Adele returned to Paris, where she appeared at court with her brother William, and after Philip’s return, she continued to act with William in several ­high-​­profile events. On two occasions in 1194 they participated in the transfer of relics at ­St‑Denis, once when the remains of several saints were placed on the altar, and once when the reliquary of Saint Denis was opened, exposing the entire ­body—​­including the head, as Rigord ­noted—​­for all to behold.61 Together they arbitrated a case that pitted their s­ister-​­­in-​­law Alice, regent countess of Blois, against the powerful chapter of canons of Chartres cathedral, where William had been elected bishop in 1165. After deposing many knights and canons for a very long inquest report, Adele and William devised a f­ace-​­saving compromise affirming the “customs and liberties” of the church of Chartres.62 As a dowager queen, Adele traveled regularly with a substantial entourage between her residences, claiming hospitality in the course of her travels.63 The abbot of Pontigny was among the reluctant hosts who received her at the abbey with her “sizable retinue of both men and women.” After touring the abbey grounds, Adele heard a sermon in the chapter hall, processed into the cloister, and stayed two nights in the infirmary “at great expense,” said the abbot. Although Innocent III authorized her burial at Pontigny, her incursion, while living, into its monastic space compromised the abbot, who was disciplined by the Chapter General of abbots for an infraction of Cistercian norms.64

At Court Marie’s ­fifty-​­six extant letters patent from the 1190s are mostly confirmations of ordinary transactions done earlier and elsewhere. Anselm of Garlande, lord of Possesse, for example, asked her to confirm his donation to the Templars of the hospital at Possesse which was founded, he explained, by his relative Jean, lord of Possesse castle and now a monk at Clairvaux.65 Henry Bristaud, vis-



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

83

count of Provins, and his mother, Heloise of Nangis, registered their sale of several properties to the Templars in Provins, including the houses of Hugh of Flanders and Master Stephen, the former chancellor, as well as an adjacent ­seven-​­room house, for the substantial sum of 300l. Five Templars witnessed, including Marie’s almoner Brother William, who had returned recently from Acre.66 The Premonstratensian monks at La ­Chapelle-​­­aux-​­Planches came to record their lease of a grange to Guy II of Dampierre, who had paid them 200l. cash on the understanding that the property with all his improvements would revert to them without question at his death. The chancery drew up two letters stating the terms of the lease, one in the name of Guy, who sealed it, the other as Marie’s confirmation.67 Fromond, son of the former marshal William rex of Provins, appeared in person to divest himself in Marie’s hand of the grain rent he sold to the monks of Sellières; Marie invested the monks with it and guaranteed its delivery.68 Those seemingly mundane cases occupied much of Marie’s time at court. Perhaps the most distinguished visitor to Marie’s court was her s­ister-​­­in-​ ­ ar-​­­le-​ ­law Agnes, countess of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc.69 Agnes had married Renaud II of B ­Duc in 1155 in her m ­ id-​­teens and was widowed in 1170 in her thirties. She served as regent for three years, during which she forcefully defended her son’s rights, on one occasion sending armed forces against the bishop of Verdun, for which she and her son were excommunicated. As the mother of Counts Henry I (1173–90) and Thibaut (1190–1214) of B ­ ar-​­­le-​­Duc and Bishop Renaud of Chartres (1182–1217), Agnes was by all accounts a prominent personage. For ­thirty-​­seven years she remained an active dowager countess (1170–1207), neither remarrying nor entering a convent, and continued to participate in her sons’ affairs while living on her dower lands at L ­ igny-​­­en-​­Barrois, just east of the Marne.70 She surely must have visited her brother Henry the Liberal and Countess Marie in Troyes, where she collected revenues, and she may well have been in touch with her sister Adele, the dowager queen, whose long years as widow (1179–1206) coincided with Agnes’s own. Following the death of her oldest son on the Third Crusade, Agnes came to Troyes with her second son, Thibaut, in 1192. She had assigned her revenue from the viscounty of Troyes to the Cistercians at ­Trois-​­Fontaines for two years following her death, for the repayment of her debts. The entire revenue would revert to her son, save for annual payments to the nuns at Foissy (15l.) and to the comital chapel of ­St‑Étienne (5l.) for anniversaries for herself and her recently deceased son. She asked Marie to confirm those provisions, which of course she did.71 Beyond confirming various private transactions, Marie mediated and

84

Ch a p t e r 5

settled cases brought to her court, as she had before. The monks of Cheminon presented a ­seventy-​­­year-​­old letter of Count Hugh of Troyes proving their right to collect grain rents from lands Hugh had given them. Robert of Belême admitted their right in Marie’s presence and agreed to return what he had exacted unjustly.72 The nuns of ­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains of Troyes brought suit against Peter of ­St‑Phal regarding their respective rights over two neighboring villages, and presented his father’s document accepting those “customs,” which Peter acknowledged; Marie confirmed them and ordered them written down.73 The knights Milo of ­St‑Martin and Milo of Ternantes appeared at court on behalf of Adam of Verdun, who before leaving on crusade had authorized them to represent his wife, Ade, in his dispute with the canons of ­St‑Étienne over property. It was agreed that Ade would quitclaim the property and the canons would give her son a 5s. annual revenue.74 The knight Hugh of P ­ orte-​­Marne complained about the harassment experienced by the nuns of Avenay over the land he had given them as entry fees for his daughter and granddaughter; in a mandate “to all,” Marie warned that she would not tolerate any injury to the nuns on that account.75 Two cases involving family law are noteworthy. In the first, Marie acted on Henry’s directive that she investigate the bequest made by the knight Robert of Sablonnières to the Templars, most likely during the Third Crusade. Robert’s sister Luca and his widow, Margaret, who had remarried, brought suit because Robert had made his bequest without their consent, dispossessing Luca of her inheritance and Margaret of her dower. Countess Marie upheld Margaret’s right to her lifetime dower, which the Templars consequently purchased for 36l.76 She also forced the Templars to pay Robert’s sister, his closest heir in the absence of children, 25l. for her share of her brother’s inheritance.77 In the second case Marie affirmed what now is called the “right of return” (retrait lignager), by which an heir could claim the right to purchase a family property within a year and a day of its sale. The issue arose when Simon Chauderon claimed his familial right ( jus hereditario) to a vineyard that Countess Marie had purchased. Admitting his right, she surrendered the vineyard for the return of her purchase price, but she stipulated that if a closer heir (propinquior heres) appeared within one year and one day, Simon would sell the vineyard to that claimant for the same amount that Marie had paid for it.78 That is the earliest recorded instance of the custom in Champagne. Archbishop Guy of Sens described an unusual case in which he and Marie acted together. It involved “certain women” in Provins who desired to reform



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

85

their lives. According to Guy, the women, desiring to repent the illicit ways of the world, assumed the religious habit and settled on land near Provins that Lambert the goldsmith rented from the abbot of M ­ ontier-​­­la-​­Celle and his prior of ­St‑Ayoul of Provins. On hearing about the women, however, the abbot and prior tried to expel them. Countess Marie intervened, and acting with the archbishop, who had jurisdiction over the clergy in Provins, she persuaded the abbot to allow the women to remain, while Canon Henry Bursaud agreed to pay the modest 23d. rent.79 The abbot accepted Henry Bursaud’s responsibility for paying the rent of, as he put it, the “women of the illicit world who took vows to the Lord.”80 That marked the foundation of the convent of ­Notre-​­Dame of Champbenoît. The nuns must have had ample financial means, because four years later they purchased 100 arpents of land for 300l., and they continued to receive substantial benefactions through the next century.81 If Marie’s extant acts are few in number, they nevertheless attest to the range of issues she dealt with at court and display her continued attention to the smallest details of the county’s affairs.

Countess Marie’s Cultural Patronage Marie was associated with two notable cultural undertakings in the 1190s. The first was to commission Evrat, a canon of ­St‑Étienne, to translate and gloss the book of Genesis.82 The countess, who was an accomplished reader, he says, chose it because she wished to understand more fully its meaning: This [Book of Genesis] informs all other romances. Since the countess of Champagne, who knows well how to understand and read, chose it from her bookcase [armaire] to be well translated and well glossed because its words are so esteemed for the two laws it contains. And whoever attempts to read it correctly may learn from it the news [novele] of the old and the new law since one is drawn from the other and told and noted and described.83

86

Ch a p t e r 5

It appears that Marie took a Latin Genesis (or the glossed Genesis listed among Henry’s books) from her cabinet and commissioned Evrat to explicate the text in vernacular with the latest scholarly interpretations.84 Evrat’s obituary notice states that he was a canon and priest at the altar of ­Notre-​­Dame in ­St‑Étienne, and that he left his house within the canons’ compound as well as a glossed Psalter “and many other books” to the chapter.85 He must have been an accomplished secular canon, well versed in biblical texts, theology, and history; Countess Marie enlisted him to translate Genesis precisely because of his expertise. Evrat’s Genesis is invaluable both for his translation/adaptation and for his comments as someone who was intimately familiar with Countess Marie and the comital family. He states that he began his work in 1192 (the year that Henry II married in Acre).86 He notes, for example, that Henry the Liberal’s body lies entombed within S­ t‑Étienne.87 And he remembers the count as having done many good things, such as honoring Saint Stephen through building and richly provisioning his chapel, which “has enriched the entire land.”88 While Henry II was engaged abroad in a “deadly war” (la mortel guerre), Evrat writes, his mother drew comfort from the count’s prowess and virtue. Evrat gives Marie high praise for having preserved the county during a difficult period: “well did she protect and govern the land.”89 Although he did not sit at court, his precise dating of events and detailed description of seals suggest that he worked in the chancery and consulted the chapter’s library for his ­gloss-​­commentary.90 Marie was not alone in commissioning a translation of a biblical text. Count Baldwin II of Guines (1169–1206) commissioned a number of translations, including the Song of Songs, which he had read to him.91 What makes Evrat’s Genèse so intriguing is that is it far more than an uninspired verse translation.92 As he himself states, in order to explain the meaning (sens) of Genesis, he offers Marie both “a history and a gloss” in romance.93 The most thorough analysis of Genèse concludes that Evrat’s translation, or more accurately his adaptation of the Latin text, was a novel experiment. By interlacing praise for the count and countess, commentaries, and allegorical explanations with allusions to the New Testament and to theologians, Evrat provides a complex commentary in clear, if not inspired, vernacular language for a lay audience.94 He had expert knowledge of current theology, especially of Peter Comestor’s Scholastic History, a widely used reference work of biblical history written by the former master and dean of the cathedral of Troyes, which he consulted in an early version that Peter left in Troyes, either at S­ t‑Étienne,



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

87

where he had a prebend, or at the cathedral.95 In effect, Evrat was popularizing the most recent understanding of how to read Genesis as an erudite, private work of devotion. The modern editor of Genèse concludes that the translator gave or read parts of the work to Marie as he finished them, so that she received almost a private tutorial in the latest biblical scholarship.96 Countess Marie’s interest in having an accessible, authoritative version of Genesis was not unusual at the time. Peter Riga, a canon at the cathedral school of Reims, produced a similar verse commentary of the Bible, but in Latin, which was wildly popular as a primer of Biblical culture.97 Written over the course of the 1170s and 1180s, the Aurora, or Biblia versificata as Peter called it, must have been known to Evrat before he began his own t­ ranslation-​ ­commentary. Marie’s personal commission of a vernacular Genesis can be seen as part of a broad lay interest in accessing religious texts through the vernacular in the late twelfth century. Vernacular translations of biblical books were popular in the city of Metz, for example, which had commercial and artistic ties with Troyes. The bishop of Metz, however, found it threatening that the laity, both men and women, were reading translated scriptures on their own, and even were preaching to one another. Responding to his complaint in June 1189, Pope Innocent III prohibited laymen from preaching, since they apparently were deriding their priests’ knowledge of scriptures, although he did not prohibit the actual translating or reading of translated biblical texts.98 In Marie’s case, it was her experience living among the nuns of Fontaines that may well have inspired her to commission a personal, proper translation of Genesis. Of the three extant copies of Evrat’s Genèse, the one made by a single copyist and beautifully painted in the Manerius style ca. 1200 apparently was intended as a presentation copy, a luxury volume suitable for Marie’s cabinet of exclusive volumes, although it seems unlikely that she ever saw the finished work.99 It is not clear whether the Latin text that Evrat used for his translation/ commentary came from Marie’s personal library or from Henry the Liberal’s collection still in the comital residence. In the absence of a catalogue of her books, we can only guess that, given her ability to read Latin as well as vernacular texts, she probably had a personal collection of books independent of Henry’s own. It would have included a copy of Chrétien’s Lancelot, the only original work she is known to have commissioned before Henry’s death, and a copy of Eructavit, which she likely commissioned for her Christmas retreat with Queens Adele and Margaret in 1184. She also may have had unbound quires of Evrat’s Genèse as he produced them, before they were copied and

88

Ch a p t e r 5

bound after her death. Those three commissions are the only ones directly attributable to Marie. She may have had copies of two lighter works from the ­mid-​­1180s in which she is featured, the De Amore, written by her chaplain Andreas Capellanus, and the Tournament of Ladies, written and perhaps staged by her niece’s husband Hugh of Oisy. Except for De Amore in Latin prose, and possibly a translation of Bernard of Clairvaux’s sermons, all the works are in vernacular verse.100 That would have made for an eclectic collection. But of those works, only Evrat’s Genèse can be positively attributed to her literary patronage in the 1190s. There is no evidence that Marie was interested in any work of history, such as the ­Pseudo-​­Turpin Chronicle, the purported account of Charlemagne’s wars in Spain, which Yolande of ­St‑Pol had translated into vernacular prose sometime between 1195 and 1202 and which her husband, Hugh IV of S­ t‑Pol, may have read before he left on the Fourth Crusade.101 Marie’s second cultural initiative at about the same time (ca. 1193) was to confirm a new chapter of secular canons and the construction of the church of ­Notre-​­Dame du Val, located just opposite S­t‑Ayoul in the lower town of Provins.102 The chapter was not Marie’s idea. The canons of ­St‑Quiriace had requested a new chapter with prebends, perhaps in response to the stress created by Henry the Liberal’s reduction of S­ t‑Quiriace’s one hundred prebends to ­forty-​­four at a time of heavy demand for prebends.103 Like Henry II, who authorized a new chapter at Vertus at the request of several canons in 1188, Marie said that she acted at the request of the archbishop of Sens and on the advice of her brother(-​­­in-​­law) Archbishop William of Reims. She approved of all gifts to the new ­community—​­understood to include fiefs without prior ­license—​­but makes no mention of her own contribution to the construction of the church or to the endowment of prebends. The chapter’s early years are shrouded in obscurity, but by 1198 it had t­ hirty-​­four canons.104 They originally seem to have had a teaching mission, but soon they were copying books.105 The seal of the chapter’s first known dean, Stephen of Cucharmoy (1198–1220), depicts a standing figure cradling a book in his arms, suggesting the chapter’s role as a ­book-​­making center.106 Guiot of Provins, the scribe who transcribed the corpus of Chrétien’s works (BnF, fr. 794), inserted in the margin of his manuscript, after copying Yvain, “so ends The Knight with the Lion; the copyist Guiot lives and works in his house directly opposite ­Notre-​­Dame du Val.”107 Whether ­Notre-​­Dame du Val was furnishing the countess with books in the 1190s remains an open question, but there is an intriguing coincidence around the year of its foundation. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, writing in the



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

89

1240s, repeats the ­well-​­known story of King Arthur’s exhumation by the monks of Glastonbury, who undertook a systemic excavation of their cemetery in 1191 after hearing that King Henry II had mentioned Arthur’s burial there. Interest in King Arthur had spread with William of Malmesbury’s History of the Kings of Britain and especially with the romances of Chrétien de Troyes, and so the enterprising monks of Glastonbury, recognizing the potential of an Arthurian tourist destination, “discovered” a tomb deep in the earth. By candlelight they read its inscription: “Here lies Arthur, flower of the realm.”108 According to Gerald of Wales, who tells the story somewhat differently, Arthur’s body, buried sixteen feet below the ground in order to escape detection by the Saxons, was retrieved from a wooden tomb in which his second wife’s body was placed at his feet. The inscription read: “Here lies buried in the Isle of Avalon the renowned King Arthur and his second wife Guinevere.”109 Earlier the Glastonbury monks had commissioned William of Malmesbury to write a history of the abbey, but only in the aftermath of a fire that reduced the abbey to ashes in 1184 did it become imperative to restore Glastonbury’s finances and its role as a destination for pilgrims, hence the discovery of Arthur’s material remains.110 Perhaps just as relevant was the fact that in October 1190, an unmarried Richard Lionheart, about to depart on the Third Crusade, named his brother Geoffroy’s son Arthur as heir to the crown of England, should he not return.111 It is indeed curious that, at the very moment the Glastonbury monks were discovering Arthur’s tomb, Marie formalized the foundation of a collegial chapter in Provins where Guiot later gathered and copied all of Chrétien’s romances. Both the Glastonbury monks and Guiot of Provins aimed to perpetuate Arthur’s memory, the monks through memorializing his material remains, the scribe by preserving a corpus of Chrétien’s imaginative stories of Arthur’s realm.

Marie’s Last Months In October 1197 Marie finally heard the news she dreaded: Henry II had died in Acre (10 September 1197). He was only ­thirty-​­one. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines reports what had become common knowledge a half century later, that Henry fell from a window in his castle in Acre.112 The exact circumstances of his death, however, are not clear. He either leaned out of an unbarred window or against a barred window that gave way, and one version has him pulled down

90

Ch a p t e r 5

to his death by a dwarf who tried to grab his clothes as he fell.113 Only a few days earlier he had welcomed his aunt Margaret, Countess Marie’s h ­ alf-​­sister, whom he had met in Troyes in June 1179, before his father left for Jerusalem, and again in the ­mid-​­1180s, when Margaret stayed in Troyes after the death of Henry the Young King. After her new husband, King Bela III of Hungary, died (18 April 1196), Margaret wrote to Marie, announcing her intention to end her days in the Holy Land. Marie responded with a personal message of consolation (addressed to karissima soror mea), carried to Hungary by her friend Abbot Joscelin of ­Notre-​­Dame of La Charmoye.114 Margaret sold her dower revenue to her husband’s brother and successor, took the cross, and traveled in the company of German knights to Tyre, where Count Henry welcomed her, probably in late August. She died eight days later, after giving Henry all her possessions “because he was her sister’s son,” and was buried in the cathedral in Tyre.115 She was ­thirty-​­nine. The deaths of her oldest son, for whom she had been regent and then ­co-​ ­lord of Champagne for sixteen years, and her h ­ alf-​­sister, with whom she had developed a close friendship during their time together in Troyes, plunged Marie into a severe depression. Robert of Auxerre reports that Marie, who had “ruled vigorously and courageously,” became depressed when she heard the news of their deaths.116 That, and the presence of her husband’s tomb next to her living quarters in Troyes, may have been too much to bear. Bishop Garnier, too, was profoundly affected. It was his “immense saddness” at hearing of Henry II’s death, he wrote to the pope, that prompted him to take the cross and travel to the Holy Land.117 In her last dated act, from October 1197, Marie confirmed the testament of Helie of Villemaur, who had taken the veil on her deathbed at the Paraclete.118 Whether Marie visited the Paraclete in October 1197, ten years after she had visited the nuns in the spring of 1187 before retiring, is not clear. But if she did, it was a stopover on her final trip to ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes. Marie’s whereabouts during the next four months are unknown, but it seems likely that she took the veil at Fontaines in preparation for her passing. On 25 February 1198 Pope Innocent III notified the prelates of Reims, Sens, and Meaux of Marie’s depressed state at the death of her son; she was so seriously afflicted, he wrote, that she was in danger of causing herself harm, and he urged them to console her and protect her lands.119 But it was too late. She died in early March 1198, seventeen years after Henry the Liberal.120 She was ­fifty-​­three, one year younger than Henry at his death.

* * *



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

91

Count Thibaut III (1198–1201) recalled that “my mother of happy memory was sincerely embraced with affectionate love” at ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes. In her memory he gave a 25l. revenue from the tolls at Coulommiers to be spent for chemises (15l.) and shoes (5l.) for the nuns, the rest (5l.) to be distributed on Marie’s anniversary, a provision that appears to reflect Marie’s instructions in appreciation for the consolation she received after taking the veil there.121 As in 1190, when she solicited her son’s benefaction for Fontevraud, Marie was concerned for the material ­well-​­being of the nuns. They commemorated her as “a most reverend nun, most noble countess of Champagne, daughter of the king of the Franks, and our dearest and much loved lady and benefactor.”122 Marie was buried in the newly reconstructed cathedral of ­St‑Étienne of Meaux.123 Her tomb later was placed in the sanctuary next to the gospel, with her effigy resting on a ­three-​­­foot-​­high table.124 The canons remembered her as “venerable Marie, countess of Champagne.”125 Thibaut endowed a perpetually burning candle in front of the tomb that later was called “the candle of Countess Marie” (cierge de la contesse Marie). Each time the censer was directed at the altar, it would also be directed at Marie’s tomb, in what was called the “blessing of the countess” (coups de la contesse).126 Among Marie’s numerous obituary remembrances, the canons of Chartres cathedral noted that she loved beautifully appointed churches and gave many adornments to their church.127 The cathedral chapter of Sens distributed 30s. from the tolls at Bray for her St‑Étienne of Troyes honored her as joint anniversary.128 The canons of ­ founder of their church with Count Henry and as supporter of their chapter after his death: “Marie, countess of Troyes, daughter of the king of France, who with her husband Count Henry of good memory founded this church, and after his death faithfully administered it (rexit).”129 Although she was not strictly a founder of ­St‑Étienne—​­the chapel was completed before she arrived in ­Troyes—​­the larger point in 1198 was that she and Henry were associated in the chapter’s fortunes. Canon Evrat, who had spent six years translating Genesis for Marie, rendered homage to her in an epilogue: “She had the heart of a man and the body of a woman.”130 Marie had preserved the county but she could not solve the lingering issue of the succession. In 1190 the barons and knights had sworn to accept Henry II’s younger brother, Thibaut, as count in the event that Henry did not return from overseas, but it was not foreseen that Henry would marry abroad and have two daughters. As his direct issue while he was still count, they might one day claim the county of Champagne as their rightful inheritance. It is not known whether Marie discussed the matter with Philip II, but in April

92

Ch a p t e r 5

1198, only weeks after her death, Thibaut III did liege homage to the king “for all the lands that my father, Count Henry, held from his father, King Louis, and my brother [Henry II held] from the same King Philip.”131 That was the first time a count of Champagne’s homage to the king was recorded on parchment, and likely the first time that a count actually did homage to the king. Ten barons from Champagne swore that they wished the count to observe good faith in his homage. The king in turn swore to observe that liege homage, and ten of his barons swore that they wished the king to observe good faith in the matter. At about the same time, the count’s own barons and knights swore fidelity and homage to Thibaut in accordance with their oaths given at Sézanne in 1190.132 But it was Thibaut’s homage to Philip that sealed his succession materially in a way that the barons’ oaths could not, for by making homage to the king essential for a legitimate succession to the principality, it preempted any future claim by Henry II’s daughters born overseas. In the spring of 1198, seventeen years after the death of Henry the Liberal, it appeared that the county was securely in the hands of a young count on the cusp of a new age. The ambiguous language of Thibaut’s ­homage—​­the lands for which he did homage are not n ­ amed—​­served the occasion well, for although Henry the Liberal’s principality in fact was comprised of fiefs held from several lay and ecclesiastical lords, it had acquired a new identity in the years after 1152, as a principality centered on its capital in Troyes. Thibaut still carried his father’s title, “count palatine of Troyes,” but the royal chancery hinted at the artifice of the old comital title by identifying Geoffroy of Villehardouin, one of the count’s sworn barons, not as marshal of the count, but as “marshal of Champagne” (marescallus Campanie). A decade earlier Count Henry II had spoken of “my county,” meaning of course, not the county of Troyes but the entirety of his lands, in toto comitatu.133 With Thibaut’s homage, that principality forged from an ad hoc collection of counties and lordships was drawn into the royal orbit and soon rebranded as “the county of Champagne and Brie.” All successor counts and countesses would render homage to the king for that principality. Simon Aurea Capra, abbot of ­St‑Remi of Reims, died shortly after Thibaut III did homage to the king. Almost five decades earlier Simon’s epitaphs commissioned by Henry the Liberal had tolled the bell for a generation of religious and political leaders that passed with the Second Crusade. Three decades later Simon marked the passing of Count Henry himself in verses engraved on Henry’s tomb, verses that compared the late count to a veritable



A Co n d o m i n i u m L ords h i p

93

sun whose light had abandoned the land.134 And so it had. Countess Marie kept its embers glowing for almost two decades while the young king of France was shifting the parameters of political action in northern France. The world of Henry and Marie, of regional courts and polities, was passing. In preserving Henry the Liberal’s principality, Marie provided a bridge for the safe passage of his county into a world of a triumphant monarchy, with Paris as its political and intellectual capital.

Chapter 6

Images of Countess Marie

Writers who knew Marie depicted her in several guises. For Chrétien de Troyes, the most elusive of contemporary writers, she was an assertive patron of romances, dictating for example the subject and meaning of the Lancelot tale. The mischievous Andreas Capellanus, who was close to Marie in the ­mid-​­1180s, drew a highly entertaining parody of Marie and the prominent women of her milieu resolving the conundrums of amatory conduct in “courts of love,” in the manner of modern advice columnists. In Hugh of Oisy’s musical performance, Marie cut a fine figure as a combatant in a tournament of elite women. It is striking how in three quite distinctive imaginative works written in the 1180s, Marie appears as an author of an Arthurian romance, a judge at a court of love, and a participant in a tournament mêlée. Others who knew Marie well in the 1180s and 1190s remarked different aspects of her character. The Eructavit poet noted her penchant for the trappings of wealth, and addressing her directly during a performance of his religious drama, chastised her for her “largesse and lavish expenses.” Evrat, on the other hand, a resident canon of S­ t‑Étienne who observed Marie closely in the 1190s, stressed her spiritual and moral character. Seeking to understand the deep meaning of the scriptures, he wrote, she provided him a copy of Genesis to translate into the vernacular and annotate with the findings of the latest “academic” studies. In an epilogue added after her death, Evrat penned a eulogy praising her largesse and renown, and comparing her, la gentis contesse Marie, to the three biblical ­Marys—​­“she would be the fourth.”1 An entirely different side of Marie was captured by Marie’s court stenographers, William (1181–87) and Theodoric (1190–97), who made verbatim transcripts of her comments and directives while observing her deal with the practical affairs of governance: assigning revenues (“I assigned 100s. on the entry



Im a ge s o f Co u n t e ss Mari e

95

tax on wine”), resolving disputes at court (“resolved in my presence in this manner”), confirming prior transactions (“I approved this act”), registering acts done at court (“done in my presence”), consenting to feudal alienations (“I approved because it was my fief ”), founding chaplaincies (“for Geoffroy, count of Brittany, my brother”), and establishing endowments (“for the anniversary of my lord and husband, Count Henry”). All of that was “done in public,” usually in the presence of her officers and witnesses.2 It was precisely in her capacity as ruling countess of Champagne that she continued Henry the Liberal’s example of performing in public as prince of his principality. Having observed Henry at ­court—​­just as Henry, while a very young man, had observed the conduct of his father, which earned him the reputation as the “good” Count ­Thibaut—​­Marie understood that the comital court, as the core institution of the principality, demanded her active participation, and she paid close attention to the great and the minor issues presented there for her disposition. It should be emphasized that Henry the Liberal’s principality was only three decades old when Marie became regent in 1181, and the primary comital residence and chapel in Troyes were barely twenty years old, not yet fully implanted as the seat of a new territorial state and mausoleum of a princely lineage. Marie’s task was to preserve the principality and its institutions intact, and to assure the continuity of the lineage. And that she did. Evrat sensed both the precarious nature of her rule and her achievement in holding a firm hand on the levers of comital authority, especially during those anomalous years of the 1190s: “Well did she protect and govern the land / letting nothing slip from her hand, / she was gracious, wise, valiant, and courageous.”3 By all accounts, Marie projected a complex, forceful, and captivating character, one that proved a worthy counterpart to the compelling personality of Henry the Liberal.

Constructing Memory The earliest pictorial image of Marie was a statuette on the tomb of her second son, Count Thibaut III, commissioned most likely within a decade of his death by his widow, Countess Blanche (1201–22).4 His metalwork tomb stood next to Henry the Liberal’s glittering gold, silver, and enamel tomb located in the nave of the comital chapel. The two effigy tombs shared similar dimensions but presented entirely different iconographical programs. Henry’s effigy lay within his tomb, visible through four arches on either side, making him in essence a relic within a reliquary that celebrated his deeds, with celestial references to the

96

Ch a p t e r 6

sun and Christian prophets to match his outsized persona.5 Thibaut’s effigy, by contrast, rested on top of his tomb, whose four closed arches on either side contained statuettes of his closest relatives: his father and mother, his older brother Henry II and his sisters, his son and daughter, his mother’s brother (the king of Navarre), and at either end of the tomb, the kings of France and England.6 As the earliest example of a “tomb of kinship,” it located Thibaut in reference to his familial ties that justified his collateral succession as count of Champagne against the claims of his brother’s daughters born overseas. Standing out from the silver statuettes on Thibaut’s tomb were the gilded bronze statuettes of Marie and Henry the Liberal. Henry’s statuette is inscribed: “Here is Henry, Thibaut, your father who had this church built.” 7 Marie’s inscription reads: “Countess Marie; I am mother of the counts [Henry II and Thibaut III], I ask Christ to be with you.”8 A sketch of her statuette, made shortly before the tomb was destroyed, shows a stylized Marie with a hat and flowing garments, seated in an ample chair.9 If the tomb was completed before 1215, and more likely before 1209, her sculpted image might well have been made by someone who had seen her before 1198. Thibaut’s tomb with its statuettes survived in ­St‑Étienne for almost six hundred years, until it was dismantled and melted down in January 1794 in the aftermath of the French Revolution.10 Whether a visitor to S­t‑Étienne in those intervening centuries would have known anything more about Marie beyond her inscription is doubtful. A slightly later depiction of Marie is a color painting in a manuscript of the scribe Guiot, which contains the earliest extant collection of romances by Chrétien de Troyes (ca. 1225–ca. 1250). It bears such a strong resemblance to the tomb statuette that it seems to have been modeled on it. The tomb statuette has Marie seated, with her left hand relaxed in her lap, her right hand pointing upward, and her face looking straight ahead to the viewer visiting the chapel. The painting in Guiot’s manuscript has her seated with her right hand raised and pointing to her open left hand, as if she were commanding Chrétien to write ­Lancelot—​­as he claims she d ­ id—​­while her face is turned to the right, as if she were speaking to the poet (who is absent from the scene).11 Unlike a “narrative image,” a scene illustrating an event in the text, Marie’s manuscript portrait depicts her as a sponsor or patron who commands with her right hand and receives with her open left hand.12 If the inscription on her tomb statuette commemorates Marie simply as the mother of two counts, the painting in Guiot’s manuscript implicitly inscribes her as the commissioner of the Lancelot text that follows it. About the time that the Guiot manuscript was painted, Philip the Chan-



Im a ge s o f Co u n t e ss Mari e

97

cellor of ­Notre-​­Dame of Paris (1218–36), a polymath theologian, preacher, poet, and musician, composed a set of monophonic laments (planctus) for several distinguished personages, including Henry the Liberal, Philip II, Geoffroy of Brittany, Bishop Alberic of Liège, and Peter the Chanter.13 In Jerusalem, Jerusalem, a joint lament for Countess Marie and Count Henry II, the ­poet-​­musician remembers Marie as “a gracious lady ( gratiosa domina)” and “that light of Champagne (illa lampas Campanie)” who as a widow radiated exemplary virtue. A recent analysis of the music concludes that the second and third stanza of the planctus, which deal with Countess Marie’s death, “contain some of the most moving and beautiful music of any of the Florence ­ oet-​­composer appears to have known Marie [collection of ] planctus.”14 The p or heard about her from someone who knew her in her later years: While lamenting the son [Henry II], not yet released from grief, suddenly there is most abundant death. In the fall of the mother, we sink into a river of lamentation. We are turned to Marie, the star from which so many lights have shone for our people; because weakened, we leave these jewels of virtue, and with pious laments, we mourn, O gracious lady. I will speak of wonders; the sun fell in the east, causing the setting of the sun in this west. That light of Champagne, O Maria, mother of grace, in whom so many lights, ignorant of night and shadows, and so many stars of praise shone; because the eyes of mortals had not seen rays of such virtue as in the widow.15

98

Ch a p t e r 6

That image accords with Evrat’s own depiction three decades earlier and, like Evrat’s, must have been based on direct observation. Philip, too, commented on the specific challenges Marie faced during a perilous time for the princes of northern France. He recalled her first great challenge at the start of her rule in 1179, just after Henry the Liberal left on his overseas expedition.16 In his lament for Count Henry, Omnis in lacrimas, the Chancellor depicts Marie’s ­half-​­brother Philip as a determined, impulsive ­boy-​­king (rex puer), who cast out his mother, Adele, and her brothers, who had exercised such a great influence over Louis VII. The Chancellor mentions Marie’s success in coping with the subsequent familial and political disruption, which Henry the Liberal could have prevented: The peace of the kingdom dies with the burial of the count. Raging from the tinder of rancor, arises discord. O, if only the uncle [Henry] had ruled the boy king . . . He would have calmed this thirst for war.17 Marie soon recovered the new king’s good graces, and her ­brother-​­­in-​­law, Archbishop William, became a pillar of Philip II’s reign through the next two decades. But it was the bellicose ­boy-​­king, the Chancellor reminds his listeners, who presented the first serious challenge to Marie in the p ­ ost-​­Henrician world a half century earlier. Modern historians would concur with Evrat and Philip the Chancellor that Marie managed to overcome those two existential challenges, by a determined b­ oy-​­king in the early 1180s in Henry the Liberal’s absence, then by Henry II’s prolonged absence in the 1190s. Several decades after the Chancellor’s laments, the Dominican Thomas of Cantimpré (ca. 1200–70) left an entirely different image of Marie in his Book of Bees (1262), a collection of 350 exempla that had a wide circulation as a manual for preachers.18 Under the title “On Vanity and the Death of Marie, Countess of Champagne,” Thomas represents Marie as having conducted herself in a most vainglorious manner after the death of her husband. He describes the scene in which she pays for her vanity, a “reprehensible and damnable” trait in “notable persons.” “On her deathbed,” he writes, “she summoned the abbot [Adam] of Perseigne, a most saintly and eloquent man, to



Im a ge s o f Co u n t e ss Mari e

99

her bedside, but since she died before he arrived, he was not admitted into her chamber. While he waited outside, her knights, servants, and attendants argued over her personal possessions: gold and silver vases, precious clothing, purple cushions, linens, and even her robes.” Then, one of her servants who arrived late grabbed the bed and dumped the corpse on the floor. The abbot, beyond his patience, broke down the door and seeing Marie’s nude, delicate body, cried out about the vanity of a most noble countess who had been blessed with honor and glory, and how she ended.19 Adam of Perseigne was a ­well-​­known abbot (1188–1221), a distinguished “Cistercian humanist” with a strong spiritual bent, and also a skilled diplomat who undertook delicate missions for the pope.20 It is possible that he knew Marie, just as he knew in some manner the other prominent women with whom he corresponded, notably Marie’s sister Alice, countess of Blois, and later Countess Blanche of Champagne. But the abbot’s circle of spiritual friendship was located in western France; he did not correspond with Marie, nor was he her chaplain or confessor.21 It is not known where Thomas of Cantimpré obtained his anecdote of Marie’s death, certainly not from Adam of Perseigne, whom he ostensibly quotes but who died four decades before Thomas compiled his Book of Bees. It might have been an old derogatory story, essentially malicious gossip, passed on by the monks at Cantimpré, a house founded by Hugh of Oisy, the viscount of Meaux, who wrote the Tournament of Ladies. The stripping of a deceased’s possessions was not uncommon, but why the Dominican chose Marie for his exemplum remains an open question.22 The fact that Thomas had to identify Marie as the wife of Henry the Liberal, daughter of Louis VII, sister of Philip II, and sister of four (sic) kings of England before telling his tale, suggests that Marie was not widely remembered when Thomas was collecting exempla a half century after her death. His characterization of Marie is so much at odds with other, more credible observations that the story seems to have been an outright fabrication, offered perhaps as a counterexample to the lives of the exemplary religious women whose biographies Thomas was writing. Memory of Marie all but vanished within a few years of her death in large part because two transformative events overshadowed her enduring achievement as ruling countess of Champagne. The first was the emergence of a muscular King Philip II, who succeeded in bringing most of the northern princes to heel in the 1190s while Paris emerged as a truly royal capital, its ideal location in the Paris basin and its premier schools making it the dominant urban center of northern France. No longer could the counts of Champagne comport

100

Ch a p t e r 6

themselves as virtual peers of a king whose “royal principality” differed little from theirs, nor could any of their urban centers, despite their trade fairs, rival Paris. The second event that subsumed the memory of Marie was the long regency of Countess Blanche of Champagne (1201–22), another forceful personage who learned how to maneuver within the parameters allowed by the same Philip II, whose reign encompassed the rule of both countesses. She, too, overcame an existential threat to the county, of an internal baronial war that flared ostensibly over the question of succession to the county but was overlaid by resistance to what seemed to be a forever rule by two determined countesses. With the exception of three years (1187–90), Marie and Blanche ruled the county between May 1179 and May 1221, ­forty-​­two years during which its relative position ­vis-​­­à-​­vis the royal domain shifted fundamentally. It was with good reason that when Thibaut IV succeeded as count, he claimed Blanche’s inheritance, the kingdom of Navarre, in order to wear a crown, albeit of a small, landlocked realm in the Pyrenees, at a time when the county of Champagne had become a royal fief and was fast becoming a royal province.

* * * Marie was buried in the cathedral of Meaux, where the presence of both royal and comital residential quarters reflected her dual identity of “countess of Troyes” and “daughter of the king of the Franks.” It is not clear whether she was excluded from burial in S­ t‑Étienne of Troyes, which Henry the Liberal planned as a dynastic mausoleum, but the canons of ­St‑Étienne, who remembered her as joint founder of the chapel, most likely would have accepted her burial there, had she requested it, and placed her tomb next to Henry’s. She certainly could have been buried in the priory church of Fontaines, where she apparently spent her last months veiled as a nun. Instead she was buried in the imposing cathedral of S­ t‑Étienne of Meaux, newly constructed under Bishop Simon of Lizy (1176–91) as one of the largest cathedrals at that time in France.23 Her effigy tomb in the sanctuary became part of the liturgy, being censed three times after the censing of the altar, a spectacle performed for almost four hundred years, until the tomb was destroyed by Huguenots on 25 June 1562.24 In a sense, Marie’s tomb in Meaux rivaled Henry’s own tomb in Troyes as a destination for visitors, with the commemorative censing of the tomb continuing in its absence into the nineteenth century. Charles Dickens, visiting Meaux in 1854, was told the story in a somewhat garbled version. “It was cus-



Im a ge s o f Co u n t e ss Mari e

101

tomary,” he reported, “after the incense had been offered at the altar, for the officiating priest . . . ​to cast the holy perfume three times over her tomb in grateful remembrance of the benefits she had conferred on the church. This Countess Marie was the mother [sic] of the famous Thibault [IV], Count of Champagne and Brie, whose hopeless love for Blanche of Castile has been so often sung by the troubadours.”25 Three decades later, in 1883, Gaston Paris rescued Marie from obscurity by creating a new identity for her as the literary patron who furnished Chrétien de Troyes with the Lancelot story. It was Paris who invented the concept of “courtly love” by fusing Andreas Capellanus’s “court of love” (amoris curia), where cases of amatory conduct were adjudicated, with the specific case of Lancelot’s submissive conduct ­toward King Arthur’s queen in Lancelot, thereby inspiring a vigorous subfield of scholarly inquiry that continues into the ­twenty-​­first century.26 A large bibliography now presents Marie as one of the more prominent literary patrons of the Middle Ages, although it no longer can be said that she channeled her mother, Eleanor, in bringing the lyric of the Midi to the “court” of Champagne. Beyond Lancelot, Marie can be credited with commissioning two vernacular verse ­translation-​­adaptations of religious works, Eructavit and Evrat’s Genèse. That she also makes an appearance in such original works as Andreas Capellanus’s De Amore, Hugh of Oisy’s Tournament of Ladies, and Gace Brulé’s love song suggests a wider involvement in the cultural life of her time than can be documented today. Had a catalogue of her books survived, we would be better able to determine more precisely her role as a literary patron and bibliophile who retreated from daily affairs to her private chambers to read her vernacular texts in private, much like Henry the Liberal withdrew from public life to read works of history in Latin. Perhaps more certain evidence will emerge one day about Marie’s intellectual and literary interests. In the interim, it is time to recognize her principal achievement that can be documented, administering and preserving the county of Champagne during two fraught decades at the end of the twelfth century.

Appendix 1. Countess Marie’s Court Officers

Office

Dates

Relatives

1181–87

brother: Hugh II, lord of Plancy (1138–89)

Chancellor Haice of Plancy

brother: Milo, seneschal of Jerusalem (1167–74) ­brother-​­­in-​­law: Anselm II of Traînel, butler (1152–84) ­brother-​­­in-​­law: Abbot Milo (of Traînel) of ­St‑Marien of Auxerre (1155–1203) Guy

1187–88

Haice of Plancy

1188–90

Walter of Chappes

1190–1207

father: Clarembaud III of Chappes brother: Clarembaud IV of Chappes

Seneschal Geoffroy III of Joinville

1152–88

brother: Bishop Guy of Châlons (1164–90)

Geoffroy IV of Joinville

1188–90

sister: Abbess Guillemette of Avenay (1197–1202) ­brother-​­­in-​­law: William I of Dampierre, constable (1169–74)

Geoffroy V of Joinville

1190–1205

Constable Odo of Pougy

1152–69

brother: Manasses, provost of ­St‑Étienne of Troyes, bishop of Troyes (1181–90)

?Guy II of Dampierre

1171–1216

father: William I of Dampierre, constable (1169–74)

104

Office

Ap p e n d i x 1

Dates

Relatives

1152–84

brother: Garnier of Traînel, lord of Marigny (1152–95)

Butler Anselm II of Traînel

sister: Isabelle (wife of Hugh II of Plancy) brother: Abbot Milo of ­St‑Marien of ­Auxerre (1155–1202) ­brother-​­­in-​­law: Haice of Plancy, provost of ­St‑Quiriace, chancellor (1168–87) ­brother-​­­in-​­law: Milo, seneschal of Jerusalem (1167–74) ?Walter III of Châtillon Marshal Lucas

1182–83

father: Girard Manducator, provost of Ervy

Erard of Aulnay

1183–85

uncle: Geoffroy of Villehardouin

Geoffroy of Villehardouin

1185–1204

brother: Roscelin, canon of S­ t‑Étienne of Troyes brother: Villain II, canon of Troyes cathedral nephew: Erard of Aulnay, marshal (1183–85)

Treasurer (camerarius) Milo of Provins

1165–86

father: William rex of Provins, marshal (1152–79) wife: Helie of Villemaur, daughter of viscount Manasses

Artaud of Nogent

1163–90

Robert I of Milly

1161–86

Milo Breban of Provins

1186–1204

Without Portfolio Hugh II of Plancy

1138–89

brother: Haice of Plancy, chancellor of Champagne (1181–87), bishop of Troyes (1191–93) brother: Milo, seneschal of Jerusalem (1167–74)



Co u n t e ss Ma r i e’s Co u r t Offi cers

Office

Dates

Relatives

Garnier (of Trâinel) of Marigny

1152–95

brother: Anselm II of Trâinel, butler (1152–84)

105

brother: Abbot Milo of ­St‑Marien of ­Auxerre (1155–1202) sister: Isabelle, wife of Hugh II of Plancy ­brother-​­­in-​­law: Haice of Plancy, provost of ­St‑Quiriace, chancellor of Champagne (1181–87), bishop of Troyes (1191–93) ­brother-​­­in-​­law: Milo, seneschal of Jerusalem (1167–74) Knights of the Court Nevel of Aulnay

1153–86

Daimbert of Ternantes

1155–79

Girard Eventat of Égligny

1158–97

brother: Roric, archdeacon of Meaux, canon of ­St‑Étienne of Troyes (1159–88) brother: Geoffroy Eventat of Égligny

Appendix 2. Andreas Capellanus as Witness to Countess Marie’s Acts

Andreas Capellanus in Witness Lists Date Position in List Author of Act Transaction 1182 1183 1184 1185 1185 1186 1186 1186 1186 1186

first first first first second second first first first first

Marie Marie Marie Marie Marie Marie Marie, Henry Marie, Henry Marie, Henry Marie

entry gift to ­St‑Loup1 donation to S­ t‑Mammès2 donation to leper house3 dispute with leper house4 donation to S­ t‑Étienne5 for cathedral of Paris6 donation to leper house7 for Sellières8 for ­St‑Nicholas of Sézanne9 for Troyes cathedral10

Others Witnessing with Andreas Capellanus Witness

Number of Times

Artaud (Marie’s bursar) Gilo of Tornel (knight) Brother William (Templar, Marie’s almoner) Garnier of Traînel (baron) Geoffroy of Villehardouin (Marie’s marshal) Milo of Provins (Marie’s treasurer) Nevel of Aulnay (Marie’s knight escort) Geoffroy Eventat (knight) Master Odo of Sézanne (Marie’s cleric) Peter (of Hebron, Marie’s chaplin) Erard of Aulnay (Marie’s marshal) André of Ramerupt (baron) Guy of Châtillon (baron) Benedict of Pont (knight)

5 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

Appendix 3. The Regional Bishops

See

Name

Dates

Relatives / Prior Position

Autun

Henry of Burgundy

1148–70

­brother-​­­in-​­law of Count Henry I

Stephen

1170–89

canon of Auxerre

Walter

1189–1223

William of Toucy

1167–81

treasurer of Auxerre cathedral, archdeacon of Sens, brother of archbishop Hugh of Sens

Hugh IV of Noyers

1183–1206

treasurer of Auxerre cathedral

1164–90

brother of seneschal Geoffroy III of Joinville

Rotrou of Perche

1191–1200

archdeacon of Reims, nephew of Countess Marie

Walter of Burgundy

1163–79

­brother-​­­in-​­law of Count Henry I

Manasses of ­ Bar-​­­sur-​­Seine

1179–93

dean of Langres cathedral, brother of Count Milo III of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Seine

Warner of Rochefort

1193–1200

abbot of Clairvaux (1186–93)

Stephen de la Chapelle

1162–71

canon of Sens, Paris, chanter of Meaux

Peter of Pavia

1172–73

abbot of ­St‑André of Chartres

Simon of Lizy

1176–95

treasurer of Meaux cathedral, archdeacon of Sens, nephew of Bishop Manasses II of Meaux (1134–58)

Anselm II

1197–1207

dean of S­ t‑Martin of Tours

Auxerre

Châlons Guy of Joinville

Langres

Meaux

108

Ap p e n d i x 3

See

Name

Dates

Relatives / Prior Position

Nevers

Thibaut

1176–89

dean of Nevers cathedral

John

1190–96

dean of Nevers cathedral

Walter of Pougy

1196–1202

archdeacon of Troyes cathedral, son of constable Odo of Pougy

Henry of France

1162–76

bishop of Beauvais; brother of Louis VII, uncle of Countess Marie

Reims

William of Champagne 1176–1202 Sens

Troyes

Hugh of Toucy

­brother-​­­in-​­law of Countess Marie

1142–68

William of Champagne 1168–75

­brother-​­­in-​­law of Countess Marie

Guy of Noyers

1176–93

archdeacon of Sens cathedral

Michael of Corbeil

1194–99

dean of Meaux cathedral, master in Paris

Henry of Carinthia

1145–69

maternal uncle of Count Henry I

Mathieu of Provins

1169–80

dean of S­ t‑Quiriace of Provins

Manasses of Pougy

1181–90

provost of ­St‑Étienne of Troyes (1158–79), brother of Odo of Pougy, constable

Haice (Bartholomew) of Plancy

1190–93

provost of ­St‑Quiriace, chancellor of Champagne, brother of Hugh II of Plancy

Garnier of Traînel

1193–1205

canon of Sens and Troyes cathedrals, cousin of butler Anselm II of Traînel and Garnier II (of Traînel) of Marigny

Genealogy of Countess Marie and Her Relatives

Henry = Margaret the of France Young King d.1183

Henry II king 1154-89

Richard I king 1189-99

Plantagenets

=

Geoffroy duke of Brittany 1166-86

Alice countess of Blois 1164-98

(1) Louis VII king 1137-79

Henry II count 1187-97

Marie = Henry I countess of count Champagne 1152-81 1165-98

(2) Eleanor (1) = of Aquitaine queen of France 1137-52 queen of England 1154-1202

Stephen count of Sancerre 1152-91

Baldwin IX count of Flanders 1194-1205

Scholastique = countess of Mâcon 1184-1221

William V count of Mâcon 1184-1224

(2) = William IV of PercheGouët d.1168

Marie = duchess of Burgundy 1143-74

Agnes = Renaud II countess count of of Bar-le-Duc Bar-le-Duc 1149-70 1155-1207

(3)

(2) = Bela III king of Hungary 1172-96

Philip II Margaret (1) = Henry b.1158-1197 the Young king of France 1179-1223 King d.1183

(2)

Odo II Margaret duke of nun at Burgundy Fontevraud 1143-62

Adele queen of France 1160-79 d.1206

Henry bishop of Beauvais 1149-62 archbishop of Reims 1162-75

Elizabeth = Roger d.1180 of Apulia d.1149

Mathilda = Rotrou III countess count of of Perche Perche 1160-84 1144-91

Marie = countess of Flanders 1194-1204

William archbishop of Sens 1168-75 archbishop of Reims 1176-1202

Thibaut III = Blanche count of Navarre 1198-1201 countess 1199-1221 d.1229

Thibaut V count of Blois 1152-91

Peter count of Nevers 1184-1219

Peter of Courtenay d.1183

Capetians Robert of Dreux 1152-88

Champenois

(2) = Constance of Castile queen 1154-60 (3) = Adele of Champagne queen 1160-79 d.1206

Countess Marie and Her Relatives

Chronology

1140s 1144 1145 1147 1149

1150 1152 1153 1154 1159 1160 1164

Queen Eleanor meets with Bernard of Clairvaux (22 April). Abbey church of ­St‑Denis is dedicated (11 June). Marie of France is born (March/April). Second Crusade departs from ­St‑Denis (11 June). Louis and Eleanor return to Paris via Sicily and Rome (11 November). Alice of France is born (spring/summer). Count Henry the Liberal succeeds (18 January). Louis VII and Queen Eleanor divorce (21 March). Eleanor marries Count Henry of Anjou (18 May). Marie is betrothed to Count Henry the Liberal. Henry of Anjou is crowned king of England; Eleanor as queen of England (19 December). Marie is placed in Avenay abbey or with the viscountess of Mareuil. Louis VII marries Constance of Castile (fall). Count Thibaut V of Blois as royal seneschal (1154–91) (fall). Marie consents to marry Count Henry. Queen Constance dies in childbirth (4 October). Margaret of France and Henry the Young King of England marry (2 November). Louis VII marries Count Henry’s sister Adele (queen of France, 1160–80, d. 1206) (13 November). Abbess Heloise dies at the Paraclete (16 May). Count Thibaut V of Blois marries Alice of France (September/ October).

112 Ch ro n o lo gy

1164/65 1165 1166 1166 1169

Thomas Becket arrives in Sens (November), settles in Pontigny (to November 1166). Countess Marie joins Count Henry in Troyes. Queen Adele of Champagne gives birth to Philip (II) of France (21 August). Countess Marie gives birth to Henry (II) of Champagne (29 July). Marie seals her first letters patent. Thomas Becket moves to ­Ste‑Colombe of Sens (November), where he remains until October 1170. King Henry II and Queen Eleanor celebrate Christmas at Nantes (December).

Chrétien de Troyes completes Erec and Enide. Archbishop Thomas Becket is murdered (29 December). Countess Marie gives birth to daughter Marie (spring). Double marriage treaty for Marie’s children (infant Marie and ­five-​­­year-​­old Henry) with children of Count Baldwin V of Hainaut (August). ?1172/73 Marie gives birth to Scholastique. 1173 Plantagenet brothers (Marie’s ­half-​­brothers) conspire with Louis VII and Counts Henry, Thibaut, and Stephen against Henry II (in Paris, Easter). Marie probably present with Queen Adele. 1176 Marie’s ­brother-​­­in-​­law William as archbishop of Reims (to 1202) (8 August). Chrétien de Troyes completes Cligés. 1177 Count Henry takes the cross (December). ca. 1177 Chrétien de Troyes completes Lancelot (The Knight of the Cart). ca. 1177/81 Chrétien de Troyes completes Yvain (The Knight with the Lion). 1178 First survey of comital fiefholders (Feoda Campanie) (fall). 1179 Marie gives birth to Thibaut (III) in Troyes (13 May); Margaret of France present; marriage treaty of 1171 reaffirmed. Count Henry departs on crusade (late May); Countess Marie rules in his stead. Coronation of Philip II of France (1 November); estrangement of Queen Adele and her brothers. 1179/91 Chrétien de Troyes writes Perceval (The Story of the Grail ). 1170 1171



Ch ro n o lo gy

113

King Philip II marries Isabelle of Hainaut (28 April). Isabelle of Hainaut is crowned queen of France (29 May). Philip II reconciles with Queen Adele at Gisors (28 June). Louis VII dies (18 September). Count Henry the Liberal dies (16 March). Marie as regent for Henry II (17 March 1181–29 July 1187). Henry (II) is betrothed to Yolande of Hainaut (14 May, Provins). Champenois siblings present, conspire with the count of Flanders against Philip II. Simon Aurea Capra as abbot of ­St‑Remi of Reims (1181–28 July 1198). Manasses of Pougy as bishop of Troyes (1181–11 June 1190). 1182 Elizabeth of Vermandois, wife of Philip of Flanders, dies (26 March). Countess Marie and Philip II reconcile (11 April). Renaud of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc (son of Henry’s sister Agnes) as bishop of Chartres (1182–1217). Marie franchises her men of Ervy. 1183 Henry the Young King of England dies (11 June). 1183/84 Scholastique of Champagne is betrothed/married to William V of Mâcon. 1184 Marie and Margaret of France attend memorial service for Henry the Young King, in Rouen. Eructavit performed for Countess Marie and Queens Margaret and Adele, Christmas, at Foissy. 1185 Marie appoints Geoffrey of Villehardouin as marshal (1185–1202) (July). 1182/86 Andreas Capellanus writes De Amore. 1187 Battle of Hattin (4 July). Acre falls to Saladin (10 July). Marie retires to ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes; Henry II succeeds (29 July). Jerusalem falls to Saladin (2 October). 1188 Count Henry II takes the cross for Third Crusade (22 January). Philip II announces the Saladin tithe (March). Great Fire in Troyes (23 July). 1189/90 Second survey of comital fiefholders. 1180 1181

114 Ch ro n o lo gy

1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1196 1197 1198

Henry II of England dies (6 July). Richard I Lionheart as king (1189–99). Philip II awards future county of Namur to the heir of Hainaut (1 September). Treaty of Nonancourt (Philip II and Richard I) (30 December). Barons swear at Sézanne to accept Thibaut (III) as successor to Count Henry II (spring). Queen Isabelle of France dies (15 March). Count Henry II departs on Third Crusade via Marseille and Sicily (May); Countess Marie as regent (1190–97). Count Henry II lands in Acre (28 July). Philip II departs from Vézelay on the Third Crusade (4 July). Haice/Bartholomew of Pougy as bishop of Troyes (1191–20 February 1193). Count Baldwin V of Hainaut becomes Baldwin VIII of Flanders (1191–93). Acre falls to crusaders (12 July). Philip II leaves for home (2 August). Count Henry II and Richard I march to Jerusalem (25 August). Evrat begins translation of Genesis for Countess Marie. Henry II marries Queen Isabelle of Jerusalem (5 May). Richard I leaves for home (9 October). Garnier of Traînel as bishop of Troyes (1193–14 April 1205). Death of Saladin (4 March). Marie confirms the foundation of ­Notre-​­Dame du Val of Provins. Marie at Compiègne with Philip II and Baldwin (VI) of Hainaut (June). Margaret of France dies in Tyre (September). Count Henry II dies in Acre (10 September). Countess Marie as regent for Thibaut III (September 1197– March 1198). Marie’s last letters patent (October). Pope Innocent III (8 January 1198–16 July 1216). Innocent warns about Marie’s state of mind (25 February). Countess Marie dies (3/5/8 March). Thibaut III succeeds (March 1198–May 1201). Count Thibaut III does homage to King Philip II (April).

Abbreviations

Actes AD AN BM BnF Feoda GC MGH SS MSA MSM n.s.

PL RHF

Recueil des actes d’Henri le Libéral, comte de Champagne (1152– 1181). Documents cited by edition number and date Archives Départementales Archives Nationales (Paris) Bibliothèque Municipale Bibliothèque Nationale de France (Paris) Feoda 1 (ca. 1178), Feoda 2 (ca. 1190). Surveys of comital fief­ holders, in Longnon, Documents, vol. 1 Gallia Christiana in provincias ecclesiasticas distributa Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores Mémoires de la Société Académique d’Agriculture, des Sciences, Arts et B ­ elles-​­Lettres du Département de l’Aube Mémoires de la Société d’Agriculture, Commerce, Sciences et Art du Département de la Marne new style. Converts the beginning of the year from Easter (the common practice in Champagne) to 1 January. Thus a date written as January 1151 becomes here January 1152 n.s. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France

Notes

Preface 1. Among the many brief accounts of Marie’s life viewed largely through literary works are: Lejeune, “Rôle littéraire de la famille d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine,” 324–28 (1958); Biblolet, “Marie, comtesse de Champagne” (1957); McCash, “Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine” (1979); Labande, “Les filles d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine,” 101–4 (1986); and Evergates, “Aristocratic Women in the County of Champagne,” 76–79 (1999). 2. Olivier-Martin, Études sur les régences, ch. 2. 3. Odo of Deuil, De profectione Ludovici VII, 14. For Philip II, see 146n. 12. 4. For the practice in Champagne, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 96. For practices in the ­Anglo-Norman realm and an analysis of the royal inquest of widows and wards (Rotuli de Dominabus et Pueris et Puellis) of 1185, see Johns, Noblewomen, 165–93. 5. This book began as part of a dual biography of Henry the Liberal and Marie in what I had envisioned as a study of a power couple who ruled the county of Champagne for almost the entire second half of the twelfth century. A reader of that manuscript, however, pointed out that the material on Marie was “thin” in a narrative actually dominated by Henry. Having reoriented that project as a separate study on Henry, I felt that Marie deserved a book of her own, despite the challenge of limited source materials. For their many helpful comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this book, I wish to thank Amy Livingstone, June Hall McCash, and Randall Pippenger.

Chapter 1 1. Suger, Scriptum Consecrationis and Gesta in his Oeuvres, vol. 1. Buc, “Conversion of Objects,” 143, lists the prelates present at the several events. 2. See Beech, “The Eleanor of Aquitaine Vase.” 3. Suger, Gesta (Oeuvres, 1), 154. ­Gaborit-​­Chopin, “Suger’s Liturgical Vessels,” 284–85, and fig. 3, accepts the crystal vase known as “the Ewer of ­St‑Denis” as the one Suger is describing here. See also La France romane, 167, fig. 114. 4. I have borrowed “surreptitious summit” from Grant, “Suger and the ­Anglo-​­Norman World,” 61, and applied it to the preliminary meeting of 22 April instead of the dedication of 11 June. 5. For these events, insofar as they involved the count of Champagne, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 7–12.

118

No t e s t o Pa ge s 2 –5

6. Fragmenta Gaufridi, 300, §50 (printed separately in Verdeyen’s edition of the Vita prima Bernardi): Sollicite quaere quae ad pacem sunt et ego tibi confisus de deuina miseratione partum promitto. Geoffroy of Auxerre was recording Bernard’s miracles preparatory to writing Bernard’s vita. Those anecdotes were later used by the three contributors to the Vita prima Bernardi (Recension A). The Fragmenta’s account of Eleanor’s meeting with Bernard was rewritten in the Vita prima sancti Bernardi (171, bk. 4, §18); Bernard’s reply to Eleanor became: “If you do what I advise, I will entreat the Lord for what you ask” (Si feceris, inquit, quod moneo, ego quoque pro verbo quod postulas, Dominium exorabo). 7. Brown, “Eleanor of Aquitaine,” 13–14, suggests a birth date of March or April 1145. 8. Phillips, The Second Crusade, 38, concludes that Edessa’s fate was known in Rome by May 1145. 9. Phillips, The Second Crusade, 64–65, reviews the possible motives. 10. Bernard of Clairvaux, Epistolae (Opera Omnia, 8), 330–31, no. 371 (Letters, 473–74, no. 401, dated to ­mid-​­1146), in which Bernard reports to Abbot Suger what he wrote to the king. 11. For Louis and Eleanor on crusade, see Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 70–104. 12. William of Tyre, Chronique, 2: 760 (History, 2: 184–86), bk. 17 cap. 1: dominus Henricus, domini Theobaldi senioris comitis filius, comes Trecensis, eiusdem domini regis gener, egredie indolis adolescens. William was writing in the 1170s of events that transpired two decades earlier while he was a student in France. Although his statement has been challenged as a later insertion (Fourrier, “Retour au terminus,” 301), it does seem an accurate observation for the 1140s. If William was inserting into the 1140s what he knew in the 1170s, he would have called Henry the ­brother-​ ­­in-​­law (not the s­ on-​­­in-​­law) of Louis, because the king married Henry’s youngest sister, Adele, in 1160. For an analysis of William’s statement, see Evergates, “Louis VII and the Counts of Champagne.” 13. RHF 15: 502, no. 53, undated. If Henry carried the letter with him, it was most likely drawn up between 24 July and his departure in August or September 1148 (Luchaire, Études, 175, no. 237, dates it from 24 July 1148 to 3 April 1149). It is also possible that Louis sent the letter directly to Suger (it is one of five letters in Suger’s collection of 188 letters that is not addressed to Suger), in the expectation that he would forward it to Count Thibaut (Nortier, “Étude sur un recueil de lettres,” 57, no. 77). 14. John of Salisbury, Historia Pontificalis, 52–53. 15. John of Salisbury, Historia Pontificalis, 61–62. 16. Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 104–12, recounts Eleanor’s divorce and remarriage. Sassier, Louis VII, 232–33, accepts the probability of Eleanor’s infidelities and reasons that, for Louis, the incessant rumors that besmirched the king’s dignity and the risk of her bearing an illegitimate heir outweighed the loss of her vast inheritance. Eleanor’s abandonment of her daughters in Paris was a convenience to her, in that it simplified the formation of a new family with Henry of Anjou. Flori, Aliénor d’Aquitaine, 81–82, notes that Marie and Alice would assure the continuity of the royal lineage through their husbands in the event that Louis failed to produce a male heir in a second marriage. In fact Marie already was promised in marriage to Henry of Champagne, who might well have regarded himself as a possible successor to Louis, at least until the birth of Philip II in 1165. 17. After the death of Louis VI, Queen Adelaide remarried in 1138, to Mathieu of Montmorency. She died at Montmartre after commissioning her tomb, the earliest surviving tomb of a French queen; see Nolan, Queens in Stone and Silver, 47–64. 18. Louis married Constance in the second half of 1154 (Sassier, Louis VII, 253). It is not known where Alice spent the next eleven years before she married Thibaut in 1164 (see 120n. 2).



No t e s t o Pa ge s 5–7

119

19. Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 74, doubts a close relationship between Eleanor and Marie in the absence of any firm evidence that they ever met again. 20. Actes, no. 37, 19 April 1153–3 April 1154: anno illo quo filiam ipsius regis affiduciavi. The prior and “the neighborhood knights” (vicinorum milites) of Coincy had asked Henry to establish a market at Coincy, which he did, reserving to himself half of the sales taxes and fines collected on the day of the market. The same phrase referring to his betrothal was copied in a second letter (Actes, no. 42, 1153). Had the notary not recorded Count Henry’s incidental remark, we would not know about the betrothal in 1153. 21. Avenay was founded in the seventh century by Bertha, s­ ister-​­­in-​­law of Bishop Nivard of Paris; for what is known about the convent before the twelfth century, see ­Poirier-​­Coutansais, Les abbayes bénédictines, 1: 453–73. 22. Elizabeth, heiress of the viscounty of Mareuil (in 1127), first married Robert, lord of Montaigu (d. before 1154), then Robert Guiscard, count of Roucy (d. 1178/80); see Bur, Formation, 250 (Genealogy no. 24), 267–69, 445. Elizabeth of Mareuil was still alive in 1202 (Sars, Le Laonnois féodal, 1: 225). It should be noted that in 1158 Louis VII had Queen Constance’s daughter Margaret placed in the household of Robert of Neubourg in Normandy, rather than in a convent, in preparation for her marriage to Henry the Young King of England; see Bowie, The Daughters of Henry II, 126–27. 23. According to the feudal register of 1178, the viscount of Mareuil was on permanent duty (Feoda 1, no. 606). The castellany of Mareuil had 83 enfeoffed knights of the count at that time (Feoda 1, nos. 542–625), of whom 42 rendered annual castleguard of one week (1 knight), six weeks (3), two months (15), three months (10), four months (2), six months (3), and a­ ll-​­year garrison duty (7 plus the viscount), with an average of 15 knights on duty at any time. For comparisons with castleguard owed in the rest of the county, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 206, Table C.2. 24. In 1147 Pope Eugenius III confirmed Avenay’s possessions, including the church of St. Hillary in suburbia castri Marolii (Avenay, 2: 81, no. 11). In that same year Archbishop Samson of Reims granted the nuns the right of appointing the church’s dean (Avenay, 2: 78–80, no. 10, 1147). 25. Actes, no. 141, 1159. Earlier, I had assumed that Marie and her magistra (Aelesdis) were living in the monastery. However, the fact that Henry’s letters patent was copied in Avenay’s cartulary means only that the convent recorded Henry’s gift of a rent in return for an unspecified favor bestowed by the nuns on Marie. That transaction does not mean that Marie lived with the nuns. The notary’s record of Henry’s gift was drawn up in formal letters patent and delivered by Chancellor William at the count’s residence in Vertus. Alice does not appear in any other extant document. 26. For Henry’s experiences on crusade and as apprentice count of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube and Vitry, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 2. 27. For Henry’s construction of a new capital in Troyes, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 3. 28. Thibaut became seneschal between 1 August and 24 November 1154 (Luchaire, Études, 47). 29. Actes, no. 141, 1159, letters patent that William, the count’s chancellor, presented at Vertus. 30. If Henry promised Marie her dower on this occasion, the notary was entirely correct in regarding her as de facto countess. From a close reading of the letter of 1159, Fourrier, “Retour au terminus,” concluded that sponse meant betrothed, not wife or spouse. Morelle, “Mariage et diplomatique,” 232–33, especially n. 27, confirms that reading on the basis of ­well-​­documented contemporary cases in the ­Laonnois-​­Soissonnais. Thus, Marie was formally betrothed in 1153, after Eleanor left Paris; in 1159 she gave her consent to marriage, which was not consummated until she began to cohabit with Henry in 1164/65.

120

No t e s t o Pa ge s 7 – 12

31. This separation is perhaps the origin of Robert of Torigni’s comment that Henry later “took back the daughter of King Louis whom he earlier had sent away.” Torigni refers to the fact that Marie did not cohabit with Henry for another five years after giving her consent to marriage. For an interpretation of that remark, see Fourrier, “Retour au terminus,” 299–301. 32. Chronique de ­Saint-​­­Pierre-​­­le-​­Vif de Sens, 204–5. Another monk, writing ca. 1184/85, added that archbishops and bishops, as well as proceres, advised Louis to marry Adele (ibid., 314). 33. Historiae gloriosi regis Ludovici VII, 129. Dufour, “Adèle de Champagne,” provides a biographical sketch. He places Adele’s birth in 1142/45. 34. E ­ rlande-​­Brandenburg, “Le grand dessein de Maurice de Sully.” 35. For the early years and marriage of Henry the Young King, see Strickland, “On the Instruction of a Prince,” 188–94, and Henry the Young King, 1–33. 36. Historia gloriosi regis Ludovici VII, 129. The writer omitted a sister, Margaret, who was a nun at Fontevraud. 37. On Henry II’s maneuvers, see Diggelmann, “Marriage as Tactical Response,” and Bowie, The Daughters of Henry II, 126–30.

Chapter 2 1. Actes, no. 215, dated between 12 April 1164 and 3 April 1165: Laurentius clericus comitisse. Since the comital chancery began the new year with Easter, a letter dated 1164 might fall between Easter 1164 and Easter 1165. It should be emphasized here that “court” (curia) was a technical term meaning the place or the occasion at which the count, and later the countess, conducted business, whether to confirm transactions, to mediate or resolve disputes, to make benefactions, or to direct officials in the administration of the principality. Those who regularly sat with the count or countess included the high officers (seneschal, butler, constable), technical staff (bursar, treasurer, marshal), and chancery personnel (notary, chancellor), as well as the litigants, beneficiaries, and local officials who needed to know what was decided or enacted, that is, “done” (actum) at court” (in curia, mea presente). Andreas Capellanus in his satire on “courts of love” uses the term in the same manner, as a judicial session at which judgments were rendered. 2. Fourrier, “Retour au terminus,” 302, dates Thibaut’s marriage with Alice to 23 September–9 October 1164. In a letter to the king that year, Thibaut reported that he had just married Alice (RHF 16: 103, no. 318, 1164). Nothing is known about her life until then; for her later life, see A ­ rmstrong-​­Partida, “Mothers and Daughters as Lords,” 81–89. Thibaut had previously married Sybille, heiress of C ­ hâteau-​­Renault and widow of Josselin of Auneau (died ca. 1144), at an indeterminate date; see Carré de Busserolle, Dictionnaire géographique, 2: 271 (without source). For William’s election as bishop of Chartres, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 103–4. 3. See 119n. 30. 4. Henry’s act at court in Sézanne referenced Louis VII, “whose daughter Marie I have in marriage” (cujus filiam Mariam nomine in conjugio habebam), a remark that I take to mean cohabitation, as distinct from Marie’s formal status as wife and countess (Actes, no. 245, 1166). It is likely that Marie was with Henry at Sézanne on that occasion, when she sealed her first letters patent (see 122n. 23). 5. For the details in this paragraph, see ch. 1. 6. On the construction of the residence and the comital campus, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 3.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 1 5–17

121

7. Laurent’s prebend in Marie’s service was at S­ t‑Quiriace (Provins, BM, ms. 85 no. 6, 1169 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1169f ). He is last mentioned as her cleric in 1176, perhaps after his death, when Marie transferred to the chapter of S­ t‑Quiriace the 40s. she earlier had assigned to Laurent (Actes, no. 431). 8. Nevel “of Aulnay” held a fief from the count of Brienne and was married but without children when he named his brother Roric, archdeacon of Meaux, and Roric’s sons and daughters as his “­co-​­heirs” (Actes, no. 41, 1153). He witnessed Count Henry’s acts from 1154 and is listed in the roll of fiefs for Rosnay (Feoda 1, no. 194: liege and (he owes) six months castleguard). He was Marie’s miles comitisse in her first act (AN, K 192, no. 72, e­ ighteenth-​­century copy = Benton, “Recueil,” 1166d), and is last mentioned in Marie’s last act as regent countess in 1186 (Paraclet, 92–93, no. 75), having completed thirty years’ service to Henry and Marie. Nevel was occasionally identified as “of Ramerupt,” which suggest that he held property there or was in some way related to the lords of Ramerupt. He was not related to the marshals from Aulnay(-​­l’Aître), who descended from the A ­ rzillières-​­Villehardouin lineage. 9. Benton, “Recueil,” 1175g: Marie gave Nigra a rent at Escardes with confirming letters patent; Nigra then endowed her own anniversary after death by giving both the rent and the document to the canons of ­Notre-​­Dame of Vertus. 10. As part of the settlement between the regular and secular canons of S­ t‑Quiriace in 1160, the sisters of the hospital of Provins gave their buildings to the canons who left S­ t‑Quiriace to establish a chapter of regular canons at S­ t‑Jacques; in return, the sisters received the residence of the countess from Count Henry (St‑Quiriace, 45 n. 10). 11. RHF 16: 115–16, no. 355, undated letter to Louis, dated by the editors of the RHF, without justification, to ca. 1164, that is, within her first year of marriage. The tolls now yield only 40s. to 60s., she said, whereas they used to yield 7l. to 10l. 12. In one letter Marie states that she had no knowledge of the accusations against Peter of Melun, the king’s former porter, and asks Louis to accept him back (RHF 16: 115, no. 354, undated). She also wrote to Louis on behalf of Hugh of Sens, her husband’s hospes who had served him well but who had committed some undisclosed infraction for which the king, in anger, demanded a fine (RHF 16: 115, no. 353, undated); Count Henry sent a similar but less personal letter to Louis on the same matter (RHF 16: 115, no. 352, undated). 13. For Henry’s intellectual life, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 5. 14. Simon also composed a set of epitaphs for those whom Henry admired as a young man and who died about the time he became count: his father, Thibaut; Abbot Suger of ­St‑Denis; and three ­Cistercians—​­Bernard of Clairvaux, Pope Eugenius III, and Bishop Hugh of Mâcon (first abbot of Pontigny); see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 35, 94. 15. McCash, “Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine,” draws on two types of circumstantial evidence of a continuing relationship between Marie and her mother: literary allusions to contacts among poets associated with the two women, and Marie’s relationship with Eleanor’s children. For a thoughtful assessment of their relationship, see Brown, “Eleanor of Aquitaine Reconsidered.” Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 107, finds no evidence that Marie ever saw Eleanor again. Eleanor’s treatment of her daughters by Henry II apparently was quite different, keeping them with her during her frequent travels until they were ready for marriage; Bowie, The Daughters of Henry II, argues for Eleanor’s strong maternal investment in her daughters born of Henry II of England. 16. RHF 16: 103, no. 318, between 23 September and 8 October 1166. 17. Alice presumably accompanied Thibaut to Troyes when he sat at Henry’s Christmas court on 29 December 1166 (Actes, no. 239).

122

No t e s t o Pa ge s 1 7 –2 0

18. Troyes, BM, ms. 2275, copied between 1166 and 1174, most likely in 1166 or 1167 (photo in Splendeurs, 51, fig. 3). The canons had a close relationship with the count’s father ever since Thibaut converted the chapter to regular canons with the help of Bernard of Clairvaux (­St‑Loup, 18–22, no. 6, 19 March 1136). Henry continued making benefactions to ­St‑Loup, and in 1163 he associated its canons with his secular canons of S­ t‑Étienne (Actes, no. 195); see also Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 67. 19. ­St‑Loup, 7–8. 20. An inventory of S­ t‑Loup’s treasury in 1544 describes the cover as being encased in silver and precious stones (Lalore, Inventaires, 2: 106, no. 836). It survived to 1637 (Desguerrois, Saincteté chrestienne, 289, 291) but was lost or dismantled after 1789. 21. In 1175 (Actes, no. 404) Henry retrieved that revenue he had given the nuns on the occasion of his son’s birth, giving them in exchange a house in the market of Troyes next to the house of Manasses of Pougy, provost of ­St‑Étienne. Helissent was prioress of Foissy in 1155, when she asked Henry to exempt William the Englishman, a tenant in one of the priory’s houses in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube, from the count’s provost there (Actes, no. 72); her two sons, Anselm II and Garnier, were among the witnesses (see also Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 93). Both sons appeared with her in 1145, when they approved of Anselm I’s accord with the canons of ­St‑Loup of Troyes (­St‑Loup, 30–31, no. 13). 22. AN, K 192, no. 76, 1166, done in Sézanne; e­ ighteenth-​­century copy (=Benton, “Recueil,” 1166d). 23. Text printed in Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins, 251 n. 540, 1166. Marie’s cleric Laurent, who probably drafted the document, presented it to Milo Breban. Milo lo Braiban witnessed an act of Count Henry in 1168 (Actes, no. 266) and in 1177 (Actes, no. 448). He often witnessed the count’s acts as a treasury official with Artaud (Artaudus camerarius et Milo Braibanus). For Milo and Artaud, see 131n. 32. 24. Actes, no. 243, 1166. 25. Provins, BM, ms. 85, no. 3, 1170, original letter (=Actes, no. 297). Although Marie’s seal is lost, the document has slits for the silk threads of two pendant seals; over the left slit, intended for Marie’s seal, is written dote. 26. Archives Départementales de l’Aube, 42 Fi 97, detached deal with inscription reading: Sigill[um] Marie Reg[is] Francor[um] filie, Trecens[sis] comitisse (seal of ca. 1192). Image downloaded from its catalogue of seals under open license from www.­archives-​­Aube.fr. on 17 September 2017. See Chassel, Sceaux, 129, fig. 134 (seal of ca. 1184), and Baudin, Les sceaux, 140, who concludes that Marie used only one seal matrix until 1192. Marie’s act of 1166 is known only from a later copy. Baudin calls the bird in Marie’s hand a oiseau, but McCash, in a private correspondence, identifies it as a sparrow hawk. 27. Bony, French Gothic Architecture, 72. Von Simson, The Gothic Cathedral, 142, regards Sens as “the first Gothic cathedral,” to which E ­ rlande-​­Brandenburg, “La cathédral ­Saint-​­Étienne de Sens,” 35–38, concurs. For the stages of construction, see Henriet, “La cathédrale S­ aint-​ ­Étienne de Sens.” 28. For Becket’s years at S­ te‑Colombe, see Barlow, Thomas Becket, 158–224. For the connections between Count Henry and the English clerics at Reims, Pontigny, and Sens, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 104–5, 116–23. 29. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 66. 30. Thomas Becket, Correspondence, 2: 812–15, no. 180, after 28 December 1168, letter to Pope Alexander III reporting on the consecration of Archbishop William of Sens in the presence of the king and queen and leading men of the realm.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 2 0 –2 3

123

31. For what follows, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 6. 32. According to Peter of Celle, it was the count’s brother, Archbishop William of Sens, who “elected” Bishop Mathieu, whom he had known while being provost of the chapel of ­St‑Quiriace of Provins (Peter of Celle, Letters, 416–18, no. 102, July/September 1176). Peter recalled to William, by then archbishop of Reims, that he earlier had appointed (elegisti) Mathieu as bishop. For Mathieu’s role in resecularizing the chapter of S­ t‑Quiriace, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 63–64. 33. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 6 (Bibliomania). 34. For Count Henry’s ties with the English exiles, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 115–23. For a concise summary of the tale, see Maddox and Maddox, “Erec et Enide.” 35. Henry’s copy, now lost, was listed in his library catalogue as Item magistri Gaufridi (Lalore, Inventaires, 2; 270, no. 2271). 36. I accept the reasoning of Fourrier, “Encore la chronologie,” 70–74, that (1) Chrétien’s description of King Arthur’s court at Nantes was so specific as to place and so credible in detail that it must have been based on his own experience at Henry II’s Christmas court at Nantes in 1169, and (2) Erec was written before the murder of Becket on 29 December 1170, after which the archbishopric was vacant for three years. S­ chmolke-​­Hasselmann, The Evolution of Arthurian Romance, 232–41, strongly supports Fourrier and argues for an A ­ nglo-​­Norman audience. 37. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 102–3 (Chronicle, 60), §64, writing about the marriage contract in the summer of 1171, states that Countess Marie’s daughter was named Marie. Elizabeth of Hainaut was born in April 1170; her brother Baldwin (VI) was born in July 1171 (Chronique, 101–2 [Chronicle, 59–60]), §§61, 63. Gislebert was a cleric, then chancellor (1178/80–95), of Baldwin V of Hainaut. It appears from Gislebert’s account that only Count Philip came to Troyes to negotiate the marriage. It is not clear who swore oaths of warranty. 38. Actes, no. 373, 1174, act of Henry announcing Marie’s gift; done at Provins in her absence but in her cleric Laurent’s presence. 39. Meaux, 2: 62, 1175, letter drawn up and presented by her cleric Laurent. Henry confirmed that gift, which he later specified as wine paid by the abbot of Lagny on the feast of Saint Martin (Actes, no. 441, 1176). 40. Both Marie’s gift for Laurent (­St‑Quiriace, 259–60, no. 27, 1176) and Henry’s confirmation (­St‑Quiriace, 260, no. 28 = Actes, no. 431) were done in Troyes. Marie confirmed the carta that Nigra presented to the canons of Vertus (Benton, “Recueil,” 1175g). 41. AN, J 764, no. 1, copy of 1548 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1171q (Marie’s letter: Ego Maria, divina providentia Henrico, Trecensium comite legali matrimonio copulata). Actes, no. 320, 1171 (Henry’s letter). 42. Peter of Celle, Letters, 488–91, no. 132, ca. 1171/72. 43. Roger of Howden, Gesta, 1: 43–44. 44. As suggested by McCash, “Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine,” 707–8. For a detailed account of the revolt, see Strickland, Henry the Young King, 119–304, and 138–41, for the meeting in Paris. 45. For the role of the Champenois siblings in the revolt, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 133–36. 46. Fontevraud’s obituary for Margaret follows her sister Marie’s epitaph (Pavillon, Robert d’Arbrissel, 592). Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine left her infant son John (born 27 December 1166) at Fontevraud; his epitaph states that he was an oblate who remained at Fontevraud for five years (Pavillon, Robert d’Arbrissel, 585, no. 90). See also Bienvenu, “Aliénor d’Aquitaine,” 21–22, and Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 190–91, 275–76.

124

No t e s t o Pa ge s 2 3 – 2 5

47. A biography is in Petit, Bourgogne, 2: 135–51. See also Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 208 n. 65. 48. RHF 16: 67–68. no. 213. 49. Petit, Histoire, 2: 349–50, no. 527. 50. Petit, Histoire, 2: 146–49. 51. Actes, no. 374, 1174, done in Provins for “the former duchess of Burgundy.” The revenue would pass to Fontevraud after her death. In 1187 Count Henry II renewed his father’s grant (Benton, “Recueil,” 1187e–add1). 52. Pavillon, Robert d’Arbrissel, 591–92, no. 101. In 1190 her son, Duke Hugh III of Burgundy, assigned 40s. from the tolls at C ­ hâtillon-​­­sur-​­Seine to the church there, effective after his mother’s death, which must have occurred shortly afterward (Petit, Histoire, 3: 295–96, no. 825). 53. ­Kenaan-​­Kedar, “The Cathedral of Sebaste,” 102–4. Thompson, “The Formation of the County of Perche,” 307 n. 38, dates Isabelle/Elizabeth’s entry in Fontevraud to 1180, but Count Henry’s new grant to Fontevraud suggests that she may have entered the convent by 1175. She may have made that decision in 1173, when she met her sister Mathilda, countess of Perche, at Bonneval abbey (Thompson, The County of Perche, 93 n. 31). For her life, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 8, 207 n. 46. 54. Actes, no. 397, 1175. Isabelle/Elizabeth and Marie were remembered in the obituary of ­Fontaines-​­­les-​­Nonnes as Domina Elisabeth venerabilis, monacha, ducissa [of Apulia] soror domine Marie, ducisse [of Burgundy] (Obituaires, 4: 192, 13 August). 55. Barlow, Thomas Becket, 252–75. 56. See Bredero, “The Canonization of Bernard of Clairvaux,” 84–90, and Dutton, “A Case for Canonization.” For Eleanor’s meeting with Bernard, see ch. 1 at n. 6. In preparing a dossier in support of Bernard’s canonization (Recension B), Bernard’s traveling companion Geoffroy of Auxerre, who succeeded Bernard as abbot of Clairvaux (1163–65), omitted the story of Eleanor’s complaint, perhaps because by then, Eleanor’s fertility was not in question. A translation of the vita is The First Life of Bernard of Clairvaux. 57. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 140–45, and Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 6, who suggests that Henry planned his tomb around 1173. 58. Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 23, concludes that the tomb was completed “shortly before 1180,” that is, before Henry left on crusade in May 1179. 59. Alexander III, Epistolae, 1063–64, January 1176, directive to legate Peter of Pavia. For Peter of Pavia, bishop of Meaux (1172–75), ­cardinal-​­priest of S. Crisogono (October 1173– May 1179) and archbishop of Bourges (4 May 1179–2 August 1182), see Brixius, Die Mitglieder, 65, no. 23, and Janssen, Die Päpstlichen Legaten, 92–108. For events in the East, see Phillips, Defenders of the Holy Land, 225–45. 60. William of Tyre, Chronique, 2: 962 (History, 2: 359–61), bk. 20, ch. 12. On the significance of King Amalric’s letter seeking western aid from the monarchs of France, England, Germany, and Sicily, and the counts of Flanders, Champagne, and Chartres, among others, see Phillips, Defenders of the Holy Land, 168–208. The pope sent his own appeal, Inter Omnia, dated 29 July 1169, addressed to all “princes, knights, and Christians” (Alexander III, Epistolae, 599– 601, no. 62, 29 July 1169). 61. Roger of Howden, Gesta regis Henrici secundi, 2: 44, quotes the joint letter of Henry II and Louis VII promising to take the cross. A commission of three prelates and three barons from each side was to oversee the peace; the French king was represented by his brothers, Peter of Courtenay and Robert of Dreux, and his seneschal (and b­ rother-​­­in-​­law) Thibaut of Blois.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 2 5–2 8

125

62. Gervase of Canterbury, Chronica , 262. For Count Philip’s expedition, see Hamilton, The Leper King, 119–31, and Phillips, Defenders of the Holy Land, 231–40. 63. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, Chronicon, 855 [year 1178]. RHF 16: 166, letter of Abbot Henry of Clairvaux to the pope (16 October 1175–1 January 1179). 64. I have followed Fourrier, “Encore la chronologie,” 74–81, in dating Cligés to ca. 1176; in an extended analysis of Cligés ten years later, Fourrier opted for 1176/77 (Le courant réaliste, 123–78, at 178). Ciggaar, “Encore une fois Chrétien de Troyes,” 267–68, argues for a completion before September 1176. McCash, “Reconsidering the Order of Chrétien de Troyes’s Romances,” makes a case for dating Cligés to 1181–83, that is, after Count Henry’s return from overseas. But I prefer to locate the tale during the r­ un-​­up to the expedition, a story that would appeal to a generation of veterans of the Second Crusade. A recent summary and analysis is Grimbert, “Cligés and the Chansons: A Slave of Love.” 65. “Mez gardez quo molt soiez larges / Et cotoise et bien affetiez . . . ​/ Que Largece est dame et reïne / Qui toutes vertuz enlumine . . . ​/ Par lui fet preudome Largece . . . / Ausi la ou Largece vient, / Desor toutes vertuz se tient” (Cligés, lines 184–85, 192–93, 201, 211–12). 66. RHF 15: 607–8, no. 81 (1147); trans. in Evergates, Documents, 103–4, no. 81. For Bernard’s letter of recommendation of Henry to Emperor Manuel Komnenos, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 22–24. For the literary background of Cligés, see Grimbert, “Cligés and the Chansons.” 67. ­Bullock-​­Davies, “Chrétien de Troyes and England,” makes a convincing case for Chrétien’s ­first-​­hand knowledge of England, acquired most likely in the years 1168–74, when he would have seen the repairs being made to Windsor castle. 68. For the ideal of a “courtly knight,” and the transfer of chivalry and learning from Greece to Rome and finally to France, as Chrétien expresses it in the prologue to Cligés, see Putter, “Knights and Clerics,” 246–48. 69. Robert of Auxerre, Chronicon, 250. 70. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 142–43. 71. For Henry of France’s library, see Stirnemann, “Quelques bibliothèques,” 12–21. 72. Epistolae pontificum romanorum ineditae, 179–80, no. 308, 1179, letter granting Marie’s request. 73. For the inquest and resultant rolls of fiefs, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 17–21, and 49, fig. 1. 74. Foreville, Lateran I, II, III, et Lateran IV, 134–58 and 389 (list of prelates attending the Council). The bishop of Langres had just died, and the bishop of Châlons (Guy of Joinville) apparently did not attend. 75. Walter Map, De Nugis Curialium, 450–53. Walter Map’s account of his meeting in Troyes was an incidental anecdote within a chapter on Kings Louis VII and Henry I. Walter’s book did not circulate at the time and survives in a single f­ourteenth-​­century manuscript. Smith, Walter Map and the Matter of Britain, has disentangled that heavily revised work in progress, which contains postauthorial glosses as well. 76. Walter Map, De Nugis Curialium, 450–51. 77. McCash, “Chrétien’s Patrons,” 20–21, suggests that Walter Map met Chrétien de Troyes during his stopover in Troyes and might have passed on material relating to the Lancelot story; if so, the composition of Lancelot would be placed after the spring of 1179, that is, after Count Henry’s departure; see McCash, “Reconsidering the Order of Chrétien de Troyes’s Romances,” 246–29. 78. Peter of Pavia, cardinal legate in France, presented the pope with a list of candidates worthy of being named cardinal (Alexander III, Epistolae, 1370). See also Guillemain, “L’épiscopat français à Lateran III,” 28.

126

No t e s t o Pa ge s 2 8 – 31

79. Actes, no. 495, 1 April–30 May 1179. 80. Actes, no. 507, 1 April–30 May 1179, done in Troyes. Wilmart, Meaux, 103–25, dates it to between 1 April and 13 May and provides a full analysis of the charter and its context in Meaux. 81. Actes, no. 507, 1 April–30 May 1179. 82. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 112 (Chronicle, 72), §89. 83. Strickland, Henry the Young King, 236–37. Strickland does not account for Margaret’s whereabouts between 1177 and 1183, when she may have been in Troyes with Marie. 84. Actes, 616–17, no. 497, 1179, 1 April–­mid-​­May, delivered in Provins; Henry referred to domine Marquisie cognata comitisse, whom I take to be Margaret. The revenue came from the first taxes collected in the new stone house built by Peter of Langres in Troyes, payable at the fairs of Saint Jean and Saint Remi. 85. I have no evidence for this suggestion, but it seems likely in view of Margaret’s later presence with Marie at Foissy. 86. Brother William, “my almoner,” said Henry in 1173 (Actes, no. 353), was with Henry at Sebastia in 1179/80 (Actes, no. 527). Henry II of England had a Templar almoner by 1177, but Philip II did not have one until 1222; see La Salle, Le service des âmes, 35. 87. Benton, “Recueil,” 1179v, confirmation of Henry’s letter (Actes, no. 513, 1179). 88. For his journey, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 160–63. 89. Actes, no. 523, 1179. Witnessing in Beaune were Robert of Milly (treasurer), William the marshal, Artaud the treasurer, Thibaut of Fismes (scribe), Master Philip (of Sézanne), and Peter of Langres. 90. Cîteaux, 186, no. 235, 1179, done in Troyes, and witnessed by dominus Nevel and the Templar Brother Climmanus. 91. Clairvaux, 263, no. 222, undated. 92. Epistolae pontificum romanorum ineditae, 193, no. 325, 17 June 1180. 93. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 6, states that since Louis relinquished his authority ( jus suum et potestatem), he was deprived of his seal, in effect the capacity to authenticate, which modern historians have taken to mean that the royal seal was confiscated. 94. Rigord, Gesta, 126–29, §3. 95. Strickland, Henry the Young King, 262–64, and Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 5–6. 96. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 127 (Chronicle, 73), §92. 97. Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione, 229, suggests that Philip intended to replace Count Thibaut as royal seneschal with Count Philip of Flanders. 98. Baldwin, Philip Augustus, 5–7, describes the coronation scene from all available references; none mention the Champenois. Conon de Béthune’s poem, “Love summons me to depart” (Mout me semont Amors que je m’envoise) has been taken to represent a reading at the coronation, when the poet complains that “the Champenois [Counts Thibaut and Stephen] and also the countess [Marie]” ridiculed his Artesian accent, while the queen (Adele) and her son, the king (Philip), were not courteous to him, despite the fact that they well understood him (Conon de Béthune, Chansons, 5 no. 3). Lefèvre, “L’image du roi chez le poètes,” 137–38, imagines a postcoronation banquet scene at which Queen Adele and Countess Marie vent their anger at the Flemish allies of Philip II by denigrating the accent of Conon, who was in their camp. Lefèvre is correct to detect a plot developing before the coronation to expel the Champenois from the royal court, but nothing in the poem suggests that Marie was present at the coronation, or that she and Adele and Philip were together on that occasion. Neither Marie nor her i­n-​­laws attended the



No t e s t o Pa ge s 3 1–34

127

coronation, and with good reason. If Conon did perform for Marie, Adele (as queen mother), and Philip II, the more likely occasion would be after their reconciliation in April 1182. 99. Gislebert of Mons (Chronique, 129–30 [Chronicle, 74–75], cap. 94). 100. Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, 289–90, remarks that young Philip swore on his father’s deathbed to marry the count of Hainaut’s daughter so that he would inherit the county of Flanders in the absence of a male heir, and that he did this without the advice of his mother and uncles and the rest of their friends (amici). Falmagne, Baudouin V, 129, suggests the possibility that Philip himself was taken by Elizabeth. 101. Sivéry, Philippe Auguste, 47–57. Falmagne, Baudouin V, 127–31, describes the marriage contract. 102. For Isabelle’s life as queen, see Hornaday, “A Capetian Queen as Street Demonstrator.” 103. Chronique de ­Saint-​­­Pierre-​­­le-​­Vif de Sens, continuation, 315–16. 104. Gervase of Canterbury, Chronica (Opera, 1), 294. See also Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 129–31 (Chronicle, 74–75), cap. 94. 105. ­St‑­Germain-​­­des-​­Prés, 1: 254, no. 177, 1178. 106. Rigord, Gesta, 136, §8. 107. William of Nangis, Chronique, 73, 108. William of Nangis, Chronique, 69–70, reports that Philip expelled Adele from her dower lands after she began to fortify their castles (the chronicler does not explain why she would do that, if in fact she did so), and that she fled to her brothers, who consequently fanned discord against the king. But, says the chronicler, a council soon reestablished peace between the king and the great lords. 109. Roger of Howden, Gesta regis Henrici, 1: 247–48, and Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 6, quote the text of the accord, which Henry II retained. Philip II’s copy was stored in his chancery archive (Recueil des actes de Philip Auguste, 1: 8–10, no. 7, 28 June 1180). Each monarch furnished three bishops and three barons as securities. Philip II named the bishops of Clermont, Nevers, and Troyes (Mathieu of Provins, former precentor of Sens), and Count Thibaut of Blois, Robert of Dreux, and Peter of Courtenay (but not the count of Flanders). For the ­twelfth-​­century meetings between Trier and Gisors, see Benham, Peacemaking in the Middle Ages, 21–23. 110. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 6. 111. For his return trip and meeting with Philip II at Sens, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 162–63. 112. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, Chronicon, 856. 113. Bishop Mathieu died 27/28 September 1180 at Vauluisant (Cistercian) abbey. He was buried at Boulancourt (Cistercian) next to his predecessor, Bishop Henry of Troyes (Prévost, Histoire du diocèse de Troyes, 1: 91). 114. Actes, no. 530, 1181, March 10–16; photograph in Splendeurs, 53, fig. 7. 115. I have accepted the dates of Chrétien’s works proposed by Fourrier, “Encore la chronologie,” which seem to fit best the nonliterary evidence. 116. Chrétien de Troyes, Le chevalier de la Charrette (in Romans), lines 1–4; trans. Kibler in Arthurian Romances, 207. Fourrier, “Encore la chronologie,” 81–88, concludes that Lancelot and Yvain were written concurrently ca. 1177–81, that is, between the time that Henry took the cross in the fall of 1177 and his return in March 1181. Fourrier notes (87) that Chrétien used croisié only once in all his works; that seems to allude to Henry’s taking the cross in 1177. 117. Chrétien de Troyes, Le chevalier de la Charrette (in Romans), lines 10–11, 15–18; trans. Kibler in Arthurian Romances, 207.

128

No t e s t o Pa ge s 3 4 – 36

118. Chrétien de Troyes, Le chevalier de la Charrette (in Romans), lines 24–27; trans. Kibler in Arthurian Romances, 207. 119. McCash, “Marie de Champagne’s ‘Cuer d’ome et cors de fame,’ ” 234–38, points out that the story was driven by women, notably by Lancelot’s mother, by the queen, and by Countess Marie, and develops a fruitful comparison of Lancelot, Andreas Capellanus’s De Amore, and Evrat’s comments in his Genèse. If Marie did suggest such a tale, Chrétien might have subverted it by irony, in showing how ridiculous the practice of “courtly” love was (as Kibler remarks in Arthurian Romances, 511 n. 3). 120. McCash, “Reconsidering the Order of Chrétien de Troyes’s Romances,” reviews the debates over the dating of the two works and the relationship between them. 121. Actes, no. 195, 2 September 1163. 122. La ­Chapelle-​­­aux-​­Planches, 22–24, no. 22, 117, 1173, done in the episcopal palace. Obituaries of the cathedral and N ­ otre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains of Troyes remembered a priest Christianus (Obituaires, 4: 269, 16 November; 363, 3 October). 123. Actes, no. 136, 1159, Henry’s charter of foundation. 124. Clairvaux, nos. 146–148 (all from 1172), 234 (1185), 266 (1189), 309 (1179–93), 346 (1196: dominus Christianus); La ­Chapelle-​­­aux-​­Planches, no. 188 (1188: dominus Christianus). One act was noted as having been done through his hand (partial photograph of the document in Holmes and Klenke, Chrétien, Troyes, and the Grail, 54, fig. 1: Xianus capellanus de Sancto Macuto in cujus manu factum est). This Christianus “of B ­ ar-​­­sur-​­Aube” was remembered in the obituary of the cathedral of Troyes as the brother of Girard of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube (Obituaires, 4: 260, 3 September). 125. Clairvaux, 354–56, no. 285, item 20, 1190: Christianus monachus Clarevallensis. This may be the same Christianus mentioned in the obituary of the cathedral of Troyes (see n. 124). 126. Eracle has been dated to between 1176 and 1184 (Gautier d’Arras, Eracle, ed. Raynaud de Lage, x–xi, following the extended analysis by Fourrier, Le courant réaliste, 204). Literary historians accept the unified conception of the work, which consists of three distinct parts, the last third being devoted to the loss of the true cross, its recovery by Emperor Heraclius, and its return to Jerusalem. Such a narrative certainly resonated with the loss of the “true” cross in the aftermath of Hattin (July 1187), and since Eracle exists in only three manuscript collections from the late thirteenth century, it is impossible to determine whether that third part might have been written after 1187. 127. “Li quens Tiebaus [V] ou riens ne faut, / Li fix au boin conte Tiebaut [IV], / Me fist ceste oevre rimoiier. / Par lui le fis, nel quier noiier, / Et par le contesse autreesi, / Marie, fille Loëy” (Gautier d’Arras, Eracle, ed. Pratt, lines 6523–28). 128. Benton, too, discounts Gautier’s passing mention of Marie as constituting patronage (Benton, “The Court,” 20–22). 129. “Faite m’en a mainte assaillie / Cil qui a Hainau en baillie, / Que je traitasse l’uevre en fin. / . . . ​/ Quens Bauduin, a vos l’otroi” (Gautier d’Arras, Eracle, ed. Pratt, lines 6529–31, 6559). 130. For the rich world of romance writing at that time, see H ­ arf-​­Lancner, “Chrétien’s Literary Background,” and Lacy, “Arthurian Legend before Chrétien de Troyes.” 131. Benton, “The Court,” 36–37, has concluded that Rigaut de Barbezieux, another poet often linked to Marie and who in one poem praised a countess who “illuminated” Champagne, most likely referred to Champagne de Cognac near Barbezieux, and was not active after 1163. 132. He is the first witness as Dominus Nevel (Benton, “Recueil,” 1179ff) and as Nevel of Aulnay (Benton, “Recueil,” 1179v).



No t e s t o Pa ge s 3 7 –40

129

Chapter 3 1. The origin of the custom of comital succession at t­wenty-​­one is obscure, and in fact it occurred only once in the twelfth century, with Henry II in 1187. It did not obtain for the sons of barons. See Evergates, Aristocracy, 156–59. 2. Petel, “La Commanderie de Payns,” 1: 40, 17 March 1181, and Roserot, Dictionnaire, 1095, cite Marie’s gift but without reference to source. For Payns as the site of the earliest Templar Commandery, since at least 1130, see Leroy, “The Organization of the Champagne Templar Network,” 116–21. For Manuel’s presentation of arms to Henry in 1147 and his ransom of Henry in 1180, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 22–24, 161. 3. André of Marchiennes, Continuatio Aquicinctina, 418. 4. Langres, 172–74, no. 145, 28 March–31 October 1182, done in Troyes: it begins: Ego Maria Trecensis comitissa notum facio. . . . ​Marie refers to the “men” (homines) of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube, who paid the count 300l., money of Troyes, on the Feast of Saint Remi, which suggests that Count Henry had granted a commune to the townsmen at the same time he granted one to the townsmen of Meaux before leaving on his pilgrimage. Pope Lucius III confirmed the grant (Langres, 46–47, no. 13, 6 February 1185 n.s.). 5. Langres, 73–74, no. 32, 1182, drawn up by the archbishop’s own scribe; trans. Evergates, Documents, 114–15, no. 92. Archbishop William refers to 30l. collected annually “at the fairs of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube,” which suggest that the count’s bailiffs or tax collectors paid that pension from the general fair revenues. 6. AN, K 192, no. 261, done in Meaux (=Benton, Recueil,” 1182c). Among those who witnessed in Brindisi and later testified at court were the treasury officials Artaud of Nogent and Milo of Provins, the chaplain Peter (of Hebron), the almoner Brother William, Robert of Milly, and Ralph of Montigny. Bisolus inherited the fief of his father, Robert, sometime between 1178, when Robert was listed in the count’s roll of fiefs for Meaux (Feoda 1, no. 1059), and 1190, when new rolls of fiefs were prepared. That fief was later described as 26l. assigned on a mill’s revenues (Feoda 2, Meaux, no. 2294). Bisolus also held a fief from his aunt Ada, viscountess of Meaux (Actes, no. 341bis, 1172). 7. Details are in Henry’s letter (Actes, no. 529, 10–16 March 1181). Marie’s confirmation (AN, K 222, no. 9, 10–16 March 1181 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1181c) simply refers to his letter (sicut in carta ejusdem domini me continetur). 8. Benton, “Recueil,” 1181h. 9. AD, ­Haute-​­Marne, 18 H 1 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1182e). 10. Actes, no. 530, 10–16 March 1181. 11. AD Aube G 3984 (=Benton, “Recueil,” 1181e), a verbatim copy of Henry’s letter (Actes, no. 530, 10–16 March 1181), in which Marie states that she acted with the approval of Archbishop William. 12. Manasses of Pougy was provost of S­ t‑Étienne in 1157 (Actes, no. 125) and subdeacon in the cathedral of Troyes by 1167 (Montiéramey, 81–82, no. 54). He later recalled that he had been educated at the cathedral school of Troyes, where he and his amici enjoyed many benefices (­St‑Pierre, 63–64, no. 51, 1188). 13. Martène, Voyage littéraire, 1: 92–93. 14. Provost, “L’abbesse, l’évêque et le palefroi,” 283–86. Further details in Vallet de Viriville, Archives historiques, 340–52. 15. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 35, 94–95.

130

No t e s t o Pa ge s 4 0 – 44

16. Simon succeeded Peter of Celle, who was elected bishop of Chartres; see Prache, ­Saint-​ ­Remi de Reims, 41–42, and Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 166–69. 17. ­St‑Étienne, fol. 97r, undated letter of Countess Marie (=Benton, “Recueil,” ­sdm-​­2). 18. ­St‑Loup, 8, no. 8, 1181. Abbot Guitier describes this incident in his comments added to ­St‑Loup’s cartulary. He notes that the ring was attached to the book’s cover; it is described in an inventory of 1429 in the cathedral’s treasury (Lalore, Inventaires, 2: 106, no. 836). 19. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 132–33 (Chronicle, 76), §97. Napran notes (Chronicle, 76 n.131) that Adela’s name is missing in Vanderkindere’s edition of the Chronique. 20. André of Marchiennes, Continuatio Aquicinctina, 420. 21. Robert of Auxerre, Chronicon, 250. 22. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 8–9. See also Strickland, Henry the Young King, 264–69. 23. André of Marchiennes, Continuatio Aquicinctina, 420, credits an assembly of prelates and proceres that brokered a peace with the papal legate. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 122 (Chronicle, 83), §103, identifies the principal mediators as Henry II of England, Henry the Young King, Archbishop William of Reims and his brothers Counts Thibaut and Stephen, the duke of Burgundy, and the count of Hainaut. 24. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 239–40 nn. 48–50, and 243 n. 100. It is an open question whether Master Peter Manducator (Comestor), author of the Historia Scholastica, was related to the Manducator family. Peter is first known in 1147, when at the request of Abbot Alan of Larrivour, the bishop of Troyes granted the church of Laubressel, free from all exactions, to Master Peter Manducator (­St‑Pierre, 17–18, no. 13). Peter appeared in two local obituaries: as Magister Petrus Manducator (Obituaires, 4: 474, for ­St‑Étienne), and as Peter Manducator, dean of ­St‑Pierre and canon of S­ t‑Loup (Obituaires, 4: 297). In the preface to his Historia Genesis, Peter called himself “Master Peter Manducator” (Clark, The Making of the Historia Scholastica, 264). Although he appears more commonly as Peter Comestor, his family name seems to have been Manducator, which makes it likely that he was related to Girard, provost of Ervy, and his son Lucas, the marshal. 25. The dates of Scholastique’s birth, betrothal, and marriage are entirely conjectural. Gouget and Le Hête, Les comtes de Blois et de Champagne, 51, make her older than her sister Marie, but without evidence. Scholastique is not mentioned in any document before Marie’s birth in 1171, and it seems unlikely that a younger daughter would be betrothed before an older one. She appears to have been born later, perhaps in 1172/73. She became William V of Mâcon’s second wife (little is known about his first wife, Pontia of Beaujeu) and later arranged for her burial at Miroir (Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 343–44, nos. 388–89, 16 December 1218). She died before November 1221 (ibid., 331, no. 373), a few years before her husband. 26. The dramatic events of that narrative take place at a traditional borderland between Mussy and ­Châtillon-​­­sur-​­Seine (Lemarignier, Hommage en marche, 149–50). The theme and events in the chanson reflect the conflict between the Champenois and Philip II in the years 1181–83 and might be taken as a cautionary tale of the 1180s; see Van Emdem, Girart de Vienne, ix, xxxiv, and Lejeune, “Rôle littéraire,” 327–28. Grossel, Le milieu littéraire en Champagne, 1: 136, prefers to date the poem to the 1190s. 27. They married in 1159, the same year that Marie formally accepted marriage with Count Henry. For Eleanor’s life and artistic patronage, see Shortell, “Erasures and Recoveries,” 161–73. 28. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 147–49 (Chronicle, 82–83), §103. The meeting was held at Easter in 1183 at La ­Grange-​­­Saint-​­Arnoul, between Senlis and Crépy. 29. William of Andres, Chronica, 715, is alone in claiming that Marie had granted her favors too soon to Count Philip. See Gislebert of Mons, Chronicle, 91 n. 351.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 4 4–45

131

30. Of Marie’s 40 letters patent from 1181–87 edited by Benton in his “Recueil,” 70 percent were enacted in Troyes (20) or Provins (8); the rest were in Meaux (5), Sézanne (4), and C ­ hâteau-​ ­Thierry (3). 31. Haice of Plancy was canon (1161), master of the school (1163), and subdeacon of ­St‑Étienne before becoming chancellor (1181–86). He became dean of the cathedral of Troyes (1182), provost of S­ t‑Quiriace (1184), and dean of S­ t‑Étienne (1186). He was briefly treasurer of the cathedral of Reims, perhaps imported by Archbishop William (1189), then returned to Troyes as bishop (20/21 February 1191–93); see Mayer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 592. Chancellor Stephen followed Henry overseas and presented his letters in Nazareth, Jerusalem, and Sebastia in 1179 and 1180. If this Stephen was the same as Stephen of Aliotro, he returned to Troyes, retired as chancellor, and was still alive as a canon at S­ t‑Étienne in 1186 (­St‑Étienne, fols. 56v–57r). 32. Artaud first witnessed Count Henry’s act as camerarius in 1158 (Actes, no. 118) but had been in service to the count before 1152 (Actes, no. 12). Milo of Provins joined him in the treasury in 1173, and thereafter they were usually noted as witnessing together (“Artaud and Milo of Provins”) to acts of Count Henry and Countess Marie through 1186. Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins, 125–61, has distringuished Milo (Breban) of Provins, whose ancestry cannot be determined and who usually appears as Milo of Provins, from the other Milo of Provins, son of the marshal William rex of Provins. Milo Breban was listed in the roll of fiefs for Provins with his brother Jean (Feoda 1, no. 1604) and inherited Jean’s property in 1181 (see at n. 42). Both Milo’s joined Count Henry II on the Third Crusade (Hospitaliers, 1: 603, no. 954, January 1194, n.s.). Milo, son of the marshal, died before 1197 (see 154n. 118), while Milo Breban became a close companion of Geoffroy of Villehardouin on the Fourth Crusade. 33. Brother William had served Henry since 1173. It is not clear whether Marie had a personal almoner before she began to rule. Brother Mathieu served as her almoner in 1179/80 (Benton, “Recueil,” 1179v) in the absence of Brother William, who was with Count Henry in Sebastia (Actes, no. 527, 1179). Brother William returned with Henry and appeared at Marie’s court until 1190, when he followed Count Henry II on the Third Crusade. Brother Mathieu again served as Marie’s almoner in 1192 (Benton, “Recueil,” 1192d). After Brother William returned to Provins, he witnessed as Marie’s almoner; he apparently resided in the Templar house in Provins (Templiers de Provins, 46–47, no. 7, 1193). 34. Guy II of Dampierre (1174–1216) was never identified as constable. His son William II (1216–32) later stated that he was granted the constableship (at least the title) for life (Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 187, no. 191, 1221), but like his father, he did not announce that title on his seal; see Baudin, Les sceaux, Corpus (­CD-​­ROM), 80–81. 35. Count Henry’s marshal William rex of Provins is not mentioned after 1179 and presumably died overseas; see Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins, 103–10, 133 (genealogy). Lucas and his father, Girard Manducator, provost of Ervy, witnessed an act of Count Henry in the 1150s (Actes, no. 102, 1152/58). In 1178 Lucas was a garrison knight in Troyes (Feoda 1, no. 1920: ligius et estagium); he appeared as Marie’s marshal in 1182, witnessing her grant of the Charter of Lorris to the residents of Ervy (Benton, “Recueil,” 1182g). Also witnessing that act was Erard of Aulnay, a garrison knight in Vitry in 1178 (Feoda 1, no. 379: ligius et estagium toto anno), the next marshal (1183–85), whose grandparents were Villain of A ­ rzillières-​­Villehardouin and Yvette of Rethel; see Evergates, Aristocracy, 263, Genealogy 16. 36. In their joint letter of 1186 funding two priests to guard the treasury in ­St‑Étienne, the scribe inserted Henry’s promise: “when I have a seal, I will confirm this charter with my seal” (Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 472, no. 153).

132

No t e s t o Pa ge s 4 5– 48

37. Paraclet, 89–90, no. 72, 1185, done in Sézanne ante consilium nostrum, delivered in ­Pont-​­­sur-​­Seine. 38. Benton, “Recueil,” 1181k. After hearing the testimony of both parties, Marie confirmed the transaction in the presence of her court. Her chancellor later presented her sealed letter at ­Château-​­Thierry. 39. ­St‑Quiriace, 275, no. 38, 1183. 40. ­St‑Loup, 109–10, no. 75, 1184. 41. Vauluisant, 416–17, no. 409 (=Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins 252, n. 558 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1183d). In a similar arbitration, the monks of M ­ ontier-​­­la-​­Celle agreed with Garnier Fournier of Méry that they had exclusive jurisdiction in their respective villages, even over the tenants of the other lord (­Montier-​­­la-​­Celle, 44–45, no. 37, 1186). 42. Provins, BM, ms. 85, no. 22, 1181, done in Provins (Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins, 252, n. 558 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1181g). Milo paid his brother’s widow 95l. for her dower properties and her half of the community property acquired during her marriage with Jean. 43. ­St‑Quiriace, 279, no. 43, 1184, done in Provins in the presence of Archbishop William of Reims. The nephews were paid 125l. for their quitclaim. 44. For Henry’s grant of a commune to Meaux (Actes, no. 507), see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 159–60, and Wilmart, Meaux au Moyen Âge, 103–25. 45. Benton, “Recueil,” 1184j, two identical letters in the same hand (AN, L 885, no. 57, and S 2292, no. 25, both of 1184). 46. John of Salisbury, bishop of Chartres, excommunicated the townsmen on 15 October 1179 (GC 7: 1146). But in Count Henry’s absence overseas, Bishop Simon refused to promulgate the decree. Abbot Stephen of S­ te‑Geneviève of Paris (later bishop of Tournai), complained to the papal notary, John of Orléans; he asked Rome to compel Bishop Simon to enforce that excommunication (Stephen of Tournai, Lettres, 94–95, no. 80, November 1180/84). 47. Benton, “Recueil,” 1182g, done in Provins. Those who swore on Marie’s behalf included her marshal Lucas, Erard of Aulnay (future marshal), Adam Bridaine (of Épernay), and Milo (Breban) of Provins. Marie’s text follows closely the Charter of Lorris (originally granted by Louis VI in 1112 and confirmed by Louis VII in 1155) as reissued by Philip II in 1187 (Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 1: 243–46, no. 202). 48. The custom of Beaumont was based on Louis VII’s grant to ­Villeneuve-​­l’Archevêque while William was archbishop of Sens; see Bonvalot, Le tiers état d’après la charte de Beaumont. On the extension of the Beaumont charter far beyond Reims, see the studies in La charte de Beaumont. 49. Meinert, Papsturkunden, 354, no. 209, 31 December 1182. In a perhaps related incident, Robert of Auxerre reports that in 1180 the ­fifteen-​­­year-​­old king came to Sens, where he told the archbishop that he wanted secular cases treated in his own court, to which the archbishop objected. Philip replied: either do it or go into exile, a not too subtle reference to Becket and his fate (Robert of Auxerre, Chronicon, 243). 50. Benton, “Recueil,” 1185g. 51. Benton, “Recueil,” 1184c. 52. Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 35–36, no. 4. 53. For the mutually beneficial transfer of castle mouvances from episcopal lords, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 153–56. 54. Sassier, Recherches, 197–201, 206 n. 146, concludes that Peter actually did homage to the counts of Champagne for three of the five castles that he held from the bishop of Auxerre, and that prelates cooperated in the transfer of mouvance over their castles until Bishop William of Seignelay (1207–20) objected.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 4 8–5 0

133

55. Littere Baronum, 78–79, no. 37, 1186 (=Quantin, Yonne, 2: 378, no. 369), letter issued jointly with Henry (II) but sealed only by Marie. 56. André of Marchiennes, Continuatio Aquicinctina, 421 (year 1183). See also Dossat, “L’hérésie en Champagne,” 63–65. 57. Jordan, The French Monarchy and the Jews, 30–37, dates the royal seizure of Jewish property to the beginning of February 1181, that is, after the death of Louis VII (19 September 1180), and the deadline for the expulsion of Jews living on the royal domain as 24 June 1182. The great princes of the realm, including Countess Marie, did not follow the king’s example. 58. Stephen of Tournai, Lettres, 136–37, no. 17, 1184. Philip II’s letter to Pope Lucius III, explained why he could not let William go to Rome (Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 1: 136, no. 109, 1184): karissimus avunculus noster W. Remensis archiepiscopus, in consiliis nostris oculus vigilans, in negociis dextra manas. 59. Crouch, Tournament, 21–27. See also Strickland, Henry the Young King, 239–58. 60. Crouch, Tournament, 76–77. History of William Marshal, 1: lines 4450–69. 61. History of William Marshal, 1: lines 4443–87, and Crouch, Tournament, 36–37. 62. History of William Marshal, 1: lines 4457–59. 63. Strickland, Henry the Young King, 289–323. 64. Robert of Torigni, Chronicle, 305. For the outpouring of laments at his death, see Strickland, Henry the Young King, 2–3. 65. Gervase of Canterbury, Chronica, 304–5. Gervase contrasts young Henry with his brother Richard, “who was odious to all.” Gervase of Tilbury, too, was unstinting in his characterization of Henry; see Strickland, “On the Instruction of a Prince,” 187. 66. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, 1: 1011, no. 41, undated cartulary copy for ­Notre-​­Dame of Rouen. For the probable date of June or July 1184, see n. 68. 67. Countess Hawise of Gloucester (1150–97) may have befriended Margaret during the Plantagenet rebellion a decade earlier; she was widowed by William, earl of Gloucester on 23 November 1183. See Crouch, The Beaumont Twins, 85; Johns, Noblewomen, 69, 81–82, 85, and 98 n. 5; and Strickland, Henry the Young King, 316. For John of Possesse, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 240. 68. The fact that Geoffroy’s original foundation letter is dated 1184, in Rouen (Calendar of Documents, 1: 10, no. 39), suggests that Margaret’s charter likewise was from 1184, and therefore Countess Marie’s presence in Rouen can be dated to late June or early July 1184. 69. For Adele’s life, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 69–70, and Dufour, “Adèle de Champagne.” 70. I infer this sequence of construction from Count Henry’s confirmation of his father’s grant of his garenna, where the nuns had a capella and lived in a hermitagium, and where the nuns (later) built a monasterium and ecclesiam (Actes, no. 422, 1176). Lalore, Origines de ­Notre-​ ­Dame de Foissy, provides a brief account of Foissy’s early years. 71. See 122n. 21. 72. Actes, no. 404, 1175: Henry gave the house in exchange for the 10l. income he had assigned to Foissy on the occasion of his son’s birth in 1166. He assigned that 10l. to his sister Marie, duchess of Burgundy, who had just entered Fontevraud; the prior of Foissy or his agent would collect the revenue for the duchess until her death, after which it would pass to Fontevraud for her anniversaries. 73. It is not known how or when Foissy acquired those properties, but one of those houses in ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube was occupied in 1155 by William the Englishman, who apparently was a professional scribe; see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 93.

134

No t e s t o Pa ge s 50 –5 2

74. Cartulary of Vauluisant, 422–23, no. 416, 1176. The last sentence of the document, drawn up in the name of Abbot Hardouin of Larrivour, states that it was presented to Count Henry “in his house in Troyes.” The count confirmed the transaction at court in Troyes with his officers witnessing (Actes, no. 436, 1176). 75. AD Aube 27 H 3 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1184a. 76. Benton, “Recueil,” 1184c. 77. Benton, “Recueil,” 1185e. 78. I agree with McCash, “Eructavit cor meum,” 163, that 1184 is the most likely date. 79. Eructavit, lines 3, 11. I cite the Eructavit as edited by Jenkins. Meliga’s edition of BnF, fr. 1747 (of Provençal provenance) lacks the author’s Latin titles and differs in orthography. 80. For a reading of the Latin titles before lines 1201, 1661, and 1897, see McCash, “Eructavit cor meum,” 166–67. 81. “Le jor de Noël au matin / Nos dist sainte eglise an latin / Le saume que je vos comanz, / Metre le vos vuel an romanz” (Eructavit, lines 15–18). 82. Powell, “Translating Scripture,” 84. 83. McKibben, The Eructavit, 41–43, remarks the “strong resemblance in style and rhetoric to Chrétien.” Powell, “Translating Scripture,” 92, notes “the author’s carefully constructed analogy between liturgical and courtly poetic performance,” so that an attentive audience would not have missed the allusion to the joie de la cort occasioned by King David’s performance (line 34) and the poet’s own performance. 84. “La jantis suer le roi de France, / Recordez i vostre creance / Pansez, dame, de bien amer, / De servir et de reclamer / Celui qui le foi nos espire” (Eructavit, lines 2079–83). 85. Eructavit, lines 2095–96. 86. Powell, “Translating Scripture,” 98 n. 1, notes that the Eructavit is the earliest example of its type in France. An earlier vernacular scriptural exegesis was Sanson of Nantuil’s Les proverbes de Salemon, an ­Anglo-​­Norman text of ca. 1150 commissioned by Aeliz de Condet, widow of Ranulf of Horncastle. Although both the Eructavit and the Proverbes were written for laymen, the Proverbes was a compendium of knowledge about religion and ancient culture, with citations to numerous classical authors and intended to be read in private rather than performed before an audience. It is not clear whether the author of the Eructavit was familiar with the romanz Psalter of Laurette of Alsace, the daughter of Henry I’s crusade companion, Count Thierry of Flanders, and h ­ alf-​­sister of Count Philip of Flanders. Born ca. 1130, Laurette was married four times before she divorced Henry the Blind of Namur in June 1163 and entered the convent of ­Forest-​­­lez-​­Bruxelles. Her psalter, glossing the first 50 psalms, was written perhaps by a priest confessor and completed by the spring of 1164. Glosses on the next 50 psalms, done by a different hand, were completed by 1176, when Laurette’s h ­ alf-​­sister Gertrude took the veil at Messines. The Morgan manuscript containing the full 150 psalms may have been prepared as a presentation copy for Laurette in the early 1190s, after she had spent a quarter century as a nun (Gregory, The ­Twelfth-​­Century Psalter Commentary, 18–26). Laurette’s Psalter and the Eructavit both contain didactic ethical advice, but Eructavit is a performative work of far greater literary accomplishment (see Rector, “The Psalter en romanz”). 87. Adam was first mentioned in 1188 as Count Henry II’s chaplain in Vertus, one of seven canons who asked the count to establish a chapter of t­ wenty-​­four canons there, which he did (see ch. 4 n.52). In preparing for the Third Crusade, the count freed “Aceline, mother of master Adam, my chaplain,” from servile obligations (taille) and taxes, in effect transferring her payments to the Leper House in Troyes (“Léproserie,” 534). Later in 1188 Adam was identified as Marie’s chaplain (Benton, “Recueil,” 1188z). Adam remained as one of Marie’s two chaplains (­“­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​



No t e s t o Pa ge s 52–5 3

135

­ onnains,” 13, no. 9, 1191), but he does not appear at her court in the 1190s. He probably had a N prebend at ­St‑Étienne, for in February 1201 he appeared among the canons as “master Adam, former chaplain of the countess of Troyes” (­St‑Étienne, fol. ­116r-​­v). In 1213, as canon of ­St‑Étienne and chanter of Sézanne, he consented to the gift his mother, Aceline, and his brother Bonel had given to the Leper House in Troyes; their cousin Girard was provost of Troyes (“Léproserie,” 550). In 1220, as “priest and canon of ­St‑Étienne,” Adam helped to arbitrate a case involving his chapter (­St‑Étienne, fol. 150r), where he was still a canon in 1222 (­St‑Étienne, fol. 150v). In none of these instances was Adam identified as other than a canon, that is, a secular canon, or chaplain of the countess. As Benton, “The Court,” 35–36, notes, if the chaplain Adam were the same as Abbot Adam of Perseigne, chancery scribes surely would have identified him by his abbatial title. Adam the chaplain may well have been Adam of ­Château-​­Landon, the canon and priest remembered in ­St‑Étienne’s obituary as having bequeathed his house in ­St‑Étienne’s cloister to the chapter (Obituaires, 4: 455, March 10). 88. The chronology of Abbot Adam’s life before 1188 is highly speculative. It is often repeated that he was born near Troyes, spent time as a Benedictine at Marmoutier, then joined the Cistercians at Pontigny; but there is no evidence for the abbot’s place of birth or his presence at Pontigny. Adam’s letter to a monk at Pontigny who asked for advice on the training of n ­ ovices—​ ­in which Adam remarks that he never went through a novitiate, since he joined the white monks, then left for the Benedictines, and finally returned to the C ­ istercians—​­does not suggest that Adam ever had been at Pontigny (Adam de Perseigne, Lettres, 2: 34–71). As abbot, Adam wrote letters to a variety of laymen and religious (Reinbold, “Les cercles de l’amitié”) and was heavily engaged as a papal emissary (Maillet, “Les missions d’Adam de Perseigne”). He was a highly effective preacher in support of the Fourth Crusade and likely participated in that crusade (Andrea, “Adam of Perseigne”). In an exhaustive survey of the manuscripts, Ruini, “Appunti sull’Eructavit,” raises the possibility that the author of Eructavit was Gautier of Coincy (1177–1236), the Benedictine monk and prior of S­ t‑Médard of Soissons who wrote the widely circulated Miracles de Notre Dame. In the end, however, Ruini concludes that the Eructavit does not come close to the brilliance of the Miracles, and that there were two authors. She suggests that a systematic comparison of Adam of Perseigne’s known works (letters, sermons, tracts) with the Eructavit might well indicate, although not definitively prove, that he was the author. 89. For a sympathetic reading of Adam of Perseigne as a “Cistercian humanist“ who infused his letters and tracts with a deep spirituality, very much like the one in Eructavit, see Zink, Poésie et conversion, 151–59. 90. Adam de Perseigne, Lettres, 2: 230–43, no. 29 (to Countess Alice of Chartres), 244–55, no. 30 (to Countess Blanche of Champagne). Adam wrote two other letters that Jenkins (Eructavit, xiv–xvii), and all historians after him, have linked to the comital family of Champagne. The nun Marguerite who received his letter of inspiration (Lettres, 1: 106–9, no. 4) is identified, on the basis of her name only, as the sister of Count Henry who entered Fontevraud at an early age and about whom nothing more is known. The unnamed countess of Perche who received his letter of condolence (Lettres, 1: 236–49, no. 15) is identified as either Mathilda, daughter of Count Thibaut IV of Blois, or her ­daughter-​­­in-​­law Mathilda, whose husband, Count Geoffroy III of Perche, died in 1202 during preparations for the Fourth Crusade. 91. I agree with Benton, “The Court,” 34–36, who rejects the attribution of the vernacular verse Eructavit to the abbot, whose known writings are all in Latin prose. 92. See 156n. 19. 93. Rigord, Gesta, 142, §10.

136

No t e s t o Pa ge s 53 – 5 5

94. ­Erlande-​­Brandenburg, Le roi est mort, 121 and fig. 38. Most historians give precedence to Louis’s tomb because he died six months before Henry. But if Henry’s tomb is dated to the ­mid-​­1170s (to 1179, at the latest), as Dectot argues, the queen might well have seen it in the fall of 1179, after being expelled from the royal residence, and she certainly saw it in May 1181 and December 1184. According to Nolan, Queens in Stone and Silver, 99–101, Louis VII’s tomb most resembled the carved stone tomb created by ­St‑Germain-​­­des-​­Prés in Paris ca. 1170–75 to commemorate its founder, Childebert I. 95. Morganstern, Gothic Tombs, 203 n. 11: Principis egregios actus Maria revelat, Dum sponsi cineres tali velamine velat (from Camuzat, Promptuarium, fol. 330r, and Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 319). The inscription would have been added to a largely finished tomb. On Abbot Simon, see Prache, ­Saint-​­Remi de Reims, 41–42, and Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 35, 166–68. 96. Rigord, Gesta, 143 n. 52: Huic superes tu qui superes succesor honoris, degener es si degener a laude prioris. 97. AD Aube, 6 G 7, torn original, copied in ­St‑Étienne’s cartulary, fol. 340r (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1185h). Marie appointed an otherwise unknown master Ralph of Bligny as the first chaplain of the altar. Count Henry II later confirmed that foundation in the presence of Marie, Master Odo of Sézanne, and the chancery notary William in the absence of Chancellor Haice of Plancy (Benton, “Recueil,” 1187a). 98. For Nevel of Aulnay, see 121n. 8. His brother Roric, who was also archdeacon of Meaux and had witnessed the count’s acts since 1159 (Actes, no. 159), held two fiefs, essentially prebends, from the count, one in the forest of Mantes (Feoda 1, no. 1147), the other as a 70s. revenue in Meaux (Meaux, 2: 76, 1188). 99. Helewide, widow of Gaucher of Châtillon, is another example of a widow making amends for her husband’s conduct, in this case against the convent of Avenay. She gave a 8l. revenue in ­compensation—​­7l. for his depredations and 1l. for his construction of a tower (munitio) on their land without their consent. The nuns in turn agreed to celebrate an annual Mass for him (Avenay, 2: 86–88. no. 22, 1189). 100. Robert, “La maison d’Aulnay,” 186–87, no. 2, 1185. All the other documents related to this event are dated July 1185. An obituary recorded by N ­ otre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains of Troyes, where Erard’s sister Emeline was a nun, gives Erard’s date of death as 1 July (Obituaires, 4: 358: “1 July, Erard, knight, marshal of Champagne”). 101. The archbishop’s letter (Longnon, Recherches, 152–53, no. 8, after 1 July 1185; trans. in Evergates, Documents, 129–30, no. 98). Marie’s letter (Longnon, Recherches, 153–54, no. 10, after 1 July 1185, drafted by her scriptor Milo) confirmed both the settlement with the canons of Châlons and Erard’s widow’s benefaction to the Cistercian brothers at ­Trois-​­Fontaines for burying Erard in their cemetery and praying for his soul. Count Henry II later reconfirmed Marie’s confirmation of the grant to ­Trois-​­Fontaines (AD Marne, 22 H 60 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1188f ). 102. See Longnon, Recherches, 45–56 (for Geoffroy of Villehardouin), and 17–20 (for canon Roscelin of Villehardouin, ca. 1150–ca. 1182). 103. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 191 (Chronicle, 104–5), §123. 104. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 191 (Chronicle, 104–5), §123, states that Baldwin VI was thirteen and Marie only twelve, but since Baldwin was born in July 1171 (§64), a few months after Marie, both were about fifteen at their marriage; see ch. 2 n.37. See also Falmagne, Baudouin V, 114, 172–74. 105. Gislebert’s observation that young Marie was constantly praying and fasting has been interpreted that she and Baldwin had a kind of spiritual marriage; but Joris, “Un seul amour,”



No t e s t o Pa ge s 55–5 7

137

notes that in fact Gislebert was comparing Baldwin’s monogamy with his father’s extramarital liaisons. 106. Gislebert, Chronique, 191–92 (Chronicle, 104–5), §123. Gislebert thought that prince Henry was “sixteen or more years.” 107. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 40, states that “the countess of Champagne” accompanied Margaret. 108. Calendar of Documents, 1: 382–84, no. 1084, 11 March 1186, Margaret’s letters patent, which she deposited in Fontevraud’s archive for safekeeping. 109. While in Provins, Philip sealed a letter at the request of Archbishop William (­St‑Nicaise, 255–56, no. 79, 1186 [between 13 April and 31 October] = Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 1: 217–18) confirming the archbishop’s earlier confirmation of revenues to ­St‑Nicaise of Reims (­St‑Nicaise, 255, no. 78, 1178). 110. For the Vergy war, see Richard, Les ducs de Bourgogne, 160–66, and Petit, Histoire, 3: 1–20. 111. Petit, Histoire, 3: 21–36. The editors of Rigord’s Gesta, 76, date the conclusion of the Vergy war to March or April 1186; if Philip’s letter for S­ t‑Nicaise is dated after Easter (13 April 1186), the war would have ended in late April 1186. Girart de Rousillon, a chanson written about the same time and perhaps occasioned by the same event, places the great battle between King Charles and Girard of Vienne at Mt. Lassois, between Mussy and ­Châtillon-​­­sur-​­Seine, the fortresses on the border between Champagne and Burgundy (Lemarignier, Hommage en marche, 149–51). 112. Avenay, 1: 84–85, no. 18. Abbess Helisende seems to have used the convent’s resources as well as her personal finances to such an extent that in 1201, fifteen years after the dedication of the rebuilt church, Archbishop William prohibited the acceptance of new nuns until the size of the community contracted to forty nuns (Avenay, 2; 94, no. 34). See also Venarde, Women’s Monasticism, 169. 113. Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, 142–45, concludes after reviewing all the evidence that Geoffroy died of an illness (as reported by Rigord, Gesta, 218, §48), not at a tournament, as is often repeated. 114. Rigord, Gesta, 220, §49. 115. ­Notre-​­Dame de Paris, 1: 296–97, 1186: the treasurer Artaud and Ansold of LePlessis were present. Marie assigned 5l. to be paid by the toll collector ( pedagii receptor) at Coulommiers to the chaplain’s nuncio, and 10l. to be paid from the 100l. she collected at the clearing of accounts (pagamentum) at the conclusion of the fair of Lagny. 116. Everard, Brittany and the Angevins, 132–39. 117. Rigord, Gesta, 216–18, §§46–47, reports these events. Margaret left Paris for Hungary on 25 August 1186. See also Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 41. 118. Bowie, The Daughters of Henry II, 166–68. 119. ­St‑Pierre, 58–59, no. 45, 1186. 120. “Léproserie,” 519–20, 1123. See also Touati, Maladie et société au Moyen Âge, 261–62. 121. “Léproserie,” 530–31, 1184. 122. “Léproserie,” 532, 1186. Haice of Plancy, dean of the chapter, issued a letter with the names of eighteen canons of ­St‑Étienne who consented to Marie’s gift (“Léproserie,” 532–33, 1186). 123. ­St‑Étienne, fols. 56v–57r, 1186 (copy of AD Aube, 6 G 7). Canon Peter apparently came from Hebron to claim Count Henry’s grant of a 15l. revenue and a building lot in Troyes for the construction of a house for the canons of Hebron (Actes, no. 525, done in Jerusalem, probably September–October 1179).

138

No t e s t o Pa ge s 57 –5 9

124. Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 472, no. 153, 1186. Master Odo of Sézanne, who had acted as chancellor after Henry the Liberal left on crusade in 1179 (Benton, “Recueil,” 1179ff), was one of the guardians. He continued to serve as Henry II’s cleric (Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 474–75, no. 156, 1188). Marie’s act renewed Henry the Liberal’s grant of 1176 (Actes, no. 434), in which he appointed two subdeacons of ­St‑Étienne as guardians of the treasury: Bonel, priest and nephew of Andreas of Luyères, and Aubert of Vitry. 125. Paraclet, 92–93, no. 75, 1186: Elizabeth assigned a 14l. revenue from her tolls and sales tax at Nogent, to be delivered to the convent by her toll collectors, as well as some land and 16s. to be collected from her tenants’ rent, all for the purchase of wax for the church’s lamps. 126. Vauluisant, 394–95, no. 377, 1186, Provins = Benton, “Recueil,” 1186f, and Benton, “Recueil,” 1186g (Templars). 127. For Elizabeth and the fate of her line, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 239. 128. Elizabeth gave to ­St‑Denis the land that she earlier had given to Vauluisant, then recovered for transfer to S­ t‑Denis (AN, LL 1158, p. 3 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1187u, “done at the Paraclete,” before Easter). 129. McCash, “Eructavit,” 171–71, has Chrétien leaving Champagne for Flanders, while Stirnemann, “Some Champenois Vernacular Manuscripts,” 211–12, keeps him in Champagne. In either case, Chrétien left Perceval unfinished and may have entered Clairvaux, where a monk named Christianus appeared in 1190 (Clairvaux, 354–56, no. 285, item 20, pancarte of 1190). For the link between Perceval and Count Philip’s own life and experiences overseas, see Adolf, “A Historical Background for Chrétien’s Perceval.” Nicholson, Love, War and the Grail, 112–20, accepts Adolf ’s basic argument as well as the specific context of the Third Crusade, as developed by Diverres, “The Grail and the Third Crusade.” 130. Gace may have been related to two knights who held comital fiefs in the 1170s: Henry Brullé (Feoda 1, Provins castellany, no. 1625: liege); and Hugh Brullé (Feoda 1, Provins castellany, no. 1624, and Payns castellany, no. 1666). Bovo Bruslez was among the men of ­St‑­Jean-​­­en-​­Châtel in Troyes who witnessed Count Henry’s act in 1166 (Actes, no. 174). But Gace does not appear either in the fief rolls or the comital acts. 131. “Les oxelés de mon païx / Ai oïs en Bretaigne. / A lors chans m’est il bien avis / K’en la douce Champaigne / Les oï jadis, / Si n’i ai mespris” (Gace Brulé, song no. 2, lines 1–6 (slightly revised translation here), in ­Rosenberg-​­Danon, The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé, 4–5. 132. “Bien cuidai toute ma vie / Joie et chanson oblierir / Maix la contesse de Brie / Cui comant je n’os veeir. / M’ait comandeit a chanteir / Or est bien drois ke je die / Quant li plaist comandeir” (Gace Brulé, song no. 45, lines 1–7, in R ­ osenberg-​­Danon, The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé, 150–53, 312–13, 386 [musical score]). 133. ­Rosenberg-​­Danon, The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé, xiii–xxviii, summarize the evidence. For an extended analysis of Gace’s poetics, see Grossel, Le milieu littéraire, 1: 378–80. 134. Petersen Dyggve, Gace Brulé, 457–58. 135. Song no. 4, which speaks of the count as if he had died (li cuens cui j’ai touz jors amé), in ­Rosenberg-​­Danon, The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé, 14–15. 136. Song no. 64, in R ­ osenberg-​­Danon, The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé, 210–13. 137. My sense is that the unnamed count of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc was Henry (son of Agnes of Champagne), who was born ca. 1158 and succeeded in 1173 after his mother’s t­hree-​­year regency; see Poull, La maison souveraine et ducale de Bar, 119–28. Similarly I think that the count of Blois was Thibaut V (brother of Henry the Liberal), who was born ca. 1130 and succeeded as count in 1152. Both counts died on the Third Crusade. Petersen Dyggve, Gace Brulé, 42–45, argues instead for Count Thibaut I of ­Bar-​­­le-​­Duc (born ca. 1160, succeeded his brother as count in 1191, and died



No t e s t o Pa ge s 59–60

139

in 1214) and Count Louis of Blois (born ca. 1171/71, succeeded his brother in 1195, and died on the Fourth Crusade in 1205). 138. “Car, quant je veul muelz pairleir / Et a li mercit crïer, / Lors me dist per contralie: / ‘Quant ireis vos outre meir?’ ” (Gace Brulé, song no. 45, lines 18–21, in ­Rosenberg-​­Danon, The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé, 150–53, 312–13, 386 [musical score]). 139. Petersen Dyggve, Gace Brulé, 90–96, gathers the few available references. 140. Among the many recent works, see Cherchi, Andreas and the Ambiguity of Courtly Love (1994); Monson, Andreas Capellanus (2005); and ­Anderson-​­Wyman, Andreas Capellanus on Love? (2007). 141. Karnein, De Amore, 21–39, and Walsh, in Andreas Capellanus on Love, 1–3, review the evidence for the identity of Andreas Capellanus and the date of De Amore. They concur that circumstantial evidence puts Andreas Capellanus in Troyes in the ­mid-​­1180s and within Countess Marie’s cultural milieu. The argument for placing Andreas in Paris as a chaplain of the king of France rests on three points: [1] Of the forty or so extant manuscripts, the three earliest identify Andreas as chaplain of the king (Karnein, 274–75, 279, for manuscripts #2, #5, #24). Those identifications, made in the titles inserted by copyists, ultimately derive (as Walsh, in Andreas Capellanus on Love, 2, points out) from a lengthy dialogue between a man G and a woman A(enor), in which Andreas inserts himself as “the lover Andreas, chaplain of the royal court” (Walsh edition, book 1.6, lines 386–87). The earliest manuscript (Vatican, Ottoboni lat. 1463A, thirteenth century), titles the work liber amoris et courtesie (Karnein, 279, no. 24). As both Karnein and Walsh note, the French king in question, Philip II, displayed no interest in the literary arts. [2] An inventory of 1350 in the royal archive (not the library) lists a liber Galteri, which describes a series of dialogues between men and women concerning “questions and decisions of love” (Karnein, De Amore, 32–35). [3] Walter, to whom De Amore is addressed, has been identified as Walter the Young, son of the royal chamberlain Walter, who had served as chamberlain to Louis VII (since 1150) and then Philip II. Walter the Young appeared as royal chamberlain (cambellanus) in 1197 with responsibility for reconstituting the royal documents lost at Fréteval in 1194 (Baldwin, Government, 34–35). In sum, it takes a real stretch of the imagination to connect these dots so that an author of an anonymous book of unknown provenance inventoried in the royal treasury ca. 1350 was Andreas Capellanus who appeared at the “royal court” ca. 1190, when King Philip, who lacked any documented interest in literary matters, was on the Third Crusade. 142. AD Aube, 6 G 7, done in Provins (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1185h). 143. ­Notre-​­Dame de Paris, 1: 296–97, 1186, done in C ­ hâteau-​­Thierry. 144. ­St‑Pierre, 58–59, no. 45, 1186. 145. The author of De Amore might have been Andreas of Luyères, the canon of ­St‑Étienne (1159–86) who is well attested with Marie precisely during Margaret of France’s stay in Champagne. Karnein, “De Amore,” 37–38, comes to the same conclusion. Andreas of Luyères, a canon and priest of ­St‑Étienne since its foundation in the 1150s, witnessed nine acts of Henry the Liberal between ­1159—​­when he and thirteen other canons of S­ t‑Étienne witnessed Count Henry’s act done “in public” in the church of ­St‑Étienne (Actes, no. 125)—​­and 1176. Andreas of Luyères lived within the count’s campus in a stone house that he bequeathed to the chapter (Obituaires, 4: 451–52, January 26: “his stone house in the close, which master John Faber now holds).” Benton, “The Evidence for Andreas Capellanus,” rejects this identification of Andreas Capellanus with Andreas of Luyères, against Karnein, De Amore, 37–38. It seems unlikely that Andreas Capellanus was Andreas the treasurer (camerarius) of the bishop of Troyes (Actes, no. 432, 1176).

140

No t e s t o Pa ge s 60 – 64

146. Andreas Capellanus on Love, 42–43, bk. 1.6.2 (aula amoris), 152–53, bk. 1.6. 385–87 (amoris curia). 147. Andreas Capellanus on Love, 251–71, bk. 2, §7. It is possible that in three decisions (§§17, 19, 20), by “the queen” refers to Queen Adele; but I think that the sense of humor requires the queen to be Eleanor, who was in the “news,” rather than Adele, about whom there is no evidence of scandal. 148. Andreas Capellanus on Love, 255–57, bk. 2, §6. 149. Andreas Capellanus on Love, bk. 2, §13. The rumor of Elizabeth’s adultery was reported by Roger of Howden, Gesta regis, 1: 99–100, and Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 1: 402. Harvey, “­Cross-​­Channel Gossip,” 51–59, provides the details. 150. Andreas Capellanus on Love, 154–57, bk. 1, which follows a long dialogue between a man “G” and a woman “A.” 151. Andreas Capellanus on Love, 266–67, bk. 2, §17. 152. Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 231, 237. 153. Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 229–30. It should be noted that Andreas’s allusion to “Hungarian silver” in De Amore (Andreas Capellanus on Love, 100–101, bk. 1, §6, lines 215–18) referred to the 300 marcs of silver that Bela promised to send to Margaret (see at n. 67). 154. Book 2, chapter 7 (rulings of the courts of love), chapter 8 (an Arthurian tale). 155. For Marie’s library, see Stirnemann, “Quelques bibliothèques princières,” 31–36. 156. If Marie did commission translations in the 1180s, she might have possessed, in addition to the Eructavit, a translation of Bernard of Clairvaux’s sermons (BnF, fr. 24768), which Stirnemann, “Quelques bibliothèques princières,” 33–34, suggests on the basis of painting style may have been produced for her in Troyes. Stirnemann, “Some Champenois Vernacular Manuscripts,” identifies more than sixty manuscripts painted in Manerius style between 1175 and 1225. In a long colophon at the end of volume 3 of the “Bible of Manerius,” Manerius recalls his mother and other deceased relatives in England (Splendeurs, 71 no. 43). 157. ­St‑Pierre, 58–59, no. 45, 1186. Since this act is known only through a copy, it is possible that the copyist omitted the names of other witnesses. But the fact that the copyist included the names of both the notary who recorded the act and the chancellor who presented it, suggests that he accurately copied the record of a quiet, private affair done in the presence of Marie’s closest clerics as she prepared to leave Troyes.

Chapter 4 1. See 138n.125. 2. AN LL 1158, p. 3 (Cartulaire Blanc de ­Saint-​­Denis) = Benton, “Recueil,” 1187u, done at the Paraclete, regarding the land at C ­ hâtenay-​­­sur-​­Seine, which her son Milo II had given to Vauluisant. Since in Champagne the practice was to begin the year with Easter, and since Marie acted with her son Henry before he became count, this act must be dated between Easter 1187 (29 March) and Henry II’s accession (29 July 1187). For Elizabeth and the lords of N ­ ogent-​­­sur-​ ­Seine, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 147–48, 239. 3. Actes, no. 75, 1156, “done in public in Meaux, in my castello,” confirmation of Fontaines’s possessions; and Actes, no. 81, 1156, grant to the cathedral of Meaux. For a topographical map of Meaux, see Wilmart, Meaux au Moyen Âge, 371. 4. The border between Champagne and the royal domain, as defined in 1270, placed Meaux just within Champagne; see Hubert, “La frontière occidentale,” 13 (map).



No t e s t o Pa ge s 64–65

141

5. Bonno, “Notice historique,” 190–92. 6. In ceding his regalian rights over the deceased bishop’s personal household possessions, Thibaut designated the nuns of Fontaines as the primary beneficiary, with the leper house of Meaux as the contingent beneficiary in the event the convent was disbanded (Meaux, 2: 24, ca. 1129 = Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 424, no. 91). The count also asked the chapter of Meaux to share its possessions with the nuns (Meaux, 2: 25–26, ca. 1133), and he asked Suger to support the building program (Martène and Durand, Thesaurus, 1: 419–29, no. 10, between 11 June 1147 and early November 1149). 7. Fontaines, “Obituaire,” 564: Mathildis comitissa et monacha, uxor comitis Theodaudi et benefactrix nostra. According to Henry the Liberal’s letters patent dated 1161 (Actes, no. 171), Mathilda was buried at the Paraclete’s priory of La Pommeraye; the editors accept the authenticity of the letter written in the late thirteenth century. 8. Actes, no. 75, 1156. Henry’s letter copied a long list of the priory’s possessions presented to him. 9. Actes, no. 295, 1170, done in Fontaines, the document was delivered by the chancellor in Meaux. If Marie had been present, she surely would have been noted as a witness. 10. Actes, no. 296, 1170, done in Provins, abstract of a lost letter. 11. Benton, “Recueil,” 1184c, done in Meaux. 12. For Eleanor’s gifts to Fontevraud from the 1170s, see Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 190–91. 13. Actes, no. 144, 1159, Count Henry’s confirmation of his father’s gifts to Foissy. 14. Actes, no. 529, 1181, Count Henry’s confirmation. 15. Bonno, “Notice historique,” 195–200, assembles what little is known about the priory, which burned with its archive in 1215. I have placed Scholastique’s marriage in the early 1180s, but if she was married later, in the 1190s, as some historians have argued, she would have accompanied Marie and her younger brother Thibaut in retirement. 16. Meaux, 2: 62–63, no. 130, 1176, done in the royal palatium in Meaux. In 1145 the papal legate Hostensius reported that Fontaines had more than one hundred nuns (Meaux, 2: 40, no. 67, letter to Pope Eugenius III). 17. Her obituary, a decade later, does not make clear whether Marie took the veil at this time or only in her last months of 1197; see ch. 5 n.122. 18. Benton, “Recueil,” 1190o–add 1, done in Troyes; the revenue was collectible after Marie’s death. 19. Eleanor of Aquitaine gave Fontevraud a 100l. income in 1185; see Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 249. Just how, or whether, Marie knew of it is unknown, although she might have been in communication with her s­ isters-​­­in-​­law in Fontevraud. 20. Meaux, 2: 82, 1196 (for Prioress Edna). For the anniversaries, see ch. 5 n. 42. 21. Meaux, 2: 83, no. 192, 1198, vidimus of Count Thibaut IV (1238) of Thibaut III’s gift to Fontaines of 25l. from the tolls at Coulommiers, presumably from Marie’s dower revenues. 22. An intriguing entry in the necrology of ­Fontaines—​­“Andreas, chaplain of our master Robert”—​­raises the possibility that Andreas Capellanus joined the community of nuns at Fontaines as one of its chaplains (Fontaines, “Obituaire,” 564: 4 Idus Augusti. Andreas Capellanus magistri nostri Roberti). 23. Eleanor retired to Fontevraud in 1194 after obtaining Richard I’s release from captivity. See Bienvenu, “Aliénor d’Aquitaine et Fontevraud,” 23–24 (who speaks of Fontevraud as Eleanor’s “base of operations”), and Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 275–77. 24. Actes, no. 507, 1179. One wonders whether an ulterior motive in 1179 might have been to prepare Meaux as Marie’s eventual dowager residence.

142

No t e s t o Pa ge 66

25. Meaux, 2: 76, 1188. 26. Bishop Simon (of Lizy) was related to the powerful Cornillon lineage, which furnished four bishops of Meaux in the twelfth century and controlled much of Meaux’s surrounding countryside; see Wilmart, Meaux au Moyen Âge, 103–25. Roric of Ramerupt was one of the original canons of S­ t‑Étienne (Actes, no. 125, 1 February 1159). He was archdeacon of Meaux by 1166, when Marie sat at court with him in Provins (Actes, no. 243, 1168). 27. Hugh III of ­Oisy-​­­le-​­Verger (1165–30 August 1190), viscount of La ­Ferté-​­Ancoul and of Meaux (through his mother, Ade) and castellan of Cambrai (1171–90), divorced his first wife, Gertrude, daughter of Count Thierry of Flanders, who entered the convent at Messines in 1176. The necrology for the Premonstratensian abbey of Cantimpré, which he founded, notes that when he returned from overseas (at an unknown date), he went first to the monastery, instead of his own house, in order to donate precious relics and to exempt the monks from taxes within all his lands (Boitel, ­Montmirail-​­­en-​­Brie, 647–48). Hugh took the cross in 1188 (Meaux, 2: 76, no. 169: leaving for Jerusalem, he gave Fontaines the right to collect one cart of firewood daily). It is not known whether he actually went on the Third Crusade; he is said to have died on 30 August 1189 and to have been buried in the choir of the abbey of Rueille; for his life, see Cardevaque, “Oisy et ses seigneurs,” 115–23. Information on Margaret of Blois is scattered and contradictory. I have relied on Gouget and Le Hête, Les comtes de Blois, 104, for basic dates (they date her birth to ca. 1170), but see also A ­ rmstrong-​­Partida, “Mothers and Daughters as Lords,” 84–90, 96–98. Margaret had married Hugh by 1186 and continued to hold the viscounty of Meaux (and its viscomital residence there) in dower after his death. In 1194 she married Odo II, count of Burgundy (1189–13 January 1200) and son of Frederick Barbarossa, but they separated shortly afterward “by common consent” (Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 276–77 [Chronicle, 152], §189). In April 1218 Margaret succeeded her nephew as countess of Blois and Chartres; she died in her sixties on 12 July 1230. 28. In 1183, for example, Queen Adele sealed letters patent in both Villeneuve and Meaux. In Villeneuve she confirmed the division of future revenues from a mill to be built at her own expense (Registres de Philippe Auguste, 458, no. 19, 1183). In Meaux she sealed a letter by which one of her men gave a house in Meaux to the abbot of ­Seine-​­Port, and she licensed three newcomers (hospites), who were not from her own fiefs or domain lands, to buy and sell in the house without paying tolls or taxes; the act was done “in public” in Meaux and delivered by her chaplain (GC 12: instrumenta, 58–59, no. 69, 1183). One of her latest acts, a gift of a 3s. rent to ­St‑­Pierre-​­­le-​­Vif of Sens for an anniversary Mass for Louis VII, was done in Meaux (Quantin, Recueil, 25, no. 52, October 1205). The fact that Countess Blanche of Champagne funded a daily Mass in ­St‑Étienne of Troyes in memory of Adele, “the illustrious former queen of France,” in thanks for her “familiarity and love” (­St‑Étienne, fol. 61r, 1209), suggests that Adele in her last years visited Blanche in Troyes or Meaux (at the royal residence) to comfort Blanche in her early years (1201–6) as a young widow of Count Thibaut III. 29. Huon d’Oisi, Le tournoiement des dames (trans. Crouch, Tournament, 167–71). The Tournoiement cannot be dated precisely; it was written after Hugh’s marriage (1186) to Margaret of Blois (who appears in the Tournament as one of the first on the field “eager to joust”) and before Hugh’s death in 1189. Petersen Dyggve, “Personnages historiques,” identifies the tournament participants. Earlier, in Le chevalier de la charrette (Lancelot), lines 6359–79 (ca. 1177), Chrétien de Troyes described a tournament organized by women seeking husbands. As noted by Crouch, Tournament, 51, the tournament site at Lagny is now occupied by Disneyland. 30. Crouch’s inspired translation of: “Dient que savoir voudront / Quel li colp sont / Que pour el(e)s font / Leur ami” (Crouch, Tournament, 167).



No t e s t o Pa ge s 66 –69

143

31. Crouch, Tournament, 36–37. 32. The critical dates being 1186 (marriage), 1188 (taking the cross), and 29 August 1189 (his death). 33. Pulega, Ludi e spettacoli nel medioevo, vii–xx, 87–97, analyzes the poem as a musical composition. Cremonesi, “A proposito de alcuin versi,” suggests a choreographed performance. For Crouch, Tournament, 158, it was performed at a “­post-​­tournament dinner.” 34. One wonders whether Hugh was deliberately transposing Andreas Capellanus’s courts of love to the tournament grounds, with women displacing men in both venues. 35. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 49–50, with the text of the letter. 36. Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 472, no. 153. 37. Lambert of Ardres, Historia, 604 (History, 124–25), §§91–92. 38. E ­ ighteen-​­­year-​­old Henry was among those in Troyes in January 1186 who swore to his betrothal to Yolande of Hainaut (Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 191–92 [Chronicle, 104–5], §123). 39. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 195–96 (Chronicle, 107), §129. See also Falmagne, Baudouin V, 180–82. 40. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 197–99 (Chronicle, 108–9), §132. See also Falmagne, Baudouin V, 181–86. 41. André of Marchiennes, Continuatio Aquicinctina, 425, reports that when Count Baldwin of Hainaut heard of Henry’s betrothal to the heiress of Namur, he asked Emperor Frederick to summon Henry to court; but since Henry was then in service to the French king, he was unable to appear. Falmagne, Baudouin V, 200–26, traces the wars over the Hainaut succession. 42. Baudin, Les sceaux, 85–86, 116 and Corpus (­CD-​­ROM), 7–7bis (AD Marne, 17 H 8, letter with seal = Cheminon, 60–61). Henry II was the first count to use a counter seal (Baudin, “Les sceaux du comte Henri Ier,” 83 n. 4). 43. Chancellor Haice of Plancy became treasurer of the cathedral of Reims (1188–90), no doubt appointed by Archbishop William, his former colleague in the cathedral of Troyes; see Demouy, Genèse d’une cathédrale, 72, 665. 44. The chancery also developed a standard form of address in mandates to his bailiffs and provosts: universis baillivis, prepositis et servientibus meis precipio. 45. The chancery recopied several letters of Henry the Liberal and Countess Marie without adding a benefaction by the new count, as had been customary. When Henry II confirmed his father’s grant of a 10l. life revenue from the money changers in Troyes for his aunt Marie, a nun at Fontevraud, and his parents’ letter for La Crête confirming their acquisitions (Benton, “Recueil,” 1187e–add 1), the chancery simply copied Henry I’s letter of 1174 (Actes, no. 374, 1174). For the chapter of ­St‑Nicholas of Sézanne, Henry II confirmed his parents’ grant, scripto autentico (Actes, no. 495, 1179), and the chancery made a copy “according to the testimony of their letter” (Benton, “Recueil,” 1190f: juxta testimonium cartarum suarum). 46. Henry II’s confirmation of her donation (AD Marne, 17 H 135, no. 2, 1188 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1188j). That confirmation extracted the essentials of Hugh of Vitry’s letter but without referring to it (AD Marne, 17 H 135, no. 1, 1188 = Cheminon, 63). 47. In 1177, for example, the archiepiscopal chancery of Reims confirmed Count Henry the Liberal’s grant to ­St‑Martin of Épernay, sicut in authentico scripto ipsius comitis continentur (Épernay, 2: 135, no. 11bis, 1166). For other examples, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 30–31. 48. Benton, “Recueil,” 1187i. 49. Benton, “Recueil,” 1187o. 50. For example, Henry licensed Wermond of Mareuil to give a village to the Templars,

144

No t e s t o Pa ge s 69 – 7 2

with the approval of all members of his family, since “the property was my fief ” (Barthélemy, ­Châlons-​­­sur-​­Marne, 1: 406, 1188). 51. For the quest for comital prebends, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 65–68. 52. Barthélemy, ­Châlons-​­­sur-​­Marne, 1: 352, 1188. For the maintenance of the chapel, he gave a 6.5l. revenue for lighting and one modius of grain and five modii of wine for the religious services; he also licensed the chapter to acquire fiefs from his fiefholders by gift or purchase, perhaps anticipating the need of his knights to sell fiefs for their expenses on the Third Crusade. 53. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 51. Roger of Howden, Chronica, 2: 335. Rigord, Gesta, 244–46, §62. 54. Meaux, 2: 76, 1188, done at Lagny (incomplete copy). Roric, “archdeacon,” is listed for a comital fief in the feudal register of 1178 for the castellany of Meaux (Feoda 1, no. 1147); that entry was updated ca. 1190 to read “the entire [fief ] reverted to the count.” Roric had planned to retire to Clairvaux by 1186, when he transferred his house in Meaux to Thomas, Clairvaux’s monk in Meaux (Clairvaux, 288–89, no. 243). In 1192 Roric was listed among the monks of Clairvaux who witnessed an agreement between the abbots of Clairvaux and M ­ ontier-​­­la-​­Celle regarding their properties in Provins (Clairvaux, 363–64, no. 294). 55. Benton, “Recueil,” 1188z: she remitted the grain rents owed by the hospital in Meaux and by ­St‑Féréol of Essomes. It is not clear where Marie established this endowment nor who drew up the letters patent. The fact that her act was witnessed by Bishop Nevel of Soissons and Archdeacon Hugh of Sens, as well as by her own chaplain Adam and treasurer Artaud, but not by her regular councilors, suggests that it was enacted at Fontaines or Meaux. 56. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 215–19 (Chronicle, 117–19), §142. See also Falmagne, Baudouin V, 198–200. 57. For Robert, a Premonstratensian monk from ­St‑Marien of Auxerre (1181–1211), see Neel, “Man’s Restoration: Robert of Auxerre,” and Chazan, L’empire et l’histoire universelle, 333–41. 58. Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 37, concludes that the tomb did escape the fire. 59. Robert of Auxerre, Chronicon, 253 (trans. in Evergates, Documents, 130, no. 99): Sancti Stephani basilica quam Henricus comes fundarat et dotarat reditibus aurique et argenti et ornamentorum varia supellectilla adornarat, periit, et cum ea tota illa ornamentorum insignium congesta varietas. 60. Robert’s account seems overly dramatic to modern historians, who note that the cathedral in fact remained in use while its damaged structure was repaired in an ambitious building campaign after 1208 (Murray, Building Troyes Cathedral, 12–13). Paston and Balcon, Les vitraux, 32, note that religious services continued there after 1189, even “in front of the altar,” and that Robert refers only to the burning of the roof tiles. A burnt frieze of the Romanesque church survives (The Knights Templar, 47, illustration 29). The cathedral library was all but destroyed; Bibolet, “La bibliothèque des chanoines de Troyes,” identifies very few surviving books made before 1200. 61. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 49. 62. Stephen of Tournai, Lettres, 389–91, no. 11, undated letter to the pope from the papal delegates (Abbot Stephen of S­te‑Geneviève, Dean Hervé of Montmorency, and Peter the Chanter of Paris), which includes a copy of the pope’s directive dated 15 June 1188 explaining the case against Bishop Manasses and announcing that they had suspended the bishop from his office. A copy of the letter was sent to S­ t‑Loup of Troyes (­St‑Loup, 130–32, no. 95). For the earlier case regarding the commune of Meaux, see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 8 n. 66. 63. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 243–44 (Chronicle, 132–33), §156.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 7 2–7 5

145

64. See Evergates, Aristocracy, 24–26, 199–201. 65. As reported almost two decades later by Geoffroy of Villehardouin and Milo Breban (Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 294–95, no. 333, ca. 1209, letter addressed to Countess Blanche of Champagne). 66. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 73; Roger of Howden, Chronica, 2: 104–5. According to the Treaty of Nonancourt (30 December 1189) between Philip II and Richard I, all who had taken the cross were to meet in April (1190), unless they departed earlier, as a number did. Anyone remaining behind who committed violence in the absence of the kings would have his fiefs confiscated and transferred to his closest relative, to be held from the lord of the fief. 67. PL 216: 980–81, no. 11, l­etter-​­report of the papal legate Robert to the bishops of Soissons and Meaux “and other good men.” 68. Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 1: 277–80, nos. 228–29, done in Paris (end of March 1188). See also Rigord, Gesta, 248–56; Pontal, Les conciles, 359; and Baldwin, Government of Philip Augustus, 52–53. 69. Quantin, Yonne, 2: 303, no. 385, 1188, done at Provins, “in my comitatus,” the first reference to the “county” of Champagne. On that same occasion Henry assigned the canons 40s. of revenue to be paid by the toll collector at Bray (Benton, “Recueil,” 1188i). 70. Quantin, Yonne, 2: 417, no. 412, 1190. It was solely in support of his expedition to Jerusalem, he promised, and did not constitute a precedent. Henry I made a similar promise in 1179; see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, ch. 8 n. 94. 71. Layettes, 1: 164, no. 378, 1190 (Provins), and Épernay, 2: 141, no. 15, 1190 (the annual payment could not be increased in the future even if the town’s population increased). Henry also franchised Chaumont, in a variant of the customs of Lorris, but it did not produce a large sum (Ordonnances, 12: 48–53, 1190, vidimus of 1224 and 1259). 72. Benton, “Recueil,” February 1190a (­Hôtel-​­Dieu); Longnon, Recherches, 159–60, no. 23, 1180 March (Boulancourt). 73. AD Aube 6 G 7 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1190k). 74. GC, 12: instr. 277, 1190: ex immoderato debitorum suorum gravamine, ad filiorum suorum dispersionem cogeretur. He gave 10 modii of oats, 10l. for the purchase of vestments, and 16 setiers of wine for the Mass. 75. Benton, “Recueil,” 1190e.

Chapter 5 1. ­St‑Étienne, fol. 55v, 1190 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1190z). Henry II also had promised a 10l. revenue to S­ t‑Quiriace of Provins, which Marie, at his mandate, assigned on the tax on wine imported into Provins (­St‑Quiriace, 281, no. 46, 1190, done in Provins). 2. Marie’s letter for Pontigny (AD Yonne H 1405, 1190 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1190o) confirmed Henry’s letter (Pontigny, 368–69, no. 382, 1190, done in Vézelay). While in Vézelay, Henry promised the monks of Cheminon all that he possessed in the village of Cheminon, effective after his death (AD Marne, 17 H 8, no. 8 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1190m). 3. Pontigny, 386, no. 381, 1190, letter of the dean of ­St‑Étienne accepting the exemption but retaining the chapter’s right to collect taxes on any wine imported above that limit of 200 modii. Count Henry I’s endowment charter of 1157 included the right of S­ t‑Étienne to collect the tax on wine imported into Troyes during the fairs (Actes, no. 95, item no. 44). 4. Pontigny, 245–46, no. 200, 1190.

146

No t e s t o Pa ge s 7 5–7 7

5. Benton, “Recueil,” 1190q. 6. ­St‑Quiriace, 281, no. 46, 1190, done in Provins. 7. Hospitaliers, 1: 564, no. 888, 1190. 8. Mayer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 908, no. 12, (1–20) June 1190. He also confirmed Geoffroy Eventat of Égligny’s gift of woods to the ­Hôtel-​­Dieu (Mayer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 906–7, no. 11, [1–20] June 1190). 9. For Bishop Haice of Troyes (June 1190–21 February 1193), see Benton, “The Court” (1959), 110–12, and Meyer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 592. 10. For Walter of Chappes as chancellor, see Mayer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 592–93. 11. For a biography of Alice (Alix), see A ­ rmstrong-​­Partida, “Mothers and Daughters as Lords,” 81–89. 12. Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 1: 416–19, no. 345, the royal ordinance on governance of the king’s lands in his absence (quoted from Rigord, Gesta, 276–85, §77) authorized three judicial sessions per annum for the review of provost accounts; Philip also left a second seal with counterseal for four townsmen of Paris, who served to check the acts of Queen Adele and Archbishop William (Dufour, “Adèle de Champagne,” 39–40). She is known for one important initiative during her regency, for writing an extremely deferential letter to the pope requesting that he postpone arbitration of a conflict between the churches of Dol and Tours until Philip II returned from crusade (RHF 19: 291, no. 16, ca. 1191). See Baldwin, Government of Philip Augustus, 102–4. Adele and William decided one case regarding a fief (Boutaric, Actes du Parlement de Paris, 1: ccxcvii–viii, no. 2, 1190, done in Sens). 13. Louis was acting as count by 20 October 1195, when he gave a 6 modii grain rent to the Hospitallers in memory of his father; witnesses and consenters included his wife, Catherine; his brother Philip; and his sisters Margaret, Isabelle, and ­Adelita—​­but not their mother, Countess Alice (Hospitaliers, 1: 621, no. 979). 14. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, Chronicon, 864 [year 1190], quoting Guy of Bazoches, wrote that Henry’s forces waited several days in Marseille before they could sail. Bettin, Heinrich II. von Champagne provides a detailed chronology of Henry’s life overseas. 15. Ibn Shaddād, History of Saladin, 120. According to the Itinerarium Peregrinorum, 92–93 (Chronicle of the Third Crusade, 97–99), bk. 1, chs. 42–43, Henry assumed command of the new arrivals. Suard, “Henry II, comte de Champagne,” surveys Henry’s first two years overseas as reported by the chronicles. 16. The siege of Acre is well told by Gillingham, Richard I, 155–71, and Pryor, “A Medieval Siege of Troy.” La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, 104 (“Continuation,” 94), §103, makes a point of noting that the counts of Flanders, Champagne, Blois, and Sancerre arrived in Acre before (in fact more than eight months before) the two kings. 17. Ibn Shaddād, History of Saladin, 138, 143. 18. Roger of Howden, Chronica, 3: 87–89, and the Itinerarium Peregrinorum, 92–93 (Chronicle, 97–99), bk. 1 c. 42, list some of those who died at Acre. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 272– 74 (Chronicle, 150), §185, also lists some of the w ­ ell-​­known leaders who died on the crusade. 19. Guiot of Provins, La Bible, 24, lines 476–77. 20. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, Chronicon, 867 [year 1191]. Aubri may have been quoting from Guy of Bazoches’s Chronosgraphia without citing his source. 21. Ibn Shaddād, History of Saladin, 228. 22. William of Nangis, Chronique, 99, noting the loss of French princes at Acre, understood the political implications for the future of the French monarchy. 23. Ibn Shaddād, History of Saladin, 208, 212–13.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 7 7 –7 8

147

24. Harari, “The Assassination of King Conrad,” concludes that Richard and Saladin are the most likely suspects in contracting Conrad’s murder. 25. Itinerarium, 342–43, 346–49 (Chronicle, 308–9, 312–13), bk. 5 chs. 28, 34–35. Ambroise, Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, lines 8903–29, relates a similar story. 26. Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, 142–43 (“Continuation,” 115–16), §138. See Gillingham, Richard I, 199–203. 27. The circumstances of Henry’s marriage drew immediate and persistent scrutiny and had ­long-​­term implications for the county in Champagne. Several of Henry’s companions in 1192 later testified at a papal inquest (in 1213) as to the legitimacy of his marriage and hence of his daughters born of it (PL 216: 980–81, October 1213). Guy II of Dampierre recalled that Humfrey of Turon (Isabelle’s first husband) had lived with Isabelle before marrying her, and that Humfrey had complained among the troops that she was abducted (to be married to Conrad of Montferrat). The rumor ( fama publica) circulating in the army, said Guy, was that the ­eighteen-​­­year-​­old Isabelle was still married to Humfrey at the time of her marriage to Conrad, which “the count [Henry] well knew.” Oudard of Aulnay confirmed Guy’s testimony, as did Guy of Chappes, who added that he did not think that Humfrey had divorced Isabelle. Hugh of ­St‑Maurice added a detail: alerted to the abduction of his wife, Humfrey called out to her as she was being taken away, but she spurned his plea, acceding to her abduction (and subsequent marriage to Conrad). That incident remained a powerful memory for Robert II of Milly, who recalled that within the army the capture and killing of “many knights and others” by the Turks was seen as a consequence of Isabelle’s abduction and marriage to Conrad of Montferrat while still married to Humfrey of Turon; Robert tied that event to Count Henry’s marriage to the same Isabelle and his eventual death by falling from a window. Robert II was the son of the treasurer Robert I of Milly (­Seine-​­­et-​­Oise), who witnessed the acts of Henry I and Marie from 1161 through 1186; he held two fiefs from the count, owing three months castleguard each at Coulommiers and Meaux (Feoda 1, nos. 1098, 1181), and he followed Henry I to Palestine in 1179. Robert II was still unmarried in 1190 when he became a Templar confrater and gave all his land at Trilbarbou to the Templars at Moissy, with his sister Amelia and ­brother-​­­in-​­law Manasses as witnesses (Schenck, Templar Families, 215). He swore at Soissons in 1190 to accept Thibaut III as count and followed Henry II on the Third Crusade; he was among the important men of Champagne who guaranteed Count Thibaut’s fidelity to the king in 1198; and he supported the king as a knight banneret at Bouvines in 1214. He was still alive in 1238. See Benton, “The Court” (1959), 96–98. For Robert II’s gifts to the Templars in Champagne, see Schenck, Templar Families, 233–34. 28. Rigord, the apologist for Philip II, states without irony that Henry II, seeing that the overseas Franks had been abandoned by both kings, decided to remain with his companions in service to God “rather than return home in shame for not having visited the Sepulcre of the Lord.” The Knights Templar and the Hospitallers “and other pilgrims” chose Count Henry II as king of “the city of God and gave him the daughter of the king of Jerusalem in marriage” (Rigord, Gesta, 316, c. 95). Henry’s hasty marriage to Queen Isabelle, one week after the assassination of her husband Conrad of Montferrat, raised the suspicion that the two events were related in some nefarious way, specifically that Richard I needed to stabilize the political leadership of the overseas westerners before he returned home, with Guy of Lusignan in Cyprus and Henry of Champagne on the mainland; see Gillingham, Richard I, 199–202. 29. Ambroise, Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, lines 11816–23. Ambroise remarks than many of the French, angry at that arrangement, left for home. 30. Ibn Shaddād, History of Saladin, 228–32, describes the negotiations leading up to the treaty. Henry swore to it on 3 September 1191. The Continuation de Guillaume de Tyre, 153

148

No t e s t o Pa ge s 7 8 –80

(“Continuation,” 121), §143, confirms that Richard had Henry swear to observe the truce. Ambroise, Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, lines 5316–21, states that at least five important lords were pledge to Saladin. 31. As when Henry gave the Hospitallers a wall with a gate in Acre and the right to pass through it by day or night (Hospitaliers, 1: 616–17, no. 972, 5 January 1195). 32. For Henry’s dealings with the Pisan and Genoese merchants who furnished the essential goods for the survival of the port cities, see F ­ avreau-​­Lilie, Die Italiener im Heiligen Land, 297–326. 33. Preuilly, 81, no. 105, 1196. 34. Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 480, no. 165, October 1196, done in Acre. 35. Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 477, no. 160, 1191 (before 2 July), “done at the siege of Acre”: Excipimus tamen quod civitatis aut castri not liceat dominium in terra mea obtinere. 36. Richard of Devizes, Chronicle, 42–44. Gillingham, Richard I, 165 n. 49, finds this unique report credible. 37. Falmagne, Baudouin V, 219–20. 38. Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines, 2: 104–5. 39. Quoted in Gabrieli, Arab Historians of the Crusades, 242. On “robes of honor,” see Köhler, Alliances and Treaties, 285. 40. Baudin, Les sceaux, 140, notes that the design of the new seal was done with “less finesse.” Photographs of the two extant seals from this period are in Baudin, Les sceaux, CD ROM, no. 29 (undated), and Bony, Un siècle des sceaux figurés, Plate XXXI, no. 201 (1197). 41. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 255 (Chronicle, 140), §172. It is not clear whether Ermesinde was living with Marie or was still in the custody of the count of Rethel (see ch. 4 at n. 40). In 1198, Ermesinde, then twelve, married Count Henry II’s cousin Thibaut I, count of ­Bar-​­­le-​ ­Duc (1190–1214); see Margue, “Ermesinde.” 42. For her own and her son’s anniversary in Fontaines, she assigned 20 muids of wine at Lagny after the death of Isabelle (of Traînel, sister of the butler Anselm, who died in 1184), widow of Hugh II of Plancy (d. 1189), who had held it (in fief ) from Marie (Meaux, 2: 80, 1192). For Henry the Liberal’s anniversary in the cathedral of Meaux, Marie assigned 40s. from the bridge toll at Trilbardou (Benton, “Recueil,” 1192a, 4 August 1192). 43. ­St‑Loup, 157 no. 114, 1194. 44. However, Labande, “Les filles d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine,” 105, notes that only one of Eleanor’s five daughters (Eleanor, queen of Castile) lived to sixty. 45. I exclude here what Chazan calls “The Bray Incident,” which occurred in March 1192, shortly after Philip II returned from the Third Crusade. According to Rigord (Gesta, 308–10, §90), the king while at ­St‑­Germain-​­­en-​­Laye heard about a Christian, accused of murdering a Jew, who was handed over to the local Jewish community by the “countess” of the town for punishment and was hanged. Outraged, the king quickly traveled to the town and had “eighty or more” Jews burned in retaliation. The identities of the place and the countess remain in dispute. Most modern historians, including the recent editors of Rigord (Gesta, 310 n. 508), read Braiam as B ­ ray-​­­sur-​­Seine, that is, a c­ astle-​­town within the county of Champagne, and therefore identify the comitissa ipsius castri as Countess Marie. However, earlier editors read Braiam as Braine or ­Brie-​­­Comte-​­Robert and therefore identified the countess as Agnes of Braine and Dreux; Jordan, The French Monarchy and the Jews, 35–36, concurs. For Agnes of Braine and her involvement with a Jewish girl from the local community and her miraculous conversion, see Caviness, Sumptuous Arts, 67–68. It should be noted that Countess Marie was never called “countess of Bray.” Even Rigord



No t e s t o Pa ge s 8 0–81

149

called her “countess of Champagne” (Gesta, 220, §49; 340, §122) or “countess of Troyes” (Gesta, 348, §131), the actual title she used on her seal and letters. Braine was much closer to ­St‑­Germain-​ ­­en-​­Laye and therefore Philip could reached it quickly (velocissimo), as Rigord reports; it was moreover a fief held from the archbishop of Reims, who as the king’s closest advisor at the time must have authorized the king’s act in the absence of the lord of Braine, the king’s cousin Robert II (of Dreux and Braine), who was still overseas after Philip returned to France and thus could not defend his town. There is no evidence that Philip ever intruded in the lands of Countess Marie, with whom he had good relations since the ­mid-​­1180s. Finally, the Jewish community of Bray was thriving in the thirteenth century (Chazan, “The Bray Incident,” 14–18), which would not be expected if it was decimated in 1192, as reported by Jewish sources. 46. Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier, 291. 47. Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 283, no. 318, 1199–1200: Peter Estrovet presented Henry’s letter of debt for 160 marks. See also four other quittances of debt in 1199 (Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 81–82, no. 52; 90–91, no. 64; 282–83, no. 317; and 285–86, no. 321). 48. In 1195, for instance, Henry altered his earlier bequest to Cheminon (see n. 2), making it actionable immediately, instead of after his death (Meyer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 988–19, no. 17, [1–3] August 1195). 49. According to the cathedral’s obituary, Haice (Bartholomew) died on 20 February (Obituaires, 4: 226). 50. Williams, “William of the White Hands,” 368 n. 20, citing the archbishop’s act of 1180. For a brief biography of Garnier, see Longnon, Compagnons, 13–15. 51. See Ysebaert, “The Power of Personal Networks,” 172–76. 52. ­Notre-​­Dame de Chartres, 3: 170. 53. McCash, “Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine,” 709–10, suggests that Eleanor and Marie might have met on two occasions. On returning from the Third Crusade in the fall of 1191, Eleanor passed through northern Italy, no doubt on the “French Road,” and might have taken the route through Champagne to arrive in Normandy by Christmas. While that is possible, there were of course shorter routes to the south and west of Champagne that would have taken her directly to her own lands. The second occasion was in late 1193, when Eleanor might have passed through Meaux or Provins on her way to Speyer to negotiate the final details of Richard’s release from captivity. Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine, 198, 273, allows for that possibility, but says nothing about a meeting in 1191. No evidence has yet been found of any encounter between Marie and her mother after Eleanor left her daughters in Paris in 1152; Turner, who has paid close attention to Eleanor’s life, doubts that she ever saw her two daughters again. 54. Goldin, Lyrics of the Troubadours, 375–79, full text with translation. Gillingham, Richard I, 242, dates the poem to 1193. 55. Rigord, Gesta, 340, §122. 56. Gislebert of Mons, Chronique, 332 (Chronicle, 182), §256. 57. Countess Marie of Flanders appeared in several of Baldwin’s acts in 1202, before he left on the Fourth Crusade eventually to become Latin Emperor of Constantinople (May 1204– April 1205). She stayed behind because she was pregnant, but in the summer of 1204 she sailed to Acre in search of Baldwin, who was by then in Constantinople. She died of the plague in Acre in August 1204. Geoffroy of Villehardouin, who had known Marie as a girl in Troyes while he was doing his castleguard, spoke for many who mourned her and regretted that she would not be with Baldwin as empress of Constantinople (Villehardouin, Conquête de Constantinople, §§317–318). 58. Cartulaire de la ville de Blois, 50–58, no. 10, done in Blois, 7 June 1196, with the consent

150

No t e s t o Pa ge s 8 1 –83

of Countess Alice; of Louis’s wife, Catherine; and of his brother Philip and sisters Margaret, Isabelle, and Alice. 59. Cartulaire de la ville de Blois, 80–81, no. 21, done in Provins, (after 7) June 1196, Marie’s confirmation. 60. Countess Alice is last known in 1198, when Philip II stated that “my sister Alice, countess of Blois,” had recognized that she had no right to take wood from the forest of Yvelines without his license (Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 2: 127–28, no. 579). 61. Rigord, Gesta, 300–3, §87, on 25 August and 8 October 1191. 62. ­Notre-​­Dame de Chartres, 1: 229–43, no. 121, 1194. William would have been sympathetic to the canons, while his sister Adele would have been sensitive to the interests of her ­sister-​­­in-​ ­law. The resultant settlement includes a long list of testimonies by knights and canons as to the respective rights of the counts and the chapter. On this conflict, see ­Armstrong-​­Partida, “Mothers and Daughters as Lords,” 86–87. 63. Dufour, “Adèle de Champagne,” 40, has catalogued Adele’s 110 known letters patent. 64. Quantin, Recueil, 23–24, no. 48, 1205. Adele’s last act was a gift in 1206 to S­ t‑Denis of 10 modii of wine that Countess Catherine of Blois had given her; a photo of her letters patent with intact pendant seal is in Nielen, Les sceaux des reines, 121, planche 1. Adele was buried at Pontigny (Rigord, Gesta, 394–97, 154) by license of Innocent III (Martène and Durand, Thesaurus, 3: 1244–45, 24 April 1205). Rigord states that Adele’s father, Thibaut IV of Blois, was buried at Pontigny, rather than at Lagny, a surprising error for a monk at ­St‑Denis. 65. AD Marne, 53 H 81, no. 8, 1192 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1192d). Anselm III (1175–1200) of ­Garlande-​­Possesse then registered his transfer with the king’s court in Paris, affirming that it had been approved by the archbishop of Reims and the ­bishop-​­elect of Châlons (AD Marne, 53 H 81, no. 7, February 1193 n.s.). For John of Possesse, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 240 and Genealogy 8. 66. Templiers de Provins, 46–47, no. 7, 1193, confirmation of the letter of sale sealed by Henry Bristaud and his mother (ibid., 105–6, no. 84, 1193). The sale also included the house of deceased Hugh of Flanders, an adjacent s­even-​­bedroom house, and a mill at the entrance to Coulommiers acquired from the knight Peter of Touquin; Henry Bristaud’s two brothers and sister consented to the sale at court. Witnesses included Templar Brothers William (almoner of the counts), Geoffroy of Tours, and Geoffroy, marshal. Since the monks of ­Montier-​­­la-​­Celle collected a rent from one of the sold properties, they accepted a transfer of the revenue to another property (ibid., 134–35, no. 129, 1193). 67. Benton, “Recueil,” 1194i (Marie’s letter). La ­Chapelle-​­­aux-​­Planches, 38, no. 38, 1194 (Guy’s letter). The monks would sing a daily Mass for him. Guy also leased a house in Troyes, free of all rent, from the canons of ­St‑Loup, again with the stipulation that it and all improvements would return to them at his death (Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 3: 478, no. 162). 68. BM Provins, ms. 85, no. 24, May 1195, done in Provins (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1195c). It is not clear how an institution insolvent five years earlier and rescued from dissolution by Count Henry II (see 145n. 74) could afford to pay 160l. for a grain rent. 69. For a biography of Agnes, see Poull, La maison souveraine et ducal de Bar, 112–28. 70. Her dower lands consisted of the castle of Ligny and twenty villages. Agnes continued to seal letters patent on her own account and with her sons, and witnessed their acts. In 1189 she witnessed as “Agnes, Countess of Bar,” when her son Thibaut, still only lord of Briey, assigned a dower to his new wife, Ermesinde of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Seine (widow of Anselm II of Traînel, butler of Champagne) (Actes des comtes de Bar, 2: Thiébaut Ier, no. 2). In 1197 Agnes and Thibaut I founded a chapter of canons in the castle of Ligny (ibid., no. 16), and in 1201 they established rules of residency for the canons to draw their prebends (ibid., no. 36).



No t e s t o Pa ge s 8 3–86

151

71. Actes des comtes de Bar, 2, no. 10, 1192, presumably done at court in Troyes. Agnes died on 7 August 1207 and was buried at ­Trois-​­Fontaines, the Cistercian monastery that she long had supported. She was remembered in Fontevraud’s obituary as Domina Agnes of Bar, sister of duchess Marie (of Burgundy), who died a nun at Fontevraud (Pavillon, La vie du bienheureux Robert d’Arbrissel, 579). 72. Benton, “Recueil,” 1191d; his brother and son consented. 73. “­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains,” 15–17 January 1196. 74. S­ t‑Étienne, fols. 55v–56r, 1190. 75. Avenay, 2: 90, no. 26, 1193. The fact that Hugh alone was present at court (teste eodem Hugone) suggests that he, rather than a representative of Avenay, brought suit. Hugh of ­Porte-​ ­Marne was liege for a comital fief and owed two months castleguard at Sézanne (Feoda 1, no. 1793). The scribe who updated the entry ca. 1190 noted that Hugh was still alive (vivit). 76. Templiers de Provins, 107, no. 87, 1194. See also Evergates, Aristocracy, 93, 114, and Mayer, Die Kanzlei, 2: 569, who places Robert’s death in 1190. For her similar decision in 1181 in favor of a remarried woman retaining her dower from her first marriage, see 132n. 42. 77. Templiers de Provins, 97–98, no. 73, April 1195. 78. Benton, “Recueil,” 1195a, 5 March. In a similar case, Milo of Bray dispossessed his brother’s three underage sons and daughter by transferring a shared vineyard to S­ t‑­Jean-​­­en-​ ­Châtel of Troyes, which cleared half of the vineyard to make arable and built a structure on the other half. Countess Marie required the prior to pay the children 21l. cash for consenting to the alienation when they reached the “age of discretion” (Montiéramey, 131–32, no. 103, July 1194). See also Falletti, Le retrait lignager. 79. Verdier, ­Saint-​­Ayoul, ­CD-​­ROM, ­A-​­II, 035, October 1193 (= GC 12: instrumenta, 61, no. 74), letter of Archbishop Guy of Sens announcing the decision, in which quedam mulieres de illecebris seculi ad viam salutis converti cupientes . . . ​ad penitentiam agendam convenissent, habito religionis assumpto. 80. Verdier, ­Saint-​­Ayoul, ­CD-​­ROM, ­A-​­III, 036, 1194: ubi mulieres de mundi illecebris ad Dominum converse. 81. Verdier, ­Saint-​­Ayoul, ­CD-​­ROM, ­A-​­II, no. 005, 1197, Countess Marie’s confirmation of the purchase of land from Fromond of Provins, son of the former marshal William rex of Provins. The convent’s ­thirteenth-​­century transactions are edited in Verdier, ­Saint-​­Ayoul, ­CD-​ ­ROM, ­A-​­III. 82. “A son tens fu encommenciéz / Cist livres et enromanciéz” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 189–90). A full study and complete edition is Boers, La Genèse; a long summary analysis is Boers, “La Genèse d’Evrat.” For a ­wide-​­ranging review of cultural patronage by women, including the translation of Latin texts, see McCash, “The Cultural Patronage of Medieval Women.” 83. “Cist toz altres romanz ensegne, / Quand la contesse de Champagne / Ki bien lo sout entendre et lire / Lo peut en son armaire eslire / Por bien dit et por bien glosé / Tant en sunt li mot alosé / Par les deus lois que l’en i trueve / Et ki del bien lire s’eprueve / Par ce puet savoir la novele / De la Vielz et de la Novele / Si cum l’une est de l’autre estraite / Et dite et notée et portrait” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 21–32). I thank E. Jane Burns for her reading of this passage. 84. Henry’s library contained a glossed Genesis (Lalore, Inventaires, 2: 271, no. 2293: Item liber Genesis glossatus). 85. Obituaires, 4: 450 (11 January): Evrardus canonicus et sacerdos altaris Beate Marie qui dedit nobis domum suum de claustro et Psalterium glossatum et plura alios libros. This may have been the same Evrard who sold half the village of Le ­Essart-​­­les-​­Sézanne (Épernay, Esternay), as noted in Henry’s confirmation of ­St‑Étienne’s properties in 1173 (Actes, no. 354, item no. 117).

152

No t e s t o Pa ge s 8 6–88

86. Evrat, La Genèse, line 115 (“twelve hundred years less eight”) and lines 121–22 (“twelve years have passed since the good count died”), that is, Henry died on 16 March 1180, old style. 87. “Cil Ebron de qu’il est tels joies / C’est la riche eglise de Troies / Que li cuens Henris fist del suen, / A son voloir et a son buen, / En l’oneur del premier martir. / De qu’il ne vout onques partir: / La est ses chans et sa couture, / La est se droite sopulture / La gist ses cors, en ciel est s’ame” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 20720–28). 88. “Et doze ans avoit ja passéz / Ke li bons sire ert trespasséz / De ceste vie en parmanable, / U il ne dote mais diable. / C’est li bons cuens ki tans biens fist, / Ke l’onor Saint Estievene assist / Riche eglise et bien provendée / Dont la terre et tote amendée” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 121–28). 89. “Bien garda la terre et maintint” (Evrat, La Genèse, line 185). 90. Evrat, La Genèse, ed. Boers, 3: 138–44, 165–66. 91. Lambert of Ardres, Historia, 598 (History, 114–15), §81. For Baldwin’s library, see Stirnemann, “Quelques bibliothèques,” 36–38. 92. Bonnard, Les traductions de la Bible, 118. 93. “Hystoire et glose i aprendra / Por resclairier lo sens del livre” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 200–201). 94. Evrat, La Genèse, ed. Boers, 3: 9–15. 95. Boers, in La Genèse, 3: 218, suggests that Evrat used an early version of Peter Comestor’s Scholastic History as a guide, that is, the original (no longer extant) manuscript completed ca. 1170, rather than Peter’s revised version that became the standard scholarly edition. See also Stirnemann, in Splendeurs, 65, fig. 31, photograph of an early ­two-​­volume copy of the Historia Scolastica, produced in Troyes and dated from its Manerius style of painting to 1185–1200. Peter was dean of the cathedral of Troyes from the 1140s and canon of S­ t‑Loup of Troyes; he also held a prebend in the comital chapel of S­ t‑Étienne of Troyes until 1178, when he retired to S­ t‑Victor of Paris; see Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 239–40, nn. 48–50, and 243 n. 100. 96. Evrat’s autograph copy does not survive. Of the three extant copies BnF, fr. 12456 (A), made between 1201 and 1225/1250 by four professional scribes who punctuated the text to be read in private, seems closest to Evrat’s autograph copy (Boers, “La Genèse d’Evrat” 80–88). The editor notes that it is the only copy that refers to Marie in the present tense (ibid., 100). Henderson, “A Critical [incomplete] Edition of Evrat’s Genesis,” 1–2, 60–62, suggests that BnF, fr. 12457 (B) was rewritten in a ­pro-​­feminist manner at Countess Marie’s request, a proposition that Boers, “La Genèse d’Evrat,” 138–48, rejects entirely. 97. Peter Riga, Aurora: Petri Rigae Biblia Versificata. More than 250 surviving manuscripts attest to its popularity. 98. Boyle, “Innocent III and the Vernacular Versions of Scripture.” See also Bonnard, Les traductions de la Bible en vers français, 105–19. 99. BnF, fr. 900 (C), copied by a single hand, painted in the Manerius style, and most likely produced in Troyes ca. 1200; see Boers, “La Genèse d’Evrat,” 119–40, and La Genèse, 1: 119–31, 150 (plate 20, photograph of BnF, fr. 900). See also Stirnemann, “Quelques bibliothèques,” 31–33, who first understood the importance of this manuscript, and “Women and Books in France,” 248. 100. Stirnemann, “Quelques bibliothèques,” 31–36, initially suggested that three translated books may have come from Marie’s library: Evrat’s Genèse (the presentation volume completed after Marie’s death), Peter Lombard’s commentary on Psalms (which Stirnemann now attributes to Metz; see her “Some Champenois Vernacular Manuscripts,” 197 n. 7), and the sermons of Bernard of Clairvaux (an attribution based on its Mosan painting style).



No t e s t o Pa ge s 8 8 –9 0

153

101. According to the prologue of the French translation of the ­Pseudo-​­Turpin Chronicle, Count Baldwin V of Hainaut (1171–95) was so taken with the stories that singers and jongleurs told about Charlemagne, but dissatisfied with the stories themselves, that he sent his clerics to find more authentic accounts of Charlemagne’s exploits. At an unspecified library in Sens they found a “chronicle” supposedly written by Charlemagne’s companion, Archbishop Turpin of Reims, recounting Charlemagne’s deeds in Spain, and made a copy of it for Baldwin. In his last days Baldwin gave that copy to his sister Yolande (ca. 1141–ca. 1223), charging her with its care in his memory. Yolande, the second wife (1178) of Hugh IV, count of S­ t‑Pol (1178–1205), had it translated into French because, said the translator, many literate people do not know Latin, and also “it will be better preserved in French.” The colophons of two translations state that it was commissioned by Hugh of ­St‑Pol (who may have wanted to read it before embarking on the Fourth Crusade). See Rouse and Rouse, “French Literature and the Counts of ­Saint-​­Pol,” 104–6. 102. In her undated letter of ca. 1197 confirming the new foundation (Veissière, ­Notre-​ ­Dame du Val, 137, no. 1; 163, no. 54, confirmation of June 1224), Marie reserved the right to appoint the provost and half of the prebendaries except the dean, who would be elected by the canons themselves; the archbishop of Sens would appoint the chanter and grant the remaining prebends. Veissière, ­Notre-​­Dame du Val, 19, accepts Bourquelot’s proposed date of 1193 for the original foundation. No material trace of the church remains today. 103. Actes, no. 425, item 43, 1176. 104. Veissière, ­Notre-​­Dame du Val, 138, no. 2, June 1198: Archbishop Michael confirms ­thirty-​­four prebends, including a dean, a chanter, and a provost. 105. The canons of the new chapter had intended to run the schools of Provins, but on complaint by the canons of S­ t‑Quiriace, who had that right, the archbishop of Sens withdrew that privilege (­St‑Quiriace, 284–85, no. 52, 1198). 106. Veissière, ­Notre-​­Dame du Val, 25 (photograph of the seal of 1218). 107. “Explicit li chevaliers au lyeon / Cil qui l’escrist Guioz a non / Devant nostre dame del val / Est ses ostex tot a estal” (Le Chevalier au Lion, 936 note, marginal notation after line 6808 in Guiot’s copy [BnF, fr. 794]). Guiot’s collection of Chrétien’s works is generally dated to the second quarter of the thirteenth century. For a codicological analysis of Guiot’s manuscript, see Busby, Codex and Context, 1: 93–108, and Busby, The Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes, 2: 28–31. The significance of Guiot’s copy has evoked strong reactions among literary historians; see Reid, “Chrétien de Troyes and the Scribe Guiot,” and Hunt, “Chrestien de Troyes: The Textual Problem.” 108. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, Chronicon, 871 [year 1193]: Hic iacet Arturus flos regum, gloria regni. 109. Gerald of Wales, De principis instructione liber, 126–27. Gerald goes on to explain the etymology of “Glastonbury” and why Arthur was buried at Glastonbury. 110. On the Glastonbury legends, see Watkin, “The Glastonbury Legends,” Gransden, “The Growth of the Glastonbury Traditions and Legends,” and Wood, “Guenevere at Glastonbury.” 111. . For a full analysis of Arthur’s discovery, see Wood, “Fraud and its Consequences,” who dates the exhumation to 1191. 112. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines, Chronicon, 874 [year 1197]. 113. Morgan, The Chronicle of Ernoul, 86–88, analyzes the discrepant accounts. 114. AD Marne, 16 H 13 = Benton, “Recueil,” 1197e: Marie called Abbot Joscelin her dilectum et familiarem meum and relates how he returned to Champagne with a couple originally from Reims who desired “to return to the land of the prince of Champagne” in order to become

154

No t e s t o Pa ge s 9 0 –9 1

lay converts at La Charmoye; she obliged their request, freeing them from the taxes, taille, and military service they owed her, and released them from her lordship. In a second letter, Marie confirmed Abbot Joscelin’s sale of woods to Avenay; several of her close companions witnessed: Geoffroy of Villehardouin, Milo of Provins, Master Odo of Sézanne, Manasses of the Close, and Lambert of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube (Benton, “Recueil,” 1197f ). 115. Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, 191–93 (“Continuation,” 142–43), §183. 116. Robert of Auxerre, Chronicon, 257. 117. Register, 1: 100–3, no. 69, 15 March 1198, the pope’s letter notified him that the archbishop of Sens, concerned about the absence of a bishop in Troyes, asked the pope to dispense Garnier, who already had reached Piacenza, from fulfilling his vow. The archbishop was aware of the potentially delicate transition of comital authority in Champagne, since Thibaut III at nineteen was still underage with respect to the comital office, and Henry II’s very young daughters in Acre presented a complicated question of legitimate succession. Bishop Garnier returned to Troyes, but the next year, in the company of Count Thibaut III at Écry, he took the cross again for the Fourth Crusade. 118. AD Aube, 24 H 24 = Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins, 246, no. 458 = Paraclet, 117–18, no. 93, October 1197. Helie’s testament included a 10l. toll revenue for the nuns, 1l. for her paternal aunt and, with the consent of the entire chapter of the Paraclete, an entry gift for her daughter Melisendis as a nun. The text identifies Helie of Villemaur as defuncto Milonis marscalli Pruvino quandam uxor, which is usually read as “widow of the deceased Milo, marshal of Provins.” However, the only marshal at the time was Geoffroy of Villehardouin (1185–1205). Benton in his p ­ re-​­edition of the letter (1197b) identifies Helie as “widow of Milo of Provins, son of the marshal [William rex of Provins, died 1179/80],” which seems correct. Among the witnesses were Helie’s b­ rother-​­­in-​­law Fromond Bonifer, who was in fact Milo’s brother and son of the marshal William rex. Marie sealed a second letter on that occasion, for Fromond of Provins, “son of the marshal,” who sold 100 arpents of land at Bouy to the nuns of Champbenoît (Verdier, ­St‑Ayoul, ­CD-​­ROM, A ­ -​­III, 005, 1197). In 1190, most likely in preparation for the Third Crusade, Milo of Provins identified himself as the son of William the marshal when he established his anniversary, with the consent of his wife, Helie [of Villemaur], and his brother Fromond (Verdier, L’aristocratie de Provins, 255 n. 589, 133 [Genealogy 5]). Milo of Provins was with Count Henry II in Jaffa in January 1194 (Hospitaliers, 1: 603, no. 954); he is not known to have returned to Champagne. Marie made only one benefaction to the Paraclete in the 1190s, a vacant lot next to the market of Provins, with permission to erect temporary stalls (Paraclet, 112, no. 87, 1194). 119. Register 1: 41–42, no. 28, 25 February 1198 (= PL 214: 22–23, no. 28). The pope did not include Bishop Garnier of Troyes, who was on his way to the Holy Land. 120. The exact date of death is not certain: Arbois de Jubainville prefers 5 March, the date given by the necrologies of the chapters of Meaux and ­Saint-​­Étienne of Troyes. The necrology of Fontaines gives 8 March (Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 4: 75 note b), and the hospital of Provins gives 3 March (Obituaires, 1.2: 931). 121. Thibaut assigned that rent on the tolls at Coulommiers (BnF, Lat. 5993A, Liber Pontificum of the counts of Champagne, ca. 1271), fols. 189r–190v, 1267, vidimus of Count Thibaut IV’s vidimus of September 1219 (Meaux, 2: 83, no. 193): “cum mater mea felicis recordationis M, comitissa, prioratum ecclesie de Fontanis sincero complexa fuerit dilectionis affectu.” 122. “Migravit feliciter de hac vita pie memorie domina Maria, reverendissima monacha, nobilissima Campanie comitissa, Francorum regis filia, charissima atque amantissima domina et benefactrix nostra” (Obituaires, 4: 190, March 8 [1198], from a t­hirteenth-​­century obituary of Fontaines). It appears that Marie entered Fontaines after October 1197. The same obituary lists



No t e s t o Pa ge s 9 1–9 5

155

Richard I as rex Anglie Richardus dominus et amicus familiarissimus (ibid., 190, April 2 [1198]), and Queen Adele as venerabilis mater regis Franciae (ibid., 191, June 12 [1206]). 123. In founding an anniversary Mass for his mother, father, and brother at the cathedral of Meaux (20l. from tolls of Coulommiers), Thibaut III noted that his mother was buried there (Meaux, 2: 82, no. 191, 1198, n.s. between 5 and 29 March). See Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 42. Evrat noted her burial in Meaux: “A Meaz regist la gentils dame / Ki l’eglise a si maintenue / Qu’a grant honor en est venue” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 20729–31). 124. Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 4: 75–76. The cathedral was rebuilt in the 1170s, perhaps after the chapter’s treasurer, Simon of Lizy, was elected bishop of Meaux (1176). Kurmann, La cathédrale S­ aint-​­Étienne de Meaux, 40, doubts whether the choir was completed by 1198, and therefore suggests that Marie’s tomb may have been moved, perhaps in the thirteenth century, to its later location. 125. Obituaires, 4: 37 (17 March). 126. For the ritual of the censing, see Arbois de Jubainville, Histoire, 4: 75–76. 127. ­Notre-​­Dame de Chartres, 3: 55: multis decoravit ornamentis. It is not known when, or if, Marie visited Chartres cathedral. Her m ­ other-​­­in-​­law, Mathilda, who died in 1160, was inscribed in the same necrology as mother of “illustrious princes” who also gave the cathedral many ornamenta (ibid., 3: 20). 128. Obituaires, Sens, 1: 5 (3 March). 129. Obituaires, 4: 454. For her anniversary, “seven pendant candles ought to burn in front of the altar.” 130. Evrat, La Genèse, line 20760: Qu’elle ot cuer d’ome et cors de fame. 131. Littere Baronum, 159–69, App. 1, April 1198 (Thibaut’s letter). Philip sealed an identical letter (Layettes, 1: 195–96, no. 473, April 1198 = Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, 3: 129–30, no. 582). For the events relating to Thibaut III’s succession, see Evergates, Aristocracy, 25, 39–40. 132. Innocent III’s letter of 13 December 1213 to the bishops of Soissons, the Cistercian abbot of Longpont, and the dean of Soissons cathedral summarizes the result of the inquest he ordered for the swearing in 1190 (PL 216: 940–41, no. 149). Innocent adds that, after the death of Henry II, the “barons and knights received their lands [in fief ] from Count Thibaut [III] and promised fidelity and homage ( fidelitatem ad homagium prestiterunt).” 133. Henry II first spoke of “my county” as a distinct entity in his letter of nonprejudice for the canons of Sens in 1188; he collected the Saladin tithe from their lands in comitatu meo, but without setting a precedent (Quantin, Yonne, 2: 393, no. 385). 134. Morganstern, Gothic Tombs, 12.

Chapter 6 1. “Des Maries n’i ot que troies, / Mais elle pot estre la quarte” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 20751–52). 2. I am fully aware of the difficulty in distinguishing standardized chancery language from the notary’s record of words spoken at court, but the fact that the notary usually included his name in the formal sealed letters patent, thus guaranteeing the authenticity of the matter at hand even in the absence of witnesses at court, suggests that he was responsible for transcribing Marie’s speech as an authentic record of her acts. 3. “Bien garda la terre et maintint / Ne rien de quankes a mains tint / Ne perdi, tant fu gratïouse / Et sage et prous et coragouse” (Evrat, La Genèse, lines 185–88).

156

No t e s t o Pa ge s 9 5–9 9

4. Since the statuette of Thibaut’s III’s son Thibaut (IV) is identified as a puer (he was born 30 May 1201), the tomb must have been finished before November 1214, when Thibaut IV did homage to the king and sealed letters patent with his seal (Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 412, no. 453), and most likely before 1209, when Thibaut IV would have been eight years old (see the Cartulary of Countess Blanche, 4–7). Bur, “L’image de la parenté,” 63–64, locates the tomb within the context of Countess Blanche’s campaign to defend her son’s inheritance against the claims of Henry II’s daughters. See also Morganstern, Gothic Tombs of Kinship, 10–19, and Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 32–37, 53–56. 5. See Evergates, Henry the Liberal, 143–45. 6. Canon Peschat described the tomb and copied its inscriptions in 1710; see Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 51–56 (Annex IV). For the placement of the statuettes, see Morganstern, Gothic Tombs of Kinship, 17 (fig. 2). Rigord, in noting Marie’s death, identified her as a sister of both Philip II (through her father) and Richard I (through her mother), as well as mother of two counts, that is, Henry II and Thibaut III (Rigord, Gesta, 348, §131). 7. Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 54. 8. Maria Comitissa, Mater ego Comitis, Christum rogo sit tibi mitis (Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 54). 9. Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 33 (photo of an anonymous sketch ca. 1786 of the statuettes on the right side of the tomb). 10. ­Hany-​­Longuespé, Le trésor et les réliques, 12. The remains of Thibaut and his father, Henry the Liberal, were exhumed and transferred to the cathedral in 1793 (Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 50–51). 11. The original folio with the color image of Marie may be viewed on the web at “BNF, fr. 794, fol. 27.” See also Hindman, Sealed in Parchment, 76 (fig. 41), 197. 12. For an analysis of body language, especially the use of hands, in manuscript illustration, see Garnier, Le langage de l’image, especially 1: 165–74. 13. Taylor, “The Eight Monophonic Political Planctus,” 45–53, analyzes the poem and the music. For a review of Philip the Chancellor’s other musical compositions, see ­Rillon-​­Marne, Homo considera: La pastorale lyrique de Philippe le Chancelier. 14. Taylor, “The Eight Monophonic Political Planctus,” 49. 15. “Dum lacrimantur filium. / nondum repente lacrima / resolvit nos uberrima. / mors in mororis flumina, / in lapsum matris labimur. / ad mariam convertimur, / stella de qua tot lumina / nostris scintillant seculis. / quod virtutum carbunculis / obtusi nos excedimus. / et pio planctu plangimus / o gratiosa domina. / / Mira loquar cecidit / sol in oriente. / causa solis concidit / in hoc occidente. / illa lampas campanie / o mater maria gratie / In qua tot luminaria / noctis et umbre nescia / tot stelle laudis luxerant. / quod oculi mortalium / tante virtutis radium / in vidua non viderant” (text and trans. in Taylor, “The Eight Monophonic Political Planctus,” 47, lines 15–38). 16. The Chancellor elides two related events, Henry’s departure in May 1179 and his death in March 1181. 17. “Pax regni moritur. / sepulto comite / furens de fomite, / rancoris oritur / discordia . . . ​ / O si regem puerum / regeret avunculus . . . ​/ belli sitim hanc sedaret” (text and trans. in Tayor, “Eight Monophonic Political Planctus,” 15–16, lines 36–40, 47–48, 52) 18. More than 115 manuscripts survive; see Platelle in Thomas de Cantimpré, 5. 19. Thomas of Cantimpré, Bonum universale de apibus, 1: 31–32, bk. 1 ch. 7 (annotated French trans. in Platelle, Thomas de Cantimpré, 71–72). This is the only reference that links Adam of Perseigne directly with Countess Marie.



No t e s t o Pa ge s 9 9 –10 6

157

20. For a brief biography, see Bouvet’s introduction to Adam de Perseigne, Lettres. 21. For Adam of Perseigne’s regional influence in Western France, see Reinbold, “Les cercles de l’amitié,” fig. 1 (map). For Marie’s chaplain Adam, see 134–35n. 87. 22. For examples of the stripping of the dead, see Platelle in Thomas de Cantimpré, 274 n. 15. 23. See Kurmann, La cathédrale ­Saint-​­Étienne de Meaux. 24. For the tomb, see Dectot, “Les tombeaux des comtes,” 12–13, 42. 25. Dickens, Household Words, 10: 443. 26. Paris, “Études sur les romans de la Table Ronde, Lancelot du Lac. II,” 530, speaks of the “fusion” between the idéal amoreux et courtois (as in De Amore) with the Arthurian materials (in Lancelot). In effect, curia amoris becomes amour courtois, in a subtle crossing of the noun curia with the adjective courtois. For a recent analysis of Paris’s work, specifically on courtly love, see Bähler, Gaston Paris, 587–621.

appendix 2 1. AD Aube, 4bis H 9 (­St‑Loup), 1182 = ­St‑Loup, 101–3, no. 68. 2. Benton, “Recueil,” 1183b: Dominus Andreas Capellanus. 3. “Léproserie,” 535, 1184. 4. “Léproserie,” 531, 1185. First witness after the principals of the act, the abbots of Larrivour and ­St‑Loup of Troyes. 5. AD Aube, 6 G 7 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1185h): Petrus et Andreas capellani, listed after Margaret of France, widowed queen of England. 6. ­Notre-​­Dame de Paris, 1: 296–97, no. 13, 1186: Petrus et Andreas capellani mei. 7. “Léproserie,” 532, 1186. 8. AD Aube, 9 H 21 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1186h). 9. AD Marne, G 1308 (= Benton, “Recueil,” 1186j). 10. ­St‑Pierre, 58–59, no. 45, 1186.

Bibliography

Primary Sources Actes des comtes de Bar, vol. 2: Thiébaut Ier (1190–1214). Ed. Jacqueline Laplace. Actes des princes lorrains, II. Les comtes. Nancy: Université de Nancy II, 1974. Adam de Perseigne. Lettres, 1: Texte latin, introduction, traduction et notes. Ed. Jean Bouvet. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1960. Alexander III. Epistolae. PL 200: 70–1318. Ambroise. Estoire de la Guerre Sainte. Ed. Marianne Ailes and Malcolm Barber. Trans. Marianne Ailes as The History of the Holy War: Ambroise’s Estoire de la Guerre Sainte. 2 vols. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2003. André of Marchiennes. Continuatio Aquicinctina of Sigbert of Gembloux. Ed. D. L. Conrad Bethmann. MGH SS 6: 405–38. Andreas Capellanus. Andreas Capellanus on Love. Ed. and trans. P. G. Walsh. London: Duckworth, 1982. Aubri of ­Trois-​­Fontaines. Chronicon. Ed. Paul ­Scheffer-​­Boichorst. MGH SS 23: ­631–​­950. Han­ over, 1874. Avenay. Louis Paris. Histoire de l’abbaye d’Avenay. 2 vols. Paris: Picard, 1879. Barthélemy, Édouard de. Diocèse ancien de ­Châlons-​­­sur-​­Marne: Histoire et monuments. 2 vols. Paris: A. Aubry, 1861. Benton, John F. “Recueil des actes des comtes de Champagne, 1152–1197.” An unpublished “­pre-​ ­edition” (1988) of 732 acts of Henry I, Marie, and Henry II. The acts of Henry I are now published as the Recueil des actes de Henri le Libéral, 1152–1181 (2009). The acts of Marie and Henry II are accessible only in this “­pre-​­edition,” available at several major university libraries in the United States and France. Bernard of Clairvaux. Epistolae. In Sancti Bernardi Opera, vols. 7–8. Ed. J. Leclercq and H. M. Rochais. Rome: Editiones Cisterciensis, 1957–78. ———. The Letters of St Bernard of Clairvaux. Trans. Bruno Scott James (1953), with a new introduction by Beverley Mayne Kienzle. Stroud: Cistercian Publications, 1998. Bertrand of ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube. Girart de Vienne par Bertrand de ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube. Ed. Wolfgang van Emden. Société des Anciens Textes Français. Paris: Picard, 1977. ———. The Song of Girart of Vienne by Bertrand de ­Bar-​­­sur-​­Aube: A ­Twelfth-​­Century Chanson de Geste. Trans. Michael A. Newth. Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 1999. Boutaric, E. Actes du Parlement de Paris, vol. 1. Paris: Plon, 1863. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France Illustrative of the History of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 1: A.D. 918–1206. Ed. John Horace Round. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1899.

160 Bi b li o gr a p h y Camuzat, Nicolas. Promptuarium sacrarum antiquitatum Tricassinae dioecesis. Troyes: U. Moreau, 1610. Cartulaire de la ville de Blois (1196–1493). Ed. Jacques Soyer and Guy Trouillard. In Mémoires de la Société des Sciences et Lettres de ­Loire-​­­et-​­Cher 17 (1903–7). The Cartulary of Countess Blanche of Champagne. Ed. Theodore Evergates. Medieval Academy Books, no. 112. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009. ­Champollion-​­Figeac, J. J., ed. Documents historiques inédits tirés des collections manuscrites de la Bibliothèque royale et des archives ou des bibliothèques des départements. 4 vols. Paris: F ­ irmin-​ ­Didot, 1841–48. La ­Chapelle-​­­aux-​­Planches. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de la ­Chapelle-​­­aux-​­Planches. In Lalore, Collection, vol. 4. Chassel, ­Jean-​­Luc. Sceaux et usage de sceaux: Images de la Champagne médiévale. Paris: Somogy, 2003. Cheminon. Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de N ­ otre-​­Dame de Cheminon. Ed. E. de Barthélemy. Paris: Champion, 1883. Chrétien de Troyes. Arthurian Romances. Trans. William W. Kibler and Carleton W. Carroll. London: Penguin Books, 1991. ———. Chrétien de Troyes: Romans. Ed. J. M. Fritz, Charles Méla, O. Collet, D. F. Hult, and M.-​­Cl. Zai. Paris: La Pochothèque, 1994. Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier. Ed. L. de Mas Latrie. Paris: Veuve Jules Renouard, 1871. Chronique de ­Saint-​­­Pierre-​­­le-​­Vif de Sens, dite de Clarius. Ed. and trans. R ­ obert-​­Henri Bautier and Monique Gilles. Paris: CNRS, 1979. Cîteaux. Chartes et documents concernant l’abbaye de Cîteaux, 1098–1182. Ed. J. Marilier. Rome: Editiones Cistercienses, 1961. Clairvaux. Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Clairvaux aux XIIe siècle. Ed. Laurent Veyssière. Paris: CTHS, 2004. Conon de Béthune. Les chansons de Conon de Béthune. Ed. Axel Wallensköld. Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion, 1968 La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr (1184–1197). Ed. M. R. Morgan. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1982. Trans. Peter W. Edbury as “The Old French Continuation of William of Tyre, 1184–97,” in The Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade: Sources in Translation, ed. Peter W. Edbury, 11–45. Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1996. Desguerrois, ­Marie-​­Nicolas. La saincteté chrestienne. Troyes: Jean Jacquard, 1637. Épernay. Auguste Nicaise. Épernay et l’abbaye S­ aint-​­Martin de cette ville: Histoire et documents inédits. 2 vols. ­Châlons-​­­sur-​­Marne: J.-​­L. Le Roy, 1869. Epistolae pontificum romanorum ineditae. Ed. S. Loewenfeld. Leipzig: Veit, 1885. Eracles. See La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyre. Eructavit: An Old French Metrical Paraphrase of Psalm XLIV, Published from All the Known Manuscripts and Attributed to Adam of Perseigne. Ed. T. Atkinson Jenkins. Dresden: Gesellschaft für Romanische Literature, 1909. An edition of Occitanian provenance, with orthographic variants, is L’“Eructavit” ­Antico-​­Francese secondo il ms. Paris B.N. fr. 1747, ed. Walter Meliga. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso, 1992. Evergates, Theodore, ed. Feudal Society in Medieval France: Documents from the County of Champagne. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. Evrat. La Genèse d’Evrat. Ed. Wil Boers. 4 vols. Leiden: Universiteit Leiden, 2002. A partial edition is Jane Frances Anne Henderson, “A Critical Edition of Evrat’s Genesis: Creation to the Flood [lines 1–2568].” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto, 1977.



Bi b li o gr a p h y

161

Fontaines, “Obituaire.” In B. Pavillon, La vie du bienheureux Robert d’Arbrissel, 563–64. Foreville, Raymonde. Lateran I, II, III et Lateran IV. Histoire des conciles oecuménique, 6. Paris; Éditions de l’Orante, 1965. Fragmenta Gaufridi [of Auxerre]. See Vita prima sancti Bernardi. Gabrieli, Francesco, ed. and trans. Arab Historians of the Crusades. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Gace Brulé. Gace Brulé, trouvère champenois: Édition des chansons et étude historique. Ed. Holder Peterson Dyggve. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 1951. ———. The Lyrics and Melodies of Gace Brulé. Ed. Samuel N. Rosenberg and Samuel Danon, music ed. Hendrik van der Werf. New York: Garland, 1985. Gallia Christiana in provincias eccleiasticas distributa. 16 vols. Paris, 1739–1877. Gautier d’Arras, Eracle. Ed. and trans. Karen Pratt. King’s College Centre for Late Antique and Medieval Studies, 21. Exeter: Short Run Press, 2007. ———. Eracle. Ed. Guy Raynaud de Lage. Paris: Champion, 1976. Gerald of Wales. De principis instructione liber. In Giraldi Cambrensis opera, ed. George F. Warner, vol. 8. Rolls Series. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1891. Gervase of Canterbury. Chronica. In Opera Historica, vol. 1. Ed. William Stubbs. The Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II, and Richard I. Rolls Series 72. 2 vols. London: Longman, 1879–80. Gislebert of Mons. La chronique de Gislebert de Mons. Ed. Léon Vanderkindere. Brussels: Kiessling, 1904. Trans. Laura Napran as Chronicle of Hainaut. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2005. Goldin, Frederick. Lyrics of the Troubadours and Trouvères: Original Texts, with Translations and Introductions. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1973. Gregory, Stewart. The ­Twelfth-​­Century Psalter Commentary in French for Laurette d’Alsace (An Edition of Psalms I–L), vol. 1, Psalms I–XXXV. London: Modern Humanities Research Council, 1989. History of William Marshal. Ed. A. J. Holden, trans. S. Gregory, with historical notes by D. Crouch. 3 vols. London: A ­ nglo-​­Norman Text Society, 2002–6. Historia gloriosi regis Ludovici VII. RHF 12: 124–33. Hospitaliers. Cartulaire général de l’ordre des Hospitaliers de S. Jean de Jérusalem (1100–1310), vol. 1: 1100–1200. Ed. J. Delaville le Roux. 4 vols. Paris: E. Leroux, 1894–1906. Huon d’Oisi, Tournoiement des dames. Ed. A. Jeanroy, “Notes sur le tournoiement des dames,” Romania 28 (1899): 240–44; trans. David Crouch in Tournament, 167–71. Ibn Shaddād. The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin. Trans. D. S. Richards. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001. Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi. Ed. W. Stubbs. In Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I. Rolls Series 38, vol. 1. London, 1864. Trans. Helen J. Nicholson as The Chronicle of the Third Crusade. Crusade Texts in Translation, 3. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997. John of Salisbury. The Historia Pontificalis of John of Salisbury. Ed. and trans. Marjorie Chibnall. London: Thomas Nelson, 1956. Lalore, Charles, ed. Collection des principaux cartulaires du diocèse de Troyes. 7 vols. Paris: E. Thorin, 1875–90. ———, ed. Inventaires des principales églises de Troyes. Collection de documents inédits relatifs à la ville de Troyes et de la Champagne méridionale. 2 vols. Troyes: D ­ ufour-​­Bouquot, 1893. Lambert of Ardres. Lamberti Ardensis historia comitum Ghisnensium. Ed. Johann Heller. In MGH SS 24: 550–642. Trans. Leah Shopkow as The History of The Counts of Guines and Lords of Ardres. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001.

162 Bi b li o gr a p h y Langres. Cartulaire du chapitre cathédral de Langres. Ed. Hubert Flammarion. 2nd ed. Turnhout: Brepols, 2004. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes. Ed. Alexandre Teulet et al. 4 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1863–1909. “Léproserie.” Harmand, “Notice historique sur la Léproserie de la ville de Troyes.” MSA 14 (1847–48): 429–669. Liber Pontificum, BnF, Lat. 5993A. Littere Baronum: The Earliest Cartulary of the Counts of Champagne. Ed. Theodore Evergates. Medieval Academy Books, no. 107. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003. Longnon, Auguste, ed. Documents relatifs au comté de Champagne et de Brie (1172–1361). 3 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1901–14. Longnon, Jean. Recherches sur la vie de Geoffroy de Villehardouin, suivis du catalogue des actes des Villehardouin. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1939. Luchaire, Achille. Études sur les actes de Louis VII. Paris: Picard, 1885. Martène, Edmond, and Ursin Durand, eds. Thesaurus novus anecdotorum. 5 vols. Paris: F. Delaulne, 1717. Rpt. Farnborough: Gregg, 1968–69. Meaux. Michel Toussaints du Plessis. Histoire de l’église de Meaux. 2 vols. Paris: G ­ andouin-​ ­Giffart, 1731. Meinert, Hermann, ed. Papsturkunden in Frankreich. Neue Folge. 1 Bd. Champagne und Lotharingien. 2 vols. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1933. Montiéramey. Cartulaire de Montiéramey. In Lalore, Collection, 7 (1890). ­Montier-​­­la-​­Celle. Cartulaire de ­Montier-​­­la-​­Celle. In Lalore, Collection, 5 (1882). Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores. 30 vols. Hanover, 1824–1924. Nicholas of Montiéramey. Epistolae. PL 196: 1593–1654. “­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains.” “Documents sur l’abbaye de ­Notre-​­­Dame-​­­aux-​­Nonnains de Troyes.” Ed. Charles Lalore. MSA 38 (1874): 5–236. ­Notre-​­Dame de Chartres. Cartulaire de ­Notre-​­Dame de Chartres. Ed. E. de Lépinois and Lucient Musset. 3 vols. Chartres: Garnier Imprimeur, 1862. ­Notre-​­Dame de Paris. Cartulaire de l’église ­Notre-​­Dame de Paris. Ed. M. Guérard. 4 vols. Paris: Crapelet, 1850. Obituaires. Obituaires de la province de Sens. Paris: Impr. Nationale. 1. Diocèse de Sens et de Paris. Ed. Auguste Molinier, 2 vols., 1902. 2. Diocèse de Chartres. Ed. Auguste Molinier, 1906. 4. Diocèses de Meaux et de Troyes. Ed. Armand Boutillier du Retail and P. Piétresson de S­ aint-​ ­Aubin. 1923. Odo of Deuil. De profectione Ludovici VII in Orientem. Ed. and trans. Virginia Gingerick Berry as The Journey of Louis VII in the East. New York: Norton, 1948. Ordonnaces des rois de France de la troisième race. Ed. E. J. Laurière et al. 22 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1723–1849. Paraclet. Cartulaire de l’abbaye du Paraclet. In Lalore, Collection, 2 (1878). Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina. Ed. J.-​­P. Migne. 221 vols. Paris, 1844–65. Pavillon, B. Ls vie du bienheureux Robert d’Arbrissel. Saumaur: François Ernov, 1667. Peter of Celle. The Letters of Peter of Celle. Ed. and trans. Julian Haseldine. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Peter Riga. Aurora Petri Rigae Biblia Versificata. Ed. Paul E. Beichner. 2 vols. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1965. Pontigny. Le premier cartulaire de l’abbaye cistercienne de Pontigny (XIIe–XIIIe siècle). Ed. Martine Garrigues. Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1981.



Bi b li o gr a p h y

163

Preuilly. Chartes et documents de l’abbaye cistercienne de Preuilly. Ed. Albert Catel and Maurice Lecomte. Montereau: Imprimerie Claverie, 1927. Provins, BM, ms. 85. Collection of charters. Quantin, Maximilien, ed. Cartulaire général de l’Yonne. 2 vols. Auxerre: Perriquet et Rouillé, 1854, 1860. _____. Recueil de pièces pour faire suite au Cartulaire général de l’Yonne (XIIIe siècle). Auxerre: Société des Sciences Historiques et Naturelles de l’Yonne, 1873. Ralph of Diceto. Ymagines Historiarum. Ed. W. Stubbs. In The Historical Works of Master Ralph of Diceto, Dean of London, 1: 291–440; 2: 2–174. Rolls Series 68. 2 vols. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1876. Recueil des actes d’Henri le Libéral, comte de Champagne (1152–1181). Vol. 1. Ed. John Benton and Michel Bur, with the collaboration of Dominique Devaux, Olivier Guyotjeannin, Xavier de la Selle, and Rosy Meiron and Michèle Courtois. Académie des Inscriptions et B ­ elles-​ ­Lettres. Paris: De Boccard, 2009. Vol. 2. Indices et addenda. Ed. Michel Bur, with the collaboration of Michèle Courtois. Académie des Inscriptions et ­Belles-​­Lettres. Paris: De Boccard, 2013. Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste. Ed. ­Henri-​­François Delaborde, Charles ­Petit-​­Dutaillis, Jacques Boussard, and Michel Nortier. 4 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1916–79. Vol. 5: Supplément d’actes, actes perdus, additions et corrections aux précédents volumes. Ed. Michel Nortier. Académie des Inscriptions et ­Belles-​­Lettres. Paris: De Boccard, 2004. Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France. Ed. Dom Bouquet et al. 24 vols. Paris, 1734–1904. Die Register Innocenz’ III, vol. 1. Ed. Othmar Hageneder and Anton Haidacher. ­Graz-​­Cologne: Verlage Hermann Böhlais, 1964. Les registres de Philippe Auguste. Ed. John W. Baldwin et al. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1992. Richard of Devizes. The Chronicle of Richard of Devizes of the Time of King Richard the First. Ed. John T. Appleby. London: Thomas Nelson, 1963. Rigord. Gesta. Histoire de Philippe Auguste. Ed. and trans. Élisabeth Carpentier, Georges Pons, and Yves Chauvin. Sources d’histoire médiévales, 33. Paris: CNRS, 2006. Robert (of ­Saint-​­Marien) of Auxerre. Chronicon. Ed. O. H ­ older-​­Egger. In MGH SS 26: 219–76. Robert of Torigni. The Chronicle of Robert of Torigni. Ed. Richard Howlett. In Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I. Rolls Series 82, vol. 4. London: Longman, 1889. Trans. Joseph Stevenson as The Chronicles of Robert de Monte. The Church Historians of England, vol. 4, pt. 2. London: Seeleys, 1856; rpt. and repaginated, Lampeter: Llanerch, 1991. Roger of Howden. Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Hovedane. Ed. W. Stubbs. Rolls Series 51. 4 vols. London: Longman, 1868–71. ———. Gesta Regis Henrici secundi et Ricardi Primi. Ed. W. Stubbs. In The Chronicles of the Reigns of Henry II and Richard I, A.D. 1169–1192, Known Commonly Under the Name of Benedict of Peterborough. Rolls Series 49. 2 vols. London: Longman, 1867. ­St‑Étienne. Cartulary of ­Saint-​­Étienne of Troyes. BnF, Lat. 17098 (ca. 1271). Original foliation cited here. ­St‑­Germain-​­­des-​­Prés. Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de ­Saint-​­­Germain-​­­des-​­Prés. Ed. Réné Poupardin. 2 vols. Paris: H. Champion, 1909, 1930. ­St‑Loup. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de ­Saint-​­Loup de Troyes. In Lalore, Collection, 1 (1875). ­St‑Nicaise. Cartulaire de S­ aint-​­Nicaise de Reims (XIII siècle). Ed. Jeannine C ­ ossé-​­Durlin. Paris: CNRS, 1991.

164 Bi b li o gr a p h y S­ t‑Pierre. Cartulaire de ­Saint-​­Pierre de Troyes. In Lalore, Collection 5 (1880): 2–228. ­St‑Quiriace. Michel Veissière. Une communauté canoniale au Moyen Age: ­Saint-​­Quiriace de Provins (XIe–XIIIe siècles). Provins: Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de l’Arrondissement de Provins, Documents et travaux, 1. Provins: L’Imprimerie ­Notre-​­Dame, 1961. Sigebert of Gembloux, Chronica cum continuationibus. Ed. L. C. Bethmann. MGH SS 6: 268–474. Stephen of Tournai. Lettres d’Étienne de Tournai. Ed. Jules Desilve. Paris: Picard, 1893. Suger. Oeuvres. Ed. Françoise Gasparri. 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1996, 2008. ———. Vie de Louis VI le Gros. Ed. and trans. Henri Waquet. 2nd ed. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1964. Templiers de Provins. Histoire et cartulaire des Templiers de Provins. Ed. Victor Carrière. Paris: H. Champion, 1919. Thomas Becket. The Correspondence of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1162–1170. Ed. Anne Duggan. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000. Thomas of Cantimpré. Bonum universale de apibus. Ed. Georges Colvénère. Douai: Beller, 2nd ed, 1627. Henri Platelle provides a French trans. as Thomas de Cantimpré: Les exemples du Libre des Abeilles, une vision médiévale: Présentation, traduction et commentaire. Turnhout: Brepols, 1997. Vallet de Viriville, A. Les archives historiques du département de l’Aube et de l’ancien diocèse de Troyes. Troyes: Bouquot, 1841. Vauluisant. “Cartulary of Vauluisant (BnF Lat. 9901).” Ed. William Owen Duba. MA thesis, University of Iowa, 1994. Villehardouin. Conquête. La conquête de Constantinople. Ed. Edmond Farat. 2 vols. 2nd ed. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1961. Vita prima sancti Bernardi Claraevallis Abbatis [Recension A], ed. Paul Verdeyen, and Fragmenta Gaufridi, ed. Christine Vande Veire, 234–317. Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaeualis, 89B. Turnhout: Brepols, 2011. For a translation of the Vita [Recension B], see Hilary Costello, The First Life of Bernard of Clairvaux by William of ­Saint-​­Thierry, Arnold of Bonneval, and Geoffroy of Auxerre. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2015. Walter Map. De Nugis Curialium (Courtiers’ Trifles). Ed. and trans. M. R. James, rev. C. N. L. Brooke and R. A. B. Mynors. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983. William of Andres. Chronica Andrensis. Ed. I. Heller. MGH SS 24: 684–773. Hanover: Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1879. William of Nangis. Chronique latine de Guillaume de Nangis, de 1113 à 1300. Ed. Hercule Gérard. 2 vols. Paris: Renaud, 1843. William of Tyre. Chronique. Ed. R. B. C. Huygens. 2 vols. Turnhout: Brepols, 1986. Trans. Emily Atwater Babcock and A. C. Krey as A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea. 2 vols. New York: Columbia University Press, 1943.

Secondary Works Adolf, Helen. “A Historical Background for Chrétien’s Perceval.” Publications of the Modern Language Association 58, no. 3 (1943): 597–620. ­Anderson-​­Wyman, Kathleen. Andreas Capellanus on Love? Desire, Seduction, and Subversion in a ­Twelfth-​­Century Latin Text. New York: Palgrave, 2007. Andrea, Alfred J. “Adam of Perseigne and the Fourth Crusade.” Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses 36 (1985): 21–37.



Bi b li o gr a p h y

165

Arbois de Jubainville, Henry d’. Histoire des ducs et des comtes de Champagne. 7 vols. Paris: A. Durand, 1859–69. ­Armstrong-​­Partida, Michelle. “Mothers and Daughters as Lords: The Countesses of Blois and Chartres.” Medieval Prosopography 26 (2005): 77–107. Arnaud, ­Anne-​­François. Voyage archéologique et pittoresque dans le département de l’Aube et dans l’ancien diocèse de Troyes. Troyes: Imprimerie de L.-​­C. Cardon, 1837. Bähler, Ursula. Gaston Paris et la philologie romane. Geneva: Droz, 2004. Baldwin, John W. The Government of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. Barlow, Frank. Thomas Becket. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. Baudin, Arnaud. Les sceaux des comtes de Champagne et de leur entourage ( fin XIe–début XIVe siècle): Emblématique et pouvoir en Champagne. Langres: Éditions Dominique Guéniot, 2012. ———. “Les sceaux du comte Henri Ier le libéral: Images et usages.” In Recueil des actes d’Henri le Libéral, 2: 79–112. Beech, George T. “The Eleanor of Aquitaine Vase, William IX of Aquitaine, and Muslim Spain.” Gesta 31 (1993): 3–10. Benham, Jerry. Peacemaking in the Middle Ages: Principles and Practices. Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 2011. Benton, John F. “The Court of Champagne as a Literary Center.” In Benton, Culture, 3–43. ———. “The Court of Champagne Under Henry the Liberal and Countess Marie.” Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, 1959. ———. Culture, Power and Personality in Medieval France. Collected articles. Ed. Thomas N. Bisson. London: Hambledon Press, 1991. ———.“The Evidence for Andreas Capellanus R ­ e-​­ examined Again.” In Benton, Culture, 81–88. Bettin, Hans. Heinrich II. von Champagne: Seine Kreuzfahrt und Wirksamkeit in heiligen Lande (1190–1197). Historische Studien, Heft 85. Berlin: Matthieson Verlag, 1910. Rpt. Vaduz: Kraus Reprint, 1965. Biblolet, Françoise. “La bibliothèque des chanoines de Troyes: leurs manuscrits du XIIe au XVIe s.” MSA 104 (1964–66): 139–77. _____. “Marie, comtesse de Champagne.” Almanach 1957 de l’Indépendant de l’Aube, 64–73. Troyes, 1957. Bienvenu, ­Jean-​­Marc. “Aliénor d’Aquitaine et Fontevraud.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 29 (1986): 15–27. Boers, Willy. “La Genèse d’Evrat.” Scriptorium 61 (2007): 74–149. Boitel, abbé. Histoire du bienheureux Jean, surnommé l’humble, seigneur de M ­ ontmirail-​­­en-​­Brie. Paris: H. Vrayet de Surey, 1859. Bonnard, Jean. Les traductions de la Bible en vers français au moyen âge. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1884. Bonno, abbé. “Notice historique sur le monastère de ­ Fontaines-​­­ les-​­ Nonnes (Diocèse de Meaux).” Revue de Champagne et de Brie 24 (1887): 189–204, 356–66; 25 (1888): 11–22, 118–30. Bonvalot, Édouard. Le tiers état d’après la charte de Beaumont et ses filiales. Paris: Picard, 1884. Bony, Jean. French Gothic Architecture of the 12th and 13th Centuries. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983. Bony, Pierre. Un siècle de sceaux figurés (1135–1235). Paris: Le Leopard d’Or, 2002.

166 Bi b li o gr a p h y Bourgain, Pascale. “Aliénor d’Aquitaine et Marie de Champagne mises en cause par André le Chapelain.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 29 (1986): 29–36. Bowie, Colette. The Daughters of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014. Boyle, Leonard E. “Innocent III and the Vernacular Versions of Scripture.” In The Bible in the Medieval World: Essays in Memory of Beryl Smalley, ed. Katherine Walsh and Diana Ward, 97–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. Bredero, Adriaan H. Bernard of Clairvaux: Between Cult and History. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerd­mans, 1996. ———. “The Canonization of Bernard of Clairvaux.” In Saint Bernard of Clairvaux: Studies Commemorating the Eighth Centenary of His Canonization, ed. M. Basil Pennington, 63– 100. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1977. Brixius, Johannes Matthias. Die Mitglieder des Kardinalkollegiums von 1130–1181. Berlin: R. Trenkel, 1912. Brown, Elizabeth A.R. “Eleanor of Aquitaine Reconsidered: The Woman and Her Seasons.” In Eleanor of Aquitaine: Lord and Lady, ed. Bonnie Wheeler and John Carmi Parsons, 1–44. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. Buc, Philippe. “Conversion of Objects.” Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies 28 (1997): 101–43. ­Bullock-​­Davies, Constance. “Chrétien de Troyes and England.” Arthurian Literature 1 (1981): 1–61. Bur, Michel. La Champagne médiévale: Recueil d’articles. Langres: Éditions Dominique Guéniot, 2005. ———. La formation du comté de Champagne, v. 950–v. 1150. Nancy: Publications de l’Université de Nancy II, 1977. ———. “L’image de la parenté chez les comtes de Champagne.” In Bur, La Champagne médiévale, 59–89. Burgtorf, Jochen. The Central Convent of Hospitallers and Templars: History, Organization, and Personnel (1099/1120–1310). Leiden: Brill, 2008. Busby, Keith. Codex and Context: Reading Old French Verse Narrative in Manuscript. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2002. Busby, Keith, Terry Nixon, Alison Stones, and Lori Walters, eds. The Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1993. Cardevaque, A. de. “Oisy et ses seigneurs.” Mémoires de la Société d’Emulation de Cambrai, 37 (1881): 53–212. Carré de Busserolle, Jacques Xavier, ed. Dictionnaire géographique, historique et biographique d’­ Indre-​­­et-​­Loire et de l’ancienne province de Touraine. Vol. 2. Mayenne: Floch, 1966. Caviness, Madeline Harrison. Sumptuous Arts and the Royal Abbeys in Reims and Braine. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990. Chapin, Elizabeth. Les villes de foires de Champagne des origines au début du XIVe siècle. Paris: H. Champion, 1937. La Charte de Beaumont et les franchises municipales entre Loire et Rhin. Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1988. Chassel, ­Jean-​­Luc, ed. Sceaux et usages de sceaux: Images de la Champagne médiévale. Troyes: Somogy, 2003. Chazan, Mireille. L’empire et l’histoire universelle: De Sigebert de Gembloux à Jean de S­ aint-​­Victor (XIIe–XIVe). Paris, 1999.



Bi b li o gr a p h y

167

Chazan, Robert. “The Bray Incident of 1192: Realpolitik and Folk Slander.” American Academy for Jewish Research 37 (1969): 1–18. Cherchi, Paolo. Andreas and the Ambiguity of Courtly Love. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994. Ciggaar, Krijnie. “Encore une fois Chrétien de Troyes et la ‘matière byzantine’: La révolution des femmes au palais de Constantinople.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 38 (1995): 267–74. Clark, Mark J. The Making of the Historia Scholastica, 1150–1200. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 2015. A Companion to Chrétien de Troyes. Ed. Norris J. Lacy and Joan Tasker Grimbert. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005. Cremonesi, Carla. “A proposito du alcuni versi (55–63) del Tournoirment des Dames di Huon d’Oisy.” Studi Francesi 55 (1975): 81–84. Crouch, David. The Beaumont Twins: The Roots and Branches of Power in the Twelfth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. ———. Tournament. London: Hambledon and Continuum, 2005. Dectot, Xavier. “Les tombeaux des comtes de Champagne (1151–1284): Un manifeste politique.” Bulletin Monumental 162 (2004): 1–62. Demouy, Patrick. Genèse d’une cathédrale: Les archevêques de Reims et leur église aux XIe et XIIe siècles. Langres: Éditions Dominique Guéniot, 2005. Dickens, Charles. Household Words. Available in digitized form in Dickens Journals Online. Dictionnaire des lettres françaises: Le Moyen Âge. Ed. Robert Bossuat et al. Paris: Fayard, 1962, 2nd ed. 1992. Diggelmann, Lindsay. “Marriage as Tactical Response: Henry II and the Royal Wedding of 1160.” English Historical Review 119 (2004): 954–64. Diverres, Armel. “The Grail and the Third Crusade: Thoughts on Le Conte del Graal by Chrétien de Troyes.” Arthurian Literature 10 (1990): 13–109. Dossat, Yves. “L’hérésie in Champagne aux XIIe et XIIIe siècles.” MSA 84 (1969): 57–73. Reprinted in Dossat, Église et hérésie en France au XIIIe siècle. London: Variorum, 1982. Dufour, Jean. “Adèle de Champagne, troisième femme de Louis VII, une reine méconnue.” In Reines et princesses au Moyen Âge, 1: 35–41. 2 vols. Montpellier: Université de ­Paul-​­Valéry, 2001. Dutton, Marsha L. “A Case for Canonization: The Argument of the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi.” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 52, no. 2 (2017): 131–60. ­Erlande-​­Brandenburg, Alain. “La cathédrale ­Saint-​­Étienne de Sens: La première cathédrale gothique.” In Les laïcs dans les villes de la France du Nord au XIIIe siècle, ed. Patrick Demouy, 29–42. Turnhout: Brepols, 2008. ———. “Le grand dessein de Maurice de Sully (1160).” In N ­ otre-​­Dame de Paris: Un manifeste chrétien (1160–1230), ed. Michel Lemoine, 71–92. Turnhout: Brepols, 2004. ———. Le roi est mort: Étude sur les funérailles, les sépultures et les tombeaux des rois de France jusqu’à la fin du XIIIe siècle. Geneva: Droz, 1975. Everard, J. A. Brittany and the Angevins: Province and Empire, 1158–1203. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Evergates, Theodore. The Aristocracy in the County of Champagne, 1100–1300. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007. ———. “Aristocratic Women in the County of Champagne.” In Aristocratic Women in Medieval France, ed. Theodore Evergates, 75–110. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.

168 Bi b li o gr a p h y ———. Feudal Society in the Bailliage of Troyes Under the Counts of Champagne, 1152–1284. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975. ———. Henry the Liberal: Count of Champagne, 1127–1181. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016. ———. “Louis VII and the Counts of Champagne.” In The Second Crusade and the Cistercians, ed. Michael Gervers, 109–17. New York: St. Martin’s, 1992. Falletti, Louis. Le retrait lignager en droit coutumier français. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1923. Falmagne, Jacques. Baudouin V, comte de Hainaut, 1150–1195. Montréal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal, 1966. ­Favreau-​­Lilie, ­Marie-​­Luise. Die Italiener im Heiligen Land vom esrten Kreuzzug bis zum Tode Heinrichs von Champagne (1098–1197). Amsterdam: Verlag Adolf M. Hallert, 1989. Flori, Jean. Aliénor d’Aquitaine: La reine insoumise. Paris: Éditions Payot & Rivages, 2004. Fourrier, Anthime. Le courant réaliste dans le romane courtoise en France au moyen âge, t. 1, Les débuts (XIIe siècle). Paris: A. G. Nizet Éditeur, 1960. ———. “Encore la chronologie des oeuvres de Chrétien de Troyes.” Bulletin Bibliographique de la Société Internationale Arthurienne 2 (1950): 69–88. ———. “Retour au terminus.” In Mélanges de langue et de littérature du moyen âge et de la renaissance offerts à Jean Frappier, 1: 299–311. Geneva: Droz, 1970. La France romane au temps des premiers Capétiens (987–1152). Ed. Danielle ­Gaborit-​­Chopin. Exhibition catalogue, Musée du Louvre, 10 mars–6 juin 2005. Paris: Musée du Louvre Éditions, 2005. ­Gaborit-​­Chopin, Danielle. “Suger’s Liturgical Vessels.” In Abbot Suger and ­Saint-​­Denis: A Symposium, ed. Paula Liber Gerson, 283–93. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986. Garnier, François. Le langage de l’image au moyen âge. 2 vols. Paris: Le Léopard d’Or, 1982, 1989. Gillingham, John. Richard I. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. Glastonbury Abbey and the Arthurian Tradition. Ed. James P. Carley. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2001. Gouget, Jean, and Thierry Le Hête. Les comtes de Blois et de Champagne et leur descendance agnatique: Généalogie et histoire d’une dynastie féodale, Xe–XVIIe siècle. ­St‑Sebastien de Morsent: T. Le Hête, 2004. Gransden, Antonia. “The Growth of the Glastonbury Traditions and Legends in the Twelfth Century.” In Glastonbury Abbey and the Arthurian Tradition, 29–54. Grant, Lindy. “Suger and the A ­ nglo-​­Norman World.” ­Anglo-​­Norman Studies 19 (1996): 51–68. Grimbert, Joan Tasker. “Cligés and the Chansons: A Slave to Love.” In A Companion to Chrétien de Troyes, 120–36. Grossel, ­Marie-​­Geneviève. Le milieu littéraire en Champagne sous les Thibaudiens. 2 vols. Orléans: Paradigme, 1994. Guillemain, Bernard. “L’episcopat français à Lateran III.” In La Troisième Concile de Lateran (1179): Sa place dans l’histoire, ed. Raymonde Foreville, 23–31. Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1992. Hamilton, Bernard. The Leper King and His Heirs: Baldwin IV and the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. ­Hany-​­Longuespé, Nicole. Le trésor et les reliques de la cathédrale de Troyes, de la Quatrième Croisade à nos jours. Troyes: Maison du Boulanger, 2005. Harari, Yuval Noah. “The Assassination of King Conrad: Tyre, 1192.” In Harari, Special Operations in the Age of Chivalry, 1100–1550, 91–108. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007.



Bi b li o gr a p h y

169

­Harf-​­Lancner, Laurence. “Chrétien’s Literary Background.” In A Companion to Chrétien de Troyes, 26–42. Harvey, Ruth. “­Cross-​­Channel Gossip in the Twelfth Century.” In England and the Continent in the Middle Ages, ed. John Mitchell, 48–59. Stamford: Shaun Tygas, 2000. Henriet, Jacques. “La cathédrale S­ aint-​­Étienne de Sens: Le parti du premier maître et les campagnes du XIIe siècle.” Bulletin Monumental 140 (1982): 81–176. Hindman, Sandra. Sealed in Parchment: Rereadings of Knighthood in the Illuminated Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Holmes, Urban T., Jr., and M. Amelia Klenke. Chrétien, Troyes, and the Grail. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959. Hornaday, Aline G. “A Capetian Queen as Street Demonstrator: Isabelle of Hainaut.” In Capetian Women, ed. Kathleen Nolan, 77–97. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Hubert, Jean. “La frontière occidentale du comté de Champagne du XIe au XIIIe siècle.” In Recueil de travaux offerts à M. Clovis Brunel, 2: 14–30. Paris: Société de l’École des Chartes, 1955. Hunt, Tony. “Chrestien de Troyes: The Textual Problem.” In Busby, The Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes, 1: 27–40. Janssen, Wilhelm. Die Päpstlichen Legaten in Frankreich von Schisma Aneklets II. zum Tode Coelestins III. (1130–1198). Cologne: Böhlau, 1961. Johns, Susan M. Noblewomen, Aristocracy and Power in the ­Twelfth-​­Century ­Anglo-​­Norman Realm. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003. Jordan, William Chester. The French Monarchy and the Jews, from Philip Augustus to the Last Capetians. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989. Joris, André. “Un seul amour . . . ​ou plusiers femmes?” In ­Femmes-​­­Mariages-​­Lignages, XIIe–XIVe siècles: Mélanges offerts à Georges Duby, ed. Jean Dufournet, André Joris, and Pierre Toubert, 197–214. Brussels: De Boeck Université, 1992. Karnein, Alfred. “De Amore” in volkssprachlicher Literatur: Untersuchungen zur A ­ndreas-​ ­­Capellanus-​­Rezeption in Mittlelalter und Renaissance. Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1985. ­Kenaan-​­Kedar, Nurith. “The Cathedral of Sebaste: Its Western Donors and Models.” In The Horns of Hattin, ed. B. Z. Kedar, 99–120. London: Variorum, 1992. Köhler, Michael. Alliances and Treaties Between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East: ­Cross-​­Cultural Diplomacy in the Period of the Crusades. Trans. Peter M. Holt. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Kurmann, Peter. La cathédrale S­ aint-​­Étienne de Meaux: Étude architecturale. Paris: Arts et Métiers Graphiques, 1971. Labande, E ­ dmond-​­René. “Les filles d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine: Étude comparative.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 29 (1986): 101–12. Lacy, Norris. “The Arthurian Legend Before Chrétien.” In A Companion to Chrétien de Troyes, 43–51. Lalore, Charles. Origines de N ­ otre-​­Dame de Foissy (Aube). Troyes: Imp. Brunard, 1884. La Salle, Xavier de. Le service des âmes à la cour: Confesseurs et aumôniers des rois de France du XIIIe au XVe siècle. Paris: École des Chartes, 1995. Lefèvre, Yves. “L’image du roi chez les poètes.” In La France de Philippe Auguste: Le temps des mutations, ed. ­Robert-​­Henri Bautier, 132–44. Paris: CNRS, 1982. Lejeune, Rita. “Le rôle littéraire de la famille d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine.” Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 1 (1958): 319–37. Lemarignier, J.-​­F. Recherches sur l’hommage en marche et les frontières féodales. Lille: Bibliothèque Universitaire, 1945.

170 Bi b li o gr a p h y Leroy, Thierry. “The Organization of the Champagne Templar Network, 1127–1143.” In The Knights Templar: From the Days of Jerusalem to the Commanderies of Champagne. Catalogue of the Exhibition, 16 June–31 October 2012, ed. Arnaud Baudin, Ghislain Brunel, and Nicolas Dohrmann, 116–21. Troyes: Somogy, 2012. Longnon, Jean. Les compagnons de Villehardoun: recherches sur les croisés de la quatrième croisade. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1978. Maddox, Donald, and Sara S­ turm-​­Maddox. “Erec et Enide: The First Arthurian Romance.” In A Companion to Chrétien de Troyes, 102–19. Maillet, Laurent. “Les missions d’Adam de Perseigne, émissaire de Rome et de Cîteaux (1190– 1221).” Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l’Ouest 120, no. 3 (2013): 99–116. Margue, Michel. “Ermesinde: Notice biographique.” In Ermesinde et l’affranchissement de la ville de Luxembourg, ed. Michel Margue, 11–27. Luxembourg: Musée d’Histoire de la Ville de Luxembourg, 1994. Martène, Edmund. Voyage littéraire de deux religieux bénédictins de la Congregation de ­Saint-​ ­Maur. 2 vols. Paris: F. Delaulne, 1717. Mayer, Hans Eberhard. Die Kanzlei des lateinischen Könige von Jerusalem. 2 vols. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Schriften, Bd. 40. Hanover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 1996. McCash, June Hall. “Chrétien’s Patrons.” In A Companion to Chrétien de Troyes, 15–25. ———. “The Cultural Patronage of Medieval Women: An Overview.” In The Cultural Patronage of Medieval Women, ed. June Hall McCash, 1–49. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1996. ———. “Eructavit cor meum: Sacred Love in a Secular Context at the Court of Marie de Champagne.” In Earthly Love, Spiritual Love, Love of the Saints, ed. Susan J. Ridyard, 159–78. Sewanee, Tenn.: University of the South Press, 1999. ———.“Marie de Champagne and Eleanor of Aquitaine: A Relationship Reexamined.” Speculum 54 (1979): 698–771. ———. “Marie de Champagne’s ‘Cuer d’ome et cors de fame’: Aspects of Feminism and Misogyny in the Twelfth Century.” In Spirit of the Court, ed. G. S. Burgess and R. A. Taylor, 234–44. Cambridge: Brewer, 1985. ———. “Reconsidering the Order of Chrétien de Troyes’s Romances.” In “Li premerains vers”: Essays in Honor of Keith Busby, ed. Catherine M. Jones and Logan E. Whalen, 245–60. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2011. McCracken, Peggy. The Romance of Adultery: Queenship and Social Transgression in Old French Literature. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1998. McKibben, George Fitch. The Eructavit, an Old French Poem: The Author’s Environment, His Argument and Materials. Baltimore: First Co., 1907. Monson, Don. A. Andreas Capellanus, Scholasticism, and the Courtly Tradition. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 2005. Morelle, Laurent. “Mariage et diplomatique: Autour de cinq chartes de douaire dans le ­Laonnois-​­Soissonnais, 1163–1181.” Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes 146 (1988): 225–84. Morgan, M. R. The Chronicle of Ernoul and the Continuations of William of Tyre. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973. Morganstern, Anne McGee. Gothic Tombs of Kinship. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000. Murray, Stephen. Building Troyes Cathedral: The Late Gothic Campaigns. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987.



Bi b li o gr a p h y

171

Neel, Carol. “Man’s Restoration: Robert of Auxerre and the Writing of History in the Early Thirteenth Century.” Traditio 44 (1998): 253–74. Nicholson, Helen. Love, War and the Grail. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Nielen, ­Marie-​­Adélaïde, ed. Les sceaux des reines et les enfants de France. Corpus des sceaux français du moyen âge, t. 3. Paris: Service Interministérial des Archives de France, 2011. Nolan, Kathleen. Queens in Stone and Silver: The Creation of a Visual Imagery of Queenship in Capetian France. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Nortier, Michel. “Étude sur un recueil de lettres écrites par Suger ou à lui adressées (1147–1150).” Journal des Savants (2009): 26–102. ­Olivier-​­Martin, F. Études sur les régences, 1: Les régences et la majorité des rois sous les Capétiens direct et les premiers Valois (1065–1375). Paris: Librairie de Recueil Sirey, 1931. Paris, Gaston, “Études sur les romans de la Table Ronde. Lancelot du Lac. II. Le Conte de la Charrette.” Romania 12 (1883): 459–534. Paston, Elizabeth C. and Sylvie Balcon. Les vitraux du chœur de la cathédrale de Troyes (XIIIe ­siècle). Corpus Vitrearum. France, vol. 2. Paris: CTHS, 2006. Petel, A. “La Commanderie de Payns et ses dépendences à Savières, à ­Saint-​­Mesmin, à Messon, et au Pavillon.” Revue Champenoise et Bourguignon 1 (1904): 25–54. Petersen Dyggve, Holder. “Personnages historiques figurant dans la poésie lyrique française des XIIe et XIIIe siècles. III. Les dames du ‘Tournoiement’ de Huon d’Oisi.” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 36, no. 2 (1935): 65–91. Petit, Ernest. Histoire des ducs de Bourgogne de la race capetienne. 9 vols. Dijon: Imp. Darantiere, 1885–1909. ­Peyrafort-​­Huin, Monique, in collaboration with Patricia Stirnemann, with a contribution by ­Jean-​­Luc Benoit, La bibliothèque médiévale de Pontigny, XIIe–XIXe siècles: Histoire, inventaires anciens, manuscrits. Paris: CNRS, 2001. Phillips, Jonathan. Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations Between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. ———. The Second Crusade: Extending the Frontiers of Christendom. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007. ­Poirier-​­Coutansais, Françoise. Les abbayes bénédictines du diocèse de Reims. Gallia Monastica, vol. 1. Paris: Picard, 1974. Pontel, Odette. Les conciles de la France capétiénne jusq’en 1215. Paris: IRHT, 1995. Poull, Georges. La maison souveraine et ducale de Bar. Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1994. Powell, Morgan. “Translating Scripture for Ma Dame de Champagne: The Old French ‘Paraphrase’ of Psalm 44 (Eructavit).” In The Vernacular Spirit: Essays on Medieval Religious Literature, ed. Renate B ­ lumenfeld-​­Kosinski, Duncan Robertson, and Nancy Bradley Warren, 83–103. New York: Palgrave, 2002. Prache, Anne. ­Saint-​­Remi de Reims: L’oeuvre de Pierre de Celle et sa place dans l’architecture gothique. Geneva: Droz, 1978. Prévost, Arthur Émile. Histoire du diocèse de Troyes. Vol. 1. Troyes: Gustave Frémont, 1908. Provost, Alain. “L’abbesse, l’évêque et le palefroi: Note sur une enquête à Troyes au temps de Philippe le Bel.” In Au cloître et dans le monde: Femmes, hommes et sociétés (IXe–XVe siècle), ed. Patrick Henriet and A ­ nne-​­Marie Legras, 281–90. Paris: Presses de l’Université de ­Paris-​ ­Sorbonne, 2000. Pryor, John. “A Medieval Siege of Troy: The Fight to the Death at Acre, 1189–1191 or The Tears of

172 Bi b li o gr a p h y Salah ad Din.” In The Medieval Way of War: Studies in Military History in Honor of Bernard S. Bachrach, ed. Gregory I. Halfond, 97–114. Farnham: Ashgate, 2015. Pulega, Andrea. Ludi e spettacoli nel medioevo, 1, Tornei di Dame. Milan: Instituto Editoriale ­Cisalpino-​­La Goliarda, 1972. Putter, Ade. “Knights and Clerics at the Court of Champagne: Chrétien de Troyes’s Romances in Context.” In Medieval Knighthood, V, ed. Stephen Church and Ruth Harvey, 243–66. Papers from the Sixth Strawberry Hill Conference, 1994. Woodbridge: Boydell, 1995. Rector, Geoff. “An Illustrious Vernacular: The Psalter en romanz in ­Twelfth-​­Century England.” In Language and Culture in Medieval Britain: The French of England, c. 1100–c.1500, ed. Jocelyn ­Wogan-​­Browne et al., 298–306. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2009. Reid, T. B. W. “Chrétien de Troyes and the Scribe Guiot.” Medium Aevum 45 (1976): 1–17. Reinbold, Aurélie. “Les cercles de l’amitié dans la correspondance d’Adam de Perseigne (1188– 1221).” Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l’Ouest 120, no. 3 (2013): 87–98. Richard, Jean. Les ducs de Bourgogne et la formation du duché du XIe au XIVe siècle. Dijon: Imprimerie Bernigaud et Privat, 1954. ­Rillon-​­Marne, ­Anne-​­Zoé. Homo considera: La pastorale lyrique de Philippe le Chancelier: Une étude des conduits monodiques. Turnhout: Brepols, 2012. Roserot, Alphonse. Dictionnaire historique de la Champagne méridionale (Aube) des origines à 1790. 3 vols. Langres: Imprimerie Champenoise, 1942–48. Rpt. Marseille: Laffitte Reprints, 1983. Rouse, Mary A., and Richard A. Rouse. “French Literature and the Counts of S­ aint-​­Pol, ca. 1178–1377.” Viator 41, no. 1 (2010): 101–40. Ruini, Danielle. “Appunti sull’Eructavit ­antico-​­francese e le sue attribuzioni.” Studi ­Medio-​­Latni e Volgari 54 (2008): 211–48. Sars, Maxime de. Le Laonnois féodale. 5 vols. Paris: Champion, 1924. Sassier, Yves. Louis VII. Paris: Fayard, 1991 ———. Recherches sur le pouvoir comtal en Auxerrois du Xe au début du XIIIe siècle. Auxerre: Publications de la Société des Fouilles Archéologique et des Monuments Historiques de l’Yonne, 1980. Schenk, Jochen. Templar Families: Landowning Families and the Order of the Temple in France, c. 1120–1307. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. ­Schmolke-​­Hasselmann, Beate. The Evolution of Arthurian Romance: The Verse Tradition from Chrétien to Froissart. Trans. Margaret and Roger Middleton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Shortell, Ellen M. “Erasures and Recoveries of Women’s Contributions to Gothic Architecture: The Case of ­Saint-​­Quentin, Local Nobility, and Eleanor of Vermandois.” In Reassessing the Roles of Women as “Makers” of Medieval Art and Architecture, ed. Therese Martin, 1: 99–174. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Sivéry, Gérard. L’économie du royaume de France au siècle de Saint Louis. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille, 1984. ———. Philippe Auguste. Paris: Plon, 1993. Smith, Joshua Byron. Walter Map and the Matter of Britain. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017. Splendeurs de la cour de Champagne au temps de Chrétien de Troyes. Exhibition catalogue. Bibliothèque municipale de Troyes, 18 June–11 September, 1999. Troyes: Archives Départementales de l’Aube, 1999. Stirnemann, Patricia. “Quelques bibliothèques princières et la production hors scriptorium au



Bi b li o gr a p h y

173

XIIe siècle.” Bulletin Archéologique du Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques, n.s. 17–18. Années 1981–82. Fascicule A. Antiquités Nationales, 7–38. Paris: CTHS, 1984. ———. “Some Champenois Vernacular Manuscripts and the Manerius Style of Illumination.” In Busby, The Manuscripts of Chrétien de Troyes, 1: 195–226. ———. “Women and Books in France: 1170–1220.” In Femina Medievalia, 1, Representations of the Feminine in the Middle Ages, ed. Bonnie Wheeler, 247–52. Dallas: Academia, 1993. Strickland, Matthew. Henry the Young King, 1155–1183. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2016. ———. “On the Instruction of a Prince: The Upbringing of Henry, the Young King.” In Henry II: New Interpretations, ed. Christopher ­ Harper-​­ Bill and Nicholas Vincent, 184–214. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007. Suard, François. “Henri II, comte de Champagne, et la troisième croisade (1190–1192).” In Les champenois et la croisade: Actes des quatrièmes journées rémoises, 27–28 novembre 1987, ed. Yvonne Bellenger and Danielle Quéruel, 39–54. Paris: Aux Amateurs de Livres, 1989. Taylor, Leslie Anne. “The Eight Monophonic Political Planctus of the Florentine Manuscript.” MA thesis, University of British Columbia, 1994. Thompson, Kathleen Hapgood. “The Formation of the County of Perche: The Rise and Fall of the House of Gouet.” In Family Trees and the Roots of Politics: The Prosopography of Britain and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century, ed. K. S. B. K ­ eats-​­Rohan, 299–314. Woodbridge: Boydell, 1997. ———. Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France: The County of Perche, 1000–1226. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2002. Touati, ­François-​­Olivier. Maladie et société au Moyen Âge: Le lèpre, les lépreux et les léproseries dans la province ecclésiastique de Sens jusqu’au milieu du XIVe siècle. Brussels: De Boeck Université, 1998. Turner, Ralph V. Eleanor of Aquitaine. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009. Veissière, Michel. La collégiale N ­ otre-​­Dame du Val de Provins au Moyen Âge (1193–1359). Provins: Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie, 1998. Venarde, Bruce l. Women’s Monasticism and Medieval Society: Nunneries in France and England, 890–1215. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997. Verdier, François. L’aristocratie de Provins à la fin du XIIe siècle. Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de l’Arrondissement de Provins. Documents et Travaux, 21. Provins, 2016. _____. ­Saint-​­Ayounl de Provins: un prieuré au temps des foires de Champagne. Éditions Dominique Guéniot, 2009. Von Simson, Otto. The Gothic Cathedral: Origins of Gothic Architecture and the Medieval Concept of Order. 1956; 2nd rev. ed. New York: Pantheon, 1962. Watkin, Aelred. “The Glastonbury Legends.” In Glastonbury Abbey and the Arthurian Tradition, 13–27. Williams, John R. “William of the White Hands and Men of Letters.” In Anniversary Essays in Mediaeval History by the Students of C. H. Haskins, ed. John L. La Monte and Charles H. Taylor, 365–87. Boston: ­Houghton-​­Mifflin, 1929. Wilmart, Mickaël. Meaux au Moyen Âge. ­Monceaux-​­­lès-​­Meaux: Éditions Fiarce, 2013. Wood, Charles T. “Fraud and Its Consequences: Savaric of Bath and the Reform of Glastonbury.” In The Archaeology and History of Glastonbury Abbey: Essays in Honor of the Ninetieth Birthday of C. A. Raleigh Radford, ed. Lesley Abrams and James P. Parey, 273–83. Woodbridge: Boydell, 1991. ———. “Guenevere at Glastonbury: A Problem in Translation(s).” In Glastonbury Abbey and the Arthurian Tradition, 83–100.

174 Bi b li o gr a p h y Ysebaert, Walter. “The Power of Personal Networks: Clerics as Political Actors in the Conflict Between Capetian France and the County of Flanders During the Last Decade of the Twelfth Century.” In Aspects of Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, ed. Brenda Bolton and Christine Meek, 165–83. Turnhout: Brepols, 2007. Zink, Michel. Poésie et conversion au Moyen Âge. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2003.

Index

Unless otherwise noted, the spelling and identification of place-​­names follow Benton-​­Bur, R ­ eceuil des actes d’Henri le Libéral, vol. 2. Comital castle-​­towns are signaled by an asterisk. Acre, 89; siege of, 76 Adam (knight) of Verdun, 84 Adam, abbot of Perseigne (Cistercian), 52, 98, 99 Adam, chaplain of Countess Marie, 52, 69 Adelaide, queen of France, 5 Adele of Champagne, queen of France, viii, 8, 17, 28, 32, 53, 66, 76; dower, 31, 33; with Countess Marie, 20, 23, 41, 48–51, 82 advocacy, custody (over monastic villages), 39, 69 Agnes of Braine and Dreux, 148 n. 45 Agnes (of Champagne), countess of Bar-​­le-​ ­Duc, 83 Alexandreis, Latin poem, 26 Alexis Komnenos, 33 Alice of France, countess of Blois, 11, 17, 52, 76, 81, 82, 99 Alice of Mareuil, magistra of Countess Marie, 6–7 Andreas Capellanus, author of De Amore, 45–48, 53, 56, 60–62, 66, 94, 106; identity, 59–60, 62, 139 n.145 André of Marchiennes, monastic chronicler, 42 André of Ramerupt, 53, 106 Anjou. See counts: Geoffroy, Henry Anselm II of Traînel, butler of Champagne, 7, 44 Arnold of Ardres (II of Guines), 68 Arras, publicani of, 48 Artaud of Nogent(-​­l’Artaud)-​­sur-​­Marne, treasurer/bursar, 22, 38, 44, 55, 59, 106, 129 n.6 Artois, 31 Aubri of Trois-​­Fontaines, Cistercian chronicler, 33, 77, 88–89

*Aulnay-​­l’Aître. See marshals: Erard, Ouard Aulnay (-​­Ramerupt). See Laurent (Marie’s cleric), Nevel (Marie’s escort), Roric (archdeacon of Meaux) Auxerre, bishops: William of Seignelay, 48, William of Toucy, 8. See also Robert of St-​­Marien (chronicler) Avenay (Benedictine convent of St-​­Pierre), 5, 7, 11, 56, 84; abbess: Helisende of Roucy, 56 Baldwin II, count of Guines, 86 Baldwin, count (V) of Hainaut and (VIII) of Flanders, 22, 29, 31, 32, 35, 41, 43, 54, 72, 80 Baldwin, count (VI) of Hainaut and (IX) of Flanders, 29, 55, 81 Bar-​­le-​­Duc. See counts: Henry I, Thibaut I; countess: Agnes; Renaud (bishop of Chartres) *Bar-​­sur-​­Aube, 6; Christianus (chaplain of St-​­Maclou), 35; franchise, 38; Hospitallers, 75 Beaugency, Council of, 5 Beauvais. See Henry of France (bishop) Bela III, king of Hungary, 49, 57, 90 Benedict of Pont-​­sur-​­Seine, 106 Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux, viii, 2, 3, 24–26 Bernerenus, abbot of St-​­Crépin of Soissons, 23 Bertrand of Bar-​­sur-​­Aube, author of Girart de Vienne, 43 bishops (regional), 107–8 Bisolius of Forfory, 38 Blanche (of Navarre), countess of Champagne, 52, 99, 100 Blois, franchise, 81. See also counts: Thibaut

176 In d e x IV, Thibaut V; countesses: Alice of France, Mathilda (of Carinthia) Boulancourt (Cistercian monastery), 39 Braine-​­Comte-​­Robert, Jews of, 148–49 n. 45 *Bray-​­sur-​­Seine: “the Bray incident,” 148–49 n. 45; tolls, 91 Burgundy. See dukes: Hugh II, Hugh III, Odo II, Odo III; duchess: Marie (of Blois) castellany district, 27 castleguard, 18 castles, mouvance of, 47–48, 56 Chablis, 73 Châlons-​­sur-​­Marne, cathedral canons, 54. See also bishops: Guy of Joinville, Rotrou of Perche Champagne, county, 10 (map); court (definition), 120 n.1; court stenographers, 39, 94–95; officers, 103–5. See also: chancellors: Haice of Plancy, Walter of Chappes; counts: Henry I, Henry II, Thibaut II (IV of Blois), Thibaut III, Thibaut IV; countesses: Mathilda of Carinthia, Marie of France, Blanche of Navarre; fairs in Provins, in Troyes Chartres, cathedral chapter, 82. See also bishops: John of Salisbury, Renaud of Bar-​­le-​ ­Duc, Peter of Celle, William of Champagne Cheminon (Cistercian monastery), 69, 84 Chrétien de Troyes, 28, 36, 94; identity of, 34–35; Cligés, 25–26; Erec and Enide, 21; Lancelot, vii, 34, 36, 101; Perceval, 35, 58; Yvain, 34, 58 Cistercians, Chapter General, 30 Coincy (Cluniac priory), 5 Compiègne, 81 Conon of Béthune, 126 n.98 consanguinity, 3 Constance of Castile, queen of France, 5, 7 *Coulommiers: dower of Countess Marie, 15; tolls, 16, 22, 91 “court of Champagne,” vii, 36, 120 n.1 “court of love,” 60, 94 “courtly love.” See Andreas Capellanus; Gaston Paris crusades: Second, 2–5; Third, 69–70, 74 Dampierre (Aube): Guy II, William I Dickens, Charles, 100–101

dower, 22, 24, 46 (and community property), 83, 84 dowry, 8, 46 Dreux. See Robert II (count) Eleanor of Aquitaine, queen of France, vii, viii, 2, 3; queen of England, 23, 60, 65, 81; divorce, 4 5; “Eleanor Vase,” 1 Elizabeth of Blois, sister of Count Henry I, 24 Elizabeth of Hainaut, 22, 29, 31–32. See also Isabelle (queen of France) Elizabeth, viscountess of Mareuil-​­sur-​­Äy, 5–6, 11 Elizabeth, heiress of Nogent-​­sur-​­Seine, 57–58, 63 Elizabeth of Vermandois, 43, 60 England. See kings: Henry II, Richard I; queens: Eleanor of Aquitaine, Margaret of France *Épernay, commutation of taille, 73 Erard of Aulnay-​­l’Aître, marshal, 45, 53–54, 106 Ermesinde, heiress of Namur and Luxembourg, 68, 79 Eructavit, 51–52, 94 *Ervy-​­le-​­Châtel: franchise, 46; Girard Manducator (provost), 47. See also Lucas (marshal), Peter Comestor (Manducator) Evrat, translator of Genesis, 52, 61–62, 85–88, 91, 94, 95 fiefs, 47, 72; alienation of, 47, 64, 69; rolls of, 27, 72 Flanders. See Philip I (count) Foissy (Fontevrist priory of Notre-​­Dame), 18, 29, 49–51; commercial properties, 38, 64; Helisent of Traînel (prioress), 18, 50 Fontaines-​­les-​­Nonnes (Fontevrist priory), 38, 47, 51, 64–66, 90, 91; Edna (prioress), 65 Fontevraud, 23, 64, 65. See also priories: Foissy, Fontaines-​­les-​­Nonnes franchises (and “customs”). See Bar-​­sur-​­Aube, Ervy, Meaux Gace Brulé, poet, 58–59 Garnier (of Traînel) of Marigny-​­le-​­Châtel, 44, 53, 63, 106 Garnier (of Traînel), bishop of Troyes, 80, 90 Gaucher, Gautier. See Walter Gautier d’Arras, author of Eracle, 35 Gautier of Coincy, 135 n. 88



In d e x

Genèse. See Ervart Geoffroy of Auxerre, author of the Fragmentum and vita of Bernard of Clairvaux, 2, 118 n.6 Geoffroy, count of Anjou, 3 Geoffroy (Plantagenet), count of Brittany, viii, 17, 23, 31, 49, 56–57, 59 Geoffroy Eventat of Égligny, knight, 45, 106 Geoffroy III of Joinville, seneschal, 44 Geoffroy IV of Joinville, seneschal, 77 Geoffroy of Villehardouin, marshal, 54, 59, 92, 106 Gerald of Wales, 89 Gervase of Canterbury, 32, 49 Gilo of Tornel, knight, 106 Girard Manducator, provost of Ervy-​­la-​ ­Châtel, 47 Gislebert of Mons, chancellor of Hainaut, 22, 29, 31, 41, 54, 70, 72 Glastonbury, 89 Guy (of Noyers), archbishop of Sens, 84–85 Guy (of Joinville), bishop of Châlons, 54 Guy of Bazoches-​­sur-​­Vesles, author of Chronosgraphia, 77 Guy of Chappes, 72 Guy III of Châtillon, 53, 77, 106 Guy II of Dampierre, 44, 72, 83 Guiot of Provins, copyist of Chrétien de Troyes’ romances, 88, 96 Guiot of Provins, monk, author of the Bible, 77 Haice (of Plancy), bishop of Troyes, 37, 38, 44, 55, 75, 80 Hainaut. See counts: Baldwin V, Baldwin VI; Elizabeth/Isabelle Hawise, countess of Gloucester, 49 Helie of Villemaur, 90 Henry (of France), archbishop of Reims, 20, 23, 26 Henry (of Carinthia), bishop of Troyes, 13 Hewnry, count of Anjou. See Henry II, king of England Henry I, count of Bar-​­le-​­Duc, 41, 59, 77, 83 Henry I (the Liberal), count of Champagne, vii, 23, 64; crusades, 3–4, 25; books, 16, 21, 33; siblings, 16–17, 20, 31, 32, 41–43, 54; tomb, 24–25, 40, 52, 53, 86, 95–96 Henry II, count of Champagne, 8, 17, 22, 31, 33, 41, 50, 63, 67–73, 76–79, 89–90; mandates, 75, 80; marriage, 147 n. 27; seal, 68

177

Henry II, king of England, viii, 3, 5, 7, 8, 27, 33, 42, 69–70 Henry the Young King of England, 8, 17, 23, 28, 31, 42, 48–49 Henry (the Blind), count of Namur, 68, 70 Henry, castellan of Vitry, 69 Herbert of Bosham, 19, 21 homage, 18, 47, 68, 91 Hospitallers, 75 hospitality (gistum), right of, 41 Hugh (of Toucy), archbishop of Sens, 8 Hugh, count of Troyes, Bar-​­sur-​­Aube, Vitry, 69 Hugh III, duke of Burgundy, 23–24, 30, 41, 43, 56, 70 Hugh (Huon) III of Oisy, viscount of Meaux, author of Tournament of Ladies, 59, 66–67, 94, 99 Hugh II of Plancy, 44 Hugh IV of St-​­Pol, 88 Ibn-​­al-​­Athīr, 79 Ibn-​­Shaddād, biographer of Saladin, 76–78 inquests, 38, 45, 72 inquisition (in Arras), 48 Isabelle, queen of Jerusalem, 77–78 Isabelle (of Hainaut), queen of France, vii, 32, 41, 68. See also Elizabeth of Hainaut Jean of Villehardouin, 54 *Jean (castle lord) of Possesse, monk in Clairvaux, 49, 50, 82 John of Salisbury, 4, 21 Joinville. See Guy (bishop of Châlons); Geoffroy III (seneschal), Geoffroy IV (seneschal) Josbert of Chaumont, advocate of the count, 39 Joscelin, abbot of Notre-​­Dame of La Charmoye, 90 *Jouy-​­le-​­Châtel, 16; monastery, 18 *Lagny-​­sur-​­Marne, fairs, 22; monastery, 70; tomb of Count Thibaut, 70, tournament site, 49, 66 Langres, bishops: Geoffroy (de la Roche), 3; Manasses (of Bar-​­sur-​­Seine), 37–38; Walter (of Burgundy), 20. See also St-​­Mammès Larrivour, (Cistercian monastery), 30, 50 Laurent (of Aulnay/Ramerupt), cleric of Countess Marie, 11, 15, 22

178 In d e x Laurette of Alsace, Psalter of, 134 n.86 Louis, count of Blois, 81 Louis VII, king of France, vii, viii, 1–4, 7–8, 20, 23, 27, 30; tomb, 53 Lorris, charter of, 46 Lucas (of Ervy), marshal, 44–47 Mailly, castle, 47 Manasses (of Pougy), bishop of Troyes, 50, 71, 75; installation of, 39–40 Manerius, 87 Manuel Komnenos, emperor of Constantinople, 6, 25–26, 37 Mareuil-​­sur-​­Äy, 5. See also Alice (magistra), Elizabeth (viscountess) Margaret (sister of Count Henry), nun at Fontevraud, 53 Margaret (of Blois), countess of Blois-​ ­Chartres, viscountess of Meaux, 66 Margaret (of France), viii, 8, 17, 23, 60, 90; dowry, 8, 55; with Countess Marie, 28–30, 48–51, 53, 55–57, 59 Marie (of Blois), duchess of Burgundy, 23–24 Marie (of France), countess of Champagne: betrothal, 3–6; birth, 2; books, 61–62, 87– 88, 101; dower, 16, 18, 59, 64; dowry, 15; letters-​­patent, 15, 22; obituaries, 91; portrait, 96; seal, 18, 19 (fig. 5), 39; statuette, 96; tomb, 91, 100–101. See also almoners (Templars): Mathieu, William; chaplains: Andreas Capellanus, Peter of Hebron Marie (of Champagne), countess of Flanders, 22, 29, 55, 81 marriage contracts, 22, 29, 41, 54, 68, 72 Martène, Edmund, 40 Mathieu (Templar), almoner, 30 Mathieu (of Provins), bishop of Troyes, 8, 20, 33, 39, 46, 50 Mathilda (of Carinthia), countess of Blois-​ ­Champagne, 16, 64 Mathilda, countess of Tonnerre, 47 Maurice of Sully, bishop of Paris, 8 Meaux: cathedral of St-​­Étienne, 100; comital residence, 63; commune, 28–29; county, 6; viscountess Ada, 38. See also bishops: Simon of Lizy, Stephen de la Chapelle; viscount: Hugh of Oisy Milo II of Nogent-​­sur-​­Seine, 46 Milo of Provins, treasurer of the count, 46, 154 n.118

Milo (Breban) of Provins, knight and treasury officer, 18, 38, 44, 46, 59, 106, 129 n. 6, 131 n.32 Milo of Ternantes, knight, 84 Montier-​­la-​­Celle (Benedictine monastery), 85 Namur. See: Henry the Blind (count); Ermesinde (heiress) Nevel of Aulnay/Ramerupt, knight escort of Countess Marie, 15, 18, 30, 45, 54, 59, 106 Nevers. See Peter of Courtenay (count); Mathilda (countess) Nicholas of Montiéramey, chaplain of Count Henry I, 16, 21 Nogent-​­sur-​­Marne. See Artaud Nogent-​­sur-​­Seine, 57; tolls, 138 n.125. See also lords: Elizabeth, Milo II Notre-​­Dame of Champbenoît, convent in Provins, 84–85 Notre-​­Dame of La Charmoye, 90 Notre-​­Dame-​­aux-​­Nonnains (convent in Troyes), 12, 39–40, 70, 84 Notre-​­Dame of Paris (cathedral), 8 Notre-​­Dame du Val (chapter in Provins), 88 oaths: at Sézanne (1190), 72, 80; to marriage contracts, 22, 54, 55, 68 Odo of Sézanne, master, 60, 62, 67, 106 Oisy-​­le-​­Verger (Pas-​­de-​­Calais). See Hugh III of Oisy Oudard of Aulnay, marshal, 72 Paraclete (convent), 45, 57–58, 63, 90 Paris. See Maurice of Sully (bishop); Notre-​ ­Dame (cathedral) Paris, Gaston, 101 Peter Comestor (Manducator), author of the Scholastic History, 42–43, 86–87 Peter Riga, author of Aurora, 87 Peter of Celle, abbot of Montier-​­la-​­Celle, 23, 42 Peter of Courtenay (brother of Louis VII), count of Nevers, 47, 48, 75 Peter of Hebron, chaplain of Countess Marie, 53, 56, 57, 106, 129 n.6 Philip (de Grève) the Chancellor of Notre-​ ­Dame of Paris, 96–98 Philip (of Alsace) I, count of Flanders, 22, 25, 31, 41, 43–44, 70, 76 Philip II, king of France, vii, 30–33, 42, 55, 69–70, 72, 76, 79, 99



In d e x

Plancy. See Haice (bishop of Troyes), Hugh II *Pont-​­sur-​­Seine, tolls, 30 Pontigny (Cistercian monastery), 19, 21, 74, 82. Popes: Alexander III, 9, 20, 26–27, 30; Clement III, 71; Eugenius III, 2–4; Lucius III, 47; Innocent III, 87, 90 Possesse. See Jean Pougy. See Manasses (bishop of Troyes) prebends, 45, 57, 69, 78, 88 Provins, 41; comital chapel, 53; fairs, 64; taille commutation, 73; wine tax, 73, 75. See also: Notre-​­Dame du Val (chapter); Notre-​ ­Dame of Chambenoît (convent); St-​­Ayoul (priory) Pseudo-​­Turpin chronicle, 8 Ralph of Diceto, historian, 42 Ralph, count of Vermandois and royal seneschal, viii, 24 Ramerupt. See Aulnay regencies, vii–viii, 32, 76 Reims. See archbishops: Samson, Henry of France, William of Champagne Renaud (of Bar-​­le-​­Duc), bishop of Chartres, 42, 70, 83 retrait lignager (right of closest heir), 84 Richard I, king of England, viii, 17, 23, 31, 81 Rigaut de Barbezieux, 128 n. 131 Rigord, monk at St-​­Denis, author of Gesta of Philip II, 31, 33, 53, 56 Robert II of Dreux, 148–49 n. 45 Robert I of Milly, knight and treasurer, 55, 129 n. 6 Robert II of Milly, knight and treasurer, 72, 147 n. 27 Robert of Sablonnières, knight, 84 Robert (of St-​­Marien) of Auxerre, chronicler, 42, 70, 90 Robert of Torigni, abbot of Mont-​­Saint-​ ­Michel, historian, 31–32, 49, 120 n. 31 Roric of Aulnay/Ramerupt, archdeacon of Meaux, 54, 66, 70 Roscelin of Villehardouin, 54 Rotrou of Perche, bishop of Châlons, 81 Sablonnières. See Robert St-​­Ayoul of Provins (priory of Montier-​­la-​ ­Celle), 40. See also: Simon Aurea Capra (prior) Ste-​­Colombe of Sens, 19

179

St-​­Denis, monastery: dedication, 1–3, 63; merchants of, 16; relics, 82 St-​­Étienne of Meaux, cathedral, 91 St-​­Étienne of Troyes (comital chapel), 71; canons, 20, 30, 40 St-​­Loup of Troyes (Augustinian monastery): Abbot Guitier, 17–18, 41; Gospel book, 18, 41 St-​­Mammès of Langres, 38 St-​­Remi of Reims (Benedictine monastery). See: Peter of Celle (abbot) Saladin, 79 Samson Mauvoisin, archbishop of Reims, 8 Sancerre. See: Stephen (count) Sanson of Nantuil, Proverbes, 134 n. 86 Scholastique (of Champagne), 27, 42–43 Sellières (Benedictine monastery), 73, 83 Sens, cathedral, 18. See also archbishops: Guy of Noyers, Hugh of Toucy, William of Champagne; monasteries: St-​­Pierre-​­le-​­Vif, Ste-​­Colombe *Sézanne, oaths (of 1190), 72, 80 Simon Aurea Capra, poet, prior of St-​­Ayoul of Provins, abbot of St-​­Remi of Reims, 16, 40, 92 Simon Chauderon, 84 Simon (of Lizy), bishop of Meaux, 28, 46, 66, 100 Stephen (de la Chapelle-​­en-​­Brie), bishop of Meaux, 8, 20 Stephen of Cucharmoy, dean of Notre-​­Dame du Val of Provins, 88 Stephen (of Blois), count of Sancerre, 20, 23, 38, 41, 43, 76 Stephen (of Orléans), abbot of Ste-​ ­Geneviève of Paris, bishop of Tournai, 71, 81 Suger, abbot of St-​­Denis, viii, 1–2 Templars, 37, 55, 78, 82–84. See also: Mathieu (almoner), William (almoner) Theodoric, court notary, 94 Thibaut I, count of Bar-​­le-​­Duc, 83 Thibaut IV, count of Blois (and Champagne), 1–2, 50 Thibaut V, count of Blois-​­Chartres, royal seneschal, viii, 7, 11, 17, 20, 23, 35, 41, 43, 56, 59, 70, 72, 76 Thibaut III count of Champagne, 29, 65, 91, 92; tomb, 95–96 Third Lateran Council, 27

180 In d e x Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, 8, 11, 19, 20, 24 Thomas of Cantimpré, Dominican, author of Book of Bees, 98–99 tombs. See Count Henry I, Count Thibaut III, Countess Marie, King Louis VII. tournaments, 49, 68 Traînel. See Anselm II (butler), Garnier (of Marigny), Trois-​­Fontaines (Cistercian monastery), 83. See also Aubri (chronicler) *Troyes, 6, 14 (fig. 3); cathedral (St-​­Pierre), 71; comital residence, 6, 11, 12 (fig. 1), 13, 15 (fig. 4); fairs, 12–13, 29, 30, 71, 74–75; fire of 1188, 70–71; leper house, 57; toll on wine, 74. See also bishops: Haice of Pougy, Henry of Carinthia, Mathieu of Provins, Manasses of Pougy; chapters: St-​­Étienne, St-​­Loup; convent: Notre-​­Dame-​­aux-​ ­Nonnains; counts: Hugh, Thibaut IV of Blois, Henry I, Henry II, Thibaut III; countesses: Marie (of France), Mathilda (of Carinthia), Blanche (of Navarre) Vauluisant (Cistercian monastery), 50, 63 Vergy, war, 56 *Vertus, 7, 73; chapter, 69, 88

Villehardouin. See Geoffroy (marshal), Jean, Roscelin (canon) Villeneuve-​­sur-​­Yonne, 66, 82 *Vitry (-​­en-​­Perthhois), 6; destruction of, 2, 3 Walter Map, courtier of Henry II of England, 27–28 Walter of Chappes, chancellor, 75–76 Walter of Châtillon, author of Alexandreis, 26 William (Templar), almoner of Countess Marie, 30, 39, 44, 50, 53, 59, 83, 106, 129 n.6 William, court notary, 7, 94 William rex of Provins, marshal, 7, 44, 83 William (of Champagne), archbishop of Sens and Reims, viii, 11, 13, 17, 19, 24, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33, 38, 39, 41–43, 54, 69, 72, 73, 76, 80, 81 William (of Toucy), bishop of Auxerre, 8 William I of Dampierre, constable, 44 William, count of Joigny, 48, 72 William V, count of Mâcon and Vienne, 42 William of Malmesbury, historian, 89 William of Nangis, chronicler, 33 William of Tyre, archbishop and chronicler, 4 Yolande of Hainaut, 41, 55, 68 Yolande of St-​­Pol, 88