Download The later Capetian Kings Chapter 4 of `Capetian France 9871328

The later Capetian Kings Chapter 4 of ‘Capetian France 987­1328’ by Elizabeth M. Hallam and Judith Everard (2001) published by Longman Chapter 4: The Revival of Royal Power 1108­1226 Louis VI (1108­37); Louis VII (1137­80), Philip II (1180­1223) Louis VI is also covered by your SL classes Questions to answer on reading of pages 145­147. See also family tree on page 148. 1. Give an outline of Louis VI’s powers in 1108 when he acceded to the throne of France. ● Not very powerful ­ master of a small and ill­discplined principality centred on Paris and Orléans. ● Could claim in theory royal powers over the church and over the princes and other great nobles of France – but in practice these were often ignored. (See later pages in chapter from about page 224 to page 252.) 2. How had the balance of power changed by the time that his great­grandson, Louis VIII died in 1226? ● Royal lands included a well­disciplined and well­administered royal principality, together with the duchy of Normandy, the counties of Maine and Anjou and most of Poitou (as well as substantial holdings in the Languedoc). ● The king’s legal suzerainty was acknowledged and generally obeyed. ● His power over the French church considerable. By end of his reign in 1270 his power firmly consolidated. 3. Describe briefly the different historical perspectives of the Capetian monarchs (historiography) according to various scholars. ● Fawtier in his Capetian Kings emphasized the power of the early Capetians, which set them apart from their vassals by stressing the wealth of their domain, their powers over and alliance with the church and their legal rights over the nobility. ● French scholars since 1897 have provided some support of Fawtier with emphasis on the role of the episcopate and the royal chancery in promoting continuity of the institution of kingship. ● But it seems, in conclusion, that the theoretical advantages of the early Capetians provided the th​
‘seed­bed’ that enabled the growth of royal power in the 12​
century. 4. What was one of the key factors which helped the kings in their rise to power during this period? ● The social and economic change taking place (long­term and complex process). 5. In what ways was this manifested? ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Population growth Land clearance Spread of markets, fairs and commerce Increasing prosperity An economy more dependent on coinage than a century earlier King and princes did not divide their estates (like the nobility – see below) Constant warfare and insistence on feudal duty enabled kings and princes to subjugate turbulent nobles, to introduce their own administrations and to gain the support of towns and the church. ● In this way, principalities throughout France were gradually brought under the closer contol of their rulers and patterns of power became clearer. ● The royal principality was subjugated and the resources of the royal domain could be fully exploited. 6. How did the nobility compared to the kings and princes fare during this period of change? ● The negative economic effects on the nobility, in particular the castellans (division of their lands between heirs in many parts of France and the consipicuous consumption of luxury goods had all taken their toll). 7. What were the two fundamental elements in the French conquest of the Angevin lands? ● New sources of revenue (Philip Augustus) from a relatively well­organised and thoroughly taxed principality. ● Feudal and sacral powers that went with royal office had practical meaning with princes becoming more habitually the king’s vassals and acknowledging his suzerainty. 8. In conclusion, what, according to Hallam and Everard, enabled the Capetians during this period rise in power (with reference in particular to Philip Augustus)? ● Resources and character. When Philip seized Normandy, greater Anjou, Poitou and Brittany he led a well­fought campaign backed up by faithful allies. Normandy and greater Anjou were easy to hold because of the political power already built up there by the Norman dukes and Angevin counts. By contrast Poitou and Brittany were less easily held (Brittany eventually granted away). ● The English did not relinquish their claim to Normandy and some of its links with England continued after 1204 after Philip’s victory at Bouvines where John’s allies were defeated. ● Hallam and Everard suggest that the rise of the Capetians was made possible by underlying developments that were important only because the king was able to turn them to good account (resources and character). ● The significance of Philip Augustus’s reign was very great. In the dramatic decade 1194­1204 Philip first lost his early gains to Richard, but then took them back from John and finally went on to seize the heartlands of John’s French possessions. ● Events of the time reveal the significance of the characters and abilities of the main players in the struggle, the outcome of which was vitally important to the Capetians. ● Richard I of England was a match for Philip and more. ● But Philip was a better soldier and politician than John. ● Philip Augustus was a king of ability who profited from events. ● The rise of the Capetians was not inevitable Louis VI, 1108­37 (pages 149­155) 1. What did Abbot Suger of Saint­Denis say about Louis VI? How does Ivo of Chartres’ account of Louis VI corroborate with that of Abbot Suger? ● Suger wrote that Louis VI defended churches, protected the needy and the poor and worked ceaselessly for peace and for the defence of his realm. ● Both writers portray Louis VI as a man of simple, open nature, rarely perfidious, often kindly and a generous patron of monks (although he quarreled with the church on a number of occasions). 2. What was the purpose of Suger’s description? ● To emphasise his view of monarchy and to glorify his abbey, whose patron saint was the special protector of the king and kingdom. 3. Describe Louis VI’s characteristics in general terms. ● Interests were directed towards the battlefield – not many ‘saintly’ qualities. ● Vigorous and active in his youth ● Suffered poor health and had a tendency towards obesity and gluttony making him so fat that by the age of 46 he was no longer able to get on a horse. 4. What did Guibert of Nogent have to say about Louis VI? ● Guibert of Nogent accuses Louis VI of a sordid cupidity, substantiated to some extent by the king’s money­raising methods. He left his jewels and regalia in pawn for a period of over 10 years. 5. How was Louis VI able to set the French monarchy on a firm footing? ● Through his achievements as a warrior whereby he tamed the royal principality through constant warfare through the castellans. ● He helped to develop the royal administration. ● With the help of these and the church Louis VI was able to set the monarchy on a firm footing. 6. Who was Louis’ principal advisor from 1120 to 1127? ● Stephen of Garlande, archdeacon of Notre­Dame at Paris,from 1120 royal seneschal and chancellor and a noted pluralist. Stephen’s loyalty could waver and in 1127 Louis had him removed from office. ● In 1132 Stephen was reinstated as chancellor but he had lost some of his influence. 7. What factors brought Louis VI into ‘bad odour’ with Pope Innocent II? ● The murder of two reforming ecclesiastics, one of whom was killed by the retainers of Stephen’s clerk John, the other who fell at the hand of Stephen’s vassals (see page 150 for details). 8. Who were Louis VI’s advisors after 1127? What differences were there between these two advisors? ● Suger, abbot of Saint­Denis ● Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux – severe and ascetic was more ready than Suger to criticize the role of the king in the French church. ● The views of the two men differed on the decoration of ecclesiastical buildings (Bernard was of the Cistercian order – simplicity). ● Suger achieved more for Louis VI and for Louis VII, by acting as a counselor and an administrator and by promoting the royal dignity as an adjunct to that of his abbey’s patron saint, Denis. ● Suger had no official title in royal government (although qualified in a royal charter as a close friend and faithful counselor to the king). ● Suger played a major part in the politics of the last decade of Louis VI’s reign and reappeared as the leading counsellor of his son from 1143 until his death in 1151. 9. What was Louis VI’s main preoccupation during his reign and why? ● The domination of the castellan families of the Ile­de­France. Their powers in the areas they controlled were often substantial and some were particularly savage, according to accounts. 10. Who were Louis’ two main rivals (described by the chroniclers) during this period? How did Louis deal with them? ● Thomas of Marle. ● Hugh le Puiset ● Thomas of Marle is described (albeit in a biased manner) by Guibert of Nogent (see page 150). He was, nevertheless, a threat to the Laon area (see map). Thomas of Marle engaged in constant warfare with his father Enguerrand of Coucy (see Barabara Tuchman’s ‘ A Distant Mirror’). He also cut the throat of a relative, Walter, archdeacon of Laon. ● In 1112 when the townsfolk of Laon murdered their bishop Thomas gave protection to the ringleaders. ● He also occupied two properties of the abbey of Saint­Jean of Laon. ● In 1114 Thomas of Marle was excommunicated by a council held by the papal legate and declared unfit to bear arms. ● The king, with the backing of the church waged war against him. ● The king, heading an army of men levied by the church parish by parish, razed Thomas’s castles at Crécy and Nouvion. Thomas, surrounded at Marle, was forced to submit and offer indemnity to both king and church. ● Louis, being chivalrous, pardoned him. This was an error on Louis’s part because made more powerful by inheriting the castles of Coucy and Bouves, Thomas returned to his hostile ways. ● In 1130 Raoul, count of Vermandois (Thomas’s personal enemy and the king’s close advisor) joined with a group of bishops and persuaded Louis VI to organized another punitive expedition. ● Thomas was eventually captured at Laon and died in captivity. ● Hugh of le Puiset posed a similar threat to law and order in the area of the Beauce and round Charters. ● Suger describes him as a man who devoured church lands and mocked excommunications. ● In 1111 the king was holding court at Melun when various princes, bishops and abbots laid strong charges against Hugh encouraging the king to order him to appear before the royal court. ● Hugh refused to do so. The result was that the king declared Hugh’s lands forfeit, besieged and took Le Puiset and captured Hugh. ● But he released him in 1112 and Hugh, like Thomas of Marle, again began to terrorise his neighbourhood. ● In 1118 Louis managed to defeat him once more. ● Hugh died soon after this on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. 11. How did Louis VI secure the Paris area and how did Capetian power become established (page 152) in this area? ● By waging war on opponents and granting lands to allies (house of Vermandois and Coucy). ● In 1130 when Thomas of Marle fell the lands north of Paris were relatively secure. ● To the south of Paris the powerful castellans had many of their castles destroyed and confiscated by the king. ● ● The removal of the Montlhéry family made the Paris area safer, that of the Puisets secured the Beauce. ● The defeat of other castellans such as Humbert of Saint.Sévère in 1107 opened up the way to the Loire. ● Louis made use of the resources of the crown, summoned vassals to his court and then, if they did not appear, mounted campaigns against them, often confiscating their lands. These actions emphasized his power as overlord and tightened the ties of vassalage. ● Hallam and Everard describe this as the “first step in the formation of a ‘feudo­vassalic’ pyramid in the Ile­de­France. ● Louis also constructed new royal castles at important strategic points. A chronicler lists these (see page 152). 12. How did Louis establish his authority further afield? Give a specific example. ● Having shown himself as both as an effective soldier and chivalrous adversary in the Ile­de­France, protecting church lands and crushing the castellans, nobles and ecclesiastics from further afield appealed to him for help. ● The more Louis intervened effectively to help the greater his prestige and the more others would be likely to turn to him. ● His often aggressive expeditions to regions previously outside the royal influence are clear signs of a slowly widening royal power in the kingdom. ● Two examples – one – his expedition into the Bourgonnais in Berry to establish the rightful heir in the face of a usurper. Suger commented that the kings had long arms. ● Second example – Aimery, bishop of Clermont was cast out of his see by William VI, Count of Auvergne and appealed to Louis for help. Louis, with allies supporting him seized the castle of Pont­du­Chateau and drove the count out of Clermont, burned Montferrand and forced the count of Auvergne to appear before the royal court at Orléans and to make peace. 13. What caused war to break out between Louis VI and Henry I of England in terms of the duchy of Normandy? ● In 1106 Henry I of England captured Normandy from Robert Curthose, his elder brother and oldest son of William the Conqueror. ● At first Henry agreed with Louis VI that the important castle of Gisors should be held by a neutral castellan, but Henry soon occupied it. ● Louis called on Henry to account for his actions, Henry refused and war broke out. ● Intially Louis was successful (with help from count of Anjou and Theobald, count of Blois). In 1109 he overran part of the Norman Vexin, but Theobald switched his loyalty to Henry and gthe English kings also had the support of castellans (Guy of Rochefort and Hugh of Le Puiset) and Hugh, count of Troyes. ● Louis defeated the castellans in the field but was pushed back by Henry I. 14. What was the outcome of the war? ● In 1113 peace was sealed, in which Louis recognized Henry’s suzerainty over Maine and Brittany. 15. What caused renewed hostilities between 1116 and 1120? ● Louis encouraged the rebellious Norman rebels and supported William Clito (Robert Curthose’s son) in his claims to Normandy. 16. What was the outcome of these hostilities? ● In 1119 Louis’ army was crushed by Henry I’s forces in pitched battle at Brémule. ● Louis was angry and humiliated and laid his case before Pope Calixtus II, who was holding a council at Reims. Orderic Vitalis describes the proceedings of the council, in which, he says that Louis accused Henry of violent aggression and lawless behavior. 17. What role did Pope Calixtus II play in all of this? ● He persuaded the two sides to negotiate but otherwise was ineffectual. ● In 1120 Louis agreed to receive the homage of William, Henry’s heir, and to cede Gisors (poor terms). ● Henry was to lose a great deal, both politically and emotionally from the death of his son, William, drowned in 1120, leaving Henry with no direct male heir to succeed him. 18. How did Louis attempt anew to replace William Clito for Henry I as duke of Normandy? Was Louis successful? ● In 1123 Louis gathered the support of Fulk of Anjou, Galeran of Meulan (treacherous) and other Norman nobles to attempt to replace Henry I with William Clito. ● This was not successful, but Louis continued to fight sporadically against Henry I. 19. In what ways was Louis successful against the Emperor Henry V and how did this demonstrate the prestige of the king of France? ● In 1124 Henry V moved towards France from the east in the hope of building up his lands in Lorraine and I support of Henry I, his father­in­law (Henry V was married to Henry’s daughter, Matilda). ● Louis VI called on the support of all his vassals – their positive response (there were many – see page 154) was both a measure of the size of the threat but also the increased prestige of the king. ● According to Suger, Louis made fervent and patriotic speeches and the emperor fell back before such an imposing force. 20. How did Louis try to establish his authority in Flanders? ● In 1127 Louis rushed to Flanders on the murder (in the church of Saint­Donatian at Bruges, whilst at mass) of count Charles the Good, Louis’ kinsman and friend. He intended to punish the wrongdoers, to try to seize the count’s treasure and maybe even in the hope of being elected count himself. ● Louis was unsuccessful in all these objectives. But he managed to assert his authority in Flanders for a short time since it was in a state of complete confusion. ● Louis also arranged for William Clito (who was a great­grandson of Baldwin of Lille) to be elected. ● He and William Clito fought other claimants, captured and killed the murderes of Charles and subjugated Flanders. But his success was not long­lived. ● A growing number of Flemish, including the important towns, declared themselves in favour of Theirry of Alsace as the count’s successor. ● In 1128 Louis made a show of arms but William Clito was wounded and died. The king had to accept Theirry as the new count, receiving homage from him for his lands. 21. Who was Louis’ most important enemy at this time? ● Theobald of Blois who was involved in most of the hostile coalitions against the king. ● In 1125, when the count joined Champagne to Blois, the king’s difficulties with him increased 22. Read the summary paragraph towards the end of page 155 about growing French monarchical prestige and power. Louis VII, 1137­80 (pages 155­164) 1. How do the chroniclers and various sources describe Louis VII? ● He is described as pious, as a man of religion (Stephen of Paris) whose faith shone out from him (Odo of Deuil). A just man with simple tastes but with a high view of monarchy. 2. He was the second son of Louis VI, so what made him heir to the throne? ● The death of his brother Philip in 1131. Louis succeeded to the throne as a youth in 1137. 3. What did the English Walter Map have to say about Louis VII? ● That he was a lover of justice, so much so that when he found that the buildings of his palace at Fontainbleau encroached on the lands of a poor peasant, he ordered them to be pulled down. 4. What do historians have to say about Louis VII? ● Historians have been less enthusiastic about Louis VII than his contemporaries – seen as a colourless nonentity under the heavy influence respectively of Eleanor of Aquitaine, Abbot Suger of Saint Denis and then Bernard of Clairvaux committing a dangerous political error in allowing the formation of the Angevin empire. 5. What view do the revisionists take (Pacaut and Sassier)? ● That he was respected for his upright character and piety and that he became more resolute during the second part of the reign – a time when he successfully consolidated his domain. 6. What were his main weaknesses as a ruler? ● Easily influenced (see answer to question 4 above) and capable of both deeds of impetuous rashness and of periods of lassitude and indecisive inactivity. 7. What made Louis VII strong at the time of the civil war in England (Stephen and Matilda)? ● Domestic and political hostilities developing between Stephen and Geoffrey the Fair of Anjou and his wife the Empress Matilda (daughter of Henry I of England) over the title to the kingdom of England and the duchy of Normandy made Louis in a strong position at the time. ● He married Eleanor, heiress to the duchy of Aquitaine in 1137. 8. Why were there rifts between Louis and Theobald of Blois­Champagne? How were these manifested and what was the outcome? ● Theobold of Blois refused to give the king aid to crush a rebellion in Poitou in 1138 showing a mounting hostility between the two of them. ● The rift was widened by the marital problems of Raoul, count of Vermandois, Louis’ seneschal. He repudiated his wife, Eleanor of Champagne, Theobald’s niece, for Petronilla of Aquitaine (sister of Eleanor of Aquitaine) and managed to find bishops prepared to marry them. ● Eleanor and her uncle Theobald appealed to Pope Innocent II, whose legate excommunicated Raoul. ● Louis entered the conflict against Theobald on behalf of Raoul, his cousin. ● According to William of Saint­Thierry he burned and ravaged parts of Champagne with extreme ferocity (1142­3). This culminated with the burning of the church at Vitry, with 1,500 people caught in the flames – which horrified the king. ● Even so it cost Bernard of Clairvaux and Suger a considerable effort to persuade Louis VII and Theobald to negotiate. ● But events didn’t end there as Raoul refused to give up Petronilla, resulting in a renewal of his excommunication and so Louis occupied part of Champagne again and forbade any appointments to b made in its Episcopal sees. ● In 1144 the next pope, Celestine II, together with Suger and Bernard managed to bring the king to make peace. Whilst Louis had been occupied with Champagne Geoffrey the Fair had overrun Normandy. However, Louis managed to extract control of the important strategic town of Gisors in return for recognizing Geoffrey’s conquest. 9. How is the break in Louis’ reign viewed by historians (that is to say the period when he moved away from Eleanor of Aquitaine’s influence and came under the influence of Bernard of Clairvaux and Abbot Suger)? ● Pacaut and Sassier saw the break as coming after Louis’ crusade – an attempt by the king to regain his lost reputation after the burning of Vitry. ● Petit­ Dutaillis has suggested the burning of Vitry was a shock which transformed the king. 10. Why did Louis VII go on the Second Crusade (give several reasons)? ●
●
●
●
●
To regain his lost reputation (as above Q 9). Zeal for the Christian faith (Odo of Deuil) and longing to save the Holy Places. Political humiliations at home needed redeeming. (Louis was the first king involved directly in a crusade) From the western viewpoint there was a clear need for an army from the west to go to relieve the kingdom of Jerusalem. In 1144 Edessa had fallen to the Atabeg Turks under Zengi and his son Nur­ad­Din. They were moving down from the north, and Melisende, queen regent of Jerusalem, wrote to Pope Eugenius III asking for help. ● Eugenius directed an appeal to Louis VII who responded with enthusiasm. ● He called together an assembly at Vézelay for Easter 1146 where Bernard of Clairvaux preached the Second Crusade with dramatic success. The Emperor Conrad III joined the western forces. 11. Who was left as regent in Louis’ place whilst he was on crusade? What problems did the regent have to deal with? ● Abbot Suger remained as regent. ● Robert of Dreux, Louis’ brother, had returned to France from the east and was plotting with a group of dissident nobles to take over the throne. ● Suger called an assembly of the French nobility at Soissons in 1149 and reminded them of their duty to the absent king. The threat of rebellion died down. ● Finances were stretched to pay for the crusade causing Suger at Easter 1149 to call on Louis to return to France. ● Suger retired to Saint­Denis and died there in 1151. He had been a valued administrator and loyal counsellor to Louis. 12. What problems did Louis have to deal with on his return from the crusade (1149)? ● The threat of the build­up and scale of Angevin power in Normandy. ● Louis put forward Eustace, Stephen’s son against Henry (son of Geoffrey) who had been given the duchy, and waged war. ● In 1151 peace was made with Geoffrey and Henry, and Louis gained the Norman Vexin, including Gisors. 13. What personal and political disaster marked Louis’ reign after the Second Crusade? ● Rift between him and his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine. She was accused by contemporary chroniclers of lewd and improper behavior and of showing unnatural fondness for her uncle, Raymond of Antioch. ● In 1149 Pope Eugenius III had reconciled Louis and Eleanor. ● By 1151, however, Louis withdrew his servants from her duchy and in 1152 the council of Beaugency declared the marriage null and void on the grounds of consanguinity. ● A few months later Henry Plantagenet, now count of Anjou after the death of his father Geoffrey the Fair in 1151, married Eleanor. Henry was ordered before the French court in 1152 having married Eleanor without Louis’ permission but he ignored the summons and Louis could do nothing about it. 14. How did Henry Plantagenet’s marriage to Eleanor and subsequent accession to the throne of England affect relations with king Louis VII? (How did the relations between the kings of England as dukes of Normandy and dukes of other French dominions such as Anjou and Aquitaine develop over time?) ● When Henry became king of England he was also the greatest landholder in France and his lands overshadowed those of his suzerain the French king. ● Henry paid homage to Louis for his French lands and respected his rights as suzerain. ● Henry’s father, Geoffrey had done homage to Louis VII to legalise his conquest of Normandy and henry did the same in 1151. ● Henry repeated the homage for all his French lands in 1156, probably to gain the alliance of Louis VII and his support for Henry in retaining Anjou and Maine. ● But the Capetians had come to power partly through their powerful position as territorial princes and the Plantagenet threat must have seemed very real even though Henry seems to have had no designs on the French crown. Louis (until 1165 and the birth of his son Philip) had no male heirs causing a succession crisis if he died heirless. ● Louis had no need to fight for personal survival because Henry II had enough challenges of his own, but he had to prevent himself being overshadowed inside France. ● In paying homage the Norman and Angevin kings had more to gain from such actions than did the Capetians, since the acceptance of homage conferred legitimacy without imposing specific obligations. ● During Henry II’s reign, acts of homage to Louis VII and Philip for Normandy in 1169 and 1183 seem to have functioned as ritual gestures to seal alliances between the kings as equals. ● In practical terms these acts meant very little at the time, and most of them were performed on the borders, but taken together they were important in the build­up of Capetian suzerainty and would stand Philip in good stead in 1202. ● For Henry’s sons, homage to the Capetians was a weapon against one another in their internecine strife, but by encouraging and accepting it – from Henry the Young King in 1160, Richard in 1188 and 1189, Arthur of Brittany in 1199 and John in 1200 – the Capetians established their suzerainty over Normandy. Thanks to these developments Philip would have legal backing for his conquest of Normandy and Anjou (see discussion page 218). 15. Give an account of the different ‘phases’ of Louis VII’s reign (page 160­161). ● In the first years as king Louis was effective in military terms. ● Following the accession of Henry to the throne of England, with his vast dominions in France, Louis lost much of the courage and vigour of the exploits in the early part of his reign. This might also been due to the strong influence of the Cistercians and other ecclesiastics upon him. ● Nevertheless Louis still continued to wage war sporadically, and not entirely fruitlessly, against Henry II. Louis would also negotiate as often as fight because he was unable to match the resources of the English king. ● At the end of the reign the possibilities of curtailing Henry’s power began to emerge and Louis took a firmer approach. Eventually he was to ally with Henry’s disgruntled sons against Henry. Details of the phases of Louis VII’s reign with Henry as king of England ● In the late 1150s Plantagenet power continued to expand and Louis appeared at his weakest. ● On the death of Henry’s brother Geoffrey (Lord of Nantes) Henry claimed the overlordship of Brittany and overran it. Louis put up no resistance to this. ● When Henry tried to take Toulouse in 1159, Louis took firm action and allied himself with the count of Toulouse occupying the city. Henry, unwilling to besiege his suzerain, fell back with his army. Louis thus remained on peaceful terms with Henry. ● Louis allowed his daughter Margaret to be betrothed to Henry’s son and heir, the young Henry, and given into Henry’s custody. In 1162 Henry celebrated their marriage and seized the Norman Vexin, her dowry, for himself. The rupture with Louis new emerged openly. ● In the 1160s the French king began to build up supporters against his rival, Henry II of England. Louis married Adela of Champagne which gave him a male heir. It also brought him an alliance with Henry the Liberal, count of Champagne. ● Odo II and Hugh II of Burgundy were favourably inclined towards Louis VII. ● Louis also collected a following of nobles in both Burgundy and the Languedoc. The French kings and their relationship with the princes of France ● Princes in France gradually acknowledged the king’s role as suzerain and began to fulfill their obligations to him more fully. th​
● The practice of giving military service became more common in the later 11​
century and it continued to th​
revive in the 12​
century. ● Leading lay and ecclesiastical magnate began to sit with the king and make judgements as peers of the th​
realm. The first full list of these, made by the chronicler Matthew Paris in the mid 13​
­century included the counts of Flanders, Champagne and Toulouse, the dukes of Normandy Burgundy and Aquitaine, the archibishop of Reims and the bishops of Beauvais, Noyon, Chalons, Laon and Langres. ● The title of peer (​
pair​
) dated from much earlier than this but its regular appearance in the language of administration did not occur until Philip Augustus’s reign when the most important princes were probably acting as the king’s formal counsellors on a regular basis. th​
● The princes also began to attend royal councils more frequently during the 12​
century. But the number of princes who attended gatherings in 1111, 1128 and 1130 was limited (except for a military gathering in 1124). ● Following a major council in 1146, princes and great nobles appeared far more frequently at court, as in 1152 at Beaugency when Louis VII divorced Eleanor of Aquitaine, in 1155 at Soissons, in 1173 at Paris and in 1178 at Reims for the coronation of the young Philip Augustus. ● The princes who attended and endorsed royal decisions were described in royal charters as ​
barones​
, a th​
th​
word that had begun life in the 11​
century as the rough equivalent of vassal, but in the 12​
century was increasingly applied to the great men of the realm. ● In addition royal counsellors drawn from the nobility rather than the royal household began to appear. These are the signs of the formation of a royal council, probably under the influence of Roman law, and perhaps modeled on the idea of Charlemagne’s court. By the end of Philip Augustus’s reign it was meeting on a regular basis (see pages 219, 220 and 221). 16. What were relations like between Louis and Henry II of England? (see map page 163). How was the church and church politics implicated in this relationship between the two monarchs? ● Whilst Louis built up supporters against his rival Henry II the relations between them could be complex. ● Frederick Barbarossa, elected emperor in 1152, negotiated with Henry and Louis in turn. ● In 1159 another papal schism erupted. Frederick recognized Victor IV; Henry II and Louis VII accepted Alexander III in 1160. In 1162 Alexander was driven out of Italy by Frederick and took refuge in France. ● When Alexander gave his sanction to Henry II for the marriage of the Young King Henry and Margaret, Louis negotiated with the emperor, but Henry of Champagne and Frederick Barbarossa arranged a meeting of both kings and both popes. Alexander refused to appear and the discourtesy of the emperor and his adviser to the French king drove Louis back to supporting Alexander who found refuge and protection in France. ● In 1164 Louis VII gained another useful, albeit embarrassing ecclesiastical refugee in his lands – Archbishop Thomas Becket. ● During these years Louis VII was marked out as an ally of the church (​
rex Christianissimus​
) and his opposition to Henry II was given a moral dimension. ● The French king fought Henry sporadically for several years, but Alexander III did not give him backing because he needed to keep the friendship of such a powerful monarch as Henry. ● In 1170 when Becket was murdered Henry was blamed by all Christendom. Louis, who had protected the martyr, gained great general approval. He went into the last decade of his reign in a much strengthened moral position. ● Louis’s opposition to Henry and his sons became more effective, even though the royal principality was still overshadowed by the Plantagenet lands. 17. What was Louis’ role in the rebellion of 1173­4 against Henry II of England? ● Louis began to foment discord between Henry II and his sons. ● He probably played an important part in bringing about the rebellion of the Young King and his brothers in 1173­4 that posed a dangerous threat to Henry’s power. ● Louis campaigned against Henry but did not lend full, wholehearted support to the rebels. ● Louis helped the Young King, Richard and Geoffrey to arrange the peace that followed Henry II’s victory in 1174. ● Henry’s power nevertheless again began to increase (see pages 162­163). And see map page 163. 18. What was the state of affairs at the end of Louis’ reign? ● This was a more peaceful phase of Louis VII’s reign. ● In 1179 he held a great assembly of lay and ecclesiastical magnates in Paris, and his son Philip was elected, anointed and crowned as his successor. ● In 1180 Louis VII, the old king, died having just managed to control Angevin power. Philip II ‘Augustus’ 1180­1223 (pages 164­174) 1. How was Philip II viewed by contemporaries? ● Not popular. J.W. Baldwin (see p 442 of bibliography) describes him as an “astute, manipulative, calculating, penurious and ungallant ruler”. (See question and answer to Q.7 below). These characteristics are alluded to by most contemporary writers and this modified their early enthusiasm for the new king. The early enthusiasm is expressed by Rigord of Saint­Denis (self­appointed chronicler of the king’s deeds) in which he speaks of the young man’s intelligence and prudence. He also describes him as Augustus because he was august – he augmented the crown’s possessions (Artois and Vermandois through his marriage to Isabella of Hainault), and he was born in August – as God­given and the most Christian king. 2. How is he viewed by historians? ● See Baldwin above. A popular character with French historians but subject of scholarly study only in th​
last two decades of 20​
century ( see bibliography page 442). ● Norman Cantor in his book ​
The Civilisation of the Middle Ages ​
has described him as “the third of the th​
great rulers of the later 12​
century, alongside Henry II (of England) and Frederick Barbarossa (of Germany) Philip was lacking in their glamorous and attractive qualities. He was a miserable, crafty hunchback totally without scruples. His high­sounding appellation was probably intended to mean ‘the augmentor’ rather than to associate him with the Roman emperors. Yet Philip’s devious qualities were the only ones that could have led to a great increase in the French royal demesne.” Cantor continues…. “ the rearrangement of the political map of France could not be accomplished without craft and guile, qualities in which Philip excelled. But Philip was also an extremely industrious and ingenious administrator who prepared for the expansion of the royal demesne by creating the bailli, the local financial, legal, administrative, and military representative of the French monarchy.” 3. Who was his first wife? What legacy did she leave? ● Isabella of Hainault – gave him a son and heir, Louis. She died in 1189. She also gave lands as her dowry. 4. What affect did his wife Isabella’s death have on Philip? ● He re­married – Ingeborg of Denmark whom he cast aside in a violent manner, finding complaisant bishops to marry him to Agnes of Méran instead – this fuelled hostility from the church and damaged his reputation. Heavy taxation of the church also fuelled the hostility (see below). ● It is thought that Philip suffered from a major disorder due to symptoms that emerged on his return from the Third Crusade – heir loss, extreme nervousness, violent antipathy to his wife, Ingeborg. ● Agnes produced a daughter and a son, Philip Hurepel before her death in 1201. But Philip aroused major disapproval from the pope (Innocent III) and despaired of obtaining a divorces taking Ingeborg back in 1213. ● This was just after the birth of a son to his heir, Prince Louis. 5. Why did the chronicler Rigord change his opinion of Philip as time evolved? ● Because of his marital difficulties, cynical behavior and heavy taxation of the church. From 1191 Rigord merely referred to Philip as ​
rex Francorum​
, king of the Franks. 6. Who was Philip’s official historiographer after Rigord and how did he depict the king? ● William the Breton – he reworked and added to Rigord’s chronicle as the ​
Philippidos​
which appeared just after Philip’s death in 1226. In it he depicts the king in a heroic light, glossing over his faults. 7. How did most chroniclers of the time differ from William the Breton in their depiction of Philip? ● Giles of Paris described him as an evil, intolerant man who had brought disgrace to France by his repudiation of Ingeborg. ● Bertran of Born (an Anglo­ Norman) described him as inert and cowardly. ● A more favourable, yet still critical view is given by Payen Gatineau, a canon of Tours in his​
Chronicle of Tours.​
He describes Philip as physically attractive and a lover of wine, women, good cheer and money. He says Philip was quick to judge, harsh with rebels and a fomenter of discord against his enemies, but he never let an enemy die in prison. He helped the poor and needy and protected the church. ● Another chronicler tells us that, unlike his Plantagenet rivals, he didn’t like strong language and refused to spend money on frivolous public entertainments. 8. How is Philip summed up in Hallam and Everard’s book? ● An unappealing figure with consistently strong political acumen (ability). A king who nurtured powerful ambitions from early in his reign and who achieved them. (See page 165.) 9. What lands did he gain and what influence did Philip exert as king of France in the early part of his reign? ● Through marriage to Isabella of Hainault, Philip gained Artois as her dowry. This gave him vital claim to the family’s other lands. (Isabella was the daughter of Baldwin V, count of Hainault, and niece of Philip of Alsace, count of Flanders.) ● Norman Cantor in his book “​
The Civilisation of the Middle Ages” ​
suggests that Philip was ambitious and pursued his “crooked schemes” one of which was to gain the northern county of Artois by marriage and then turn upon the vast domains of the Angevin ruler in northern France. ● Made an alliance with Henry II of England at Gisors which alienated the counts of Flanders and Champagne, who allied against Philip with Stephen of Sancerre in 1182 which resulted in sporadic fighting until 1185. ● On the death of Countess Isabella (wife of Philip of Hainault) in 1182 Philip claimed the lands to which she was heir – Vermandois, Amiénois and Valois. But these lands were passed initially to her sister, Eleanor, countess of Beaumont. ● In 1185 Philip defeated the countess of Hainault’s widow, Philip of Hainault and a settlement of the lands was reached at Amiens in 1186. Under the terms of the settlement king Philip retained Artois, his wife’s dowry, (a permanent gain when Louis VIII was born in 1187). Eleanor, countess of Beaumont kept Valois and Vermandois was divided. King Philip gained the important city and county of Amiens and 65 castles, the county of Montdidier, and the reversion of Philip of Alsace’s share of Vermandois. This was a triumph for Philip. ● In 1186 King Philip also made another successful expedition into Burgundy and brought the duke to heel. 10. How, when and why did relations with Henry II change in 1186­7? ● In 1186­7 both the Young King Henry and Geoffrey of Brittany (two of Henry II’s sons) died. The young king would have been a congenial successor to Henry II and Geoffrey was a valued fellow­conspirator and friend. ● Richard, Henry’s eldest surviving son, was, by contrast a ruthless and dangerous rival. ● Richard failed to fulfill his promises to marry Alice, Philip’s sister. This caused Philip to demand that both she and her dowry, the Norman Vexin be returned to him. ● There were problems, following Geoffrey’s death over the lordship of Brittany. ● There were also problems concerning Toulouse. ● Philip decided to make war on Henry. Philip marched into Berry and besieged Chateauroux. A truce was made, however (mainly on Richard’s initiative) and in 1188 both kings (Philip and Henry) agreed to go on crusade. 11. How did Philip’s relationship with Richard evolve after 1188? How did the Third Crusade affect this relationship? ● The two became close allies. ● Henry seemed to be favouring his youngest son John above Richard. ● Philip exploited this family quarrel. Richard paid Philip homage for Henry II’s continental lands and they joined forces against Henry overrunning Normandy, Maine and Toulouse (by this time Henry II was elderly and sick). ● In July 1189​
Henry II met Richard and Philip and conceded on all points: Richard was to be his successor, the Angevins were to keep the Norman Vexin but Philip was to retain his conquests in Berry and to be recognized as suzerain of the Auvergne. ● Two days after the meeting Henry II died after hearing that John had rebelled against him. ● Richard became king of England and Philip’s vassal for Normandy, Maine, Anjou, Touraine, Poitou and Aquitaine. Richard’s military prowess was formidable. Philip was intent on reducing his great power in the French kingdom. ● In 1190​
Richard and Philip set off for Palestine together on the Third Crusade. ● Philip left his mother Adela of Champagne and his uncle the archbishop of Reims as regents, as his wife had died shortly before. ● In Sicily, en route to the Holy Land, the fragile friendship between Richard and Philip broke down. ● Richard again refused to marry Philip’s sister Alice (he alleged that she had been his father’s mistress). Instead he made Berengaria of Navarre his wife. This was a shrewd political move aimed probably to protect Aquitaine and Gascony from the hostility of the powerful count of Toulouse. Richard gained the support of Tancred of Sicily and Philip, count of Flanders. ● Philip revised his agreement with Richard. ● In 1191 by the Treaty of Messina​
Richard paid Philip 10,000 marks and agreed to restore Alice and the town of Gisors to him. The Norman Vexin was to remain in Norman hands unless he had no male heirs. If Richard had two sons his lands were to be divided between them, and both were to hold their lands in France directly from the French king. Historians have studied these arrangements to question whether there was such a concept as an “Angevin Empire”. Boussard is cited as having defined the ‘Plantagenet empire’ as a conglomerate of lands forming a conceptual and administrative whole with small pieces of evidence to support this. Hallam and Everard, however, say that these examples were the exception rather than the rule and there were no signs of plans for centralizing the administration throughout the Angevin dominions even though there was some movement of officials from one area to another to tap into the expertise. Neither Henry II or Richard I used the term empire or thought of the lands as a political unit and each styled himself as king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou. The lands were never regarded as a unit to be kept together (see above) – the collection of lands was to be divided between their heirs in the tradition of French territorial princes. But on each occasion the practical and normal principle of division was disregarded and one man took all the lands by force. This does not mean that their intentions had always been of this nature. ● In the long term Philip hoped to divide the Plantagenet lands. In the short term he was ready to exploit the rivalry of Richard and John. ● In 1191 the town of Acre fell. ​
This was the crusader’s first objective. The booty was divided and Philip returned to France. Richard intended to carry on to Jerusalem. ● Philip of Alsace had died on crusade and Philip’s regents had occupied Artois in the name of Prince Louis. Péronne and Saint­Quentin (the parts of Vermandois that Philip of Alsace had been allowed in 1186) also passed into the king’s hands. ● On his return from crusade Philip also reached a new agreement with Eleanor, countess of Beaumont. She renounced all claims to the Arménois and large portion of Vermandois. The rest, including the county of Saint­Quentin she was to hold as a fief from the king, to whom it would pass on her death. ● This agreement was opposed by Baldwin VIII of Flanders, the new count, nephew of Philip of Hainault, but Philip’s gradual build­up of lands and rights in northern France continued. ● Philip met with the Emperor Henry VI probably on his return journey from the East and was given his support against the English king. (Emperor Henry VI was the counterclaimant to Sicily and angry at Richard’s treaty with his rival Tancred). ● It is possible that when Richard was captured by his enemy, Duke Leopold of Austria on his return from the crusade, it was Philip who arranged 12. How did Philip profit from Richard’s capture and imprisonment on his return from the crusade? ● He overran the Vexin, seized Gisors and allied with John, planning (it seems) to invade Normandy and England in defiance of his agreement with Richard and violating both feudal and canon law. ● On his release from prison Richard mobilized all the resources of the duchy and drove Philip back. ● In 1196 a truce was made and almost all Philip’s conquests were lost. 13. How did Richard consolidate his position against Philip? ● Richard won the support of Count Baldwin IX of Flanders and Renaud of Dammartin, count of Boulogne (whose support Philip had tried to secure). In 1197 they attacked Philip’s lands in northern France. The king invaded Flanders in retaliation, but nothing was settled. ● Richard overran the Norman Vexin. ● A truce was arranged in 1197​
during which time Richard strengthened his lines of defence, building the Chateau Gaillard, modelled on crusader castles and virtually impregnable. ● In 1198 war started again. ​
Philip was driven out of the French Vexin as well. At this time he attempted to repudiate Ingebord and this resulted in disputes with the papacy. ● In 1199 a truce was arranged between the two kings.​
Richard was killed unexpectedly in curbing the revolt of the viscount of Limoges. 14. What was the effect of Richard’s death on Philip? ● A new rival came to the English throne – John. ● Philip exploited John’s weakness of character. ● Richard was a powerful and charismatic figure, more than a match for Philip Augustus. John’s abilities as a warrior and politician have, according to Hallam and Everard, been much overestimated. 15. What kind of character was John? ● Mixed – determined and ruthless like Richard, but petty, tyrannical and indecisive. Capable of waging brilliant campaigns but also of inaction. Found it hard to win men’s loyalties due to his vindictiveness. ● Whereas Richard was ready to fight for his rights, John, once he had gained control of his brother’s inheritance, preferred to hold on to it by concession, conciliation and diplomacy (see Q 17 below). ● Even when he was pushed into war John seemed incapable of the consistent effort needed to exploit and build on any gains he made – characteristics that were easily exploited by Philip. ● 16. What happened to Richard’s lands after his death and following John’s succession? ● Eleanor of Aquitaine rallied her duchy on behalf of John and the English and Norman nobility (thanks in part to the counsels of William Marshall) accepted John as king and duke and had him crowned. ● Arthur, count of Brittany (son of John’s elder brother Geoffrey) was favoured over John in Anjou, Maine and Touraine. Philip supported Arthur and invested him with Normandy, Brittany, Anjou, Maine and Touraine. ● Philip, in the midst of the confusion following Richard’s death also invaded Normandy and Maine. ● William des Roches, seneschal of Anjou, defected from Arthur to John. Philip retreated. 17. What were the terms of the Treaty of Le Goulet in 1200? ● Peace was concluded at Le Goulet in 1200.​
The terms of the treaty were as follows: (i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
John was to hold all Richard’s former fiefs from Philip (rendered him homage). John was to pay 20,000 marks as relief for the fiefs (this was an enormous relief). Blanche of Castile, John’s niece, was to marry the future Louis VIII. John gave as her dowry lands in Berry, Gracay and Issoudun and the Chauvigny estates. These were to be held by Philip until the marriage was consummated – and the two protagonists were still children. Philip was ceded the county of Evercin and Evereux – a sizeable portion of Normandy (including the Norman Vexin), and a valuable concession. This ensured Philip a greatly strengthened frontier with Normandy John agreed to this in order to secure his lands against the claims of Arthur. John arranged to receive back into homage the troublesome count of Angouleme and the viscount of Limoges, but acknowledged that the counts of Flanders and Boulogne ought to be Philip’s vassals and not his own. Philip had received substantial feudal and material gains by the terms of the treaty. It must be noted that to secure his lands against the claims of Arthur of Brittany John made enormous allowances to Philip in this treaty, which neither Henry II nor Richard would ever have considered. 18. Who gained least from the Treaty of Le Goulet? ● Arthur of Brittany. He now held his much reduced lands from John. John’s marriage to the heiress Isabella of Angouleme ● It was a wise move for the English king to marry Isabelle of Angouleme, for this area was one of long­standing turbulence. Richard had waged regular warfare against the counts of Angouleme and the viscounts of Limoges since the 1170s. It was very foolish of John, however, not to compensate Hugh IX de Lusignan, count of La Marche, to whom Isabella had previously been betrothed (see Q 20 below and John’s conflict with the Lusignans) ● 19. What other gains did Philip make at this time? ● In 1200 Baldwin IX of Flanders relinquished all his rights over the Amiénois, Artois and the counties of Saint­Quentin and Péronne to Philip. ● By the end of 1200 the French royal lands had grown considerably in size. 20. What advantages did Philip gain over the next four years? ● After the treaty of Le Goulet Philip was able to back up his new advantages with force. John seemed to play into his hands. ● Due to John’s conflict with the Lusignan’s over John’s marriage to Isabella of Angouleme, fighting broke out. John sent his officials into La Marche to administer it directly and the Lusignans appealed to their suzerain Philip, accusing John of unfairly attacking and plundering them. John agreed to give the Lusignans a fair trial but then failed to do so. Philip’s summoned John to the royal court in 1202 to answer for his misdeeds. John failed to appear. John’s lands were forfeit. Philip took Normandy and invested Arthur with Brittany. (see pages 169 & 170). ● Normandy still had a slightly different status from the other Plantagenet lands in France, then, and it is not clear whether Normandy was included in the forfeit of lands. Perhaps Philip had already decided to keep it for himself if he could capture it. He invested Arthur with all John’s other French lands. He was ready to fight John to back up his authority and dispossess him of his lands. ● Philip and Arthur began hostilities against John in 1202 but Arthur was defeated by his uncle, imprisoned and probably murdered by John in1203. ● Rumours of Arthur’s death were rife by 1203 and both then and later these provided excellent propaganda for the French king. ● By high­handedness John also alienated William des Roches, seneschal of Anjou. ● Thus John’s enemies were gathered in Brittany, Anjou, Poitou and the Ile­de­France, while potential allies such as the count of Flanders and a number of German princes had gone off on the Fourth Crusade. ● John was gradually being deserted by many of his followers and relied increasingly on often ill­disciplined mercenary troops (which annoyed the Norman nobility as well as his frequent mulching) ● For John his efforts pub an enormous strain on the economy. ● He put up some resistance at first but by 1203 seems to have lost the will to fight. He fled to England. ● Philip bought the support of the nobles, the towns and the church in Normandy with concessions. He made grants of privileges to towns and monasteries as he captured them, attracting the Norman nobility as his vassals and the church as an ally. ● Just as John lost potential allies, Philip was helped by the departure of the frequently hostile Baldwin of Flanders on the Fourth Crusade. ● The nobility who stayed behind – Duke of Burgundy and Renaud of Dammartin, count of Boulogne – favoured Philip. ● By 1204 Philip had struck at his rival John, and overrun Normandy, taken Chateau Gaillard by storm and seized Rouen. ● Maine, Touraine, Anjou and Brittany also fell to him in 1206.. ● Philip held Poitou from 1205­1206 until Aimery of Thouards, whom he made seneschal, went over to John. The English king held it until in 1224 Louis VIII overran it again.the French crown until 1259. ● He left Poitou and Aquitaine in English hands. Poitou was a valuable holding. The English king held it until in 1224 Louis VIII overran it again.the French crown until 1259. ● Aquitaine and Gascony were less attractive because of their unruly nobles and the weak feudal and administrative structures. Philip therefore concentrated on taking the richest and best governed parts of the Plantagenet holdings (of the Angevin Commonwealth). In doing so he had cut direct communications between England and the remains of its French lands. He had gained immense advantages for the French crown in land, wealth and manpower. ● In the space of five years the balance of power had tipped dramatically towards King Philip. He had gained land, wealth and a considerable reputation, and this he was to further augment at the Battle of Bouvines in 1214 when he defeated John’s ally, the Emperor Otto of Brunswick (see below), John himself having earlier been routed by Prince Louis. These conquests greatly strengthened French control over their new conquests. ● Philip had to consolidate these advantages against the background of a wider conflict. 21. What was the impact of the death of the Emperor Henry VI in 1198? And how did events unfold between the English and French monarchs? What gains did Philip make? ● A succession dispute in which alliances were rapidly made and broken over the next few years. ● The struggle of the English and French kings became part of this wider conflict. ● Otto and Philip of Swabia were both contenders until Philip of Swabia’s assassination in 1208. ● Philip Augustus put forward his own candidate, Henry of Brabant, whilst Pope Innocent III and John favoured Otto of Brunswick, who then alienated the pope by invading Italy. ●
●
●
●
John and Philip were consecutively the pope’s favourite according to alliances made and broken. John joined forces with Boulogne and Flanders who were alarmed by French royal expansion. The French king eventually turned against Flanders but gained very little. The slight success in Flanders emboldened John. He left his allies Ferrand and Otto of Germany to tackle Philip Augustus from the north. John set off for Aquitaine hoping to advance from the south­west with his army. ● John was defeated by Prince Louis and fled to La Rochelle. ● Prince Louis brought Anjou under control and secured Philip’s rear against the English king. th​
22. What happened at the Battle of Bouvines on 27​
July 1214? th​
● At the battle of Bouvines on 27​
July 1214​
Philip was victorious against the count of Flanders and Otto of Brunswick supported by the count of Boulogne and an English force. It became the symbol of the revived royal power of the Capetians. The victory had a powerful effect on the image of the French monarchy, at both the intellectual and the popular levels. A small but well­organised French force had defeated an army three times its size. This was also an indication that God had favoured the French. ● Philip gained noble captives and a prestige that enabled him to deal with the princes of France, with other kings and the emperor from a position of unprecedented strength. ● Philip founded a monastery near to Senlis, named La Victoire after the battle (his one and only monastic foundation). The monastery was intended as both a celebration and a thank­offering to God for a great victory (just as William the Conqueror’s foundation of Battle Abbey on the site of the battle of Hastings has been). ● Clerical historiographers made much of Philip’s victory – William the Breton in his ​
Philippidos ​
gives the king’s victory a mythical quality alongside those of Pompey, Caesar, Vespasian and Titus. In a later account composed around 1240 by Philip Mousket and the writings of the Minstrel of Reims (c. 1260), Bouvines entered into the realm of legend and was linked with the flourishing cult of sacral kingship. Mousket emphasized the role of Saint Denis and Charlemagne’s ​
oriflamme​
, and the Minstrel, the idea of the rebirth of the monarchy and the legitimacy of Capetian rule. 23. Why was Bouvines an event of major importance in the politics of Western Europe and in the rise of the French monarchy? ● Philip’s enemies suffered a humiliating defeat. Otto was put to flight, Renaud of Boulgne and Ferrand of Portugal, count of Flanders, captured. ● Ferrand was kept imprisoned in Paris, leaving his wife Joan to rule Flanders. ● Renaud was kept in custody until his death in 1219. ● Renaud’s daughter was married to Philip Hurepel, Philip Augustus’s second son, who was granted his fiefs. This was an important gain for the French royal house. The king consolidated it by seizing Ponthieu in 1221. The major ringleaders suffered badly in 1214 but Philip was more generous to other rebellious French barons. ● Otto died in 1218 and was succeeded by Frederick II Hohenstaufen who had defeated him. ● John, supported by the pope, made a truce with Philip and Louis and went back to England. ● In conclusion:​
Philip had consolidated his conquests of the Angevin lands and his acquisition of the northern French lands; he had defeated the emperor and the English king despite their papal backing, and had established his own pre­eminence in France. Bouvines was vitally important in the rise of the French monarchy. ● The conquest of Normandy was decisive in giving the Capetians a financial advantage. By 1221 Philip Augustus’s annual revenue had, according to Baldwin’s calculations, jumped some £200,000 parisis a year, a figure based on the surviving accounts for that year. (see discussion about royal resources: Capetian versus Plantagenets on pages 224­228 of Hallam and Everard & see notes made from these pages below). 24. Why did Prince Louis invade England in 1216? What arguments did the Capetians give for the legitimacy of his claim to the English throne? ● The English nobility were angered by John’s financial demands and his ever encroaching administration. ● They forced him to agree to the major concessions embodied in ​
Magna Carta.​
But John refused. Pope Innocent III declared the charter null and void. ● The English barons appealed to the French king for support. ● Prince Louis invaded making a claim to the English throne through his wife Blanche of Castile, granddaughter of Henry II. The Capetians also argued that John had illegally surrendered his kingdom to the pope without the consent of his barons. 25. What was Philip Augustus’s position on this invasion? ● Unclear – seemed to support it and yet not support it (see page 173). 26. How were Louis’s claims (and therefore the French claims) to the English throne relinquished? ● Due to death of John and the succession of his very young son, Henry III who was favoured by the English nobility and supported by the new pope, Honorius III. ● Louis was defeated at the battle of Lincoln and came to terms at Lambeth in 1217. ● French hold on most of the former holdings of the English kings in France, however, was increasingly secure although the legal status of these lands was not to be settled until 1259 (under Henry III and Louis IX). 27. How did the French monarchy make further gains to the French crown? ● Through gains made via intervention in the Albigensian crusade in southern France (the Languedoc). The result of bloody campaigns against Raymond VI, count of Toulouse and Peter II of Aragon was the Lateran council of 1215 where Raymond was disinherited of his lands with only a small part left for his son. Simon de Montfort who had led the force into the south became count of Toulouse and did homage to Philip Augustus. Later, though following Simon de Montfort’s death, the northern forces were driven out of the Languedoc. 28. When did Philip die? What was his greatest achievement? ● Philip Augustus died in 1223 following a serious illness. His victory at Bouvines gave him a pre­eminent position in France – see map on page 175. French Society, 1108­1226 Social and economic changes (pages 178­181) ● The revival of Capetian power took place in a period of economic expansion and social change from which the kings were able to profit. ● Historians have characterized this period 1050­1250 as the ‘second feudal age’. Sources for this period ● Sources, such as those from the abbey of Cluny, provide details of information about land, fairs, markets, tolls and mills. ● There is also an account dating from the 1150s, produced probably under the influence of Henry, bishop of Winchester, who stayed at the abbey and helped to reorganize its finances. ● Another important source is Abbot Suger’s treatise about his administration of the abbey of Saint­Denis and its estates. ● The above sources only provide information about ecclesiastical lands so much of the evidence of change has to be sought on the land itself, in traces of new settlements and land clearance, in the appearance of new villages. Place names can help with this – ​
Villeneuve. ● Some idea of the rural life of the peasants emerges from the pages of illuminated manuscripts and the carved capitals of churches. ● Despite the obstacles of the incomplete information from sources overall patterns of social and economic development clearly emerge. ● From the middle of the tenth century in some areas in France there was a growth in prosperity and a th​
quickening in the economic life which became widespread in the second half of the 11​
century and the th​
whole of the 12​
century. ● By the time of Philip I’s reign (1060­1108) land clearance was increasing, villages and monastic communities expanding, long­distance trade growing as the demand for luxury goods gradually increased, local markets multiplying sand coinage circulating widely in much of France. ● The population expanded as the birth rate grew and life expectancy increased. ● This brought about a pressure on uncleared land and an increased mobility among the rural population. ● Patterns of landholding and farming changed – the number of serfs declined. Money was used more and more at a lower level of society and dues often replaced labour services. ● Why these changes? Probably improved climatic conditions – the medieval warm period – increasing agricultural production. Improvements in ploughing techniques were part of the increase in cereal cultivation and production. th​
● By the later years of the 12​
century the Ile­de­France and Picardy were the wealthiest regions of France where horse­drawn ploughs were probably widespread (as opposed to oxen­drawn ploughs). The heavier and stronger horse often produced more work than the ox. ● Surpluses of food could be sold, stimulating the growth of rural trade and provisioning the growing urban population. The above changes caused land to be cleared and reclaimed from the forests for farming where new settlements, villages and religious communities began to appear. ● New patterns of peasant landholding emerged, the newly claimed land being let out for rent or for a fixed proportion of the produce. th​
● The changes of the 12​
century brought better economic conditions and in improved social standing to many of the peasants. ● The banal lordship remained the basic social agrarian unit with the powers of the lord over the peasants still being considerable. The lords could levy taxes, tallage and tolls. Lords also made profits by selling surplus produce. ● Labour services began to be commuted in return for rents. This provided the lord with money to hire casual day labourers. th​
● Families paying fixed rents in lieu of services did well during the course of the 12​
century as inflation reduced the value of their rents. The lords suffered proportionately and by 1100 many landowners were running into dept as a result of conspicuous expenditure. ● Expenditure included long­distance pilgrimages and crusades, foundations of religious houses, lavish almsgiving, expensive clothing and entertaining on an extravagant scale. ● Religious communities also spent immense sums on large new churches, almsgiving, on a vast body of servants to care for their members, but which failed to administer their lands efficiently. th​
● Urban communities were becoming increasingly important in the 12​
century, their tradesmen, merchants and craftsmen all aware of the importance of profit and living from the rewards of flourishing trade, both local and long­distance. ● From about 1180 a great quickening of the economic life of France occurred. ● The growing pressure of land was soon to lead to land­hunger. Corn began to rise in price, exchange built up and there was an economic boom. ● Towns expanded rapidly, many of the greater nobles, the territorial princes and the king began to exploit their lands directly and to manage them better, using urban techniques of trading for rural estate management and encouraging commerce, the growth of towns and the passage of merchants through their lands. ● The counts of Flanders and Champagne and Philip Augustus all adopted deliberate economic policies, and their ability to tap the wealth of the towns gave them a great financial advantage over the nobles in their lands and helped political centralization to take place. Urban and rural communities: the growth of Paris (pages 181­189) ● Due to the growth in trade the professional merchant class increased in numbers and as a result towns and villages that housed them expanded in size and prosperity. ● Such communities began to require and demand freedom from the economic, social and judicial ties that bound them to their overlords. ● Privleges or franchises were won by force from, or granted by, many lords to both urban and rural th​
communities during the course of the 12​
century. ● Areas of expanding prosperity were Normandy, Flanders and other parts of northern France. th​
th​
● Some associations achieved the coveted status of a commune, in the late 11​
and early 12​
centuries an association of burgesses or villages bound by oath. This gave them their status and solidarity and they often fought their overlord to defend the privileges felt to be due to the group. th​
● By the end of the 12​
century a change had taken place and a commune now depended on the charter granted to it by its lord that gave it legal validity (these were now needed to create a commune as well as confirm a commune that already existed). ● The status of commune was eagerly sought for political reasons – that the commune regulated its own affairs. ● Complete judicial and political independence, a full commune, was given only to some rural communities and in the case of the urban communes, only usually as the result of forceful action. (Examples of this are given on pages 183 and 184.) ● The territorial princes and the king profited from the communal movement as far as they could. ● The counts of Flanders and Champagne gradually took control of it, founded communes, conceded franchises and created new settlements to encourage trade, from which they gained considerable advantages. ● Henry II and his sons organized the Norman communes to defend the duchy. ● Philip Augustus likewise used the towns for his own ends, political (to gain loyalty of the burgesses), military (some communes, in recognition of their strategic importance were given full communal privileges, but still had to maintain an urban militia) and financial (communes had to pay rent in exchange for privileges). ● Paris was in the years 1108­1226 a settlement in the process of growth and expansion. By the end of the th​
12​
century it was indisputably the capital city of France and had outstripped in size and prosperity all its rivals in the northern part of the kingdom. ● The process began in earnest under Louis VI and Louis VII. At its heart the ​
Ile de la Cité, ​
previously semi­rural in aspect, was built over and work was done to embellish the old cathedral. ● In 1163 a complete rebuilding of the cathedral was begun under Bishop Maurice of Sully that was to make Notre­Dame a masterpiece of early Gothic architecture and art. To the south of the cathedral lay the episcopal palace, and at the other end of the island, the royal palace which was also extended during this period. A considerable number of churches and chapels were situated in this area, many of them of th​
12​
century foundation. ● A growing commercial life was reflected in the expansion of the bourgs on the right bank. ● The merchant corporation of the ​
marchands de l’eau​
was increasingly important and profited from royal patronage. In 1170 Louis VII confirmed the customs they had enjoyed in his own and his father’s reigns. ● There were other trade guilds too, for butchers, fishmongers and bakers, and shops and money changers began to proliferate. ● To cater for the spiritual needs of this growing population parish churches were founded in considerable numbers. ● The growth on the left bank was not only due to commerce but also because it was the centre of the schools of Notre­Dame, of Saint­Victor and Sainte­Geneviève. ● Around Paris, too, more outlying settlements such as Saint­Lazare and Montmartre were showing signs of vigour. ● Under Philip Augustus Paris began to show signs of becoming a large urban conglomeration rather than a series of settlements as it was before. Much of this was due to the king himself who showed a considerable interest in the commercial life of the city. ● The Parisian burgesses began to play an important role in royal administration; in 1190 when the king went on crusade they were given financial responsibilities and involved in the council of regency. ● Trade in salt and wine was increasing rapidly and the ​
marchands de l’eau ​
did well under royal protection, becoming the virtual monopolists of river traffic. ● In 1186 the king decided to have the streets of Paris paved and in 1189­90 to build a wall around the expanded city. The earlier walls (Roman in origin) enclosed only 25 acres, whilst Philip’s walls contained 625 acres. They had over 70 towers along their length. The king also had the Louvre castle constructed. These works gave the city powerful defences and greatly increased its security. The king’s archives and principal residence, too, were here. ● In the reign of Philip Augustus the university of Paris emerged from the schools. Gradually the teachers and students formed into corporations or guilds that were to form the basis of the institution. It had built up a considerable reputation from about 1100, long before it was fully organized. (Information about the faculty and the subjects available, teachers, training and tuition are found on pages 187­189.) Orthodox and heretical religious movements (pages 189­198) th​
th​
● One of the key features of the late 11​
and 12​
century French society was the strong tide of monastic reform, which brought with it many new orders. ● By about 1100 the great Benedictine monasteries appeared to many critics, both internal and external, to have become too closely bound by their elaborate liturgical rounds to concentrate fully on their spiritual life; and despite their emphasis on running their great estates, another source of distraction, many were noticeably and heavily in debt. ● Bernard of Clairvaux and his companions were largely responsible for the spread of the Cistercian ideal and the expansion of the order thanks to Bernard’s ability and enthusiasm. He came to hold a central role in the religious life of both France and western Europe. He preached the Second Crusade; he disputed and made friends with eminent scholars such as Peter Abelard, with Benedictine abbots such as ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Suger and with Peter the Venerable of Cluny; he intervened in Episcopal elections against Louis VI of France and other rulers. The enthusiasm for renewed monasticism (epitomized by Frontevrault) affected the female population just as much as the male. There was a steady increase in the number of convents in France during the th​
11​
century. The abbots of Cluny, as well as the Capetian kings, were sympathetic towards female monasticism. In the wake of the crusades and the growth of the cult of chivalry two orders appeared that were dedicated to fighting the infidel – ​
the Templars and the Hospitallers.​
They became the crack fighting troops of the crusading armies, living under a severe quasi­monastic discipline, and spread widely in th​
France during the 12​
century. The Templars ​
were founded in Jerusalem in 1118 to provide disciplined, effective troops, first to guard pilgrims, and later for the crusading armies. Ten years later they adopted many Cistercian customs. The knights, fighting monks who were lay brothers but from aristocratic backgrounds, took vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. The small houses where they lived when not on campaign were served by priests and domestics. th​
The Knights Hospitaller ​
emerged in the Holy Land in the early 12​
century, to care for the poor and sick and again to protect pilgrims. Initially they were very similar to the Augustinian canons in their way of life. They subsequently adopted many features of the Templars’ organization and become increasingly orientated towards warfare. By 1200 both orders​
​
had amassed considerable wealth, and the Templars acted as bankers to both the French and the English kings. The church​
accepted and supported a great variety of religious orders following many different customs (see description of many of these on pages189­195). It was not, however, prepared to accept heretical religious movements, whose adherents it sought to make outcasts from society, and ultimately crush. Two of the most celebrated French heretical preachers were Peter of Bruis and Henry the Monk (see page 196­7). The Cathar heresy ​
is probably one of the most well known taking root in southern France around 1150. Learning, literature and the schools in France (pages 198­202) th​
● The 12​
century also saw a burgeoning of artistic, literary and intellectual activity. The word “renaissance” is often used to describe this movement. The influence of classical antiquity ● Contemporaries were well aware of the influence of antiquity upon them, such as Abbot Suger of Saint­Denis and Bernard of Chartres. ● Paris in particular played a central and vitally important part in this series of movements. It was the home of a new artistic style, the Gothic, of important literary developments, and of a flourishing monasticism, invective in rules and vocations and strong in spiritual fervor. ● Major libraries were built up by many ecclesiastical communities as texts, all copied by hand, were disseminated widely. ● Paris and the other schools of northern France were the focus of the study and development of the traditional classical and scholastic disciplines: in particular the ​
trivium​
(grammar, rhetoric and logic) and to a lesser degree the ​
quadrivium​
(arithmetic, music, astronomy and geometry). ● Peter Abelard made an important contribution to the growth of scholasticism with his ​
Sic et Non, ​
a theological treatise discussing such propositions as ​
“that to God all things are possible, and contra”. ● Scholasticism reached full development with the ​
Summa Theologica​
of Thomas Aquinas in the mid­thirteenth century. ● The rediscovery of Aristotle’s ​
New Logic ​
and other texts increased a growing interest in logic at the th
expense of grammar, rhetoric and literature, and later the arrival of the works of Averroes, the 12​
century Muslim philosopher, caused the church considerable concern over the upholding of orthodoxy. th​
● Interest in ancient Rome was particularly strong in the early 12​
century and had a number of different manifestations. ● The architect at Autun cathedral imitated in the elevation of his church the Roman city gate of the town. ● Classical Latin writings too were copied and widely studied. Government literature on England and France ● England rather than northern France was the leader in developments in the literature of government, but th​
by the end of the 12​
century the French royal court was developing more sophisticated administrative records. th
● Written instruments, charters and deeds were becoming increasingly important as evidence, and the 12​
century saw, as well as an improvement in the style and form of the charter, flourishing schools of forgers who resolved gaps or ambiguities in their title deeds by filling them themselves. History writing and chronicles th​
● The writing of history showed a marked improvement in quality during the 12​
century, its proponents showing a more critical approach to source materials and a better developed sense of chronology. The Anglo­Norman chroniclers were leaders here but other parts of northern France were quick to follow. th​
The chronicle of Robert of Torigny, abbot of Mont­Saint­Michel, dating from later in the 12​
century is of a general European, not just a local, interest, and shows a wide knowledge of current events doubtless culled from visitors to the abbey. The monks of Saint­Denis gradually emerged as the official royal historians. Biographies and vernacular literature ● Biographies, too, were more competently written, as is shown by examples such as Suger’s ​
Life of​
​
Louis VI. ● In vernacular literature the south of France exercised a strong influence over the north. The troubadours, and the trouvères, their northern equivalents, were of great importance in the composition and the dissemination of the ​
chansons de geste​
, vernacular epic poems such as the ​
Chanson de Roland​
, recounting heroic exploits on the battlefields. th​
● At the end of the 11​
century there appeared in the south of France lyric poems, written about courtly th
love and also in the vernacular; this form had been taken up in the north by the middle of the 12​
century. Southern France, northern Italy, Roman and Canon Law ● The schools in the south of France were closely bound up with intellectual developments in northern Italy, the focus of the revival south of the Alps. As well as making a contribution to these studies they disseminated some of them to the north. An example is Roman law, centred at Bologna in Italy, where Justinian’s great summary, the ​
Corpus Iuris Civilis, ​
was recovered in full, extensively analysed and commented upon. ● A school of civil law was set up at Montpellier around 1160, which later became a university, and from here the study of Roman Law filtered north to Orléans, Paris and the royal court, where trained civil lawyers, laymen, not clerics, were to prove loyal and useful servants of the king. Under the influence of the southern French written law the customary law of the north was codified. ● Canon law studies were also centred at Bologna. The study of canon law spread to the north as the growth of papal government brought with it an increase in case law, and papal decretals were collected in the northern as well as the southern centres. ● Study of science, medicine and philosophy were to spread, stimulated by the recovery and translation of classical and Muslim texts, by Euclid, Galen, Hippocrates, Aristotle and Averroes, and by many others. ● As a result of all this activity France became a popular land, and the Ile­de­France was thought of as ​
la douce France, ​
by the cosmopolitan society of western Europe. ● The French kings were popular rulers, if relatively impecunious, and according to Hugh of Champfleury, royal chancellor from 1150 until 1172, their administrators seemed more interested in intellectual government. ● The ruthless efficiency of Henry II’s administration was undoubtedly more effective, but less philosophical and less personal. The reputation of the Capetians, if not immediately their power, was thus enhanced by the twelfth­century revival. The Rise of the French Monarchy, 1108­1226 The royal household and administration (pages 203­206) ● For most of Louis VI’s reign the royal household changed very little in its composition from Philip I’s time. Royal charters tended to be witnessed by local men, often of moderate social standing, and by the great royal officials. ● As royal power grew the great men of the kingdom were attracted back to court to act as royal counsellors and endorse royal decisions. ● Count Raoul of Vermandois, a relative of Louis VI who occupied the office of seneschal in his reign, was the sole layman of any consequence in attendance on his king. ● He was succeeded under Louis VII by Theobald, count of Blois, a relative of his third wife Adela of Champagne. Louis also raised several relatives of his own and of Adela to leading ecclesiastical positions, widening his circle of significant supporters. ● After about 1150 there were increasingly frequent occasions when a large gathering of leading nobles and ecclesiastics assembled at the royal court (see previous notes and page 219 for further details) ● The routine work of administration was being taken over by officials of more humble origins, who gradually replaced the dynasties of overmighty castellan and knightly families from the royal principality. ● The great officials who had been pre­eminent in the house­hold from about 1080 until 1127 were drawn mainly from the castellan families of the Ile­de­France. ● Compare and contrast English (Henry I and Henry II) and French government and administration during this period. ● The Montlhéry­Rochefort family, which monopolized the office of seneschal until the end of Philip I’s reign were replaced after Louis VI’s divorce from Lucienne of Rochefort in 1107 by men of more humble rank (how do these compare to the “men raised from the dust” in Henry I of England’s reign?), most notably the Garlande family (Anseau, Stephen, William and Gilbert) who appropriated most of the great offices from 1107 until 1127. Stephen was chancellor (1107) also became seneschal in 1120. From 1112 Gilbert was butler. There was also the Senlis or de la Tour family. Guy of Senlis was royal butler from 1108 to 112, before Gilbert of Garlande. ● These families originated not as castellans but as knights from the ​
milites​
of the great cities and castles, th​
who in the later 11​
century built up very considerable wealth through the royal service, but who had no allodial holdings at all. ● The ​
nouveaux riches​
officials started to dominate the household and tried to consolidate their place in the entourage, until in 1127 Louis VI dislodged the Garlande family and then began to undermine the practical importance of these offices. That was done first by his refusal to recognize them as hereditary and then by his giving them an honorific ceremonial significance. After this some such offices were filled by the territorial princes. ● The success of this upgrading in the status of the royal offices is attested to by the treatise of Hugh of Clers on the seneschalship of France, written in 1158. This was to put forward the claims of Henry II of England to the office and insisting that he be given the highest honours at the French court. ● The office of seneschal was occupied by Raoul, count of Vermandois, and then by Theobald, count of Blois, in the later years of Louis VII, but was suppressed in 1191. The chancellor’s office was left vacant from 1172 to 1179 and 1185 to 1223, and then filled in 1223­7 by Guérin, bishop of Senlis, before being quashed again. ● The great officials were in turn replaced at court by their lesser counterparts, butler and chamberlain, drawn mostly from the lesser nobility of the Ile­de­France; some made their offices hereditary but were th
unable quickly to reach the dominant position or noble rank of their predecessors in the early 12​
century. ● They did benefit, though in the longer term from their royal service (see page 204). ● As the great officials declined in power the kings drew more and more on men of low birth to carry out routine administrative tasks – ​
curiales ​
­ court officials. The household knights, paid by fief­rents rather than lands, were their secular equivalent and had played an important part in fighting the castellans under Louis VI. ● Royal clerks served in the royal chancery as notaries and scribes and formed the core of the royal bureaucracy. ● Many were attached to the royal chapels which the Capetians founded or refounded in abudance during th​
th​
the 12​
and 13​
centuries. ● Under Philip Augustus their importance increased and one family from this background, La Chapelle, became the king’s close advisors. th​
● By the late 12​
century burgesses began to appear as counsellors to the king. th​
● Early in the century (12​
) Guibert of Nogent described such new royal administrators as ​
viles personae. ● Aubri of Trois­Fontaines found Walter, chamberlain at the end of Louis VII’s reign, more noble in deeds than birth. (How do such men compare to those in England described by Orderic Vitalis as “men raised from the dust”?) ● Such men raised up by the king and usually holding no specific or specialized offices, did not pose the same kind of challenge to royal independence as the great castellans or the newly but lavishly enriched knightly families. They were part of a new and slowly expanding royal administration. ● In the early years of the reign of Philip Augustus the young king was under the influence of Count Philip of Flanders and then Count Henry of Champagne. ● Later such territorial princes had less direct importance although there were limited and varying opportunities for a few princes to act as close advisors of the king. ● However, great dukes, counts and bishops still continued to return to court regularly on important occasions to act at the king’s counsellors in the more formal sense. ● The work of administration was left to the royal clerks and chamberlains. By 1213 a group of administrators had emerged as the king’s close counsellors: Walter the Younger, the chamberlain, whose family was of humble origins; Bartholemew of Roye and Henry Clément, both royal knights; and Guérin, a king’s clerk and Knight Hospitaller, and a bishop of Senlis from 1213 (the king’s main advisor in the later part of the reign). ● The development of the royal administrative structures seem to have been made by these men. ● From Philip’s reign comes the first surviving royal account; the first full lists of royal domain rights and military service; the setting up of a central royal archive; the compilation of registers, of royal documents – signs of a growing administration. ● The charter, the basic instrument of government, shows a far greater degree of sophistication and uniformity, perhaps under English influence. ● The evolution of the system of royal accounting may have taken place over a long period of time, but even so the first half of Philip’s reign emerges as a period of great progress which has been compared by Hollister and Baldwin with the reign of Henry I of England in its innovative importance. ● Baldwin (see bibliography) has characterized the 1190s as the ‘decisive decade’ in the reign of Philip Augustus. Baldwin argues that the gains made by Philip in this decade, both territorially and in terms of more efficient administration shifted the balance of power between himself and the Plantagenets before the conquest of Normandy. Communal privileges and royal defence (pages 206­209) ● Some of the discussion of the franchises and communes in this section can be found in the notes on the changea and growth of urban and rural communities under the subheading above. ● Grants of communal privileges and franchises by the French monarchs built political support and were financially valuable to the king. Many of Philip’s charters granting privileges stipulate that a substantial rent had to be paid to the king in return. ● Some towns acquired important military functions; a number of fortified towns on the borders of the royal lands with Normandy and Flanders were given full communal privileges because of their strategic importance. They were expected to give military service in return. ● Philip maintained the urban militia where it was needed and in 1188 the communal troops of Mantes held out against Henry II. ● Philip Augustus, according to the historian Coulson (see bibliography) differed from both the Plantagenet kings and from his Capetian forebears in abandoning as unrealistic royal claims to control all fortifications within the realm. Instead he concentrated his efforts on those that he could control by consent and exercise of seigneurial authority. ● Philip Augustus was also an active builder of castles with their characteristic circular stone towers often built in a position to oversee the existing castle, as a stamp of royal authority. ● Bands of mercenary soldiers had been used on a large scale by Henry II and his sons against Louis VII, and Philip Augustus began soon after his accession to build up specialist mercenary corps that soon became a vitally important part of the French army. ● The king followed the Angevins in employing not only individual stipendiary soldiers but also whole companies of mercenaries who originated from outside the French kingdom (Navarre or Germany) from the Flanders, Hainault and Brabant areas “Brabancons”. ● Besides using mercenaries Philip continued to rely heavily on feudal contingents and dues for his armies. ● In 1194 Philip had a full list of military service due him drawn up from the villages, towns, communes and abbeys of the royal domain, a document known as the ​
prisée des sergeants​
. ● Not all communities had to pay service simply in a given number of men. Two towns (Arras and Beauvais) were allowed the alternatives of paying a subsidy. ● By 1202­3, year in which the first surviving royal account exists these subsidies had extended further. The account also reveals considerable expenditure by the king on stipendiary troops: heavy knights, mounted sergeants who formed a light cavalry force, mounted archers and footsoldiers, as well as the troops of mercenaries employed by their own commanders. The royal principality and the domain to c. 1200 (pages 209­213) ● The reigns of Philip Augustus from 1200 and of his son Louis VIII constitute the critical period in the rise of the king to power in France, when political chances were seized and great conquests were made. th
● In1200 royal power was still a relatively localized affair. The French king was still, during the 12​
century, overshadowed by the Plantegenets, and had no effective means of controlling a hostile coalition of princes apart from relying on his rights as overlord – and these might confine princely activities, but could not curb them. ● The gains made by Louis VI and Louis VII, although limited, were of great importance in giving the French kings an effective power base from which to operate, and in spreading the idea of kingship more widely in the French kingdom. ● Louis VI was mainly responsible for the subjugation and consolidation of the royal principality. th
● The greatest threat to the king’s power in this area had come in the 1030s, but during the rest of the 11​
century the king’s authority made only slow headway against the castellans of the Ile­de­France. ● When Louis VI began systematically to attempt to reduce the more powerful amongst the castellans royal authority was able to emerge. He campaigned against Hugh of Le Puiset and Thomas of Marle and other nobles, actions praised by Guibert of Nogent and Abbot Suger. In doing this law and order were gradually brought to the principality. ● The political domination of the Montlhéry­Rochefort and the Garlande families in the household was also broken. ● Louis VI, like many of the territorial princes, fought his way back to power in his own lands, and no reversal to the king’s position occurred under Louis VII. ● The kings were helped by social developments in the principality. The fortunes of many castellans in the area were beginning to decline. Many noble estates were divided on the death of their holders, with the larger portion going to the oldest son. This ‘custom’ was abolished by the king, and generally gave way to outright division. Both processes resulted in the disintegration of some noble holdings. th​
● From the mid­12​
century parts of fiefs were frequently sold off to meet cash crises, further weakening some nobles against the newly aggressive monarchy. The castellans were brought into closer feudal dependence on the king as chains of vassals began to form in the area, culminating in the sovereign. ● Louis VI extended the system of ​
prévotés​
that had appeared in his father’s reign (administrative units headed by mayors to whom royal justice was often delegated). ● Under Louis VII more prévotés emerged. ● Under Philip Augustus more prévotés again appeared. th​
● At the end of the 12​
century a new kind of royal administrator had begun to appear, the ​
bailli. ​
Philip used them as early as 1184. At first these were itinerant officials with judicial and financial functions sent out in groups of three or four by the king on temporary missions, to hold requests and assizes. They had many similarities with, and were probably based on, Henry II of England’s itinerant justices. ● By the end of Philip Augustus’s reign they held authority in given areas, and this probably developed from their financial functions. They supervised groups of prévotés, heard appeals from their courts, and took over many of their sources of revenues, and in addition to this levied regalia rights, tallage, scrutage and forest dues on the king’s behalf. ● Resources of the monarchy – Louis VI increased this. Louis VII made fewer gains and some losses, yet the geographical extent of the recorded domain under Louis VII widened. ● In the first 20 years of his reign Philip Augustus made a number of important gains (see notes on Philip Augustus). ● However, the conquests after 1204 radically altered the whole balance of power in the French kingdom shown in a register taken after the conquests (drawn up in 1204­6). The lists of rights in towns and ecclesiastical areas, and the great catalogue of royal vassals that follows, gives a precise idea of royal rights following the collapse of the power of the English king in France, and show the extent to which they had been augmented by Philip’s conquests (see pages 212 & 213.) The king and the princes (pages 213­221) Was there an ‘Angevin empire’? (pages 221­224) Royal resources: Capetians versus Plantagenets (pages 224­228) The Capetian conquest of Normandy, Anjou and Maine (pages 228­231) Capetian rule in Normandy, Anjou and Poitou (pages 231­236) The Capetians and the Languedoc (pages 236­239) The image of monarchy (pages 239­245) The kings and the Church Louis VI, Louis VII and the church (pages 245­252) Philip Augustus, Louis VIII and the church (pages 252­257) The king and the princes The years 1108­1226 saw an expansion of royal power in France and the political consolidation of the principalities. th​
During the 12​
century the princes imposed law and order and introduced or strengthened their administrations. Feudal hierarchies began to form. Normandy and Flanders were already well organized. This achievement of feudal superiority by the princes, the growth of feudal bonds and the development of hierarchies brought the princes into a closer dependence on the monarchy. Philip Augustus was able to profit from this considerably. When he captured Normandy and Anjou, the high level of ducal and comital control already built up there allowed him to take them over more easily. The princes promulgated ordinances in their lands, as when Charles the Good instituted the public peace in Flanders between 1119 and 1127 and when, for example in 1185 Duke Geoffrey laid down the rules for noble inheritance in Brittany. th​
Feudal assemblies (forerunners of the provincial estates of the 14​
century) met to sanction princely decision. Princely courts such as the exchequer in Normandy had a growing competence to decide feudal and other matters. Princely households contained lesser functionaries, often of humble birth, as well as nobles who sometimes counseled the princes. Princely finances were organized and developed e.g. Flanders (accounts for 1187) and Normandy Exchequer rolls demonstrate. In many cases the princes continued to control the church in their lands (Normandy) but not in all. th​
The relationship of the king and the princes was, in the 11​
century, crucial to royal power in the kingdom, and the changes served to strengthen the king’s authority as suzerain. In his ​
De administratione, ​
Abbot Suger stated that the king could do homage to no one. Henry I of England refused to do homage to Louis for Normandy. The principal emerged that the king could be a lord, but not a vassal. Obligations of vassals towards the king became increasingly well defined (see bottom of page 214/top page 215). th​
By the end of the 12​
century the idea that the king was liege lord, who was owed liege homage, superior to all other forms of homage (peace, border), by the princes for all their lands, was becoming widely accepted​
. These changes were to be of the greatest practical importance in tipping the balance between kings and princes th​
in the 13​
century in France. In the reigns of Louis VI and Louis VII, whilst these changes were taking place they had little impact, for the power of the counts of Flanders and Champagne was considerable, whilst that of the Anglo­Norman and Plantagenet kings of England eclipsed that of the French crown. Only under Philip II “Augustus” did the changes have their full impact. th​
Legal ties between the French kings and Flemish counts were clearly understood throughout the 12​
century even if not put into practice given a particular political situation (see page 216). Gradually better relations were established with the counts of Blois and Champagne leading to closer ties. (see details page 216). The principalities of southern France had weaker connections with the French crown than those in the north, but nevertheless a gradual extension of royal authority was visible here too. th​
The Norman and Plantagenet kings of England remained the foes of the French king throughout the 12​
century and generally conceded as little as possible (see page 217). Henry II (of England) was the first established ruler of Normandy to do homage for it. See fuller discussion of the English kings as Norman dukes and their relationship with the French king page 218. Henry II’s acts of homage to Louis VII and Philip for Normandy in 1169 and 1183, seem to have functioned as ritual gestures to seal alliances between kings as equals. These acts meant very little at the time in practical terms and most were performed on the borders, but taken together they were important in the build­up of Capetian suzerainty and would stand Philip in good stead in 1202. For Henry’s sons, homage to the Capetians was a weapon against one another in their internecine strife, but by encouraging and accepting it – from Henry the Young King in 1160, Richard in 1188 and 1189, Arthur of Brittany in 1199 and John in 1200 – the Capetians established their suzerainty over Normandy. Not only did the princes gradually acknowledge the king’s role as suzerain and its implications, they also began to fulfill their obligations to him more fully. The practice of giving military service, often without homage, was th​
th​
becoming more common in the later 11​
century, and it continued to revive in the 12​
. During the German invasion of 1124, contingents from Blois, Champagne, Nevers, Vermandois and Flanders, and from various sees including Reims, Laon, Paris, Saint­Denis and others all rallied in support of the king. Other duties of the princes to the kings were also more frequently recognized and performed. Ecclesiastical magnates began to sit with the king and make judgments as peers of the realm. The first full list of these, made by the chronicler Matthew Paris in the mid­thirteenth century, included the counts of Flanders, Champagne and Toulouse, the dukes of Normandy, Burgundy and Aquitaine and archbishops of some of the big ecclesiastical towns. th​
The princes also began to attend royal councils more frequently during the 12​
century. Under Louis VI and in the first part of Louis VII’s reign some royal assemblies were called for the ceremonies of crown wearing, whilst others were more like the Caronlingian feudal councils, the king taking advice from a number of important men, described as his leading men, faithful men or courtiers. Some such councils were used for important political decisions to be made, as when in 1111 the opponents of Hugh Le Puiset gathered at Meulun, when in 1128 the disputed election in Flanders was discussed, and in 1130 when the choice between two popes was made. Except for the military gathering in 1124 the number of princes who attended such meetings was limited. From 1146, following another major council, princes and great nobles appeared far more frequently at court, as in 1152 at Beaugency when Louis VII divorced Eleanor of Aquitaine, in 1155 at Soissons, in 1173 at Paris and in 1178 at Reims for the coronation of the young Philip Augustus. The princes who attended and endorsed royal th​
decisions were described in royal charters as ​
barones,​
This word in the 11​
century meant the equivalent of a th​
vassal. In the 12​
century, however, it was increasingly applied to the great men of the realm. Royal counsellors drawn from the major nobility rather than the royal household began to appear. A royal council (under the influence of Roman law) was formed and perhaps modelled on the idea of Charlemagne’s court. By the end of Philip Augustus’s reign it was meeting on a regular basis. The important function of the royal court was to render justice to all the king’s vassals. (see page 220 for important details). Abbeys, priories and cathedral chapters from an increasingly wide area of France also tended to turn to the Capetians for protection against the encroachment of local lords. th​
As well as extending the range of royal justice, 12​
century French kings began to issue ordinances for the whole kingdom, not just for the principality. The first was probably Louis VII’s instructions of 1144 banishing Jewish converts to Christianity who had relapsed. This was followed in 1155 by the constitutions of Soissons which established the peace of God throughout the kingdom for 10 years. Philip Augustus issued an ordinance for the government of the kingdom in 1190 and one on succession to fiefs in 1209­10 (for royal lands). In 1223 another ordinance concerning the Jews was issued. These examples mark the early revival of the king’s right to legislate throughout the kingdom. Royal charters issued by later Capetian kings also witness the spread of royal influence and authority in the kingdom. The same is true of the royal itineraries. Louis VII travelled extensively inside France and even went outside its borders on a number of occasions. His successors also did this. Conclusion th​
Although royal power in the 12​
century remained limited in terms of land and resources the reputation of the king as overlord, lawgiver and protector was beginning to revive quite widely, well before the great conquests th​
of the early 13​
century. So too was the efficacy of royal finances and administration and the image of the French king as the holder of sacral powers and as the defender of the kingdom. Was there an ‘Angevin empire’? Historiography The notion of an ‘Angevin Empire’ is questioned by historians. Boussard (see bibliography page 444) is cited as having defined the Plantagenet ‘empire’ as a conglomerate of lands forming a conceptual and administrative whole. The evidence he uses as proof is the measures taken by Henry II in several of its component parts – e.g. the Norman Inquest of 1171, similar to the English Inquest of the Sheriffs in 1170. The edict of 1177 dealing with debts that took effect in Normandy, Anjou, Aquitaine and Brittany; and the Assize of Arms of 1181 which appeared both in England and in Henry’s French lands. Hallam and Everard say these were the exception rather than the rule. There are no signs of plans for centralizing the administration throughout the lands even though there was some movement of officials from one area to another to tap into the expertise e.g. Richard of Ilchester who overhauled the Norman Exchequer. Neither Henry II or Richard I used the term of empire or thought of the lands as a political unit and each styled himself as king of England, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine and count of Anjou. The dominions were never regarded as a unit to be kept together. They viewed their lands as a collection of holdings, a kingdom, two duchies, counties, lordships – a collection that would be divided between their heirs in the tradition of French territorial princes. But on each occasion the practical and normal principle of division was disregarded and one man took all the lands by force. This doesn’t mean that their intentions had always been of this nature. Henry II envisaged a division of lands. In 1169 he laid down that the Young King was to inherit England and Normandy, Maine and Anjou. Richard was to have Aquitaine and Geoffrey Brittany by his marriage to Constance. Louis VII confirmed this arrangement. But in 1183 the Young King died and despite Henry II’s instructions to Richard to relinquish Aquitaine to John, he refused to do so. Thus again he took all his father’s lands. In 1191, however, Richard made an agreement at Messina with Philip Augustus that if he had two sons the second would take Normandy, or greater Anjou, or Aquitaine, and that he should hold it directly from the French king. The Angevin lands were a diverse collection of a kingdom and a number of French principalities each with their own history, identity and customs. The only sense in which it was a unity was in terms of Henry’s peripatetic court and household. The strongest links of family, landholding, feudal tenure and patronage were between Normandy and England. Each French principality continued to have its own identity under Plantagenet rule. Henry II further developed the Norman administration and reduced the nobles of Anjou to order. Richard made an impact in Aquitaine and Geoffrey in Brittany. The component ‘states’, as they were brought under princely control, retained their own laws and customs, sentiments and loyalties and formed their own communities. th​
By the later 12​
century despite the Plantagenet’s attempts to levy service or scutage throughout their lands for any given campaign, it was beginning to be expected that this was due only inside each principality for its own defence; outside expenses should be met by the princes. By the 1180s and 1190s there were signs of a growing rift between England and Normandy manifested in an increasing differentiation between English and Norman business on the exchequer rolls and in diverging laws and inheritance customs. There was also a growing awareness of differences between the ‘English’ and the ‘French’, of separate cultural traditions. Henry II had had to use his authority over the succession of fees to prevent the English and Norman parts of many cross­channel baronies being split and the closeness of the Anglo­Norman links under Henry I had not been re­established. th​
The differences between the various parts of the Angevin lands were clearer at the end of the 12​
century than they had been in the middle, but this is still not sufficient to explain the collapse of Angevin rule in France between 1199 and 1204. Financial, personal and political factors all came into play in a dramatic reversal of power within the French kingdom. Royal resources: Capetians versus Plantagenets Historical debate Growth of Capetian royal resources from 1108­1226 is an area of lively historiographical debate. What is not disputed is that there was a very major increase over the period, but the extent and the timing of that increase is controversial. th​
During the 12​
century the French kings began to resort to various novel taxes to enhance their power. Feudal aids began to emerge as an important source of revenue; the first recorded was levied in 1137 to cover the expenses of the future Louis VII when he went to Aquitaine to marry Eleanor. In 1147 a tax was levied to pay for Louis VII’s crusade. This marks an extension of the incidents under which the tax could be raised. Philip Augustus levied taxes in 1184­8, and Louis IX was to use the crusading aid to supplement the revenues conceded to him by the papacy. Crusading aids were important to the royal budget and mark the cooperation of the pope and king in the extraction of wealth from the French church. In 1188 Philip Augustus levied the Saladin tithe to finance his crusade, but he met with such opposition from the clergy that he was forced to halt its collection. In both 1211 and 1218, however, he extracted 20ths to finance the ‘crusade’ in the Languedoc with less opposition. Fighting the Angevins was expensive. In the 1180s and 1190s Philip Augustus’s needs for funds became acute. His financial system was overhauled and the Jewish community suffered persecution and heavy mulcting. In 1186 he extracted 1000 marks from Saint­Denis. In 1194 the king plundered the churches under Richard I’s protection and raised considerable sums as well as hostility. Epic struggles between the Capetians and the Plantagenets occurred between 1189 and 1204 culminating in the conquest of Normandy. What resources were there at their disposal? Royal resources under Louis VII and Philip Augustus are centred on information from the royal account roll for 1202­3 and while complex to use and interpret show that the royal finances were operating by a well­established system. Philip Augustus’s ordinance of 1190 details the arrangements for the administration of the kingdom – written accounts of king’s treasure to be stored in large chests at the Paris Temple. The Templars and the king’s regents kept the keys. The 1202­3 accounts are divided into three terms. They detail receipts and expenditures and indicate the scale of expenditure on the war against the Plantagenets. On the Plantagenet side the sources are richer comprising a full set of pipe rolls for England and an incomplete set for Normandy. By the 1190s the English exchequer had been operational for almost a century – the system was well established and for its time, sophisticated. Contemporaries appear to have thought that the Plantagenets were wealthier than the Capetians in the second th​
half of the 12​
century. Louis VII’s declaration to Walter Map that the king of England lacked for nothing, but that in France “they only have bread, wine and good cheer” is well­known. Gerald of Wales also commented that the Plantagenets were well resourced (see bottom of page 226). Philip Augustus concentrated on increasing his income. The success of his efforts is attested to by Conan, provost of Lausanne (see page 227). Historians are not always in agreement with contemporaries, some interpreting sources to show that the revenues of Philip Augustus were more than those of the Plantagenets and that the French domain yielded more than all the Angevin lands together. Philip’s victory over John was due to sound finances. Other historians disagree and suggest that it was Philip’s skill and ability, coupled with John’s ineptitude that accounted for the victory. Gillingham suggests that overall the Plantagenet’s resources were greater except in 1193­4 when Philip had more funds available to him than Richard. The work of Baldwin and Barrat (see bibliography) suggests a more complex model with the balance tipping away from Richard in favour of Philip Augustus in the 1190s, so that by 1203 Philip had increased his resources considerably whilst Richard’s were being depleted to fund his ward. Barratt concludes that the resources of John and Philip on the eve of the conquest of Normandy were probably similar. The Capetian conquest of Normandy, Anjou and Maine Richard’s death in 1199 removed a powerful and charismatic figure, more than a match for Philip Augustus. John acceded to the English throne in 1199 a weaker character with a kingdom depleted of sources (Richard’s crusade, Richard’s ransom, the construction of the Chateau Gaillard and other projects had used up resources). Philip Augustus made inroads into Norman territory leaving John a much smaller duchy than Richard had had. John also had to make concessions to the magnates in England to secure his disputed succession. To secure his lands against the claims of Arthur of Brittany John made enormous allowances to Philip in the Treaty of Le Goulet in 1200, with neither Henry II or Richard I would have considered. Philip made substantial gains by the terms of the treaty, both feudal and material. Details of John’s losses and Philip’s gains can be found on page 230. The conquest of Normandy was decisive in giving the Capetians a financial advantage. By 1221 Philip Augustus’s annual revenue had been greatly increased. (See details of Philip’s conquest on page 232). By the act of taking over the duchy of Normandy Philip probably doubled the number of monastic houses under his direct control. Philip consolidated his hold on Normandy by a mixture of firmness and conciliation (see page 235). The image of Monarchy The growing tide of biographical and historiographical writing slowly and gradually reburbished the royal th​
image from the battered and tarnished state it had fallen into in the mid and late 11​
century. The Abbey of Saint­Denis and Abbot Suger in particular contributed to this revival (he had, however, a narrow audience at the time of literate clergy). Suger’s main purpose was to increase the prestige of his abbey and in glorifying the abbey Suger glorified the king (Louis VI) by association. The abbey was propagating the cult of Charlemagne too. The oriflamme supposed to have been used by Charlemagne (as his standard) and then by Louis VI when he and his army went and frightened off the emperor (Henry V in 1124) . Suger’s account of the highly stage­managed ceremony that took place at Saint­Denis is of interest in the history of the royal revival. Louis VI, he says, in the presence of certain great counsellors, took from the altar the oriflamme, the standard of the French Vexin, to which he had the right as count of the Vexin, land held from the abbey. This ceremony enhanced the royal prestige and symbolizes the special ties between king and community. It also linked the king with the cult of Charlemagne. (see descriptions of how this cult was manifested on pages 241 and 242 of the textbook ‘Capetian France’). And it linked the Capetians with the Carolingians. The term th​
“Francia” was used again in the 12​
century to define the kingdom. The ​
Chansons de geste ​
and other popular forms of literature glorified the king and his realm at the time. The victory of Philip Augustus in 1214 had a powerful effect on the image of the French monarchy, at both the intellectual and popular levels (see pages 172, 244 and previous notes above). The kings and the Church Louis VI was a generous patron of the monastic orders. But he was also drawn to disputes over ecclesiastical elections and investitures in France. He remained on good terms however, with the papacy which sought alliance with the French king to counterbalance the hostility of the emperors. He tried to retain his regalia rights where possible by supervising elections and insisting on his consent to the successful candidate for a bishopric or abbey. Incoming bishops and abbots were not invested by the king, but expected to pay him homage for their lands. But Louis fell out with the church over some elections to bishoprics (see page 247). His relationship with the papacy blew warm and cool but warmed up towards the end of his reign. Louis VII was as determined as his father to maintain his rights and powers over the French church and found himself embroiled in wrangles with the pope as a result. Louis VII had a reputation for considerable piety and for being a protector and defending the church. He helped reform some religious communities. Early in his reign he was an important patron of the Cistercian order (see page 251 for extra information to add to this summary). Overall, particularly in the period after the crusade, Louis VII did not give away nearly as much land to the church as his father had, favouring the smaller and increasingly popular monastic institutions. With his support of these he retained the support and alliance of the church in northern France which was to serve his successors in good stead (see page 252). Philip Augustus, Louis VIII and the church (pages 252­257) According to Joinville, Philip is supposed to have declared on his deathbed that he would rather forfeit royal rights than quarrel with God’s priests. William the Breton describes the king as an admirer and a defender of the clergy. His actions suggest that he was rather less accommodating than these eulogies imply, however, and when he did allow the church to enjoy rights and privileges there were usually good political reasons, as in Normandy (see notes above and pages 232­5 of text book). He went on crusade, but he left the siege of Acre in 1191 to return to France to settle his claims in Artois and Vermandois, as well as to undermine Richard I of England’s position in his French lands. Under Philip, the close links that Louis VII had built up with the papacy came under some strain. But the French church generally tended to support the king against the pope, particularly against the centralizing and authoritarian Innocent III. Philip’s first quarrel with the pope came in about 1196 when he repudiated Ingeborg of Denmark and was married to Agnes of Méran (see page 253). In this quarrel he had the backing of several French bishops. In 1213 (after Agnes had died) Philip took Ingeborg back, perhaps to gain the alliance and support of both Denmark and the papacy, and she remained the recognized queen of France until her death in 1223. The disputed imperial throne was a further cause of friction between the king and the pope, but from 1210 Philip and Innocent both backed Frederick II. Philip also supported Innocent III against John of England (see page 171 and page 253). Although Innocent is noted for his reforming activities (Fourth Lateran Council of 1215) it was the temporal, political side of his activities that concerned the sovereigns of western Europe most closely. Some of the claims of the pope over the sovereigns of western Europe were very grandiose; and they were also effective at times, particularly in the case of England. In glorifying the papal office Innocent extended to some degree the claims of his predecessors to intervene in secular affairs. He suggested that since spiritual power was superior to temporal power, in some instances the pope might need to intervene in secular matters. (Remember the chapter entitled “Ecclesia and Mundus” in Norman Cantor’s ‘ The Civilisation of the Middle Ages’) Philip Augustus was not prepared to allow any extension of papal pretensions in France. For example, in 1203 Innocent ordered him to make peace with John but Philip, with the backing of his council, declared that the matter was a feudal one and not the concern of the pope, nor did the pope have a say in disputes between kings. (see details on page 254). Philip Augustus generally allowed free elections to take place in bishoprics particularly in conquered lands, although his consent was required before the victorious candidate could be installed. In long­standing royal bishoprics the king’s men were often elected, as with Guérin, the king’s principal adviser, made bishop of Senlis in 1213. The king also upheld his regalia rights, and was ready to compel loyalty from the episcopate if necessary. (eg. page 255 – in 1200 he confiscated the estates of the bishops of Orléans and Auxerre when they refused him military service). He also maintained strong control over the abbeys in his lands. Whilst permitting “free elections” he frequently expected his own candidates to be chosen, and in the 1190s he mulcted religious houses to pay for his wars against Richard I. In general he seems to have kept any charitable instincts firmly subordinate to political reality, making only a few grants, sufficient to secure the well­being of his soul. Just as the grants made by King John in England, there was a general shift of interest towards small monasteries and hospitals. Philip seems to have been generous to the church only posthumously as he will testifies. For example, he laid down that the Templars and the Hospitallers should have substantial sums (further examples can be found on page 256). Norman Cantor in “​
The Civilisation of the Middle Ages”​
​
looks at the relationship of the later Capetian kings with the church. He goes so far as to say that the relation between the Capetian monarchy and the church played an important part in the Capetian triumph. The papacy had abandoned traditions of theocratic monarchy in the powerful monarchs of Germany and th​
England. From the late 11​
century the papacy generally looked on the French monarchy as its ally and supporter, if for no other reason than that the pope had to have some support among the kings of Europe. The pope was intermittently embroiled with the German emperor and feared the consequences of his claims over northern Italy. In view of the power of the English monarch, his hold over the church in his territory and the distance of England from Rome, the papacy could not ally itself with the Norman and Angevin kings. The French king remained the only possible candidate, and he appeared so weak and innocuous that it seemed impossible that he would ever threaten the authority of the papacy. th​
The Capetian kings, furthermore, had a great reputation for piety; even in the 12​
century they were known as the “very Christian” kings. Therefore Pope Gregory VII was unusually moderate in his relations with the th​
th​
Capetian monarch. During the late 11​
and 12​
centuries, France became a common place of refuge for popes driven from Rome by the German emperor. Urban II went to France to get away from the armies of Henry IV and to preach the First Crusade, and Pope Alexander III sought the protection of Louis VII in the late 1160s when Frederick Barbarossa held Rome for a short time. The sympathetic attitude of the papacy allowed the French kings to perpetuate some of the archaic traditions and rituals of early­medieval kingship. There was a close association between the Capetian dynasty and the abbey of Saint­Denis. The regalia of the French crown were kept there, and much later than monastic statesmen played a leading role in other European governments, abbot Suger of St. Denis in the reigns of Louis VI and Louis VII, continued to be the chief minister of the royal administration. Whereas the ceremony of anointment was becoming a mere formality in Germany and in England, the religious and emotional qualities of this ceremony were accentuated in France. The association of the church with the French monarchy was particularly emphasized during the long reign of Louis VII (1137­1180). Louis, who was personally devout, exhibited great friendship for both the pope and the higher clergy all over France. He received Alexander III with the greatest deference, and he took the side of bishops and abbots in their struggles with local lords. In so doing, he was, of course, helping to advance royal power as well as satisfying his own devout inclinations. Louis’s attempts to aid the higher clergy were part of his general effort to expand the jurisdiction of the royal court. The Capetian king’s reputation as the friend and ally of the papacy could not but help contribute to his prestige in France and might eventually prove useful in his relations with the great feudatories and other kings of Western Europe. The moral and religious traditions of the very Christian Capetian monarchy were valuable to Philip Augustus. They provided the necessary façade behind which he could undertake his depredations and pursue his crooked schemes. He gained the northern county of Artois by marriage and then turned upon the vast domains of the Angevin ruler in northern France. He fomented the rebellion of Henry II’s sons against their father and made the last king’s years miserable. He was continually plotting against Richard and John, and by 1204 he had achieved his great triumph. He had incorporated all northwestern France into the royal domain, leaving the English king with only Gascony and part of Poitou, the most distant of the former French possessions of the Angevin house. In the first two decades of his reign ​
Philip clearly demonstrated for his successors how the territory of the French crown might be expanded: by dynastic marriage, by political and diplomatic chicanery, by feudal forfeiture, and by outright conquest​
. The old innocuous royal ally of the church had th​
suddenly become a great power in northern Europe, and not the least of the problems facing the 13​
century papacy was the king of adjustment it should make to this new situation.