Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T08:37:49.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Presidential Address: Feudal Society and the Family in Early Medieval England: III. Patronage and Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

J. C. Holt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

ON a previous occasion I posed a question: family relations mattered, or did they? I now intend to investigate in what way they mattered. It is a complex problem. In the middle ages men were reminded more frequently than now by the varied representation of the tale of Cain and Abel that family relations are not always easy; they could be supportive, cohesive, quarrelsome or murderous. So it is reasonable to ask: why the one rather than the other? Behind that there are other questions: when did the family matter and when not? Why did it matter when it did and why when not? A long established tradition in Anglo-Saxon scholarship has been concerned with the respective roles of kinship, lordship and local association. What can be said on the same topics for the post-Conquest period? For it is plain that there can be no secure conclusions about the family unless it is correctly located and properly embedded in the matrix of social and political relationships within which men lived their lives.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 34 , December 1984 , pp. 1 - 25
Copyright
Copyright Royal Historical Society 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Painter, Sidney, The Reign of King John (Baltimore, 1949), 290Google Scholar.

2 Painter, 291.

3 Painter, 292.

4 Powicke, F. M., Stephen Langton (Oxford, 1928), 212Google Scholar.

5 Round, J. H., King John and Robert fitz Walter. Eng. Hist. Rev., xix (1904), 70711CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Powicke acknowledged that this paper of Round led the way (Powicke, , 207, n. 1Google Scholar.

6 Painter, 291.

7 Round, J. H., Feudal England (1895), 472Google Scholar; Altschul, Michael, A baronial family in Medieval England: The Clares 12171314 (Baltimore, 1965)Google Scholar, table 1.

8 Complete Peerage, v, 1136; x, 198; Painter, 291; Powicke, 21013.

9 Memoriale fratris Walteri de Coventria, ed. Stubbs, W. (2 vols, Rolls Series, 1872 1873), ii. 220Google Scholar.

10 See the essays conveniently collected in The Medieval Nobility, ed. Reuter, T. (Amsterdam, 1978)Google Scholar.

11 See the essays conveniently collected in Gnicot, L., La noblesse dans l'Occident mdival (1982)Google Scholar; Warlop, E., The Flemish Nobility (4 vols, Kortrijk, 1975 1976)Google Scholar.

12 See the essays conveniently collected in Duby, Georges, Hommes et Structures du moyen ge (Paris, 1973)Google Scholar, all the immediately relevant items wherein are translated in Duby, Georges, The Chivalrous Society, trans. Postan, Cynthia (1977)Google Scholar. See also Duby, Georges, Medieval Marriage (Baltimore, 1978)Google Scholar.

13 Fossier, Robert, La Terre et les Hommes en Picardie jusqu' la fin du xiiie sicle (Paris, 1968)Google Scholar.

14 See particularly La Noblesse au moyen ge, ed. Contamine, P. (Paris, 1976)Google Scholar.

15 Leyser, K. J., The German Aristocracy from the ninth to the early twelfth century, Past & Present, 41 (1968), 2553CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in K. J. Leyser, Medieval Germany and its neighbours 9001250 (1982). See also Leyser, K. J., Rule and Conflict in an early medieval society (1979)Google Scholar. Cf. Bullough, D. A., Early medieval social groupings: the terminology of kinship, Past & Present, 45 (1969), 318CrossRefGoogle Scholar and K. J. Leyser, Maternal kin in early medieval Germany, ibid., 49 (1970), 126134.

16 On the libri memoriales see especially Schmid, Karl, Uber die Struktur des Adels im frheren Mittelalter, Jahrbuch fr frankische Landesforschung, 19 (1959), 123Google Scholar, trans, in Reuter, 3759, especially 426. For criticism see, among others, Leyser (1968), 334.

17 Monasticon Anglicanum, v. 5334. For discussion of the date and value of the Historia Laceiorum see Wightman, W. E., The Lacy Family in England and Normandy 10661194 (Oxford, 1966), 1214Google Scholar.

18 Liber Memorandorum ecclesie de Bernewelle, ed. Clark, J. W. (Cambridge, 1907), 3751Google Scholar; for the purpose of the book see 37.

19 Liber memorandorum, 41.

20 Liber memarandorum, 50.

21 Rouen, Archives dpartementales: Seine Maritime, 13 H 15. I have been unable to date this charter more precisely. The terminus post quem of 1140 depends on Robert of Torigny who states that William succeeded on the death of his father, Rabel, in that year (Chronique, ed. Delisle, L., 2 vols, Socit de l'histoire de Normandie, 1872 1873, i. 218)Google Scholar. But William was still alive in 1191 and may well have been a minor in 1140. See Complete Peerage, x, Appendix F, 524; Landon, L., Itinerary of Richard I (Pipe Roll Soc, n.s., xiii, 1935), 50Google Scholar. A. Dville sheds no further light on the matter either in Histoire du Chteau et des Sires de Tancarville (Rouen, 1834) 1247Google Scholar or in Essai historique et descriptive sur l'glise et l'abbaye de Saint-Georges-de-Bocherville (Rouen, 1827) 29, 736Google Scholar, where the text is printed. Delisle, apparently referring to the same charter, gave a date antrieur 1157. See Boussard, J., Le gouvemement d'Henri II Plantagent (Paris, 1956), 361nGoogle Scholar. The terminus ante quem of 1157 depends on the death of Louis, Abbot (Gallia Christiana, xi. 270)Google Scholar.

22 See the account of the expulsion of Abbot Robert de Grandmesnil, 1061, and the misfortunes of the founding family Who can tell of the manifold tribulation that the church of St Evroul then endured? During these uncertainties the church of St Evroul suffered great loss, and was robbed of many of her former possessions So the church of St Evroul lost at that time many possessions that she has never, to this day, been able to recover (Ordericus Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, Marjorie, ii. 949)Google Scholar.

23 See the effects of the intrusion of Geoffrey fitz Peter recorded in a narrative committed to the rival claimant, de Sai, Geoffrey (Monasticon Anglicanum, iv. 1458)Google Scholar.

24 Mortimer, R., The family of Rannulf de Glanville Bull. Inst. Hist. Research, liv (1981), 116CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Leiston Abbey Cartulary and Butley Priory Charters ed. Mortimer, R. (Suffolk Record Society)Google Scholar; Suffolk Charters, i (1979), 19Google Scholar.

25 Stenton, F. M.. The First Century of English Feudalism (Oxford, 1961), 281Google Scholar; Sir Christopher Hatton's Book of Seals, ed. Loyd, Lewis C. and Stenton, Doris Mary (Oxford, 1950), no. 204Google Scholar; Early Yorkshire Charters, ed. Farrer, William and Clay, C. T., 12 vols (Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Ser., Extra Ser., 1914 1965), xi. 2789, 3278, 344Google Scholar.

26 Documents illustrative of the social and economic history of the Danelaw, ed. Stenton, F. M. (London, British Academy, 1920), nos 458, 462Google Scholar; Facsimiles of early charters from Northamptonshire Collections, ed. Stenton, F. M. (Northants. Rec. Soc., iv, 1930)Google Scholar, no xxx(b); Early Yorkshire Charters, vii. 167; xi. 128.

27 Stenton, , First Century, 273, 276Google Scholar; Danelaw Documents, no. 476; Early Yorkshire Charters, xi. 62.

28 Danelaw Documents, no. 459, also in Book of Seals, no. 146.

29 Danelaw Documents, no. 483.

30 Danelaw Documents, nos. 484, 485; Book of Seals, no. 48.

31 Danelaw Documents, nos. 484, 485.

32 Danelaw Documents, nos. 487, 509, 510; Book of Seals, nos. 302, 330; Early Yorkshire Charters, xi. 2301.

33 Danelaw Documents, nos. 528, 529; Book of Seals, no. 434.

34 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 87.

35 De Legibus, VII, ed. Hall, G. D. G. (1965), 6974Google Scholar.

36 Almost all the examples cited above were in fee and inheritance. For examples involving knight service see Facsimiles of early charters from Northamptonshire Collection, no. xxx(b); Stenton, , First Century, 276Google Scholar; Danelaw Documents, no. 475; Book of Seals, no. 302. For examples involving homage see Early Yorkshire Charters, xii. 54, 79. Glanville's discussion of grants to younger sons assumes that they involved homage, which barred the donor and his heirs (De Legibus, ed. Hall, , 703)Google Scholar; compare his discussion of marriage portions (De Legibus, ed. Hall, , 924)Google Scholar; and see especially Bailey, S. J., Warranties of land in the thirteenth century, The Cambridge Law Journal, ix (1947), 967Google Scholar.

37 De Legibus, ed. Hall, , 71Google Scholar.

38 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 8, 469, 478.

39 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 2, 5, 14, 104, 131, 192, 371, 485, 519.

40 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 89, 1089, 353, 507, 509.

41 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 258, 293, 294, 317, 488.

42 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 268.

43 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 383, 4056.

44 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 87; Curia Regis Rolls, i. 429.

45 Curia Regis Rolls, i. 246, 346, 377, 378; ii. 33, 222, 291; iii. 21; iv. 194.

46 Curia Regis Rolls, i. 374.

47 The earliest Lincolnshire Assize Rolls 12029, ed. Stenton, Doris M. (Lincoln Rec. Soc., 22, 1926), nos. 1451, 1475Google Scholar; Curia Regis Rolls, iv. 231; vi. 207.

48 Curia Regis Rolls, v. 334.

49 Hurnard, Naomi D., The King's Pardon for Homicide before A.D. 1307 (Oxford, 1969), 171213Google Scholar.

50 See for example Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 121.

51 Powicke, F. M., King Henry III and the Lord Edward (Oxford, 1947), 60911Google Scholar.

52 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 4056.

53 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 45960.

54 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 338, 36970; 372, 4434; 384, 4457; 4256, 4612.

55 Rot. de Liberate ac de misis et praestitis, 103; Round, J. H., Geoffrey de Mandeville (London, 1892), 3912Google Scholar; Early Yorkshire Charters, iii. 199. Roger de Lacy was the son of Robert's half sister.

56 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 57981.

57 Rot. Litt. Claus., i. 241b.

58 Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 5701.

59 Rot. Chartarum, 30b; Rot. de Oblatis et Finibus, 275; Holt, J. C., Magna Carta (Cambridge, 1965), 856Google Scholar.

60 Painter, , Reign of King John, 24250Google Scholar; Holt, J. C., The Northerners (Oxford, 1961), 1846Google Scholar.

61 Complete Peerage, vii. 677; Wightman, W. E., The Lacy Family in England and Normandy (Oxford, 1966), 856, 116Google Scholar.

62 Duby, G., Medieval Marriage (Baltimore, 1978), 1013Google Scholar, which is an emphatic development of his Les jeunes dans la socit aristocratique dans la France du Nord-Ouest au xiie sicle, Annales: conomies, Socits, Civilisations, 19 (1964), 83546CrossRefGoogle Scholar, trans, in Duby, , The Chivalrous Society, 11222Google Scholar; reinforced by his Lignage, noblesse et chevalerie au xiie sicle dans la rgion maonnaise. Une rvision, Annales, 27 (1972), 80323CrossRefGoogle Scholar, trans, in The Chivalrous Society, 5980.

63 Lamberti Adrensis Historia Comitum Ghisnensium, ed. Heller, J., Scriptores, M. G. H., 24 (1879), 550642Google Scholar. See Duby, Georges, Remarques sur la littrature gnalogique en France aux xie et xiie sicles, Acadmie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 1967, 33545Google Scholar, trans, in The Chivalrous Socety, 14957, and Medieval Marriage, 83110.

64 Holt, J. C., Politics and Property in early medieval England, Past & Present, 57 (1972), 445CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 Complete Peerage, x, appendix J, 1125.

66 I have chosen an example from the early twelfth century. Professor Duby suggests that families began to make provisions for junior branches in the late twelfth century (Medieval Marriage, 1025). It may well be that the freer disposition which acquisitions allowed in England imposes a different chronology.

67 Histoire de Guillaume le Marchal, ed. Meyer, P., 3 vols (Socit de l'histoire de France, 1891 1901) i. ii. 153643Google Scholar. I owe stay-at-homes to Powicke, F. M., The Loss of Normandy (Manchester, 1961), 3O3nGoogle Scholar.

68 Coutumiers de Normandie, ed. Tardif, E.-J., 2 vols (Socit de l'histoire de Normandie, 1881 1896), i. 1011Google Scholar.

69 Pollock, F. and Maitland, F. W., History of English Law (Cambridge, 1898), i. 3267Google Scholar.

70 Bracton, , De Legibus, f. 87bGoogle Scholar; ed. S. E. Thorne, 4 vols (Cambridge, Mass., 196877), ii. 254. Pollock and Maitland, i. 321.

71 For comment on the problem at a later date see Roskell, J. S., The office and dignity of Protector of England, EHR, lxviii (1953), 193233CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, , vi. 304Google Scholar.

73 Gerald, of Wales, , Opera, ed. Brewer, J. S., Dimock, J. F., Warner, G. F., 8 vols (Rolls Series, 1861 1891) viii. 298301Google Scholar; William, of Newburgh in Chronicles of the reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. Howlett, R., 4 vols (Rolls Series, 1884 1889), i. 281Google Scholar.

74 Gilbert of Clare and Hugh Bigod.

75 The relationship was all the closer in that, according to Glanville, homage was not performed for a maritagium (and services not rendered) until the third generation. The effect was that the grant was made by infeudation, but amounted to an allocation of part of the donor's inheritance, which would revert on failure of heirs of the marriage, rather than an irrecoverable alienation. See Glanville, ed. G.D.G. Hall, 106; Bailey, S. J., Warranties for Land, Cambridge Law Journal, ix (1947), 935Google Scholar; Milsom, S.F.C., The Legal Framework of English Feudalism (Cambridge, 1976), 1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 Histoire des dues de Normandie et des rois d'Angleterre, ed. Michel, F. (Socit de l'histoire de France, 1840), 1169Google Scholar.

77 Jordan Fantosme's Chronicle, ed. Johnston, R. C. (Oxford, 1981), 73Google Scholar.

78 See the case of the Bigod earls of Norfolk discussed Holt, J.C., Feudal Society and the Family in early medieval England: I. The Revolution of 1066, above, 5th ser., 32 (1982), 205Google Scholar.

79 Les Romans de Chrtien de Troyes, II, Cligs, ed. Micha, Alexandre, Classiques Francais du moyen ge, 1957, where the tale is summarized, iiixiGoogle Scholar.

80 Complete Peerage, v. 120122.

81 For Percy see Complete Peerage, x. 44955 and Holt, , The Northerners, 21Google Scholar. For Briouze, see Complete Peerage, i. 22Google Scholar; Patent Rolls 121625, 165; Curia Regis Rolls, viii. 1012, 27, 35; ix, 9, 3067; x, 1345, 195; xi, 390, 1969. For Quency see Complete Peerage, xii, pt 2. 749751 which fails to note that Robert de Quency, d. 1217, had a legitimate daughter, Margaret, (Complete Peerage, vii. 679)Google Scholar.

82 Milsom, 1479. I hope to deal more fully with the casus regis in a forthcoming work on the succession of 1199. Although the evidence is not easy to assess, it suggests that actions of this type multiplied after John came to the throne.

83 Holt, , The Northerners, 240Google Scholar; VCH, , Lanes., i. 3356Google Scholar. the dispute lay in the first instance between uncle and nephew in the senior line in the court of John Count of Mortain and continued as litigation between first cousins in the King's court from 1200. It was not, however, an example of the casus regis, because in this case the nephew's father had in fact succeeded to the inheritance.

84 VCH, Lanes., vi. 11nGoogle Scholar.

85 Gesta Abbatum Monasterii S. Albani, ed. Riley, H. T., 3 vols (Rolls Series, 1867 1869), i. 220Google Scholar.

86 Rotuli de Dominabus (Pipe Roll Soc., 35, 1913), 1Google Scholar; Book of Fees, 577.

87 Rot. Litt. Pat., 47b.

88 Painter, , Reign of King John, 3614Google Scholar. See also fitz Walter's, letter to William in Chron. Maj., ii. 614Google Scholar.

89 Complete Peerage, xii, pt 2. 746.

90 Red Book of the Exchequer, 349.

91 Chron. Maj., ii. 482; Coggeshall, 1434.

92 Oxford, Magdalen College: Brackley Deeds, no. 12.

93 Rot. Litt. Pat., 101b.

94 Chron. Maj., iii. 41; Annnahs Monastici, ii. 292.

95 de Gray Birch, Walter, Catalogue of seals in the department of manuscripts in the British Museum, 6 vols (1887 1900), ii, no. 6016Google Scholar; Tonnochy, A. B., Catalogue of seal-dies in the British Museum (1952), no. 332Google Scholar. For Saer's and other de Quenci seals see Complete Peerage, xii, 2, 750 n.(h) and ibid. Appendix I, 2931; also Book of Seals, no. 418. For Robert fitz Walter's see the splendid silver die in the British Museum, now generally attributed to him rather than to his grandson. On the whole question see Henderson, George, Romance and politics on some medieval English seals, Art History, i (1978), 2642CrossRefGoogle Scholar, where it is noted that the seal of Margaret, Saer's widow, bore both the Quenci and Fitz Walter arms. Henderson does not emphasise brotherhood in arms (37). For some discussion of such adoption of arms see Keen, M. H., Brotherhood in Arms, History, xlvii (1962), 117, especially 1314CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

96 Curia Regis Rolls, ii. 12.

97 Curia Regis Rolls, ii. 219.

98 J. C. Holt (1982), 2034.

99 Mortimer, R., The Family of Rannulf de Glanville, 1112Google Scholar.

100 Magna Carta, cap. 50.

101 In addition to parentes, Orderic uses cognati, consanguinei, consobrini and both stemma and parentela, ed. Chibnall, , i. index verborumGoogle Scholar.

102 Coronation Charter of Henry I, cap. 4.

103 J. C. Holt (1982), 21112.

104 Cambridge University Library, MS Ff. 2.33, f. 51; BL, Harl. MS 638, f. 209.

105 Cambridge University Library, MS Ff. 2.33. f. 51.