The Creation of Brittany: A Late Medieval State

THE CREATION OF BRITTANY

The donjon at Dinan, begun in 1382 under the supervision of Etienne le Tur, master of works, one of a series of important towers built for Duke John IV (see pp. 36-9).

THE CREATION OF BRITTANY A LATE MEDIEVAL STATE

MICHAEL JONES

THE H A M B L E D O N PRESS LONDON

AND

RONCEVERTE

Published by The Hambledon Press, 1988 102 Gloucester Avenue, London NW1 8HX (U.K.) 309 Greenbrier Avenue, Ronceverte WV 24970 (U.S.A.) ISBN 0 907628 80 X ©M.C.E. Jones 1988

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Jones, Michael C.E. The Creation of Brittany: a late medieval state 1. Brittany (France) - History I. Title 944'. 1024 DC611.B854 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jones, Michael C.E. The creation of Brittany: a late medieval state Bibliography p. xiii. Includes index. 1. Brittany (France) - History 2. France - History - Medieval period, 987-1515 I. Title DC611. B854J66 1988 944'. 1 - dc!9

Printed and bound by Billing & Sons, Worcester

CONTENTS

List of Plates List of Maps and Tables Acknowledgements Preface Additional Bibliography I

The Duchy of Brittany in the Middle Ages

II

The Defence of Medieval Brittany: a Survey of the Establishment of Fortified Towns, Castles and Frontiers from the Gallo-Roman Period to the End of the Middle Ages

III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI

XII

Notes sur quelques families bretonnes en Angleterre apres la conquete normande La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons au XIIP siecle d'apres leurs testaments The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany from Peter Mauclerc to Duchess Anne, 1213-1514 The Seals of John IV, Duke of Brittany, 1364-1399 Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre, 1386 The Breton Civil War The Breton Nobility and their Masters from the Civil War of 1341 -64 to the late Fifteenth Century The Finances of John IV, Duke of Brittany, 1364-1399 The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne, Count of Penthievre: an Aspect of English Foreign Policy, 1386-1388 'Mon Pais et ma Nation': Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

vii viii ix xi xiii 1

13 69 95 111 159 175 197 219 239

263 283

VI

XIII XIV XV XVI Index

Education in Brittany in the later Middle Ages: a Survey 'Bons Bretons et Bons Francoys': the Language and Meaning of Treason in Later Medieval France L'armee bretonne, 1449-1491: structures et carrieres Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne, reine de France, duchesse de Bretagne

309 329 351 371 411

LIST OF PLATES

Frontispiece

The donjon at Dinan

Between pages 122 and 123 la b

Peter Mauclerc, Secret seal 1219 John I, Small seal 1253

2

John I, Great seal 1263

3

John V, Great seal 1424

4

Peter II, Seal of majesty 1453

5

Francis II, Great seal 1481

6a b

Peter II, Counter seal 1453 Francis II, Counter seal 1481

Between pages 168 and 169 7

John IV, Great seal 1366

8a b

John IV, Seal no. 1 1362 John IV, Counter seal no. 1 1366

9a b

John IV, Counter seal no. 2 1387 John IV, Counter seal no. 1 reworked 1387

10

John IV, Great seal no. 2 1387

11

John IV, Great seal no. 3 1398

12a b

John IV, Counter seal no. 3 1398 John IV, Privy seal no. 1 1366

Vlll

13a b c d

John John John John

IV, IV, IV, IV,

Privy seal no. 3 1372 Privy seal no. 4 1387 Privy seal no. 5 1391 Seal of accounts 1373

14a b c d e

John John John John John

IV, IV, IV, IV, IV,

Signet no. Signet no. Signet no. Signet no. Signet no.

1 3 4 5 6

1366 1372 1381 1385 1398

LIST OF MAPS AND TABLES

1

The medieval defences of Nantes

16

2

The medieval defences of Rennes

18

3

Clisson castle in the fifteenth century

43

4

The towns of later medieval Brittany

46

5

The castles of later medieval Brittany

50

6

Provisional list of chancellors of Brittany, 1213-1514 152-4

7

Types of letters issued by the chancery, 1489

8

Map to illustrate the Breton Civil War

198

9

Genealogical tables of the Breton ruling house at the time of the Civil War

210

155-6

10

The Breton Ordonnance Companies, 1454-91

366-7

11

Musters in the dioceses of Vannes and Leon and the archdeaconry of Dinan

368

12

The War Budget, 1481-5

369

13

List of the Masters of Artillery, 1449-91

369

14

Manuscripts associated with Duchess Anne

400-7

15

Manuscripts relating to the funeral of Queen Anne

407-9

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The articles in this volume initially appeared in the following places. They are here reprinted by the kind permission of the original publishers. I

This chapter appears here for the first time.

II III

ArchaeologicalJournal, cxxxviii (1981), 149-204. Memoires de la Societe d'Histoire et d'Archeologie de Bretagne, Iviii (1981), 73-97.

IV

Memoires de la Societe d'Histoire et d'Archeologie de Bretagne, \x (1983), 19-33.

V

Landesherrliche Kanzleien im Spdtmittelalter (Munich,

VI VII VIII IX

X

1984), pp. 681-728. Antiquaries Journal, Iv part II (1975), 366-81. Memoires de la Societe d'Histoire et d'Archeologie de Bretagne, Ixi (1984), 83-104. Froissart: Historian, edited by J.J.N. Palmer (Woodbridge, 1981), pp. 64-81, 169-72. Memoires de la Societe d'Histoire et d'Archeologie de Bretagne, lii (1972-4), 27-53. This appears here in a revised English version.

The Crown and Local Communities in England and France in the Fifteenth Century, edited by J.R.L. Highfield and Robin Jeffs (Gloucester, 1981), pp. 51-71. XI Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, xlv (1972), 7-26. XII War, Literature and Politics in the Late Middle Ages, edited by C.T. Allmand (Liverpool, 1976), pp. 144-68. XIII Nottingham Mediaeval Studies, xxii (1978), 58-77.

x XIV

Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 32(1982), 91-112. XV La France de la Fin du XVe siecle: Renouveau et Apogee, edited by B. Chevalier and P. Contamine (Paris, 1985), pp. 147-65. XVI Memoires de la Societe d'Histoire et d'Archeologie de Bretagne,lv.(l97S), 43-81.

PREFACE

The articles reprinted here were originally written for many different audiences on either side of the Channel, hence the occasional overlap or repetition of subject matter. But a common theme is the investigation of government and society in the medieval duchy of Brittany, especially under its dukes of the house of Drcux-Montfort (1213-1514). For although each piece had a separate genesis in response to particular requests or in seeking to illustrate from a Breton angle some aspect of a general theme chosen for conferences or collective works and I was not always conscious of a systematic plan, over the years that is how they now appear to have developed. They thus represent an elaboration of issues and questions that I first faced in Ducal Brittany 1364-1399 (Oxford 1970), not merely the problem of ducal relations with the great powers of the medieval west, England and France, but the whole question of Brittany's own development in response to the policies pursued by its rulers. The creation, one could say the invention, of the medieval duchy as a conscious work of art, to borrow Burckhardt's famous phrase on the Renaissance state, is the thread that runs through all the essays. To those who guided me during my apprenticeship, especially the late John Le Patourel and Pierre Chaplais, I thus owe an enduring interest in things Breton and the making of many good friends and colleagues subsequently among those sharing the same preoccupations. Thanks must go to the editors and publishers who have kindly allowed articles to be reprinted, reset or translated for this collection. Details of the original publication appear above with the exception of Chapter I which has not been published previously. M. Xavier du Boisrouvray, Director of the Archives departementales de la Loire-At!antique, gave permission for the reproduction of photographs of seals at Nantes and M. Simon did the photography; to both I owe grateful thanks. Most particularly I am obliged to Martin Sheppard for enabling me to bring together this miscellany in such a handsome format, allowing me to present, I trust, a more accessible and coherent account of some of the developments which have interested me for so long. Little did I realise in 1963, when I first seriously took up the matter of late medieval Brittany, the appropriateness for myself of Duke John IV 's enigmatic motto A ma vie. Michael Jones Norwell Michaelmas 1987

This page intentionally left blank

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

In addition to the articles republished in this volume, other articles treating aspects of the history of Brittany may be listed for completeness: 'Brest sous les Anglais (1342-1397)', Les Cahiers de I'lroise, xvi (1969), 2-12. 'L'enseignement en Bretagne a la fin du moyen age: quelques terrains de recherche', MSHAB, liii (1975-6), 33-49, cf. Chapter XIII above. 'The Diplomatic Evidence for Franco-Breton relations, c. 1370-1372', English Historical Review, xciii (1978), 300-19. 'Bulletin historique: 1'histoire du bas moyen-age breton 1200-1500. Publications et directions de recherche depuis quinze ans', MSHAB, Ivi (1979), 207-20. 'Sir Thomas Dagworth et la guerre civile en Bretagne au XlVe siecle: quelques documents inedits', AB, Ixxxvii (1980), 621-39. 'Brittany (Duchy)', Dictionary of the Middle Ages, ed. J. R. Strayer, New York, ii (1983), 377-81. 'Trahison et 1'idee de lese-majeste dans la Bretagne du quinzieme siecle', Actes du 107e Congres National des Societes Savantes, Brest 1982, Philologie et histoire jusqu'a 1610, i (Paris 1985), 91-106, cf. Chapter XIV. 'La mort de Walter Huet (1373)', Bulletin de la societe d'etudes et de recherches historiques du pays de Retz, no. 4 (1984), 28-34. 'L'aptitude a lire et a ecrire des dues de Bretagne a la fin du moyen age et un usage precoce de rimprimerie', MSHAB, Ixii (1985), 37-53, cf. Chapters V, XIII and XVI. 'Mon pais et ma nation: 1'identite bretonne au XlVe siecle', Dalc'homp Sonj! Revue historique bretonne, no. 10 (1985), 1-9 (a translation of Chapter XII). 'Edward Ill's Captains in Brittany', in England in the Fourteenth Century, ed. W. M. Ormrod, Woodbridge 1986, pp. 99-117. 'Les branches anglaises des seigneurs de Dinan', in Dinan au Moyen Age, ed. L-R. Vilbert, Dinan 1986, pp. 221-35, cf. Chapter III.

XIV

'Sir John de Hardreshull, king's lieutenant in Brittany, 1343-1345', Nottingham Medieval Studies, xxxi (1987), 76-97. 'Roches contre Hawley: la cour anglaise de chevalerie et un cas de piraterie a Brest, 1386-1402', MSHAB, Ixiv (1987), 53-64. 'Notaries and Notarial Practice in Medieval Brittany', in Notariado publico y documento privado; de los origenes al siglo XIV, VII Congreso internacional de diplomatica, Valencia, 6-12 octubre 1986, Valencia, forthcoming. 'Les capitaines anglo-bretonnes et les marches entre la Bretagne et le Poitou, 1342-1373', Actes du 11 le Congres National des Societes Savantes, Poitiers 1986, forthcoming. 'Aristocratic, faction et 1'etat dans la Bretagne du XVe siecle', in L'£tat et les aristocraties (France, Angleterre, Ecosse), XIHe-XVIIe s., ed. P. Contamine, forthcoming. 'Le cas des etats princiers: La Bretagne au moyen age', in L'Etat moderne; territoires, droit et systeme politique, ed. N. Coulet, Aix en Provence, forthcoming, cf. Chapter 1 above. 'Raoul de Caours', Bulletin de la societe d'etudes et de recherches historiques du pays de Retz, no. 7 (1987), 5-10.

I

THE DUCHY OF BRITTANY IN THE MIDDLE AGES' The role of the princes in France, whether in the central or later Middle Ages, has been more sympathetically considered in recent years than was once the case. 'The road from the achievements of the Carolingian state to the beginnings of the 'modern state' leads through the compact territories of northern France to the great powers of England and France which developed out of them', wrote K. F. Werner in an influential article, 'Kingdom and principality in twelfth-century France'. But progress towards Tfitat moderne' thereafter was not entirely straightforward, despite the considerable advances made by the Capetians, especially in law and administration. 'There was more to the political development of France in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries than the progress of the monarchy', argued John Le Patourel over twenty years ago in a fine synthesis which concluded that 'France, like Germany and Italy, passed through an "age of principalities"; and, though her experience was shorter than theirs, unity under the king was not the only possible outcome'. 2 At much the same time Andre Leguai valuably brought together much scattered material on 'Les £tats princiers en France a la fin du moyen age'.3 Both, in a sense, were reacting to the absence of just such a comparative synthesis from the standard modern Histoire des Institutions fran^aises au moyen age, edited by F. Lot and R. Fawtier. The first volume of this had appeared in 1957 with the significant title Institutions seigneuriales (Les droits du Roi exerces par les grands vassaux). It consisted of fourteen excellent brief regional monographs but their collective import was summarized in less than a page. Quite rightly, therefore, since then the creation of autonomous princely states within the greater kingdom of France in the later Middle *An earlier version of this chapter will appear as 'Le cas des etats princiers: La Bretagne au moyen age' in L'Etat moderne: territoires, droit, systeme politique, ed. N. Coulet, Aix en Provence, and I am grateful for permission to adapt it for the present collection. 1 The Medieval Nobility, ed. T. Renter, Amsterdam, New York & Oxford 1979, pp. 243-90. 2 J. Le Patourel, 'The King and the Princes in Fourteenth-Century France', Europe in the Late Middle Ages, ed. J. R. Haleetal., London 1965, pp. 155-83, reprinted in his Feudal Empires Norman and Plantagenet, ed. Michael Jones, London 1984. 3 Annali della Fondazione Italiana per la Storia amministrativa, iv (1967), 133-57.

2

The Creation of Brittany

Ages, their nature and ideology, has properly absorbed increasing attention. It is a subject worthy of study for its own sake, especially for the diversity of regional experience. It also helps to illuminate the development of the monarchy itself and aspects of the creative tension between the centre and the periphery.4 There is hardly need to emphasise now that a proper understanding of the creation of the modern state, at least in France, depends on an appreciation of all the various elements which went into its making. Amongst these the contribution of the princely administrations of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries is of paramount importance since, at the lowest level, 'it is . . . a commonplace that the monarchy eventually took over the princely governments as the basis of its own provincial organization'.5 Whilst, at a higher level, as Le Patourel realized, they could represent an alternative to the monarchy; in any discussion of such developments the medieval duchy of Brittany has always attracted attention. Its ultimate growth, of course, was truncated by union with France, painfully accomplished in the late fifteenth century. But before then under its Montfort dukes, in particular, it was recognized at the time and ever since that the duchy enjoyed a certain independence from the crown. The question was and is, how much and of what kind? This mise au point is largely based on recent contributions to the story of how an earlier feudal polity adapted to new circumstances in the later Middle Ages. Limitations of space prevent detailed comparison with other late medieval principalities. But some conclusions may be drawn on how far such polities could progress along the road so skillfully described by JPh. Genet in his introductory paper, 'Genese de 1'Etat moderne en Europe'. Since he encourages us to see this 'dans la longue duree', I begin with remarks about the duchy prior to the late thirteenth century. In this longer perspective, I make no apology for drawing attention to certain Gaulish, Roman and Celtic factors which were important in the creation of medieval Brittany. It was, for example, the division of the Armorican peninsula amongst five Gaulish tribes, formalized during the Roman occupation by the establishment of civitas capitals, that gave the region certain fundamental territorial, administrative, political, even religious divisions, which affected its whole future development and is still reflected in the five modern departements of Brittany.6 This heritage from Antiquity was particularly important in the eastern and southern parts of the peninsula where the core of the Carolingian Breton March, the counties of Rennes, Nantes and Vannes, reflected earlier 4

cf. P. S. Lewis, Essays in Later Medieval French History, London 1985, pp. 151-68. Le Patourel, loc. cit., p. 155. 6 Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. J. Delumeau, Toulouse 1969; Lexikon des Mittelalters, ii. 615-28 and A. Chedeville & H. Guillotel, La Bretagne des saints et des rois, Ve-Xe siecle, Rennes 1984 provide the most recent authoritative syntheses and bibliography. 5

Brittany in the Middle Ages

3

arrangements of the late Roman Empire. 7 It was not quite so true for the territories which stretched along the northern coast. These were the areas most affected by the immigration of large (though incalculable) numbers of Britons in the fourth to sixth centuries from Britannia major to Britannia minor (first so named by Gregory of Tours). It is perhaps still premature to pronounce a verdict on the hotly debated issue of the origin of the Breton language and its relation to primitive Gaulish; what no one could deny is that the immigration had important ethnic, cultural and social consequences, some still felt.8 However, though all these earlier influences need to be considered in any full account of medieval Brittany, it is fair to say with M Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'La Bretagne, en tant qu'unite politique, s'est constitute au IXe siecle'.9 Moreover, the fragile unity then imposed on the Breton regnum, lying loosely within the Carolingian Empire, was all too easily smashed by the Vikings. Its re-establishment from the mid-tenth century was to be the work of Alan Barbetorte and his successors, especially the counts of Rennes. Recent work emphasises that the models which they followed were in no real sense Celtic but those of Carolingian Europe. 10 Brittany's evolution thereafter as a feudal duchy both politically and socially parallels its more powerful and intensively studied neighbours. That is to say, under the counts of Rennes (generally acknowledged throughout the province as dukes between c. 970-1066) and the other closely related comital families of Cornouaille and Nantes (who also controlled the county of Vannes), public authority was for a time preserved, even restored. But as in other northern French principalities and on the royal demesne by the mid-eleventh century this authority had come to be shared more widely with an aristocracy of great castellan families, whilst the same period also saw the appearance of large numbers of lesser knightly lineages, gradually brought under the sway of the duke or his great vassals. Though there are hints that Celtic practices influenced some legal usages and it is not yet possible to demonstrate in Brittany that genetic continuity amongst the high nobility from Carolingian times which has been a concern of much recent work in ' L. Levillain, 'Le Marchc de Bretagne, ses marquis et ses comtes', Annales de Bretagne (cited as AB), Iviii (1951), 89-117; Chedeville & Guillotel, op. cit. 8 L. Fleuriot, Les Origines de la Bretagne, Paris 1980 provides a controversial view of these developments (cf. English Historical Review, xcvi (1981), 844-6 and H. Guillotel in Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne, cited as MSHAB, Iviii (1981), 350-7). The most recent contributions on the language question can be found in Questions d'histoire de Bretagne (Actes du W7e Congres National des Societes Savantes, Brest 1982),Philologieet Histoirejusqu'a 1610, n (Paris 1984). 9 'Le Grand Fief Breton', Histoire den Institutions, ed. Lot & Fawtier, i. 267. 10 H. Guillotel, 'Le premier siecle du pouvoir ducal breton (936-1040)', Actes du 103e Congres National . . . Nancy-Metz 1911, Philologie et Histoire jusqu'a 1610 (Paris 1979), pp. 63-84.

4

The Creation of Brittany

other provinces, there is little else to differentiate Breton developments from those of neighbouring regions. It is a matter of emphasis, of plotting the diffusion of certain key terms and customs, elsewhere recognised as typical of feudal society in its prime. For even in the far west of the peninsula, most intensively settled by emigrant Britons and furthest from centres of ducal power, the late eleventh and twelfth centuries saw the emergence of hereditary castellan families and all the other forms of feudalism that typified Breton society further to the east and south, though these never had the rigour to be observed in regions like the Anglo-Norman realm. The organs of government in Brittany remained simple, chiefly in the hands of the duke and his household, his milites et barones, and a few ecclesiastics.11 Politically these developments had in Brittany some of the consequences they did elsewhere. Initially with the restoration of ducal authority, the duke also acknowledged fealty to the crown. Alan Barbetorte performed homage to Louis IV Outremer in 942 but royal influence was not felt in the duchy again until Louis VI confirmed the rights of the bishop of Nantes in 1123.12 No duke repeated Barbetorte's gesture until Arthur I acknowledged owing liege homage to Philip Augustus in 1202. Indeed at some point, probably early in the eleventh century, the duke began to perform homage to the duke of Normandy through whom he may be deemed indirectly to have paid homage to the crown.13 Whilst at home after the mid-eleventh century crisis of Conan II's minority and a civil war, and despite accumulating all former comical titles in one hand by 1103, ducal authority was often challenged. The subordination of Brittany to more powerful neighbours was intensified with the duke living under the shadow of William the Conqueror and his successors. He was inevitably embroiled in Norman and Angevin rivalry. Subjection became complete when on the death of Conan III in 1148, there was a disputed succession which enabled the young Henry II of England, now both duke of Normandy and count of Anjou, to intervene directly. He finally secured the whole province for his third son, Geoffrey, who was betrothed to the ducal heiress, Constance, in 1166.14 The period of Plantagenet rule in the duchy, finally brought to an end by the invasion of Philip Augustus in 1206, was important for renewed 11

cf. Chapter II below, especially pp. 24-31. J-F. Lemarignier, 'Les Fideles du roi de France', Recueil Clovis Brunei, Paris 2 vols 1955, ii. 146-7; J. P. Brunterc'h, 'Puissance temporelle et pouvoir diocesain des eveques de Nantes entre 936 et 1049', MSHAB, Ixi (1984), 29-82. 13 P. Jeulin, 'L'hommage de la Bretagne', AB, xli (1934), 380-473; J-F. Lemarignier, Recherches sur I'hommage en marche et les frontieresfeodales, Lille 1945, pp. 116-22. 14 cf. J. LePatourel, The Norman Empire, Oxford 1976; J. Boussard, Legonvernementde Henri II Plantagenet, Paris 1956; W. L. Warren, Henry II, London 1973; Y. Million, 'La Bretagne et la rivalite Capetiens-Plantagenets', AB, xcii (1985), 111-44. 12

Brittany in the Middle Ages

5

attempts to impose authority on the duchy's most intransigent nobles and the creation of an administration and resources more in keeping with the needs of the late twelfth century. It was a period as fertile for new departures in law, finance, local and central government institutions in Brittany as elsewhere in the Angevin (or Capetian) lands, though the exact contribution of the Plantagenets and the chronology of these developments is still little understood. It may be suggested, nevertheless, that a more centralized and authoritarian regime was produced, laying the groundwork for the consolidation which was to occur in the thirteenth century. This was particularly the work of a Capetian cadet, Peter Mauclerc (1213-37) and his two immediate successors, John I (1237-86) and John II (1286-1305).15 The main outlines of this evolution can be sketched.16 Beginning with the reconstruction of a serious ducal administration during the period of Plantagenet domination, these reigns witnessed a prolonged but in general successful struggle by the dukes to master a turbulent nobility. There were occasional setbacks. The baronial coalitions against Mauclerc had by 1235 forced Louis IX to institute a series of inquiries which revealed the arbitrary methods Mauclerc had employed to dominate his nobility, often using force and acting in defiance of established custom to defeat his enemies. He had, for instance, deprived nobles of cherished privileges like the exercise of lagan (shipwreck), limited their freedom to build castles wherever they liked on their estates, extorted by way of relief large sums of money or wasted their lands when they fell into his hands by right of bail. By this means he could exploit the estates of a deceased tenant for an indeterminate period, limit testamentary freedom and in other ways curtail aristocratic judicial rights. It looked as if the barons were on the point of regaining these privileges when John I succeeded. But he was able to avoid capitulation and win over men previously opposed to his father like Raoul III de Fougeres and Andre HI de Vitre. A few years later his rule was again threatened from various quarters, not least by the increasing authority of the crown and with it the growth of centralizing institutions like the newly fledged Parlement of Paris. This court enabled the king to attract suppliants and among them were many Breton nobles appealing about decisions issued against them in ducal courts or complaining about more 15 S. Painter, The Scourge of the Clergy. Peter of Dreux, duke of Brittany, Baltimore 1937. J. L. Montigny, Essai sur les Institutions du duche de Bretagne a I'epoque de Pierre Mauclerc (1213-1237), Paris 1961 should be used only with the greatest caution. J-P. Leguay & H. Martin, Pastes et malheurs de la Bretagne ducale, 1213-1532, Rennes 1982 provides the best recent account with full bibliography. '* cf. below Chapters II, IV and V. 17 A. de la Borderie, Nouveau recueil d'actes inedits des dues et princes de Bretagne, Rennes 1902, nos. III-VII. 18 A. de la Borderie, Recueil d'actes inedits . . . Rennes 1888, nos. CXIV and CXV.

6

The Creation of Brittany

arbitrary action, including despoiliation of both the lay nobility and of i • • 19 great ecclesiastics. Fighting on two fronts, against the crown's claims to interfere in the duchy and against internal rivals, Peter Mauclerc and his son had staunchly countered these attempts to undermine their authority. In a series of wars, the- full extent of which has never been adequately described, by insisting on recognition of their ducal and feudal rights and by building up their own administration, the ducal position was strengthened. As La Borderie showed long ago, John I especially was able to take advantage of the financial difficulties of leading vassals to annex land to his own demesne in parts of the duchy where his influence was previously weak. Notably this was the case in Leon and the Tregorrois where the viscounts of Leon and the lords of La Roche Derrien were dispossessed, but the families of Hennebont and Lanvaux with properties in Cornouaille and Broerec and of Dinan in Eastern Brittany provide further instances in other regions.20 Finally in compromise measures like the Assize ofRachat (1276) the duke dropped claims to exercise bail indefinitely in an arbitrary manner. He guaranteed testamentary freedom, especially to name tuteurs or curateurs for minors, in return for payment of a relief equal to a year's income from the deceased's estates or agreed to exercise bail simply for a year with a promise not to waste the property. There were a few families which did not signify their immediate individual assent to the Assize and continued like the lords of Fougeres and Tinteniac to negotiate separately with the duke at the death of a tenant in chief, but in general harmonious relations were restored.21 Increasing wealth, growth of a more advanced administration, provision of ducal courts and a general parlement (first mentioned in 1288) in which major disputes might be more readily settled than by recourse to arms, all led to an enhancement of ducal power and prestige. We should, perhaps, beware of overemphasising his success. Some disputes between nobles were still settled outside ducal courts by the traditional means of arbitration, with the disputants or their friends choosing commissions of arbiters, whilst private warfare between nobles was still a fairly regular occurrence. But by the late thirteenth century the duke of Brittany had re-emerged as the clear leader of his duchy, a status acknowledged by promotion to the peerage of France in 1297.22 19

Actes du Parlement de Paris, ed. E. Boutaric, Paris 2 vols 1863-7, nos. 89*, 1188, 1456, 1693, 1788, 1845. See also Nicole Le Roy, 'L'influence francaise en Bretagne (1213-1341) et les Institutions privees bretonnes', Positions des theses, Ecole des Chartes, Paris 1965, pp. 51-6. 20 A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iii (Paris & Rennes 1899), 343-6, 353-6. 21 cf. M. Planiol, Histoire des Institutions de la Bretagne, new edn. by J. Brejon de Lavergnee, Mayenne 5 vols 1981-4, ii. 288-91. 22 Below Chapter XII.

Brittany in the Middle Ages

1

In comparison with some other principalities (or would-be principalities) Brittany enjoyed certain advantages. Since the stabilisation of its frontiers in the eleventh century, its territory was more exactly defined, if only because much of it was surrounded by sea. Administratively the thirteenth-century dukes were able to build on the foundation of older divisions, Plantagenet reforms, the increasing wealth and trade of the duchy and the example provided by nearby Capetian demesnes. Although there were inherent dangers in the increasing royal interference from the time of Philip Augustus onwards and in the more subtle penetration of French cultural and social influences (through law and education, for example), the fact that the duchy had only just been brought back into a direct relationship with the crown meant that there was no long tradition of close royal overlordship.23 Furthermore, to set against these influences, by virtue of its geographical position athwart the major sea route between England and its remaining continental possessions and the fact that since the mid-twelfth century the duke had important territorial interests in England through holding the honour of Richmond, his relations with the king of England allowed him to play off the two sovereigns who competed for his allegiance. Clearly first seen in the career of Mauclerc, oscillating between England and France, it was a policy more or less favoured by virtually all his successors down to Duchess Anne.24 In the later Middle Ages this may be held to be one of the most critical factors enabling the dukes to maintain their independent stance, most particularly in the Hundred Years War. But to return to the thirteenth century, it may be emphasised that although future lines of development can be discerned, the duchy was still a feudal polity; its institutions were still very rudimentary. There was no ducal chancery to speak of nor a formal council before the late thirteenth century; a primitive chambre des comptes was in process of formation from the 1260s but revenues were chiefly domainal; a parlement first properly emerges in the late 1280s; the feudal military obligations of tenants in chief had dwindled to a mere 166 knights and 17 esquires by 1294 (if they had ever been more extensive).25 Apart from normal loyalty and obedience owed by the population at large to their duke, his rule was still very largely personal or seigneurial and 23

cf. Leguay & Martin, op. cit., pp. 30-8. Michael Jones, Ducal Brittany 1364-1399, Oxford 1970; G. A. Knowlson, Jean V, due de Bretagne et I'Angleterre (1399-1442), Cambridge & Rennes 1964; B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Francois II et I'Angleterre, 1458-1488, Paris 1929. 25 Planiol, op. cit., originally written in the 1890s but only recently published in full, is a mine of information, though necessarily needing correction. For Breton finances see B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Le plus ancien role des comptes du duche, 1262', MSHAB, xxvi (1946), 49-68; for the council, idem, 'Le conseil du due de Bretagne d'apres ses proces-verbaux' Bibliotheque de I'ecole des Charles (cited as BEC), cxvi (1958), 136-69; for the Chancery, below Chapter V. 24

8

The Creation of Brittany

unsophisticated in form, dependent on the good will of great vassals. Much of this was to change in the late Middle Ages. If we are looking for a specific turning point nicely situated in that period 1280-1360 which Jean-Philippe Genet pinpointed as critical in the formation of the modern state, it is the year 1297 in the case of Brittany. Then John II was formally recognized as a duke and peer of France in return for a promise to perform liege homage, arrparently affirming the traditional relationship of the duke and the king. Thereafter Philip IV and his successors maintained a constant position. They expected the duke to perform certain services and to recognize the ultimate sovereignty of the crown, a sovereignty which was critically formulated in the period from c. 1250 on the basis of revived interest in Roman law. In practical terms this chiefly meant that cases from the Breton parlement could be carried on appeal to the parlement of Paris, the duke was occasionally called upon to do military service and to appear at court, and royal ordonnances should have been applicable in the duchy. Strictly interpreted it meant that the king and, more significantly, his officials could interfere in the everyday affairs of the duchy. Normally it was impractical for them to do so, though the monitory example of Guyenne shows how far a king could go in exploiting his sovereignty over a great prince. As in the royal appanages so in the case of Brittany conventions developed to ease potential points of tension. Over appeals to Paris it was established that they could only be made in two instances: false judgement and denial of justice. In the later Middle Ages the ducal council vetted all mandates from Paris. Royal sergeants could be refused permission to execute them, indeed were sometimes violently assaulted or banished from the duchy. By the fifteenth century there was a permanent commission of lawyers in Paris representing the duke, scrutinizing all documents from Brittany which might upset royal sensibilities, and advising on the most appropriate forms of action. In these and other ways royal sovereignty, so embracing in theory, could be circumscribed in practice. Reaction to the increasing demands of the crown may already be seen early in the fourteenth century in Brittany: quarrels over royal efforts to regulate ducal coinage, appoint bishops to Breton sees or control private warfare in the duchy, for instance, led to confrontation. In the general movement for provincial charters in 1314-5, John III obtained a detailed and restrictive statement on the circumstances in which the king could intervene judicially in the duchy. But from the mid-fourteenth century, under the pressure of war, diplomacy and the increasing expectation of the duke's own subjects for reward in his employment, views were formulated on what contemporaries called ducal regalities which were incompatible with royal ones. This was by no means a development 26

Below Chapters XII and XIV.

Brittany in the Middle Ages

9

unique to Brittany: on 25 September 1347 Gaston III of Foix declared that he recognized no superior but God for his vicomte of Beam, and a theory of sovereignty for Beam has been traced into the early seventeenth century.27 But already in the 1330s there were those who argued that Breton dukes no less than Kings of France were 'princes who recognized no superior'. The weapon of Roman law was two-edged and to the claims made on behalf of the crown were opposed those similarly based on behalf of the principes. More generally, however, the Montfort dukes of Brittany as rulers of an extensive, ancient and populous duchy, now set out to foster more deliberately a sense of provincial identity.28 If in other regions similar civilian concepts were pressed into action, it may perhaps be argued that nowhere were other princes quite so successful as the Breton ones in fostering this practical and ideological autonomy, not even in the outstanding example of the fifteenth century, le grand duche du Ponant, Valois Burgundy. This may be demonstrated at several levels. In the first place there was an independent Breton administration in the later Middle Ages, with its own parlement, Etats (after 1352) and the duke developing his own extensive legislative powers.29 After Philip IV no French king raised taxation in the duchy. If Tetablissement d'une fiscalite d'Etat' makes a modern state, then this was largely achieved in Brittany by the 1360s. By then the chambre des comptes, with its own seal, personnel and jurisdiction, supervised the levying offouages and aides. These, together with customs dues and indirect taxes on consumables, remained the mainstay of ducal finances for the rest of the period. Such taxes were levied not only in wartime but also increasingly during truces or peaceful interludes.30 In the mid-fifteenth century the duke was the first provincial prince to follow royal example and to reform his military forces by creating a small permanent army. 31 Enormous sums were spent on the physical protection of the duchy by erecting modern defences, especially on the eastern frontier, and by developing a specialist artillery corps.32 Safeconducts to travel to Valois France or elsewhere outside the duchy were increasingly issued by the chancery, first properly organized from the mid-fourteenth century.33 An elaborate ducal household, remodelled on 27

P. Tucoo-Chala, La vicomte de Beam et la probleme de sa souverainete des origines a 1610, Bordeaux 1961. 28 Below Chapters XII and XIV. 29 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Les faux "fitats" de Bretagne de 1315 et les premiers £tats de Bretagne', EEC, Ixxxvi (1925), 388-406; idem, 'La genese du legislatif dans le duche de Bretagne', Revue historique du droit fran^aiset stranger, 4emeser. xl (1962), 351-72. 30 Planiol, op. cit., iii. 279 et seq.; J. P. Leguay, 'Le fouage en Bretagne', Diplome d'etudes superieures, Rennes 1960; below Chapter X. 31 Below Chapter XV. 32 ibid, and Chapter II. 33 Below Chapters V and XIV.

10

The Creation of Brittany

Burgundian lines by Philip the Bold himself, projected the image of a powerful, ceremonious and dignified ruler. The same purpose was served by a coronation service (first elaborately performed in 1403 though much older in origin), joyeuses entrees, courtly pomp, magnificent funeral displays, including yet another princely imitation of royal practice in the laying out of the duke 'en son habit royal', and the creation of no less than three chivalric orders or devises - The Ermine of John IV, the £pi of Francis I and La Cordeliere of Francis II.34 Other increasingly overt signs of majesty were displayed both in chancery documents, seals and formulae and in the symbolism of the ducal cercle or crown, decorated with fleurons by Francis II and considered a calculated insult to his own majesty by Louis XI. 5 To enhance his dignity yet further, but also for very practical reasons, a full range of diplomatic and marital contacts was maintained in the fifteenth century with most Western European states, a matter still under-investigated. At the same time a separate Breton church negotiated its own concordats with the papacy. Pius II was one of the most notable outsiders to acknowledge the full validity of ducal claims to independence, giving practical support to Francis II in the foundation of a university (at Nantes in 1459-60) without which no late medieval state was complete.36 Even the implications of Brittany constituting a separate heraldic march should not be overlooked in an analysis of the characteristics of an advanced late medieval principality. Though there was initially little original in the conception of ducal authority, and much was imitation of royal practice, its transformation developed its own momentum through the precocity and persistence with which it was propagated. Successive kings acknowledged the very real and brazen threat it now posed to their own authority by seeking to curb both its practical and symbolic expression, though as already seen, they were in this endeavour for long largely unsuccessful. For ducal power and pretensions expanded with ducal wealth and the political circumstances which threatened the very existence of the Valois monarchy itself. In practical terms, by the late fourteenth century the duke had come to exercise most prerogatives then normally ascribed to a sovereign prince. 34 There is no comprehensive treatment of ducal ceremonial. For the display ofjohn V at his funeral see Dom P-H. Morice, Memoirespour servir depreuves a I'histoire ecdesiastique et civile de Bretagne, Paris 3 vols 1742-6, ii. 1373, and for the beguin of Francis II (1488), ibid., iii. 603-8. Francoise Fery-Hue, 'Le ceremonial du couronnement des dues de Bretagne au XVe siecle: edition', Questions d'histoire de Bretagne (above n. 8), pp. 247-63 is a valuable addition to the meagre literature. 35 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Couronne fermee et cercle ducale en Bretagne', Bulletin philologique du comite des travaux historiques (jusqu'a 1715), annees 1951 et 1952, Paris 1953, pp. 103-112; below Chapters V and VI. 36 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les papes et les dues de Bretagne, Paris 2 vols 1928, remains fundamental; for learning see below Chapters XIII and XVI and Leguay & Martin, op. cit., pp. 372-86; below Chapters VII and XI for ducal diplomacy.

Brittany in the Middle Ages

11

These included the right to ennoble and enfranchise, the earliest Breton example of which now surviving is dated March 1391. He could also legitimate, grant licences for fairs and markets, fortifications and seigneurial warrens, create notaries, legislate and issue general ordinances, control noble taxation and supervise exemptions. He authorized donations in mortmain, remitted capital offences, exercised regalian rights in episcopal vacancies, issued protections and, among his most prestigious and jealously guarded rights, coined silver and gold, often seeking advantage by manipulating the value of Breton currency.38 The importance of providing Brittany with an account of its own indigenous origins and traditions (alluding, for example, to its status as a regnum during the Carolingian period) for propaganda and other purposes led to the classification of ducal records and searches for other literary remains in abbeys and churches, even in the royal archives.39 Historical and legal documents, saints' lives and other legendary materials, chronicles and more imaginative pieces were ransacked for suitable evidence. Diplomats seldom left the duchy without dossiers bulging with pieces justificatives. The ducal council long deliberated the exact form of words the duke or the chancellor was to use on formal state occasions or in defence of ducal privileges. Legal treatises and other aide memoire were consulted w7hen delicate matters of policy had to be decided. Contrary to royal views, there is no doubt Breton officials considered their master enjoyed most, if not all, sovereign rights and that his duchy fulfilled most conditions thought appropriate to a contemporary state. According to the fourteenth century French lawyer Johannes Faber any ruler who held a limited territory for a long time was established there by right and possessed imperial powers. In formulating the notion that treason (laesa majestatis) could be committed against the duke and his state, lawyers could not have gone further in fifteenth-century conditions than they did in declaring the autonomy of Brittany by claiming the protection of the lex Julia majestatis.41 If in relations between crown and duke in the reign of Louis XI, 'la sujetion eclipse la vassalite" as M Pocquet du Haut-Jusse argued, the same may also be said of the duke's relations with his own people, his subjects, for 37 Recueil des actes dejean IV, due de Bretagne, cd. Michael Jones, Paris 2 vols 1980-3, ii. no. 773; cf. i. 45-8 for a discussion of the range of ducal actes. 38 J. Kerherve, 'Finances et gens de finances des dues de Bretagne 1365-1491', These de doctoral de 1'fitat, Universite de Paris I, 1986 has now transformed our knowledge of monetary and other financial matters. " 9 Below Chapter V and J. Kerherve, 'Aux origines d'un sentiment national. Les chroniqueurs bretons de la fin du moyen age', Bulletin de la societe archeologique du Finistere, cviii (1980), 165-206; P. Contamine, 'The Contents of a French Diplomatic Bag in the Fifteenth Century: Louis XI, regalian rights and Breton bishoprics', Nottingham Medieval Studies, xxv (1981), 52-72 for French reaction to Breton propaganda. 40 Below Chapter XIV, p. 102. 41 ibid., pp. 104-6.

12

The Creation of Brittany

whose 'bien publique' he exercised his prerogatives.42 The period then from the late thirteenth century to the late fifteenth appears to have seen the creation of a proto-modern state in the duchy of Brittany. Largely under the impact of war a regular taxation system had been established and with it came more advanced institutions - £tats to authorise its levying, an expanded chambre des comptes and other specialised financial offices like the tresor de I'epargne which raised and spent this taxation. Whilst the other organs of government - chancery, council, parlement and lower courts, the ducal household itself, the army (and to a lesser extent the navy) - all called for a more highly trained, literate and skilled personnel. Though the duke was the lynch-pin of the whole administration and inability to exercise his rights to the full (as Francis II occasionally failed to do so) could cripple government and breed faction, much of the routine of government became impersonal and formal. It ran in well defined channels under the supervision of a professional and closely-knit bureaucracy, chiefly staffed by laymen, our knowledge of whom is currently being transformed by detailed studies of such specialists as the: gens de finance.43 The interests of the duke, his duchy and 'le bien publique' were upheld by this self-interested group, just as the crown and other advanced polities were similarly maintained. A patrimonial or seigneurial concept of government had been replaced by the revival of the more sophisticated idea of public authority grounded in Roman and customary law and the formulation of ducal 'regalities'. These were expressed both in written and ceremonial forms and based on carefully garnered precedent or studiously nurtured practice. An ideological battle was fought for the allegiance of the duchy's population at large by concerted propagandist exercises. Judgement on how successful the dukes were must be a duty of those who seek to assess the true position of medieval principalities in 'la genese de 1'fitat moderne', but in the final analysis such judgement will always be personal and subjective. For my part I would not want to argue seriously with anyone who maintained that, in most respects, the Franco-Breton war of 1487-91 was fought by two separate states and that the victory of Charles VIII brought an end to one of the most precocious, imaginative and thorough attempts to create a sovereign principality within the larger kingdom of later medieval France. This was the 'realite historique' in one small part of the Medieval West. It forms the dominant theme running through all the articles which are reprinted in this volume.

42

B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Une idee politique de Louis XI, la sujetion eclipse la vassalite", Revue historique, CCXXVI (1961), 383-98. 43 Kerherve, op. cit.

II THE DEFENCE OF MEDIEVAL BRITTANY:

A SURVEY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FORTIFIED TOWNS, CASTLES AND FRONTIERS FROM THE GALLO-ROMAN PERIOD TO THE END OF THE MIDDLE AGES

INTRODUCTION 'Nous abordons un sujet qui fut assez peu etudie jusqu'a present dans son ensemble. Une seule etude generale . . . a degage les lignes principales et discute certaines dates a propos de quelques chateaux celebres'. So wrote Roger Grand introducing a discussion of military architecture in Brittany down to the time of Vauban, which appeared in three successive numbers of the Bulletin Monumental in 1951-52. His only serious precursor was the great nineteenth-century historian of the province, Arthur de la Borderie. He had published an article on 'Les monuments de 1'architecture militaire du moyen-age en Bretagne' in 1886 and a few years later edited some of the many valuable documents he had brought to light bearing on this subject (La Borderie i886& 1894). It was on these two articles that La Borderie was to draw extensively in his Histoire de Bretagne, which was the culmination of his lifetime of research and which appeared in six volumes between 1896 and 1914. Individual monuments which had received scholarly attention between La Borderie's death and 1951 were cited in a valuable footnote to Grand 1951 (238 n.2). Since then many more sites have been studied and there has been another major contribution to the general outline of the subject in a masterly paper on 'Le chateau de Vitre et 1'architecture des chateaux bretons du XlVe au XVIe siecle' which supersedes all earlier accounts of the late medieval period (Mussat 1975).

14

The Creation of Brittany

In view, however, of the ramifying specialized bibliography, the huge increment of knowledge both from detailed documentary studies and from the increasing volume of archaeological evidence, it seems an appropriate moment to survey some of the matters of current interest in this field and to relate them to general features of the history of the duchy of Brittany in the Middle Ages. Whilst stopping far short of an exhaustive account, it is hoped that this review will enable Breton developments to be placed more securely in general and comparative studies of fortification in the Middle Ages where recently they have suffered from relative neglect (compare Petrikovits 1971; Contamine 1978; Fournier 1978), although specific parallels are seldom pursued in any detail. It will be noticed that the balance of the paper tends towards an emphasis on the beginnings of castellation and then on later medieval developments. There are several reasons for this: the origins of castles in Brittany, as in other parts of France, can now be traced in more exact detail than was formerly possible and in view of certain suggestions relating to the nature of feudalism in Brittany it has seemed appropriate to provide some information on this subject, whilst documentary evidence for the later Middle Ages is abundant for certain aspects of the fortification of towns and castles and for the implementation of ducal policies of defence and control of building. The comparative lack of information on some of the developments c. 1150-^.1350 reflects both the dearth of additional new documentary evidence to augment that discovered by La Borderie and current historical and archaeological preoccupations with earlier and later periods (but see Durand 1978). It also coincides with a period of relative calm in the internal politics of the duchy, particularly from c. 1240 to c. 1341. During that period developments were, it seems, chiefly limited to improving the domestic comforts of those who lived in castles rather than to incorporating the latest advances in military techniques. Appearances, especially of surviving castles, may however be somewhat deceptive since some major donjons from this period have been destroyed subsequently (pp. 23, 42 below). It is also clear that the thirteenth century saw the beginnings of much more systematized campaigns of urban fortification (Leguay 1978, 1981). This topic, it may be felt after the opening section, becomes a subsidiary one, emerging again fitfully in connection with ducal defensive policies in the late Middle Ages. Yet it seems impossible to account comprehensively for the origins of castles in the duchy without some notice of the position of these works in the defence of towns with antique origins, whilst the interdependence of urban and castle defences in the frontier zones discernible at the end of the period should be manifest. In the light of Jean-Pierre Leguay's studies of some individual towns and the thesis he has just published (see bibliography), it has seemed best not to anticipate unduly the more general points of urban development which his work elucidates on a scale which cannot be rivalled here. The main emphasis here is thus on the lines of evolution of the castle in Brittany with urban defences and associated problems of the frontier brought in to complement the major theme. AN OUTLINE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF URBAN DEFENCES On 24 June 843 the Vikings, in their first serious sweep up the Loire valley, easily mastered the dilapidated urban defences of Nantes (Merlet 1896, 15-17). On their side they had not only the element of surprise (it was St John the Baptist's day and the city

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

15

was en fete) to account for the success of their raid but they were also assisted by the military disarray of Lambert, count of Nantes, who was engaged in warfare with a rival from south of the river. In subsequent years further Viking attacks from bases established around the mouth of the Loire or on islands close to the mainland led to widespread devastation of the region despite efforts to refurbish the Roman walls of Nantes which had also suffered partial dismantling at the hands of Lambert's western rivals, the Bretons, in these very years of Viking attack. A local chronicle, allegedly written about 1060, which is the chief narrative source for the history of the whole of Brittany in the preceding two centuries, preserves a vivid account of events around the beginning of the tenth century. Then, under Bishop Fulcher, a wall was built around the cathedral so that both clerics and laity 'fleeing for safety, if it were necessary, could defend themselves against the Northmen' because, the writer explained, 'the city of Nantes was large and since antiquity it had been stormed and captured so many times that, as may be seen to this day, it had been thereby much destroyed in many places' (Merlet 1896, 74, 78). Fortifying the cathedral close and putting the urban defences in order did not, however, prevent further raiding and a few years later many of the leading men, not only of the county of Nantes, capital of the Carolingian march, but of Brittany at large, sought refuge in more distant parts of France or crossed the Channel to England. Amongst the latter were Matuedoi, count of Poher — the central districts of the present department of Finistere — and his son Alan. After spending some years at the court of King Athelstan, Alan, nicknamed Barbetorte, had returned to Brittany by 937 and with a small warband fought a series of hard campaigns which resulted in a general acceptance of his rule throughout the province (Merlet 1896, 82 ff.; La Borderie 1898; Guillotel 19793). At the time of the flight of the leaders of Breton society, most counts had rural palaces and encampments which were their chief residences (de Keranflec'h-Kernezne 1892; La Borderie 1898, 107-09, 215-22). On his return to Brittany, no doubt influenced by his Wessex experiences, Alan Barbetorte appreciated the value of urban centres as bases for comital rule in uncertain times punctuated by continued Viking attacks. Accounts of his campaigns reveal the strategic significance of monastic centres and small towns like Dol, St-Brieuc, Rennes and Nantes. His arrival before this last town is, for example, once again graphically described by the local chronicler for whom the prince, having to cut his way into the roofless cathedral through a mass of brambles, was a hero whose only defect was that he subsequently limited episcopal power in the city. Choosing to make it his principal residence, Alan ordered the repair once again of the defences round the cathedral and town and settled down in the main tower on the walls. It is alleged, probably anachronistically, that he made new dispositions of urban tolls, reducing the share of the bishop from half to one-third and settled his knights for the most part on ecclesiastical properties (Merlet 1896, 88-96). Despite further Scandinavian raids, exacerbated by aid now provided from the settlements of their compatriots in Normandy, the city of Nantes now held firm, notwithstanding disputes over its lordship between the counts of Anjou and Rennes for many years after the death of Alan in 952 and a series of uncertain successions during the latter half of the tenth century (La Borderie 1898, 419 ff.). Its key position was recognized by other princes and after an expedition against it, Conan, count of Rennes,

Fig. i.

The medieval defences of Nantes (after Le Mene 1961 and Leguay 1978)

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

17

who had captured the town and with it Alan Barbetorte's mural castle, built £.990 a second castle in the south-west quarter of the city. With the addition of Le Bouffay, as it was known down until its destruction last century, these defences served the city for the next two hundred years until Guy de Thouars and Pierre Mauclerc, dukes of Brittany by right of their wives, undertook work on the site of the present castle in the south-eastern quarter of the city and expanded the circuit of town walls to 2200 m in the early thirteenth century. The enclosed area was some twenty-six hectares in comparison with the fifteen hectares of the Roman town. The process of expansion continued in the later Middle Ages. New suburbs were enclosed until about fifty hectares were protected by walls (Fig. i). The thirteenth-century castle was completely rebuilt from 1466 (Gregg 1977; Merlet 1896, 127-29; Le Mene 1961; Tonnerre 1977, 71-73). This sketch of the development of Nantes and its defences is paralleled in the history of the other two principal towns of Brittany which had vestiges of Roman fortification: Rennes and Vannes. Utilizing only a part of the Gallo-Roman defences, to which were added castles abutting the walls, built in all probability during the period of Viking raids, these centres formed redoubts from which comital power was to be extended following the end of the invasions (Guillotel 19793). Critical new phases of urban expansion occurred in the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries. At Vannes, for example, where an area of some five hectares had been enclosed at the end of the third century, there is evidence for urban growth during the eleventh and twelfth centuries with the creation of new parishes, the rebuilding of the cathedral and other churches, the provision of a new market place and the establishment of a mint. But it was during the thirteenth century that the duke ceded the site of the earliest castle, significantly called La Motte, to the bishop to use as a manor and began a major campaign of construction of town walls. The port, which had been located at the foot of the hill on which the cathedral was sited, on the present Place des Lices, was resited further to the south beyond the Porte de Greguinic, a fourteenth-century work, incorporating a tower built as an advance bastion overlooking the port by John II c. 1300. In the late fourteenth century a small new ducal castle was added to the defences which were themselves further strengthened. As a result almost three times as much ground was now enclosed as in the late Empire (Leguay 1975). At Rennes before the construction of a new enceinte, begun in 1421, the enclosed area of the town was only some eight or nine hectares, the equivalent of Paris or Le Mans in the fourth century (Leguay 1969; Leguay 1972, 91-107). Three major building campaigns resulted in the enclosure of some sixty-two hectares and even then not all the suburbs were provided with protection (Fig. 2). As at Vannes, the earliest ducal castle was abandoned; it was being used as a quarry by the inhabitants in 1405 and it was not subsequently replaced. Carhaix, the presumed civitas capital of the Osismes who inhabited much of modern Finistere, does not seem to have been fortified at the period £.275 when Rennes, Nantes and Vannes received their Gallo-Roman walls. It also failed to become the seat of a bishopric and although an important road centre it never developed on the same scale as the Gallo-Roman walled towns during the Middle Ages (Pape 1978). Another important Roman site, Alet (Ille-et-Vilaine), which had been endowed with Gallo-Roman defences still being used in the tenth century, was abandoned for various reasons for an adjacent site in the twelfth century, so that strictly there is not continuity between the

Fig. 2. The medieval defences of Rennes (after Leguay 1969, 1972 & 1978)

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

19

Roman defences and the medieval ones at St-Malo (Langouet 1976). But with regard to the development of specifically medieval defences the story here as at Rennes, Nantes and Vannes, that is of cities with antique origins, is paralleled in many towns which lacked such a history. At Dinan (C6tes-du-Nord), whose stone walls were apparently admired by the twelfth-century Moslem geographer, Idrisi (Jaubert 1840, 354), it was not until after the town had fallen into ducal hands in 1283, according to Cornon (i949a, 172-86), that the circuit of some 2684 m was completed in the form still largely visible today. This gave an enclosed area of some thirty hectares, double that of Vannes, and made Dinan the third most important town in Brittany after Rennes and Nantes. At Hennebont (Morbihan), Quimper (Finistere), Concarneau (Finistere) and Fougeres (Ille-et-Vilaine), under ducal or seigneurial pressure, urban fortifications dating principally from the late thirteenth century were constructed (Leguay 1978, 123-28). This and other evidence suggests Brittany shared in the great urban expansion of the central Middle Ages in the sense that new towns came into existence and older settlements expanded. But the chronology of this movement needs to be examined carefully; in comparison with commercially more advanced regions, whilst growth in terms of new urban centres was impressive — Bourde de la Rogerie (1928) listed fifty-seven new towns in the eleventh and twelfth centuries — the size of these was often extremely modest. When enceintes were built they were normally unique, not being expanded subsequently as were those of great commercial, industrial or governmental cities like Bordeaux, Florence and Paris, and Leguay (1978, 90) has commented recently on the almost complete absence of evidence for municipal organization in Brittany prior to the fourteenth century as a sign of the under-urbanization of the duchy. On the other hand, despite pestilence, warfare and other factors limiting population in the later Middle Ages, urban vitality and renewal is a continuing feature of Breton history at a time when other more developed regions were often experiencing serious regression. EARLY CASTLES IN BRITTANY It is against this background that the development of the castle in Brittany needs to be seen, for fifty-two of the towns cited by Bourde de la Rogerie (1928) grew up in the shadow of one. The exceptions are those towns alongside important abbeys — Ste-Croix-de-Quimperle (Finistere), St-Sauveur-de-Redon (Ille-et-Vilaine), Daoulas (Finistere), St-Meen (Ille-et-Vilaine) — and St-Malo, moved from Alet to its new site by Bishop Jean de Chatillon c. 1146 (Chedeville 1979, 51). Even in these cases of ecclesiastical domination, as more surely in the case of seigneurial, comital or ducal towns, urban self-rule was severely limited in the duchy to the end of the Middle Ages. Yet the chronology of the early development of the castle in Brittany is still very obscure. Clearly the men of the early Middle Ages living beyond easy reach of Gallo-Roman fortifications had not been entirely defenceless. When the Carolingians invaded the province they found the Bretons using large earthwork encampments as well as possessing residences which could be held against considerable forces (La Borderie 1898, 7-26). Some of these were hill or promontory forts like Castel-Coz at

20

The Creation of Brittany

Beuzec Cap Sizun (Finistere) or Plouay (Morbihan) of much earlier origin which had been re-utilized (Wheeler & Richardson 1957, 105, 109; Giot 1977, 112) and some forts of this type were to be modernized still further by the later addition of a motte. A ringwork, including earthbanks and dry-stone walling, at Castel-Cran at Plelauff (Morbihan) is an irregular polygonal fortification which on coin evidence seems to have been deserted at the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century. It has been tentatively identified as an appropriate residence for a machtiern, a local aristocrat and judicial figure rather like a Carolingian vicarius (de Keranflec'h-Kernezne 1892; La Borderie 1898, 142 ff). At Locronan (Finistere) the circular earthwork known as the Camp des Salles, traditionally called Gaulish, now appears to be assignable to the Carolingian period (Merdrignac 1979, 133). Machtierns frequently lived in 'palaces' and held court, the general location of which seems to be preserved in the place name element Us (cf. Welsh llys) which was normally translated as aula in Latin sources (Largilliere 1925, 233-34). But recognition of specific sites 'defeats archaeological identification' at present (Giot 1977, I I 2 ) although a number of settlements of the Carolingian period are now known (Andre 1962). At Trans (Ille-et-Vilaine) two camps, one polygonal with a perimeter of 110—20 m and the other on the same scale but rectangular and sited some 500 m away, have traditionally been recognized as the opposing camps of Breton and Viking forces prior to a decisive engagement in 939 (La Borderie 1898, 396-98). Recent discoveries of Carolingian-style pottery here and at sites adjacent to these camps seem to indicate appropriately enough occupation in the second quarter of the tenth century (Langouet 1977). It may be hoped that archaeological investigation, especially of many camps which have been dubbed 'Roman' or 'Gaulish' will lead to the closer dating of many similar ringworks and earthen encampments. In general, however, it is historical sources which have been exploited in a search for evidence of the early foundation of castles in Brittany. For example, to cite the Chronique de Nantes again (Merlet 1896, 22-25), it is reported that in 843 when the Vikings were destroying the 'townships and fortified sites of the districts of Mauges, Tiffauges and the Pays de Rays' a certain Bego, successor to Rainald, duke of Aquitaine, had already built 'on the banks of the Loire recently not far from the city of Nantes a castle (castellum) on which he had bestowed his own name'. The castrum Begonis has been identified with a feudal motte at Bougon (Loire-Atlantique) which survived until recent extensions to the municipal aerodrome of Nantes necessitated its destruction. Although this would be an extremely early example of a phenomenon which was to become widespread in Brittany as in other parts of France during the eleventh century — the naming of castles after their founders or earliest holders — and thus might be thought a rationalization by the chronicler based on conditions c. 1060 rather than on the situation some two centuries earlier, there is nothing inherently improbable about the tradition the chronicler records (cf. Fournier 1978, no-ii). Recent archaeological surveys are beginning to reveal the impressive number of feudal mottes which survive in the province. Many of these may well have been built originally in response to the unsettled conditions of the ninth and tenth centuries. As many as 166 mottes have so far been discovered in Finistere (Sanquer 1977); a less systematic survey of C6tes-du-Nord (Frotier de la Messeliere 1934) reveals comparable

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

21

numbers and it is clear that study of the other Breton departments will eventually yield similar results (cf. Salch & Burnout 1977). In this search elements such as mottc, roche and plessis in place names are particularly significant and in regions like those bordering on Normandy, Maine and Anjou where they are scattered thickly they are presumably indicative of strategic fortifications in this early feudal period. In the particular case of haie, 115 such names have been identified in Loire-Atlantique, no fewer than 251 in Ille-et-Vilaine, forty-four in C6tes-du-Nord, thirty-seven in Morbihan and seventeen in Finistere (Bernier 1977). Although the evidence for locating them securely in a chronological sequence is fragile, the suggestion that they reflect fortification in the wake of an increasingly feudalized society seems acceptable. The case ofguerche, stemming ultimately from a Germanic root werki, a fortification, has given rise to considerable debate, but whether the origin is essentially Prankish (Souillet 1944) or Norse (Quentel 1962), there is little argument but that it signifies a form of defence, a strong point, probably made of earth and wood, of which numerous examples are again to be found in the eastern march districts of Brittany and in neighbouring Maine, Anjou and the Vendee. Even in Finistere there are cases of the firmitas of Gallo-Roman and Carolingian times being transformed into the feudal ferte (Sanquer 1977). Thus archaeological and toponymic surveys will considerably augment the poor historical sources for castles and defensive developments in Brittany before c. 1100, although much remains to be done. As the Carolingian armies discovered, many of the earliest Breton defences relied heavily on inaccessibility, especially on positions in marshy areas and forests, to remedy other defects in fortification. The siting of mottes in Finistere continued this tradition since many were in the bottom of valleys on marshy ground or in the meanders of rivers (Sanquer 1977). Many were also positioned close to known Roman roads or at fords and important junctions and crossing points. Such evidence suggests that in Finistere as in the Cinglais region of Normandy (Fixot 1969) the mottes, whilst serving a defensive purpose, are also to be associated with the colonization and exploitation of new agricultural lands (cf. Couasnon 1949, 290-91). Their absence, for example, from the central regions of Finistere is explicable because this area was not to be opened up seriously until the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries by the Cistercians and knightly orders. On the other hand, their absence from the littoral is somewhat surprising in view of the importance of such areas both from an economic as well as a defensive point of view. It could be a testimony to the insecurity and fear inspired by the Viking raids. Excavation of a number of Breton mottes bears out the impression derived from documentary evidence and the unique visual testimony of the Bayeux Tapestry, that the artificial mounds of earth were originally surmounted by wooden palisades and towers, which were replaced in many instances by more permanent stone structures at a later date. At Leskelen en Plabennec (Finistere), for instance, excavation of a circular motte with a diameter of 25-30 m at its summit, has shown that the base of a square donjon overlies earlier levels of occupation (Irien 1976). At nearby Lamber en Ploumoguer, a motte recently destroyed in the course of building operations (Sanquer 1976) revealed another stone donjon superimposed on a layer of burnt material (the remains, we may surmise, of the earlier palisade and tower) in which were discovered.

22

The Creation of Brittany

three coins dating from the reign of Conan II (1040-66). Such evidence makes the suggestion that the very important later castle of Clisson (Loire-Adandque) derives its name from 'clisse', a wooden construction prior to the first stone castle, appear probable (Berthou 1910, 3ii;cf. Fournier 1963). Furthermore, a nearly contemporary notice in the cartulary of Redon (Ille-et-Vilaine) relating to the foundation of the future Chateau Josselin (Morbihan) adds an interesting detail. Guethenoc, the earliest recorded viscount of Porhoet, decided early in the eleventh century to move from Chateau Tro, a feudal motte which still survived in the sixteenth century, to a new site. Seeking the guidance of the monks of St-Sauveur de Redon, in whose honour he wished to found a chapel in his new castle, he inaugurated building operations in the presence of the monks by driving in the first stake rather than laying the first stone (C. Redon, no. CCXCII). The Bayeux Tapestry shows three Breton fortresses: Dol, Rennes and Dinan. Interpretation of the designs of these structures is beset with many difficulties, above all how far they represent realistic attempts to display actual features of buildings in these places. LaBorderie (1899, 18), greatest of modern historians of the province, was of the opinion that the Tapestry showed that the castle of Dol was built of stone and was probably square in shape, although he admitted the possibility of a triangular design. A more recent commentary describes the building at Dol as an 'unsubstantial structure . . . clearly a "mound castle", i.e. earthworks on a natural eminence surrounded by a wooden stockade with wooden buildings in the centre' (Stenton 1957, 167). Comparison of the illustrations used by La Borderie (1899, 5, 29) and photographs of the Tapestry shows that his artist modified and regularized his sketch of the Breton fortresses in a misleading fashion (cf. also Sanquer 1977). But in view of the unsuccessful forty-day siege of Dol by William the Conqueror in 1076 we may more readily agree with La Borderie that the donjon was already built of stone (Douglas 1964, 234 and contra Davison 1969, 37-38). A century later when John of Dol died in 1162 leaving an heiress, Henry II seized the castle which was besieged by the king and his Brabancons a few years later after Raoul of Fougeres had taken refuge in it. By this stage the building, consistently described by Robert of Torigny as 'the tower', was clearly made of stone, though whether it was the same tower as that figured in the Tapestry or in the siege of 1076 is a moot point (Torigny, 214, 228, 259-61). As for the defences of Rennes and Dinan, the surrounding palisades in the Tapestry seem to be quite clearly made of wood, although the building within each enclosure is of more advanced design (Grand 1951, 256). La Borderie interpreted that at Rennes as a hexagonal donjon, with an elegant cupola, and that of Dinan as a round stone donjon of at least two storeys, the upper parts being sheathed in lead plates. This would seem to be somewhat fanciful. Both buildings more probably had shingled or just possibly tiled roofs, and no round donjons dating from such an early period have yet been identified in north-west France. What the Tapestry indubitably shows is that all three fortresses were situated upon a substantial real or artificial motte and access was by means of a wooden bridge or ladder thrown across the surrounding ditch. If the Tapestry does indeed faithfully represent the type of castle found at Dol and Dinan, given the natural advantages of their sites, it would suggest that the art of fortification towards the end of the eleventh century in Brittany was not very

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

23

advanced. This impression is reinforced by the discovery that there remain no substantial upstanding towers comparable with the earliest stone donjons of Anjou (Deyres 1974) nor with Norman work in the duchy and in England (Yver 1955-56; Douglas 1964, 140-42, 215-17), though it has been plausibly conjectured by James (i968b, 317-20) that the core of the mam gate at Chateaubriant (Loire-Atlantique), externally work of the fourteenth century, is probably the original stone castle. Presently measuring 18 m square with walls 3.5 m thick at the base, such a donjon in its earliest form may well have been comparable with that at Leskelen en Plabannec where the base of the donjon occupies a 14.5 m square. The remains of other early stone keeps are known and have been described at Chevre en la Bouexiere (Ille-et-Vilaine), Luzuen en Nizon (Finistere), Castellec en Pluvigner (Morbihan) and at Coetmen (C6tes-duNord) (La Bordene 1899, 95-96). At Chevre these remains are on a natural motte. At Coetmen, a site now terribly threatened by quarrying, a low artificial motte carries the severely mutilated remains of a donjon which displays a regular pentagonal interior design and an irregular fourteen-sided exterior, giving it a circular appearance, with walls some 4 m thick, standing to a height of 6.5 m on the northern side. A parallel has been drawn between this castle and another twelfth-century castle, Chatillon Coligny en Gatinais (Loiret), which has similar multi-faceted walls (Barbier 1966) but the advanced state of destruction allows little certainty. In the early nineteenth century a gateway on the eastern side of the enceinte at Coetmen still survived. Visitors passed through an arch at the base of a square tower, an arrangement similar to the surviving gateway of the early thirteenth century at Fougeres which might be considered additional evidence for the archaic characteristics of this castle. But elsewhere in Brittany little seems to survive from the first period of construction in masonry. The base of an enormous hexagonal tower some 20 m in diameter at Fougeres is traditionally represented as the original stone keep demolished by Henry II in 1166. Mussat (1975, 152 n.yo), however, views this attribution sceptically and he seems to regard it as part of later defences subsequently demolished in modifications which radically changed the shape of the castle during the last phase of medieval fortification, a view partly endorsed by Leguay (19783, 574), who attributes the donjon to the fourteenth century and its destruction to Richelieu. A major quadrangular keep, which has been considered since the nineteenth century to be of twelfth-century origin, is that at Tremazan (Finistere), overlooking the harbour of Portsall (La Borderie 1899, 95). This castle was the caput of the lordship of the important family of Chastel. The donjon adjoins the south-west side of a small rectangular enclosure to which is added in a north-easterly direction a second, larger, rectangular enclosure. Recent excavations have shown that contrary to earlier opinion, the donjon does not stand on an artificial motte, but its base is encased to a height equal to half that of the interior ground floor rooms (emottee par un talus ma^onne: Durand 1978, 162) on its own south-west face and on those of the north-west and south-east to within 3 m of their junction with the curtain of the first enclosure. This curious feature, other stylistic points and documentary sources have led Durand to suggest that the castle in its present form was built first in the late thirteenth century. The only serious Breton parallel he could find to this square donjon was one at Clisson for which a late fourteenth-century date has been advanced by Erlande-Brandenburg (1968, 271), thus apparently raising yet further

24

The Creation of Brittany

problems. Some of these may be resolved by the evidence cited below (p. 178) hinting at an earlier date for the donjon at Clisson; in any event it is clear that Tremazan cannot now be considered amongst the earliest military monuments in the duchy where there is a dearth of quadrangular keeps (cf. Chatelain 1973). Nor do we find in Brittany shell keeps like that at Totnes (Devon), a town with Breton connections, at Farnham (Surrey) or at Carisbrooke (Isle of Wight), built in the course of the twelfth century. To the end of the Ancien Regime the possession of a motte often constituted a vital element in the exercise of seigneurial lordship. Many possessors of such primitive fortifications, with or without stone keeps, must constitute the forebears of the numerous Breton noblesse which emerges once documentary evidence begins to become plentiful in the twelfth century (cf. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse 1966). In the later Middle Ages these men chose to live in more or less fortified manor houses. This important development can only be mentioned briefly in passing. Surviving visual and documentary evidence makes it possible to reconstruct features of the typical manor, forerunner of many later chateaux. A long low building of two storeys, frequently with outhouses, barns and so on arranged around a courtyard which could be enclosed and protected by the addition of gateways and towers, it foreshadows many manor houses which survive in large numbers from the sixteenth century. Kessedjian (1972, 16) provides a typical example at La Chatiere en Tremblay (Ille-et-Vilaine) rebuilt from 1453. According to the means of its possessors, such a building acquired defensive features, and in Brittany as in England many more advanced manor houses of the later Middle Ages merge almost imperceptibly into seigneurial castles as do Roche-Jagu, C6tes-du-Nord (Couffon 1968), Trecesson (Morbihan) and Kerouzere, Finistere (below p. 53). But for other lords the possession of an early motte was but one stage in the creation of powerful castellanies exercising extensive privileges and jurisdiction (Fournier 1978, 100—35). These begin to emerge in the eleventh century when men like Viscount Guethenoc and his descendants abandoned wooden towers and small mottes for the ever-increasing protection, spaciousness and sophistication offered by substantial stone buildings. Sanquer (1977) has drawn attention to material remains suggesting a difference in social status between those who lived in the buildings on the motte and those who inhabited the bailey in some Breton castles. In the former indications of an aristocratic life-style is demonstrated by the discovery of arms, spurs, money, horses' bits and even gaming pieces and dice, whilst in the latter pottery, hearths, mill-stones, animal bones and so on inform us about the activities of menials and servants around the lords. But the appearance of castellanies in Brittany, and with them a fully-fledged feudal society, remains to be studied in depth by the meticulous research methods recently applied to this phenomenon elsewhere in France by Duby (1953), Fossier (1968), Guillot (1972), Chedeville (1973) and others. THE EMERGENCE OF CASTELLANIES AND THE BEGINNING OF FEUDALISM 'Beaucoup d'historiens', wrote La Borderie (1899, 50) 'ne veulent voir dans la regime feodal et surtout dans la division des fiefs, que caprice et confusion; c'est une erreur'. And he proceeded to discern certain general principles underlying the feudal structure of the province into which framework, in a remarkable feat of historical reconstruction, he managed to fit the myriad pieces of the jigsaw of lordships which constituted

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

25

the medieval duchy (see also La Borderie 1889). From the time of Alan Barbetorte onwards, he argued, dukes were wedded to the idea of the Breton state, utilizing all the institutions of feudalism to buttress their efforts to build it. From the start there was logic in such activities as the distribution of lands, promotion of Breton-speaking lords, creation of lordships and direction of policies towards strategic ends, the establishment of frontier castellanies, the balancing of one powerful baron by another and in the clever interposition of minor vassals and ducal demesne in the interstices between the big agglomerations. Though he acknowledges that there could not have been a pre-arranged master plan for the distribution of fiefs, nevertheless he argued that from the beginning feudal developments in Brittany were in step with those in neighbouring provinces. Thus the counts of Rennes, who united the duchy in the eleventh century, no less than Geoffrey of Anjou when he ejected the tenants of Thibaud of Blois in 1044 (Boussard 1963), or William, duke of Normandy, when he conquered England, could be described taking positive action to shape their emergent feudal state. A more pessimistic view of the position of the duke of Brittany was expressed by the great English scholar of feudalism, Sir Fank Stenton. Perhaps because he derived most of his information from the problematic cartulary of Redon (below p. 195), he was of the opinion that in 1066 feudalism in Brittany was an exotic institution imposed on a society which was still Celtic in character and in much of its organization (Stenton 1961, 27-28). He commented sensibly on the limitations of ducal power even in the twelfth century in comparison with that in neighbouring Normandy, a factor confirmed by more recent work (Le Patourel 1976, 121-76). We may take the appearance of independent and hereditary castellan families in Brittany as a crux in the debate which must ensue from such widely differing opinions on the origins and character of Breton feudalism, for as Chedeville (1973, 268) remarks 'au Xle siecle . . . la veritable puissance s'exprimait par les chateaux'. The Chronique de Nantes has already been cited for the establishment of castles at Nantes and Bougon. It refers, too, to the foundation £.987 of Ancenis (Loire-Atlantique) by Aremberg, wife of Guerech, count of Nantes, together with her son, Alan, and the chronicle mentions incidentally other more distant castles, including Craon (Mayenne, but at that time part of the county of Nantes), Blois (Loir-et-Cher), Chinon (Indre-et-Loire) and Chartres (Eure-et-Loir) during its account of events (.".950 (Merlet 1896, 29, 102, i n , etc.). An alleged charter of c.goo of Alarms rex, summus Britonum dux, in loco ac castello nomine Seio cum militum multitudine consistentes contained in this chronicle has certainly been revised at a later date and has recently been rejected as a forgery (Merlet 1896, 74-77, Guillotel 19713). Another annal records in 1091 the foundation of Montfort-sur-Meu (Ille-etVilaine) which appears in charter evidence only from c. 1152-56 (La Borderie 1899, 69, n. 2). As late as 1850, before being largely levelled to make way for the present church, an enormous motte some 20 m high survived, a token of the strength of the lords of Gael, one of whom was Ralph, earl of Norfolk, until his rebellion in 1076 (Douglas 1964, 231-35). The principal evidence, however, for the appearance of castles and their lords is provided by charters. In the case of Ancenis just cited, for instance, whatever the truth of the story about its origins, by the middle of the eleventh century it had passed out of the control of the counts of Nantes into that of a certain Wihenon or Guihenoc who

26

The Creation of Brittany

witnessed a charter of Conan II c. 1064 X 1066 as Wihenonis de Castro Anceniso (Guillotel 19713, no. 66). He was the progenitor of a family in which the name Guihenoc recurs frequently during the next two centuries. In another contemporary charter which can be dated no more closely than 1054 X 1084, Hoel, count of Nantes, confirmed a grant by one of his knights, Bernard of Guerande, to the abbey of St-Aubin d'Angers, whilst besieging the castle of Ancenis (Guillotel 19713, no. 80). In a charter off. 1032 X 1036, which is unique for so early a date in Brittany, the abbess of St-Georges de Rennes made an agreement with a certain Donoal, permitting him to build his castle at Tinteniac (Ille-et-Vilaine) in which no enemy of the abbey was to be given refuge (C. St-Georges, no. V). Another charter in the same cartulary (no. XIII), dated tM05O, records that Geoffrey son of Salomon, who had already built his castle at Nulliaco (? Noyal-sur-Seiche, Ille-et-Vilaine), had subsequently agreed that he would not use it to harm either Count Eudo or the abbess of St-Georges, their men and lands. Charters provide the main evidence for the establishment prior to 1050 of a very important line of castellanies along the Breton frontier with Anjou and Maine at Fougeres, Vitre, Combour (a castle held by the Dol family) and further to the south at Chateaubriant, whilst on the other side of the frontier the same period saw the creation of similar castellanies such as Laval, Mayenne, Craon, Sable (Sarthe) and Champtoceaux (Maine-et-Loire). The priory of Bere (Loire-Atlantique) founded c. 1040, was said to be a castro Briendi situm (Preuves, 1,401). Rivallon of Combour in making a grant to the abbey of Marmoutier (Indre-et-Loire) c. 1040 X 1064 described himself thus:. . . ego Rivallonim homo militaris ex Britannia de castello Combornio (Guillotel 19713, no. 57). In another charter oft. 1040 X 1047 for Marmoutier, although the castle of Fougeres is not specifically mentioned, the grantee Main is not only styled de Filgeriis in the witness list, but proudly announces in the charter that after Mainonus avi mei. . . Alfridusgenitor meus . . . ego in lineajam tertia positus . . . (Guillotel 19713, no. 47). The first holder of the future castellany of Vitre W3S Rivallon the vicar, who witnessed charters from c. 1008, whilst just across the future frontier, Crson is first mentioned ss 3 castellany between 1006 and 1020, Sable before 1015, Mayenne before 1040, Champtoceaux between 1040 and 1059, and Laval shortly after 1055 (Guillot 1972, 457-58, 465). In the next fifty years additional border castles together with a greater number fringing the Loire make their appearance: Chateaugiron (Ille-et-Vilaine, Preuves I, 463, c.io86), Chateaubourg (Ille-et-Vilaine, Preuves, I, 459, 1084), Donges (Loire-Atlantique, Preuves, I, 427, before 1066), Pontchateau (Loire-Atlantique, Preuves, I, 473, c. 1070), La Roche Bernard (Loire-Atlantique, C. Redon, no. CCCLXIII, 1095), La Garnache and Beauvoir (both Vendee, C. Redon, no. CCCX, allegedly before 1060), and so on; whilst the period from 1100 to 1150 saw in this respect the greatest number of additions to the list of existing seigneurial strongholds. Many of these may be assumed to have more remote origins, for a surprisingly large number of castles of families of known aristocratic importance do not appear in record sources until a relatively late date. The charter on which La Borderie based his belief (1899, 69) that the family of Loheac descended from a certain Herve first mentioned before 1008 has recently been demonstrated to be a forgery (Guillotel 19713, no. 14). Some other charters from the cartulary of Redon which have normally been cited as additional evidence for the family's history in the eleventh century are similarly

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

27

suspect. One of c. noi on behalf of Walterius Judicaelis filius de Lohoac quidam miles nobilissimus et illius Castri Princeps et Dominus (C. Redon no. CCCLXVI) may well have been 'edited' at a later date. But Riocus de Loheac does begin to appear as a witness to genuine charters in the late eleventh century (Guillotel 19713, no. 99; Preuves, I, 480), although his castle is not mentioned until the early twelfth century (Preuves, I, 524). Today the remains of no fewer than three mottes at Loheac (Ille-et-Vilaine) seem to witness to the early power of the family. One of them lying approximately due west some 150 m from the present church in low lying marshy ground on the outskirts of the village is a substantial work some 6 to 7 m high, providing at its summit an oval platform some 40 m X 20 m orientated north-south. Another family, that of the lords of Rieux (Morbihan), may be traced back to Rodaldus de Reus who witnessed charters c. 1021 (Guillotel 19713, no. 12). On the site of a Roman settlement called Duretia which had its own temple and arena, it has even been suggested recently (Leguay 1978, 31) that the castle of Rieux may have been built before 872! But there is no serious documentary proof to substantiate this claim and it seems much more probable that it appeared in the early eleventh century along with Rouaud de Rieux and his son Alain and their successors. In the case of the lords of Rays their origins can be pushed back further to £.975, but their principal castle of Machecoul (Loire-Atlantique) is not specifically referred to until the time of Gestin who died in 1093 (C. Rays, p. Ivii). It seems clear enough however that in Brittany as in other parts of northern France up to c. 1150, those men who usually appear in charters, especially comital ones, amongst the lay witnesses with names which include a place name element, with or without the additional title dominus, are in fact the lords of important castles. Hence Rualentis domni Doli (Guillotel 19713, no. 35, 1037), Rivallon lord of Dol, was followed at the end of the century by his grandson Rivallonus domini Doli castri (Preuves, I, 486, 1095). Whilst in the early twelfth century it was normal in Brittany to refer to such figures in the form Dominus Guillelmus de Guirchia (Preuves, I, 529, c.m $),Joscelinus dominus de Rocha (ibid., 531, c.in6), Brientius dominus de Vareda (ibid., 542, r. 1120), Gaufridi Dinanensis Dominus (ibid., 545, 1122) or Garsilius dominus de Macheco (Guillotel 19713, no. 147, 1138), the lords respectively of the castles of La Guerche (Ille-et-Vilaine), La Roche Bernard, Varades (Loire-Atlantique), Dinan and Machecoul (cf. Fournier 1978, 111). The better survival of records for the eastern and southern parts of the province, together with the slow diffusion only gradu3lly across Brittany of feudal terminology 3nd practice from regions further east undoubtedly produces a distorting effect when these early castellanies are located on a map. Yet from the mid eleventh century the viscounts of Leon, Gourin, Faou and Poher, the lord of Hennebont and other notables in Finistere were clearly establishing themselves in power by the same means used by their eastern contemporaries (C.Ste-Croix, passim, Guillotel I97ib). Periou, who gave his name to La Roche-Piriou (Morbihan) c. 1025, was reputedly a son of Benedic, count of Cornouaille. Of his castle nothing remained as early as 1575, although when a road was being built in 1907 a tower which dated from the thirteenth century was discovered (7G Morbihan, 14). It has recently been conjectured that remains of a castle at Le Stang (Morbihan) may even date from the tenth century (ibid., 145). In northern Brittany it is much the same story where members of the Penthievre family, cadets of the counts of

28

The Creation of Brittany

Rennes and prominent in the conquest of England, together with their own cadet branches of Avaugour and Roche Derrien, in the late eleventh and twelfth centuries, came to dominate the countryside from castles at Guingamp, Lamballe, Moncontour, La Roche Derrien and elsewhere, all in the modern department of C6tes-du-Nord (La Borderie 1899, 86-92, Guillotel I979b). As these last examples show, many of the first lords of castles were descended from comital families whose origins can be traced back to Carolingian times, whilst the process of establishing the hereditary castellanies can be followed with a fair degree of certainty. A century after Viscount Guethenoc, himself allegedly the descendant of a count of Rennes though more probably a client (Guillotel I979b, 82), moved his residence, his great-grandson Alan was granted c. 1120 by his elder brother Geoffrey, viscount of Porhoet, a bloc of largely unexploited territory west of the river Oust (du Halgouet 1921, 1-3). By the time of Alan's death in 1128 a new castle had been raised at Rohan (Morbihan), which became the caput of a great lordship which later came to overshadow its parent, Porhoet. But the appearance of other lords of castellanies is not so easy to document. Despite references to counts of Leon in the Carolingian period, a recent careful study of the family which held the viscounty in the eleventh and twelfth centuries is unable to trace a connected genealogy further back than c. 1020 (Guillotel I97ib). The earliest holder of Fougeres was not, according to La Borderie (1899, 57), a member of the comital family of Rennes within whose county the castle lay, but was related to an archbishop of Dol. Recently the charter on which this assertion was based has been demonstrated to be a forgery, probably perpetrated by the monks of Mont-Saint-Michel (Guillotel 19713, no. 6). It may well be that as his name, Main, disarmingly suggests, the family's links are to be sought in Mayenne in the first instance rather than in Brittany (C. Fougeres, p. 29). The fact that the namejuhel occurs among the descendants of Main I of Fougeres and was common to both families of the counts of Rennes and Mayenne during the eleventh century is another complicating factor, whilst close feudal ties with the counts of Mortain further adds to difficulties in establishing clear lines of descent (Hill 1976, 243). When Rivallon the vicar (vicarius) was installed at Vitre c. 1008, probably as the representative of Count Alan of Rennes, he quickly succeeded in usurping his master's powers of banal jurisdiction and establishing himself and his family in a fashion typical of many early castellans. He remained a member of the comital entourage, but it is not clear how far one can trust the later, picturesque family tradition that his origins were in Broerec (roughly equivalent to present-day Morbihan) and that he had fled to Rennes to avoid the consequences of a murderous attack on the neighbouring lord of Quemenet-Heboi (La Borderie 1899, 60), for whose lordship a sixth-century origin was once posited although its earliest named lords appear only in the eleventh century (C. Ste-Croix, 3 56, 7G Morbihan, 14). It may similarly be safer to confess ignorance in the case of the personal antecedents of another neighbour, viscount Haimon, the first identifiable member of the powerful family of Dol-Combour, though it is clear in this case that the origins of his temporal lordship can be found in the acquisition by force or otherwise of lands belonging originally to the archbishop of Dol £.990, for whom he acted as lay protector (La Borderie 1899, 56, Guillotel 1975). It is possible future research will reveal that in Brittany many of the castellans who are as yet not clearly linked with

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

29

comital families were not quite the new men they appear to have been c. 1000 and that, as their titles vicecomes, vicarius, etc., sometimes suggest, they did indeed have Carolingian antecedents like those of certain families in Anjou and Touraine, examined by Boussard (1962) in Poitou (Garaud 1967) or further afield in Lorraine (Parisse 1976). From all of this it would appear that many of those Bretons who accompanied the Conqueror in 1066 were not as unfamiliar as Stenton alleged with feudal institutions, which were developing contemporaneously with those in regions like Normandy (Douglas 1964, 83-104). The great aristocratic families of Brittany like those members of the house of Penthievre endowed in England were ultimately as ancient or more so than those in other neighbouring provinces. Judicael of Totnes, holder of the second largest honour in the possession of a Breton family in Domesday Book, was a scion of the house of Mayenne whose connections with Fougeres have already been mentioned (above p. 28; Sanders 1961, 89). Nor was Breton society at this juncture as thoroughly and aggressively Celtic as the remarks of Stenton or La Borderie state. The most fruitful cultural influences in the duchy since the ninth century had after all been Frankish-Carolingian ones. In political terms the region under the nominal control of the leading Breton princes reached its apogee in the reign of Salomon c. 870 when in addition to present-day Brittany, the dioceses of Coutances and Avranches (both Manche), most of Mayenne and parts of Anjou up to the walls of Angers itself, were conceded by Charles the Bald. Some Bretons even seem to have penetrated as far as Caen, Calvados (Lemarignier 1945, 9-10). Since that time the Viking invasions and the emergence of a new political order with the rise of Normandy and Anjou, and the decline of royal and Breton comital power, had created opportunities for many Breton families to exploit a region which offered a potentially more fertile and attractive aspect than the harsh conditions of the Armorican peninsula. There is evidence for a considerable wave of emigration not merely to La Borderie's frontier of the eleventh century but into parts of the Cotentin peninsula and Maine where many Breton names were common to c. 1150 (Chedeville 1974, 304). La Borderie interpreted the appearance of Breton names amongst the leading families of eastern and southern Brittany as evidence of deeply laid plans to create a Breton nation by farsighted dukes and spoke of the bretonisation of Haute-Bretagne or Bretagne-gallo, French speaking Brittany (1899, 28-29). In some instances this expansion can be specifically attributed to comital influence. Towards the end of the eleventh century when Hoe'l, count of Cornouaille, who had married Havoise, sister of Conan II of Rennes, also entered into his mother's inheritance at Nantes, thus uniting the duchy under his rule (cf. Tonnerre 1977, 62), the Nantais had just cause to complain about the way in which men from Cornouaille benefited at their expense. HoeTs two brothers Quiriac and Benedic were successively bishops of Nantes and amongst the religious houses which were considerably enriched by acquiring properties around the city was the abbey of Ste-Croix-de-Quimperle (Finistere), deep in Bretagne-bretonnante, Bretonspeaking Brittany. Witnesses in the charters of Alan, HoeTs successor, were sometimes divided into two groups, the Nantais and the Bretons (C. Ste-Croix, no. XXXV). But emigration from Bretagne-bretonnante to Bretagne-gallo had also clearly been occurring at a time when there were only the loosest political links between the counts of Cornouaille and Nantes.

30

The Creation of Brittany

The evidence of personal names, particularly but not exclusively from the cartulary of Redon, suggests that many of the lords of the Loire basin were of Breton-speaking origin. The holder of Chateau Bougon c. 1050 was said to be a certain Glevian whose son, Gourmaelon, has been tentatively suggested as a later lord of Pornic, LoireAtlantique (C. Redon, 278, C. Ste-Croix, no. XLVI). The castellans of Le Pellerin, Frossay and St-Pere en Rays to the south of the Loire in the same departement, and the viscounts of Donges and the lords of La Roche Bernard and Pontchateau just to the north, seem likewise to bear Breton or Germanic names for the most part during this period (La Borderie 1899, 61-62, Boisseau 1971, 120-21, Guillotel 19773). But these were not the standard-bearers of a Celtic revival; they were those first affected by that ripple effect generated by the earliest centres of feudalism in Touraine and neighbouring regions now reaching Brittany as their normal successoral practice of primogeniture shows. The question of nationality did not enter into the matter (cf. Dhondt 1948, 105-07, 245). Since the tenth century some ambitious Bretons had been found amongst thefideles of counts in the Loire valley (Chedeville 1974, 315-17). At critical periods the lords of Dol-Combour, Fougeres and Vitre were likely to appear in the entourage of the duke of Normandy (C. Laval, nos. 28, 96), and at the beginning of the twelfth century the lord of Clisson was just as likely to be with the count of Anjou as with the duke of Brittany, some of whose vassals formed a second generation of landowners who came into their estates when they accompanied Henry I to England (Chartrou 1928, 261, no. 30; Le Patourel 1976, 341). Whilst it would be idle to deny the existence of some fixed geographical frontiers, feudal politics allowed for flexibility or overlapping jurisdictions, and if opportunities presented themselves allegiances were changed and frontiers might be advanced. Sparsely populated regions like the marches between Brittany and neighbouring provinces might be colonized and that not simply by hermits or monks who established houses like those of Savigny (Manche) and La Roe (Mayenne) (Raison 1948). Conan II was engaged on such an acquisitive expedition in 1066, having already annexed Pouance (Maine-et-Loire) when he was assassinated (La Borderie 1899, 21-22, Guillot 19723, 290); whilst the process frequently worked the other way, for the Norman drive into north-eastern Brittany at the end of the same century was spearheaded by the future Henry I of England from his base in the Cotentin (Le Patourel 1976, 341-47). In view of such facts it seems better not to try to force the feudal jigsaw of interpenetrating castellanies into some preconceived and procrustean mould. Lordships were not uniformly constituted with immutable boundaries. La Borderie instanced as an example of political foresight on the part of the counts of Rennes the way in which they had 'enclave, comme une sorte de contrepoids un fief d'etendue moyenne (8 paroisses) relevant de Rennes immediatement, la baronie de la Guerche' in the centre of the barony of Vitre (i 899, 57). Yet the direct link between La Guerche and Rennes was already in existence around the year 1000 when Mainguen, a son of Thibaud, bishop of Rennes, possessed it, that is before the apparent appointment of Rivallon to Vitre, the piecemeal growth of which was eventually to lead to the creation of the enclave at La Guerche (Preuves, I, 353). Thibaud and his family were not only to hold on to the bishopric of Rennes for virtually all the eleventh century, presenting one of the most remarkable examples of dynastic episcopal families in the pre-Gregorian

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

31

age (Chedeville 1979, 58-60), but also to the lordship of La Guerche. Though as Guillot (1972, 290) points out, and in support of arguments advanced above, by the end of the century, Pouance, which in 1066 had been in the hands of bishop Sylvester of La Guerche, was now held by a successor who acknowledged that he was a vassal of the loxd of Vitre! The growth of castellanies was not entirely haphazard but neither, as these examples show, was it altogether the result of careful manipulation of men and lordships by powerful princes. At least it is difficult to accept this was the case in Brittany, where the count-dukes of this period struggled to survive, exercising only the most nominal overlordship on occasion over the congeries of independent lordships which had sprung up (but see Guillotel I979a) and they anxiously sought to avoid the fate that had threatened the duchy long before it finally occurred in 1156, that is incorporation into the polity of one of its stronger neighbours (La Borderie 1899, 269 ff.; Lemarigmer 1945, 115-22). THE EVOLUTION OF CASTLES AND TOWNS c. 1150-1340 The eleventh and first half of the twelfth century had thus seen in Brittany theestablishment of numerous comital and seigneurial castles with authority far in excess of that which could be exercised from a primitive feudal motte, although the actual buildings were not militarily so advanced as those in some neighbouring provinces. This would appear to be the implication not only of surviving visual evidence but of the relative ease with which the Angevins overran the duchy after the death of Conan III in 1148 and the minority of Conan IV (Boussard 1956, 413 ff, Warren 1973, 72-77, loo—oi). In 1167, as Robert of Torigny records, Guihomar of Leon was frightened into submission by the speed with which his well-victualled and well-armed castles fell to Henry II's forces (Torigny, 232). In the following year a conspiracy led by Eudo of Porhoet and the lords of Dinan was swiftly crushed with Angevin troops laying waste to Josselin, sallying quickly to destroy Auray (Morbihan), returning to capture Hede (Ille-et-Vilaine) from Geoffrey de Montfort and overrunning Tinteniac and Becherel (Ille-et-Vilaine) after a few days siege. Roland of Dinan, whose castle of Lehon (C6tes-du-Nord) erat natura et arte munitissimum — and anyone who has seen the enormous natural motte on which it is raised cannot but agree — likewise submitted after a short siege (Torigny, 236—38). A few years later during the revolt of the young Henry against his father, a number of Breton barons seized the opportunity to throw off their Angevin allegiance. Led by Raoul of Fougeres, who had refortified his castle after its earlier destruction by Henry II, the fighting centred on the major military strongholds of eastern Brittany — Fougeres, Combour, Dol — with the same results. Raoul and his supporters were frequently forced into refuge in their forests because they could not hold their castles against the king. Once again in 1182 Henry II had to invade Brittany. Besieging Rennes he took and burnt the tower, which he subsequently rebuilt and refortified; Becherel fell once more to him (Torigny, 259-61, 302). It was after these disasters that a number of Breton seigneurs began to rebuild their castles on an altogether more impressive scale. At Fougeres and Vitre there survives a considerable amount of early thirteenth-century work. At Fougeres there are, for example, the impressive double gatehouses and flanking towers, together with long stretches of the curtain wall, whilst at Vitre, though the silhouette of the castle now

32

The Creation of Brittany

shows an archetypal French castle of the late fourteenth/early fifteenth century, as Mussat (1975, 137) has recently underlined Tensemble actuel n'est que la modernisation du chateau qu'Andre de Vitre edifia dans son perimetre actuel' between c. 1209-50. The rebuilding of Lehon by the lords of Dinan similarly resulted in much greater emphasis being laid on the curtain walls which were strengthened by angle and mural towers. At Clisson there is documentary evidence for building activities c. 1217 (Erlande-Brandenburg 1968, 272), and some recent commentators have rather indiscriminately viewed operations there and elsewhere at Fougeres, Vitre, Chateaubriant, Oudon (Loire-Atlantique), Champtoceaux, Chamtoce (Maine-et-Loire), Machecoul, Blain (Loire-Atlantique), Largoet (Morbihan), Josselin and Dinan as part of a vast campaign under Capetian direction to protect Brittany against the Plantagenets (Erlande-Brandenburg 1968, 272, following Grand 1951, 263). The evidence advanced to support such a view is slight and unconvincing, whilst the chronology is extremely doubtful. At Oudon, for instance, as Grand himself later showed (1955), major building operations occurred only long after the Plantagenet menace had receded in the period after 1240. It is true that after the death of Duke Geoffrey in 1186 Plantagenet influence in the duchy was eclipsed and that the supporters of Constance and her son Arthur, besides being antagonized by Richard Coeur de Lion, were often divided amongst themselves, thus giving an opportunity for Philip Augustus to intervene in the duchy (La Borderie 1899, 286—98, Powicke 1960, 153 ff.). With the intention of strengthening the resolve of Breton barons, Philip alienated a certain amount of ducal demesne after he had gained possession of the duchy in 1206, releasing shortly afterwards to representatives of the Penthievre family lands of which they had been despoiled by the Plantagenets (Recueil, nos. Ixxiii, Ixxix-lxxxi). Royal protection of the interests of the house of Vitre is seen in some of these transactions as in the marriage of Andre III of Vitre to Catherine, daughter of Guy of Thouars, third husband of Duchess Constance, who was a pliant figure in the hands of Philip Augustus. His successor, the king must have originally felt, would be an even more subservient figure since he chose him personally from a junior branch of the Capet family: his first cousin, Peter of Dreux, normally styled Pierre Mauclerc (Painter 1937). Yet for all of this there appears to have been little policy of a co-ordinated kind responsible for the building campaigns of the period. The evidence largely depends on architectural features which suggest the experience of Capetian engineers was utilized by the builders of Breton castles. There is nothing inherently improbable in this but it must be emphasized that indisputable documentary proof for direct royal interference and direction is largely lacking. Or where it survives, it shows Philip Augustus and Louis IX as much concerned with how to gain repossession of castles granted to supporters (often of dubious allegiance) on the frontiers of Brittany with Anjou and Maine (Coulson 1972, 121, 131-33, 314) as with more strictly military considerations entailing the improvement of existing defences. Moreover once Pierre Mauclerc was in control of the duchy his attempts to licence castle-building and to establish for himself the custom of rendability (Coulson 1972 & 1973), together with other efforts to clip the wings of ambitious seigneurs, provoked widespread disturbances and protestations alleging the previous unfettered freedom of Breton lords to build where and when they liked (Nouv. Recueil, nos. iii-vii, Painter 1937, 17-24).

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

33

The increasing costs of building as much as ducal attempts to curb unauthorized construction may well lie behind the very interesting agreement of Raoul III of Fougeres and Andre III of Vitre drawn up on i September 1244 not to build any more castles in the Vendelais (C. Fougeres, no. xl). Both lords, supporters of the French king, had suffered considerable damage in the wars which Louis IX waged against Mauclerc; Raoul's concern to obtain the major share of the Porhoet inheritance, following the death of Eudo III of Porhoet in 1234, leaving three daughters, one of whom was Raoul's mother, and Andre's desire to go on a second crusading venture were no doubt further considerations which led them to limit their rivalry in the district lying between their respective castles of Fougeres and Chatillon-en- Vendelais (Ille-et- Vilaine). In the case of other lords, like Fougeres and Vitre, possessors of a number of early castles, there seems to have been an increasing tendency to concentrate their building activity on one main residence. For families just recently arrived at the summit of the feudal hierarchy, like the lords of la Hunaudaye (C6tes-du-Nord), the practice more normally was to build impressive castles de novo (Couasnon 1949, 281). And like the duke, other leading families such as the Rohan exercised the right to licence castle building by their own leading vassals. A convention of 1228 between Geoffrey de Kermorz, lord of Hennebont (Morbihan) and Alan, viscount of Rohan, resulted in the former agreeing that neither he nor his heirs would 'in futurum apud dictum Borgeel nee alibi in toto feodo nostro dominico vel gentili quern tenemus vel tenere poterimus in futurum in vicecomitatu de Rohan castrum, domum, edificium, firmatum muro nee muris nee fossatis nee barris nee palliciis nee stagnum nee stagna nee nundinas nee mercate facere, edificare nee construere, nee facere fieri, edificari vel construi' (Preuves, I, 862-63). On the other hand, as the century progressed and their revenues from an enlarged demesne, more effective taxation, profits of trade and other sources of income increased their wealth, the ducal family came more and more to dominate all forms of urban and military architecture in Brittany (Pocquet du Haut-Jusse 1946; Touchard !969, 159—62). It was Pierre Mauclerc, for example, who was responsible for the only planned towns so far documented in medieval Brittany, at Gavre (Loire-Atlantique) and St-Aubin-du-Cormier (Ille-et-Vilaine). Both were founded in conjunction with a castle, and although the former was not a successful plantation, the grid-iron pattern of plots is still visible in the street plan of the latter, running up to the curtain walls of the castle (Painter 1937, 51-52). Mauclerc also started construction of the castle of Susciniou (Morbihan) and greatly extended that at Nantes. Susciniou became a favourite haunt of all later dukes of Brittany not only because of the plentiful hunting in the attached park but also because of the castle's proximity to Vannes, the centre of the duchy's financial administration from the late thirteenth century until 1494. The reputation of the castle as a ducal residence has long been known; Froissart called it 'uri biaus chastiaus et cambre des dus de Bretagne' (Diller 1972, 472). The gardens were a constant concern and cause of considerable expenditure (La Borderie 1906, 133). But the recent discovery of remains of a chapel some 30 m long dating from c. 1250-1350 outside the moat on the southern side has underlined the high standard of domestic comfort and rich decoration now associated with ducal castles following the succession of the house of Dreux. This chapel contained a tesselated pavement of high quality, decorated with a wealth of geometric, floral and heraldic designs, in a wide range of

34

The Creation of Brittany

colours, the closest parallel to which appears to be a contemporary pavement at St-Denis outside Paris dating from the reign of Louis IX (Andre 1976). The acquisition by John I of the lands of the viscounts of Leon between c. 1240 and 1280, the dispossession of the last lords of La Roche Derrien and the exploitation of the financial difficulties of a number of other leading families, of Lanvaux and Dinan, for example, led to a vastly increased ducal demesne by the time of John II (La Borderie 1899, 343-46, 353-56). So that in addition to the reconstruction of many castles and manors which had long been held by the dukes, work was undertaken at these newly acquired sites. A key stronghold to come into ducal possession was Brest (Finistere) where evidence of late thirteenth-century building work still survives (Peyronnet 1975; Jones 1970, 143-71) and another important castle acquired was Hede (Ille-et-Vilaine) where the substantial remains of a donjon some 24 m X 22 m in size, with walls 3.8m thick, have recently been plausibly assigned to the period c. 1265-70 (Leguay 1978, 125). Additionally a whole series of towns obtained their still surviving circuits of walls, largely through initiatives taken at this time by the dukes or, as in the case of the Lusignans at Fougeres, through the endeavours of great seigneurial families. Many castles and towns were to benefit from legacies from the will of John II for the repair of their walls; ironically, the duke's premature death at Lyon in 1305 which brought this windfall was caused by the collapse of a wall on to the procession in which he was taking part with the pope, Clement V (Nouv. recueil, nos. xxvii-1). Between the beginning of the personal reign of John 1 in 1237 and the death of John III in 1341 Brittany experienced a century of virtually unbroken and entirely unaccustomed peace. During this period the duke and many of his leading barons gained military experience abroad in the ventures of Louis IX, in expeditions like that against Aragon in 1285 and against the Flemings in the early fourteenth century or on their own crusades to the Middle East (La Borderie, 1899, 352-53, 360-63, 394-95). But once again in comparison with the developments to be observed in royal military works of the time both in France and in England, there were few novelties to be observed in the duchy, no concentric castles displaying possible eastern influence, no Master James of St-Georges (Taylor 1950), no uniform and massive curtain walls like those of Angers (Mallet 1965), no double urban enceintes on the scale of Carcassonne backing up a powerful urban castle (Heliot 1966). The limited resources both of dukes and seigneurs usually meant a piecemeal adaptation of existing works. At Oudon (Grand 1955) and Chateaubriant (James I968b, 317-20), for example, the early fourteenth century seems to have witnessed important renovations of existing curtain walls, construction of new gateways, including drawbridges which had been slow to diffuse through Brittany, and the provision of additional domestic buildings. Fragmentary accounts show minor works in hand at Vitre during the same period (AIV, i F 1535). Nevertheless the outbreak of civil war in 1341 found the defences of many Breton towns and fortresses in an unprepared state. THE CIVIL WAR AND ITS AFTERMATH Despite the intervention of the kings of England and France on behalf of their respective candidates for the ducal throne vacated by the death of John III, and the fighting of a number of battles, especially La Roche Derrien (1347), Mauron(i352) and

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

35

Auray (1364), the story of the civil war is chiefly that of siege and counter-siege (Jones 1970, ii ff.). Usually the forces involved were small though for the siege of Rennes in !356~57 larger numbers were engaged (Fowler 1969, 160—64). The territorial dispositions and composition of the opposing parties had been quickly determined and suffered few major changes in the course of the war. From the point of view of Edward III, it would appear that once he was satisfied that certain key ports were occupied by Anglo-Breton forces and that this strategic ring would not be broken except by massive French intervention, he was content to allow a series of royal lieutenants and freebooting captains to administer occupied regions in the names of himself and the Montfort family. Even after the capture in 1347 of Charles de Blois, the rival French candidate for the ducal title, little was done to bring the war to a conclusion, and for some years Brittany was the chosen hunting ground for ambitious captains who used their positions to establish personal regimes of tyranny over local inhabitants. In these circumstances, as I have demonstrated elsewhere (Jones 1970, 164-66), the Anglo-Breton administration struggled against difficult conditions, fought the war with inadequate resources and acknowledged some responsibility for the welfare of the subject population. On both sides the administrators sought makeshift remedies to ensure the maintenance of garrisons and the upkeep of fortifications. The amount of surviving work from this period which can be identified is however slight. Towns like Guerande, Vannes, Hennebont, Auray, Concarneau and Quimper, just to mention some of the most important centres on the south-western coastline, still retain curtain walling from the period, although in many instances this has clearly been reinforced or rebuilt at a later stage. Redon (Ille-et-Vilaine) may have received its first full circuit of walls on the instructions of Jean de Treal, abbot of St-Sauveur 6.1350 (Leguay 1978, 129). All these towns were besieged during the war, some on more than one occasion. Charles de Blois in 1344 ordered an impot on certain basic foodstuffs and wine sold in Nantes, the proceeds of which were to be devoted to maintaining its fortifications and garrison. This is the first of a whole series of such measures of which records remain (Privileges, no. iv). In 1278 Philip III had ordered John I not to raise one penny on goods sold in Rennes for the 'amelioration' of the town (Boutaric 1863, no. 2155); now this form of tax, comparable with English murage grants, was to be the principal means of raising money for urban defences in the duchy for the rest of the Middle Ages. Often termed the right of cloison or douaison, as its name suggests the purpose of such a grant was to complete the enclosure of the town. And because of the under-urbanization of medieval Brittany until the mid-fourteenth century, as Leguay (1978, 245 ff.) has admirably demonstrated 'les murailles ont donne naissance aux finances communes qui a leur tour sont a 1'origine de 1'administration municipale'. Indirect taxation could be levied on clothing and other merchandise as well as on basic comestibles and beverages. In the fifteenth century the billot or apetissement, an ad valorem tax usually of onetwentieth restricted to the sale of wines and other drinks, generally conceded for periods of between three and five years at a time, became the main source of funds for ducal and seigneurial towns. Apropos the new enceintes at Rennes, as Leguay (1969, 92) wryly remarks, such extensive defences are a vivid testimony to the drinking capabilities of the duchy's population in this period, where over fifty per cent of

36

The Creation of Brittany

municipal revenues in the fifteenth century came from the billot. Elsewhere the story is much the same; at Nantes on average about 41.5% of municipal revenues came from the billot. At Fougeres, between 1481 and 1483, no less than 75% was derived from this source (Leguay 1978, 516). At Rennes and Nantes it has also been demonstrated that over fifty per cent of such revenues was spent annually on urban fortifications and defence during most of the century (Gregg 1977). At Moncontour (C6tes-du-Nord) between 1449 and 1453 no less than 77.5% of municipal revenues went on military works and over 70% was similarly expended at Vitre in 1480-81. 'Partout ailleurs les gros travaux militaires occupent une place considerable, un gouffre sans fond' (Leguay 1978, 532), and comparison with French towns like Tours and Poitiers suggests that these levels of expenditure in Brittany on defence were above normal royal averages. Leaving aside the particular case of Brest, which was almost uninterruptedly held by an English garrison from 1342 to 1397 and to which considerable attention has already been devoted elsewhere (Jones 1970, 143-71), it is almost impossible in surviving work to distinguish specific English influence either in urban defences or in the many castles which were occupied by English captains. It is probable that the fortifications at Concarneau, which enclose an island some 400 m X 100 m, owe their main shape to work undertaken during the civil war when the town was held by the Anglo-Bretons (Leguay 1978, 142). Excavations have been carried out at La Foret-Landerneau (Finistere), the castle ofjoyeuse-garde of Froissart's celebrated account of the Breton civil war. But the remains appear to date from the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries; the main walls of this rectangular castle are 3.30 m thick, whilst the angle and interval towers have a diameter of 8 m, their walls being 2 m thick. The overall impression is not that of the overwhelming strength literary sources imply (Deserts 1970). The castle of Le Collet (Loire-Atlantique) in the Pays de Rays, an adulterine fort brought into existence by the war, was largely built by the English adventurer Walter Huet in the 13505, but its site is today revealed only by a few mounds in an otherwise flat field (Jones 1970, 18, 49). More substantial remains of towers survive at Derval (LoireAtlantique) in a densely wooded and moated site, a castle once held by Huet's companion, Robert Knolles, but in its present state it is impossible to discern the plan of the castle or to attribute the remains to a particular period of the later Middle Ages. In the fifteenth century it was held by Jean de Malestroit, son of Geoffrey de Malestroit, lord of Combour, a great patron of the arts. He had a grant of billot for the repair of Derval, Chateaugiron and Combour for three years on 28 January 1462 (ALA, B 2, fol. 7V). This was extended for three years on 16 June 1464 and again on 3 November 1467 (ALA, B 3, fol. 78V; B 5, fol. I35 V ). In this case it seems certain later work completely transformed the castle of the civil war period as a late fifteenth-century manuscript illumination shows (BN, MS. fr. 8266 fol. 281); even more spectacularly largely because the curtain walls have been razed to the ground, another castle held once by Robert Knolles at Fougeray (Loire-Atlantique) makes its impression on a modern visitor. But as will be shown below there are grounds for thinking that the surviving donjon is of the late rather than mid fourteenth century (below p. 41). The most fruitful and distinctive period of Breton military architecture dates in fact from after the end of the main phase of the civil war in 1365, especially from the reign of John IV who was very anxious to repair the material ravages of that war and to restore

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

37

ducal prestige as best he could. In this he was imitated by many of his nobles; as far as their castles are concerned, 'ne disposant pas de grands moyens des princes des fleurs de lis, presses aussi par les circonstances, les seigneurs bretons se servent autant qu'ils le peuvent des constructions existantes' (Mussat 1975, 152). In the adaptation of earlier, principally thirteenth-century works, to new conditions in the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (improvements in the effectiveness of traditional artillery, the introduction of gunpowder, etc.) particular attention was often diverted from the curtain walls to works reinforcing angles and other potentially weak spots, gatehouses, for example. Towers, whether free standing, linked in twos and threes or incorporated into enceintes, thus took on an altogether more massive appearance, and the distinctive corbels, consols, machicolations (often taking the form of an inverted pyramid) and crenellations associated with Breton military design were adopted in other parts of France, either through imitation or through the direct employment of Breton masons, stonecutters and architects (below p. 193). Several works built for John IV can be dated within restricted limits — the Tour Solidor, built to provide a home for the small garrison which protected the duke's interests at St-Malo, is first mentioned in 1369 (PRO, £.101/315/35). It took the form of three corner towers linked by short stretches of curtain wall, the whole welded into one restrained but powerful unit. Although its shape was an irregular quadrilateral, a somewhat similar design also seems to have been used for John's castle at Pirmil guarding the southern approaches to the bridge over the Loire at Nantes. Both bridge and castle have been destroyed but from descriptions of the demolition work in the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, it appears that on the north stood an imposing tower (latterly called the Tour-au-duc). This was linked by short curtains, topped by a chemin du ronde, to two smaller towers on the south-west (Tour de la Sevre) and south-east (Tour de 1'Amiral). Between these lay a corps de logis which had in its southern face a gatehouse and drawbridge, whilst alongside the Tour-au-duc there was on the north-western front a water gate to the Loire (Nantes, Bib. mun., MS 1542). It is traditionally asserted, although there is no sound documentary warrant for such an assumption, that John IV ordered his admiral Nicholas Bouchart to build Pirmil in 1365; there was certainly a castle there at the end of the century (Privileges, no. x). The appearance of gun ports in the upper storeys on the landward side at Solidor is one of the earliest indications of the adaptation of Breton castles to this new form of warfare. Cannon were used at the siege of Becherel in 1371 and at several engagements in the 13705 (LaBorderie 1899, 427, 452; Jones 1970, 159). The gunloops at Solidor could thus be contemporary with the earliest work of John IV; at the latest they date from restoration of the castle shortly after his return from exile in England in 1379 when his landfall in the duchy was actually at Solidor. The nearby city of St-Malo had long proved to be a particularly troublesome thorn in the side of dukes of Brittany ever since it declared itself a commune at the beginning of the fourteenth century, and its bishops entertained pretensions to independence (La Borderie 1899, 384-88; 1906, 96-103). For some forty years from the 13708 to 1415 this already notorious haunt of pirates often contained a garrison which acknowledged French allegiance. From 138710 1415 Charles VI intermittently financed it, whilst Pope Clement VII transferred the allegiance of the city to the king of France (Pocquet 19283;

38

The Creation of Brittany

Contamine 1972, 169, 209, 211). John IV and his son were thus forced to interfere continually in the affairs of the town where the bishop was the leading temporal lord. The building of the Tour Solidor was the first stage of a campaign to overawe this opposition. The duke was to build similar towers outside St-Brieuc (Cesson) and Quimper (in the confluence of the rivers Odet and Steir) which were likewise under episcopal domination, though only a crumbling portion of the hexagonal tower at Cesson survives on an inaccessible privately-owned site and there is no trace now of the tower at Quimper (Pocquet 19283, 385-86). After regaining possession of St-Malo in 1415, John V decided that it was necessary to establish a stronghold even closer to the city and by the early 14205 considerable building operations were in hand. Some recent commentators, following La Borderie, have attributed the impressive horseshoe shaped donjon, adjoining the town wall, built after the demolition of a gateway, to this period. There is documentary support for this in an account of the symbolic protest of Guillaume de Montfort, bishop of St-Malo, in 1424 when he came to throw a stone at the newly built defences, and in the naming of Jean Previn as master of works (Buffet 1949, 320), whilst Guillaume Andre 'a present miseur de noz euvres de St Malo' was freed from paying the hearth tax (fouage) on 8 April 1426 (Lettres, no. 1679). But as Grand (1951, 377) points out, many of the stylistic features of this work, especially the superstructure with covered batteries, an observation platform and the advanced design of gun-ports, suggests rather the time of Francis II or even Duchess Anne. At St-Malo, the donjon, constructed it may be conjectured, over a considerable period in the fifteenth century, formed the nucleus of an entirely new castle. About 1395 Charles VI authorized the building of a tower on the urban enceinte that later formed one of the four corners of this fortress. It was to be mainly completed in the reigns of Francis II and Anne by the addition of the remaining corner towers with massive masonry walls some 7 m to 9 m thick characteristic of the late fifteenth century and early sixteenth. In addition, Francis II also much strengthened the urban walls by rebuilding the Grande Porte, with its two enormous flanking towers, and added the bastion-like Tour de la Cloche fronting the sea on the north-west (Buffet 1949, 309; Cornon 19493, 320-23). With characteristic vigour La Borderie countered the opinion, unsubstantiated by documentary proof, that the surviving castle at Dinan was as its common name indicated 'le chateau de la duchesse Anne'. He produced evidence to show that in 1382 John IV had authorized his captain, Patry de Chateaugiron, to clear houses for building operations, and we know the name of the master of works was Etienne le Tur (La Borderie 1894, 146—49; 1906, 109). As a result the appropriately enormous surviving donjon consisting of two interlinked towers some 34 m high and containing four main floors has been generally considered one of the most securely dated works of military architecture in the duchy. Once more, however, as Grand points out, the visual evidence scarcely seems to support such a view. The oblong shape of this work and the decoration of the upper portions with the unparalleled elongated corbels hanging almost like tassels around the tower, suggest a much later date (Grand 1951, 378), although his suggestion has not yet been generally accepted (Leguay 1978, 538). As a counter-argument there could be urged the lack of advanced artillery features in the tower at Dinan in comparison with the donjon at St-Malo. A compromise view might

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

39

thus be that John IV, renowned for the construction of great towers, began work on the donjon at Dinan, which incidentally he called 'our house', meson, rather than castle or tower. This was subsequently completed, perhaps with some modifications to the original design especially on the exterior in the fifteenth century. The general layout of the interior, high standard of fittings and stonework, fireplaces and other features reveal that it was principally built as a pleasant, comfortable residence for the duke (cf. Cornon I949a, 180-81). Although the rest of the town curtain at Dinan, into an indentation of which the castle is set, is not now so impressive as that at St-Malo or Guerande, it must be remembered that the destruction in 1879 of the Porte de Brest has deprived us of a replica of the Grande Porte at St-Malo. The story has a familiar ring: 'un veritable acte de vandalisme: aucune raison valable ne 1'autorisait, seul 1'entetement d'une municipalite inconscient en fut la cause' (Cornon 19493, 174-75). From a nineteenth-century drawing completed shortly before its destruction (now in the museum at the donjon), it is clear that this gate was a late fifteenth-century work, in all probability stemming from orders following visits by the ducal chancellor or marshal to inspect the defences. In 1464, for example, chancery registers show that Guillaume Chauvin visited Dinan in his capacity as chancellor to inspect recent repairs (ALA, B 3, fol. 74r), and an impot was granted to pay for the town's fortifications in December following (fol. I74 r ), whilst more repairs were in hand in August 1468 (ALA, B 6, fol. H5 V ). In 1476 Jean, sire de Rieux, the marshal of Brittany, made a similar tour of Breton defences including those at Dinan (Leguay 1978, 551-52) where it seems several artillery towers on the north side of the town and boulevards before the gates were completed soon afterwards. The sequence of late medieval building at Dinan would thus seem to be one of considerable rebuilding from c. 1382, followed by mid fifteenth-century restoration, together with the continuing vigilance of Francis II and his captains to keep the fortifications in good order and to adapt them to advances in the improvement of artillery. Since the 13908 the duke had his own master of the artillery, fragments of whose accounts survive. These show that he was responsible not only for the building of traditional siege engines, but also for founding cannon (ALA, E 214 and 216). In the fifteenth century investment in these weapons was considerable; between 1418 and 1493 Leguay (1969, 280-97) has traced mention of some 382 cannon bought or made at Rennes. From 1418 to 1440 the numbers remain modest, although a wooden palisade erected to fill a gap in the new enceinte between 1425 and 1427 included gunloops (Leguay 1978, 541). But in 1442-44 alone twenty-eight new pieces were acquired just as the second enceinte was being completed. In 1472 during an emergency, no fewer than thirty-eight cannoneers were in the town's service. Artillery was now being used in every part of the duchy; at Nantes in 1468 there were some 121 pieces, in 1472 159 and in 1487 on the eve of the French siege 292. Brest was another important armoury with 106 cast pieces in 1495 and 92 iron, whilst at this period Dinan, St-Malo and Fougeres were the other chief fortresses well defended by artillery (Leguay 1978, ii5off.). The principles of defence against it are well known. Towers, for example, were reduced in height but increased in diameter. The Tour Melusine built at Fougeres in the late fourteenth century was three times the height of its diameter, two constructed

40

The Creation of Brittany

c. 1480 had proportions of 1:1 (Mussat 1975, 155). Here and at Guingamp (C6tes-duNord), Guerande, Dinan and Nantes, where the castle was rebuilt from 1466, towers were placed more excentrically in relation to the curtains, often taking on that horseshoe or hemi-cyclical shape encountered at St-Malo in the donjon and enceinte in order to command the curtains more effectively. Although the adoption of such advanced work was often slow and very large towers were still being built well into the fifteenth century — that of St-Laurent at Vitre was 45 m high — height gradually diminished and some towers also came to support platforms for artillery to counter enemy batteries. Others, as at Concarneau, were filled to withstand assault (Leguay 1978, 601). At Nantes one such tower is still called the Tour du Fer-a-cheval, and artillery platforms survive at Concarneau, Fougeres, Clisson, Hennebont and Dinan in ducal castles and towns, and at Chateaubriant and Pontivy (Morbihan), the latter reconstructed by Jean II, viscount of Rohan c. 1480-90 (du Halgouet 1921, 98-112). Moinneaux, low little forts or blockhouses attached to urban ramparts make their appearance, for example, between the portail aux Foulons and the Tour Le Bart at Rennes (1467-69). One such structure was some 9 m long, 2.50 m wide and 2.50 m high. It contained nine gunloops, three frontal ones and six lateral ones; similar blockhouses have been discovered at Hede, Dol, Clisson and Nantes (Leguay 1978, 595). By the late fifteenth century, too, boulevards, a forward work protecting gates, and faulces brayes, low exterior enceintes, make their appearance, together with platforms, gunloops and many other features connected with defence against artillery, in the chief strongholds of the duchy in the last years before it was overrun by the French following their victory at St-Aubin-du-Cormier in July 1488. Among experts called in to advise on the most recent methods of fortification were Englishmen, Germans and Flemings (Leguay 1978, 599). The fashion set in the late fourteenth century by John IV in building a series of towers found a response in the work of a number of his seigneurs. In particular members of the Rieux and Malestroit families followed his lead. The key work which is closely dated is the tower at Oudon. In 1392 John IV granted permission to one of his court favourites, Alan de Malestroit, lord of Oudon, to construct a castle (La Borderie 1894, 150-53). The surviving donjon at Oudon, which is free standing from the enceinte, being enclosed within a chemise, is an irregular octagon some 40 m high with walls some 3-4 m thick. Although somewhat restored in the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, features like the windows with their finely carved embrasures and the equally fine decoration of the quadruple corbels and machicolations are nevertheless part of the original design, in which domestic comfort, elegance and seigneurial display were obviously critical considerations for a man who owed a rich marriage and financial assistance to ducal generosity (Grand 1955, compare Mesqui 1977, Coulson 1979). The use of at least four different types of stone in constructing Oudon is notable. The basic material was a local schist, but many of the decorative features are picked out in granite, in a very durable limestone or in a softer tufa from the region of Saumur (Maine-etLoire). Jean de Malestroit, lord of Malestroit, Alan's elder brother, was the owner of the castle of Largoet-en-Elven (Morbihan) at this time and it would seem that it is principally to him that we owe the surviving massive donjon. The family relationship

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

41

between their possessors is closely mirrored in their castles. At Largoet the main feature is the outstanding irregular octagonal tower some 44 m high, measured from the interior court, or 57 m high from the bottom of the moat, with walls up to 9 m thick on the northern, outer, side adjoining the enceinte (Grand i9Ha, 266-91). The principal material used is a light grey granite 'compose de blocs de moyenne grandeur, disposes par lits reguliers et lies par un mortier tres riche en chaux de coquillages, la seule que produise la region' (ibid., 280). Although the lord of Rieux undertook extensive restoration of Largoet at the end of the fifteenth century, when an important series of accounts reveals repairs on the fourth and fifth storeys in the years 1493-96 (AM, E 2709, fols. 35 r ~36 v ), there seems no doubt that the basic features of the donjon, in which a concern above all for solidity rather than decoration has been discerned, date from the previous century. In addition, however, there is one major tower of the late fifteenth century on the north-west, and the original thirteenth-century gate, consisting of two flanking towers, has been modified by the addition of substantial fifteenthcentury work to form a bold square fronted entrance, incorporating a drawbridge. In all likelihood it was Jean, lord of Rieux (d.i4i7), into the hands of whose descendants Largoet was eventually to fall, who built the present Tour du Guesclin at Fougeray (Mussat 1975, 151). This is a round tower, containing five storeys, on the south-west face of which there is attached a staircase tower leading to the fourth storey and to the superstructure in which resemblances with Oudon have been discerned. The walls of the donjon are 5 to 6 m thick and contain a second staircase, whilst on each floor there is 'tout un jeu de couloirs, de salles laterales avec cheminee et de latrines' (Mussat !975» I5l~52)- Nor was this the full extent of Jean's building activities, for after his marriage in 1374 to Jeanne, lady of Rochefort, the couple left their devices on the walls and towers of Ranrouet castle (Loire-Atlantique). These take the form of roundels, the dominant charge on their respective arms (either in the form of a saltire, which has been attributed to Rochefort but is in fact a variant of Rieux, or in a pile (4, 3, 2, i), the traditional arms of Rieux, also seen on fifteenth-century work at Largoet) set into the masonry on the external face of towers. In addition to the donjon at Ranrouet, there is a very powerful barbican gatehouse clearly dating on these heraldic grounds from the late fourteenth or early fifteenth century. There is also some documentary support for this date because in 1420 John V gave Jeanne of Rochefort permission to raise taxes on her various lordships in order to repair her castles including Ranrouet (Mussat 1975, 153). Excavations are currently in progress under the auspices of the Friends of Ranrouet in order that more may be recovered of this fine monument, described in an aveu of 1600 as 'un grand chateau compose de six tours, d'un corps de logis et son donjon, avec dehors et boulevards, d'un bastion avec fosses autour' (Kersansson de Pennendress 1886, 301). Another castle which belonged to this group of families which may have been reconstructed from this period onwards was Combour. With its four round corner towers, an archetypal model, this castle appears from building lines and differences in style of corbels to have been completed in two major campaigns. The rebuilding is usually attributed to Geoffrey de Malestroit-Chateaugiron c. 1420-60. But the lack of artillery features and certain stylistic archaisms suggest that an earlier date cannot be ruled out for the beginning of this work as Mussat hints (1975, 150). Likewise,

42

The Creation of Brittany

whatever doubts there may be over the actual date of the donjon at Chateaugiron (Ille-et-Vilaine), where a thirteenth-century origin appears most probable, there is clearly evidence of rebuilding there in a style similar to that observable at Oudon and Largoet. Both Combour and Chateaugiron may thus be seen as further examples of that widespread movement around the year 1400 when all over the duchy lords were restoring castles and adapting them to more domestic concerns on the return of settled conditions after the ravages of the civil war. Amongst those who devoted considerable resources to this rebuilding and not exclusively for domestic reasons, was Oliver IV, lord of Clisson. In 1370 he acquired Chateau Josselin by exchange with Pierre, count of Alencon, and there is documentary evidence that alterations and improvements were carried out (Grand 19Hb, 303—22). Although now deprived of an enormous thirteenth-century donjon as a result of slighting by Cardinal Richelieu (who also levelled another great donjon at Rieux, besides destroying other Breton castles), nevertheless Josselin still makes a considerable impact today on the visitor to its triangular enceinte set picturesquely above the river Oust on a granitic outcrop. An inventory of the contents on the death of Clisson in 1407 reveals staggering material wealth (Bruel 1905). Clisson also had the castle of Blain (Loire-Atlantique) refortified (Gaden-Pouget 1970) and when in the 14305 a new town gate was required at Rennes men were sent 'pour aller . . . au chasteau de Bleyn pour veoir le portal dudit lieu de Bleyn pour en fere un au patron audit lieu de Rennes en la rue es Foullons' (Leguay 1978, 542, citing Rennes A. mun.). But even more considerable operations may have been carried out at Clisson itself. Unfortunately, despite recent excavations, some serious problems about the dating of fourteenth-century work at Clisson remain. In the thirteenth century the castle was provided with a double round donjon on the south side of a roughly circular enceinte; in the fourteenth century yet another large irregular polygonal donjon was added on the northern side of the enceinte incorporating an earlier gateway. This work has been attributed to Oliver IV of Clisson, and its principal dimensions are 18.40 m X 16.40 m for an overall ground plan orientated on its longer axis south-east to north-west, with one remaining wall standing to a height of 24 m but being only some 3 m thick at the base and 2.50 m at 2 m above ground level. Largely on the style of the machicolations, which are carried on massive simple triple corbels and are said by ErlandeBrandenburg (1968, 280) to be comparable with work that can be approximately dated in other castles, this donjon has been dated to the end of the fourteenth century. It has been argued that the man who was Constable of France from 1380 to 1392 would be hardly satisfied with anything less than the most recent architectural developments. It is also clear from other examples already cited from Brittany and as Emery (1975) has recently shown for England, that the idea of a donjon itself at this time was not as regressive as earlier historians have assumed. But without invalidating either of these two statements it is possible to suggest, as indeed Berthou (1910, 165) did many years ago, that the Constable was not responsible for this donjon. The relative weakness of the walls, for instance, the fact that the corbels are widely spaced out (only nine for the interval between the corner corbels which without being wider than the interval ones serve two sides) and the simple uncrenellated form of the gallery above, all suggest that a late fourteenth-century date for such work would indeed indicate that the Constable

Fig. 3.

Clisson castle in the fifteenth century (after P. de Berthou 1910)

44

The Creation of Brittany

had accepted second best. Rather as Berthou, whose survey of the architectural and historical evidence remains by far the most exhaustive account, demonstrates as convincingly as possible in the absence of definite documentary proof, the donjon is in all likelihood to be dated prior to 1350 and his parallel with the donjon at Chateaubriant may not be misplaced. His verdict was clear: 'On ne reconnait pas 1'ceuvre du grand homme de guerre celebre par ses connaissances en architecture militaire: jamais il n'eut bati des edifices si imparfaits surtout le donjon ou tout porte la marque de la precipitation et de 1'economie et qui s'est ecroule tout seule par vice de construction' (Berthou 1910, 165). Grand (1951, 269) seems to have been persuaded by this view and he comments on the important restorations by Oliver IV's father who was executed by Philip VI in 1343; it is strange that these works seem to find no place in ErlandeBrandenburg's account, and for the moment the matter of dating cannot be considered settled. In the course of the fifteenth century this castle, which controlled vital communications with Nantes and was a key stronghold for the defence of the duchy south of the Loire, as will be shown later, finally fell into ducal hands. For in 1420 it was confiscated from Oliver of Blois, the Constable's grandson, for treason against John V and given to the duke's brother Richard of Etampes. He was father of the future duke Francis II, who on the death of his mother (who had held Clisson as part of her dower) attached Clisson to the ducal demesne briefly before, in 1481, granting it to his natural son, Francis of Avaugour, whose descendants held it until 1746. In the chancery registers of the duchy which start near the beginning of Francis II's reign, hardly a year goes by without reference to repairs, clearance of the moats and other work on the maintenance of Clisson. Extensions are mentioned in 1468, and in 1477 there is an order to complete 'les faulses brayes, tour, boulevart et moenneaux qui sont encommencez a faire environ de la basse court dudit chasteau entre icelui chasteau et la ville' (Erlande-Brandenburg 1968, 285-86). The most notable feature of the late medieval castle at Clisson is, in fact, the enormous new enclosure some 100 m X 50 m added on the western side of the castle (Fig. 3), undoubtedly to provide a protected encampment for ducal soldiers, their horses and other equipment (Berthou 1910, 244; Cintre 1972, 136). The work at Clisson is thus a key to the dukes' policy with regard to the frontiers of Brittany. THE DEFENCE OF THE BRETON FRONTIERS IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY The maintenance of frontiers and perimeter defences, often invoked in a careless and anachronistic fashion with regard to certain periods and regions in the Middle Ages (Mesqui 1977; Fournier 1978, 158-61), was a concept with which John IV would have been familiar because of his contacts with the English. Their policy towards the duchy during the fourteenth-century phase of the Hundred Years' War, as has already been emphasized, was to ensure that castles and ports around Brittany's coastline were in their hands or in those of an ally on whom they could depend. Their concern was based above all on strategic considerations: defence of England itself and of vital lines of communication with Guyenne. Although he was not actually present at the Gloucester parliament of October 1378, John IV was exiled on his English estates. For most of September and October 1378 he was at Castle Rising, Norfolk, and he was frequently in touch with the English government (ALA, £117 and 206/3). Undoubtedly because

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

45

of his interest in Brest castle which he had leased to the English, he would have been familiar with the 'barbican' policy outlined by Richard le Scrope to that parliament (Jones 1970, 9-10, 84). The Chancellor of England argued that the country ought to be protected in the first instance by a line of fortified positions along the coast of northern France which had fallen to the English by various means in the previous thirty years. In the 13805 it seems that the policy was to be stretched to include Ghent in the Low Countries and Bayonne (Pyrenees-Atlantiques) in the far south-west (Palmer 1972, 7f., 44 ff.). In response to these English policies, based on Calais (Pas-de-Calais), Cherbourg (Manche), Brest and holdings in the south-west, Charles V and Charles VI of France created frontier zones in Picardy, Normandy and Guyenne with military commanders given a great deal of freedom in the field and provided with a limited number of permanent troops (Rey 1965, 363-85; Contamine 1972, 135 ff.). In unsettled conditions, especially in the early fifteenth century with a particularly violent outburst of the perennial piracy which affected the western reaches of the Channel and exacerbated Anglo-Breton relations, John V can be found putting his defences in order. In 1404, for instance, the abbe of St-Mathieu de Fineterre (Finistere) was ordered 'd'aller visiter les forteresses de Basse-bretagne et de les faire garnir' (Preuves, 2, 730) and in the following year Olivier Amice was sent to view the 'oeuvres de maconnerie es villes et forteresses de Bretaigne' (Lettres, no. 44). Later, in the 14205, the duke seems to have been trying to develop his own frontier zone along the eastern border to counteract the damage inflicted on the duchy by the marauding of troops engaged in the English occupation of Normandy and Maine. It was at this point that the reconstruction and expansion of the defences of Rennes was undertaken from 1422, chiefly on the initiative of Arthur de Richemont, John V's brother, later to become Constable of France and architect of royal military reforms (Leguay 1969, 133 ff.). Fougeres, which was transformed into one of the most completely fortified ensembles of town and castle in the duchy (Besnard 1912; Gillot 1963) was acquired from the counts of Alencon in 1428 (ALA, E 178, nos. 12, 16-31). Its brief loss to Francois de Suhenne in 1449 (Bossuat 1936, 315-17; Keen & Daniel 1974) led to an enormous campaign of fortification on its recovery (Leguay 1978, 554-55). Works were put in hand at Vitre again from 1428 and at St-Aubin-duCormier in 1435-37 (Cintre 1972, 132), and further ducal initiatives in the marches could be cited as well as important works elsewhere like the defences of Guingamp rebuilt in the 14405 (Leguay 1978, 545). In 1432 John V experimented briefly with the establishment of two guardians or governors of the frontiers of Anjou, Maine and Normandy. Pierre de la Marzeliere and Bertrand du Pouez were appointed over the captains of individual fortresses to co-ordinate defensive measures. They were, for example, to be provided with limited funds from the revenues of certain ducal dues levied in the region, together with income from the right to issue letters of safe-conduct in the same form as the Breton chancery (Lettres, no. 1981). A similar regime of safe-conducts was in operation in the 14805 on the border with Anjou and Poitou (Cintre 1972, 153 f ) . Already at the time of a general revision of the hearth tax lists in 1426—27, commissioners discovered that many frontier districts had been severely damaged and that warfare had accentuated population losses caused by earlier mortalities (Cintre 1972).

Fig. 4. The towns of later medieval Brittany (after Mussat 1975 and Leguay 1978)

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

47

In the succeeding period to the early 1450$, again spasmodically in the 1460$ and 14705 and more continually in the 1480$, these districts were subject to depredation at the hands of rival garrisons. Zones particularly affected by the English garrisons of lower Normandy have been described by Cintre (1972). A swathe of destruction was scythed by invading forces in 1425 who reached Rennes before turning northwards, and another was created in 1431 when a raiding party swept round through Avranches and Pontorson (Manche) to St-Malo. But equally damaging were the activities of French garrisons at Pouance (Maine-et-Loire), Craon, Laval and La Gravelle (all Mayenne) and a number of lesser centres. The abbeys of Mont-St-Michel (Manche), garrisoned by the French, and Savigny (Manche), occupied by the English in 1434 (Lettres, no. 2160), both served with a fine lack of discrimination as centres for raiding the nearby Breton countryside. To make matters worse, the duke's own troops had a bad reputation for discipline. On 19 May 1466, tor instance, Francis II had to appoint a commission to take the muster of troops from his ordonnance companies on their return from France and to inquire into complaints by the civilian population (ALA, B 4, fols.54 v -55 v ). Offenders were to be dismissed summarily. If in the final months of resistance to the French invasion of 1488, Duchess Anne had to issue orders to the garrisons at Chateaugiron and Acigne (Ille-et-Vilaine) not to obtain victuals from the surrounding parishes without reasonable payment and command that at Marcille (Ille-et-Vilaine) parishioners should not be constrained to do excessive watch and ward duties (Cintre 1972, 99-100), such peremptory mandates are by no means novel by this stage (compare de Bourdelles 1919). Although the damage, measured in terms of remissions granted from hearth taxes (fouages), seems to have been particularly severe in the north-east, no frontier zone was spared. An index of the devastation in some areas of Brittany, traditionally thought to have been spared the worst horrors of fifteenth-century warfare in comparison with neighbouring regions, was that here too depopulation was widespread and the only living things to thrive were wolves (Cintre 1972, 107). Even when harvests were reaped on lands reckoned amongst the richest 111 the province, weather conditions were on occasion so atrocious that little ot value could be saved. At an inquiry held at Fougeres in 1438 to determine remissions to the fouage, witnesses from the parishes of Parigne and Montours (Ille-et-Vilaine) testified in dramatic fashion that 'de teil po d'avoine que lesdits subjiz avoient cuilli a 1'aoust derrion ils en ont veu plusieurs de quoy le grain estoit si mauveys que les gens qui en mangeoint pour letir vie soustemr en ont este tres forte malades . . .' (ALA, B 2450, no. 8) and many other graphic details are provided for the inquiry by neighbouring parishes. It was against such a background that the dukes developed their frontier policy, fortifying the border in order to stabilize a decreasing population by offering it the protection of well-walled towns and powerful castles (Figs 4 & 5). In 1425 John V had listed the entrees et yssues of Brittany in an ordonnance regulating the imposition of customs on merchants trading in the duchy. Those towns specifically mentioned were St-Malo, Dol, St-Aubin-du-Cornner, Vitre, Fougeres, La Guerche, Chateaubriant, Vouvantes (Loire-Atlantique, as are all the following towns), La Chapelle Glain, Ancenis, Varades, Nantes, Oudon, Viellevigne, Machecoul, Bourgneuf, St-Nazaire and Guerande (Preuves, 2, 1154). If these can be considered a first line of defence, by the

48

The Creation of Brittany

later fifteenth century they were reinforced in depth by a second one which included Rennes, Dinan, Hede, Montmuran (Ille-et-Vilaine), Montfort, Chateaugiron, Malestroit (Morbihan), Redon and Clisson, at all of which extensive fifteenth-century fortifications had been raised even if few traces of them now survive (Fig. 4). At Redon, for instance, an eighteenth-century plan shows at least 950 m of enceinte, with three gates and thirteen mural towers at intervals of approximately 70 m, built in the typical semi-circular and open-gorged fashion characteristic of much urban defensive architecture in Brittany (Leguay 1978, 566-67). At Dol, where in the fourteenth century John IV had to struggle almost continually with the bishop over their respective rights with regard to the town's fortifications (ibid., 541), the following century saw improvements to the urban defences of two main gates, a postern and thirteen interval towers, most of which were destroyed in the late eighteenth century (ibid., 568—70). Amongst these many towns just cited, a few were especially selected as garrison towns where troops were billeted, ready to rush to threatened sections of the frontier. Those troops withdrawn from France after the War of the Public Weal who were tyrannising the inhabitants of the north-east in 1466 (above p. 183) were to be stationed under their captains at Chateaugiron, where the lord of La Roche had forty lances, Fougeres, another forty lances under the lord of la Hunaudaye, Dol, seventy lances under Geoffrey de Couvran and Olivier de Broon, and Malestroit, fifty lances under the lord of Quelenec. When, on 28 August 1477, Francis II made an order for the repair of defences of'places fortes de nostre pays assises en frontieres' (ALA, B 8, fol. 13 i r ), it was dispatched to the captains of Fougeres, Rennes, Vitre, Chateaubriant, St-Aubindu-Cormier, Dinan, Dol, Ancenis, Redon and Clisson. And of these, Dinan, Dol, Fougeres, St-Aubin and Chateaugiron in the north-east and Nantes, Machecoul (de Berranger 1956) and above all, Clisson, in the south, served as bases for the troops of the permanent lance companies established by the Constable Richemont, Pierre II and Francis II (compare Contamine 1972, 280). It was from Clisson that troops sallied forth to lay waste neighbouring areas of Poitou during the wars between Francis II and Louis XI, and it was to Clisson, with its enormously expanded fortifications, that they returned laden with booty, as a letter from Louis de Belleville to the king ruefully observed in 1473 (BN, MS fr. 8269, fol. 93). The defences of Clisson thus provided a permanent Breton equivalent to the portable champ de bataille with which Louis XI had been experimenting since 1466 (Contamine 1972, 300). In the meantime enormous efforts were simultaneously being made to bring the defences of Nantes up to standard (Fig. i). The main stages of this programme appear to have been the rebuilding of the Porte St-Nicholas from 1444-50 and curtain walls along the Erdre river to the west from 1450-59, reinforcement of towers and completion of boulevards early in Francis II's reign, and from 1477 onwards frenetic activity to rebuild the Porte St-Pierre, water gates to the Erdre, and the Portes Poissonniere (commanding the bridges on the Loire) and Sauvetout (Gregg 1977; Leguay 1978, 549-51). Successful resistance to a powerful French siege force in 1487 is testimony to the effectiveness of these works. In earlier periods the inhabitants of the marcher districts had usually enjoyed a number of privileges, including exemption from regular taxation. John V, for instance, had tried to preserve this when negotiating with Charles VII (Nantes, Bib. mun., MS

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

49

Dugast-Matifeux 223). But as the Hundred Years' War drew to a conclusion and relations between Brittany and France moved into a critical phase before the absorption of the duchy by Charles VIII, the French kings levied taxes on the marches and the dukes of Brittany followed suit, as a result of which the inhabitants often had to pay doubly as their respective suzerains shared the profits. But the ambiguous status of these areas, conflicting jurisdictions and so on, made ruling them difficult. In 1465 Louis XI, at the end of the War of the Public Weal, conceded full responsibility for them to Francis II. Cintre (1972, 128-29) is probably justified in seeing this move as a typical piece of that king's shrewdness, for all recent history showed that the exercise of authority whether by Breton duke, Poitevin count or French king, met with the same stubborn resistance from local seigneurs and a recalcitrant populace. The inevitable disputes which would arise could provide the king's officials with many suitable excuses for intervention in the case of ducal default; it was a technique used in relations with other powerful royal vassals like the dukes of Bourbon at this time (Bossuat 1957). It was just one more item that the duke and his advisers had to contend with in preserving their frontiers, for whilst threats from the sea led to a continuing need to maintain port defences, especially along the south-western coastline (Pocquet 1929, 52-53), the principal ducal resources were committed to the maintenance of the land and river boundaries which separated the duchy from royal France. CONTROLS OVER NOBLE BUILDING IN THE LATER MIDDLE AGES In the course of their efforts to maintain the political independence they enjoyed both as a result of the weakness of the French monarchy from the mid-fourteenth century, and their own deliberate, pragmatic policies, the dukes of Brittany became increasingly concerned in directing the efforts of their nobility. Not as powerful as some feudal princes like the dukes of Normandy or counts of Bigorre (Grand 1951, 259), who as early as the eleventh and twelfth centuries were claiming the right to licence the building of new castles, especially where stone structures were replacing wooden ones, from the thirteenth century the dukes of Brittany had sought to exercise such a prerogative. In a recent interesting discussion of licences to crenellate, Coulson (1979) seeks to emphasize the formal and symbolic nature of the control exercised by kings and lords in both England and France. Much of what he says about the essential indefensibility of many works built following such licences to crenellate remains valid and the spurious detail of their formulae may, even in some Breton examples, be established. But as the following discussion seeks to show, at least in the case of Brittany it would appear that he is in danger of underestimating the very real political significance of the exercise of licensing rights by the duke. His actions and those of his agents reveals that they did not consider the matter one of simple symbolic importance. Initially this action provoked opposition (above p. 32), yet intermittently, and more regularly from after the end of the civil war in 1365, the dukes licensed and controlled the character of new works when they could. In 1371, for instance, ducal officers had been attacked whilst supervising the demolition of recent unauthorized fortifications at Dol (ALA, E 183, no. 12), whilst in 1383 Prigent de Trelever, the duke's maitre d'hotel and keeper of the barony of Rays which had been taken into ducal hands, was ordered to go to La Benaste (Loire-Atlantique) to prevent Marguerite de

Fig. 5.

The castles of later medieval Brittany (after Mussat 1975 and Leguay 1978)

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

51

Machecoul from fortifying her castle in defiance of ducal authority (ALA, E 126, no. 9), and many similar examples could be cited. In addition, from the late fourteenth century John IV and his successors restricted the ability of their lords to levy tallies at will on their own men without his permission and at the same time established their own right to demand fouages, aides and other impots which provided them with enormously greater resources (Jones 1972-74, 27-53). It is true that, like the kings of France, dukes of Brittany in this period found it politic to concede to leading seigneurs a share of the fouages raised on their lands, but this was a matter for negotiation and seigneurs could not anticipate a regular income from this source (Lettres, no. 573; Preuves, 2, 1385). A nice combination of the duke's newly found authority to control building and aid seigneurs is seen in the case of Tonquedec (C6tes-du-Nord). After the civil disturbances of 1393-94 John IV ordered the demolition of this castle (Preuves, 2, 649). But on 22 November 1406 Roland, viscount of Coetmen, acknowledged receipt of 3000 livres for reparation (ALA, E 209, no. 12) and shortly afterwards raised a new castle incorporating a free standing donjon, connected to the main rectangular enceinte by a double drawbridge from which entry to the donjon was gained at the level of the second storey (La Barre de Nanteuil 1911). Strict supervision of grants of billot in the fifteenth century allowed the ducal administration a further measure of central control. Usually proceeds had to be used for the fortification of seigneurial towns; more exceptionally it was granted for specific castles with detailed conditions relating to its expenditure and accounting. Finally, the freedom of lords to demand watch and ward services from their men and to call upon them for corvees relating to the maintenance of castles was closely supervised by ducal officials. Even such a great lord as Guy XIV of Laval had in 1467 to seek permission to constrain his subjects of low estate (i.e. roturiers) in the castellany of Chateaubriant to make a moat at the castle, notwithstanding any opposition, together with similar rights at Vitre, for the moats, ditches and 'a lever dun belouart que led. conte yfaitfaire (ALA, B 5, fol. I39 V ). Although even careful ducal supervision was unable to prevent the occasional violence of peasantry constrained to extra duties, as when in 1464 some 500 or 600 peasants in the castellany of Donges rose up against the lord of Rieux's officials demanding watch services (ALA, B 3, fol. 46). As a single illustration of the far-reaching importance of ducal control entries on the Chancery register for 1462, a year of no particular military significance, may be cited (ALA, B 2). Among those towns and castles benefiting from grants of billot which were conceded or renewed in that year were Guerande, Le Croisic (Loire-Atlantique), Hennebont, Guingamp, Ancenis, and a number of towns in Finistere — Quimper, Concarneau, Lanmeur, Morlaix, Pont-1'Abbe — and Rostrenen (C6tes-du-Nord). In addition grants were made to certain leading lords of the right to raise similar taxes for the repair of castles at Derval, Chateaugiron, Combour, Montfort, Gael, Comper (Ille-et-Vilaine), Tremazan, Josselin and Coetfrec (C6tes-du-Nord) (La Barre de Nanteuil 1912). Furthermore the register gives additional evidence for continuing ducal works at Rennes, Brest, Fougeres, St-Aubin-du-Cormier, Jugon (C6tes-duNord) and Moncontour, to cite only major sites. Succeeding registers testify just as fully to this feverish building activity in the duchy later during the reign of Francis II. This is explicable in terms of the worsening relations of the duke and the king of France,

52

The Creation of Brittany

but it should also be remembered that scattered references to the grant of billot before it can be more systematically traced in the registers reveals that this building activity was not novel c. 1460 (C. Morbihan, nos 703, 709, 719). In the interior of the duchy during the course of the Middle Ages a number of powerful territorial complexes were built up: Penthievre in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, and again in the fourteenth; Rohan established in the twelfth and maintained into the sixteenth century and beyond; the barony of Vitre on the eastern border, with its powerful links with Laval; the estates of interlinked families like the Chateaubriant, Clisson, Montfort, Rieux and Malestroit. In La Borderie's view, 'Vitre avait pour mission speciale de tenir en bride Laval, seigneurie immense dressee comme une menace par les comtes du Maine sur la frontiere de Bretagne' (1899, 58-59). In fact Vitre appears to have emerged as a castellany before Laval and even before their union in the mid-thirteenth century the two families were inextricably and amicably bound up in each other's affairs (C. Laval, passim). But on occasion these territorial units threatened the political balance of the duchy at large, as when Oliver IV of Clisson in the late fourteenth century, even without the aid of his son-in-law, Jean de Bretagne, count of Penthievre, held a dominant position running across Brittany from Moncontour to Josselin, Blain and Clisson (Lefranc 1898, 273-75). At one point it seemed that he was about to turn this into an enclave within the duchy for in 1399 during the hearing of a case between John IV and his opponents, the lords of Clisson, Rohan and Penthievre, in the Parlement of Paris, the ducal proctor argued that the former Constable of France 'a fait de nouvel une chambre quil dit la chambre de Clisson ou il fait ses sujets ressortir et combien que le due ait fait crier que les quets cessent et que nul ne paye que les anciens Clisson a fait crier le contraire' (BN, MS fr. 16654, fol. I90r). When Clisson's daughter married Jean de Bretagne in 13 8 8 and war broke out against John IV, it appeared that all the old rivalries of the recent civil wars, temporarily concluded by the two treaties of Guerande (1365 and 1381), were to be resurrected (Jones 1972). The years 1393—94 saw a whole series of sieges and marches by opposing forces (Lefranc 1898, 377 ff.). As late as 1417-19 the duke was powerless to prevent a major reconstruction of the Penthievre stronghold of Lamballe and the feuds continued grumbling on until 1420. In that year, hoping to achieve a decisive advantage, the Blois-Clisson faction captured John V and held him in close captivity for some weeks before losing their nerve and releasing the duke unharmed. Once at liberty he took a savage revenge, dispossessing the remaining members of the Penthievre family, distributing their lands to a host of supporters and destroying many of their fortifications, including those at Lamballe where c. 1500 m of curtain walls with six gates surrounding the triangular enceinte were demolished under the supervision of the master of works from the nearby castle of la Hunaudaye (Anc. Ev., 6, no. cxcvii; Preuves, 2, 1031). It was the same story at Guingamp, Broons and Moncontour (Leguay 1978, 545-46). In carrying out this draconian punishment, John V, far from showing the magnanimity attributed to him by La Borderie (1906, 196-214), decisively altered the whole political balance of the duchy; for he rewarded not only a number of families who had originally supported Blois in the civil war but also other more substantially entrenched traditional Montfortist supporters to whom were added many of the rising figures at the ducal court, administrators, military captains and minor

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

53

nobles (Lettres, nos. 1403-10, 1413-14, 1417, 1420, 1422, 1425-26, etc.). By this means he created a lobby of men who could not readily afford to countenance the return of the exiled Blois family, who were thus left forlornly negotiating a settlement of their claims, which were finally bought out by Louis XI and his successors (La Borderie 1906, 346—48, 495-97). At the same time the dukes redoubled their efforts to encourage the right kind of building by their seigneurs. By the 14505 when castles like La Cheze (Morbihan) and Josselin, which had been key strongholds in the later fourteenthcentury troubles, were found to be dilapidated it was the duke Pierre II who encouraged Alan IX of Rohan to refurbish them (Grand 1951, 372; compare du Halgouet 1921, 98 ff.). As an example of the lesser lords benefitting from such ducal encouragement, we may take the lords of Kerouzere (Finistere). In 1385 a Jean de Kaerouzere appears as seneschal of Morlaix (BN, MS fr. 11531, p. 375). In all probability he was the father of Eon de Kerouzere, seneschal of Broerec from 1405, subsequently president of Brittany and a close counsellor of John V (Lettres, nos 155, 575, 1413, etc.). Eon, in turn, was the father of another Jean, echanson in 1416, councillor of the duke and entitled noble homme in 1426. In 1435 this Jean, now styled first echanson, was granted three annual fairs in his lordships (Lettres, nos 1207, 1228, 1426, 1457, 1716, 2204). Under Francis I (1442-50) he was to become a ducal chamberlain and his lands were promoted to higher judicial status by the addition of a third post to his justice patibulaire (AIV, 2 Er 269). At about the same time Kerouzere was engaged in various financial dealings with Pierre, count of Guingamp, the duke's brother, selling him a rent for fifty livres on the confiscated Penthievre lands (ALA, £163, no. 19; ACN, E 1067). A few years later, now as duke, Pierre granted Kerouzere permission to build a tower on i December 1453 (AIV, 2 Er 269). As the ducal mandate explained, Kerouzere's manor house was close to the sea in an exposed and dangerous position, especially for English raids, so he was to be allowed to raise a tower some twenty-four 'feet' (pieds) wide 'ornee de creneaux, doulve, un fausse braye avec une bariere ou belvir devant, et selon la meilleure forme et devis que il scaurra adviser'. If he could not complete it in his own lifetime, his successors were to be allowed to do so. The building of Kerouzere gave rise to a dispute with the lord of Kermorvan which as late as 1466 prevented its completion (ALA, B 4, fol. 66r); finally in 1468 further permission was granted to the lord of Kerouzere 'de faire clorre, douver et fossaier sa maison de Kerouzere pour seurte dicelle en telle maniere et dedans tel temps qui bon lui semblera' (ALA, B 6, fol. 7"). As a result the family began to raise a very substantial fortified residence; on the northern side facing across salt-marshes to the sea there are two sturdy round towers flanking the main corps de logis. The southern front is manifestly incomplete but has to the south-western corner the remains of a rectangular (almost square) tower standing to the height of three storeys, with few windows at lower levels, and a set of latrines at the level of the parapet of the upper floor, which isjettied out on the western side on typical Breton corbels and consols. This could well be the core of the building as licensed in 1453. Despite suffering severe damage in a siege in 1590-91 (Wacquet 1960, 70) Kerouzere still presents a formidable aspect, the bold assertion of prestige, wealth and status that came from close association with the ducal family and the prosecution of its policies in the fifteenth century. It is

54

The Creation of Brittany

unfortunate that chancery enrolments of such licences to crenellate, which survive in large numbers in English sources from the late twelfth century (Williams 1974-75; Coulson 1979), do not occur until 0.1462 in Brittany, and that we are dependent on chance survival of a few original letters for the dating of a handful of castles and a close appreciation of the effectiveness of ducal control. Nor do we possess for Brittany a useful list of building contracts, like that compiled from English sources (Salzman 1967, 413-584), which outside towns and castles in ducal hands (whose accounts survive more fully) are extremely rare. A full account of ducal relations with their nobility in the fifteenth century cannot be given here. In many respects John V and his successors were to show themselves true heirs of thirteenth-century dukes; the main change was that the nobility willingly or otherwise now acquiesced in this ducal leadership. The reasons for this change were varied. War weariness as a result of civil disturbances in the fourteenth century may be one. Another was the increasing disparity between noble pretensions and noble financial resources which meant that, for their part, seigneurs were anxious to receive all the support they could from the dukes for the renovation of their castles and towns. Defensive purposes were not entirely neglected as the provision of imposing gatehouses or chatelets at Montmuran (James 19683, 289-303), Montauban (Ille-et-Vilaine) and Vitre show. But increasingly as the century wore on efforts to adorn and to make more comfortable these ancient fortresses became a predominating concern (Mussat J 975)- Yet even here ducal interference was not unknown. In 1467 an order was issued to the seneschal of Guingamp to forbid Jean, viscount of Coetmen, and his men from chopping down trees in the wood near Tonquedec, 'qui a fait a la decoracion et beaute diceluy (chasteau)' (ALA, B 5, fol. 52 V ). Thus in a remote corner of the Tregorrois, distant from the normal residences of the dukes, a family whose members had not infrequently in previous generations displayed a surly disregard for ducal authority (above p. 187), were once again muzzled and brought to heel by the Montfort dukes. Their reward was promotion to the rank of baron in 1487 (Preuves, 3, 551-53) and the continuing survival of their castle, once again hidden today in the woods of a precipitous little valley. A few politically ambitious lords, Jean II, viscount of Rohan, and Jean II, lord of Rieux, chief amongst them in the late fifteenth century, tried to keep their castles in a defensible state. Both suffered heavily during the Franco-Breton war of 1487-91 and both required heavy subsidies from their lords. On 23 December 1491 Charles VIII granted Rohan permission to rebuild seven castles severely damaged in the recent wars (BN, MS fr. 8269, fol. 361). A year previous Duchess Anne had granted Rieux 100,000 ecus for various losses including the destruction of Ancenis, Rieux, Rochefort and Largoet-en-Elven (Preuves, 3, 674-75), and his efforts to repair Largoet in the 14905 have already been discussed (above p. 177). But the majority of great nobles now accepted royal or ducal pensions and spent their income domesticating their residences. The incorporation of Brittany into France in 1491 was to allow this tendency full rein, having removed strategic considerations for the maintenance of expensive fortifications. In the late 14905 and early sixteenth century the Rohans raised the show fronts of Josselin and Blain, rivalling their cousin, Pierre de Rohan, lord of Gie, with his extravagant building operations at Mortiercrolles, Le Verger (both Maine-et-Loire),

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

55

and La Motte-Glain (Loire-Atlantique), where some of the earliest influence of Italian Renaissance architecture can be discerned on French styles (Demouveaux 1968, 221-30). Gie denied, when accused of raising fortifications, that he built with defence in mind although he admitted his castles were very sumptuous (Mussat 1975, 157-58; compare Coulson 1979). The fashion the Rohans set were copied by other nobles, especially those like Christophe de Goulaine who frequented the royal court after the marriages of Anne to Charles VIII and Louis XII. Already Francis II and Anne at Nantes had begun to imitate royal practice and to employ materials both equally drawn from the Loire valley where royal influence was paramount (Melot 1968, 231-40). With this development that paradox which is a constant feature of Breton medieval history — simultaneous attraction to royal France with its rich cultural and political traditions and the intense desire on the part of the duchy's rulers to avoid incorporation in the realm (Jones 1976, 144-68) — was resolved to all intents and purposes. The frontier that had been a reality for much of the later Middle Ages was swept away, and though indigenous traditions continued to influence every aspect of early modern Breton society, it seems an appropriate point to conclude this survey with the return of the kings of France to Rennes and Nantes effectively for the first time since the Carolingian period. The deceptive ease of the final French victory has always been attributed to the overwhelming effectiveness and superiority of royal artillery (Contamine 1964, 221-61), with the implication that Brittany's defences were largely powerless and outdated (Grand 1951, 381). The recent survey by Leguay (1978, 538—608) confirms the poor state of many castles and urban enceintes where even the sites of old gates could not be easily distinguished by ducal commissioners. The walls of Lamballe and Becherel had been destroyed; the curtains of Quimperle and St-Pol-de-Leon (Finistere) were recognized to be of little value and even at Rennes in 1460, despite enormous expenditure, a very pessimistic view was taken of the ability of the town to withstand a siege, whilst contemporaries also commented on the weaknesses of Dol, Chateaubriant and Redon. Some castles had been allowed to fall into ruin because they were of little strategic value like Landerneau and Chateaulin (Finistere). Numerous seigneurial strongholds were in a similar dilapidated state. At many other sites work of renovation was still proceeding when the duchy lost its political independence. But this should not obscure the fact that there were a number of great key centres like Fougeres, Vitre, La Guerche, Ancenis, Nantes and Clisson which contained the most recent advances in military architecture and in fact royal engineers after 1491 had a high opinion of much Breton work. Charles VIII himself called St-Malo 'le plus beau port de mer qui soit en nostre royaume' (Leguay 1978, 800) and it, together with Fougeres, St-Aubin-duCormier and Dinan, was immediately seized to guarantee the Franco—Breton peace of 1488 (Preuves, 3, 598-602). It was in general those castles which had only been partially modified to take account of recent developments that were destroyed. At Chateaubriant, Louis de la Tremoille informed Charles VIII the battery had been so effective that it was no longer possible to guard the castle. The king thus ordered its total destruction only to discover that the work could not easily be done (James I968b, 306), and even today considerable portions of the medieval walls of the double enceinte still survive. At Ancenis Charles again ordered la Tremoille 'faictes abreger d'abatre ceste

56

The Creation of Brittany

place le plus tost que faire ce pourra et faictes gecter dedans les fossez les pierres et les terres quilz sont dedans le chasteau et non pas de celles du dehors' (James I968b, 306). According to the chronicler Jaligny the castle was levelled to the ground, with the royal troops warming to their task after the distribution of goods found in the castle. Yet here again two enormous drum towers flanking a gateway, very similar in style to the Grande Porte at St-Malo, still survive. In the main it was the castles of the interior which were dismantled; the kings of France had a keen appreciation of the coastal defences they inherited from the dukes and they continued to spend extensively especially on Brest and St-Malo (ALA, E 215). If further proof is necessary of the intrinsic and continuing military worth of Breton late medieval defences it is in their subsequent adaptation and augmentation not only in the time of Louis XIV and his great military architect, Vauban, but also in the fact that the headquarters of the French nuclear fleet is concealed in the medieval castle of Brest and the Archives de la Marine have been deposited in the thirteenth-century donjon there. RETROSPECT To the knowledge of the defences of Breton princes and counts in the Carolingian period and their inheritance from the Gallo-Romans, a little has been added recently to the survey to be found in La Borderie's Histoire de Bretagne, and it can be confidently asserted that medieval archaeology, which is only just seriously beginning in Brittany, will make much more significant additions to the evidence about material remains in the next few years. Urban studies, especially the many heavily documented contributions of Jean-Pierre Leguay, together with evidence fortuitously turned up by Second World War bombing and the enormous contemporary urbanization of centres like Rennes and Nantes, have brought into prominence the chronology of an urban growth which differs from that of regions economically more precocious and active than Brittany in the Middle Ages. In the particular matter of town walls, Leguay, and to a lesser degree Le Mene, Gregg (1977) and others at Nantes, have described not only the various campaigns of construction but also the financial mechanism which facilitated their building. It is possible now to follow in enormous detail the creation of the three successive enceintes at Rennes, or to trace the circuit at Vannes. Whilst careful correlation of information in the chancery registers allows a more exact picture of similar activities at other towns to emerge. As Leguay emphasizes so insistently throughout his work, Brittany is fundamentally a province of small towns and the conscious investment of such a large proportion of the duchy's wealth in military works has wider implications, reflected for example in the small scale of most commercial ventures (Touchard 1967). It is a nice point whether the overwhelming sacrifice of other forms of investment to military ends is offset by the development of more advanced municipal institutions to meet ducal financial demands in the later Middle Ages. With regard to castles, whether they are the primitive mottes of the earliest feudal times, or elaborate buildings constructed in a confusing series of campaigns, forming a part of a larger urban enceinte, standing alone out in the depth of the Breton countryside or on an isolated promontory like the Fort de la Latte (La Roche Guyon, C6tes-du-Nord), there has been an enormous increment of recent knowledge as the

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

57

result of careful study of visual remains, archaeological excavation and documentary studies. More, obviously, remains to be done: the question of earlier castles beneath the surface of ostensibly later medieval ones, the dating of the transformation from wooden to stone keeps, the connection between such fortified sites and even more remote periods of history remains a desideratum at many places. Here archaeologists appear to be making a decisive impact. But the origins of many castellan families need to be critically re-examined in the light of similar studies elsewhere. It would appear that a satisfactory synthesis of many major developments could now be given even if specific examples require careful scrutiny. Here particular emphasis has been placed on the role of the dukes in controlling and directing building operations from the thirteenth century onwards as part of a more general defence of an independent Brittany, whose frontier fortifications were part of the external manifestation of a movement which had an increasingly political and ideological basis. This in turn is now being discussed in terms which seek to avoid the chauvinistic excesses which mar La Borderie's immense work (Jones 1976). With means which were frequently circumscribed, Breton architects nevertheless contributed distinctively to the design of later medieval castles. Quarrymen and stone cutters from Lamballe, Moncontour and neighbouring towns were to be found practising their crafts not only in the duchy but also more widely; Breton influence, for instance, has been detected at the castle of Bonaguil (Lot) in the Agenais (Grand 1952, 41), and in the nearby Pont-Valentre at Cahors (Leguay 1978, 582). Perhaps somewhat conservative and slow to accept major innovations, in artillery for example, nevertheless the technical quality of the best Breton masonry work in the later Middle Ages was very high, with regular courses, well-shaped blocks and plenty of attention to problems like the evacuation of water and siting of openings to avoid weakening the walls. The durability of many of the materials available to local builders, especially the schists and granites of the peninsula, was clearly another advantage, although on occasion local sandstones and softer sedimentary rocks from around Rennes and the Loire basin were substituted. In addition, geographical as well as geological features were obviously accommodating, and the siting of castles skilfully exploited the terrain. The coast of Brittany, for example, was ringed in the later Middle Ages with a line of port defences which has few parallels, to which were added a number of important seigneurial castles, a fact already appreciated by Edward III in the fourteenth century and quickly seized upon by the kings of France after the annexation of the duchy in 1487-91. This protective carapace was the deliberate creation of a determined line of dukes and its effectiveness should not be underestimated although there were clearly gaps in it as there were on the eastern frontier towards Anjou (Leguay 1978, 607-08). It was above all the increasing costs of warfare with, among other things, the introduction of sophisticated defences against more efficient weaponry, which clearly limited the number of seigneurs who could hope to keep abreast of technical developments without substantial ducal aid. When combustible artillery was introduced, a number of seigneurial castles like Frinaudour (C6tes-du-Nord) owned by the lords of Montfort c. 1400 possessed small cannon (Anc. Ev., 6, 235-40; AIV, i F 1544). In the course of the next century many places were adapted to take some account of this development. But it was the ducal artillery train with its supporting services which

58

The Creation of Brittany

expanded on a large scale just as it was in ducal castles that the most advanced architectural adaptations occurred. Mussat (1975, 164) notes, for instance, that in comparison with earlier ducal gunloops those to be found at Pontivy, Corlay (Morbihan) and Blain in the late fifteenth century after Rohan's rebuilding were unimpressive. Thus although some lords entertained pretensions to rivalry with the ducal house, in the final analysis they lacked resources, just as in 1487-91 the duchy at large faced by overwhelming French royal strength could not resist effectively for long. Roger Grand discerned a movement from c. 1450 in which 'la Bretagne entreprend . . . la plus vaste refection et la plus complete mise au point de son appareil defensif' contrary to general developments in most other regions of France (Grand 1951, 374). In his immensely detailed recent survey Leguay (1978, 546) suggests that it is from c. 1430 that the predominating concern with urban military works begins to reveal itself in the records, especially with adaptations to meet the challenge of cannon. In fact, as this survey seeks to demonstrate, it is difficult to distinguish periods from c. 1340 onwards when the reconstruction of Breton military installations was not a prime concern of the dukes and their leading lords. When defeat came in the late fifteenth century, some blame can no doubt be attributed to the inferior quality of some of the defences raised or artillery used by the dukes; in quantity Breton resources were clearly inferior. But a major reason for the duchy's overthrow lies rather with the nobility whose divisions had fatally weakened it and left it a prey to a monarchy now in the ascendant. Politics, the nice calculation of the opportune moment to change sides, when to abandon principles and accept a fait accompli, to gauge when further resistance might prove not only futile but fatal, these were often the thoughts of those engaged upon a last defence of Breton independence at the sieges of Guingamp, Rennes, Clisson, Nantes and elsewhere. When Francis of Avaugour, the duke's natural son, made his peace with the French in 1487, it was not simply royal artillery before Clisson (pace Erlande—Brandeburg 1968, 288) which persuaded him to do so but because he had already been seduced by a royal pension of 6000 livres tournois (AN, KK 79) which was appropriately reduced in 1489—90 when it had served its purpose. At St-Aubin-du-Cormier it was the lamentable state of the defences, alleged Guillaume de Rosnyvinen, that persuaded him to capitulate but ducal councillors suspected similar bribery (Preuves, 3, 558-63). Now as in the fifteenth century Bretons love Duchess Anne. Had her first husband, Maximilian, king of the Romans, succeeded in providing her with troops and supplies on a regal scale, it is just possible that Brittany would have survived for a little while longer (La Borderie 1906, 573-74). But when the duchess agreed to marry Charles VIII, French military victories were consummated and the claims to independence became one of the province's most cherished myths. The immense investment of its Montfort dukes in fortified towns and castles fringing its frontiers was now an inheritance of the French kings. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am especially grateful to Messieurs Hubert Guillotel, Jean-Pierre Leguay, Rene Sanquer and Gildas Durand for their kindness and co-operation in sending me offprints, xerox copies and other material needed for this paper. Additionally Messieurs Guillotel and Leguay gave me

The Defence of Medieval Brittany

59

permission to use their unpublished theses, whilst through the kind offices of Monsieur Xavier du Boisrouvray, director of the Archives departementales de la Loire-Atlantique, Nantes, I was also able to consult a number of other unpublished diplomes. At Renncs the staff of the Archives departementales d'llle-et-Vilaine, under their director Monsieur Jacques Charpy, have been extremely co-operative, as have those at the Archives departementales du Morbihan, Vannes, presided over until recently by Madamoiselle Francoise Mosser. Professor Alan Rogers kindly read and made valuable criticisms of an earlier draft, as did Dr Philip Dixon, who also arranged for the figures to be drawn by Sheila Knight. Finally, grants from the Wolfson Foundation and the Leverhulme Trust for a study of the Breton nobility in the Middle Ages has enabled me to consult much of the manuscript material cited and to visit most of the sites mentioned in the paper. BIBLIOGRAPHY GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Amongst the published documentary sources there will be noted a number of cartularies. Those relating to Fougeres, Laval and Morbihan are cartularies artificially made up from disparate sources by their modern editors. The cartularies of Rays, Redon, Ste-Croix-de-Quimperle and St-Georges-de-Rennes survive in the original. The oldest of these, the cartulary of St-Sauveur-de-Redon, now at the archives of the archbishopric of Rennes, presents particular problems to its users. It is essentially a manuscript of the mid-eleventh century containing transcripts of some 283 charters and notices for the period c. 800-924, to which further charters have been added at periods up to the mid-twelfth century. In its present form it contains 144 folios, but it is known from eighteenth-century transcripts and other sources that at least fifty folios have been lost. It has generally been considered that the copies of charters dating from the Carolingian period are of authentic originals, an assumption on which the most recent serious study of these texts is based (Tonnerre ipyyb). But those charters relating to the eleventh and twelfth centuries present enormous problems for modern authorities for it is clear that during the compilation of the cartulary many texts were revised or edited, even if they were not invented de novo. Guillotel (19713) has devoted an appendix specifically to this subject of forged charters both in the Redon cartulary and in that of Ste-Croix-de-Quimperle. His meticulous study reveals the need for extreme caution in using any material from the cartulary of Redon for this later period without other independent corroboration. When such evidence is cited in this paper, I have endeavoured to indicate the extent of its reliability. To a lesser degree, the Chronique de Nantes (Merlet 1896), allegedly compiled c. 1060, also seems to present similar problems since besides genuinely early material some passages are clearly derived from documents of a later period (Guillotel I97yb, 64—66). A new critical edition is a major desideratum. Rene Sanquer, in addition to his general article on mottes in Finistere (1977) has provided many more specific details on recent archaeological work in his annual survey for the Bulletin de la societe archeologique du Finistere since 1966. Further reference to these is not made here. Nor is specific reference in the text made to an extremely valuable nineteenth-century work which provides engravings of many sites mentioned above. Because of destruction or subsequent development, this visual evidence is recommended especially for the appearance of individual sites and buildings: J. Taylor, Ch. Nodier and Alphons de Cailleux, Voyages pittoresques et rustiques dans I'ancienne France, Bretagne. 2 vols., Paris: Firmm-Didot 1845—46 (new impression announced). Certain sections of this paper would have benefited from the valuable reports prepared for an important conference held at Caen in October 1980, together with notes of the discussions on that occasion, which were published when this paper was already in proof: Les fortifications de

60

The Creation of Brittany

terre en Europe occidentale du Xe au Xlle siecle (Colloque de Caen, 2-5 octobre 1980), Archeologie Medievale, II (1981), 5-123, though it should again be noted that Breton examples have been almost completely ignored, a strange omission in view of the work by Sanquer and others cited in the following bibliography.

UNPUBLISHED DOCUMENTARY SOURCES ACN AIV

ALA

AM AN BN

Archives departementales des C6tes-du-Nord, St-Brieuc £1067: letters of Jean, lord of Kerouzere, 16 January H45 Archives departementales d'llle-et-Vilaine, Rennes i F 1535: accounts of the lordship ofVitre, 1310-84 1 F 1544: inventory of Frinaudour castle, c. 1400 2 Er 269: letters of Francis I, 28 August 1445, and Pierre II, i December 1453 for Jean, lord of Kerouzere Archives departementales de la Loire-Atlantique, Nantes 62-13: Chancery registers, 1462-91 62450: inquiry at Fougeres, 1438 E 126, no. 9: contemporary copy of letters of John IV, 18 April 1383 £117: Ducal household accounts, 1378 E 163, no. 19: letters of Jean, lord of Kerouzere, 2 January H45 E 178: letters concerning the acquisition of Fougeres, 1428" £183, no. 12: letters of Geoffrey le Voyer, 4 December 1371 £209, no. 12: letters of Holland, viscount of Coetmen, 22 November 1406 E 214-216: Accounts relating to the master of artillery Archives departementales du Morbihan, Vannes E 2709: Accounts of Francois de Locquemenen, receiver of Largoet-en-Elven, 1493-96 Archives Nationales, Paris KK 79: Accounts of Olivier Barrault, for pensions paid to Bretons by Charles VIII, 1485-91 Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris MS francais 8266: Pierre le Baud, Histoire de Bretagne, c. 1480 8269: Original documents and copies concerning the Rohan family MS 11531: Seventeenth-century extracts from fourteenth and fifteenth-century ducal accounts (now lost) MS 16654, fols 174-211: Seventeenth-century extracts from the case of John IV against the count of Penthevre and the lords of Clisson and Rohan, 1399

The Defence of Médiéval Brittany Nantes, Bib. mun.

PRO Rennes, A. mun.

61

Nantes, Bibliothèque municipale Ch. Bougouin, La forteresse de Pirmil, essay MS 1542: awarded a bronze medal by thé Société Académique de Nantes, 26 November 1864 MS DugastMatifeux 223: original documents relatmg to thé Marches of Brittany, 1446-77 Public Record Office, London £.101/315/35: Accounts of Robert Beverley, 1369 Rennes, Archives municipales Accounts ofPerrin Pépin, miseur, 1435-42

PUBLISHED DOCUMENTARY SOURCES

Ane. Ev. Boutaric Bruel 1905

C. Fougères C. Laval

C. Morbihan C. Rays C. Redon

C. S te-Croix

C. St-Georges de Bourdeilles 1919 Diller 1972

Guillotel 19713

Jaubert 1840

Anciens évëchés de Bretagne, edited by J. Geslin de Bourgogne and A. de Barthélémy. 6 vols, St-Brieuc and Paris: Dumoulin 1855-79 Actes du Parlement de Paris, edited by E. Boutaric. 2 vols, Paris: Pion, 1863-67 F. Bruel, Inventaire de meubles et de titres trouvés au château de Josselin à la mort du connétable de Clisson, 1407, Bibliothèque de l'école des chartes, 66 (1905), 193-245 Le cartulaire de la seigneurie de Fougères, edited by J. Auberge. Rennes: Oberthur, 1913 B. de Broussillon, La maison de Laval 1020-1605: étude historique accompagnée du cartulaire de Laval. 3 vols, Paris: A. Picard, 1895-1900 Cartulaire de Morbihan, edited by P. Thomas-Lacroix, Bull. soc. polymathique du Morbihan (1938), 113-44 Cartulaire des sires de Rays, edited by R. Blanchard = Archives historiques du Poitou, 28 (1898) and 30 (1900) Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Redon en Bretagne, edited by Aurelien de Courson. Pans: Collection des documents inédits sur l'histoire de France, 1863 Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Sainte-Croix de Quimperlé, edited by L. Maître and P. de Berthou. 2nd édition, Paris and Rennes: Bibliothèque bretonne armoricaine, fasc. 4, 1904 Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Georges de Rennes, edited by P. de la Bigne Villeneuve. Rennes: Catel, 1875 I. de Bourdeilles, Etat de misère de la paroisse de Marcillé-Robert en 1479, Bull. soc. archéol. d'Ille-et-Vilaine, 46 (1919), 139-44 Jean Froissart, Chroniques, début du premier livre: édition du manuscrit de Rome Reg. lat. 86g, edited by George T. Diller. Geneva: Droz, 1972 Hubert Guillotel, Recueil des actes des ducs de Bretagne 944-1148. Thèse, Faculté de Droit, Paris, 1971 (to be published by thé Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres) Géographie d'Edrisi, edited by P. Amedée Jaubert. 2 vols, Paris, 1836-1840

62 La Borderie 1894

Lettres Merlet 1896 Nouv. Rec. Pocquet1946 Preuves Privilèges

Recueil Salzman 1967 Torigny

The Création of Brittany L'architecture militaire en Bretagne du moyen âge: recueil de documents relatifs aux monuments de l'architecture militaire du moyen âge en Bretagne, 1222-1497, edited by A. de la Borderie, Bull, archéol. Assoc. Bretonne, sér. 3, 12 (1894), 135-205 Lettres et mandements de Jean V, duc de Bretagne, edited by R. Blanchard. 5 vols, Nantes: Société des bibliophiles bretons, 1889-95 La Chronique de Nantes (570 environ-1049), edited by René Merlet. Paris: Collection de textes pour servir à l'étude et à l'enseignement de l'histoire, 1896 Nouveau recueil d'actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne (XIHe et XlVe siècles), edited by A. de la Borderie. Rennes: Eugène Prost, 1902 Le plus ancien rôle des comptes du duché, 1262, edited by B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, Mém. soc. hist. archéol. Bretagne, 26 (1946), 49-68 Dom P.-H. Morice, Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne, 3 vols, Paris: Charles Osmont, 1742-46 (Reprinted by Gregg International 1968) Privilèges accordés par les ducs de Bretagne et les rois de France aux bourgeois, habitants, maires et échevins de la ville de Nantes, edited by S. de la Nicollière-Teijeiro. Nantes: Société des bibliophiles bretons, 1883 Recueil d'actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne (Xle, XHe, XIHe siècles), edited by A. de la Borderie. Rennes: Eugène Prost, 1889 L. Salzman, Building in England down to 1540: a documentary history. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952, reprinted 1967 Chronicles ofthe Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, 4: The Chronicle of Robert of Torigny, abbot ofthe monastery ofSt-Michael-inperil-of-the-sea, edited by R. Howlett. Rolls Séries, 82, London: HMSO, 1889 OTHER WORKS

André, J. 1962 André, P. 1976 Barbier, P. 1966 Bernier, G. 1977 Berranger, H. de 1956 Berthou, P. de 1910 Besnard, Ch. 1912 Boisseau, C. 1971

Deux cours carolingiennes du Morbihan: Bodieu en Mohon et Lahan en Plaudren, Mém. soc. hist. archéol. Bretagne, 42 (1962), 49-57 Le pavement médiéval de Suscinio, Archéologia: trésors des âges, no. 97 (août 1976), 42-49 Le donjon de Coatmen, Bull. soc. d'émulation Côtes-du-Nord, 95 (1966), 83-91 Un toponyme franc d'origine carolingienne en Bretagne: Haie, Dossiers cent. rég. archéol. Alet, 5 (1977), 27-28 Le Château de Machecoul, Bull. soc. archéol. hist. Nantes, 95 (1956), 150-65 Clisson et ses monuments. 2 vols, revised édition, Nantes, 1910-13 Le château de Fougères, Bull, monumental, 76 (1912), 5-21 Les prieurés de l'abbaye de Marmoutier dans le pays de Retz, Xle-XVe siècles, Mémoire de maîtrise, Université de Nantes. 2

The Defence of Médiéval Brittany

Bossuat, A. 1936 Bossuat, A. 1957 Bourde de la Rogerie, H.1928 Boussard,J. 1956 Boussard, J. 1962 Boussard,J. 1963 Buffet, H. Fr. 1949 Chartrou,J. 1928 Châtelain, A. 1973 Chédeville, A. 1973 Chédeville, A. 1974 Chédeville, A. 1979 Cintré, R. 1972

Contamine, P. 1964 Contamine, P. 1972 Contamine, P. 1978 Cornon, R. 19493 Cornon, R. 1949!? Couasnon, H. 1949 Couffon, R. 1968 Coulson, C. L. H. 1972 Coulson, C. L. H. 1973

63

vols. 1971 (Copy at thé Archives départementales de la LoireAtlantique, Nantes) Perrinet Gressart et François de Surienne, agents d'Angleterre. Paris: E. Droz, 1936 Le bailliage royale de Montferrand 1425-7356. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1957 Les fondations de villes et de bourgs en Bretagne du Xle au XlIIe siècle, Mém. soc. hist. archéol. Bretagne, 9 (1928), 69-106 Le gouvernement d'Henri II Plantagenêt, Paris: Librairie d'Argences, 1956 L'origine des familles seigneuriales dans la région de la Loire moyenne, Cah. avilis, médiévale, Xe-XHe siècles, 5 (1962), 303-22 L'éviction des tenants de Thibaut de Blois par Geoffroi Martel en 1044, Le Moyen Age, 75 (1963), 141-50 L'enceinte de St-Malo, Congr. archéol., 107: Saint-Brieuc 1949, 309-19 L'Anjou de 1109 à 1151. Foulque de Jérusalem et Geoffroi Plantagenêt. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1928 Donjons romans des pays d'Ouest: étude comparative sur les donjons romans quadrangulaires de la France de l'Ouest. Paris: A. & J. Picard, 1973 Chartres et ses campagnes, Xle-XIIIe siècles. Paris: Klincksieck, 1973 L'immigration bretonne dans le royaume de France du Xle au début du XIVe siècle, Ann. Bretagne, Si (1974), 301-43 Le temps des réformes et du dynamisme, Xle-XIIe siècles, Histoire du diocèse de Rennes,]. Delumeau, 47-72. Histoire des diocèses de France, 10. Paris: Editions Beauchesne, 1979 Les marches de Bretagne au XVème siècle. Mémoire de maîtrise d'histoire, Institut Armoricain de recherche et d'études historiques, Rennes, 1972 (Copy also at Archives départementales de la Loire-Atlantique) L'artillerie royale française à la veille des guerres d'Italie, Ann. Bretagne, 71 (1964), 221-61 Guerre, état et société à la fin du moyen âge: études sur les armées des rois de France 7337-7494. Paris and The Hague: Mouton, 1972 Les fortifications urbaines en France à la fin du moyen âge: aspects financiers et économiques, Rev. hist., 200 (1978), 23—47 Dinan, Congr. archéol., 107: St-Brieuc 1949, 172-86 Le château de St-Malo, Congr. archéol., 107: St-Brieuc 1949, 320-27 Le château de la Hunaudaye, Congr. archéol., 107: St-Brieuc 1949, 280-94 La Roche-Jagu, Bull. soc. émulation Côtes-du-Nord, 97 (1968), 35-53 Seigneurial fortresses in France in relation to public policy c. 864-c. 1483. Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1972 Rendability and castellation in médiéval France, Château-Gaillard: études de castellologie médiévale, 6, 59-67. Caen: Centre de recherches archéologiques médiévales, 1973

64 Coulson, C. L. H. 1979 Davison, B. 1969 Demouvcaux, C. 1968 Déserts, M. C. des 1970 Deyres, M. 1974 Dhondt,J. 1948 Douglas, D. C. 1964 Duby, G. 1953 Durand, G. 1978 Emery, A. 1975 Erlande-Brandenburg, A. 1968 Fixot, M. 1969 Fleuriot, L. and Giot, P. R. 1977 Fossier, R. 1968 Fournicr, G. 1963 Fournicr, G. 1978 Fowler, K. A. 1969 Frotier de la Messelière, H. 1934 Gaden-Pouget, C. 1970

Garaud, M. 1967 Gillot, G. 1963

The Création ofBrittany Structural symbolism in médiéval castle architecture, J. Br. Archaeol. Assoc., 132 (1979), 73-90 Early earthwork castles: a ncw model, Château-Gaillard: European castle studies, 3, edited by A. J. Taylor, 37-47. London and Chichester: Phillimore, 1969 La Motte-Glain, Congr. archéol., 126: Haute-Bretagne 1968, 221-30 Le château de Joyeuse-Garde: compte-rendu des fouilles, Bull. soc. archéol. Finistère, 96 (1970), 75-87 Les châteaux de Foulque Nerra, Bull, monumental, 132 (1974), 7-28 Etudes sur la naissance des principautés territoriales en France IXe-Xe siècle. Bruges: De Tempel, 1948 William thé Conqueror: thé Norman impact on England. London: Eyre and Spottiswode, 1964 La société aux Xle et XHe siècles dans la région mâconnaise. Bibliothè-que générale de l'école pratique des Hautes Etudes. 2nd édition, Paris: Editions Jean Touzot, 1971 Le château de Trémazan en Landunez, Léon, Gwechall. Le Finistère Autrefois, I (1978), 159-93 The development of Raglan Castle and keeps in late médiéval England, Archaeol.J., 132 (1975), 151-86 Le château de Clisson, Congr. archéol., 126: Haute-Bretagne 1968, 271-88 Les fortifications de terre et la naissance de la féodalité dans le Cinglais, Château-Gaillafd: European castle studies, 3, éd. A. J. Taylor, 61-66. London and Chichester: Phillimore, 1969 Early Brittany, Antiquity, 51 (1977), 106-16 La terre et les hommes en Picardie jusqu'à la fin du XIHe siècle. 2 vols, Paris and Louvain: Nauwelaerts, 1968 Le château du Puiset au début du Xlle siècle et sa place dans l'évolution de l'architecture militaire, Bull, monumental, 122 (1963), 355-74 Le château dans la France médiévale: essai de sociologie monumentale. Paris: Aubier, 1978 The King's Lieutenant: Henry ofGrosmont, First Duke ofLancaster. London: Elek, 1969 Les fortifications de pierre des Côtes-du-Nord, Bull, archéol. Assoc. bretonne, ser. 4, 46 (1934), 65-78 Le château de Blain, Loire-Atlantique. Mémoire de maîtrise, Université de Nantes, 1970 (copies at thé Archives départementales de la Loire-Atlantique and Bibliothèque municipale, Nantes) Les châtelains de Poitou et l'avènement du régime féodal Xle et XII siècles = Mém. soc. antiq. de l'Ouest, sèr. 4, 8 (1964) (Poitiers, 1967) Les fortifications de Fougères, Bull. mém. soc. archéol. hist. arrondissement de Fougères, 7 (1963), 1-173

The Defence of Medieval Brittany Grand, R. 19143 Grand, R. ipi4b Grand, R. 19140 Grand, R. 1951-52 Grand, R. 1955 Gregg, E. M. 1977 Guillot, O. 1972 Guillotel, H. I97ib Guillotei, H. 1975

Guillotel, H. 19773 Guillotel, H. I977b Guillotel, H. 19793 Guillotel, H. I979b Halgouet, H. du 1921 Hcliot, P. 1966 Hill, Bennett D. 1976

1C Morhihan Irien.J. 1976 James, F. C. 19683 James F. C. I968b Jones, M. 1970 Jones, M. 1972 Jones, M. 1972-74

65

Chateau de Largoet-en-Elven, Congr. archeol., 81: Brest et Vanncs 1914, 266-91 Josselin, Congr. archeol., 81: Brest et Vannes 1914, 303-22 Chateau de Suscinio, Congr. archeol., Si: Brest et Vannes 1914, 378-400 L'architecture militaire en Bretagne jusqu'a Vauban, Bull, monumental, 109(1951), 237-71, 357-88 and no (1952), 7-49 Le chateau d'Oudon, Bull, monumental, 113 (1955), 81-102 Urban finance and defence spending at Nantes during the fifteenth century. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Yale University, 1977 Le comte d'Anjou et son entourage an Xle siecle. 2 vols, Paris: A. & J. Picard, 1972 Les vicomtes de Leon au Xle et XIIc siecles, Mem. soc. hist, archeol. Bretagne, 51 (1971), 29-51 La devolution de la seigneuric de Dol-Combour aux Xle et Xlle siecles: contribution a 1'etude des successions seigneuriales en Bretagne avant 1'Assisc au Comtc Gcoffroy, Rev. hist, droit fr. etrang., ser. 4, 53 (1975), 190 Les origines du bourg dc Dongcs: unc etape de la redistribution des pouvoirs ecclesiastiques et laiques aux Xle-XIIe siecles, Ann. Bretagne, 84 (1977), 541-52 Les origines du ressort de 1'eveche de Dol, Mem. soc. hist, archeol. Bretagne, 54 (1977), 31-68 Les origines de Guingamp, Mem. soc. hist, archeol. Bretagne, 56 (1979), 81-100 Le premier siecle du pouvoir ducal breton 936-1040, Actes du ioje congres national des societes savantes Nancy-Metz 1977, Section de philologie et d'histoirejusqu'a 1610, 63-84 La vicomte de Rohan et ses seigneurs, 1. St-Bricuc: R. Prud'hornme, 1921. L'agc du chateau de Carcassonne, Ann. Midi, 78 (1966), 7-21 The counts of Mortain and the origins of the Norman Congregation of Savigny, Order and innovation in the Middle Ages: essays in honor of Joseph R. Strayer, cd. W. C.Jordan et al., 237-53, 495-97. Princeton: University Press 1976 Inventaire general des monuments etdes richesses artistiques de la France, Commission regionale de Bretagne: Morbihan, Cantons Le Faoitet et Gourin. Paris: Imprimcrie nationale 1975 Camp, motte ct chapellcs de Leskelen en Plabennec, Archeologia: tresors des ages, no. 97 (aout 1976), 19-27 Le chateau de Montmuran, Congr. archeol., 126: Haute-Bretagne 1968, 289-303 Le chateau de Chateaubriant, Congr. archeol., 126: Haute-Bretagne 1968, 304-40 Ducal Brittany 1364-1399. Oxford: University Press 1970 The ransom of Jean de Bretagne, count of Penthievre: an aspect of English foreign policy 1386-8, Bull. Univ. London Inst. Hist. Res., 45 (1972), 7-26 ; below, pp. 263-82. Les finances dejean IV, due de Bretagne 1345-1399, Mem. soc. hist, archeol. Bretagne, 53 (1972-74), 27-53; below, pp. 239-61 (English version, revised).

66 Jones, M. 1976

Keen, M. H. and Daniel, M. J. 1974 Keranflec'h-Kernezne, C. de 1892 Kessedjian, M. 1972

Kersausson de Pennendress, J. de 1886 La Barre de Nanteuil, A. Vicomte de, 1912 La Barre de Nanteuil, A. Vicomte de, 1912 LaBorderie, A. de 1886 La Borderie, A. de 1889 LaBorderie, A. de 1898, 1899, 1906 Langouët, L. 1976 Langouët, L. 1977 Largillière, R. 1925 Lefranc, A. 1898 Leguay, J. P. 1969 Leguay,J. P. 1972 Leguay,J. P. 1975 Leguay,]. P. 1978

Leguay,]. P. 1979 Leguay,]. P. 1981 Lemarignier, J. F. 1945

Le Mené, M. 1961 LePatourel, J. 1976

The Création ofBrittany 'Mon pais et ma nation': Breton identity in thé fourteenth century, War, literature andpolitics in thé late Middle Ages, éd. C. T. Allmand, 144-68. Liverpool: University Press, 1976 ; below, pp.283-307. English diplomacy and thé sack of Fougères in 1449, History, 59 (1974), 375-91 Castel-Cran IXe siècle: une obole inédite d'Erispoë 851-857, Bull, archéol. Assoc. bretonne, sér. 3, 10 (1892), 111-44 Une seigneurie rurale des marches de Bretagne au XVème siècle: St-Brice-en-Coglès sous la famille des Scepeaux (Etude des comptes). Mémoire de maîtrise, Université de Rennes, 1972 (copy at Archives départmentales de la Loire-Atlantique) Le château de Ranrouët et les seigneurs d'Assérac, Congr. archéol., 53: Nantes 1886, 298-314 Le château de Tonquedec, Bull, monumental, 75 ((1911), 43-76 Le château de Coëtfrec, Bull, monumental, 76 (1912), 486-507 Les monuments de l'architecture militaire du moyen âge en Bretagne, Bull, archéol. assoc. bretonne, sér. 3, 5 (1886), 149-97 Essai sur la géographie féodale de la Bretagne. Rennes: Plihon 1889 Histoire de Bretagne, 2-4, continued by B. Pocquet. Paris and Rennes: J. Plihon, L. Hervé, L. Hommay and A. Picard, 1898-1906 (offset reimpression Mayenne: Floch, 1972) Alet, ville ancien, Dossiers cent. rég. archéol. Alet, 4 (1976), 57-81 La poterie carolingienne de Trans. Dossiers cent. rég. archéol. Alet, 5 (1977), 109-142 Les saints et l'organisation chrétienne primitive dans l'Armorique bretonne. Rennes:]. Plihon & L. Hommay, 1925 Olivier de Clisson, connétable de France. Paris: Victor Retaux, 1898 La ville de Rennes au XVème siècle à travers les comptes des miseurs. Paris: Klincksieck, 1969 Rennes aux XlVe et XVe siècles, Histoire de Rennes, éd. J. Meyer, 91-136. Toulouse: Privât, 1972 Vannes au XVe siècle: étude de topographie urbaine, Ann. Bretagne, 82 (1975), 115-32 and 248-68 Les villes bretonnes à la fin du moyen âge 1364 — vers 1514-1515. Université de Bordeaux, thèse pour le doctorat es lettres, 1978 (Copy at Archives départementales d'Ille-ct-Vilaine, 16 F 280 (1-3)) Guingamp au XVe siècle, Mém. soc. hist. archéol. Bretagne, 56 (1979), 101-25 Un réseau urbain au moyen âge: les villes du duché de Bretagne aux XlVème et XVème siècles. Paris: Maloine S. A. Editeur, 1981 Recherches sur l'hommage en marche et les frontières féodales. Travaux et mémoires de l'université de Lille, Nouvelle série, Droit et lettres, 24. Lille, 1945 La construction à Nantes au XVe siècle, Ann. Bretagne, 68 (1961), 361-402 The Norman empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1976

The Defence of Médiéval Brittany Mallet.J. 1965 Melot, M. Merdrignac, B. 1979 Mesqui,J. 1977 Mussat, A. 1975 Painter, S. 1937 Palmer, J. J. N. 1972 Pape, L. 1978 Parissc, M. 1976 Petrikovits, H. von 1971 Peyronnet, G. and Leguay,J. P. 1975 Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, B. A. 1928 Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, B.A. 1929 Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, B. A. 1966 Powicke, M. 1960 Quentel, P. 1962 Raison, L. and Niderst, R. 1948 Rey, M. 1965 Salch, C. L. et al. 1977 Sanders, I.J. 1960 Sanquer, R. 1976 Sanquer, R. 1977 Souillet, G. 1944 Stenton, F. (éd.) 1957 Stenton, F. 1961

67

Les enceintes médiévales d'Angers, Ann. Bretagne, 72 (1965), 237-62 Le château de Goulaine, Congr. archéol., 126: Haute-Bretagne 1968, 231-40 Saint Ronan, Un pays de Cornouaille: Locronan et sa région, éd. M. Dilasser, 109-51. Paris: Nouvelle Librairie de France, 1979. La fortification dans le Valois du Xle au XVe siècle et le rôle de Louis d'Orléans, Bull, monumental, 135 (1977), 109-49 Le château de Vitré et l'architecture des châteaux bretons du XlVe au XVIe siècle, Bull, monumental, 131 (1975), 131-64 The scourge ofthe dergy Peter of Dreux, Duke of Brittany. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1937 England, France and Christendom 7377-99. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul, 1972 Le civitas des Osismes à l'époque gallo-romaine. Paris: Klincksieck, 1978 La noblesse lorraine Xle-XIIIe siècles. 2 vols, Lille: Atelier Reproduction des thèses, Université de Lille III, 1976 Fortifications in thé north-western Roman Empire from thé third to thé fifth centuries A.D., J. Roman Stud., 6l (1971), 178-218 L'ouverture sur la mer, Ve-XVe siècles, Histoire de Brest, éd. Y. le Gallo, 37-64. Toulouse: Privât, 1975 Les papes et les ducs de Bretagne. 2 vols, Paris: De Boccard, 1928 François 11, duc de Bretagne, et l'Angleterre 1458-1488. Paris: De Boccard, 1929 De la vassalité à la noblesse dans le duché de Bretagne, Bulletin philologique et historique du comité des travaux historiques, congrès de 1963 (Paris 1966), 2, 785-800 The loss ofNormandy. 2nd édition, Manchester: University Press, 1960 La Guerche, les Vikings et la Bretagne, Mém soc. hist. archéol. Bretagne, 42 (1962), 23-47 Le mouvement érémetique dans l'ouest de la France, Ann. Bretagne, 55(1948), 1-45 Les finances royales sous Charles VI: les causes du déficit 1388-1413. Paris; SEVPEN, 1965 L'Atlas des châteaux forts en France. Strasbourg: Publitotal, 1977 English baronies: a study of their origin and descent 1086—1327. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960 Naissance de l'archéologie médiéval en Bretagne, Archéologia: trésors des âges, no. 97 (août 1976), 14-18 Les mottes féodales du Finistère, Bull. soc. archéol. Finistère, 105 (1977), 99-126 La Guerche: le problème de la marche franco-bretonne, Mém. soc. hist. archéol. Bretagne, 24 (1944), 25-46 The Bayeux Tapestry. London: Phaidon 1957 The jirst century of English feudalism 1066-1166. 2nd édition, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961

68

The Création of Brittany

Taylor, A. 1950 Tonnerre, N. Y. 19773. Tonnerre, N. Y. içyyb

Touchard, H. 1967 Touchard, H. 1969

Wacquet, H. 1960 Warren, W. L. 1973 Wheeler, M. and Richardson, K. M. 1957 Williams, D. T. 1974-75 Yver,J. 1955-56

MasterJames of St George, Engl. Hist. Rev., 65 (1950), 433-57 Le haut moyen-âge Ve-XIIIe siècles, Histoire de Nantes, éd. P. Bois, 47-76. Toulouse: Privât, 1977 Le diocèse de Vannes au IXe siècle d'après le Cartulaire de Redon: édition et commentaire des actes. 2 vols. Thèse de troisième cycle, Université de Paris X, 1977 (copy at Archives départementales du Morbihan, Th. 971"2) Le commerce maritime breton à la fin du moyen âge. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1967 Le moyen-âge breton Xlle—XVIe siècles, Histoire de la Bretagne, éd. J. Delumeau, 153-215. Toulouse: Privât, 1969 (reprinted 1973) Art breton. Paris: Arthaud, 1960 Henry H. London: Eyre Methuen, 1973 Hill-Forts of Northern France. Reports of thé Research Committee of thé Society of Antiquaries of London, 19. Oxford: University Press, 1957 Fortified manor houses, Trans. Leicestershire Archaeol. Hist. Soc., 50(1974-75), 1-16 Les châteaux forts en Normandie jusqu'au milieu du XII siècle: contribution à l'étude du pouvoir ducal, Bull. soc. antiq. Normandie, 53 (1955-56), 28-115, 604-09.

Additional Note : Chapter II André Mussat, Arts et cultures de Bretagne, un millénaire, Paris 1979, was not available to me when I wrote thé survey above. It contains brief but perceptive remarks on castle architecture (pp. 64-74) and manoirs (pp. 179-90), some of which hâve important défensive features. It is splendidly illustrated. J-P. Leguay has now published his important thesis as Un reseau urbain au moyen âge: les villes du duché de Bretagne aux XlVème et XVème siècles, Paris 1981, which deals definitively with thé stages and fmancing of urban fortification. Several contributions to Dinan au moyen âge, éd. L-R. Vilbert, Dinan 1986, deal with that town's defences. Whilst a more detailed discussion of 'Le château-fort de Largoët en Elven' by Gérard Danet in Arts de l'Ouest, études et documents (Centre de Recherches sur les Arts Anciens et modernes de l'Ouest de la France, Université de Haute-Bretagne, Rennes II), Rennes 1981, pp. 143-56, draws attention to yet further repairs in thé late fifteenth century but concurs that thé main donjon is thé product of thé period 1375-90 (cf. above p. 39). Investigation of mottes is proceeding apace (cf. L. Langouët, J. Y. Hamel-Simon and L. R. Vilbert, Les mottes castrales dans l'arrondissement de Dinan, Dossiers du Centre régional archéologique d'Alet, no. 9 (1981), 1-26; M. Lanos, Les mottes castrales de l'arrondissement de Saint-Malo, ibid., no. 10(1982), 73-105; J-F. Caraës, Au fil de l'Achenau et du Tenu, Bulletin de la société d'études et de recherches historiques du Pays de Retz, no. 4 (1984), 20-8).

NOTES SUR QUELQUES FAMILLES BRETONNES EN ANGLETERRE APRÈS LA CONQUÊTE NORMANDE En 1914, le Comité pour les privilèges de la Chambre des Lords fut appelé à trancher sur les revendications du vicomte Gage et de Sir Robert Bourchier Sherard Wrey, au sujet de l'héritage des baronnies de « Dynaunt Fitzwaryn et Martin » (1). Nous ne nous attarderons pas sur Martin, mais l'étude de Dynaunt et Fitzwaryn va nous ramener à une question qui a été plus ou moins négligée par les historiens professionnels et aussi, d'une façon plus surprenante, par les généalogistes des deux côtés de la Manche pendant beaucoup de générations, je veux dire la nature et l'étendue du peuplement breton en Angleterre après la conquête normande. Car les auteurs des revendications de 1914, malgré la résolution rigoureusement précise du Comité pour les privilèges « qu'aucune preuve n'a été fournie concernant l'existence ou la descendance de la présumée baronnie de Dynaunt », étaient pourtant des descendants en ligne directe de Josselin, frère de l'archevêque Junkuené de Dol, et fondateur de la maison de Dinan qui a vécu dans la première moitié du XIe siècle (2). La branche anglaise aînée de la famille descend de l'arrière-petit-fils de Josselin, Geoffroy, seigneur de Dinan (mort après 1122), et de son fils aîné Olivier ; elle est connue à travers treize générations, de père en fils, jusqu'à l'époque de John, lord Dinham (mort le 28 janvier 1501), tandis qu'une branche cadette qui rattache Dinan à Fitzwaryn est issue, selon toute apparence, de Josselin, le (1) The Complète Peerage, nouvelle édition par V. Gibbs, H.A. Doubleday, G.H. White et Lord Howard de Walden, 13 tomes, Londres, 1910-1959 (citée comme Peerage), iv. 382. (2) A. de la Borderie, « Origines de la ville de Dinan et de ses seigneurs», Revue de Bretagne, de Vendée et d'Anjou, v (1891), 255-277, 436-447 ; Peerage, rv. 369.

70

The Création ofBrittany

frère cadet d'Olivier (3). Nous reviendrons sur l'histoire de cette famille, dont est tiré le thème extravagant du roman du propre petit-fils de Josselin, Fouke le Fitzwaryn (4). Cet exemple est représentatif des nombreux liens créés à travers la Manche par la conquête ou peu après, et dont les fortunes et les implications n'ont pas encore été complètement examinées en ce qui concerne la Bretagne. En Angleterre, non plus, ne s'est pas manifesté, en règle générale, le souci de retracer les liens familiaux de ceux qui étaient venus du duché de Bretagne avec le conquérant ou de ceux qui suivirent, ainsi que cela a été réalisé pour les Normands (5). Malgré l'intérêt actuel pour les problèmes de l'émigration bretonne au Moyen Age vers les îles britanniques, je ne connais pas beaucoup d'ouvrages publiés récemment en France sur ce sujet depuis les récits confus et inexacts de La Borderie et de Dupont : leur recours aux sources littéraires ultérieures pour augmenter les minces renseignements des chroniqueurs contemporains n'avait-il pas conduit cet irascible, mais extraordinaire savant du début du XXe siècle, John Horace Round, à dénoncer comme « préhistoriques » les méthodes qu'employait Dupont (6) ? (3) Dom Morice, Preuves, i. 514, charte de Benoît, évêque d'Alet, confirmant le don de Saint-Malo de Dinan à Marmoutier par Geoffroi : « Dinanni castri Dominus ... quam filius ejus Olivarius ... concessit etiam hoc uxor ejus Radegundis cognomento Orvidis cum filiis suis Guillelmo, Rollando atque Goscelino » (1108). Ce Josselin doit être identifié avec Josce de Dinan, partisan de la reine Matilda dans les années 1140 (voir plus loin, page 92). (4) Fouke le Fitz Waryn, éd. E.J. Hathaway et al, Anglo-Norman Texts, xxvi-xxvn (pour 1968-1970), Oxford, Blackwéll 1975/6. Hawisa de Dinan, la fille de Josce, épousa Fouke I Fitzwaryn au cours d'une cérémonie célébrée par un certain Robert, évêque de Hereford, d'après le roman. Les éditeurs les plus récents l'identifient comme Robert de Béthune, évêque de 1131 à 1148. Mais Hawisa était prête à payer une amende de 30 marcs en 1188 « pro pace habenda ne marietur » après la mort de Fouke (Pipe Roll, 10 Richard I, 72), une amende qu'elle payait encore en 1205 (P.R., 1 John, 162) et elle était encore en vie en 1211 (P.R., 13 John, 199). Il semble plus probable que son mariage fut célébré par Robert de Melun, évêque de Hereford de 1163 à 1167, ou par Robert Foliot, évêque de Hereford de 1174 à 1186. (5) Lewis C. Loyd, The Origins of Some Anglo-Norman Families, éd. C.T. Clay et D.C. Douglas, Harleian Society, cm (1951), résume savamment une littérature notoirement inexacte ; Early Yorkshire Families, éd. C.T. Clay avec D.E. Greenway, Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record séries, cxxxv (1973), est une étude régionale de valeur. (6) A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, m. 25-26 ; E. Dupont, La participation de la Bretagne à la conquête de l'Angleterre par les

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

11

Ce fut Round qui, le premier, expliqua d'une façon scientifique les origines bretonnes d'un certain nombre de grandes familles arrivées en Angleterre après la conquête, comme celles de Juhel de Totnes, d'Alured de Lincoln, d'Alain Fitzflaad et d'Eudo fils de Spirewic, seigneur de Tattershall (7). Ainsi que l'écrivait Sir Frank Stenton : « II n'y a guère, en effet, de comtés dans lesquels on ne puisse retrouver cet élément breton et, dans quelques comtés, son influence fut profonde et permanente » (8). Stenton désignait surtout le Lincolnshire, le North Yorkshire, quelques régions de l'est Anglie et le sud-ouest, le Devon et le Cornwall, régions où cette influence apparaît nettement dans la nomenclature et les propriétés féodales. Tout récemment, le professeur Le Patourel a de nouveau insisté sur le fait que « les Bretons qui reçurent des terres en Angleterre après la bataille semblent avoir formé l'élément non-normand le plus nombreux dans l'aristocratie étrangère établie dans le pays » (9). Il a également réétudié avec soin les relations féodales entre le duc de Bretagne et son suzerain, le duc de Normandie, à cette époque. Cependant, l'attention s'est principalement portée sur un honneur breton véritablement important, Richmond, tenu à l'époque de Domesday (1086) par le comte Alain le Roux, au détriment d'honneurs moins importants, mais nombreux, délaissant ainsi l'étude des problèmes de peupleNormands, Paris, 1911 ; idem, Recherches historiques et topographiques sur les Compagnons de Guillaume le Conquérant, Saint-Servan, 1907, passées en revue par Round dans English Historical Review, xxm (1908), 121. Concernant les remarques ingénieuses, mais totalement erronées de Dupont à propos d'une rencontre de réfugiés bretons en Angleterre au Xe siècle avec des Bretons encore prospères dans le Dorset (Participation, pages 42-44), basées sur certaines inscriptions, voir la déclaration autoritaire dans An Inventory of Historical Monuments in thé County of Dorset, tome 2, South Easî, deuxième partie (Londres, 1970), 310-312, où ces anciennes inscriptions chrétiennes sont datées du VIF siècle jusqu'à l'année 800 environ. (7) J.H. Round, Feudal England, recomposé avec un nouvel avant-propos par F.M. Stenton, Londres, 1964, pages 254-256 ; idem, Studics in Peerage and Family History, Westminster, 1901, pages 120-131, et dans de nombreuses contributions aux volumes individuels du Victoria County History (cité comme V.C.H.). F.M. Stenton, The First Century of English Feudalism 1066-1166, deuxième édition, Oxford, 1961, pages 1-4, fournit une brève évaluation de Round. (8) Ibid., page 26. (9) The Norman Empire, Oxford, 1976, page 74.

72

The Création ofBrittany

ment à travers le royaume anglo-normand (10). Nous pensons, avec Stenton, qu'« il est prudent d'avancer qu'un peuplement, qui a laissé tant de traces évidentes derrière lui, fut quelque chose de plus important que l'établissement de quelques dizaines de chevaliers et de sergents dans des tenures militaires. Cela avait sûrement dû prendre la physionomie d'une vraie migration, bien que ce fût sur une petite échelle » (11). Nos connaissances en ce domaine demeurent très rudimentaires ; les problèmes annexes de l'assimilation des Bretons au sein de la société anglo-normande en Angleterre et de la poursuite des relations des émigrés avec leur patrie sont demeurés du domaine de la recherche arthurierme et n'ont guère préoccupé les historiens politiques et sociaux (12). Le but de cette courte communication ne peut pas être de fournir la synthèse complète que ce sujet mérite, mais de souligner, par ses faiblesses mêmes, le besoin de recherches nouvelles. En particulier, des études récentes entreprises sur d'autres régions ont montré qu'il y a toujours beaucoup à apprendre sur l'évolution de la société féodale dans les travaux soigneux prosopographiques et terminologiques (13). Et puisque la pauvreté relative de bonnes sources documentaires provenant de Bretagne pour les environs de 1100 sera toujours une gêne, il semblerait qu'un peu d'aide puisse être obtenue des archives anglaises contemporaines, plus volumineuses, et des travaux modernes sérieux sur la généalogie, en particulier le Complète Peerage, et sur l'histoire locale dont la plupart sont contenus dans les nombreux volumes de la Victoria (10) The Honour of Richmond, éd. C.T. Clay, en deux parties, Yorks. Arch. Soc., Record séries, Early Yorkshire Charters, Extra séries, 1935-6, rassemble d'une façon très commode la plupart des matériaux pertinents pour les fiefs de Richmond dans le Yorkshire et le Lincolnshire, mais comme l'a fait remarqué Stenton (op. cit., page 26, n. 4) l'histoire des autres fiefs de Richmond n'a pas encore été étudiée en détail et il faut encore plus d'études individuelles, comme K. Major, Conan son of Ellis, an early inhabitant of Holbeach, Reports and papers of thé Architectural and Archaeological Societies of thé counties of Lincoln and Northampton, XLII (1936), 1-28. (11) Op. cit., pages 26-27. (12) Voir E.M.R. Ditmas, Geoffrey of Monmouth and thé Breton families in Cornwall, Welsh History Review, vi (1972-3), 451-461 ; idem, A re-appraisal of Geoffrey of Monmouth's allusions to Cornwall, Spéculum, XLVIII (1973), 510-524; voir aussi P. Flatrès, «Les Bretons en Galles du XIe au XIIIe siècle», M.S.H.A.B., xxxvi (1956), 41-46. (13) Cf. G. Duby, Hommes et structures du Moyen Age, Paris, 1973, pages 267 et seq., 395 et seq.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

73

County Historiés (V.C.H.) (14). Dans le contexte de ce congrès consacré aux relations bretonnes avec les Iles Britanniques, il n'est pas besoin de prétexte pour signaler que, outre l'émigration originelle des Bretons en Armorique, ce fut le premier échange des populations entre ces deux régions (échange permanent connu et même chiffré). Il convient d'admettre tout d'abord qu'il ne sera jamais possible de savoir vraiment combien et quels étaient les Bretons qui ont accompagné le Conquérant. Parmi les quelques ouvrages modernes sur les familles anglo-bretonnes qu'on peut classer à côté du travail classique de Round et Stenton, signalons l'étude de notre collègue Hubert Guillotel qui a adroitement résumé la preuve documentaire (15) : « Guillaume de Poitiers précise dans sa description de la bataille d'Hastings que l'aile gauche de l'armée du Conquérant comprenait les fantassins et cavaliers bretons ainsi que d'autres auxiliaires. Pourtant, non plus que les autres chroniqueurs contemporains, il ne nomme de Bretons ayant participé à l'expédition de 1066. Au siècle suivant, Wace prétendait remédier à cette lacune en énumérant dans le Roman du Rou des personnes illustres par leur origine ou par les services que leur famille avait rendus à la monarchie anglo-normande. Dans sa liste supposée figurent : Alain Fergand, futur duc de Bretagne, qui était alors vraisemblablement trop jeune pour être venu ; le seigneur de Dinan, dont la famille n'a été dotée en Angleterre que sous le règne d'Henri Ier Beauclerc ; Raoul de Gaël, alors que son père était déjà investi de fonctions auprès d'Edouard le Confesseur ; enfin le fils Bertrand de Peleit ». Ce dernier était l'ancêtre semi-mythique d'une famille dont le cri de guerre allait par la suite résonner dans les oreilles anglaises quelque trois siècles plus tard, Du Guesclin (16). Par (14) Peerage, rx. 568-574 sub Norfolk est un bon exemple de sa prudente érudition fournissant un récit de l'histoire de la famille de Gaël-Montfort ; ibid., x. 799 et seq. pour Richmond. (15) Une famille bretonne au service du Conquérant : les Baderon, Droit privé et institutions régionales. Etudes historiques offertes à Jean Y ver, Paris, 1976, page 361. (16) Dupont, Participation, page 37, identifia ce personnage comme étant un membre d'une famille de Poilley, près de Fougères. La famille Du Guesclin apparaît pour la première fois dans des documents probants vers le milieu du XIIe siècle et prit son nom de Guarplic près de Cancale (cf. Revue des questions historiques, 1872, 208-220).

74

The Création ofBrittany

suite de ces lacunes dans les sources, les recensements les plus prudents des compagnons nommés du Conquérant, dressés par G.H. White et D.C. Douglas, ont donné une liste d'une vingtaine de noms sur lesquels les deux savants sont d'accord et douze autres candidats probables, auxquels s'en est ajouté un autre depuis lors (17). Aucun d'eux n'est breton. « Ce silence des sources narratives proches de l'événement semble bien montrer, dit M. Guillotel, qu'à l'exception du comte Brian, fils du comte Eudes — le frère d'Alain III duc de Bretagne — chargé en 1069 par Guillaume le Conquérant de repousser les forces débarquées à Exeter sous la direction de deux fils d'Harold, le duc recruta en Bretagne principalement des petits seigneurs ». Au premier abord, le témoignage de Domesday Book semble contredire cette déclaration. Ce témoignage fournit des preuves de la dotation généreuse, non seulement du comte Alain de Richmond, mais aussi d'autres éminents seigneurs anglo-bretons, tels Geoffroy de la Guerche, Geoffroy Aiselin, Juhel de Totnes, sans compter les propriétés moins importantes des membres des familles Fougères, Baderon et Musard (18). Mais, comme Douglas nous l'a rappelé (19), « Domesday, sauf dans des cas exceptionnels, (17) D.C. Douglas, Companions of thé Cpnqueror, History, xxvm (1943), 129-147 ; Peerage, xn, part i, Appendices pages 47-48 ; J.F.A. Mason, The Companions of thé Conqueror : an additional name, Eng. Hist. Rev., LXXI (1956), 61-69. Wace ne semble pas posséder une source connue pour le passage dans lequel il identifia le contingent breton {Le Roman de Rou de Wace, éd. AJ. Holden, Société des anciens textes français, 3 tomes, Paris, 1970-1973, IL 122 lignes 6317 et seq., et in. 151). (18) Geoffroy de la Guerche épousa l'héritière saxonne Aelfgeofu, fille de Leofwine, qui tenait des terres dans le Leicestershire et dans le Warwickshire, et Geoffroy avait aussi des terres dans l'Ile de Axholme (Lines.). La plupart sont passées aux mains de Nigel d'Aubigny pour faire partie de son honneur de Mowbray (Charters of thé Honour of Mowbray 1107-1191, éd. D.E. Greenway, Londres, 1972, pages xx-xxi). Geoffroi Aiselin avait des terres dans le Northamptonshire, Leics., Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Lines., et Yorks. Voir A.S. Ellis, Biographical notes on Yorkshire tenants named in Domesday Book, Yorks. Arch. Journal, iv (1877), 226-227. V.C.H., Devon, i. 557-559, et I.J. Sanders, English Baronies. A Study of their origin and descent, 1086-1327, Oxford, 1960, pages 89-90 pour Juhel. La famille Fougères tenait des terres dans le Surrey, le Devon, le Buckinghamshire, le Norfolk et le Suffolk où ils ont souvent succédé à la comtesse Godgifu (D.B., f. 36 b, 113 b, 151 b, 263 b, 432). Pour Baderon, voir Guillotel, loc. cit. ; en sus de Monmouth, ils avaient aussi tenu brièvement la baronnie de Much Marcle dans le Herefordshire (Sanders, page 66) avant qu'elle passât aux mains de Hamelin de Ballon du Maine (Round, Studies, pages 181-215). Pour Musard, voir Sanders, pages 83-84. (19) History, xxvm (1943), 133.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

75

ne précise pas que les divers fiefs fussent encore aux mains des premiers donataires ; la possession de terres anglaises par un Normand (ou, pour notre propos, un Breton), en 1086, ne donne pas la moindre preuve que lui-même ou un de ses ancêtres ait pris part à une bataille vingt ans auparavant ». Domesday montre seulement, en effet, ce qui est confirmé par des documents postérieurs, en particulier l'enquête mettant en lumière les Cartae Baronum de 1166 (20), le nombre très considérable de Bretons tenant par service militaire, au cours du siècle qui a suivi la conquête. Ce sont, en majorité, des seigneurs avec des fiefs très petits, souvent même une fraction. Il est logique de supposer que beaucoup les ont acquis comme récompense pour les services rendus en 1066 et dans les années qui suivirent immédiatement. Pourtant, comme ce fut le cas de Ralph thé Staller, le fondateur de la maison de Gaël-Montfort (Quidam nobilis, natione Brito, nomine Radulfus, comme l'écrit Hariulf de Saint-Riquier) qui s'était installé dans l'Angleterre anglo-saxonne et y avait un certain nombre de compatriotes comme « tenants », la présence d'un Breton ne fût pas toujours le résultat d'une conquête (21). Il est normal de se demander de quelle partie de leur province natale venaient ces Bretons. Malheureusement, la plupart du temps on ne possède que leurs noms personnels, et ceux-ci suggèrent souvent l'élément celtique puissant dans la société bretonne. Lorsque le fils du Staller, Raoul de Gaël, comte de Norfolk, se révolta en 1075, Lanfranc put s'exclamer en s'adressant à Guillaume I : « Gloria in excelsis Deo cujus misericordia regnum vestrum purgatum est spurcitia Britonum » : parmi ces hommes exilés se trouve Eudes fils de Glamahoc. Un des aspects les plus humains dans Domesday est l'histoire d'un autre « tenant », Wihenoc, qui avait acquis son fief par le mariage (Sed unus homo Wihenoc amavit quandam feminam in illa terra et duxit eam et postea tenuit ille istam terram ad fedum Wihenoc sine dono régis et sine liberatione et successoribus suis. D.B., f. 232). Le nom (20) The Red Book of thé Exchequer, éd. H. Hall, 3 tomes, Londres, 1896, i. 186-442. (21) Peerage, ix. 568 ; V.C.H., Norfolk, il. 10. Un autre émigrant de Bretagne avant la conquête fut Robert Fitzwimarc (Round, Feudal England, page 257, cependant la raison pour laquelle il suggère que Wimarc est un nom féminin est déconcertante, car Guimarc'h et ses variantes, en Angleterre comme en Bretagne, sont largement certifiés comme noms chrétiens masculins à cette époque ; voir Honour of Richmond, éd. Clay, Index sub Wimar.

76

The Création ofBrittany

d'un autre homme, Gautier de Dol, nous donne cependant un indice sur la région d'où venaient principalement les émigrants. Lorsque des éléments toponymiques sont inclus dans les noms de personnes, ceux-ci peuvent être localisés, en majorité, dans le nord-est de la Bretagne (22). M. Chédeville a remarqué que la plupart des émigrants bretons en France venaient de la HauteBretagne, surtout du triangle Lamballe-Rennes-Fougères, limité au nord par la côte. Il semble que la même origine se retrouve dans l'émigration vers l'Angleterre, qui atteint son point culminant pendant la période 1070-1100 (23). Quant aux origines sociales, il apparaît, d'après les archives anglaises, que ces émigrants proviennent de souches chevaleresques ou aristocratiques. L'exemple de Raoul de Gaël et de ses hommes, et l'échec de Brian fils du comte Eudes pour consolider sa position dans le Cornwall, dans les années 1070, montrent que quelques-uns des gains obtenus en 1066 ou avant étaient de courte durée, bien que, dans le cas du comté de Norfolk, un grand seigneur breton ait été remplacé par un autre, le comte Alain succédant à Raoul de Gaël, tout en amenant ses propres hommes (24). Ceci fait ressortir, comme le professeur Le Patourel l'a très récemment démontré, que d'autres occasions pouvaient se manifester après 1066. La succession de Henri I en 1100, en particulier, amena une autre génération d'aventuriers en Angleterre (25). En se joignant à des hommes de la Mayenne, du Maine, d'Anjou et du Cotentin, arriva en Angleterre la famille bretonne d'Aubigny, Alain Fitzfiaad de Dol, ancêtre de deux remarquables familles anglaises nobles (22) V.C.H., Norfolk, n. 10 ; cf. la concentration de seigneurs ayant des liens avec le diocèse de Dol, comme Alain Fitzfiaad, Geoffroi Aiselin, Guillaume d'Aubigny, Geoffroi et Olivier de Dinan. Pour les remarques de Lanfranc, voir F. Jouôn des Longrais, « Les moines de l'abbaye Saint-Melaine de Rennes en Angleterre. Les chartes du prieuré d'Hatfield Régis », Recueil de travaux offert à M. Clovis Brunel, 2 tomes, Paris, 1955, n. 31, citant Epistolae Lanfranci, éd. Giles, i. 57, n° 38. (23) A. Chédeville, « L'immigration bretonne dans le royaume de France du XIe au début du XIVe siècle », Annales de Bretagne, LXXXI (1974), 309, 339-340. (24) V.C.H., Norfolk, u. 69-76 ; Comte Brian, déjà mort en 1086, fut remplacé dans le Cornwall par Robert, comte de Mortain, le demi-frère du Conquérant (Le Patourel, op. cit., page 308), mais le lien breton avec ce comté fut brièvement renouvelé par Stephen (voir ci-dessous page 81) et ce fut une région avec une des plus grandes densités de petits seigneurs bretons. (25) Op. cit., pages 341 et seq.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

77

subsistantes, les Fitzalans, futurs comtes d'Arundel et ducs de Norfolk, et la famille royale des Stewarts d'Ecosse, ancêtres de la reine Elizabeth II (26). Elles s'y joignirent à d'autres familles nouvelles et remuantes, telle la famille Harscouët de Saint-Hilaire, dont le nom est emprunté à la ville de Saint-Hilaire dans la Manche, mais dont l'origine bretonne ne fait pas de doute, famille qui avait fait sa première apparition parmi les témoins des chartes du comte Alain dans les années 1080 (27). Ces aventuriers allaient profiter des avantages de l'installation d'un empire normand. En se mariant entre membres de différentes familles des provinces environnantes, en obtenant des offices et des propriétés des deux côtés de la Manche, et en prêtant leur concours à la colonisation croissante de l'Ecosse et du Pays de Galles, ils faisaient partie d'un plus grand monde que celui qui se centrait autour de Rennes ou de Nantes (28). Bien sûr, tous ces émigrants n'ont pas réussi à s'établir solidement dans la société anglo-normande, les faux calculs politiques de Raoul de Gaël ont été mentionnés. La disparition de l'Angleterre, vers 1093, de Geoffroy de la Guerche et la dispersion de ses propriétés est quelque chose de mystérieux ; Juhel de Totnes, très probablement un membre proche des familles de Mayenne et Fougères, semble avoir perdu sa position prééminente dans le Devon, précisément au même moment (29). Pour les (26) Round, Studies, pages 120-131. (27) Honour of Richmond, éd. Clay, part n, 86-88, pour la famille de Saint-Hilaire et Saint-James de Beuvron. Un château fut érigé à Saint-Hilaire par le comte e Robert de Mortain en 1083 (J. Boussard, « Le comté de Mortain au XI siècle », Le Moyen Age, LVIII (1952), 272 ; L. Musset, « Peuplement en bourgade et bourgs ruraux en Normandie du Xe au XIIIe siècle », Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, Xe-Xlle siècles, rx (1966), 206) qui en investit sans doute Harscouët que l'on retrouve comme témoin d'une charte du comte Guillaume de Mortain (1100-1104). En 1150, la famille pouvait simplement se référer au « coram militibus et burgensibus meis apud Sancto Hilario » dans une charte pour l'abbaye de Savigny (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS. Nouv. acq. lat. 1022, page 24, n° 23, copie du XIXe siècle tirée du cartuîaire maintenant perdu). (28) Cf. Le Patourel, op. cit., pages 319 et seq. (29) Geoffroy de la Guerche semble avoir été le fils cadet de Sylvestre, évêque de Rennes (Preuves, i. 529), et il est mentionné pour la dernière fois en Bretagne en 1093 (ibid., 481). Il a pu avoir un fils, Hervé; la seigneurie de la Guerche descendit par son frère Guillaume. L'histoire ancienne de la famille, comme l'a retracée Du Paz, contient beaucoup d'épisodes fabuleux (Preuves, i. 353 ; La Borderie, Histoire, m. 60). Sanders, pages 89 et 104 pour Juhel. Dupont, Participation, pages 38-39,

78

The Création ofBrittany

Bretons qui s'attachèrent aux seigneurs normands, il était évident que la rivalité entre les trois fils du Conquérant avait compromis leur main-mise sur des terres anglaises lorsque de grands honneurs furent confisqués par la couronne (30). D'ailleurs, de nombreuses preuves indiquent que les terres avaient changé de mains rapidement dans les générations qui suivirent, au gré des fortunes de l'histoire familiale (manque d'héritiers mâles ou mariage chanceux). Ainsi, Guillaume d'Aubigny Brito a acquis la baronnie de Belvoir (Leics.) en épousant Cecily, petite-fille et héritière du propriétaire de Domesday, Robert de Toeni (31) ; Maud de Saint-Hilaire apporta la baronnie de Field Dalling (Norfolk) à ses maris successifs : Roger, comte de Hereford (mort en 1173) et Guillaume, comte d'Arundel (mort en 1193), et l'ascendance des Fitzalans fut aidée par une série de mariages avec des héritières fortunées (32). Quelques-uns des hommes du comte Alain de Richmond, insignifiants, allaient par de tels coups de fortune se hisser eux aussi dans le petit baronnage (33). Il était encore possible aussi, pour ceux qui étaient arrivés plus tard en Angleterre comme Alain, frère cadet d'Eudes, vicomte de Porhoët, dans la deuxième moitié du XIIe siècle, de fonder, par des moyens identiques, des familles nobles de longue durée (dans son cas, la famille de Zouche) (34). Bien qu'il soit difficile de confirmer dans quelle mesure une même origine bretonne a pu conduire des familles à s'allier entre elles pendant de nombreuses générations après leur installation en Angleterre, on remarque que, conscientes ou non de telles origines, il en fut ainsi. Un bon exemple est fourni par le dernier lord Dinham qui mourut en 1501, laissant quatre sœurs comme mentionne le Lai d'Eliduc de Marie de France qui raconte qu'un certain Juhel avait débarqué à Totnes et s'était mis au service du roi d'Exeter (bel amalgame de mythe et d'histoire). (30) Voir les hommes nantis par Henri Ier, souvent au détriment des premiers émigrants (Le Patourel, op. cit., pages 341 et seq.), bien que J.C. Holt, Politics and property in early Médiéval England, Past and Présent, n° 57 (novembre 1972), 32, mette l'accent sur la sécurité relative des arrière-tenants. (31) Sanders, page 12, et cf. L. Musset, «Aux origines d'une classe dirigeante : les Tosny, grands barons normands du Xe au XIIIe siècle », Francia, v (1977), 45-80. (32) Sanders, page 44. Pierre de Saint-Hilaire, l'oncle de Maud, continua à tenir Saint-Hilaire-du-Harcouët ; Peerage, v. 391-392, et Sanders, page 71, pour les Fitzalans. (33) Early Yorks. Familles, éd. Clay, page 27 (Fitzalan de Bedale), 28 (Fitzhugh de Ravensworth), 64 (Musters de Kirklington), etc... (34) Peerage, xn, part n, 930-931.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

79

co-héritières, dont deux étaient respectivement la dame de Fitzwaryn et la dame de la Zouche (35). Par contre, de grandes propriétés en Bretagne ne garantissaient pas automatiquement des premières dotations généreuses en Angleterre : les terres et les manoirs que les seigneurs de Fougères, de Vitré, de Dinan et de Porhoët possédaient en Angleterre, par exemple, étaient très modestes en étendue (36). La mobilité sociale pouvait aussi bien descendre ou monter. Si les derniers descendants, au Moyen Age, de Tihel de Helion livrèrent bataille à Crécy et à Azincourt, les domaines familiaux étaient déjà dans une large mesure sortis de leurs mains au cours du début du XIIIe siècle, par suite de dettes contractées envers la couronne. En 1236, l'honneur était tenu par les Juifs ; celui de Domesday de Ansgar Brito à Odcombe (Somerset), fief mouvant du comte de Mortain, échappait graduellement à la famille d'origine et celles qui en héritèrent en 1199 épousèrent des personnes insignifiantes (37). Pour les années qui s'étendent de 1160 à 1230, les Pipe Rolls nous permettent de retracer les fortunes de quelques propriétés données à Josce de Dinan dans le Berkshire. Hugh de Plugenet, Guillaume de Lanvallay et Henri fils de Riulfus et leurs héritiers respectifs, tous Bretons d'origine, continuèrent obstinément à maintenir leur possession sur Lambourn (Berkshire). Ce n'était pourtant qu'un unique domaine et seuls les Plugenet semblaient avoir d'autres propriétés d'une certaine valeur mentionnées dans cette source importante (38). (35) Ibid., iv. 381. (36) Le plus grand ensemble de terres possédées par Raoul de Fougères semble avoir été dans le Devon (The Devonshire Domesday and Geld Inquest, Plymouth, 1884-1892, pages 908-909) où les manoirs d'Ipplepen et de Galmpton valaient 30 livres. La propriété principale de Geoffroi de Dinan se trouvait aussi dans le Devon, à Harpford et à Nutwell, tandis que son frère Alain, seigneur de Bécherel, possédait des terres un peu partout (Magnum Rotulum Scaccarii vel Magnum Rotulum Pipae de anno tricesimo primo regni Henrici Primi, éd. J. Hunter, Londres, 1833, passim). Pour Vitré et Porhoët, voir ibid., pages 155, 159, 161. (37) J.H. Round, Helion of Helion's Bumpstead, Transactions of thé Essex Archaeological Society, New séries vin (1903), 187-191 ; Sanders, pages 121-122, 132-133. (38) Pipe Rolls 2-3-4 Henry H, 80 ; ibid., 5 Henry II, 36 ; 13 Henry II, 5 ; 14 Henry II, 200 ; 15 Henry 11, 78, été... ; Peerage, x. 552 (Plugenet). Pour Guillaume de Lanvallay, sénéchal de Rennes pour Henri II, voir R.W. Eyton, The Court, household and itinerary of Henry II, Londres, 1878, passim, et L. Delisle, Recueil des actes de Henri II, roi d'Angleterre et duc de Normandie, Introduction, Paris, 1909, pages 486-487. Guillaume acquit la baronnie de Walkern (Herts.) par mariage (Sanders, page 92).

80

The Création ofBrittany

II reste donc beaucoup à faire pour établir les diverses fortunes des Bretons en Angleterre après la conquête. Le docteur I.J. Sanders a étudié la descendance des honneurs anglais de 1086 à 1327, en dressant une liste de quelque deux cent quatre baronnies. En règle générale, ceux-ci sont identifiés par le paiement de cent livres à la charge de l'héritier ; ce paiement existe pour cent trente-deux baronnies et on peut supposer, selon les informations que nous possédons, que les autres honneurs avaient un rang baronnial. Au cours du XIIe siècle, il semblerait, d'après ses listes, que douze baronnies, de façon certaine, et sans doute cinq autres (y compris Richmond) étaient aux mains de personnes presque certainement d'origine bretonne, c'est-à-dire entre cinq et sept pour cent de cette classe de propriétaires (39). Ce chiffre correspond à celui que l'on peut calculer en se basant sur les Cartae Baronum de 1166 : d'un total servitium debitum d'environ cinq mille chevaliers, il semble que les Bretons aient été responsables d'au moins deux cent cinquante fiefs, soit environ cinq pour cent (40). Une dernière estimation peut être faite, au cours du siècle qui suivit 1066, époque durant laquelle un comte breton tint régulièrement Richmond parmi la poignée d'hommes importants du royaume ; les rois anglo-normands évitèrent, en effet, de créer des titres de comte, sauf à l'époque où Stephen et Matilda se disputaient le pouvoir (41). Hervé Brito, comte de Wiltshire, fils de Guiomar III de Léon, à qui Stephen avait confié Devizes en 1139-1140, apparut brièvement, mais dut laisser la ville et le château aux mains d'une bande de paysans en 1141 et fut ensuite banni (42). Au cours de la même année, Alain de Richmond, à (39) Belvoir (Leics.), Chiselborough (Somerset), Field Dalling (Norfolk), Monmouth, Much Marcle (Herefordshire), Staveley (Derbys.), Tattershall (Lines.), Thoresway (Lines.), Totnes (Devon), Walkern (Herts.), Wolverton (Bucks.) ; je les ai comptées comme des baronnies bien déterminées ; Helion's Bumpstead (Essex), Odcombe (Somerset), Richmond (Yorks.) et probablement Aveley (Essex) et Shelford (Notts.) ont presque certainement été tenus par des Bretons. Hasculf de Tany, qui tenait Aveley, avait un successeur du nom significatif de Graciant. Sanders, sub nomine. (40) Calculé du Red Book, éd. Hall, i. 186 et seq., cf. Round, Feudal England, pages 182-245. (41) G.H. White, King Stephen's Earldoms, Transactions of thé Royal Historical Society, 4th séries, xm (1930), 51-82 ; B.C. Douglas, William thé Conqueror, Londres, 1964, pages 294-296 ; R.H.C. Davis, King Stephen, Londres, 1967, pages 129-145 ; Le Patourel, op. cit., pages 257-260. (42) Gesta Stephani, éd. K.R. Potter et R.H.C. Davis, deuxième édition, Oxford, 1976, pages 108-109.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

81

qui Stephen avait aussi accordé le comté de Cornwall en 1140, perdit ce titre et ses bienfaits au profit de Reginald, fils illégitime de Henri I, désigné par Matilda (43). Ce qui veut dire que, parmi l'élite politique et militaire de l'Angleterre anglo-normande, les Bretons avaient acquis un peu plus de cinq pour cent des richesses terriennes du pays, l'équivalent de ce que Guillaume avait laissé aux mains des Anglais (44). De fait, si Ralph thé Staller et Robert Fitzwimarc sont comptés comme Bretons, comme ils doivent l'être sans aucun doute, cette part apparaît encore plus importante si l'on se souvient que Guillaume avait distribué, sans compter sa famille immédiate et l'église, cinquante pour cent seulement de ce qu'il avait acquis (45). Il faut reconnaître que pour arriver à ces estimations imprudentes, il a été nécessaire de se fier en grande partie à des preuves onomastiques à propos desquelles beaucoup de doutes peuvent être légitimement exprimés. L'importance accordée par les Bretons d'Angleterre à leurs origines, en conservant l'habitude de donner des noms traditionnels, est une question qui n'a pas été traitée à fond. Quelques familles semblent, en effet, ne pas l'avoir oublié pendant plusieurs générations. A Manno le Breton, Domesday seigneur de Wolverton (Bucks.), succéda Meinfelin Brito (mort après 1136), qui fut suivi par Hamo (mort en 1185), à qui succédèrent ses trois fils: Hamo (mort entre 1196 et 1198), Guillaume (mort en 1248) et Alain (mort en 1249) (46). Dans la branche anglaise de la famille Dinan, les noms de Josce et Olivier étaient encore utilisés au XIVe siècle ; Eon et Alain étaient encore utilisés à cette période tardive par les Zouches (47), et Alain et Brian étaient employés alternativement chez les seigneurs de Bedale (Yorks.), jadis considérés comme création du comte Alain (mort en 1146), mais actuellement considérés plus probablement comme des descendants de Scolland, sénéchal de Richmond qu'on rencontre pour la première fois dans les chartes anglaises du comte Stephen de Richmond, dans les années 1090, et dont les origines (43) Davis, op. cit., pages 139-140. (44) WJ. Corbett, The development of thé duchy of Normandy and thé Norman conquest of England, Cambridge Médiéval History, éd. J.R. Tanner et al, v (1926), 508-511. (45) Ibid., page 508, et cf. Le Patourel, op. cit., pages 23, 31 et seq. (46) Sanders, page 100. (47) Peerage, iv. 371-373 ; ibid., xn, part il, 930 et seq.

82

The Création ofBrittany

sont inconnues (48). Il aurait pu être Breton ou bien épouser une Bretonne. Pourtant, les noms successifs de ses descendants montrent plus le respect qu'il avait pour les seigneurs de l'honneur de Richmond qu'un lien direct avec la Bretagne. Il y a moins de doute dans le cas de beaucoup de noms utilisés par des hommes de l'honneur du XIIe siècle ; Roald, Harscouët, Hasculf, Ruaient, Gurwant et Guihomar sont fréquents, et l'origine bretonne de beaucoup de chevaliers au recensement de 1166, en sus de ceux réellement dénommés Brito, avec des noms tels que Alured, Hervé, Jordan, Hoël, Morvan et Jarnogan, est une présomption sérieuse. Des incertitudes, il y en a peut-être, mais nous pouvons nous sentir relativement sûrs quand William Fitzalan retrouve parmi ses hommes, dans le Shropshire, les noms de Brien le Chen, Herbert fils de Gurant, Gwomar le Rotur et Gwido Extraneus, quand Baderon de Monmouth nomme Ranulfus Brito, Jordanus, Elveredus de Neuham et Ywain filius Andreae parmi ses hommes, et quand, sur l'honneur de Wallingford (Berks.), habitent Galfridus Boterel, Morevanus, Ruelent de Alverso, Alanus de Valenes et Urveius Malet, que nous avons affaire à ceux qui sont Bretons ou qui comptaient des Bretons parmi leurs ancêtres immédiats (49). Une étude menée comté par comté soulignerait simplement la portée significative, non seulement de la pénétration des Bretons dans les cercles chevaleresques au cours des années qui suivirent la conquête, mais aussi la façon dont ils continuèrent à tenir leurs propriétés. Georges Minois a récemment développé une étude des fiefs de l'Essex de l'honneur de Richmond, entreprise par W.R. Powell qui identifie un certain nombre de ces familles, par exemple celle d'Espagnes, probablement venant d'Espinay (département Ille-et-Vilaine), et celle des Jekylls, descendants de Guillaume Gikel, un « tenant » du comte Alain (50). Il y a longtemps déjà, Round établissait ingénieusement les origines bretonnes de Helion's Bumpstead dans le même comté dont il avait retracé l'histoire jusqu'au possédant de Domsday, Tihel de la Croix-Helléan (arrondissement Pontivy, canton Josselin, département Morbihan) (48) Early Yorks. Familles, éd. Clay, page 27. (49) Red Book, éd. Hall, i. 271-274, 280-281, 309-310. Brient le Chen apparaît comme témoin à une charte du comte Alain, 1136-1145 (Honour of Richmond, éd. Clay, part n, 351). (50) G. Minois, « Les possessions bretonnes dans le comté d'Essex du XIe au XVe siècle », Annales de Bretagne, LXXXV (1978), 525-542 ; W.R. Powell, The Essex Fées of thé Honour of Richmond, Trans. Essex Arch. Soc. third séries, I, part 3 (1964), 179-189.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

83

(51). En 1166, Robert de Helion répondit à la couronne qu'il avait dix chevaliers de la vieille inféodation parmi lesquels il nomma Roger fils de Méen, Ralph le Breton et Robert et Alan Malpertus, tandis que, dans le Sussex, Nicholas, évêque de Chichester, cita Jordan de Hellam, peut-être membre de la famille Helion, et un certain Aluredus, parmi ses chevaliers (52). Un voisin, le Normand Walkelin Maminot, releva les noms de Henri de Fougères, Alain vicecomes (soit Alain de Rohan ou Alain la Zouche) et Robert et Henri Brito (53). Il serait fastidieux de continuer cette liste ; cent ans après la conquête, une forte présence bretonne en Angleterre est encore ressentie. Ce qui demande beaucoup plus d'attention, c'est le problème des familles qui s'étaient très vite assimilées, en adoptant de nouveaux noms. Ainsi, si l'on n'avait pas eu de preuves convaincantes concernant les origines probables de Eudo fils de Spirewic, seigneur de Tattershall (Lines.), les noms de ses successeurs, Hugh, Robert, Philip et Robert fils de Walter, auraient pu ne pas nous mettre sur la voie (54). En outre, comme les familles chevaleresques bretonnes étaient en général plus lentes à adopter l'emploi régulier de noms patronymiques ou géographiques et toponymiques que leurs voisins normands et angevins, l'emploi sans distinction de noms chrétiens communs, souvent sans l'épithète ethnique supplémentaire Brito, veut dire que beaucoup de ces familles sont masquées dans nos sources (55). (51) Ci-dessus note 37. (52) Red Book, éd. Hall, i. 199, 357. A l'époque de Domesday, un certain Herveus de Helion tenait des terres dans le Devon par droit de sa femme (Devonshire Domesday, page 1090). (53) Red Book, éd. Hall, i. 194-195. Loyd, Anglo-Norman Familles, page 42, identifia Henri de Fougères avec une famille normande de Feugères, dép. Calvados, arr. Bayeux, cant. Issigny. En 1166, Raoul fut le principal représentant de la famille bretonne de Fougères en Angleterre ; ses terres furent saisies au cours de la révolte de 1172-1173 (P.R., 19 Henry H, 104, 128, 149). Peerage, xn, part il. 930, donne 1172 comme la première date à laquelle Alain la Zouche est repéré en Angleterre ; Alain III, vicomte de Rohan (mort en 1195), donna l'église de Fulborae (diocèse d'Ely) à l'abbaye du Bon-Repos vers 1184 (Preuves, i. 696). (54) Stenton, Feudalism, page 26 ; Sanders, page 88 ; Peerage, xn, part i. 645-653. (55) Cet argument sera développé plus à fond dans un ouvrage en préparation sur la noblesse bretonne. Un des noms les plus intéressants est celui de Ruald Adobed (Devonshire Domesday, pages 968-999) qui tenait au moins trente-trois manoirs, dont quelques-uns furent sous-loués à des Bretons ; son nom de famille a été spécieusement interprété comme Ruald, « le chevalier adoubé » (V.C.H., Devon, i. 552).

84

The Création ofBrittany

Malgré ces imperfections, l'emploi continuel de certains noms sûrement bretons par des émigrants en Angleterre peut fournir une appréciation sur la densité de leur peuplement. D'autres habitudes pourraient être utilisées pareillement pour distinguer les Bretons dans l'Angleterre anglo-normande : les successions féodales. Il a été affirmé, traditionnellement, que le fractionnement était une particularité des anciennes successions féodales bretonnes et que le but principal de la fameuse assise du comte Geoffroi (1185) fut d'empêcher d'autres divisions de fiefs chevaleresques et baronniaux qui diminuaient leur valeur militaire (56). Est-ce que les Bretons en Angleterre, après la conquête, pratiquent le partage ? Il existe un cas en 1208, à la suite d'une succession contestée (57). Cette année-là, William de Scalars poursuivit son cousin Hugh en justice pour la possession de toutes ses terres : les membres du jury déclarèrent que Hardoin de Scalars était venu avec le Conquérant et qu'à sa mort il avait divisé son fief en parties égales entre ses deux fils, Richard, ancêtre de William, et Hugh, ancêtre de Hugh. Une comparaison entre le fief de Hardoin dans le livre de Domesday et ceux de William et Hugh confirme la déclaration des membres du jury. Ceci est un exemple très clair de partage ; malheureusement, bien que Hardoin fut un homme du comte Alain en 1086, il n'y a aucune preuve certaine qu'il fut Breton (58). Painter cite un autre exemple qui est un petit peu plus convaincant, celui de Guillaume d'Aubigny, Brito, le favori d'Henri Ier. Il divisa sa baronnie, non pas pour créer deux tenures égales, mais pour donner à son fils cadet au moins le même nombre de fiefs et pour le placer comme homme de son frère aîné, se conformant ainsi visiblement à une version modifiée de la coutume bretonne (59). Mais, à vrai dire, ces deux exemples assez douteux, tirés des (56) M. Planiol, « L'assise au comte Geffroi », Nouvelle revue de droit français et étranger, xi (1887), 116-162, 653-708, est la source essentielle. M. Guillotel a récemment présenté quelques découvertes importantes sur les successions avant 1185; le sujet entier mérite de nouvelles recherches (« La dévolution de la seigneurie de Dol-Combour aux XIe et XIIe siècles », e Rev. hist. de droit français et étranger, 4 sér., LUI (1975), 190). (57) S. Painter, The Family and thé Feudal System in Twelfth-Century England, Spéculum, xxxv (1960), 1-16, réimprimé dans Feudalism and Liberty, éd. F.A. Cazel jr., Baltimore, 1961, page 198, citant Curia Régis Rolls, v, 7207-9, 8-10 John, Londres, 1931, 139-140. (58) Honour of Richmond, éd. Clay, part n, 260-265 ; Sanders, page 30, tire le nom de L'Escalerie, dép. Manche. (59) Painter, loc. cit., page 198, après le Red Book, éd. Hall, i. 328. Un autre exemple serait le partage de l'héritage de Geoffroi Aiselin, bien que le lien de parenté avec ses successeurs Ralph de Hanselin et Robert de Cauz ne soit pas connu (Sanders, page 76).

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

85

sources abondantes concernant la descendance des fiefs au cours du XIIe siècle en Angleterre, montrent qu'on pratiquait peu cette habitude qui, en fait, semble avoir déjà été abandonnée dans les régions d'origine des Bretons au moment même où le droit d'aînesse devient coutumier (ou du moins visible) dans les provinces environnantes (60). La partition n'est donc pas un indicateur utile des origines bretonnes en Angleterre et n'est pas non plus caractéristique des échelons élevés de la société bretonne aux alentours de 1100. Si l'héritage de Dinan en Bretagne et en Angleterre fut divisé à la mort de Geoffroi vers 1123, cela ne semble pas être le cas pour d'autres propriétés anglaises de familles aristocratiques et ne semble pas avoir été repris par les Dinan (61). La majorité des familles bretonnes en Angleterre pratiquèrent la primogéniture. Il y eut division entre les héritières, en l'absence d'héritiers mâles, comme dans le cas des terres de Juhel de Totnes à Barnstaple, qui vers la fin du XIIe siècle furent partagées entre les familles Braose et Tracy, tandis que Braose partageait aussi la moitié des terres de Totnes qui avaient été acquises auparavant par la famille Nonant (62). Le patrimoine, non plus, ne fut pas divisé quand il revenait à des héritiers plus éloignés. Ainsi les terres qu'Alain de Dinan, seigneur de Bécherel, possédait dans le Berkshire au début du XIIe siècle passèrent par son fils Roland, (60) Planiol, op. cit., pages 142 et seq., tout en admettant que quelques exemples de primogéniture dans des grandes seigneuries peuvent être trouvés avant l'année 1185, ne l'avait pas considéré comme une pratique générale en Bretagne. Pour la création des lignages en Normandie, voir Holt, Past and Présent, n° 57 (1972), 7-8. Il y eut un développement parallèle en Bretagne (cf. Jones, The defence of Médiéval Brittany, Archaeological Journal, 1981, ci-dessus, p. 13-68 ). (61) La Borderie, Origines de Dinan, page 445. La descendance des terres des Dinan en Angleterre n'est pas facile à retracer, mais il semblerait qu'Alain, seigneur de Bécherel, et Olivier de Dinan, son neveu, se soient mis d'accord à leur façon pour le partage des terres de Geoffroi de Dinan, car Roland, le fils d'Alain, gardait un intérêt pour Hartland (Devon) et Buckland Denham (Somerset) qui retournèrent aux descendants d'Olivier, tandis que les terres du Cornwall, tenues à l'origine par Alain, retournèrent aussi à la branche aînée ; l'emprise sur ces propriétés, affaiblie par des donations au cours du XIIe siècle, fut rétablie dans la deuxième moitié du XIIIe siècle (d'après les Pipe Rolls, passim). Dans une charte, entre 1189 et 1199, Olivier, seigneur de Dinan, stipula que « de tota terra quam pater meus Galfridus de Dynham tenuit in Britannia et in Anglia scilicet quod tota terra quam predictus Galfridus pater meus tenuit in Britanniam quieta remanebit imperpetuum mihi et heredibus meis, tota vero terra quam idem pater meus tenuit in Anglia quieta remanebit imperpetuum predicto Olivero avunculo meo et heredibus suis » (British Library, MS. Add. 34792 A, f. 19v, cartulaire de la famille de Dynham, XVe siècle). (62) V.C.H., Devon, i. 557-559 ; Sanders, pages 89-90, 104-105.

86

The Création ofBrittany

qui mourut sans laisser d'héritiers directs, aux mains du fils de sa sœur Emma, Alain de Vitré, et les terres de Josce de Dinan furent transmises par l'intermédiaire de ses filles, Sybilla et Hawisa, aux familles Plugenet et Fitzwaryn (63). Toute la question de l'évolution des lois concernant la descendance des propriétés foncières en Angleterre est controversée et il est clair qu'au milieu du XIIe siècle les lois étaient encore très changeantes (64). Le fait que beaucoup de domaines anglais appartenant aux Bretons fussent des acquisitions de la première génération, leur permettait d'être traités différemment de l'ensemble des domaines patrimoniaux. Mais en héritant de tels domaines, la grande majorité des Bretons en Angleterre ne semble pas ici agir autrement que leurs voisins normands. Les implications de cette découverte pour l'étude des pratiques féodales en Bretagne elle-même n'ont pas encore été établies. Bien qu'il y eut moins de domaines importants des deux côtés de la Manche en comparaison de ceux établis par les principales familles normandes, à travers tout le XIIe et même une bonne partie du XIIIe, dans le cas des Aubigny, Rohan, Dinan et Zouche, les problèmes concernant la gestion de propriétés éparpillées, et par la suite sous différentes souverainetés, continuèrent à préoccuper les Anglais et les branches de plusieurs familles bretonnes (65). Le cas de Richmond est, bien sûr, sui generis. (63) Alain de Vitré (ou Dinan) tenait les terres de Roland de Dinan dans le Berkshire vers 1186-87 (P.R., 33 Henry 11, 202). En 1200, Sybilla de Plugenet et Hawisa de Dinan devaient 60 marcs « pro habendo recto in curia Régis de villa de Stanton cum pertinentiis per brève de recognitione de morte antecessoris scilicet Joscei patris sui » (P.R., 2 John, 161). En 1207, elles se disputaient avec Olivier de Dinan pour la possession de Buckland Denham qui avait appartenu à Roland de Dinan (P.R., 8 John, 226), de même que celle de Hartland. (64) Holt, loc. cit., page 9. (65) En 1230, Alain V de Rohan était en négociation avec Pierre Mauclerc et aussi Henri III, afin de garder son influence en Angleterre (Preuves, i. 869, 871-872). Pour Zouche, voir Peerage, xn, part n, 931-932. Raoul d'Aubigny et ses héritiers continuèrent à tenir la seigneurie de Landal (dép. Ille-et-Vilaine) et Ingleby (Lines.) en commun au cours de la première moitié du XIIIe siècle (Peerage, iv. 93-95) ; leurs successeurs, seigneurs de Landal, avaient encore des propriétés anglaises vers la fin du XIVe siècle. En 1265, Olivier de Dinan reçut la ferme des domaines de Harpford et Nutwell (Devon) qui appartenait aux moines de Saint-Malo de Dinan (Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, 513), une propriété qu'il racheta en 1269 pour £ 250 (Preuves, i. 1014). J. Le Patourel (The Norman Conquest, 1066, 1106, 1154?, Proceedings of thé Battle Conférence on Anglo-Norman Studies, I, 1978, Ipswich, 1979, 107) montre un certain nombre de ces propriétés des deux côtés de la Manche en cours de création à l'époque d'Henri II.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

87

Les liens religieux montrent la même évolution. Au moment de la conquête, les principales influences à l'intérieur de la Bretagne elle-même émanaient des monastères importants de la vallée de la Loire, comme Saint-Florent de Saumur, Saint-Serge d'Angers et Marmoutier, et ce fut naturellement ces maisons qui furent favorisées par les Bretons s'installant en Angleterre (66). Les Baderon, par exemple, fondèrent le prieuré de Monmouth sous la tutelle de Saint-Florent et Juhel de Totnes fonda, dans cette ville, un prieuré dépendant de Saint-Serge (67). Quelques vieilles maisons établies en Bretagne, comme Saint-Melaine de Rennes, allaient éventuellement bénéficier de donations de propriétés en Angleterre, mais en comparaison avec les abbayes françaises en dehors de la Bretagne, leurs acquisitions furent modestes (68). Aucune abbaye bretonne ne tenait quoi que ce soit en Angleterre à l'époque de Domesday. Par la suite, la famille de Fougères fit des donations en Angleterre à Rillé et à Savigny, et parmi les nouvelles fondations du XIIe siècle, un petit groupe de maisons bretonnes du nord, telles Bégard, Bon-Repos et en 1202 Beauport, attirèrent quelques bienfaiteurs autres que la famille comtale de Richmond-Penthièvre (69). Quand Alain fils de Jordan, sénéchal héréditaire de Dol et petit-fils de Alain Fitzflaad, fonda l'abbaye du Tronchet dans le diocèse de Dol, la dotant de terres anglaises et d'églises bretonnes, (66) Cf. P. Marchegay, « Les prieurés anglais de Saint-Florent près Saumur », Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Chartes, XL (1879), 154-194 ; Jouôn des Longrais, Recueil ... Brunel, il. 31-54. (67) W. Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicana, nouvelle édition par J. Caley et al., 6 tomes, Londres, 1817-1830, iv. 630. Juhel plaça un prieuré à Barnstaple sous l'abbaye clunisienne de Saint-Martin-des-Champs, Paris (ibid., v, 197-198). (68) Jouôn des Longrais, Recueil ... Brunel, il. 31-54: on remarque qu'aucune abbaye bretonne n'est mentionnée dans le Domesday Book. (69) Preuves, i. 606-607 (Rillé). En 1164, Raoul de Fougères et sa mère, Olive, donnèrent ensemble des chartes confirmant des donations anglaises à Savigny (Archives Nationales, L 968, nos 216 et 220). Bégard fut fondé par le comte Stephen de Richmond en 1130 (Preuves, I. 562) et fut le lieu de sépulture du comte Alain (mort en 1146, Honour of Richmond, éd. Clay, part i, 31-32). Bien qu'ayant quelques difficultés au milieu du XIVe siècle à obtenir des rentes en Angleterre (Cal. Inquisitions Miscellaneous,. m. 22, n° 55, 18 juin 1350), Bégard en reçut de nouveau entre les années 1380 et 1390 (Public Record Office, Londres, E 364/18 m. 62 r; E 401/593, 15 octobre 1393, ibid., 600, 29 novembre 1395). Bon-Repos reçut des donations en Angleterre des familles Rohan et Zouche (Preuves, i. 656, 696-698, 878-879). En 1235, l'abbaye se disputa avec Henri III au sujet du patronat de l'église de Honningham (diocèse de Norfolk, ibid., 892). Mon. Ang., vi. 1050 (Beauport).

°°

The Création ofBrittany

elle fut rattachée à l'ordre de Tiron, et quand les frères Geoffroi et Olivier de Dinan, avec le fils de ce dernier, Geoffroi, fondèrent l'abbaye de Hartland (Devon) vers 1160, c'est aux chanoines réguliers de Saint-Augustin de Saint-Nicolas d'Arrouaise, près de Calais, qu'ils empruntèrent une règle. Il n'y eut pas, semble-t-il, de pillage des ressources anglaises par les patrons bretons à la façon des normands ; de même, moins de prêtres bretons reçurent des bénéfices en Angleterre, à part l'évêque breton de Bangor, Hervé, qui fut plus tard transféré à Ely (70). Le prieuré de Bodmin, scène en 1113 du fameux débat entre un habitant du pays, très probablement un breton, et les chanoines en visite de Laon, à propos de l'historicité du roi Arthur, fut aussi engagé plus tard dans une querelle avec l'abbaye de Saint-Méen à propos du vol de reliques (71). En outre, quelques patrons bretons de maisons anglaises choisirent finalement d'être enterrés dans le duché, comme le comte Alain de Richmond à Bégard ; bien plus nombreuses, néanmoins, furent les donations par les Bretons aux nouvelles abbayes et prieurés en Angleterre. Encore une fois, une liste de donations semblables pourrait être établie pour chaque comté : les descendants de Flaad subventionnaient le prieuré de Sporle (Norfolk), Sele (Sussex), Haughmond (Shropshire) et l'abbaye de Paisley en Ecosse, au cours des deux générations qui suivirent, en sus de donations en Bretagne. Parmi les fondateurs de l'hôpital de Clerkenwell à Londres, centre actuel des chevaliers de l'Ordre de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, nous trouvons Jordan, fils de Raoul, fils de Brian, et Alured de Lincoln, dont la sœur s'est faite religieuse là-bas (72). La fondation Aubigny à Belvoir fut soutenue par d'autres Bretons, ce qui laisse (70) Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, éd. L. Merlet, 2 tomes, Chartres, 1883, IL 90 (Tronchet). Mon. Ang., vi. 436-437 ; G. Oliver, Monasticon Dioecesis Exoniensis, Exeter et Londres, 1846, pages 204-218, et The Cartae Antiquae Rolls 1-10, éd. L. Landon (Pipe Roll Society, LV, new séries xvn, 1939), 122-124 pour Hartland. Le Patourel, Norman Empire, pages 248 et seq., 351-353. (71) J.P.S. Tatlock, The English Journey of thé Laon Canons, Spéculum, vm (1933), 454-465 ; G.H. Doble, The relies of Saint Petroc, Antiquity, xm (1939), 403-415. (72) Round, Studies, page 129, résume les donations des successeurs de Flaad. Alain, celui qui est le fils de Jordan, sa femme Lauret et son fils André, qui firent une donation à l'abbaye de Croxton (Leics.) à Skillington (Lines.) sembleraient appartenir à une famille différente (Historié Manuscripts Commission, Duke of Rutland at Belvoir Castle, iv (1905), 177). Mon. Ang., iv. 82, 85 (Clerkenwell).

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

89

supposer l'existence d'une petite colonie d'émigrants dans cette région, tandis que Raoul d'Aubigny fonda aussi un couvent prémontré à Orford, à Stainton-le-Vale (Lines.) (73). Une autre fondation bretonne dans le Lincolnshire fut l'abbaye cistercienne de Kirkstead établie par Hugh, seigneur de Tattershall. Pour la possession de l'église Saint-Mary-Magdalen d'Oxford, Hugh de Plugenet fut accusé par Gilbert Foliot, évêque de Londres, d'avoir fait preuve de violence envers les chanoines de Osney (Oxon.), afin de favoriser sa maison de Saint-Frideswide (74). Le cartulaire de cette dernière maison montre une gamme complète de donations venant de ce même Hugh et de son fils Josce (75). Le célèbre Ralph Brito fonda l'hôpital de Saint-Lawrence à Brentford (Middlesex) au cours du règne de Henri II (76). En sus de jeter de la lumière sur la distribution géographique d'un tel patronage, une étude plus complète pourrait élucider les attitudes religieuses de ce groupe de bienfaiteurs. Dans quelle mesure ont-ils continué à soutenir le système monastique bénédictin traditionnel ? Jusqu'à quel point furent-ils influencés par les nouveaux courants de spiritualité manifestés par les Cisterciens, les Hospitaliers et les Templiers, les chanoines réguliers de Saint-Augustin et beaucoup d'autres mouvements moins importants, au cours du XIIe siècle ? Dans quel lieu les patrons voulaient-ils se faire enterrer ? Dans quels ordres les fils cadets et les filles cadettes sont-ils entrés ? Leur comportement démontre-t-il une différence marquée soit avec les Normands avoisinants, soit avec les Bretons restés dans le duché ? Voilà des questions intéressantes qu'on pourrait poser et auxquelles on pourrait donner des réponses précises. Mais nous devons conclure. Les circonstances politiques favorables sous lesquelles les Bretons avaient partagé les fruits de l'impérialisme normand ne (73) H.M.C., Rutland, iv. 98 et seq. ; Mon. Ang., vi. 936; V.C.H., Unes., H. 209. (74) Ibid., 135 ; The Letters and Charters of Gilbert Foliot, éd. Z.N. Brooke, Dem Adrian Morey et C.N.L. Brooke, Cambridge, 1967, n° 427 (1176). Gilbert avait auparavant réprimandé Josce de Dinan et Baderon de Monmouth pour avoir violé les droits ecclésiastiques, bien que tous les deux, par la suite, aient semblé regagner sa faveur (ibid., nos 69, 114, 152, 332, 338). (75) The Cartulary of thé monastery of St Frideswide at Oxford, éd. S.R. Wigram, Oxfordshire Hist. Soc., 2 tomes, 1895-1896, i. n° 489, n. n08 711-713, 715-718, 726-727. (76) Letters of Gilbert Foliot, n° 464.

90

The Création ofBrittany

peuvent être mieux démontrées que dans le cas de Brian Fitzcount, fils illégitime d'Alain Fergant. Vers la fin, à l'époque où il fut partisan de la reine Matilda dans les années agitées de 1140, il fut accusé par Henry de Blois, évêque de Winchester, frère du roi Stephen, d'être un réactionnaire. Gilbert Foliot, néanmoins, accourut à sa défense et fit l'éloge de sa loyauté envers Henri Ier qui « vous avait élevé depuis votre enfance, éduqué, fait chevalier, enrichi », jusqu'à ce que Brian ait tenu une position et des propriétés dont l'importance n'était dépassée que par les plus puissants dans le pays (77). Il y avait beaucoup d'autres bénéficiaires dispersés largement à travers la société territoriale anglonormande ; mais avant même son accession, Henri Ier avait commencé à employer des mercenaires bretons (78). L'accession de Henri II, bien qu'elle eut provoqué des hostilités entre le roi et le duché, ne semble pas avoir ébranlé de façon significative la position de ces Bretons possédant des propriétés des deux côtés de la Manche. La confiscation temporaire fut une arme que le roi angevin utilisait, de 1166 à 1173, comme moyen de pression contre quelques rebelles bretons qui tenaient des terres en Angleterre, mais les terres furent restituées par la suite. La rupture finale de ces liens, qui eut lieu à l'époque du roi Jean, n'a pas encore été étudiée en détail (79). Il y avait, par ailleurs, un lent processus d'assimilation : parmi ceux appelés à servir Jean dans la campagne poitevine de 1214, se trouvait Oliver de Dinan et, dans les années qui suivirent, la fidélité de ces familles anglo-bretonnes fut démontrée par leur dévouement continuel à la couronne (77) R.W. Southern, The place of Henry I in English History, Proceedings of thé British Academy, XLVIII (1962), 142. (78) Le Patourel, op. cit., pages 202-204, 345. (79) P.R., 19 Henry II, 75, 104, 128, 149, pour les terres de Raoul et Guillaume de Fougères dans les mains royales. P.R., 14 Henry II, 51, 125, 140, 193 ; ibid., 15 Henry II, 2, 48, 56, 73, etc..., pour la saisie des rentes et la vente de biens mobiliers de Roland de Dinan ; ibid., 16 Henry II, 23, 69, 125, pour la preuve qu'il jouissait de nouveau de la faveur royale. Jusqu'à sa mort, il continua à bénéficier de paiements et de lettres de grâce, et fut un des principaux lieutenants d'Henri en Bretagne dans les années 1170 (Delisle, Recueil, Introduction, pages 453-454). Son héritier, Alain de Vitré, paya une amende d'entrée de 60 s en 1198 (P.R., 10 Richard I, 105), mais n'apparaît plus sur les Pipe Rolls ; le sheriff de Cornwall rendit compte de la somme de £ 25 pour la ferme de ses terres en 1199 (P.R., 1 John, 184). En 1203, les terres dans le Lincolnshire possédées auparavant par Guillaume de Fougères étaient aux mains de Ranulf de Vin, Peter Ruald et Yvon Franco (P.R., 5 John, 105).

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

91

anglaise dans les campagnes à l'étranger ou dans le pays (80). Parmi les principaux chefs d'Edouard Ier dans les guerres galloises, figuraient les Fitzalan, les Fitzpayn (qui avaient obtenu par mariage des terres venues d'Alured de Lincoln) et Alan de Plugenet, tandis que, parmi les opposants dans la crise constitutionnelle de 1297, nous trouvons Robert de Tattershall, Fulke Fitzwaryn et Alan la Zouche (81). Ces hommes ont sans doute été factieux, guerriers et encore ambitieux, mais ces caractéristiques pourraient, à ce stade, ne rien devoir à leurs lointaines origines bretonnes. Ils furent complètement intégrés dans la société anglo-normande ; leurs familles auraient fourni aux rois anglais de la fin du Moyen Age des soldats qui, au cours de leurs générations respectives, seraient retournés en France, décidés à conquérir un riche héritage dans une terre étrangère, comme leurs ancêtres de 1066 (82). A la veille du conflit qu'on appelle la Guerre de Cent Ans, au cours de laquelle, les premières années, des milliers d'Anglais allaient servir dans le duché de Bretagne, un clerc inconnu rassembla l'histoire de Fouke le Fitzwaryn tirée d'une fable qu'on a pas retrouvée et destinée à une audience chevaleresque. Son héros est un petit baron renié venant des marches du pays de Galles qui, au cours des premières années du règne de Jean, menait une bande de hors-la-loi dans une série d'aventures merveilleuses et s'opposait à la tyrannie du roi (83). Nous n'avons pas le temps de démêler la vérité de la légende dans ce conte si vivant « d'un Lancelot moderne qui se sent bien à l'aise dans un monde où les tournois et les croisades et la délivrance de jeunes femmes de bonne famille des mains des géants, des dragons et des voleurs sont la substance de l'existence » (84). Mais dans le (80) P.R., 17 John, 101 ; Peerage, iv. 369 et seq. (Dinan) ; ibid., x. 552-555 (Plugenet) ; ibid., xu, part n. 931 et seq. (Zouche), etc... (81) J.E. Morris, The Welsh Wars of Edward I, Oxford, 1913, passim ; Peerage, v. 393 (Fitzalan), 448 et seq. (Fitzpayn) ; M. Prestwich, War, Politics and Finance under Edward I, Londres, 1972, pages 249-250. (82) Cf. John de Helion's Bumpstead qui était à Crécy et Robert Helion qui s'obligea à servir avec Henri V (Trans. Essex Arch. Soc., New ser., vm (1903), 191). (83) Fouke le Fitz Waryn, éd. Hathaway (ci-dessus note 4), est l'édition la plus récente. S. Painter, The reign of King John, Baltimore, 1949, pages 48-53, est le meilleur commentaire sur le Fouke historique. (84) M.H. Keen, The Outlaws of Médiéval Legend, Londres, 1961, page 50.

92

The Création ofBrittany

contexte de cette étude, il est important de mettre l'accent sur deux points. D'une part, les premières parties du roman contiennent certainement un plus grand fond de vérité historique qu'on n'a pu s'en rendre compte jusqu'ici. Il y a des allusions à l'établissement d'Alain Fitzflaad à Oswestry (Shropshire) (85). Et si le récit de l'acquisition, par Joscè de Dinan, de la ville et du château de Ludlow contient quelques renseignements confus, encore une fois l'auteur connaît les traditions et démontre une connaissance de l'histoire familiale de la branche anglaise des Dinan qui n'a pu être obtenue que d'une personne très proche d'eux (86). Voici donc les liens établis par la Conquête. Deuxièmement, en décrivant comment Fouke avait fui la colère de Jean en traversant la Manche pour s'exiler avec ses cousins en Bretagne, la fable décrit un monde ébranlé par les événements du règne de ce roi. Jusqu'au début du XIIP siècle, les contacts établis, en 1066, entre le duché et l'Angleterre étaient restés solides et fréquents, non seulement pour la famille comtale de Richmond, mais aussi pour une multitude de familles moins importantes. La chute de l'empire angevin allait changer tout ceci, car même si Pierre Mauclerc et ses successeurs avaient regagné la possession temporaire de Richmond, leurs officiers ont très rarement tenu des positions à la fois dans le duché et à Richmond, comme ce fut le cas au XIIe siècle (87). Pour ces familles anglo-bretonnes, dont les liens avec Richmond n'avaient pas été très forts, les rapports avec la Bretagne devinrent de plus en plus lointains et leur assimilation dans la société anglaise devint plus définitive (88). Mais leurs (85) Ed. Hathaway, page 7. (86) S. Painter, The sources of Fouke Fitz Warin, Modem Language Notes, L (1935), 13-15, réimprimé dans Feudalism and Liberty, pages 114117, nie que l'auteur du roman original fut très proche de la famille Fitzwaryn. Mais ce n'est pas une simple coïncidence que la lignée du XIIe siècle de son héros soit relativement précise et que les lieux mentionnés dans le récit, tels Hartland (Devon), Gloucester et Laijibourn (Berkshire), soient associés avec le vrai Josce de Dinan et sa famille (voir aussi W.E. Wightman, The Lacy Family in England and Normandy 1066-1194, Oxford, 1966, pages 180-181, 187-188). (87) Honour of Richmond, éd. Clay, passim; P. Jeulin, «Un grand « Honneur » anglais. Aperçus sur le « comté » de Richmond en Angleterre, possession des ducs de Bretagne (1069/71-1398) », Annales de Bretagne, XLII (1935), 265-302. (88) Les alliances par mariage révélées, par exemple dans Sanders, op. cit., ou Early Yorkshire Familles, éd. Clay, sont significatives à cet égard.

Notes sur quelques familles bretonnes

93

expériences dans les années immédiatement après la conquête, ainsi que l'existence continue de certaines familles qui, vers la fin du XXe siècle, peuvent retracer leurs ancêtres jusqu'à ceux qui ont accompagné le Conquérant ou qui ont fait fortune dans l'Angleterre du XIIe siècle, devraient nous mettre en garde contre le désir de limiter nos recherches à nos frontières nationales ou provinciales. Rappelons-nous, encore une fois, que les deux côtés de la Manche ont partagé leur histoire (89).

(89) Je voudrais remercier MM. Steven Chang et Jacques Charpy et Mme Chantai Reydellet pour la traduction de cet article.

Additional Note I hâve recently examinée! thé case of thé Dinan family, thé starting point for this article, in greater détail in 'Les branches anglaises des seigneurs de Dinan', Dinan au Moyen Age, éd. Loic-René Vilbert, Dinan 1986, pp. 221-35. An expanded bilingual version of this has appeared to mark thé twinning of Dinan and Exmouth: The Family of Dinan in England in thé Middle Ages: La famille de Dinan en Angleterre au Moyen Age, Dinan 1987, 62 pp.

This page intentionally left blank

IV

LA VIE QUOTIDIENNE DE TROIS NOBLES BRETONS AU XIIIe D'APRÈS LEURS TESTAMENTS Le nombre de testaments datant de la Bretagne médiévale que l'on ait retrouvé jusqu'à présent est mince en proportion de ceux d'autres régions de France. Déjà en 1921, une première étude de A. Perraud avait attiré l'attention sur la majorité d'entre eux, et plus récemment des historiens s'intéressant à l'économie et à la société, ont exploité cette documentation et y ont ajouté de nouveaux exemples (1), J'aimerais attirer votre attention sur trois testaments de nobles en particulier parmi les exemples bretons connus. Ils ont beaucoup de traits caractéristiques en commun. Ils étaient écrits en latin. Ils datent de la période 1262-1264. Ils éclairent différents aspects de la vie des nobles. Leurs auteurs avaient le même prénom — Geoffroy (dit IV), sire de Châteaubriant, qui rédigea son testament et son codicille en 1262 ; Geoffroy de Pouancé, sire de la Guerche, qui, «laborans in extremis», dicta le sien le 4 mai 1263, et Geoffroy Tournemine, sire de la Hunaudaye, qui apposa son sceau sur le sien le 10 juin 1264. Ces testaments ont été imprimés depuis fort longtemps. Des extraits des dernières volontés de Tournemine ont été publiés par le père du Paz en 1619, et le texte fut édité dans sa totalité au siècle dernier ; Du Paz a tiré également l'essentiel du testament de Geoffroy de Châteaubriant, maintenant perdu mais le codicille fut publié par Lobineau et Morice, et celui du sire de la Guerche par Blanchard en 1898, d'après une copie trouvée dans le cartulaire des sires de Rays (2). Il serait bon de noter qu'aucun d'entre ( 1 ) A. PERRAUD, Etude sur le testament d'après la coutume de Bretagne, Rennes 1921 ; J. KERHERVÉ, Testaments et histoire sociale. Le réseau des relations et des affaires d'Yvonnet Flourée dit Prioris, officier de finances breton du XVe siècle, Annales de Bretagne LXXXVi (1979), 525-552 ; J.-P. LEGUAY, Un réseau urbain au moyen âge: les villes du duché de Bretagne aux Xiv< et XVe siècles, Paris 1981, p. 313-316, 335-337.

(2) Père Augustin DU PAZ, Histoire généalogique de plusieurs maisons illustres de Bretagne, Paris, 1619, 1.148-149; J. GESLINDE BOURGOGNE et A. DE BARTHÉLÉMY, Anciens évêchés de Bretagne, 6t.,Saint-BneucetParis, 1855-1879,iii. 142-145; Du Paz, op. cit., Ib. 16-17, Dom A. LOBINEAU, Histoire de Bretagne, 21., Histoire de Bretagne, 21., Paris, 1707, ii. 3 98; Dom P.-H. MORICE, Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne, 3 t., Paris, 1742-1746, i. 985-986 (Ch. Goudé y fait référence dans son Histoire de Châteaubriant. Baronnie, Ville et Paroisse, Rennes 1870, p. 27-28) ; Cartulaire des sires de Rays, éd. R. Blanchard Archives Historiques du Poitou, xxviii (1898) et xxx (1900), i.110-117 n° XLV.

96

The Création ofBrittany

eux n'apporte d'élément nouveau quant à la forme si on le compare aux deux autres, ou à d'autres testament similaires portant sur une période plus large (3). Cependant, derrière les formules rigides employées par les clercs qui les établirent, il émerge quelques traits des différents tempéraments des trois testateurs. En clair, il serait donc possible de tenter cette étude des mentalités qu'Alain Croix nous exhortait à faire il y a quelques années dans sa conférence sur les testaments du XVII e siècle, et qu'il a utilisée d'une façon si dramatique dans un récent ouvrage (4). L'analyse des legs à l'intérieur de ces trois testaments nous permet de percer les formules conventionnelles pour apprécier les sentiments et la piété véritables du testateur. Mais, dans le cadre de cette conférence, je tiens surtout à insister sur des particularités qui peuvent être utilisées pour illustrer la vie quotidienne des nobles dans le duché du treizième siècle. Ces caractéristiques peuvent être liées à des considérations d'une importance plus générale, comme les relations existant entre les ducs et la noblesse, un sujet par trop négligé depuis le remarquable travail d'Arthur de la Borderie, pionnier en la matière et qui fait autorité (5). J'introduirai ce sujet brièvement, mais les thèmes sur lesquels j'aimerais attirer votre attention, sont intéressants en eux-mêmes, et demandent une grande attention. Les thèmes abordés seront respectivement l'exploitation et la succession dans les domaines nobiliaires, la violence et les dettes propres à la noblesse, les préoccupations mondaines de ces trois membres de la noblesse, et l'histoire individuelle de leurs familles. On peut rapidement évoquer les grandes lignes des relations changeantes entre les ducs et leurs seigneurs. Commençant avec la reconstruction d'une sérieuse administration ducale durant la domination des Plantagenêts, les règnes de Pierre Mauclerc, Jean I et Jean II (1213-1305), furent témoins de la lutte prolongée, mais en général victorieuse, de la part des ducs afin de maîtriser une noblesse turbu(3) MORICE, Preuves, i.727-728, testament d'André de Varades (1196); ibid., . cstament de Guillaume Le Borgne (daté à l'époque de 1215/1216, mais aujourd'hui on pense qu'il fut écrit en 1220: A. OHEIX, Essai sur les sénéchaux de Bretagne des origines au XIV siècle, Paris 1913, p. 112-114); testament d'André III de Vitré (1248-B. DE BROUSSILLON, La maison de Laval, 3t., Paris 1898, i.242) sont les meilleurs exemples à comparer étant antérieurs à ceux que nous étudions. (4) A. CROIX, Tester, c'est mourir un peu. Testaments, vie et mort des Bretons au XVIIesiècle, Mémoires de la société d'histoire et d'archéologie de Bretagne, Ivi (1979), 41-53 ; La Bretagne aux XVIe et XVII* siècles. La vie, la mort, la foi, 2t., Paris, 1981. (5) A. de la BORDERIE, Histoire de Bretagne, continué par B. Pocquet, 61., Rennes et Paris 1896-1914, iii.308 et seq. S. Painter, TheScourgeoftheClergy. Peterof Dreux, duke of Brittany, Baltimore 1937 contient des informations utiles tout comme B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, Les papes et les ducs de Bretagne, 21., Paris 1928, tandis que le résumé de H. Touchard dans Histoire de la Bretagne, éd. J. Delumeau, Toulouse 1969, p. 153 et seq. est une aide précieuse.

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

97

lente (6). Il y eut des échecs occasionnels. La coalition des barons contre Mauclerc en 1235 avait forcé Louis IX à ordonner une série d'enquêtes qui révélèrent les méthodes arbitraires employées par Mauclerc pour dominer ses seigneurs, car il utilisait souvent la force et bravait le droit coutumier établi, pour vaincre ses ennemis. Il avait, par exemple, privé les nobles de privilèges fort goûtés, comme l'exercice du droit de naufrage, ou encore limité leur liberté de construire des châteaux là où bon leur semblait sur leurs domaines. Il avait encore extorqué d'importantes sommes d'argent comme seigneur féodal au moment de la transmission des fiefs de père au fils ou également saccagé leurs terres quand il s'en emparait en tant que bail (7). Ce droit lui donnait la possibilité d'exploiter les domaines d'un tenancier défunt, et ce pour un temps indéterminé. Il pouvait également limiter la liberté testamentaire, et en d'autres cas, limiter les droits judiciaires des seigneurs. Lorsque Jean I succéda au trône du duché, les barons semblèrent sur le point de regagner ces privilèges, mais le nouveau duc évita la capitulation et parvint à s'attacher des hommes qui étaient auparavant opposés à son père tels Raoul de Fougères et André de Vitré (8). Quelques années plus tard, son règne allait être à nouveau menacé de plusieurs côtés, et pas moins que par l'autorité croissante de la couronne et avec elle la poussée d'institutions à but centralisateur, comme le Parlement de Paris, récemment reconnu. Cette cour permettait au Roi de s'attirer les suppliques et beaucoup d'entre elles venaient de nobles bretons faisant appel au sujet de décisions prises à leur égard dans les cours ducales, ou portant plainte contre des actions plus arbitraires, tel la spoliation dont étaient à la fois victimes la noblesse laïque et les membres du haut clergé (9). Se battant sur deux fronts, contre d'une part les prétentions de la couronne de se mêler des affaires du duché et contre d'autre part la noblesse, Pierre Mauclerc et son fils déjouèrent loyalement ces tentatives pour miner leur autorité. Après une série de guerres mineures, et dont l'étendue exacte n'a jamais été pleinement décrite, ils réussirent à renforcer la position ducale, en insistant sur la reconnaissance de leurs (6) J. LE PATOUREL, Henri Plantagenêt, et la Bretagne, Mémoires de la soc. d'hist. et d'arch. de Bretagne, Iviii (1981), 99-116; Touchard, loc. cit. (7) A. DE LA BORDERIE, Nouveau recueil d'actes inédits des ducs de Bretagne, Rennes 1902, nos III-VII (cf. Morice, Preuves, i. 885-888). (8) MORICE, Preuves, i.910-914, 916-917, 919-920; A. DE LA BORDERIE, Recueil d'actes inédits des ducs et princes de Bretagne, Rennes 1888, nos CXIV, CXV. (9) Actes du Parlement de Paris, éd. E. Boutaric, 21., Paris 1863-1867, nos 89*, 1188, 1456, 1693,1788, 1845. Nicole LE ROY, L'influence française en Bretagne (1231-1341) et les Institutions privées bretonnes, Positions des thèses, Ecole nationale des Chartes, Paris 1965, p. 51-56.

98

The Création ofBrittany

droits ducaux et féodaux, ainsi qu'en construisant leur administration propre. Comme l'avait montré La Borderie, il y a maintenant quelque temps, Jean I, plus particulièrement, utilisa à son avantage les difficultés financières de ses principaux hommes pour annexer leurs terres et les rattacher à son propre domaine, et ce dans les parties du duché où sa position était autrefois faible. Un exemple notoire à Léon et autour de Tréguier fut celui des vicomtes de Léon et les seigneurs de La Roche Derrien qui furent ainsi dépossédés, mais les familles d'Hennebont et Lanvaux en Cornouaille et en Broërec, ainsi que celle de Dinan dans la partie est de la Bretagne apportent d'autres détails concernant différentes régions ( 10). Finalement, grâce à des compromis tel que celui de l'Assise de Rachat (1276), le duc abandonna toute volonté d'exercer indéfiniment le droit de bail, et ceci d'une façon très arbitraire. Il accepta la liberté testamentaire en échange soit du paiement d'une somme compensatoire égale au revenu annuel des domaines du défunt, soit de l'acceptation du droit de bail pour un an sans ruiner la propriété. Certaines familles ne donnèrent pas leur accord immédiat à l'assise et, tels les seigneurs de Fougères et de Tinténiac, continuèrent à négocier séparément avec le duc lorsqu'une seigneurie changeait de mains. En général, cependant, on revint à d'harmonieuses relations (11). Les pouvoirs et le prestige du duc furent accrus par des revenus croissants, le développement d'un système administratif plus avancé, les décisions par les cours ducales, et un parlement au pouvoir plus généralisé qui permettait de régler les désaccords majeurs sans avoir recours aux armes. A la fin du XIII e siècle, le duc de Bretagne avait retrouvé sa position de maître tout puissant dans son duché, un statut reconnu par sa promotion au titre de pair de France en 1297 (12). Cependant, nous ne devrions pas accorder trop d'importance à ce succès. Les guerres privées étaient encore lieux communs, tandis que certaines disputes entre seigneurs étaient toujours réglées sans faire appel aux cours ducales en employant les moyens traditionnels, à savoir par des commissions d'arbitrage choisies par les différents adversaires (13). Le premier testament que nous allons étudier illustre particulièrement cette violence qui faisait partie du quotidien. Ceci ne

(10) La BORDERIE, Histoire, m. 343-346, 353-356. (11) Ibid., 343-346 ; M. PLANIOL, Histoire des Institutions de la Bretagne, Nouvelle édition par J. Brejon de Lavergnée, 3t., Mayenne 1981, ii.288-291. (12) MORICE, Preuves, i.l 122-1123 (cf. Archives Nationales, K 166 n° 92). (13) MORICE, Preuves, i.997-998 (1265), accord d'Olivier de Clisson et de Eudo du Pont qui devait être gagner par l'intervention de Geoffroy de Châteaubriant et de Guillaume de Lohéac avant le recours à la cour ducale. Cart. des sires de Rays, éd. Blanchard, i.xx-xxi, Ixxxiv-lxxxviii pour la querelle opposant Girard I et Girard II de

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

99

devrait pas nous surprendre outre mesure. Bien que Louis IX tentât de contrôler les guerres privées, il ne put arriver qu'à des résultats médiocres dans le royaume. Cependant, il dicta ses exigences dans une série d'ordonnances royales, et parmi celles-ci, l'on trouve les chartes provinciales de 1314 et 1315 qui cherchaient à réduire les aspects les plus terribles des guerres privées, et ordonnaient qu'on leur mit fin si le royaume était menacé dans son entier (14). Il est certain que la couronne cherchait à étendre son contrôle dans ce domaine sur le duché, mais le début du XIV e siècle fut marqué par de nombreuses rebuffades de la part du duc, puis la guerre civile entraîna une nouvelle situation ( 15). Au XIII e siècle, malgré les records inégaux et l'assertion de La Borderie que Jean I essayait en général d'éviter, la confrontation armée avec ses seigneurs, il était cependant clair que de nombreuses actions illégales n'étaient pas réglées par le duc ni par le roi. On connaît certains détails concernant des guerres mineures, menées soit par le duc luimême, soit en son nom contre des familles telles que celles de Clisson, Pont, La Roche-Derrien, Léon et Lanvaux. Une série de querelles opposant certaines familles nobles dérangèrent la paix dans d'autres régions, au sud de la Loire, par exemple (16). L'on soupçonne bien d'autres exemples d'efforts personnels mais on en prend connaissance que par hasard, avec la découverte de certains documents qui ont été conservés. Tel est le cas de Geoffroy de Tournemine. Les origines de la famille de Tournemine en Bretagne sont incertaines. Du Paz a suggéré qu'un certain Edouard Tournemine accompagna Conan IV en Bretagne en 1156, quand ce dernier reprit le duché des mains de son beau-père, Eudo de Porhoët, et qu'Edouard épousa la sœur de Conan, Constance (17). La version moderne de cette histoire, Rays à Geoffroy de Châteaubriant et Maurice de Belleville pour la châtellenie de Machecoul après 1258 ce qui conduisit à une guerre privée. En 1288, Olivier II de Machecoul et son frère, Jean, ainsi que Girard III de Rays et Hugues de Thouars en 1318, s'étaient également déclaré la guerre (ibid.). (14) R. GAZELLES, La réglementation royale de la guerre privée de saint Louis à Charles V et la précarité des ordonnances, Revue historique du droit français et étranger, 4e sér., xxxviii (1960), 535-548. ( 15) Philippe IV avait déjà renvoyé à la cour du duc de Bretagne le cas concernant la guerre opposant Olivier II de Machecoul et son frère (Morice, Preuves, i.1074). En 1316, Louis X accepta une décision concernant la demande du duc d'exercer la justice en matière de ports d'armes (Ordonnances des rois de France de la troisième race, éd. E.S. de Laurière et al., i.621 ) et en 1325 des lettres royales de non-préjudice furent données au duc alors qu'une solution au droit qu'il réclamait était toujours en instance (E. Perrot, Les cas royaux, Paris, 1910, p. 346 citant Arch. Nat., Xi a 8844, un cas provenant de l'attaque fomentée par Geoffroy VII de Châteaubriant sur La Guerche avec une bande d'hommes en armes). (16) Voir note 13.

(17) Op. cit., p. 144.

100

The Création of Brittany

que l'on trouve, par exemple, dans la brochure en vente au Château de la Hunaudaye, est qu'un Guillaume Tournemine accompagna Conan, et qu'il est possible qu'il reçut les terres de Botloy, Lesardre et Kermilien en Pleudaniel, comme récompense, qu'il épousa la sœur de RivalIon, comte de Lamballe, dont il eut un fils, Olivier, lui-même père de Geoffroy II, dont nous possédons le testament (18). D'autres preuves, mentionnées par des chartes, semblent appuyer cette généalogie, depuis environ 1160(19). Avant cette date, une note de c. 1145 dans le cartulaire de Tiron peut sans doute apporter une preuve plus ancienne de la présence de Guillaume Tournemine en Bretagne car parmi les témoins d'une transaction entre l'abbaye et les seigneurs de Rays sur le prieuré de Sept-Faux, commune d'Arthon, arrondissement de Paimbœuf en Loire-Atlantique, on compte un Guillelmo Tornamina (20). De toute façon en ce qui concerne les comtes de Lamballe et de Penthièvre, les liens furent reserrés par le mariage de Geoffroy I à Eline, fille de Rivallon de Lamballe, et le service de la duchesse Constance, ainsi que des dons à différentes maisons religieuses, montrent la richesse croissante de la famille au XIII e siècle (21 ). Sans doute sur les conseils de Majclerc, et ce pour affaiblir la position du comte de Penthièvre, Olivier de Tournemine se vit accorder en 1214, divers domaines à Pléhérel, Landébia, ainsi que dans la forêt de Lanmeur; en 1220 environ, commencèrent les travaux de construction du futur château de la Hunaudaye (22). Olivier épousa, semble-t-il, Sybille de Châtaubriant, leur fils Geoffroy II épousa Juliana Boterel, qui venait d'une autre branche cadette de la maison de Penthièvre (23). Notre connaissance de la carrière de Geoffroy II, ainsi que du début de l'histoire de sa famille, se fonde sur des documents provenants du cartulaire de l'abbaye cistercienne de Saint-Aubin des Bois. De nombreuses transactions témoignent des dons faits à cette abbaye par

(18) F. RENIER dans La Hunaudaye ou la féodalité au cœur des Pays d'Ai-guenon (Association du Château de la Hunaudaye, Châtelaudren, s.d.). (19) Ane. évêchés, iii.34. (20) Cartulaire de l'abbaye de la Sainte-Trinité de Tiron, éd. L. Merlet, 21., Chartres 1883, ii.55 n° CCLXXXVI. (21) LA BORDERIE, Nouv. Recueil, n° IV, témoin 23 dans l'enquête de 1235 donne beaucoup de détails dans cette affaire. Ane. évêchés, iii.46 pour un charte de Gaufredus Tornemine domini Alani filii comitis in Pentevria senescallus (1208). (22) MORICE, Preuves, i.824-825; ibid., 832 pour une charte de 1216 issue par Olivier et son père Geoffroy. H. Couasnon, Château de la Hunaudaye, Congrès archéologique de France, Session de Saint-Brieuc 1949, p. 280-294. (23) Ane. évêchés, iii. 125 charte de 1256 dans laquelle Geoffroy Tournemine et son primogenitus Pierre mentionnent bone memorie Juliana uxor mea.

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

101

ses ancêtres (24). Geoffroy II lui-même fit d'autres donations. Il servit de témoin des engagements pris par divers débiteurs de l'abbaye, et à l'occasion, il servit de répondant pour certaines de ces dettes (25). Bien sûr, c'est en ceci que consistaient les affaires courantes des chartes monastiques. Quelques détails concernant les soucis quotidiens de Geoffroy, quelques renseignements sur sa femme et sa famille, des indices de leur richesse et de leur statut — tout ce matériel pourrait à peine nous aider à cerner sa vie, si le cartulaire ne contenait également son testament. Celui-ci se présente sous la forme d'un document sibyllin commençant par la classique invocation de la Sainte Trinité et soulignant la clarté d'esprit du testateur (26). Puis sans plus de préambule, et avec une candeur à laquelle je n'ai pas trouvé de parallèle, Geoffroy, annonçant que toutes ses dettes devaient être payées, se lance dans une série de legs envers ceux à qui il avait fait du tort lors de nombreuses et violentes actions : «Item, volo et precipio in primis quo heredibus hominum de Corron qui interfecti fuerunt fiât emenda cum consilio executorum meorum. Item, pro domibus succensis apud Plancoit similiter fiât emenda, et de aliis rébus perditis in guerra de Plancoit. Item, Oliverio filio Oliverio Daniel fiât emenda usque ad xx libras. Item, heredibus illius hominis qui interfectus fuit apud Coitiagu fiât emenda...». Ceci n'est qu'un simple extrait d'une liste dans laquelle de pauvres hommes et femmes, ces dernières étant bien souvent veuves, ou leurs héritiers, ainsi que des hôpitaux locaux, des chapelles, des monastères et des villages entiers, reçoivent des dédommagements pour les pertes qu'ils ont subies. Une somme se montant à 141 livres 10 sous était spécialement destinée à ce but. Dans bien d'autres cas, cependant, les exécuteurs testamentaires de Geoffroy devaient parvenir à un accord avec ceux qui se plaignaient de lui. Des membres de sa propre famille — sa sœur Margilie et son mari, ses tenanciers militaires, ses paysans et ses voisins, qu'ils soient de haute ou de basse lignée, tous avaient souffert entre ses mains. En tant que propriétaire, Geoffroy s'était révélé un véritable rapace extorquant les droits féodaux. Il avait saisi des moulins, des bois, de petites surfaces de terrain, des chevaux, des rentes, des clapiers ou des garennes, des dîmes, des récoltes, et bien d'autres choses. Il avait tyrannisé des individus et des communautés entières et partout où il allait, il laissait dans ses domaines de nombreuses dettes. Il (24) Cf. Ane. évêchés, ni.30 et seq. pour une édition du cartulaire. (25) Ibid., 90, 115, 125 (une charte de 1256 assignant des rentes d'un montant de 50s. sur plusieurs moulins, y compris ses moulins à fouler d'Arguenon à l'abbaye). (26) Ane. évêchés, iii.142-145: «In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, amen, Ego Gaufredus Tornemine, miles, compos mentis mee, pro salute anime mee condo testamentum meum in hune modam...»,

102

The Création ofBrittany

est intéressant de noter que les endroits mentionnés dans son testament appartiennent tous à ses domaines, qu'il se soit livré au massacre jusque sur la côte de Pléhérel, ou dans la vallée d'Arguenon jusqu'à Plancoët (27). Mais c'est la mention tout à fait fortuite de la guerra de Plancoit, Vequitatura de Bocigne, Yequitatu de Landebia et de Sancto Boco ainsi que le dédommagement pour avoir incendié des maisons et tué des hommes qui vient ternir cette histoire d'un baron breton voleur. Car il est clair que Geoffroy avait déclaré une guerre ouverte à ses ennemis sans se soucier et sans avoir peur de représailles par procédé légal ou autorité ducale, et cela jusqu'à un moment avancé dans sa vie où il fut soudain pris par des remords de conscience et chercha à la hâte des moyens pour faire réparation de sa triste vie. Dans son testament, il essaye donc de distribuer certains de ses gains mal acquis pour acheter l'immunité contre les victimes qu'il avait faites sur terre ou leur héritiers et pour acheter aussi une place au paradis en faisant des bienfaits munificents. Parmi ces derniers on peut inclure une donation à la Basilique SaintPierre de Rome, le seul legs de ce genre venant de Bretagne que j'ai pu trouver jusqu'à présent, et une autre au chapitre général de Cîteaux, sans nommer un grand éventail de dons allant des ecclésiastiques locaux à des églises, monastères et foyers de mendiants (28). Profitons de ce moment de pénitence pour laisser Tournemine et nous tourner vers son proche parent, Geoffroy IV, sire de Châteaubriant. Quels étaient ses préoccupations lorsqu'il en vint à rédiger son testament ? Ils étaient principalement d'ordre familial comme l'on peut s'y attendre de la part d'un grand seigneur. Il tenait beaucoup à ce que sa seconde femme et ses héritiers obtinssent leur part équitable; il voulait que sa fille Guyote ait deux chartées de vin lors qu'elle sera retournée à son mary; il se souciait de sa propre santé morale; il souhaitait que les maux qu'il avait commis fussent réparés et que ses tenanciers fussent traités d'une manière juste. Peut-être était-ce parce que Geoffroy de Châteaubriant avait un fils pour lui succéder, contrairement à Geoffroy de Pouancé que nous rencontrerons bientôt, qu'il nous apparaît comme avoir particulièrement apporté des soins à étudier en détails des termes financiers pour préserver sa fondation des Trinitaires à Châteaubriant, d'établir quelques autres rentes pour des (27)Iiïd. (28) La liste comprend les abbayes de Saint-Aubin des Bois, Beauport, Bocquen et Saint-Georges de Rennes, les églises de Pludélia, Trégomar et la cathédrale de SaintBrieuc, les Cordeliers de Dinan et toutes les autres maisons franciscaines et dominicaines de Bretagne (dont on en dénombrait respectivement cinq et quatre à l'époque), à toutes les chapellenies du diocèse de Saint-Brieuc, aux treize abbayes cisterciennes de Bretagne et à plusieurs membres du clergé et religieuses individuellement.

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

103

ecclésiastiques et pour prendre des dispositions concernant ses domaines. Cependant, l'impression générale que nous laisse le testament est celle d'un homme soucieux de sa succession, fier de ses fonctions de régisseur pour les domaines familiaux et assez juste dans ses relations avec ses voisins et tenanciers, c'est-à-dire un digne représentant de l'une des plus anciennes familles du duché. Car on peut remonter la maison de Châteaubriant jusqu'au début du XIe siècle, jusqu'au moment où apparurent dans le duché comme dans d'autres régions de France, de grandes familles de châtelains qui faisaient de l'autorité publique une affaire privée et qui en venaient à dominer leurs localités de leurs puissants châteaux (29). Vers l'année 1040, Brient, fils de Tiher, seigneur de Châteaubriant, fonda le prieuré de Béré près de son château (30). Vers le début des années 1060 son fils Geoffroy lui avait succédé et, chacune à leur tour, des générations successives de Châteaubriant le suivirent et cela jusqu'à Geoffroy IV qui fit son testament en 1262 (31). Comme beaucoup d'autres membres de sa famille avant lui, Geoffroy IV était un personnage puissant et pas seulement dans la société bretonne. Il avait des intérêts en Anjou et aussi dans le Poitou; il partit, en toute probabilité, en croisade et lutta pour Louis IX (32). Comme Tournemine et Pouancé, il fit un legs aux Templiers et fut un bienfaiteur généreux pour les maisons religieuses. Sa fondation des Trinitaires de Châteaubriant, avec un énorme revenu en loyers s'élevant à 200livres par an, est un signe révélateur de sa richesse; l'abbaye de la Meilleraye et les prieurés de la Primaudière et de Saint-Martin de Teillay, profitent aussi largement de ses actions charitables (33). Lui aussi pouvait être un propriétaire exigeant; dans (29) Voir Michael JONES, The Defence of médiéval Brittany, Archaeological Journal, cxxxvm (1981), 149-204 à p. 160-167 ; ci-dessus, pp. 24-31. (30) Cf. MORIŒ, Preuves, 1.401-402. (31) GOUDÉ, Hisi. de Châteaubriant d'après du Paz fournit les grandes lignes mais il faut reconsidérer les premières années de l'histoire de cette famille. J'ai utilisé la numérotation traditionnelle des seigneurs de Châteaubriant bien que, comme j'espère le montrer par ailleurs, ce soit imprécis. (32) MORICE, Preuves, i.922, 20 décembre 1243, donation accordée par Guy de Thouars de la sénéchaussée de Onde et de Lion d'Angers; Arch. Nat., J 400 n°41 (1242), dans le camp devant Fontenay (cf. Layettes du trésor des chartes, éd. A. Teulet et al., 51., Paris 1863-1902, ii.n° 2974 et cf. iii.n 0 3607 (1247)d'après Arch. Nat,J 180), accord d'Alix de Mauléon et de son frère, Raoul, sur la succession de leur père, Savari, auquel assistaient Geoffroy et son fils, Geoffroy, maris respectifs des filles d'Alix, Aumaria et Belleassez. Pour une liste, probablement inventée par Nicolas Delvincourt au XVIII e siècle, de ceux qui sont supposés avoir accompagné Geoffroy en croisade en 1250, voir Bib. Nat., Pièces originales 502, dossier 11381. (33) H. MARTIN, Les ordres mendiants en Bretagne (vers 1230-vers 1530), Paris 1975, p. 13 (Trinitaires de Châteaubriant); Arch. dép. Loire-Atlantique H 75, cartulaire factice de l'abbaye de Meilleraye, pages 13,23, 29, 30, 40, 52 ; Du Paz, op. cit., Ib. 16-17.

104

The Création of Brittany

son testament il ordonna que s'il avait augmenté plusieurs tailles sur ses terres, elles devaient être réduites au niveau auquel elles étaient avant qu'il ne prenne la succession de ses domaines de son oncle. A l'occasion, la famille de Châteaubriant usait de la force, mais en conformité avec l'image qu'elle avait acquise lorsqu'il s'agissait de l'exploitation de ses terres, avant tout juste et consciencieuse; le fait que ses voisins le tenait en haute estime est significatif. Geoffroy faisait fonction de médiateur dans quelques-unes de querelles entre nobles auxquelles on a déjà fait allusion au cours de cette conférence (34). L'intérêt que portait Geoffroy à ses ressources forestières est l'un des points les plus singuliers de son testament. Il avait hérité de plusieurs forges dans les bois à Teillay et Juigné et c'était sur leurs revenus que s'appuyaient les Trinitaires (35). Avec des possessions dans la ville de Nantes, Geoffroy avait un revenu plus diversifié que beaucoup de ses contemporains (36). Il y a très peu d'indices dans son testament qui laissent à penser qu'il avait des difficultés financières comme celles qui servent d'exemples dans notre troisième testament, à savoir celui de son voisin et débiteur Geoffroy de Pouancé, seigneur de la Guerche. Comme les seigneurs de Châteaubriant, les seigneurs de la Guerche et de Pouancé devinrent de puissants personnages sur les frontières entre la Bretagne et l'Anjou au onzième siècle. Du Paz nous offre une généalogie assez fantaisiste qui fait remonter la famille jusqu'au Xe siècle et il y a des spécialistes modernes qui acceptent largement cela (37). Mais l'histoire que nous raconte Du Paz conserve beaucoup de points obscurs. Les détails ne peuvent être confirmés d'une façon convaincante qu'à partir du moment où apparaît Sylvestre de la Guerche, évêque de Rennes (1076-1093), et ses deux fils, Guillaume et Geoffroy, et à partir desquels on peut établir une généalogie sans failles jusqu'au temps de Geoffroy III, sire de la Guerche, et qui fit

(34) Voir ci-dessus note 13. Le compromis entre un dénommé Geoffroy de Châteaubriant et Geoffroy, sire d'Ancenis, sur des droits de chasse dans les forêts de Viorel et La Benaste enregistré dans Arch. dép. Loire-Atlantique E 249 (publié dans Oheix, Essai sur les sénéchaux, p. 334-239) est probablement l'œuvre de son fils. (35) Cf. Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Sulpice-la-Forêt, éd. Dom Anger, Rennes 1912, nos CIII, CV; les forges étaient encore une importante source de revenus quand les comptes pour la seigneurie de Châteaubriant commencent à survivre — Arch. dép. Loire-Atlantique, E 211 n° 7 m. 9 (1383-1384). (36) Arch. dép. Loire-Atlantique H 75 p. 52 pour une allocation de 51. sur les revenus tirés de Nantes (d'un montant annuel de 1001.) par Geoffroy de Châteaubriant à l'abbaye de Meilleraye. (37) MORICE, Preuves, i. 353 après les notes de Du Paz; A. CHÉDEVILLE dans Histoire du diocèse de Rennes, éd. J. Delumeau, Paris 1979, p. 58-59.

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

105

son testament en 1263 (38). Ce fut probablement Sylvestre qui posséda le premier Pouancé et à partir du XIe siècle sa descendance est étroitement liée à celle de la Guerche (39). Parfois La Guerche et Pouancé étaient la propriété du même seigneur; parfois c'était une branche cadette qui possédait La Guerche. On peut donc dire que, tantôt Pouancé, tantôt La Guerche, semblent de prime importance dans les intérêts de la famille, dans un contexte qui n'est pas sans rappeler les histoires de familles de Vitré et de Laval qui s'enchevêtraient mutuellement et dont les possessions chevauchaient sur les frontières de la Bretagne et du Maine (40). Des alliances matrimoniales, des affaires seigneuriales, des transactions commerciales, l'expérience commune de la croisade, le même choix de fidélité étaient autant d'éléments qui avaient lié la famille de La Guerche-Pouancé à la plupart des autres grandes familles de cette région limitrophe, Vitré, Craon, Châteaubriant, Fougères, Châteaugontier, Sillé, etc. En 1200, par exemple, beaucoup d'entre elles dépendaient des rois angevins d'Angleterre; dans les quelques années qui suivirent elles arrivèrent à un accord avec Philippe Auguste (41). Guillaume de la Guerche, fondateur en 1206, de la collégiale dans laquelle repose encore ses restes vénérables, eut pour successeur son fils, le Geoffroy qui nous intéresse dans cette étude, et qui épousa Emma de Châteaugontier. Mais c'est avec ce couple que s'acheva la lignée masculine qui avait engendré au moins sept générations de seigneurs de la Guerche. Car bien que Geoffroy et Emma eussent eu des fils, ils moururent tous sans héritiers (42). L'héritière principale de la famille était Jeanne qui n'était pas encore mariée à l'époque où son père rédigea son testament. Plus tard, elle devait donner la Guerche aux vicomtes angevins de Beaumont, domaine qui devait passer entre les mains de plusieurs familles

(38) GOUDÉ, Histoire de Châteaubriant, p. 17 tout comme Du Paz, qui se basait lui-même sur le travail de Pierre Le Baud, dérive la famille de Pouancé-La Guerche de celle de Châteaubriant. (39) O. GuiLLOT, Le comte d'Anjou et son entourage au Xf siècle, 2t., Paris 1972, i.290. (40) Cf. BROUSSILLON, Maison de Laval, passim. (41 ) Rotuli Chartarum, éd. T. Duffus Hardy, Londres 183 7, p. 75 ; pour une charte datant d'avril 1203 et par laquelle Guillaume et Geoffroy de La Guerche promirent de rendre hommage à Philippe Auguste et jurèrent de ne jamais servir le roi d'Angleterre voinBib. Nat., MS. Coll. Dom Housseau VI, 2193. Mais voir aussi Rot. Chart., éd. Hardy, p. 199, 23 juin 1214, où Guillaume détenait le château de Segré pour le roi Jean. (42) Abbé G. DE CORSON, Les grandes seigneuries de Haute-Bretagne, Deuxième série. Les baronnies, marquisats, comtés et vicomtes compris dans le territoire actuel du département d'Ille-et-Vilaine, Rennes 1898, p. 208-213, bien qu'il fût bon de noter que ma reconstruction de la généalogie de la famille diffère sensiblement de cet exposé.

106

The Création of Brittany

encore plus importantes, parmi lesquelles Du Guesclin et Alençon avant la fin du Moyen Age (43). Peut-être était-ce à cause de l'avenir incertain de ses domaines que Geoffroy de la Guerche avait mené une vie extravagante. Quand il composa son testament, il fit des dons conventionnels à divers établissements religieux. Des rentes totalisant la modeste somme de 2 7110s. furent établis au profit du monastère de Fontaine Haouis, Notre Dame de la Guerche, ses chanoines et choristes, les églises de Rannée, SaintPierre de Pouancé, Notre-Dame de Pouancé, Saint-Sauveur de Legé, Marie-Madeleine de Legé et Saint-Pierre de Martigné (44). Des dons en argent d'une valeur de 121. 10s. furent concédé à l'abbaye de Clermont, aux Franciscains d'Angers et de Rennes, aux Dominicains d'Angers, aux Frères du Sachet à Angers et au bâtiment de la cathédrale Saint-Pierre de Rennes, tandis que les Frères mineurs de Nantes devaient recevoir la somme de 481., somme encore en suspens du testament de Guillaume Campel et que Geoffroy avait refusé de payer. En plus de cela un certain nombre d'ecclésiastiques et d'églises furent aussi reconnus comme créanciers. Mais c'est dans une liste de dettes en souffrance que l'on peut sentir reposer le principal intérêt de ce testament même. Comme pour le cas de Geoffroy Tournemine, on possède très peu de détails ; on peut donc seulement deviner les raisons pour lesquelles Geoffroy ne devait pas moins que l'énorme somme de 34691. La plupart, en fait, étaient de petites dettes s'élevant à quelques sous ou quelques livres. Mais il devait 1501. à Geoffroy Marr., 1001. à Hervé Le Pelletier, 2801. aux héritiers de Mathieu le Pintier, 1001. à Geoffroy, sire de Châteaubriant (qui, dans son testament réclama 10001. de Pouancé), 4501. à ses neveux, Geoffroy et Guillaume de Bur., et pas moins de 15001. à Philippe Le Fercé. Le fait que Geoffroy eût des dettes envers des hommes à Angers et à Tours, et diverses allusions à des emprunts éventuels d'argent à des Juifs (il devait 70 s. à Soloman Alietar et 801. à Guillaume le Converse), indiquent bien que Geoffroy était un noble aux goûts dispendieux qui vivait au-dessus de ses moyens (45). Mais vivre dans l'opulence, faire étalage de sa richesse et récompenser généreusement de loyaux services étaient des manières d'agir auxquelles on s'attendait de la part des seigneurs puissants et avec une seule fille pour lui succéder, Geoffroy avait manifestement (43) Ibid. (44) Quand La Guerche passa au duché en 1385 un certain nombre de ces rentes étaient encore payées (Arch. dép. Loire-Atlantique E 211 no. 6 m. 19r). (45) Cf. P.S. LEWIS, Later Médiéval France: thé polity, Londres 1968, p. 201-208. Pour les dettes de la famille Avaugour à leur sénéchal Guillaume Le Borgne en 1220 voir Morice, Preuves, i. 828-829.

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

107

peu de scrupules à vouloir préserver son patrimoine. En plus de ses dettes considérables, et de ses dons religieux, il se montrait assez généreux envers ses anciens serviteurs ; aux sommes déjà mentionnées venaient s'ajouter 271. 10s. en rentes à vie et 1301. en espèces qui devaient leur être distribuées. Avec un certain optimisme, on devait mettre 10001. de côté pour la réalisation du testament de son père et 10001. aussi pour la réalisation du sien. Ayant été conventionnel dans son style de vie et dans la piété, Geoffroy avait la ferme intention de bien finir. Peut-être le plus intéressant de ses legs fut un legs conditionnel. Geoffroy laissa à deux chevaliers, un certain Geoffroy et Raoul de Traba, la somme de 5001. pour couvrir les dépenses qu'occasionneraient un voyage au royaume de Jérusalem pour porter sa croix. S'ils n'accomplissaient pas cette mission, on devait demander à deux autres, Geoffroy du Plessis et Pierre Coille Avalle d'y aller à leur place. Seulement si les quatre refusaient devait-on donner l'argent aux Templiers, déjà établis à La Guerche, par l'intermédiaire de leur commanderie d'Aquitaine, dont le commandeur était aussi, peut-on noter au passage, un exécuteur du testament de Geoffroy de Châteaubriant (46). Une autre des caractéristiques communes à ces trois testaments est donc leur préoccupation et enthousiasme pour l'ordre des Templiers et pour le sort de la Terre Sainte. En cela, ils semblent refléter un enthousiasme plus général dans la société bretonne à propos duquel on possède très peu de documents mais qui se manifeste aussi par la fondation à cette époque d'un hôpital breton à Acre, par les entreprises de nombreux nobles bretons importants en 1239 et 1248, dans les activités de Jean I et dans d'autres legs, comprenant même un legs venant du duc Arthur II (47). Des légendes devaient alors jaillir et se modeler autour du personnage de l'un de nos testateurs, Geoffroy de Châteaubriant, des légendes se greffant sur sa croisade ; les termes de chacun de ces trois testaments montrent que l'influence de leur homonyme Geoffroy de Bouillon, héros de la première croisade, projette (46) MORICE, Preuves, i.985 pour Frère Guy de Bona Carniera, précepteur d'Aquitaine; Abbé G. de Corson, Les Templiers et les hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem dits chevaliers de Malte en Bretagne, Nantes 1902, demeure l'ouvrage de base même si une révision s'impose; pour un exposé général, comprenant des photos des restes de la commanderie à La Guerche, voir M. Lascaux, Les Templiers en Bretagne, Rennes 1979. (47) Archives de l'Orient Latin, i(1881), 423-433 pour l'hôpital à Acre; PAINTER, The Scourge of thé Clergy, p. 110-129; LA BORDERIE, Histoire, iii.352-353 (JeanI); Arch. dép. Pyrénées-Atlantiques E 22 (1311), testament d'ArthurII dans lequel une donation de 10001. devait être payée pour sa feue femme pour la Terre Sainte et tout manquement à l'exécution de d'autres clauses rendait ses exécuteurs passibles d'une amende de 10.0001. dont le tiers devait être accordé à la Terre Sainte.

108

The Création of Brittany

encore une ombre importante sur la vie quotidienne des nobles bretons du treizième siècle (48). Je dois conclure. Une analyse beaucoup plus approfondie que celle que j'ai essayé de faire ici à propos de ces trois testaments est possible. Une telle analyse devrait aussi être replacée dans le contexte d'une meilleure connaissance des circonstances matérielles concernant particulièrement ces grandes familles, que celle qui a apparu dans cette communication. Cependant, trop peu d'éléments sont suffisamment solides pour que l'on puisse en tirer des généralisations sûres concernant des questions comme la grandeur des familles nobles dans la Bretagne médiévale, les taux d'extinction dans la lignée mâle, les moyens pour pourvoir aux besoins des plus jeunes fils et filles, la façon dont les grandes lignes théoriques étaient établies dans l'Assise du Comte Geoffroy, tous ces problèmes auraient un effet certain sur la dévolution de domaines nobles. On n'a rien pas trouver des tout premiers comptes de domaine avant le XIV e siècle ; pour cette raison, on ne connaît que très peu de choses avant cette date d'une façon indubitable sur l'étendue, la valeur et l'exploitation de propriétés nobiliaires (49). Il y a des signes qui indiquent des crises dans des cas individuels — les dettes de Geoffroy de la Guerche en sont un bon exemple — mais jusqu'à quel point de tels problèmes reflétaient-ils quelque chose de plus général ? Des preuves bien établies à partir de l'exemple de Geoffroy de Châteaubriant, un proche voisin, montrent combien les fortunes et les circonstances peuvent vraiment différer même à l'intérieur de la classe limitée de la plus haute noblesse bretonne. Quant à Geoffroy Tournemine, nullement le dernier de sa lignée à être impliqué dans des délits de violence, jusqu'à quel point représentait-il son groupe social ? (50) On ne le saura peut-être jamais mais les préoccupations quotidiennes de ces trois seigneurs tel qu'on a pu le voir à travers leurs dernières volontés et leurs testaments nous ont peut-être fourni quelque indication sur l'éventail de l'expérience à laquelle on s'attend ou ne s'attend pas et que ces documents de valeur nous font connaître. Figures illustres dans le duché du XIII e siècle, les (48) Ces légendes atteignirent leur apothéose dans les Mémoires d'Outre Tombe (éd. M. Levaillant, 4 t., Paris 1948), lorsque François-René de Chateaubriand donne un compte rendu sur sa famille. (49) Arch. dép. Ille-et-Vilaine 1 F 1535, des fragments des comptes de Vitré environ 1310 sont les plus anciens comptes bretons que j'ai découvert mis à part ceux qui se rapportent au domaine ducal. (50) MORICE, Preuves, ii.498-511 (1385), pour l'implication notoire de Pierre Tournemine dans le meurtre de Jean de Beaumanoir ; pour des charges semblables contre François, Georges et Jean Tournemine en 1486 pour le meurtre de Jean Eder, sire de Beaumanoir, voir Arch. dép. Loire-Atlantique E 200 n° 1.

La vie quotidienne de trois nobles bretons

109

trois testateurs avaient pour préoccupation principale de payer leurs dettes locales, de pourvoir aux besoins de véritables offices religieux pour eux-mêmes et leurs familles une fois qu'ils seraient décédés, et de régler leurs affaires du mieux qu'ils le pouvaient. Mais ils montrèrent aussi un certain intérêt pour la réalisation de plus grands aboutissements même si cela se manifesta surtout par des legs conventionnels aux Templiers. En ce qui concerne leurs aboutissements culturels, le patronage dans l'érudition, l'intérêt porté aux arts, aussi bien l'architecture que la littérature, les legs nous laissent dans un silence presque total — véritable supplice de Tantale (51). Mais sans les testaments notre ignorance serait encore plus profonde et nous devons leur être reconnaissants d'avoir survécu à l'épreuve du temps (52).

(51) Le legs de 101. de Geoffroy de la Guerche à Raoul, prêtre de Mouché, « Magistro scolarum de Guirchia» et les petites donations à la fabrique de diverses églises sont les seules indications d'un tel intérêt, quoique Geoffroy de Châteaubriant ordonna l'achèvement de l'église de Notre-Dame de Châteaubriant à ses dépenses. (52) Je voudrais remercier Mlle Sylvie Lescop et M. Philippe Lanoë pour leur aide dans la traduction de cet article.

This page intentionally left blank

V THE CHANCERY OF THE DUCHY OF BRITTANY FROM PETER MAUCLERC TO DUCHESS ANNE, 1213-15141 The Breton chancery fulfilled the same function as chanceries in other late medieval states by serving primarily as the writing office for letters issued in the name of the ruler. Such letters were normally authorised by the duke and his councillors - either by that small semi-permanent group of advisers who handled the day-to-day affairs of the duchy or by larger bodies called together for a particular purppse like Parlement or the Etats (which assembled fairly frequently from the late fourteenth century) or by informally summoned groups called to advise on special issues2. By the fifteenth century the letters issued could cover every matter of business from great matters of state down to the most insignificant administrative detail; the duke exercised in this res1

The following abbreviations have been used throughout: A Bret. Annales de Bretagne ALA Archives departemen tales de la Loire-Atlantique EEC Bibliotheque de I'ecole des chartes B. m. Bibliotheque municipale BSAF Bulletin de la societe archeologique du Finis tere Lapeyre & Scheurer A. Lapeyre and R. Scheurer, Les notaires et secretaires du roi sous les regnes de Louis XI, Charles VIII et Louis XII, 2 vols. Paris 1978. Lettres de Jean V Lettres et mandements de Jean V, due de Bretagne, 1402-1442, ed. R Blanchard, 5 vols. Nantes 1889-95. Monuments, ed. Plaine Monuments du proces de canonisation du bienheureux Charles de Blois, due de Bretagne, ed. F. Plaine, St-Brieuc 1921. MSHAB Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne Planiol Marcel Planiol, Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne, new edition, 5 vols. Mayenne 1981-4. Preuves Dom P-H. Morice, Memoires pour servir de preuves a I'histoire ecclesiastique et chile de Bretagne, 3 vols. Paris 1742-6 (reimpression 1968). Recueil Jean IV Recueil des actes de Jean IV, due de Bretagne, 1357-1399, ed. Michael Jones, 2 vols. Paris 1980-3. 2 Planiol, iii. 105-53, 411-25; B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les faux etats de Bretagne et les premiers etats de Bretagne, BEC, Ixxxvi (1925). 388-406; idem, Le conseil du due en Bretagne d'apres ses proces-verbaux, ibid., cxvi (1958), 136-69.

11 2

TTze Creation of Brittany

pect full sovereign powers over his subjects within the duchy. He corresponded and entered into treaties with foreign princes as an equal. At the head of his administration - both of the small ducal council and of the chancery itself- was the chancellor. It was under his authority that clerks and secretaries wrote the letters and the appropriate seals were attached. The two administrative organs of council and chancery, for long directly linked in the position of the chancellor, were in the end officially joined in the last ordonnance (1498) concerning the chancery in its late medieval phase and served between them as the chief guardians of the duke's rights3. Misunderstandings could arise. When in 1404 secretaries were reminded not to 'escrire lettres qui puissent grever ou porter dommage au royaume ne duchie de Bretaigne, ne autres lettres de grand pois pour envoier hors desdiz royaume et duchie sans deliberation de conseil' or when in 1459 it was decided 'touchant les lettres que le due en a escript a Paris, il convient que le due escripve a son procureur et gens de son conseill a Paris que la cause soit porseue o diligence, non obstant quelxconques Jettres que le due par inoportunes requestes inadvertment ou sans deliberacion de son conseil' had issued, we can see this friction. The chancery, just like the council, might act on its own authority. Individual clerks might be persuaded to issue letters unknown to council; the chancellor himself, as some charges in 1463 allege, might collude with them for private gain4. But in normal circumstances council and chancery cooperated to protect ducal interests and this role was not purely defensive. It involved the active preparation of what would now be called propaganda to promote those interests. Their reciprocal functions, even common personnel (for at any one moment other councillors besides the chancellor also worked in the chancery) can be emphasised at the outset. The chancery gave public expression to decisions taken in council. What is known about the chancery's records, organisation and personnel in Brittany during this period? First, its position, like that of the council, becomes progressively clearer as the period unfolds. WTien Jacques Levron catalogued the letters of Peter Mauclerc, ruler of the duchy between 1213-37, including documents in which Peter's name occurred, not simply limiting himself to those apparently issued by the chancery during his reign, he listed 283 entries. But of these he cited only 19 as still surviving originals relating to 3

Preuves, iii. 791. The ordonnance is transcribed at the beginning of Jean Regnier's accounts as paymaster of the chancery from April 1498-September 1512 (Nantes, B.m.,MS. 1336 fos. 2r-4v). 4 ALA, E 5 no. 3 (= Preuves, ii. 737, 1404); E 131 fo. 25r (1459); E 198 nos. 23-39 (cf. Preuves, iii. 38-40) and below p. 146 for 1463.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

113

Peter's rule, whilst the name of the chancellor who seems to have served for most of his reign appears just once in this catalogue5. Leon Mafrre compiled a similar catalogue for Charles de Blois and his wife, Jeanne de Penthievre, who ruled for a comparable period (1341-64) just over a century later, listing just 59 documents6. It is true that this was a time of civil war and there may be some truth in the claim that their successor, John IV (1345-99), deliberately attempted to destroy the documentary evidence of his predecessors' rule7. It is also unfortunately true that Maitre's catalogue is woefully inadequate as a survey of the surviving ducal letters of this period8. Yet the contrast with the next reign is startling. In my recent edition of the letters of John IV for the period 1357-99,1 have listed over 1200 entries. Whereas for Blois the names of 23 secretaries or clerks have been brought to light, the identity of his chancellors still remains obscure. But in the case of John IV, over 50 chancery clerks are known by name and a reasonably reliable sequence of chancellors can be constructed9. A keeper of the ducal archives (tresor des chartes) was appointed and in 1395 he compiled the first, still surviving, inventory of the ducal records10. This advance in available evidence continues with the next reign. There is an ordonnance issued jointly in 1404 by Philip the Bold, duke of Burgundy, and his ward John V (1399-1442), which throws some light on the organisation of the chancery and payments to its staff11. For a brief moment between 5

J. Levron, Catalogue des actes de Pierre de Dreux, due de Bretagne, MSHAB, xi (1930), 173-266. But it should be noted that Levron did not track down all surviving originals (for e.g. those of nos. 35 and 149, cited after Preuves, i. 831-2 and 869, can be found in Nantes, B.M., MS. 1691). For the single letter given 'per manum Ran' cancellarii' cf. no. 9 (March 1214), published in Recueil d'actes inedits des dues etprinces de Bretagne (Xle, XHe, Xllle siecles), ed. A. de la Borderie, Rennes 1889, no. LXXXV. 6 L. Maitre, Repertoire analytique des actes du regne de Charles de Blois, Bulletin de la societe archeologique de Nantes, xiv (1904), 247-73: Maitre made similar repertoires for the other dukes which still remain in manuscript (ALA, 14 J 2-15). 7 Planiol, iii. 23. 8 I have notes on at least a further 40 letters not in Maitre's list; cf. also ALA, 7 JJ 22, papiers de Rene Blanchard for a more complete repertoire of Blois's letters. 9 Recueil Jean IV, i. 35-7. For a provisional list of chancellors see below Appendix I. 10 ALA, E 238, 'Cest linventoire des lettres de monseignour le due de Bretaingne baillees en garde de Maistre Herve le Grant en la Thesaurerie de la Tourneuve de Nantes ou moys de Juign Ian mil troiscens quatrevins et quinze.' The oldest records date from the mid-thirteenth century, but the majority come from the reign of John IV himself. 839 articles are listed. 11 ALA, E 5 no. 3 ( = Preuves, ii. 735-40; Lettresdejean V, no. 2).

114

The Creation of Brittany

1404-8, fragments from two series of overlapping registers have been conserved in their original form or later transcripts12. These provide for the first time summaries of considerable numbers of letters issued from the chancery, with the result that for a reign of comparable length to that of his father, John Vs collected letters number some 2700 in the remarkable edition of Rene Blanchard, even though the editor unfortunately omitted the letters issued during the minority (1399-1405). The names of over 160 chancery clerks are known for this period13. The records of the next three short-lived dukes (Francis I, 1442-50; Peter II, 1450-7; Arthur III, 1457-8) have been less well preserved14. But from 1462 there survives a broken 'series of original registers covering some 20 of the last 52 years of the period in detail, while eighteenth-century transcripts or publications provide some indications of the contents of now lost registers for a further four years13. From them can be obtained a comprehensive view of ducal government at work as it expressed itself through the formal work of the chancery or, in the case of the register for 1490-1, of an administration in crisis during the last days of the independent duchy. From February 1491, in particular, this register shows increasing disorder in the enrollment of documents. There are many blanks for letters which were to be written up subsequently but never were. Folios have been misplaced or lost and office routine as a whole appears to have collapsed almost entirely between March and July. Only the siege of Nantes in 1487 had provoked similar irregularities on an earlier occasion on such a scale16. Subsequently, when Brittany came into the hands of Charles VIII of France, he officially suppressed the post of chancellor and replaced it with a governor of the chancery. Letters were issued largely in the King's name, omitting mention of his wife, the former duchess Anne, and no regi-

12

cf. Lettres deJean V, i. pp. c-cxvi for a description; ALA, B 1, 12 March-22 July 1407 fragments. 13 Identified in the index by the note 'acte signe par lui.' 14 Extracts from the lost register of Arthur III are in Preuves, ii. 1709-18. 15 ALA, B 2-21 covering 1462-3, 1466-8, 1473, 1477, 1480, 1486-8, 1489-91, 1503, 1505-6, 1508-11, 1513. Preuves, iii. 321^ (1477), 538-41 (1486-7), 574-83 (1487-8), 662-4 (1489-90) for published extracts; ibid., 238-9 (1472), 281-3 (1474_5) and 456-8 (1484) for extracts from now lost registers. 16 Between 12 March-23 July 1491 there are no entries (ALA, B 13 fos. 126r-128 bis v). Many documents from this register have been printed in Choix de documents inedits sur le regne de la duchesse Anne de Bretagne, ed. A. de la Borderie, Rennes 1902. ALA, B 10 fos. 187 et seq. for the confusion at the time of the siege in 1487 when there was a complete break in registration from 7-31 July.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

115

sters have survived17. At present the series recommences with the register for 1503 - Queen Anne, acting in her own right as duchess, had re-established the chancery two days after the death of her husband in April 149818 - and only two registers are missing for the last ten years of her reign. In comparison with entries in the registers of Francis II or in those of the first years of her own reign, their content is now much more formal, though it is unfair to say that they only contain remissions in full as one recent commentator has stated19. Clearly, however, with the disappearance of the independent Breton state after 1491, most of the political and diplomatic material which predominated when Brittany was still at war with France also disappears. From Anne's reign, too, there are a number of documents throwing light on the functioning of the chancery like a unique fragment of a daily register of fees, collected on behalf of the chancellor, for the issue of letters between October 1489 and 1 February 1490 and other material relating to the payment of secretaries, especially between 1498 and 151220. There are the two important ordonnances - that relating to the abolition of the chancery by Charles VIII in 1493 and that to its re-establishment in 1498 - which add considerably to a precise knowledge of its personnel. In addition important efforts were made to provide suitable accommodation for the preservation of the records at Nantes both by Charles VIII and Anne. In the early sixteenth century the archives were placed in wooden boxes (cassettes) in cupboards (armoires] and given a reference number which served to identify them until the compilation of the Inyentaire sommaire in the nineteenth century. The original boxes still survive, whilst the contemporary reference numbers on documents which have been scattered since the early sixteenth century have enabled archivists to identify several formerly kept at Nantes21. As a result the reign of Anne is by far the best documented in the period under study, though as the records relating to the inquiry into the alleged misconduct of Chancellor Guillaume Chauvin in 1463 show, a penetrating light can occasionally be thrown onto chancery practices at earlier periods. 17

Preuves, iii. 757-8. Maitre lists only two grants made in Anne's name between her marriage to Charles VIII in December 1491 and her widowhood in April 1498 (ALA, 14 J 15). 18 Preuves, iii. 791. 19 H. de Berranger, Guide des Archives de la Loire-Atlantique, 2 vols. Nantes 1962-4, i. 18. 20 ALA, E 212 no. 21 shows 717 ecus were collected; for a breakdown of the types of letters issued, see below Appendix II; Nantes, B. m., MS. 1336, payments. 21 L Delisle, Pieces soustraites au tresor des chartes des dues de Bretagne, EEC, liv (1893), 413-7; Iviii (1897), 379-80. The best account of the development of the tresor des chartes is in Lett res dejean V, i. p. iii et seq.

116

The Creation of Brittany

Despite this increasing wealth of evidence and considerable interest in all aspects of the history of the duchy during the later middle ages, studies of diplomatic and the systematic edition of ducal letters have not advanced as quickly as might have been expected given the fundamental work on the Breton chancery done with admirable thoroughness by Blanchard almost a century ago in his monumental edition of the letters of John V. He included a survey of the earlier history of the chancery and its archives. He paid particular attention to the origins of registration which, in some form, he traced back to the thirteenth century22. He also provided a full description of the diplomatic of documents for John Vs reign, which with some modification also seems to hold good for earlier periods too23. It would be futile to attempt to emulate that description here, but it should also be noted that in addition Blanchard kept detailed notes on ducal acta from other reigns and that these notes, together with those of his literary executor, Abbe Bordeaut, himself a very competent historian, still form a remarkable source of information on Breton diplomatic. Both fichiers are now deposited at the Archives departementales de la Loire-Atlantique24. A few additional letters of John V have been discovered since Blanchard's day but general studies of the Breton chancery have advanced little25. The ill-fated Marcel Planiol, a near contemporary of Blanchard, provided some useful pages on the chancery in his Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne, but unfortunately neither Levron nor Maitre in their later catalogues attempted a serious study of the diplomatic of their respective dukes' chanceries26. Although a welcome start has been made to calendaring the late fifteenth-century registers in diplomas undertaken by students at the University of Nantes (a series which is currently being revived under M. Jean Kerherve at the University of Western Brittany at Brest), by

22

ibid., p. c. He claimed that the word Scripta on the dorse of letters of John I in 1275 was contemporary. However similar notes, in a hand and ink which appear identical, occur on a number of documents widely separated in date (e.g. ALA, E l 51 nos. 7 [1294] and 10 [1371]) and suggest that many of these notes were later cataloguing marks, possibly c. 1400 when the ducal archives were first seriously inventoried (see below p. 140 and cf. A.-L Courtel, La chancellerie et les actes d'Eudes IV, due de Bourgogne [1315-1349], EEC, cxxxv [1977], 304). For the additional R or Registrata on letters of John IV and John V, cf. Recueiljean IV, p. 34. 2 3 cf. ibid., 23-34. 24 There is a typescript inventory (ALA, 7 JJ); see in particular 7 JJ 20, notes on diplomatic by Blanchard. 25 cf. F. Merlet, Cinq actes inedits de Jean V, due de Bretagne, Association bretonne, 1933, pp. 109-19. 26 Above notes 5, 6 and 8; cf. Planiol, iii. 115-21.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

117

their nature these studies of a single annual register preclude a serious comparative approach to the diplomatic of the period27. The main addition to the corpus of available material has been the recently completed edition of the letters of John IV, in which parallels and contrasts with his son's reign have been commented upon briefly. More particular attention has been devoted to the seals of that duke which have been shown to display a hitherto unsuspected richness of variety, form and symbolism which is in line with the increasingly independent aspirations of the duke as a ruler28. Although this variety cannot be matched in the seals of any other rulers of the duchy, comparative studies of sigillography in Brittany will in future be considerably assisted by the compilation at the departmental archives at Nantes of a photographic record, now available for consultation, of all the surviving seals in that repository. To sum up the results of a hundred years' labours, the letters of two dukes have been edited or calendared in their entirety, those of two others have been listed (one very inadequately), but ten out of the fourteen rulers of the duchy between 1213-1514 still await definitive editions of their letters which would enable a sound comparative study of diplomatic and of the development of the chancery to be written. The lack of serious studies of the letters of John I (1237-86), Francis II (1458-88) and Anne (1488-1514) - who briefly issued letters jointly with her first husband, Maximilian, king of the Romans - are especially regrettable29. We may now turn to the organisation and role of the chancery. The period from 1213 to the mid-fourteenth century is a dark age about which little is, 27

J-P. Dupuis, Les activites de la chancellerie du due de Bretagne en 1466, DES Nantes 1964; J-J. Dubreuil, Les activites... en 1468, DES Nantes 1965; A. Lescouzieres, Les activites . . . en 1477, Memoire de maitrise, Nantes 1968. Copies of these are deposited at ALA. 28 Recueil Jean IV, i. 40-5 and more fully Michael Jones, The Seals of John IV, duke of Brittany, 1364-1399, The Antiquaries Journal, lv ; see below, pp. 159-74. 29 Anne was married by procuration to Maximilian on 19 December 1490 and is styled Queen for the first time in the registers on 4 January 1491 (ALA, B 13 fo. 100r), though letters of 28 December 1490 refer to her by that title (Preuves, iii. 682). The usual address of their joint letters was 'Maximilian et Anne, par la grace de Dieu, roy et royne des Remains, due et duchesse de Bretaigne, a touz ceulx qui cestes presentes lettres verront, salut' (cf. Choix de documents, ed. La Borderie, nos. LXVIIILXX). The latest letters in that form that I have seen are dated 28 September 1491 (ALA, B 13 fos. 141 v-2 v), though as late as 15 November letters issued earlier were still being registered with that title (ibid., fos. I43r-4r). Anne married Charles VIII by a contract of 6 December 1491 (Paris, Bibliotheque nationale MS. Nouv. acq. frangaise 11339, cf. Preuves, iii. 711-8).

118

The Creation of Brittany

or perhaps can be, certainly known, for the separate existence of a chancery cannot be definitely established. The succession of a Capetian cadet in 1213 seems to have coincided with a number of changes in diplomatic practice. It was, perhaps, natural that Levron, who first directed attention to these (which he viewed favourably), should have attributed them largely to the influence of a French cleric who accompanied Mauclerc to Brittany and became his chancellor, Rainaud, future bishop of Quimper. 'Aux usages anglais, he wrote, qui etaient jusque-la observes dans la redaction des actes, il substitua des regies franchises. Sous sa direction, les scribes de la cour ducale adopterent des habitudes d'ordre, de clarte. Rainaud imposa meme ces pratiques aux chancelleries secondaires (monasteres et petites cours feodales)30.' These views have been repeated by subsequent writers, although they now seem to be largely misconceived31. It is true that in comparison with charters dating from the period of Plantagenet domination in the duchy (c. 1156-1206), there are some grounds for arguing that a majority of Mauclerc's letters are somewhat simpler in form, technically more ordered and their latinity clearer32. But it is at a cost. Those interested in administration or in diplomatic will regret the absence of witness lists, a paucity of details on the circumstances of issue, often imprecise dating clauses, a dearth of indications on the type and mode of attachment of the seal, failure by the scribes responsible for the documents to append their names and an absence of other useful additional notes in comparison with both earlier Breton documents and those issued later. It is, in fact, the loss of just such features which makes study of the Breton proto-chancery and its organisation during the thirteenth century such a barren one at present - rather like that of the royal chancery at a slightly earlier period33. Evidence for personnel from the chancellor downwards is almost entirely lac-

30 Levron, MSHAB, xi (1930), 175. 31 J. L. Montigny, Essai sur les institutions du duche de Bretagne a I'epoque de Pierre Mauclerc, Paris 1961, p. 51 simply plagiarises Levron. 32 cf. Recueil, ed. La Borderie, nos. LXXXIII-CII. Most of the original charters of Mauclerc which I have seen are of modest dimensions (200X100 mm or less), sometimes in a very contracted hand and lacking decorative features, characteristics to be observed in the diplomatic of other regions of the west in this period. 33 cf. M. Nortier, Les actes de Philippe Auguste: notes critiques sur les sources diplomatiques du regne, in La France de Philippe Auguste. Le temps des mutations, ed. R. H. Bautier (Actes du Colloque international organise par le C. N. R. S., Paris 29 septembre-4 octobre 1980), Paris 1982, pp. 429-51.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

119

king34. In the absence of any paleographical studies, the identity of different ducal clerks and their hands is unknown, and not until some aid is afforded by financial accounts late in the century may we guess some names. For it was not until the reign of Charles de Blois (1341-64) that it became normal practice for clerks to sign their names again, whilst lists of witnesses only begin to re-appear consistently from c. 1330. Warranty notes such as 'Par le conseiP or more detailed references to the circumstances of issue or on the seal used only appear at all regularly from the end of the thirteenth century 35 . At that period, and indeed for the rest of the Middle Ages, advantage was particularly taken of formal meetings like Parlement, sessions of the Chambre des Comptes and also of the Etats to publicise grants and privileges36. It may be gathered from all of this that in the thirteenth century Breton chancery practices, in keeping with other aspects of the rudimentary administration of the duchy, lagged considerably behind the much more sophisticated chanceries of France or England37. To take the example of the missing clerk's signature; already in Edward I's reign in England the legal manual Fleta had stated as axiomatic that every royal writ 'had to bear the name of the scribe who wrote it, so as to engage the scribe's responsibility towards the purchaser of the writ38.' In French royal letters, likewise, the addition of the name of the clerk became a feature of late thirteenth century documents and

34

In addition to the letter cited in note 5, Rainaud delivered judgement in 1219 as 'R. del gratia Corisopitensis electus Britannic cancellarius' (Paris, Bibl. nat., MS. latin 9035 fo. 6 no. 2) and was still called chancellor by Gregory IX in 1236 (Abbe Peyron, Actes du Saint-Siege concernant les eveches de Quimper et de Leon, Bulletin diocesain d'histoire et d'archeologie de Quimper, 1911, p. 249 no. 35). But no other thirteenth-century chancellors are known. In 1293 Bertrand de Chaveigne, alloue at Rennes, described himself as 'lator sigilli ipsius ducis tune temporis' (Cartulaire de I'abbaye de Saint-Georges de Rennes, ed. P. de la Bigne Villeneuve, Rennes 1876, appendice no. XLIV) but this may simply have meant that he held the seal of contracts of the court of Rennes rather than the ducal great seal. 35 The name Yvon de Noial appears at the foot of a letter in 1274 (Preuves, i. 1033 cf. Cartulaire du Morbihan, ed. L. Rosenzweig, Vannes 1895, no. 356) but it is a unique case; for a letter authorised 'Par nostre bon conseiP in 1318 see Preuves, i. 1281; cf. Courtel, EEC, cxxxv (1977), passim for remarkable parallels with Burgundian practice. 36 Preuves, i. 1084-5, 1090, 1361, 1369; Nouveau recueil d'actes inedits des dues et princes de Bretagne (XUle et XIVe siecles), ed. A. de la Borderie, Rennes 1902, nos. XII and XIII; Planiol, iii. 135 et seq. 37
120

The Creation of Brittany

from this period separate lists of royal notaries begin to survive39. This similarly was to become a rule in the Breton chancery - the letters enrolled on the surviving registers all bear the name of the clerk responsible for them - but the practice does not begin to operate until c. 1342, perhaps as an innovation by Blois's French clerks40. It is thus not just on the grounds that Levron's views are simplistic, nor his evident prejudice against the supposed 'English practices' of the Plantagenets, nor his touching faith in the ability of Rainaud to impose standard practices not only on the Breton chancery but on other scriptoria in the duchy, that I would now judge his opinions inadequate. Rather, it is clear that the changes he observed, whilst owing something to the installation of a new regime - and one manifestly much influenced by Capetian example - were also part of a general movement in Western Europe. This was fuelled by growing literacy and familiarity with written records, their increasing number and the need to streamline and standardize office procedure. 'La grande nouveaute du regne (de Philippe Auguste), it has recently been argued, est precisement le recours constant a 1'ecrit41.' It was a time of experiment in documentary forms in response to pressures which demanded more business-like, precise and unambiguous official records though, conversely, in the course of development, there was a period when some records temporarily became less precise, too simplified, lacking authenticating detail. Something of the same process may be seen at work in the royal chancery as standardization occurred42. In other words, although some of the changes which happened in the thirteenth-century Breton proto-chancery may be attributable to the deliberate decision of the chancellor and his staff to adopt certain specific practices in imitation of other influential chanceries - notably the French, but one might suspect the English and papal chanceries as well - or because of increasing familiarity with Roman law and notarial practice, many usages seem to have crept in gradually, even surreptitiously, over long periods. It was surely by a similar process of imitation, rather than at the behest of the chancellor, that 39 Lapeyre & Scheurer, i. x et seq. 'Mentions hors teneur' only occur in Burgundian letters from c. 1331 (Courtel, EEC, cxxxcv [1977], 295). 40 Preuves, i. 1345,1431. 41 R. H. Bautier, La place du regne de Philippe Auguste dans Phistoire de la France medievale, La France de Philippe Auguste, p. 17 and cf. M. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record. England 1066-1307, London 1979, pp. 29-59. 42 A comparison with the letters of Louis VI, Louis VII and Philip Augustus is instructive in this respect, whilst the splendid exhibition Die Furstenkanzki des Mittelalters, Munchen, 25. Oktober-18. Dezember 1983 organised by the Staatlichen Archive Bayerns provided admirable evidence for a similar evolution in Germany.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

121

letters written elsewhere in the duchy adopted similar forms. The result was that certain formulae were favoured (or ignored) for a period before being replaced (or omitted) by slightly different forms. Thus the relaxation of precise detail on dating, notable in Mauclerc's letters, is gradually replaced in John I's reign by more informative clauses; conversely John I's early letters make only the most sparing references to the seal which was attached, frequently, indeed, omitting all mention of it43. Yet the overall appearance of ducal letters, like royal ones from the 1190s, remained fairly constant from one reign to the next44. As far as we can tell, at this stage the duke made regular use of only two seals - the great seal (with a counter seal) and a secret seal45. In the fourteenth century, dukes from Charles de Blois began to use privy seals and signets much more freely and, from early in John Vs reign, a seal of majesty, a unique usurpation of sovereign rights by a French prince46. As in other chanceries there developed a close connection between the particular seal used, its mode of attachment, the colour of the wax and the type of letter to which it was appended. In the thirteenth century the dukes used white or yellow wax for solemn grants (later considered a royal prerogative), and by the late fourteenth century it was normal to use green wax for grants in perpetuity (appended to the most solemn and elaborate letters on multi-coloured silk laces) and red wax for other business. Any deviation from the usual routine was noted on the document as an added precaution - the use of a departmental or institutional seal, a seal of absence, a particular signet or privy seal. A final authenticating feature was the autograph of the duke. John IV seems to have been the first duke to have annotated his letters extensively (from 1372), not 43 Dating by the Easter style was generally adopted in Brittany in the early thirteenth century (cf. A. Oheix, Recherches sur le commencement de 1'annee civile en Bretagne au Moyen Age, Le Moyen Age, xxvii [1914], 215-32). From about 1250 John I made occasional references to his seal but still exceptional for their detail are letters issued at Rome on 7 April 1256 (Preuves, i. 963-4) in making his submission to Alexander IV, where the close supervision of the papal chancery may be felt. 44 M. Nortier's introduction to the Recueil den actes de Philippe Auguste, 4 vols., ed. H. Fr. Delaborde, Ch. Petit-Dutaillis, J. Monicat, J. Boussard and M. Nortier, Paris 1916-79, will contain an important discussion of diplomatic. 45 Plates 1-6, following p. 122 below, provide a few examples of ducal seals. 46 ALA, E 176 no. 5 (1353) has an impression of Blois's small armorial seal and Public Record Office, London, E 30 no. 74 (1356) for an impression of his signet. 10 examples of John Vs first seal of majesty were known to Blanchard, dating from 18 May 1405-4 June 1408 (Lettres dejean V, i. p. Ixxxvi). It replaced a large privy seal of John IV which showed the duke as a standing, armed figure ; below, pp. 168-9.

122

The Creation of Brittany

merely with his signature. His successors were usually less free with their holograph comments, but all continued to sign throughout their rule. In contrast to the royal practice by which certain clerks imitated the royal sign manual, Francis II in 1483 took advantage of the introduction of printing to have his normal signature engraved on a block for application to routine financial documents to lessen the burdens of government47. The most obvious external change to occur in the form of thirteenthcentury Breton documents was the way in which French was adopted as a new language for charters from the late 1240s. This innovation may be considered not as a deliberate act of state, an early anticipation of the ordonnance of Villers-Coterets, but one brought about largely by a natural geographical diffusion of that language in written sources. At first used only for documents relating to the affairs of the ducal family and great nobles, it reflected the spoken language of the Breton court and, presumably, the desire of the parties involved to be as fully informed as possible on their legal position. Then documents in French rapidly began to appear across the whole duchy between c. 1250-80, even in the remotest western districts, until they were even used for transactions between religious houses involving no lay parties48. The language's advance in Brittany came a generation or more after French had begun to be employed regularly for similar transactions in north-eastern France, about twenty years after its incursion into Saintonge, Poitou and the Charentais, but only a few years after its appearance in documents issued in the Middle Loire region - Anjou, Touraine and Berry49. Royal and princely chanceries had been remarkably conservative, even resistant to the use of the vulgar tongue in France, but it is interesting to note that the first royal letters issued in French by Louis IX in 1254 involved John I of Brittany as one of the parties30.

47

Recueil Jean IV, i. 29-31 and Lettres de Jean V, i. p. Ixxiii for the holograph of John IV and John V; ALA, E 128 no. 6 (1483), printed below p. 157. 48 Preuves, i. 940-2 (1249) for the earliest ducal letters in French. Many documents exhanged by John I and Herve, vicomte de Leon, were in French (Recueil, ed. La Borderie, pp. 238-74). The first ducal ordonnance in French was the Assise des Pledeours (1259) though Planiol believed the text to be a translation of a lost Latin original (La tres ancienne coutume de Bretagne, Rennes 1896, p. 331, cf. Preuves, i. 971). I have noted letters in French amongst ecclesiastical archives from 1255 (abbey of Bocquen), 1257 (St-Malo de Dinan), 1262 (abbey of St-Aubin des Bois), 1264 (abbey of Geneston), 1272 (priory of Montonac), 1275 (abbey of Buzay), 1277 (St-Magloire de Lehon), etc. 49 A. Giry, Manuel de diplomatique, Paris 1903, pp. 467-70. 50 Paris, Arch. Nat., J 198 no. 97 (= Preuves, i. 985), cf. G. Tessier, Diplomatique royalefranfaise, Paris 1962, p. 239-

la Ib

Peter Mauclerc, Secretum meum, 1219, actual size 40 mm., ALA, E 78 no. 5. John I, Small seal, 1253, actual size 43 mm., ALA, H 46.

2

John I, Great seal, 1263, actual size 83 mm., ALA, E 17 no. 1.

3

John V, Great seal no. 2, 1424, actual size 100 mm. ALA, E 29 no. 6.

4

Peter II, seal of majesty, 1453, actual size, 77 mm., ALA, E 155 no. 13.

5

Francis II, Great seal, 1481, actual size 104 mm E 4 no. 3. ' '

ALA

6a 6b

Peter II, Counter seal, 1453, actual size, 54 mm., ALA, E 155 no. 13. Francis II, Counter seal, actual size 58 mm., ALA, E 4 no. 3.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

123

A superficial survey of protocol in letters issued by Mauclerc and his successors (in the notification, address, salutation or ducal title and the dating clauses) reveals that there were certain, limited, standard forms which continued in use from reign to reign, subject only to necessary modifications dependent on personal circumstances - the addition or omission of an extra territorial title, a particularly solemn form of address, the conventional reversal of the normal word order to show deference to a superior party51. So that although no early formularies have been discovered - the first register which may have had that purpose was compiled by Master Herve le Grant at the beginning of the fifteenth century52 - it is plain that there were established and regularly followed forms practised by Breton clerks throughout the period with which we are dealing. Ducal letters and grants were no longer written up, as they had once been in Brittany as elsewhere, by the beneficiaries, but in the chancery. Apart from the change from Latin to French as the normal language for the vast majority of documents written from c. 1280, the formulae used by John III (1312-41) or Francis II differed little from those used by Mauclerc. The introduction of new formulae - the phrase 'par la grace de Dieu' into the ducal title by 1417, for instance - thus had a deliberate political significance. It was a further step in the duke's increasing assertion of his own independent sovereignty which marks the rule of all the late medieval dukes53. 51

Whether they actually enjoyed possession or not, all dukes in this period from Mauclerc usually included the title 'earl of Richmond' (Comes Richemondie, conte de Richemont) in their style, unless the county was held by a cadet. Among other titles used by more than one duke were those of viscount of Limoges, and count of Montfort, Etampes and Vertus, whilst Mauclerc was briefly lord of La Garnache, Charles de Blois and Jeanne de Penthievre were lord and lady of Avaugour, Guyse and Mayenne, John IV was lord of the Rape of Hastings and of Rays, and Arthur III, lord of Parthenay and constable of France. 52 ALA, E 236, containing letters dated between 1220-1407, a splendid manuscript bound in red leather boards, roughly 300X340 mm. '(C)y ensuit la tenour par vidimus et copie de pluseurs des lettres de tres excellent prince et segnour monseignour le due de Bretaingne que Maistre Herve le Grant tresorier et garde dicelles a fait escripre en cest livre pour lutilite et profit de mondit seignour des quelles ensuit les rebriches en la forme si apres contenantes ...' (fo. 5 r). The majority were copied by Jean Halouart and Jamet Lamouroux, notaries. 53 Lettres de jean V, i. p. xxxiv, where an example of 1408 is also discussed. In letters drawn up by a notary, but bearing the duke's own autograph signature, agreeing to marry Juana of Navarre (13 April 1385) John IV is styled 'Jehan, par la graice de Dieu, due de Bretaingne', the only such case I have come across (Archive general de Navarra, Caj. 49 no. 20, cf. Recueiljean IV, i. 27). Although listed in the supplement to that Recueil, no. 540 B, a full text arrived too late for inclusion. See now MSHAB, Ixi (1984), 101-2, and below pp. 193-4.

124

The Creation of Brittany

The implication of these last few remarks is that there was tradition and continuity, the maintenance of archives and the training of clerks in the particular forms of letters issued in the duke's name, even though little can be directly learnt of all this before 1341. As more records survive, so the range of business covered also expands until, inter alia, we find the duke exercising the whole range of powers which royal officials were anxious to reserve solely to the sovereign. He ennobled, enfranchised, legitimised, amortised, created notaries, fairs, markets and warrens, authorised fortifications, controlled taxation, struck money (including gold from the reign of Charles de Blois), enjoyed regalian rights during ecclesiastical vacancies, issued safeconducts and pardons, even by the later middle ages, claimed the jurisdiction of cases of lese-majeste*4. And although the expansion of the political ambitions of the duke is sometimes signalled by the exercise of a right revealed by a new form of letter from time to time - John V, for example, particularly exercised his powers of ennoblement and promotion of those already within the ranks of the nobility - it would be wrong automatically to assume, in the absence both of diplomatic studies and of the fragmentary survival of the documents, that previous dukes had never exercised similar privileges35. But of the internal organisation of the chancery which produced this diverse range of records, at least before 1341, little is known. We may presume that there was a succession of chancellors after Rainaud though the example of Burgundy where there was a break between c. 1210-70 may make us equally wary. The likelihood is that they were clerics but there is no definite evidence until mention of Mace le Bart, canon of Dol and Rennes, as chancellor in 1319. There is a tradition that he served John III for 15 years and that he had a hand in the compilation of La tres ancienne coutume de Bretagne''6. Later on there was Gautier de St-Pern, bishop of Vannes, who

54

Michael Jones, 'Boris Bretons et bons Francoys': The Language and meaning of treason in later medieval France, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 32 (1982), 91-112; idem, Trahison et 1'idee de lese-majeste dans la Bretagne du quinzieme siecle, Actes du 107 e Congres national des societes savantes, Brest 1982 , Paris 1984, La faute, la repression et le pardon, p. 91-106. 55 A single letter ennobling lands survives for John IV (Recueil Jean IV, ii. no. 773). In Burgundy the duke had been exercising this right since 1371 and in the Bourbonnais since 1334 (A. de Barthelemy, Etude sur les lettres d'anoblissement, Revue historique nobiliaire, 1869; see also R.H. Lucas, Ennoblement in Late Medieval France, Mediaeval Studies, xxxi [1977], 239-60). 56 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Mahe le Leal ou Mace le Bart, 1'un des auteurs de la Tres Ancienne Coutume de Bretagne, Revue historique de droit francais et etranger, 4erne ser., iv (1925), 445-53.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

125

seems to have served under Charles de Blois for whom a number of other names have also been suggested as chancellors57. The habit of referring to the chancellor as 'Vous' in the list of witnesses from c. 1361 is a complicating factor since it deprives us on many occasions of certainty as to the identity of the chancellor concerned58. For this reason, when the duchy was still divided by civil war, we cannot be sure who it was who served John IV as chancellor possibly John de Locmine, archdeacon of Vannes. But after 1364 other evidence is available and it is notable that at least three of John IVs next six chancellors were laymen, signalling the end of a long clerical monopoly in the fourteenth century in Brittany as in other contemporary administrations. Though the post was to be held again by clerics in the first half of the fifteenth century, thereafter it reverted to laymen. Jean, vicomte de Rohan, in the fourteenth century and Louis de Rohan, sire de Guemene and Philippe de Montauban, sire de Sens, in the fifteenth came from some of the most distinguished families in the duchy, though in the latter two cases they were from cadet branches, but the other lay chancellors emerged from more obscure backgrounds. Silvestre de la Feuillee and Jean de la Riviere were minor nobles and the latter was also a 'maistre en medecin'59; others came from bourgeois families or from those of very recent noble status and owed their advance to their professional expertise in the law. They had often acquired their training by attending university and holding other administrative posts. Once acquired the post might be filled for a long period: Jean de Malestroit was chancellor for thirty-five years from 1408-43, Guillaume Chauvin for 22 (1459-81) and Philippe de Montauban for almost thirty years (1487-1514), though he had a rival early in his appointment and was deprived of the title during Charles VIII's reign. All three have attracted attention because of their important political role -John, duke of Alencpn, considered Malestroit so influential with John V that he captured him in 1431, provoking a small war. The long-standing rivalry of Chauvin with Pierre Landoys, Arch. dep. Pyrenees-Atlantiques, E 624 no. 1, accounts for the viscounty of Limoges show various payments to Gautier as chancellor of Brittany in 1345-6. Witnesses at the 1371 canonisation inquiry (Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 118; Preuves, ii. 20) mention Auffroy le Voyer and Guillaume Paris as chancellors but I have been unable to confirm this. 58 Recueil Jean IV, i. 35-6. There is an original letter of Blois in the bottom right hand corner of which there is the note 'Vo' with a contraction which could be extended as Vous or voir, possibly indicating the chancellor's presence (Nantes, B. m., MS. 1707 no. 2, 24 Feb. 1347), otherwise the earliest example of the practice is Recueil Jean IV, i. no. 8 (8 Feb. 1361). The chancellor did not use a visa in Brittany. 59 Arch. dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 F 1116, fragments of accounts of Arthur III. 57

126

The Creation of Brittany

Francis IPs treasurer, has given rise to much discussion, particularly since their feud involved matters of principle over conflicting foreign policies. It ended in the cruel death of Chauvin, imprisoned at Landoys' behest, and in the violent end of the treasurer himself in 1485, events which are part of the general history of the fifteenth-century duchy60. The story of Montauban's career would also be worth telling in more detail. He first appeared in ducal service as a man-at-arms in the ordonnance companies in 1465 and he can be traced through other military and civil ranks until he became chancellor in September 1487. The next few years were especially hectic as he tried to protect Duchess Anne from the rival baronial cliques who wanted to use her as a pawn in a complex diplomatic game as the final war of independence was fought against France. He survived both personal misfortunes and considerable financial losses in the duchess's cause, provoking after 1491 the hostility of royal councillors like Cardinal Guillaume Bricpnnet by his uncompromising stand for Breton rights. But he emerged again as chancellor of the duchy in 1498, when he was able to rebuild his fortunes. His final solemn service to his mistress was his central role in the burial of her heart in the Carmelites' church in Nantes in 1514 amidst much pomp. However, on his death shortly afterwards the position of chancellor of Brittany was amalgamated with that of the chancellor of France61. And what of other, lesser known, chancellors like Francois Chrestien, allegedly a pawn of Landoys, appointed to replace Chauvin, but who in 1485 refused to seal letters in which Landoys accused his enemies of lese-majeste? He was, said the chronicler Alain Bouchart, who

60

P. Thomas-Lacroix, Jean de Malestroit, chancelier du due Jean V, Bulletin de la societe archeologique et historique de Nantes et de Loire-Atlantique, cxv (1978), 135-93; B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Franfois II, due de Bretagne, et I'Angleterre (1458-1488), Paris 1929. 61 Preuves, iii. 124, 238, 388, 427, 462 (military career). Promoted to chancellor through the influence of the duke of Orleans and prince of Orange (according to Alain Bouchart, Les Grands Croniques de Eretaigne, ed. H. Le Meignen, Nantes 1886, fo. 235 v) in September 1487 (ALA, B 10 fo. 246bisr; Preuves, iii. 541), an attempt to replace him by Gilles de la Riviere, a former vicechancellor, was made in January 1489 (ibid., 617) but he kept Anne's favour and was her staunchest defender in the next few years (B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, La polidque d'Anne de Bretagne. Inspirateurs et intentions, MSHAB, xxvii (1947), 1-16; idem, Les debuts du gouvernement de Charles VIII en Bretagne, EEC, cxv (1957), 138-55). He drew up his will on 27 June 1514 (Preuves, iii. 923—4). Unfortunately there is no surviving register for 1514 to show when he last sat as chancellor. For his role at the burial of Anne's heart see below p. 151 and note 172.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

127

had probably served under him, 'un homme simple et paisible'62. It would be interesting to know more about him and the other chancellors as influential political figures. Here, however, we must limit ourselves to a few further remarks on the role of the chancellor. By the fifteenth century something of the dignity of his office can be gathered from his place on ceremonial occasions. In the funeral procession for Francis II, for instance, the seals of the duchy were borne before the chancellor on a square of velvet. Other members of the chancery, too, including no less than 24 secretaries received black cloth for mourning robes63. Montauban was similarly accompanied by the full chancery staff, maitres des requites and secretaries in the vast procession to bury Anne's heart. Elsewhere, in Parlement and at the Etats, chancery officials had their special positions. It was the chancellor who normally gave the speech from the throne on the latter occasions. It was he who summed up council discussions and gave the decisive opinion64. Among his most important public appearances in the later middle ages came to be the speech which he made on behalf of the duke at the ceremony where he rendered homage to the king of France. In the thirteenth century this homage was indisputably liege but from 1366 every effort was made by the duke to avoid pronouncing the, by now, distasteful words acknowledging his inferiority. When John IV first refused, royal officials were outraged as they continued to be as the same charade (as it has been called) continued to be reenacted at every homage ceremony until Louis XI's reign65. In the interim it was the chancellor who was called upon to justify his master's refusal and his speech on these occasions needed to be a masterpiece of tact. Of course a compromise formula was reached - the duke performed homage 'as his predecessors had done' without specifically mentioning that it was liege homage. This usually satisfied both parties. But it was always a

62 Bouchart, fos. 226 v, 231 v; ALA, E 212 no. 17 fo. 6r, 'A maistre Francois Chrestien chancelier de Bretaigne institue aud. office environ le premier jour de Juign (1484) derrain pour ses gaiges jouira du sceau de la chancellerie.' 63 Documents inedits sur le Complot Breton de M. CCCC. XC. II, ed. A. de la Borderie, Nantes 1884, no. XLVII at pp. 85-7, 64 Pierre Cheque, Brittany Herald, Commemoracion et advertissement de la mort de ... madame Anne (edited by L. Merlet and Max. de Gombert as Recit des funeraittes d'Anne de Bretagne, Paris 1858); I have used the copy for a princess of the house of Bourbon (Nantes, B.m., MS. 653); Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, EEC, cxvi (1958), 154 after ALA, E 131, the surviving minutes of the council, 1459-62. 65 P. Jeulin, L'hommage de la Bretagne, ABret., xli (1934), 380-473; B.A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Une idee politique de Louis XI: la sujetion eclipse la vassalite, Revue historique, no. 460 (oct.-dec 1961), 383-98; Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 19, 46-7.

128

The Creation of Brittany

stern test and in preparation for it, as council minutes in 1461 make clear, careful arrangements had to be made beforehand to ensure that the duke's case was not mishandled66. It was at these moments that the value of the chancery's staff became apparent in providing the necessary briefs and actual documents to be displayed. By this time, of course, the chancery was highly organised with a hierarchy of officials, including a vice-chancellor (first named in 1415), mattres des requites and comeillers ordinaires (their role was described in the 1498 ordonnance succinctly for they were to serve 'par quartier et signeront les lettres et mandemens en queue qui y seront deliberez et expediez'), a group of senior clerks, specifically called ducal secretaries, of whom one was sometimes singled out as the first secretary, a keeper of the seals and a keeper of the archives, other clerks and greffiers, normally between 20-30 officers in all67. But two hundred years earlier things were very much less formal. It may be presumed that c. 1300 the chancellor normally held the great seal (as he did later in the century), that his remuneration was chiefly from fees charged for the issue of letters, that the records of chancery were deposited in various ducal residences or religious houses and that for normal business there were a few scribes in attendance on the duke. Accounts occasionally reveal the names or numbers of the resident clerks in the household - seven are listed in a document of 1305 - and it may be suspected that these were the principal chancery officials at that moment68.

66 See below p. 144 and note 140. Bouchart, fos. 208v-9v has elaborated with considerable skill themes from the speech of Mr Jean du Cellier in 1458 (cf. Preuves, ii/ 1729), by quoting earlier documents at length. 67 Preuves, iii. 791. The beguin of Francis II in 1488 names 13 councillors and maitres des requetes, 22 other officers 'extraordinaire', 24 secretaries and 2 huissiers of the chancery, 61 names in all, under the general heading 'Gens du ConseiP (Complot Breton, ed. La Borderie, pp. 85-7). 68 Nouveau recueil, ed. La Borderie, p. 149, cf. Preuves, i. 1189 and 1196. Unfortunately La Borderie who claimed that he had published all the articles in a series of accounts c. 1289-1311 (ALA, E 20) 'qui ont un interet historique', omitted a number of items which might have thrown light on the functioning of the chancery, e. g. in 1311 the notary Jamet de Vern was paid 100s 'pour escripture ... et dut faire quatre instrumenz publique pour covenance faite o lui de linventoire de la Tour nue' (E 20 no. 16 fo. 2). These inventories were probably like three he drew up in 1315-6 of John IPs jewels and other goods at Nantes (E 23 nos. 65-7). In 1311 Mr Guillaume Gaumont was paid 6 1. for services 'en deffendant les privileges mons. contre les personnes deglise' and there is a later payment 'Pour parchemin, cire et encre et pour .iij. clefs pour les huches du tresor des chartes les freres de Vanes, xxiij s.' (E 20 no. 16 fo. 3). The whole series would probably repay study.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

129

Numbers grew only slowly; in the late fourteenth century there were probably six or eight clerks simultaneously writing ducal letters, of whom three or four might specifically be called secretaries69. Amongst these latter there were also by this stage some important members of the duke's entourage, councillors who went on diplomatic missions and held other posts in the administration, which clearly left them little time to work daily in the chancery. As a result the numbers of secretaries and clerks tended to inflate, a tendency which continued modestly through the fifteenth century. In the household regulations of 1404 two secretaries had 'bouche a cour' and 50 1. p. a., Guillaume Bruneau, 'secretaire et controlle' had 'bouche a cour' for himself and his clerk and 80 1. p. a. whilst two other secretaries 'de la chancellerie' received 40 1. p. a.70. A few years later Blanchard found that ten or twelve clerks were already at work concurrently in the chancery and the same picture emerges from the first surviving registers when between 12 and 15 clerks, on average, seem to have been authorised to issue and enroll letters at any one period71. Nevertheless a few stand out for the regularity and volume of letters they wrote72. As with other household positions, chancery clerks sometimes 69

Recueiljean IV, i. 38-40. Preuves, ii. 737-8 (ALA, E 5 no. 3). 71 Lettres de Jean V, i. p. Ixxxix. In 1451-2 there were 14 secretaries (Preuves, ii. 1605-6); nine are mentioned in 1454-5 but there were also 'autres secretaires pour la chancellerie' (ibid., 1686) and 9 secretaries and two former secretaries are listed in 1457-8 (ibid., 1726). I have noted the regular signatures of 12 clerks in 1462 (ALA, B 2), 10 in 1464 (B 3), 11 in 1466 (B4), 9 in 1467 (B 5), 10 in 1468 (B6), 16 in 1473 (B 7), 12 in 1477 (B 8), 14 in 1480 (B9), 17 in 1489-90 (B 12), 15 in 1490-1 (B 13), 11 in 1506 (B 16) and 10 in 1513 (B 21). 72 The following list gives details of the numbers of letters signed by the leading clerks of John V (after Lettres de lean K). Jean Rocher, secretary 127 Jean Mauleon, secretary 108 Jean Cador, secretary 93 Pierre Ivette 89 Jamet Godart 83 Alain Coaynon, secretary 76 Guillaume Bily 73 Jean Fresero 46 Ph. de Marois, secretary 43 Rene Pasquier 42 Bertrand Huchet 37 Robert Cador, secretary 35 Among the clerks of Francis II early in his reign the most hardworking secretaries by this crude measure were Robert le Gouz, Henri Milet, Guyon Richart, Robert Marc, Jacques and Pierre Raboceau (ALA, B 2-6). 70

130

The Creation of Brittany

worked a rota system, whereby some remained in the chancery for a set period - three months seems to be an average stint - before being relieved73. This need for dupplication would account for the 24 named chancery clerks in the begum of Francis II in i48674. On the other hand, the first secretary and some other leading officials, the keeper of the seals, for example, appear to have remained on duty almost constantly. Among the reforms proposed by Charles VIII in 1493 was the reduction in the number of secretaries to eight. In 1498 Anne authorised ten and in the early sixteenth century the numbers of chancery employees remained fairly constant, though two men or more could on occasion share one salary75. By this period the council and chancery were normally expected to perform their duties chiefly in Nantes and Rennes (Anne's ordonnance stipulated alternating periods of a year at each location) though both could still be peripatetic as is evidenced by their activities when accompanying Anne in her pilgrimage and triumphal tour of the duchy in 150576. At earlier dates most chancery work was performed in the normal administrative centres of the duchy Nantes, Rennes and Vannes - often in houses owned or hired by the chancellor for the purpose, though by the late fifteenth century the majority of records seem to have been moved principally to the castle at Nantes77. The house in which Jean de Malestroit lived as chancellor in Vannes - Chateau

An impression which might be modified by more thorough study. Girard de Billy was called resident secretary in 1477 (ALA, B 8 fo. 167 v). 74 Above note 67. 75 Nantes, B. m., MS. 1336 fo. 31 v shows that three huissiers 'qui ne font que deux quant ausd. gaiges en ensuivant lesd. lettres de chartre' (of 1498) received only 80 1. a year between them. 76 ALA, B 15. In July and August sessions were held at Auray, Quimper, Lesneven and St-Pol, during September at Morlaix (3), Guingamp (13), St-Brieuc (16), Dinan (19), St-Malo (20), Dol (22), St-Aubin du Cormier (24) and Vitre (28); cf. A. de la Borderie and B. Pocquet, Histoire de Bretagne, 6 vols., Paris and Rennes 1896-1914, iv. 601-3. 77 ALA, E 240, 'Inventaire de lettres du tresor rendu par Yves evesque de Vennes', a composite volume, containing various lists of documents in the keeper's charge or delivered to various envoys between 1450-6, shows that most of the records were then already in armoires at the Tourneuve, Nantes, but some important records were also at Vannes. In 1490 Mr Jean Blanchet took various documents from the tresor at Nantes to Rennes. These were returned in 1506 (ALA, E 242 no. 2). A petition seeking the transfer of the records of the chambre des comptes from Vannes to Nantes was made in 1492 (Paris, Bibl. nat., MS. francais 15541 fo. 81, published in EEC, cxv [1957], 150-2) although they were not finally moved until 1501. 73

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

131

Gaillard - still stands, whilst Guillaume Chauvin occasionally delivered letters at his manor house just outside Nantes and Philippe de Montauban frequently despatched business at his manor of Bois de la Roche78. Sometimes the absence of the ducal household or of the chancellor was useful as an excuse to delay the issue of letters79. On the other hand both the chancellor and vice-chancellor might take advantage of visits to different parts of the duchy to issue letters on the spot80. Naturally the duke acted in the same fashion wherever he was within or outside the duchy. In the absence of registers before 1462 there has been some speculation on the volume of ducal letters issued in relation to the proportion now surviving. Blanchard thought that on average six or seven letters a day were issued from John Vs chancery, which led him to calculate that some 90,000 might thus have been written in the course of that reign81. However this figure probably ought to be revised downwards, perhaps by as much as a half, for the annual enrollment in Francis IPs early registers totals about 1000 letters while the fragment of the daily register of letters for which fees were charged for the period 24 October 1489 - February 1490, shows that not such a large percentage of letters as was once thought escaped registration. The registers also show that normally sessions were not held daily for the issue of letters but every two or three days or even after longer intervals - in 1506, for example, there were less than 100 sessions at which letters were authorised. This leads me to suggest that an average of 4 or 5 a day seem to have been issued in the late fifteenth century, hardly an intolerable workload for the dozen or

78

Congres archeologique de France, lxxxie session, Brest et Vannes, 1914, Paris 1918, pp. 429-30 for Chateau Gaillard, now the home of the Societe polymathique du Morbihan and its collections. ALA, B 7 fo. 91 r (1 July 1473) for Chauvin at Bois; ibid., B 16 shows that Montauban despatched business at Bois de la Roche from 2 January-15 February, for a few days after 5 March and on 4 April and 25 May 1506, but that apart from a brief trip to Ploermel, for the rest of the year he divided his time between Rennes and Nantes, apart from 12 September-6 October when he was a{: Vannes, or en route between these three centres. 7 9 ALA, E 131 fo. 12 v (15 June 1459) for a case where the chancellor used the absence of the duke and the greater part of his council to delay publishing certain royal letters. 80 ibid., fo. 104 r (23 Oct. 1460) shows the council sitting at Fougeres. On 5 March 1462 Chauvin was at Malestroit, at la Cheze on 9 March, Josselin (10-13 March) and at Vannes by 17 March (ALA, B 2 fos. 19v-27r). Some business was transacted in his absence at Nantes on 22-24 March before he himself returned there on 25 March (ibid., fo. 29r). 81 Lettres dejean V, i. p. xxvii.

132

The Creation of Brittany

so leading clerks and an added reason, perhaps, for Charles VIII's desire to reduce their numbers82. Whether the Breton chancery clerks developed any form of collegiality or received any corporate privileges like the royal notaries and secretaries, we cannot say at the moment. As individual figures chancery clerks only begin to emerge from their anonymity during Charles de Blois's reign. In addition to signing letters, a number of them gave evidence at the hearings intended to establish his sanctity, held at Angers in 137183. From this testimony, in addition to personal information of considerable interest, it is clear that many features of the chancery's activities which can only be easily documented from a later period, were already well established. For example, in normal circumstances and in conformity with other contemporary chanceries, fees were exacted for letters of grace and justice and it was from these that the chancellor was rewarded84. Later there is evidence that he was often also in receipt of a pension, which either supplemented or recompensed him for these fees, and of an allowance for daily attendance in the chancery and council85. Henri le Barbu, chancellor from 1386-96, received 1000 1. a year as a pension, but it could be a smaller sum86. A hundred years later, Philippe de Montauban received a pension and fees which sometimes amounted to as much as 4000 1.

82

The total number of letters registered in 1462 is 949 (ALA, B 2), 998 in 1466 (B 4), 993 in 1468 (B 6) and 1008 in 1477 (B 8). A comparison of the accounts for the 'produit de la chancellerie' and the corresponding section of the register for the same period shows that very few letters for which fees were charged escaped registration, though they might be referred to under different headings in the two records (ALA, E 212 no. 21 and B 12). The average number issued per day at this point was 5 (cf. Appendix II). Letters issued by the Chambre des comptes should also be remembered in any total of documents issued in the duke's name. 83 Monuments, ed. Plaine, passim. 84 ibid., p. 41. A scale of fees to be charged in local courts for sealing contracts etc. between 1334-41 may be found in La tres ancienne coutume, ed. Planiol, pp. 348-9. 85 Preuves, ii. 738 (1404), 'L'evesque de Rcnnes chancelier a M. 1. de pension et se paiera sur le profit et revenu des sceaux, se tant peuvent monter et valoir et se non le parsur luy sera fourni et seront mis les sceaux au prix que estoient ou vivant de feu Mons. et Madame, et en outre lad. pension, aura pour chacun jour qu'il sera mande par monsieur pour aller hors de son hostel ou de la ville de Rennes pour les affaires et besoignes de Monsieur, Cs. par jour.' 86 Arch. dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 F 1111, accounts for 1393; Lettres de Jean V, i. p. Ixxxv (after Preuves, ii. 900) indicates that in' 1416 the chancellor was receiving only 6001.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

133

p. a.87. By then the normal pension of the vice-chancellor was 600 1. p. a., mattres des requetes received 300 1. p. a., whilst secretaries could usually expect annual salaries (in addition to robes) in the range 40-200 1. depending on seniority, figures which seem to have remained fairly stable throughout the century, though Master Henri Milet as first secretary to Francis II received the exceptional sum of 240 1. p. a. Conversely, after 1498 the normal pay of a secretary fell to 100 1. p. a.88. Of course there were other rewards as well, since the clerks were in a position to promote their own interests, but the payment of salaries was not always guaranteed. Towards the end of Francis IPs reign a proportion only of the salary - ten months, six months or even no wage at all on occasion - might be paid as desperate attempts were made to meet all the duke's commitments89. Like civil servants in other administrations who faced similar demands, they were sometimes called upon even to make loans to the duke90. However, when the annual income of many Breton gentlemen

87

Nantes, B. m., MS. 1336 fos. 20r-l r show that from 1 April 1498-31 December 1506 he was paid 2000 1. breton p. a., from 1 January 1506 he had received an increase of 400 1. p. a. on his pension, together with another 1200 1. p. a. to recompense him for revenues from the seals which he used to draw and that from 1 January 1507-30 September 1512 he received 4000 1. p. a., a total of 40, 500 1. in all. 88 Jean de Rouville received 600 1. in 1465-6 as vicechancellor (Preuves, iii. 145, 166-7) as did Guy du Boschet, bishop of Quimper, in 1481-2 (ALA, E 212 no. 16 fo. 10r). In 1465-6 Milet was receiving 200 1. (Preuves, iii. 145), which had been raised to 240 1. by 1468 (ALA, B 6 fo. 188 v). The Etats de finance for 1481-5 show that Guyon Richart and Mr Guillaume Gueguen were the highest paid secretaries at 150 1. p. a., raised in the latter case to 200 1. in 1484 (ALA, E 212 nos. 16-19). Mr Jean Blanchet as garde des chartes got 120 1. In 1491 ten secretaries received between 20 1. and 120 1. p. a. (ALA, E 214 no. 41 fo. 6r). From 1498-1512 there were normally six mattres des requetes and eight secretaries in office at 300 1. and 100 1. p. a. respectively (Nantes, B.m., MS. 1336), together with one extra secretary and two (or three huissiers) on the normal strength of the chancery. But many of these must have employed juniors of whom we hear little save for Guillaume Vaillant, secretary to Vicechancellor Gueguen, to whom an ex gratia payment of 25 1. was made 'pour ses paines davoir durant cinq ou six annees grossoyer et mynuter les estaz des debtes de Bretaigne tant generaulx que particulier dont il avoit eu la garde durant lad. temps et faict plusieurs expeditions et escriptures' (fo. 32 v). Jean Regnier, receiver of the chancery, was a royal secretary by 1501 (Lapeyre & Scheurer, no. 573). 89 ALA, E 212 nos. 17-19- Around 1500 Laurens Maczault claimed he was still owed 523 1. 15 s for diplomatic missions to England and Maximilian, king of the Romans, before the loss of Breton independence, and other secretaries like Jean Mauhugeon and Roland Scliczon claimed debts outstanding since the days of Francis II (E 209 no. 23 fos. 2r, 5 r, 12r-v). 90 cf. J. Bartier, Legistes et gens de finances au XV e siecle. Les conseillers des dues de Bourgogne, Philippe le Bon et Charles le Temeraire, 2 vols., Brussels 1955-7.

134

The Creation of Brittany

and lesser nobles was often less than 100 1. a year, the regular financial and other rewards of service in the chancery must nevertheless have appeared attractive enough during the latter half of our period. For the higher officials, there were other opportunities, too, to accumulate modest fortunes. The total wage bill for the chancery between 1498-1512 came to 91,270-11-7 d, approximately 6300 1. p. a.91. To return to the chancery in the mid-fourteenth century: according to some witnesses in 1371, the volume of business was already considerable. Guillaume Andre alone claimed, in exaggerated fashion, that he had written over 10,000 letters during his time as secretary92. He and others testified with surprising approbation that a number of office rules had been broken by order of the duke when it was a matter of rendering justice to his poverty stricken subjects. We thus hear of Charles de Blois waiving fees, issuing letters freely to paupers (some of whom received their letters on the spot after accosting the duke in the countryside, his clerks having to dismount there and then to write the orders), getting his secretaries to write letters outside normal hours by night and even dipping into his own pocket to provide parchment and, significantly, paper for his clerks93. All of which speaks highly of the flexibility of this group of civil servants in accepting the foibles of their eccentric and saintly master. It was a similar flexibility that some of them showed when they transferred their allegiance after his death in the battle of Auray, 29 September 1364, to his rival and successor, John IV. Among those who made this transition was Master Guillaume Paris, reputedly once chan-

91 Nantes, B. m., MS. 1336 fo. 34 v. By 1534 the bill was 8584 1. 16 s t. (Preuves, iii. 1014). 92 Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 98. 93 ibid., p. 136. Paper was already being used in the duchy for accounts by 1342 (ALA, 7 JJ 143/2). The earliest ducal letter on paper known at present dates from 1364 (Recueiljean JV, i. no. 34) but it would be unwise to consider this date as final in the absence of diplomatic studies for earlier dukes. ALA, E 238 fo. 79 r (1395 inventory) mentions 'le papier de celx qui doyvent host au due de Bretaingne et est ledit papier en parchemin' - a reference to the famous muster at Ploermel in 1294 (Preuves, i. 1110-5). From this ambiguous reference it is not clear whether the manuscript of the Livre desOstz still surviving at Nantes is meant (ALA, E 132). In the crisis conditions of 1490 the president and members of the Chambre des comptes were ordered to accept various quittances on paper presented by Mr Pierre Becdelievre for payments by Guillaume de Forestz on the extraordinary revenues 'neantmoins le stille et usement de lad. chambre soit de apparaistre lesd. quittances en parchemin' (ALA, B 13 fo. 18 r).

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

135

cellor for Blois, later certainly dean of Nantes and one of the leading councillors of the new duke94. What of the quality and experience of these fourteenth century clerks? Most of those named in 1371 were, of course, in religious orders. Virtually all those who styled themselves secretary had been to university, though there were some who seemed either to have been trained within the ducal administration or to have had notarial training. A good example is Holland Poence, from Goudelin in the diocese of Treguier, aged 53 when he gave his testimony. He had known Blois since his marriage to Jeanne de Penthievre in 1337. He had served successively as a clerk and notary 'in curia senescallorum' for fifteen years, then as alloue (a chiefly legal post) and lieutenant to the seneschal of Guingamp, followed by another spell of fifteen years upto Charles's death as one of his secretaries, a position which he held simultaneously for the last four years with that of seneschal of Cornouaille95. Similar career patterns can be established from this point for many of Poence's colleagues. Of the 15 clerks whose signatures appear at the foot of Blois's letters in Maitre's catalogue, four testified in 1371 as did the brother of a fifth, while the names of three additional ducal clerks and secretaries can be added if the details of the testimonies can be trusted96. They and others like them, who began their careers in other ducal courts - the later registers reveal the names of scores of such clerks and notaries who never rose above these minor jurisdictions might expect employment once within the chancery for thirty years and more97. Guillaume Andre, originally from Le Mans, had known Blois for 31 years and spent the last 24 with him as a notary98. Geoffrey le Fevre, who first comes to attention in the court at Morlaix in 1346, was still in ducal service in the mid 1380s99. The same pattern continues through the fifteenth century. The social origins of these clerks was mixed, with a preponderance, not surprisingly, of bourgeois and lesser nobles, and the network of brothers, 94

Paris was serving Blois in 1355 (Nantes, B. m. MS. 1707 no. 1). For his career under John IV cf. Recueil Jean IV, s. n. As dean of Nantes he accepted the second treaty of Guerande in 1381 ( Arch, Nat., J 242 no. 5818; Preuves, ii. 280) and he was still dean in 1390 (ALA, E 163 no. 32). 95 Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 135-40. 96 ibid., 93-8 (G. Andre), 56-60 (G. Berengar), 71-7, 351-3 (P. de la Chapelle), 44-6 (R de Coestelles), 135-40, 330-2 (R Poence), 147-9, 332^ (R. Poulard), 84-9 (A. Raoul) and 174-6 (J. Vitreari}. 97 At least eight secretaries for local courts were instituted in 1462 (ALA, B 2), 5 in 1464 (B 3), 7 in 1468 (B 6) etc. 98 Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 93-8. 99 RecueilJean IV, i. 38 n. 150.

136

The Creation of Brittany

fathers and sons, uncles and nephews soon becomes all too apparent. Frequently success led to ennoblement in the fifteenth century of those lacking noble lineage. Charles de Blois rewarded some of his servants in the traditional fashion by helping them to obtain ecclesiastical benefices or by providing them with pensions. Alain Raoul had been a scholar at Paris before becoming a secretary for three years before Blois's death; in 1371 he was rector of Plouzevede in the diocese of Leon100. Master Holland de Coestelles, a graduate in arts and law, who had spent twenty years with Blois and his children 'tarn serviendo in capella ... et instruendo dictos liberos in scienciis litterarum quam in offlcio secretarii', including several years with Blois during his English capitivity, was now a canon of the cathedrals of Nantes, St-Pol de Leon and Angers101. Yet others might move on to different administrations like Mr Jean Vitreari who claimed in 1371 to be a royal secretary after spending five years with Blois102. Whilst yet others were considered influential enough with their master to warrant a pension from a foreign prince like two secretaries of John IV, Richard Clerk, who received one from Louis, duke of Anjou103, and Master Robert Brochereul, one of the chief negotiators of the duke's third marriage to Juana of Navarre. Her father, Charles II, gratefully acknowledged his services by granting him 500 Aragonese florins a year104. As in other administrations a bishopric was the ultimate reward for a few of the outstanding secretaries. Among the clerks of John IV were Gacien de Monceaux, later bishop of Quimper (1408-16) and Master Alain de la Rue, later bishop of St-Brieuc (1419-24), where he succeeded Chancellor Malestroit105. Later Guy du Boschet and Guillaume Gueguen had served Francis II as secretaries before becoming vice-chancellors. Boschet was elected bishop of Quimper (1480-4) and

Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 84-9. 101 ibid., 44-6. 102 ibid., 174-6; his name does not appear in Managements et actes divers de Charles V (1364-1380), ed. L. Delisle, Paris 1874 . 103 Journal de Jean le Fevre, evtque de Chartres, chancelier des rots de Sidle, Louis I et Louis II d'Anjou, ed. H. Moranville, Paris 1887, p. 4, 'Item, une lettre seellee par laquele monsegneur retient en secretaire maistre Richart... secretaire du due de Bretaingne'fc Aug. 1381). 104 Archive general de Navarra, Caj. 54 no. 38 iv, Pamplona, 6 May 1387, quittance from Brochereul for 300 florins out of 500. 105 Recueiljean IV, ii. nos. 985, 998, 1006, 1026, 1107, 1110, 1163; B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les statuts synodaux d'Alain de la Rue, eveque de Saint-Brieuc (1421), Memoires de la societe archfologique d'llle-et-Vilaine, xlvii (1920). 100

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

137

Gueguen after a prolonged battle, bishop of Nantes (1500-06)106. But lesser dignities were not spurned; Mace Louet, one of the leading chancery officials at the turn of the fifteenth century became archdeacon of Vannes and then also of Dreux107. Increasingly, however, many clerks were not simply satisifed by the rewards of celibacy but married and established families. An early example is that of Pierre Poulard, one of Blois's leading advisers108. Like those royal notaries and secretaries in the later middle ages whose careers, social advance and family connections have in recent years been so remarkably traced by MM. Lapeyre and Scheurer, or the councillors of the fifteenth-century dukes of Burgundy studied by M. John Bartier, within the more limited context of Brittany's history similar success stories can be described109. One example, which will have to serve for many, is that of Master Robert Brochereul just cited. Little is known of his family background before he emerged as a member of the ducal administration in the early 1380s. Possibly of bourgeois stock from Nantes, certainly a minor landholder in the Pays de Rays and a graduate in law from the university of Angers, he held a succession of important offices such as seneschal of Nantes and Rennes before becoming chancellor from 1396-9- Though his name does not appear amongst those of the clerks signing ducal letters, he is styled ducal secretary in documents connected with his mission to Navarre in 1386 and he undertook many other confidential missions, to the English and French courts in particular110. As his status rose, 106

B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les papes et les dues de Bretagne, 2 vols. Paris 1928, ii. 877 et seq. for Gueguen's election in 1487. 107 ALA, E 126 no. 2 (1397) as archdeacon of Vannes; P.R.O., C. 76 no. 90 mm. 7, 11, 22; no. 91 mm. 18, 22, as archdeacon of Dreux (1406). Richard Clerk (above note 103) had briefly been treasurer of Vannes and archdeacon of Poher (Preuves, ii. 446) but later became chanter of Nantes. IDS Poulard married Constance de Kerraoul and his will mentions three sons, Jean already dead, Guillaume (bishop of Rennes, 1357-9, and of St-Malo, 1359-66) and Roland (Preuves, i. 1554-5, 14 July 1362). His brother Roland gave evidence in 1371 (above note 96). 109 M. Jean Kerherve is currently studying the analogous group of Breton gens de finance; see especially, Une famille d'officiers de finances bretons au XVeme siecle: les Thomas de Nantes, ABret., Ixxxiii (1976), 7-33 and Jean Mauleon, tresorier de 1'epargne, Une carriere au service de 1'Etat breton, Actes du 107 e Congres national des societes savantes, Brest 1982, Paris 1984, Questions d'histoire de Bretagne, p. 161-84. 110 Preuves, ii. 379, 450, 555, 576, 580; Recueiljean IV, Index s.n. and Archivo general de Navarra, Caj. 60 no. 7, 29 May and 2 September 1386 for his diplomatic career. See also Michael Jones, Mon pais et ma nation: Breton identity in the Fourteenth Century, War, Literature and Politics in the Late Middle Ages, ed. C. T. Allmand, Liverpool 1976, p. 159 for his career at Angers; below, p. 298.

138

The Creation of Brittany

so did his material fortunes and although he left only daughters, his eldest married into the prestigious Montauban family and was grandmother of the last chancellor of the duchy111. Though replaced as chancellor on John IVs death in 1399, Brochereul continued to sit in John Vs council till 1410 at least112. Throughout the fifteenth century the network of family alliances between the duke's servants in all the offices of his administration - council, chancery, chambre des comptes and the local legal and financial offices - became ever denser113. Master Herve le Grant, the prime organiser of the late fourteenthcentury ducal records, married into the Mauleon family who were to prove one of the major bureaucratic families of the fifteenth century114. The names of Breil, Carne, Chapelle, Chauvin, Coetlogon, Coglais, Perron, Gibon, Lespervier and Mauhugeon, to name but a few families in this tangled network, constantly reappear amongst the chancery clerks and other office holders from this point115. Nor were relations limited simply to the duchy, but stretched to the royal and other princely administrations like the case of Master Henri Milet, for long first secretary to Francis II. His father, Jean, a royal clerk, had been ennobled by Charles VI before 1419 and lived until 1463. His other sons included Jean, bishop of Soissons, Eustache, a counciller in the Parlement of Paris, and Pierre, who served the duke of Burgundy116. Henri first comes to attention in the service of the Constable, Arthur de Richemont (the future Arthur III) in 1439 and from then until his death in 1477 he was at the centre of Breton politics117. Latterly he was particularly responsible for coordinating the diplomatic correspondence of Francis II and his allies against Louis 111

Lettres de Jean V, no. 1934 cf. Pere Anselme, Histoire genealogique et chronologique de la maison royale de France, 3 rd ed., 9 vols. Paris 1726-33, iv. 82. 112 Lettres de jean V, no. 1104. In 1413-4 he was exchanging various rents and lands with the lords of Rays and La Suze (Cartulaire des sires de Rays, ed. R. Blanchard, Archives historiaues du Poitou, xxviii [1898] and xxx [1900], nos. CXLIX-CLII). 113 cf. in addition to his studies cited in note 109, J. Kerherve, Les tresoriers de Pepargne du duche de Bretagne au XVe siecle, paper read at the University of Bielefeld, 1982. 114 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, La derniere phase de la vie de Du Guesclin. L'affaire de Bretagne, EEC, cxxv (1967), 145. 115 For Carne and Gibon see Michael Jones, The Breton Nobility from the Civil War of 1341-64 to the Late Fifteenth Century, The Crown and Local Communities in England and Prance in the fifteenth Century, ed. J. R. L. Highfield and Robin Jeffs, Gloucester, pp. 60-1; below, p. 230. 116 Lapeyre & Scheurer, no. 471. 117 E. Cosneau, Le connetable de Richemont, Paris 1886, pp. 582-3. Milet Was dead by 8 March 1477 (ALA, B 8 fo. 47 r).

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

139

XI. I treasure a reference to the king and his agents in 1471 in true cloak and dagger fashion piecing together the charred remains of some incriminating coded letters discovered after one of Milet's secret journeys to Guyenne to Charles, Louis's brother, as evidence for this world of intrigue into which the formal records of the chancery so infrequently allow us to penetrate118. That Henri took his chancery duties seriously may be gathered from the fact that he acquired the legal books and working papers of Master Jean Lespervier in 1473, when this member of another established bureaucratic family, defected to Louis XI119. A prosopographic study of the fifteenth-century chancery clerks would reveal many similarly intriguing connections and enable us to plot more exactly their place in the social structure of the duchy, their intellectual interests and attainments, the range of their religious and artistic patronage120. But we must return to the central political role of the chancery in Brittany during the later middle ages. It had long been realised that defence of ducal rights, both against his own subjects, but more importantly against the claims of the king of France, his sovereign, might be more effectively countered by the production of documents supporting the ducal point of view. Even before the civil war began in 1341, there is evidence that claims based on both actual records and legendary materials were coming to play a part in the thinking of the duke and his council in the preparation of legal defences121. Once formulated the argu118

Lettres de Louis XI, ed. E. Charavay, J. Vaesen and B. de Mandrot, 11 vols. Paris 1883-1909, iv. no. DXC and pieces justificative* x and xi. His incriminating correspondence had been discovered by Olivier le Roux, a former colleague as secretary of the Constable (Arch. Nat., K 69 no. 8 = Cosneau, pp. 652-3), who had to flee the duchy on the accession of Francis II (ALA, E 131 fo. 33 v) and became a leading adviser of Louis XI (Lapeyre & Scheurer, no. 423, where his Breton antecedents are ignored). Milet had also acted as secretary and controller general of finances in Normandy for Charles (H. Stein, Charles de France, frere de Louis XI, Paris 1920, pp. 524, 653). On 23 September 1467 he entered the chancery to collect certain secret letters of alliance (ALA, B 5 fo. ll bis r). U 9 ibid., B 7 fo. 67 r. Lespervier had first fallen under suspicion in 1470 though no charges were preferred against him after investigation (ALA, E 198 no. 14). He later became First President of the Parlement de Paris (Lettres de Louis XI, viii. no. MCCCXCIII [1479], MCCCCXXXII [1480]; ix, p. j. xii). 120 Many ducal officers had known each other since student days at Angers, Orleans, Paris or, after 1461, Nantes (cf Jones, War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, pp. 157-60 and idem, Education in Brittany during the later Middle Ages: a survey, Nottingham Mediaeval Studies, xxii [1978], 58-77). Below pp. 296-9, 309-28. 121 Some documents relating to the disputed succession to the duchy of Brittany, 1341, ed. Michael Jones, Camden Miscellany, xxiv, (Royal Historical Society, Camden Fourth Series 9, London, 1972), 1-78,

140

The Creation of Brittany

ments could be valuable to future ducal governments and the details revised or re-inforced by further evidence. It was chiefly the responsibility of the chancellor and his staff to produce such evidence from their records. Given the initially unpopular victory of the Montfortists (aided by the English) in the civil war and the shaky position of the ducal administration for much of John IVs reign, it is not surprising that he and his advisers should seek to make full use of this relatively cheap form of propaganda. They attempted to build up ^uite deliberately an image of an independent identity for the duchy of Brittany which would appeal to local pride, stimulate loyalty to the Montfort dynasty and limit the authority of the king of France within the duchy122. Its worth has already been glimpsed in connection with the question of the duke's homage; by the 1380s it was being put to similar use to justify other pretensions. In particular a group of chancery clerks, headed by two ducal secretaries, Master Guillaume de Saint-Andre and Master Herve le Grant, seem to have coordinated literary and administrative moves to create a Montfortist mythology which was to serve the rulers of the duchy until its incorporation in the kingdom of France. Saint-Andre's major literary contribution was a eulogistic biography in verse of John IV to demonstrate triumph over adversity and his writings show that he had an abiding interest in the mutations of fortune123. As for Herve le Grant, his well-established role as the organizer of the ducal archives has already been touched upon. Besides his inventory of 1395, he compiled a formulary (c. 1407-8), a similar collection of papal bulls and either undertook himself, or had copied under his supervision, other copies of important documents. Some of these were of considerable antiquity like the ordonnance of John I in 1240 expelling the Jews from Brittany which Le Grant attested in a public instrument in 1397 or the fine copy of the Livre des Ostz of 1294, together with documents relating to the duke's homage, which he had copied at much the same time as his formulary124. He was to hold the position of 'tresorier et garde des lettres et chartes' 122 J. Kerherve, Aux origines d'un sentiment national: Les chroniqueurs bretons de la fin du moyen age, BSAF, cviii (1980), 165-206 is a fine survey of the literary aspect. 123 Cest le livre du bonjehan, due de Bretaigne, ed. E. Charriere as an appendix to the Chronique de Bertrand du Guesdin par Cuvelier, 2 vols. Paris 1839, ii. 421-560, omitting 1200 lines (cf. F. Lecoy, Guillaume de Saint-Andre et son 'Jeux des echecs moralises', Romania 61 (1942), 491-503). It was dedicated to the author's son. 124 ALA, E 55 (bulls); E 236 (formulary); E 126 no. 2 (Jews - for a photograph of the original letters of John I, 10 April 1240, see La Borderie and Pocquet, Hist, de Bretagne, iii. 336-7); E 132 (Livre des Ostz), 22 fos., 160X230 mm., bound in the same red leather boards and written and decorated in much the same style as the formulary.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

141

until 1416 and one frequently comes across documents endorsed with notes like 'Doyt estre et a portee a mestre Herve' and other indications of documents confided to his keeping125. As a result it is not surprising, perhaps, that in recent years opinion has been swinging strongly to the view that Herve le Grant is the most likely author of an ambitious although incomplete history of the duchy, for long inaptly entitled the Chrontcon Briocense126. Its tone can be gauged from a recent comment that it was written by 'un fougeux patriote breton, chez qui Pamour du pays s'accompagnait d'un violent sentiment xenophobe a 1'egard des Anglais et des Francois.' Whoever the author was, he was an expert on Breton and was an ardent defender of the church. 'II regrettait la scission au moment du Grand Schisme d'Occident. Ses sympathies allaient aux clementistes, mais plus encore a PEglise universelle127.' He was also someone who had easy access to the ducal archives - no fewer than 34 ducal letters and 5 papal bulls are cited verbatim in the chronicle - and also had inside knowledge of the workings of the ducal council and a familiarity with notarial practices. No one better fills this description than Le Grant, a native of the diocese of Quimper and a graduate of Angers, who entered ducal service in 1379 at the beginning of the great schism128. He was a qualified notary, and a man who throughout his professional career came to have an intimate knowledge of

125

ALA, E 172 no. 18 (1399 - Doyt estre ... Herve), whilst ibid., no. 20 also has a note that it is to be taken to him; Preuves, i. 1216, 'Get instrument (concerning the confiscation of the goods of the Templars, 1308) fut trouve chez les Freres Mineurs de Nantes en la huche du sire de Septmaisons le Jeudi 13 de Janvier 1406 et donne a Herve le Grant, Tresorier des lettres de Bretaigne'; Lettres dejean V, no. 1222 (1416); for other examples of his public instruments see Arch. dep. C6tes-du-Nord, 1 A 1 nos. 4 (1383), 8 and 9 (1391); ALA, E 8 nos. 2 and 3 (1392), E 166 no. 8 (1389), E 72 no. 10 (1397), E 138 no. 24 (1385), E 172 no. 7 (1383); E 159 no. 14 (1410) is in a different hand from his earlier instruments. 126 Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, EEC, cxxv (1967), 145; Kerherve, BSAF, cviii (1980), 205-6. Chronicon Briocense. Chronique de Saint-Brieuc, ed. G. Le Due and C. Sterckx, vol. i, Paris 1972, provides a text clown to the year 640, but the edition is both incomplete and sadly deficient; Preuves, i. 7-102 continues the text in extracts. The main manuscripts are Paris, Bibl. nat., MS. latin 6003 and 9888, together with some important additions in Pierre le Baud's notes (Arch. dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 F 1003). !27 Kerherve, BSAF, cviii (1980), 205-6. 128 Recueiljean IV, i. no. 322 (29 September 1379). As Herveus le Grant clericus Corisopitensis he witnessed a grant in 1388 (Preuves, ii. 548) and in 1397 a sentence of excommunication on him for obtaining the office of chanter of Nantes was raised (ALA, E 38 no. 11). It is not known whether he had married before or after this event.

142

The Creation of Brittany

the ducal archives and of the family affairs of John IV129. A frequent member of diplomatic missions, closely associated with all aspects of ducal policy, no one would have known better where to find the documents which have been summarized, quoted verbatim or invented in the Chronicon Briocense, which provides a classic statement of the Montfortist view of Breton History130. Herve would have been by no means a unique example of a princely archivist in the fifteenth century who put his expert knowledge to good use in writing history - the house of Foix employed several such figures as the value of records for propaganda purposes became more widely appreciated131. Whilst in Brittany itself another burst of similar and more distinguished literary activity in the late fifteenth century was again spearheaded by two ducal secretaries, Pierre le Baud and Alain Bouchart, both of whom were fully aware of the political value of their histories to the defence of Breton interests132. The Breton court, more particularly the chancery, as a centre of historical studies in the later middle ages seems a well established fact now. But chancery clerks did not spend all their time composing or inventing history. It is tempting to link Herve le Grant's name with an important step in enabling the administration to keep track of its records for more prosaic purposes, that is the introduction of registration. Given his orderly mind and notarial training (unfortunately no Breton notarial registers survive until the late fifteenth century)133 and the fact that it was during his period as keeper of the archives that registration seems to have" first been extensively practised, it may seem logical to see Herve's hand in this innovation. However, another candidate as originator of the idea may have been Herve's one-time senior, Henri le Barbu, chancellor of the duchy from 1386-96. For it was shortly after Le Barbu transferred from Vannes to the see of Nantes in 1404 that he ordered the

He drew up copies of the mutual donation between John IV and Juana of Navarre in 1387 (Arch. dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 E 2 no. 1), was particularly busy at Tours in 1392 when the terms for the marriage of the future John V and Jeanne de France were drafted (ALA, E 8 nos. 2 and 3) and acted as the duchess's secretary on several occasions (e.g. Arch. dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 E 10, 1394). His notarial sign included ermines, the ducal arms, as did St-Andre's (ALA, E 151 no. 14 [1384], for a joint instrument). 130 cf. Preuves, i. 7-102. 131 Guillaume Leseur, Histoire de Gaston JV, comte de Foix, ed. H. Courteault, 2 vols. Paris 1893-6, i. pp. xxvi-xxvii; J. Richard, Les archives et les archivistes des dues de Bourgogne, BEC, cv (1944), 123-69, for the more routine activity of archivists. 132 Kerherve, BSAF, cviii (1980), 202-4. 133 ALA, E 1071-^, cf. R-H. Frangois, Les activites d'un notaire rural de Saint-Philbert de Grandlieu a la fin du XVe siecle, Memoire de Maitrise, Nantes 1968. 129

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

143

compilation of baptismal registers throughout his diocese134. But whoever promoted the idea, both the fragmentary chancery registers of John V and the parochial registers of Nantes (curiously the first full surviving registers from both series now begin in 1462 and 1464 respectively) testify to the systematizing surge that was sweeping over the duchy c. 1400. Their value was increasingly appreciated whilst at fairly regular intervals throughout the rest of the century, inventories of the archives were prepared which enabled appropriate records to be produced for envoys going to defend the duke in Paris or elsewhere135. From the mid-century in particular diplomatic bags containing lists, originals or copies, dossiers which could be revised almost immediately, stood ready for use and were quickly brought out in emergencies. A case in point was the quarrel over the regale at Nantes in 1462 which M. Contamine has recently investigated136. There he found that the royal administration on this occasion, unlike its ducal counterpart, had virtually to start from scratch to find the documentary justification for its position, whereas the duke began with a long tradition of defending his claims which had resulted in the creation of a whole archive of records to be brought into the argument137. "When royal commissioners were sent to gather information in the duchy, they were accompanied round it by ducal servants anxious to gather yet further material for their own dossier138. Another contentious issue which had resulted in a similar file was the disputed jurisdiction of the Breton marches discussed over

134

Preuves, ii. 770; A. Croix, Nantes et le pays nantais au XVIe siecle. Etude demographique, Paris 1974, pp. 18-19. 135 ALA, E 239-242 for most of the surviving inventories, cf. Lettres de Jean V, i. pp. iv-v. 136 P. Contamine, The Contents of a French Diplomatic Bag in the Fifteenth Century: Louis XI, Regalian Rights and Breton Bishoprics 1462-1465, Nottingham Medieval Studies, xxv (1981), 52-72. 137 ALA, E 59-60, cf. E 240 fo. HOr-111 v (c. 1450), 'Touchant les Regaeres'. 138 ALA, E 241 no. 2, a cahier of 30 fos., includes on fos. 1-12 r a list of documents collected at St-Malo, Rennes and Dol and at the abbeys of Tronchet, Rille, Montfort and Paimpont in May 1464; cf. no. 10, 'Memoire daucunes lettres trouvees aux abbays de Bretaigne', a similar cahier of 9 fos. with lists of letters and extracts from manuscripts, breviaries, chronicles etc. gathered at the same time. This latter had subsequently been handed to royal officials who annotated the margins with demands for the production of the originals or authenticated copies. Ibid., no. 11, a cahier of 20 fos., includes fos. 9r-l4v another list: 'Cest inventoire des lettres livrees rapportez de Paris qui touchent les regales, les fondacions et droitz de Bretaigne', also probably dating from 1464-5.

144

The Creation of Brittany

the years by a succession of commissions139. Yet another, of course, was the question of homage. On the eve of his journey to Tours in 1461, the council not only discussed 'que sont a besoigner touchant le voiage' but prepared statements on what Francis II was to say to Louis XI and what documentary evidence he was'vto display, 'et a servir a cest article le tresor des lettres baillera au vichancelier les lettres et instruments des precedentes hommages tant de la part du due que de la part du roy140.' Over the years, under the obvious guidance of ducal councillors, as in two great inquiries in 1392 and 1455, other testimonies had been gathered around the duchy on what the duke was pleased to call his own 'regalities' with a view to providing a suitable defence of his exercise of these rights141. Within the chancery whenever the word was mentioned there was an almost pavlovian reaction and a standard recitation of what this meant in practice was produced automatically. Themes first elaborated in John Ill's reign were thus constantly repeated, refined or expanded by chancery officials in defence of the duchy142. By the fifteenth century, then, the Breton chancery was highly organised with professional personnel, clearly established office procedures, carefully following its own rules for the formulation of letters, the application of seals and registration, and it played a crucial role in the defence of the duchy's political stance. Though it had not developed many distinctively different procedures from those practised in other French chanceries, its letters had their own characteristics, idiosyncrasies of language and style and decoration143.

13

9 Nantes, B. m., MS. Dugast-Matifeux 223, including a list of documents (23 May 1459) for delivery to Mr Bertran de Coetanezre, vicechancellor, about to go to the royal court, and a 'Memoire des materes desquelles mons. le vichancelier doibt avoir souvenance'. 140 ALA, E 131 fo. 168r (5 Dec. 1461), cf. E 241 no. 9, a cahier of 12 fos. of 'Lettres des redevances faitz par les dues de Bretaigne aux roys de France et de leurs aliances ensemble' and no. 5, 27 fos., 'Lettres royalles touchant les libertez et previleges de Bretaigne', both produced c. 1461. 141 cf. Preuves, ii. 595-7,1651-8. 142 Jones, War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand; cf. ALA, E 240 fos. 109r-112 v, 'Des lettres que Reverend Pere en Dieu Missire Yves evesque de Vennes a bailie du commendement du due et de son conseill a Olivier de Coetlogon, conseiller et contrerolleur de la meson du due pour le voyage de Paris' (1456), which includes the sectional headings 'Touchant les Regaeres' and 'Touchant le Parlement de Bretaigne' and the marginal note 'Dei gratia' to signify three main topics of discussion. 143 cf. Recueiljean IV, i. 23-34 and Lettres dejean V, i. pp. xxxi et seq. Decoration of ducal letters was normally limited, extremely rare in the thirteenth century, less so later. The initial letter (or letters), sometimes a few words of the address or ducal title, were normally written in a larger hand and sometimes enlivened by allusions to

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

145

Apart from recourse to public instruments - a particular characteristic of John IV5 s reign, but one also practised by other dukes for a wide range of business - the competence of the chancery to handle all forms of document was unquestionable144. From time to time efforts were made to tidy up aspects of its administration - the ordonnances in 1404, 1493 and 1498 are reasonably well documented - some attempted reforms in the mid-1450 s less so. In a brief and still too little understood reign, Peter II undertook an almost complete overhaul of the duchy's administration145. In the case of the chancery he confirmed the traditional fees for the issue of letters. These were halved briefly by his successor, Arthur III, but returned to their usual level in Francis IPs reign146. As a further sign of the tightening up of the administration from the mid-century, in the chancery as in some other departments, continuous appointments can be traced to offices which had lapsed or been left vacant in the recent past. Thus regular appointments of vice-chancellors, keepers of the seals and other subsidiary posts within the chancery begin again147. Posts were now normally filled only on the death or resignation of the previous occupant. By the late fifteenth century great care was often taken to ensure the safety of the seals, with elaborate rituals developing for their handover or guardianship148. The registers contain many notes on the particular circumstances of the issue or cancellation of letters, use of seals of absence and fees to the duchy's arms (ermines) or its connection with the sea (the initial J was frequently in the form of a fish). I have seen no highly decorated letters like those produced in contemporary royal chanceries. 144 Recueiljean IV, i. 13, 40; a study of Breton notaries is a desideratum. Courtel, EEC, cxxxv (1977), 290 remarks that the use of public instruments by the dukes of Burgundy, common in the thirteenth century had become rare by the fourteenth. 145 La Borderie and Pocquet, Hist, de Bretagne, iv. 396-400. 146 preuves> ill. 38. In 1463 Robert Marc gave particularly detailed evidence on the chancery practice with regard to sealing during Peter IPs reign (ALA, E 198 no. 33). 147 Two vicechancellors have been traced between 1415-26 (Lettres de Jean V, i. pp. Ixxxv—Ixxxviii) but the next known holder of the office is Yves de Pontsal, bishop of Vannes, vicechancellor from 1450-7. He was succeeded by Messire Jean Inisan (1457-8), Messire Bertrand de Coetanezre (1458-61), Mr Jean de Rouville (1461-71 or later), Mr Guy du Boschet (by 1474-82), Gilles de la Riviere (1486-7) and Mr Guillaume Gueguen (1488-1506); cf. Planiol, iii. 117. 148 ALA, B 9 fo. 88 v, 'Aujourduy xiijc jour de may Ian mil iiijc iiijxx la poche des seaulx de la chancelerie qui paravant avoit este close soubz le signet de monsgr. le Vichancelier a este apportee par Jehan de Cerisy, conterolle general et garde descl. seaulx devant monsgr. le Chancelier close soubz le seel de secret du due. Et a dit led. conterolle que le due avoit en sa presence fait ouvrir lesd. seaulx et fait seeller une lectre de laquelle le registre est cy apres escript. Et apres avons fait clorre lesd. seaulx soubz led. seel de secret lesd. seaulx avoint este clos soubz le signet de monditsgr. le Vichancelier des le quart jour de cedit moys de May. Et depuis en cedit xiijc jour de May ont este

146

The Creation of Brittany

be exacted149. The signatures of other members of the administration who had come to the chancery to collect particular records, to note their delivery or return, and so on, also occasionally appear. At the end of each session's business the presiding officer - the chancellor or his deputy - now added his own signature to conclude the day's work and to ensure against unauthorised enrollment150. The neat business-like registration of letters and this concern for minutiae encourages a generally favourable impression of the efficiency of the chancery at this stage. But it should be remembered that appearances can be deceptive sometimes. The witnesses in the 1371 inquiry at Angers were unanimous in praising the concern of Charles de Blois to appoint just officers in all levels of his administration151. But there were occasional lapses in probity. It has already been seen that the duke might inadvertently grant letters which contradicted earlier ones, appointing two men to the same office, for instance, and one can occasionally suspect an element of bribery, other pressures or simple ignorance152. More seriously, an inquiry into the misconduct of Chauvin and his staff in 1463, shows how relatively easy it was for chancery clerks to engage in fraudulent practices. In this instance they had apparently conspired to issue blank safeconducts which were then sold to English and German merchants wishing to trade in the duchy in contravention of a general prohibition by Louis XI. It is impossible here to unravel all the intricacies of the plot which involved some of the most senior members of the chancery, possibly the chancellor himself153. Public confidence had been shaken and morality outed, it was alleged, by these events. Olivier du Breil, the proctor-general, called lesd. seaulx apportez devant monditsgr. le Vichancelier clos soubz led. seel de secret, lequel les fist ouvrir, et apres avoir seelle aucunes lettres de justice les clouyt soubz son signet, presens a ce Maistre Pierre le Boteiller, Robert Marc et Jacques Raboceau' and signed with flourishes 'P. Le Bouteiller, present soit. R. Marc. J. Raboceau'. 149 cf. ALA, B 2 fos. 17 r, 19 v, 71 r, 83 v; B 3 fo. 133 r; B 4 fos. l l r , 17 v; B 5 bis lll r; B 6 fos. 12 v, 74 v, etc. 150 ALA, B 7 fo. 139v (19 Oct. 1473), Pierre Landoys signed to acknowledge receipt of a quittance from Francis II to Louis XI for 30,000 1.1.; B 9 fo. 147 v (2 Oct. 1480), Gilles de la Riviere, archdeacon of Rennes, and Etienne Millon, papal protonotaries, signed the register. The practice of the chancellor or his deputy signing had begun by 1503. 151 Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 41, 46, 56, 59, 66-7 etc. 152 ALA, E 131 fo. 25r, cf. B 5 fo. 39v (2 April 1467), a pardon for murder granted (according to a marginal note) under pressure from Odet d'Aydie, lord of Lescun. On 19 Nov. 1490 a grant of rachat on the death of the lord of Molac to the lord of La Roche had to be revoked because Molac was still alive (B 13 fo. 55 r). 153 ALA, E 198 nos. 24-39 (briefly summarized in Preuves, iii. 38^40); see Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Franfois 11 et I'Angleterre, pp. 61-9.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

147

for a searching investigation, a powerful commission was appointed and eventually many serious charges about the breach of chancery practices were layed against the chancellor154. It was even claimed that through his actions the very safety of the prince and duchy had been imperilled, that he had indeed committed crimes which amounted to lese-majeste1^. But for reasons about which we cannot be clear, Francis II chose to forgive most of those involved with the plot. Giles de Cresolles, the chancery clerk most deeply involved (homme feable, said Jacques Raboceau, his senior) is no longer found signing the register but no one else was dismissed, despite incriminating confessions; blank letters and letters with windows as they were picturesquely called, were later still used for some kinds of business156. But it was an episode which rankled and Chauvin's reputation as chancellor never entirely recovered, for although he survived this first serious assault on his position, the charges were to be resurrected many years later in 1482 by his bitter rival, Landoys, to justify his ultimate dismissal157. 154

ALA, E 198 no. 38, 'Ensuit aucune remonstrance pour lentendement du mal commis et perpetre par Guillaume Chauvin, chancelier, ses clercs, commis et depputez en la maniere devoir bailie les sauffconduiz es ennemis'. 155 Ibid.; this case is not discussed in the two articles on treason cited in note 54, though it adds significantly to the arguments advanced there. 156 ALA, E 198 no. 23 (18 June 1463), commission to the Grand Maitre (Tanguy du Chastel), president of Brittany (Jean Loisel), the vicechancellor (Rouville), the seneschals of Rennes and Treguier (Pierre Ferre and Pierre le Cozic) and Olivier de Coetlogon to inquire into the abuses, including the issue of letters 'les ungs seelles en blanc, les _autres a fenestres pour y mettre et emploier telz port de navires, nombre de gens, pour les conduyre, le date, nombre et noms de marchans que bon leur sembleroit'; cf. B 4 fo. 81 v (22 June 1466), 'ont este scellees vignt lettres decharge que ont este baillees en blanc au regart des noms a Jamet Thomas qui doit rendre du seau icelles lettres'; Ph. de Commynes, Memoires, ed. J. Calmette and G. Durville, 3 vols. Paris 1921-5, i. 15. 157 La Borderie and Pocquet, Hist, de Bretagne, iv. 500-2, but cf. Bouchart, Croniques, fos. 225 v et seq. for whom Chauvin remained renowned for his just administration. Little survives of the documents in his case but an interesting discussion took place in the ducal council on 22 June 1482 in the presence of Guy Boschet, vicechancellor, and others, in which the proctor-general (Guillaume de la Lande) asked about the status of Chauvin's lands during his imprisonment: 'Apres avoir apporter veu et leu aucuns livres de droit faisans mencion delad. matiere pour icelle plus meurement veoirs et estudier, que le due ne devoit selon raison pendant le proces centre led. Chauvin et par avant santence et condempnacion despouiller ne deposseder reellement led. Guillaume Chauvin de lexercice de lad. jurisdicion de sesd. terres ... aincoys que lad. jurisdicion devoit estre exercee ou nom dud. Guillaume Chauvin mays les fruiz, revenus et esmolumens dicelle jurisdicion aussi bien comme des terres et autres heritaiges dud. Chauvin devoint estre mys en sauvegarde' (ALA, E 198 no. 40). Two months later Louis XI tried to evoke his case (ibid., no. 411).

148

The Creation of Brittany

As for the technical competence of the fifteenth-century chancery there is another minor incident which may be used to show it up in rather poor light. It was normal for original letters to be produced before the council when privileges needed to be checked. In the surviving minutes for 1459-63 this procedure can be observed on several occasions as in November 1459, when the rights of the abbey of St-Melaine to enjoy certain privileges in the forest of Rennes were inspected. A number of original ducal letters were exhibited including those of Conan III (1128), Duchess Constance (1193), John III (1333) and one of 1379 'contenant une sentence'158. A year later the countess of Laval displayed letters of John IV (1395) to support claims in a dispute' with the duke over her possession of the barony of Vitre and she followed this up with even older letters of 1235, whilst the ducal proctor countered with a whole series of aveux 'estans ou tresor dou due'159. But the ability of the councillors to apply their critical faculties to the examination of some of these letters must be called into question when, in December 1462, the lord of Derval produced before them one of the most handsome forgeries in a duchy renowned for such productions in the later middle ages160. These were allegedly letters of Arthur II 'soeant en nostre general parlement o la solemnipte de nos troes estas' by which he granted to his kinsman Bonabe, lord of Derval (by a mythical descent from 'nostre feu oncle Salmon jadis conte de Nantes') the right to include two plain quarters of ermine in his family arms161. According to the secretary, who wrote the council minutes - probably Pierre Raboceau, one of those implicated in the scandal of 1463 - these letters supposedly granted on Monday after St Mark's day, 1306, were 'saines et entieres en escripture, signe et seel'. They bore a seal on silk laces displaying the arms of Dreux with an ermine quarter (Brittany) and the legend 'S. Parlamenti Britanie'162. Although the attention of any alert chancery clerk should have been immediately aroused by letters which began 'A tous les oeans et voeans ces presentes, Artur par la grace de Dieu due et prince de Bretaigne ...' no comment is made on their authenticity. It is unfortunate that the laconic minutes do not provide further detail on the context for the production of these letters in council. The evidence is that they had been forged in

158 ALA, E 131 fo. 46 v. 159 ibid., fos. 90-95 v. 160 cf. B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les faussaires en Bretagne, Bulletinphilologique et historique (jusqu'a 1715), annees 1951 et 1952, Paris 1953, pp. 95-102. 161 ALA, E 131 fo. 225 v. 162 Though Parlement is known to have had a seal, no fourteenth century impressions survive (cf. below, p. 170).

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

149

the very recent past, possibly at much the same time that Peter II promoted Jean, lord of Derval, to the rank of one of the nine ancient barons of Brittany in 1451, in order to explain the appearance of the ermines of Brittany in the Derval arms163. Perhaps the fact that this original forgery still survives in the former ducal archives should be taken as indicating that someone in the council meeting in December 1462 was not quite so credulous as his colleagues164. And to be fair, it must be pointed out that other forgeries were detected and measures were frequently taken to try to end fraudulent practices in the fifteenth-century duchy165. The duke enjoyed the confiscated property of convicted forgerers. Prosecutions did occur, though he also exercised clemency towards offenders166. There continued to be a certain ambivalence in the attitude of officials; after all there were occasions when the ability to fabricate documents might be useful to the state as the work of the chancery historians shows! It is thus doubtful whether in the end the Breton administration was in this respect any different, more corrupt and inefficient, than other contemporary administrations. It is perhaps right that this survey of the history of the Breton chancery should conclude with some remarks on the strengths, weaknesses and failings of its personnel. The registers show how well placed its members were to forward their own private interests, sometimes at the expense of the state. More often their rewards were considered legitimate perquisites - the registration of letters on their behalf, taking advantage of the fact that they were often the first to learn that an office was vacant, a plot of land available, the farm of

163 Preuves, ii. 1560-1. In the fourteenth century the Derval-Chateaugiron line, of which Jean was the representative, bore Quarterly, 1 and 4, Gules, a cross patee argent, 2 and 3, gules, two fasces argent, arms used as late as 1416 (Preuves, ii. Planche 11, no. CLXXXIV) but Jean bore Quarterly, 1 and 4, Ermines (3, 2, 3), 2 and 3, argent, two fasces gules, arms which appear on his many manuscripts (J. Dupic, Un bibliophile breton du XVe siecle, Jean de Derval, Tresors des bibliotheques de Prance, xix [1935], 157-62). 164 ALA, E 152 no. 1, where the date given is 30 April 1302. 165 ALA, E 131 fo. I47r-8r (10 July 1461), condemnation of a forger to be pilloried at Nantes, Rennes and Vitre 'un chapeau de papier paint sur la teste ou soint les personnaiges desd. faulsonneries et une escripture que on face mancion'; B 8 fo. 48 v (23 March 1477). 166 ALA, B 7 fo. 68 v (10 May 1473), remission to Olivier le Pelotier and his wife 'davoir induit Roland Riou et Alain du Launay a faire et passer par faulczonnerie ung certain contract du nombre de xii s. de rente entre ilz et feu Jehan le Mestrier sans que pour lad. remission ilz seront aucunement restituez a leur bonne renommee'. Riou was also given a remission but the moveable goods of all four were given by the duke to Pierre de la Mote, sire de Kergoet.

1

50

The Creation of Brittany

a lucrative source of revenue about to be renewed. The first grant in the first surviving register is to the chancellor, Guillaume Chauvin or, more probably, a namesake167. He was in a position also to speed the prosecution of those who infringed his rights like those caught fishing his lakes in 1464, to register a grant of a fair at St-Leger in 1473 or the enfranchisement of properties or to forward his claims to other inheritances168. And what the chancellor could arrange, mutatis mutandis, so could his subordinates169. Whilst those outside the chancery knew that its employees were influential and their cooperation essential if certain titles were to be established. Only more prolonged study of its personnel will reveal the parameters of acceptable behaviour, the baffling and dense family connections and the extent to which the chancery was the lynchpin of the duchy's administration, the source of its political propaganda in the struggle with the crown, the ultimate guardian of Breton liberties. After more than two centuries of continuous existence described briefly here, the first half of the sixteenth century saw the disappearance of the chancery as it had been developed in the service of the dukes of Brittany. The first ominous indications of what was to be royal policy had manifested itself in the suppression of the chancellor's title between 1493-8. There followed a brief Indian summer after 1498 and while Anne lived her council and chancery in Brittany still had an important role in the affairs of the duchy. But with her death on 9 January 1514 and that shortly afterwards of her devoted chancellor, Philip de Montauban, the tightening grip of the royal administration became apparent. There was room in France now for only one chancellor; the office in Brittany was merged with that of chancellor of France. A non-Breton from one of the most powerful royal bureaucratic dynasties, Jean Bricpnnet, was appointed vicechancellor and it was he who now directed the Breton council and chancery170. As late as 1539 Francis I once more confirmed the chancery's existence but the fundamental political role which council and chancery had played under the Montfort dukes had long since ceased. Finally in November 1552 its judicial duties were taken over by thepresidiaux courts

167

ALA, B 2 fo. 1 r, 'Respit a ung an pour Guillaume Chauvin habitant de la ville de Nantes'. 168 ALA, B 2 fo. 99 r; B 3 fo. 169 r; B 4 fo. 61 v; B 8 fo. 137 v etc. 169 ibid., B 125-129, individual letters of ennoblement and enfranchisement, contain many obtained by ducal secretaries for themselves or their relatives and friends. 170 ALA, B 22 fo. 56 v (18 April 1515) for Bricpnnet's first appearance in the chancery. He is not listed with other members of his family in Lapeyre & Scheurer, nos. 97-105.

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

151

and the Parlement de Bretagne assumed responsibility for the registration of public acts171. But as far as the late medieval phase of the chancery's history is concerned this ended symbolically on 19 March 1514 when in the church of the Carmelites at Nantes 'led. chancellier print le cueur de ladicte dame (Anne) et au devant de luy le roy darmes Bretaigne ... descendirent soubz celle voulte ... et la fut pose le cueur de la magnanime dame en ung coffre dacier fermant a clef entre son pere et mere .. ,'172.

171 172

Berranger, Guide des archives de la Loire-Atlantique, i. 18. Nantes, B. m., MS. 653 fo. 35 r-v.

Appendix I: A provisional list of chancellors of Brittany, 1213-1514 Name

Acting

Other posts

References

Rainaud d. 1245

By March 1214-1236 at least

Bishop of Quimper 1219-45

Levron, no. 9 (1214); Bib. nat. MS. 9035 fo. 6 no. 2 (1219); Bull, diocesain... Quimper, 1911, 249 no. 35 (1236).

Mace le Bart

28 March 1319

Canon of Dol, Rennes and St Martin de Tours, scholastic of Nantes (1321-3), chanter of Dol (1323-40)

G. Mollat, Etudes et documents sur I'histoire de Bretagne, Rennes 1907, pp. 54-5.

Gautier de St-Pern1 d. 1359

Between 30 April 1345 14 May 1346 at least

Bishop of Vannes 1346-59

Arch. dep. Pyrenees-Atlantiques E 624 no. 1 fos. 5-8

Jean de Locmine d. 1365

Between 8 Feb. 1361 4 May 1365

Archdeacon of Vannes

Recueil Jean IV, i. nos. 8, 33, 43-5.

Hugues de Montrelais d. 28 Feb. 1384

By 27 Jan. 1366 - 28 Nov. 1372 at least

Bishop of Treguier 1354-7; bishop of St-Brieuc 1357-84; Cardinal 1372

Recueil Jean IV, i. no. 66; Lettres secretes de Gregoire XI, no. 1010.

Jean, vicomte de Rohan d. May 1396

By 26 Sept. 1379 5 May 1384

Recueil Jean IV, i. no. 320; ii. 493

Silvestre de la Feuillee d. after Oct. 1392

8 June 1384 - 6 June 1385 at least

Recueil Jean IV, ii. nos. 511, 521, 546.

1

The names Auffroy le Voyer and Guillaume Paris have been suggested as chancellors of Blois (Preuves, ii. 20); also that of Henry du Bois but without serious reference

Name

Acting

Other posts

References

Henri le Barbu d. 27 April 1419

Probably by 19 May 1386 - 18 July 1395 at least

Abbot of Prieres (1381); bishop of Vannes 1383-1404; bishop of Nantes 1404-19

Recueil Jean IV, ii. 582; Bib. Nat. MS. francais 22319 p. 154.

Robert Brochereul d. after May 1414

1 August 1396 Nov. 1399 at least

Seneschal of Nantes and Rennes

Recueil Jean IV, ii. no. 1063; Preuves, ii. 697, 699.

Mr Etienne Ceuret d. 6 Dec. 1429

July 1401 - before 7 Jan. 1404

Bishop of Dol 1405-29

Lettres de Jean V, no. 734.

Anselme de Chantmerle d. 1 Sept. 1427

7 Jan. 1404 - at least 18 May 1404

Bishop of Rennes 1390-1427

ibid., no. 2; Preuves, ii. 740.

Hugues Lestoquier d. 10 Oct. 1408

By 18 Nov. 1404 April 1408

Bishop of Treguier 1403-4; bishop of Vannes 1404-8

Lettres de Jean V, nos. 20, 1025

Jean de Malestroit d. 14 Sept. 1443

Between 9 April / 20 June 1408-1443

Bishop of St-Brieuc 1405-19; bishop of Nantes 1419-43

ibid., nos. 1027, 1029, 1034, 1251

Louis de Rohan, sire de Guemene d. 1457

1445-50

Preuves, ii. 1395; Mathieu d'Escouchy, Chronique, iii. 247; E. Cosneau, Le connetable de Richemont, Paris 1886, p. 388.

Jean de la Riviere, chevalier d. after 1461

By 3 Nov. 1450 - before 27 Sept. 1457

Preuves, ii. 1545, 1554, 1605-6, 1671, 1686, 1708, 1725; iii. 38.

Mr Jean du Cellier d. by 9 Aug. 1468

27 Sept. 1457-1458

Seneschal of Rennes; alloue of Vannes

ibid., ii. 1710, 1733.

Name

Acting

Other posts

References

Guillaume Chauvin d. 1484

By 28 Feb. 1459-5 Oct. 1481

Tresorier de 1'epargne; tresorier general; president de Bretagne

Bib. Nat. MS. francais 11549 fo. 134; Preuves, ii. 1741.

Mr Francois Chrestien

June 1484-1485

Mr Jacques de la Villeon d. by 19 Sept. 1487

Sept. 1485-1487

Procureur de Lamballe; seneschal of Rennes

Preuves, iii. 484, 577; ALA, E 2-9 no. 23 fo. 12.

Philippe de Montauban2 d. 1516

20/23 Sept 1487-1514

Seigneur de Sens et du Bois de la Roche; captain of Montauban and Rennes

Preuves, iii. 541, 694, 757, 923-4.

2

ALA, E 212 no. 17 fo. 6r; Preuves, iii. 446, 461-3.

Mr Gilles de la Riviere was named chancellor on 24 Jan. 1489 as a rival to Montauban (Preuves, iii. 616-7).

Appendix II A. Types of letters issued according to the register of fees from 24 Oct. - 1 Dec. 1489 (ALA, E 212 no. 21). October November December 24 27 28 29 30 31 2 3 6 7 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 20 21 22 25 26 27 28 1 Mandement Institution Remission Sauvegarde Commission Saufconduit Conge Decharge Confiscation Respit Excuse Donation Deport Rabat Evocation Relevement Sourceance Maintenue Ordonnance Surete Restitution Prorogation Change

3 4 1 1 1 1 1 4 5 1 1 16 1 1 1 2 1

1 2 5 5 7 2 1 1

1 3 1 1 1 9 1 3 1 11

5 1 4 1 3 22 41 3 4 4 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 17 1 2 2 2 11 1 1 1 1 3 2 7 1 1 1

1

1 2 1

1

1 1 1

11 3 1

1

12

1

1

1 1 1

1 1

1

1

2 1

1

1 1

1

4 13 20 13 7 9 9 3 11 2 6 9 3 8 3 7 5 6 7 2 2 6 9 6 2 2

Total

74 14 4 34 4 20 25 1 4 2 4 6 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 207

B. Types of letters issued according to the chancery register from 24 Oct. - 1 Dec. 1489 (ALA, B 12).

e/i ON

October November December 24 27 28 29 30 31 2* 4 6 7 9 10 12 14 16 17 18 20 22 23 25 26 27 28 1 Mandement Institution Donation Remission Sauvegarde Commission Saufconduit Evocation Conge Decharge Respit Excuse Deport Rabat Relevement Sourceance Maintenue Ordonnance Surete Prohibition Prorogation Restitution

3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 5 1 1 1 4 1 2 2

1 3 5 5 7 2 4 9 3 1 2 4 1 3 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 6 2 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 10 2 3 1 1 2 1 2 3

2

7

1

2 1

1 1

2

1 1

1

1

2 1

1

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 2 1 1

5 13 18 13 8 8 9 3 10 2 5 8 * Dated 12 November in register.

3 28 5 7 8 2 3 3 9 7 2 3

total

66 12 7 4 35 3 23 2 20 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 196

The Chancery of the Duchy of Brittany, 1213-1514

157

Appendix III. Francis II orders the chancellor and the other officers who preside in his council to accept letters sent to them by Guyon Rjchart and Guillaume Gueguen, secretaries, to which the duke's signature has been added by means of an engraved stamp, Nantes, 6 May 1483 (ALA, E128 no. 6 (anc. N. H. 31), original parchment, 350X219 mm, formerly sealed on a tongue, with a tying thong). Francoys, par la grace de Dieu, due de Bretaigne, conte de Montfort, de Richemont, d'Estampes et de Vertus, a noz bien amez et feaulx conseillers, noz chancelier, vichancelier et autres qui ont preside et presideront en nostre conseil, salut. Comme par cy devant depuis lavenement a nostre principaulte pour les faiz et affaires de nous, noz subgetz et du bien de la chose publique de nostre pais, nous ait este necessaire et expedient continuellement vacque a lexpedicion de grant nombre de lettres et mandemens patens et autres, tant de grace, de justice que dautre nature et quallite et icelles signer et expedier de nostre seign manuel, a quoy le temps passe avons porte et eu de grans ennuyz, pour la grant multitude et habundance desdites lettres et pluseurs importunes requestes avons faictes de signer et expedier icelles lettres et soit ainsi que presentement chacun jour et plus que jamais nous surviennent pluseurs matieres tant pour nous, nosdiz subgetz que pour les exprez affaires de nostre pays. Pour lexpedicion desquelles et les vallider et auctoriser soit besoign y apposer le seign de nostre main a quoy ne pourrions vacquer ne satisfaire ainsi que bien requis seroit obstant pluseurs autres grans occupacions enquoy suymes bien souvant, et pour ceste cause ayons nagueres fait faire engraver et inprimer nostre signet le plus conforme que possible a este sans y avoir fait inprimer le chiffre que avons acoustume a faire et apposer apres nostre nom aux lettres, mandemens et estaz de finance, rolles et descharges et autres qui doresenavant seront expediez soubz nostre dit signe manuel duquel ainsi inprime avons desja use en aucunes lettres, mandemens, rolles, estaz et descharges, et depuis en ayons fait faire engraver et inprimer ung autre ouquel avons fait inprimer le chiffre que avons acoustume de faire et apposer apres nostre nom et desdiz deux signetz tant en mandemens, patens, rolles, estaz et descharges de finances et autres que lettres missives entendons de cy enavant nous en aider et user. Et pour ce vous mandons et commandons expressement que lesdites lettres et mandemens, patens tant estaz, rolles et descharges de finance que avons ja soit signer et expedier soubz nostredit signe dinpression depuis environ le premier jour de fevrier mil quatre cens quatre vingtz et deux et que doresenavant ferons expedier desdiz signetz qui sont et seront signez de nostre contrerolle general Guyon Richart et Maistre Guillaume Gueguen, noz secretaires, de nostre commandement, vous les passez, seellez et expediez en ce qui

158

The Creation of Brittany

sera a faire en nostre chancellerie ainsi que silz estoint signez de nostre main, et a ce faire vous avons auctorisez et auctorisons par ces presentes et voullons que esdites lettres ainsi expediees et signees soit garde estat et autant de fby et effect estre adjoustez comme si icelles lettres et mandemens, estaz, rolles et descharges de finance estoint signez de nostre main car tel est nostre plaisir, non obstant quelxconques choses a ce contraires. Donne en nostre ville de Nantes le vj mc jour de May Ian mil cccc quatre vingtz et troys. FRANCOYS (autograph with a flourish, the chiffre noted above) Par le due de son commandement G. Gueguen Dorse:

Lettre de limpression du signe du due Francois deuxieme de ce nom (and various later sixteenth century additions).

Additional Note The activities of notaries in ducal service mentioned briefly above have been examined in a more detailed study on 'Notaries and Notarial Practice in Medieval Brittany' presented to the VII Congreso internacional de diplomatica held at Valencia in October 1986, which will appear in the proceedings: Notariadopublico y documentoprivado: de los origenes al siglo XIV, ed. J. Trenchs.

VI

THE SEALS OF JOHN IV, DUKE OF BRITTANY, 1364-1399 F R O M material collected for a catalogue and edition of the actes of John IV, duke of Brittany, it is possible to reconstruct the series of seals used by the duke and his chancery during the course of his reign.1 Some seals are represented by one or two surviving impressions only, and it is possible that, especially in the case of the secret and signet seals, these series may be incomplete through the loss of particular examples. But from surviving impressions and from descriptions of the seals on documents which have subsequently been lost or had their seals removed, it seems that what remains constitutes a fairly complete and representative sample of ducal seals. The description which follows deals with them in this order: first, the seal used by John IV before he came to the ducal throne as a result of his success at the battle of Auray on 29 September 1364^ then with the four main series, the Great Seal (and its counter seal), the Privy and Secret Seals (together with certain other armorial and departmental seals used on ducal documents), and finally with the Signet. With the exception of two (possibly three) of the signets, all the surviving impressions are of round seals in red or green wax. Seal no. 11361-1362 The earliest impressions of a ducal seal are appended to letters renouncing claims to the earldom and honour of Richmond on 19 January I36i. 3 Approximately 35 mm. in diameter, this seal displays a shield, ermines, 5, 5, 4, 3, 2, I, suspended from a bush, within a gothic surround, encircling which is the legend: S'JOHIS :DUCIS :BRITANN ICOMITIS :DE IMONTFORT : This seal was in all probability made for the duke in England where he had spent most of his youth under the guardianship of Edward III. 4 Five impressions of this seal survive, all on documents now in the Public Record Office, London, although the last of these shows that the duke used it in Brittanv after his return to the 1 I hope shortly to publish a Recueil des actes de Jean IF under the aegis of the Institut Armoricain de Recherches Historiques de .I'Umversite de Haute-Bretagne, Rennes. I am particularly grateful to the British Academy for a European Research Grant which enabled me to consult much of the manuscript material cited in this paper. 2 For the general circumstances of the duke's reign see Michael Jones, Ducal Brittany 1364— I399> Oxford, 1970. 3 Public Record Office London ( = P.R.O.),

D.L. 27 nos. 325 and 326, cf. Calendar of Close Rolls, 1361-4 (London, H.M.S.O., 1912), pp. 250-1. In view of my forthcoming edition and in order not to overburden the already extensive notes, I have not cited the published versions of documents unless absolutely necessary. 4 Cf. E. Deprez, 'La querelle de Bretagne de la captivite de Charles de Blois a la majorite de Jean IV de Montfort (1347-1362)', Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d"1archeologie de Bretagne, vii (1926), 47-8; Jones, op. cit., p. 16.

160

The Creation of Brittany

duchy in the summer of 1362, since it is appended to a document issued at Becherel on i October I362. 1 The Great Seal The main series of ducal seals properly starts With those used after the battle of Auray, the most important of which was the Great seal. In conformity with French royal and princely practice, John IV used a one-sided Great seal, with a smaller armorial seal as a counter seal.2 Only one impression survives of the first Great seal and only two of the third, whilst the second is represented by ten whole impressions and some fragments. In view of the scanty evidence for the first and third Great seals, it might be suspected that other forms of this seal may have once existed and subsequently perished, but it is unlikely that this seal was changed more frequently than was absolutely necessary. John V of Brittany (1399-1442) used two Great seals in his reign of 43 years.3 His father, John IV, was forced by his mixed political fortunes to use three Great seals. One was in use before his renewed exile in England from 1373 to 1379; the second was made on his return to the duchy and took into account his changed style, including the title 'earl of Richmond' which he had regained in 1372. The third seal once more took account of a change of style made inevitable by the investiture of his eldest son with the county of Montfort I'Amaury, although the seal was only finally altered some years after that event.4 The Great seal was normally in the keeping of the Chancellor of the duchy, in conformity with general Western European practice.5 Impressions in both preen and red wax survive.6 1 P.R.O., D.L. 27 nos. 325-6, E. 30 nos. 194, 195 (ist October 1362), 197. It is presumably to a cast of this seal that the Catalogue of Seals in the Department of Manuscripts in the British Museum, ed. W.de Gray Birch, 6 vols (London, 1887-1900), v. no. 20, 048, refers when it describes: '(Round, \\ inch.) A Shield of arms Ermine, Bretagne. Suspended by the strap from a bifurcated tree. Within a carved gothic rosace or panel of six points, open at the top to allow the tree to issue and ornamented along the inner edge with small quatrefoils. Legend: S'.JOH'IS.DUCIS.BRITANIE :COMITIS:DE: MONTFORT. Beaded borders.' 2 Cf. G. Tessier, Diplomatique royale frartfaise (Paris, 1962), pp. 192-7. 3 Lettres (et mandements] de Jean 7, (due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard, Societe des bibliophiles bretons, Nantes, 5 vols., 1889-95), i, pp. IxxvIxxvi. Blanchard provides the most detailed ac .it of the workings of the Breton chancery, . ose practices in the early fifteenth century differ only slightly from those used in the time of John IV. For the durability of Great seals, cf. Y. Metman, Sigillographie, Vhistoire , et ses methodes, ed. C. Samaran, Ency dope die de la Pleiade (Paris, 1961), p. 400.

* Below, pp. 162-3. s Tessier, op. cit., pp. 141-2 for France, or P. Chaplais, English Royal Documents, King JohnHenry FI, 1199-1461 (Oxford, 1971), pp. i ff., and Sir H. C. Maxwell-Lyte, Historical Notes on the Useofthe Great Seal of England (London, 1926), passim, for England. 6 The Breton Chancery in the late fourteenth century used only red and green wax. In doing so it followed common French practice: grants in perpetuity were authenticated by the Great seal in green wax; all other actes were authenticated by impressions of seals in red wax. The only exception I have found is a signet letter of an uncertain date between 1366 and 1384 which was originally sealed close with green wax (Muniments of the Marquess of Bath, Longleat MS. 390). In the thirteenth century natural or yellow wax had occasionally been used but this was later considered a royal prerogative, although it was used by Duke John III as late as 1315 (A.L.A., E 238 f. 36r inventory of 1395). For further details, see A. de Bouard, Manuel de diplomatique francaise et pontificale, 2 vols. (Paris, 1928-49), i, 335, and Chaplais, op. cit., p. 15.

The Seals of John 1V, Duke of Brittany

\ 5\

1

i. 14 November I366. An equestrian seal (plate 7) of traditional design, approximately 87 mm. in diameter, showing a fully armed knight and horse, riding to the sinister,2 against a geometrically patterned ground of angels and cockatrices. In an eighteenth-century engraving of this seal originally used to illustrate Lobineau's Histoire de Bretagne, and later taken over by Morice (from an impression allegedly appended to a document of I37i), 3 the horse is caparisoned ermine and has a crest, in the form of a lion. The knight bears an ermine shield, and his surcoat is erminee, whilst his horned helm also bears a lion as crest. In his right hand the knight wields a sword, which together with the helm, the horse's crest, its feet and tail break through into the surround, which carries the legend: SIGIL(LUM) JOHANNIS DUCIS: BRIT(ANIE ET) COMIT(IS MONTIS)FORTIS On the surviving impression the same legend is to be found, 4 but (as Blanchard found when comparing the surviving seals of John V with the engravings in Lobineau and Morice)5 there are a number of inaccuracies or differences of interpretation to be noted in some of the details of the seals. In this case, the main discrepancies between the survivor and the engraving lie in the amount that parts of the knight and horse break through into the surround (the tail and front feet of the horse hardly doing so in the actual impression), and in the fact that the angel in the background bears a long staff diagonally across his body, held in his right hand, rather than the sword which he holds in the engraving. This figure is to be identified with St. Michael on whose feast day the duke won his duchy, who became patron saint of the duke's order of chivalry, the Ermine, and for whom the duke appears to have had a considerable affection.6 Furthermore the lines of angels and cockatrices are at right angles to each other in the impression of 1366 (and thus alternately within each horizontal line) where the engraving shows them running diagonally and thus in alternate horizontal lines. The counter seal (plate 8b) is approximately 36 mm. in diameter, displaying an ermine shield (5, 4, 5, 4, 3), supported by an archangel (St. Michael) holding a long staff with which he impales a dragon, or the devil in the form of a serpent, through its mouth at the base of the shield.7 The legend is: 1 Archives departementales de la Loire-Atlantique, Nantes (= A.L.A.), £ 1 5 4 no. 3. A photographic record of all seals in this archive is now being prepared by Mile. Illaire, conservateurad joint. 2 Cf. Metman, loc. cit., pp. 417-18. 3 Dom G.-A. Lobineau, Histoire de Bretagne, 2 vols. (Paris, 1707), seal no. clxvi; Dom P.-H. Morice, Memoires pour servir de preuves a Vhistoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, 3 vols. (Paris, 1742—6: cited throughout as Preuves}, ii, plate ix, no. clxvi. In order to avoid duplication I have simply given references to the plates in Preuves. 4 A.L.A., E 154 no. 3. 5 Lettres de Jean F, i, p. Ixxvi. 6 For the Ermine see below, p. 172; Archives

departementales d'llle-et-Vilaine, Rennes (= A.I.V.), I E 10, order from John IV to Richard de Lesmenez, his treasurer, 7 April 1388, to pay 2O/. 'de nostre don a celui qui nous aporta un ymaige de Saint Michel de la ville de Paris'. Among the items which Hugh Damery was conveying to Brittany for the duke in 1393 was an alabaster image of St. Michael (Cal. Close Rolls 1392-1396 (London, 1925), 57). 7 The iconography of St. Michael can be approached through the fine exhibition catalogue Millenaire de Mont Saint-Michel 966-1966, Paris, 1966, especially section I, 'Saint Michel, vainqueur du demon', where examples of seals bearing this motif are described. The source of inspiration is Rev. 12: 7 ff.

162

The Creation of Brittany

CONT'S' IOHIS : DUCIS : BRITANIE : COMITIS : MO'TISFORTIS There is an engraving corresponding to this seal in Preuves, ii, plate ix, no. clxvi, from the document of 1371 referred to in the description of the Great seal. Despite variations between the surviving impression of that seal and the engraving, it seems likely that the latter is also an example of the first Great seal and counter seal, which must therefore have been in use between 1366 and 1371, and, it might be supposed, probably from the beginning of the duke's reign in 1364. But as a result of his negotiations with Edward III in 1372, John recovered the earldom of Richmond.1 As late as 28 December 1372 he personally autographed a letter with his old style 'Le vostre, Jauhan, due de Bretaigne et conte de Monfort de ma main escript',2 but on 6 January 1373 the Breton chancery used the style 'Jehan, due de Bretaigne, conte de Montfort et de Richemont' which quickly became standard form.3 Unfortunately there is no surviving impression of a Great seal in the next few months, before the duke went into exile at the end of April, which would reveal whether a new seal was engraved to take account of this change. This was certainly the case when John returned to the duchy in 1379. 2. 1379-92.4 The second Great seal (plate 10), another equestrian one, approximately 95 mm. in diameter, bears a very similar design to the first Great seal, with an armed knight and horse, displaying the ermines of Brittany, but they are set against a background which is diapered with eight-pointed stars and lions rampant (to the sinister), instead of angels and cockatrices. The legend reads: -f SIGILLU : JOHANNIS : DUCIS : BRITANIE : COMITIS : MONTISFORTIS : ET : RICHEMONDIE.

The counter seal (plate 9a) is approximately 35 mm. in diameter. St. Michael continues to tread down the devil, but he is carrying a smaller shield to that displayed in the counter seal of the first Great seal, bearing ermine, a pile, 4, 3, 2, i, with the legend: COTS. JOHIS : DUCIS : BRITANIE : COIT : MOTISFORT : 2: RICHEMODIE 1

Foedera, Conventions*, Litterae, etc., Record Commission Edition, 4 vols (London, 1819-69), iii, part ii, p. 953, grant of the earldom of Richmond to John IV, 19 July 1372. Seisin was ordered on the following day (ibid., p. 955). 2 Archives Nationales, Paris (= A.N.), J. 246 no. 130, to Charles V. 3 Archives departementales du Morbihan, Vannes ( = A.M.), H St-Gildas 3. 4 Impressions: A.I.V., I FIIII, 2 5th September 1379 (in red wax); A.N., J 242 no. 59, igth November 1380; ibid., J 243 no. 64, 3oth May 1381; Bibl. num., Nantes, MS. 1703 no. 8, 30th May 1381 (in red wax); A.L.A., E 152 no. 9, 4th June 1381; ibid., E 78 no. 15, 16 February 1383; ibid., E 15 2 no. i o, i st February 1387; ibid., E 17 no. 12, 24th February 1387 (photograph in

Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. J. Delumeau, Toulouse, 1969, facing p. 209, and revised edition, 1973, facing p. 209, in both instances either wrongly described or dated); A.N., J 182 no. 112, 4th January 1390 (fragments); ibid., J 243 no. 73, 26th January 1392. I have been unable to see a probable further impression of this seal on a document of 3rd August 1395 (Collection F. Joiion des Longrais, published in Bulletin et memoires de la societl archeologique du departement a"Ille-etVilaine, xliii (1914), 247-9). The present owner, Professeur F. Jouon des Longrais, has been unable to find this, as so many other, of his father's medieval records. I am grateful to him, nevertheless, for his co-operation. In the sealing clause the Great seal is always announced.

The Seals of John IV, Duke of Brittany

163

The engraving in Preuves., ii, plate ix, no. clxv, gives the legend as: COTS : JOHIS : DUCIS : BRITAN : COM : MONTF: ET: RICHEMO. It also fails to show the floral spray background with which the surviving examples of this seal are diapered. It must also be noted that in one instance at least, the counter seal for the second Great seal (plate 9b) was a seal whose only difference from the counter seal on the surviving exemplar of Great seal no. I, was a new legend: COTS. IOHIS. DUCIS BRITAN1E COIT. MOTISFORT ET RICHEMONDIE. 1

Although the duke dropped the title 'comte de Montfort' from his style in documents issued shortly after the birth of his son on 24 December 1389,2 there had been no alteration in the legend of the Great seal as late as the time of the negotiations with the king of France at Tours in January 1392.3 The actual delivery of seisin of the county of Montfort TAmaury to the future John V did not occur until 13th August I397- 4 Since the two surviving impressions of the third Great seal date from February 1398, it seems highly probable that John IV continued to use his second Great seal until shortly before this date. 3. 2 February I398. 5 The two surviving impressions of this seal (plate 11) reveal that it was a remarkable chef d'oeuvre of the engraver's art, forcibly reminding one of the naturalistic techniques of contemporary manuscript illumination. Indeed the background against which the armed knight and his horse are set, in much the same fashion as in the previous two Great seals, could well have been copied from a manuscript like the Livre de Chasse of Gaston Febus III, count of Foix, John's contemporary and sometime creditor.6 Greyhounds, a dog for which the duke had 1

A.L.A., E 152 no. 10, ist February 1387. Cf. A.N., J. 182 no. 112, 4th January 1390, 'Jehan, due de Bretaigne et comte de Richemont', which became standard form, with or without et. 3 The impression attached to A.N., J. 243 no. 76, 26th January 1392 (green wax), is of Great seal no. 2, with the surviving legend: +SIGILU": 2

JOHANNIS . . . IS : MONTISFORTIS : ET : . . . ONDIE. 4

A.L.A., E 245 no. 2 f. 3V, inventaire de i 561, titres de Montfort. By an act of 3rd November 1395 it can be seen that the duke had kept a controlling say in the affairs of the county: Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris (== B.N.), MS. fr(ancais), 20692, pp. 388 and 393, grant to the count of Montfort of all the lands previously held in the county by the dame de Bretancourt. 5 A.I.V., I E 10 no. 2, mutual donation by the duke and duchess of all their goods to each other; A.L.A., E 17 no. 16, a public instrument of the same date, announcing the terms of this donation and sealed with the duke's Great seal. For a precis

of an earlier agreement between the duke and duchess of a similar kind see Preuves, ii, 547-8 (1387). A third example may exist in the archives of the parish of Pace (dep. Ille-et-Vilaine) on a document of 3rd May 1399, but my efforts to locate it have proved fruitless so far (cf. Melanges d'archeologle et d'histoire de Bretagne, ii (Rennes, 1858), 61). 6 The best surviving manuscript of the Livre is B.N., fr. 616, dating from c. 1405—10. For a useful bibliography: P. Tucoo-Chala, Gaston Febus et la vicomte de Beam, 1343-1391 (Bordeaux, 1961), pp. 18-20. See also Gaston Phebus. Livre de Chasse, ed. G. Tilander (Karlshamn, 1971), pp. 24-7. At some date before i8th June 1382 Gaston lent John IV 10,000 francs (cf. A.L.A., E 209 no. i and A.I.V., I E 18 no. 3, notarial instruments, 18 June 1382, recording the delivery of a quittance for repayment. No actes relating to this transaction appear in Tucoo-Chala's catalogue of the actes of Gaston Febus, loc. cit.~).

164

The Creation of Brittany

a distinct reputation as a breeder,1 and other kinds of dog prance after rabbits, a badger looks on, whilst piglets root for delicacies at the base of the seal. The landscape, which may represent one of the ducal warrens on which much care and money were lavished,2 sprouts grass, trees and other plants, whilst in the sky several birds can be seen, including a hawk about to seize a less aggressive opponent which is trying to elude capture. In structure, the seal is also considerably larger than the previous two Great seals, having a diameter of approximately 107 mm.3 It bears the legend: S*. MAGNU. JOHANIS. DUCIS : BRITANNORUM :

Thus in design, size, and legend there is no parallel to this third Great seal of John IV amongst his other seals, or in the Great seals of his son, John V. These latter, to a limited degree, continue the rustic theme by having the equestrian figure riding across a base in which plants are to be found (teazels—Dipsacum fullomum—can be easily recognized in the second). But in size they revert to the pattern of John IVs second Great seal and their legends are traditional.4 Some fine fifteenth-century English seals reflect a similar artistic tradition,5 but the general impression to be gained from this third Great seal, apart from the probable allusions to the duke's personal tastes and possessions, especially his love of venery, is that the seal is a symbolic representation of the political aspirations of the duke to independence from the kingdom of France during the last years of his reign. It is possible, for example, that there has been a conscious adaptation of the solemn style of the king of France (Tails Dei Gratia Francorum Rex),6 For although John IV never adopted, in his style in written records, the phrase 'par la grace de Dieu',7 his subjects were at this very time beginning to think of him in these terms. The Dean and Chapter of Nantes, for instance, called him 'Jehan, par la grace de Dieu, due de Bretagne et comte de Richemont' in a document dated the day before those to which the two examples of the third Great seal are appended, 8 whilst either in combination or separately, the phrases Dei gratia and Britannorum Dux (or its variants) were to be found on the duke's coinage at this time.9 The duke and his 1

Cf. A.N., KK 253, 16 Nov. 1397, mention of a gift of greyhounds to John, duke of Berry, in Berry's accounts. 2 This emerges most forcibly from such accounts as those of the ducal receiver of La Guierche (A.L.A., E 211 no. 6, for 1385-6, and B 2448, for 1388—9). Licences to build warrens had to be sought from the duke (e.g., Archives du chateau des Touches, dep. Morbihan, com. Guer, 14 April 1391, letters of John IV for Jean, sire des Touches). 3 The progressive enlargement of seals is a common phenomenon (cf. Tessier, op. cit., p. 192, and A Guide to Seals in the Public Record Office, London, H.M.S.O., 1954, p. 12) but the increase of 20 mm. alone in the course of John's reign is unusual. 4 Lettres de Jean V, i, plate i.

s C. H. Hunter Blair, 'Armorials on English Seals from the Twelfth to the Sixteenth Centuries', Archaeologia, Ixxxix (1943), 6 and plate v. 6 Tessier, op. cit., p. 240. This legend remained unchanged on the Great seals of the kings of France for 600 years from Robert the Pious to Louis XIII (Metman, loc. cit., p. 414). 7 The only document purporting to be an original letter of John IV containing this style (A. Morbihan, H St-Gildas 3 no. 14, 8 March 1368, printed in Cartulaire du Morbihan, ed. P. Thomas-Lacroix, Bulletin polymathique du Morbihan, 1935, no. 562) is a fabrication of about 1440. 8 A.L.A., E 78 no. 23, i Feb. 1398. 9 F. Poey d'Avant, Monnaie feodales de France, 3 vols. (Paris, 1858-62), i, nos. 565-6, 587-92, 614-20, 657, 664, 667-71, etc.

The Seals of John IV, Duke of Brittany

16 5

advisers consistently emphasized the notion of 'le pais de Bretaigne' and 'le nation de Bretaigne' in their political dealings with Valois France, and the claim to be 'duke of the Bretons' accords with other efforts they were making to unify the duchy and to build up a common heritage with a tradition of loyalty to the ducal house.1 It may be premature at this stage to speculate on whether John IV and his chancery were already moving towards the more open usurpation of the title 'Dei gratia which the king of France regarded as a sovereign right,2 and which John V finally adopted about the year I4iy. 3 But it would certainly not have been out of keeping with the general tenor of ducal policies in the 13905 nor with the extravagant claims of the duke's more enthusiastic supporters.4 In a period when the symbolic implications of slight changes in age-old formulae were quickly understood (witness the complaints of the French king against the duke's infringement of his rights with regard to the coinage),5 the indications are that in Brittany towards the end of the fourteenth century conscious efforts were being made in the ducal chancery and elsewhere to promote the image of a ruler endowed with many, if not all, sovereign attributes. The third Great seal, like the coinage, was a visible sign of the abstract notions on ducal prestige and authority which were emanating from the ducal court and influencing ducal subjects' own views on government.6 It must be noted, however, that the counter seal shows no innovatory features (plate 12a). Were it not for the fact that it appears to be slightly smaller (at 33 mm. diameter) than the counter seal of Great seal no. I, it could have been an identical copy, with a slight change in the legend: CONTS.IOHIS DUCIS BRITANIE COMITIS RICHEMONDIE. 7

In view of the possible re-use of the first counter seal on the reverse of Great seal no. 2, there are grounds for thinking that this is another reworked counter seal.8 The Privy and Secret Seals John IV did not possess a seal of majesty like the one which his son used from 1408 onwards, showing the duke seated inside a ceremonial pavilion.9 After the 1 I have examined this theme in more detail in 'Mon pais et ma nation; Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century', War, Literature and Politics. Essays in honour ofG. W. Coopland, ed. C. Allmand, Liverpool, 1975; below, pp. 283-307. 2 Cf. A. de Boiiard, Manuel de diplomatique franfaise et pontificate, i, 264. In the twelfth century even quite minor lords in Northern France had freely used the title (cf. W. M. Newman, Les seigneurs de Nesle en Picardie, ^ vols., Paris, 1971, ii, 5) but gradually the practice died out or was forcibly suppressed by the crown, which was strong enough in the fifteenth century to force lords in regions to the south of France which had continued to use the title into submission (cf. C. Samaran, La maison d'Armagnac au XVe siecle, Paris, 1907, p. 26).

3

Lettres de Jean F, i, p. xxxiv. Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 114 ff. and in Essays . . . Coopland. 5 Cf. Preuves, ii, 630 (1394). 6 Essays . . . Coopland, passim. 7 From A.I.V., I E 10 no. 2. The legend on the other example is difficult to read; the suggested 4

COTS. IOHIS DUCIS BRITAN. COM. MONTE ET RICHEMO.

noted in the photographic catalogue now under preparation at A.L.A. is obviously inaccurate in view of the changed style of the duke. 8 Above, ip. 162, and p. 163, n. 1. 9 Lettres de Jean F, i, plate 11. The two exemplars measure 72 mm. and 78 mm. in diameter. For contemporary royal seals of majesty see R.-H. Bautier, 'Echanges d'influences dans les Chancelleries souveraines du Moyen Age d'apres les

166

The Crea tion of Brittany

Great seal, the most important seal was the duke's privy seal, which in the earlier part of his reign was an exclusively armorial seal, based on an ermine shield, with a wide range of supporters. However, from 1381 onwards, John IV used two seals which appear to have had equal status, although one is described as 'our secret seal' and is in the design tradition of the earlier privy seals, and the other is a larger seal (simply designated 'our seal') which is of a design fashionable amongst the princes of the Fleur de Lys at this time.1 But a comparison of the documents to which both these seals were appended shows that for practical purposes they were interchangeable. It was, for example, the seal which is specifically denoted as the secret seal in its legend that was left behind in the duchy when John IV went on the expedition led by Charles VI and his uncles against the rebellious towns of Flanders in 1383.2 Unfortunately from our point of view, the Breton chancery was not always very specific in its sealing clauses when drafting documents and it is impossible in the majority of cases to decide which seal was used unless an actual impression has survived. Although the duke probably kept a 'privy' seal in his immediate household besides his signet which he carried personally as he moved around the duchy,3 he seems to have had no particular preference for either of the two privy seals which he possessed from 1381, and the one which he had left behind in the summer of 1383 had been carried to Paris for his use by February 1384.4 There seems no reason to suggest, therefore, that the larger of these two seals, was in any sense a deputed seal, for example, the chancery seal which is mentioned in some documents but of which no example has apparently survived.5 It is not unprecedented for princes of this period to have two privy seals, although their design was usually similar, which would explain an apparent anomaly amongst the earliest privy seals of the duke.6 Both the seals in use after 1381 have thus been included in the following sequence which is tentatively offered as a guide to the privy and secret seals of the duke. i. 26th January 1366—14^1 July 1370. Eight impressions7 of a seal approximately 43—c mm. in diameter (plate 12c) displaying within an ornamental types des sceaux de majeste', Academic des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Annee 1968, Comptes rendus, pp. 192-220, especially 208 ff. 1 The contemporary royal sigillum secreti was not a chancery seal but one kept by a chamberlain. From the description given by Tessier (op. cit., pp. 203-5) it would appear that the 'secret' seal of John IV conformed closely in design and usage to the royal one, although, as will be obvious from the text, a rigorous distinction between it and the Privy seal was not always made in practice. See also Metman, loc. cit., p. 418; L. Douet d'Arcq, Collection de sceaux, 3 vols. (Paris, 1863-4), i, nos. 421-2, 427 and cf. R. Lacour, Le gouvernement de I"1apanage de Jean, due de Berry, 1360-1416 (Paris, 1934), p. 164. 2 A.L.A., E 120 no. 13, gth September 1383, see below, p. 168, n. 2.

3 Cf. B.N., MS. fr. 22339 f. nor, seventeenthcentury transcript of letters of John IV discharging the vicomte de Rohan from the office of chancellor, 5th May 1384: 'Donne tesmoing notre secret seel dont nous avons la garde et notre signet et le passemen de notre main. . . .' * B.N., MS. fr. 20590 no. 28, i Feb. 1384, cf. 5 below, p. 168, n. 2. Below, p.U?0. 6 Cf. M. Sharp, 'A Jodrell Deed and the Seals of the Black Prince', Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, vii (1922), 7 ff. For overlap in the use of privy seals nos. i and 2, the latter probably the duke's secret seal, see next two notes, and cf. T. F. Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England, v (Manchester, 1930), 161 ff. and 195 ff. 7 All given 'under our seal': A.L.A., £154 no. 8, 26th January 1366; ibid., E 212 no. i, I3th May

The Seals of John IV, Duke of Brittany

167

geometric framework, a shield, ermine (a pile, 4, 3, 2, i), suspended by a guige from a tree, beneath which is the head of a wildman, all the latter breaking through into the surround which bears the legend: S. JOHIS :DUCIS IBRITANIE .'COMITIS .'MONTISFORTIS.

2. 3
Kingsford corrects the Catalogue of Seals in the British Museum describing a seal appended to Additional Charter 79O9,4 which implied there was an inscription; there is no legend, as the other impressions also clearly demonstrate. Some of the 1366; A.I.V., I F 1544 (a fragment), 2nd August 1366; A.L.A., E 119 no. n, aoth May 1367; B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 5216 no. 7, 2ist May 1367; A.L.A., E 232 no. 3/3, 22nd January 1368; A.N., J 241 no. 50, 25th October 1369; A.I.V., 3 H 23, I4th July 1370. From a description by Blanchard of a seal attached to a document of I7th January 1368 (in the Bibl. mun., Nantes, MS. fr. i 5 3 5, as late as February-March 1900, but now lost) it is clear that this too was sealed with this seal (A.L.A., 7 JJ 20, papiers de Blanchard), whilst A.I.V., 3 H 23, 3rd July 1366, has a small fragment of this seal still adhering. 1 A.I.V., 18 H 2, 30th November 1368; ibid., 3 H 23, 7th May 1369; ibid., 18 H 2, loth November 1369; A.L.A., E 162 no. 4, 8th December 1369; cf. description by Blanchard of this last example: 'un ecu penche charge d'hermines, somme d'un heaume a comes au lion accroupi entre les cornes, tenants de chaque cote: au bas 2 animaux ?lions passants, surmontes de 2 lions montants, surmontes eux-memes de 2 anges en pied' (A.L.A., 7 JJ 20). Unfortunately the surviving impressions are so mutilated that it has proved impossible to get a clear reproduction.

2

A.L.A., E 233 no. 29, dated the i5th of an unknown month 1370/1, with no note on sealing; A.N., J 242 no. 54, 2Oth February 1372, 'souz nostre prive seel' (described in Doiiet d'Arcq, nos. 547-8); P.R.O., E 30 no. 262, 2ist February 1372, 'souz nostre prive seel'; ibid., no. 265, 25th February 1372, 'souz nostre prive seel et signet' (cf. below, p. 378); A.L.A., E 165 no. 17, 8th September 1372, 'souz nostre prive seelle'; P.R.O., E 30 no. 269, 22nd November 1372, 'par tesmoignance de nostre prive seal et signet en labsence de nostre grant seal'; British Museum (= B.M.), Add. Charter 7909, 2oth October 1374, under 'our seal'; Muniments of Lord de 1'Isle and Dudley, V.C., Penshurst Place, 2gth November 1377, no note on sealing (see also next note); A.L.A., E 117 no. 3, ist December 1377, 'south nostre seial'; ibid., no. 7, 5th February 1378, 'south nostre seel'. 3 C. L. Kingsford, 'On some Ancient Deeds and Seals belonging to Lord de 1'Isle and Dudley', Archaeologia, Ixv (1913-14), 262, cf. pi. xxxm, no. 6. 4 Catalogue, ed. de Gray Birch, v, no. 20, 047.

168

The Creation of Brittany

letters to which these impressions are appended specify that this was the duke's privy seal.1 4. 4th July 1381-18th December 1398. Eleven impressions2 of a fine armorial seal (plate 13b) which has been described by Rene Blanchard in these terms: Sceau rond de 38 mill.; ecu penche, charge de 10 hermines (4, 3, 2, i), timbre d'un heaume a cornes aux armes, somme d'un lion a queue fourchee assis entre les deux cornes, supporte par deux lions manteles, celui de droite d'un echiquete au franc-canton d'hermines, celui de gauche mantele au lion a queue fourchee. Legende: -f- S.SECRE . . . ITANIE.Co(M)lTIS.M5TISFORTIS ET RICHEMODIE. 3

My measurements of surviving impressions suggest an approximate size of 40 mm., but there is little else to add to this description, except that from a study of the surviving examples the legend can be completed in this form: -f-S.SECRETU. JOHANIS.DUCIS BRITANIE. COITIS MOTISFORTIS ET RICHEMODIE.

Blanchard had difficulty fitting the engraving in Preuves, ii, plate x, no. clxxx, which purported to be a copy of the signet of John V, into a sequence of that duke's seals.4 Apart from the omission of ET RICHEMODIE from the legend, and the mantling of both lions, ermine, the engraving just serves as a passable reproduction of John IV's privy seal as just described. 5. loth April I38i-i6th March 1397. Ten impressions,5 nearly all of which are seriously damaged, and none of which is still whole, of the new type of privy seal 1

Above, p. 167, n. 2. A.N., J 243 no. 64/3, 4th July 1381, 'nostre seel' (this document also bears an impression of signet seal no. 4, below, p. 171, n. 4); A.L.A., E 172 no. 2, ist December 1381, 'nostre seau'; Bibl. num., Nantes, MS. 1703 no. 3", I7th February 1382, 'nostre propre seel'; A.I.V., 3 H 23, igth August 1382, 'soubz nostre seel'; A.L.A., E 92 no. 20, 27th October 1382, 'soubz nostre secret seel'; ibid., E 120 no. 13, gth September 1383, 'souz nostre seau' (cf. above, p. 166, n. 2); B.N., MS. fr. 20590 no. 28, ist February 1384, 'soubz nostre seel' (cf. above, p. 166, n. 4); A.L.A., E 17 no. 10, 15th February 1387, a fragment; ibid., E 143 no. 29, 28th November 1393, 'our seal'; Bibl. mun., Nantes, MS. 1691, no. 10 bis, 2gth June 1396, no mention of sealing; P.R.O., E 30 no. 332, 23rd April 1398, 'nostre seel secret'; A.L.A., E 162 no. 46, 18th December 1398, under 'the duke's seal'. 3 Lettres de Jean 7, i, p. Ixxix. The mantling of one supporter with cheeky, a canton ermine, makes reference to the arms of the Dreux-Montfort family used by the dukes of Brittany from Pierre Mauclerc 2

to John II and abandoned by John III about the year 1312 (cf. B.-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Les faux etats de Bretagne de 1315 et les premiers etats de Bretagne', Bibliotheque de I'ecole des chartes, Ixxxvi (1925), 393-5). The lions refer to Montfort. In 1387 Philip, duke of Burgundy, intended to send a lion to John IV as a gift (cf. B. Prost, Inventaires mobiliers et extraits des comptes des dues de Bourgogne de la maison de Valois, 1363-14^^, i (Paris, 1902), 298). 4 Lettres de Jean V, i, p. Ixxvii. 5 A. N., J 242 no. 58', loth April 1381, 'soubz nostre seau' (Douet d'Arcq, no. 549); ibid., J 243 no. 68, igth August 1383, 'nostre seel'; A.L.A., E 154 no. 15, 29th January 1385, no mention of sealing; ibid., E 166 no. 6, 27th August 1388, no mention of sealing; ibid., E. 108 no. 22, igth April 1389, 'nostre seel'; ibid., E 8 no. I, E 181 no. 11, and A.I.V., I E no. 3, all igth April 1391 and under 'nostre prive seel'; A.L.A., E 115 no. 7, 3ist July 1391, 'soubz nostre seel'; A. Morbihan, H. Abbaie de la Joie, fonds non classes, 17th November 1395, no mention of sealing; A.I.V., 4 H 10, 16th March 1397, a fragment, no mention of

7

Great seal (actual size 87 mm.).

8a 8b

Seal no. 1 (actual size 35 mm.). Counter seal 1 (actual size 36 mm.).

9a 9b

Counter 2 (actual size 35 mm.). Counter 1 reworked (actual size 35 mm.)-

10

Great seal 2 (actual size 95 mm.).

11

Great seal (actual size 107 mm.).

12a 12b

Counter 3 (actual size 33 mm.). Privy 1 (actual size 43-5 mm.).

13a

Privy 3 (actual size 38 mm.)

13c

Privy 5 (actual size 45-6 mm.).

13b

13d

Privy 4 (actual size 40 mm.).

Seal of accounts (actual size 27 mm.).

14b

14a

Signet 1 (actual size 14 mm.)-

14c

Signet 3 (actual size 15 mm.).

Signet 4 (actual size 14 mm.).

14d

Signet 5 (actual size 18 mm.).

14e

Signet 6 (actual size 14 mm.).

The Seals of John IV, Duke of Brittany

169

(plate 13c) noted above. It is approximately 45-6 mm. in diameter, and has been described by Douet d'Arcq in these terms: Le due debout arme et portant un pourpoint d'hermines tenant sa lance a droite et a gauche 1'ecu d'hermines (legende detruite).1

This description needs to be augmented. There is an ermine pennon on the lance; the shield is surmounted by a bull's head-shaped helmet (ermine spotted),2 whilst to the dexter, the front half of a horse, with a lion crest, spotted ermine, breaks through the surround and approaches the armed figure. All this design is set on a swirling floral background in which there also appears the letter s just underneath the knight's right hand and in front of the knee of the horse's raised left foreleg.3 There is an engraving of an impression of this seal in Preuves, ii, plate x, no. clxxii, which suggests the following legend: S. JOHIS. DUCIS BRITANNIE COIT . . . MONTISFORTIS ETC.

A more accurate reconstruction of the legend from the mutilated seals which survive reads: s. JOHIS :DUCIS :BRITANIE :COITIS :MOTISFORTIS ET RiCHEMODiE-fIn common with all the other privy seals described, this seal was never countersealed except by the impression of a thumb print. Other Armorial and Departmental Seals As noted above, the first seal which the duke used was a plain armorial seal. Another seal of the arms of Brittany was appended to a document in John's name on 8 February 1361, although it has not survived on the original.4 This seal was, presumably, that of the ducal court of Nantes, normally called the seal for contracts, similar to an impression of 1371 described in the Catalogue of Seals at the British Museum as: A shield of arms; ten ermine spots in pile, 4, 3, 2, I, for Duchy of Bretagne. Suspended from a tree on a mount replenished with flowers. Supporters two lions rampant.5

This seal has a diameter of i| inches (44 mm.). A document of 1367 cites the use sealing. There is a seventeenth-century sketch of an impression of this seal in B.N., MS. fr. 22325, p. 17 from a document of 23rd October 1389 (now A.I.V., G 195, and without seal). Whilst the description of a seal on a letter of 25 September 1397 shows that it was still in use at this date (Arch, dep. C6tes-du-Nord, H abbaie de Beaulieu, livre parchemin, f. 5V). 1 Collection de sceaux, no. 549. 2 A similar helm served as a head-rest for the effigy on the duke's tomb (cf. J. Adhemar, with

G. Dordor, 'Les tombeaux de la collection Gaignieres. Dessins d'archeologie du xvme siecle', Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 6eme ser., Ixxxv (1974), 173, no. 970). 3 The implication of the letter s is a mystery at present, like so many of the devices and mottoes adopted by the later medieval nobility. 4 A.L.A., H 57, 'soubz nostre seel'. A copy of 1668 notes that it was 'scelle sur simple queue en cire rouge du seel de Bretagne' (ibid?). 5 V. no. 19, 138.

170

The Creation of Brittany

of a seal for contracts on a ducal order.1 There is considerable variety displayed both in terms of content and size by the contracts seals, ranging between 35 and 46 mm. in diameter and bearing a shield ermines, with or without a helm, supporters, and legend.2 They are the seals often referred to in later transcriptions of original documents now lost simply as shields of arms of Brittany or a shield of ermines.3 Seals showing these characteristics which cannot be fitted into the sequence of Privy seals as described above, should, it seems, be attributed to the ducal courts rather than to the duke himself, especially when detached from their original letters.4 There are, however, examples of the duke using other official and departmental seals on his letters, besides the seals for contracts or other seals belonging to ducal courts. Mention is made of 'our seal of Parlement'5 and 'our Chancery seal',6 but the only seal of this kind for which impressions survive is 'our seal of accounts' (plate 13d). This was, in the early years of his reign, a lozenge, 5 ermine spots, within a small round framework (27 mm. in diameter) bearing the legend: IDUCIS BRIT . . . COMPOTORU. 7

The Signet In the course of his reign John IV used at least six identifiable signet seals, and because the sequence, especially for the early part of his reign, appears incomplete, it is likely that he used other signets which have since perished. This seal was his most personal seal which he always wore,8 and the surviving documentation suggests that it was particularly used to warrant letters authorising payments by his financial officers, although it could equally well be used for the most important and confidential diplomatic documents.^ i. 1365-6. Two impressions, and one fragment,10 of a round seal, approximately 1 A.L.A., E 245 no. 3 f. i5r, lyth May 1367, cf. Ibid., E 232 no. 2/13, 6th January 1371, 'Donne ceste copie soubz la merche des actes de la court de Nantes' written over 'Tesmoin la merche de la prevoste de Nantes', struck out. 2 For an example with both legend and supporters, see the seal for contracts at Champtoceaux (A.L.A., E 232 no. 2/9, ist February 1368, approximately 45 mm. in diameter, a shield, ermine, 4, 3, 2, i, suspended from the head of a lion affronte, supporters two lampreys, with a surround bearing the legend: +JOHANNIS DUC • • • BR . . . is). 3 Cf. above, p. 169, n. 4. * For some loose examples of privy and secret seal no. 4 incorrectly attributed to Jean V, see Lettres de Jean F, i, p. Ixxix, amending L. Delisle, Les collections de Bastard d'Estang a la Bibliotheque Nationale. Catalogue analytique (Nogent-le-Rotrou, 1885), pp. 200-1, nos. 69 and 72. 5 Arch. dep. d'Indre-et-Loire, H 932, 2O.th October 1365, 'soubz nostre seau doudit parlement'.

6 A.L.A., E 120, no. i, igth June 1397, 'nostre grant seau avecques le seau de nostre chancelerie'. 7 Ibid., £ 2 3 3 no. 41, 26th March 1373, cf. A. Morbihan, H St-Gildas 3, 3rd December 1379, 'soubz le seau de noz acomptz en absence de noz autres seaux', cf. also Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 28. 8 Cf. Cartulaire du Morbihan, ed. ThomasLacroix, no. 585, letters of I4th April 1380, sealed 'en nostre grant conseil. . . de limpressure de nostre grant seau en laz de soie et cire verte en maniere acoustumee avec nostre prive signet lequel nous portons que nous y avons mis et appose et signe de nostre propre main pour ce que nostre dit cousin (le vicomte de Rohan) avoit la garde de nostre seau. . . .' 9 Cf. Foedera, iii, part ii, 935-6, commissions for Thomas de Melbourne, envoy to Edward III, February 1372 (below, p. 171, n. 2), and A.N., J 240 no. 40, before gth July 1385, requests to Charles VI. 10 A.L.A., £ 1 5 9 no. 3, 20 June 1365, a fragment; ibid., E 129 n. i, I2th August 1365; ibid.,

The Seals of John Iv, Duke of Brittany

171

14 mm. in diameter, bearing, against an ermine background, a helm with crest, a lion seated between two horns, spotted ermine (plate 14b). There is no legend or inscription. There is an engraving of this seal in Preuves, ii, plate vn, no. cxxxiii, which does not depict the background. 2. 1367. One impression1 of a slightly oval seal (although this may be due to damage over the course of time), approximately 12 X 11 mm., with much the same design as signet seal no. i, with the addition of two lions as supporters for the helm. Again there is no inscription. 3. 1372. Two impressions2 of a seal approximately 15 mm. in diameter, displaying a horned helm with a lion crest and mantling, after the style of signet seals I and 2 .(plate 14a). Instead of supporters, however, there are two three-pointed crowns surmounting, to the dexter an initial I, and that to the sinister a lion (or just possibly a dog) seated; whilst at the base of the helm there may originally have been a banderole bearing a motto or inscription which it is now impossible to decipher or recognize (despite photographic enlargement), although it might be suggested that the motto used on later signets A ma vie would have just fitted the space allowed.3 The whole design is within a circular border, the inner edge of which is scalloped. 4. 1381—4. Seven impressions, six alone from 1381,4 survive of this seal which is approximately 14 mm. in diameter. The whole design is filled with a fine example of a lion rampant with a forked tail and a mantle, bearing a lion, after the style of the supporting (sinister) lion on Privy seal no. 4 which was brought into use at much the same time (plate 14c). 5. 1385-7. Five impressions5 of a seal approximately 14 mm. in diameter (plate 14d) which has been described by Doue't d'Arcq in these terms: Une hermine au natural, emmantelee d'hermines. Sur une banderole: A ma vie.6 E 204 n. i, 20th May 1366, 'souz nostre signet'. In the first two cases it seems probable that one of the larger seals was appended first and the signet was appended beneath it (cf. plate cited above, p. 162, n. 4). 1 B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 5216 n. 7, 2ist May 1367. 2 P.R.O., E 30 nos. 263 and 265, both 25th February 1372, and given 'souz nostre prive seel et signet'. 3 For A ma vie, see below, p. 172. The initial I may be taken to signify the duke's name Jehan. For the implications behind the adoption of the crown motif, cf. B.-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Couronne fermee et cercle ducal en Bretagne', Bull, philologique et historique du comite des travaux scientifiques (1951-2), pp. 103-12. Charles de Blois had a signet which displayed a crowned helmet (Deprez, art. cit., Mems. de la soc. d'hist. etd^arch. de Bretagne, vii (1926), 50-1, with plate from P.R.O. E 30

no. 74, gth August 1356, the unique example). 4 A.N., J 242 no. 58', roth April 1381 (with privy seal no. 5); ibid., J 243 no. 64, 3oth May 1381 (with Great seal no. 2); Bibl. num., Nantes, MS. 1686 no. r, 3oth May 1381 (with Great seal no. 2); A.L.A., E 152 no. 9, 4th June 1381 (with Great seal no. 2); A.N., J 243 no. 64^, 25th June 1381, 'nostre seel'; ibid., no. 64^', 4th July 1381 (with Privy seal no. 4); A.L.A., E 117 no. 4, i March 1384, 'soubz nostre signet en labsence de nostre seel'. 5 A.N., J 240 no. 40, before gth July 1385 (= Douet d'Arcq, no. 8719); A.L.A., E 129 no. 6, ist February 1386; ibid., E 210 no. 3, 16th August i386;/^zV., E 152 no. ro, ist February 1387, 'noz grant seel et signet'; ibid., £ 1 7 no. 12, 24 Feb. 1387, 'nostre grant seel en laz de saie et cire vert et signe de nostre propre main et de nostre prive signet a maire fermete'. 6 Collection de sceaux, no. 8719.

172

The Creation of Brittany

The motto, the meaning of which has never satisfactorily been explained, was that used on the collars of the Order of the Ermine which John IV founded, probably in 13 81, in order to honour and to pray for the memory of those who fell at Auray in 1364, and to bind to him for political as much as for chivalrous reasons, some of the leading nobles and knights of his duchy.1 It is just possible, as noted above in connection with Signet no. 3, that the duke might have adopted the motto prior to the period of his exile from the duchy between 1373 and 1379. 6. 1388—98. Five fair impressions and one substantial fragment survive of the last signet (plate 14e),2 which has been described by Demay as follows: Signet ovale, de 18 mill. Intaille. Buste de femme de profil a gauche, les cheveux tresses. Fragment de legende fruste.3

Attempts to read the legend on other impressions have not been altogether successful, since it is not at all clear whether the letters are to be read from the inside or outside of the seal.4 They flank the female bust on either side and on the best impression an imaginative rendering might be Sanz battre, but there can be no certainty at present on this matter. The most interesting feature about this seal, however, is its style. The use of intaglio gems of antique origin for later medieval as opposed to early medieval seals, although not a common practice in northern Europe immediately prior to the period of the Renaissance, is not unprecedented. Richard I of England may have had such a seal for use as a privy seal—a matrix survives which is now in the British Museum and has been attributed to this king. His brother, John, is definitely known to have possessed a similar seal which he used both as count of Mortain before his accession, and afterwards as a counter seal to the Great seal of England.5 It would appear, however, that John IV's seal is a conscious imitation of an antique gem. The style suggests Roman provincial work of the second to fourth century A.D.—the working of the nose is particularly indicative of this period and provenance—and many thousands of original examples survive.6 But a modern expert has declared that this Breton example is a copy, and it is interesting to note that the only other Breton seal of a similar kind which has so far been identified belonged to Guillaume le Barbu, esquire, a member of a family which was closely in touch with the duke through service at his court.7 Whether the seal 1

The history of the Order of the Ermine is obscure, but see Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 140 for references. 2 B.N., MS. Clairambault 48 p. 3637 no. 206, iyth March 1388; A.L.A., E 126 no. n, yth February 1395; A.I.V., 2 Er 186, fonds de Robien, I2th February 1395, a fragment; Bibl. mun., Nantes MS. 1691 no. 10"; A.L.A., E 167 no. 27, 2jth July 1397; ibid., E 78 no. 26, 4th September 1398. 3 G. Demay, Inventaire des sceaux de la collection Clairambault a la Bibliotheque Nationale (Paris, 1909), no. 1512. 4 Usually, of course, they are read from the

inside, but in the particular circumstances of this seal and the poor state of the surround of most of the impressions, the scarcely discernible letters can be as easily read from the outside. 5 Chaplais, English Royal Documents, p. 24, with further references. 6 I am grateful to Mrs. Janet Hamilton for her comments on this seal. 7 H. Wentzel, 'Portraits "a 1'Antique" on French Mediaeval Gems and Seals', Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, xvi (1953), 342-52, at p. 348 and plate 50^, for John's seal, and p. 347 no. 54, for Guillaume le Barbu's (cf. Jones, Ducal Brittany, Index sub Barbu).

The Seals of John IV, Duke of Brittany

173

included an antique gem or simply a copy of such a gem, its use by the duke is of interest, since it breaks with the tradition of signets of a basically armorial or chivalric character, to which, it can be noted, John V was to revert.1 Contemporary princes, John, duke of Berry and his brothers and nephews pre-eminently, collected curios, and detailed inventories of their art treasures survive. These include antique gems.2 But there is a dearth of information about John IVs personal habits, largely through the loss of the major part of his household accounts.3 There is evidence for his interest in some aspects of the visual and plastic arts,4 but it is not known whether he collected curios or whether his interest in the ancient world led to the production of anything other than this seal copied 'a 1'Antique'. Conclusion

From this description of the surviving impressions of the seals of John IV, it would appear that from shortly after his accession, the duke used three main series of seals to authenticate and warrant documents issued in his name. A fourth series, the duke's own secret seal, probably carried by a chamberlain, is represented by two examples which have been catalogued above as Privy and Secret seals nos. 2 and 4. The symbolism used in the decoration of all these series overlaps considerably, with the same motifs, mainly derived from the ermine coat of arms which stood for the duchy of Brittany in the late fourteenth century, 5 being used simultaneously on three if not all four series. The same symbolism is to be seen even more obviously in the other departmental or court seals used by the duke on occasion. With regard to the main series of seals, some evolution can be discerned in the design, size, and content of the various seals.6 Some of these changes seem to be linked with the development of ducal political pretensions, whilst at the same time showing an awareness of the aesthetic potentialities of design within a small compass. Many of these ducal seals display a very high standard of heraldic design and artistic execution. Whilst the duke's first seal was probably made for him in England, his other seals are probably of local Breton provenance, although there were opportunities on visits to centres like Paris for the duke to commission craftsmen who were masters of their art.7 It would also seem that there is a link 1

Cf. Lettres de Jean F, i, p. Ixxviii, and plate m. Cf. J. H. Wylie, The Reign of Henry the Fifth, ii: 1415-1416 (Cambridge, 1919), pp. 408 ff. 3 For John's finances see Michael Jones, 'Les finances de Jean IV, due de Bretagne', Me'ms. de la soc. d'hist. et d'arch. de Bretagne* below, pp. 239-61. 4 Ibid, and above, p. 368, " 6. 5 This coat has been adc r .~JL c. 1312 (above, p. 168, n. 3, and G. Brault, 'The Use of Plain Arms in Arthurian Legend and the Origin of the Arms of Brittany'', Bulletin bibliographique de la societe Internationale arthurienne, 1966, pp. 117-23). For the history of the Ermine in Brittany to the beginning of the fourteenth century, see S. de la Nicolliere-Teijeiro, Etudes Heraldiques. U Her mine, 2

Vannes, 1894, tirage a part from Memoires de la Societe archeologique de Nantes, xxxii (1893). 6 Cf. above, p. 164; n. 3. 7 John's seals are in the mainstream of stylistic developments in sigillography (cf. above, p. |166> n. i). There is some evidence for the local engraving of seals for the duke: cf. A.L.A., E 211 no. 3, accounts of Guillaume Moreau, receiver of the regale of Nantes, 1392-3, m. 4, order from the duke to pay 2/. to Jean Liemer 'pour avoir fait taille et merche les seaulz et merche des actes de k court de Sable', 9 Jan. 1393. Jean V obtained some of his seals from Paris {Lettres de Jean V, i, p. Ixxv).

174

The Creation of Brittany

between the evolution of the separate series of seals, apart from enforced changes as a result of altering political circumstances. In particular, the Privy and Signet seals evolve in close synchrony, especially in the first period of the duke's rule between 1364 and 1373. Although, in most instances, it is pointless to speculate why the design of a particular seal was altered, such a change seems almost inevitably to have led to alterations in a parallel series. It is unfortunate, therefore, that there are so few examples of the third .Great seal and the Privy and Signet seals in use at the end of John's reign. It is, indeed, the poor state and numerical lack of surviving impressions that must inevitably limit the completeness of this study, where the fortuitous discovery of an impression might necessitate a revision of the provisional classification offered here. It is a matter of small consolation that relatively more examples of some of John IV's various seals survive than do for those of the reign of his son who ruled for a comparable period of time.1

1 Cf. Lettres de Jean V, i, pp. Ixxv-lxxix. I wish to thank Dr. P. Chaplais for reading and commenting on a draft of this paper. Since completing the paper I have come across an eleventh impression, again unfortunately much damaged, of Privy Seal no. 5 (above p. 168) in A. Morbihan, H (176) Auray 5, 26th January 1387.

Additional Note Seal no. 1 (above pi. 8a) and Privy Seal no. 3 (pi. 13a) have both been carefully described in the Catalogue of Seals in the Public Record Office, Personal Seals, vol. ii, compiled by Roger H. Ellis, London HMSO 1981, nos. PI769 and PI770. In the latter case it is from an impression unknown to me when I originally wrote the article, nor is it listed in my Recueil des actes de Jean IV, due de Bretagne. It is attached to a quittance delivered to English officials by the duke at Dartington, Devon, on 14 March 1375, acknowledging receipt of £3579-16s-4d for his wages and those of his men, en route for Brittany in the expedition John IV jointly led with Edmund, earl of March (PRO, E43/486). This adds new detail to an important but little documented phase of the duke's life.

VII LE VOYAGE DE PIERRE DE LESNERAC EN NAVARRE, 1386 Le but de la mission entreprise en Navarre en été 1386 par Pierre de Lesnerac, connétable de Nantes, fut de ramener en Bretagne la future épouse du duc Jean IV. Il quitta donc Nantes le 20 juin pour descendre le courant jusqu'à Batz puis il continua par mer jusqu'à San Sébastian. Il retourna enfin au Croisic au début de septembre avec l'Infante Juana, fille du roi Charles II. On fêta son mariage avec le duc au manoir de Saille le 11 septembre ( 1 ). Pour autant qu'on le sache, le voyage d'aller en Espagne du nord ainsi que le retour de Rayonne s'effectuèrent rapidement et sans incidents. Pour faire le voyage d'aller, distance de 450 km par la route la plus courte, il semble qu'on n'ait mis que trois jours, ce qui fut la moyenne pour une telle distance (2). Selon toute probabilité, on fit le voyage de retour d'une façon presque aussi rapide car les bateaux ne quittèrent Rayonne que le 4 septembre et on peut estimer qu'il fallut un ou deux jours pour faire les derniers préparatifs pour le mariage après l'arrivée en Bretagne. Entre temps une délégation diplomatique avait voyagé par le col de Roncesvalles jusqu'à Saint-Jean-Pied-de-Port et Bayonne (distance de quelque 220 km par les routes modernes). La délégation rejoignit à Bayonne le reste du parti qui avait fait venir les bateaux le long de la côte de San Sébastian. Bien qu'il fallût des guides en Espagne, les routes qu'on prit ne furent ni nouvelles ni inconnues aux Bretons car les relations avec cette région de la côte de Biscaye existaient de longue date (3). L'aspect particulier de ce voyage, réalisé à la fin du quatorzième siècle, provient en ce qui concerne les sources bretonnes, de la profusion de renseigne(1) Sauf indication contraire tout détail au sujet du voyage vient des comptes de Lesnerac (décrits ci-dessous 178 et 179). Je n'ai pas vu l'article de J. ZuNZUNEGUI, El matrimonio de Infanta Juana con el Duque de Bretana, Principe de Viana, x (1943), 57-68. (2) Wendy CHU.DS, Anglo-Castiliari Trade in thé Later M'iddle Ages, Manchester U.P., 1978, p. 170. (3) H. TotCHARl), Le commerce maritime breton à la fin du Moyen Age, Nantes 1967, p. 89.

176

The Création ofBrittany

ments fournis par les comptes du connétable. On a des informations sur les différentes étapes des préparatifs, et ce dès le début, sur les dépenses, les conditions matérielles du voyage et sur le personnel qui accompagna Lesnerac. Il semble donc bien à propos de faire quelques observations sur ces aspects de l'histoire. Considérons d'abord le contexte dans lequel se déroulèrent ces événements. On peut vite résumer les circonstances diplomatiques du mariage proposé. Le duc Jean IV, né vers 1340, s'était déjà marié deux fois [avant 1386] avec une Anglaise chaque fois, mais ces deux mariages s'étaient terminés sans enfants. Lorsque son second mariage avec, Joan Holland, belle-fille d'Edouard, prince de Galles et de Guyenne, fut rompu par la mort de celle-ci, en automne 1384, le duc, qui avait maintenant une bonne quarantaine d'années, s'intéressa, bien sûr, à engendrer un héritier naturel (4). Cela fut d'une importance particulière car on avait précisé, dans le premier traité de Guérande (1365) que si la lignée masculine de la branche Montfort de la famille ducale venait à manquer, la succession au duché retournerait à leurs rivaux acharnés de la guerre civile, la branche Penthièvre (5). En automne 1384 apparurent des changements menaçant, car lorsque Jeanne, comtesse de Penthièvre, mourut en septembre, le nouveau chef de cette branche de la famille fut son fils aîné, Jean. Pourtant, en ce temps-là il était comme Guy, son frère cadet, toujours otages en Angleterre car son père n'avait pas payé la rançon. Ses partisans en France engagèrent aussitôt des négociations pour obtenir sa libération, dont l'urgence leur apparut pleinement quand Guy mourut le 22 janvier 1385 (6). Bien qu'il soit impossible de découvrir en entier la nature exacte des intrigues diplomatiques qui entouraient ces manœuvres, il est évident qu'il existe des liens entre les efforts que fit Jean IV pour empêcher la libération de son rival et les préparatifs pour son troisième mariage. Ce n'était pas la première fois non plus que Jean IV et Charles II de Navarre s'étaient alliés. Mais ce n'est pas maintenant le bon moment pour discuter longuement de leurs rapports ; il convient pourtant de noter qu'ils existaient de longue date et qu'en général les deux princes avaient entretenus de (4) Michael JONF.S, Ducal Brittany, 1364-1399, Oxford 1970, p. 17, 45, 96-7 pour les mariages précédents. (5) Dom P-H. MORICF, Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne, 3 t.", Paris 1742-6, i. 1592. (6) Michael JONF.S, The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne, count of Penthièvre: an aspect of English Foreign Policy 1386-8, Bulletin of thé Instiiute of Historical Research. xlv (1972), 7-26; ci-dessous, p. 263-82.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

177

bons rapports amicaux surtout à l'époque où ils étaient alliés d'Edouard III, roi d'Angleterre. En 1371 par exemple, Charles II avait fait de Jean IV son lieutenant pour ses terres en Normandie et il y avait donc beaucoup de contact contre les deux dirigeants (7). Cependant, à cause d'une série de complots entre Charles V, roi de France, Charles II dut passer son temps dans son royaume du sud et en 1381 Jean IV promit même à Charles VI qu'il continuerait à servir contre Navarre (8). Pourtant, lui et Charles II continuèrent à partager certains intérêts pendant la guerre anglo-française. Ils avaient tous les deux le problème d'une garnison anglaise établie sur leurs terres comme suite d'une alliance avec l'Angleterre — ces garnisons étaient à Brest et à Cherbourg respectivement — ce qui représenta une source d'embarras et de difficulté. Ils voulaient tous les deux profiter bien sûr des faiblesses de leur souverain français (9). D'autres contacts entre la Bretagne et Navarre avaient été établis sur le plan personnel ainsi que sur le plan commercial et l'idée d'une alliance entre le duc et Juana n'était pas aussi bizarre qu'on l'aurait trouvé au premier abord. Quant à l'initiative de cette affaire, elle aurait bien pu, pour les Bretons, venir de Jean, vicomte de Rohan, chancelier du duché démissionnaire et ce qui est encore plus significatif, mari d'une autre Juana de Navarre la sœur de Charles II et tante de la future mariée du duc (10). De toute façon, avant le 2 7 novembre 13 84 on s'occupait déjà des négociations qui devaient finir par permettre le mariage, et le jour même où la cour anglaise célébrait une messe de requiem pour feu la duchesse Joan, l'Infante autorisa Guillem de Plantarosa, maître de l'hôtel de son père, à conclure les termes avec Jean IV ( 11 ). Le 13 avril 1385 grâce à l'encouragement et aux bons offices de Jean, vicomte de Rohan, ainsi que de sa femme, le duc se mit d'accord en principe pour le mariage. Certains des termes financiers ont été discutés à une réunion des Cortes de Navarre qui, peu après, accordèrent 120.000 francs pour

(7) Recueil des actes de Jean IV, duc de Bretagne, éd. Michael JONFS, 2t., Paris 1980-3, i. n° 187; JONFS, Ducal Brittany, p. 62-3. (8) Recueil, i. n° 389. (9) P.E. RUSSFI.I,, The English Intervention in Spain and Portugal in thé time of Edward III and Richard ///, Oxford, 1955, traite ce thème le mieux ; pour Brest cf. T ONFS, Ducal Brittany et pour Cherbourg cf. J.R. CASTRO, Carlos III el Noble, rey de Na\ ne, Pamplona 1967. ( 10) Recueil, i. nos. 319-320, ii. n°. 493 ; Catâlogo del archive général de Navarra, éd. J.R. CASTRO, t. xi (Pamplona 1955) et seq. (11) Catâlogo, éd. CASTRO, xv (1956), no. 599; JONFS, Ducal Brittany, p. 99 (requiem).

178

The Création ofBrittany

l'alliance, mais des difficultés survinrent pour se procurer la dot (12). D'autres problèmes se présentèrent aussi. Les documents navarrais donnent l'impression qu'avant avril 1385, la plupart des préparatifs pour le mariage avaient été achevés d'une manière satisfaisante, mais Pierre de Lesnerac ne partit pour raccompagner la duchesse en Bretagne qu'en été 1386 après d'autres missions d'envoyés ducaux (13). Il faut croire que des raisons diplomatiques causèrent ce retard. Des signes d'opposition à cette alliance ont pu venir de plusieurs coins de France. Il est certain que Jean IV agit de façon très circonspecte. Comme on l'a déjà constaté, avant avril 1385 les préparatifs étaient déjà bien avancés, mais une communication avec Charles VI et son conseil, reçue à Paris au début de juillet, révéla que le duc se plaignait encore de ce que ses efforts pour trouver une mariée n'avaient toujours pas réussi et il fit donc même appel au roi de lui trouver quelqu'un de convenable afin que «ge puisse avoir ligne». Il paraît que la plupart de celles qu'on lui avait proposées étaient de Favis du duc et de son conseil trop jeune pour lui donner des enfants dans le proche avenir ( 14). Dans quelles mesures le duc cherchait-il à tromper le roi de France sur ses projets? On ne peut pas le savoir maintenant, mais cela est plausible. Une autre raison de ce retard provient du fait qu'il fallut gagner l'approbation du pape, qui ne fut reçue qu'au mois d'août 1386 (15). Ainsi donc, malgré le besoin urgent pour le duc d'engendrer un héritier, presque dix-huit mois s'écoulèrent entre sa première promesse d'épouser Juana et la célébration du mariage. Même lorsque Lesnerac se mit en route pour l'Espagne, il exista toujours plusieurs problèmes à résoudre sur le plan diplomatique, mais ses comptes nous renseignent surtout sur les affaires matérielles. Les comptes commencent le 20 juin 1386. Ils ont été écrits sur dix-huit feuilles de parchemin, cousues bout à bout pour créer un rouleau long de plusieurs mètres, et conservé maintenant dans les archives départementales de la Loire-Atlantique, E 206 n° 4. Le rouleau est divisé en plusieurs parties de longueur inégale mais on peut les décrire comme suit:

(\2) Catâhgo, éd. CASTRO, xv, nos. 819, 859,861, 1009, 1137. (13) Ibid., nos. 1026, 1037, 1051, 1129, 1159; xvi, no. 22, 66. (14) Recueil, ii. no. 551 : «alan parlle de pluseurs dont les unes sont si jeunes que bonnement ne seroit la lignée par elles si briefvement trouvée comme mes amis et soubgiz le desiroent». (15) Catâlogo, éd. CASTRO, xv, no. 970, xvi, no. 1104; CASTRO, CarlosIII, p. 116-7.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

179

f. 1. —Résumé des recettes en argent et en nature pour financer le voyage. f. 2-6. —Le prix des victuailles et des provisions pour les navires, et des listes d'approvisionnements et d'équipements. f. 7. —Dépenses pour faire un petit baleinier qu'on ne prit pas finalement. f. 8. —Dépenses pour faire une «chambre» pour Juana de Navarre sur la «barche» de Jean Maloin, et quelques dépenses encourues en arrivant en Espagne. f. 9-14. —Dépenses quotidiennes pour le voyage d'aller, la période d'attente en Espagne et à Bayonne, et puis pour le retour. f. 15. —Listes de noms de ceux qui accompagnèrent Lesnerac et de l'équipage ainsi que des détails de paiement qu'on leur fit. f. 16. —Dépenses encourues par Thomas Roux pendant le voyage de San Sébastian à Pamplona. f. 17. —Dépenses encourues par Roux à San Sébastian et par Régnier de Saint-Liz en accompagnant le connétable de Bayonne à Saint-Jean-Pied-de-Port. f. 18. —Conclusion des comptes, septembre 1386. Que peut-on apprendre de ces documents au sujet des navires qui formèrent la petite flottille qui partit chercher la future duchesse? Tout d'abord il semble qu'on eut l'intention d'envoyer deux vaisseaux qu'on appelle «barches» et deux baleiniers, dont on précise qu'un était petit. On abandonna rapidement l'idée de prendre le petit baleinier et ce furent deux barches, dont l'une se nomme «la grant barche» et un baleinier dont Denis le Peletier se chargea, qui firent le voyage. Ce dernier vaisseau transporta un équipage de 43 hommes et on peut supposer que c'était un navire qui jaugeait 50 à 100 tonneaux à peu près s'il se conformait aux niveaux contemporains (16). Normalement les barches (barques, barges) étaient de dimensions à peu près semblables, il en existe une confirmation puisqu'on chargea le vaisseau de Lesnerac de 36 muids de sel (qui équivalent à 36 tonneaux de vin), qu'on allait vendre pour soulager les frais du voyage. Les comptes indiquent aussi que l'équipage des trois navires, y compris des chevaliers, des écuyers, des « gentilz hommes d'armes », des arbalétriers et des

(16)TouCHARD,op. cit., p. 101-2 et cf. D. BuRWASH. Englhh Merchant Shipping 1460-1540, Toronto U.P., 1947, p. 181.

180

The Création ofBrittany

pages ainsi que des marins, comptait au moins 156 hommes (17). Comme 44 de ces hommes étaient sur le baleinier, il en restait 112 à peu près sur les deux autres navires pour le voyage d'aller. Même si on n'a pas tous les noms de ceux qui firent le voyage, et la liste telle qu'elle est comprend beaucoup de gens qui n'étaient pas marins de leur métier mais plutôt membres de la maison ducale qu'on envoya accompagner la future duchesse, ces chiffres n'indiquent pas que les équipages des vaisseaux étaient très grands (18). Bien qu'il fallût, évidemment, tenir compte du fait qu'au voyage de retour il y aurait plus de passagers — à savoir Juana et sa suite — il faut supposer que les vaisseaux n'étaient pas remarquables. Il existe pourtant la possibilité que l'un des vaisseaux fût bien grand, à en juger par les normes contemporaines. Au mois de janvier 1386 Lesnerac avait reçu une très grande somme d'argent, à savoir 1250 1. «pour la fazcon de sa barge» (19). Dans ses comptes comme on l'a déjà constaté, il fait allusion à « la grant barche». Il est bien probable que ce vaisseau était le navire qu'on appelait plus tard «Katharine de Nantes»qui jaugeait 300 tonneaux, et au moyen duquel le duc fit du commerce à son profit pendanfquelques années, tout en le louant à bail à une série de capitaines et d'officiers ducaux (20). Il est donc à regretter que dans ses comptes Lesnerac ne fit pas mention des navires de sa flottille selon le nom mais plutôt selon le modèle ou selon le nom des capitaines ou des autres officiers. A priori, on peut supposer que pour une mission aussi prestigieuse que celle entreprise en 1386, le duc voulait faire bonne impression en envoyant un navire tout neuf et imposant, pour chercher sa future épouse. Des problèmes de construction peuvent expliquer en partie le retard qu'on éprouva avant de conclure définitivement l'alliance, mais le fait qu'il fallut construire une chambre spéciale pour Juana sur ce vaisseau en été 1386 suggère qu'on ne le construisit pas d'abord pour cette mission. Il est donc impossible d'être sûr que Lesnerac prit la Katharine comme son vaisseau amiral, cependant on peut suivre l'his(17Wf. TOUCHARD, p. 102-3. (18) M. Mou.AT, Le commerce maritme normand à la fin du Moyen Age, Paris 1952, p. 345, constate que les sauf-conduits anglais au quinzième siècle autorisaient 15 à 20 marins à peu près pour un navire de 60 à 100 tonneaux, 40 pour 200 tonneaux et 60 pour 300 tonneaux. Mais au quatorzième siècle les barches de 50 à 70 tonneaux pouvaient avoir des équipages de 45 ou même plus (Public Record Office, Londres, E 101/40/36, détails de la flotte de Richard, comte d'Arundel, 1387). (19) Archives départementales de la Loire-Atlantique (A.L. A). E206n°5. Il était possible, d'habitude, d'obtenir un navire d'une grandeur moyenne pour 1001. environ (Touchard, p. 139n).

(20) TOUCHARD, p. 44.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

181

toire de ce navire pendant plusieurs années durant cette période (21). Au moment où commencent les comptes de Lesnerac deux barches étaient au Croisic ou à Batz et le baleinier était à Nantes. Les préparatifs étaient peu avancés mais grâce aux comptes on saisit l'impression très vive de l'urgence soudaine avec laquelle on accéléra les affaires. Une fois chargé de mener l'expédition, Lesnerac fit organiser tout de suite les stocks de provisions à Nantes et aux environs, au Pellerin, aux pays de Rays et aux environs de Guérande et du Croisic. Le 20 juin il quitta Nantes dans un baleinier chargé de cargaison pour descendre le courant jusqu'à Saille et le Croisic, mais la plus grande partie de la cargaison était destinée à être chargée sur les barches au Croisic que l'on fit passer en escaffes. Il fallut, par exemple, nettoyer le blé qu'on obtint à Nantes, puis le moudre pour en faire de la farine avant de le livrer à la Fosse pour être transporté en tonneaux achetés à cette fin (22). Parmi les dépenses nécessitées par le transport, il y avait des paiements à Jeanne de la Sarzaye qui avait assumé le rôle de gardienne de l'escaffe dans laquelle on transporta le blé. On acheta aussi le pain en plusieurs endroits, y compris Couëron et Guérande. On mit une partie de ce pain et de l'eau douce dans des pipes pour le voyage. On prit plusieurs types de vin, on acheta onze pipes du prévôt de Vertou ; la cave du duc à la Tourneuve à Nantes fournit quatre pipes de vin angevin et l'on fit de nombreuses petites dépenses en charroyant ces produits à la rive afin de les transporter en escaffe de la Fosse, de Couëron, du Port de la Garenne à Guérande et d'ailleurs. Il en fut de même pour la viande et le poisson procurés pour le voyage. Les aliments principaux étaient le bœuf, le porc salé ou le lard et le poisson séché. On acheta douze «beuffx gras» à Jean Dangers à 3 1. chacun, mais il fallut en jeter cinq dans la mer car ils s'étaient putréfiés. On acheta encore onze «beuffs» à 2 1. chacun du terrouer de Guérande et 28 flèches de lard variées ainsi que d'autres quartiers de viande salée et quelques petits oiseaux (23). On se procura 300 livres de poisson séché au Pellerin, et on varia les menus au début du voyage tout au moins, grâce aux maquereaux. On embarqua également une certaine quantité d'épices et de condiments ainsi que d'autres aliments essentiels comme 60 livres de beurre, un pipe d'haricots, 8 fromages, 6 livres

(21 ) cf. S. de LA Nicoi.UFRF-TF.ljFlRO, La manne bretonne aux \Ti et VTA siècles Nantes, 1887, p. 14-15. (22) A.L.A., F, 206 n°. 4, f.2,«Irem pour cuver etnetaierled. bleameytieaumolin er le randre en farine a la fousse de Nantes dedanz le scaffe qui le porta, 1 8 s » . (23) Ibid., f.4; les oiseaux s'appelaient chastriz — une variété de merle.

182

The Création of Brittany

d'amandes et deux livres de riz (24). Faire avancer des bateaux même légers chargés de cargaison le long de la Loire, aux hautes eaux des marées, ce problème fut résolu par des paiements faits à trois hommes «qui furent a nager le ballinier au départir de Nantes jusques à Saille», puis à Mace Guenandeau et quatre compagnons «qui furent mis à nager et mener les dites escaffes a fin de les haster quar le vent estoit contrayre», démonstration d'un art du Moyen Age dont on ne connaît que fort peu (25). Les derniers jours avant le départ de Lesnerac plusieurs ménagères des environs de Guérande et du Croisic furent chargées de faire du pain que l'on prit à bord le 24 et 25 juin. Et pour l'équipage qui partit le 26 juin? Le capitaine, Pierre de Lesnerac, connétable de Nantes était membre d'une famille du pays guérandais, tristement célèbre dans certains quartiers car on prétendait qu'un Lesnerac avait tué traîtreusement Charles de Blois après la bataille d'Auray. Certains auteurs modernes ont même identifié ce traître avec Pierre lui-même, mais, selon une tradition du quinzième siècle, l'homme dont il s'agissait s'appelait Charles (26). Quoi qu'il en soit, Pierre avait certainement reçu des témoignages de bonnes grâces ducales dès 1371. Au cours des dernières années qui précédaient sa mission il semble a voir acquis un rôle prééminent dans l'administration

(24) Les fromages coûtèrent 22 s 6 d, le beurre 60 s, les haricots 60 s, les amandes 14s, le ris 5 s, le poivre 8 s, les maquereaux 61. pour un millier, 300 livres de poissons sec 17 1. 10s. Voici quelques prix relevés dans les comptes de Lesnerac: f. 2 Blé (un tonneau, 8.1.) Pain (par pièce, 3 d) Vin de Vertou (un pipe, 41.) Vin de Guérande (un pipe, 3 francs) f. 4 Bœuf (par pièce, 60 s). Lard (par pièce, une livre) Chasîriz (par pièce, 6 s) Viande salée (par pièce, 14 s 4 d) Poisson séché (le livre, 14 d) Maquereaux (un millier, 61.)

f. 5

Fromage (par pièce, 3 s 9 d) Beifrre (un livre, 8 d)

Févres (un pipe, 60 s) Amandes (un livre, 2 s 6 d) Riz (un livre, 2 s 6 d) Poivre (un livre, 8 s) Gingembre blanc (un livre, 16 s) Sucre roset (un livre, 12 s) Quenelles (un livre, 16 s) Poudre dypocras (un livre, 16 s) f. 9 Sardines (un millier, 60 s) Pomade (un pipe, 2 francs) Merluz (par pièce, 5 s) Mullez (une douzaine, 3 s 4 d) Merlanz (par pièce, 6 d) Congre (par pièce, 4 s 6 d)

(25) Ibid., f. 5; cf. N.ORMF, Early British Swimmwg, 55 BC - AD 1719, Exeter, 1983, p. 22-45. (26) Arch.dép. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1F 1003 f. 118; cf. Jean FROISSART, Chroniques, éd. S.Luce et al. , 15t., Paris 1869-1975, vi. p. Ixxiv.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnemc en Navarre

183

ducale; il maintint son service loyal jusqu'à sa mort en 1392 (27). Quant à ses autres compagnons, les personnages les plus importants en 1386 étaient Geoffroy de Poulglou, Patry de Châteaugiron et Maître Robert Brochereul, secrétaire, futur chancelier du duché. Tous les trois, comme Lesnerac, avaient des liens étroits avec le duc qu'ils allaient représenter aux négociations finales à Navarre en tant que membres de son hôtel et de son conseil (28). Ils furent accompagnés d'autres personnes qui avaient des titres similaires — (Bonabé de Tréal, Régnier de Saint-Liz, Laurens Coupegorge) — ou étaient destinés à des fonctions élevées comme Petit Guion, Armel de Châteaugiron, fils de Patry (29). Tels étaient les hommes chargés d'aller à Pamplona, d'accompagner la princesse Juana à Saint-Jean-Pied-dePort et à Rayonne, de faire bon accueil aux dignitaires navarrais, de préparer des cadeaux convenables et de faire valoir les navires aux visiteurs bien informés comme Marcus Jourdain, amiral de Navarre. (30). Les comptes sont peu précis sur les marins de carrière qui accompagnèrent Lesnerac. Le vaisseau dans lequel le connétable prit la mer est parfois appelé sa barche, parfois il est dit le vaisseau «de monssour Jehan Maloin et douditconnestable» ou celui de Jean Maloin. Il semble bien que Maloin fut le capitaine, son nom étant associé à celui de Lesnerac dans des lettres envoyées aux autres membres de la mission. Il joua un rôle prépondérant dans la résolution d'un délicat problème ouvrier relatif aux paies des marins du baleinier. Maloin reçut aussi 200 francs pour la part qu'il prit dans le voyage, le même taux de paie élevé que Mons. Patry de Châteaugiron, avec lequel il partagea certains devoirs diplomatiques (31). Des marins, on nous fournit le nom

( 2 1 ) Recueil, i. n°. 177; ii. nos. 428, 593, 641, 835-6; A.L.A., E 1227 pour des documents relatifs à la seigneurie de Lesnerac de 1360, que tint Robert, puis Guillaume de Lesnerac pour la plus grande partie de la vie de Pierre (cf, ibid., B 1450). (28) Recueil, Index pour ces hommes. En 1385 Patry promit qu'il retournerait de Castile à la demande du duc lorsqu'on lui accorda la permission de mener des hommes d'armes hors du duché (A.L.A., E 143 n ° . l l ) . Catâlogo, éd. CASTRO, xv. nos. 1129, 1159; xvi, nos. 22, 294; xviii, nos. 684-6 pour Brochereul et Poulglou dans Navarre 1385-6. (29) Recueil, Index pour ces hommes sauf pour Régnier de Saint-Liz. (30) A.L.A., E 206 n° 4 f.9, paiement pour 2 aulnes d'étoffe donnés à Marcus Jourdain « amiraut du roy de Navarre pour sa peine daller par de vers le roy pour haster le fait et nous en apportent remission... pour ce que il ne vouloit prendre argent». (31 ) Ibid., f.8, «pour le fait de la chambre de madame faicte et ordrenee en la barche de monssour Jahan Maloin et doudit connestable»; f.9, paiement pour Ferrando, un messager, de s'acquitter des lettres de Maloin et de Lesnerac à Pamplona ; f. 12, contrat; f. 15, paies.

184

The Création ofBrittany

probable de deux maîtres : Denis le Peletier qui commande le baleinier et Hervé Chauvete (ou Chamiete) qui commanda probablement la deuxième barche (32); et de l'équipage le nom d'un certain Jean Bouchard, qui reçut la paie la plus élevé (13 1/3 francs), peut-être de la famille célèbre de Guérande (33). Mis à part les paies différentes, on ne distingue pas la fonction des hommes d'équipage; le professionnel dont il faut noter la présence, c'est Hervé l'Arbalétrier. Il y avait aussi un certain nombre de messagers ducaux qui transmettaient non seulement les messages au roi de Navarre mais aussi, par voie de terre, à Jean IV dans le duché (34). Comme on l'a déjà constaté, le voyage à San Sébastian semble s'être passé sans incidents sérieux, le frère Geoffroy Rabin étant monté à bord des vaisseaux pour leur donner la bénédiction avant leur départ au Croisic, seul petit inconvénient, on arriva en vue de la terre à Bermeo, à quelque 60 km à l'ouest de San Sébastian. On ne sait si cet incident fut le résultat d'une erreur de navigation ou des vents et des courants dominants, mais le fait qu'on prit à bord un pilote peut faire prévaloir la première explication (35). De toute façon, les marins purent vite régler les affaires et on gagna San Sébastian avant le 30 juin. La première partie de la mission fut promptement achevée mais ensuite les affaires ralentirent. On envoya un messager à Charles II à Pamplona et puis une délégation mené par Geoffroy de Poulglou et maître Robert Brochereul, sénéchal de Nantes. Pendant leur absence, entre le 10 et le 12 juillet on se rendit par mer de San Sébastian à Bayonne où l'on s'arrêta, d'abord à ce qu'on appelait Port Breton, situé dans l'estuaire de F Adour avant d'être conduit par le pilote jusqu'au port de Bayonne lui-même. Les navires devaient y rester amarrés pendant les six semaines suivantes, un retard qui semble avoir causé une certaine frustration parmi les membres de l'équipage du baleinier (36). (32) #«/., f. 12, 15. v'33)

Ibid., f.15 (cf. TOUCHARD, p. 44, 125; Recueil, i. n°. 357; ii. 751).

(34) Ibid., f.4 (Hervé); les messagers y compris Hennequin (f.8), Perrinet (f.8), qui fut envoyé de Pamplona au duc dans le duché, Jean Legalais (f.9), Ferrando (f.9), et Jean Chesnaie (f. 10), Alfonse qui fournit les clous à Guérande (f.3), fit partie aussi de l'expédition (f. 15). (35) Ibid., f. 15, «Item fut paie a frère Geffroy Rabin qui alla dedanz les vesseaulx, 6 francs» f.8, «Premièrement le jour Saintz Pierre et Saintz Poul (29 juin) que lesdiz vesseaulx armèrent devant le havre de Vermeou pour le sallaire dun lomentz que vendrent o un bateau, 1 franc». Il semble qu'on ne sache que peu au sujet de l'art de naviguer en Bretagne à cette époque mais cf. MOLLAT, Le commerce maritime normand, p. 349-355. (36) On acheta un bœuf à San Sébastian le 9 juillet et le 12 juillet on paya 6 francs « pour dous lomenez qui vindrent du port breton pour conduire et mettre les barches hors des dangiers jusqes au port de Beonne» (f.8).

Le voyage de Pierre de Lemerac en Navarre

185

A la fin d'août, la nouvelle de l'arrivée imminente de la princesse commençait à circuler. Juana gagna Rayonne le 2 5 août et plusieurs Navarrais, y compris son frère, le futur Charles III, vinrent inspecter les navires le 27 août (37). Deux jours plus tard on les déplaça à Cail Breton, endroit plus en aval et on commença les derniers préparatifs pour remonter le navire pour le voyage de retour. Les affaires se conclurent vite. Le 2 septembre l'abbé de Monreal, Pierre Godeile, secrétaire du roi de Navarre, célèbre une cérémonie de mariage à la cathédrale de Bayonne en présence de Charles II et des représentants du duc; puis le 4septembre les navires déradèrent finalement pour quitter le Cail Breton et, à l'aide encore une fois de pilotes, ils allèrent en aval par « le Boucquau de Beonne » pour gagner le large et continuèrent jusqu'au Croisic. Une simple cérémonie, le 11 septembre, à Saille, conclut l'alliance solennelle de Jean IV et de l'infante et la mission de Pierre de Lesnerac se termina (38). Pour terminer cet exposé je voudrais faire quelques remarques sur trois autres aspects du voyage: les conditions matérielles de la vie à bord des navires en été 1386, les aspects cérémoniels de la mission, les dépenses. Sur les conditions à bord du navire, il convient de faire quelques observations sur la nourriture et les facilités. Comme on a déjà remarqué, les navires étaient chargés dès le début de l'expédition d'une grande variété d'aliments de base, dont les comptes fournissent des renseignements précieux au sujet des prix, mais on ne sait ni le poids des pains ni des quartiers de bœuf et on ne possède pas non plus la connaissance exacte des mesures de capacités dont on se servait tant pour les liquides que pour les matières sèches. Il est donc impossible d'estimer la valeur calorifique de la nourriture fournie (39). Comme le voyage prévu n'allait pas durer très longtemps le fait que la nourriture fournie pour Lesnerac et ses compagnons ne comprît que le pain, la viande, le poisson et le vin et une absence totale de fruits et légumes à (37) Ibid., f. 13, un franc payé «au Calais qui ala a Saint Jouhan du Pie des Portz pour savoir quant madame seroit preste a venir» (23 août) et 401. 5s et 13 francs dépensés le 25 août «que madame arriva a Beonne» (Ibid.) ; 15 1. 2s 6d et 6 francs furent dépensé le 27 août «quant mons. Charles de Navarre et les gens du roy vindrentdedanz les barches pour voers la chambre de madame» (Ibid.). (38) CASTRO, Carlos III, p. 117; «Item pour les lomentz qui conduirent et mistrent hors les vesseaulx a sen venir du Caill Breton et passer le boucquau de Beonne, 12 florins» le 4 septembre, f. 14). (39) cf. Michael PRFSTWICH, Victualling Estimâtes for English Garrisons in Scotland during thé Early Fourteenth Century, English Historical Review, Ixxxii (1967), 346-53 ; BURWASH, op.cit, p. 72-76 discute des mesures sur le plan du ravitaillement au quinzième siècle. Elle cite les lois d'Oléron, article xviii, qui constata que les marins bretons « ne doivent avoir qune esquysine le jour par la raison quilz ont buuraige en alant et venant» (p.75).

186

The Création ofBrittany

l'exception des haricots, ne doit pas trop nous inquiéter. Bien qu'il eût une caisse de charbon à sa disposition ainsi que plusieurs marmites en métal et deux trépieds, on peut supposer que la plupart des repas pris à bord étaient froids. Une fois les navires amarrés à Rayonne, il n'est pas étonnant que les détails des dépenses quotidiennes pour l'achat et la consommation de nourriture indiquent une variété beaucoup plus grande. Malgré la quantité considérable de viande qu'on prit à bord au départ on acheta encore du bœuf et de petits oiseaux à San Sébastian et le bœuf resta comme nourriture principale pendant les longues semaines à Bayonne. Mais, en tant que bons Bretons ils consommèrent une variété de poisson beaucoup plus grande que celle qu'on prend ordinairement: des sardines, des harengs et, lorsqu'il y avait des invités, on prépara même des coquillages, du merlan, de la merluche et un congre, du moins pour les membres les plus importants de la délégation. Comme première boisson, outre le vin, on buvait de la pomade. Bien qu'il ne soit pas possible de constater précisément ni les quantités de vivres qu'on acheta, ni la quantité qu'on en consomma, j'ai l'impression que pendant le long séjour à Bayonne (en particulier, au mois de juillet et d'août), les compagnons de Lesnerac montrèrent une préférence sensible pour les fruits de mer. Il me semble aussi que le coût de la vie était plus élevé que dans le duché — problème qu'on continue à rencontrer, pour la plupart, lorsqu'on voyage à l'étranger (40). Les comptes indiquent aussi des différences de nourriture selon les groupes sociaux, selon la région et les saisons. La nourriture fournie aux membres supérieurs de la mission était beaucoup plus variés, plus coûteuse que celle destinée aux marins'ordinaires, et lorsque la princesse allait à bord on peut croire qu'il fallait pourvoir à ses goûts délicats. Si l'on compare avec les épices dont on a déjà fait mention pour le voyage d'aller — du poivre, du gingembre blanc et ordinaire, et de diverses sortes de sucrages (sucre rosé, pouldre dypocras) — il est significatif de constater qu'on acheta davantage de moutarde, d'oignons et d'ail. Certains y trouveraient un contraste entre les goûts bayonnais ou espagnols ou bretons, mais ces achats ont aussi pour cause la saison plus avancée de l'année (41). Ce qui est encore plus (40) Chastriz, qui coûtèrent 6s chacun en Bretagne (f.4) et qui coûtèrent 11. à San Sébastian (f.8) et du bœuf qui coûta 41. 3 s 4 d pour un quartier ou plus. 2 milliers de sardines (sardilles) coûtèrent 61. et 2 pipes de pomade coûtèrent 4 francs (f.9), deux douzaines de moules coûtèrent 6 s (f. 16) et 4merluz 20 s, 12 merlanz 6 s et le congre 4s 6d. (41) II est certain qu'on cultiva les oignons et l'ail en Bretagne au quatorzième siècle (cf. P.R.O., E 101 /174/4 et 5, 17571 et 4, 176/9 etc., comptes de Giles de Wyngreworth, trésorier de Bretagne, 1359-62), mais il convient de noter les différences de goût entre les pays. On achète aussi de l'huile pour cuisiner. On ne sait pas, quelle quantité des

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

187

significatif d'un goût plus délicat c'est que l'on ne se contente pas de pain ordinaire avant de quitter Rayonne, mais l'on fit aussi de la pâtisserie (pour lafaczon des patez farine et poudres}. On décanta aussi du vin dans des bouteilles pour en offrir à Juana et à son entourage «et es autres gens de bien ». De la même façon ceux qui firent le voyage de San Sébastian via Tolosa à Pamplona ne se privèrent pas et ils consommèrent de « la langue de bœff », du coquillage, du pain blanc et de la soupe (42). On connaît peu de choses sur l'hébergement à bord, mis à part les détails relatifs à la chambre de Juana. On employa sept charpentiers pendant vingt-quatre jours ouvrables pour la construire. La chambre semble avoir compris une charpente en bois à laquelle on attacha une couverture de toile et de filet car on acheta plus de 300 clous ordinaires et 2000 « clous de tache... pour coudre le treillis », ainsi que de la cire, de la résine et de la graisse, destinées probablement à imperméaliser la couverture. La chambre était située, paraît-il, sur le pont sans doute attachée au pont arrière, à la poupe ou à la passerelle du vaisseau de Lesnerac. Bien qu'on eût fait certains préparatifs avant de quitter la Bretagne, on acheta à Pamplona l'ameublement et une partie du bois dont on se servit pour la construction (43). Quant aux autres ustensiles, assiettes, bols et soucoupes en étain, ils étaient destinés probablement à l'usage des membres de grades supérieurs de la mission, tandis que 60 bols en bois quoique « de la plus belle» et de la poterie de terre étaient destinés évidemment à l'usage de l'équipage (44). On n'acheta pas moins de 24 aulnes de toile «pour faire toailles et davantaux pour les cuysiniers» à Guérande, les cuisines furent équipées de tables, bols et autres articles (45). Parmi les articles pris à bord il y avait six

provisions chargées en Bretagne, n'était pas consommée au début de septembre; beaucoup des épices les plus chères et des vins de meilleure qualité devaient être destinés à la princesse et à sa suite. (42) On acheta une pipe de vin à Rayonne le 25 août «et baillée par boteilles es gens de madame et es autres gens de bien» (f. 1 3); un dînera Tolosa pour Jean Maloin et ses valets coûta 64s (f. 1 7). (43 ) « 12 grandes planches pour tables et pour paner sur le tillac (= pont) qui estoit brae en la dicte chambre achate a Pampelune» (f.8); cf. Burwash, op.cit., p. 76-77 qui cite l'exemple presque contemporain d'une chambre dressée pour Henri, comte de Derby, futur roi Henri IV d'Angleterre, en raison de ses voyages en Prusse pendant les années 1390. (44) Les «escuelles de boays... de la plus belle» coûtèrent 22s 6d, 6platz, \2escuelles et 12 sauciers destain coûtèrent 71. 10 s, 6 grand gorbeill (corbeils) coûtèrent 5s, tandis que la poterie de terre coûta 13s 6d (f.5). (45) Ibid., f.5 où «10 verges de linge pour fere toailles es mariniers» coûtèrent 40s ; 24 aulnes de quencvaz, 2 francs; 2 paelles de fer et 2 tre^piers coûtèrent 22s (f.5).

188

The Création ofBrittany

lanternes ainsi qu'une provision de bougies, trois flambeaux de cire qui pesaient 4 livres chacun, trois qui pesaient 2 livres chacun et quatre «menuz fambleaux de cyre» et le charbon dont on a déjà fait mention (46). Quant aux armements, bien qu'on puisse supposer que les hommes d'armes amenèrent leurs armes avec eux et que plusieurs arbalètes furent munies de cordes et de pieds de support, l'article le plus original était un canon fort petit certainement, car on n'acheta qu'une livre de salpêtre et une demi-livre de soufre pour «refreschir les pouldres » qu'on avait achetées peu avant. Bien que ce ne soit pas la première allusion à l'usage d'armes à feu à bord d'un bateau, c'est la première fois que je le rencontre à propos de la Bretagne (47). Quoiqu'on n'ait pas d'inventaire complet des installations à bord des navires, on est bien porté à croire qu'on y vécut de façon assez primitive et à l'étroit, d'autant que pour le voyage de retour on transportait quelques chevaux (48). Il n'est donc pas étonnant que, lorsque les navires furent amarrés quelques semaines, certains membres de la partie diplomatique prirent domicile à terre, où on avait loué une maison, et que la plupart des équipages logèrent en ville, pour ne laisser qu'un équipage réduit à bord. Aussi les dépenses quotidiennes pour la nourriture achetée à Bayonne évoluèrent considérablement suivant le nombre de personnes désormais à bord et la nature des achats. On se procurait certains aliments, comme le pain chaque jour, mais d'autres nourritures, tels des quartiers de bœuf, ne se consommaient qu'en plusieurs jours (49). Les difficultés de la livraison des provisions à l'équipage du baleinier posèrent un problème particulier — qui fut résolu le 11 août lorsqu'on passa un contrat où il en fut convenu que le maître devait recevoir 5 francs par jour pour couvrir les frais de son équipage (50). Cela mit fin à un sujet de plainte des marins,

(46) Ibid., f.5. Esr-cc que les rouarrees de bnche, qui coûtèrent 66s étaient du comestible pour la cuisine aussi ? Le charbon coûta 15s et encore 5s pour le «fust» dans laquelle on le mit. 100 livres de bougies coûtèrent 100s. (47) Ibid., f.4, «Item pour une livre de sallepestre et demie 1. de souffre achate de Robinet Le Spicicr pour refreschir les pouldrcs de quenon, 12s». C. de LA RoxciFRK, Histoire de la marine française, 6t. Paris 1899-1930, i. 4 1 7 ; ii. 490; Russii.l., English Intervention, p. 230 pour des canons sur des galées castillanes pendant le quatorzième siècle. Deux bêtes de charge amenèrent «harnois» de Saille au Croisic (f.5). (48) Ibid., f. 14, «Item pour xij planches qui furent achate pour faire les mangeours pour les chevaulx en une les barches», 2 septembre. (49) Les dépenses du 14 juillet au 21 juillet sont typiques: 2 1. 5s 4d, 51. I s 4 d , 2 1 . 17s lOd, 7 1. 1 8s 8d, 16s 6d, 3s, 21 s 4d, 1 3 1 2s 7d (y compris 2 quartiers de bœuf achetés pour 11 francs). On paya 4 francs pour louer une maison à Rayonne pour A/laloin et le connétable (f. 1 7). (50) Ibid., (.12.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

189

mais il exista pourtant encore un danger, la maladie. La courte traversée de trois jours au nord-est de l'Espagne ne fut guère assez longue pour causer une privation sérieuse, mais les longues semaines d'attente à Rayonne en plein été provoquèrent la maladie. On dut payer le logement de certains malades qui prirent domicile en ville parce qu'il «bailloit et queroit les chouses neccessaires pour plusieurs malades qui estaient en son ostel des compagnons des vesseaulx», mais on ne précise pas la nature de la maladie (51). Celle-ci a pu être provoquée par la nourriture contaminée — n'oublions pas qu'on dut jeter du bœuf à la mer — ou bien par le changement de nourriture et de climat, ou par les excès de table; on ne peut pas le savoir. Les dépenses somptuaires du voyage ne nous retiendront guère. Dès le début on avait mis l'accent sur l'aspect diplomatique du voyage. Lorsqu'on sut que le but était atteint et que la princesse retournerait au duché, on acheta force bannières pour la grande barche et une bannière herminée à la petite barche; on acheva les préparatifs pour la chambre de Juana. Les chevaux embarqués à Rayonne étaient sans doute destinés à tirer son carosse, moyen de transport normal pour les femmes de qualité à cette époque (52). En conclusion, on peut faire quelques remarques sur les dépenses engagées pour le voyage. Au début de ses comptes, Lesnerac accuse réception de 3315 francs en espèces et de 36 muids de sel. Pour le sel, on en troque à San Sébastian contre cinq milliers 33 livres de fer, et vend ce qui reste pour 55 francs à Rayonne (53). Le montant de ces transactions et d'autre somme d'argent reçu, soit à Lesnerac à payer l'équipement des navires au mois de juin, et à couvrir les frais encourus pendant le voyage, la paie des équipages, les dépenses des délégations qui allèrent à Pamplona et d'autres imprévus. Lesnerac ne fut pas chargé de régler les paies de certains représentants diplomatiques qui firent partie de la mission, mais il paya des frais légaux, des frais de pilotage, de mouillage et de douane et aussi l'achat de sauf-conduit

(51 )/&
190

The Création ofBrittany

(54). Parmi les dépenses faites sur son ordre par Thomas Roux et par Régnier de St-Liz au cours des voyages par voie de terre, il y avait des frais pour des guides et des mulets pour le trajet de San Sébastian à Pamplona et pour les chevaux qu'on loua pour le voyage de Rayonne à St-Jean-Pied-de-Port où Charles II avait fait venir Lesnerac. Il n'était pas chargé de payer certaines dépenses de location de barches (55). Le résultat de ses comptes montre qu'on lui devait 20 francs, mais, il lui fallait aussi tenir compte du fer qu'il avait acquis et de vin qu'on n'avait pas bu. En tout il dépensa 3396francs (56). Les voyages maritimes destinés à chercher des futures mariées eurent lieu fréquemment à la fin du Moyen Age. Juana elle-même devait entreprendre un voyage semblable en 1403, lorsqu'elle a traversé la Manche pour épouser Henri IV, roi d'Angleterre. On peut également citer le voyage entrepris pour chercher Isabel d'Ecosse, la future épouse du duc François Ier (57). De tels voyages purent être dangereux et peu agréables, tel celui de Margaret, sœur d'Isabel, qui épousa le Dauphin Louis en 1436; il fallut alors faire face à des vents contraires et à une flotte ennemie (58). Mais, nous l'avons vu, aucun drame ne survint pendant le voyage de Lesnerac. L'intérêt de ce voyage réside plutôt dans les détails pratiques, dans l'aspect tradition-

(54) II ne tint pas les comptes pour les salaires payés à Maître Robert Brochercul ni à Mons. Geoffroy de Poulglou; son propre salaire ne fut pas compris dans les comptes non plus. On paya 4 francs à Olivier Levesquc «qucrrc lesaufconduita Beonnc» (f.8)et 2 moutons «pour la cousrume de lancrange desdiz troix vcsscaulx» le 7 août (f. 11 ), et Lesnerac paya encore 2s 6d «pour parchemin affaire le sauffconduyre» pour les Navarrais le 9 août. (55) Lesnerac dénia toute responsabilité pour le fret (frais de transport) des barches à l'exception de 103 francs 3/4 payés à Hervé Chauvete (f. 17); «pour le louage de ix mulles qui portèrent led. connestable, Régnier de Saint Liz, Jehan le Clauvrier, Thomas Roux, Alain le. Cleuz et ij valiez es ij bahutz pour aller de San Sébastian jusqes a Pampelune» (ibid.). (56) II resta encore 8 pipes de vin à boire — on en déchargea 5 à Batz et 3 furent livrées à la barche de Eon de Lesnerac (f. 18). (57) G. A. KNOVVI.SON, Jean V, duc de Bretagne et l'Angleterre (1399-1442), Cambridge et Rennes 1964, p. 36, 40. Jeanne de Navarre quitta Camaret le 13 janvier 1403 ; pour Isabel voir A. de LABctRDVRlF, Histoire de Bretagne, continuée par B. Pocquet, 6t., Paris 1896-1914, iv. 311. Elle arriva en Bretagne au mois d'octobre 1442. (58) M. THIBAUT, La jeunesse de Louis M, 1423-1445, Paris, 1907, p. 124-126; LA RONCIF.RF, op. cit., ii. 257-8. Regnault Girard qui mena la mission en Ecosse laissa une narration complète qui n'a pas encore fait l'objet d'une édition moderne (Bib.Nat., MS. français 17330). Sur le voyage en Flandre de la future épouse de Philippe le bon, duc de Bourgogne, en 1428 voir C.A.J. ARMSTRONC, La politique matrimoniale des ducs de Bourgogne, Annales de Bourgogne, 40 (1968), 42 et seq.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

191

nel même du voyage, bien qu'il fur court, er dans les longues semaines d'arrenre. Sans négliger l'importance diplomatique de la mission et d'un mariage qui allait prolonger encore de cent années le pouvoir de la dynastie Montfort sur le duché, ce sont les renseignements au sujet des vaisseaux, des équipages, de l'équipement et des provisions qui constituent pour nous l'intérêt et l'importance de cet incident. Si ces renseignements n'avaient été tirés d'une seule source principale, il aurait fallu les rechercher laborieusement dans de très nombreux documents. De manière modeste, ils contribuent également à mieux comprendre les conditions matérielles et sociales de la vie du duché à la fin du quatorzième siècle. Ces comptes fournissent non seulement des renseignements au sujet de la vie de tous les jours d'un marin breton typique mais donnent aussi un aperçu du monde plus raffiné de la cour ducale et de la diplomatie représentées par les officiers de l'hôtel du duc. On découvre aussi une princesse royale dont la dernière demeure — la cathédrale de Canterbury — était bien loin de la Navarre, son pays natal, qu'elle quitta au mois d'août 1386 pour devenir la troisième épouse du duc Jean IV de Bretagne (59).

(59) cf. A.R. M\i RS, The capriviry of a Royal Witch, Bulleini of thé John Ryltmds Library, xxiv (1940), 263-84 et x x v i (1941-2), 82-100 pour quelques aspects de dernières années de sa carrière en Angleterre. Flic mourut en 1437.

192

The Création ofBrittany

Appendice Le texte entier des trois lettres de Jean IV ici publiées n'était pas à ma disposition lorsque je finissais mon Recueil des actes de, Jean IV, duc de Bretagne, ii, 1383-1399 (Paris 1983); pourtant ces lettres sont citées dans le supplément à ce volume comme numéros 540A, 540B et 589A. Elles fournissent des détails supplémentaires et importants sur les négociations et les conditions du troisième mariage du duc àJuana de Navarre (dont le transport en Bretagne fut le but du voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac comme décrit ci-dessous). Il faut noter que le numéro 540B est d'une importance particulière. C'est la première lettre connue de Jean IV dans laquelle on emploie la formule «par la graicedeDieu». Au premier abord il semble que le responsable en soit le notaire, Yvo Tuich, prêtre du diocèse de Tréguier, qui dressa le document mais qui, pour autant qu'on le sache, ne fut jamais employé à faire autre chose dans la chancellerie ducale. Blanchard découvrit un usage plus ancien de la formule par Jean V en 1408 (Lettres de Jean F, i xxxiv note 2 et numéro 1041 ) mais il douta de son authenticité. Il semble que l'on n'ait employé régulièrement cette expression qu'après 1417 (cf. mon Recueil, i. 27-28). L'attestation signée de Jean IV est suivie d'une attestation notariale dans laquelle Tuich déclara que lui, il avait été témoin du duc lorsqu'il prit la main de Guillaume Plantarosa pour signifier son adhérence (de la part de son maître) au contrat de mariage.

540 A 1385, 12 avril, Guéméné-Guingamp. Lettres pour faire connaître à Charles II, roi de Navarre, sa satisfaction à l'égard de la visite de Guillaume Plantarosa, conseiller du roi et maître de son hôtel, envoyé en Bretagne pour organiser le mariage de Juana de Navarre au duc et pour autoriser à Plantorosa de faire savoir au roi les réactions du duc. A. Archive General de. Navarra, Pamplona, Caj. 173 n°6I, 297X 195mm, sur papier scellé au dos avec le signet du duc n°5.

Treshonoure et puissant prince et montrescher seigneur et frère, Jay receu voz gracieuses et amiables lettres par Guillaume [Plantarosa], vostre conseiller et maistre de hosteil, etenctendu la créance quil ma dit de par vous touchant vostre bonne sancte, estât et nouvelles de quoy Je suy tresliez et joyoux touteffois que Je en puis oir bonnes nouvelles, quelles Dieux vuille que soint toudit si très bonnes comme vous mesme sauriez mielz diviser, et que je vouldroye pour moy mesme et de moy pour ce que vous vouldriez savoir les voz merciez, au

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

193

partir de cestes Je estoie en bonne santé de corps, loue nostre seignour, qui par sa graice le vous vuille octrier. Treshonoure et puissant prince et montrescher seignour et frère Je vous mectre tant à certes et de tout mon cueur, comme Je pins du grant bien et honour que vous me vouldriez et de la bonne amour et voulente que vous avez a moy, touchant le mariage de vostre ^ille et de moy, comme vostre dit maistre dosteill et autres de voz genz me ont dit de par vous, de quoy Je vous suys atenu a toujours mais, Et tresvoulontiers feroye en ce voz bons plaisirs si ce estoit chose qui peust bonnement estre au plaisir de monseigneur le Roy comme sur tout ce Jay plus a plain dit a vos dictes genz, aux quelx vous pour ce quil vous plaise croire et ajouster plainiere foy en ce quils vous diront de par moy, Et si choses vous plaist que pour vous puisse faire bonnement de me vuillez escripre riablement pour lacomplir a mon poair. Treshonoure et puissant prince et montrescher seigneur et frère le Saint Esperit vous ait en sa sainte et especial garde. Escript a Kemeneguegant le xij e jour davrill. Vostre frère, le duc de Bretaigne comte de Monfort et de Richement (1). (1) De la même main que le reste.

540 B 1385, 13 avril, Guéméné-Guingamp. Lettres qui annoncent la promesse du duc d'épouser Juana de Navarre et qui présentent les termes du contrat de mariage comme négociés avec son procureur, Guillaume Plantarosa. A. Arch. Gen. de Navarra, Caj. 49 n° 20, 5 2 0 X 3 1 1 m m , «con la firma autografa y restos del signet del duque».

Sachent touz que nous Jehan par la graice de Dieu, duc de Bretaingne, conte de Monfort et de Ricnemont, confessons et cognôissons par la tenour de ces lettres que nous avons jure et promis de a voir pour ramme et nostre espouse noble dame Johanne fille de très excellent et noble prince le Roy de Navarre si ensi est qu'elle soit de laage de seze anz ou au desus et saine de toute maladie contagieuse, et de ce avons nous baille nostre foy a Guillaume Planterose, maistre dostel dudit roy et procureur de la dicte dame quant a ce, comme par la dicte procuracion peut apparoir. En cas que les choses a nous promises a cause du dit mariage par noble homme le vicomte de Rohan et noble dame Jehanne de Navarre, sa famme, et par le dit Guillaume Planterose, procureur dudit roy et de noble seingnour messire Charles de Navarre, son filz esne, nous seront acomplies, cest a savoir qu'il nous ont promis pour le dit mariage a avoir la some de dous centz mille francs ou la value pour toutes chosses a poier quatre vingz mille francs le jour que nous

194

The Création of Brittany

lespouserons et quarante mille francs le jour de la Touzsainz prochain enssuiant les dictes espousailles. Et pour les quatre vigntz mille francs de demourant le dit roy de Navarre sera tenu a nous faire assiete bonne et souffisant de six mille livres de rente dedanz le temps que nous dirons qui sera competant et convenable et de ce nous baedrons noz lettres, et en cas que dedanz le temps il ne nous seroit la dicte assiete il sera tenu a nous poier la dicte somme de quatre vigntz mille francs largent ou la terre a nostre choys pour acomplissement des ditz dous centz mille francs et de ces chosses faire et acomplir le roy de Navarre et son dit filz, de lauctorite du dit roy, son père, sobligeront par les meillours et plus forte obligacions que lan pourra faire tant de court diglisse comme de court laye. Et avec ce pour ce que la chosse ait greignour fermeté le dit roy de Navarre fera de celz il peut baille lobligacion de très noble et excellent prince le roy de Castelle et lors le dit roy de Castelle ne vouldroit bailler sen obligacion le dit roy de Navarre sera tenu tant que les chosses desusdites soint acomplies de nous bailler et envoier pour ostages sanz enpa (chement) les filz esnez du sire de Luxe, du sire d'Angemont et du viconte de Baigorri. Et par les chosses dessus dictes acomplisses nous promectons comme dit est a prendre et prenons de meintenant la dicte dame Jehanne en la persoine de Guillaume Planterose, son dit procureur, a famme sanz jamais avoir autre et le dit procureur u nom de la dicte dame nous a prins a mary en entencion dun consentement mutuel de contracter ensamble mariage de présent en cas que les chosses et condicions susdites nous soient comme grées et devises sont acomplies. Et en ampres promectons que si tôt comme nous laurons espouseeetquenous arons jeu avecques elle de luy bailler et délivrer son douere tel es si souffisant qu'elle et touz les siens en tendront acomptenz selon la coustume de nostre pais, aussi promectons a ce nous obligons en cas que nous arions pour la dicte terre les quatre vigntz mille francs de les emploier et en acnàter terre en nom de la dicte dame et de ses hoirs jusques a la value des dictes six mille livres de terre et lors nous yrions de vie a trespassement avant la dite dame sanz avoir hoirs de nous yssanz, nous voulons et nous plest que la dite rante ou les quatre vigntz mille francs retournent et soient a la dite dame et a sa ligne, et semble ou la dite dame yroit de vie a trespassement avant que nous sanz avoir hoirs de nous yssanz que la dite rante ou les ditz quatre vigntz mille francs retournent au dit roy de Navarre et a ses hoirs et a ce nous obligons nous et noz hoirs. En tesmoing des quelles chosses nous avons ces lettres signe de nostre prive signet et passe de nostre main a plus grant congnoissance. Donne a Quimenet Guegant le xiije jour davrill lan mill .iij.c quatre vigntz et cincq. CE A MERE FERMETE A VOMES CI DESOUZESCRIPT DE NOSTRE MAIN NOSTRE PASSEMENT. PASSE DE NOSTRE MAIN Constat largent ou la terre a nostre choys LE DUC sanz en partir.

Le voyage de Pierre de Lesnerac en Navarre

195

589A 1386, 29 mai, Nantes. Nomination de Geoffroy de Poulglou, chevalier, chambellan du duc et capitaine de Saint-Malo, et Robert Brochereul, licencié-ès-lois, comme procureurs pour accomplir les termes du contrat de mariage entre leducetjuana de Navarre. B. Arch. Gen. de Navarra, Caj. 60 n° 6, lettres de Charles II, roi de Navarre, à Rayonne, 4 septembre 1386, d'après une copie notariale du 29 mai 1386 par Olivier de Chefdubois, prêtre du diocèse de Vannes. Jehan, duc de Bretaigne, conte de Montfort et de Richement, faisons savoir a touz que nous confians a plain du bien, sens, loyauté et bonne diligence de nous chers et bien âmes et feaulx Gefroy de Pouglou, chevalier, nostre chambelan et capitaine de nostre ville de Saint Mallou, (et) maistre Robert Brocherell, licencie en loys, nostre âme conseiller et seneschal de nos juridicions de leveschie de Nantes, yceulx et chacun avons constitue, ordene et establi et encore ordenons et establisons, noz procureurs gênerais et messagers specials et lun deulx, quant a prendre par mariage pour et ou nom de nous par paroles de futur ou de présent si ils voyent que soit expédient noble dame Johanne fille du roy de Navarre, ycelle prandre et recevoir et amener par devers nous en nostre pays de Bretaigne et o povoir de prandre et recevoir les promaisses a nous promises tant par meuble que héritage, et de ce quils en lun deulx en recevront et acceterount, doner quitance et du parsus que me recevrount doner créances comme bon leur semblara et a lun deulx. Et a povoir de recevoir, prandre et aporter obligacions tant de meuble comme de héritage, et de obliger en nom de nous que ou cas que nous recevrions, prandrions et accepterions aucunes terres ou pecunie a cause du dit mariage, et le cas avendroit que la dicte dame decederoit premier de nous, sans aver aucun enfant procrée de nous en elle, nos ou les aians cause de nous serions tenus de rendre la dicte terre ou pecune que a cause de la dicte terre nous auroit este poyee et soluee audit roy et ses hères. Et a pov-(o)ir de recevoir les obligations, ostaiges de personnes, de chasteaulx et en yceulx mettre et instituer gens de par nous a les garder aux despens du dit Roy jusques a lacomplissement du poyament et assiete a nous promis dudit Roy et de son aisne filz ainsin et en la manière que sera devise et ordene par noz diz conseillers queulx sur la foy et amour quils ont a nous de ce les avons encharges. Et generalment de faire toutes les choses et chacune que nous ferions et faire porions si presens estions de nostre personne honorables, utiles et nécessaires, pertinentes environ tel cas qui par vroy et leal procureur puent estre faites, grées, promises et expédiées combien que cas requiert mandament spécial ayans et aurons ferme et estable, agréable et ratifiable tout ce que par noz diz procureur

196

The Création ofBrittany

ou lun deulx sera promis, grée, jure senz espérance daucun rapel. Et o povoir de jurer en nostre âme les choses honorables et nécessaires environ le bien et acomplissement du mariage devant dit. Et repromectons et jurons en bonne foy par ces présentes signées de nostre main ce tenir. Donne en nostre ville de Nantes le xxixe jour de may, lan mil. ccc. iiij xx et siex. Passe par nous le duc de nostre main.

VIII

THE BRETON CIVIL WAR* ON 7 September 1341 Philip VI made it known that he would accept the homage proffered for the duchy of Brittany by Charles of Blois, on behalf of his wife, Joan of Penthievre, and that he thereby rejected a similar request first made to him by John of Montfort, respectively niece and half-brother of the late Duke John III. Twenty-five years later on 13 December 1366 Charles V, Philip's grandson, thankfully admitted John of Montfort's son into his homage for the duchy in a tense ceremony at the Hotel St Pol in Paris.1 In the interim there had been waged a bitter, often bloody, civil war for succession to John III, in which the original claimants had received military support from England and France. The course of this war is graphically and most comprehensively described in some of the finest passages in Froissart's Chronicles. Episodes like the elder John of Montfort's blitzkrieg of 1341 and the heroic defence of Hennebont by his wife in 1342, or accounts of the sieges of Brest, La Roche Derrien and Rennes, and the battles of La Roche Derrien (20 June 1347), of the Thirty (26 March 1351) and of Auray (29 September 1364) are highlights which successive generations have avidly perused. Dramatic confrontations, powerful characterisation, stirring, patriotic speeches and lively dialogue, cliff-hanging suspense with rescue in the nick of time, all and more than the usual ingredients of chivalric history are displayed, often with consummate artistry. Yet leaving literary qualities aside, the question — how valuable to the historian are the successive redactions of these events related in the Chronicles'? — has often been and still needs to be posed. There are no good contemporary Breton accounts of the civil war, and surviving sources from the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries not unnaturally recognised the rightfulness of the outcome which had resulted in the Montfort family gaining power and consolidating its position.. Although writers like Guillaume de St Andre and the author of the Chronicon Briocense, both in ducal employment (c.1380-1416), or in a later generation, Pierre le Baud (fl.14601505), drew on oral traditions and on written sources, some of which are now lost, for the period of the war, these writers often have a propagandist purpose on behalf of the Montfort dynasty (Jones 1976: 144-6,163-5). The independent or novel factual content of their work is slight in comparison with that provided by Jean le Bel, Froissart, writers in the St Denis tradition, or by those English * All references to the Chronicles are to volume and page of the SHF edition unless otherwise stated. For full details of other references, see pp. 216-8.

i

Morice 1742: 1421-4, 1608-13.

198

The Creation of Brittany

MAP TO ILLUSTRATE THE BRETON CIVIL WAR

chroniclers (Murimuth, Avesbury and Geoffrey le Baker) who were contemporary with events, or like Henry Knighton were later able to draw on authoritative sources.2 From Jean de St Paul in the mid-fifteenth century (La Borderie 1881: i-xxii), most native Breton authors relied heavily and usually uncritically on Froissart, seldom writing more than a paraphrase of those picturesque episodes already noted.3 If the Benedictine historians of the eighteenth century, Dom Lobineau (1707a: 311-80) and Dom Morice (1750a: 245-320), started to produce more scholarly syntheses, based on their prodigious efforts in collecting the literary and documentary evidence relating to the duchy, the general structure of their accounts was still determined by the outline provided by Froissart. 2

3

There is no modern study of the various fragmentary, composite and interdependent Breton chronicles like the Chronicon Brittanicum and Les Chroniques Annaulx, of their place of origin and date, nor of their relationship with the Chronicon Briocense or the work of Pierre le Baud (cf. Morice 1742: 1-117). Cf. Meignen 1886: ix; Argentre 1618: 340-474, although the great jurist was the first to exploit the legal records of 1341 seriously (Jones 1972a: 2).

The Breton Civil War

199

The rediscovery of the unique manuscript of Jean le Bel's work in the midnineteenth century, followed by the critical editions of Froissart's chronicle by Lettenhove and Luce shortly afterwards, called for a reassessment of the latter's account of the Breton civil war. In 1871 Dom Francois Plaine launched a wholesale attack on Froissart's credibility as an historian of that war. Doubts were now seriously cast not merely on some manifestly incorrect details or on some of the more fantastic individual deeds of prowess, but on the occurrence of whole campaigns which Froissart had recounted with a wealth of substantiating detail, much but not all of which he had derived from Le Bel. The ferocity of Plaine's attack, to which he returned several times, provoked the greatest of modern historians of the duchy, Arthur de la Borderie, to a series of critical studies in which Plaine himself came under severe scrutiny. For although he had an enviable ability to uncover novel pieces of evidence and to pose new questions about that which was already known, his cavalier handling of historical sources and a naive approach to some problems requiring a rigorous knowledge of diplomatic, left him open to devastating counter attack. Eventually La Borderie's researches culminated in the very comprehensive treatment of the war which was published in the third volume of his Histoire deBretagne (1899). La Borderie was able to utilise not only his own immense knowledge of all the sources of Breton history, but also the labours of an outstanding generation of editors, inspired by Simeon Luce, and which included the Moliniers, Moranville and Lemoine. If he lacked the standard editions of Le Bel and the Grandes Chroniques which Jules Viard (aided by Eugene Deprez) was to produce after his death, La Borderie had nevertheless mastered all the significant contemporary literary sources for the war, and Lemoine, in particular, had made available to him information drawn from the Public Record Office in London. As a result his account of the period remains the standard one; it may be supplemented, especially by reference to Deprez's work, and modified in detail. New scholarly editions and the predominating concern with documentary sources have enabled a clearer picture of the tangled sequence of events to emerge.4 But as Froissart's work so influenced earlier generations, so La Borderie's has largely shaped serious debate in the twentieth century. Moreover, since he was largely prepared to vindicate the broad outlines of Froissart's account, after his examination of the Chronicles, through this modern exegete, whose account is ignored with peril, Froissart's version of the Breton civil war continues to dominate historical writing. Occurring as it did between 1341 and 1364, all or part of the civil war was treated in the three redactions of Book I of the Chronicles. The major points of difference between these successive versions must be emphasised in so far as they concern Brittany. In the first redaction (composed from 1369 onwards, and in what Luce has termed its revised form, from 1378 although, as argued above (11-12), there is room for debate on this issue), Froissart largely follows Le Bel on the origins and early course of the war. His dependence is evident from the start when he borrows the description of the methods of composition used by the earlier writer in passages relating to Brittany, and Froissart does little 4

Galbraith 1927; Pocquet 1928; Bock 1931; Le Patourel 1954, 1958; Jones 1970.

200

The Creation of Brittany

thereafter but paraphrase his model.5 Many of the picturesque phrases which have been taken as particularly characteristic of his style find their origin in Le Bel's work. John of Montfort, half-brother of the late duke, for example, was not, according to Le Bel 'extrait de 1'estoc de Bretaigne' (I, 247). He is similarly described by Froissart in MSS of the first redaction as the man 'qui n'estoit point extrais de 1'estok de Bretaigne' (II, 88). In the Amiens MS the context changes a little but the key phrase remains: 'Lequelx ne venoit mies dou droit estock de Bretaingne' (II, 267). In the case of his wife, the countess of Montfort, she is always for Le Bel as subsequently for Froissart 'the one who had the heart of both man and lion'.6 Conversely, knights are conventionally and repetitively described as 'terribly brave' and 'very valiant' as were Gamier de Clisson, Miles and Waleran, castellans of Champtoceaux, Henry and Olivier de Spinefort and many others.7 All Le Bel's errors, whether those relating to particular events and personalities or those simply induced by ignorance of geography, are reproduced. Confusion seems to reign at every level — actual inland locations like La Roche Periou situated 35km from the sea are, according to Le Bel and Froissart, lapped about with tidal waters, distances are telescoped, and conventional descriptions of the sites of 'a fine town' or a 'very strong castle' are taken over without more ado, whether they are appropriate or not. Even if La Borderie's suggestion that Le Bel and Froissart both habitually confused Dinan and Guemene-Guigant (now Guemene-sur-Scorff) is accepted, the conventional nature of the description repeated several times, that the town was 'only enclosed with a palisade and ditch' is completely at variance with what is known of the defences of Dinan, whilst recent excavations at the castle of Joyeuse-Garde near Landerneau — the Goy-la-Forest of Froissart — revealed very modest defences contrary to the chroniclers' description.8 The catalogue of trivial and, indeed, of more serious errors is almost endless. Armies march in a bewildering series of eccentric movements and castles are in the hands of commanders who, according to other records, were known to be far away, safely incarcerated by their opponents, dead or frankly mythical. Generations of historians, for instance, have argued whether the name of the commander at Brest in 1341 was Garnier or Gautier de Clisson but neither he nor Olivier de Clisson, captain of La Roche Periou, both allegedly cousins of the (historical) Olivier III, sire de Clisson, have ever been identified from authentic record sources (La Borderie 1899: 427). The time scale, like that of distance,

5 6 7

8

Diller 1002-10 for a concordance; cf. SHF II, 86ff, and Le Bel I, 246ff. LeBell, 248, 262, 271 etc. SHF II, 91, 108, 147. SHF II, 99 (La Roche Periou 'scant sus un hault tertre qui s'estent droit sus la mer'. Cf. Le Bel I, 256). The countess of Montfort would have been endowed both with remarkable eyesight to spot ships at sea from the walls of Hennebont (II, 150) and stamina to undertake a journey from there to Brest overnight (II, 145). In this latter case modern opinion favours identification with Brech as the most likely local site (II, xlvii, n. 2 and La Borderie 1899: 452-3). For Dinan and Guemene see Le Bel I, 312; SHF II, 148 and La Borderie 1899: 460, n.3. For Goy-la-Forest see Deserts 1970.

The Breton Civil War

201

within which most events take place is purely conventional and few actual dates are proffered. When they are, they are often highly inaccurate. In the first redaction only two dates are seriously advanced for Breton affairs during the whole of the period 1341-3 - 'about All Saints Day' (1341) for the capture of Nantes by the French, and 'the beginning of May 1342' for the delivery of Rennes to Blois, whilst a truce concluded shortly afterwards was to run to Pentecost. In the second redaction Nantes is said to have been captured on 20 October 1340 and in the third redaction this is revised to c.19 November (1341) which is probably closest to the actual date. In the second redaction there is a hopeless muddle over events of 1342 which are attributed to 1343.9 Where Le Bel does occasionally admit his ignorance and abbreviate the narrative accordingly, Froissart in the first redaction wisely follows suit. In a few instances only does he add details, presumably, though the point can hardly be demonstrated, from his own personal knowledge. For instance he added the names of Bourchier and Despenser to those lords accompanying Robert of Artois from England to Brittany in 1342, whose names he found originally in Le Bel's account, and we know from other evidence that he had contacts with both these families when he was in England.10 But for the rest in the first redaction it is only in his narrative of the decisive battle of Auray that Froissart clearly displays his own undeniably independent abilities as a chronicler in the chivalric mode. For virtually all the other material relating to the war in the duchy down to 1356 (the year in which by his own admission he began to take an interest in history) in the first redaction, even in the revised form contained in the MSS of Luce's group B, Froissart followed Le Bel. He thus naturally shared with his predecessor the generally pro-English interpretation of events.11 In the second redaction, that contained in the Amiens and Valenciennes manuscripts and generally dated to the years 1376-83 (but see above: 11-12), when Froissart reached the commencement of the Breton succession war, he now commented at much greater length before introducing his narrative. His explicit claims must be quoted; they provide a yardstick by which he invited others to measure him and so indirectly a warrant for the critical modern scholarship lavished on his Chronicles: Many minstrels and singers in their turn have made up songs about the Breton wars, corrupting by their contrived rhymes the real course of events. This greatly annoyed both Master Jean le Bel, who began to write a chronicle about them in prose, and myself, Jean Froissart, who within the limits of my power, loyally and correctly continued that work, for their contorted verses and songs in no way recounted the true state of affairs. Now you may see how we have done so in completing it through our own considerable efforts, for one achieves nothing of note without great anxiety and travail. I, Jean

9 10 11

P l a i n e l S V l : 15-18; SHF II, xxxixff. Le Bel II, xvi-ii, 9, 246, 271 and SHF III, 5. For the chronicler's relations with the Despensers see KL I, i, 143-50. There is one manuscript of the 'first' redaction (A 17) which may well have been possessed by a member of the Du Guesclin family and to which the copyist, Raoul Tanguy, a Breton, added local details (SHF VI, Mi, n. 1).

202

The Creation of Brittany

Froissart, immediate successor to Jean le Bel in this work, went and visited the greater part of Brittany and asked lords and questioned heralds about the wars, captures, attacks, invasions, battles, rescues and all the other fine feats of arms which have happened there since 1340 up to the latest time mentioned in this book, both at the request and expense of my own patrons and for my own satisfaction, to establish my account on as truthful a basis as I could, for which I have been greatly rewarded (II, 265-6). Whilst the debt to Le Bel is thus clearly acknowledged, Froissart's treatment of the common material is now altogether much freer both in the sense that he manipulates it with greater assurance, compressing and changing the emphases by omission or by introducing entirely new passages, and in the language he uses. Additional sieges are added, for example, to the summer campaign of 1341, and in describing the feats of the countess of Montfort under the year 1343, there is a magnificent description of a naval battle in which she valiantly fights, fully armed, at the head of her forces in an engagement, the details of which are necessarily incorrect in almost every particular.12 Similar embellishments are added to other episodes, whether real or fictitious, which form the core of his account, many of which are of the kind which Froissart imagined would inspire future generations of knights to behave in accordance with the strict etiquette of chivalric practice. The heroic role of those individuals who appear as leit-motiv in the Chronicles, like Walter Mauny and Robert of Artois for the Anglo-Bretons and Olivier de Clisson and Herve de Leon for the Franco-Bretons, are consistently emphasised. Outstanding archetypal deeds of prowess like the battle of the Thirty or the jousts at the siege of Rennes are included at appropriate points when Froissart's main theme is no longer Breton affairs but the war in some other theatre. For after the battle of La Roche Derrien, in which Blois was captured and led off to captivity in England and the greater Breton nobility were severely depleted by death and capture, both the first two redactions treat the later stages of the war as a minor theme, isolated episodes of which occasionally gain prominence, but in which quite significant battles like that at Mauron (14 August 1352) are surprisingly neglected. On the other hand the character of the war is brilliantly encapsulated in a few short passages in which the career of the adventurer Crokart and the activities of English garrisons are evoked.13 But there is no attempt to describe in detail the guerilla warfare and obscure sequence of sieges (La Roche Derrien in 1347 and Rennes in 1356-7 excepted) which formed the core of the account of the years 1341-3 and continued to provide

12 HI, 8-9, 208-9 - if only for the reason that she never went personally to England for aid (below, p.204). 13 For Mauron the main accounts are Molinier 1882: 105-6 and Thompson 1889a: 189-91, where Bentley's letter announcing his victory is the major text. Froissart briefly alludes to it in the second redaction (SHF IV, 128) and in some manuscripts of the first redaction there is a brief passage based on the Grandes chroniques added to his text (SHF IV, 399, 402). For Crokart and the later stages of the war, see IV, 69-70, 110-15, 302-3, 339-41; cf. Le Bel II, 175-6. For Raoul de Caours, another adventurer, see Viard 1937: 296, 326; Fowler 1969: 89-92 and Le Bel II, 355-6.

The Breton Civil War

203

material for other contemporary writers.14 But despite these omissions, the second redaction is much fuller in its history of the duchy during these troubled years. Le Bel apart, the only other chronicles to approach Froissart's comprehensive coverage are the Grandes Chroniques and the early fifteenthcentury compilation largely based on the same material from St Denis, the Chronographia regum Francorum (Viard 1905). Froissart was himself the first to comment on the possibility that his treatment of the civil war was influenced by a desire to please his patrons. In the Besanqon MS, one of the earliest copies of the A group of manuscripts, which according to Luce contain the first version of the text, he writes: One might say that I deliberately falsified this great history out of favour for what I received from Count Guy of Blois, who made me write it and who paid me more than I expected, because he was much more like a son than a nephew of Count Louis of Blois, full brother of St Charles of Blois, who as long as he lived was duke of Brittany. But truthfully it is not so. For I do not wish to recount anything but the truth and to act impartially, blaming neither one side nor the other. Indeed nor would the gentle lord and count, who forced me to begin to write this account, have wished me to do otherwise than relate the truth (I, liii-iv). For the most part this disclaimer can be accepted at its face value. In the general prologue to the second redaction Froissart tried to establish his impartiality by balancing the names of the great heroes on the English side during this phase of the Hundred Years War by equally worthy names from the French side. As he explains, even in the darkest hours of defeat there were many valiant knights who had comported themselves with distinction from Philip ofValois downwards. Among those included at this point only in the Valenciennes MS of this redaction is the name ofMessire Charles de Blois — the copyist of the Amiens MS was unable to decipher his original and left a blank (I, liii). Elsewhere, once again speaking of Count Guy of Blois, Froissart comments favourably on his high lineage and social connections. But this is essentially the limit of his eulogy of the Blois family. It is in the presentation of the parcel rather than in any significant change in its contents that this version is notably different in so far as it concerns Brittany. For apart from a topical reference to the popular cult of Charles of Blois and recognition of the legitimacy of Blois's claim to Brittany, there are few other alterations to the main body of the text to change the interpretation of events in order to make Blois appear in a more favourable light.15 In passing it may be noted that since the official commission sitting at Angers between 9 September and 18 December 1371 did not finally pronounce in favour of the canonisation of Blois, ultimately achieved w Viard 1937: 255-6, 260-9, 296-309; Lemoine 1896: 67-70, 77-81 for the campaigns in the Tregorrois and Finistere in 1345-7; Molinier 1882 mentions several small actions in north east Brittany in the early 1350s; Lemoine 1896: 96 has an account of the capture of Nantes by the English in February 1355 and its immediate recapture by the French (see also Delachenal 1910: 50). 15 Plaine 1921 (canonisation). In later sections of the Chronicles whenever the name of Blois was mentioned, he was styled 'saint' (Diverres 1953: 16).

204

The Creation of Brittany

with Dom Plaine's assistance this century, and that since French royal policy in support of Blois's claim to the duchy of Brittany manifest from 1341 was reversed by Charles V in 1378, Froissart's version in this redaction poses interesting questions about the dating of the Amiens MS. On the traditional interpretation such favour towards the Blois family could be explained by the manuscript being antecedent to the reversal of royal policy; if it were written after the case of John of Montfort came before the court of peers in December 1378, such favour might be indicative of undue and increasing partiality on the part of the author for his patron.16 This ambiguity apart, most of the modifications in the Amiens MS are of a factual nature, perhaps reflecting Froissart's own increasing knowledge of events and personalities. For example, the movements of Blois during the years 1342-3 are chronicled a little more closely. Family details are more correctly given, and the subsequent fate of the hostages for his ransom in 1356 are traced.17 But his dilemma, when presented by Louis of Spain with the demand to deliver two English hostages whom he knew Louis was planning to execute, is just as poignant in the first as in later redactions; whilst the undoubted heroism of Blois, in particular at La Roche Derrien and Auray, is as fully portrayed in the first and third redactions or even more so.18 Nor does Froissart give favourable prominence to the activities of Joan of Penthievre, unlike the sympathetic treatment accorded to the countess of Montfort who, long after she had left with Edward III in February 1343 for an exile from which she never returned, is described continuing the struggle in the duchy with the aid of English lieutenants.19 Indeed, the intransigence of Joan of Penthievre in defence of her rights in 1364 and her speech stiffening the resolve of Blois to hazard all on a final battle is the first occasion on which she took a directing part in affairs as described by Froissart (VI, 325-6). This contrasts sharply with her position when studied from administrative and diplomatic documents.20 The claim, then, that he did not deliberately or unduly falsify his narrative, even in the interests of powerful and rich patrons, when describing events in Brittany seems to be a fair one. The main characteristics of the third redaction, that contained in the Rome MS and compiled between 1400-5, for the Breton civil war which require comment are structural, factual and literary. In the first place, unlike the earlier versions which in some form cover the whole war, the third redaction contains only an account to the time of the battle of La Roche Derrien (1347). Moreover, since the story of that battle is recounted in a separate chapter, essentially the redaction contains, within one long coherent section, an artistically satisfying account of the years 1341-3, only momentarily broken up by a single chapter on Scotland (Diller 462-600). In the earlier versions Scottish affairs, Edward Ill's amorous advances to the countess of Salisbury (toning 16 Delachenal 1931: 236-51. Most fully in Book III (SHF XIII, 121-5) which I failed to exploit thoroughly in Jones 1972b. 18 II, 171-3, 404-5 (Louis). The third redaction has the fullest account of the battle of La Roche Derrien (IV, 38-44, 260-9; Diller 810-9). 19 IV, 38-44, 260-9; Le Bel II, 144ff. 20 Deprez 1926,Pocquet 1928a: 30Iff. 17

The Breton Civil War

205

down the more lurid story of her rape found in Le Bel), the foundation of the Order of the Garter and other miscellaneous matters often break up the flow of the narrative. Froissart had originally taken the sequence from Le Bel but it is clear that he already felt some unease, for example, in the transposition from Breton to Scottish affairs in the first redaction which occurs during a period of swiftly moving events in the duchy recounted under the year 1342. Now in the third redaction Froissart deals with the period from the opening of the succession dispute to the truce of Malestroit (19 January 1343) as a whole. Thereafter, preserving the fiction that the truce was carefully observed by all parties, which confuses his chronology of events like the execution of Olivier HI de Clisson (2 August 1343) and the other Breton and Norman traitors (29 November 1343 and April 1344), he only notices subsequent Breton matters when it is absolutely necessary.21 In comparison with the brief but closely factual accounts of the best English chroniclers, who all provide evidence on the small expeditionary forces sent to the duchy by Edward III after his return to England, Froissart ignores the skirmishing which went on as the Anglo-Breton administration strengthened its hold.22 To the end he persists in an error for which Le Bel was originally responsible but for which equally he had craved indulgence should it turn out to be incorrect. That is, he continued to state that John of Montfort died in prison at the Louvre to which he had been consigned after being seized at the capitulation of Nantes in the autumn of 1341.23 In reality, after being released on parole (in all probability in 1343) he escaped to England around Easter 1345 and did homage for the duchy to Edward III.24 like an earlier departure from Paris by Montfort, this one was apparently dramatic and worthy of retelling in Froissart's finest style. But this time the scoop fell to the St Denis writers to describe. They were then able to gloat at Montfort's swift demise when he returned to the duchy with William Bohun, earl of Northampton, in the summer of 1345. Montfort's final delirium and the augury of a parliament of crows gathering about the lodgings where he lay on his deathbed are touches of which Froissart might have been justly proud! (Viard 1937: 255, 258). In terms of factual accuracy, the third redaction superficially offers a much greater precision of reference. Dates have been revised sensibly as demonstrated above. The names of those involved in specific actions and the names of towns and castles besieged are more comprehensive, as a comparison of the account of

u Diller 589-600, 810-19, Gazelles 1958: 151-5 and Guttler 1978: 91, 123and 194-6 for the traitors. 22 Thompson 1889a: 125-9, 135, 164-8, 177-89, 243, 339-42; Thompson 1889b: 76-7 (1342 expedition with incorrect date of 1345);Lumby 1895: 23-31, Prince 1931: 362-5. PRO C 47/2/33, giving details of a proposed force, which Prince thought referred to the 1340 expedition, is now regarded as dating from the Breton expedition of 1342 (Lewis 1964: 8), the fullest account of which is PRO E 36/204, Wardrobe accounts passim. 23 Diller 499, 504, 592, Le Bel I, 271. 24 Viard 1937: 243, Moranville 1893: 207-8; La Borderie 1899: 496. St-Andre, line 278, records that he was held in prison for more than three years (Lobineau 1707b: 695).

206

The Creation of Brittany

events in the summer of 1341 in this redaction and earlier ones shows clearly.25 Although there are still fundamental misconceptions about the course of events, the strategic objectives of campaigns, and the motivations of individuals, as a later section of this paper will demonstrate, the overall pattern is a more balanced one, with fewer entirely absurd flights into fantasy. From a literary point of view, dialogue is imaginatively used to evoke a fuller emotional response in the Rome MS. John of Montfort's interviews with Gamier de Clisson and Philip VI, the appeal to and encouragement of her supporters by his wife, Blois's exchanges with Louis of Spain, are here used economically but effectively to advance the story (Diller 120-5). Professor Diverres long ago noted how Froissart developed traditional direct speech in French historical works into realistic dialogue by the time he came to write his third book about 1390. His remarks a propos Froissart's treatment of dialogue in the sections relating to his journey to Beam in 1388 are as appropriate for the third redaction of events in Brittany where dialogue is equally 'an essential part of narrative, a means of varying the tempo of a passage, of carrying the action forward and of giving substance to the characters . . . often introduced to mark a particularly dramatic incident' (Diverres: xxvi). In the same way, as Professor Diller pointed out, the interior monologue has a similar function when the character, finding himself in a critical position, thinks aloud in steeling himself to use every conceivable ruse to escape from his predicament. A clear example is when Montfort, having appeared in the court of peers, recognises that if he stays in Paris to await Philip's sentence, it is unlikely that he will remain at liberty, so he makes a clandestine escape, reaching Nantes before the king is aware he is not in his lodgings (Diller 122). In its refashioning of a story already twice told at length, this third recension displays few signs of tiredness. The literary imagination is still fertile and the form of presentation represents that preoccupation with 'fine language' for which Froissart is sometimes prepared to sacrifice objective historical exposition in his later years (Diller 24-31). For where around the year 1400 could he have turned to gain reliable information on conversations, which if they had taken place, had occurred some sixty years earlier? This raises the whole question of Froissart's sources for his various accounts of Breton matters. In common with other parts of the first redaction the obvious source is the work of Le Bel, on which the close reliance of Froissart both for form and content has already been amply demonstrated. But this simply pushes us a stage further back. From where did Le Bel obtain his information? Modern opinion seems to suggest that the Breton sections of this earlier chronicle were written about 1358 and that Le Bel principally used oral testimony.26 The only written sources to which he refers are by jongleurs. These he dismisses as 'so full of humbug and lies that I dare not repeat them' (I, 3; II, 10, 21), and in his turn Froissart, as noted above, scathingly dismissed them too (II, 265). The only work to have survived which could possibly fit into this category during the 25 Diller 464, 472 for the names of places 'taken' in the 1341 campaign, or, for dates, above n.9. The reasons for some of the minor changes in the text remain intriguing; Auray, described by Le Bel (I, 311) as built by Arthur, a description borrowed in the first'two redactions (SHF II, 146, 364) is now said to have been fortified by Julius Caesar (Diller 472). 26 Le Bel I, xvi-ii, Viard 1905: 540-6.

The Breton Civil War

207

1350s is the poem on the battle of the Thirty, written by someone familiar with eastern Brittany c.1355. It has been suggested that both Le Bel and Froissart (at least by the time of the third redaction) had seen copies of this work; neither acknowledges a specific debt but a number of verbal similarities make this a distinct probability (Bush 1911-12: 516). At about the time Froissart was completing his second redaction, two mediocre writers, Guillaume de St Andre and Jean Cuvelier, were working on their respective verse lives of John IV of Brittany and Bertrand du Guesclin, both of which necessarily touched upon the civil war (Charriere 1839). No doubt Froissart's condemnation of 'contrived rhymes' could be made to include these rambling pieces, but again there is no direct evidence that he consulted either. In fact, like Le Bel before him, it seems Froissart neither used nor required literary sources for his account of the Breton civil war, nor apart from documents incidentally relating to the duchy in the treaty of Calais (24 October 1360), which he exceptionally quoted at length in the second redaction, did he normally have recourse to official material (VI, 34-46). His nonchalant citation of alleged truces and treaties, which may have some basis in reality, but which often seem to be introduced for literary effect, to enable him to change location and so on, is particularly evident in his handling of diplomatic incidents concerning Brittany.27 Unlike many contemporary chroniclers, Froissart did not very evidently use newsletters, of which several sent to England by commanders of expeditionary forces to Brittany survive and were clearly accessible.28 Apart from Le Bel, whom he significantly calls the first historian of the Breton wars, Froissart spurned or was ignorant of other contemporary historical works dealing with the duchy. The major sources of this kind are the Grandes Chroniques, which for the period 1340-50 is apparently contemporary, the Chronique normande, originally compiled c.1369-73, or the many adaptations of the material gathered at St Denis, all of which must be used by modern historians to fill gaps in Froissart's narrative after the truce of Malestroit.29 For Brittany, then, Froissart's classic method of gathering material was by personal interview of participants, eye-witnesses or those who could recollect family tradition about events; in short almost anyone whom he could persuade 27 SHF II, 178, 414, 416-17 an alleged truce of the countess of Montfort and Blois in November 1342. The terms of an actual truce between the countess and Philip VI on 1 March 1342 are largely printed in La Borderie 1899: 446, n. 1 from AN J 241, no.43bis. 28 Thompson 1889a: 126-7, 388, 415-6. Such a newsletter obviously lies behind the account of Dagworth's campaigns in 1346 most fully described in Oxford Bodley MS 462, fos. 31r-32r, extracts from a fuller version of the Historic. Aurea in a manuscript of c.1420, in all probability compiled under the guidance of Thomas Walsingham (Prince 1931: 365 and Galbraith 1937: introduction) from which it found its way into the Ypodigma (Riley 1876: 288-90) in a full but edited form. 29 Viard 1937: iv-vi. The relationship of the Chronique normande to the St Denis sources is not at all clear (Gransden 1972: 333, n.4) but it seems that both the author of that chronicle and the compiler of the Chronographia drew on the same sources for the early part of the Breton war, although for the 1350s the Chronique normande provides a unique account of several episodes in the duchy.

208

The Creation of Brittany

to talk to him. For the most part they remain anonymous. Minor alterations and additions, even in the first redaction, to the list of Englishmen who accompanied Artois and Bohun in the summer of 1342 (which he derived originally from Le Bel) suggests that Froissart had talked to Englishmen about their experiences in the duchy (n.10). Sometime between late April and December 1366, Froissart passed through Brittany en route for Bordeaux, but the only Breton who helped him and was specifically named was a certain Guillaume d'Ancenis whom he met at Angers shortly before his journey to Beam in 1388 (KL I, i, 153-5). Ancenis was a cadet of one of the oldest noble families in the duchy, whose cousin, the lord of Ancenis, Froissart claims to have met at Sluys in 1386; certainly the Ancenis family receives much fuller recognition in the third redaction.30 But for the most part the events on which Ancenis provided the chronicler with new material were much more recent ones like the capture of the constable of France, Olivier IV de Clisson, by John IV at Vannes on 26 June 1387, and on the family history of Du Guesclin, rather than on the civil war period, of which there is but an echo in some later exploits of Du Guesclin and his companions (XIV, 4-19). It is probable that Froissart interviewed Even Charruel, one of the heroes of the battle of the Thirty. In a corrupt manuscript of the second redaction Luce discovered this interesting addition: . . . car bien vingt deus ans puissedy j'en vich ung seoir a la table du roy Charle de Franche, que on appelloit monseigneur levain Caruiel. Et pour chu que il avoir este 1'eun des T rente, on 1'onnouroit deseure tous aultres. Et ousy il moustroit bien a son viaire qu'il sgavoit que cops d'espees, de daghes et de haches valloient, car il estoit moult plaiies (IV, 340-1). Taking Froissart at his word, the encounter must have occurred c. 1373-4, and in all likelihood whilst Charles V was in Paris. Luce had misgivings about this date; a reference, which appears unambiguously to provide evidence that Froissart was in Paris in 1364 had been discovered, and he suggested that the copyist of the manuscript might well have added a supplementary X in the phrase XXII ans puissedy (IV,xlv). But if the problem is seen from Charruel's point of view, the date 1373-4 appears the more likely one. In 1364 Charruel, who clearly loved to be in the thick of fighting wherever it might be, was alongside Du Guesclin in the capture of Mantes on 7 April, of which he became captain, and a few weeks later he fought heroically at Cocherel.31 Thereafter, most of the Breton troops in royal pay returned to the duchy to join Charles of Blois in the campaign which led to his defeat at Auray. A visit to Paris in the midst of this feverish military activity is improbable; in 1373-4, however, with the duchy temporarily in the hands of Charles V and his lieutenants, Du Guesclin chief amongst them, such a journey to Paris would be entirely appropriate for there were many Breton

30

31

The lord of Ancenis is present at the capitulation of Nantes in the third redaction (Diller 550; SHFII, 112-14,322) and another Guillaume d'Ancenis was among prisoners exchanged after the truce of Malestroit (SHF III, 246, 35). Luce 1876: 427. Froissart added his name, together with that of Du Guesclin, to the defenders of Rennes in 1342, in elaborating Le Bel's brief account. There is no other authority for this (SHF III, 31).

The Breton Civil War

209

knights who had gone there to enjoy largesse.32 The only other named informant on Breton affairs is Guillaume de St Mesmin, a surgeon and astrologer, whom Froissart met at a monastery near Montpellier, again in 1388.33 With a degree of foresight which is hardly exceptional, he had warned Blois about the dire consequences of giving battle at Auray. He could well have provided other details on the household of Charles and Joan, but this is not explicitly stated. Froissart remains, perhaps not surprisingly in view of the patronage of the Blois family, from whom over the years he seems to have gathered more precise information on Brittany, remarkably reticent about his specific sources.34 Clearly he had authoritative English informants on the duchy like Windsor herald who told him of the battle of Auray and members of those aristocratic families who fought there either in 1364 or earlier. Although he says he visited the duchy (in 1366 in all probability) how long the visit lasted, where he went and who he met, are all matters for speculation (KL I, i, 154). He does not appear to have visited the duchy again, nor to have established direct contact with the Montfort family. It is possible that during John IV's many journeys outside the duchy, Froissart met some of his entourage. He notes, for instance, the death of Montfort herald in Flanders in 1383. But very often the quality of the later information which he recounts on Breton affairs reflects common rumour rather than an authoritative source.35 There can be no question here of correcting in the light of modern knowledge all the factual inaccuracies revealed by patient editorial work. In completing this assessment of Froissart's work as an historian of the Breton civil war, the examination of a few key episodes must suffice. Those chosen are his explanation of the origins of the war, Montfort's summer campaign of 1341 and the treatment of naval affairs during the first phase of the war, all of which are first described in Le Bel's chronicle, the siege of Rennes which Le Bel briefly mentions, and finally, the battle of Auray for which Le Bel provided no model. The succession war is introduced in the first redaction (II, 86 ff) with the briefest of preambles after the statement that the duke of Brittany died on his way home after the 1340 campaign had been concluded by the truce of Esplechin (25 September 1340). The rights of the respective claimants are hopelessly confused by Le Bel (I, 244 ff), who admits candidly that he does not even know the name of the late duke. He then retells a story about John of Montfort being the uterine rather than the consanguineous brother of John III, so that he did not 'issue from the true house of Brittany'. This seems to reflect Valois propaganda, which finds its fullest expression in the Chronographia regum Francorum. It comes strangely from a chronicler who is traditionally considered pro-English. 32 Jones 1970: 74ff; BN MS Nouv. Acquis. Fr. 20026, no. 172, order from Charles V, 10 September 1373, to pay 3,000 francs to ten Breton knights and esquires 'pour entrer en sa foy et homage'. 33 KL I, i, 318; La Borderie 1899: 588, n.4. 34 cf. the changes in the genealogical table below and the retrospect on the civil war in Book III (SHF XIII, 121-5). The remarks on Breton ducal finances there are remarkably apposite (Jones 1972-4). 35 XI, 104-5; IX, 127-35, an extremely confused account of an alleged journey of John IV to Flanders in 1379; and for events in 1388, XV passim and Jones 1970: 108-11.

The Creation of Brittany

210

Froissart not only took over this account in his first redaction but persisted in repeating it in the two following redactions (II, 87-8, 266-8). Whilst nearly all the French chroniclers who deal with the genealogical intricacies of the succession are confused (in marked contrast, for example, to the text-book clarity of Avesbury's exposition), the following tables will demonstrate the peculiar blend of generalised knowledge, ignorance and misrepresentation contained in the Genealogical table constructed from the information contained in the three redactions of the Chronicles =

A duke of Brittany

(1) Duchess/Countess (2)

An un-named husband 1

(1)

(1)

A duke of Brittany o.s.p.

=

=

(2)

An un-named son who d. before his elder brother

Duchess

I count of Montfort 3

2

=

Sister of Count Louis of Flanders

Sister of King Philip VI

A daughter 4

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

=

Mons. Charles of Blois5

MS Rome states he was count of Montfort. MS Rome calls him John of Brittany, count of Penthie'vre. MS Amiens adds, and had issue a son and a daughter. MSS of Book III call her Joan. MS Rome adds, called Joan, countess of Penthievre by right of her mother. One MS of the first redaction adds, younger son of Count Guy of Blois. Amiens MS adds, younger son of Count Louis of Blois. MS Rome states he was son of Count Guy and brother of Count Louis of Blois.

Simplified table to illustrate the genealogy of the Breton ruling house

ARTHUR II (1305-12)

=

(1) Mary, da. of Guy VI of Limoges (2) Yoland, da. of Robert IV of Dreux, countess of Montfort

JOHN III (1312-41) o.s.p. legit.

(2)

(D

(D

=

(1) Isabella of Valois (d.c.1303) (2) Isabella of Castille (d.24.7.1328) (3) Joan of Savoy (d.29.6.1344)

JOAN OF PENTHIEVRE (d.9.9.1384)

Guy (d.1331)

=

=

Joan of Avaugour (d.1327)

CHARLES1 OF BLOIS (1341-64)

1. Yr. s. of Guy, count of Blois, and Margaret of Valois, sister of Philip VI.

JOHN (1341-5)

JOHN IV (1364-99)

(2)

=

Joan of Flanders (d.c.1373)

Joan

Five das.

The Breton Civil War

211

accounts of Le Bel and Froissart and require little further comment, except to say that much of the genealogical information provided by these writers for the Breton civil war appears to be similarly flawed.36 Attributed relationships 'the cousin of X' or 'the uncle of Y' are all suspect until otherwise established.37 Once the disputed succession question arose, the strategic importance of Brittany was bound to lead to the involvement of England and France. According to Le Bel and Froissart it was Montfort's appeal to Edward III which stimulated English intervention, and the reasons why Edward seized the opportunity to intervene in the duchy have been no better explained by modern historians than by the words which Le Bel put into Philip VI's mouth, when he attempted to forestall Edward by sending troops to the assistance of Blois: 'He could do us no greater harm and obtain no better entry into our kingdom than by coming that way, especially if he should obtain the province and fortresses of Brittany . . .' (I, 264). Froissart repeats this and although concrete evidence of Edward Ill's intentions remains slight, what there is suggests that he did take the initiative in 1341. But both kings had been planning their respective policies in the full knowledge of John Hi's eventual childlessness (Le Patourel 1958: 186-7). Under the year 1334, for example, the anonymous continuator of the chronicle of Guillaume de Nangis (who wrote contemporaneously with events and before the outbreak of the civil war), has a report of John Ill's proposal to leave Brittany to Philip VI 'in order to avoid the dangers which would befall the kingdom should the duchy fall into the hands of a woman, namely his niece who said she had claims to it . . . but certain Bretons opposing this, the negotiations remained incomplete . . . and finally it all came to nothing'.38 A few years later Philip gained a much more personal interest in the Breton succession when his nephew married that ducal niece. In the interim her hand as the duke's heiress had also been sought in 1335 by Edward HI for his younger brother, John of Eltham, whose premature death in 1336 put an end to this scheme.39 But the exchange of embassies and formal grants suggest that diplomatic relations between the two courts remained close, in any case they are virtually all the evidence we have.40 In 1339 the service of Breton sailors with the French fleet and in 1340 that of John III himself with the French army, provided Edward III with an adequate excuse to confiscate the earldom of Richmond from the duke. But he had not done so at the time of John's death; clearly he wished to remain on friendly terms with him. Similarly Philip VI had equally sought to avoid any very serious breach with the late duke although there were important matters relating to ducal coinage and judicial rights which had been much debated. Whilst within the duchy, if there had been baronial opposition in 1334, little is known of any other causes for discontent or of the formation of rival groups anticipating the 36 Thompson 1889a: 339; cf. Viard 1937: 217-20; Lemoine 1896: 54-5; Newhall 1953: 35-6, 159-62. 37 The uncle of Herve de Leon who was allegedly bishop of St Pol de Leon has never been identified (SHF II, xlix, n.2). A bishop of St Pol testified at the hearing of the succession dispute in August 1341 (BN MS Fr. 22338, fo.!25r). 38 Geraud 1843b: 144-5; cf. La Borderie 1899: 403-4, Gazelles 1958: 140. 39 Rymer 1821: 929; CPR 1334-8, 191, 245, 412; La Borderie 1899: 405-8. 40 Rymer 1821: 965, 1129; cf. CPR 1338-40,29,30, 110,207,423.

212

The Creation of Brittany

divisions of the civil war.41 In this respect modem historians are little better informed than fourteenth-century chroniclers about the prelude to the war. Turning to the campaign of 1341, a crux is reached. The original account is Le Bel's. It is embellished in the first two redactions of the Chronicles, whilst in the third, although abbreviated (and it now appears that many of the towns and castles which gave themselves up, did not require much persuasion), nevertheless the main outlines of the story remain. That is to say, John of Montfort, hearing of the death of his brother, hurried to Nantes, and decided with his wife to call the barons and other representatives of the duchy to a feast to do homage. In the interval before the appointed day, he rushed to seize the ducal treasure at Limoges (for the late duke was also viscount of Limoges), and returned to Nantes to find only Herve de Leon had answered his summons. So leaving his wife, but accompanied by Leon and the troops he had hired with his treasure, he went to besiege Brest first and then several other strongholds. It was the confusion of this subsequent itinerary, followed by an account of a brief visit to Edward III, prior to an appearance before the court of peers at Paris, which first seems to have sparked off serious doubts about the veracity of the Chronicles. It seemed impossible to compress all this action into a timescale already prescribed by what was known from other sources. Luce and La Borderie, in particular, introduced some order into Froissart's account, but much remained uncertain. If they accepted, for example, Montfort's flying visit to the English court, subsequent generations of scholars, whilst being far from unanimous, have in general adhered to the view expressed by Lemoine that the visit never took place.42 But even if this complication in Montfort's itinerary is removed, the sequence of events in the summer of 1341 is still difficult to disentangle. John HI died at Caen on 30 April 1341. On 16 May the news was already known in England and in early June messengers left to meet John of Montfort.43 Yet in the duchy things appear to have remained calm for on 15 June the late duke's executors were peaceably sorting through his effects at Nantes. The document recording their activities is now significantly in the Public Record Office, but nowhere does it suggest they were acting under duress.44 Moreover 41

42

43 44

Gazelles 1958: 140-2 marshals most of the evidence; AN J 241B, no. 35 (1340), BN MS Fr. 16654, fos. 210-11 and Gazelles 1962: no. 118 for Breton money; La Borderie 1899: 40. SHF II, xxxii-iii; La Borderie 1899: 423-32; Lemoine 1896: 55, n. 1; Le Patourel 1958: 187, n. 57. Viard and Deprez were still inclined to accept the story (Le Bel I, 259, n. 1). Morice 1750: plate between 244-5; Le Patourel 1958: 187. PRO E 30/63 = Morice 1742: 1413-15 and Rymer 1821: 1164. The presence at Nantes of quantities of coin from Limoges indicated in this document and remitted in the normal course of events by the vicecomital receiver may be at the base of the chronicler's story about the seizure of treasure which first appears in Le Bel, is followed by Froissart, and is also found in the Chronique normande and theChronographia. Fragmentary accounts showing John III appointing joint-moneyers for Nantes and Limoges, and Charles of Blois drawing on their revenues survive, together with a document of 13 August 1341 which shows Joan, dowager duchess of Brittany, exercising her rights in Limoges (AD Basses-Pyrenees E 624, nos. 1, 2, 5, 13, 14). For the separate issue of the succession to Limoges see Spinosi 1961.

The Breton Civil War

213

as late as 11 July, Charles of Blois seems to have been conducting himself with due propriety. For a document issued then in his name simply styled him 'lord of Penthievre', a courtesy title acquired by his marriage. Nor is there any other evidence to confirm military disturbances up to the time the two claimants appeared to present their claims for Brittany at Paris in the latter half of August.45 If the chroniclers' accounts of Montfort's progress have any basis, it is surely that of the self-styled duke receiving pledges of loyalty from his new subjects during a tour of inspection of the towns and castles of the ducal demesne as a precaution lest his proffered homage should be rejected at Paris (La Borderie 1899: 425-9). It was only after Montfort's precipitate flight (probably to be dated between 1 and 4 September) that serious military operations began as the St Denis chroniclers more accurately suggest and, consequently, Froissart's account of the summer campaign is a wild travesty.46 It would be possible to examine in yet greater detail the whole chronology of this phase of the war, where almost every sentence which Le Bel and Froissart wrote requires minute critical attention. But one final example may be chosen to demonstrate the general pitfalls of trying to marry literary and documentary sources to produce an acceptable account, which are so much a part of Froissart scholarship. The war at sea engaged the chroniclers' interest almost as much as that on land; in the early stages of the civil war, the struggle between England and France to gain control of the peninsula and with it a vital section of the lines of communication between the Channel and the Bay of Biscay hardly needs reemphasis. From the outset, whatever his ultimate intentions were in supporting John of Montfort, Edward III had shown that a predominating concern was control of the Breton coastline through garrisoning certain ports and coastal castles (Jones 1972a: 72-4). Later in the war when the opportunity offered itself for the king to overrun the whole duchy, it was allowed to slip away because by that time the Anglo-Breton administration was firmly entrenched, particularly around Brest and on the south-western coastline.47 The standard account of the war at sea during this period remains Charles de la Ronciere's Histoire de la marine franqaise. Normally very reliable because of close acquaintance with administrative records, the chapter on the Breton war (1899: 462-70) is marred by giving credence to stories found in Froissart which even the chronicler on maturer reflection or in the light of new information thought prudent to edit or to omit. In the second redaction (III, 8-13, 208-12) the action between Artois and the countess of Montfort (returning from a visit to England which is as legendary as her husband's in 1341) and Louis of Spain off Guernsey is finally ended by a storm which blows Louis so far off course that he finds himself attacking the kingdom of Navarre! More prosaically, in the 4

$ Geslin de Bourgogne 1864: 384; BN MS Fr. 22338, fos. 117-55, interrogation of witnesses by a commission headed by the bishops of Laon and Noyon, 27 August - 4 September 1341. 46 There was a break in the work of the commission between 1 and 4 September and on this last day only witnesses for Blois were heard (BN MS Fr. 22338, fos. 134v, 152r). For the campaign of the duke of Normandy in the autumn see SHF II, xxxix-xliii; Viard 1937: 220ff. 47 Le Patourel 1958: 187-8. At the end of 1343 it was particularly these regions which Edward III was anxious to hold (Rymer 1821: 1242).

214

The Creation of Brittany

third redaction (Diller 566-7) the two naval forces engaged in the summer of 1342, are prevented from meeting by the providential storm. Such a change warns us that the description of similar naval actions may be equally fabulous; administrative documents show considerable activity off the south-western coastline of the duchy at this stage. English exchequer records have still not been fully exploited. What they show, and this may help to clear up some of the confusion displayed in contemporary chronicles (shared by those modern historians who have rigidly tried to interpret the dates given for the sailing of fleets) is that many expeditions, made up of numerous contingents, sailed at different times from a variety of ports so that it is often misleading or impossible to give a single exact date for their departure and arrival.48 The two final episodes — the siege of Rennes and the battle of Auray - may be discussed much more summarily, for they have been exhaustively covered by modern scholars. The siege of Rennes occurs at the point when Froissart is beginning his own independent career as a chronicler no longer primarily guided by Le Bel. In some manuscripts of the first redaction his account is relatively brief, emphasising chiefly the role of Henry of Lancaster as Le Bel did. But in others there is considerable development of a number of personal encounters, involving the young Bertrand du Guesclin and his cousin, Olivier de Mauny, of a type more usually associated with the style of the second redaction, where in this case little further is added except to make the roll-call of those defending Rennes more comprehensive.49 The quality of Froissart's evidence in both versions is very much on a par with that of other chroniclers. The chivalric aspects of both redactions are carried to extremes in the work of Du Guesclin's eulogist, Cuvelier.50 For the battle of Auray which concluded the civil war, Froissart finally provides what is by far the fullest serious, contemporary account of an event in Brittany. His narrative is marred by a number of demonstrable errors of a venial kind - characteristically he misdates the battle by a week - but in other respects the accuracy of his factual information appears to be of a much higher standard than in the earlier parts of his Chronicles which deal with Breton matters. The reason for this seems obvious: in October 1364 Froissart was at Dover, following the court of Edward III who was conducting negotiations with the count of Flanders, when news was brought by a poursuivant of Montfort's victory. Froissart seized the opportunity and gained from the future Windsor herald as circumstantial an account as he could from which he later constructed his own narrative.51 With such a source, it is to be expected that much of the information on those who participated in the battle would be accurate; what still needs careful handling is Froissart's treatment of the wider issues of strategy and diplomacy in the campaign. For instance, he states that Du Guesclin was deliberately sent to help Blois by Charles V; other records suggest he took French leave (VI, Ixvii). But when Charles stopped his pay in September 1364 4

« P R O E 101/23/18,22,35 E 101/24/10; E 36/204 passim. SHF V, 85-7, 304-8; Fowler 1969: 161-5 for the most recent serious treatment of the siege, so Molinier 1882: 117; Lemoine 1896: 110-11; Delachenal 1910a: 110-11; Charriere 1838b: 1053-2029; La Borderie 1899: 551-9. si SHF VI, 148-74, 322-52; La Borderie 1899: 582-97; Jones 1970: 19. 49

The Breton Civil War

215

was this a prudent public relations exercise? The matter remains open to opposing interpretations and is typical of the ambiguities which arise through the use of the Chronicles. Froissart intentionally in the second redaction set out to provide both contemporaries and future generations with the unvarnished truth about the history and course of the Breton civil war. Despite an increasing concern with literary style both in later books and in the third redaction of the first book, this insistence on the accuracy of his account is frequently reasserted whenever he touches upon Breton affairs (XIV, 3). But the methods he used to collect his material were little different from those of many contemporaries and he shared with them the strengths and weaknesses of these methods. Above all overreliance on oral testimony in which distortion readily occurs through faulty memory, conscious or unconscious misrepresentation, misattribution and all manner of kindred defects, undoubtedly left Froissart at the mercy of some of his informants and undermined his efforts to achieve literal truthfulness (Thorne 1979). Furthermore the chivalric form emphasising individual achievement in which Froissart chose to present his history had a similar effect, glorifying as it did a particular way of life which had its own very stylised practices and literary devices and which was lived by ideals which, if shared by many, were practised by a minority. For those, then, who simply want to know why the Breton succession war was fought, who took part and what happened, Froissart is a treacherous guide. Thanks to administrative documents, the nature of the legal arguments over the respective claims to the duchy and the subsequent character of the war, with its often harsh exploitation of the native population, can be studied in depth. So can diplomacy and the organisation of military expeditions, some of which, omnivorous collector of such information as he was, Froissart failed to chronicle. Yet for all these defects, many of which stemmed originally from his dependence on Le Bel, Froissart, perhaps better than any other contemporary, catches the flavour of the war and reflects contemporary attitudes and feelings; even in glorifying it and praising great names, he is aware of the suffering and cruelty war caused 'by which such great evil came into the world by land and sea' (KL II, 3). In his account of the Breton civil war, woven with increasing mastery into that much greater panorama of the conflict between England and France, there can be found in piccolo the same fundamental features of this extraordinary writer. For even were every word he wrote historically valueless -- and the inconsistencies, confusions and contradictions of his various attempts to recount the Breton civil war have tempted some to assert that hypercritical view - there would be many, the present writer included, who would continue to read the Chronicles for sheer pleasure.

ADDITIONAL NOTE: M. Prestwich, 'English Armies in the early stages of the Hundred Years War: a Scheme of 1341', Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, Ivi (1983), 102-113 has convincingly argued that PRO C47/2/33 (above n. 22) should be assigned to 1341. I have elaborated my account of the early years of the succession war in Brittany in 'Edward Ill's Captains in Brittany', in England in the Fourteenth Century, ed. W. M. Ormrod, Woodbridge 1986, pp. 99-118, and 'Sir John de Hardreshull, king's lieutenant in Brittany, 1343-1345', Nottingham Medieval Studies, xxxi (1987).

216

The Crea tion of Brittany

LIST OF REFERENCES (CHAPTER VIII) ARGENTRE, B. DE. 1618. Histoire de Bretagne. 3rd edn. BOCK, F. 1931. Some New Documents Illustrating the Early Years of the Hundred Years War (1353-1356). BJRL 15: 60-99. GAZELLES, R. 1958. La societe politique et la crise de la royaute sous Philippe de Valois. CHARR1ERE, E. (ed.) 1839a and b. Jean Cuvelier, Chronique de Bertrand du Guesdin. 2 vols. GUTTLER, S. 1978. The Law of Treason and Treason Trials in Later Medieval France. Oxford D.Phil. DELACHENAL, R. 1909aandb, 1916, 1928, \93l.Histoirede Charles V. 5 vols. — (ed.) 1910, 1916, 1920a and b. Chronique des regnes de Jean II et de Charles V. 4 vols. SHF. DEPREZ, E. 1926. La 'Querelle de Bretagne' de la captivite de Charles de Blois a la majorite de Jean IV de Montfort (1347-1362), 1. Pendant la captivite de Charles de Blois (1347-1356). Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne 7: 25-60. DESERTS, M. C. DES. 1970. Le chateau de Joyeuse-Garde. Compterendu des fouilles. Bulletin de la societe archeologique de Finistere 96: 75-87. DILLER. Froissart, Chroniques, ed. G.T. Diller. Geneva, 1972. —. 1980. Robert d'Artois et 1'historicite des Chroniques de Froissart. Le Moyen Age 86: 217-31. DIVERRES, A.H. (ed.) 1953. Jean Froissart, Voyage en Beam. Manchester. FOWLER, K. 1969. The King's Lieutenant. Henry of Grosmont, First Duke of Lancaster, 1310-1361. GALBRAITH, V.H. (ed.) 1927. The Anonimalle Chronicle, 1333 to 1381. Manchester. - (ed.) 1937. Thomas Walsingham, The Saint Albans Chronicle, 14061420. Oxford. GERAUD, H. (ed.) 1843. Chronique latine de Guillaume de Nangis de 1113 a 1300 et de ses continuateurs, 2. SHF. GESLIN DE BOURGOGNE, J. and AJ.B.A. DE BARTHELEMY (eds.) 1864. Anciens eveches de Bretagne, 4. GRANSDEN, A. 1972. The Alleged Rape by Edward III of the Countess of Salisbury. EHR 87: 333-44.

The Breton Civil War

217

JONES, M. \910.DucalBrittany, 1364-1399. Oxford. - (ed.) 1972a. Some Documents Relating to the Disputed Succession to the Duchy of Brittany, 1341. RHS. Camden Miscellany 24: 1-78. - 1972b. Below, chapter XI, pp. 263-82. - 1972-4. Below, chapter X, pp. 239-61. - 1976. Below, chapter XII, pp. 283-307. KL. Froissart, Oeuvres, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, Brussels 1867-77. LE BEL. Jean le Bel, Chronique, ed. J. Viard and E. Deprez. 2 vols. 1904-5. SHF. LA BORDERIE, A. DE. 1899. Histoire de Bretagne, 3. LEMOINE, J. 1896. Chronique de Richard Lescot, religieux de SaintDenis, 1328-1344, suivie de la continuation de cette chronique, 1344-1364., SHF. LE PATOUREL, J. 1954. L'administration ducale dans la Bretagne montfortiste 1345-1362. Revue historique de droit franqaise et etranger I Vs. 32: 144-7. - 1958. Edward III and the Kingdom of France. History 43: 179-89. LEWIS, N.B. 1964. The Recruitment and Organisation of a Contract Army, May to November 1337. BIHR 37: 1-19. LOBINEAU, DOM G.A. (ed.) 1707a and b. Histoire de Bretagne. 2 vols. LUCE, S. 1876. Histoire de Bertrand du Guesclin et de son e'poque: la jeunesse de Bertrand. LUMBY, J.R. (ed.) 1895. Henry Knighton, Chronicon, 2. RS. MEIGNEN, H. LE. (ed.) 1886. Alain Bouchard, Les grandes chroniques de Bretaigne. Nantes. MOLINIER, A. and E. (eds.) 1882. Chronique normande du xive siecle. SHF. MORANVILLE, H. (ed.) 1893, 1897. Chronographia regum Francorum, 2, 3. SHF. MORICE, DOM P.H. (ed.) 1742. Me'moires pour servir de preuves a I'histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, 1. - 1750, 1756. Histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne, 2 vols. NEWHALL, R.A. (ed.) 1953. Jean de Venette, Chronicle. New York. PLAINE, DOM F. 1871. De 1'autorite de Froissard comme historien des guerres de Bretagne au xive siecle, 1341-1364. Revue de Bretagne et de Vendee Ills. 4: 5-23, 119-36. — (ed.) 1921. Monuments du proces de canonisation du bienheureux Charles de Blois, due de Bretagne, 1320-1364. St. Brieuc.

218

The Crea tion of Brittany

PRINCE, A.E. 1931. The Strength of English Armies in the Reign of Edward III. EHR 46: 353-71. RILEY, H.T. (ed.) 1876. Thomas Walsingham, YpodigmaNeustriae. RS. RYMER, T. 1821. Foedera, conventiones, literae (etc.), II, ii. Royal Commission. SHF. Froissart, Chroniques, ed. S. Luce et al., 1-15, 1869-(in progress) SPINOSI, C. 1961. Un reglement pacifique dans la succession de Jean III, due de Bretagne, a la vicomte de Limoges. Revue historique du droit franqais et etranger IVs. 39: 453-67. THOMPSON, E.M. (ed.) 1889a. Adam of Murimuth and Robert of Avesbury, Chronica. RS. - (ed.) 1889b. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicon. Oxford. VIARD, J. 1905. La chronique de Jean le Bel et la Chronographia regum Francorum. Bibliotheque de VEcole des Charles 66: 540-6. — (ed.) 1937. Les Grandes chroniques de France, 9. SHF.

IX THE BRETON NOBILITY AND THEIR MASTERS FROM THE CIVIL WAR OF 1341-64 TO THE LATE FIFTEENTH CENTURY1 In his La Noblesse bretonne au XVIHe siecle Professor Jean Meyer referred to a 'renewal of the noblesse'1 after the civil war of the mid-fourteenth century. 2 The 'multitude of poor nobles who formed a veritable plebeian nobility' ('petite noblesse')3 that was characteristic of the last century of the Ancien Regime is seen to have very clear medieval origins. Likewise many specific features of 'droit nobiliaire' in the later period are evidently based on the customary law of the medieval duchy. But it was not part of Meyer's purpose to examine these antecedents in detail. Yet one may ask what are the elements of continuity? In what ways did the nobility capitalize on their opportunities under dukes who pursued domestic and foreign policies in complete independence of royal France? How did royal annexation of the duchy in 1491 change the underlying social structure? What are the implications of the relationship of Brittany and France for the social, economic and political developments of the duchy during this period? Some of these issues are to be examined here in an attempt to discover general features of noble life in the duchy during the last century of its independent existence. I begin with an example which displays both the wealth of the evidence and some of its shortcomings. About the year 1492 Guillaume de Rosnyvinen presented a Memoire to the council of his sovereign lady, Anne, queen of France and duchess of Brittany. 4 Rosnyvinen was one of several Breton captains of the royal ordonnance companies dismissed on the accession of Louis XI. Since 1461 he had not been re-employed in royal service and, as he wrote in the Memoire, 'Every time that the duke (Francis II) was in dispute with King Louis, I placed in jeopardy all my heritage in France, which was worth a good 600 livres in annual rent, in order to come to serve the duke, and I lost thereby more than 4,000 francs income/ Nor was this the limit of his sacrifice: 'I have refused all the oilers the king made me if I would serve him — a lump sum payment of 6,000 ecus, a pension of 4,000 francs and all the offices which

1.

Since this essay is a general statement about work in progress, references have been kept to a minimum. I am grateful for particular help from Malcolm Vale, Alan Cameron, Peter Lewis, and the late John Cooper, and to the Wolfson Foundation for a scholarship which enabled me to consult some of the manuscripts cited. 2. J. Meyer, La Noblesse bretonne au XVIHe siecle (2 vols., Paris, 1966), i, 57. 3. 'Abondance de la noblesse pauvre qui forme une veritable plebe nobiliaire', ibid. i. 21. 4. Morice, Preuves, iii. 558-63.

220

The Creation of Brittany

I had formerly held under his father.' 5 In France Guillaume had spent four years in the household of Dauphin Louis and fourteen in the company of Charles VII. He could write succinctly but with pride of the losses sustained by his family in ducal service: 'Item, died in ducal service, four of my nephews, namely Jacques, Louis, Jehan, Olivier and my brother of Vaucoullour.' Like the ageing Antoine de Chabannes, he too could tell of exploits in the wars stretching back forty years and more to the capture of Gilles de Bretagne and the taking of Fougeres in 1449. More recently in the critical year 1487 Guillaume was captain of St-Aubin-du-Cormier. This frontier fortress he had eventually surrendered to the invading French but not, he alleged, until he had done everything in his power to prevent the capitulation. 6 What had been the reward for this conspicuous loyalty? Both Rosnyvinen and his wife had lost much when their houses and farms held by tenants on a share-cropping basis (metairies] at Plessis-BonenfTant, together with other possessions, were pillaged by German troops in ducal pay and even by the duke's own officials. His household goods had been auctioned publicly at Rennes; more seriously he had fallen under suspicion of collusion with the French and legal proceedings had been started against him. He would, his Memoire stated, willingly have given 50,000 ecus to repair his damaged honour. For the moment, payments amounting to over 14,000 livres would settle an account which included a debt outstanding from 1432.7 Special pleading apart, the basic outline of Guillaume's story accords remarkably well with what can be discovered from other sources. This career, in particular in its dual and sometimes equivocal service to the king of France and to the duke of Brittany, is archetypal: Rosnyvinen's experiences were shared by many Breton nobles in the fifteenth century. The ways in which such experiences affected the position and outlook of the Breton nobility in this period have received only limited attention. Recent surveys, together with detailed investigations of noble fortunes in particular societies, have familiarized us with the general contours of noble life in France in the later Middle Ages.8 Do the ideals, concepts, aspirations, and social mores of the Breton nobility conform to the established pattern? Likewise, with regard to economic problems, where the chronology has received small attention, does Breton noble experience conform more or less to the lot of the nobility in western Europe? We may assume that landed fortunes were adversely affected by the usual range of climatic, genetic, and man-made disasters. Plague, famine, and war devastation created particular predicaments for landlords with falling prices for 5. 6.

7. 8.

'Premier echanson, son conseiller, Grant-Reformateur des eaux et forests de France' (Morice, Preuves, ii. 1299, 1409, 1642). P. Contamine, Guerre, etat et societe a la Jin du moyen age. Etudes sur les armees des rois de France, 1337-1494 (Paris, 1972), pp. 447-8. B.N. MS. 15541 f. 28, report on state of St-Aubin; A. Dupuy, Histoire de la reunion de la Bretagne a la France (2 vols., Paris, 1880), ii. 118, 448-50. Cf. Lettres et mandements de Jean V, due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard (5 vols., Nantes 1889-95, cited as Lettres dejean P), no. 2041 contra B.A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Francois II, due de Bretagne, et I'Angleterre (1458-1488) (Paris, 1928), p. 169 n.33. Bibliography in La Noblesse au Moyen Age Xle — XVe siecles, ed. P. Contamine (Paris, 1976), pp. 19-35.

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

221

agricultural produce, shortages of labour, and excessive wages in Brittany as elsewhere. 9 Some Breton landowners showed themselves willing to adopt new practices or extend old ones in order to exploit their lands more effectively in difficult times. Share cropping, generous leases, and other privileges were offered to attract tenants to lands which had run to waste; forest and mineral rights were exploited, and so on. Some landlords were more conscientious, or just simply luckier, than others.10 Within the Breton nobility at this point, extremes of wealth and poverty, of rank, social prestige and honour, of political influence and armed might, may be as easily observed as it can be elsewhere. The carefully garnered wealth of Olivier IV, sire de Clisson, or that prodigally expended by Gilles, sire de Rays, at one end of the scale, is balanced by the impecuniosity of (he plebe nobihaire who are already so numerous that Brittany ranks alongside Anjou and Maine as one of the provinces with the highest proportion of nobles in the total population, as it has remained even to this century." Fortunately perhaps, we are not here concerned with the origins of this nobility. Reference is necessary, however, to certain prevailing conditions if some salient characteristics of the late medieval period are to be seen in perspective. First, the constitutional framework within which Breton political life evolved in this period may be briefly summarized.' 2 In 1297 the grant of peerage regulated external relations between the duke and the crown of France to which the duke owed liege homage. In 1341 there arose a disputed succession between the Montfort and Penthievre branches of the ducal house. With English assistance, the Montfort family eventually emerged as the successful party and John IV and his successors were able henceforward to exploit the political difficulties of the French kings. Charles V recognized, albeit reluctantly, the succession of John IV; though the first treaty of Guerande in 1365, contained a provision which was to prove ultimately fatal for the survival of the independent duchy by limiting succession to the male heirs of the Montfort family, with reversion to the Penthievre family in case of default. In the 1370s Charles V all but succeeded in annexing the duchy before overplaying his hand and unwittingly causing the reconciliation of the duke and his nobility. The second treaty of Guerande in 1381, very similar to the first, thus registered a rebuff for the crown. On the basis of a fragile accord between the duke and his nobility, John IV established a working relationship with the majority of his leading subjects, whose powers were gradually curbed. This relationship formed the platform on which the independence of the fifteenth-century duchy rested. In 1420, 1437, and on other occasions until the later years of the reign of Francis II, the nobility generally rallied round the ducal family

9. Morite, Preuves, ii. 1152-61, constitutions of 1425 combatting these developments. 10. Cf. Bois, in La Noblesse, ed. Contamine, pp.219-33. 11. B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'De la vassalite a la noblesse dans le duche de Bretagne', Bulletin philologique et historique (jusqu' a 1610) du comite des travaux historiquts et scientifiques, 1963, pp.785-800, Meyer, op.cit,, i.21ff., 440-2. P. Contamine, The French nobility and the war', The Hundred Years War, ed. K. Fowler (London, 1971), p. 138. 12. Michael Jones, Ducal Brittany 1364-1399 (Oxford, 1970), passim for this paragraph.

222

The Creation of Brittany

in times of crisis. 13 Without the co-operation of the nobility, the duke and his immediate circle of advisers were too weak to withstand the pressure which the Crown could bring to bear in its efforts to obtain practical recognition of its theoretical sovereignty. With their co-operation, despite animosities inflamed by the actions of the displaced Penthievre claimants to the ducal throne, or families like the Rohan and the Rieux, ambitious to exploit the uncertain succession to Francis II, the Montfort family were able to elaborate longcherished and increasingly grandiose ideas about the status of the duchy,14 which they governed with an almost total freedom from royal intervention. In addition after 1381 John IV and his successors were generally able to avoid deep and irrevocable commitment to an English alliance, and seem to have striven more or less consistently to maintain a neutral position in the Anglo-French war in its latter stages. Even during the ominous reign of Louis XI for Francis II an English alliance was a pis alter.15 It used to be thought that neutrality brought considerable economic advantages to the duchy; such views require some modification.16 Nevertheless, until the last third of the fifteenth century, Brittany suffered only marginally from the warfare and internal disputes which racked royalist France during this period. Thus the independent constitutional position of the duchy presented its nobility with opportunities which could be profitably exploited. 'The renewal of the Breton noblesse' is in part the exercise of choice and the exploitation of these opportunities. But before the renewal is examined in greater detail, some further elements of continuity in the feudal and social geography of the duchy deserve attention. An obliging contemporary provides a plausible answer to the simple question of how many Breton nobles there were? At the Council of Basle in 1434 Philippe de Coetquis, archbishop of Tours, a former Breton councillor, stated that Brittany contained three counts, nine great barons, eighteen bannerets, and 4,700 lesser nobles.17 What is well exemplified here is a characteristic of all European nobilities, the restricted number of really powerful and wealthy members of this order, and the overwhelming majority of other ranks within the nobility. The origins of this division clearly antedate our period, but it would also appear that within the duchy there are some particularly enduring tenurial arrangements, like the high proportion of large agglomerations formed in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, which survive in a recognizable form throughout the Middle Ages and beyond. 18 That, despite unusual family longevity and individual fec13. A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, continuee par B. Pocquet (6 vols., Paris-Rennes, 1896-1914), iv.197-214, 247, 524-5. 14. Michael Jones, "'Mon pais et ma nation"; Breton identity in the fourteenth century', War, Literature, and Politics in the Late Middle Ages, ed. C.T. Allmand (Liverpool, 1976), pp. 144-68. Below, pp. 283-307. 15. Cf. M. Keen and M. Daniel, 'English diplomacy and the sack of Fougeres in 1449', History, lix (1974), 383-7. Pocquet, Francois II, passim. 16. H. Touchard, Le Commerce maritime breton (Paris, 1967), pp. 157-74. 17. Concilium Basiliense, ed. J. Haller et al., iii. Protokolle des Concils von 1434 und 1435 (Basel, 1900), p.50. 18. La Borderie, Histoire, iii. 56-92 and map.

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

223

undity, comital, baronial, and knightly families became extinct in Brittany as elsewhere according to the rhythms described by McFarlane, Perroy and others is a likely hypothesis simply requiring statistical demonstration. 19 But underlying kaleidoscopic changes in the ownership of land, the primitive castellany seems to have conserved much of its original territorial and juridical integrity. This is particularly the case in the eastern and southern parts of the duchy. A series of frontier lordships, some of which had extremely ancient origins, dominated this region in the twelfth century, as with minor modifications they did in the fifteenth.20 Moving westwards to the interior of the duchy, there was the same phenomenon. Only in the far west had the really large feudal complexes so broken down that, apart from considerable expanses of ducal demesne, the Finistere peninsula contained few of the duchy's major lay landholders. And although a number of the outstanding figures in Franco-Breton affairs in the fifteenth century came from this region — Tanguy du Chastel, who smuggled the future Charles VII out of Paris in 1418, his nephew, Tanguy, vicomte de la Belliere, or the Coetivy brothers — their patrimony was small and it was only towards the end of our period that occasionally a family like that of the lords of Pont 1'Abbe acquired possessions which enabled them to rival the holders of lordships in the centre, east, and south of the duchy. 21 Reasons for the stability of the great baronial lordships must obviously be first sought in the successoral practices governing the descent of estates. As early as 1185 the Assize of Count Geoffrey declared: 'that baronies and knights' fees should not be divided in future, but the eldest son should receive the whole inheritance, making suitable provision, according to his means, for his younger brothers.' 22 Juveigneurs (cadets) were to receive a life interest only, which they generally held without performing homage. Modifications to this strict successoral regime were made in 1276. The duke gave up his claim to exercise prolonged wardship during a minority (bail), conceded greater testamentary freedom to his great vassals and allowed them to recover any portion for which homage had been performed of younger brothers dying without heirs. In return he was granted the right to a year's revenue from the estates of a deceased tenant-in-chief (rachat) regardless of the heir's age. Remission, suspension or donation of the rachat as an act ot grace and favour was a valuable weapon in the hands of fifteenth-century dukes. By then juveigneurs who had heirs were able to pass on to them some of their landed possessions to dispose by will of rents in perpetuity assigned on the provision made for them by their elder brother. Yet the indivisibility of baronial and knightly holdings, though never an immutable law, was generally accepted and held firm until the reformation

19.

Cf. K.B. McFarlane, The Nobility of Later Medieval England (Oxford, 1972), pp.xxiii, 142-76. 20. J. Boussard, Le Gouvemement d'Henri II Plantagenet (Paris, 1956), pp. 103-12. 21. A. de la Borderie, Etude historique sur les neuf barons de Bretagne (Rennes, 1895) for the fluctuating numbers and composition of baronial lordships. 22. La tres ancienne coutume de Bretagne, ed. M. Planiol (Rennes, 1896), pp. 321-3.

224

The Creation of Brittany

of the Breton custom in 1580.23 Although in the later Middle Ages Brittany had no exact equivalent of the English "use' and entail or the Castilian 'mayorazgo', a number of great families, whose direct line was failing, were not prevented from making special provision for their main holdings to pass entire to suitable successors by marriage to an heiress. By this means the adoptive or substitute heir acquired not only an inheritance and a wife, but sometimes also a new name and arms, agreeing to drop entirely his former identity, as did the chosen heir of the Chabot-Rays family in 1401 and that of Montmorency-Laval in 1405.24 Another important family, the Rohans, faced by the prospect of proliferating cadet lines, made arrangements in 1422 for the creation of an inalienable family patrimony which, while conforming to the spirit of the Assize of Count Geoffrey, ran counter to prevailing custom in an effort to preserve the unity of its holdings.25 In such ways baronies were preserved by a restricted number of great lords. But at any one moment these formed numerically a minute proportion, not even 1 per cent of all noble holdings. Examples can be found, even amongst the great baronies shortly after the promulgation of the Assize of 1185, of a practice which allowed a lord to distribute up to a third of his possessions, unhindered by customary constraint. 26 This mode of dividing inheritances became well established among knightly families and it moulded the noble law of succession in the later Middle Ages. Professor Meyer has demonstrated the importance of this for the eighteenth-century nobility: 'From the fifteenth century the multiplicity of cadet branches irremediably condemned a section of the nobility, first to an increasing poverty and then to absorption in the ranks of commoners.' 27 What should be recognized here is that the problem was not new in the period when the legal right of juveigneurs to a third was guaranteed by the revised custom of 1580. From the thirteenth century, at latest, many families declined in social status as their landed wealth was fragmented by successive partitions which the Assize and custom might slow down but could not prevent. Nor does the story lack pathos, since few families were so entirely and consistently unscrupulous 'in sacrificing junior members for the sake of the family's future'. 28 Virtually nothing is known of the growth of this petty noblesse, of its relations, other than strictly feudal, with the greater nobility, or of its economic fortunes prior to the acute crises of the 23.

M. Planiol, 'L'Assise au comte GeofFroi. Etude sur les successions feodales en Bretagne', Nouvelle revue historique de droit franfais et etranger, xi (1887), 117-162, 652-708, is fundamental. 24. 'Cartulaire des sires de Rays', ed. R. Blanchard, Archives historiques du Poitou, xxviii (1898), pp. cvii-cviii; and xxx (1900), no. CCCXVI. A. du Chesne, Histoire genealogique de la maison de Montmorency et de Laval (Paris, 1624), pp. 573-5. 25. Lyon, Bibliotheque municipale, Coll. Henry Morin-Pons, 24 December 1422, published by L. Caillet, A. Bret, xxvi (1910-11), 100-4. 26. Planiol, art. cit., p. 688, and also J. Yver, 'Les Conditions originaux du groupe de coutumes de 1'ouest de France', Revue historique de droit franfais et etranger, 4eme ser., xxx (1952), esp. pp. 41-43. 27. Meyer, op. cit. i. 166; for the problems of an heir with indulgent parents see Morice, Preuves, ii. 1357-8. 28. Planiol, art. cit., p. 699.

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

225

mid — and later — fourteenth century. But for present purposes its existence and numerical importance should be noted, facts borne home by the events of the civil war which broke out in 1341. A clear polarization was taking place. The lowlands and valleys of the feudal map were already filled by a mass of lesser nobles, whose origins remain obscure, while the great families and their landed properties formed the semi-permanent reference points on the uplands. As in England and elsewhere in Europe after the Black Death, outstanding landed wealth came, if anything, to be concentrated in even fewer hands. In some respects, then, the 'renewal' of the noblesse after the civil war may appear to be more remarkable than it really was, but for present purposes the existence of an already impoverished and numerically important petty noblesse by the time of the war of 1341-64 should be noted. The presence of poor Breton nobles was a constant feature of the history of the duchy; I shall now discuss their livelihoods. Despite the comparative lack of documentary evidence, 29 two general matters concerning the position of the nobility deserve emphasis. The first concerns the allegiance of the nobility. Although the precise composition of the opposing sides in the civil war has still to be fully investigated the greater nobility on the whole appear to have supported the Penthievre family, and the lesser, especially in the west and north, at first supported Jean de Montfort. 30 Yet this simple division may, on the analogy of studies of other disputed regions, prove to be much more complex. Already during the civil war the proportion of the lesser noblesse entering French royal service in the companies of greater lords is impressive. 31 This suggests that the distinction between the differing general allegiance of the two groups within the Breton nobility is inadequate. Certainly by the 1370s support for the Montfortists amongst the lesser noblesse, even in Finistere had reached its nadir. 32 But disenchantment may well have set in much earlier in consequence, perhaps, of economic difficulties accentuated by guerilla warfare. In fifteenth-century Guyenne nobles living on the frontier of war devised a regime of local truces and altered the practice of succession in order to protect their lands from the worst effects of warfare. 33 Local truces were arranged in Brittany, but it is not clear whether Breton families adopted the stratagem of dividing their lands amongst relatives with different allegiances, although the occasional hint of such practices may be detected. The balancing act which John IV performed between England and France was paralleled by similar multiple acts of tightrope 29.

Cf. Bois, in La Noblesse, ed. Contamine, p. 225 for general reasons for the growth of documentation in the later fourteenth century, though some earlier accounts do survive (for example, from the barony of Vitre, Arch. Dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 F 1527, 1535-6, 1542, 1549-50). 30. Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 11-12. 31. Morice, Preuves, i. 1469-74, 1478-84, 1489, etc., and cf. Contamine, Guerre, etat et soaete, p. 153. 32. On 10 September 1372 ten Breton knights and esquires, several of whom possessed lands in Finistere, were given fiej-rentes by Charles V, (B.N. MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 20026, no. 172). 33. M. G. A. Vale, English Gascon? 1399-1453 (Oxford, 1970), pp. 154-215.

226

The Creation of Brittany

walking by his nobility and defection could take place on a massive scale. The traditional, feudal hold which the duke of Brittany might once have had over his nobility had manifestly failed in the civil war to secure its total allegiance. Amongst other things it was considered necessary in the late fourteenth century to devise 'a supplementary oath and a legal contract' which would, it was hoped, reinforce the feudal nexus. 34 The numerous alliances (non-feudal political contracts) formed in pursuit of this end have been skilfully described by Peter Lewis: he asks whether such contracts in Brittany ensure the fulfilment of their purpose. The moral constraints of the alliance — the fear of dishonour and reproach for perjured knightly faith — or more obvious sanctions like the loss of one's property, pension, or office, must undoubtedly have influenced the actions of those who entered into such agreements. But short of a case study of each alliance, the obvious answer is that in some cases it did cement allegiance between the contracting parties while in others breakdown of trust or outright disobedience led to its nullification sooner or later. Yet Mr Lewis and M. Capra entertain doubts. In Guyenne, where the creation of alliances has an equally long history, they claim that nobles were a great deal less inconstant in their loyalties than other historians admit. 35 It may well be that with a few exceptions the same is true in Brittany. Some alliances, Lewis suggests, were 'imposed upon a contractor because of some dereliction of duty or as a pledge of good behaviour'. Certainly the alliance in Brittany was principally used when the relations between the duke and his nobility were strained. After he returned from exile in 1379, John IV extracted a series of obligations or bonds from a considerable number of nobles, including some of the most influential. The sire de Malestroit was obliged for a fine of 4,000 livres; and perhaps in connection with Malestroit's case, the sire du Molac was obliged for 2,000 livres in 1383 'because of a certain dispute which had arisen between the lord of Malestroit and himself. 36 In 1382 the lord of Rostrenen had subscribed an obligation for 1,000 livres; Jean, sire du Chastellier d'Yreac, and Rivalen de Rochefort were pledges for Monsieur Rivalen de Ploe'r in the sum of 2,000 francs. In 1382 again, the sires de Montauban and Montfort stood surety for Jean, sire de Beaumanoir, who was obliged to the duke for 6,000 francs 'because of certain acts of disobedience committed against my lord, the duke'. 37 Many other such pledges are recorded in the first inventory of the ducal archives drawn up in 1395, and since its compiler was careful to note cancelled letters, it must be presumed that many of these obligations were still in force. Some guaranteed the appearance of offenders in court, probably to answer civil charges. Others relate to prisoners of war and those guilty of criminal offences who were, in effect, on parole. The brevity of the entries in the inventory is often 34. 35. 36. 37.

P.S. Lewis, 'Of Breton alliances and other matters', War, Literature, and Politics ed. Allmand, p. 137. Idem, 'Decayed and non-feudalism in later medieval France', B.I.H.R. xxxvii (1964), 157-84. P. Capra, 'Les Bases sociales du pouvoir anglo-gascon au milieu du XlVe siecle', M.A. Ixxxi (1975), 293-9. 'a cause de certain debat esmeu entre le sire de Malestroit et luy', Arch. Dep. LoireAtlantique, E. 238, inventory by Herve le Grant, 1395, for the following details. 'a cause de certaines desobeissances faites a mons', ibid. f. 46r-

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

227

tantalizing. But that the majority of such obligations were not just simple actions for debt is made clear by other entries in the inventory. Many of these obligations must have hung suspended over the lesser contracting party in a way reminiscent not only of King John's practices in England, but also foreshadowing the punitive recognizances taken by Henry VII a century later. 38 Like the alliance or the pension, such bonds represented a weapon in the duke's armoury which could be used to compel allegiance and determine political behaviour. The second general matter which needs to be stressed with regard to the position of the nobility during the civil war and succeeding military actions is the way in which these circumstances helped at the time to differentiate the noblesse from other sectors of Breton society. Traditionally it was the pre-eminent role of the nobility in medieval societies to fight. Nor had the nobles of the duchy shirked their duties before the civil war.39 But traditions of military service outside the duchy took on an entirely new dimension from the mid-fourteenth century. In thirteenth-century Paris immigrant Bretons were satirized as carriers of bundles and cleaners of latrines.40 From 1341 to the early sixteenth century it was the noblesse who temporarily emigrated, not only to theatres of war elsewhere in France but also to Italy and Spain. 41 Many reasons for emphasis amongst the Breton nobility on its military role during this period may be postulated. From the fifth century A.D. the duchy has acted as a human reservoir. Overpopulation, economic recession and civil war may be held responsible for releasing a particular flood in the mid-fourteenth century. The duchy appears to have largely escaped early visitations of the plague. 42 Royal service provided an income which was welcome in difficult days. There is little remarkable in a poor region capitalizing on one of its few assets — a relative abundance of manpower in a period of general population decline — as the analagous examples of Scotland and Switzerland in the later Middle Ages also demonstrate. Though the result of the predominating concern of the Breton nobility in the later Middle Ages with warfare may have led to a hardening of its social attitudes. Long after it had lost its military reputation, it remained conservative, obstinate, and jealous of its feudal and judicial privileges.43 38. J.R. Lander, 'Bonds, coercion and fear: Henry VII and the peerage'. Florilegium Histonale: Essays presented to Wallace K. Fergusson, ed. J.G. Rowe and W.H. Stockdale (Toronto, 1971), pp. 327-67; reprinted in'j.R. Lander, Crown and Nobility, 1450-1509 (London, 1976), pp. 267-300. 39. In a French host of 1271 the duke of Brittany was obliged to supply 60 knights, including 16 bannerets; Burgundy, 50 or 55 knights (7 bannerets); Flanders, 40 knights (13 bannerets), etc. (B.N. MS. fr. 32510, fo. 27r). 40. A. Chedeville, 'L'immigration bretonne dans le royaume de France on Xle au debut du XlVe siecle', A. Bret. Ixxxi (1974), 321-2. 41. L. Mirot, 'Sylvestre Budes et les Bretons en Italic', B.E.C. Iviii (1897), 579-614; lix (1898), 262-303; though only a few fought in the Italian wars of the late fifteenth century (cf. F. Lot, Recherches sur les effectifs des armees frangais des guerres d'ltalie aux guerres de religion, 1494-1562 (Paris, 1962). For Bretons and Spain cf. Lettres de Jean V, no" 2282 and J. Duran y Lerchundi, La Toma de Granada, ii (Madrid, 1893), 153-5, a reference kindly supplied by Dr. J.R.L. Highfield. 42. Touchard, Le Commerce maritime, p.55. 43. Cf. Meyer, op.cit. i. 24-25.

228

The Creation of Brittany

Although many noble families in the duchy had ancient origins, for the mass of the noblesse continuous family histories begin with the names of those who were mustered, especially under the two successive Breton constables, Bertrand du Guesclin and Olivier de Clisson. This is an accident of surviving documentation. Thus Prigent de Coetivy, knight, is recorded in the late thirteenth century, but there is then a long gap until we meet Guillaume de Coetivy, esquire, in Clisson's company in 1379, together with Alain, sire de Coetivy, father of the Admiral and his brothers.44 The earliest forbears of Guillaume de Rosnyvinen who can be easily traced all appear under the constable in the years following 1370.45 The Chastels were an old family, but about this time many of its members served in royal armies. Examples could be cited from many more families besides those of de Coetivy, de Rosnyvinen, or du Chastel. During the late fourteenth century it becomes possible to trace descents from among the amorphous mass of nobility. In the late seventeenth century 28 per cent (a high survival rate) of the noblesse appear to have been directly descended in the male line from families which were already noble in the fifteenth century.46 The survival of an increasing number of records from the Breton Chambre des Comptes also gives an impression that there was a 'renewal' of the nobility. The development of general taxation in the duchy c. 1345-70 was achieved at the price of allowing the nobility to retain their personal immunity from Jouages, impots, and aides.41 There is only one full surviving letter of John IV by which he ennobled land. Additional records show that individually or corporately others sometimes enjoyed respite fromfouages.48 After 1417, however, letters of ennoblement and enfranchisement were issued in increasing numbers. 49 From the later fourteenth century, there survive a series of general or local 'reformations des feux'. 50 Tax records thus provide some crude minimal averages for recruitment to the nobility, their distribution and density. 51 More accurate lists for fiscal purposes at 44. 45. 46. 47.

48. 49. 50. 51.

Recueil d'actes inedites des dues et princes de Bretagne (Xle, Xlle, XHIe s.), ed. A. de la Borderie (Rennes, 1889), nos. cxxxvi, clxviii; Morice, Preuves, i. 1087, 1110-11; ii. 203, 205, 207, 246; Lettres de Jean V, nos. 172, 229. Morice, Preuves, i. 1648; ii. 203, 205, 207, 275, etc. A seventeenth century family history traces the descent from a certain Geoffroy and his relatives mentioned c. 1338 (Arch. Dep. Ille-et-Vilaine, 2 Er. 299). Meyer, op.cit. i.57. Michael Jones, 'Les Finances de Jean IV, due de Bretagne', Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne, Hi (1972-4), 29-30. For others exempt cf. Lettres de Jean V, no. 2191. Fouage a direct tax on households, calculated in Brittany on the theoretical basis of three households to a hearth (feu); impots and aides — indirect taxes levied as customs or sales taxes on foodstuffs and other basic products. Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, B.125, no. 8, 1 March 1391; Lettres de Jean V, nos. 424, 739, 888. Ibid., no. 1248 (Arch Dep. Loire-Atlantique, B. 126, no. 68, 24 August 1417); letters ennobling Charles Even and his lands, appear to be the first surviving example. Cf. Touchard, Le Commerce maritime, pp. 54-55. Reformations des feux — a revision of the official list of households on the basis of which fouage was levied. Catherine Guilmet, 'Etude de la population bretonne d'apres le Registre de la Reformation des feux de 1426', (Diplome d'etudes superieures principal, Nantes 1966), already indicates the high density of nobles in the diocese of St-Brieuc, a point graphically demonstrated by Meyer (op.cit. ii, map).

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

229

this time also presented added advantages to the dukes who were now in a much better position to control entry into the nobility and as a facet of their patronage they keenly exploited rights to ennoble. Accession to the lowest ranks of the Breton nobility seems to have been relatively easy. 'Arms', wrote the author of Le Jouvencel 'ennoble a man whoever he may be.'52 And fifteenth-century Bretons, unlike their seventeenth-century successors, accepted in practice that 'when one has been counted twice at the musters then one is henceforward reputed noble'.53 Many families passed into the Tanks of the noblesse by service in arms. The acquisition of noble fiefs had been another traditional means of achieving nobility. Families who practised partition of estates according to the principles adopted by the nobility were themselves, ipso facto, considered noble. In both these instances, the acquisition and enjoyment of nobility is fairly simply described. In the next instance, strict definition is impossible. In Burgundy and the bailliage of Senlis, 'It is not the office which ennobles'. 54 The same would appear to be true in Brittany, but hints of change can be found. Letters of enfranchisement for lands reveal that this privilege, often an early step towards the acquisition of nobility, was particularly a reward for office holders. Ducal officials also benefited from personal grants of franchise from taxation. 55 In 1428, for example, Henri Faiaust, assistant to Jean Mauleon, tresorier de I'epargne, a practising 'lawyer, clerk and notary of our court of Ploermel, who is accustomed to living and conducting himself as a noble without in any way concerning himself with any craft or commercial practice except with writing and notarial arts' was freed from contributing tofouages5* In 1433 Guillaume Jahou, 'homme de science, avocat d'assise' went one better and had his lands ennobled because he was 'a noble person issuing and descending from noble persons', even though he held various lands in the diocese of Rennes which were subject to partible inheritance 'according to the manner of those of low estate and condition'. 57 In the following year Jean Jouguet was ennobled, and the reasons for this are explained in some detail. 58 In none of these three cases did the holding of an office ennoble on its own account. Faiaust lived in a noble style; Jahou was a noble by blood and race; and Jouguet was a noble by arms. Though lowly, their offices were compatible with nobility. There has been an increasing appreciation in recent years of this conjunction of office and nobility in later medieval France,59 but for what range 52. 53. 54.

55. 56. 57. 58. 59.

A. Bossuat, Perrinet Gressart et Francois de Surienne, agents d'Angleterre (Paris, 1936), p.2. Meyer, op.cit. i. 107-9; Bossuat, loc.cit. J. Bartier, Legistes et gens de finances au XVe siecle: les Conseillers des dues de Bourgogne, Philippe le Bon et Charles le Temeraire (Bruxelles, 1955), p. 198, cf. B. Guenee, Tribunaux et gens de justice dans le Bailliage de Senlis a la fin du moyen age (vers 1380-vers 1550) (Paris, 1963), p. 413. Lettres de Jean V, nos. 1863, 1872, 2048, 2259, 2360, 2375, 2415, etc. Ibid., no. 1799. Ibid., no. 2124. Ibid., no. 2156. Cf. Guenee, op.cit., pp. 413-15. E. Dravasa, 'Vivre noblement: Recherches sur la derogeance de Noblesse du XlVe au XVIe siecles', Revue juridique et economique du Sud-Ouest, sene jundique, (1965) 135-93 and (1966), 23-129, esp. tables, pp. 78-83.

230

The Creation of Brittany

of offices was this true in Brittany? Was venality systematized by Francis I in 1522-3 already a general characteristic of office-holding under the dukes? How far were the nobility in competition with others for office? Although the questions have yet to be fully studied, it is clear that many nobles, whatever their rank, accepted office and acquired training in such practical subjects as law in order to compete for ducal, seigneurial, and municipal employment. 60 A number of ducal secretaries, forefathers of the noblesse de robe, may have come from ancient noble families; many received patents of nobility and thus paralleled the social rise of secretaries in royal service who automatically acquired nobility following an ordonnance of Charles VIII. 6 1 The fortunes of the descendants of Jean Gibon, illustrate the point. Gibon's holdings were freed from fouages in 1436 as a reward for his services as secretary. In 1496 his grandson, Maitre Jean Gibon, 'ecuyer, sire du Grisso, procureur de la Chambre des Gomptes de Bretagne', came to terms with his fellow parishioners over the demolition of 'a length of the choir of the church of Notre-Dame du Mene next to the presbytery' in order to build as a chapel a family burial place, and in whose great window the arms of Gibon and his wife were to be displayed. In 1523 Maitre Jean's grandson married Adele de Carne, a representative of another family which had risen even more dramatically in ducal service. Both families were to survive to the eighteenth century when the Games married into the 'high royal court nobility', while the Gibons du Grisso et du Pargo continued to provide members of the Breton parlement. 62 The medieval antecedents of noblesse de robe are still little understood. Nor is representation of the ancienne noblesse in branches of the legal profession which were considered compatible with nobility. 63 But it seems clear that as a result of acquiring seigneuries and offices, and also of intermarriage among its members, the bureaucratic class was rising quickly to prominence.64 The most usual way to acquire nobility in Brittany was by letters patent, and those who were granted patents of nobility form a very miscellaneous group. That in Brittany ducal surgeons and apothecaries and the relatives of clerks of the ducal chapel became members of the noblesse scarcely appears surprising when carpenters and those endowed with little but abnormal physical strength were likewise ennobled. 65 Those willing to marry the illegitimate daughters of the high nobility were sometimes lucky enough to acquire nobility themselves.66 It is common knowledge that participation in retail trade as opposed to international commerce, raising of 60. Jones, in War, Literature, and Politics, ed. Allmand, p. 160 and idem, 'L' Enseignement en Bretagne a la fin du moyen age: quelques terrains de recherche', Mems. de la soc. d'hist. et d'arch. de Bretagne, liii (1975-6); 33-49. Cf. below, pp. 309-28. 61. Bartier, op.cit., p. 191. G. Tessier, Diplomatique royale franfaise (Paris, 1962), p. 157. 62. Arch. Dep. Morbihan, E. 1542-4. Aspects of this story are highlighted in J. Gallet, 'Les Seigneurs dans le Vannetais: L'exemple des Gibon du Grisso (XVe-XVIIIe siecles)', Enquetes et Documents, iii (Centre de Recherches sur Fhistoire de la France Atlantique, Nantes, 1975), 79-104. 63. Cf. J.H.M. Salmon, Society in Crisis: France in the Sixteenth Century (London, 1975), pp. 101-12. 64. Cf. Bartier, op. cit., p. 197. 65. Lettres de Jean V, nos. 1749, 2245, 2276, 2290, 2551, etc. 66. Ibid., no. 2357. For other varied qualifications, nos. 2250, 2470, 2489.

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

231

livestock, keeping of taverns and sundry other allegedly demeaning occupations was not as elsewhere in France in the first half of the fifteenth century an automatic derogation of noble status in Brittany. 67 There developed the notion of dormitwn of noblesse. Individuals,, even whole families, practised commerce and after they had made modest fortunes, they reassumed noble status. 68 Acknowledged practice in the fifteenth century, dormitwn became an article of the Breton custom in the sixteenth and remained a unique and, to royal officials, a disturbing feature of Breton noble law in the seventeenth. 69 In the world of commerce, high finance and office holding the interests of the old and new families of the noblesse, and of the socially indeterminate, merged in the late fifteenth century though the pattern which can then be distinguished was probably much older.70 As a result average annual recruitment to the nobility under John V, as measured by the issue of patents, far exceeded such averages in Valois Burgundy, where Philip the Good created only one new noble family a year during the course of his reign. The Breton average of about six families a year for the period 1417-42 is very similar to the rate of royal promotions for the whole of France during the reigns of Charles VII and Louis XI. 71 Military emergencies in particular presented opportunities for aspiring candidates to present themselves as willing to undertake service as other nobles were accustomed to do. Many who were thus without formal ties with the noblesse were admitted; others who had proved themselves in the wars likewise gained admission. Under Francis I the average number of promotions remains almost the same, at about six a year, though the correlation with warfare is not quite so obvious. It can therefore be understood why such a constantly high level of ennoblement by contemporary standards should have been criticized. The main concern of Peter II seems to have been to appease rotuners (commoners), who were left to pay the tax burden which fell proportionately more heavily upon them with each ennoblement, and to protect his own income. In the great set of constitutions issued in the Estates of 1451 it was decreed that: henceforward commoners of simple and low condition, retailers, those practising law and others who are not of noble descent cannot by any means acquire nor obtain in hereditary possession in our country and duchy of Brittany, heritages or noble fees, held nobly, and by fealty, of us or lords of our country, nor appropriate 67. 68.

69. 70. 71.

Touchard, Le Commerce maritime, pp. 356-63. Dravasa's remarks on the ending of derogeance in Brittany by the acquisition of letters of rehabilitation require re-examination (art. cit. iv (1966), 121 n.364, 126-7 nn.384, 387) because the legal texts cited do not entirely support his views and there is a dearth of historical examples from this period. On occasion the duke confirmed the right of those of noble status to continue trading; alternatively those no longer enjoying noble status nevertheless were enfranchized from taxes normally falling on commoners (cf. Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, B. 4, fo. 107', 5 August 1466, and B. 5, fo. 15 l v , 24 November 1467, lor examples). Meyer, op.cit. i. 135 ff. Cf. Touchard, op.cit., pp. 358-61. J. Kerherve, 'Une Famille d'officiers de finances bretons au XVe siecle: Les Thomas de Nantes', A. Bret. Ixxxiii (1976), 7-33. Bartier, op.cit., p. 195. G. du Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII (6 vols., Paris, 1881-91), ii. 606-7; iii. 457; iv. 422-3; v. 330-1; vi. 373-4. The main source for Breton ennoblements is Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, B. 125-31.

232

The Creation of Brittany

in any manner whatsoever such heritages and noble fees except by our permission and licence.72

A brake was applied — the average number of ennoblements for Peter's reign falls to under four a year. One only is recorded for the brief reign of Arthur III. From a review of similar evidence for the reigns of Francis II and Anne, it would seem that there was a distinct fall in the number of ennoblements in the last half of the century. Under Francis II promotions at an average of a little over one a year, and under Anne, of less than one a year, suggest that the noblesse was becoming increasingly closed, a feature which was common to other contemporary nobilities.73 After a period of relatively easy access during which a 'renewal' took place as new families acquired noble status or old ones had theirs confirmed, the qualifications for admission to the nobility appear to have been tightened. The ducal legislation of 1451, repeated in 1455, was echoed sixty years later when nobles in the Estates of 1517 petitioned to prevent winners obtaining noble fiefs.14 Whether it was a response to such requests or not, Francis I gave critics of excessive ennoblement by patent little to quarrel about in Brittany and the virtual cessation of official promotions in Brittany after its annexation to France may well have served to strengthen the provincial exclusiveness of the Breton nobility. 75 Though much more research on the full social consequences of the absorption of the duchy into the kingdom remains to be done, before the cycles opening and closing the noblesse are plotted in detail. Another index of increasing noble consciousness and exclusivism is differentiation of rank. Such differences had existed long before the civil war, but from the reign of John V, the process of promotion within the nobility by ducal patent can also be observed. In 1433, for example, Jean de Beaumanoir, sire du Bois de la Motte et du Tremereuc, was created a banneret, for the reason that he was: descended in all lines from great and noble families . . . and also he possesses the power and faculty, both in subjects as in rents and revenues, to hold the estate of banneret . . . with the right to keep, have and maintain in perpetuity, arms and banners on the battlefield, in the army at funerals and obsequies and in all other places where it is appropriate and necessary for him to do so, as do the ancient barons and bannerets of our duchy. 76

In 1440 Guillaume de Sevigne, knight, received a similar privilege to have his own banner, together with 'a gibbet with three posts'; in the same year 72. La Tres ancienne coutume, ed. Planiol, pp. 405-20 (quotation, p.417), a better text than that of Morice, Preuves, ii. 1582-91. 73. Cf. McFarlane, Nobility, pp. 268-78. 74. Documents inedits relatifs aux Etats de Bretagne de 1491 a 1589 ed. vicomte Ch. de la Lande de Calan (2 vols., Nantes, 1908), i. 26-31. 75. Only two clearly Breton families are cited in J-R. Bloch, L' Anoblissement en France au temps de Francois ler (Paris, 1934), Catalogue nos. 37, 44, and 265. But cf. Salmon, op.cit., pp.99-100. 76. Lettres de Jean V, no. 2096.

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

233

the seigneury of Fresnay was erected into a barony. 77 Between 1451 and 1455 Peter II created six bannerets, and Francis II and Anne continued to confer this dignity on leading subjects. 78 Promotion to banneret was originally closely linked with particular forms of army organization. Because of the development of royal ordonnance companies in the 1440s the military grade of 'banneret', with special rates of pay, was suppressed in France. 79 Its use in Brittany thereafter would appear to have been primarily social. That such questions of status and dignity were much in the mind of a duke like Peter II is also made plain by his promotion of the lords of Derval, Malestroit, and Quintin to the ranks of the nine great barons in the Estates of 1451. Francis II again followed suit. The myth of the nine ancient baronies of Brittany emerged in the early fifteenth century. It was perhaps fostered by the Rohan family, but was more probably developed as a conscious imitation of the twelve peers of France or the cult of the nine worthies as part of a deliberate effort to create a court mystique. 80 Like the creation of orders of knighthood, such an institution increased the range of patronage available to a ruler, reflected glory on him and his leading subjects, created tangible and intangible bonds among the higher nobility, and strengthened their cohesion. The importance of such considerations cannot be measured, but they obviously mattered to a society, which was increasingly dominated by men of rank and prestige. Since at least the late fourteenth century patents of creation as well as other grants of privileges to the nobility, were normally presented to the Estates for their acknowledgement. 81 In the Estates there were frequent disputes, such as that about the baronies created in 1451, about precedence which often held up the other business. Such disputes, apparently over fine points of honour, are too easily dismissed as absurd. They do in fact reveal how conscious the nobility was becoming about its status. In many respects they may be considered as part of the proper business of the Estates, which were, it appears, often indifferent to the serious business of politics, especially since the grant of a particular privilege implied, enhanced, or conferred judicial and other rights which might have detrimental effects on another seigneur. A mark of honour for one family might be interpreted as a slight by another. Even the numerous disputes over the positioning of knightly tombs, pews, and armorial bearings in parish churches and chapels may thus be important for the light they throw on tensions that arose among the higher nobility, and also on the role of the duke when he reconciled nobles whose quarrels appear, on first sight, to have been oc-

77. 78. 79. 80.

81.

Ibid., no. 2455. Musee des Archives Nationals. Documents originaux de I'histoire de France exposes dans ['hotel Soubise (Paris, 1872), no. 453 for Fresnay (not in Lettres de Jean V). Morice, Preuves, ii. 1563-4, 1592-3, 1594-5, 1641-2, 1668-70; iii. 31-32, 902-3. Contamine, Guerre, etat et societe, pp. 250-2. Morice, Preuves, ii. 1560-3; iii. 368-70, 480-2, 551-2, 749-50. The full terms of the grant of the barony of Lanvaux to Andre de Laval, lord of Loheac, with a clear statement on the theory of the nine baronies, are set out in letters of 24 March 1464 (Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, B 3 fos. 152V- 15r), cf. also La Borderie, Etude, passim. Cf. Morice, Preuves, ii. 459-65, 513-25 and 649-55.

234

The Creation of Brittany

casioned by fits of pique. 82 Deeply cherished assumptions about order and precedence sometimes came, under fire and political action might as easily be determined by injured pride as by strictly economic factors. The surviving council minutes for 1459 - 63 show how closely the duke's advisers kept an eye on the private affairs of the nobility; they vetted, for example, all royal mandates concerning litigation in the Parlement of Paris, oversaw marriage contracts, protected the interests of minors, rebated the rachat, and consented to a whole series of personal privileges. The broken series of chancery registers reflect similar discussions of which we have no record. But they tell the same tale. 83 If a separate Breton identity was to be maintained in the fifteenth century, the dukes not only had to depend on continuing social harmony among the nobility, but also had to satisfy its aspirations at all levels. But the duke by no means monopolized the services of his nobility, however much on occasion he tried to circumscribe their actions.84 For some who ventured beyond the Breton frontiers in the fifteenth century the rewards, or the opportunities in the short term at least to run up bigger debts, may have been considerable; with a flow of offices, dignities, pensions, lands, and other marks of royal favour. In succession to Du Guesclin and Clisson in the fourteenth century, Brittany provided a number of leading officers for the royal administration in the fifteenth, Arthur, comte de Richemont became Constable of France in 1425, thirtytwo years before he became duke in 1457. In his entourage Chastels, Rosnyvinens, Coetivys, and many others served the King.85 Jean, sire de Rieux, Marshal of France, ceded his office in 1417 to his son, Pierre. Gilles, sire de Rays, was appointed a marshal of France in 1429, losing his place only when his monstrous crimes became manifest in 1440. He was succeeded shortly afterwards by Andre de Laval, sire de Loheac.86 At the same time Prigent de Coetivy was appointed admiral, a post which was later held by Jean, sire de Montauban.87 Towards the end of the century there was Pierre, sire de Gie, a cous'n of the vicomte de Rohan, and a man who according to Louis XI was 'greatly avaricious and loved money'. Louis nevertheless made him a marshal a position eventually

82.

83. 84. 85. 86. 87.

H. du Halgouet, 'Droits honorifiques et preeminences dans les eglises en Bretagne', Menu, de la soc. d'hist. et d'arch. de Bretagne, iv (1923), 31-87, a valuable introduction especially to legal aspects, but the Chancery registers have not been used. In 1466 alone there were no fewer than 12 such disputes (Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, B 4 passim.} Ibid., E.131 (council minutes), B.2ff. Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 66; Lewis, in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, p. 133. In 1461 steps were taken to ensure the exclusive service of some ducal officers in ducal employment (Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, E.131, fos. 122V-3V). Cf. M. G. A. Vale, Charles VII (London, 1974), p. 119. E. Cosneau, Le Connetable de Richemont (Paris, 1886), passim. Prigent de Coetivy left debts totalling £42,230 1 \s 3d (L. de la Tremoille, Prigent de Coetivy, amiral et bibliophile (Paris, 1906), pp. 84-86). Contamine, Guerre, etat et societe, pp. 236, 239. G. Dupont-Ferrier, Gallia Regia, ou etat des qfficiers royaux des bailliages et des senechaussees de 1328 a 1515 (6vols., Paris, 1942-65, cited as G.R.), nos. 9271, 2013, 20134.

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

23 5

lost as a result of court intrigues in 1506.88 A number of other families gained a lesser prominence like the Pontbriants, who were implicated in the fall of Gie.89 But a survey of the names listed in Gallia Regia suggests a number of observations. First, and in confirmation of the primarily military role adopted by the Breton noblesse from the mid-fourteenth century, Bretons serving the king are chiefly to be found in army commands. Secondly, the number of Breton nobles holding civil office in France seems to have been a very restricted one, if their total numbers and potential suitability is considered. Few Bretons were appointed royal baillis or seneschals. Little evidence survives for the interchange of personnel between the ducal and royal administrations. Nor is there much surviving evidence for extensive movement among the financial officers of the duke and king.90 Unlike other great provincial later medieval rulers the dukes of Brittany were either unlucky in placing their servants about the royal court, or in royal employment or they were less concerned to do so.91 This is yet another aspect of the independence of the duchy in the fifteenth century. Especially during the reign of Louis XI, some ducal pensioners might be found at the royal court, and some royal pensioners at the ducal court. Charles V made considerable use of pensions to subvert the position of John IV; but in normal circumstances kings of France found such outlay a poor investment and when they were being economical pensions were stopped.92 Only during the last years of the reign of Francis II did the king use more costly and also more regularly paid pensions to outbid the duke and the inducements he could offer to his nobility. Neither the number of royal pensioners, nor the material rewards which the majority of Breton nobles acquired from their service to France, should be overestimated.93 To judge by the rebuilding of manor houses, or chateaux, which imitated the latest styles of the Loire valley, some royal pensioners derived from their service to the kings of France more than a taste for beautiful things.94 But ducal support was pervading and important. Both Peter II and Francis II were concerned with castles. They urged their owners to repair them, seized the revenues of those who refused to comply, and destroyed weak places. Whereas in the rest of France seigneurs were becoming much more aware of domestic comforts and kings kept an alert watch on the military works of their leading lords 'Brittany undertook, on the contrary, the most 88.

Morice, Preuves, iii. 301-3. But the essential source for his career is Procedures politiques du regne de Louis XII, ed. R. de Maulde (Paris, 1885), pp. xi-cxxxi, 1-786. For Louis's views, p. 244. 89. Ibid., pp. Ixxxvi IT. G.R., nos. 6140, 7372, 22358. 90. A remark based on information kindly supplied by M. Jean Kerherve, who is studying the financial personnel of the duchy. 91. Cf. P.S. Lewis, Later Medieval France: The Polity (London, 1968), pp. 153-8. 92. The fiej-rentes granted in 1373 (above n. 32) were cancelled in 1387 (B.N. MS. Clairambault 487, fos.lSg^O^. 93. Arch. Dep. Loire-Atlantique, E. 212; Arch. Nat., KK 79. Only a handful of Bretons appear on the remarkable list of some 769 royal pensioners, c. 1480 (B.N. MS. fr.2900, fos.7 r -16 r ), of which Peter Lewis kindly gave me a transcript. 94. A. Mussat, 'Le Chateau de Vitre et I'architecture des chateaux bretons du XlVe au XVIe siecle', Bulletin monumental, cxxxiii (1975), 132-64.

236

The Creation of Brittany

extensive and complete reconstruction of its defensive system', with a massive rebuilding of ducal and seigneurial castles from c. 1450.95 Concessions of taxes like the billot on wine and other products multiplied and were carefully licensed, accounts being rendered to the duke's own financial officers by seigneurial receivers. But the duchy may not have footed the total costs of this rebuilding programme, for as Rosnyvinen's Memoire relates, individual captains might have to find finances themselves and in doing so they might draw on revenues derived in France.96 As it transpired this modernization was inadequate; royal artillery played a decisive role in reducing fortresses in 1487-91, though the defence of Nantes (19 June-16 August 1487) shows what could be done with up-to-date urban defences and a resolute garrison.97 Factors such as these must undoubtedly be remembered, even though it is not yet possible either to measure the strain which building operations put on noble finances or to determine the effects of the transfer to the duchy of specie in the form of wages and pensions. There may well have been a crisis in noble fortunes, which in individual cases was clearly exacerbated by the political turmoil of the 1480s and early 1490s. But the extent and nature of this crisis cannot be determined until such matters as the normal contributions of estate revenues to the income of the nobility are investigated. Thus there are many problems to be resolved before the role of the nobility in the history of the duchy can be critically assessed. Politically their posture throughout the fifteenth century was Janus-like; the ambivalence which Rosnyvinen showed at the outset of his career is but one example. Loyalties were divided; the divisions of the 1480s proved fatal to the survival of the independent duchy. But who gained and who lost on the political merry-go-round remains obscure, and what of the benefits gained over the preceding century by Bretons in royal and ducal service? Even disregarding the longer perspectives, problems of the survival of old families, recruitment of new, differences of rank within the nobility, definition of noble privileges and their exercise all require much closer attention. Concluding his remarkable book, Professor Meyer writes: from the end of the Middle Ages to the beginning of the twentieth century Brittany indubitably offers the unique example of a region dominated by the same order, formed for the most part of the same families. Certainly there was a partial renewal of this social framework but the newcomers were absorbed into the governing body whether they came from the noble stock of other regions . . . or from the ranks of richer townspeople. This permanence of the noble framework of Breton provincial life has contributed not inconsiderably to the reinforcement of

95.

R. Grand, 'L'Architecture militaire en Bretagne jusqu'a Vauban', Bulletin monumental, cix (1951), esp. pp.368-79. See also now above, pp. 34-58. 96. Morice, Preuves, iii. 558-63. 97. La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 533-8; P. Contamine, 'L'Artillerie royale francais a la veille des guerres d'ltalie', A. Bret. Ixxi (1964), 221-61. For the defences of Rennes, J-P Leguay, La Ville de Rennes au XVe siecle a trovers les comptes des miseurs (Paris, 1968).

The Breton Nobility and their Masters

237

the irreducible originality of the province and has thus perpetuated the problems bound up with its very existence.98

When future investigations into some of the problems which I have discussed are completed, a similar conclusion, though with suitable modifications, may be reached for the later Middle Ages and the early modern period. Such investigations will not only lead to a better understanding of the nature of French society, crown and community; they will add yet another dimension to a long and complex story.

98.

'de la fin du Moyen Age aux debuts du XXe siecle, la Bretagne offre sans doute 1'exemple unique d'une region dominee par la meme ordre, forme sur une large part des memes families. II y a eu certes rennouvellement partiel de ces cadres, mais les nouveaux venus se sont fondus dans le milieu dirigeant qu'ils fussent issus de la noblesse d'autres regions . . . ou de la bourgeoisie. Cette permanence du cadre nobiliaire de la vie provinciale bretonne n'a pas peu contribue a renforcer I'originalite irreductible de la province, et a perpetuer aussi les problemes, lies a son existence.' Meyer, op.cit. ii.1255.

This page intentionally left blank

X

THE FINANCES OF JOHN IV, DUKE OF BRITTANY, 1364-1399 Considerable attention has been devoted to the development of provincial administration alongside the royal government in later medieval France, particularly in the last two or three decades. A pattern has emerged of a number of territorial complexes, more or less unified, sometimes copying royal practice, utilizing royal administrative personnel and developing in conjunction with the royal government, sometimes reacting against royal interference and evolving indigenous administrative organs, but all sharing political power with the king.1 One of the basic weaknesses of these 'states' within the greater union of the kingdom of France has been identified: the lack of financial resources capable of sustaining the political ambitions of the princes. 2 Even where he was a careful administrator of his lands, the costs of warfare, an unlucky capture, a marriage, or some other fairly normal occurrence, besides the great natural disasters which occurred in the fourteenth century, could quickly exhaust the prince's financial resources, especially his stock of ready money, unless he had access to extraordinary sources of supply - generally to be found, either by obtaining permission to take a proportion of the royal aides collected in his lands, or from the receipt of royal largesse in the form of pensions and gifts. But our knowledge of the financial history of the lesser administrations within France, Burgundy apart, 3 is still inadequate, whilst the scale of individual princely financial dealings has only been established for a limited number of apanages and lordships.4 The reasons for this gap in knowledge are basically two-fold. First of all, the questions which modern historians pose about medieval finances 1 J. Le Patourel, 'The King and the Princes in Fourteenth-Century France', Europe in the Late Middle Ages, ed. J. Hale et al, London 1965, pp. 155-83; A. Leguai, 'Les "Etats" princiers en France a la fin du moyen age', Annali della Fondazione Italiana per la Storia amministrativa, iv (1967), 133-57, for two recent surveys. 2 Leguai, art, cit., pp. 152-3, cf. idem, De la Seigneurie a I'Etat. Le Bourbonnais pendant la Guerre de Cent Ans, Moulins 1969, pp. 256-91 (cited as Leguai, Le Bourbonnais). 3 Bibliography in R. Vaughan, Philip the Bold, London 1962, esp. pp. 226-36, cf. also M. Nordberg, Les dues et la royaute. Etude sur la rivalite des dues d'Orleans et de Bourgogne, 1392-1407, Uppsala 1964, pp. 25-38. 4 Infra pp. 255ff.

240

The Creation of Brittany

are not those which, in general, the prince and his advisers posed or for which they kept records. Secondly, the survival of medieval financial records in France has been much more patchy than in some other parts of Europe, notably England.5 Thus even where the records have survived they are frequently uninformative for the purposes to which we wish to put them. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the case of Brittany. True, an outline of Breton financial history can be traced with a degree of accuracy from the thirteenth century to the 'budgets' of Duke Francis II.6 But, as with the finances of John, duke of Berry, whose political career has recently been retold in immense detail with an apparent wealth of documentation, so what can be said about the finances of John IV of Brittany is very unsatisfactory. This is particularly frustrating for those who wish to quantify and give precision to underlying changes which can be vaguely sensed but demonstrated only with difficulty. When M Maurice Rey published his work on the reign of Charles VI he put French royal finances at the end of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth century on a new historiographical plane, despite the inevitable shortcomings of his documentation.8 Perhaps his promised third volume on the finances of the cadet Anjou branch of the Valois family will perform a like service for princely finances.9 But in the meantime the information which he has made available already gives us a yardstick by which to gauge princely fortunes. Against such a background a few sketchy remarks and speculations about the finances of John IV of Brittany may be permissible although, as it will be seen, overall estimates can only be offered with extreme diffidence, and then simply for the later years of the reign. By deduction and by comparison with other princely finances one can arrive at figures which may be valid, but in all of this the unsatisfactory nature of the results which can be obtained at the moment deserve to be emphasised at the outset. 5 Though even here details of the finances of many leading families can be but imperfectly known: see G. A. Holmes, The Estates of the Higher Nobility in FourteenthCentury England, Cambridge 1957, or R. R. Davies, 'Baronial Accounts, Incomes and Arrears in the Later Middle Ages', Economic History Review, 2nd series, xxi (1968), 21129, citing earlier literature. 6 H. Touchard, 'Le Moyen-Age Breton (XII-XVI siecles)', in Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. J. Delumeau, Toulouse 1969, pp. 159-62, 197-8, for a summary; M. Planiol, Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne, 3 vols, Rennes 1953-5, iii, 231 ff: L. Maitre, 'Le Budget du duche de Bretagne sous le regne de Francois II, Annales de Bretagne, v (1889), 293-318 (cited as A.B.). 7 F. Lehoux, Jean de France, due de Berri. Sa vie, son action politique, 1340-1416, Paris, 4 vols, 1966-8. The approach is purely narrative and details of Berry's finances are nowhere collected together. R. Lacour, Legouvernement de I'apanage dejean, due de Berry, 1360-1416, Paris 1934, whilst admirable on the organisation and administration of the duke's lands, refrains from attempting a survey of the duke's financial position. 8 M. Rey, Les finances royales sous Charles VI. Les causes du deficit, 1388-1413, and Le domaine du roy et les finances extraordinaires sous Charles VI, Paris 1965. 9 Rey, Les finances, p. 592 n. 3. (This has still not been published.)

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

241

It has long been recognized that the period of John IV's reign (13451399) coincides with important changes in the organisation, nature and utilization of ducal finances.10 There has not been so much stress on the fact that Brittany conforms in this respect to a pattern which can be witnessed in other parts of France at the same time.11 With regard to the organisation and administration of ducal finances, the movement is towards a much more formal, regular and bureaucratic system. There is still the normal medieval habit of mixing the income of the duke in his private capacity, from his domaine, with that derived from his public functions, from taxation, for example. A similar confusion exists in the pattern of expenditure as revealed in the treasurer's (or receivergeneral's) accounts.12 The treasurer received an indiscriminate series of orders for payment on items ranging from ducal alms or the maintenance of his household, to the payment of officials in 'public service' or for the upkeep of fortresses for the defence of the duchy. He simply paid what he could from the cash he had in hand. But there is also apparent an increasing definition of the personnel and duties of the chambre des comptes at Vannes during the course of the fourteenth century, and particularly in the period after the first treaty of Guerande (1365).13 It would be possible to give a more refined account of the development of this institution than is to be found in print at present, and this development can be compared to the establishment or reform of similar chambres des comptes in the lands of the dukes of Anjou (c. 1368), Bourbon (1374), Berry (1379) or Burgundy (1386).14 In these cases, too, the mixture of the older seigneurial aspects of princely finances with the newer resources derived from taxation and royal pensions also appears. Secondly, with regard to the nature of ducal resources, there is a parallel between the development by the king of France of new and more effective means of taxing his subjects in the 1340s, 1350s and 1360s, alongside the exploitation of his traditional feudal resources, his domaine, the proceeds of justice, his coinage rights and so on, and developments in Brittany during and immediately after the Breton civil war. In France and in Brittany the stimulus was the same: the exigencies of war.15 There was resistance to the notion of general taxation from certain sectors of society, the towns and the nobility especially. The latter although under 10

Planiol, op. cit., iii, 231 ff. Michael Jones, Ducal Brittany 1364-1399. Relations with England and France during the reign of Duke John IV, Oxford 1970, pp. 22 ff. C. Bellier-Dumaine 'L'administration du duche de Bretagne sous le regne de Jean V, A.B.,xiv-xvi (1899-1901), esp. xv (1900), 162-88, on John V's finances, points to parallels in the fifteenth century. 12 Cf. Bellier-Dumaine, art. cit., xv (1900), 181-3. 13 H. Fourmont, Histoire de la chambre des comptes de Bretagne, Paris 1854; Jones, op. cit., pp. 28-9. 14 Ibid. p. 29. 15For the huge increase in royal resources in the mid-fourteenth century see Rey, Le domaine, pp. 35 ff. 11

242

The Creation of Brittany

attack in France exploited their position and maintained a large measure of exemption from personal taxation. In the kingdom and in the duchy the nobility were also able to wring such valuable concessions from the king or the duke as the right to take a certain percentage of the tax levied on their own tenants and vassals.16 In Brittany, however, by the time John IV went into exile for the second time in 1373, the principle seems to have been established that the duke, with the consent of his major subjects, could \evyfouages at fairly regular intervals in order to meet his financial obligations and supplement his seigneurial revenues.17 Thirdly, with regard to the expenditure of revenue, this period in the latter half of the fourteenth century, starting with the money raised for the ransom of Charles de Blois,18 sees much more considerable sums passing more frequently through the duke's hands. This naturally led to an increased technical competence in the handling of money and the professionalization of ducal financial services; there is little new in all of this, although the chronology of some of these developments can be refined. Fourmont and Planiol both examined the institutional side of the development of ducal finances and La Borderie first described the extent of John IV's financial commitments in the 1360s.19 And the main reason why we cannot advance much further than these nineteenth-century historians in our understanding of these matters is the lack of documentation. Even before the 'Commission du triage in the Revolutionary period made further inroads into the financial records of the duchy, there is evidence to suggest that these were fairly sparse for the late fourteenth century. The only document, for example, in the works of the Breton Benedictines which is of any real significance for the financial history of the reign is one concerning the allocation ofafouage in 1392-3 which gives us the total offeux in the duchy: 98,447 (of which, 18,699 were in the hands of Oliver de Clisson and his allies).20 The Benedictines published no accounts, even in the summary form in which they printed some of those surviving from John V's reign,2 although fortuitously a 16

For a list of those nobles enjoying a share of the royal aides in 1372, Rey, Le domaine, pp. 371-2, and for the whole question of French taxation, J. B. Henneman, Royal Taxation in Fourteenth-Century France. The Development of War Financing, 13221356, Princeton, New Jersey 1971, cf. esp. pp. 166 ff, 308 ff. 17 Jones, op. cit., pp. 32-4. But even as late as October 1445 Francis I had to allow the vicomte de Rohan the right to levy a 5 sous fouage so that he would consent to permit the duke to levy one of 63 sous (Dom). P. H. Morice, Memoires pour servir de preuves a I'histoire ecdesiastique et civile de Bretagne, 3 vols., Paris 1742-6 (cited as Preuves), ii, 1345. I owe this reference to Miss Maggie Daniel. 18 Below, Chapter XI. 19 A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iv (Paris and Rennes 1906), 112 ff. 20 Preuves, ii, 589-90. 21 Cf. B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Les comptes du duche de Bretagne en 14351436', Bibliotheque de I'ecole des Charles, Ixxvii (1916), 88-110 (cited as B.E.C.).

Th e Finan ces of Joh n IV of Brit tony

243

number of fragments relating to the ducal household and the activities of the treasurer and receiver-general have actually survived. The remarks of Rene Blanchard apropos the survival of the financial records of John V are of equal relevance to the reign of his father.2" The chance survival of the details of a series of orders, mainly to the ducal treasurer, Richard de Lesmenez, between 1386-8, in notes taken by the Benedictines from the archives of the marquis du Molac,24 reveals how much must have been lost from the chambre des comptes, not only as a result of natural wastage, destruction and decay but also through human agencies long before the Revolution. Many of the subsidiary records - the warrants and quittances - were of ephemeral value, and once the accounting official had presented his accounts there was no very good reason to preserve the majority of the pieces justificative*, although files of such documents were kept through departmental conservatism. The relatively better survival rate for the records of the tresor des chartes cannot, obviously, in this instance, compensate for the paucity of chambre records though here, too, some details to fill out the story can be obtained.25 As for the discovery of new documents, the major contribution in recent years has been the utilization of the records of Giles de Wyngreworth, the Anglo-Breton treasurer of the duchy for the years 1359-62.26 M Henri Touchard has drawn on these accounts in his study of Breton commerce and Professor John Le Patourel and Dr Kenneth Fowler have used them to examine the wartime financing of the Anglo22

Baron de Wismes, 'Le Tresor de la rue des Caves a Nantes', Revue de Bretagne, v (1859), 152-61, 311-35, for the discovery and rescue of some of these accounts, most of which are now to be found amongst La Borderie's papers at Rennes (Archives departementales d'llle-et-Vilaine (cited as A.I.V.), I F IIII). Some of the documents also bear the stamp and reference number they received whilst at the Archives departementales de la Loire-Inferieure (now Loire-Atlantique), Nantes (cited as A.L.A,). See also, H. de Berranger, 'Fragments de comptes de la maison ducale de Bretagne (xv-xvi siecles)', Bull, phil. et hist, du comite des travaux scientifiques, annees 1951 et 1952, Paris 1953, pp. 89-94. 23 Lettres et mandements de Jean V, due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard, Archives de Bretagne public par la Societe des Bibliophiles Bretons, iv (Nantes 1889), pp. vii-xii. 24 Bibliotheque Nationale, MS. fr. 22331, pp. 4-55. 25 A.L.A., E 238, inventory of the tresor, compiled by Herve le Grant in 1395, is a good guide to some of the missing records. A few entries at random: f. 53 v., an obligation of the English knight William Elmenton to the duke for 200 francs, 'et est un poy mangee de Raz'; f. 54 r.', obligation of Georges Monchet, chevalier, for 1,500 francs owed to the duke 'conpissee et mangee de Raz'; f. 79 r., obligation of Nicholas Bouchart to pay the duke 10,000 francs. Many of the surviving quittances are inventoried too, for example, f. 70 v., for those printed by La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 112-3. 26 Public Record Office, London, E. 101/174/4-6, 10-13; 175/1, 4-7; 176/9-10; 179/1; E. 372/207 mm 41 d et 46 d; E. 159/139 Brev. dir. bar., Michaelmas term 37 Ed. Ill, mm. 2 r., 4 v., 8 r., 10 r. Part of a roll of Wyngreworth's payments in 1361-2 can be found in Bib. Nat., MS. latin 9093 n° 7.

244

The Creation of Brittany

Breton administration.27 It is just possible that a closer inspection of these documents, with their detailed information on the obligations of individual parishes, together with an examination of some of the evidence for the imposition of the early/0wd£e5 and the exploitation of the domaine, might enable us to draw inferences about the incidence of ducal taxation in the late fourteenth century.28 In passing, it may be noted that it has also been possible to use various English records in conjunction with the surviving documents at Nantes to piece together a rough outline of the extent and nature of the English resources enjoyed by John IV from his holding of the honour of Richmond - it was only during a brief period of his exile from 1373-9 that John IV enjoyed anything like the full resources available from his English estates and they, like his lands in France but lying outside the duchy, may largely be dismissed from this account. Potentially they were an important part of the duke's resources, in practice they contributed irregular and limited supplements to his revenues.29 New documents can still be discovered, though none of the recent ones have been specifically related to the period under discussion, although some of the household accounts, found in the nineteenth century, have been published more recently.31 We are left then, with the problem of piecemeal reconstruction if we wish to obtain an approximate picture of ducal finances. John IV had three principal sources from which he could draw 27

H. Touchard, Le commerce maritime breton a la fin du moyen age, Nantes 1967; J. Le Patourel, 'L'administration ducale dans la Bretagne montfortiste, 1345-1362', Revue historique du droit fran$ais et etranger, 3eme serie xxxii (1954), 144-7; K. Fowler, 'Les finances et la discipline dans les armees anglaises en France au XIVe siecle', Les Cahiers Vernonnais, iv (1964), 55-84, and The King's Lieutenant, Henry ofGrosmont, First Duke of Lancaster, 1310-1361, London 1969, pp. 166 ff., cf. Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. J. Delumeau, p. 181. Attention was drawn to these documents by the late Eugene Deprez who identified the parishes in an article in Quest-France, 9 Janvier 1951. 28 There is, for example, some correspondence between the amounts paid as a cens on certain parishes of Fougeres castellany to the Franco-Breton forces in 1357-8 with sums paid to the Anglo-Breton forces by the same parishes as ransoms two years later (Jones, op. cit., p. 166 n. 3), although other instances where such comparisons might be possible have not yet been examined. Unfortunately I have not been able to consult J. P. Leguay, 'Le fouage en Bretagne ducale aux XIVe et XVe siecles', D.E.S. principal, Rennes 1961. 29 Jones, op. cit., pp. 172-98, esp. pp. 181-3. The honour of Richmond may have yielded £2,000 or approximately 12,000 livres tournois in normal years. For John's land elsewhere in France see infra. 30 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Le plus ancien role des comptes du duche, 1262', Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne, xxvi (1946), 49-68; Y. Renaudin, 'Les domaines des dues de Bretagne. Leur administration du XIIIe au XVe siecle', Ecole des Charles, pp. 278-9 (cf. Positions 1957); Berranger, Bull. phil. et hist., annees 1951 et 1952, pp. 89-94. 31 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'L'hotel de Jean IV. Fragment du compte des depenses (c. 1365-1370)', Bull, et mems. de la soc. archeologique du departement d'llle-etVilaine, Ixix (1953), 66-77.

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

245

revenue, two of them yielding fairly regular but in general limited income, the third, irregular, but occasionally producing very lucrative revenue. Like his princely contemporaries, John exploited the resources of his own domaine and used his rights as a seigneur.32 Secondly, as duke, he had a number of rights, regalities, besides the normal profits of justice, such as his control over coinage and wrecks, rights to the temporal administration of church lands during episcopal vacancies (regaire or regale], the right to issue brefs, other safe-conducts and licences of all kinds, together with the usual run of fees from the chancery and civil contracts passed before his officials in local courts.33 The third and major source of revenue, the irregular or extra-ordinary revenue, came not only from the imposition of thefouage and other forms of direct or indirect taxation, - Hevin said that John IV was 'un grand inventeur des gabelles et de subsides'33- but also from such items as dowries, ransoms, gifts and so on. In this same category we can perhaps place royal pensions and gifts, remission of the proceeds from aides on his lands outside Brittany, and the like, sums which should perhaps have formed a regular part of John's income, as they did of that of so many of his contemporaries, but which were in practice received irregularly.34 In addition, to tide him over periods when he was short of ready cash, the duke was able to raise loans, minor ones from some of his officials, 35 32 Renaudin, op. cit., pp. 84 ff. For maps of the ducal domaine at various stages. A. de la Borderie, Essai sur la geographic feodale de la Bretagne, Rennes 1889, and D. Collet, 'A propos du domaine du due de Bretagne', A. B., Ixxvi (1969), 364. See also L. Maitre, 'Domaines de Bretagne dependants de la couronne ducale avec leur evaluation', A.B., xxxviii (1928-9), 188-207. 33 Planiol, Hist, des institutions, iii, passim, cf. Bellier-Dumaine A.B., xv (1900), 162 ff. for an account based on the much fuller, but basically similar evidence for John V, though the author is unable to draw up a 'budget'(p.181, but cf. Planiol, op. cit., iii,238). 33a Planiol, op. at. iii, 321-2. 34 For the remission of aides on the county of Montfort I'Amaury in 1372, Rey, Le domaine, p. 371. John IV was supposed to receive various pensions or rents from the king of France for his claims to land in Rethel and Nevers (for their acquisition, R. Gazelles, La societe politique et la crise de la royaute sous Philippe de Valois, Paris 1958, pp. 86-7) and in Normandy. These were never regularly paid and were the subject of endless wrangling, cf. Archives Nationales, J. 240 n° 35, complaints of John IV over Rethel, c. 1372, and a series of commissions to seek for compensation etc., 1381-97 (A.L.A., E 108, cf. Preuves, ii, 620-2, where alternative lands to the value of 2,0321. 3 sous parisis were assigned in 1393). For John V's negotiations over these pensions, Rey, Le domaine, p. 48. In 1382 John IV had been assigned 260 1. t. on the receipts of Bayeux and, in 1384, the castellany of Longjurrieau in compensation for St James de Beuvron and other lands he claimed in France (A.L.A., E 108). For other royal pensions and gifts to John and other princes, see infra pp. 255-6. 5 For example, A.L.A., E 211, in 1392 'pour lachat dou chastel de Sable', 50 francs from Martin Laillier; A.I.V., I F 1111, by a ducal order of 4 Nov. 1393, 35 francs were paid back to Guillaume Coppegorge. Perrot Preszeau, Eon Bino and Jean Daviet 'que ilz presterent autreffoiz a mondit seignour par la main de Eon Guiole a son voiage de Tours'. Cf. Bellier-Dumaine, A.B., xv (1900), 183-4. This was a common princely practice and there is little point in using pejorative language to describe it.

246

The Creation of Brittany

larger ones from French and English merchants and money changers, or from his nobles and fellow princes.36 It is from this group of occasional resources that a major part of John's income seems to be derived. One of the reasons for this dependence on what were in effect 'windfalls' is, that, during the civil war period, the ducal domaines, which had been increased in area and profitability by the careful management of dukes since the time of Peter Mauclerc, had suffered depredation.37 There are indications that towards the end of his reign John IV paid some attention to the acquisition of new lands. La Guerche was in ducal hands by 1385. The lordship of Coueron was acquired at about the same time and so was part of the lordship of Le Pellerin in 1388.38 Although the most ambitious attempt to extend the domaine by acquiring the barony of Rays met with failure, John's officers controlled its extensive resources for several years.39 Furthermore, since John IV did not have to provide for any children until late in his reign, his domaine was not seriously diminished by alienations except of a temporary nature. Nor were his finances to be reduced by the settlement of dower lands on his third wife, Jeanne of Navarre.40 Some ducal lands had fallen into the hands of men who had served him during the civil war, but there is little evidence to show that they or their heirs were able to establish permanent claims to ownership. Indeed the reverse happened. John can be seen buying in claims and reasserting his right to these lands.41 In fact, the general picture which emerges of the domaine at this time is one of partial

36

For loans from merchants and changeurs infra p. 252. In 1397 Jean de Bretagne, count of Penthievre, allowed John IV 12,000 1. as a loan from thefouage being levied on his lands (Bib. Nat., MS. fr. 22319 p. 527). For a loan from Gaston de Foix, infra p. 251. In 1384 John still owed John, lord Bourchier 3,000 ecus for services possibly dating back to the civil war (Muniments of the Marquess of Bath Longleat MS. 231). 37 Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. Delumeau, pp. 159-62; Renaudin, op. cit., pp. 146 ff. for destruction. An index of the damage caused by warfare (and of reconstruction after the return of more peaceful conditions) is provided by the letters granted by the papacy for the repair of churches, monasteries, etc. M. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse counted 144 such letters between 1370-1455, no fewer than 72 of which were issued between 1380-9 (Les papes et les dues de Bretagne, Paris 2 vols 1928, i. 363). This pattern of reconstruction during the more peaceful interludes of the Hundred Years War has been made familiar by such works as R. Boutruche, La crise d'une societe. Seigneurs et paysans du Bordelais pendant la Guerre de Cent Ans, Nouvelle tirage Paris 1963, pp. 165-231, and other recent contributions to the regional economic history of France like G. Fourquin, Les campagnes de la region parisienne a la Jin du may en age, Paris 1964, pp. 260 ff. 3 ® Renaudin, op. cit., pp. 18-21. 39 A.L.A., E 172 and Cartulaire des sires de Rays, ed. R. Blanchard, Arch. hist, de Poitou, xxviii (1898) et xxx (1900) for the relations of John IV and Jeanne, dame de Rays. 40 A.L. A., E 17. Jeanne was given the county of Nantes and other lands which were supposed to constitute a third of the domaine in 1387. 41 Jones, op. cit., pp. 48-50.

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

247

reconstruction and I do not take quite such a pessimistic view of the effects of the civil disturbances in the duchy on the administration of the domaine between 1341-81 as some recent historians.4 The duke and his officials took an interest in the negotiation of new leases or farms (of the duke's boat, property, customs and admiralty dues, market tolls etc.), the repair of domanial installations, walls and fences of parks, the exploitation of salines, sluices, secheries, mills, ovens, cohues and forests, showed an interest in fairs and markets and took a hand in farming, besides a special interest in gardening.4 Where figures can be worked out, the slight evidence points towards an increasing income from these forms of revenue. The rents of the domaine at Touffou, fixed at 142 livres in 1348-50, reached 2761. in 1398; rents from Rennes, averaging 307 1. between 1382-98, reached 355 p.a. in the early years of the fifteenth century.44 As the result of an agreement which had formerly been made with the parishioners of Sainte-Croix de Nantes, Saint-Pierre de Bouguenays and Rezay over various fishing rights in the Loire, the duke was accustomed to receiving 285 l.p.a., by a new agreement in 1387 this was increased to 325 l.p.a. and in 1398 to 445 l.p.a. 45 Likewise it is from the period after the middle of the century, and more particularly from the 1380s that the intensive exploitation of the salines of Guerande and the lordships south of the Loire dates. No doubt, as a result of increased attention to such items, the ducal income was supplemented, but no aggregate estimate of income from the domaine can be made with any degree of accuracy at the moment.47 The same difficulty of aggregation is to be found with regard to the other regular sources of ducal income. John IV paid considerable 42

For example, Renaudin, op. cit. p. 160. This summary is based on the collection of ducal letters which I am making. It cannot be illustrated fully here, but on the theme of Fairs and Markets of the conference at Dinan, September 1972, we can note the grant of a fair at Poterie de Fontenay (2 April 1380, Bib. Nat., MS. fr. 22331 f. 445); letters authorizing Silvestre de la Feuillee to hold a fair at Tressignaux (6 June 1385, Arch. dep. des C6tes-du-Nord, E 2492); institution of a fair at St-Jean-Brevelay and confirmation of one at Meneac in 1386 (Cartulaire du Morbihan, ed. P. Thomas-Lacroix, Bulletin de la societe polymathique du Morbihan, 1934-8, n° 598) and letters authorizing a fair at Chatillon-en-Vendelais (22 January 1389, Arch. Nat., AA 55). For gardening, infra p. 260. 44 Renaudin, op. cit., pp. 86-7, 100-1. 43

45 46

A.L.A., G555.

Renaudin, op. cit., p. 102; H. Touchard, Le commerce, pp. 5-26. I have not been able to consult Y. H. Nouailhat, 'L'administration et les revenus de la seigneurie de Rays d'apres le cartulaire des sires de Rays (1160-1449)' D.E.S. secondaire, Rennes 1957. 47 For the value of various domaines from which Jean de Bretagne, count of Penthievre, was to derive 8,000 1. p.a. see Preuves, ii. 655-6 and cf. Maitre, A.B., xxxviii (1928-9), passim. Some of the castellanies were, of course, his own but others were the duke's who had also been holding the rest.

248

The Creation of Brittany

attention to obtaining a share of the dues levied on merchandize passing through Breton ports. Agreements to this end were concluded with the bishops of St Malo and Quimper in 1365 and Treguier in 1394, whereby the duke took up to two-thirds of the receipts. But our knowledge of the sums derived from these taxes is scanty in the extreme and it is impossible even to make an informed guess, though a considerable traffic might be suspected.48 In the case of ducal brefs there is evidence of some decrease in ducal income in John IV's reign. Proceeds from the brefs sold at Bordeaux and La Rochelle in 1321 had reached 5,000 livres.49 At the end of the civil war John IV leased the ferm of the brefs at these two ports for 80 tuns of wine, 200 silver marks and 50 ecus p. a. (with the addition of 10 tuns p. a. if the price at Bordeaux fell below 25 ecus a tun), say 3,385 ecus p.a.,50 whilst by 1380 the ferm of the brefs at Bordeaux alone was leased for only 500 francs. Moreover the duke's enjoyment of revenues from this source had been frequently disrupted.51 With the economic revival of the 1380s and 1390s revenue from this source might have been expected to rise, but the overall income derived from brefs would still have formed only a minute percentage of the total revenues. As important, possibly more so, in terms of the amount of money handled are the occasional accounts of the administrators of the regale. At Nantes over 7001. passed through the receiver's hands from August 1398 to January 1399.52 As a result of the vacancy at Rennes in 1383-4 over 10,000 1. passed through the receiver's hands and there were two other vacancies of this see during John's reign.53 At Dol, a much poorer see, nearly 2,0001. was collected and spent in 1381-2;54 in the course ofjohn's reign there were seven vacancies there, from five of which John could have benefited.55 In all from over 30 vacancies in the nine Breton bishoprics during the period after 1364, John had the opportunity to exercise regale on about 25 occasions.56 It would be informative if we could total up the income from this source, not all of which was simply at

48 Cf. J. Darsel, 'Les seigneuries maritimes en Bretagne', Bull. phil. et hist., annee 1966, part I, pp. 42-3. H. Touchard, 'Les sources de 1'etude i quantitative de commerce medieval breton', Les sources de I'histoire maritime, ied. M. Mollat, Paris 1962, pp. 289-95. 49 Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. Delumeau, p. 162. 50 Jones, op. cit., pp. 205-7; in 1364 the mark of silver was worth 100 s tournois (F. de Saulcy, Documents relatifs a I'histoire des monnaies, Paris 1879, i, 62). 51 A.L.A., E 201. The fundamental article is H. Touchard, 'Les brefs de Bretagne', Rev. d'hist. econ. et so dale, xxxiv (1956), 116-40. 52 A.L.A., E 66, accounts of Jean de la Fontaine. 53 A.L.A., E 211, accounts of Guillaume Triquart. 54 A.L.A., E 61, accounts of Robert de Melece. 55 Further accounts of 1382-4, 1391-2 survive, ibid., E 62 et 63. 56 Vacancies calculated from P.B. Gams, Series Episcoporum, 2nd edn. Leipzig 1931.

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

249

the duke's disposal, though a large proportion of it was.57 John's income from other ecclesiastical sources was small - only once did the pope allow him to take a subsidy, for the marriage of his heir in 1396, and this was revoked six months later.58 As far as I am aware, there are no documents at all which throw light on the income John IV derived from his seignorage rights in the minting of coins. The mints in the duchy were extremely active throughout his reign and several documents point to the duke's interest in this aspect of his regalian rights.59 Earlier evidence, both from Brittany and France, suggests the profitability of these rights.60 At most, as with the case of individual rachat agreements, many of which were the outcome of a considerable struggle with his nobles, it is possible to see (or suspect) the duke obtaining substantial sums, either from the exercise of his rights, or from the bargains made to abrogate them. Succession to the Derval lands in 1394 was contentious whilst the new vicomte de Rohan paid the duke 3,000 1. in 1396 as compensation for the duke's rachat rights.61 It is only when we come to examine the 'irregular' or extraordinary sources of ducal income that we can begin to obtain any real indication of the scale of ducal financial operations. As a base line we may take Wyngreworth's accounts: in 1359-60 from a limited area, not even a half of the duchy, in wartime conditions, approximately 77,000 1. was raised, principally from ransoms on parishes.62 It is hardly surprising that John IV soon devised means of tapping this taxative potential of the

57 Cf. A.L.A., E 211, accounts of Guillaume Moreau, receiver of the diocese of Nantes, 1392-3, extracts from which have been published by La Borderie, Histoire, iv, 131-3. My impression is that this source of revenue is not as negligible for John IV's reign as Bellier-Dumaine implied it was for that of John V (A.B., xv (1900), 166). For further details on the extent and nature of regale rights see Melanges d'anheologie et d'histoire de Bretagne, 2 vols., Rennes 1855-8, i. 216-31 (Saint-Brieuc), ii, 29-35 (Treguier), 66-79 (Rennes). 58 Pocquet, Les papes, i. 437-8. 59 Cf. Touchard, Le commerce, pp. 97-100. A good catalogue of John IV's coinage can be found in F. Poey d'Avant, Monnaies feodales de France, Paris 1858, i. 90-135. For a pardon for an infringement of the duke's rights, Preuves, ii, 465 (1384) and for a description of these rights, ibid., 596 (1392). For a reciprocal currency arrangement between Brittany and Guyenne, ibid., 62 (1372). 60 In 1262 the mints at Rennes and Nantes yielded the duke 10,400 1. (Pocquet, Mems. de la soc. d'hist. et d'arch. de Bretagne, xxvi (1946), 62). For tables showing the amount of royal income from this source, Comptes du Tresor, 1296, 1316, 1384, 1477, ed. R. Fawtier, Paris 1930, pp. xlvii, Ivi-lxxi. In 1349 (p. Ixiv) 522,028 1. out of 781,746 1. was derived from monnayage. 61 A.L.A., E 151 (Derval); Preuves ii, 665-7 for agreements with Rohan (11 May 1396); Bib. mun., Nantes, cartons Bizeul, MS. 1691 n° 10 (29 June), quittance. 62 Cf. supra p. 243 and table in Fowler, Les Cahiers Veronnais, iv (1964) 84. I have used the rate of exchange £1 sterling = 61. tournois (Jones, op. cit., p. 215 n. 1).

250

The Creation of Brittany

duchy. But it is only in the later years of his reign that we can get an impression of the sums to be raised byfouages. That imposed in 1392-3, for example, was calculated to bring in 110,000 francs; an imposition of 30 50us on about 100,000/ew.x in 1394-5 should have produced about 150,000 francs,64 and a 2 francs fouage in 1379 may have brought in a slightly larger sum, though conditions in the duchy were disturbed as a result of the duke's exile and the attempt by Charles V to annex the duchy.65 Even the imposition offouages on limited areas of the duchy could result in the raising of substantial amounts.66 Similarly the occasional windfall, the ransom of Olivier, sire de Clisson, for 100,000 francs in 1387,67 the receipt of 120,000 francs as dowry for Jeanne of Navarre in the previous year,68 or the receipt of 16,000 (20,000) francs from Charles VI between October 1383 and February 1384,69 reveal a different scale of dealings from that generally met with in a study of the seigneurial side of John's finances. And it is frequently in connection with aspects of John's relations with England that the full scale of his operations becomes evident. La Borderie calculated that the duke's expenses in the years immediately after his assumption of power in 1364, in paying off his English debts, were in the region of 327,000 livres tournois. This figure needs to be analysed more closely. But I calculate that something in the region of just over 200,000 livres tournois was disbursed in payments to the English between 1364-73.71 It is especially with regard to items of war expenditure over the course of the reign, the 50,000 (possibly 70,000)

63

Preuves, ii, 589-90. A.L.A., E 167. 65 Preuves, ii. 229-30. Earlier in the year the Defence league had agreed 'qu'un franc soit leve sur chacun feu en la duche de Bretagne, pour contribuer a payer les Gens d'armes pour la garde du pays . . . et . . . que les revenus du duche de Bretagne ordinaires et extraordinaires, seront departis es Gens d'armes comme seront les fouages . . .', ibid., 215. 66 Planiol, Hist, des institutions, iii, 273 ff. for fouages. For later ones, see BellierDumaine, A.B., xv (1900), 169-71. 67 Preuves, ii, 540-2. No other ransom yielded so much. The vicomte du Fou paid John 1,000 francs after Auray (A.L.A., E 238 f. 47 r.) and a number of the obligations of English knights in the 1395 inventory may also have been for ransoms. John bought Robert de Ventadour for 240 marks sterling (A.L.A., E 120 n. 20 i, 1379) and, probably, John Bagot, knight for 580 francs and 4 silver marks (A.L.A., E 238 f. 64 r.). 68 A.L.A., E 7, Charles II of Navarre also promised John IV 6,000 1. p.a. on lands in Normandy. 69 Jones, op. cit., p. 94 n. 5. This sum came from monthly payments of 4,000 francs from his expenses at the peace conference at Saint-Omer from October 1383-February 1384. Quittances survive for all months except January, which was nevertheless probably paid. 70 Histoire, iv, 114. 71 Jones, op. cit., pp. 215-8. 64

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

251

francs spent on Brest between 1375-7,72 the 50,000 francs paid to a number of English captains in 1381,73 the further expenses incurred at the siege of Brest (1386-7),74 and at the time of its recovery in 1397, when at least 150,000 francs changed hands,75 that the magnitude of John's obligations is revealed. Besides these specific amounts which can be traced, the normal expenses of maintaining troops were high and all this points to a scale of income much greater than that which we can account for from traditional sources and which, we must conclude, was derived from fairly regular taxation.76 Other details can tell us something about John's ability to meet his heaviest commitments. Admittedly he almost entirely escaped from paying the biggest single obligation that he incurred - the 200,000 francs indemnity attached to the second treaty of Guerande (1381).77 It was also in the period immediately after this treaty that he contracted one of the biggest of his known loans, borrowing 10,000 francs from Gaston III, count of Foix, one of the richest and most financially astute of John's contemporaries.78 Likewise John escaped from, or rather, shifted the burden of the indemnity he was supposed to pay Clisson as a

72 A.L.A., E 214, the muster rolls of the garrison at Brest show at least 51,329 francs spent in wages and another document (ibid., E 212) indicates that John, lord Neville, utilized 20,035 francs, which he had found at Brest, for a similar purpose. There is no way of telling whether this latter sum was included in the former. 73 A.L.A., E 238 fols. 70 r. et 73 v., cf. Jones, op. cit., p. 91, n. 4. 74 A. de la Borderie, 'Le siege de Brest en 1387', Revue de Bretagne, de Vendee et d'Anjou, ii (1889), 198-203, printing a fragment of the treasurer's account. This shows over 35,000 1. passing through his hands from October 1386 to July 1387; La Borderie assumed that all the payments were on the siege, and certainly those made in July refer to expenses incurred there, but since these are the only details which survive and there is no full heading for the account, we cannot be sure that this was the case. The fragment is now kept in A.I. V., I F IIII. A.fouage was levied to finance the siege (Preuves, ii, 541). 75 120,000 francs to Richard II and over 30,000 francs to John Holland, earl of Huntingdon, captain of Brest and his men (A.L.A., E 120 nos 2 ii et 3 i, cf. Jones, op. cit., pp. 138-9). 76 Fouages seem to have been taken in the following years - 1365-7, 1369-72, 137982, 1386-7, 1392-5, 1397 - and may have been taken in several others. 77 Jones, op. cit., pp. 93-4. Only 12,500 francs appear to have been paid, although John was supposed to pay 8,000 francs of the sum he owed Charles VI to Jean du Juch, former captain of Conq for Charles V, for royal debts still owing to him in 1382 (Preuves, ii, 416). 78 A.L.A., E 209 (18 June 1382), cf. ibid., E 238 f. 80 r., 'Item, une lettre soubz instrument o le seau du conte de Foix de quittance pour le due de X mille frans contenant en la soubscription "Autre quittance pour Mons. de X M frans qu'il devoit au Conte de Foix"'. For Gaston III and his finances, P. Tucoo-Chala, Gaston Febus et la vicomte de Beam, 1343-1391, Bordeaux 1960, pp. 135-47. No document concerning this transaction appears in M. Tucoo-Chala's catalogue of Gaston's actes (cf. pp. 422-4). On Gaston's death it was found that he had amassed 737,550 florins of Beam in his tower at Orthez (ibid., p. 146).

252

The Creation of Brittany

result of a series of agreements between 1388-95.79 But in both these cases, over the Guerande terms and those with Clisson, payment was avoided, we might suspect, not simply because the duke was povertystricken and unable to meet his obligations, but because these were disputatious political matters. Some of the evidence for the 1390s suggests that by then John's financial position was relatively healthy. The duke is to be found contracting a number of loans, but even the largest of these, 2,350 livres tournois from two merchants of Angers in 1397 or 7,000 francs from Andre du Moulin, changeur of Paris, in 1398,80 are fairly unimportant in relation to the total sums passing through ducal hands, and there is no evidence of the perennial indebtedness or rash borrowing which characterizes the finances of a number of John's contemporaries.81 In 1396 the duke is found engaged in certain small exchange deals to meet pressing debts, but his loan repayments seem generally to have been prompt.82 In 1394 John received 50,000 francs for the release of Sable castle.83 The dowry of Jeanne de France, betrothed to the count of Montfort, was fixed at 150,000 francs. A number of small gifts had also been received from Charles VI, such as 5,000 francs in 1392 and 10,000 in 1398.84 This income might have been offset by the payment of 100,000 francs as the dowry of John's daughter, Marie, wedded to the count of Perche in 1396, had not John failed to fulfil the terms of the agreement - a failure which eventually led to war with the duke of Alencon in 1431. John IV seems to have paid only 25,000 francs of the stipulated sum.85 But the duke's ability to raise speedily and without any great signs of strain the 150,000 francs required to recover Brest in the early summer of 1397 again suggests it was a matter of politics rather than a lack of hard cash which dictated John's parsimony over his daughter's dowry.86 79

F. Bruel, 'Inventaire de meubles et de titres trouves au chateau de Josselin a la mort du Connetable de Clisson, 1407', B.E.C., Ixvi (1905), 204 n. 8 and nos. 4-24 of the published inventory. 80 A.L.A., E 209. For Moulin, see Rey, Les finances, pp. 388-90. La Borderie exaggerated the extent of John's borrowing from the merchants of Nantes and Rennes (400,000 francs, Histoire, iv, 128) by converting the sums into modern values and multiplying by a factor of 50. 81 Cf. Leguai, Le Bourbonnais, esp. pp. 280 ff; F. Lehoux, 'Le due de Berri, les Juifs et les Lombards', Revue historique, ccxv (1956), 38-57. For a general view of the noble way of life and its financial and political implications in France at this time, P. S. Lewis, Later Medieval France. The Polity, London 1968, pp. 201-37. 82 J. Geslin de Bourgogne et A. de Barthelemy, Anciens eveches de Bretagne. Diocese de Saint-Brieuc, iii (Rennes 1864), p. ccxlii; cf. supra p. 246. 83 Preuves, ii. 629. 84 Ibid., 592 (Marriage settlement). The dowry was not, of course, to be paid all at once; A.L.A., E 104 (gifts). 85 A.L.A. E 8 (4 Aug. 1396), quittance from Peter, count of Alencon, for 25,000 francs. For the later history of the dowry, Bellier-Dumaine, A.B., xv (1900), 178, 185. 86 Jones, op. cit., pp. 138-9.

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

253

In the absence of good indications of what his annual income was, a closer examination of certain aspects of the duke's expenditure may help to determine the size of his budget. We can certainly get some information on the expense involved in running the ducal household (and that of the duchess). Eight orders to the receiver-general in the last half of 1393 show at least 8,069 1. being spent on or through the household.87 This can be compared with Planiol's figure for the household of John V in the 1420s of 8,000 1. p.a. or more.88 Other fragments of household accounts during John IV's reign suggest that this figure is a low one and that household expenses ran well in excess of 8,000 1. p.a. Expenditure on the day-to-day purchase of provisions and on the domestic departments of the household seem to average 30 livres a day early in the reign - a total of 11,000 1. p.a.89 The paucity of evidence for payments to ducal officials - the Chancellor, the gens des comptes, clerks, legal officers, receivers and so on, nevertheless reveals that considerable sums were necessary by the 1380s and 1390s for the administration of the duchy.90 The duke also paid a number of pensions and fief-rentes to nobles, councillors and other retainers.91 The two biggest permanent pensions (had they ever been paid regularly and in full) were the one of 10,0001. originally granted to Jeanne de Penthievre by the first treaty of Guerande, which was in fact largely paid by 87 88

A.I.V., I F IIII.

Hist, des institutions, Hi. 70. 89 Cf. Melanges d'arch. et d'hist., i. 151-5; Pocquet, Bui. et mems. de la soc. arch, du dep. d'llle-et-Vilaine, Ixix (1953); A.I.V., I F IIII. Whenever John IV considered retiring to England in the 1380s or 1390s he asked for a pension of £10,000 (60,000 1. t.) to maintain his style of life (for example, in 1388, Jones, op. cit. p. 110). Does this give us some indication of the real costs of his household? 90 Henri le Barbu, bishop of Vannes and chancellor, was receiving a pension of 1,000 1. in 1393, the treasurer 600 1. p.a. in wages in 1393-4, members of the chambre des comptes 100 1. or 200 1. and the clerk of the accounts 80 1. (cf. 1408, when the chambre wages came to 580 1. for the year, Bellier-Dumaine, A.B., xv (1900), 176). Foresters on the domaine got 12 1. p.a. in the 1390s (A.I.V., I F IIII). At a slightly later date the duke of Burgundy spent approximately 50% of his income on his administration (Comptes generaux de Vetat Bourguignon entre 1416 et 1420, ed. M. Mollat and R. Favreau, Paris 1965, p. xliv). 91 Eustache de la Houssaie was in receipt of 250 1. p.a. on the castellany of Dinan in 1369 and was still receiving this sum in 1384 when it was paid from the proceeds of the regale of Rennes, and the pension was confirmed in 1398 (A.L.A., E 154, 211, 143). Antoine Rys received a pension of 1001. p.a. from 1381 and Alain de Malestroit, lord of Oudon, received 6,000 1. and a pension of 200 1. p.a. in 1387 (ibid., E 152). Many of the agreements between John and his captains for the holding of castles included monetary clauses, and all were in receipt of wages (e.g. Jean de St-Gilles received 500 francs p.a. for St-Aubin-du-Cormier, ibid., E 140). For other such agreements, ibid., E 136-143 passim. Councillors received 200 1. p.a. under John V and local domaine receivers 20-30 1. (Bellier-Dumaine, A.B., xv (1900), 176). There might be up to 30 or 40 councillors at any period during John IV's reign (Jones, op. cit., pp. 38-40).

254

The Creation of Brittany

Charles V, and that of 8,000 1. granted to her son in 1388.92 Military costs, even for the maintenance of minimal forces, let alone the waging of campaigns, the building, repair and defence of castles, were extremely heavy; the upkeep of 127 knights and men-at-arms and 38 crossbowmen for a month in and around Nantes in 1387 was 1,604 I.93 The fragment of the treasurer's account from October 1386 to July 1387, published by La Borderie, reveals at least 35,000 1. passing through his hands. This was a time of considerable diplomatic and military activity. In July 1387 alone, the treasurer disbursed 6,000 1. on the siege of Brest and this had lasted well over a year.94 A troop of 70 soldiers under the command of John Cornwall cost at least 6,950 1. for a few months service in 1391-2.95 A ducal ordonnance of 1386 or 1387 fixed rates of pay for soldiers at 15 1. per month (180 livres p. a.) for a knight, 10 1. per month (120 1. p.a.) for an ordinary man-at-arms and 8 1. per month (96 1. p.a.) for a crossbowman.96 A campaign lasting a month with a force of only 500 men (say, 25 knights, 400 men-at-arms and 75 crossbowmen) would cost almost 5,000 I.;97 the maintenance of such a force in garrisons around the duchy for a year, 60,000 I.98 In August 1392 the treasurer spent more than 3,700 1. on soldiers and harness for a force which could scarcely have numbered 300 men;99 it is inconceivable that this was the limit of the duke's expenditure or the sum total of his forces at a time when he was threatened by the invasion of a royal army numbering 7-8,000 men in a campaign costing the king 150,000 I.100 The conclusions to be obtained from all the foregoing account are disappointing and hardly sufficient to allow any meaningful comparisons with the size of the revenues of John IV's contemporaries. 92

Preuves, i. 1591; A.L.A., E 165 no. 8 (quittance, 1366); Arch. Nat., J 240 nos. 38 et 38 bis (1372); Preuves, ii. 655-6. 93 Bib. Nat. MS. fr. 22331 p. 4 no. 264, p. 57 nos. 337-9. 94 Supra p. 251 n. 74. 95 A.L.A., E 238 f. 70 r. et E 120 no. 8. 96 Cf. Bib. Nat., MS. fr. 22331 p. 26 no. 152, p. 54 no. 307. 97 John allowed Jean, sire de Rieux et de Rochefort, to lead a force of 500 lances in the service of Charles VI in 1386 (British Museum, Add. Ch. 3350). 98 The duke probably had 20-30 castles or small fortified residences which would have to be garrisoned in wartime and which would carry a skeleton staff during more peaceful times. The Chronicon Briocense, which is generally fairly accurate with regard to numbers, states that the duke had a force of 5,500 troops in the campaign against Clisson in 1394; Preuves, i, 72 'Aderant autem in illo exercitu quern secum habebat ex suo Ducatu Britannic. V. millia et DLVI. homines armati, videlicet II. millia et quinginti milites et armigeri arma sua in suis tuniculis super se defferentes, et III millia ac LVI arbalistarii, sagitarii et servitores seu famuli egregie armati'. 99 A.I.V., I F IIII. 100 Rey, Les finances, p. 387, n. 2, 411, cf. Jones, op. cit. p. 129, n. 2 for some of John's other precautions in 1392.

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

255

But relying, principally, on the information contained in M Rey's books on royal finances, supplemented by works on other individual princes, some tentative statements may be advanced. There is, of course, a danger inherent in compiling what is in effect a league table of princely incomes. What is important is not so much the total size of these incomes in relation to one another, but how much income could be devoted by the prince to particular projects and schemes, to nonrecurrent expenditure or generally disposed of in a flexible manner. Some princes overspent their incomes for long periods and incurred heavy debts, but they could not go on doing this indefinitely without completely alienating their creditors or provoking political crises, and there is no evidence that John IV fell into this category of prodigal princes. The apparent disparity between the size of royal revenues and those of the duke of Burgundy (or indeed, those of the pope), is somewhat diminished in real terms when it is discovered that much of the king's income was automatically absorbed in paying for the royal administration or in supplementing the revenues of the princes.10 The king's ability to dispose at will of his much greater resources was severely limited and the spending power of princely revenues consequently enhanced. But bearing these qualifications in mind we may proceed to some comparisons. The best known case is that of Philip the Bold, duke of Burgundy (1363-1404). During the middle years of his reign (the late 1380s and 1390s) he could dispose of 400-450,000 francs p.a. 102 In 1395 preparing for a projected crusade an estimate was drawn up which purported to show that the duke might be able to raise 519,000 francs for this special campaign. By 1400 gifts and pensions from the crown were contributing around 175,000 francs p.a., ducal domaines produced about 180,000 francs and aides, both royal ones and those levied by the duke, ran at about 60,000 francs p.a. each over the period 1384-1403. In effect, about half of Burgundy's revenues were contributed by the crown and half derived from the exploitation of ducal rights and the domaine. Burgundy's two closest rivals in political and financial power were his brother John, duke of Berry (1360-1416), and his nephew Louis, duke of Orleans (1392-1407). Berry's financial position is difficult to assess and all that can be said with confidence is that his expenses in

101

Rey, Les finances, esp. pp. 580 ff. M Rey estimates that probably 800,000 1. t. p. a. (a third of the product of the aides') went on pensions to the princes. For an interesting comparison of royal, princely and papal finances, J. Favier, Les finances pontificates a Vepoque du Grand Schisme d'Occident, 1378-1409, Paris 1966, pp. 689-91 and for a summary table, B. Guenee, L'Occident aux XIV* et XV" siecles. Les Etats, Paris 1971, p. 180. 102 Vaughan, Philip the Bold, pp. 226-36. For a comparison of royal and Burgundian finances at a slightly later date, Comptes generaux, ed. Mollat and Favreau, pp. xxxviii ff.

256

The Creation of Brittany

1413-14 seem to indicate an annual revenue in the region of 300-350,000 1. and that this was not sufficient to cover his expenses.103 As for Orleans, in 1404-5 his income has been calculated to be 453,159 1. Of this amount, 250,000 1. was derived from royal gifts and pensions, whilst income from aides, the faille and gabelle contributed another 160,000 1. Pointing out that in this year Orleans achieved a rough parity with the duke of Burgundy in financial matters, M Nordberg comments 'II n'est pas exagere de dire que du point de vue financier, Louis d'Orleans dependait presque entierement du roi'.104 Louis II, duke of Anjou (1384-1417), may have had an income in the region of 150,000 1. or more, with money derived from royal grants again accounting for as much as 50% of this.105 Louis, duke of Bourbon (1356-1410), had seen his royal pension climb from 12,000 francs p.a. to 36,000 francs by 1400 and his total revenues may have fluctuated between 80-120,000 francs p.a.106 John, duke of Alencon (1404-15), it has been estimated, had an annual income of 70-80,000 francs and his father, who died in 1404, probably enjoyed comparable revenues in his last years. 7 Again the percentage derived from royal pensions and aides is a considerable one: the same is, mutatis mutandis, true for other noble families and the great officers of the crown.108 In territorial terms the duke of Brittany with 35,000 km2 possessed lands nearly three times the extent of those of the duke of Bourbon and over two thirds those of the dukes of Burgundy and Berry. Bourbon has been described as 'le plus mal dote des princes a fleur de lys' and his 13,000 km 2 as 'de peuplement mediocre et de richesses tres douteuses'.110 Berry's lands, despite their greater extent (around 50,000 km2) were only moderately productive, largely lay away from the main 103

Rey, Les finances, pp. 593-7; Lehoux, Rev. hist., ccxv (1956), 57. Nordberg, Les dues et la royaute, pp. 22-3; Rey, op. cit., pp. 602-4. 105 Rey, op. cit., pp. 592-3. 106 My calculations from ibid., pp. 590-2; Leguai, Le Bourbonnais, pp. 256 ff. prudently refrains from any aggregate estimate of annual income. But he describes the efforts made to reform Bourbon's finances, quoting the very pertinent remarks of Pierre de Nourry on Bourbon's extravagant style of life and its consequences for his master's finances, ibid., pp. 283-90. 107 Rey, op. cit., pp. 582-3. 108 Ibid., pp. 584-5 for remarks about the finances of the counts of St-Pol and Tancarville (cf. Lewis, op. cit., p. 221 on those of Guy VI de la Tremoille), and ibid., pp. 573-7, 580-2 for the officers. Although Rey points out that they must be exonerated from some of the more extreme criticism of their preying on royal finances nevertheless the general point about their dependence on royal favours for a large percentage of their income remains true. 109 Cf. Bourbon's 13,000 km 2 and the 50,000 km 2 of the dukes of Berry and Burgundy (Rey, op. cit., pp. 590, 594). M Touchard's slip -25,000 km 2 Le commerce, p. 3 - was pointed out by P. Contamine, in his compte-rendu, Le May en Age, Ixxvi (1970), 373. 110 Rey, op. cit., p. 590. 104

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

257

currents of commerce and for considerable periods were subjected to the ravages of the routier companies.111 As for the duke of Burgundy's territories, they included some of the most densely populated rural areas as well as some of the most heavily industrialised regions of northern Europe in Flanders, Hainaut, Picardy and Artois,11 whilst in the duchy and county of Burgundy, wine and salt were coming to be important items in interregional trade. 1K The duke of Brittany's lands share a number of the characteristics just observed in the royal apanages. There is evidence for poverty in parts of the interior where agriculture was unrewarding and there were no major trade routes.11 On the other hand increasing activity along the coastline, partly associated with the participation of Bretons in the important coastal trade based on the trans-shipment of wine, salt and agricultural products, partly based on fishing, and partly on the growth of the rural textile industry in the duchy, points to a relatively heavy density of population. M Touchard has calculated that there may have been as many as 1,000,000-1,250,000 inhabitants in the duchy at the end of the fourteenth century. 115 The purpose of these last remarks is that (if this admittedly unsatisfactory line of reasoning is followed) we might conclude that the duke's income in the late fourteenth century would be more than comparable with that of the duke of Bourbon, possibly as great as that of the duke of Anjou, and conceivably even larger: somewhere between 100-150,000 livres p.a., a figure which can be compared with the very similar revenues of fifteenth-century dukes before Francis II.115aSuch a sum would be acceptable in the light of the duke's known sources of income and the levels of his expenditure. If this is the case, John IV's achievement needs to be emphasised - the princes of the fleur de lys drew a very considerable proportion of their revenue from royal sources, most of them 50% or more over a number of years. John IV did not need to ask for royal permission to take afouage although the 111

Cf. Lehoux, Jean de France, ii, passim. " N. J. G. Pounds, 'Population and Settlement in the Low Countries and Northern France in the Later Middle Ages', Revue Beige de philologie et d'histoire, xlix (1971), 369402, with maps, and citing earlier literature. 113 R. Vaughan, Philip the Good, London 1970, pp. 238-67, a chapter on economic affairs which has a retrospective value for the period at the end of the fourteenth century since in neither of his two previous books on the Valois dukes had Prof. Vaughan discussed the economy of their lands at any length. 114 This very brief sketch is based on Touchard, Le commerce. 115 Ibid., p. 55. For an earlier attempt to work out the population of the duchy in the fifteenth century, H. Touchard, 'La consommation et l'approvisionnement en vin de la Bretagne medievale', Mems. de la soc. d'hist. et d'arch. de Bretagne, xl (1960), 33-5 where a total of 700-750 000 inhabitants is tentatively advanced (p. 34, n. 38). 115a Planiol, Hist, des institutions, iii, 238-9. 1

258

The Creation of Brittany

King claimed he did.116 But unlike his contemporaries, he did not receive a regular and increasingly large royal pension nor large occasional gifts to supplement his income. Because of his early connection with the English and the independent policy which he pursued after 1364, he was never able to establish a claim to royal largesse, and he had to rely chiefly on income he could derive by his own efforts from the duchy. To reverse La Borderie's jibe, we may say that he never became one of the king of France's regular pensioners.1 It may be a sign of this limitation to John's financial resources that the duke, unlike almost all his contemporaries, does not appear to have spent lavishly on his court and that his patronage of the arts was largely restricted to expenditure on buildings, many of which had a severely functional purpose. The Valois family had set a pattern of royal expenditure on luxury items which was quickly copied. In the case of Charles V there were political motives behind his connoisseurship.118 But the extravagance of the duke of Berry is proverbial and his enthusiasm for the arts led him to devote very large sums, some of which were handed to him for political purposes, to the beautification and furnishing of his residences.119 His other brothers and nephews were not far behind him - Nicolas de Bataille's tapestry, The Apocalypse, made for Louis I, duke of Anjou, Philip of Burgundy's Charterhouse at Champmol, the manuscripts possessed by the leading magnates, all point to the rich tastes of these patrons.1 In the case of John IV I do not think that there is a single manuscript, painting or tapestry of his which has either survived or for which we have his commission. The only manuscript which can be associated with the duchess Jeanne before her marriage to Henry IV of England is a breviary, now lost, left to her in 1395.121 Guillaume de Saint-Andre, the 116

Arch. Nat., J 243 nos. 69-70 (1384). 'Le serf d'Edouard III', A. de la Borderie, 'La guerre de Blois et de Montfort, 134164', Etudes historiques bretonnes, 2e serie, Paris 1888, p. 197, Bellier-Dumaine, A. B. xv (1900), 173-4, for royal gifts and pensions to John V who, on occasion, received considerable sums, though like his father, he does not appear to have enjoyed regular payments. 118 There are a few suggestive remarks (which require, however, much greater definition and authentication) in P. Pradel, 'Art et politique sous Charles V, Revue des Arts, i (1951), 89-93. The Valois concern for books is much better documented: L. Delisle, Recherches sur la librairie de Charles V, roi de France, 1337-1380, 2 vols. Paris 1907. 119 300 000 1. delivered to him in 1385 by the king was spent largely on luxuries (Lehoux, Jean de France, ii. 162-3). It has been noted that many of the duke of Burgundy's loans were contracted for purposes of consumption, especially on luxuries (Comptes generaux, ed. Mollat and Favreau, p. xlvii). 120 Cf. most recently from a large literature, R. Planchenault, L'Apocalypse d''Angers, Paris 1966; Vaughan, Philip the Bold, pp. 188-207; M. Meiss, French Painting in the time of Jean de Berry, i. The Late XIV Century and the Patronage of the Duke, 2 vols. London 1969; ii. The Boucicaut Master, London 1968. 121 L. Delisle, 'Notice sur un Psautier du XIIIe siecle appartenant au comte de Crawford', B.E.C., Iviii (1897), 392-3. 117

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

259

duke's secretary, wrote a verse life of his master, but otherwise there are few signs of an interest in or patronage of literary pursuits at the ducal court.1213 There is evidence that John enjoyed music,1 but there is little to suggest a very opulent court life in the ducal manors and castles.123 The duke did establish an order of chivalry, the Ermine, and endowed the chapel of St Michel at Auray with 600 1. p.a. in rents from the ducal domaine.124 Like most nobles John contributed to the foundation, endowment, building and repair of ecclesiastical institutions; he seems to have particularly favoured the Dominican order. He confirmed the grants of his predecessors and further burdened his successors in perpetuity with regular payments to many houses. 125 But the size of the ducal household, and that of his three 121a Cf. F. Lecoy, 'Guillaume de St-Andre et son "Jeu des echecs moralises"', Romania, Ixvii (1942-3), 491-503. 122 La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 132; Planiol, op. cit., iii. 124. In both instances this is very conventional. 123 The evidence for the size of the household reveals a relatively modest establishment (Jones, op. cit., pp. 40-1). Burgundy's court in the mid-1380s comprised 200-350 members (Vaughan, Philip the Bold, p. 190) and the duke of Berry's was about the same size (Lacour, op. cit., p. 152), whilst the count of Alencon's in 1404 numbered 236 (Rey, Les finances, p. 583). The Breton court did not reach this kind of figure until the 1420s after the duke of Burgundy's reforms of the early fifteenth century and when a number of posts were held in rotation (Planiol, Hist, des institutions, iii. 54 ff.). The ducal household accounts show cloth, wine, skins and furs and other items being bought for the duke but even where expensive goods were acquired the amounts involved are small (A.I.V., I F IIII & La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 131-2). In 1388 Thomas Maidon, the duke's goldsmith, was given 6 marks of silver 'pour parachever levrage de un pot, une cuiller et unes fourcheittes dargent qui li avons ordone affaire pour nostre gingebre vert' (Bib. Nat., MS. Clairambault 48 no. 206). In 1384 he had received ISVa marks (approximately 1,137 1. t.) from the duke for plate etc. (La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 131). 1-4 Preuves, ii. 356-7, 445-6; Cartulaire du Morbihan, no. 589. 123 The biggest single payment for which evidence survives is the 4,000 francs John gave to the Dominicans ofRennes for the rebuilding of their house in 1371 (A.I.V., 18 H 2). Some other examples from the early period of John's reign: grant of land to the Dominicans of Nantes (1 May 1365, A.L.A., H 299 no. 39); letters on behalf of the hospital of Tredias (21 June 1365, Preuves, i. 1605-6); letters of exemption from various dues, granted to the abbey of Mont-St-Michel (11 May 1366, Bib. Nat., MS. fr. 22326, p. 717); permission to the abbey of Prieres to possess upto 100 1. of rent on various amortized lands granted by William, lord Latimer (4 July 1366, Preuves, ii. 165); confirmation of various rents due to St-Gildas-de-Rhuys (25 November 1367, Cartulaire du Morbihan, no. 558). Was John the donor of two reliquaries which still belong to the church of St-Gildas (Congres archeologique de France, lxxxi c session, tenue a Brest et a Vannes en 1914, Paris 1919, p. 377 and plate)? One of these shows Christ on the Cross between John and Mary. In 1361 John IV had married Mary, daughter of Edward III (cf. Jones, op. cit., p. 17). By an order of 3 September 1393 to the 'gens du chappitre de Vennes' the duke gave 20 silver marks 'Pour enchasser partie des reliques de Saint Salomon et de Saint Gfrallon] jadis roys de Bretaigne predecessours de monseignour' (A.I.V., I F IIII). For the burdening of lay heritages with ecclesiastical commitments, cf. Boutruche, op. cit., 27385; Leguai, op. cit., pp. 256-64.

260

The Creation of Brittany

successive wives, does not suggest a style of living matching up to that of several of his most powerful contemporaries, despite the discovery of a number of ducal orders which suggested to La Borderie overfeeding of the household.126 Looked at objectively and in the light of what is now known about the household expenditure of other fourteenth-century princes, the picture which emerges in Brittany is again one of restraint and the enjoyment of more frugal, provincial even rustic pleasures. Only with regard to expenditure on buildings, especially on ducal castles, where besides the military works, there is also evidence for expenditure on the gardens at Vannes, Sucinio and Nantes, can any hints of extravagance be detected even though here too a more prosaic culinary reason may have stimulated interest.127 Important military works were undertaken during the reign at Auray, Nantes, Sucinio, Guerande, Vannes and at Dinan, besides the towers built alongside the episcopal towns of Quimper (Odet), St Brieuc (Cesson) and St Malo (Solidor). It would be interesting to have a more detailed study of this aspect of John's rule.128 If John IV did not fall into heavy debt neither was he able to build up the private treasure that his ancestor John II had done,129 and it was not until John V's reign that the tresor de I'epargne was established.130 Nevertheless, since even La Borderie commented that John IV's imposts were not excessive, the impression we gather of his financial administration is that of a government carefully exploiting its reserves to the best advantage. It is true that this image may simply be a reflection of the inadequacy of our records and the destruction of material remains. And in view of the financial limitations which some aspects of John's career as duke imply, perhaps we should take a less sanguine view of John's financial position and the ability of his duchy to pay than I have suggested. It is an open question whether this apparently prudent use of economic resources was enforced or simply acquired by habit as a result of John's many misfortunes. Brittany was, after all, one of the states which developed in later medieval France whose eventual growth and political independence was halted by its lack of adequate resources in the face of a monarchy which had regained possession of the finances the princes were squandering at the end of the 126

Supra, p. 252 and n. 85. John IV may have liked fresh vegetables as much as his son, cf. Pocquet, B.E.C., Ixxvii (1916), 94 no. 12, 'A Jehan Houoet, Jardier, du don de monseigneur, pour ce qu'il lui avoit apporte et fourny par pluseurs foiz de febves nouvelles d'un sienn jardrin de Vennes . . .', (1436). For John IV's gardens see, in the first instance, La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 133. 128 See now Chapter II above. 129 Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. Delumeau, p. 161. 130 Bellier-Dumaine, A.B., xv (1900), 167, 182. 131 Histoire, iv. 114. 127

The Finances of John IV of Brittany

261

fourteenth century. 132 This has been very much an essay of negatives and qualifications, though I think that further closer investigation of a number of the topics touched upon, together with a more careful collection of the data which has survived, will give us in the future more accurate material for estimating the size of ducal income, for establishing patterns of expenditure or levels of taxation in the duchy and enabling further comparisons to be made, dangerous, though it may be to generalize from such limited evidence. What the records do suggest is a general confirmation and extension back into the fourteenth century of the views expressed by M Touchard for the fifteenth on the restricted, fragile economic wealth and potential of the duchy, even when political circumstances enabled its duke to exploit his position between England and France. Pockets of flourishing local trade generating wealth can be observed; the natural fertility of population in an era of contraction is significant; the effects of warfare in stimulating the economy and governmental developments must be remembered alongside its deleterious effects but these characteristics should not be exaggerated in assessing economic well-being. As far as the financial administration of John IV is concerned we can observe a competent government adapting to changing circumstances and, within its limits, providing the duke with the resources which enabled him to forward successfully his political ambitions. John IV cannot be blamed if these resources eventually proved, in changed conditions, to be inadequate for Brittany's pretensions to independence.

132

Cf. the remarks of the Milanese ambassadors on the duke's difficulties at the time of the War of the Public Weal, 1465, Depeches des ambassadeursmilanais, ed. B. deMandrot and C. Samaran, iii (Paris 1920), 89, 120, 183. Francis II enjoyed an income of just over 200,000 1. at the beginning of his reign and he had doubled this by the 1480s (Planiol, op. cit., iii. 238-9).

262

The Creation of Brittany

Additional Note The conclusions of this article appear to have been broadly accepted (cf. J. P. Leguay & H. Martin, Pastes et malheurs de la Bretagne ducale, 12131532, Rennes 1982, pp. 185-92), but knowledge of the personnel and mechanisms for raising revenue have been transformed by the recent exhaustive treatment of J. Kerherve, 'Finances et gens de finances des dues de Bretagne, 1365-1491', These de doctorat de 1'fitat, Universite de Paris I 1986. Particularly important is his treatment of the monetary policies of the dukes but all aspects of central and local financing are considered. However unless significant new documentation is discovered the problem of aggregating revenues will remain. Since writing the original article the appearance of my Recueil des actes dejean IV, due de Bretagne, Paris 2 vols 1980-3 has added to the financial records available for John IV's reign. But chance discoveries can still be made, like that of fragments of an account of a receiver of Vannes forfouages in 1399-1400, among the remarkable donation of manuscripts from Dr Le Breton to the abbey of Landevennec, which came to light during a search in September 1986. In 1984 I also had the good fortune to acquire ExPhillipps MS. 18465, which contains transcripts (some unpublished) from fifteenth-century ducal accounts, supplementing those found in Dom Lobineau and Dom Morice; these were made available to M Kerherve.

XI THE RANSOM OF JEAN DE BRETAGNE, COUNT OF PENTHlfeVRE: AN ASPECT OF ENGLISH FOREIGN POLICY, 1386-1388 THE ransoming of important prisoners in the later middle ages was often a long process, producing extensive documentary evidence which has survived to enable historians to study various aspects and implications of individual ransoms. The ransoms of David II and James I of Scotland are cases in point where negotiations were prolonged and payments delayed.1 In the case of David II and Jean II of France, Edward III made political as well as financial capital out of his captives. For the immediate financial details of the ransoms were often subordinated to political considerations affecting national issues. Jean IFs unpaid ransom was still an issue in Anglo-French affairs as late as the reign of Henry V and the victor at Agincourt manipulated his prisoners for political ends besides the usual financial ones.2 The importance of this diplomatic aspect of ransoming has already been partially recognized. What is less frequently emphasized is that the political circumstances leading to the arrangement of a ransom could be influenced by disputes between the ransomers themselves. The ransom of Charles, duke of Orleans, in 1439-40 after a captivity dating from 1415 is an example of this.3 The principal political interest of the ransom of Jean de Bretagne, count of Penthievre, in 1387 lies in the divisions this caused among the English, who were ransoming him, and among the various parties in France who were anxious to advance or retard his release. Yet as well as the political factors influencing negotiations concerning ransoms, the repercussions of the ransoms themselves on the persons concerned and their families are worthy of study. Besides the diplomatic and financial aspects of ransoming4 there are also administrative and social *£. W. M. Balfour-Melville, Edward HI and David II (Historical Association Pamphlet, G. 27, 1954); Balfour-Melville, 'Papers relating to the captivity and release of David II', Miscellany of the Scottish Historical Society, ix (1958), 1-56; Balfour-Melville, The English Captivity of James I, King of Scots (Hist. Assoc. Leaflet, no. 77, 1929); A. F. O'D. Alexander, 'The War with France in 1377* (unpublished London Ph.D. thesis, 1934), p. 120. 2 'The Ransom of John II, King of France, 1360-70', ed. D. M. Broome, Camden Miscellany, xiv (1926); R. Delachenal, Histoire de Charles V (Paris, 1909-31), ii. 325-31; E. F. Jacob, The Fifteenth Century (Oxford, 1961), p. 140; A. Leguai, 'Le probleme des rancons au XVe siecle; la captivit£ de Jean ler due de Bourbon', Cahiers d'histoire, vi (1961), 41-58. 3 C. T. Allmand, 'The Anglo-French Negotiations, 1439',BIHR, xl(i967), 14 ff.; P. Champion, Vie de Charles d'Orle'ans (i394-1465) (Paris, 1911), pp. 398-404. 4 Cf. P. Marchegay, 'La rancon d'Olivier de Coetivy, seigneur de Taillebourg, et se"n6chal de Guyenne, 1451-77', Bibliotheque de I'e'cole des Chartes, xxxviii (1877), 5-48 for an extensive dossier on the financial aspects of ransoming.

264

The Creation of Brittany

ones. The need to raise large sums of money quickly could lead to organizational innovations. This is illustrated by the impetus that the collection of Jean IPs £500,000 ransom gave to the development of the French royal taxation system.1 The corollary, the problems caused by the absorption of large amounts of specie into the country benefiting from the ransom, England in this instance, has not yet been exhaustively studied.2 But the study of individual ransom cases has already provided valuable information on the effects of war as a contributory factor to social change in the later middle ages. Warfare and ransoming could be profitable for some people. The social advance of Sir John Fastolf and his minions through war profits, including ransoms, has been admirably demonstrated.3 On the other hand, the disastrous consequences of a heavy ransom on the fortunes of individuals and their families have been graphically shown in the cases of Jean, seigneur de Rodemack and Guillaume, seigneur de Chateauvillain. In the former case the family was completely disinherited and in the latter serious sacrifices of capital assets had to be made to pay for the litigation to which the ransom gave rise.4 The mortgaging and sale of parts of an estate to meet such exigencies can be illustrated from numerous examples on either side of the Channel during the Anglo-French war as it can from the case of Jean de Bretagne. The misfortunes of a prince or noble could mortgage the security and fortunes of succeeding generations of his family.5 In dealing with Jean de Bretagne three more particular points may be considered. First, his extended captivity was not the result of his own misfortunes in war but those of his father, who was captured at the battle of La Roche Derrien in 1347. Bretagne was held as a hostage for his father's 1 Cf. Delachenal, ii. 325-31; F. Lot and R. Fawtier, Histoire des Institutions francaises au Moyen Age, ii, Institutions royales (Paris, 1958), pp. 258-9. 2 Cf. H. Miskimin, Money, Prices and Foreign Exchange in iqth-Century France (New Haven and London, 1963), pp. in, 141. 3 K. B. McFarlane, 'The investment of Sir John Fastolf's profits of war', Trans. Royal Hist. Soc., 5th ser., vii (1957), 91-116; McFarlane, 'A business-partnership in war and administration 1421-45', Eng. Hist. Rev., Ixxviii (1963), 290-310. A parallel Breton example of the Molyneux-Winter contract is the alliance between Alain du Pare, seigneur de la Roche-Jagu and Jacob du Fou, 22 March 1425; A. de la Borderie, 'Une alliance d'armes au moyen age', Melanges d'histoire et d'archdologie bretonnes, ii (Rennes and Paris, 1858), 8-10. 4 A. Bossuat,' Les prisonniers de guerre au XVe siecle; la ran$on de Jean, seigneur de Rodemack', Annales de VEst, seme sir., 2eme annee (1951), 145-62; Bossuat, 'Les prisonniers de guerre au XVe siecle; la ranfon de Guillaume, seigneur de Chateauvillain', Annales de Bourgogne, xxiii (1951), 7-35. 5 Cf. P. le Cacheux, 'Compte de la vicomtd de Pont-Authou pour la ran9on d'Olivier du Guesclin', Soddtd de Vhistoire de Normandie, Melanges, 6eme ser. (1906), 307-30, and Pere Anselme, Histoire ge'ne'alogique et chronologique de la maison royale de France (Paris, 1726-33), vi. 186-7 f°r the example of the count of Longueville. Robert, Lord Moleyns was captured at Castillon in 1453. For his ransom see Dugdale, Baronage, ii. 209 and G. E. C., Complete Peerage, vi. 619 note a. His personal losses must be set against the general profit of his family in the French war. By Henry VII's reign they had recovered all but two of the manors lost by Robert, ex inf. K. B. McFarlane.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

265

ransom like the count of Denia's son who was a prisoner in England from 1367 to 1390.! Secondly, the arrangements for ransoming Charles de Blois and then his son, Bretagne, were complicated by political circumstances involving three main parties, England, France and Brittany. There were many interests which had to be reconciled before a final settlement could be reached. Thirdly, Bretagne's experience illustrates the personal risks taken by those who wanted to exploit the hostage. Private interests often clashed with the official policies of governments. In this case substantial sums of money changed hands but it is difficult to draw up a balance-sheet of profit and loss.2 The disputed succession to Duke Jean III of Brittany in 1341, which led to war between the two rival contenders for the title, Charles de Blois and Jean de Montfort, forms the immediate background to the misfortunes of Jean de Bretagne. Charles de Blois, Bretagne's father and claimant to the duchy through his marriage to Jeanne de Penthievre, had been declared duke of Brittany by Philip VI of France who sent his army to help Charles establish himself in the duchy. In November 1341 Jean de Montfort, half-brother to the late Jean III and uncle of Jeanne de Penthievre, was captured at Nantes by the Franco-Breton force and taken as a prisoner to Paris. However, before his capture he had already entered into negotiations with Edward III of England and during his captivity his wife made arrangements to hand over certain towns and castles in the duchy to the English who supported the Montfortists in the field. Civil war broke out and a decisive turning-point came in 1347 with the capture of Charles de Blois by Thomas Dagworth at the battle of La Roche Derrien.3 Dagworth was acting as Edward's lieutenant in the duchy and as representative of the young Jean de Montfort, since his father had died shortly after escaping from Paris and doing homage to Edward for Brittany in 1345. Blois was taken to England, and negotiations began for his release and the solution of the Breton succession question.4 The negotiations were protracted. Edward nearly reached an agreement with Blois in 1353 but it was not until 1

E. Perroy, ' Gras profits et rangons pendant la guerre de Cent Ans; 1'affaire du comte de Denia', in Melanges Louis Halphen (Paris, 1951), pp. 573-80; A. Rogers, ' Hoton versus Shakell: a ransom case in the Court of Chivalry, 1390-5', Nottingham Medieval Studies, vi (1962), 74-108, vii (1963), 53-78; the latest reference to the Denia ransom is 111 years after the count's capture: Col. Papal Registers: Papal Letters, xiii (1471-84), pp. 241-2. 2 A. Lefranc, Olivier de Clisson, connetable de France (Paris, 1898), pp. 283 ff. for an account of the ransom based almost exclusively on Froissart. A. Mirot's editorial comments (J. Froissart, Chroniques (Soc. de 1'hist. de France, xiii, 1957), pp. xlii-xlvii) although giving the fullest documentation of the case in print, are not entirely freed from Froissart's romantic embroideries. This edition (ed. S. Luce, G. Raynaud, and L. and A. Mirot, 14 vols., Paris 1869-1966 continuing), except where otherwise stated, is used throughout this article. 3 A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne (Rennes and Paris, 1896-1914), iii. 500 ff. 4 E. Deprez, 'La querelle de Bretagne', Me'ntoires de la sode'te' d'histoire et d'arche'ologie de Bretagne, vii (1926), 25 ff.

266

The Creation of Brittany

1356 that a final treaty was drawn up.1 The reasons for abandoning the previous agreement in which Edward would have recognized Blois as duke of Brittany and brought the Succession War to a conclusion, have never been satisfactorily explained. However, by the terms of the treaty of Westminster, 1356, Blois was allowed to go back to the duchy but he was not personally to take part in any fighting and Edward continued to support his Montfortist ward. Charles was to pay the enormous sum of 700,000 ecus (£116,666 13$. 4^.), although there were special clauses dealing with the rebates he was to receive for prompt payment of the individual instalments of the ransom. As sureties for the accomplishment of his promises, Blois left behind in England his two eldest sons Jean and Guy who had already been brought over in 1353 when the earlier treaty was about to be ratified. A few of the ransom instalments were paid but Blois soon fell into arrears and the civil war in Brittany, now absorbed into the wider AngloFrench conflict, continued.2 The treaty of Bretigny-Calais did not resolve the Breton conflict nor did further attempts to bring the rivals to an agreement in the years 1361-4.3 The intransigence of Jeanne de Penthievre, who refused to release her claims to the duchy, claims which had been implicitly endorsed by the king of France, has been considered the principal reason for the continuing failure to achieve a compromise in Brittany. Eventually her stubbornness led Charles de Blois to mount a campaign in which he met his death at the battle of Auray in September 1364. Since 1360 the kings of England and France had moved warily with regard to the Breton problem and the succession of Charles V to the French throne in April 1364 presaged no radical change in French attitudes which had been growing conciliatory for some time. The death of Blois enabled Charles V to withdraw his limited support of the Penthievre faction. Under the direction of his mediators a treaty was drawn up at Guerande on 12 April 1365 between Jean de Montfort, now recognized as Jean IV, duke of Brittany, and Jeanne de Penthievre.4 The first treaty of Guerande 1

Public Record Office, Exchequer Diplomatic Documents, £30/74(9 Aug. 1356). Edward Ill's confirmation is dated 10 Aug.: Foedera (Record Comm.), iii. 336. For the earlier 1353 draft treaty: F. Bock, 'Some new documents illustrating the early years of the Hundred Years War (1353-6)', Bull. John Rylands Libr., xv (1931), 84-91. 2 Blois was to pay his ransom at first in instalments of 100,000 &us, rebated to 50,000 per term if he could meet the stipulated dates. These were 24 June and i Nov. 1357, Easter and Michaelmas 1358, and then at the rate of 50,000 ecus at Easter and Michaelmas 1359-61. He managed to meet the first two dates despite some delays and received quittances for 100,000 ecus (Foedera, iii. 360, 382). But in 1358 one of the instalments was lost in transhipment across the Channel and he received no further quittances: De la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iii. 561. 3 Michael Jones, Ducal Brittany Jjd^-pp (Oxford, 1970), pp. 15, 18-19. 4 P. H. Morice, Memoires pour servir de preuves a Vhistoire eccUsiastique et civile de Bretagne (3 vols., Paris, 1742-6), i. 1588 ff., cited hereafter as Preuves. One of the mediators, Jean de Craon, archbishop of Reims, had helped to raise money in 1357 for Blois's ransom: B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Juss6, Les papes et les dues de Bretagne (Paris, 1928), i. 328.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

267

brought no immediate relief to the hostages who were still in England for the unpaid ransom of Charles de Blois. One of its most important terms stated that succession to the duchy of Brittany should remain with the Montfort family only as long as it produced male heirs; upon extinction of the male line the succession was to revert to the Penthievre family. Jean IV had already married one of Edward Ill's daughters, who died shortly afterwards, and he was to marry another English wife in I3661 but in the meantime Jean de Bretagne was his heir presumptive. At Guerande Jean IV promised to use his influence with his former guardian to obtain the release of the hostages and to promote a marriage between his sister and Jean de Bretagne. In the years after 1365 neither Jean IV nor Edward III was particularly anxious to obtain the hostages' release. Jean IV could hardly contemplate the presence of his legal heir in the duchy with equanimity so soon after the end of the civil war, and Edward, who had become adept at using prisoners for diplomatic ends, could hardly release a prisoner who was one of the major weapons he had for coercing the new duke of Brittany to follow policies sympathetic to his own. Jean IV's general aim was to defend the independence of his duchy and to establish a form of neutrality in the war between England and France. As long as Edward continued to hold the hostages Jean IV had to step carefully. In the political circumstances of the late thirteen-sixties and early thirteen-seventies there was little hope of the hostages being released. Indeed it was not until 1379 that any serious possibility of their release was considered, apart from one occasion wrhen their case was raised at the Anglo-French peace talks in I377-2 Up to 1379 the prisoners were in an unenviable position. Whilst Edward and Jean IV were friendly (and after his exile from the duchy in 1373 Jean IV became almost entirely dependent on Edward) there was little likelihood of the hostages' liberation and, conversely, if Edward and Jean were in dispute at any moment it would be extremely improbable that Edward would let them go easily without using them to overcome the duke's opposition. After a process in the Parlement of Paris in 1378 against Jean IV, Charles V of France decided to annex Brittany to the royal demesne.3 This decision dashed the hopes of supporters of the Penthievre faction that Jean de Bretagne's claims to succeed the still childless Jean IV would be recognized by France in accordance with the first treaty of Guerande. Messengers were sent from the duchy to England and the hostages were consulted. The outcome was that the Penthievre party leaders agreed to join with the former Montfortists and invited the exiled Jean IV to take possession of his duchy again, which he did with little trouble in the late summer of 1379. 1

Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 45. The Anglo-French Negotiations at Bruges 1374-7', ed- E. Perroy, Camden Miscellany, xix (1952), 85; Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 85. 3 Delachenal, v. 235 ff.; B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse", 'La derniere phase de la vie de du Guesclin. L'affaire de Bretagne', Bibliotheque de I'&ole des Charles, cxxv (1967), 161 ff.; Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 85-6. 2<

268

77z£ Creation of Brittany

Even Jeanne de Penthievre played her part in the united Breton resistance to French annexation. As part of the price for this support it might have been expected that Jeanne would have obtained some guarantees that her sons would eventually be released. However, in the years following Jean IV's return to the duchy, no progress was made in this direction despite the declining political value of the hostages to Richard II once Jean IV had agreed to the second treaty of Guerande with Charles VI in 1381,! and despite the continuing expense of keeping the hostages. For more than twenty years they were maintained as a public charge on the funds of the exchequer at an annual cost of about £100 each.2 Hopes of a return to their homeland must have been remote when news of their mother's death was received in the autumn of 1384.3 The years since 1379 had, however, brought a certain realignment of forces in France and Brittany which was ultimately to bear fruit in the release of the hostages. In 1360 Jeanne de Penthievre's daughter Marie had married Louis, duke of Anjou, who after the death of his brother Charles V in 1380 became the most important member of the royal family. In 1382 Anjou set off to conquer the kingdom of Sicily and in 1384 he died in Italy, leaving his widow, who had remained in France, to try to obtain reinforcements and support for the Angevin Italian schemes.4 After the death of her mother, Marie also felt obliged to assume responsibility for obtaining the release of her brothers in England. Her funds were severely limited and her demands for financial assistance from the French crown had to compete in the next few years with many other such demands, particularly those which stemmed from the war with England. Marie's most important source of strength, however, was the support of the great Breton nobleman Olivier, sire de Clisson. During the civil war in Brittany, Clisson's father had been treacherously executed by Philip VI. His family had naturally gravitated towards the Montfortists. But in 1368-9 a change occurred in the relationship between l

Preuves, ii. 298-302. On 4 Nov. 1364 Edward III ordered the payment of whatever was necessary for their sustenance (P.R.O., Warrants for Issues, E 404/7/45) and between 29 Sept. 1364 and 29 Sept. 1372 Roger Beauchamp received los. a day for their upkeep, plus a clothing allowance. He should have received £1,461 and he actually acknowledged receiving £1,345 9s- r i ^ (P.R.O., Exchequer, King's Remembrancer, Accounts Various, E 101/29/15 and Exchequer, Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer, Enrolled Accounts Foreign, E 364/6 m. 35). By an indenture of 22 June 1378 Beauchamp agreed to look after the hostages for £200 p.a. (E 364/12 m. Av) and this was renewed in 1380. Between 16 Feb. 1380 and 1386 he received £1,100, taking£200 p.a. until the death of Guy de Bretagne (22 Jan. 1385) and then £100 p.a. until his executors released Bretagne on 13 July 1386 (E 364/25 m. 49). For a full list of the surviving accounts for keeping the hostages: P.R.O., Lists and Indexes, XI, Foreign Accounts, p. 107. 3 Jeanne died on 10 Sept. 1384 (Preuves, ii. 481). 4 F. Lehoux, Jean de France, due de Berri, sa vie, son action politique (1340-1416) (4 vols., Paris, 1966-8), ii. 115 ff. 2

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

269

1

Jean IV and his most powerful supporter. Wooed by promises from Charles V, Clisson began to oppose the policies of Jean IV and in 1369 he signified his disapproval by becoming Jeanne de Penthievre's lieutenant in the duchy. His quarrels with Jean IV increased in intensity and with Bertrand du Guesclin and the viscount of Rohan he governed Brittany during the exile of Jean IV. Clisson alone of the major Breton seigneurs seriously opposed Jean IV's readeption in 1379. In 1380 he succeeded du Guesclin as Constable of France and it was only after the second treaty of Guerande (April 1381) that Clisson once more accepted Jean IV as his duke. Even then the agreement sealed between them on 30 May 1381 was more an alliance between equals than one between lord and vassal.2 Already there were rumours both in England and in France that Clisson was intriguing with the hostages for their release.3 His position as Constable, allied to his seigneurial power in Brittany, made the duke's task of disciplining him almost impossible. Despite minor points of dispute with Jeanne de Penthievre, Clisson's support for her, for her daughter Marie and her sons, Jean and Guy, was a most dangerous development for Jean IV in the early thirteen-eighties, since he was still without an heir. The death of Jeanne de Penthievre brought matters to a head. Jean IV moved swiftly and ordered the confiscation of the Penthievre estates. His council supported him and the protests made on Jean de Bretagne's behalf were ignored.4 The Constable made a new approach for the release of the hostages to prevent the duke from consolidating his initial successes. Messengers were dispatched to England. The envoys obtained Bretagne's approval for the appointment of Clisson as his representative in the duchy of Brittany and began negotiations with the English council for the delivery of the hostages.5 But the death of Guy de Bretagne on 22 January I3856 gave an added incentive for the English to make the best possible use of Jean, who by 1385 had been in England for thirty-two years. Among Clisson's reasons for desiring Jean's release it may be suspected that he had already begun to plan a marriage between his youngest daughter and the eldest male representative of the Penthievre family. Although it was not until 1386 that Pope Clement VII granted a dispensation for the marriage,7 some such motive may well have been at the back of the Constable's mind in the winter of 1384-5. At that stage the negotiations with England seemed to be making definite progress. Since his return to the 1

Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 54, 80, 86 for the following paragraph. Preuves, ii. 370. * Rotuli Parliamentorum, iii. 91—3; Froissart, Chroniques, x, pp. li, 168—9. 4 Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 100. 5 Preuves, ii. 482-3 (6 Jan. 1385 at Gloucester), appointment of Clisson; P.R.O., Treaty Rolls, C 76/69 m. 12 (18 Jan. 1385), protection for Holland de Quothells, who had come on business connected with the hostages' release, printed in Foedera, vii (1709), p. 454. 6 Above, p. 268, n. 2. 1 Journal de Jean le Fevre, e'vgque de Chartres, chancelier des rois de Sidle, Louis I et Louis II d'Anjou, ed. H. Moranville (Paris, 1887), p. 312. 2

270

The Creation of Brittany

duchy in 1379 and the treaty with the French in 1381, Jean IV had been largely out of favour with the English. He had pursued a much more independent line and relations had become so strained that although he had given some assistance to the remnants of the Despenser crusade in 1383, the English had confiscated his honour of Richmond and turned a deaf ear to his requests for the return of Brest castle. In addition, by the winter of 1384-5 they had ratified the forfeiture of Richmond, promised aid to the Urbanist bishop of Nantes when they knew full well that Jean IV had accepted the Clementist leanings of his subjects on his return to Brittany in 1379, and, besides a number of other snubs, they had begun to entertain Clisson's advances on behalf of Jean de Bretagne.1 It was at this moment that divisions in English government circles, largely between those who wanted a more active prosecution of the war with France and those who sought a negotiated settlement, began to have an effect on the subsidiary problems of Anglo-Breton relations. The release of Jean de Bretagne became one of the bones of contention between the king, who appeared even at this early stage to favour negotiation,2 and his critics, notably the dukes of Lancaster and Gloucester and the earl of Arundel who favoured the voie de fait. The struggle between the king and his opponents was to come into the open especially after the departure of the duke of Lancaster for Spain in July 1386. Up to that time the Penthievre faction had pressed on with negotiations for Jean's release, receiving some slight encouragement for their efforts from a section of the English council.3 At last in March 1386 tangible signs of their efforts began to appear. On 23 March Richard II granted all the profits from Jean de Bretagne to his favourite, Robert de Vere, earl of Oxford.4 There was no mention of the unpaid instalments of his father's ransom. This was to be an entirely new ransom of the hostage. De Vere, soon to be created duke of Ireland, 1

Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 92 ff. A. Steel, Richard //(Cambridge, 1962), p. 122, thinks that Richard was 'bellicose and patriotic' as late as Oct. 1386 and that there was as yet no peace party in England, but ever since 1383 Michael de la Pole, chancellor of England, had considered the possibilities of peace with France (J. J. N. Palmer, 'The Anglo-French Peace Negotiations 1386-99' (unpublished London Ph.D. thesis, 1967), pp. 6 ff.) and initiatives for peace to which Richard responded were evident from 1385 (Diplomatic Correspondence of Richard II, ed. E. Perroy (Camden 3rd series, xlviii, 1933), no. 66). 3 P.R.O., C 76/70 m. 32 (12 Dec. 1385), m. 26 (6 Feb. 1386), safe-conducts for Guillaume Martin and others to come to England to treat about Bretagne's ransom. The first order was warranted by the council, the second by the king. An undated letter from Jean IV (Anglo-Norman Letters and Petitions, ed. M. D. Legge (AngloNorman Text Soc., iii, 1941), p. 325, no. 265) has been assigned to 1386 by its editor and this date was accepted by A. Mirot (Froissart, Chroniques, xiii (1957), p. xlvi, n. 2). But the tone of the letter and other evidence suggests Edward III as its recipient (see M. C. E. Jones, 'John de Montfort, England and the duchy of Brittany 1364-99' (Oxford D.Phil, thesis, 1966), p. 125). 4 Foedera, vii (1709), p. 503, cf. C.P.R. 1385-9, p. 132. 2

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

271

was about to begin a term of two years' service in Ireland with a force of 500 men-at-arms and 1,000 archers. The ransom was to be charged at the exchequer against the expenses of his Irish expedition and any superplus was to be accounted for. That the terms of the grant were a matter of dispute can be deduced from the issue of two warrants under the privy seal, one on 8 April, ' for all his costs in the recovery and conquest of Ireland . . . without rendering anything therefor', being followed by one on n April re-stating the terms of the letters of 23 March.1 Another indication of divisions may be seen in the delay between the grant of Bretagne's ransom to de Vere and the time when his attorneys took charge of the prisoner in July. It may be significant that this was not until after the departure of John of Gaunt for Spain.2 The political implications of the ransom make it obvious that reasons for opposition to the grant to the earl of Oxford were not simply based on the personal antipathy of some of the king's critics towards his favourite. Whilst the Penthievre representatives had been coming and going in 1385 and 1386, so too had Jean IV's representatives.3 The results of the rift between the duke and the English government had begun to worry some members of the royal council. He had sent material aid to Charles VI for his projected invasion of England in 1385 and he did the same in 1386. In the duchy he undertook, in the summer of 1386, the siege of Brest (still held by the English), probably with the intention of forcing the English to desist from further encouraging his rebellious subjects, Clisson and Bretagne.4 One of the possible reasons for the delay between the grant to de Vere and the handing over of Bretagne to his attorneys was the promise which Jean IV had received from some members of the royal council that the hostage would not be released without his assent.5 During the next few months the political complexities of Bretagne's case were to be still further confused, not only by the divisions now apparent in English governing circles but also by very similar divisions at the French court. 1

P.R.O., Chancery Warrants, C 81/492 nos. 3947 (8 Apr.), 3949 (n Apr.). Gaunt left on 9 July (P. E. Russell, The English Intervention™ Spain and Portugal in the time of Edward HI and Richard II (Oxford, 1955), p. 417) and Bretagne was handed over on 13 July (above, p. 268, n. 2)., 3 P.R.O., 076/69 m. 3 (loMay 1385,byking and council),m. i (8 June, by council), C 76/70 m. 24 (24 July 1385, by council), m. 7 (20 May 1386, by council), orders for the issue of safe-conducts to Jean IV's envoys and nuncii. 4 In 1385 Jean IV wrote to Charles VI that he was prepared 'pour resister a la malice de ceulx de Brest' (Paris, Archives Nationales, J 240 no. 40). Breton troops assembled at Damme (Preuves, ii. 491). In 1386 Charles VI issued letters stating that' nostre treschier et tresame cousin le due de Bretaigne ait entencion et volente denvoier par devers nous le sire de Rochefort acompaigne de cinq cens lances pour venir avec nous en ce present voiage que nous entendons a faire au plaisir de Dieu ou pais Dangleterre' and the king retained Rochefort 'a tel nombre comme il amena avec lui soit plus ou moins pour nous servir oudit voiage ou autrepart en noz guerres ou bon nous semblera', Amiens, 8 Sept. 1386, British Museum, Add. Charter 3350. For the siege of Brest: De la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iv. 104-6; Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 103 ff. ^Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council, ed. N. H. Nicolas, i. 48. 2

272

The Creation of Brittany

Just as in England the relative merits of an aggressive or a conciliatory policy towards the adversary had been discussed, the same debate had been taking place in France. The chief proponents of the invasion plans of 1385 and 1386 were the Constable, Clisson, and the admiral of France, Jean de Vienne. Their main opponent was Jean, duke of Berry, whose procrastination in joining the royal expedition in 1386 was at least one of the reasons for its eventual abandonment.1 Paradoxically, however, in order to obtain Bretagne's release, Clisson had to deal with those members of the English government who were sympathetic towards a negotiated settlement with France. At the same time, although Bretagne's friends showed their hopes for his imminent release by obtaining a dispensation for his marriage to Marguerite de Clisson in August 1386,2 demands for financial assistance from the French crown, linked to requests for further aid to the Angevins in Italy, came at a very awkward time for the French government after the expenses incurred by the invasion fleet.3 The duke of Berry pointed out to the dowager duchess of Anjou's chancellor, Jean le Fevre, in a series of discouraging interviews in January 1387, that the Crown had no ready cash and that the king's resources were already fully stretched by the need to send reinforcements to his Castilian ally and to defend France's many vulnerable frontiers.4 It is an index of Berry's influence in French affairs, and perhaps, too, of his sympathy for Jean IV of Brittany,5 that although he was almost alone in opposing the new invasion plans which the Constable and admiral, with the concurrence of Duke Philip of Burgundy, had devised for 1387, the Angevins received little encouragement or aid from the French crown in their endeavours to raise the finances they needed for their Italian schemes and for Bretagne's ransom. In England the split between the king and his nobles had been no more than temporarily patched up by the appointment of the Commission of November 1386. Early in 1387 Richard II cut himself free from the Commissioners by going on his celebrated gyration through the midlands and north of England. It was with the Commissioners that Jean IV dealt in the winter of 1386-7. His long-standing grievances over the retention of Richmond and Brest by the English had not been remedied and he continued to press the siege of Brest intermittently. Yet there was every indication that he was prepared to compromise and to co-operate with the war party in England by joining forces with the earl of Arundel, who had been appointed admiral of a fleet which was to prevent the projected French invasion of 13 87 from taking place.6 In this way Jean IV may also have hoped iLehoux, ii. 181-90; L. Mirot, 'Une tentative d'invasion en Angleterre pendant la guerre de Cent Ans', Revue des etudes historiques, Ixxxi (1915), 253 ff. Mirot (p. 265) was misled by his belief that Bretagne was free in 1386, see below, p. 275, n. 4. 2 Journal de Jean le Fevre, p. 312. Clement VII was sympathetic towards the Angevins because of his own Italian policy against his rival Urban VI, cf. Lehoux, ii. 195-8, 219. 3 M. Rey, Les finances royales sous Charles VI1388-1413 (Paris, 1965), p. 431. 4 5 Lehoux, ii. 197-8. Ibid., p. 201. 6 Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 104-5.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

273

to prevent the release of Bretagne, but in any event, de Vere's continuing arrangements to let Bretagne go were entirely contrary to the policy being pursued by the majority of the Commissioners. What the king and his friends were trying to do in 1387 in the field of foreign affairs remains very uncertain, but some indications may be gathered from the charges made against the five traitors in the Merciless Parliament of February-May 1388. The accusation contained in article XXIII, that the three principal traitors had been responsible for Jean de Bretagne's release, seems to be proved in de Vere's case. By allowing Bretagne to be ransomed, as he was in November 1387, it was said that they had purposely contravened, without warrant, decisions taken in parliament and council, deprived the king of an important source of revenue, greatly strengthened the king of France and thereby weakened the English king and his kingdom. They may not have accroached the royal power but they had certainly encouraged the king to ignore parliamentary ordinances.1 These were serious charges and when taken in conjunction with the accusations of articles XXVIIIXXXII, later declared treasonable,2 it helps to make the Appellants' attack on their enemies more understandable in terms of national issues. When the Commissioners had committed themselves to extensive and costly efforts in 1387 to conduct the war more realistically, the duke of Ireland's interference in ransoming Jean de Bretagne and thus annoying Jean IV of Brittany, one of the Commissioners' allies, was serious, especially as he could claim the king's support for what he did. Richard's own actions in the summer of 1387 are very obscure but he is known to have been in communication with the French court.3 Although the Appellants were no doubt motivated by private grievances against the king's favourite counsellors, they were also divided sharply from them by desiring the vigorous conduct of the war with France, whilst the king and his friends were exploring the possibilities of peace. In one sense, therefore, when Jean IV captured Olivier de Clisson on 25 June 1387 and imprisoned him in the Chateau Ermine at Vannes, not only did he help his English friends, the Commissioners, but also Richard II, whose personal animus against Jean IV was never very successfully disguised. The expedition which the Constable had been organizing against England had to be abandoned.4 Richard sent new envoys to France, presumably to open the way for peace negotiations based possibly on the release to the French of certain occupied territories such as Calais.5 The value of Bretagne as a bargaining counter at this moment would be vastly l

Rot. ParL, iii. 232b. Ibid., pp. 234, 237. 3 Palmer, 'Anglo-French Peace Negotiations', pp. 60 ff., cf. Diplomatic Correspondence, no. 78 and n. 4 Froissart, Chroniques, xiii, p. Ixxviii; Lehoux, ii. 205. 5 John Golafre, later suspected of being an intermediary between Richard II and Charles VI (T. Favent, 'Historia Mirabilis Parliament!', ed. M. McKisack, Camden Miscellany, xiv (1926), 6) was sent to France in Sept. 1387 (P.R.O., C 76/72 m. 23), cf. Palmer, 'Anglo-French Peace Negotiations', pp. 63 ff. 2

274

The Creation of Brittany

improved. The Constable had suffered a humiliating experience at the hands of Jean IV and only obtained his release on the strictest terms.1 But he had not lost all his influence at the French court and he weathered the stormy reception which the king's uncles gave him on his return from Brittany, where his supporters were urged to wage war on the duke.2 The moment for waging war on England had passed. Realizing this, Clisson was probably quick to grasp the implications of Richard IFs peaceful overtures. Forgetting his promises to Jean IV not to attempt further to obtain Bretagne's release and his marriage to his daughter, Clisson seems to have renounced his aggression towards England and joined forces with his major enemy Jean, duke of Berry. In giving up his war policy he hoped to exploit Richard IFs desire for peace and to achieve the final emancipation of Bretagne. Concessions there must certainly have been on both sides of the French court in September 1387, for among the sureties for half the sum of 120,000 gold francs for which Bretagne was to be ransomed, is the name of Clisson's opponent, the duke of Berry, as well as that of his brother Philip of Burgundy.3 The terms of Bretagne's ransom and release can be gathered from an indenture drawn up at Calais on i October 1387 between the attorneys of Robert de Vere, including Sir John Lancaster, Sir Henry Ferrers and John Newton and the representatives of Marie of Anjou and Olivier de Clisson.4 At some previous negotiations the ransom had been fixed at 120,000 gold francs. This was to be paid in three instalments, the first of them five weeks after the indenture of i October, when half the ransom was to be delivered. The second and third instalments were to be paid in equal portions on i January and at mid-Lent 1388. The second half of the ransom was guaranteed by an impressive list of French and Breton nobles whose obligatory letters were to be delivered to Robert de Vere's attorneys together with the first half of the ransom.5 Upon receipt of the money and letters Bretagne was to be set free. Not surprisingly these conditions were not strictly adhered to. The delay which had occurred iproissart, Oeuvres, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove (Brussels, 1867-77), x«- 382; Preuves, ii. 540-2. 2 Lehoux, ii. 211-12; Lefranc, pp. 309 ff. 3 Preuves, ii. 528, where the document is misdated ii Oct., cf. the original, Nantes, Bibliotheque municipale, Cartons Bizeul, MS. 1695 with date 2 Oct. On 17 Sept. Marie ordered her lands to be mortgaged to raise Bretagne's ransom (Journal dejean le Fevre, p. 417). The sureties were the dukes of Berry and Burgundy for 10,000 or 20,000 francs each, the count of Alen9on, and the sires de Laval and Coucy for 10,000 each, and the following pairs jointly for 10,000, the sire de la Tremoille and the admiral; the sire de Blainville and the sire de Hambuye; the chancellor of France and the sire de Raineval; Bureau de la Riviere and Guillaume des Bordes; the viscount of Rohan and the sire de Beaumanoir; Jean de Blaisy and Jacques de Montmor. The count of Blois or the count of Harcourt was to guarantee 10,000. Although these guarantees added up to 120,000 or 140,000 francs, the guarantors were only responsible for raising 60,000 francs. 4 Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 1707 no. 2. 5 Above, n. 3.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

275

since Bretagne had been brought to Calais, where he may have arrived as early as April 1387 and where he had been for fourteen weeks prior to the payment of his ransom, enabled de Vere's attorneys to claim another 14,400 francs for the costs and expenses they had suffered.1 But the efforts of Bretagne's friends in France to secure his release were brought to a successful conclusion in November 1387. On 19 November a sum of 78,000 francs arrived at Calais from Boulogne2—a total remarkably in excess of the first half of the ransom—and by the beginning of December Jean de Bretagne was officially free from a captivity which dated from 1353. He may have visited Paris in October to arrange details of a number of loans which had to be raised to help him pay the ransom.3 The first real indication of his freedom was the gift of a horse to him by Charles VI in December when he arrived at the French court.4 On 20 January 1388 he married Marguerite de Clisson.5 Bretagne obtained his release only just in time. Whilst preparations were being made in France to fulfil the ransom agreement, in England Richard IPs freedom of action was dramatically curtailed. In a short struggle for power the king's critics, led by Gloucester, Warwick and Arundel, overcame the only force put into the field in the king's defence at the battle of Radcot Bridge on 19 December when Robert de Vere was defeated.6 The reasons for the sudden activity of the king's opponents in issuing their accusations against the 'traitors' in November 1387 may be bound up with the evidence for a projected meeting between Richard II and Charles VI in the late 1

Journal de Jean le Fevre, p. 340; Nantes, Bibl. num., MS. 1689 no. 10, n Sept. 1388, letters of Audoin Chanveron, preVdt of Paris, witnessing Charles VFs letters concerning the supplication of de Vere that' les gens dudit due a ses fraiz et despenz avoient garde le dit Jehan lespace de quatorze sepmaines en attendant la finance de sa raencon'. 2 Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 1689 no. 18, letters of William Beauchamp, captain of Calais; ibid., no. 16, letters of John Newton, 19 Nov. at Boulogne, acknowledging receipt of 78,000 francs of ransom and 4,400 for himself and his fellow attorneys from the proctors of Marie and Clisson; ibid., no. 15, letters of John Say, Beauchamp's lieutenant, 19 Nov., acknowledging that he had helped him to put money in coffers at Calais. 3 Ibid., no. ii, 3 Oct. 1387, letters of Audoin Chanveron certifying that Bretagne had come before him that day in Paris to state that certain seigneurs were obliged to him for his payments to de Vere and one of them, Coucy, had asked for the obligations to be witnessed. Bretagne may thus have been allowed to come to Paris on parole. 4 Paris, Arch. Nat., KK 34 fo. 135, accounts of Colart de Tanques, master of Charles VI's stable, running from i Jan. 1387 (n.s.), 'pour despens faiz par le dit Colart le viiie jour de decembre pour aler de Paris a Noyon devers nostre dit seigneur qui estoit audit lieu. . . . Et si tost quil fu devers lui le renvoia hastivement a Paris pour faire finance dacheter un courcier que le Roy vouloit donner, lequel courcier fu achete. . . . Et tantost fu donne a Jehan de Bretagne qui nouvellement estoit revenu Dengleterre par viii jours.' 5 Chronique du Religieux de Saint-Denys, ed. L. F. Bellaguet (Paris, 1839-52), i. 498. 6 M. McKisack, The Fourteenth Century 1307-99 (Oxford, 1959), pp. 450 ff.

276

The Creation of Brittany

autumn.1 Once the Appellants were in power they ignored advances made on behalf of Charles VI by the duke of Burgundy for a truce of four or five years.2 They busied themselves sorting out the tangle into which English foreign policy had twisted itself with the king and the Commissioners working in opposite directions. In the meantime de Vere, probably aided by the king, slipped off abroad. The Appellants were too late in December 1387 to prevent Bretagne's release but they endeavoured to secure possession of the ransom money which had already been handed over and to prevent that which was due in January and Lent 1388 from falling into de Vere's hands. On 23 December attorneys were appointed to receive the mid-Lent instalment and a week later the Appellants ordered the arrest of de Vere's attorneys.3 These provisions were only partially successful. On i January John Newton received another 10,000 francs on the duke of Ireland's behalf.4 Janico Dartasso, who was sent by the council to Calais to find the money which had been delivered and to receive the mid-Lent instalment, was himself arrested there, apparently on the king's orders.5 But Dartasso or another of the Appellants' servants did manage to discover over a quarter of the ransom money. This was confiscated and given to the treasurer of Calais for the maintenance of the English garrison.6 By the early spring of 1388 the Appellants were also trying to restore amicable relations with Brittany and to reassure the duke that his interests would not be slighted in the future as they had been by the actions of Richard II and Robert de Vere.7 Ambitious plans were laid for prosecution of the war with France on several fronts. Arundel was again to command a large fleet, whilst the co-operation of Gaunt, now in Guyenne after his adventures in Spain, and the dukes of Brittany and Guelders was envisaged. l

C f . Lehoux, ii. 215, n. 5; Diplomatic Correspondence, no. 126 note, redated to 1387 by Palmer, 'Anglo-French Peace Negotiations', p. 76. 2C.P..R. 1385-9, PP. 502-3. ^Foedera, vii (1709), p. 565; P.R.O., C 76/72 m. 17, 30 Dec., council to W. Beauchamp, R. Walden and Janico Dartasso. 4 Nantes, Bibl. num., MS. 1689, i Jan. 1388 at Calais, quittance from Newton for 10,000 francs for which Bureau de la Riviere and Guillaume des Bordes were obliged and letters of John Say certifying that the money had been handed over, cf. Preuves, ii. 529. 5 P.R.O., Issue Roll, E 403/518 m. 22, 27 Feb. 1388, Dartasso sent 'exordinacionem consilii Regis versus Gales' ad explorandum et recipiendum ibidem certas summas auri nuper receptas ad opus Ducis Hibernie de redempcionem Johannis de Bloys et ad dictas summas usque Westm' portandum et carriandum'. The release of Newton and Dartasso was ordered by the king (under pressure from the Appellants ?) on 20 Apr. (P.R.O., C 76/72 m. 8). 6 P.R.O., E 403/518 m. 23, 2 March 1388,' In pecunio xxii m. cccc xli frankorum quolibet frank' computato ad iii s. ii d. et iii m. dccclviiili.scutorumcomputatorum ad v m. iiii c. Ixv ix d. ob. quolibet frank' comp* ut supra nuper receptorum per attornatos Ducis Hibn' de redempcione Johannis de Bloys de Britannic et in manibus eorundem attornatorum arrestatorum et domino Regi cause forisfacture predicti Ducis', cf. Receipt Roll, E 401/570 sub 2 March and E 364/24 m. 4od. 7 Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 107 ff.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

211

The overall strategy of the 1388 campaign was thrown into disarray by new negotiations between the duke of Brittany and the French princes. Since the attack on Clisson and the threat of Jean IV to co-operate with the English, the royal uncles had been trying to reconcile Jean and Clisson. Through the winter and spring of 1387-8 many embassies went to and fro.1 These eventually led in July 1388 to a temporary truce between Jean and Clisson arranged at the royal court. Thus, during the months of June and July when Arundel was cruising in the Channel, Jean was absent from his duchy. In August Gaunt agreed to a truce with Berry on the borders of Guyenne and the French were able to turn almost all their attention to the campaign against Guelders.2 The resolution of the Appellants to prosecute the war disappeared and their efforts were no more successful than those of the Commissioners in 1387. By the summer of 1388 even the most hardened English militants recognized that the time had come for a new peaceful diplomatic approach to France.3 The return of Jean de Bretagne from England did not radically change the duke of Brittany's policies towards England but it did help to confirm him in his attempts to steer his duchy to a more independent position. The duke's personal animosity towards Clisson and Bretagne was increased by Jean's marriage to Marguerite de Clisson, although his own anxieties over an heir were not quite so severe since his third wife, Juana of Navarre, had already proved her fecundity.4 The truce, arranged after the usual prevarications, in July 1388, did not prevent the intensification of the feud between the duke and Clisson and Bretagne in the next few years.5 But because of Bretagne's presence in France, the struggle entered a new phase in which the English were not so intimately concerned. For some years Jean IV was able to hold his own against the Constable and his son-in-law without recourse to English aid. The overthrow of the king's friends in England in November and December 1387 led to the exile of the leading royalists. For the duke of Ireland exile accentuated the difficulties of securing the full value from Bretagne's ransom. The outstanding payments were very necessary to him after the Appellants had confiscated all his property in England and part of the ransom of Bretagne at Calais. In March 1388 he wrote from Trier confirming a change in the place for receipt of the remaining portions of the ransom 1 Lehoux, ii. 216 ff. Mile Lehoux (p. 216 n. 3) is misleading when she suggests that Jean IV concluded a treaty with Charles VI on 29 Cept. 1387 against the kings of England and Navarre. Her source (Paris, Arch. Nat., J 240 no. 17) is a copy of the original (ibid. no. 60) which is clearly dated 29 Sept. 1381, cf. Preuves, ii. 298; the clerk has obviously written vij for un. 2 Lehoux, ii. 227.

*C.P.R. 1385-9, pp. 502-3.

4 5

De la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iv. 136. Cf. Lefranc, pp. 323 ff.

278

The Creation of Brittany 1

from Calais to Paris. In the summer he appeared at Charles VI's court anxious to lay his hands on as much of the ransom as possible.2 In his letter from Trier the duke of Ireland had deputed William Beauchamp, captain of the town of Calais, to act as one of his proctors for the collection of the outstanding ransom payments. This brings to the fore the question of the allegiance of the officers at Calais during the struggle between the king and the Appellants. The divisions in the government went deep, and royal officers, particularly those closely connected with the ransom of Jean de Bretagne at Calais, were bound to be affected and their loyalties tested. William Beauchamp, for example, was a younger brother of Thomas, earl of Warwick, and English chroniclers relate how in 1387 he opposed Richard IFs plan to release Calais to the French.3 Yet in October 1387 not only is he to be found witnessing the indenture between de Vere's attorneys and the proctors of Marie and Clisson, but he was also in touch with the duke of Burgundy's representatives at a time when that duke was pursuing a more conciliatory policy.4 In November Beauchamp was present when some of the ransom money was counted out at Calais.5 His position is thus ambiguous and the usual pro-Appellant sympathies credited to him must be weighed with caution, especially since Robert de Vere was still prepared to place confidence in him as late as March 1388. The captain of the castle at Calais, Edmund de la Pole, was also suspect in view of his family ties with his elder brother Michael, earl of Suffolk, and he was eventually replaced as captain.6 His part in the capture and return of his brother to England after Michael's first escape to Calais may have been an elaborate exercise in propaganda designed to disguise the real purpose of the earl of Suffolk's visit to the town.7 Yet again care must be taken not to assume too readily that Edmund was as pro-royalist as Beauchamp was pro-Appellant. The treasurer of the town, Roger Walden, had just been appointed captain of Merk castle in the Pale by the king from 5 October 1387; in the thirteen-nineties he was certainly one of the king's most loyal civil servants, making a rapid rise to become archbishop of Canterbury in 1 Nantes, Bibl. num., MS. 1697, letter of de Vere in a vidimus of Audoin Chanveron, 16 July 1388, dated at 'Trecorensis in Almania', 24 March 1388. 2 Cf. Chronique du Religieux de Saint-Denys, i. 494-7. ^Chronicon Henrici Knighton, ed. J. R. Lumby (2 vols., Rolls Set., 1889-95), ii. 243-4, 25!; Chronicon Angliae 1328-88, ed. E. M. Thompson (Rolls Ser., 1874), PP-383-44 Inventaire sommaire des archives de'partementales ant^rieuresaijgo, Nord, SerieB, I i, ed. C. C. A. Dehaisnes and J. Finot (Lille, 1899), p. 356; R. Vaughan, Philip the Bold (1962), p. 182. 5 Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 1689 no. 18. 6 P.R.O., C 76/72 m. 5, 15 March, Philip la Vache was appointed in his place by council. Dr. J. Palmer kindly supplied this reference. 1 Chronicon Henrici Knighton, ii. 250-1; Historia Anglicana, ed. H. T. Riley (2 vols., Rolls Ser., 1863-4), »• J63, 169; Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden, ed. J. R. Lumby (9 vols., Rolls Ser., 1865-86), ix. 108; Palmer, 'Anglo-French Peace Negotiations', p. 80 points out that it was not until his second 'escape' that Suffolk sent a ship to collect his goods.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

279

1398.! Was he a royalist already by 1387 ? He managed to hold on to his captaincy throughout the period of Appellant rule when a number of other captains in the Pale fell under suspicion and had to obtain pardons for their supposed offences.2 The Appellants must have considered him loyal enough to their cause, although a suspicion must exist about possible collusion between him, Beauchamp, Dartasso and de Vere's attorneys in the spring of 1388 over the ransom money remaining in Calais. Walden accounted in the exchequer for some of the money handed over to him after its discovery, but this was only a quarter of what had actually been paid at Calais.3 The loyalties of the men at Calais during this critical period are thus very difficult to ascertain; the value of the Pale to warring factions in England was, however, already clearly recognized. How successful was de Vere in obtaining further payments of the ransom after March 1388 ? His supplications to Charles VI in July 1388 achieved some measure of success after his claims had been discussed at the highest level in the French royal council. In his petition he recounted that Bretagne had been granted to him by Richard II on condition that he led an expedition to Ireland. He catalogued the course of the ransom negotiations to date, claimed that 42,000 francs were still owing and that the mid-Lent term had not been kept. But in the course of his flight from England and the subsequent seizure of his goods, he had lost some of the obligatory letters. When Clisson and Bretagne were informed of de Vere's claims they acknowledged that most of what he said was true but claimed that 14,400 francs should be deducted from the sum de Vere demanded because it had been added to the original ransom under threat when Bretagne was at Calais. They argued further that de Vere and one of his attorneys, John Lancaster, who had accompanied him to Paris, had been banished from England and they professed scruples at handing over any money to them. In the end Berry and Burgundy decided to uphold some of these objections and in return for de Vere's promise that he would not use any of the obligatory letters, should he ever recover them, they ordered Clisson and Bretagne to pay 27,600 francs. Amongst those who gave their assent to this settlement was Michael de la Pole, another of the king's friends who had fled from England.4 It is not clear how much of the 27,600 francs de Vere received. He was still in Paris on n September 1388.5 On i November Clisson paid 1,660 iP.R.O., E 101/183 no. 12, 6 Oct. 1387: Steel, p. 218. C.P.R. 1385-9, PP- 4i6, 427, 495, 522. 3 Above, p. 275, n. 2. The career of John Say requires further study. 4 Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 1689 no. 10, vidimus of Chanveron, n Sept. 1388, reciting letters of 12 July issued by Charles VI in which de Vere's petition and the king's answer are given, cf. Preuves, ii. 529 and Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, MS. fr. 22325 p. 895, order from Charles VI to Clisson to pay de Vere, n July. Pole is referred to as 'le conte de Chuffort'. He died in Paris in Dec. 1389: G. S. Haslop, 'Two entries from the register of John de Shirburn, abbot of Selby 1369-1408', Yorks. ArchaeoLJour., xli (1964), 288. 5 Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 1689 nos. 10 & 12, another vidimus of Chanveron, 2

280

The Creation of Brittany

francs but de Vere's quittance, dated n November 1388, does not mention the place where he was at that moment.1 Nearly a year later, on i o September 1389, a further quittance was given by the Parisian merchants acting as Robert de Vere's proctors, Bartholomew Baude and his brother. In this they quitted Penthievre, through his representative, Geoffrey de Quidallec, master of his household, for the receipt of 6,000 francs, ' en deducion et rabat de douze mille frans en quoy le dit Jehan de Bretaingne estoit tenuz pour partie de sa raencon et estoient obliges envers le dit mons' le due [Dirlande] nobles et puissant hommes mons' Olivier de Clicon, seigneur de Belleville, connestable de France, le sire de Hambuie, le sire du Hommet, le sire de Courseule, messire Nicole Paynel et messire Foulques Paynel '.2 The duke of Ireland left France and later retired to Louvain where he died in 1392 with part of Bretagne's ransom still not accounted for.3 Obligations connected with the ransom were mentioned in a letter from Robert Selby to Roger Walden in 1395. Selby had succeeded as treasurer of Calais shortly after Walden had become treasurer of England. Selby had been bringing the obligations to England and wanted instructions what to do with them as he had fallen ill.4 In the following year Walden received another letter about the ransom from John Lancaster, who had been proscribed by the Merciless Parliament and was now in the direst straits in Paris.5 Lancaster was obviously heartily sick of his sojourn abroad and possibly hoped, now that his former master had been taken back to England for reburial in 1395, that he too would be readmitted by Richard II through Walden's intercession. Indeed, Walden's interest in Bretagne's ransom in 1395-6 might well be connected with the king's rather eccentric behaviour over the return of his dead favourite and the reminder this would have given of the circumstances surrounding the ransom's payment.6 But at this 28 Nov. 1388, of de Vere's letters of 12 July quitting Coucy because Clisson had assumed responsibility for payment of his 10,000 francs. De Vere also renounced his claims to the 4,400 francs paid to Newton and Lancaster and acknowledged receiving 3,904 francs from Clisson's secretary. On i Nov. 660 francs were to be paid, cf. Preuves, ii. 528. 1 Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 1689 no. 14, cf. Preuves, ii. 528, where it is wrongly dated 6 Nov. 2 Archives d6partementales de la Loire-Atlantique, E 120 no. 10. ^Complete Peerage, x. 232 note b, cf. McKisack, p. 476. In 1391 his mother received a pardon for visiting him in Brabant without a licence (C.P.R. 1388-92, p. 407). 4 Anglo-Norman Letters, no. ii. 5 Ibid., no. 22; Rot. ParL, iii. 235, 248. In July 1388 he received 'Un fermail d'or a ymaige de St George a iij balaiz ix perles et un dyamant ou milieu' worth 200 francs from the duke of Burgundy (B. Prost, Inventaires mobiliers et extraits des comptes des dues de Bourgogne 1363-1477 (Paris, 1902-13), ii, no. 2696). Pardoned in 1393 (Rot. ParL, iii. 303), he was later a prisoner of the French (F. Devon, Issues of the Exchequer, Henry Ill-Henry VI (1837), pp. 253-4) and was still at Calais in 1397 (Rot. ParL, iii. 379). 6 Annales Ricardi Secundi, ed. H. T. Riley (Rolls Ser., 1886), pp. 184-5 f°r Richard's bizarre behaviour when de Vere was buried at Earl's Colne in 1395.

The Ransom of Jean de Bretagne

281

point the trail fades out; after Lancaster's letter nothing more is heard of the ransom. The success of Thomas Dagworth in capturing Charles de Blois in 1347 led to the exaction of two ransoms from the Penthievre family over the course of the next forty years. Of the original ransom Edward III acknowledged receipt of 100,000 ecus (£16,666 13$. 4^.).1 The ransom of the hostage Jean de Bretagne for 120,000 gold francs in 1387 (approximately £19,000 at the current exchange rate of i franc = 3$. 2^.), after a captivity of about thirty-five years, led to a further sum of at least 103,964 francs (£16,452) changing hands. More may have passed between the parties but quittances for this sum alone survive, even though it cannot now be decided from them who the main beneficiaries were or what their exact profits totalled.2 The financial sacrifices made by the Penthievre family were not, however, as severe as these figures at first suggest. Charles de Blois's ransom had been partly paid for by the imposition of taxes on the whole of that part of the duchy which was under Penthievre control during the Civil War.3 Moreover, the fortunes of the Penthievre family were not as badly affected by the second ransom as they might have been had they borne its cost in full, because the ransom was guaranteed by the financial resources of Bretagne's father-in-law, Olivier de Clisson.4 In order to redeem some of their obligations both Jean de Bretagne and Marie, dowager duchess of Anjou, had, however, to cede lands, at least temporarily, to Clisson in return for his financial assistance.5 But the full extent of the count of Penthievre's losses cannot be easily assessed because the vicissitudes of the Penthievre appanage in the years after 1388 were bound up with the successes and failures of Bretagne and Clisson in their continuing feud with Jean IV. The financial losses suffered by Bretagne were not, therefore, crippling, severe though they were. Likewise, the political effects of the ransom, although exercising considerable immediate influence over the general 1

Above, p. 266, n. 2. It is not clear what purpose was served by the quittance issued by Lancaster, Newton, Ferrers and Bennington on 20 Nov. 1387 for the whole sum of 120,000 francs (Preuves, ii. 529) in view of the many other documents which show conclusively that the whole sum was not paid all at one time. Quittances for 78,000, 10,000, 4,400, 3,904, i,660 and 6,000 francs were given by de Vere or his attorneys or proctors and of this sum at least 27,906 francs were found at Calais. Ferrers was another excepted from the general pardon in 1388 (Rot. Par/., iii. 248). 3 In passing it may be remarked that the collection of this ransom in Brittany acted as a spur to the creation of a more advanced financial organization in the duchy, as did the collection of Jean II's ransom in France. Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 27. 4 Rey, pp. 575-6 for a sober estimate of Clisson's fortune. Lefranc, p. 307 claimed that Clisson was able to raise 100,000 francs in specie in four days in 1387 to pay his own ransom to Jean IV but quotes no source. In 1385 he was prepared to lend Charles VI 80,000 francs: Brit. Mus., Add. Ch. 40, published by J. J. N. Palmer, 'Prets a la couronne (1385)', Bibl. de I'e'cole des Charles, cxxvi (1968), 419-25. spreuves, ii. 593-4. 2

282

The Creation of Brittany

course of Anglo-French and Anglo-Breton relations for a protracted period, did not in the end lead to any long-term changes in the policies of the respective governments involved in the negotiations. Warfare was intermittent in northern Brittany until settlements of numerous differences between the duke and his enemies were achieved in 1395.* The rivalry between the Montfort and Penthievre-Clisson families was to remain a constant feature of Breton politics for many years to come. In 1420 Olivier de Blois, son of Jean and Marguerite, treacherously captured Jean V of Brittany as Jean IV had captured Olivier's grandfather Clisson in 1387. On his release Jean V vigorously retaliated and members of the Penthievre family were forced into exile.2 The rivalries engendered by the Breton War of Succession died hard. This prolongation of ancient disputes is typical of the political considerations which were taken into account in the negotiations for the release of Jean de Bretagne. His misfortunes as a hostage were closely connected with political events in England, Brittany and France. The cost of Jean's captivity in personal suffering and anguish for him and his family cannot, of course, be measured. The length of that captivity and the manner of his release in 1387 can only be adequately understood against the complex background of the internal and external politics of the three states.3

!De la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iv. 89. Lettres et mandements de Jean V, due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard (Soc. des Bibliophiles Bretons, vi, Nantes, 1892), no. 1456. 3 1 wish to thank Dr. Alan Rogers for his very constructive criticism of earlier drafts of this paper and Mr. James Sherborne for drawing my attention to numerous points of detail. 2

Additional Note The discovery that Buonaccorso Pitti was busy in England at the end of 1380 in connection with the ransom of Jean de Bretagne may lend more support to my suggestion that his mother had obtained guarantees for assistance in ransoming her sons as part of the bargain with John IV in 1379 (above p. 268 and cf. F. Quicke, Les Pays Bas a la veille de la periode bourguignonne, 1356-1384, Paris & Bruxelles 1947, p. 207 n. 3). But I have not been able to follow this intriguing new piece of evidence any further. C. GivenWilson, The Ransom of Olivier du Guesclin', Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, liv (1981), 17-28 adds further to the literature in discussing a Breton contemporary ofjean de Bretagne, although the full story of Olivier's almost lifelong financial difficulties has never been told.

XII 'MONS PAIS ET MA NATION': BRETON IDENTITY IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY Contemporary writers provide evidence for the existence of a regional sentiment in the duchy of Brittany in the fourteenth century. Guillaume de Saint-Andre, secretary and biographer of Duke John IV, put into the mouth of his hero a patriotic speech at the point when the duke resolved firmly to defend his duchy against the king of France in 1379.' It is but one of a number of such expressions which indicate feeling for Brittany and an incipient nationalism. Saint-Andre argued that the duke was not the liege man of the king of France; Brittany and France were two separate entities and there was little respect amongst the Bretons for the French, an effeminate race of men with forked beards who Bien danczoint en salles jonchees, Et si chantoint comme serrenes, Les plus veulx ressambloint jeunes.2

Nor do the English fare much better despite acknowledgement of the assistance which they rendered to John IV in obtaining his duchy. The reader is exhorted to peruse Saint-Andre's book carefully and to draw from it the obvious lesson of history: the duke of Brittany, despite hardship and ill-fortune, has triumphed over his enemies, and by implication, established his rule.3 Another writer close to the duke and his court, who began the 1. In a work completed shortly after 1381, Le Libvre de bonjehan, due de Bretaigne, printed as an appendix to Jean Cuvelier, Chronique de Bertrand de Guesclin, ed. E. Charriere (2 vols., Paris, 1839), ii. 421-560. Cf. p. 521, lines 3025 ff. A eulx yrai-ge vrayement! Sanz plus tarder ne plus actendre G'iray a eulx pour les deffendre ... Mon pais et ma nation 2. Ibid., p. 515, lines 2818 ff. 3. Ibid., pp. 459, 556, and passim.

284

The Creation of Brittany

Chronicon Briocense in 1394, shared these views.4 In his final assessment of John IV he commented, 'suumque Ducatum Britannic et ejus libertates ac subditos contra quoscumque tuebatur et deffendebat atque in pace et tranquillitate servebat'.5 Attempting to characterize the temperament of certain races, the author of the Chronicon described a world remote from his own era in which Greeks were vain, Romans prey to jealousy, Lombards greedy, Franks cruel and proud, Saxons treacherous, Bretons brave or foolhardy, Slavs drunkards, Saracens debauched, Jews oppressive, and Spaniards disorderly and abominable.6 His dislike of contemporary Englishmen emerges every time he mentions the Saxons from whom they were descended.7 Both the compiler of the Chronicon and Saint-Andre display an interest in Breton origins. SaintAndre refers to the illustrious descent of his master from Brutus;8 in the Chronicon emphasis is laid on the Breton language as the purest surviving form of ancient Trojan.9 But these individual touches apart, the ideas, and the phraseology in which the authors expressed them, on the origins and identity of Brittany, the distinctiveness of its people, and the separateness of its institutions, follow a pattern common to many regions of western Europe. Professor Rubinstein, writing on Florence, comments generally that the beginnings of political thought are 'always closely related to the awakening of the interest in history, and in the early periods of society, interest in the past appears to be inseparable from the observation of existing conditions and from the expression of prevailing ideas'.10 In a medieval Italian context the example of Rome provided the starting point for a historical investigation of urban state origins, identity, and development; in northern Europe origins were more often sought in the legends about Troy." The differences between peoples inhabiting the various parts of Europe were crudely delineated; xenophobia predominated and, as in the Breton cases just cited, much description was as derivative as it was obligatory. The early parts of the 4. Partially edited in Morice, Preuves, i. 7-102. A new edition is in progress; Chronicon Briocense: Chronique de Saint-Brieuc. Texte critique et traduction (henceforward Chronique de Saint-Brieuc), ed. G. Le Due and C. Sterckx, i (Paris, 1972). For possible authorship, see below, pp. 302-3. 5. Morice, Preuves, i. 78. 6. Chronique de Saint-Brieuc, i. 84. 7. Ibid. 50-54, 94,118, and passim. 8. Chronique de Bertrandde Guesclin, ii. 447, lines 631 ff. 9. Chronique de Saint-Brieuc, i. 74 and 114. 10. N. Rubinstein, 'The Beginnings of Political Thought in Florence. A Study in Medieval Historiography',/0uma/ of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, v (1942), 198. 11. B. Guenee, L' Occident aux XI Ve et XVe s&cles. Les £tats (Paris, 1971), pp. 12430.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

285

Chronicon Briocense, for example, depend heavily and not surprisingly on Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historic. Regum Britanniae. The search for a regional identity in the Middle Ages thus meets a number of obstacles; those which faced contemporaries when they wanted, for a wide variety of reasons, to describe or encourage regional differences; those which face historians of our own day trying to grasp the significance of abstract ideas to men of a remote period. Beginning from the documents, there is nothing exceptional in the way Breton chronicles, letters, legal and administrative documents make reference to 'le pais de Bretaigne' and 'la nation de Bretaigne'. The wordspais and nation had evolved in French in a fairly direct manner from their classical counterparts, patria and natio. One's land of birth, patria^ might be a region as large as a duchy or even a kingdom. It could also be a much smaller unit. These words were but two of the many medieval synonyms of 'province', a word later used to describe the various major geographical and administrative regions of France.12 In Brittany men referred to the 'pais de Rays', to the 'pais de Dinannais', to the 'pais de Guerande' and so on.13 From Isidore of Seville, who was himself summarizing classical usage, medieval man learnt that natio simply described a group of men having a common origin—multitudo ab unoprincipio orta14—like the students of the Breton nation at the University of Angers or the butchers of the Breton nation at Paris in the 13905. Yet familiar phrases might take on new shades of meaning in the mouths of the duke and his advisers, as we shall see. In the present century historians of all opinions have discussed at great length the characteristics of nationalism. It is not my intention to rehearse the many arguments; modern nationalism had medieval or" gins.15 This essay attempts to discover how far the feelings of the 12. G. Dupont-Ferrier, 'Sur 1'Emploi du mot "province", notamment dans le Iangage administratif de 1'ancienne France', Rev. Hist, clx (1929), 241-67; Dupont-Ferrier, 'De quelques synonymes du terme "province"', ibid, cki (1929), 278-303; DupontFerrier, 'Le Sens des mots "patria" et "patrie" en France au Moyen Age et jusqu'au debut du ^XVIIe siecle', ibid, clxxxviii (1940), 89—104, citing Breton examples; B. Guenee, 'Etat et nation en France au Moyen Age', ibid, ccxxxvii (1967), 17-30; and P. S. Lewis, Later Medieval France. The Polity (London, Toronto, and New York, 1968), pp. 1-4. 13. See Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, E 147, no. 5, contemporary endorsement of a ducal alliance, n August 1379: 'Obligacion sur mons. Robin de Lanvalay et mons. Rogier de Beaufort et autres chevaliers et escuiers de Dinanaies pour servir le due centre touz, etc.' 14. Guenee ,'Etat et nation en France', p. 19. 15. Gaines Post, Studies in Medieval Legal Thought (Princeton, New Jersey, 1964), pp. 434 ff.; Guenee, L'Occident, pp. 14-15 and 296-302.

286

The Creation of Brittany

Bretons were a spontaneous expression of a sense of regional identity, and how far they were the product of political and administrative activity on the part of the duke and his advisers, consciously encouraging such sentiments.16 It will also investigate some of the forces that were operative to counteract the growth of regionalism; limitations of space prevent a full discussion of all the points raised, but it is hoped that this sketch will illustrate, from the case of Brittany, some of the characteristics of what Professor Galbraith aptly described as 'the primary groupings of the Middle Ages . . . the provincial or regional nationalities'.17 The great principalities of France, like the national state which eventually absorbed them, came into being and flourished only as a result of the constant attention of their rulers to the problem of creating loyalty to themselves and to the much more intangible concept of a regional state.18 Evidence for this in Brittany can be found in the views elaborated by lawyers, representing the duke, and by writers at the ducal court, in the changing formulae and practices of the ducal chancery, in the visual symbolism of the coinage in daily use and the heraldic representation of ducal authority, in court ceremonial—all reminding ducal subjects of their common history, inheritance, and tradition.19 The defence of a provincial society with its own privileges is neither novel nor limited to Brittany in fourteenth-century France. At the very moment when, according to Professor Guenee, in a broad sense a 'French' political community recognized that it formed an ethnic community,20 the movement for provincial charters of liberties had just 16.1 should like to thank John Le Patourel and Malcolm Vale for their help and criticism in the preparation of this essay. 17. V. H. Galbraith, 'Nationality and Language in Medieval England', T.R.Hist.S., 4th ser. xxiii (1941), 114. He also remarks (p. 113), 'A nation may be defined as any group of people who believe they are one; and their nationalism as the state of mind which sustains this belief. Broadly speaking the sentiment of nationality is much the same in quality at all times and in all places. Its minimum content is love, or at least awareness, of one's country, and pride in its past achievements, real or fictitious; and it springs from attachment to the known and the familiar, stimulated by the perception of difference—difference of habits and customs, often too of speech from those of neighbouring peoples.' 18. See Lewis, Later Medieval France, pp. 59—77. 19. Some of these points are discussed below; others can only be mentioned briefly in passing, yet their importance is obvious, particularly where, as with chancery formulae and coinage, the pretensions of the dukes, their emulation of French royal practice and the infringement of royal sovereignty, can easily be discerned. For example, the adoption of the style 'par la grace de Dieu' around 1417, see Lettres et mandements dejean V^ due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard (5 yols., Nantes, 1889-95), i, p. xxxiv. 20. About 1318 (Guenee, 'Etat et nation en France', p. 21).

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

287

21

achieved expression. The various 'nations' of France were to survive for another two centuries at least. Some historians have reacted too sharply against the tradition which sees French history purely in terms of the centralization of the country under an absolutist monarchy,22 but there is still a danger that provincial feeling as an element in the history of France in the late Middle Ages can be under-rated, even though the techniques used by the provincial rulers owed much to royal example. From the time when parts of the Armorican peninsula were settled by immigrants from southern Britain, Breton history followed a slightly different course from that of the rest of the kingdom of France. The failure of Charlemagne to incorporate fully the future area of the duchy into his empire and the dominance of the dukes of Normandy over the counts of Brittany in the eleventh and twelfth centuries reduced contact with the evolving French monarchy. The relationship of the duke, sensu lato, to the king of France was not regulated precisely until the homage agreements of the thirteenth century and the grant of peerage in I297.23 Although Philip III and Philip IV had begun to interfere in the affairs of the duchy, Brittany still stood somewhat apart from the kingdom at the beginning of the fourteenth century,24 when certain sections of Breton society began to express views on the nature and status of the duchy. In 1314-15, for example, it is perhaps symbolic that such aspirations as there were in the duchy were channelled by the duke into obtaining the confirmation of legal privileges conceded by the Capetians in 1297, with additional restrictions on royal sergeants who had recently begun to operate on a more extensive scale in the duchy.25 There was no general movement of the Breton nobility and, when such movements did occur in the fourteenth century, they favoured the strengthening of ducal power against any attempt by the king to exercise more direct rule in the duchy.26 But Breton attempts to limit the extension of royal interference through its local representatives such as 21. A. Artonne, Le Mouvement de 1314 et les chartes provinciates de 1315 (Paris, 1912), passim. 22. See Lewis, Later Medieval France, pp. 195-9. 23. J.-Fr. Lemarignier, Recherches surl'hommage en marche et les frontieres feodales (Lille, 1945), pp. 115 ff.; and P. Jeulin, 'L'Hommage de la Bretagne', A. Bret, xli (1934), 380-473. 24. H. Touchard, in Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. J. Delumeau (2nd ed., Toulouse, !973)> PP-i7°-425. Artonne, Le Mouvement, pp. 48—49. 26. In 1334, for example (R. Gazelles, La Societe politique et la crise de la royaute sous Philippe de Valois (Paris, 1958), pp. 140-2), and in 1379 (see below, p. 302).

288

The Creation of Brittany

the baillis of the Cotentin, Touraine, and Poitou, through the appointment of royal clerks to important benefices, and through the acceptance of appeals from the ducal courts in the Parlement of Paris, reflect a general movement. This found supporters even in regions which had a much more intimate and longer connection with the crown, as well as amongst those who lived in the great fiefs on the periphery of the kingdom; Flanders, Burgundy, and Guyenne in particular.27 With varying degrees of emphasis, regional awareness based on a whole range of ethnic, linguistic, cultural, artistic, political, and administrative traditions can be found in areas which lacked even the apparent unity of the duchy of Brittany. Recent works on the economy and social structure of the duchy have tended, quite rightly, to insist on the huge range of geographical and social diversities to be observed there.28 Nevertheless in the fourteenth century contemporaries did recognize the separateness of the duchy behind well-defined frontiers. Sergeants in charge of those banished by sentence of the ducal courts, for example, were ordered to take prisoners 'dehors le duche jusques a Pontorson, et aporter relation de [les] avoir fait passer la riviere de Coaynon, comme il est de coustume'.29 The exact limits of the duchy were often known with extreme precision—in the fifteenth century boundaries were even marked by posts bearing the ducal arms.30 Where the geographical bounds did not correspond to the modern conception of a frontier, as in the marches separating the duchy from Anjou and Poitou to the south of the Loire, the customs prevailing in these areas were sufficiently defined for the inhabitants to know under what law they lived, who their political master was, and for disputes to be amicably settled between the duke of Brittany, and, say, the count of Poitou.31 When contemporaries referred to events 'in partibus Britannie' there was little ambiguity; they meant within the duchy of Brittany, 27. See R. Gazelles, 'Le Parti navarrais jusqu'a la mort d'Etienne Marcel', Bulletin philologique et historique (jusqu'a 1610) du comite des travaux historiques et scientifiques (1960), part ii. 845 ff. i 28. H. Touchard, Le Commerce maritime breton (Paris, 1967), pp. 5-86; and J. Meyer, La Noblesse bretonne au XVIIIe siecle (2 vols., Paris, 1966), i, pp. xii-xiii, and passim. 29. Morice, Preuves, ii. 654. 30. Ibid. ii. 1660. 3I.E. Chenon, 'Les Marches separantes d'Anjou, Bretagne et Poitou', Nouvelle revue historique de droit franfais et etranger, xvi (1891), 18-62 and 165—211; M. Jones, Ducal Brittany 1364-1399 (Oxford, 1970), p. 124; in 1371 Mag. Jean Vitrier, king's secretary and a native of Bouzille (dep. Maine-et-Loire) described himself as 'in finibus Andegavie et Britannic oriundus' (Monuments du proces de canonisation du bienheureux Charles de Blots, due de Bretagne, 1320-64, ed. F. Plaine (Saint-Brieuc, 1921), p. 174.)

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

289

whose inhabitants 'the gretteste rovers and the gretteste thevys'32 had acquired a reputation for bravery and daring, qualities essential in their careers by land and sea, as royal mercenaries and in the routier companies, as sailors and pirates.33 In the context of fourteenth-century Brittany, it is possible to examine administrative developments under John IV (1364-99), in order to see how he was able to use the existing political situation to further claims to rule an independent duchy.34 It has been traditional to view the civil war fought between the Montfortists and their English allies and the Penthievre-Blois party, as the great turning point in the history of the duchy. In the first phase of the war the Montfortists established their claim to succeed; this was recognized by Charles V at the time of the first Treaty of Guerande (1365). A second phase, in which John IV's struggle with his one-time ally, Olivier, sire de Clisson, with other members of the Breton nobility and with his sovereign, was punctuated by the duke's exile (1373-9), the second Treaty of Guerande (1381) and a series of agreements which led to a more permanent peace with Clisson, and was finally concluded in 1395. As a result, warfare, though not continuous nor simultaneously affecting the whole of the duchy, was an important factor in maintaining disturbed conditions, creating tensions in Breton society, and providing John IV with the excuse, as well as the need, to develop a more extensive administrative machine. In these conditions increasing institutional maturity was encouraged by the quickening pace of political life, with more business for ducal courts, the Parlement and the beginnings of the Etats. Contrasting ducal administration before the civil war with that functioning afterwards, the government can be seen changing from a largely private, personal type, characteristic of feudal society in its prime, to an administration of a public nature with fixed institutions and personnel, small though numbers often were in central offices like the Chancery and Chambre des Comptes. As records accumulated, traditions developed and the expertise of ducal officers in using them to support ducal pretensions and authority increased. The civil war, the troubles of John IV's reign, and French distraction by the war with England, allowed the duke to 32. The Libelle ofEnglyshe Polycye, ed. G. Warner (Oxford, 1926), p. 9. 33. For Bretons in French royal armies see below, p. 301; as mercenaries see L. Mirot, 'Sylvestre Budes et les Bretons en Italic', B.E.C. Iviii (1897), 579-614 and lix (1898), 262-303; and as sailors and pirates see Touchard, Le Commerce, passim. 34. See Jones, Ducal Brittany, for a more detailed account of these developments.

290

The Creation of Brittany

build up a de facto position of independence on which his fifteenthcentury successors were to build. Pursuing policies at variance with the wishes of his sovereign, and even of his one-time guardian, the king of England, like his contemporaries, the cadet sons of John II of France and their cousins, John IV was concerned with power for his own ends. Yet it is inaccurate to suggest that it was only after the civil war that separatist feelings emerged in Brittany;35 the war enabled the duke to cast off a number of restraints. His legislative competence, previously restricted by deference to seigneurial privilege and criticism, increased.36 A more modern taxation system, taking into account seigneurial interests once again, was imposed with a fair degree of success after 1364, supplementing the financial monopolies and an expanded demesne available to dukes prior to the war.37 Individual bishops, seigneurs, and towns might oppose ducal authority as they had done with impunity before i34i,38 but by the reign of John IV, few were able to maintain their opposition for long, unless they were able to command the support of the king of France, like the citizens of Saint-Malo between 1387 and 1415.39 The political balance within the duchy was tipping much more towards the duke and his officers in their attempts to limit privilege other than that granted and authorized by the duke. But it needs to be stressed that the ideological foundations of ducal action had not greatly changed as a result of the civil war; opportunities to make claims to independence a reality had simply improved. Some evidence for this view can be gathered from the dukes' fulfilment of the obligations entered into when accepting the peerage in 1297. With reservations the dukes had generally served the king in the various capacities expected of them as peers in his court and army. Possessing the attributes of sovereignty, the king could hear appeals from the duchy, though only under two conditions (false judgement and denial of justice)—conditions, which were constantly being infringed, but which the king, especially in times of weakness, could only 3 5. A traditional view most recently reaffirmed in the otherwise excellent chapter by Touchard, in Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. Delumeau, pp. 187-8. 36. B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'La Genese du legislatif dans le duche de Bretagne', Revue histor'tque de drottfranfais et etr anger, 4* ser. xl (i962), 351-72. 37. M. Jones, 'Les Finances de Jean IV, due de Bretagne (1364-1399)', Memoires de la societe d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne, Hi ; see above, pp. 239-61. 38. B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les Papes et les dues de Bretagne (2 vols., Paris, 1928), i. 234 ff. and 425. 39. Touchard, Le Commerce, pp. 83-85.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

291

40

confirm. He could also attempt to levy taxation in the duchy, publish royal ordonnances there, and interfere in the duke's issuing of coinage. Several of these matters were still claimed as royal prerogatives in the late fourteenth century, but by then John IV had been able to ensure that such claims had no practical importance.41 Elements of ambiguity were introduced into the actual ceremony of liege homage. John IV and his advisers argued in 1366 that it was simple homage, a position they restated in 1381. This was repeated at future ceremonies until Louis XI, with a characteristically bold stroke (though unprofitable in the shortterm) attempted to bring Francis II to heel by ignoring the form of words recently used in the ceremony, and insisting on the subject-status of the duke.42 In the case of homage the records used to back up ducal claims were not very convincing.43 But there are other instances where the use of traditional arguments, enshrined in a series of legal briefs and other documents of an official or semi-official nature, shows how late-fourteenth-century claims for the powers of the duke and the status of his duchy depend substantially on a position adopted prior to the civil war. The locus dassicus for such claims is in the dispute between John de Montfort and Charles de Blois for the succession to John III in i34i.44 Many of the statements then made had already been adumbrated before the Parlement of Paris in 1336, in the case of John III versus Marie, countess of Saint-Pol, who was claiming a share in the succession to Duke John II (d. I305).45 Some of them are of interest for contemporary views of the character of French peerages in general. It was stated, for instance, that les dictes parries et baronnies [de France] furent fondees premierement et entraduytes riches et puyssantes pour les noblesces et juridicions garder et pour la deffense des 40. Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, E no, no. 3, original letters of Philip IV, February 1297 (see Morice, Preuves, i. 1121), confirmed by Philip V in March 1317 and Charles IV in 1323 and 1324 (Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, E no, nos. 12, 13, and 15). Particularly notable are a series of letters from Philip VI, between 23 April and 16 June 1328, chiefly addressed to the Parlement of Paris to send back to Brittany any cases it had received contrary to customary form, and to respect ducal privileges, which were confirmed in accordance with letters of 1303, 1316, 1318, and 1319 (ibid., nos. 18-26). 41. Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 2-4 and 114 ff.; Morice, Preuves, ii. 629-33. 42. B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Une Idee politique de Louis XI: la sujetion eclipse la vassalite', Rev. Hist, ccxxvi (1961), 383-98. 43. Jeulin, 'L'Hommage de la Bretagne', pp. 419-33. 44. 'Some Documents relating to the Disputed Succession to the Duchy of Brittany, 1341', ed. M. Jones, Cam Jen Miscellany, xxiv (1972), i, 15-70, and 75-76. 45. Ibid., pp. 4-5.

292

The Creation of Brittany

pays ou elles sont et especialment du Royaume, et que le Roy se en peust mieuz aydier, quant mectier en avient, quar de tant est il plus noble, plus fort et plus puyssant comme il a plus nobles et puyssanz subiez, les quielx ne seroyent puyssanz ne nobles si les dictes parries ou baronnies se partoyent, quar toute chose devisee est mains force de soy meymes que ne est une ensemble unie.46

Other points are similarly made about the weaknesses which follow from the division of great lordships among several heirs. The disadvantages affect not merely the lord, but ultimately 'le Roy et le Royaume' if the power of such lordships is diminished by division. The majority of the arguments used in 1336, however, with their claims resting on 'historical' foundations were intended to support the conclusion that 'le due de Bretaigne ne la duche ne sont pas de autel condicion comme les autres pers et parries de France'.47 As far as succession to the dukes was concerned, the proctors of John III argued that they stood above the customary laws of the duchy applicable in the case of noble successions. Even though they could find support for the indivisibility principle in the laws applied to other recent peerage successions, they pressed a much more dangerous line: 'Item, que ou temps passe la terre de Bretaigne fut Royaume ... Item, que le Roy ou les Roys de Bretaigne pour le temps ne recognoissoyent nul soverain en terre... ,'48 By 1341, then, royal lawyers were becoming familiar with some of the more extravagant Breton claims that the acceptance of the peerage by the duke in 1297 had not resulted in any diminution of his prerogatives as successor to former 'kings' of Brittany. The duchy was a jewel in the crown of France, a 'vroie escharboucle reluisant et erradiant en ilcelle',49 but the duke's privileges, his 'regalities', were not to be shared with subject or far-off sovereign because Brittany possessed 'les droiz et nobleces de royaulme'.50 Feelings might have been somewhat mollified by the critical qualification 'exceptee la soveraynete et le resort de son parlement que il volut que fust au Roy notresire'51 for this was, of course, the key issue when new and ever more precise definitions of what constituted sovereignty threatened to undermine the ability of a duke to rule in his duchy, even if there were goodwill towards the 46. Arch. Nat., K 1152, no. 49, m. i. 47. Ibid., m. 8. 48. Ibid., mm. i and 8; see Post, Studies, pp. 453 ff. For the use of similar arguments in fifteenth-century Burgundy, see j. Richard, ' "Enclaves" royales et limites des provinces. Les elections bourguignonnes', A.B. xx (1948), 107; and Y. Lacaze, 'Le Role des traditions dans la genese d'un sentiment national au XVe siecle: La Bourgogne de Philippe le Bon', B.E.C. cxxix (1971), 303-85. 49. Camden Miscellany, xxiv (1972), 57. 50. Ibid., p. 23. 51. Ibid., p. 5,n. 19.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

293

sovereign.52 Yet if John Ill's lawyers thought in 1336 that their arguments about indivisibility and male succession might appeal to Philip VI,53 in the light of royal succession problems since 1316, their boldness in pressing John's claims in these terms, in their definition of some of the particular characteristics of the duke's prerogatives,54 must have put royal lawyers on their guard. Repetition of these claims in 1341 reveals a similar lack of sensitivity to royal views.55 To a large extent, the issue of the Breton succession in 1341 was already predetermined by the close personal ties between Philip VI and his nephew, Charles de Blois, before the disputants reached court.56 Royal advisers had a facility for producing arguments to buttress a decision politically favourable to the king on the question of important successions;57 Breton claims to virtual independence espoused by Montfort cannot have helped his cause. They were, all the same, to be used with increasing frequency by his son and his successors. Repetition did not validate the authenticity of historical claims made on behalf of the dukes, but it did help to implant in the minds of their subjects an idea of those claims.58 Formal occasions for publicizing regional feelings were presented by meetings of the Parlement, and subsequently by meetings of the Etats, where the duke could consult thirty or more major nobles, the leading ecclesiastics, his legal officers, and representatives of the commons.59 As a supplication to the king in 1384 stated: Toutesfoiz quil en est double et que bon semble au prince, les prelaz, barons et commun doudit pais ou chose leur estre necessaire, tant de subsides que autres choses, au proulfit doudit pais le faire, len le fait, et pour laubsence de dun ne de dous 52. P. Chaplais, 'La Souverainete du roi de France et le pouvoir legislatif en Guyenne au debut du XlVe siecle', M.A. Ixix (1963), 449-69; J. Favier, 'Les Legistes et le gouvernement de Philippe le Bel', Journaldes Savants (1969), pp. 92-108. 5 j. Arch. Nat., K 1152, no. 49, especially mm. i, 2,4, and 8. 54. Ibid., m. 8: 'Item, que de telles noblesces usa celi . .. due qui ores est quar il a son parlement ou len appelle de ses senechalx et a la garde et les regalles des yglises quant elles vaquent et plusours autres noblesces que ne ont pas les autres pers ou barons (interlined) qui seront autres foyz decleries si mestier est . . .'; and Cam Jen Miscellany, xxiv (i972),555. Cam Jen Miscellany, xxiv (1972), 31, 34, 38, and 62-63. 56. On 17 April 1341, just a fortnight before the death of John III, Philip VI ordered a vidimus to be made of the terms of his confirmation of the marriage contract between Charles and Jeanne de Penthievre, originally issued on 4 June 1337 (Arch. Nat., K.42, nos. 37, 37 bis, and 37 ter). 57. See Camden Miscellany, xxiv (1972), 4 and 9-10. 58. See below, pp. 302-3. 59. B-A. Pocquet de Haut-Jusse, 'Les Faux fitats de Bretagne de 1315 et les premiers etats de Bretagne', B.E.C. Ixxxvi (1925), 388-406.

294

The Creation of Brittany

ne tarde pas, puis la maire et plus saine partie se y abssant, et il est avise par le prince et son consaill ainssi le faire, quia quodprincipi placuit legis habet vigorem.60

But it was generally in the smaller ducal council that policy was formed and 'le conseil etant le reflet direct de la puissance ducale, sa competence est pratiquement illimitee'.61 Its composition, at least for the late fourteenth century, is fairly well established. Even in the early years of John TV's reign, after the bitter struggles of the civil war and despite the presence in it of a few Englishmen, the council reflected a good crosssection of the duchy's nobility, the leading churchmen, and those with legal and administrative experience, often gained in the service of the late Charles de Blois.62 In effect, the duke was not alone in being able to influence opinion about regional identity. His advisers, whether owing their position to social status or professional expertise, were also in a position to do so. It is interesting, therefore, to examine their opportunities for education in order to assess what kind of formative experiences and intellectual traditions they brought to their work as ducal councillors. In particular, a number of recent studies have emphasized the position of lawyers in the creation and maintenance of many specific characteristics of later medieval administrations, and it might be expected that the same would be true for Brittany.63 French historians have long assumed that education at a primary level was readily available in the later Middle Ages. Simeon Luce wrote, 'on ne peut guere douter que pendant les annees meme les plus agitees du quatorzieme siecle la plupart des villages n'aient eu des maitres enseignant aux enfants la lecture, 1'ecriture et un peu de calcul'. A. Dupuy, writing about fifteenth-century Brittany agreed.64 Recent historians, more cautious than their forbears and anxious to document such wide claims, have been able to show that even if schools were not to be found in every parish, they were numerous enough in some areas.65 From chance references in Breton sources, it can certainly be established that besides schools in the leading towns of the duchy, there were many, run 60. Morice, Preuves, ii. 457-8. 61. B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Le Conseil du due en Bretagne d'apres ses procesverbaux', B.E.C. cxvi (1958), 140. 62. Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 38-40 and 55-57. 63. Bibliography in Guenee, U Occident, pp. 51-53. 64. S. Luce, Histoire de Bertrand du Guesclin (Paris, 1876), pp. 15—16; A Dupuy, Histoire de la reunion de la Bretagne a la France (2 vols., Paris, 1880), ii. 377—81. 65. For examgle, B. Guenee, Tribunaux et gens de justice dans le bailliage de Senlis a la fin du Moyen Age vers ijSo-vers i55o (Paris, 1963), pp. 186—8.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

295

by parish priests or by professional schoolmasters, which flourished, at least briefly, in the countryside. Saint-Yves Helori learnt grammar just after the mid thirteenth century from the parish priest of Pleubian, who later accompanied his star pupil to the University of Orleans.66 Schools existed at Machecoul and Bourgneuf in the pays de Rays in the mid fourteenth century.67 At an inquiry held at Vannes in 1402, Jean Loppin, advocate in the court of the bishop's official, testified that he had gone to school at Landaul where Geoffroy Nesindre, master of sciences, grammar, and logic, was his mentor. Loppin had himself taught grammar at Muzillac around the year 1366 and had then directed a grammar school at Vannes.68 This evidence is significant since the diocese of Vannes, one of the poorest in the duchy, appears to be the one which sent fewest students on to the universities.69 That the lack of formal higher education was not in itself an impediment to lucrative and important office is shown from the case of Loppin himself or that of Holland Poence. Loppin had been befriended at Vannes by Mag. Jean le Thiec and Mag. Pierre de Cancouet, respectively official of the bishop and collector of apostolic dues. So well had he deputized for Cancouet during his absences from the diocese that he succeeded him as receiver for the chapter of Vannes, and began to take on commissions from neighbouring parishes which enabled him to practise as an advocate.70 Poence, a married clerk and native of the parish of Goudelin in the diocese of Treguier, aged about fifty-three when he deposed at the inquiry at Angers in 1371 into Blois's sanctity, had chosen a secular career. As a clerk and notary he had served fifteen years 'in curia senescallorum' before becoming alloueand lieutenant to the seneschal of Guingamp. At about the same time he was appointed secretary to Blois and held this position for fifteen years until Charles's death, and for the last four years he had also been seneschal of Cornouaille.71 But among the secretaries of Charles de Blois there were men with university degrees, the duke 66. Monuments originaux deVhistoire de St-Yves, ed. A. de la Borderie et al. (SaintBrieuc, 1887), pp. 8,15, 36-37, and 41. 67. 'Cartulaire des sires de Rays', ed. R. Blanchard, Archives historiques de Poitou, xxviii (1898), xviii; Arch. Nat., i AP 606, fo. 75, accounts rendered to Alienor de Thouars, 10 June 1360: 'Mise de vin: Item, i pipe au mestre de 1'escole (de Bourgneuf).' 68. Arch. Dep. Morbihan, 58 G i, fos. 83-85 v; see Inventaire sommatre, Morbihan, serie G, ed. J. de la Martiniere, G. Duhem and P. Thomas-Lacroix (Vannes, 1940), ii. 165. Other witnesses, too, made reference to their schooling. 69. Pocquet, Les Papes, i. 226, and below, pp. 297-8. 70. See above, n. 68. 71. Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 135 ff.

296

The Creation of Brittany

had himself received a clerk's education and he liked to dine with learned men.72 A factor which may have militated against the growth of a specifically Breton intellectual outlook or tradition in the fourteenth century was the lack of a studium generate.73 Bretons seeking higher education had to leave the duchy. The influence of the schools of the Loire valley, and of Paris, where four colleges were established by the early fourteenth century for Breton students, may be suspected where it is at first difficult to demonstrate.74 There are hints of the influence of this academic training on the circle of ducal advisers, amongst whom must be numbered in the reign of John III the compilers of La tres andenne coutume, with its borrowings from Roman law and the customary law of Anjou and Touraine.75 At an earlier date, Saint-Yves had gone on to Orleans University after Paris, whence he returned to Brittany to practise as an official in the ecclesiastical courts of the archdeacon of Rennes and the bishop of Treguier. Yet contact with wider cultural horizons in cosmopolitan universities did not automatically obliterate provincial attitudes. In the case of Saint-Yves, on his return to the duchy, not only did he display his newly acquired knowledge of the law and an increasing asceticism (marked by the use of his copy of the Decretals as a pillow), but also the appropriate Breton stance in opposition to royal attempts to levy taxation in the duchy.76 Many Bretons were to follow his example in obtaining an education outside the duchy; by the later fourteenth century, an increasing proportion of those who returned can be found in the service of a duke, who was pledged to the defence of a regional political identity. There does, however, appear to have been an interesting change with regard to the popularity of particular universities, if the evidence of the rolls for benefices, submitted to the pope, can be relied upon for tracing the careers of Bretons in the absence of matriculation records.77 Paris 72. For example, ibid., pp. 44-46, 56-60, and 84-89, for secretaries; 11-16 and 54for duke's education; 30 and 56 for dining habits. 73. Documents concerning the abortive attempts by John V to found a university at Nantes in 1414, and its subsequent establishment in 1460, can be found in Les Statuts et privileges des universites franfaises depuis leur fondation jusquen zj$g,ed. M. Fournier (3 vols., Paris, 1890-2), iii, nos. 1588-95. 74. Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. Delumeau, p. 165. 75. La Tres Andenne Coutume de Bretagne, ed. M. Planiol (Rennes, 1896), pp. 7-11; cf. J.-Ph. Levy, 'La Penetration du droit savant dans les coutumes angevins et breions au Moyen Age', Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, xxv (1957), 1-53. 76. Monuments Originaux, ed. de la Borderie et a/., pp. 28 and 46. 77. The rolls present disadvantages for statistical analysis; there is no means of

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

297

maintained its importance for those who wished to enter the higher faculties of theology, canon law, and medicine, and cases can be cited of Breton graduates of Orleans and Angers transferring to Paris to continue their studies and to teach.78 Paris was also the university most favoured by Bretons from the dioceses of Quimper, Saint-Brieuc, Saint-Pol-de-Leon, and Treguier. Saint-Malo produced a number of graduates but the other four Breton dioceses sent only a handful each of students to Paris.79 Yet the number of Paris graduates entering directly into the ducal administration was small, and by the 13705, Orleans had lost ground to Angers. There the Breton element, more numerous even than at Paris, although only comprising one of the six nations, appears to have dominated the university.80 The majority of Bretons came from the dioceses of Rennes, Saint-Malo, Nantes, and Quimper. In the case of the first three, the proximity of Angers, its emphasis on law and the recent strong patronage of Louis, duke of Anjou, son-in-law of the late Charles de Blois, may have attracted them. As for the diocese of Quimper, its over-all educational record deserves more attention than it can receive here, since it provided the highest number of Breton students at Paris and Orleans,81 and comes second in the list for Breton students at the three universities under discussion. There was a long tradition of learning at Quimper but it is also indicative of contemporary concern with educational matters which appears to be more evident there than in any other Breton chapter in the late fourteenth century.82 telling what proportion of university members are included, or even, on occasion, whether the man for whom a benefice was being sought was resident. 78. Statements about Paris University are based on Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, ed. H. Denifle and E. Chatelain (4 vols., Paris, 1889-97), ii (1286-1350) and 111(1350-94). 79. Calculations based on ibid, ii, nos. 1164-5 i an ^ iii, nos. 1263,1265,1304,1307-8, 1426, 1429, 1431-7, 1496, 1539, I 54 I > and J 5^3j show that Breton dioceses were repressented by the following totals of teachers and students for the period 1349-88: Quimper, 71 names; Saint-Brieuc, 52; Leon, 49; Treguier, 36; Saint7Malo, 16; Nantes and Vannes, 5 each; Rennes and Dol, 4 each. These figures cannot be used as absolute numbers; some names are repeated in different rolls (see also above, p. 296, n. 77). 80. Statistics for Angers are calculated from Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, nos. 1894-8. For the period 1362-93, 382 Breton names appear on the rolls as opposed to 242 at Paris from 1349-88. Totals, by diocese, as for Paris, are: Rennes, 113 names; SaintMalo, 74; Nantes, 65; Quimper, 35; Vannes, 25; Dol, 21; Treguier, 20; Saint-Brieuc, 16; Leon, 13. See A. Coville, La Vie intellectuelle dans les domaines d'Anjou—Provence de 1380 a 1435 (Paris, 1941), pp. 506 ff. for the history of the University of Angers. 81. Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, nos. 1888-91, give the following figures for Orleans for the period 1378-94; Quimper, 11 names; Rennes and Treguier, 9 each; Leon, 7; Saint-Malo, 6; Nantes, 3; Dol and Saint-Brieuc, 2 each; Vannes, o. 82. For Geoffroy le Marhec, bishop of Quimper (1357-83), see Chartularium, ed. Denifle and Chatelain, ii. 1164 and note; for the chapter library and its use, see Cartulaire

298

The Creation of Brittany

Angers was dominated by legal studies, and out of 286 bachelors in the Faculty of Law for whom benefices were sought in 1378, 117 were definitely of Breton origin; in 1393 the figures were 49 Bretons out of 96. In 1378 at least 84 out of 188 scholars were Bretons; in 1393,44 out of 95.83 Among the bachelors and scholars were a future chancellor of the duchy, bishops, abbots, ducal secretaries (including Guillaume de Saint-Andre), and notaries.84 Among those with higher degrees, 22 out of 73 licentiates in law in 1378 at Angers were Bretons, while the corresponding number in 1393 was 12 out of 22.8s Guy de Cleder, described in 1363 as 'legum doctoris ordinarie in eodem studio regentis et qui jam per septem annos vel circa rexit',86 was a councillor of Charles de Blois and his wife, whom he represented at Guerande in 1365, and also of John IV. He was still trying to accumulate more benefices as a professor at Angers in I393-87 Hugues de Keroulay, a doctor of both laws, professor at Angers in 1378, was later in John IV's council and became bishop of Treguier, following a standard career pattern.88 There were two Raouls de Caradeuc from the diocese of Quimper. One was doctor of both laws as early as 1371 and may still have been teaching as late as 1418; it is more likely, however, that the survivor then was the second Raoul, described as a bachelor in decretals in I378.89 One of them, at least, undertook diplomatic missions for John IV and sat on his council,90 many members of which in the 13803 and 13905 had been deVf.gli.se de Quimper, ed. Abbe Peyron (Quimper, 1909), nos. 334-5, 385,401, and 429 In 1349 there is mention of Guillaume, son of 'magistri Guidomari rectoris quondam scolarum gramaticalium de Kemper Corentino et Margareta filia Francisci Pergamenarii eius uxor' (ibid., no. 300). 83. Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, nos. 1896-8. 84. For Robert Brochereul, chancellor 1396-9, ibid., no. 1897; for bishops, see below, p. 299; for Jean le Bart, future abbot of Saint-Melaine, and for Saint-Andre, see ibid.; for Jean Hilari and Geoffrey Coglais, ducal secretaries in the 13803, see ibid., no. 1898; for Guillaume Chauvin, priest, and later a notary, see ibid. Breton notaries as a group deserve further study; twelve are named in the 1371 proces alone (Monuments, ed. Plaine, passim). 85. Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, loc. cit. 86. Ibid., no. 1895. In 1369 he received a dispensation for non-residence (Pocquet, Les Papes, i. 380, n. 4). 87. Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 39, 58, and 85; Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, no. 1898. 88. Ibid., no. 1897. As archdeacon of Desert he witnessed a ducal protestation on 28 October 1380 (Morice, Preuves, ii. 296). For lists of Breton bishops, see Series Episcoporum, ed. P. B. Gams (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1931). 89. Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, nos. 1896-7; Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 414; M. Fournier, Histoire de la science du droit en France, iii (Paris, 1892), 199. 90. See Nantes, Bibliotheque Municipale, MS. 1703, no. 3", 17 February 1382, Mr. Raoul de Caradeuc and Mr. Guy de Cleder in the ducal council; Arch. Dep., LoireAtlantique, E 92, no. 20, 27 October 1382, appointment of these two and Nicolas du

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

299

contemporaries at Angers in the 13705. This pattern persisted into John V's reign.91 It has recently been demonstrated that friendships made at the university amongst future members of the Parlement of Paris survived into later life.92 But how far Breton councillors shared more than a similar academic training with each other, and how far their master shared anything more than political confidences with them, remain intriguing mysteries. The most distinguished Breton bishops, like Geoffroy le Marhec, bishop of Quimper (i357-83),93 and Everart deTremaugon, bishop of Dol (i382-6),94 were not very close to the duke, and other Breton bishops who became cardinals in this period were drawn away from the duchy to Avignon and Rome. Those who remained, like Keroulay, Bonabe de Rochefort, bishop of Nantes (i392-8),95 and Gacien de Monceaux, bishop of Quimper (1408-16)96 had been trained in law, and like Henry and Guy le Barbu, Richard de Lesmenez, and Guillaume le Briz, received their bishoprics largely as a reward for administrative services to the duke.97 There is some evidence that members of noble families, from the most important to the lesser gentry, were likewise fitting themselves for ducal service by attending the University of Angers.98 The cultural interests of the nobility as a whole for this period still remain uninvestigated. It would appear, however, that they did not take any specifically Breton form.99 Their main concern was with the buildPerche, to deliver 12,500 francs to Charles VI; and ibid., H 352, no. i, 13 December 1382, ducal order to the seneschal of Nantes, on complaint of the prioress of Bourg des Moustiers, witnessed by Cleder and Caradeuc, drawn up by Saint-Andr6 as ducal secretary. 91. See Coville, La Vie intellectuelle, p. 512. 92. F. Autrand, 'Les Librairies des gens du Parlement au temps de Charles VF, Annales E.S.C. xxviii (1973), 1241. 93. See above, p. 297, n. 82. 94. See A. Coville, Everart de Tremaugon et le Songe du Vergier (Paris, 1933). 95. Listed amongst the noliles at Angers in 1378 as a clerk of Nantes diocese and scholar in laws (Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, no. 1897). 96. Amongst the second year scholars in 1378 (ibid.), ducal secretary and councillor from the 13803. For some of the terms of his will, see Cartulaire, ed. Peyron, no. 494. 97. See Pocquet, Les Papes, i, s.n. 98. Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, no. 1897. A key example is Robert Brochereul, sire de la Sicaudais, a minor seigneury in the pays de Rays, who rose to be chancellor of the duchy (see above, p.298, n. 84) and who married his daughters into the prestigious families of Montfort and Montauban (a scion of whom was a contemporary at Angers, Les Statuts, ed. Fournier, iii, no. 1897). See Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 59 and 99; and A. Du Paz, Histoire genealogique de plusieurs maisons illustres de Bretagne (Paris, 1619), pp. 550-3. 99. It would be interesting to know who owned the early fifteenth-century copy of

300

The Creation of Brittany

ing and decoration of their castles and manors rather than with academic matters.100 Some ducal servants did dabble with subjects of a conventional kind. Guillaume de Saint-Andre, besides his historical work and the daily chores of his secretarial duties, was the author of a laboured paraphrase of an earlier Jeu des echecs moralises. This lacks intellectual sparkle, although there are one or two pleasing observations.101 It reveals, as do surviving lists of books owned by clerics and notaries,102 the essentially conservative character of Breton cultural life at a point when more stimulating and astringent works were already causing excitement in literary circles in Paris,103 and when a more learned and artistic tradition flourished at the court of Charles V and his brothers. The lack of originality and general poverty of Breton court life is reflected in the duchy at large by the failure of most testators to make provision for educational foundations, and by the absence from most wills of manuscripts, apart from devotional manuals.104 Most interest was directed towards aspects of religious devotion,105 though there was some awareness amongst non-clerical elements of the population of the importance of learning. Numerous Breton witnesses at the inquiry in 1371 claimed to be illiteratus in the exact medieval meaning of that word.106 However, many knights and esquires, whose calling did not in the first instance require them to be able to write, could by the late Le Songe du Vieil Pelerin, sheets of which were later used to wrap documents in the Chambre des Comptes at Nantes (Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, Parchemins, non classes, liasses 5 and 15).! hope to examine this aspect of the nobility elsewhere; my remarks stem from an examination of the few surviving fourteenth-century accounts. 100. H. Waquet, Art Breton (Paris, 1960), pp. 65—72. 101. F. Lecoy, 'Guillaume de St-Andre et son "Jeu des echecs moralises"', Romania, Ixvii (1942-3), 491-503. 102. See Melanges historiques Bretons (Societe des Bibliophiles Bretons, Nantes, 1883), pp. 192-6, for the sale of certain books once belonging to Mag. Guillaume Hequenoille, chanter of Rennes cathedral, 1338-71. They included a Code, a Digest, a Decretum together with a commentary on it, a Sext, a psalter, and a Golden Legend (which was also the favourite reading of Charles de Blois, see Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 30). Mag. Pierre Dorenge, an important notary living at Nantes, frequently employed by the duke, left at his death in 1395 only four books which he thought fit to mention in his will: a breviary, a bible, a Golden Legend, and an 'Ystorias scolasticas' (Arch. Dep., LoireAtlantique, H 483). 103. Autrand, 'Les Libraries', pp. 1220 and 1237-41. 104. A convenient list of some surviving wills can be found in A. Perraud, Etude sur le testament d'apres la coutume de Bretagne (Rennes, 1921), pp. 251-61. 105. For example, see Morice, Preuves, ii. 658-60 and 716-21, for the wills of Jean, vicomte de Rohan (1395), and his wife (1401). 106. Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 131, 156, 176, and 179. Among those who claimed to be literate was Michel Barbelot, ducal barber, who had been a servant of the Carthusians of Paris (ibid., p. 162).

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

301

107

fourteenth century at least sign their names. This indicates some acquaintance with the rudiments of learning. But, it must be emphasized, this was not distinctively Breton. Like the duke and his court, the noblesse and clergy followed French traditions, even when, like Mathieu Bovis (an otherwise unknown clerk of the diocese of Leon, who finished copying a manuscript of the sayings of St. Augustine in 1358), their feelings towards the French lacked charity.108 The attitudes of the Breton noblesse towards France were bound to be ambivalent. There was always primitive patriotism and loyalty to one's homeland. Pugna pro patria was a well-known adage.109 Those ignorant of it could exemplify its spirit as did Yvo d'Alnet, a Breton esquire, held prisoner at Poitiers around All Saints' Day, 1370."° Provoked beyond endurance by the reproaches of a Gascon man-atarms who claimed that Gascons were better fighters and more loyal than Bretons, Yvo sought leave before the court of the seneschal of Poitou to wage battle for the honour of his countrymen, despite the superior size of his opponent, the Bourc de Caumont, who had already accounted for three men in such duels. Having admittedly taken the precaution of vowing himself to the saintly Charles de Blois, whose name (in gallice) he had had embroidered on his sleeve as a token, he nevertheless considered it miraculous that he had defeated and killed the Bourc. Yet France offered tempting prospects to the Breton noblesse, many of whom had followed Bertrand du Guesclin into the royal armies.111 The royal administration absorbed the talents of a number of Bretons: Paris University provided an outlet for those of the most highly trained Bretons.112 Guillaume de Saint-Andre describes du Guesclin's dilemma in 1379: Glequin qui Connestable estoit, Trop grand dueil en son cueur avoit, De la guerre et dissention, 107. See Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, E 137-48, passim, for a series of letters of fealty, obligations, alliances, etc., bearing signatures of the noblesse for the late fourteenth century. 108. L. Delisle, Le Cabinet des Manuscrits de la Bibliotheque Nationale (4 vols., Paris, 1868-81), 1.492. 109. Post, Studies, p. 436. 110. Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 247-9. in. P. Contamine, Guerre, etat et societe a la fin du Moyen Age. Etudes sur Us armees des rois de France, 1337-1494 (Paris and The Hague, 1972), pp. 15 5—7 and 162-3. 112. M. Fournier, La Faculte de Decret del'Universite de Paris au XVe siecle (Paris, 1895), pp. 127 ff.

302

The Creation of Brittany Estant entre sa nation, Et les Francois que il amoit.113

When the duke was at loggerheads with France, Breton pensioners of the king found that their lands and all the other ties of family alliance, the tangible and intangible links, which bound a man to his native soil, were bound to suffer. In the years 1379-81 they decided that the price to be paid for the restoration of peaceful conditions should not be the sacrifice of the virtual autonomy achieved by successive dukes.114 It was the task of the duke and his councillors to build on this shaky foundation of political loyalty. They turned increasingly to various aids which would help them to foster natural feelings of loyalty. Propaganda for their point of view took legal and literary, visual and symbolic form, as they sought to create a ducal mystique which reflected, in a shadowy form, that which surrounded the king of France.115 With regard to the duke's legal claims, not only did he make representations at Paris, based on the claims current in the days of John III, but there is some evidence to show the deliberate popularization of these views of the duchy's history and status. At an inquiry into ducal prerogatives carried out in 1392, as at a similar inquiry in 1455, a wide range of witnesses testified to the verity of the pseudo-legal and historical justifications of ducal pretensions which stemmed directly from arguments advanced before the civil war.116 It would seem that witnesses may have been carefully chosen beforehand and primed on the answers required; some certainly replied in terms suspiciously close to the wording of earlier council statements on ducal rights.117 An exercise like the 1392 inquiry also helped to condition Bretons and encouraged expression of their regional identity. A similar purpose may have been behind the literary work of Saint-Andre and the writer of the Chronicon Briocense. The use by the latter of original documents in extenso and the imaginative fabrication of spurious documents to authenticate actions of earlier rulers of the duchy which surviving historical evidence failed to corroborate, betrays a man closely in touch with ducal ideas at this 113. Chronlque de Bertrandde Guesclin, ii. 536, lines 3526-30. Cf. B.-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'La Derniere Phase de la vie de Du Guesclin; 1'affaire de Bretagne', B.E.C. cxxv (1967), 142—89. 114. Morice, Preuves, ii. 214-18 and 273-80.1 hope to study Breton pensioners of France elsewhere. 115. See Lewis, Later Medieval France, pp. 81—84.

116. Morice, Preuves, ii. 595-7 and 1651-68, and see, for instance, Camden -Mwce//any,xxiv(i972), 23. 117. See Morice, Preuves, ii. 457-8.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

303

118

stage. The Chronicon was shaped to contemporary needs; it built on existing popular traditions and encouraged loyalty to the fledgling state.119 Since the kings of France, supremely blessed by God, who had endowed them miraculously with gifts like the coronation oil, the sacred oriflamme, and the ability to touch for the king's evil, used such methods to build up their power,120 it is not remarkable that the dukes of Brittany, who had their kings and saints of old, should imitate them. John IV was naturally at pains to stamp out the cult of his defeated rival, Charles de Blois, but payments by him in 1393 'pour enchasser partie des reliques de Saint Salomon et de Saint Grallon jadis roys de Bretaigne predecesseurs de monseigneur.. ,'121 were a small investment for the potential otherworldly assistance these long-deceased monarchs might provide. Nor was this the first time in the fourteenth century that chieftains of the late Roman or Carolingian periods were recalled. John's father ransacked all sources for evidence to support his claims to succeed John III in 1341. His lawyers alleged that 'croniques et escripttures' showed conclusively 'quil ot plusours rois en Bretaigne ou temps passe et le premier fut Salemons qui ot guerre centre Charlies le Grant, le Roy Cohel et le Roy Chouable et le Roy Arbams et plusours autres qui sont nommez aes ystoires de Bretaigne.. .'I22 and some of the implications drawn from these views have already been mentioned. But Charles de Blois, for all his Valois connections, came to value these Breton traditions sufficiently to have himself portrayed in a window at one of his favourite convents in the company of his saintly predecessors, Salomon and the other 'kings' of Brittany, whose cult he encouraged.123 Other visual symbolism included the use of ducal armorial bearings displayed on buildings, especially on property taken into the ducal 118. The most likely author so far suggested is Mag. Herve le Grant. In addition to arguments advanced by M. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse ('La Derniere Phase', p. 145), it can be noted that Herve was probably responsible for a copy of the thirteenth-century Livre des Osts, which included the revised Breton version of the homage owed to France, current from 1366 (Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, E 132, fos. i8-i9v), and also a copy (ibid., fo. 2) of the forged charter mentioning the nine baronies of the duchy, which is also found in the Chronicon Briocense (Morice, Preuves, ii. p. xxv; A. de la Borderie, £tude historique sur les neuf barons de Bretagne (Rennes, 1895), p. ii). 119. For a fine fabrication, see the pseudo-charter of 689 issued by 'Alanus Dei Gratia Letauiorum seu Armoricanorum Britonum Rex' (Chronique de Saint-Brieuc, i. 216-24). 120. Lewis, Later Medieval France, pp. 65 ff. 121. Arch. Dep.,Ille-et-Vilaine, i F mi (3 September 1393). 122. Camden Miscellany, xxiv (1972), 23. 123. Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 53,67, and 137.

304

The Creation of Brittany 124

safeguard. The right to the arms of the duchy was a subject of controversy in 1341 and in later diplomatic negotiations.125 Their impact on the imagination was often all too vivid. Witnesses at Angers in 1371 deposed that they recognized Blois in visions by the arms of Brittany which he bore.126 The Chronicon Briocense recounted, with more than its usual disregard for historical niceties, a story about King Arthur adopting ermines in place of three gold crowns on an azure field.127 The ducal coronation service, and other occasions for ceremonial display, like the chapters of the Order of the Ermine, founded in about 1381, would likewise have accustomed Bretons to seeing symbolic and heraldic representation of ducal authority.128 But there were limitations to the extent of this persuasion and when lawyers could argue that 'le pais de Bretaigne est un pais distinct et separe dautres'129 such limitations should be noted. In particular, it may indeed appear strange that ducal propagandists did not exploit, in the defence of a regional identity, the Celtic element, which, like Low Dutch in Flanders, Tout thought 'made for the regional unity of those regions under their duke or count'.130 Even though many of the supporters of John de Montfort had come from the principal Breton-speaking regions, the only evidence of appeal to the Breton language as a rallying point for the disaffected lies in indirect remarks in the Chronicon Briocense.131 The sum total of written Breton surviving for the whole of 124. For example, Cartulaire de Vablaye de St-Sulpice-la-Foret, ed. Dom Anger (Rennes, 1911), pp. 318-20 (18 June 1392); 'Item, pour taille et faire bannieres dermines a mectre sur les porrtes du chastel et de la ville de Doul et sur la grant tour, et pappier armaye darmes a mectre es barriers, portes, maisons et moulin, pour taele pappier et sallaire des paintres ... xv s.', accounts of Jean le Fauchoms, receiver of the regale of Dol, 1391-2 (Arch. Dep., Loire-Atlantique, E 63, no. I, m. 3); see F. L. Cheyette, 'The Royal Safeguard in Medieval France', Studio. Gratiana, xv (1972), 645-6. 125. Camden Miscellany, xxiv (1972), 49 and 52—53; Morice, Preuves, i. 1590 and ii. 582. 126. Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 395. 127. Chronique de Saint-Brieuc, i. 198; see, also, G. Brault, 'The Use of Plain Arms in Arthurian Legend and the Origin of the Arms of Brittany', Bulletin bibliographique de la societe Internationale arthurienne (1966), pp. 117—23. 128. Camden Miscellany, xxiv (1972), 60 and n. 101, for coronation. The early history of the Order of the Ermine is obscure, but see Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 140. The deference of Charles V to Breton sensibilities is seen in his allowing coinage circulating in the duchy during the duke's exile to bear the legend Moneta Britannie, and ermine spots (ibid., p. 56, n. i for references). 129. Morice, Preuves, ii. 457. 130. T. F. Tout, France and England, their Relations in the Middle Ages and Now (Manchester, 1922), p. 16. 131. Jones, Ducal Brittany, p. 11; Chronique de Saint-Brieuc, i. 74.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

305

the fourteenth century, apart from the occasional names of places, people, and particular Celtic customs, amounts to six short lines of indifferent verse from a clerk of sensual and scatalogical tendencies (who was more at home in Latin than in Breton) and a couple of phrases noted down after a riot at Vannes in I398.132 It is well attested that Breton was spoken widely, and not just by the peasantry, west of a line running approximately from Saint-Brieuc to the pays de Guerande. Four interpreters were required to assist in the taking of evidence into the sanctity of Saint-Yves;133 at Angers in 1371, Alain Tardif, lector at the Franciscan convent of Angers, and Even de Haya, esquire, 'Brittones Brittonizantes' acted in the same capacity.134 On that occasion, too, Erard de Leon, aged fifty-five, knight, sire de Fremereville, in the diocese of Amiens, but a cadet of the Leon family of Finistere, deposed that he had known a Breton-speaking servant of Count Guy de Penthievre, whose sight had been restored through the intercession of Guy's son-in-law, Charles de Blois 'et hoc scit quia Britonnicum Brictonizans bene et congrue loquebatur; et hoc scit iste quia dictum ydioma Brictonicum bene novit', even though he had been absent 'a patria Brittanie' for thirteen years.135 Parish priests in the four dioceses of Bretagne-bretonnante must have been able to speak the vernacular in order to hear confessions,136 though it is doubtful whether all their diocesans could have easily emulated them.137 As for the dukes, Charles de Blois, despite preference for his estates in the Tregorrois, his above-average ability for study and his didactic manner, never learnt to speak Breton,138 and there is no conclusive evidence that the other fourteenth-century dukes, who favoured living in the Vannetais, were any more successful. It can be argued, of course, that this state of affairs is only natural since the dukes came of families of French descent and were, if only with moderate enthusiasm, imbued 132. J. Loth, 'Le Plus Ancien Texte suivi en Breton', Revue Celtique, xxxiv (1913), 241-8; E. Ernault, 'Encore du Breton d'lvonet Omnes', ibid., pp. 249-52; Arch. Dep., Morbihan, 58 G i, fo. 53"": 'et quando idem magister Yvo exivit portam Sancti Paterni omnes tam viri quam mulieres de burgo Sancti Paterni ceperunt clamare quod eciam Sancti Paterni clauderentur, dicendo britanice, "Ferwet, ferwet, ferwet, donet avant", quod est dicere, "Claudite, claudite, claudite, ipsi, ipsi, venerunt..." '. 133. K. H. Jackson, A Historical Phonology of Breton (Dublin, 1967), pp. 35-36; Monuments originaux, ed. de la Borderie et a/., pp. 122-3. 134. Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 318. 135. Ibid., pp. 393-5. 136. Ibid., pp. 398—400, for an example. 137. See Pocquet, Les Papes, i. 201-3 an<^ 22(> & 138. Monuments, ed. Plaine, p. 48.

306

The Creation of Brittany

with the traditions of French chivalric culture.139 But in England where the same is largely true of both Edward I and Edward III, these kings appealed to their subjects for the defence of the English language when threatened by France.140 In Wales, Owen Glyn Dwr followed suit, in measures to preserve Welsh identity through its distinctive speech, at the time of his revolt against the English.141 Flanders, like Brittany, was divided linguistically; Louis de Male, cousin to John IV of Brittany, one of his closest friends and whose political ambitions were very comparable, flattered his Flemish-speaking subjects by corresponding with them in their native tongue.142 Only in modern times has the conjunction of the vernacular and nationality in Brittany self-consciously imitated the pattern set by French, Italian, and English in the later Middle Ages. The growth of regional identity in Brittany at this time was slow and uncertain. Basic elements of unity were provided by geography, by a shared administrative and political experience, and by emotional loyalty to the duchy and a Breton people. But there were weaknesses in the ducal position. The attraction of service in the royal army and administration for the politically dominant noblesse of the duchy was a major factor in undermining the ducal position in 1372, as it was to be in the later fifteenth century.143 The continuing attraction of the French court, and the ideals for which the monarchy stood, robbed the movement for Breton autonomy of some of the psychological appeal which might have been nurtured by the development of a cultural life entirely separate from that of royal France. Furthermore until 1460, it was necessary for Bretons who wished to obtain higher education, to travel outside the duchy, especially to universities in the kingdom or established in a rival ducal principality. Yet within the ducal court, which was to be overhauled and modernized by the guardian of John V, Philip, 139. See Sarah V. Spilsbury, 'On the Date and Authorship of Anus de Bretaigne, Romania, xciv (1973), 505-22, for possible interest at the ducal court in Arthurian romances at the beginning of the fourteenth century. 140. Tout, France and England, pp. 94 and 140 ff. 141. J. E. Lloyd, Owen Glendower (Oxford, 1931), p. 120; and see pp. 46-47 for an appeal to the king of Scotland, to the Irish and Welsh supporters, based on their common ancestry from Brutus, and the Saxon oppression of his nation. 142. C. A. J. Armstrong, 'The Language Question in the Low Countries: The Use of French and Dutch by the Dukes of Burgundy and their Administration', Europe in the Late Middle Ages, ed. J. R. Hale, J. R. L. Highfield, and B. Smalley (London, 1965), p. 392. 143. Jones, Ducal Brittany, pp. 72-76; Arch. Nat., KK 79, for payments by Charles VIII to Bretons, 1485-91.

Breton Identity in the Fourteenth Century

307

duke of Burgundy, in the years following the death of John IV, the aspirations are apparent and they were not novel. Some of the methods used to project an image of the duchy, based on a widely held view of its history, backed up by propagandist activities, show the real importance attached to the establishment of a Breton identity. From 1364, at least, it was deliberate ducal policy to shape the natural and spontaneous expressions of sentiment in 'nostre nacion de Bretaigne'.144 144. B.N., MS. lat. 9093, fo. ii, notarial instrument, 10 December 1364, of ducal pardon to the bishop and citizens of Quimper for supporting Blois, 17 November 1364.

Additional Note Slightly different emphases will be found in Trahison et 1'idee de lesemajeste dans la Bretagne du XVe siecle', Actes du 107e Congres National des Sodetes Savantes, Brest 1982, Philologie et histoire jusqu'a 1610, i. La Faute, la repression et lepardon (Paris 1985), 91-106. But in neither article have I made sufficient use of one of the most interesting cases in which the charge of lese-majeste was used, that against Guillaume Chauvin, chancellor of Brittany, for maladministration and other shortcomings in 1463, for which see Chapter V (pp. 146-7).

This page intentionally left blank

XIII

EDUCATION IN BRITTANY DURING THE LATER MIDDLE AGES: A SURVEY This paper starts from the premise that the dukes of Brittany in the later Middle Ages pursued policies which were intended to create an independent state within France.1 In their endeavours they were supported by servants who sympathized with these aspirations and helped to popularize them. A study of the education and recruitment of these servants may thus throw light on the character of the state so created. My purpose is to discuss in general terms the evidence relating to education in Brittany during this period, to suggest lines of enquiry, and to comment on the implications of certain preliminary findings with regard to recruitment into ducal service at different levels.2 Let me begin with some remarks on the state of research concerning elementary education. French historians have long assumed that education at this level was readily available in the later Middle Ages. 'On ne peut guere douter', wrote Simeon Luce, 'que pendant les annees meme les plus agitees du quatorzieme siecle la plupart des villages n'aient eu des maitres enseignant aux enfants la lecture, 1'ecriture et un peu de calcul'.3 Leopold Delisle demonstrated that from the thirteenth century in Normandy schools became fairly common, even in the countryside.4 In comparison with research on aspects of university life, that on education at the primary level in France during this period has been very limited. But what has been done shows that whilst schools were not to be found in every parish, as the Carolingian bishop, Theodulf of Orleans, had ordained in his diocese, and as some historians have assumed they were nevertheless numerous enough in some areas. Naturally in important towns a wide range of schools was available; Fedou's study of Lyon demonstrates this admirably.5 In smaller towns and villages, especially around Paris, similar opportunities to obtain an education existed in a variety of schools.6 1 The juristic origins of these developments are to be sought at least as early as the twelfth century: D. C. Skemer, 'The myth of petty kingship and a new periodization of Feudalism', Revue Beige de philologie et d'histoire, li (1973), 249—70. 2 This paper elaborates some topics discussed in "'Mon pais et ma nation"; Breton identity in the fourteenth century', War, Literature and Politics in the Late Middle Ages, ed. C. T. Allmand (Liverpool, 1976), pp. 144-68 and 'L'enseignement en Bretagne a la fin du Moyen Age: quelques terrains de recherche', Memoir es de la societede I'histoire et d'archeologie de 3Bretagne, liii (1975-6), 33-49; see above? pp. 283-307. S. Luce, Histoire de Bertrand du Guesdin (Paris, 1876), pp. 15-16. 4 L. Delisle, Etudes sur la condition de la classe agricole et de I'etat d'agriculture en Normandie au Moyen Age (Paris, 1851), pp. 175-87. 5 R. Fedou, Les hommes de loi lyonnais a la fin du Moyen Age (Paris, 1964), pp. 19-26, 295-300. 6 The cartulary of Paris university reveals that there were 40 male and 20 female grammar and song school teachers in Paris and its banlieu in 1380: E. Delaruelle, E-R. Labande and P. Ourliac, L'eglise au temps du Grand Schisme et de la crise conciliate (1378-1449), Histoire de I'eglise, fondee par A. Fliche and V. Martin, XIV, ii (Paris, 1964), pp. 487-8, cf. also B. Guenee, Tribunaux et gens de justice dans le bailliage de Senlis a la fin du Moyen Age (vers I38o-vers 1550) (Paris, 1963), pp. 186-9.

310

The Creation of Brittany

In Maine, a province bordering on Brittany, a recent survey lists three fourteenth-century schools, 25 which flourished at some point in the fifteenth century and 28 additional schools which appear in the records in the first half of the sixteenth century.7 Although it awaits serious demonstration, historians of Brittany have concurred with these general opinions. The duchy had, after all, produced at the turn of the eleventh century Peter Abelard, who not immodestly referring to his own talent for letters, added that it was a 'characteristic derived from my country and family' and he paid tribute to the careful instruction he had received at an early age.8 When discussing a somewhat later period, the nineteenth-century historian, Antoine Dupuy, presented an optimistic view, which was echoed by the continuator of La Borderie's standard Histoire de Bretagne who wrote: L'instruction e"tait beaucoup plus r£pandue qu'on ne pourrait le croire a la fin du XVe siecle: chaque diocese et meme chaque paroisse devait avoir son e"cole, les villes de Vannes, de Nantes et de Rennes avaient des ecoles municipales florissantes, les 38 abbayes be"n£dictines re'pandues dans la province etaient des foyers de travail et d'e"tude . . .9 In the end this picture may well be confirmed but at present it must be emphasized that this is far from the case. It can certainly be established from chance references that besides episcopal and municipal schools in the leading towns of the duchy, there were some schools which flourished in the countryside. A school existed at Vitre" as early as 1210, and there was one at Chateaubriant in 1222.10 St-Yves Helori learnt grammar just after the mid-thirteenth century from the parish priest of Pleubian (diocese of Tre'guier).11 Raoul, priest of Mouss^ (diocese of Rennes) was referred to as 'magister scolarum de Guirchia' (La Guierche) in the will of Geoffrey de Pouanc^ in I263.12 A tradition of scholarship at Bourgneuf and Machecoul can be traced intermittently in the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, partly because of the nefarious actions 7

A. Bouton, Le Maine. Histoire economique et sociale XIV'e, XVe et XVie siecles (Le Mans, 1970), pp. 418-35, 461-7. 8 J. T. Muckle, The Story of Abelard's Adversities. A translation with notes of the Historia Calamitatum, with a preface by Etienne Gilson (Toronto, 1964), pp. 11-12 (assuming that the Historia was written by Abelard, a matter of some doubt—cf. J. F. Benton and F. P. Ercoli, 'The style of the Historia Calamitatum: A preliminary test of the authenticity of the correspondence attributed to Abelard and Heloise', Viator vi (1975), 59-86). 9 A. Dupuy, Histoire de la reunion de la Bretagne h la France (Paris, 1880, 2 vols), ii. 37781, summarizing his paper 'Les ecoles et les medecins en Bretagne au XVe siecle', Bull, de la soc. academique de Brest, 2e se"r. v (1877-8), 327-53; A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, continue'e par B. Pocquet (Paris—Rennes, 1896-1914, 6 vols), iv. 615. 10 Th. Sevaille, 'Le college de Vitre avant la revolution', Revue de Bretagne, de Vendee et d'Anjou, xiv (1895), 6; Ch. Goude and Abbe Guillotin de Corson, Histoire de Chateaubriant (Rennes, 1870), pp. 425-6. For teachers and schools before 1200 cf. La Borderie, Histoire, iii. 217-20. 11 Monuments originaux de I'histoire de S. Yves, ed. A. de la Borderie et al. (St-Brieuc, 1887), pp. 8-9; idem, 'Les dates de la vie de Saint Yves', Etudes historiques bretonnes, 2eme sir., (Paris, 1888) pp. 83-116. 12 Cartulaire des sires de Rays, ed. R. Blanchard, Archives historiques de Poitou, xxviij (1898), and xxx (1900), i. no. xlv (p. 115).

311

Education in Brittany 13

of Gilles de Rays with his notorious weakness for small boys. A school existed at St-Aubin du Cormier in 1351 and at St-Meen in 1390.14 An inquiry at Vannes in 1402 was told by Jean Loppin, aged fifty-four or thereabouts, advocate in the court of the bishop's official, that he had attended a school at Landaul where Geoffrey Nesindre, master of sciences, grammar and logic, was his mentor. Loppin had himself taught grammar at Muzillac around the year 1366, and later directed a grammar school at Vannes. Other deponents at this inquiry likewise testified to their schooling.15 A school seems to have existed at He'de' about 1400, whilst in the Monts d'Aree at the same time Pierre de Kergruz from Bourbriac and Richard le Bail were attending a school run by the vicar of Pont-Melvez, Richard le Prieur.16 A schoolmaster appears on the fouage list for Ploenouer 0.1430 and there were allegedly four schools in the parish of Le Rheu (diocese of Rennes) 0.1460, at a time when similar facilities seem to have become more widespread throughout France as a whole.17 In the majority of these cases the schools were to be found in small towns and villages and in all probability able pupils quickly left for the bigger centres in the duchy and elsewhere, as St-Yves had left for Paris in the thirteenth century. It is also known from research on rural schools elsewhere, including the recent remarkable study of Montaillou,18 that remote village in the Pyrenees, that many had only a brief history so that there can be no presumption that a tradition of education had been established in any of the smaller localities by the activities of one lone schoolmaster or parish priest.19 Such traditions were especially vulnerable in a period when natural disasters like the Black Death 13 Ibid. pp. xvii-xviii; Archives Nationales i AP 606 f. 75, accounts rendered to Alienor de Thouars, 10 June 1360; G. Bataille, Le Proces de Gilles de Rais (Paris, 1972), pp. 300-24, paraphrasing E. Bossard, Gilles de Rais, Marechal de France Ait Barbe-Bleue (1404-1440) (aeme e"d., Paris, 1886), Appendice. 14 Pouille historique de I'archeveche de Rennes, ed. Abbe Guillotin de Corson (Paris-Rennes, 1880-6, 6 vols), iii. 457; Nantes, Archives municipales, II 120. 15 A(rchives departmentales du) Morbihan, 58 G i fos. 83-5; the enquiry which lasted from 1398-1407 is summarized in Inventaire sommaire, Morbihan, serie G-Clerge seculier, ii. Fonds du chapitre, ed. J. de la Martiniere, G. Duhem and P. Thomas-Lacroix (Vannes, 1940), pp. 159-171. Among witnesses called in 1400 was Olichon Bardoul 'clericus et nobilis etatis Ixix annorum vel circa ut asserit decrepitus vel quasi et multum debilis corpore nee speratur ut multum durabit. . .' He had received the tonsure in the time of Jean le Parisi, bishop of Vannes 1312-34, from a bishop of St-Pol-de-Leon, when he was very young and attending school while living with an uncle, Jean, canon of Vannes (ibid. fos. 34-5). Daniel Guillaume, born at Locmine, rector of Meucon, aged sixty, deposed in 1402 that he had lived with an uncle, Alain Folvas, vicar of St-Patern, Vannes, in order to perfect his studies, in which he had followed the lessons of Yves Jauquenec, sacrist of the cathedral (ibid. fos. 69-70). He also referred to the school of Landaul. Guillaume Prevot, claustral prior of St-Gildasde-Rhuys, aged sixty, said he had been tonsured at Rennes when studying under Geoffrey Denis (ibid. fos. 85-6). 16 A. Anne-Duportal, 'Les e"coles a Hede avant la Revolution', Bull, de la societe archeologique du departement d'llle-et-Vilaine, xl (1910-11), 239; J. Laurent, Un monde rural en Bretagne au XVe siecle. La Quevaise (Paris, 1972), pp. 82, 274-5. 17 J-P. Leguay, 'Les fouages en Bretagne ducale aux XlVe et XVe siecles', Diploma d'e"tudes superieure (Rennes, 1961), p. 154; Pouille, ed. Corson, iii. 455. 18 E. Le Roy Ladurie, Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 a 1324 (Paris, 1975), p. 318. 19 Nicholas Orme, English Schools in the Middle Ages (London, 1973), is the best introduction to this subject. There are some valuable cautionary remarks in J. Toussaert, La sentiment religieux en Flandre a la fin du Moyen Age (Paris, 1963), pp. 60-66.

312

The Creation of Brittany

might have the effects which the Carmelite prior, Jean de Venette, described in the Paris region: Charity began to cool, and iniquity with ignorance and sin to abound, for few could be found in the good towns and castles who knew how or were willing to instruct children in the rudiments of grammar.20 Even when municipal authorities were, by the end of the fifteenth century, providing rooms or a building for a school, continuous provision of such facilities seems to have been a very recent phenomenon in Brittany. When a school can be shown to have existed as at Vitre", where in 1517 there were reported to be 300 pupils, little or nothing is yet known about the kind of education it offered.21 At present there is then no means of telling how Brittany's elementary schools during this period fit into more general patterns. Nor is it known whether they provided, in any sense, an education that had characteristic Breton elements. In Bretagne-bretonnante (the Breton speaking parts of the duchy) can we assume from the small amount of surviving material written in Breton that the principal medium of instruction was Latin? Such would be normal European practice, but the role of the vernacular awaits investigation along with many other aspects of Breton education.22 It may be suggested that the principal reason for the lack of a comprehensive study is that the evidence for such schools is by its very nature widely scattered and there are no obvious sources unexplored.23 Further, since it is largely incidental, for practical purposes it is also largely unquantifiable and of varying quality. Such evidence as there is must be carefully and patiently collected, and in presenting this material in tabular or map form attention will have to be paid to distribution patterns both in terms of the period when schools were functioning and of their geographical spread. Most of the examples which I have cited 20 21

Jean de Venette, Chronicle, trans. J. Birdsall, ed. R. A. Newhall (New York, 1953), p. 51. Cf. for the municipal school at Rennes, 1491, Dupuy, op. cit., ii. 378 and Pouille, ed. Corson, iii. 435. The college attributed to Treguier by Dupuy was in fact founded for Breton students at Paris (below p. 319). Mr Eon de Rouge, aged forty or thereabouts, master of the school at Nantes in 1341, testified in the case of Jean de Montfort v Charles de Blois (B(ibliotheque) N(ationale), MS. fran9ais 22338 fos. 140-1), cf. also L. Maitre, L'instruction publique dans les villes et les campagnes du comte Nantais avant 1789, Nantes 1882, pp. 61-4. 88 places had schools before 1789 but only those at Chateaubriant, La Roche Bernard, Nantes and Machecoul/Bourgneuf appear before the latter half of the fifteenth century when schools are also to be found at Bougenais, Clisson, Plesse and Savenay. In 1516 and 1519 the authorities at Guingamp sent to neighbouring villages to urge schoolmasters to teach in the town (S. Ropartz, Guingamp. Etudes pour servir a I'histoire du Tiers-Etat en Bretagne (aeme e*d., St-Brieuc—Paris, 1859, 2 vols), i. 144-5). Sevaille, loc. cit. for Vitre. M. nerve" Martin has drawn my attention to a formulary of the early sixteenth century from Vannes which contains a number of exercises and model 'littera scole' (A. Morbihan 230 H 3). 22 L. Thorndike, 'Elementary and secondary education in the Middle Ages', Speculum, xv (1940), 404-6; for evidence of written and spoken Breton cf. Jones, in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, pp. 165-7; B~A- Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'La regie d'idiome en .Bretagne au XVe siecle', Melanges offerts a M. Joseph Loth (Rennes—Paris, 1927), pp. 236-52; Bossard, Gilles de Rais, Appendice, p. cxxix, for a Breton from Brest sent to learn French at Bourgneuf, c. 1430. 23 Cf. H. de Berranger, Guide des archives de la Loire-Atlantique, i. Series A a H (Nantes, 1962), pp. 69-73.

Education in Brittany

313

come from the eastern parts of the duchy and, as in Maine, numerically schools only become common towards the end of the fifteenth century and beginning of the sixteenth. To some extent this reflects documentary survival. It may also perhaps have certain implications which will be reflected in the literary and intellectual achievement of those from the west and north of the duchy. To revert to Abelard again, he was in no doubt as to the differences between Bretagne-gallo, of which his birthplace, Le Pallet, in the county of Nantes was a part, and Bretagne-bretonnante. Speaking of his experiences as abbot of St-Gildas de Rhuys, he fulminated against 'Christians and monks far more savage and worse than Saracens. . . . It is', he wrote, 'a barbarous country, I did not know the language; the base and incorrigible life of the monks there was almost a legend among all, and the people of that country were rude and uncultured. . . . There within hearing of the frightening sound of the roar of the sea where the last point of land offered me no further refuge, I often in my prayers thought over the saying "To Thee have I cried from the end of the earth when my heart was in anguish" (Psalm 60.3)'.24 The linguistic barrier Abelard noted between the Breton and French speaking halves of the duchy remained a source of friction and of social and cultural division throughout the Middle Ages and still exists even today.25 To sum up these remarks on elementary education, so far little has been done to correlate the data relating to the types of schools, their size, numbers, social composition, curricula and methods of teaching. This is essential before comparisons can be drawn with developments elsewhere. Brittany certainly contained song schools and grammar schools, schools of logic and theology.26 There is some evidence to show that it was also possible to obtain a training in commercial, notarial and legal practices within the duchy.27 But there was not a tradition of business studies on a large scale in Rennes and Nantes comparable to that offered by certain masters in medieval Oxford or in Italian towns. The merchants of the duchy, writes M. Touchard, 'vivent sans inquietude et sans malaise dans un monde traditionnel. .. (Ils) ne se desinteressent pas des choses de 1'esprit. . . . Mais cet interet est limite'.28 The case of Jean de Gennes du Mee, a member of the well-known bourgeois family of Vitre, is typical. His solicitude for academic matters was only revealed in the clause in his will (1512) which stipulated that the master teaching grammar in the town, together with his pupils, was to attend the celebration of two masses which he was founding in the collegiate church of Notre-Dame in return for presentation to the chaplaincy which Gennes had established. It is hardly 24

Muckle, Abelard's Adversities, pp. 64-6. cf. H. Martin, 'Religieux mendiants et classes sociales en Bretagne aux XlVe et XVe siecles', A(nnales de} B(retagne], Ixxxii (1975), 44. 26 cf. Orme, op. cit. pp. 59-86. 27 B. N., MS. Latin 8685, the advertisement of a Nantes writing master c. 1465, offering courses lasting one or two months and costing up to two ecus, cf. L. Delisle in Journal des Savants 1899, pp. 55-60; Dupuy, op. cit., ii. 378; A. Morbihan 230 H 3 (above n. 21). 28 H. Touchard, Le commerce maritime breton a la fin du moyen age (Paris, 1967), p. 371. 25

314

The Crea tion of Brittany

surprising that only archaic and rudimentary commercial practices were used in the duchy.29 What about the education of the nobility? In Brittany there does not appear to be that concern and enthusiasm for education discernible, for example, in the pattern of lay patronage during this period in England.30 One or two seigneurs in the fifteenth century claimed the right to name the masters of schools in their lordships.31 But few Breton nobles left legacies for educational as opposed to religious or devotional foundations. No public libraries were founded by testament, few wills included legacies to support poor scholars at school or university. In the sixteenth century the Breton rural gentry still received a very bad press for their lack of intellectual discrimination from one of their number, Noel du Fail, who did not have a very high opinion of schoolmasters either.32 Though it must be admitted that noble wills do not always reveal the intellectual interests or capabilities of their authors, there is some evidence to suggest that not only the great nobility but also a relatively large percentage of the 'plebe nobiliaire' were literate in a rudimentary sense by this date. Normally the nobility employed private tutors, often chaplains, to teach their children to read and write, but poor nobles, of whom there were many in Brittany, sent their children to local schools.33 I have not come across a case similar to that of Guillaume and Amblard de Murol, from the Auvergne, who were sent by their father, Amblard, seigneur de Murol, as far as The'rouanne and St-Omer for schooling.34 But there were certainly many petty Breton nobles who were sufficiently literate to be able to sign with a firm and practised hand declarations of support for John V in I437-35 Closer analysis of these autographs possibly reveals some regional variations within the duchy in terms of rates of literacy. For instance, there seems to be some evidence to bear out the contention that elementary education was more readily available in the eastern parts of the duchy than in the north and west. Whereas all twenty-one knights and esquires from the 'pays de Vitraye' personally signed the declara29

Sevaille, loc. cit. p. 8, and cf. Touchard, op. cit. pp. 363-76. Orme, op. cit. pp. 202-6. Maitre, L'instruction publique, pp. 28 and 44. 32 Noel du Fail, Oeuvresfacetieuses, ed. J. Assezat (Paris, 1874), ii. 166; Pouille, ed. Corson, iii.33483. Dupuy, op. cit. ii. 380; Laurent, op. cit. p. 82; J. Meyer, La noblesse bretonne au XVI lie siecle (Paris, 1966, 2 vols), i. 21 for 'la plebe nobiliaire'. 34 P. Charbonnier, Guillaume de Murol. Un petit seigneur auvergnat au debut du XVe siecle (Clermont-Ferrand, 1973), p. 59. Some non-noble Bretons did travel considerable distances—Fr. Geoffrey Rabin, a Dominican from Nantes had been a scholar at Bruges, and Michael Barbelot, a literate barber from Guingamp, had learnt to read and write whilst a servant of the Carthusians in Paris: Monuments [du proces de canonisation du bienheureux Charles de Blois, due de Bretagne, 1320-1364], ed. F. Plaine (St-Brieuc, 1921), pp. 101-3, i60-6. 35 A. Loire-Atlantique, E 144 nos. 11-13, 15; E 145 nos. 1-8; E 146 nos. i-n; E 147 nos. 1-4, many of which are published in Dom P-H. Morice, Memoires pour servir de preuves a I'histoire civile et ecclesiastique de Bretagne (cited as Preuves) (Paris, 1742-6, 3 vols), ii. 130012. For their collection see La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 247; aspe£ts of this form of contract are discussed in P. S. Lewis, 'Of Breton Alliances and other matters', War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, pp. 122-43. 30 31

Education in Brittany

315

tion of support in 1437, a similar document for the castellany of Lamballe has in signatures and 150 illiterates for whom a notary appended their names. An even higher percentage of the knights and esquires of Goello did not sign, and the declarations for Treguier were drawn up entirely by the notary.36 But there are dangers in such an approach; it may have simply been administratively easier to have a notary draw up the entire document, and even among the higher nobility literary attainment and intellectual ability varied widely, even within the same family. If members of the Laval family could generally sign with bold competence, befitting their position as holders of the most extensive lay library in the duchy,37 and J acques de Dinan, seigneur de Montafilant, could sign, his brother Bertrand, seigneur de Chateaubriant, had to ask Pierre de I'Hopital to sign for him, whilst their eldest brother, Rolant, now dead, had been an idiot from birth.38 Several members of the Coetquen family had great difficulty in signing their names, and so did Tanguy du Chastel. Gilles de Rays not only read books on the black arts he also wrote them and communicated with the devil by letters (with blood for ink) in his own hand.39 But what the declarations and similar documents, muster rolls, quittances, letters of fealty and alliance do tend to illustrate is that the fifteenth century Breton nobility were now within striking distance of the position described by M. Meyer when he writes of their seventeenth and eighteenth century descendants 'II ne peut cependant guere faire de doubte que rimmense majorite de la noblesse bretonne sache lire et ecrire'.40 I will return shortly to some of the literary interests of this nobility. In the main, however, the initiative in education lay with the church, which appears to have maintained its dominance in these matters in Brittany much longer than it did in some other regions. The early fourteenth century had seen a great influx of university graduates into ecclesiastical benefices at all 36 37

E 145 nos. 3, 5, 8; E 147 nos. 2, 3 (cf. Preuves, ii. 1306-12). J. Dupic, 'Un bibliophile breton du XVe siecle, Jean de Derval', Tresors des bibliotheques de France, xix (1935), 157-62; F. A. G. Cowper, 'Peregrinations of the LavalMiddleton Manuscript', Nottingham Mediaeval Studies, iii (1959), esp. pp. 17-18. In addition to the twenty-seven manuscripts cited in these articles as belonging to members of this family, there may be added B.N., MS.fran9ais 5594, Passages d'Outremer by S. Mamerot; ibid, MS.francais 20071-2, Livy, Histoire; ibid. MS.Latin 920, an Hours, all late fifteenth century. For examples of the signatures of Guy XIV and his brothers, Louis and Andre, cf. A. C6tes-du-Nord i A i no. 16, 26 March 1435; A. Loire-Atlantique, E 144 no. 10, 24 August 1436. 38 Cf. Lewis, in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, p. 132, n. 78; Lettres et mandements de Jean V, due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard (Nantes, 1889-95, 5 vols), no. mi for Rolant. 39 A. Loire-Atlantique, E 137 nos. 18-21; E 138 no. 6; E 144 no. 8 (Chastel); Bataille, Le proces de Gilles de Rais, pp. 262, 265, after Bossard, op. cit. pp. Ixiv-lxxii. Among the various books which Gilles pawned in order to finance his excesses were copies of Ovid's Metamorphoses, French and Latin versions of St Augustine's City of God, the Facia et Dicta Memorabilia of Valerius Maximus, and De Proprietatibus (of ?Bartholomew Anglicus): Bossard, op. cit. pp. 12-13, 74-5, and Appendice p. clii. 40 Meyer, op. cit. ii. 1177, at a point when 90% of the Breton population were illiterate. For the sixteenth century cf. A. Croix, Nantes et le pays nantais au XVIe siecle. Etude demographique (Paris, 1974), pp. 57-6.

316

The Creation of Brittany

levels in Brittany.41 It is noticeable that nearly all those who referred to schooling in the 1402 inquiry mentioned upbringing with a clerical relative or guardian.42 It was the cathedrals which possessed the largest libraries in Brittany in the Middle Ages, and the role of certain ecclesiastical figures like the magister scholarum, scholasticus, cantor or subcantor can be traced in the episcopal schools.43 To judge from the surviving lists of cathedral manuscripts there was little light relief from learning based on scholastic theology and moral treatises of a conventional kind.44 Individual clerics, in addition, might possess their own copies of standard volumes of canon law.45 There was a very heavy emphasis on legal formalism in the administration of Breton dioceses as revealed in the issue of many synodal statutes during this period.46 Apart from the occasional reference to notaries in ecclesiastical courts, there is little information in these documents on the educational role of the church except in the broadest terms of disseminating fundamentals of Christian doctrine, urging upon parents their duties to teach children the Lord's prayer, the Creed or Ave Maria. A typical set of statutes, unusual only in so far as it appears to be the first set originally circulated in the duchy in print, issued by Christophe de Penmarch, bishop of Tre"guier, in May 1496, is much more concerned about curbing the lascivious tendencies of his flock, stirred to lustful thoughts and deeds by the election of 'aliquas puellas aut mulieres in reginas aut rosas propter eorum pulcritudinem'. Such beauty competitions were prohibited and, in addition, children over the age of seven were ordered to sleep only with other children of the same sex. There is no mention of learning as such.47 If the secular church in general apparently took little genuine interest in education (an exception is noted, below p,320),some mendicant friaries provided 41 B-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, Les papes et les dues de Bretagne (Paris, 1928, 2 vols), i. 224-32. 42 Above n. 15. 43 A. de la Borderie, 'Notes sur les livres et les bibliotheques au Moyen Age en Bretagne', B(ibliotheque de I") E(cole des) C(hartes), xxiii (1862), 39-53. The chapter of Quimper had 49 books in 1273 and 103 in 1361; Dol had 67 in 1440-1 and Treguier 191 in 1491. Guillaume Hequenoille, cantor of Rennes (d. 1371) had a small library; cf. Melanges historiques, litteraires, bibliographiques, publics par la societe des bibliophiles bretons, ii (Nantes, 1883), 192-6. At Vannes the subcantor was responsible for those children in the episcopal school who read badly (Inventaire sommaire, Morbihan, se'r.G., ii. 165). For the general role of the cathedral clergy cf. Maitre, L'instruction publique, pp. 61-2. Joscelin 'magister scholarum Nannetensis' appears in a document of 1234 (Cartulaire de Notre Dame de Montonac, ed. P. de Berthou (Vannes, 1964), no. xxxv). 44 La Borderie, B.E.C., xxiii (1862), passim. The library list from Dol is now to be found in A. Ille-et-Vilaine, G 281 bis, fos. 9iv-92v, the obit book of the chapter, 1300-1520, which deserves separate study. Mr Raoul Treal gave the chapter at Nantes in 1498 a Missal which is now Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, MS.36. 45 Hequenoille possessed a copy of the Decretals, the Code, a Digest, the Sext and a commentary Super Decretum, cf. above n. 43. For references to two other clerical libraries cf. Pocquet, Les papes, ii. 728 n. 2 and 861. 46 cf. Les statuts synodaux francais du XIIIe siecle, i. Les statuts de Paris et le synodal de I'ouest (Xllle siecle), ed. O. Pontal (Paris, 1971). Preuves, passim for many of the statutes, especially relating to the dioceses of Treguier and Nantes. 47 L. Delisle, 'Mandements episcopaux imprimes a Treguier au XVe siecle', B.E.C., Ixi (1900), 59-70.

Education in Brittany

317

advanced teaching in academic subjects which could be enjoyed by those preparing for university, recently down from there or otherwise prevented from attending. St-Yves appears to have been deeply influenced by hearing a set of lectures on the fourth book of Peter Lombard's Sentences at the convent of the Franciscans in Rennes, whilst he was official of the archdeacon.48 Girard de Machecoul, seigneur de Bois Onain, made provision in 1332 for a principal lecturer in theology and one in theology or natural sciences when he founded a Franciscan convent at Bourgneuf.49 Other mendicant schools have been observed at Dinan, Nantes, Morlaix, Quimperle', Guingamp, Vannes, St-Pol-deLeon, Carhaix and Lamballe.50 Whilst a few abbeys such as Rill6 and Redon gained the right (which they certainly exercised) to nominate school masters in areas which lay outside their immediate possessions.51 But the role of the church, other social groups and individuals, in Breton education will only be discovered when more is known about the patronage of learning and schools in the duchy, so that the contributions of private tutors, parish priests, secular, episcopal and collegiate establishments together with that of the monastic and mendicant orders can be adequately assessed. My own impression so far confirms that of M. Herv6 Martin who has recently written of Brittany as 'une region ou les ecoles e"taient particulierement rares'.52 In marked contrast, the work that has already been done on the history of universities in France in the Middle Ages has established a broad outline within which one can discern the main features affecting the opportunities available for Bretons to pursue higher studies. In 1414 John V attempted to establish a university at Nantes, but it was not finally until 1460 that it was successfully founded, so that for most of the period under discussion Bretons seeking higher learning had to leave the duchy, following the trail blazed by Abelard.53 A clear pattern had emerged by the early fourteenth century. Paris, inevitably, was the main pole of attraction with its higher faculties of theology, canon law and medicine, complementing the foundation courses in the Faculty of Arts. It is well known that four colleges were specifically founded at this time for Breton students, whilst in their wake other Bretons like the booksellers, scribes and notaries to be found in the city in the mid- and late-fourteenth century, succumbed to the attractions of the royal capital, as M. Che'deville has recently 48 49 50

164.

Monuments originaux, ed. La Borderie, pp. 72-4. Cartulaire des sires de Rays, ed. Blanchard, ii. no. CCCXXXVI. H. Martin, Les ordres mendiants en Bretagne, vers 1230-vers 1530 (Paris, 1975), pp. 159-

51 Pouille, ed. Corson, iii. 414, 433; A. Morbihan 230 H 3 f. 103 for a model letter of nomination. 52 Martin, op. cit., p. 164. 53 Les statuts et privileges des universites franfaises depuis leur fondation jusqu'en 1789, ed. M. Fournier (Paris, 1890-2, 3 vols.), iii. nos. 1588-95; Preuves, ii. 889-90, 1443-5, I74^~5I> for the various attempts to found the university of Nantes. In 1448 Nicholas V had issued letters for the establishment of faculties of Arts, Medicine, Canon and Civil Law; in 1459 Pius II added Theology which had been excluded in 1448, but it was principally legal studies which flourished (cf. below p. 325). A 'Johannes Britto, vir litteratus' is found at Saintes as early as 1072 (A. Che'deville, 'L'immigration bretonne dans le royaume de France du Xle au debut du XlVe siecle', A.B., Ixxxi (1974), 311).

318

The Creation of Brittany

demonstrated.54 Similarly, the general role of the schools of the Loire valley in the education of Bretons is well understood. At an early date St-Yves had gone on from Paris to the university of Orleans to finish off his legal studies and his case is typical of many. It can hardly be coincidental that there are hints of the influence of academic training in the school of the Loire valley on the compilers of La tres ancienne coutume, the informal compilation of c.1315-25 which served as the basis for Breton legal practice, betrayed in its borrowings from Roman law and the customary law of Anjou and Touraine.55 Although several of the letters are in common form, an early fourteenth-century formulary, attributed to the diocese of Treguier, witnesses to the close links between students of that diocese and Orleans.56 Later in the fourteenth century more Bretons seem to frequent the studium at Angers, yet as late as the middle decades of the fifteenth century there were still considerable numbers of Bretons at Orleans.57 From time to time, adventurous students made their way to other more distant centres of learning. In 1394 a number of Bretons are to be found reading medicine at the university of Montpellier, the preeminent centre for this discipline north of the Alps, whilst in 1403 Bretons are also found at Avignon and Toulouse. Later still, other new foundations like those at Poitiers and Bourges drew Bretons, and on extremely rare occasions so did Italy.58 54 Chedeville, A.B., Ixxxi (1974), 301-43. A 'Johannes Cachelart nacione britannie scolaris parisius bachalarius in decretis' living in the parish of St-Andre-des-Arts, wrote a copy of Honore Bouvet's L'Arbre de Bataille, which he completed on 28 October 1397 and which may later have come into the hands of Jean, due de Berry; Bibliotheca Phillippica, Medieval Manuscripts, New Series, Part X, no. 830 (Sotheby & Co., Sale of 26 November 1975). In the catalogue Cachelart, who is known as a professional scribe from other works, is incorrectly described as belonging to the 'English nation' in the university. 66 H. Touchard, 'Le Moyen-Age Breton (Xlle-XVI siecle)', Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. J. Delumeau (Toulouse, 1969), pp. 165-6. J-Ph. Levy, 'La penetration du droit savant dans les coutumes angevins et bretons au moyen age', Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, xxv (1957). i-5356 B.N., MS.Nouv.acq.latin 426, described by L. Delisle, 'Anonyme auteur du formulaire de Treguier', Histoire litteraire de la France, xxxi (Paris, 1893), 25-35. It is edited by R. Prigent, 'Le formulaire de Treguier, texte complet avec introduction, eclaircissements et notes', M.S.H.A.B., iv (1923), 275-413, and used in the best article on the subject—C. H. Haskins, 'The Life of Medieval students as illustrated by their letters', Studies in Mediaeval Culture (Oxford, 1929), pp. 1-35.

57 B.N., MS.Nouv.acq.latin 43540, Liber nationis Turonie, in use at Orleans for about 120 years to 1536. This contains the oaths of incoming proctors of the nation to maintain the status and privileges, transcribed at the beginning, and starts with the signatures of Johannes Fesini (4 Oct. 1421, f. 62r) and Dom Jean Kaergaill (30 April 1422) both from the diocese of Leon. The latter is probably to be identified with Jean Kaergoal, chaplain, and later dean of N-D. de Folgoet (cf. Lettres de Jean V, ed. Blanchard, nos. 1530 and 1681). Between 1421 and 1456 at least 25 Bretons served as proctors, representing six dioceses: Quimper (7 names), Leon (5), Treguier (4), Vannes (4), Nantes (3) and St-Malo (2). Mme. H. de Pommerol, of the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes, Paris, is making a special study of this manuscript. 58 E. Wickersheimer, Dictionnaire biographique des medecins en France au Moyen Age, (Paris 1936, 2 vols.) lists 7 Bretons at Montpellier in 1394, 5 from the diocese of St-Malo; J. Verger, 'Le recrutement geographique des universites fran9aises au debut du XVe siecle d'apres les Suppliques de 1403', Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire de I'ecole francaise de Rome, Ixxxii (1970), 879. Histoire de Rennes, ed. J. Meyer (Toulouse, 1972), p. 168 (Bourges). For Poitiers, cf. below p. 324. For Bretons in Italy, cf. Pocquet, Les papes, ii. 500, 657. Thomas Prior of Josselin copied at Rome 0.1450 De Educaceone liberorum et eorum clans moribus of Mafeus Vegius (B.N., MS. latin 6721).

Education in Brittany

319

These outlines can be filled in by much more detailed studies. Although surviving matriculation records for the majority of these universities are very meagre in this period, their absence is partially offset by the existence of a considerable number of rolls of supplications addressed by the universities to the papacy, especially during the period 1342-1417. Despite problems in their utilization, these rolls provide considerable information on masters and students. In particular, efforts are now being made to elucidate from the rotuli information on what some historians term the sociology and others 'la geographic humaine' of the universities by analysis of recruitment paterns at diocesan level. In the most detailed examination so far of any one group of rotuli, Jacques Verger has analysed the names of 4,500 Frenchmen (including 570 Bretons) in the extant rolls of the six French universities for 1403.59 Before I became aware of his work I had carried out a somewhat similar exercise on a limited scale for the three universities frequented most usually by Bretons in the latter half of the fourteenth century—Paris, Orleans and Angers.60 In broad terms our conclusions complement each other. But there are certain divergencies. These underline not only the shortcomings of the actual evidence, but also the need to present an account which takes notice of the many influences affecting the size and popularity of individual universities. It has long been known that the international standing of Paris and Orleans was affected by political factors like the outbreak of hostilities between England and France or the Great Schism.61 But it is now clear that much more can be learnt about short-term fluctuations within these broad limits. Paris, for example, was the university most favoured by Bretons in the late fourteenth century from the dioceses of Quimper, St-Brieuc, Tre"guier and St-Pol-de-Leon,62 St-Malo produced a number of graduates but the other four Breton dioceses sent only a handful each of students to Paris. M. Che"deville has suggested that preference for teaching in Latin may have influenced Bretons from Bretagnebretonnante in their choice of Paris.63 But since legal teaching both at Orleans and Angers was based principally on Latin texts it is difficult to account for the significance of language in determining student choice. Much more important, it would seem, are personal factors and tradition—after all, the four Breton colleges at Paris were all established especially for students from those dioceses which are best represented there.64 But recruitment patterns could change. 59 Verger, loc. cit., pp. 855-70 for the limitations of these records. An early attempt at this kind of analysis was 'Geographic de la clientele universitaire de Toulouse sous Charles V, L'Universite de Toulouse, i (1890), 87-95. 60 As above n.2. At Paris and Orleans Bretons appear as members of the Natio Turonie, and at Angers they formed their own nation by 1398. 61 cf. Delaruelle, Labande and Ourliac, L'eglise au temps du Grand Schisme, pp. 468-74. 62 Jones, in War, Literature and Politics, '^. Allmand, pp. 157-60, and cf. tables in M.S.H.A.B., liii (1975-6), 48-9. cf. above pp. 296-9. 63 Chedeville, A.B., Ixxxi (1974), 341-2. 64 Ibid., p. 335. M. Fournier, Histoire de la science du droit en France, iii. Les universites francaises et I'enseignement du droit en France au Moyen Age (Paris, 1892), pp. 98 ff. and 181 ff. for syllabuses at Orleans and Angers. A college for four law scholars from Fougeres or the diocese of Rennes was founded at Angers in 1361 (Les statuts, ed. Fournier, i. no. 385).

320

The Creation of Brittany

The evidence of the rotuli of 1403 shows the continuing predominance of students at Paris from St-Pol-de-Le'on (56 names) but Treguier (34), Quimper (31), St-Brieuc (30) and St-Malo (30) are now almost rivalled by Rennes (24). Whilst this pattern contrasts with that at Angers where the majority of Breton students came from the dioceses of Rennes, St-Malo, Nantes and Quimper. In the case of the first three, the proximity of Angers, its concentration on civil law, the opportunities for pursuing a legal career in ducal, seigneurial or municipal service, and the recent strong patronage of Louis, duke of Anjou, son-in-law to the late Charles de Blois, may have been reasons attracting Bretons in the late fourteenth century.65 But the case of Quimper is more debateable. On Verger's analysis of the rotuli for 1403, Quimper stands fourth in the list of total student numbers from Breton dioceses at all French universities, with less than half the total produced by the leading diocese, Rennes (70 as opposed to 144 names). Yet my own analysis for the earlier period showed that Quimper was a fairly close second to Rennes at that point, and considerably ahead of the next diocese, St-Malo (respectively 126, 117 and 96 names) ,66 Clearly local factors must be examined with a view to establishing reasons for such fluctuations. In the case of Quimper an impressionistic view is that the canons of the cathedral manifested a considerable concern for educational matters during the fourteenth century. This, in turn, may be linked with the work of bishops like Geoffrey le Marhec (1357-83), who had formerly been a leading academic in Paris.67 But a whole range of political, economic and demographic factors, besides more purely personal and intellectual ones, need to be examined in order to answer relatively simple questions about student preference, or to explain the poor performance, in terms of student numbers, of a diocese like Vannes.68 In addition it may be remarked that to do an exercise like this properly, works comparable to Emden's remarkable biographical registers of the universities of Oxford and Cambridge are required, that is a Gallia Universitas, or at least an Armorica Universitas.69 65 'Angers was par excellence the school of civil law"—H. Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, revised edn., F. M. Powicke and A. B. Emden, (Oxford, 1936, 3 vols.), ii. 153. The employment of advocates and lawyers by towns and seigneurs in Brittany has not been extensively studied, and surviving accounts throw light on this subject. For example, 13 1. 'pour la mise . . . faite par Guillaume Villen' et les forestiers de mons. (de Chateaubriant) a la defiance de lajournement que leur avoit fait donnez ma dame de la Suze pour les prinses et explez que avoint faiz en sa terre a cause des droiz de la fourest mons. et furent en proceix par quinze foiz a Nantes et despansses tant pour elx que pour avocaz et proceix' is recorded in the accounts of Jamet le Bastle for the seigneury of Les Huguetieres, 12 July 1405—10 May 1406 (A. Loire-Atlantique, E 500 no. 2 f. I2r), and cf. Charbonnier, Guillaume de Murol, pp. 224-7. 66 Verger, loc. cit., p. 879; Jones, loc. cit. 67 Jones, in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, above, p. 297, n. 82. 68 cf. M.S.H.A.B., liii (1975-6), 48-9. In the mid-fifteenth century Fran£ois Le Saux, a future counsellor in the Chambre des comptes, had gone at the age of 8 to school at Vannes 'entre les clercs et enfans d'icelle'. He later proceeded to the 'escolles a Sainct Pol de Leon* before going to Paris university (Bossard, Gilles de Rais, p. 184 n.4). 69 A. B. Emden, A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to 1500 (Oxford, 1957-9, 3 vols.), A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500 (Cambridge, 963).

Education in Brittany

321

A start can be made with the medical profession through Wickersheimer's list of doctors, but works like this must be extended if questions about recruitment into ducal service are to be answered authoritatively.70 It is at this point that I return to my original premise. Even before the Civil War in the duchy, lawyers were arguing that Brittany possessed 'les droiz et nobleces de royaulme' and such claims were adumbrated with ever increasing frequency and amplification, so that the themes 'le pais de Bretagne est un pais distinct et separe dautres' and 'le due de Bretagne est roi en son duche' were heard at both the royal court and the papal curia on a number of notorious occasions in the late Middle Ages.71 The Montfortist dukes had strong personal reasons for encouraging such claims, yet they were supported by a wide range of advisers, who on occasion sought to forward the development of regional identity by the various means of propaganda open to them.72 This prompts the questions, from where then did the duke recruit his servants and what can we learn of their formative experiences and intellectual outlook ? The most important group of advisers were the men who were officially described as ducal councillors. Traditionally the leading noblemen and ecclesiastics of the duchy expected as of right to serve the duke in this capacity; in addition his legal advisers and representatives of the towns also expected a place in Parlement or the meetings of the Etats by the late fourteenth century.73 The way in which university graduates came into royal service from the thirteenth century is now well-known.74 When did this movement begin in Brittany? By the early fourteenth century we may suspect, and in the case of ecclesiastical councillors this can be demonstrated.75 But as far as legal advisers are concerned it is only after the reform of the university of Angers in 1364 that a similar movement can be definitely traced. In his scholarly account of developments at Angers, Coville drew attention to the way in which the university trained men for the service of the Angevin princes; he largely ignored a similar, and probably, proportionately greater, service for the dukes of Brittany.76 Among the scholars and bachelors for whom benefices were 70 Wickersheimer, op. cit. Jacques Ferre, physician to John V appears to have been the most highly qualified academic doctor employed by the dukes in the later Middle Ages. Was Robert Ferre, physician to Fran9ois I, his son ? Mr Pierre Ferre was procureurgeneral in the Etats of 1455 (Preuves, ii. 1674), and seneschal of Rennes in 1461 (ibid., 1758). Fran9ois II and Duchess Anne preferred, in general, treatment by Spanish (or more probably Jewish) doctors, cf. ibid., for Gabriel Alyre. 71 Probably the fullest statement at Avignon was made in 1394 (A. Nationales J 246 nos. 1 3 I32 " , discussed by Pocquet, Les papes, i. 420-1). 72 Above pp. 283-307 passim. 73 Ibid., p. 294. 74 B. Guenee, L'Occident aux XlVe et XVe siecles. Les Etats (Paris, 1971), pp. 277 ff. 75 cf. Pocquet, Les papes, i. 224 ff. 76 A. Coville, La vie intellectuelle dans les domaines d'Anjou—Provence de 1380 a 1435 (Paris, 1941), pp. 506-14. Only two Bretons are singled out—Alain de la Rue, archdeacon of Tours and bishop of St-Pol-de-Leon (1411-19) and of St-Brieuc (1419-24), who left his library to the university (ibid., p. 552). As early as 27 February 1399 he appears as a ducal councillor (A. Loire-Atlantique, E 196 no. 8). For Philip de Coetquis, bishop of St-Pol-deLe"on (1422-7), archbishop of Tours (1427-40), Cardinal (1440-1), in ducal service see Lettres de Jean V, ed. Blanchard, Index, sub nomine.

322

The Creation of Brittany

sought in 1378 were a future chancellor of the duchy (Robert Brochereul), future bishops, abbots, ducal secretaries (including Guillaume de St-Andre") seneschals and notaries, all of whom are later to be found described as ducal councillors.77 Apart from those who were students together at Angers, there were regent masters like Hugues de Keroulay, doctor and professor of both laws and a future bishop of Tre"guier, Guy de Cleder and Raoul de Caradeuc, who are likewise to be found in the 13805 and 13905 deserting the strictly academic life to serve in council or as diplomats.78 Like the Parisian parlementaires recently discussed by Mme Autrand,79 this group of Bretons who first became acquainted with each other in the schools, continued their association and friendships in later life. A study like that by Bartier of the councillors of the dukes of Burgundy, would be able to show how far the pattern established during the reign of John IV can be traced into the fifteenth century.80 Coville remarked that Angers was an average university with courses which displayed little intellectual originality; whatever it provided was greatly appreciated by Bretons wishing to enter ducal service. Although there are instances of men trained at Paris serving in ducal administration, in general their qualifications only indirectly suited them for preferment via ecclesiastical benefices.81 If many, after graduating at Paris, rounded off their education as St-Yves had done by a course of civil law, it was now usually taken at Angers. Two examples will suffice: inscribed on the rotuli for Paris in 1378 was the name of 'Johannes de Kaercoent, clericus Leoniensis diocesis, magister in artibus et studens Andegavis in legibus'. Under John V, Jean de Kaercoent was to become seneschal of Goello and Guingamp.82 On the Parisian rotuli of 1403 seven Breton masters of arts were also described as students of Angers.83 The full impact of this influx of lawyers trained in the schools, especially at Angers, into ducal administration can only be assessed when much more has been done on particular groups—on chancellors, seneschals, alloues, secretaries, notaries— and on the content of the training they had received. But, as the studies of Professor J-Ph. Levy already show, there is a very direct connection between this training and the use to which it was put at the beginning of the fifteenth century in revising and improving Breton customary law, using the yardstick 77 Jones, 78 Ibid. 79

in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand ; above, pp. 298-9.

F. Autrand, 'Les librairies des gens du Parlement au temps de Charles VI', Annales E.S.C. xxvii (1973), 1219-44. 80 J. Bartier, Legistes et gens de finances au XV e siecle; les conseillers des dues de Bourgogne Philippe le Bon et Charles le Temeraire (Bruxelles, 1955-7, 2 vols.). The most detailed source available for the study of the Breton council is described in B-A. Pocquet du HautJusse", 'Le conseil du due en Bretagne d'apres ses proces-verbaux', B.E.C., xcvi (1958), 13669.81 These, minutes for 1459-63 are to be found in A. Loire-Atlantique, £131. This emerges from the supplications cited above nn. 58-60. 82 Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, ed. H. Denifle and E. Chatelain (Paris 1889-97, 4 vols.), iv. no. 1796 (cf. Verger, loc. cit., p. 896, n. i); Lettres de Jean V, ed. Blanchard, nos. 1324, 2120, 2373, 2413, 2422, 2431, and 2449. 88 Chartularium, iv. 1790, 1796. Others described as bachelors or licenciates of civil law may also have been trained at Angers.

Education in Brittany

323

of Roman law, and in the issuing of ducal ordonnances, a field in which John V and then Pierre II were very active.84 Bartier commented that in Burgundian service few of the ducal secretaries had a university background.85 On the other hand, the academic training of a group of councillors not usually noted for such qualities, the nobility, has also been highlighted in Philip the Good's Burgundy.86 In Brittany statistics are lacking but among the secretaries of Charles de Blois were a number of graduates and in the reign of John IV many of these were graduates, whilst it is now clear that the attendance of the Burgundian nobility at the newly founded university of Louvain was not as novel as Professor Hexter alleged.87 In the higher echelons of the royal administration by the mid-fourteenth century nobility and professional qualifications went hand in hand. The 'legistes' of Philip IV were, with one exception, already noble when invited to the royal council.88 In the Treguier formulary there is a model letter from B. sire de Chateauneuf, to his son, P. professor of law at Orleans.89 By 1440 attendance at a university, Angers for preference, was a regular experience for numerous members of the Breton nobility from the most important families downwards. Among the contemporaries of Robert Brochereul, the future chancellor, sire de la Sicaudais, and Jean le Voyer, future sire de la Clarte, at Angers in 1378, were Guillaume, later sire de Montauban, husband of Bonna Visconti, trusted officer of Isabel of Bavaria, queen of France, and father of Jean de Montauban, admiral of France, and Arthur, archbishop ol Lordeaux, and another scion of a great house, Bonabe de Rochefort, future bishop of Nantes, all of whom served

84

J-Ph. Levy, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, xxv (1957), pp. 4, 31, 45, 51. At the moment there is a lack even of a reliable list of chancellors; the only work devoted to seneschals deals with the period down to the early fourteenth century. Lists of secretaries can only be compiled after the edition of ducal actes. In 1403 John V had five secretaries and this number rose to 10 or 12 secretaries proper by the latter half of his reign (Lettres de Jean V, ed. Blanchard, i.p. Ixxxix). In the early part of the reign of his father there were four clerks regularly employed in the chancery. After 1379 the number rises to about 8, three or four of whom were designated secretaries , see above pp. 129-30. 85 Bartier, op. cit., i. 69. 86 J. H. Hexter, 'The Education of the Aristocracy in the Renaissance', Reappraisals in History (London, 1961), pp. 59-61. 87 Monuments, ed. Plaine, pp. 44-6 for Mr Holland de Coestelles, aged about 40, canon of Nantes, St-Pol-de-Leon and Angers, licenciate in arts, bachelor of laws, who had dwelt with Charles de Blois for 20 years 'tarn serviendo in capella dicti domini Caroli et instruendo dictos liberos (Jean and Guy de Bretagne) in scienciis litterarum quam in officio secretarii'; ibid., pp. 56-60 for Mr Guillaume Berengar, aged about 50, canon of St-Malo, licenciate in canon law. Remarks on the secretaries of John IV are based on my " recent Recueil. Hexter's thesis was carried furthest by L. Stone, The Crisis of the Aristocracy 1538-1641 (Oxford, 1965), pp. 672 fi. It is severely criticized in K. B. McFarlane, The Nobility of Later Medieval England (Oxford, 1972), pp. 228-47, in so far as it concerns England. See also J. Verger, 'Noblesse et savoir: etudiants nobles aux universites d'Avignon, Cahors, Montpellier et Toulouse (fin du XIVe siecle), La Noblesse au Moyen Age, ed. P. Contamine (Paris, 1976), pp. 289-313. 88 Guene"e, L'Occident, pp. 278-9. 89 B.N., MS.Nouv.acq.latin 426 fos. 6v-jr.

324

The Creation of Brittany

their dukes.90 The extent to which such nobles had been influenced by their academic training and the value attached to this by princes other than the dukes of Burgundy should not be underestimated. From the start Angers attracted a large percentage of noble students. The motives which led Louis of Anjou to support it and certain colleges in Paris or Philip the Good to found universities at Louvain and Dole, were the same as those which led John V and Francois I to propose the foundation of a university at Nantes, finally established by Fran£ois II. That is to say, to ensure a local supply of that flow of highly trained experts, especially in the law, which gave later medieval administrations their particular complexion, and to reduce that 'mobilite" des hommes', which as Professor Guene*e has argued, 'ruinait la cohesion des principaute's et renforcent celle du royaume'.91 Once more two examples will suffice: around the year 1480 Louis XI, whilst staying at Poitiers, wanted to know what scholars there were in the university from Brittany. Someone was sent from the royal household to make inquiries and a list of names was later submitted to the king, including that of a certain Perreau, bachelor of laws. Sending for him, in his familiar fashion, the king interrogated Perreau on his family, and according to the latter's later testimony, the king saying that he knew 'la plupart des dits parens demanda a Perreau s'il le serviroit et qu'il falloit qu'il le fist et lui feroit des biens. Respondit que ses parens le tenoient a 1'escolle et supplia au roy que pour faire le gre de ses parens il le laissast a 1'estude, et que s'il laissoit 1'estude ses parens 1'abonneroient. Aussi que il avoit du patrimoine en Bretagne et que se le due de Bretagne savoit qu'il eut laisse 1'estude et se feust mis ou service du roy, ledit due 1'eust empesche en son dit patrimoine. Dit que le roy respondit que quant il perdroit tous ses parens et il seroit son pere, il ne perdroit. Finablement quant il veit la voulente du roy il delibera de le servir et le roy lui feist lors f aire le serment et lui bailla pension jusques a ce que il 1'eust pourveu d'office'. Eventually Perreau was appointed greffier criminel in the Parlement of Paris.92 Little wonder in view of such pressures on a provincial alone in the kingdom that some twenty years earlier, on 24 November 1461, the Breton council was 90

Jones,(1976),op.cit.n. 2; above pp. 136-8, 183-4 and 190n especially for Brochereul. Le Voyer was in receipt of a pension from 1384 (A. Loire-Atlantique, E 211 no. 7 m.i3); the petition which he submitted about various offences by ducal officers shows that he put his training to good use, ibid., E 196 no. 3 printed in Preuves, ii. 755-6, and there dated 0.1405 after a copy. Since the petition is noted in the first inventory of ducal archives, it must be before June 1395 (A. Loire-Atlantique, E 238 f. 32v). For Montauban, Rochefort and other nobiles at Angers cf. Les statuts, ed. Fournier, iii. no. 1897. They also included Guy le Barbu (Guidoni Barbuti), later bishop of Leon (1385-1410) and Reginald Hastelou, probably a member of the well-known legal family (cf. La tres ancienne coutume, de Bretagne, ed. M. Planiol (Rennes, 1896), pp. 485-6, for the opinion of Guillaume Hastelou on a case concerning the law of succession). Guillaume Hastelou was himself retained by the abbey of St-Georges as a legal adviser 0.1372 (A. Ille-et-Vilaine, 23 H 35). 91 B. Guenee, 'Les tendances actuelles de 1'histoire politique du Moyen Age fransais', read at the Congres National des Societes Savantes, Paris 1975, typescript p. 15. I am most grateful to Prof. Guenee for sending me a copy of this important paper which was published in 92Actes du C6 Congres National, Paris (1977), i. 45-70. Ibid., p. 15 and note 90, after A. Nationales, X lA 4825 f. 40.

Education in Brittany

325

to be found discussing 'Lestat concernant le fait de luniversite'—the budget of the newly refounded university of Nantes for the coming year, fixing the salaries to be paid to teachers in the Faculties of Medicine, Theology and Law.93 This included provision of 100 ecus to hire a doctor from Angers to teach the Decretals and another 100 ecus for Messire Pierre Malgault, a resident docteures-loys. Compare their salaries with that of Mr. Rolant Gamier, B.Th., recently come from Paris to read the Sentences, in order to see the value attached by contemporaries to legal studies—Gamier received a mere 10 ecus p.a. whilst Mr. Jean Talhoet received only 20 1. 'pour la lecture de Ethiques', a sum equivalent to that given to the sacristan of the cathedral for sounding for two years the bell which had daily regulated the hours of teaching.94 The study of law was thus profitable and opened many doors, so that it is hardly surprising that a strong legal streak runs through the propaganda used to popularize ducal views of the duchy of Brittany in the later Middle Ages. The appeal to history, legal precedent and myth in the creation of regional sentiment is now a well recognized characteristic of the habits of thought of men of this period. It was indulged in by the Valois monarchy and its imitators. A particular connection has been seen between certain 'e"coles historiques d'inspiration . . . princiere grace aux quelles, rois, dues ou comtes esperaient donner a leur Etat 1'indispensable vigueur spirituelle et draper leurs ambitions d'arguments tire's d'un passe plus ou moins lointain. . . ,'95 Such developments in Brittany have usually been discussed in relation to the works of the chroniclers who worked for Fran£ois II and the Duchess Anne.96 But Pierre le Baud, Jean de St-Paul and Alain Bouchart (all gentlemen or lawyers) were simply repeating or embroidering what Guillaume de St-Andre" and the writer of the Chronicon Briocense, both university men, had already said some seventy to a hundred years before, and they in their turn were basing arguments on even earlier legal documents.97 What is important in the present discussion is that the milieu in which they worked and wrote was a ducal court in which not only clerics but also a number of lay members, including nobles, had experience of an academic, and usually, a legal training. Other nobles who had not apparently enjoyed a university education could also by this date exercise an office tradi93

A. Loire-Atlantique, E 131 fos. i65v-i66v. A number of members of the Talhoet family served their dukes: Guillaume de Talhoet who testified at an enquiry at Sarzeau in 1395 (A. Loire-Atlantique E 89 no. 10) is probably the same man as the clerk in the ducal court at Musillac found in 1380 (ibid., E 78 no. 8). For other ducal servants cf. Lettres de Jean V, ed. Blanchard, nos. 64, 643, 802, 1564, 1590, 2240, 2587. In 1471 Mr Alain de Talhoet, from the diocese of Vannes, was a proctor at Orleans (B.N., MS.Nouv.acq. latin 43540 f. Sir) and in the early sixteenth century Guyon de Talhoet and his son, Jean, were successively sires de Cremenec (A. Morbihan, E 1662). 95 Guenee, 'Les tendances . . .', p. 12, cf. P. S. Lewis, Later Medieval France: the Polity (London, 1968), pp. 65 ff.; Y. Lacaze, 'Le role des traditions dans la genese d'un sentiment national au XVe siecle: la Bourgogne de Philippe le Bon', B.E.C., cxxix (1971), 303-85. 96 La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 621-3. 97 Jones, in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand, pp. 163-5; a new edition of Le Baud's various works is a desideratum. A new edition of that of Alain Bouchart is in hand (see also below n. 108). 94

326

The Creation of Brittany

tionally dominated by the clergy—John IV was served by two other lay chancellors besides Brochereul, Jean, vicomte de Rohan, and Silvestre de la Feuille'e, and they were followed by other laymen in the fifteenth century.98 The twin subjects of history and law dominate much of the cultural life of the duchy during this period. Professional lawyers and advocates seem to have been drawn very largely from the ranks of the noblesse." Legal texts figure prominently amongst surviving manuscripts. Indeed well over thirty manuscript copies of La tres ancienne coutume exist—more than for any other work, including Books of Hours, with which in a number of cases the custom is actually bound up.100 The custom was to be amongst the first books printed in the duchy in three separate editions in 1485, one of them under the patronage of Jean de Rohan, seigneur de Cue" de 1'Isle, another produced with the advice of Jacques Bouchart, greffier in the Parlement of Brittany and brother of Alain, the chronicler.101 No doubt there were many like the man who had obtained a copy of the Custom 'in order to serve my master, the lord of Querduel, seneschal of Guemene.102 In measuring the effects of ducal propaganda, assessing the type of audience to which it was addressed and the means used, account needs to be taken of this cultural background largely coloured by legal and historical matters. In consequence the three surviving fifteenth-century copies of the Chronicon Briocense assume a greater importance when set against this framework, than their small number might at first indicate.103 The conscious propagation of ducal views on the autonomy of Brittany can be clearly traced from the late fourteenth century, whilst the increasing maturity and confidence of writers like Pierre Le Baud is revealed in the remodelling of his Chroniques de Bretaigne, first written

»« Above pp. 124-7. cf. Guene'e, Tribunaux (above n. 6), pp. 189-94. There is little reason to believe that the picture in Brittany is different from that for the area around Senlis, cf. also nn. 100-2. 100 La tres ancienne coutume, ed. Planiol, pp. 26-40 for a list of 30 manuscripts, 4 of the fourteenth century, 24 of the fifteenth and 2 of the early sixteenth centuries, to which P. Fournier, 'Anonymes auteurs de la Tres ancienne coutume de Bretagne', Histoire litte'raire de France, xxxvi (1927), 577-84, adds four additional manuscripts. Planiol's MS.P2 is now in the Harvard Law School collection, where there is an additional unlisted manuscript (Seymour deRicciandW. J.Wilson, Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States and Canada (New York 1935-40, 3 vols.), i. 1037 nos. 72-3). Planiol's MSS. J & M for the combination of an Hours and a Custom. Where there are indications of ownership it is usually that of a lawyer, advocate or ducal officer, and many of these were noble cf. Planiol's MSS.A, C, E, H, I, L, O and T. In the neighbouring province of Poitou, where the Custom was compiled about a hundred years after Brittany, only 5 manuscript copies survive (cf. Le Vieux Coustumier de Poictou, ed. R. Filhol (Bourges, 1956), pp. 13-19). 101 La tres ancienne coutume, ed. Planiol, pp. 42-3, cf. La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 626-8. 102 La tres ancienne coutume, ed. Planiol, p. 36 (MS.O). 103 Chronicon Briocense: Chronique de Saint-Brieuc. Texte critique et traduction, ed. G. Le Due and C. Sterckx, i (Paris, 1972), pp. 7-8. 99

Education in Brittany

327

0.1475-80, for Jean de Malestroit, seigneur de Derval.104 In the second recension, finished by the time of his death on 19 September 1505 and dedicated to Queen Anne,105 Le Baud had jettisoned most of the 'Matter of Britain' and other mythical material beloved of Breton authors which had found its way into his first edition.106 Queen Anne had given Le Baud every encouragement and facility to rewrite his work and in the second version he concentrates much more on historical fact. He explains, tongue in cheek, that he has written lengthily on Jean de Montfort the elder and his son, John IV, in order to correct the ignorance of others. Sources are quoted 'mais je ny ay riens mis ne adjouste que je naye trouve en escript notable et que je ne croye contenir verite'.107 His younger contemporary, Alain Bouchart, marginally less critical, but an equally staunch Montfortist, was not above a little skilful doctoring of his text when patronage was in question.108 Both these writers were well aware of the value of history as propaganda, though their works came a little late to save the independent duchy where the creation of an official version of its history had lagged considerably behind the example of royal France. Symbolically, alongside the magnificent dedicatory manuscript of Le Baud's Chroniques in the library of Jean de Derval, stood the earliest printed version of Les Grandes Chroniques de France and the chronicle of Guillaume de Nangis. Another member of the Laval family, Andre", sire de Loheac, possessed a further example of royalist propaganda, Le Songe du Vergier.109 In order to complete this picture of the literary interests of one important family mention may be made of the commission by Andre's elder brother, Guy XIV, sire de Laval, of a new translation of Egidius Colonna's De Regimine Principum in 1444.110 104 The presentation de luxe manuscript is B.N., MS.francais 8266 (cf. Les Manuscrits & peintures du XIIle au XVle siecles, Bibliotheque National 1955, no- 3 22 )- Le Due and Sterckx suggest Le Baud may have possessed the partial copy of the Chronicon Briocense of c.i460, which is in a manuscript containing other historical extracts and notes (A. Ille-etVilaine, i F 1003). In addition he compiled a Genealogie des tres ancien roys, dues et princes qui au temps passe ont regny et gouverne ceste royalle principaute de Bretagne to justify female succession c.i486. The presentation manuscript for Marguerite de Foix, wife of Fra^ois II, and mother of the future Duchess Anne is Geneva, Bib. mun., MS. fr. 131. IDS Presentation manuscript: British Library, Harley MS. 4371. An edition was published at Paris of this version in 1638: P. Le Baud, Histoire de la Bretagne, ed. le sieur d'Hozier. The earlier version Cronicques et Ystoires des Bretons was edited by Charles, vicomte de la Lande de Calan for La societe des bibliophiles bretons (Nantes, 1907). 106 cf. Cronicques, ed. La Lande de Calan, p. 6; see also Jones, in War, Literature and Politics, ed. Allmand; above, p. 284. 107 B.L., Harley MS. 4371 f. 2r-v, and cf. Cronicques, ed. La Lande de Calan, p. i. 108 M-L. Auger, 'Alain Bouchart et les seigneurs de Coetmen. Essai d'explication d'une variante des Grandes Croniques de Bretaigne', Le metier d'historien au moyen age. Etudes sur I'historiographie medievale, ed., B. Guenee (Paris, 1977), pp. 301-330. The first edition of the Grandes Croniques appeared at Paris in 1514 and was followed by one at Caen in 1518. In his edition (Les Grandes Croniques de Bretaigne, composees en I'an 1514 par Maistre Alain Bouchart, Soc. des bibliophiles bretons (Rennes, 1886)), H. le Meignen has simply reproduced the Paris version, together with additions (not by Bouchart) from the Caen edition. 109 Cowper, Nottingham Mediaeval Studies, iii (1959), 17-18. Charles V's sumptuous copy of the Songe is B.L., MS. Royal 19 C IV. 110 See Four English Political Tracts of the Later Middle Ages, ed. Jean-Philippe Genet, Royal Historical Society, Camden Fourth Series 18, 1977, p. xiv n. 36. Duke Francis I also possessed a copy of this work made for him in 1439 (B.N., MS. franfais 12254).

328

The Creation of Brittany

In conclusion, there are large gaps in the evidence assembled here relating to education in Brittany and of Bretons before the beginning of the sixteenth century when documentary sources suddenly become more abundant. Possession of academic qualifications for entry into some professions, notably the legal one, had become a sine qua non for those ambitious to reach the top in France by this date. At the same time more peaceful political conditions and an increasing taste for renaissance-style learning seems to have resulted in a renewed interest in educational matters. This was reflected in the number of new schools and colleges founded by the mid-sixteenth century. Brittany shared in these developments,111 though there remains a doubt that the apparent lack of such an interest before the late fifteenth century may only be a reflection of our lack of knowledge of what was available and which social groups took advantage of existing educational opportunities. It is clear, for example, that a study of the origins of Breton lawyers and their families would throw light on the ability of the noblesse to adapt to changing circumstances in the later Middle Ages. And what of the origins of that 'nombre affrere de notaires et de tabellions' which a royal commissioner found in Avessac (diocese of Nantes) in the early sixteenth century?112 Would further study of the social and geographical distribution of Breton students at the various French universities resolve some of these problems? Certainly a much fuller study of these educational issues is an essential preliminary to that study of 'mentalite's politiques' which is a subject of much current concern.113 In particular, a more extensive study of the type of education received by those who became ducal councillors and officers would throw light on the development of the duchy of Brittany as an independent state in this period, and thus on the evolution of France at large. 111 112 113

cf. Guenee, Tribunaux, p. 187; Maitre, L'instruction publique, pp. 103 ff. Ibid., p. ii. cf. Guenee, 'Les tendances', pp. 4-8.

XIV 'BONS BRETONS ET BONS FRANCOYS': THE LANGUAGE AND MEANING OF TREASON IN LATER MEDIEVAL FRANCE 'MEN dred tresson wher they it finden' wrote an anonymous fifteenth-century translator of the Song of Roland, the earliest and greatest of all chansons degeste which take treason as their major theme.1 In later medieval France men did not have far to search before they found evidence justifying concern with that particular topos. Treason was often associated with its sister sedition in contemporary chronicles, memoirs, pamphlets, sermons and political allegories, even in figurative representations of that betrayal, most notorious to medieval men, by Judas of his Lord.2 The long war with England naturally posed delicate problems over the loyalty and allegiance of many involved in conflict through no choice of their own. Aspects of what happened when individuals changed sides and whole provinces bent before force majeure in recognizing a new sovereign, thereby incurring the stigma of rebellion against a former lord, have recently been much discussed.3 Plots to deliver castles and towns are without number. Siege warfare, so characteristic of the period, encouraged such behaviour. Surviving interrogations reveal both serious and improbable schemes to overthrow royal authority, in which great provincial princes were often implicated.4 Thousands of letters of pardon recite, frequently in the ^Fragment of the Song of Roland', The Sege of Melayne, ed. S. J. Heritage, Early English Text Society, Extra series xxxv (1880), p. 112. 2 La Chronique d'Enguenan de Monstrelet, ed. L. Douet d'Arcq (6 vols., Paris, 1857-62), V, 303 (describing Charles VII's entry into Paris in 1437); Merits politiques de Jean Juvenal des Ursins, ed. P. S. Lewis with A.-M. Hayez, I (Paris, 1978), 218 ff.; A. Coville, Jean Petit. La question du tyrannicide au commencement du XVe siecle (Paris, 1932), pp. 203, 330-1,419-20. 3 A. Bossuat, 'Le retablissement de la paix sociale sous le regne de Charles VII', Le MeyenAge,\\ (1954), 137-62; M. Keen, The Laws of War in the Late Middle Ages (London and Toronto, 1965), pp. 82-100; M. G. A. Vale, English Gascony 1399-1453 (Oxford, 1970), pp. 154-215; C. T. Allmand, The Aftermath of War in Fifteenth-Century France', History, Ixi (1976), 344-57. 4 Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris, [B.N], MS. fran^ais 18441, fos. I-I25V (inquiry into the treachery of John, duke of Alen$on, 1456); C. Samaran, La maison d'Armagnac au XVe siecle (Paris, 1907), pp. 412-20 (John, count of Armagnac, 1468-9); Bibliotheque Ste-Genevieve, Paris, MS. 2000 (Jacques de Nemours, 1476 (cf. B. de Mandrot, 'Jacques d'Armagnac, due de Nemours, 1433-1477', Revue Historique, xliii (1890), 274-316 and xliv (1890), 240-312)).

330

The Creation of Brittany

graphic words of the guilty, the extent of innumerable individual acts of treachery towards the French crown.5 The use of spies and informers, coded and cryptic messages, poisoning, assassination, torture, bribery and blackmail, pre-arranged meetings with mysterious figures and also the invocation of intangible occult forces, sorcery, divination and black magic, to attain political ends, all these are integral to the most notorious cases of treachery.6 'La traisun ne poet estre celee', remarked Roland to Oliver when he realised that Ganelon had conspired with King Marsile; treason, like truth and murder, will out. But in fifteenth-century conditions who or what one could betray might not be such an apparently easy matter to decide as it had once been in the imaginary world of the chansons and even there the matter had become more complex.7 Why this should be so is what I hope to demonstrate here, mainly by examining aspects of the relationship between the crown of France and the duchy of Brittany in the later middle ages. First, however, the general context of laws governing definition of the crime of treason in medieval France must be examined. In common with other regions of Europe, the concept of treason in medieval France finds its roots in two major traditions, Germanic and Roman. Remarks, apropos the English law of treason by Professor Bellamy, are equally applicable to France: 'The Germanic element was founded on the idea of betrayal or breach of trust [Treubruch] by a man against his lord, while the Roman stemmed from the notion of maiestas, insult to those with public authority. Seditio is the word often associated in medieval writing with the Germanic concept, laesa maiestatis with the Roman. From the time of the Roman Empire in the west in the fifth century, the Germanic idea of breach of trust was in retreat before the intellectually more advanced although partially conflicting notion of loss of majesty. As the invading people established primitive states they absorbed the atmosphere ofRomanitas and their rulers assumed the dignities which they felt were suited to the successors of the Roman Emperors. To emulate Roman imperial style, as was often 5 M. Frangois ('Notes sur les lettres de remission transcrites dans les registres du Tresor des Charles', BibliothequedeI'Ecoledes Charles [B.E.C.], ciii (1942), 317-24) counted nearly 54,000 such letters for the period 1302-1568. 6 D.-F. Secousse, Recueildepuces servant depreuvesaux memoiressur les troubles excites en France par Charles II, dit le Mauvais, roi de Navarre et comte d'Evreux (Paris, 1755), pp. 373 ff.; F. Quicke, 'Jean de Saint-Amand, chanoine de Cambrai, chapelain du pape: faussaire, traitre et espion (13??-1368)', Etudes d'histoire dedites a la memoire de Henri Pirenne (Bruxelles, 1937), pp. 265-89; M. G. A. Vale, Charles VII (London, 1974), pp. 154-62. 7 La Chanson de Roland, ed. J. Bedier (2 vols., Paris, 1921-7), line 1458 and passim; A. Dessau, 'L'idee de la trahison au moyen age et son role dans la motivation de quelques chansons de geste', Cahiers de civilisation medievale, iii (1960), 23-6.

'Sons Bretons et Bons Francoys'

331

the aim, meant also to adopt in some degree the ideas of Roman law.' 8 The truth of these statements may be demonstrated by reference to two kinds of evidence—for the German or feudal tradition, literary, and for the Roman, legal, administrative and diplomatic. Originating in the Latin word 'traditor', in their medieval French forms the nouns 'traitor' and 'treason' and the verb to 'betray' are first frequently found in the chansons de geste alongside 'felon'.9 In these works treason and felony are viewed as crimes against the conventions of feudal society in which lord and vassal are bound together by mutual ties of dependence and obligation. A man was likely to be charged with treason if he failed to renounce fealty in proper form (diffidatio] or for communicating with the known enemies of his lord, and, if convicted, to be executed with excruciating cruelty.10 Treason was a dominant, even compulsory, motif in the chansons. The role of Ganelon in the Song of Roland is paralleled in the cycle concerning Garin le Loherain, by that of the traitor, Fromont. Elsewhere false knights and renegade Christians, Saracens and Jews, are all branded followers of the arch-traitor Satan, who had supremely rebelled and committed treason against God.11 Naturally they drew upon themselves punishment at the hands of the Lord's loyal vassals. When this obvious theme began to pall, it was given new life by an artistic twist. Sometimes it was the lord himself who was accused of doing injury to his vassal. Faintly recalling genuine opposition to Carolingian imperialism, latterly reinforced by the much more urgent threat of Capetian dominance, there grew up a vigorous 'epic of revolt' in which whole dynasties of 'traitors' are described.12 In some late 8

J. G. Bellamy, The Law of Treason in England in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1970), p. i, following F. S. Lear, Treason in Roman and Germanic Law (Austin, 1965). 9 K. J. Hollyman, Le developpement du vocabulaire feodal en France pendant le haul moyen age (Geneva and Paris, 1957), pp. 152-5. 10 Chanson de Roland, ed. Bedier, lines 3750 ff., cf. L'Histoire de Guillaume le Marechal, ed. P. Meyer (3 vols., Paris, 1891-1901), II, lines 12687 96 and III, 172. The ritualistic killing of David ap Gruffydd, William Wallace and Hugh Despenser the younger (Bellamy, Law of Treason, pp. 24-6, 32 6, and Jean Froissart, Chroniques, ed. S. Luce et al. (15 vols., Paris, 1869-1975), II, 34-5) may be paralleled by similar French examples of cruelty (S. H. Guttler, The Law of Treason and Treason Trials in Later Medieval France (Cambridge, 1981), pp. 116-19). I am deeply indebted to Dr Guttler for allowing me to use his thesis in advance of publication. It deals in much greater depth with many matters which may only be touched in passing here. 11 S. Hofer, 'Das Verratsmotiv in den chanson de geste', ^eitschrift fur Romanische Philologie, Bd 44 (1924), 594-609; cf. W. C. Calin, The Epic Quest (Baltimore, 1966), pp. 77-912 W. C. Calin, The Old French Epic of Revolt (Geneva and Paris, 1962); W. van Emden, 'Isembart and the Old French Epic of Revolt', Nottingham Mediaeval Studies, viii (1964), 22-34.

332

The Creation of Brittany

twelfth-century versions of earlier poetic traditions we find, as in the geste of Girart de Vienne, an early 'felon' transformed into a loyal if misunderstood member of the Carolingian aristocracy.13 The process of adaptation was to continue and it is instructive for our particular standpoint to note that much of this literature of revolt enjoyed a revival at the fifteenth-century Burgundian court. There it may be seen as reinforcing action by the Valois dukes to restrict, in the changed circumstances of the later middle ages, royal rights and to establish the historicity and independence of a Burgundian realm.14 So far it has proved impossible to demonstrate any extensive parallel in the duchy of Brittany where, prima facie, Arthurian literature and 'la matiere de Bretagne' might have served the same political purpose.15 Although treason occurs in epic literature in an infinite variety of situations, with vengeance exacted as good finally triumphs and those unjustly accused restored to their good name, the major themes in the literary tradition are established from an early point. I do not intend to follow them further: treason is essentially personal—the betrayal of those links of dependence established above all in the feudal act of homage and oath of fealty sworn by one man to his lord. Breach of this code was still in the later middle ages sufficient justification to bring men to the scaffold in France. Although the same idea is present in most legal documents, there is generally a wider conception of treason. Some hints of this may be gathered from late thirteenth-century texts; to take a definition by the famous practitioner Philippe de Beaumanoir: 'Treason is when one shows no sign of hatred and yet one hates mortally so that by this hatred one kills or causes to be killed, or one strikes or causes to be struck down with grievous injuries, he whom one hates by treason.'16 Treason is not just the simple breakdown of feudal bonds. Treason is not something which generally happens on the spur of the moment. It implies acts of premeditation and malice, which have subsequently been carried into practice.17 Nor for lawyers of the Orleans school c. 1280 was treason, though a serious crime (a felony), yet one to be tried 13

Girart de Vienne par Bertrand de Bar-sur-Aube, ed. W. van Emden (Paris, 1977). Y. Lacaze, 'Le role des traditions dans la genese d'un sentiment national au XVe siecle. La Bourgogne de Philippe le Bon', B.E.C., cxxix (1971), 303-85. 15 For the connection between literature and practice, cf. R. Howard Bloch, Medieval French Literature and Law (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 1977). 16 Les coutumes de Beauvaisis, ed. A. Salmon (2 vols., Paris, 1899-1900), I, 430; cf. Etablissements de St Louis, ed. P. Viollet (4 vols., Paris, 1881 -6), I, 76; Bloch, Literature and Law, p. 37; Guttler, Law of Treason, p. 4. ^Etablissements, ed. Viollet, I, 237; Bloch, Literature and Law, pp. 28-42. 14

'Bons Bretons et Bons Francoys'

333

18

exclusively by the crown. Anyone who possessed rights of high justice might judge cases of treason, a tradition which still finds some support in provincial fifteenth-century law codes.19 What is found in Beaumanoir, it has been said, is lese-suzerainty but it is on the verge of being transformed with frightening effectiveness into the fully-fledged Romanist doctrine of lese-majesty.20 In practice, the French crown had for a long time, within its own demesnes, sought to reserve to its own judgment such serious crimes as treason, homicide, rape and arson as can be seen from the earliest charters of urban liberties, while the king was ultimately responsible for the peace and safety of the whole kingdom.21 Before the twelfth century evidence is yet more fragmentary, but learned men had never completely lost sight of the Roman notion of lese-majesty.22 In the earliest known Roman laws the offences ofperduellio andproditio (both translatable as treason) constituted acts hostile to the Roman people. During the imperial period 'they had been overshadowed by and virtually subsumed within maiestas (more correctly the crimen imminutae maiestatis^ i.e. the offence of infringed sovereignty), which thereafter constituted the offence of treason: the sovereignty of the state was infringed when anyone exercised powers other than those conferred on him .. ,'.23 The supreme statement of this idea was the lex Julia maiestatis where maiestas was a crime taking on a sacrilegious hue 'committed against the Roman people and its security'.24 After eclipse during the Merovingian period, such concepts began to resurface in some Carolingian texts.25 It was a theme taken up by Bishop Fulbert of Chartres in a celebrated letter to Count Fulke of Anjou c. 1008, when Fulke's protection of those who had murdered Count Hugh of Beauvais in the royal presence was condemned as an infringement of 18

Etablissements, ed. Viollet, II, 14, 49, 342-4, 357-60 etc. Cf. Le Vieux Coustumier de Poictou, ed. R. Filhol (Bourges, 1956), pp. 29-32. 20 E. Perrot, Les cos royaux (Paris, 1910), pp. 31-2; W. Ullmann, 'The development of the medieval idea of sovereignty', Eng. Hist. Rev., Ixiv (1949), 1-33; S. J. T. Miller, 'The position of the king in Bracton and Beaumanoir', Speculum, xxxi (1956), 263-96; P. Chaplais, 'La souverainete du roi de France et le pouvoir legislatif en Guyenne au debut du XIVe siecle', Le Moyen Age, Ixix (1963), 449-69. 21 Ordonnances des rots de France de la troisieme race, ed. E. S. de Lauriere et al. (22 vols., Paris, 1723-1849), XI, 199, 226-7, 239-40, 262-8; and cf. ibid., 1, 57 'ipsi tamquam proditores, criminisque convicti et ordinationum, ac statutorum regiorum transgressores puniri... debebant' (1245). 22 M. Lemosse, 'La lese-majeste dans la monarchic franque', Revue du moyen age latin, ii (1946), 5-2423 J. A. C. Thomas, Institutes of Justinian. Text, translation and commentary (Amsterdam and London, 1975), p. 335. 24 Digest, 48.4; Code 9.8; cf. Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 6-7. 25 Lemosse, 'La lese-majeste' 17; cf. remarks of Rather of Verona (Patrologia Latina, CXXXVI, 236). 19

334

The Creation of Brittany

majesty, a direct allusion to the lex Quisquis derived by way of Justinian's code from the Codex Theodosianus.™ Increasing familiarity with such texts meant that by 1150 the concept of laesa maiestatis was a familiar one to churchmen and publicists in both the Empire and England, whilst in Provence (still part of the Empire, though falling increasingly under French influence) the count was bold enough to usurp imperial prerogatives by undertaking actions de traditione et felonia, which may be broadly interpreted as judgement of the crime of lese-majesty.27 No northern French prince, not even the crown, was to claim quite as much at this juncture, though the Norman custom of c. 1200 is fairly explicit in its definition of treason and the attached penalties from which not even the duke himself could dispense.28 The idea that treason was a crime not merely against a person, albeit the ruler of a powerful duchy, but was also in some measure a crime against a province finds expression in the mid-thirteenth century Summa de legibus Normannie in curia laicali. The language of that document is chiefly feudal, a reminder of that most famous of all Fulbert of Chartres's letters on the obligations of a vassal to his lord. But there are hints, too, that the revival of Roman legal studies had permeated Norman thinking. From this point there is no doubting the wide currency enjoyed by the notion of treason as an offence against the majesty of the ruler as representative of the state, the sovereignty of whom in the case of France was asserted by no less a figure than Innocent III. 29 In particular the rigorous penalties attached to the crime of treason, in this sense now high treason, with perpetual loss of one's possessions to the prince and disinheritance of one's heirs, in addition to the death penalty, is a forcible reminder in Norman and other codes of the severity of the lex Quisquis.™ It is well known now 26

The Letters and Poems of Fulbert ofChartres, ed. F. Behrends (Oxford, 1976), no. 13; J.-Fr. Lemarignier, 'A propos de deux textes sur 1'histoire du droit remain au moyen age (1008 et 1308)', B.E.C., ci (1940), 157-68; Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 7-8. 27 G. Post, Studies in Medieval Legal Thought (Princeton, 1964), pp. 415 ff.; J.-P. Poly, La Provence et la societe feodale 879 1166 (Paris, 1976), pp. 353-4. 28 Le tres ancien coutumier de Normandie, ed. E.J. Tardif (2 vols., Rouen and Paris, 1881, i9°3)> !> 3029 Ibid., II, 38-9; Letters of Fulbert, no. 51, where his advice passed through the Decretals (2.22.5.18) into general currency, being cited by Jean Juvenal des Ursins, for instance (Ecrits politiques, ed. Lewis, I, 84); Guttler, Law of Treason, p. 9. The ultimate source is Cicero: seeJ.-P. Poly and E. Bournazel, La Mutationfeodale, Xe- Xllesiecles (Paris, 1980), p. 149. See also J. Yver, 'Le "Tres Ancien Coutumier" de Normandie, miroir de la legislation ducale', Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, xxxix (1971), 337~7430 Cf. Bellamy, Treason in England, pp. 11-12; P. C. Timbal, -'La confiscation dans le droit fran^ais des Xllle et XlVe siecles', Revue historigue de droit franfais et etranger [R.H.D.F.E.], 3eme ser., xxiii (1944), 40-2. On the wider aspect of the subject, see also W. R. J. Barren, 'The penalties for treason in mediaeval life and literature', Jnl. Med. Hist., 7 (2) (1981), 187-202.

'Sons Bretons et Sons Francoys'

335

how from the mid-thirteenth century, the king of France increasingly appropriated Roman concepts in developing the medieval doctrine of sovereignty and how, inter alia, this became a root cause of the Hundred Years War.31 Lawyers of the Capetians might argue whether their master enjoyed the privileges of the lex Julia maiestatis because he was an Emperor in his own kingdom who recognized no temporal superior (a view championed by Jean de Blanot and others from c. 1250) or simply because he was in effect a representative of imperial power (a position challenged c. 1300 by Pierre Jaime). 32 In practice it mattered little as the victims of Philip IV's ruthless exploitation of his prerogatives might grimly reflect. He clearly could and did take action against those subjects who, he alleged, had attacked him and his powers, whether these were attacks on his public function or violations of fealty owed by vassals. Like his contemporary Edward I, who similarly exploited uncertainties in the law concerning treason, Philip IV stretched its traditional feudal bounds and was the first French king to make frequent use of the charge of lese-majesty.33 The Germanic and Roman traditions had come together again indissolubly in the royal French doctrine of sovereignty. And if, in Maitland's words, treason is a crime which 'has a vague circumference, and more than one centre', how much more sinister and flexible was the doctrine of infringed sovereignty. 34 Thus in reply to the nobles of Champagne who asked Louis X in 1315 what he meant when he reserved to himself 'les cas qui touchent nostre roial majeste' in their charter of liberties, he answered in ominous and menacing tone: 'C'est assavoir que la Roial Majeste est entendue es cas qui de droit ou de ancienne coustume puent et doient appartenir a souverain prince et a nul autre.' 35 In the fourteenth century, with increasing royal prerogative claims to exclusive jurisdiction over certain cases (cas royaux), many viewed 31 Perrot, Cas royaux, pp. 28 ff.; R. Feenstra, 'Jean de Blanot et la formule "Rex Franciae in regno suo princeps est" ', Etudes d'Histoire du droit canonique dediees a Gabriel le Bras (2 vols., Paris, 1965), II, 885-95; Chaplais, 'Souverainete du roi de France', 449 69; M. Boulet-Sautel, 'Jean de Blanot et la conception du pouvoir royal au temps de Louis IX', Septieme centenaire de la mort de Saint Louis (Paris, 1976), 57 68. 32 Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 10-13. 33 R. Genestal, Le Privilegium Fori en France du Decret de Gratien a la fin du XIVe smle (2 vols., Paris, 1924), II, 158 ff.; Registres du tresor des Charles, I, Regne de Philippe le Bel, Inventaire analytique, ed. R. Fawtier (Paris, 1958), nos. 1935, 2005 6, 2009, 2011, 2026 8, 2030, 2250. In the Parlement the specific charge oflese-majesty dates from c. \ 259 (Les Olim, ou registres des arrets renduspar la com du roi, ed. A. Beugnot (3 vols., in 4 parts, Paris, 1839 48), I, 460, no. 9). 34 P. S. Lewis, Later Medieval France: the polity (London, 1968), pp. 84 5; cf. Bellamy, Treason in England, pp. i ff. 35 Ordonnances, I, 606; cf. Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 18 19.

336

The Creation of Brittany

as forms of treason, the charge of lese-majesty was a catch-all, so that the actual word 'treason' is often absent from documents concerning traitorous behaviour.36 A distinction between treason and lese-majesty was still occasionally drawn but for the most part the crime of lesemajesty covered treason in a blanket fashion, its judgement lay with royal courts and the king of France, unlike his contemporary in England, was not forced to set out exactly in a statute the various forms of treason so comprehended. De facto, if not always de iure, the king of France was a sovereign enjoying full Roman potestas and auctoritas.37 In statements in legal manuals, or abstracted as declarations of regal rights, or stipulated in charters granted to leading vassals and to princes established in apanages, cases of lese-majesty are always reserved to the crown. There is seldom mention of the crime of treason as such. Writers of treatises like Jean Boutillier, in his Somme rural, and the compiler of the Songe du Vergier now viewed treason against the king exclusively in terms were were derived from the Roman law on laesa maiestatis.38 The fifteenth century added little new to this doctrine of royal sovereignty but much to its application. On occasion most extravagant claims could be made on behalf of the crown and buttressed with extensive citations from civil law. Usually such pedantic display was intended to overrule any logical objection by the subject, to end debate and to impose a definitive sentence in cases which, if allowed to drag on inconclusively, would have harmful social consequences.39 Deployment of such weapons seemed to many contemporaries to be justified by the imperative need to restore domestic peace after dark days of civil discord and foreign war. Insistence on royal sovereignty and the growth of a whole symbolic religion of kingship in late medieval France hardly needs added emphasis here.40 The crown used the resources of the parlement, state trials, ad hoc commissions and martial law to press home charges described bluntly as treason or 36

Dom Cl. Devic and Dom J. Vaissete, Histoiregenerate de Languedoc, new edition by A. Molinier^a/. (iGvols., Toulouse, 1872-1904), X, Preuves, cols, noo-i, 1152-3, 11578, 1193-7; N. de Pena, Documentssur la maisondeDurfort (2 vols., Bordeaux, 1977), II, nos. 1000, 1004, 1035. 37 M. David, La souverainete et les limitesjuridiqu.es du poiivoir monarchique du IXe au XVe siecle (Paris, 1954), pp. 138".; Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 9-15, 28, 55. 38 Perrot, Cas royaux, pp. 27-36, 327-8, 330-1; R. Lacour, Le gouvernement de I'apanage de Jean, due de Berry 1360-1416 (Paris, 1934), pp. 289-314; A. Leguai, De la seigneurie a I'etat. Le Bourbonnais pendant la guerre de Cent Ans (Moulins, 1969), pp. 175-80; Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 20-2. 39 Bossuat, 'Retablissement de la paix sociale', 137-62, and 'La formule "Le roi est empereur en son royaume". Son emploi au XVe siecle devant le Parlement de Paris', R.H.D.F.E., 4eme ser., xxxix (1961), 371-81. 40 Lewis, Later Medieval France, pp. 78 ff.; 'War Propaganda and Historiography in Fifteenth-Century France and England', T.R. Hist. S., 5th ser., 15 (1965), 1-21; Vale, Charles VII, pp. 194-217.

'Bom Bretons et Sons Francoys'

337

more menacingly as lese-majesty against its subjects from the very highest (including three dauphins) to the lowest.41 In the matter of treason there could be no doubt: 'rex in regno suo imperator est'. Or was he? Early on Passion Sunday, 8 April 1470, John II, vicomte of Rohan, and a few accomplices slipped out of Nantes, ostensibly on pilgrimage to St-Martin de Vertou. Scarcely had they left when they spurred their horses, reshod twice in the last few days, into precipitate flight to the court of France where they were generously rewarded. Herve du Halgouet, author of the best modern account of the family, notes tersely 'c'etait une trahison', repeating words of Arthur de la Borderie, the great nineteenth-century Breton historian. 42 It was the first of many such changes of allegiance in a career which by any standards seems notable for extraordinary faithlessness. Who or what was Rohan betraying? For Du Halgouet the answer was clearly 'la nationalite bretonne', a matter of some political significance in France today. 43 But would Rohan's contemporaries have understood the concept? That the greater provinces of later medieval France enjoyed a certain autonomy is universally recognized. How far did this reach in Brittany's case? Was there a medieval Breton nationality? What sovereign rights did the duke exercise? Did they extend to matters recognized as treasonable, even to lese-majesty? These are the questions to which the rest of this paper will be addressed. Relations between France and Brittany in the later middle ages were governed in principle by an agreement reached between Philip IV and John II in 1297. In return for recognition as a peer of France, John agreed to do liege homage to the king.44 Thereafter Philip IV and his successors maintained a constant position. They expected the duke to perform certain services and to recognize the ultimate sovereignty of the crown. In practical terms this chiefly meant that cases from the Breton parlement could be carried on appeal to the parlement of Paris, the duke was occasionally called upon to perform military service and to appear at court, and royal ordonnances should have been applicable in the duchy. Strictly interpreted it meant that the king and, more significantly, his officials could, if they so desired, interfere in the everyday affairs of the duchy. Normally it was impractical for 41

Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 55 -64; Y. Lanhers, 'Deux affaires de trahison defendues par Jean Jouvenel des Ursins (1423-1427)', Melanges Pierre TisseL (Montpellier, 1971), pp. 317 28. 42 H. du Halgouet, La vicomte de Rohan et ses seigneurs (2 vols., St-Brieuc and Paris, 1921 4), I, 88; A. de la Borderie and B. Pocquet, Histoire de Bretagne (6 vols., Rennes and Paris, 1896 1914), IV, 468. 43 duHalgouet, Vicomte de Rohan, p. 90; JackE.Reece, The Bretons aqainst France (Chapel Hill, 1977). 44 Dom P.-H. Morice, Memoires pour servir de preuves a I'histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne ( 3 vols., Paris, 1742-6), I, 1122 -3.

338

The Creation of Brittany

them to do so, though the monitory example of Guyenne shows us how far a king could go in exploiting his sovereignty in relation to the great princes. In the case of Brittany conventions developed to ease potential points of tension. Over appeals to Paris it was established that they could only be made in two instances: false judgement and denial of justice. In the later middle ages the ducal council vetted all mandates from Paris. Royal sergeants could be refused permission to execute them, indeed were sometimes violently assaulted or banished from the duchy. A permanent commission of lawyers in Paris represented the duke, scrutinizing all documents from Brittany which might upset royal sensibilities, all too easily ruffled. 45 In these and other ways royal sovereignty, so embracing in theory, could be circumscribed in practice. 46 From the mid-fourteenth century, under the pressure of war, diplomacy and the increasing expectation of the duke's own subjects for reward in his employment, views were formulated on a ducal state and on what contemporaries called ducal regalities which were incompatible with royal ones. This was by no means a development unique to Brittany: on 25 September 1347 Gaston III of Foix declared that he recognized no superior but God for his vicomte of Beam, and a theory of sovereignty for Beam has been traced into the early seventeenth century. 47 But already in the 13308 there were those who argued that Breton dukes no less than kings of France were 'princes who recognized no superior'. 48 The Montfort dukes of Brittany were rulers not of some obscure 'sovereign allod' nor of a remote Pyrenean lordship, but of an extensive, ancient and populous duchy. They set out to foster a sense of provincial identity by many measures and if, in other regions, similar civilian concepts were pressed into action in support of provincial administrations, it may be argued nowhere were other princes quite so successful as the Breton ones.49 45

Archivesdepartementalesdela Loire-Atlantique (A.L.fV), E 169 no. 17 (reflections by counsel on an accord reached in 1448 between duke Francis I and John de Bretagne, count of Penthievre) is an important example. 46 Michael Jones, Ducal Brittany 1364-1399 (Oxford, 1970) and '"Mon pais et ma nation": Breton identity in the Fourteenth Century', War, Literature and Politics in the Late Middle Ages, ed. C. T. Allmand (Liverpool, 1976), pp. 144-68, examine aspects of this story; see above, pp. 283-307. 47 P. Tucoo-Chala, La vicomte de Beam et le probleme de sa souverainete des origines a 1620 (Bordeaux, 1961). 48 'Some documents relating to the disputed succession to the duchy of Brittany, 1341', ed. Michael Jones, Camden Miscellany XXIV (Camden, Fourth Series, 9, 1972), P-549 Tucoo-Chala, Vicomte de Beam, pp. 83-5 (for sovereign allods); A. Leguai, 'Les "Etats" princiers en France a la fin du moyen age', Annali della fondazione italiana per la stona amministrativa, iv (1967), 133-57, is the best survey; cf. Lewis, Later Medieval France, pp. 187 99.

'Sons Bretons et Sons Francoys'

339

This may be demonstrated at several levels physical, political and ideological — and attention may be briefly drawn to its most important features. There was an autonomous Breton administration, army, parlement and etats. After Philip IV no French king raised taxation in the duchy. In the fifteenth century a separate Breton church negotiated its own concordats with the Papacy. Pius II was one of the most notable outsiders to acknowledge the validity of ducal claims to independence and supported duke Francis II in founding a university without which no late medieval state was complete. 50 Breton frontiers, especially those facing Valois France, were increasingly (if finally unavailingly) well-defined and fortified; in uncertain times travellers were well advised to obtain safe-conducts from the ducal chancery for journeys to France. 51 An elaborate household, remodelled on Burgundian lines by Philip the Bold himself, helped to project the image of a powerful, ceremonial and dignified ruler. 52 The same purpose was served by a coronation service, joyeuses entrees, chivalric orders and increasingly overt signs of majesty displayed both in chancery documents, seals and titles and in the symbolism of the crown. 53 A full range of diplomatic and marital contacts was maintained with most Western European states; Brittany formed a separate heraldic march. Though there was little original in this conception of ducal authority, apart perhaps from the precocity and persistence with which it was propagated, and Breton institutions frequently copied those of the crown, successive kings acknowledged the very real and brazen threat it posed by seeking to curb both its practical and symbolic expression. Ducal power had expanded in tandem with ducal wealth. 54 By the late fourteenth century the duke had come to exercise most prerogatives then normally ascribed to a sovereign prince. These included the right to ennoble and enfranchise, to legitimate, to grant licences for fairs and markets, fortifications and seigneurial warrens, to create notaries, to legislate and issue general ordinances, to control noble taxation and supervise exemptions. He authorized donations in mortmain, remitted capital offences, exercised regalian rights in episcopal 50

B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jussc, 'Histoirc anrienne dc notre universite', Annales de Bretagne [A.B.}, Iv (1948), 156-82; Memoirs of a Renaissance Pope. The Commentaries of Pius //, trans. Florence A. Gragg, ed. Leona C. Gabel (London, 1960), p. 346. 51 J.-P. Leguay, Un reseau urbam au moyen age: les miles du duchede Bretagne aux XlVe et XVe. siecles (Paris, 1981), pp. 75-96, 167-90; Michael Jones, 'The Defence of Medieval Brittany', Archaeological Journal, cxxxviii (1981), 180 -5 ; above, pp. 44-9. 52 Morice, Preuves, II, 735 40. 53 B. A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, 'Couronne fermee et cercle ducal en Bretagne', Bulletin philologique du comite des travaux historiques (jusqu'a /7/j), annees ig$i et 7952 (Paris, 1953), pp. 103 • - 1 1 2 ; Michael Jones, 'The seals ofJohn IV, duke of Brittany, 1364 1399', above, pp. 159-74 , 303-4. 54 Michael Jones, 'Les finances de Jean IV, due de Bretagne, 1364 1399', Memoires de la socie'te d'histoire et d'archeologie de Bretagne (1972-4); above, pp. 239-61,

340

The Creation of Brittany

vacancies, issued protections and, among his most prestigious and jealously guarded rights, coined silver and gold.55 The importance of providing Brittany with an account of its own indigenous origins and traditions (its status as a kingdom during the Carolingian period included) for propaganda and other purposes led to the classification of archives and a search for literary remains. Historical and legal documents, saints' lives and other legendary materials, chronicles and archives were ransacked. Diplomats seldom left the duchy without dossiers bulging with pieces justificatives.56 Contrary to royal views, there is no doubt Breton officials considered that the duke enjoyed most sovereign privileges and that his territory fulfilled most conditions thought appropriate to a state. These, according to a definition of the French jurist Johannes Faber, were that any ruler who held a limited territory for a long time was established there by right and possessed imperial powers. His views had been developed to justify the monarchy's pretensions vis-a-vis the Emperor; but they had been echoed by sovereign Italian cities; why not a French prince?57 It is against this background that treason in Brittany may now be treated. There is no comprehensive discussion of treason in late medieval Breton texts to compare with that of Jean Boutillier or Jean de Terre-Vermeille. There are some references to the crime in La Ires ancienne coutume, a lawyer's manual rather than a strict legal code, which was compiled c. 1312-25. It is a work deeply influenced by the Orleanist school where treason is seen chiefly in its feudal guise, though it may be noted that some consequences of treason—drawing and hanging of the convicted traitor and the disinheritance of his heirs— are the same as those generally encountered elsewhere in France.58 But despite a dearth of treatises and legal records, it is possible by a study of particular incidents to discover Breton attitudes towards 55

Recueil des actes de Jean IV, due de Bretagne, i, 1357-1382, ed. Michael Jones (Rennes and Paris, 1980), 45 8; Lettres et mandements de Jean V, due de Bretagne, ed. R. Blanchard (5 vols., Nantes, 1889 95), I, xli xlvii and passim. 56 P. Contamine, 'The Contents of a French diplomatic bag in the Fifteenth Century; Louis XI, regalian rights and Breton bishoprics, 1462 1465', Nott. Med. Studs., xxv (1981), 52 72 (for a particular French response to this); A.L.A., E 239, fos. 109-12 and E 241, no. i, fos. 15 23 (for examples of lists of documents contained in these dossiers); E 238 242 contain the most important late medieval inventories of ducal archives, first classified in 1395. 57 Ullmann, 'Development of the medieval idea of sovereignty', 12 (for Faber); cf. Keen, Laws of War, pp. 75-9; Archives Nationales, Paris, [A.N.J, J 246, no. 132/3 (for an interesting attempt to define the geographical limits of Brittany and ducal rights in 1394). See also Cl. Gauvard, 'L'opinion publique aux confins des Etats et des principautes au debut du XVe siecle,' Actes des congres de la societe des historiens medievistes de I'enseignement superieur public. Les Principautes au Moyen Age, Bordeaux 7973 (Bordeaux, 1979), pp. 1 2 7 5 2 . 58 La tres ancienne coutume, ed. M. Planiol (Rennes, 1896), pp. 102, 142, 147, 153, 157, 174, 188.

'Boris Bretons et Bons Francoys'

341

treason and, to a limited extent, to make suggestions in the light of what has already been said about sovereignty which confirm the increasing pretensions and authority of the dukes. A good point to start this necessarily swift survey is the outbreak of civil war in 1341. The death of John III left two candidates to contest the succession— his half-brother, John de Montfort, and his niece, Jeanne de Penthievre. On 7 September 1341 Philip VI, in the 'Arret de Conflans', agreed to accept claims to perform homage for Brittany from Charles de Blois, his own nephew, who was married to Jeanne. By then it was clear John de Montfort would oppose this decision by force and the king despatched troops to help Charles take possession of the duchy.59 Those who supported Montfort were treated as rebels guilty of treason and lese-majesty against the crown, offences which some compounded by collaborating with Edward III who came to Montfort's aid. The execution of Oliver III, lord of Clisson, on 2 August 1343 was the most notorious instance of this strictly legal though politically injudicious policy. But it was by no means unique. 60 As in other regions embroiled in the Anglo-French war, Philip VI confiscated much rebel property in Brittany; equally, he rewarded loyal service by grants from seized estates, a factor which was to make eventual restoration of peace a complicated business.61 He commissioned Charles de Blois to win over by pardon those siding with his rival, and the king subsequently confirmed his letters of remission.62 Paradoxically the crown enjoyed during this disturbed period a much closer control of Breton affairs than it had done since the death of Philip IV. In particular there was no relaxation of the royal monopoly to prosecute crimes of lese-majesty. For its part, the rival Anglo-Breton administration during the civil war similarly seems to have preserved royal rights, for traitors were executed with the full rigours of contemporary practice by virtue of Edward Ill's delegation of authority to his lieutenants in the duchy. 63 When John IV took up the reins of government after 1362, the pardons he issued make no mention of remission for lese-majesty.64 Indeed such a clause, which was by no means mandatory even in royal pardons, 59 Michael Jones, 'The Breton Civil War', Froissart: Historian, ed. J. J. N. Palmer (Woodbridge, 1981), pp. 64-81, 169 72 ; above, pp. 197-218. 60 A.N., X 2a 4, fos. loyv-Br, i i3r v, 22ov 222v (for execution of Clisson and punishment of other Breton traitors); cf. R. Gazelles, La societe politique et la crise de la rqyaute sous Philippe de Valois (Paris, 1958), pp. 153 4; Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 147-50. 61 Morice, Preuves, I, 1588-99 (terms of the first treaty of Guerande, 1365). 62 A.N., JJ 75, nos. 148-61, 204; see also nos. 20, 135, 141, 230, 235-6, 256, 338, 374, 382 etc., for grants and pardons by the Crown. 63 Michael Jones, 'Sir Thomas Dagworth et la guerre civile en Bretagne au XlVe siecle: quelques documents inedits', A.B., Ixxxvii (1980), 638, citing Bodleian Library, Oxford, Bodley MS. 462 fo. 32r (a newsletter from Dagworth about his execution of Olivier de Spinefort in 1346). 64 Recueil (ed. Jones), nos. 38 and 41.

342

The Creation of Brittany

would have been exceptional in any princely pardon issued elsewhere in France at this juncture, apart from Guyenne where special circumstances prevailed.65 It is thus of considerable significance that in a pardon of 1384 granted to the recalcitrant bishop and citizens of St-Malo, John IV, now securely restored to his throne, remitted their guilt as rebels who had committed lese-majesty in a document that bristles with statements emphasising the duke's majesty. 66 No one conversant with contemporary legal opinion can be left in any doubt as to the prerogatives the duke was claiming. It is surely no coincidence that at precisely the same moment the royal council, which had been consulted over a difficult appeal to the parlement of Paris concerning the levying of a hearth tax in the lordship of Fougeres and was informed about affairs at St-Malo, forcefully reminded him: que dun crime de lese mageste commis en Bretagne ou dune guerre dun des barons contre lautre, se le cas y avenoit et en pluseurs autres cas, le Roy en congnoiseroit senz faire remission.67 The language was polite but firm; such legal niceties constitute the quintessential character of discourse in Franco-Breton relations. They had been traditional now for several generations, but from this point until the downfall of the independent duchy royal arguments were countered in the same fashion with increasing sophistication by Bretons anxious to reduce to nothing the vestigial sovereign rights of the crown. In itself the appropriation of Roman legal adages—quodprincipi placuit legis habet vigorem was quoted to strengthen ducal arguments in the same series of exchanges over Fougeres68—did not necessarily ensure the exercise of imperial powers in practice. But claims, once made, might in favourable circumstances lead inexorably to that end; for was that not the case with the Capetian and Valois assumption of royal privileges? It was the capture in 1420 of John V by his liegemen and distant cousins, Oliver and Charles de Bretagne, that marks a critical point 65

Hist. gen. de Languedoc, X, Preuves, 838 9, 1347-8; Pena, Durfort, II, nos. 1000 and 1004; for a treason trial in Gascony, see Documents historiques inedits concernant la seigneurie deFronsac, ed. Ch. Grellet-Balguerie (Bordeaux, 1888), afterB.N., Coll. Brequigny XXX, an i8th century transcript of the original, now P.R.O., E . i o i / i 8 i / 6 (the proces-verbal of the sentence delivered in the court of Gascony against Guillaume-Sanche de Pommiers, vicomte of Fronsac, condemned to death for treason and lese-majesty in plotting to deliver Bordeaux to the French in 1377) a reference I owe to the kindness of Dr M. G. A. Vale. 66 Morice, Preuves, II, 466 8; La Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, IV, 96 103. 67 A.N., J 243, no. 70. Philip IV had seized Fougeres in 1314 from Guy de Lusignan for lese-majesty (Morice, Preuves, I, 1282) and Philip VI had retained sovereignty when granting it to Charles de Valois in 1329 (Le Cartulaire de la seigneurie de Fougeres, ed. J. Auherge (Rennes, 1913), pp. 79-81). 68 Morice, Preuves, II, 457 8.

'Sons Bretons et Bons Francoys'

343

for the duke in regard to treason and provides an unimpeachable example of the pragmatic application of the lex Julia maiestatis. Having accepted an invitation to join a St Valentine's Day party, the duke was ambushed on 13 February. After a humiliating captivity when his life was threatened, he was finally released on 6 July I42O. 69 To unravel all the diplomatic tangles of this celebrated incident, closely following the yet more notorious murder of John the Fearless of Burgundy on 10 September 1419, is inappropriate here.70 Behind the Bretagne brothers stood their mother, Marguerite de Clisson, nursing a long nurtured hatred, but behind her there lurk the shadowy figures of the dauphin Charles and his advisers, desperately casting about for diplomatic advantage in the face of an imminent Anglo-Burgundian alliance.71 In the end, failing to gain much from John's capture, they were instrumental in his release.72 For us what is important is that within days of this manifest treason it was condemned as lese-majesty by a gathering of the Breton etats rallying to the duchess (the dauphin's own sister) in an almost unanimous movement of support triggered off by revulsion against the crime.73 Felony, treason and lese-majesty were the charges levelled against Oliver and Charles de Bretagne in the first surviving original ducal letters after his capture. They were to be repeated ceaselessly tojustify expropriation of the Penthievre estates in 1420 and their transfer in subsequent generations; they justified demolition of their fortresses and a whole series of further judicial moves.74 In the end there was no trial because the Bretagne family failed to answer to charges against them. Exploiting technicalities of this default, John V eventually promulgated a definitive sentence of confiscation and capital punishment in the Breton parlement of February i425_ 7 5 By then all but an unfortunate hostage, Guillaume de Bretagne, and a few minor servants of the family who had fallen into ducal hands, had escaped a dragnet which had stretched as far as the 69 A. Bourdeaut, 'Jean Vet Marguerite de Clisson. LaruinedeChateauceaux', Bulletin de la socie'te arche'ologique de Nantes et de la Loire-Infeneure, liv (1913), 331-417 is the best account; cf. La Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, IV, 197-214; Lettres de Jean V, I, cxxiv v. 70 R. Vaughan, John the Fearless (London, 1966), pp. 263 86. 71 K. Cosneau, Le connetable de Richement (Paris, 1886), 52 3, 494 7; P. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau au traite de Troyes (Bruxelles, 1958). 72 A.N., X i a g2oo, fos. 26gv 273r (Isabeau de Vivonne v. Richard, count of fitampes, 1434) provides valuable evidence on the dauphin's actions in 1420; B.N., MS. francais 8267, fos. 68 80 (eighteenth-century extracts from the accounts ofJean Periou, 22 Apr. 1420 16 Dec. 1420, incompletely published in Morice, Preuves, II, 1065-8), provide much information on diplomatic and military efforts to recover the duke. 7:3 Morice, Preuves, II, 998-1001. 74 Lettres de Jean V, nos. 1400, 1403 10, 1413-14, 1417, 1420, 1422, 1425-6, 1428 etc.; Morice, Preuves, I I I , 368 70; A.L.A., B 51, fos. 1 1 7 1 9 (10 Oct. 1504). 75 Morice, Preuves, II, 1070-80; Lettres de Jean V, nos. 1436, 1456, 1532, 1606, 1610; A.L.A., E 169, nos. 2 - 4 ; Bourdeaut, 'Jean V, 391 ff.

344

The Creation of Brittany

Low Countries and were living in active political exile far from their Breton estates. Over the next forty years there were several attempts to compose the feud; some came close to success, with the ultimate restoration of the Penthievre estates a distinct possibility.76 But it never proved possible to wipe out memory of that fateful attack nor, most significantly, to overturn the territorial dispositions then made as John V rewarded his family and loyal supporters in the biggest single redistribution of land which occurred in the late medieval duchy. Here then was the revenge of a duke whose sovereignty had. been infringed. But did it set a precedent? Proceedings against the Bretagne family occur at the nadir of French royal fortunes. Despite later conspiracies or suspected plots against the ducal family, the number of cases in which treason and lese-majesty are specifically alleged in Brittany remains small before the 14805.77 By inference, it appears that some provisions of the lex Julia maiestatis were invoked; at least the duke in the duchy behaved in a manner consistent with the principles applied in the kingdom at large by the crown. Native-born Bretons who went to live under or, like Gilles de Bretagne, brother of duke Francis I, avowed another allegiance, absented themselves from military musters or cooperated openly with the duke's enemies might be treated as rebels and traitors and their estates became liable to confiscation.78 The fate of Bretons captured fighting ducal forces in the service of other princes was more straightforward: they could be executed summarily according to the laws of war as happened to those taken at the siege of Pouance in I432. 79 When hostilities between Brittany and France broke out in the War of the Public Weal and later in the century, many, forced to make a choice of allegiance, left royal service to return to the duchy, as had those alarmed by Louis XI's accession. Others found it expedient to explain their continuing absence and to furnish service by deputy. 80 The choice of allegiance in these circumstances was often an 76 A.L.A., E 169, nos. 5-19; Morice, Preuves, II, 1415-24; La Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, IV, 234-8, 346-8. 77 Ibid., IV, 247 (1437, suspected plot of ducal scullions); Morice, Preuves, II, 1324 (1439, plot to deliver St-Malo to the English); ibid., 1386-8 (19 Oct. 1445, ducal pardon to Gilles de Bretagne, suspected of disloyalty, felony and lese-majesty). 78 A. Bourdeaut, 'Gilles de Bretagne entre la France et 1'Angleterre', M.S.H.A.B., i (1920), 53-145; M. H. Keen and M. Daniel, 'English Diplomacy and the sack of Fougeres in 1449', History, lix (1974), 375-91; B. Wolffe, Henry VI (London, 1981), pp. 167 ff. (for Gilles), A.L.A., B 4, fo. gv (7 June 1465, seizure of the lands of the lords of Montauban and Guemene-Guigan); ibid., fo. I35V (those of the count of Penthievre for serving the king during the War of the Public Weal). 79 Lettres de Jean V, no. 2012 (a case of execution by drowning). 80 A.L.A., B 4, fos. nor, ii5r; Morice, Preuves, III, 31-2 (rewards to Tanguy du Chastel for leaving French service, Nov. 1462); P. Contamine, Guerre, etat et socittealafin du moyen age. Etudes sur les armies des rots de France 1337-1494 (Paris and The Hague, 1972), pp. 404 8.

'Bans Bretons et Bom Francoys'

345

agonizing one, though it should occasion no surprise that material considerations—present position, pension, location of estates and hopes of future advancement—seem to have finally determined the decisions of those who had sought to serve two masters.81 For although every prince, not merely the king, hoped to obtain the exclusive allegiance of his servants and subjects, and some families seem to have maintained a tradition of loyalty, others were normally divided in their allegiance.82 Sanctions against them could seldom be ruthlessly or consistently imposed for fear of political consequences, a fact recognized even by Louis XI, the monarch who most rigorously used the weapon of prosecution for treason to achieve his ends.83 A constant war of attrition was thus waged by rival princes for the service of soldiers and administrators who were prepared to be bought by the highest bidder. In the case of Brittany the stakes mounted appreciably during duke Francis IPs reign as factions within the duchy struggled to impose their own policies on a feeble duke, and Louis XI and the regents for Charles VIII seized their opportunities to crush once and for all ducal aspirations to sovereignty. 84 For if the feudal bond was seldom strong enough to bind men now to their liege-lord, how much weaker and more fragile still was the bond tying a man to his medieval sovereign, royal or ducal! The ducal inquiry into Rohan's flight in 1470 provides a glimpse into this complex world of bewildering intrigues. 85 Pean Gaudin, recently dismissed from mastership of the duke's artillery, for instance, testified to visiting the town of Amboise shortly after Rohan's welcome there, Gaudin's purpose being to conclude a sale of land forced on him by debts, chiefly to the pro-French chancellor of Brittany, Guillaume Chauvin. 86 Thus vulnerable to bribery, whilst there Gaudin contacted a wide range of Breton acquaintances in royal service. Through one of them, Geoffrey de Couvran, a captain in the royal ordonnance companies recently won back by Louis XI, he was introduced to the 81

Michael Jones, 'The Breton Nobility and their Masters from the Civil War of 1341 64 to the late Fifteenth Century', The Crown and Local Communities in England and France in the Fifteenth Century, ed. J. R. L. Highfield and Robin Jeffs (Gloucester, 1981), pp. 51 71; above, pp. 219-37. 82 A.L.A. E 131, fos. I22v-i23r, i3gr (minutes of ducal council meetings in 1462 relating to measures to ensure ducal officers left baronial service), fo. 154 (for protestations of loyalty and a eulogy on the duke). 83 Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 213-33. 84 Y. Labande-Mailfert, Charles VIIIet son milieu (Paris, 1975), is the most recent full survey of these political events. 85 A.L.A., E 190, nos. 1-15, partially summarised in Morice, Preuves, I I I , 207 9. 86 A.L.A., E 190, no. 3, fos. i -i 7v. His terms of service as master of the artillery were fully set out in a commission of i 7 Jan. 1467 (B 5, fos. gr i ir); see La Borderie, Histoire deBretagne, IV, 471 2, 500 2, and B. A. Pocquetdu Haut-Jusse, Francois II, ducde Bretagne et I'Angletene (Paris, 1929) for Chauvin.

346

The Creation of Brittany

king.87 During their conversation Louis alluded to recent diplomatic manoeuvrings and asked about current Breton attitudes: 'Et entre vous Bretons, serez vous Anglois et Bourgoignons?' Choleric by nature, Gaudin was on this occasion the soul of tact in reply: 'Nous ne serons ne Anglois ne Bourgoignons, mais tousjours serons bons Bretons et bons Francoys.' 88 More talk followed in which Louis flattered Gaudin by saying that Bretons had always loved France and received the best of rewards for service to the crown, a view at odds with his sentiments on 'les trahisons, rebellyons et mauvaisties que le due et ceulx du pais nous ont faictes' on other occasions.89 Nor was duke Francis II the first duke of Brittany to be accused of lese-majesty. Yet Louis confided in Gaudin plans to aid the earl of Warwick and to defeat Charles of Burgundy. Conducting him to the royal aviary, Louis promised to show Gaudin his artillery when he returned to Tours, only to be taken aback when Gaudin replied that he had already cast a professional eye over it on his way to Amboise. Moreover, whilst in Tours (we learn from another witness, Jean de Rouville, the devious Norman vice-chancellor of Brittany), he had been mistakenly welcomed as another recruit by gunners who had just deserted the duke for royal service.90 It was Rouville to whom Gaudin, on his return, reported a conversation with Tanguy du Chastel, one of Louis XFs closest and most influential Breton advisers. Tanguy had candidly admitted responsibility for arranging the escape of Rohan, his former ward, and that he further intended: 'enlever de environ le due touz les gens destat, de faisance et de puissance qui sont a son service quil le feroit pour faire le due condescendre au vouloir et bon plaisir du roy.'91 87

B.N., MS. francais 10238, fo. 74 (instructions about Couvran to Yvon du Fou from Louis XI); Contamine, Guerre, £tat et Societe, p. 412. 88 A.L.A., E 190, no. 3, fo. 6r;J. Calmette and E. Deprez (Lespremieresgrandespuissances (Paris, 1939), p. 165) mistakenly attributed this exchange to the year 1486. 69 Lettres de Louis XI, roi de France, ed. J. Vaesen and E. Charavay (11 vols., Paris, 1883 1909), VI, no. MVIII; cf. Ill, no. CCCXXV. 90 A.L.A., E 190, no. 2, fo. 86. Rouville had been prominent in the ducal council since 1459 at least (E 131 passim). Commynes thought him a very clever man who needed to keep his wits about him (Memoires, ed. J. Calmette and G. Durville, 3 vols., Paris, 1924-5, I, 15). 91 A.L.A., E 190, no. 2, fo. 86v; cf. no. i, fos. gr i ir, 43, 66 8. Succeeding his famous uncle, a faithful servant of Charles VII, Tanguy had been dismissed in 1461, fought against Louis in 1465, but rejoined him in May 1468 when Francis II referred to his 'desertion' and dismissed him from the captaincy of Nantes (B 6, fo. 97v). Although there were occasional rumours of a reconciliation with the duke (Morice, Preuves, III, 207) and Louis feared 'que vous aiez joue ce tour et fait de la teste de Breton' (Lettres, V, no. DCXCII), he kept spies in Brittany and remained loyal until his death at the siege

'Bom Bretons et Bons Francoys'

347

Others besides the king were anxious to ask Gaudin 'Et puix entre vous Bretons, serez vous bons?' (that is, loyal to France) and that formidably tough old Breton warrior Andre de Laval, lord of Loheac, marshal of France, accosted him with the question 'Serez vous des nostres?' 92 Now although there were those in Brittany who eagerly pointed out that 'ung tel homme . . . qui estoit maistre de lartillerie, capitaine des Francs Archiers et capitaine de Jugon, estoit assez pour faire ung mal irreparable au pays sil estoit desloyal au due' and advocated cutting off his head because it would be better 'en faire la justice et donner example sur ung tel homme comme celuy Payen que sur ung failly personnaige', there is no clear evidence that Gaudin intended treason.93 On the other hand, all those Bretons he met at court were compromised by passing, often under a cloud, from ducal service to that of the crown and vice versa. But the days of such behaviour, when it was possible to play off duke and king, were drawing to a close. In the past, despite the fearsome clauses of the lex Julia maiestatis, even the French king was inconsistent in his application of them and there may be sensed, on the part of provincial princes, a similar reluctance to exact full retribution from those who clearly had infringed their sovereignty. In the case of Gilles de Bretagne, for instance, the only 'state' trial for treason mounted in the duchy and attended at duke Francis I's request by royal advisers, procedural difficulties and diplomatic pressure prevented a final decision being reached.94 As for other cases in which treachery was suspected, it was normally the practice to appoint ad hoc commissions. These reported findings to the ducal council. 95 The need to step carefully may explain why such subterfuges were allowed to extend discussion of certain cases; not infrequently before official sentence could be delivered victims of such proceedings had already met a violent death. Notoriously this was the fate which overtook not only Gilles de Bretagne but also Guillaume Chauvin the chancellor, who was openly condemned for lese-majesty of Bouchain in May 1477, his Breton lands having been seized (Morice, Preuves, III, 240, 281; La Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, IV, 465-7). 92 A.L.A., E 190, no. 3, fo. 51-; Contamine, Guerre, etat et societe, pp. 238-9, 496-8, 412 etc. Dismissed in 1461, Loheac began to receive a pension again from Louis XI in 1466. He was one of the first knights of the Order of St. Michel but continued to manage his Breton estates, including the ancient barony of Lanvaux revived for him in 1464, until his death in 1486 (B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 24169, nos. 34-4'!; A.L.A., B 3, fos. i52V-i55r; Morice, Preuves, III, 480-2). 93 A.L.A., E 190, no. 2, fo. 7iv (testimony of Mons. Noel de Tissue). 94 Morice, Preuves, II, 1404-6. 95 A.L.A., E 198, no. 17 (Jan. 1480: inquiry into relations of Oliver du Tertre, porter of St-Malo, with the admiral of France, Louis Malet de Graville).

348

The Creation of Brittany

in 1484 only after his death.96 However, by this time caution in accusations and construction of treason was abandoned. The last years of Breton independence were ones in which factions seized every opportunity to label rivals as traitors; Pierre Landois, the treasurer, widely held responsible for the ill-treatment of Chauvin, was himself seized in the duke's presence, summarily tried and executed by an aristocratic clique in August 1485. This was a clear infringement of ducal sovereignty but it was soon pardoned.97 A desperate struggle for control of the administration and with it direction of the war against France reached a climax in the years after 1487, when, in order to rally support and pay off mounting debts, the traditional methods of judicious distribution of confiscated property or the lure of its restoration were used on a grand scale.98 This is no place to recount the individual acts of treason of even the greatest Breton lords like Rohan and Rieux, who changed sides with dazzling virtuosity, of the collective treason of those who negotiated with Charles VIII at Montargis in 1484, nor to examine the correspondence of those like the duke's illegitimate son, Francis of Avaugour, and the Laval family who, forseeing eventual French victory, curried favour at court.99 In these hectic years France was a foreign country 96 A.L.A., E 4, no. 5 ( i Oct. 1484: grant to Francis of Avaugour of lands seized because 'paravant ces heures feu Guillaume Chauvin, nostre chancelier et chief de nostre conseil, eust secretement et a nostre desceu prins intelligence et entendement a aucuns quels il savoit et congnoissoit estre noz adversaires et annemys mortelz et avecques eulx fait plusieurs factions et conspiracions par messagiers e t . . . personnes quil y avoit diverses foiz envoye se delibere et conclut daller de sa personne servir led. party a nous contraire de laisser et abandoner nostre service, il qui estoit subgect et originaire de nostre pays, en comectant parce moyen a lencontre de nous et le bien publicque de nostre pays crime de lese majeste.') Louis XI had unsuccessfully evoked the case of Guillaume Chauvin and his son Jean to the parlement of Paris for den'0.! of justice by duke Francis II on 27 August 1482 (A.L.A., E 198, no. 4I 1 ). 97 La Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, IV, 504-20. A petition to Chauvin from someone terrified by Landois, who suspected him of revealing to Francis II that the treasurer was using necromancy to maintain his dominance over the duke, may be found in Morice, Preuves, III, 399-400; see also ibid., 433-7 and 548 for further cases of lesemajesty.

98 A.L.A.,"B 11, fos. i3v, 82, i35v, 152; B 12, fos. 86, 138, 140 etc.; B 13, fos. 34v, 64v, 66, ggv, 110, i i8v-2or, 127-8 etc. 99

Labande-Mailfert, Charles VIII, pp. 55 ff.; B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 1232 contains copies of letters from Francis of Avaugour, Francis of Laval, lord of Gavre, Guy XV of Laval, John II of Rohan, John IV of Rieux, Peter of Rohan, lord of Quintin and others to Charles VIII soliciting offices and other favours and reporting news from Brittany from 1484. Duke Francis II sought to strengthen the loyalty of his son, which was already wavering in 1485-6, by augmenting his apanage in January 1487 (A.L.A., B 10, fo. io8r), but by March he was stated to be in rebellion (fo. I55v). On 7 August 1487 he had a safe conduct to come to the duke (fo. 20iv), his supporters already having received a pardon (E 200, no 15). But now in receipt of a royal pension of 6000 limes tournois (A.N., KK 79, fo. 66r), he was collaborating closely with royal forces (B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 1232, fo. 176; cf. fo. 52. See also Lettres de Charles VIII, ed. P. Pelicier

'Bans Bretons et Bons Francoys'

349

and the duke, or those acting in his name, treated those who collaborated with the crown as traitors guilty of lese-majesty. After Charles VIII's victory and his marriage to Duchess Anne, inquirers into the treasonable behaviour of certain Breton captains in the war could afford in retrospect to adopt the view that the war had been just and that Breton resistance was not simply the rebellion the king alleged at the time.100 In an atmosphere of continuing intrigue—Rohan was involved in treasonable communications with the English in 1492—it was tactful of the crown to acknowledge the success of late medieval dukes of Brittany in building up their state. To ensure its full assimilation into the kingdom would require much caution in not affronting those multiple interests which, along with the duke's, had built up an independent Brittany. In fifteenth-century France royal conceptions of sovereignty were in conflict with provincial ones; interpretation of the language and meaning of laws relating to treason reflected this fundamental division. In their imitation of the crown, provincial rulers and their advisers had increasingly dropped their feudal stance and drawn inspiration from common legal texts. In the case of Brittany where charges of lese-majesty occur earlier and more regularly than in any other province— the first Burgundian example occurs in I468 101 —the implications of embracing a Romanist position with regard to treason were and B. de Mandrot (5 vols., Paris, 1898 1905), ii, nos. CCCLXXXIII, CCCCXXIII, CCCCXLVII1).

100 A.L.A. B 12, fo. 56v (4 Jan. 1490: declaration by Duchess Anne that all those obeying the king would be treated as guilty of lese-majesty); for the later enquiries see 'Enquete relative a la prise d'un seigneur breton qui tenait le parti des franc,ais centre la duchesse Anne de Bretagne pendant la guerre de 1488 89', Bulletin de la societe archeologique duFinistere, iii (1875 6), 14 30 (nowArch. dep. duFinistere, i £504); Arch, municipales, Guingamp. AA 7, no. 22 ('Enqueste de la chancellerie et conseill du roy nostre sire en Bretagne', Sept. 1492, concerning the delivery of Guingamp to the French on 21 January 1489). For accusations of treachery against Guillaume de Rosnyvinen for delivering St-Aubin du Cormier in October 1487, see A.L.A., B n, fos. 8 and 30; Morice, Preuves, III, 558 63; Jones, 'The Breton Nobility and their Masters', 219 ff. 101 Archiv des Ordens vom Goldenen Vliesse, Vienna, Reg. 2, fos. 6 ff. (proceedings against the Croy family, summarised in Baron de Reiffenberg, Histoire de I'ordre de la Toison d'Or (Bruxelles, 1830), pp. 45 ff.). I am grateful to the Librarian, History Faculty Library, Oxford, for permission to consult a microfilm of this register. C. A.J. Armstrong ('Had the Burgundian Government a policy for the Nobility?', England and the Netherlands, II, ed. J. S. Bromley and E. H. Kossman (Groningen, 1964), pp. 9 32) has argued that the Valois dukes early adopted the use of proceedings for lese-majesty, but this specific form of words is not included in any of the cases he cites for the action of the duke in his lands within the boundaries of the kingdom of France, though he appears to have executed traitors in his Imperial lands in accordance with the lex Julia maiestatis (Monstrelet, Chronique, v. 67). In 1452 Philip the Good accused the men of Ghent of 'conspiracion tres detestable' and 'tyrannic evidente' but not treason (La Chronique de Mathieu d'Escouchy, ed. G. du Fresne de Beaucourt, 3 vols., Paris, 1863-4, IU> 4 J 3 ! 4)In the 1478 and 1481 chapters of the Golden Fleece the cases of six knights who had

350

The Creation of Brittany

clearly perceived. It was only in extra-ordinary circumstances that it was possible to exploit the crown's weakness, as in 1420 or when, in the 14808, both sides realised it was the moment of decisive encounter. Then there was no attempt to conceal ducal aspirations to sovereignty which had been long maturing. But sovereignty is exclusive and for this reason it was no longer possible to be both a 'Bon Breton et bon Francoys', a lesson learnt in a similarly painful way by those Burgundians who claimed to be 'bon et entier franchois'.102 The defeat of those two great duchies marked a decisive step in imposing royal doctrines of treason on the whole kingdom. The crown now confidently took up again a position prematurely but prophetically adopted by Philip IV. The struggle had been long and difficult, but the way was now clear for the development of those absolutist doctrines of which Jean Bodin was the supreme spokesman and the Bourbons the chief beneficiaries.103 joined Louis XI since 1477 were discussed. Only in that of Philippe de Crevecoeur was the charge specifically 'faulsete, trahison et desloyaute envers mondict seigneur et dame' (de Reiffenberg, Histoire, pp. 91-124). Commynes was less reticent with the charge of treason (cf. J. Dufournet, La destruction des mythes dans les Memoires de Ph. de Commynes, Geneva, 1966, pp. 35-42). The duke of Burgundy was several times reminded by the parlement of Paris that he could not exercise rights of lese-majesty as were other lay magnates (Guttler, Law of Treason, pp. 67-8). There was a tentative attempt to claim that crimes of lese-majesty could be committed against the Dauphin in the Dauphine (ibid., pp. 25-6). 102 J. Huizinga, 'L'Etat bourguignon, ses rapports avec la France et les origines d'une nationalite neerlandaise', Le Moyen Age, xl (1930), 180-4, citing Chastellain and Olivier de la Marche. See also A. Leguai, 'The Relations between the Towns of Burgundy and the French Crown in the Fifteenth Century', The Crown and Local Communities in England and France in the Fifteenth Century, ed. Highfield and Jeffs, pp. 129-45. 103 In preparing this paper I have incurred particular debts to Christopher Allmand, Simon Guttler, Wolfgang van Emden, Andre Leguai, Robin Storey and Malcolm Vale. I am grateful to the British Academy for financing a visit to Paris from the Small Research Grants in the Humanities Fund.

XV L'ARMÉE BRETONNE, 1449-1491 : STRUCTURES ET CARRIÈRES Bien que les documents qui subsistent pour une étude des institutions militaires bretonnes à la fin du Moyen Age soient maintenant réduits à des fragments provenant d'abondantes archives anciennes, le plan général de leur développement a été correctement analysé, il y a de cela un siècle. Ce n'est que sur une petite échelle que furent établis le noyau d'une armée permanente et un corps d'artillerie. On réforma les forces féodales traditionnelles sans parvenir à ajouter aux nouvelles compagnies un contingent bien armé et digne de confiance. L'ambitieux plan de construction de défenses modernes se révéla trop contraignant pour des ressources limitées '. Partant de ces vues précédentes moins objectives et influencées peut-être par le rôle particulier que jouèrent les troupes bretonnes sous les bannières du roi pendant les guerres du quinzième siècle, certains érudits modernes pourraient avoir tendance à surévaluer les points faibles de l'armée bretonne 2. Des comparaisons bienveillantes avec d'autres armées princières seront utiles. En tous cas certaines conséquences sociales des réformes militaires accomplies dans le duché méritent d'être étudiées de beaucoup plus près. Une étude complète des armées ducales, comme celle de Philippe Contamine, constituerait un projet fascinant mais qui se révèle ici hors de notre propos. Mais en mettant en évidence certains faits, et en essayant de me représenter une image cohérente, intégrée à une étude plus générale de la noblesse bretonne, j'espère faire œuvre utile et éclairer les particularités de ce duché à l'époque de Louis XI. Les conclusions tirées par des érudits du siècle dernier comme Antoine Dupuy et Marcel Planiol ont été adoptées par de nombreux travaux modernes. De nombreux changements, contribuant à modifier le rôle des forces féodales traditionnelles à la disposition du duc, eurent naturellement lieu lorsque le duc, 1. A. DUPUY, Histoire de la réunion de la Bretagne à la France, 2 t., Paris 1880, ii. 304-313 ; M. PLANIOL, Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne, Nouvelle édition, 5t., Mayenne 1981-1984, iv. 15-55 ; P. CONTAMINE, Guerre, état et société à la fin du Moyen Age. Etudes sur les armées des rois de France, 1337-1494, Paris & La Haye 1972 (cité comme,Etudes) ; J.P. LEGUAY, Un réseau urbain au Moyen Age : Les villes du duché de Bretagne aux XIVe et XVe siècles, Paris 1981. 2. Cf. LEGUAY, Un réseau urbain, passim, et (avec Hervé MARTIN), Fastes et malheurs de la Bretagne ducale, 1213-1532, Rennes 1982, p. 195-196, 403.

352

The Création ofBrittany

comme ses contemporains, vint à utiliser de plus en plus des troupes mercenaires spécialisées. Ayant connu déjà les contingents retenus pour des campagnes spécifiques au quatorzième siècle et les efforts expérimentaux réalisés sous le règne de Jean V pour fournir une force plus efficace, la Bretagne fut la première province à suivre l'exemple royal et à établir dès 1450 — c'est-à-dire 20 ans avant la Bourgogne — sa propre cavalerie permanente 3. Sous le règne de François II (1458-1488) celle-ci comprenait, en temps normal, quelque 200 lances, en tout entre 600 et 1 000 hommes, bien qu'en cas d'urgence elle vît gonfler ses effectifs 4. Pendant les périodes de trêve ou de paix ces compagnies étaient logées dans des forteresses ou des villes stratégiques (dont certaines furent agrandies ou adaptées pour subvenir à ces nouveaux besoins) situées essentiellement sur les frontières Est et Sud du duché 5. Outre ces hommes, il faut également mentionner d'autres troupes d'élite, notamment celles de l'hôtel du duc. Pourtant, même combinées, leur nombre restait faible et, comme dans d'autres principautés, les contingents féodaux ne pouvaient être délaissés. Malgré certaines affirmations péremptoires, nous sommes toujours remarquablement peu informés sur le début de l'histoire des forces féodales en Bretagne 6. Cependant les ducs du quinzième siècle avaient souvent recours au ban féodal comme à l'une des composantes essentielles de leurs forces. Il était normalement convoqué par diocèse sous la supervision du Maréchal qui d'habitude était à la tête des forces ducales, notamment en cas d'absence du duc. Des nobles étaient nommés pour diriger des groupes divers dont les membres sélectionnaient leur chef, et cette organisation survécut jusqu'à la fin de la Renaissance 7. Puisque tous les nobles devaient servir personnellement sous les armes, s'ils voulaient conserver leur rang, et qu'il a été calculé que le duché contenait entre 5 000 et 9 000 nobles à divers moments pendant le quinzième siècle, nous pouvons présumer que le ban fournissait en temps normal une force au moins égale à ces chiffres 8. En fait il représentait un potentiel plus important, puisque les devoirs des vassaux variaient en fonction de leur richesse, les plus riches étant supposés se présenter en étant accompagnés d'un nombre significatif d'autres hommes. Les listes qui subsistent de ces rassemblements en Bretagne comme ailleurs en cette France de la fin du Moyen Age, révèlent que le ban fournissait une force d'une qualité très variable. Seul un faible pourcentage servait en tant que chevaliers équipés de 3. A. de la BORDERIE, Le siège de Brest en 1387, Revue de Bretagne, de Vendée et d'Anjou, II (1889), 198-203 ; C. BELLIER-DUMAINE, L'administration du duché de Bretagne sous le règne de Jean V, 1399-1442, Annales de Bretagne, xvi (1900), 112-129. 4. Contrairement à la lance bourguignonne qui pouvait avoir jusqu'à 9 hommes (C. BRUSTEN, Les compagnies d'ordonnance dans l'armée bourguignonne, in Grandson 1476. Essai d'approche pluridisciplinaire d'une action militaire du XV* siècle, éd. D. Reichel, Lausanne 1976, p. 130), la lance bretonne comptait normalement un homme d'armes, deux archers et un coutillier (voir ci-dessous note 36). 5. LEGUAY, Un réseau urbain, passim ; Michael JONES, The Defence of Médiéval Brittany, Archaeological Journal, cxxxvni (1981), en particulier pages 170 à 185 ; ci-dessus, pages 34-49. 6. Cf. PLANIOL, Hist. des institutions, iv. 3-13 ; B.-A. POCQUET du HAUT-JUSSÉ, De la vassalité à la noblesse dans le duché de Bretagne, Bulletin philologique et historique du comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques (jusqu'à 1610), 1963, 785-800 est fondamental. 7. René de LAIGUE, La noblesse bretonne aux XVe et XVIe siècles. Réformations et montres, I. Evêché de Vannes, 2 t., Rennes 1902, la seule édition systématique de ces nombreux textes. 8. P. CONTAMINE, The French Nobility and thé War, in The Hundred Years War, éd. K.A. Fowler, Londres 1971, p. 138 et Etudes, p. 304 n. 151 ; Leguay & Martin, Fastes et malheurs, p. 280-281.

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

353

lourds chevaux de guerre et de leur complément intégral de montures de réserve, d'archers, de coutilliers et de pages, suivant la tradition des lances garnies des compagnies royales ou ducales. Il y avait souvent un haut taux d'absentéisme 9. Le nombre de chevaux et d'équipements qui était requis lors de ces rassemblements était énoncé à partir de 1451 dans certaines ordonnances, et était strictement lié à l'échelle graduée des revenus comme dans le système en vigueur en Anjou et en Bourgogne 10 . En 1451 il y avait six principales catégories. Ceux qui appartenaient à la première servaient en tant qu'archers, les autres comme hommes d'armes, étaient accompagnés par un nombre variable d'auxiliaires pouvant aller jusqu'à quatre archers (ou trois archers et un vougier) pour ceux qui avaient les plus forts revenus (entre 500 et 7001. br.). En 1467, faire son service dans la chevalerie était imposé à ceux qui avaient un revenu de 200 1. ou plus, mais l'équipement était alors réparti en dix catégories, le plus onéreux étant réservé à ceux dont les revenus étaient compris entre 3 000 et 5 000 1. Ces mesures permettaient de distinguer quatre principaux types de cavaliers : les hommes d'armes, les archers (ou arbalétriers), les coutilliers et les vougiers u . Pour créer une infanterie des efforts similaires furent effectués à partir de 1425 par la levée de troupes d'archers et d'autres soldats, au sein des paroisses du duché, grâce à un système qui annonçait en partie les réformes génératrices des francs-archers royaux. Il est peu probable que l'implication d'Arthur de Richemont dans ces deux politiques relève de la coïncidence 12. A leur tour les francs-archers bretons (normalement issus du groupe d'âge compris entre 24 et 45 ans) furent au moins partiellement réorganisés vers 1480 pour former le bon corps, autre décision qui suivait de près les efforts du roi pour remédier aux imperfections des francs-archers13. Des chiffres provenant de quatre des neuf diocèses bretons indiquent qu'on attendait au moins 8 800 hommes de cette levée et que dans le duché tout entier le chiffre important de 20 000 hommes pouvait être avancé u. De récentes études montrent qu'à Rennes et à Nantes, qui devaient compter chacune entre 13000 et 14000 habitants, il y avait 9. 355 tenants en fief contribuèrent pour plus de 400 hommes et chevaux lors d'une montre organisée sous le sire de Guémené en 1477 mais on ne comptait que deux hommes d'armes avec 5 chevaux, 7 avec 4 et 12 avec 3 (A. de la BORDERIE, Montres de l'évêché de Vannes en 1477, Revue de l'Ouest, 1897). Une montre dans le diocèse de Léon en 1467 révèle que 460 nobles étaient présents ou comptés pour tels tandis que 140 étaient absents. Seuls 26 d'entre eux reconnaissent avoir un revenu supérieur ou égal à 200 1., somme à partir de laquelle on devait servir comme hommes d'armes (Rennes, Bibl. mun., MS. 499, p. 610-629). Les montres pour l'archidiaconé de Dinan en 1472 (Paris, Bibl. nat., MS. Picardie 68, f°. 219 r°-238 v°) et pour les diocèses de Léon et de Tréguier en 1480 (Ibid., MS. français 18712, f°. 39 r°-53 v° ; 63 v°-71 r°) révèlent des faits similaires. Voir aussi CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 304, n. 151. 10. PocQUETdu HAUT-JUSSÉ, loc. cit., 795-798 ; M. de la CHAUVELAYS, Les armées de Charles le Téméraire dans les deux Bourgognes, Paris, 1879 ; M. REYNAUD, Le service féodal en Anjou et Maine à la fin du Moyen Age, Cahiers d'histoire, xvi (1971), 115-159. 11. Sauf indication contraire, tous les chiffres mentionnés sont en livres bretonnes, valant approximativement 20 % de plus que la livre tournois à cette époque. Dom P.-H. MORICE, Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne, 3 t., Paris 1742-1746 (cité comme Preuves), II. 1555-1557 ; III. 140-141, 226-230 ; CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 302, 305. 12. BELLIER-DUMAINE, loc. cit., p. 118 cf. Preuves, II. 1166-1167. 13. DUPUY, op. cit., II. 310 ; Archives départementales de la Loire-Atlantique (cité comme A.L.A.), B 3, f°. 110 v° pour les limites d'âge. 14. Preuves, III. 556, 580-582 ; DUPUY, op. cit., p. 310 d'après A.L.A., B 9, f°. 13 r°, 71 v°.

354

The Création ofBrittany

peut-être entre 800 et 1 350 hommes aptes au service 15. Les chiffres concernant la soixantaine d'autres villes (souvent beaucoup plus petites) sont rares. Si l'on suppose que leurs habitants n'étaient pas déjà inclus parmi le bon corps (un problème qui reste à résoudre), une milice urbaine de quelques milliers d'hommes pourrait être ajoutée au total des forces bretonnes. Donc, en récapitulant, on estime approximativement à 30 000-35 000 hommes la limite potentielle la plus optimiste des forces armées du duché, disponibles, sans recours à la levée en masse proclamée seulement en cas d'extrême urgence, comme ce fut le cas en 1468 16. Alain Bouchait, chroniqueur contemporain, annonce le chiffre, assurément exagéré, de 60 000 et même de 80000 hommes rassemblés de cette façon en 1487 17. Pourtant même la mobilisation de 35 000 hommes aurait impliqué qu'un dixième de l'ensemble de la population masculine du duché aurait pris les armes. Un tel niveau d'engagement n'a été atteint dans certains états médiévaux, nous le savons, qu'en des circonstances exceptionnelles, mais nous devons souligner le fait que dans le cas de la Bretagne lorsque de véritables chiffres, reflétant des campagnes précises, peuvent être avancés, ils sont beaucoup moins importants. En 1449, lorsque la première preuve des compagnies d'ordonnance du duché apparaît, lorsque François 1 er fait un effort considérable pour rendre service à Charles VII, et lorsque son oncle est là pour le guider, il semble que l'armée bretonne compte au plus quelque 700 lances, c'est-à-dire entre 2 800 et 3 500 hommes, dont la plupart sert sous les ordres du Connétable 18. Les campagnes antérieures faites par les troupes bretonnes engagèrent encore moins d'effectifs si bien que l'armée convoquée en 1465, qui faillit manquer le rendez-vous avec les Bourguignons avant la bataille de Montlhéry, constitue certainement la plus grande force expéditionnaire engagée dans une campagne par le duché à l'époque médiévale. Bouchart raconte qu'en plus de l'artillerie, 10 600 hommes se rassemblèrent à Châteaubriant en juin, et qu'il y eut peut-être jusqu'à 12 000 ou 15 000 soldats en tout qui servirent 19 . C'est en se référant à la menace qui pesait sur le duché que certains travaux modernes, en se basant toujours sur Bouchart, avancent les chiffres de 600 lances et de 16 000 fantassins, lors d'une montre devant François II à Malestroit en mai 1487. Lors de la seule rencontre décisive entre les forces du roi et celles du duché à Saint-Aubin-du-Cormier le 28 juillet 1488, et même avec les renforts de ses alliés, le duché ne put probablement aligner que 400 lances et tout juste un peu plus de 11 000 hommes contre une armée royale comptant environ 15 000 hommes 20. Dans de telles conditions la défaite, bien que non inévitable, est pour le moins compréhensible. Le recours à des mercenaires étrangers, expédient coûteux, revenait à reconnaître la faiblesse de la Bretagne. Parmi ceux qui furent employés à partir de 1480, on comptait plusieurs milliers d'archers anglais, des Gascons (avec 100 lances sous le commandement du sire d'Albret), des Picards, des Castillans et des Allemands, ces derniers étant célèbres pour 15. LEGUAY, Un réseau urbain, p. 366. 16. A.L.A., B 6 f°. 32 v-34r. 17. Les Grandes Croniques de Bretaigne, éd. H. Le Meignen, Rennes 1886, f°. 236 v. 18. E. COSNEAU, Le connétable de Richement, Paris 1886, p. 395 et seq. ; Chronique du Mont-Saint-Michel, éd. S. Luce, 2t., Paris 1879-1883, I. 47 et seq. 19. Bouchart, f°. 213r.; H. STEIN, Charles de France, frère de Louis XI, Paris 1920, p. 91-92. 20. Bouchart, f°. 235 r.; Y. LABANDE-MAILFERT, Charles VIII et son milieu, Paris 1975, p. 68, 77 ; CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 315-316.

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

355

leur manque de discipline. Des extraits de comptes écrits entre 1488 et 1491 montrent comment, sous la pression de la guerre, de véritables unités avaient souvent été divisées en de très petits nombres de divers soldats. Il est exceptionnel de trouver des compagnies de 100 lances comme celle conduite par Jean, sire de Rieux, maréchal de Bretagne, qui coûta 1 000 livres par mois à partir d'août 1490 ou celle d'Albret à partir de novembre 21 . Bien que l'on puisse être beaucoup plus précis, il est vraisemblable que maintenant ces estimations générales ne seront plus modifiées dans leurs grandes lignes de quelque façon que ce soit. Les forces bretonnes du XVe siècle évoluèrent, une fois que les indemnités pour les différences d'échelle furent entrées en vigueur, de façon très semblable à celles du roi de France qui apparaissent clairement comme le modèle suivi par de nombreuses réformes opérées au sein de l'armée bretonne. De même nous ne trouvons pas en Bretagne l'imagination délirante d'un Charles de Bourgogne qui réforma, en quelques années, une armée principalement féodale en une machine de guerre moderne grâce à un fatras de nouvelles ordonnances, de nouveaux codes de discipline et d'expériences tactiques 22 . En outre, ce qui peut utilement être illustré à partir de l'exemple de la Bretagne, pour compléter d'autres travaux, c'est non pas seulement l'évolution des institutions, mais aussi certains aspects de la carrière des soldats bretons pour fournir, à partir de là, une contribution à une étude plus sociologique des armées à la fin du Moyen Age. Les individus qui peuvent être le mieux étudiés à cet égard sont ceux qui, employés par le duc, étaient soldats de métier au sein de l'armée régulière : les compagnies d'ordonnance, les gardes privés de l'hôtel du duc, et les spécialistes comme les artilleurs. Même si les chiffres en question ne sont pas considérables (pour des raisons déjà mentionnées), leur rôle apparaît somme toute plus important que leur nombre ne le suggère. Non seulement ces hommes constituaient une force d'élite et remplissaient des missions difficiles, mais ils étaient indispensables, du maréchal jusqu'au simple soldat, pour organiser, diriger, entraîner et renforcer les conscrits dont disposait le duc : le ban, les francs-archers, le bon corps et les milices urbaines. Là encore, bien que la vie de cour en Bretagne ait imité clairement le modèle du roi ou celui de Bourgogne, en devenant sans cesse plus élaborée et plus sophistiquée, nous devons souligner que l'hôtel demeura très réellement au centre des forces armées bretonnes. Les officiers qui les dirigeaient étaient équipés par l'hôtel dont la fonction militaire, depuis longtemps reconnue comme fondamentale pour la création des premières administrations féodales, ne devrait pas être sous-estimée à cette période, fait que le travail de Ph. Contamine souligne bien aussi 23 . En particulier il semble évident que la formation de gardes du corps sélectionnés parmi les écuyers, les gentilshommes, les archers et les coutilliers de l'hôtel, regroupés de façon différente mais toujours plus nombreux pendant le siècle considéré, ne reflète pas simplement un souci de sécurité personnelle (vraiment compréhensible après 1420) mais une véritable tentative pour fournir 21. Preuves, III. 723-726 ; A.L.A., B 13, f°. 94 r°-96 r° (cf. Choix de documents inédits sur le règne de la duchesse Anne en Bretagne, éd. A. de la Borderie, Rennes & Paris, 1866-1902, nos. XXXVIII-XL) et A.L.A., E 214/41, Estât de VI" m. tournois que Jehan Hauguemar eut en charge en lan mil iiij01 iiij xx xj. Arch. dép. Pyrénées-Atlantiques, E 195 (Albret). 22. Cf. R. VAUGHAN, Charles thé Bold, Londres 1973, p. 197-229. 23. Etudes, p. 294-296 et La Guerre au Moyen Age, Paris 1980, p. 297 et seq.

356

The Création ofBrittany

un emploi, des perspectives de carrière et des récompenses aux principaux personnages qui participaient au maintien des forces armées du duché et par là à son indépendance 24. Dans leurs livrées voyantes et certainement coûteuses de draps noirs, violets et blancs abondamment parés de galons (de double épaisseur pour le capitaine), les gardes du corps du duc pouvaient paraître, au premier abord, posséder des privilèges inutiles et prendre avantage de leur statut jusqu'à entraîner une dépense extravagante 2S. Mais la succession des commissions uniquement en rapport avec des questions militaires dont les membres individuels de la garde étaient l'objet, pour ne pas mentionner leurs tâches qu'ils remplissaient fréquemment dans des affaires d'ordre civil, montre qu'ils étaient souvent les bras droits du prince, fonction qu'ils assumaient également dans d'autres états 26. La compétition pour une place à la cour, l'échelonnement par degrés des fonctions de responsabilité et de commandement, les traditions familiales de service et bien d'autres caractéristiques de la vie d'un noble se trouvent reflétés dans le recrutement aux fonctions militaires de l'hôtel. Nombreux sont ceux qui, ayant d'abord fait leurs preuves dans le métier des armes, furent ensuite nommés à des postes d'administration civile ainsi Philippe de Montauban, convoqué en tant qu'homme d'armes de l'ordonnance en janvier 1465, puis deux années plus tard membre du corps de garde de 51 lances, et dont la carrière atteint le zénith lors de sa nomination au poste de chancelier en septembre 1487, un poste qu'il conserva malgré bien des vicissitudes jusqu'à sa mort en 1514 27 . Bien que marquée par une grande réussite, la carrière de Philippe pourrait être prise comme exemple du but poursuivi non seulement par d'autres cadets mais par les représentants de plusieurs milliers de familles nobles dans ce duché à la fin de l'époque médiévale. C'était au sein de ce large éventail que les hommes étaient appelés périodiquement à la cour pour faire leur temps dans des fonctions qui étaient loin d'être purement honorifiques. Certains étaient appelés pour un mois ou deux chaque année, d'autres pour des périodes plus longues, accomplissant des tâches d'importance diverse, suivant un schéma institué lorsque Philippe le Hardi, duc de Bourgogne, alors tuteur du jeune Jean V, révisa en détail l'hôtel au début du siècle 28. Bien sûr, pour la plupart, ce n'était pas les récompenses mirobolantes qui les attiraient mais la lente accumulation de privilèges, les modestes paiements pour services rendus et les bénéfices incalculables qu'une relation avec la cour pouvait procurer pour rehausser le prestige social, qui les poussaient à y passer tant de temps. Bien que les documents ne soient pas aussi nombreux qu'on puisse le souhaiter, il subsiste suffisamment de listes des gardes ducales pour le siècle 24. Cf. PLANIOL, Hist. des institutions, IV. 16-18. 25. Preuves, III. 324 ; on donnait parfois des crédits pour l'équipement et l'uniforme des nouvelles recrues (A.L.A., B 4, f°. 109 v°) ou pour le renouvellement du matériel de sections entières de la garde (Ibid., E 214/37, f°.4r, E 212/18, f°.15r). 26. Un exemple de commission typique est celle confiée au prévôt des maréchaux, le capitaine de Dinan, ou à toute autre personne capable de prendre un détachement de 14 ou 15 archers, pour aller arrêter François et Gilles Madeuc, frères de Roland, sire de Guémadeuc, et ancien capitaine de compagnie, pour leur attaque de Guillaume Millon (A.L.A., E 131, f°.105 v°, 2 nov. 1460). 27. Preuves, III. 124, 238, 541, 919-920, 923-924. 28. Ibid., II. 735-740.

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

357

étudié pour montrer que de longues carrières pouvaient être espérées — trente années et plus — et que ces groupes étaient souvent remarquablement stables pendant plusieurs années de suite 29. L'importance de cet état de fait pour renforcer l'esprit de corps n'a pas besoin d'être soulignée. Il pourrait avoir été implicitement reconnu par les ducs puisque ces derniers ne caressèrent que peu de temps l'idée d'une garde composée de soldats étrangers 30. Bien que le capitaine pût occasionnellement être non breton, la majorité de ses hommes était composée de nobles bretons 31. Il a été prouvé qu'ils étaient souvent peu disposés à céder leur place sauf pour la transmettre à leur fils, leur neveu ou à l'un de ces cousins proverbiaux en Bretagne. Si l'on observe attentivement ces listes et celles des dernières compagnies permanentes, l'on retrouve les mêmes traditions de service au sein des mêmes familles, et l'apparition d'un groupe socio-professionnel bien distinct 32 . La création de compagnies d'ordonnance donna à la noblesse l'occasion de coloniser et d'étendre son influence, en offrant à proximité de chez eux des récompenses et un emploi stable que beaucoup avaient été naguère obligés de chercher, en dehors du duché, auprès du /oi. J'aimerais maintenant examiner cette évolution de façon un peu plus approfondie. Ce fut avec le renouveau de la guerre anglo-française en 1449 que François 1er commença d'abord à lever des troupes en Bretagne, à quatre ou cinq hommes pour une lance, pour aller servir en Normandie. Ils devaient être payés « selon nos autres retenues et ordonnances de gens de guerre » par le trésorier de la guerre, un fonctionnaire qui fit son apparition dans les années 1420, semble-t-il 33 . Bien qu'il ne soit pas encore possible de donner un compte rendu très complet de son rôle en Bretagne, on peut supposer que sa fonction, comme les lances qu'il payait, était calquée sur le modèle royal. Quelques années plus tard une fois que d'autres lances de tailles diverses eurent montré leur valeur en Gascogne, émergea en août 1454 le noyau d'une force permanente de 100 lances « que le duc mit sus pour la garde du pays » 34. Il est tout à fait clair d'après les montres convoquées par Pierre II que cette force était essentiellement le fruit de sa propre création et qu'il en supervisait jusqu'au moindre détail 35 . C'est à partir de là que l'administration commença à utiliser de nouvelles formes d'enregistrement qui révèlent une approche plus méthodique des questions militaires, et que la forme traditionnelle de la lance bretonne (un homme d'armes et deux archers auxquels on ajoutait normalement un coutillier) fut établie ainsi que l'habitude de subdiviser les lances en petites compagnies, peut-être afin de partager à plusieurs les récompenses liées à cette 29. Listes principales: Preuves, II. 875, 1066-1069, 1108-1109, 1205-1206, 1371-1372, 1604-1606, 1777 ; III. 388, 427 et 804-805. 30. Les archers anglais étaient employés au début des années 1430 (Preuves, II. 1262), et les Allemands étaient chargés de la sécurité de la princesse Anne (Ibid., III. 723). 31. Jean Blosset vint probablement de Normandie (cf. Preuves, II. 1745, 1777 ; CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 296 n ; STEIN, op. cit., p. 179). Jean de Foix, sire de Meillé, était Gascon (Preuves, III. 578), et Jean de Chalon, prince d'Orange, venait de Franche-Comté (Ibid., 725-726). 32. Cf. les problèmes d'identification des divers membres de la famille Meschinot qui apparaissent dans tous les comptes de l'hôtel et listes de gardes à partir de 1405 (A. de la BORDERIE, Jean Meschinot, Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des chartes, LVI (1895) : C. MARTINEAU-GENIEYS, Les Lunettes des Princes de Jean Meschinot, Genève 1972, p. x-xxvm). 33. Preuves, II. 1514 ; PLANIOL, op. cit., iv. 32-33. 34. Preuves, II. 1645-1646. 35. A.L.A., E 133/10 ; E 214/31-32, assez mal résumé dans Preuves, II. 1688.

358

The Création ofBrittany 36

fonction . Bien qu'il ne soit pas possible de suivre les fortunes de chaque compagnie de lances avec une certitude totale jusqu'en 1491, j'ai cependant compilé une table (en utilisant des listes de montres et des documents d'ordre financier) qui montre comment le commandement et les effectifs pouvaient fluctuer 37. Il est en particulier possible de les suivre de façon continue entre 1465 et 1485. Le schéma général est qu'au début une force de 100 lances sous le commandement de trois ou quatre capitaines semble avoir été le cas de figure normal, bien qu'elle pût être augmentée. Une crise des relations francobretonnes conduit les Etats en octobre 1464 à autoriser le paiement de 450 lances conduites par sept capitaines pendant la guerre du Bien Public 38. Par la suite la combinaison normale semble devoir se situer autour de 200 lances sous le commandement de cinq ou six capitaines en temps de paix, un d'entre eux possédant d'habitude le grade de maréchal. Il devint également usuel de nommer un ou plusieurs lieutenants dont certains reçurent, le moment venu, de l'avancement : le commandement d'une compagnie ou une autre importante responsabilité militaire. En ce qui concerne les membres de ces compagnies, dans les premières listes, bien que les effectifs sous chaque capitaine aient pu rester constants d'une montre à l'autre, les noms inscrits en fait témoignent souvent d'un mouvement considérable entre chaque compagnie 39. Une telle mobilité a dû poser de considérables difficultés administratives, si bien qu'il n'est guère surprenant que les dernières recrues des compagnies, comme celles qui composaient la garde par exemple, soient devenues plus sédentaires et plus stables 40 Pour ce qui est du statut des capitaines — auxquels on s'adressait suivant leur rang dans les années 1480 — il reflète en Bretagne une diversité qui s'étend des plus hauts rangs de l'aristocratie jusqu'aux familles nobles les moins importantes, tout comme les capitaines du roi que Contamine a classés41. Pour ce qui est des simples hommes d'armes, bien que je n'aie pu poursuivre mon analyse aussi loin que je le désirerais, mon impression est qu'ils étaient souvent les membres les plus riches de la noblesse, caractéristique qui apparaît également dans la composition des garnisons nommées pour défendre les places fortes stratégiques 42. En d'autres termes, bien qu'il y eût pour les nobles sans fortune la possibilité de gagner sa vie dans ces nouvelles compagnies où nombre d'entre eux étaient inscrits comme archers, le passage au grade d'homme d'armes était chose rare, car les hommes d'armes étaient normalement suffisamment riches pour se procurer les armes, les chevaux et autre équipement indispensable à leur rang avant de s'engager dans une compagnie. Néanmoins, sans que se soit constituée une véritable barrière sociale, l'armée bretonne régulière rassemblait souvent les membres 36. A.L.A., E 214/8-30, quittances de forme habituelle, toutes autographiées, provenant des capitaines engagés entre 1454 et 1455 ; ibid., n° 7, une autre datant de 1487 exactement dans le même style. Des lances bretonnes en Guyenne n'avaient que deux archers (Preuves, II. 1628) mais les coutilliers sont mentionnés avec les hommes d'armes de Pierre de la Marzelière en 1449 (ibid., 1514), et les lances garnies les incluaient normalement (A.L.A., B 3, f°.181 r°, 10 déc. 1464). 37. Voir tableau I. 38. A.L.A., B 3, f°.181r. Les hommes d'armes étaient payés 10 réaux par mois (équivalent à 12 1. 10 s br. ou 15 1. tournois) et les archers 5 réaux par mois (cf. aussi CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 634). 39. Cf. Preuves, II. 1645-1646, 1688 et 1727-1728. 40. Ibid., III. 122-123, 270-389. 41. Etudes, p. 399 et seq. 42. Remarques basées sur diverses montres, dont certains détails sont résumés dans le tableau II.

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

359

de la noblesse les plus riches. La haute noblesse avait souvent des commandements particuliers et dirigeait à l'occasion ses propres compagnies qui, dans certains cas, adoptaient, semble-t-il, les particularités des compagnies ducales 43. Cependant, ce que tous les capitaines de compagnie avaient en commun, c'était la considérable expérience du passé. Pour ceux qui avaient été nommés dans les années 1450 elle avait été acquise tout naturellement au service du roi, le plus souvent avec Arthur de Richement, dont les conseils donnés à ses neveux François 1er et Pierre II ont dû être inestimables, bien que son propre règne en tant que duc semble avoir été trop bref pour qu'il ait eu le temps de contribuer de quelque façon que ce soit au développement militaire breton 44. Au début du règne de François II, la contribution apportée par les hommes qui étaient passés du service du roi à celui du duc fut à nouveau reconnue dès que Louis XI renvoya les capitaines de son père. Philippe de Commynes s'est étendu longuement sur le sujet et les quelques documents financiers de cette époque témoignent d'un recrutement régulier d'hommes qui avaient servi dans les compagnies d'ordonnance royale et de nombreuses défections de soldats sous les ordres d'Odet d'Aydie, André de Laval, Jean, sire du Pont, Geoffroy de Couvran et Olivier de Broons 45. Guillaume de Rosnyvinen, autre Breton qui retourna à son premier suzerain, n'y fut plus à la tête d'une compagnie mais on fit bon usage de ses connaissances en lui confiant des commandements de garnisons, des inspections de forteresses, des réparations à superviser, des montres de troupes et, lorsque le conseil ducal le demandait, en utilisant ses conseils lors des discussions de problèmes militaires 4é. Bien que les chances d'acquérir de l'expérience en dehors du duché aient été limitées une fois la guerre de Cent Ans terminée et Richement privé du poste de connétable, ceux qui remplacèrent les premiers capitaines furent sélectionnés dans la mesure du possible parmi ceux qui possédaient de vastes connaissances militaires et, généralement, ils restèrent en charge pour une durée assez longue. Il y eut une ou deux défections en faveur de Louis XI ( notamment Geoffroy de Couvran) mais elles furent compensées par de nouvelles recrues qui du service du roi passèrent à celui du duc (Poncet de Rivière, capitaine de la garde, Morice du Mené) et par la grande loyauté des capitaines et des simples hommes d'armes jusqu'à la période troublée comprise entre 1486 et 1491. Bien que des compagnies de 100 lances fussent parfois regroupées — celles d'Odet d'Aydie et de Bertrand du Parc en 1467-1468 — la norme resta à des effectifs plus réduits ; 43. Preuves, III. 238. Le 15 juin 1477 Jacques du Pé, homme d'armes de la garde, convoqua l'hôtel du vicomte de Rohan à Josselin où se trouvaient 8 hommes d'armes, 8 coutilliers, 8 pages, 20 archers et 5 vougiers et un total de 56 chevaux (A.L.A., E 133/11). Les nombreux comptes du sire de Rieux ne fournissent que peu de détails sur les propres troupes de sa maison (A.L.A., E 260-280, 299 ; Arch. dép. Morbihan, E 2465-2469, 2704-2713, etc.), bien qu'il ait acheté des hocquetons pour ceux de ses archers qui étaient au service du duc en 1475 (A.L.A., E 267/8, f°.2 v°). 44. Il est impossible de préciser les carrières des capitaines de compagnie (inscrits dans le tableau I) ou celles de leurs hommes, mais on peut avoir des indications en consultant les index de Cosneau, op. cit. et Contamine, Etudes. 45. Ph. de COMMYNES, Mémoires, éd. J. Calmette & G. Durville, 3 t., Paris 1924-1925, I. 20 ; Preuves, I I I . 66, 122-125 ; CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 407-408. 46. Preuves, II. 1758, 1777 ; III. 66, 144 ; A.L.A., E 131, f°.217 r°, 237 r<> ; B 2, f°.82 r°, 84 v°, B 3, f°.132r°-v°, B 5, f°.33v°, 125r°, etc., pour quelques-unes des activités de ces années 1461-1465 ; pour sa carrière au service du roi voir CONTAMINE, Etudes.

360

The Création ofBrittany

cependant au début des années 1480, l'existence de trois compagnies plus importantes (d'au moins 50 lances) devint habituelle, tandis que le prévôt des maréchaux (Thomas de Kerazret entre 1461 et 1491) avait d'habitude le commandement de 20 lances pendant la même période 47. Les devoirs de Kerazret en tant que prévôt incluaient sa présence aux fréquentes montres des troupes régulières et du ban, l'exercice de la justice militaire et l'inspection des défenses. Son importance toujours croissante est à mettre en parallèle avec une évolution similaire de sa fonction dans d'autres régions, ainsi que l'a remarqué Ph. Contamine 48. C'est messire Gilles de Coëtlogon, son beau-fils, qui lui succéda quelques années plus tard. Après plusieurs années de relative stabilité du commandement et des effectifs, l'histoire des compagnies d'ordonnance devient très troublée après 1485. La défection vers le camp français de François d'Avaugour, fils naturel du duc et commandant de la compagnie la plus importante, la mort de Charles du Parc, la promotion d'un certain nombre de lieutenants et l'engagement de nouveaux capitaines avec des compagnies de taille modeste (entre 15 et 30 lances), tout cela contribue à de nombreux changements 49. Mais là encore ceux qui obtinrent les commandements provenaient de la même origine que leurs prédécesseurs. Les comptes de Jean de l'Espinay semblent indiquer que, jusqu'à une date aussi tardive que la fin novembre 1489, il y avait encore 200 lances, alors sous le commandement de neuf capitaines, qui constituaient les compagnies de l'armée régulière, bien que la duchesse employât elle aussi d'autres soldats et que l'on recrutât toujours individuellement des hommes d'armes aux ordonnances de 1491 50. L'analyse des listes de montres qui subsistent (malheureusement c'est trop souvent seulement une ou deux par compagnie) suggère une certaine régularité des procédures et laisse deviner l'ancienneté du personnel. Il était normal de rassembler les compagnies fréquemment, assez souvent chaque trimestre, bien que des intervalles plus longs ou plus courts pussent être rencontrés 51. Dans certaines des premières listes, au moins, les noms qui figuraient au début étaient ceux des soldats les plus expérimentés ou le plus susceptibles de recevoir de l'avancement. Ceux du bas de la liste étaient les nouvelles recrues. Mais dans d'autres cas, spécialement lorsqu'il est question d'un remplacement, le nouveau venu prenait souvent la place de son prédécesseur sur la liste si bien que nous ne devons pas y chercher trop de logique 52. S'il ne reste pas d'exemples parmi les compagnies ducales de listes réglementaires de montre 47. Tableau I ; Kerazret servit en tant qu'homme d'armes en 1454 (Preuves, II. 1646). 48. Etudes, p. 518. Kerazret épousa Jeanne le Bart, veuve d'Olivier de Coëtlogon en 1467 (A.L.A., B 5, f°.28v°). Pour son beau-fils cf. Bibl. nat. MS. français 8310, f°.174v° et Choix de documents, éd. La Borderie, n° LXVIII. 49. Avaugour avait rejoint Charles VIII au début de 1487 (A.L.A., B 10, f°.155v°), et avait, l'année suivante, donné par écrit des informations sur le mouvement des troupes bretonnes (Bibl. nat., MS. Nouv. acq. française 1231 f°. 176). Il avait 40 lances au siège de Dinan en 1489, compagnie qu'il dirigeait encore en 1490 (Preuves, III. 636-637, 698). 50. Preuves, III. 723-726. On peut glaner quelques détails dans les registres de la chancellerie (A.L.A., B 12, f°.112 r°, 123 v°, 126 v°, etc.). 51. Lorsque le 23 mai 1467, des ordres furent donnés pour rassembler les compagnies, elles ne s'étaient pas montrées depuis décembre 1466 (A.L.A., B 5 f°.34 v°-35r°). Elle avaient été inspectées en décembre 1454 et en janvier et février 1455 (A.L.A., E 133/10, E 214/31-32). 52. Preuves, III. 124, 271 ; pour les promotions de la compagnie de Queleneuc à la garde ducale en 1466 voir A.L.A., B 4, f°.109 v°.

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

361

ou d'autres documents comme les quittances qui permettent de retracer précisément la composition et l'itinéraire d'une compagnie (comme celle de Guillaume de Rosnyvinen au service du roi entre 1451 et 1461), il subsiste suffisamment de preuves pour montrer que la nomination d'un archer au poste d'homme d'armes était un fait aussi rare dans les compagnies du duc que dans celles du roi 5 3 . On doit observer là une différence avec les troupes de l'hôtel. Les membres des Enfants de la Chambre, les écuyers, les archers ou les coutilliers de l'hôtel étaient souvent nommés à d'autres fonctions si bien que leur admission paraît être une étape dans la carrière tout entière plutôt que ce que nous décririons de nos jours comme un grade dans une carrière. La tendance principale que l'on doit observer en ce qui concerne les troupes domestiques pendant cette période est l'augmentation de leurs effectifs. Au début du règne de François II, sa garde du corps comprenait 51 lances, plus tard le chiffre monte à 100 gentilshommes de la garde, 100 ou 120 archers de la première garde, 100 archers de la seconde ou petite garde, un nombre croissant de coutilliers (13 en 1461, 32 en 1488), plus un certain nombre de gardes employés à des tâches spéciales,comme les 50 « Alemans qui résident près de la duchesse a la garde de Guerrande ». Si bien que vers 1490 la duchesse Anne avait en tout quelque 510 hommes employés à plein temps aux postes militaires de son hôtel 54 . Si ce chiffre paraît insignifiant lorsqu'il est comparé aux 2 000 soldats (davantage peut-être) de Charles le Téméraire en 1476, ou du duc de Milan à la fin du quinzième siècle, il représente néanmoins une énorme augmentation du coût de revient 55 . La plupart des gentilshommes et des archers était souvent accompagnée à la cour par d'autres serviteurs. En 1481 les seuls salaires des gentilshommes s'élevaient déjà à 26 457 1. et à cette date les compagnies permanentes coûtaient environ 100 000 1. par an 56. En fait, plus d'un quart du budget devait être consacré à la maintenance des faibles forces que nous venons juste de décrire. On peut donc imaginer ce que fut le fardeau de la dernière guerre contre la France, déséquilibrant non seulement les finances habituelles de l'Etat, maintenant tout à fait insuffisantes, mais aussi celles de nombreuses familles privées obligées de consentir des prêts ou de supporter les autres dépenses du temps de guerre, exigées par l'administration 57. Comme pour d'autres petits Etats de l'époque, il était au-delà des capacités financières de la Bretagne de moderniser son armée et ses défenses. Cette dernière insuffisance peut être illustrée par une brève description de l'un des services spécialisés, l'artillerie, auquel les ducs avaient prêté une attention particulière. Nous ne donnerons pas ici une description complète de l'introduction et du développement des armes à feu en Bretagne à partir du quatorzième siècle. 53. Cf. CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 466-468 auxquelles de nombreux détails peuvent être ajoutés. 54. Preuves, II. 1777-1778 ; I I I . 120-121, 388-391, 427, 723-726, 804-805. 55. Cf. CONTAMINE, La guerre au Moyen Age, p. 298-299. 56. L. MAÎTRE, Le budget du duché de Bretagne sous le règne de François II, Annales de Bretagne, v (1889), 293-318 publia A.L.A., E 212/15, Estât de la finance, 1481. Trois états similaires demeurent pour les années 1482, 1483 et 1484 (ibid.. n os 16-18), ensemble avec quatre autres états détaillés, pour les mêmes années, pour l'office du trésorier des guerres (E 214/37-40), dont certains détails sont résumés dans le tableau III. 57. De nombreuses dettes étaient encore impayées aux environs de 1500 (A.L.A., E 209/22-26, 28-31, 35).

362

The Création ofBrittany

Cependant, là encore la campagne de 1449 semble avoir constitué une sorte de ligne de partage des eaux. C'est à partir de ce moment-là qu'une liste continue des maîtres d'artillerie peut être compilée 58. Elle comprend l'appel nominal d'officiers choisis parmi les plus travailleurs et les plus anciens au sein du duché. Ils étaient issus presque uniquement des rangs de la noblesse. Leurs devoirs étaient énoncés de la façon la plus complète dans une commission donnée à Péan Gaudin après un service de près de deux ans pendant lequel les forces bretonnes avaient été presque continuellement engagées ; la commission représente donc probablement une tentative de création institutionnelle à partir de cette récente expérience 59. Elle marque aussi un fait, dont l'importance est suggérée par d'autres preuves, dans la réformation générale de la force armée du duché, qui correspond une fois encore à la politique du roi, alors que la menace représentée par Louis XI se faisait de plus en plus présente. Jean Gourdel, par exemple, clerc de l'artillerie, qui fut en fonction pendant au moins vingt ans (1465-1485), semble aussi avoir joué un rôle de plus en plus important en supervisant, modernisant et développant les ressources de l'artillerie du duc. Si le nombre de documents qui subsistent pour une période de service est utilisé comme estimation brute, il ne fait aucun doute que Gourdel était le personnage le mieux qualifié pour occuper le poste. Deux inventaires, aucun n'étant daté, mais dont le premier provient des premières années de son entrée en fonction (environ 1470) et le second d'une période ultérieure, révèlent l'énorme développement de l'armement sous sa direction 60. Là encore on peut employer un système d'évaluation très simple : dans le premier inventaire il est question de 69 canons de tailles diverses d'un poids total de 38 022 livres ; dans le second on trouve 150 canons d'un poids de 66 946 livres. On notera en particulier que,à part les très lourds mortiers, la plupart des armes de la seconde liste se répartissent en huit ou neuf catégories dont les poids étaient assez semblables (canons en cuivre de 820 à 1 020 livres ; serpentines entre 500 et 540 livres, 400 et 420 livres, 300 et 340 livres et 250 livres ; les ribaudequins entre 230 et 250 livres, et les couleuvrines d'un poids de 100 ou 170 livres). Ils étaient presque tous montés sur des affûts dont la plupart avaient des roues cerclées de fer. En résumé les canons étaient fondus afin d'obtenir des tailles et des calibres standards, de plus ils étaient aussi mobiles. Bien qu'il soit inexact de penser que l'artillerie bretonne rivalisât avec celle du roi à chacun de ses progrès pendant cette période, il y a des preuves qui montrent que le duché n'était pas si en retard au point de vue technique 61 . Après tout, pendant la campagne de 1449, l'artillerie bretonne avait été sous la direction du fameux artilleur Girault de Samain. On a retrouvé la trace d'un certain nombre de couleuvrines « de la faczon de Maistre Giraut » parmi les comptes du clerc de l'artillerie62. A la même époque on note également que des spécialistes des Pays-Bas (Queso Velut du Hainaut était « cannonier général de Bretagne » à partir de 1444-1446, Jacob de l'Espine, 58. Tableau IV. 59. A.L.A., B 5, f°.9 r°-llr° (cf. PLANIOL, op. cit., iv. 19-20). 60. A.L.A., E 216/7-8 (cf. PLANIOL, op. cit., iv. 52-55). 61. H. DUBLED, L'artillerie royale française à l'époque de Charles VII et au début du règne de Louis XI (1437-1469). Les frères BUREAU, Mémorial de l'artillerie française, 50 (1976), 555-607 et P. CONTAMINE, L'artillerie royale française à la veille des guerres d'Italie, Annales de Bretagne, Ixxi (1964), 221-261 sont fondamentaux. 62. A.L.A., E 214/34, f°. 4 v°, 5 v°, 6 r°.

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

363

un autre étranger devint l'un des artilleurs les plus fameux sous le règne de François II) et bien d'autres étrangers, en particulier des Allemands, apparaissent parmi les artilleurs du duché 63 . Il est tout à fait évident qu'ils étaient généralement les mieux payés, signe de leur réputation et de leur valeur dans l'amélioration de l'artillerie bretonne. Leur nombre au cours du règne de François II augmenta sensiblement une fois encore. Il y avait 38 canonniers payés par le duc à Rennes en 1471 64. Une liste de 62 canonniers et autres membres de l'artillerie exempts des tailles, fouages et autres impôts est connue en 1473 65, tandis que les états de guerre du début des années 1480 montrent que les effectifs habituels dépassaient maintenant 70, et nous pourrions y ajouter les pionniers, plus spécialement les Lamballois, qui étaient appelés pendant les campagnes pour aider à transporter les pièces et préparer les positions de l'artillerie 66. Alain Bouchait fut impressionné par le convoi rassemblé à Châteaubriant à la veille du « Bien Public » 67. Deux années plus tard, en novembre 1467, ledit convoi subit une perte des plus importantes, non pas après une intervention humaine, mais en traversant le Grand Vey, un marécage de Carentan à l'embouchure du Douve ; alors qu'il progressait entre Caen et Bayeux, le convoi s'embourba, 40 hommes périrent noyés et plusieurs wagons furent perdus 68. Il y eut également d'autres pertes mais elles furent compensées dans les années 1470, comme nous l'avons vu 6 9 . Les preuves tirées des quatre états de guerre entre 1481 et 1485 démontrent qu'en sus d'une somme d'environ 5 % du total des dépenses de guerre de chaque année, on dépensait encore environ 5 autres pour cent en matériel d'artillerie, et qu'en plus il y avait bien souvent des frais considérables pour réparer et reconstruire les défenses. Dans le cas de villes comme Saint-Malo, Fougères, Nantes et Clisson, toutes, on le remarquera, sur les frontières est du duché, la qualité des travaux et l'adaptation rapide à la menace de l'artillerie, est égale à ce que l'on pourrait trouver n'importe où en France à la même époque 70. Proportionnellement François II dépensait certainement autant que 63. LEGUAY & MARTIN, Fastes et malheurs, p. 314 (Velut). L'Espine, qui était peut-être l'ouvrier « de bombardes et autres engiens » au service de Philippe le Bon, duc de Bourgogne en Brabant en 1457-1458 (CONTAMINE, La guerre au Moyen Age, p. 264), était en tout cas au service du duc de Bretagne en 1463 (Arch. mun. Rennes, liasse 156 f°.4). Il est aussi mentionné en 1465 comme « cannonier et ouvrier de fonte » (Arch. dép. Ille-et-Vilaine, 1 F 1117, fragments d'un compte de Jean Gourdel). En 1473, il était le quatrième sur une liste de canonniers (A.L.A., B 7, f°.34 r°), fut accusé de meurtre (ibid., f°M67 r°) mais recevait toujours 120 1. p.a. en tant que « cannonier estrangier » entre les années 1484 et 1485 (E 214/40, f°.6r°). Parmi les canonniers entre 1482 et 1483, on trouvait Maître Henri de Pruche, O. Héliez et Girard « Austrelins », Piètre de Holland, Haynes de Cleuze, Hance Holles et Hance de Nouremberch (E 214/38, f°.6r-7v). 64. J.-P. LEGUAY, La ville de Rennes au XVesiècle à travers les comptes des Miseurs, Paris 1969, p. 288-289. 65. A.L.A., B 7, f°.34r°. 66. On ordonna à 1 200 Lamballois d'aider au siège d'Ancenis en 1484 (Preuves, III. 456-457), et 500 furent envoyés à Rennes en 1490 (A.L.A., B 12, f°.129v°). 67. Bouchait, f°.213r°. 68. STEIN, Charles de France, p. 223 cf. Preuves, III. 153. 69. A.L.A., E 216/8, f°.llv°, « En oultre est requis de faire monter de nouvel partie de l'artillerie quelles apercy devant voyagee en plusieurs lieux tant a St Denis en France, en Normandie que ailleurs... » (cf. aussi PLANIOL, op. cit., iv.54). 70. LEGUAY, Un réseau urbain, p. 184-189, est probablement trop pessimiste cf. JONES, Archaeological Journal, cxxxvni (1981), 191-192. Ci-dessus p. 55-6.

364

The Création ofBrittany

Louis XI pour son artillerie et il semble qu'il faisait bon usage de son argent, tout spécialement lorsque les salaires du maître d'artillerie breton et de ses subordonnés étaient quelque peu inférieurs à ceux des hommes au service du roi 7 1 . Cependant, dans d'autres domaines, l'organisation de l'artillerie ducale apparaît, toute proportion gardée, similaire à celle de la couronne. Les villes et les châteaux privés avaient leurs propres artilleurs, avec personnel, armes et magasins, mais la plupart des canonniers du duché semblent avoir été regroupés en bandes telles que les compagnies d'ordonnance qui comprenaient non seulement des canonniers mais des armuriers et autres spécialistes de l'armement 72 . Comme l'artillerie royale, celle du duché était fréquemment déplacée (par voie d'eau si possible) lorsque les circonstances l'imposaient 73 . En outre l'on a la preuve que François II avait quelque peu encouragé le développement de toute une gamme de fabriques d'armes au sein du duché en plus de la fonte des canons, tout en établissant également des liens étroits avec la Flandre, l'Allemagne, l'Italie et l'Espagne pour se fournir en personnel, matériel et produits finis (armes, armures et chevaux) 74 . Il est temps de conclure : la Bretagne du XVe siècle, comme d'autres états à la même époque, a fait tout ce qu'elle pouvait pour adapter ses forces conventionnelles aux changements apportés par la guerre moderne, bien que les coûts élevés impliqués par cette dépense se soient révélés finalement trop importants pour les ressources du duché. Dans l'intervalle, cependant, une importante évolution sociale fut précipitée par la professionnalisation des forces armées. Sans analyser la démilitarisation de la société et la militarisation de l'état 75 , les chances offertes aux individus par une longue carrière militaire, les gages réguliers, le développement d'une structure de promotion rudimentaire grâce à l'apparition d'une série de grades, le cantonnement régulier dans ce qui deviendra en fait les villes de garnison, l'adaptation aux changements technologiques, et même l'exigence d'une plus grande alphabétisation parmi les soldats, tous ces facteurs, on le comprend, contribuèrent à une plus grande efficacité de l'armée. Il est vrai qu'on trouvait des comportements indisciplinés, parfois même jusqu'à la mutinerie, et il est aisé de découvrir des preuves des exactions de soldats et de leur moralité sans scrupules 76. Mais de tels méfaits n'étaient en aucun cas limités à la Bretagne. La désertion et l'indiscipline 71. CONTAMINE, Annales de Bretagne, Ixxi (1964), 231-237. En Bretagne, le salaire maximum d'un canonnier était de l'O 1. par mois bien que certains touchassent seulement une livre par mois. Le maître de l'artillerie touchait 400 1. p.a. 72. A.L.A., E 214/37, f°.5v°, « cannoniers, arbalestriers, artilliers, charpentiers et autres ouvriers de l'ordonnance et retenue de mondit seigneur ». Dans les comptes de Gourdel il y avait des références aux « cannoniers de la première ordonnance » et « autres cannoniers de la dernier ordonnance » (E 216/7, f°.8r°). Les autres travailleurs comprenaient Jean de Francmont « ouvrier de subtilz moistiers », brigandiniers, armuriers, jusarmiers, ouvriers de fer de lance, salpêtriers et « Hance Zèbres des parties dalmaigne taindours de paveillons ». 73. En 1488, on consacra 1100 1. pour le transport des canons de Nantes à Vannes par voie de mer (A.L.A., E 209/23, f°.9 r°). Des quittances des charretiers qui transportèrent l'artillerie pendant la guerre du Bien Public subsistent dans un état très mutilé (Nantes, Arch. mun., II 120). 74. Les états de guerre de 1481 à 1485 fournissent de précieuses informations sur ces sujets. Bouchait f°.227r° raconte que des armes parties d'Italie en 1481 furent capturées par des agents de Louis XI en Auvergne. En plus des manufactures d'armes de Nantes et de Rennes, révélées par ces états, d'autres centres comme Guingamp commencèrent aussi une modeste production (Guingamp, Arch. mun. CC 7 et 8). 75. Cf. CONTAMINE, Etudes, p. 542 et seq. 76. Les troupes de Bertrand du Parc se mutinèrent en 1467 (A.L.A. B 5, f°.144r°).

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491

365

étaient les soucis permanents de Charles VIII dans sa correspondance avec son lieutenant, Louis de la Trémoille, pendant ses campagnes, largement victorieuses, de 1487-1488 77 . Il est tout à fait paradoxal, voire pervers, que certains historiens reconnaissent volontiers que les troupes bretonnes ont apporté une contribution importante au renouveau militaire de la France des Valois (conclusion banale depuis Cosneau), mais affirment littéralement que ces mêmes troupes étaient, sous le commandement du duc, inefficaces, désorganisées, ou, pire encore, démoralisées. Si nous ne possédons pas les codes disciplinaires bretons, il est bon de se souvenir que la connaissance très détaillée que l'on a des fameux ordres de Charles le Téméraire et de l'équipement bourguignon, vient principalement de ses trois défaites successives 78. Il faut faire attention à ne pas trop noircir la qualité des troupes bretonnes, les faiblesses de francs-archers et du ban féodal, tout à fait reconnues par le conseil ducal, et qui peuvent être retrouvées partout ailleurs en France. Il est vrai qu'il existe des exemples picaresques de nobles sans le sou qui paraissent aux montres. Ce qui peut et doit être analysé plus précisément que cela ne fut le cas dans cette communication, c'est l'efficacité des tentatives d'amélioration de la qualité des troupes bretonnes, notamment celle du ban avec la réserve d'hommes au sein de laquelle les compagnies permanentes étaient recrutées. La question de savoir dans quelle mesure les grades et les rangs à l'intérieur des compagnies reflétaient les statuts de la société bretonne, est intéressante et digne d'être étudiée plus avant, de même pour les variations de la mobilité sociale. La structure de commandement, l'étendue de l'expérience, le rôle des non-Bretons comme Odet d'Aydie, seigneur de Lescun, du formidable bâtard d'Orléans, Jean, comte de Dunois (malgré ses crises de goutte), l'un et l'autre toujours très respectés par Louis XI, alors même qu'ils étaient dans le conseil de François II, la part qu'ils prennent à la mise en œuvre des progrès en Bretagne entre 1461 et 1480, quand fut donnée une série de commissions où nombre de ceux qui avaient servi le roi furent nommés pour réviser les défenses du duché, tout cela constitue autant de sujets qui pourraient nous mener plus loin. La bataille de Saint-Aubin fut une défaite militaire, mais les faiblesses du duché étaient autant politiques et financières que militaires. Pour ceux qui avaient choisi de servir leur souverain par le métier des armes et qui survécurent à la guerre de 1487-1491, l'unification du duché et du royaume constitua rarement un obstacle sérieux à leur avancement personnel futur. Comme les dernières fortifications bretonnes, les meilleurs éléments des anciennes forces ducales et l'armée créée entre 1449 et 1491, étaient un capital qui allait être repris par l'arsenal royal : encore un sujet pour de nouvelles recherches 79. 77. L. de la TRÉMOILLE, La correspondance de Charles VIII et de ses conseillers avec Louis II de la Trémoille pendant la guerre de Bretagne, Paris 1875. 78. VAUGHAN, Charles thé Bold, p. 210 et seq. ; F. DEUCHLER, Die Burgunderbeute, Berne 1963. 79. COMMYNES, Mémoires, III. 93, 236, pour les aventures de deux Bretons en Italie pendant l'année 1495, mais tout le sujet du rôle des Bretons dans les armées royales après 1491 mérite des recherches. Pendant la discussion à Tours, Hervé Martin a signalé l'existence des comptes paroissiaux d'Orvault (maintenant déposés à Nantes, A.L.A.) qui contiennent des détails sur les dépenses de la paroisse pour ses francs-archers et leur armement, et j'ai aussi découvert des détails semblables pour l'année 1451 (A.L.A., E 127 et cf. La Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, iv. 400). Je voudrais remercier M. Patrick Letray pour sa traduction de cette communication.

TABLEAU I Les compagnies d'ordonnance bretonnes, 1454-1491 Les compagnies d'ordonnance bretonnes, 1454-1491 Total : lances

Capitaine (et lieutenant) Nombre de lances

Date Jean, s. de Malestroit 40

Jean de Villeblanche 30

Jean, s. de Derval 30

Malestroit (Jean du Perier, s. du Plessis-Baliczon) 38/40

Henri de Villeblanche

Olivier Giffard

26/30

Galoys de Roge I 20

20

18/20

janv. 1455

Malestroit 40

H. de Villeblanche 26/30

G. de Roge 20

O. Giffard 20

J. Ruffier 18/20

fev. 1455

Malestroit 40

* H. de Villeblanche 30

G. de Roge 20

O. Giffard 20

J. Ruffier 19/20

sept. 1456

Malestroit 25

H. de Villeblanche 25

G. de Roge 25

Jean, s. du Pont 25

aout 1454

dec. 1454

*

1460 Jan. 1465

Odet d'Aydie (Perrot d'Aydie) | 100

Andre de Laval (Bertran du Pare)

100

Gm. Chevigne 20

mars 1466

nov. 1466 mars 1467 juillet 1467 sept. 1467 mars 1468

mai 1468 sept. 1468

dec. 1468 7 1471

1472

4

Roland Madeuc, s. de Guemadeuc 20

142/150

R. Madeuc 20 I R. Madeuc 20

144/150 149/150 100

50 lances 'pour la double des Angloys'

debut 1466

mai 1466

100

Jean Ruffier

'

7

i

O. d'Aydie 7 100

11

»

Aydie ? 100

J

100

7 j

' y

1

B. du Pare 7 100

* 100

Chevigne 40

*

Pare 100

J

100

4 Pare (Noel de Tissue) 50

picso

Geoffrey de Couvran

Olivier de Broons

40

740 j Broons 30 1

Gilles, s. de la Hunaudaye (Louis de Tiercent)

4

Jean, s. du Pont (Bertran, s. de Lanros) 40 f Yvon de Treanna 40 I

| Hunaudaye 40

Couvran 40

Broons 30

t La Roche 40

1 Guyon, s. du Queleneuc 50 I Queleneuc 50

J Hunaudaye

1 Couvran

I Broons 30

7400

1 1 1 La Roche 40

1 I t Queleneuc 50

1

1

1 Hunaudaye 40

1 Couvran 40

1 1 t Broons 30

7440

1

Couvran (Chas. du Pare) 40

Christophe, s. de Coetivy (Jean Jegado) 90 i Jean Jegado 90 Jean, s. de la Roche 40 La Roche 40

!

1

40 4 Hunaudaye 40

40

40 { La Roche (J. de Launay) 40

50 + Queleneuc (J. Jegado) 50

40 4 Hunaudaye (J. du Houx) 20

La Roche *

* Rieux Jean, s. de

Hunaudaye

an

An

~>n

\

Couvran 40 1

i

40

Ch. du* Pare 3* i° Pare

™

450 270

?

I

30 J Broons (Gm. de Beaulieu) 30

I Broons •>«

200

400

220

Pare

1.3 R'oche

? Rieux

50

40

juillet 1474

Pare (Tissue)

La Roche (Launay)

50

40

40

20

1475

Pare 50

La Roche 40

Rieux 40

Hunaudaye 20

1477

Pare

* Rieux (Launay) 60 Rieux (Jacques le Moine, Guyon Paynel) 60

(Clartiere )

mars 1473

* Pare

» Broons

40

4 Hunaudaye (Gilles de la Clartiere) 20

30

30

210

Rieux (Jacques le Moine)

Hunaudaye (Clartiere)

Pare ?30

Edouard, batard de Bretagne (J. de Romille) 20

? 200

Pare 30

Edouard 20

200

Pare

Edouard

mai 1473

1480-1

1482

1483-4 1484-5

Francois d'Avaugour (Ch. du Pare, J. Rozilte O. Conan) 70 I Avaugour (Romille, Conon) 70 1 t Avaugour 100

20

Pare (Barnabe Gtffart) 50

Thomas de Kerazret (Gm. de Kaerloguen)

Pare (Giffart) 50

Kerazret

20

(20)

Jean de Champvollon

Clartiere

Avaugour

7

200 ^

Rieux (Le Moine, Paynel) 60

20

Kerazret (20)

Ch. du* Pare (Romille, J. de Pontbriant) ?60

1485 1486 1487

|

Esprit de Montauban 40 « »* V, Montauban (Marc Keransquer) ?40 Louis de Rohan 30

200

Guyon Paynel 20

Jean Lanvillau 20

Paynel * (Guyon Jarret) 20

Lanvillau * (Pierre de Montbourchier) 20

Arthur Gruel

Jacques de la Chapelle 100

200 Arthur de Lespervier 40

Jean de Couvran

1489

Chapelle 20

Yvon de Querbloy 50

(20)

Bertran le Voyer 20

1490

Jean, s. de Rieux

Querbloy

Kerazret

Le Voyer

Paynel

100

50

20

Jean de Neufchastel 20

Alain S. d'Albret 100

nov. 1491

Chapelle 30

Le Voyer

Neufchastel

20

15

Guyon, s. de Vendel 30

Jacques de Beaumanoir, s du Bois de la Mote 40

s. de la Roche Gilles de Tissue 25 20

7200

(10 lances^ a Rohan) 1. Lespervier

Lespervier s. de Lornay

290 Lespervier 25

204

368

The Création ofBrittany

TABLEAU II.l Montres : Diocèses de Vannés et de Léon Année

Nobles déclarant revenus

1464 1477 1481

707 658 710

Revenus déclarés Revenu moyen (1. br.)

Nobles non déclarant

Nobles : Total

58581 62456 66061

82.8 94.9 93.04

162 257 379

869 915 1089

24513

43.15

31

599

Diocèse de Léon

1467

568

TABLEAU II.2 Montres : Diocèse de Léon Année

1470 1480 (jan.) 1480 (sept.) 1481

lances

fieffés

60 70 71 24

1100 1033 1129 893

défaillants

91

TABLEAU II.3 Montres : Archidiaconé de Dinan (1472) Hommes d'armes Pages Coutilliers Archers Arbalétriers Autres nobles Brigandines Paltocs Jusarmiers Gardes de la côte Défaillants Terres saisies

29 33 26 292 8 59 53 19 6 32

185 557

Nombre de fieffés

185 774

32 32

369

L'armée bretonne, 1449-1491 TABLEAU III Etats de guerre 1481-1485 (en livres bretonnes)

Dépenses pour l'artillerie I. Gages II. Matériel III. Total

Année et référence

Charge

Mise

1481-1482 (A.L.A., E 214/37 cf. E 212/15) 1482-1483 (E 2 14/38 cf. E 212/16)

97679

97279

4425

4283

8708

99608

93252

4011

5263

9274

(réduit à 94000) 72623

73614

4699

3060

7759

106500

106907

5270

6556

11826

1483-1484 (E 214 /39 cf. E 212/18) 1484-1485 (E 214/40 cf. E 212/17)

TABLEAU IV Maîtres de l'artillerie bretonne, 1449-1491 Nom

Période d'activité

Mons. Jean du Tiercent Mons. Jean Labbé

1449 1449-1450

Mons. Jean Uguet

Sous Pierre II

Mons. Olivier de Quelen

c. 10.VII.1458 avant 8.IV.1465 c. 8.IV.1465

Mons. Eon Sauvage, sire du Plessis-Guériff Péan Gaudin

Après 8.IV.1465 mai/juin 1470

Jean Mauhugeon, sire de Thorigny

Juin 1470 janvier 1481

Bertrand du Parc

1. 11.1481 après 17.V. 1982 1483 - 1.II.1485

Amaury de Plumaugat Louis de la Haye, sire de Chacé Jean de Lescoët, sire de Villepie Jean le Bouteiller, sire de Maupertuis

1.II.1485-1487 c. 16.111. 1488 c. 23.VII. 1491

Références A.L.A., E 214/34, f°. 5 v°, 7v°. Preuves, II. 1778 ; A.L.A., E 131, f° 83 r° ; E 214/34, f°. 12 r°, 14 r°. Preuves, III. 229 ; A.L.A., E 214/34 f°. 7 r° (22.IX.1452) Preuves, II. 1717, 1747-1748, 1777 ; III. 1 19 ; A.L.A., E. 131, f°. 112r°. Preuves, III. 143. Preuves, III. 143, 210 ; A.L.A., B. 4, f°. 7 v°, B 5, f°. 9 r°, E 190/1-3, E 205/1 f°. 131r°(27.VI.1465). A.L. A., B 7, f°. 38 v°, B 9, f°. 3 1 r°, 1 1 8 v°. E 214/27 f°. 5 r° ; Preuves, III. 543 (avec la date inexacte 7. V. 1487). Preuves, III. 39 1,42 1,428 ;A.L.A., E 2 14/37, f°. 5r°. A.L.A, E 214/39, f°. 3 v°, E. 214/40, f°. 5 v°. Preuves, III. 460, 575 ; A.L.A., E 214/40, f°. 5 v°. Preuves, III. 578. A.L.A, B 13, f°. 130 r° (cf. Choix de documents, éd. La Borderie, n° LXX).

This page intentionally left blank

XVI LES MANUSCRITS D'ANNE DE BRETAGNE, REINE DE FRANCE, DUCHESSE DE BRETAGNE Les contemporains de la fille du duc François II et de sa seconde femme, Marguerite de Foix, née le 25 janvier 1477, se rendirent rapidement compte qu'elle était une jeune fille d'une intelligence et d'une capacité considérables, malgré des petites infirmités. La décrivant en 1492, l'ambassadeur Vénitien, Zaccaria Contarini, faisait la remarque suivante : « La reine a 17 ans (15 plus exactement), elle est de petite taille, fluette, et elle boite visiblement d'une jambe, bien qu'elle porte des chaussures à haut talon pour cacher sa déformité. Elle a le teint foncé et elle est assez jolie. Sa finesse d'esprit est remarquable pour son âge et une fois qu'elle a décidé de faire quelque chose, elle s'efforce d'y parvenir par n'importe quel moyen et à n'importe quel prix » (1). Ses commentaires judicieux devaient être confirmés plus tard par la façon dont elle dirigea le gouvernement de la Bretagne après la mort de Charles VIII, la manière dont elle traita Pierre de Rohan, sire de Gié, et les intrigues et manœuvres qui entourèrent les projets de mariage concernant sa fille aînée encore en vie, née de son mariage avec Louis XII, Claude de France, un personnage plutôt pathétique. Mais après la mort prématurée d'Anne, le 9 janvier 1514, beaucoup auraient approuvé l'excessif hommage rendu par son ancien secrétaire, André de la Vigne, qui écrivait à propos de la reine qu'elle était : « la plus vertueuse, libéralle, aymée, désirée, plaincte et regrettée qui jamais sera, pour la grant magnificence d'elle (1) John S.C. Bridge, A History of France from thé death of Louis XI (5 vol., Oxford, 1921-36), i. 200; cf. Y. Labande-Mailfert, Charles Vlll eî son milieu (1470-1498). La jeunesse au pouvoir (Paris, 1975), pages 106-7.

372

The Création ofBrittany non sans cause, car elle eult troys dons de grâce singulière qui furent uncques : scavoir, povoir et vouloir. Pour parler de son savoir, oncques royne ne l'approcha ; du povoir, jamais royne n'en eult aultant ne qui mieulx l'employast. Elle avoit la disposicion de sa duché de Bretaigne entièrement sans rien réserver, et son douayre qui se montait de quatre-vingts à cent mil frans. Du vouloir tant et tant en avoit pour bien faire et advancer ses serviteurs et ceulx qui l'avoyent mérité, que oncques homme ne femme de quelque estât qu'il fust ne s'en alla mescontent d'elle. Prions tous le benoist Jhesucrist qu'en vray repos soit son âme... » (2).

Bien que flatter les princes et les princesses fût un élément courant dans la littérature de la Renaissance, de telle sorte que son absence susciterait plutôt des commentaires, le nombre de thrènes, d'épitaphes et de poèmes commémoratifs, cependant, écrits à l'occasion de sa mort par des gens qui avaient été à son service ou d'autres, dont beaucoup sont peu connus autrement, semble être réellement sans précédent. En outre, il survit encore pas moins de trente exemplaires du récit officiel de ses funérailles par le héraut de Bretagne, Pierre Choque, distribués à des personnages importants de la cour (3). Et une fois née la description du savoir considérable d'Anne ainsi que sa protection judicieuse d'écrivains et d'artistes importants, beaucoup se sont avancés, depuis le seizième siècle, à confirmer et à compléter cette image. Mon but n'est pas de minimiser les capacités intellectuelles que possédait la reine, ni de dénigrer l'usage qu'elle fit de ses amples ressources en tant que mécène, mais, à mon avis, la répétition d'éloges conventionnelles, dépourvue de sens critique, rend également un mauvais service à la mémoire de celle que Brantôme plaça à juste titre en tête dans son discours sur « Les femmes modernes célèbres » (4). Grâce à une étude brève, mais systématique d'informations relatives aux manuscrits (2) Bibliothèque] N[ationale], MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 794, page 9, une transcription datant du XIXe siècle des Croniques et gestes de très haulx... Francoys premier par André de la Vigne. Le manuscrit original fut brûlé au Louvre en 1839. (3) Voir Appendice II ci-dessous. (4) Œuvres complètes de Pierre de Bourdeille, seigneur de Brantôme, éd. L. Lalanne (12 vol., Paris, 1864-96), vii. 307-31.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

373

qu'Anne possédait, qu'elle commanda ou qu'on lui dédia, il peut être possible de réévaluer ou de tempérer les opinions généralement émises. Le premier ouvrage moderne sérieux, qui puisse surpasser l'excellent exposé fourni par le seigneur de Bourdeille à la fin du seizième siècle, fut La vie de la reine Anne de Bretagne, jemme des rois de France Charles VIII et Louis XII, publié en quatre volumes, en 1860, par Alfred Le Roux de Lincy (5). Ce qui le rendit si important, ce n'est pas tant le portrait de la reine, pour lequel Le Roux de Lincy fut peut-être encore inévitablement très influencé par Brantôme, mais la richesse des documents probants que l'auteur mit à jour et dont beaucoup furent publiés dans les pièces justificatives. Toutes les études historiques postérieures sur la reine sont redevables à Le Roux de Lincy, qui fournit un point de départ essentiel pour l'éclaircissement de tant de questions que l'on se pose sur Anne, attirant tout particulièrement l'attention sur les artistes, les écrivains et les sculpteurs qui travaillèrent pour elle, et rassemblant des témoignages pour le sujet qui nous intéresse maintenant, à savoir les manuscrits qu'elle possédait. « Le petit nombre de ceux que l'on connaît, écrit-il (6), atteste les soins, l'habilité d'exécution, les connaissances de ceux qu'elle chargeait de ce genre de travail », et il décrit environ une douzaine de manuscrits encore existants (7). Personne, après avoir vu certains d'entre eux, ne se hasarderait à s'opposer violemment à cet éloge de connaisseur. Mais Le Roux de Lincy était un pionnier et son travail nécessitait évidemment des modifications futures. Quelques années après sa publication, Léopold Delisle, le plus érudit de tous les conservateurs de la Bibliothèque Nationale, suggéra des révisions mineures dans la liste de manuscrits que Le Roux de Lincy avait dressée : « On connaît une quinzaine de manuscrits qui ont été présentés à cette princesse ou faits par ses ordres. Presque tous sont des chefs-d'œuvre de calligraphie et de

(5) Cité comme Le Roux de Lincy. Il publia aussi un certain nombre d'articles utiles qui comprennent « Détails sur la vie privée d'Anne de Bretagne, femme de Charles VIII et de Louis XII », Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Chartes (cité comme B.E.C.), xi (1849), 148-71, et « Discours des cérémonies du mariage d'Anne de Foix... 1502 », ibid., xxi (1861), 158-85, 422-39 (à ce sujet, voir ci-dessous Appendice I n. 10). (6) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 37. (7) Ibid., 37-86 ; iv. 215-25.

374

The Création ofBrittany

peinture » (8). Mais les ouvrages de la fin du dix-neuvième siècle et ceux écrits à notre propre époque, y compris la biographie intéressante d'Emile Gabory, qui est probablement la plus facilement accessible (9), n'ont pas ajouté beaucoup de manuscrits au nombre de ceux, possédés par Anne, que Le Roux de Lincy et Delisle avaient énumérés, ni n'ont tenu compte des manuscrits perdus depuis leurs travaux. De plus, quand en 1961 une exposition, par ailleurs impressionnante, fut organisée au Musée Dobrée, à Nantes, sur « Anne de Bretagne et son temps », une occasion d'étendre notre connaissance sur cet aspect du patronage de la reine, de façon marquante, fut en partie perdue (10). Il faut, de plus, prendre en considération le fait que l'utilisation aveugle de certains des éléments fournis par Le Roux de Lincy a conduit ceux qui s'intéressaient principalement, peut-être, à un artiste ou à un écrivain associés aux cours de Bretagne et de France, à faire des généralisations fausses, basées sur une chronologie inexacte de leurs œuvres et de la période du patronage royal, des récits de la vie de Jean Meschinot et André de la Vigne, par exemple, ont été déformés de cette façon là (11). Donc, il y a encore beaucoup de patient travail à effectuer sur la connaissance des relations de la reine et ce cercle d'écrivains, d'orateurs et d'artistes qui se rassemblaient dans les cours royales et princières de la fin du quinzième siècle et du début du seizième. La vie à la cour de Bretagne, durant l'enfance d'Anne, fut rarement sans heurts. Les relations extérieures de François II avec Louis XI et les régents du jeune Charles VIII furent fréquemment cause de grande tension, allant jusqu'à faire craindre des guerres (8) L. Delisle, Le cabinet des manuscrits (4 vol., Paris, 1868-83, cité comme Cabinet), i. 124. (9) E. Gabory, L'Union de la Bretagne à la France. Anne de Bretagne, duchesse et reine (Paris, 1941). (10) Anne de Bretagne et son temps (avril-juin 1961), Musée Dobrée, Nantes (cité comme Anne de Bretagne). (11) Le meilleur examen récent de la vie de Meschinot et de ses œuvres est dans Les Lunettes des Princes de Jean Meschinot, éd. C. Martineau-Genieys (Genève, 1972), pages x-lxx. Pour de la Vigne, voir Ph. Becker, « Andry de la Vigne (ça. 1470 - ça. 1515) », Berichte uber die Verhandlungen der Sdchsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Phil.-hist Klasse Bd. 80, 1928 2 Heft, est en général une source plus sûre, mais il ne supplante pas totalement E. Kerdaniel, Un auteur dramatique du quinzième siècle, André de la Vigne (Paris, 1923).

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

375

de campagne. Cette tension atteignit finalement son paroxysme dans l'ouverture effective des hostilités et les campagnes françaises de 1487-1491, quand les conflits internes qui avaient déchiré la vie politique bretonne fusionnèrent avec les dangers extérieurs (12). La vie privée du duc François II fut aussi plutôt mouvementée, à cause de la perte de sa première femme, son attirance pour Antoinette de Maignelais, son second mariage, l'inimitié personnelle de ses officiers les plus importants, Guillaume Chauvin et Pierre Landais, et de leurs supporters respectifs, et à cause des rivalités des grandes familles, usant d'intrigues pour s'assurer l'avantage quand une succession féminine semblait inévitable. Bien que la chose fût courante, Jean Meschinot, poète et courtisan, décrivit très bien la scène à ce niveau : La cour est une mer, dont sourt Vagues d'orgueil, d'envie, orages... Ire esmeut débats et outrages, Qui les nefs jettent souvent bas ; Traïson y fait son personnage. Nage aultre part pour tes ébats... (13). Bien qu'Anne fût peut-être quelque peu à l'abri de ces remous tumultueux grâce à son éducation chez Françoise de Dinan, comtesse de Laval, elle devait faire très tôt l'expérience de malheurs familiaux, perdant sa mère en 1487, son père en 1488 et se trouvant considérée comme un pion dans des intrigues politiques et des projets de mariage qui avaient des ramifications au niveau de l'Europe. Tout ceci est bien connu et le côté politique de la vie à la cour est suffisamment documenté. Mais la vie culturelle de la cour des ducs de Bretagne au quinzième siècle n'a pas attiré autant l'attention, si ce n'est comme décor entourant la carrière du soldat-poète Jean Meschinot, confrère de Georges Chastellain, et, à un moindre degré, comme cadre aux travaux des historiens Pierre Le Baud, Jean de Saint-Pol et Alain Bouchart. (12) Les meilleurs récits sont de P. Pélicier, Essai sur le gouvernement de la dame de Beaujeu, 1483-1491 (Chartres, 1882) ; B.-A. Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, François II, duc de Bretagne et l'Angleterre (1458-1488) (Paris, 1929), et Labande-Mailfert, op. cit. (13) A. de la Borderie, «Jean Meschinot. Sa vie et ses œuvres. Ses satires contre Louis XI», B.E.C., Ivi (1895), 313.

376

The Création ofBrittany

Que les ducs de Bretagne étaient lettrés, s'intéressaient aux questions culturelles et artistiques, faisaient ériger des monuments et aimaient posséder de belles œuvres d'art, des bijoux, des objets en or et des manuscrits, exactement comme leurs contemporains les ducs de Bourgogne ou d'Orléans ou René d'Anjou, cela ne fait aucun doute. Mais seuls de simples vestiges de la richesse de leurs biens et de leurs possessions sont parvenus jusqu'à nous. Ce manque de survivances matérielles de l'époque atteint même les inventaires des possessions ducales, relativement rares quand on les compare à la richesse que révèlent les inventaires très détaillés, par exemple, des possessions de Jean, duc de Berry, ou des livres et manuscrits qui composaient les bibliothèques de mécènes royaux ou d'autres protecteurs princiers de l'époque. Le Roux de Lincy affirma que François II avait une bibliothèque considérable (14), mais la plus longue des listes ayant trait aux manuscrits possédés par un membre de la famille ducale est celle qui a été établie en 1469 à la mort de sa première femme, Marguerite de Bretagne, et elle ne fait état que de quinze livres (15). Un inventaire du château de Nantes, en 1491, mentionne quelque trente-et-un livres, mais la majorité d'entre eux étaient des missels provenant de la chapelle ducale et au moins six d'entre eux semblent faire partie de la liste de ceux que Marguerite de Bretagne avait possédés (16). Bien qu'ils s'intéressassent à la poésie et à d'autres formes de littérature, on ne connaît aucun duc breton de cette époque qui ait composé, en

(14) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 27. (15) A. de la Borderie, « Notes sur les livres et les bibliothèques au moyen âge en Bretagne », E.E.C., xxiii (1862), 45-6. Une indication de la richesse des ducs est donnée dans la liste des objets qui furent offerts par Jean V comme accomplissement de ses vœux quand il fut libéré en 1420, y compris son poids en or donné aux Carmes de Nantes (cf. A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne, continuée par B. Pocquet, iv (Rennes, 1906), 211-2; Dom Morice, Preuves, ii. 1026-31). Une enluminure de cette scène apparaît dans le célèbre missel cité ci-dessous n. 23. Pour une description et des reproductions, cf. M.R. James, A descriptive catalogue of Fifty Manuscripts from thé collection of Henry Yates Thompson (Cambridge, 1898), pages 186-201, et idem, Illustrations of One Hundred Manuscripts in thé Library of Henry Yates Thompson (Cambridge, 1907), i. plates xxix-xl. (16) Le complot breton de M.CCCC.XC.IL, éd. A. de la Borderie (Nantes, 1884), pages 109-10, 114.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

377

vers ou en prose, une œuvre qui ait survécu (17), ou qui ait peint comme René d'Anjou (18). Les livres de Marguerite étaient soit religieux, soit des livres d'aventures, mais sa piété semble ne rien avoir d'original, comparée à celle d'une contemporaine anglaise, Cécily, duchesse de York (19). L'autre source importante d'informations sur les bibliothèques médiévales — les manuscrits qui ont subsisté eux-mêmes — encore une fois révèle peu de choses des richesses que l'on aurait pu s'attendre à trouver chez les ducs. La plupart des manuscrits qui peuvent être associés à la famille ducale sont des livres d'Heures, souvent somptueusement enluminés, ou d'autres instruments de dévotion. Des Heures bien connues incluent celles de Pierre II, deux que possédait Isabelle Stuart, la femme de François Ier, une possédée par sa belle-sœur et homonyme, Isabeau, qui se maria avec Guy XIV de Laval en 1432, un autre livre d'Heures possédé par Madame d'Etampes, la mère de François II, et un livre d'Heures écrit aux environs de 1410, appelé les Heures de François II, qui se trouvait jadis dans l'ancienne Bibliothèque Impériale à Saint-Pétersbourg (20). Cepen(17) Artur de Richement, qui ne reçoit pas une marque d'estime élogieuse de la part d'E. Cosneau (Le Connétable de Richemont, Paris, 1886, page 455) en ce qui concerne ses intérêts intellectuels, donna à Meschinot un cadeau de cinq écus pour un rondeau en 1457 (Morice, Preuves, ii. 1723) ; cf. aussi Les Lunettes, éd. Martineau-Genieys, passim. (18) Pour René, cf. Manuscrits à peintures du XIIIe au XVIe siècle, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, 1955, cité comme MSS. à peintures, pages 137-8; L.MJ. Délaissé, «Les copies flamandes du «Livre des Tournois» de René d'Anjou», Scriptorium, xxiii (1969), 187-98. La description la plus complète du côté littéraire de la vie à la cour durant cette période demeure l'ouvrage remarquable de G. Doutrepont, La littérature française à la cour des ducs de Bourgogne (Paris, 1909). (19) C.A.J. Armstrong, « The Piety of Cicely, duchess of York : a study of late mediaeval culture », For Hilaire Belloc, éd. D. Woodruff (London, 1942), pages 73-94. Des quinze livres que possédait Marguerite de Bretagne, onze étaient des ouvrages de dévotion ou destinés à procurer une assistance à la formation de la personnalité comme « des vertuz que les Dames doivent avoir ». Les romans de chevalerie et la poésie étaient Paris et Vienne, Troylus, Le Livre de Ponthus et La Belle Dame sans mercy. (20) B.N., MS. latin 1159, Heures de Pierre II (MSS. à peintures n. 237) ; ibid., MS. latin 1369, Heures d'Isabelle Stuart (MSS. à peintures n. 239) ; Fitzwilliam Muséum, Cambridge, MS. 62, Heures d'Isabelle Stuart (M.R. James, A descriptive catalogue of thé manuscripts in thé Fitzwilliam Muséum (Cambridge, 1895), pages 156-74 ; J. Porcher, « Two models for thé Heures de Rohan », Journal of thé Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, viii (1945), 1-6 ; M. Meiss, French Painting in thé

378

The Création ofBrittany

dant un autre livre d'Heures, que l'on a attribué à Anne elle-même, peut être plus justement imputé à son père (21). Les œuvres de dévotion comprennent une copie de Somme le Roi du Frère Laurence, écrit pour Isabelle Stuart en 1464, et un Recueil des vies de saints composé au treizième siècle et appartenant à Françoise de Bretagne, probablement la fille naturelle de François II (22). D'un autre côté, on peut supposer que le magnifique missel, autrefois associé à la maison des Carmes à Nantes et qui contient une galerie de portraits, unique en son genre, de la famille de Montfort, qui se trouve maintenant à Princeton (23), fut composé avec la vive approbation et l'aide financière de la famille ducale, dont les donations à d'autres institutions ecclésiastiques au quinzième siècle ont peut-être inclus un lectionnaire qui se trouve maintenant à Rennes (24). Il existe aussi, à Nantes, un Evangéliaire qui contient les armoiries ducales (25). Parmi les manuscrits ducaux séculiers qui ont survécu de cette époque, j'ai remarqué une copie du Livre de Chasse de Gaston Phébus, présence tout à fait appropriée étant donné l'intérêt qu'ils portaient à la chasse, un manuscrit qui fut donné plus tard à Ferdinand d'Aragon et Isabelle de Castille, également une copie de De regimine principum de Gilles de Rome, faite time of Jean de Berry. The Limbourgs and their contemporaries. Text volume (Londres, 1974), pages 306-7) ; Gulbenkian Foundation, Lisbon, MS. appelé Les Heures Lamoignon appartenant à Isabeau de Bretagne (Meiss, op. cit., page 364) ; B.N., MS. latin 1156 B, Heures de Madame d'Etampes (MSS. à peintures n. 241) ; pour les « Heures de François II », voir comte A. de Laborde, Les principaux manuscrits à peintures conservés dans l'ancienne Bibliothèque Impériale Publique de Saint-Pétersbourg (2 vol., Paris, 1936-8), i. n. 61. (21) B.N., MS. latin 10548 (V. Leroquais, Les livres d'heures: manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale (3 vol., Paris, 1927), ii. 1-3). Un livre d'heures possédé par un membre éloigné de la famille ducale, Marie de Bretagne, abbesse de la Magdalene lès Orléans (d. 1477), se trouve maintenant au Brooklyn Muséum, New York, MS. 19.78 (Meiss, op. cit., page 366). (22) B.N., MS. fr. 958, Somme le Roi (MSS. à peintures n. 240) ; B.N., MS. fr. 17229, Recueil (Cabinet, ii. 344). (23) Princeton University, New Jersey, Robert Garrett Collection MS. 40 (jadis Yates-Thompson MS. 34, cf. ci-dessus n. 15, et Seymour de Ricci, Census of Médiéval and Renaissance Manuscripts in thé United States and Canada (3 vol., New York, 1935-40, cité comme Census), i. 871). (24) Rennes, Bibl. mun., MS. 23. (25) Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 14.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

379

par un secrétaire du futur François Ier en 1439 (26), et, de façon tout aussi appropriée, une copie de VArbre des Batailles d'Honoré Bouvet, commandée par Arthur de Richement au moment de la capitulation de Cherbourg en 1450 (27). Autrement dit, il y a peu de choses qui évoquent les intérêts des ducs et il faut attendre la fin du quinzième siècle pour trouver un court ouvrage propagandiste écrit par Pierre Le Baud, qui justifiait la succession d'une femme en Bretagne, et dont le manuscrit dédicatoire à Marguerite de Foix, la mère de la duchesse Anne, existe encore (28). Il se peut que ce soit ce manuscrit-là, ou un autre semblable (29), qui ait été à l'origine de l'intérêt qu'Anne éprouva pour l'histoire de la Bretagne qui devait constituer un trait capital de son propre patronage littéraire. Etant donné le premier livre fourni à sa fille, Claude (30), et le contenu des bibliothèques des précédentes duchesses de Bretagne, on peut, par analogie, supposer sans grand risque que c'est avec des livres de piété et de dévotion principalement qu'Anne acquit sa connaissance des rudiments du latin et du français (31). Cependant, des contacts avec des membres de la famille Laval, qui peuvent être considérés comme faisant partie des plus importants protecteurs de l'époque, encourageant en particulier l'étude de l'histoire classique et plus récente, (26) Jadis Phillipps MS. 10298, Livre de Chasse (cf. B.E.C., L. (1889), 393); B.N., MS. fr. 12254, Regimen (Catalogue général, ii. 481). Tout ce qui concerne la production des manuscrits en Bretagne fait l'objet d'une recherche actuelle par E. Kônig qui a donné une étude préliminaire de certains de ses résultats, dont « Un atelier d'enluminure à Nantes et l'art du temps de Fouquet », Revue de l'Art, 35 (1977), 64-75. (27) Bibl. de l'Arsenal, MS. 2695 (MSS. à peintures n. 289). (28) Genève, Bibl. publ. et universitaire, MS. fr. 131, décrit par H. Aubert, « Notices sur les manuscrits Petau conservés à la Bibliothèque de Genève (fonds Ami Lullin) », B.E.C., Ixxii (1911), 284-6, où on fait référence à un autre manuscrit (B.N., MS. fr. 6011). Cf. aussi la note suivante. (29) C'était probablement une copie de la même œuvre à laquelle on avait ajouté l'ode de Meschinot qui souhaitait la bienvenue à Marguerite de Foix en Bretagne (1471), qui se trouvait auparavant dans la Bibliothèque Impériale de Russie (Laborde, op. cit., ii. n. 128 décrivant MS. fr. Q, v. IV. 5). Il n'est pas cité dans l'article d'E. Brayer, « Manuscrits français du moyen âge conservés à Leningrad », Bulletin d'information de l'Institut de Recherche et histoire des Textes, 1 (1958), 23-31. (30) Fitzwilliam Muséum, Cambridge, MS. 159 (James, Descriptive catalogue, pages 356-8). (31) Cf. B.E.C., xxiii (1862), 45-6, et Gabory, op. cit., page 10.

380

The Création ofBrittany

ont pu ouvrir de nouveaux horizons intellectuels pour la princesse (32). Mais dans les années qui suivirent immédiatement la mort de son père, Anne avait trop peu de moyens pour se consacrer seulement aux écrivains, étant donné que son duché devait lutter pour maintenir son indépendance d'avec la France. Ceux qui avaient déjà des succès littéraires à leur actif, comme Jean Meschinot, son maître d'hôtel, possédaient peu de temps pour écrire durant ces années critiques, même s'ils avaient eu l'inspiration nécessaire pour le faire (33). Cependant, le mariage d'Anne avec Charles VIII, le 6 décembre 1491, ramena en Bretagne des conditions plus paisibles et donna à la reine de nouvelles occasions de s'adonner à ses propres penchants, de tirer parti de sa situation et, finalement, de profiter du butin le plus précieux rapporté au pays par le roi à la suite de son invasion de Naples. A la fin de 1495, un chargement de « plusieurs tapisseries, librairie, paintures, pierre de marbre et de porfire et autres meubles », pesant 87 000 livres, avait été transporté de Naples, via Lyon, jusqu'à Amboise (34). Parmi ces articles, il y avait 1 140 livres « en latin, francoys, italien, grec et esbrieu » qui, au moment de la mort de Charles VIII, étaient passées aux mains d'Anne (35). Dans l'intervalle, la reine avait commencé à recevoir toute une série de manuscrits et d'ouvrages publiés plus tôt, qui augmentèrent le nombre de ceux qu'elle avait hérités de sa famille ou qu'elle avait acquis par son mariage. Plus tard, bien qu'il ne semble pas qu'elle ait personnellement profité dans les mêmes proportions de l'acquisition du duché de Milan et de sa célèbre bibliothèque, par son second mari Louis XII (36), Anne continua de recevoir et de commander des manuscrits et des livres jusqu'à sa mort, période à laquelle l'estimation minimum de 1 300-1 500 ouvrages dans sa bibliothèque, avancée par Le Roux de Lincy, est certainement en deçà de la vérité (37). Ce qu'il (32) Cabinet, ii. 376-7, et MSS. à peintures, nos 331 et 334 pour quelques indications. J'espère traiter des livres que possédaient différents membres de cette famille dans une étude ultérieure. (33) Cf. La Borderie, B.E.C., Ivi (1895), 129-30; Les lunettes, éd. Martineau-Genieys, passim. (34) T. de Marinis, La Biblioteca Napoletana dei Re d'Aragona, i (Milano, 1952), page 195, et cf. Cabinet, i. 97. (35) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 34 ; iii. 225-6 ; Marinis, op. cit., page 200, n. 8. (36) Cabinet, i. 125-9. (37) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 34.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

381

advint à cette collection après la mort d'Anne est incertain, bien qu'il semble plus que probable qu'elle formât une partie importante de la bibliothèque royale à Blois, inventoriée en 1518 (38). Les manuscrits autrefois possédés par Anne peuvent se reconnaître de plusieurs manières. Leur décoration comprend fréquemment une combinaison ou tout l'ensemble des caractéristiques suivantes : les armes de France et de Bretagne, soit l'initiale A, soit toutes les lettres de son nom, et les lettres utilisées par ses maris respectifs, par exemple la majuscule S de Charles VIII, et un certain nombre d'emblèmes et de devises associés à la reine et ses princes consorts, comme la Cordelière nouée, une banderole décorative qui porte les inscriptions Non mudera ou A ma vie et ainsi de suite (39). De ces manuscrits présentant certaines de ces caractéristiques dès l'époque de son premier mariage, celui qui vient en tête, c'est peut-être le plus petit, mais certainement l'un des plus remarquables livres d'Heures de la fin de l'époque médiévale, donné tout dernièrement, en 1961, à la Bibliothèque Nationale par le comte Guy de Boisrouvray. L'enluminure de ce ravissant chef-d'œuvre miniature a été attribuée à Saturnin François de Tours, un ami et collaborateur de Michel Colombe (40). D'après les entrées du livre des dépenses de la reine, on sait que d'autres Heures furent commandées ou refaites à cette époque, y compris ce qu'effectua un autre enlumineur important, Jean Poyet, mais l'autre livre d'Heures qui a survécu, datant de cette période ou de son veuvage en 1498, semble être les Heures inachevées qui se trouvent à Nantes (41). Un Pontifical, maintenant aux Etats-Unis, qu'il faut associer à Anne, date aussi apparemment de cette période, ainsi que le ravissant petit livre de prières qui est maintenant à la bibliothèque Pierpont Morgan à New York (42). Le premier manuscrit daté qu'Anne eut en sa possession est l'œuvre de (38) Marinis, op. cit., page 200, n. 8 ; (H. Omont), « Répertoire de la librairie royale de Blois rédigé en 1518 », Anciens inventaires et catalogues de la Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris, 1908), pages 1-154. (39) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 37-86, 173-6 ; iv. 215-25 ; Cabinet, i. 124-5 ; et cf. Appendice I pour un résumé des détails bibliographiques des manuscrits d'Anne. (40) Appendice I n . 1 ; P. Pradel, Michel Colombe, le dernier imagier gothique (Paris, 1953), pages 44-55. (41) Appendice I n. 2. Pour Poyet, cf. ibid. n. 33. (42) Appendice I n 08 24 et 6.

382

The Création ofBrittany

Robert du Merlin comportant ce titre explicatif : « Cy s'ensuit ung petit traitié qui se intitulera et appellera VAcort des mesdisans et bien disans », terminé à Tours le 13 décembre 1493, le premier de toute une série de poèmes à la gloire de la Vierge qu'Anne devait recevoir (43). Du Herlin, qui travaillait principalement pour la famille d'Orléans, avait été le secrétaire de Louis XI et on lui attribue un certain nombre d'ouvrages semi-religieux (44). Deux œuvres historiques dénotent également les prédilections d'Anne à ce stade. Elle reçut de la part d'Alberto Cattaneo, archidiacre de Crémone, un résumé d'histoire des rois de France, de l'éponyme Francion à Charles VIII, écrit en latin (45), et au moins un volume de VHistoire de la Toison d'Or de Guillaume Fillastre semble avoir été spécialement enluminé pour elle (46). Conjointement avec les armes de Charles VIII, les siennes, ses initiales ou devises apparaissent dans un certain nombre d'autres manuscrits, fréquemment consacrés aux ambitions du roi en Italie, comme La prophétie du Roi Charles VIII, ensemble l'exercice d'icelle de M. Guilîoche de Bourdeaux (47), La Ressource de la Chrestiéneté d'André de la Vigne, et un ouvrage d'imitation, La Ressource de la monarche chrestienne promise (48). On a aussi supposé que le Roman de Jehan de Paris, peut-être écrit par de la Vigne, fut également destiné à Anne et Charles, comme hommage, car son cadre est en accord avec le goût d'Anne pour ce qui était espagnol (49). Aucun de ces livres n'est profond, (43) Appendice I n. 3. Pour le culte de Sainte-Anne à cette époque, voir L. Febvre, « Une question mal posée : les origines de la réforme française », Revue historique, clxi (1929), réédité dans Au cœur religieux du XVIe siècle (Paris, 1957), page 32. (44) Cabinet, i. 120-1 ; iii. 343-4. (45) Appendice I n. 4. (46) Appendice I n. 5. Delisle rejeta cette attribution (Cabinet, i. 125, n. 8), mais récemment des critiques ont donné de façon convaincante l'assurance que la reine le possédait (MSS. à peintures n. 353 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 75). C'est probablement à ce manuscrit que réfère l'une des entrées dans le catalogue de Blois de 1518 (voir ci-dessus n. 38, n08 227-8). Les deux copies de l'ouvrage mentionné, chacune d'elle de deux volumes, doivent être assimilées aux manuscrits fr. 138-141 de la B.N. (47) Appendice I n. 22. (48) Appendice I n os 20 et 21 ; cf. E.R. Wickersheimer, « Deux imitations de la Ressource de la Chrétienté », Mélanges offerts à M. Emile Picot, membre de l'Institut, par ses amis et ses élèves (2 vol., Paris, 1913), ii. 543-6. (49) Y. Labande-Mailfert, « Anne de Bretagne espagnole », Mémoires de la Société d'histoire et d'archéologie de Bretagne, cité comme M.S.H.A.B., xxxiv (1954), 44, et idem, Charles VIII, pages 101, 125.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

383

mais avec leur mélange d'allégorie politique, d'allusions, d'aventure et de piété conventionnelle, ils furent composés pour plaire à une jeune femme qui avait quelques prétentions. Il est intéressant que les mêmes caractéristiques apparaissent dans les premiers ouvrages imprimés offerts à la reine : une édition des Fables d'Esope, deux classiques médiévaux, les traductions françaises de la Légende Dorée, Des nobles et célèbres femmes de Boccace et une autre œuvre de dévotion, le Trésor de l'âme de Robert (50). Jusque-là, à part les ouvrages qui évoquent les préoccupations françaises de l'époque envers l'Italie, ceux qui peuvent être associés à la jeune reine reflètent presque les mêmes intérêts que ceux de la première femme de son père qui mourut plus de vingt ans avant qu'Anne devînt reine (51). Ses goûts semblent différer (assez naturellement d'ailleurs) de ceux, d'ordre dramatique ou chevaleresque (52), de son prince, bien qu'existé sur ce point peu de preuve que la reine ait jamais commandé spécifiquement une quelconque œuvre littéraire ou pris un intérêt particulier aux écrits de ceux qui étaient à son service, situation qui changea quand elle devint veuve et atteignit un âge plus mûr. Le Roux de Lincy affirma que c'est après la mort de Charles VIII et le retour d'Anne en Bretagne qu'elle conçut l'idée d'une Histoire de la Bretagne et qu'elle chargea Pierre Le Baud, son aumônier, d'exécuter le travail (53). Aux environs de 1480, Le Baud avait déjà produit une première version de ses Chroniques de Bretaigne, qui avait été présentée à son protecteur, Jean de Malestroit, seigneur de Derval, qui mourut en 1482 (54). En outre, Le Baud avait produit un épitomé de cet ouvrage pour la duchesse Marguerite de Foix quelques années plus tard, de sorte que ses talents étaient déjà connus d'Anne (55). Ce qui (50) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 36. (51) Cf. n. 19 ci-dessus. (52) Cf. Labande-Mailfert, Charles VIII, pages 160-3, bien que la reine eût apprécié la traduction française par Guillaume le Ménard de l'ouvrage de Luidolphe de Saxe, Vita Christi, admirablement enluminé, dédié au roi (Glasgow University, Hunterian, MSS. 36-39). (53) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 37-8. Anne ordonna que Le Baud ait le droit de consulter tous les documents nécessaires le 4 octobre 1498 (Cronicques et Ystoires des Bretons, éd. Ch. de la Lande de Calan (Nantes, 1907), i. 1). (54) B.N., MS. fr. 8266 (MSS. à peintures n. 322). C'est la version éditée par La Lande de Calan. (55) Ci-dessus notes 28 et 29.

384

The Création ofBrittany

rend la commission de la reine si intéressante, c'est qu'elle octroya à Le Baud la liberté d'utiliser les archives ducales afin qu'il trouve des témoignages pour étayer son récit. Ceci est une indication des impératifs de l'historiographie officielle sous l'influence des idées de la Renaissance et Le Baud montre qu'il avait conscience de ses responsabilités en essayant de suivre les préceptes de Leonardo Bruni « en son prologue du livre de la bataille Itallique contre les Goths... » (56). Cependant, il dût finalement reconnaître en toute modestie ses limites : « Lesquelles choses j'ay pour la pluspart déduites plus par forme de cronographie que d'ystoriographie. Car à l'istoriographie apartient à plain descripre l'istoire et l'ordre des choses faictes. Et à cronographie principalement de noter les temps et succinctement en discourir la mémoire » (57). Il esquive l'histoire contemporaine en interrompant son récit après la mort de François II, avec le pieux espoir de pouvoir un jour reprendre ces questions (58). Cependant, dans la seconde recension de son manuscrit, terminé et présenté à Anne peu avant sa propre mort, le 19 septembre 1505, on trouve incontestablement une indication du changement survenu dans la présentation des œuvres historiques sur le modèle italien, car il s'est délesté de la plupart des sujets concernant « la matière de Bretagne » et des sujets d'ordre légendaire qui étaient si chers aux premiers auteurs bretons et qui étaient présents dans la première édition (59). Se référer aux origines troyennes de la langue bretonne continuait d'être une image élogieuse (60), mais les commandes réitérées d'Anne aux successeurs de Le Baud, Alain Bouchart et Jean Lemaire de Belges, insistant sur l'étude d'une histoire moderne de la Bretagne, basée sur des documents (56) British Library, Harleian, MS. 4371 f. 1 r (Appendice I n. 12). (57) Ibid., f. 2r (cf. B. Guénée, «Histoire, annales, chroniques. Essai sur les genres historiques au Moyen Age », Annales, économies, sociétés, civilisations, xxviii (1973), 1004). (58) Ibid., f. 357. Alain Bouchart devait montrer la même réticence à traiter de l'histoire contemporaine, arrêtant aussi son récit en 1488. Il fut poursuivi par un autre auteur dans des éditions ultérieures (cf. Les Grandes Cr-uniques de Bretaigne, composées en l'an 1514 par Maistre Alain Bouchart, éd. H. Le Meignen (Rennes, 1886), f. 241 v et seq.). (59) Ed. La Lande de Calan, page 6. (60) P. Jodogne, Jean Lemaire de Belges, écrivain franco-bourguignon (Académie royale de Belgique, Mémoires de la classe des lettres, Coll. in 4°, e 2 sér., t. xiii, fasc. i, 1972), page 132 ; Lemaire de Belges à François le Rouge, en 1513, « oultre le tien langage naturel de Bretaigne Armorique, laquelle est vray troyen, comme je puis imaginer... ».

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

385

probants, reflètent aussi sans doute un caractère d'érudition grandissant chez la reine, ce qui est confirmé par d'autres manuscrits qu'elle eût en sa possession après son mariage avec Louis XII. Il y a aussi des preuves croissantes des propres préférences d'Anne ; c'est très clairement à la reine que l'on s'adresse dans le poème de Lemaire de Belges, « A la louange des Princes et Princesses qui ayment la Science historialle » : Princesse heureuse ainsi comme la brasme Se meurt sans eaue, aussi le cœur d'affamé A qui ne plaist des histoires la cresme Mais vous l'aymez, par quoy vous aurez famé Resplendisant trop plus que nulle gemme... (61). Un poème médiocre d'un Breton, Disarouez Penguern, en 1510, cherche à combiner l'histoire et la poésie : La généalogie de très haulte, très puissante, très excellante et très chrestienne princesse et nostre souveraine dame Anne... (62). Malheureusement, la reine était morte quand la première édition des Grandes Croniques d'Alain Bouchart fut publiée (63), et il fallut attendre encore soixante-dix années avant la contribution scientifique de Bertrand d'Argentré qui fut d'une importance capitale pour l'historiographie du duché. En ce qui concerne la qualité artistique, ce sont encore une fois deux livres d'Heures, peints pour Anne après son mariage avec Louis XII, qui ont retenu le plus d'attention : le chef-d'œuvre de Jean Bourdichon, les Grandes Heures, décoré entre 1500 et 1508 (64), et les Petites Heures, attribuées à des peintres de l'école de Rouen et créées entre 1499 et 1514 (65). Un Antiphonaire peint pour Anne et Louis avait été fragmenté entre diverses collections vers le milieu du dix-neuvième siècle (61) Ibid., page 391. (62) Appendice I n. 41. Doit-on assimiler cet écrivain à Jehan Mauhugeon, cité par Gabory (op. cit., page 248) ? Un Jean Mauhugeon était le maître de l'artillerie de François II. (63) A Paris en 1514 (voir éd. Le Meignen, pages vi-vii). (64) Appendice I n. 7 ; Delisle, Les Grandes Heures de la Reine Anne de Bretagne et l'atelier de Jean Bourdichon (Paris, 1913) ; un critique récent appréciant la valeur de l'artiste est J. Backhouse, « Bourdichon's Hours of Henry VII», British Muséum Quarterly, xxxvii (1973), 95-102. (65) Appendice I n. 8.

386

The Création of Brittany

(66). Un folio, dans lequel la présence de Bourdichon a été détectée, est tout ce qui reste d'un autre manuscrit, probablement d'un genre moralisateur, qui peut être associé à la famille royale (67). Une traduction française de l'Ancien Testament, qu'Anne commanda à son confesseur, Antoine du Four, n'existe plus, bien qu'un manuscrit de ce travail se trouvât autrefois dans la bibliothèque du chancelier Séguier (68). Une autre traduction par Antoine du Four, celle des Epîtres de S. Jérôme, également enluminée dans l'atelier de Bourdichon aux alentours de 1505, était à la Bibliothèque Impériale de Russie à la fin du siècle dernier, mais semble maintenant avoir aussi été perdue (69). Pourtant, bien qu'Anne continuât de recevoir, durant les premières années du siècle qui commençait, des œuvres d'éducation religieuse et de caractère spirituel de la part de typographes tels que Antoine Vérard (70), ses manuscrits dénotent généralement un intérêt pour des thèmes plus séculiers. A l'occasion de son second mariage, une copie du Discours de Plutarque sur le mariage de Pollion et d'Eurydice fut rédigée pour le roi et la reine (71). Les pièces de circonstance étaient réellement devenues la façon à la mode de commémorer des événements remarquables. De telles œuvres éphémères allèrent en grand nombre alimenter le grandissant marché des ouvrages imprimés, mais des copies manuscrites, souvent écrites et parfois même peintes par l'auteur lui-même, étaient présentées à des mécènes tels que la reine. Cela n'a peut-être rien de surprenant quand l'auteur se trouvait être son héraut, Pierre Choque, ou son secrétaire, André de la Vigne. Choque rédigea au moins deux manuscrits pour la reine durant l'existence de cette dernière, et il composa aussi l'hommage bien connu : Commémoration et advertissement de la mort de ... madame Anne, deux foys royne de (66) Ibid., n. 31. (67) Ibid., n. 39. (68) Ibid., n. 28. (69) Appendice I n. 32. Décrit en 1938 par Laborde (op. cit., ii. 144-7) d'après G. Bertrand, « Catalogue des manuscrits français de la Bibliothèque de Saint-Pétersbourg », Revue des Sociétés savantes, 5e sér., vi (1873), mais n'est pas cité par Brayer (ci-dessus n. 29). (70) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 36, mais cf. Appendice I n. 11. (71) Appendice I n. 9. Le Pèlerin de Paix (B.N., MS. français 25432) qu'on a décrit dans le Catalogue général des manuscrits français, ii (1902), 591, comme des vers sur le mariage d'Anne et Charles VIII, fut écrit, en fait, à la conclusion du traité de paix anglo-français de 1492.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

387

France, duchesse de Bretaigne, avec la collaboration de La Vigne et l'artiste Jean Perréal (72). En 1502, Choque accompagna Anne de Foix quand elle partit pour épouser Ladislas VI, roi de Bohème, de Pologne et de Hongrie, et à la demande de la reine Anne il écrivit une description du voyage via Venise et Buda et de la cérémonie du mariage. Bien que le manuscrit soit resté inachevé, il contient un certain nombre de miniatures intéressantes et une quantité considérable d'informations sur les armoiries (73). Choque, aux alentours de 1513, a aussi traduit et illustré Chordigerae navis conflagratio de Germain de Brie (74). Ce poème, dédié à Anne, commémorait les exploits héroïques et la mort, survenue l'année précédente, de Hervé de Portzmoguer et de son équipage à bord du navire de la reine, « La Cordelière » (75). Un manuscrit ultérieur de l'œuvre de Choque, ayant appartenu à Claude de France, a été récemment vendu à Londres (76). Dans le même style d'ouvrage, on trouve le récit, par André de la Vigne, de l'exceptionnel second couronnement d'une reine de France et de la seconde entrée d'Anne dans Paris en 1504 : Gommant la Roy ne à Sainct Denys sacrée... à Paris elle fit son entrée. Un manuscrit de cette œuvre, qui est selon toute probabilité celui-là même que de la Vigne rédigea et présenta à la reine peu de temps après qu'elle a quitté la Bretagne pour retourner dans la vallée de la Loire en septembre 1505, se trouve maintenant à Waddesdon Manor, dans le Buckinghamshire, où il a été méticuleusement décrit par le regretté L.M.J. Délaissé (77). (72) Appendice II. Pour Perréal, voir Grete Ring, « An attempt to reconstruct Perreal », The Burlington Magazine, xcii (1950), 255-60 ; P. Pradel, «Les autographes de Jean Perréal», B.E.C., cxxi (1963), 132-86; Ch. Sterling, « Une peinture certaine de Perréal enfin retrouvée », L'Œil, juillet-août 1963. Perréal fit l'effigie de la reine pour ses funérailles, de même qu'il devait faire celle de Louis XII un an plus tard (Ring, op. cit., page 256, et Ralph E. Giesey, The Royal Funeral Ceremony in Renaissance France (Genève, 1960), pages 113-6). (73) Appendice I n . 10. (74) Ibid., n. 18. (75) C. de la Roncière, Histoire de la marine française (6 vol., Paris, 1899-1932), iii. 93-104, donne le meilleur récit moderne de cette action. (76) Jadis Phillipps MS. 4467 (Bibliotheca Phillippica, Médiéval Manuscripts, New Séries, Part 2, sale of 29 November 1966, lot 79, Sotheby et Co., Catalogue pages 104-6). (77) Appendice I n. 13. Je suis très reconnaissant au Col. Rex Waller et Miss Rosamund Griffin, conservateur de la collection des manuscrits, de m'avoir donné l'autorisation d'examiner ce manuscrit et de m'avoir rendu mon séjour à Waddesdon si agréable. Quand il était en la possession du

388

The Création ofBrittany

Une autre copie, à laquelle manquent les miniatures hors-texte du manuscrit de Waddesdon, est à la Bibliothèque SainteGeneviève (78). Les historiens ont présumé trop aisément que les reines de France étaient automatiquement couronnées. Il est vrai qu'un certain nombre tfordines pour le couronnement de la reine, soit à l'occasion du sacre du roi, soit pour d'autres occasions, ont été conservées, mais on connaît très peu de récits proprement dits du couronnement de reines (79). Cependant, en ce qui concerne Anne, très peu de temps après son premier mariage, le 8 février 1492, elle « avoit été non seulement couronnée, mais sacrée « oincte, ciej et poitrine » comme reine de France » à Saint-Denis lors d'une cérémonie qui impressionna profondément les observateurs, y compris un diplomate italien, Erasmo Brasca, qui confirma que la reine fut « non solo coronata, ma uncta e sacrata » (80). Bien que son contrat de mariage avec Charles VIII comportât les dispositions nécessaires dans le cas d'un second mariage royal pour la reine, si Charles devait décéder avant elle (81), il n'y avait pas vraiment, quand Anne se maria avec Louis XII, la même nécessité politique de prouver l'union de la baron Edmond de Rothschild, le manuscrit a été vu par Becker (Andry de la Vigne, page 6). Les trois miniatures hors-texte furent insérées séparément, une pratique qui n'est pas apparemment courante dans les manuscrits français de cette époque, bien que ce fût une technique utilisée en Flandre (cf. Backhouse, British Muséum Quarterly, xxxvii (1973), 100). (78) Bibl. Sainte-Geneviève, MS. 3036, utilisé dans son édition par H. Stein, « Le sacre d'Anne de Bretagne et son entrée à Paris en 1504 », Mémoires de la Société d'histoire de Paris et d'Ile-de-France, xxix (1902), 268-304. Comparé au manuscrit de Waddesdon, la majorité des différences dans le texte relèvent de petits détails d'orthographe. Les changements qui modifient le sens du texte sont : Stein, page 278, ligne 10, il faut lire faictes pour sainct ; ibid., lignes 32-3, il faut lire heraulx dormes pour heureuses dames; page 279 1.14, il faut lire L pour M ; page 282, dernière ligne, après arbalestriers, il faut ajouter rustres de guerre et gens délibérez ; page 285 1.4, il faut lire briesve pour preuse. (79) Th. Godefroy, Le cérémonial français, éd. D. Godefroy (2 vol., Paris, 1649), i. 23-5, 29-30, 48-51 (ordo pour le sacre de Jeanne de Bourbon, la dernière reine couronnée à Reims avec le roi en 1364 ; cf. R. Jackson, « The Traité du sacre of Jean Golein », Proceedings of thé American Philosophical Society, vol. 113 (1969), 318 n. 102); Godefroy, i. 469-70, ordo pour le sacre d'Anne en 1492 (daté, avec erreur, de 1489). Au sujet de la pauvreté des détails sur les autres sacres, voir ibid., i. 476, et Labande-Mailfert, Charles VIII, pages 117-8. (80) Labande-Mailfert, op. cit., page 118. (81) Morice, Preuves, iii. 711-8; Anne de Bretagne, n. 22.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

389

Bretagne et de la France de cette façon symbolique. Il se peut aussi que les contemporains se soient trouvés face à un dilemme, étant donné que le sacre avec l'huile sainte était un événement unique dans la vie des rois et des reines français — c'était une des excentricités de Louis XI, provoquée par son gâtisme, de réclamer un nouveau sacre quand il ressentait une peur mortelle : l'ampoule sainte était alors apportée de Reims et placée sur un coffre auprès de son lit de malade (82). Puisqu'Anne avait déjà reçu le sacre avec l'huile en 1492, il n'était pas nécessaire de renouveler la cérémonie intégrale après son mariage avec Louis XII ; des problèmes existaient aussi à propos du moment à choisir pour le couronnement, car il fallait tenir compte des grossesses de la reine, des obligations de Louis en Italie et de l'absence de la cour dans la capitale (83). En 1501, la municipalité de Paris entreprit des préparations pour l'entrée de la reine dans la capitale, qui peuvent avoir été conçues (comme elles devaient l'être plus tard en 1504) comme une conclusion du second sacre de la reine, mais l'entrée fut inexplicablement annulée au dernier moment (84). Il est également vrai que la cérémonie, réorganisée en novembre 1504, semble s'être effectuée dans les plus brefs délais pour des raisons qui sont encore tout à fait troubles aujourd'hui, bien que Louis ait été apparemment impatient qu'Anne soit couronnée (85). Etant donné que la reine avait confirmé en octobre des projets de mariage, établis à Blois le 22 septembre 1504, pour Claude et le futur empereur Charles V, marquant une victoire temporaire à son actif dans les rivalités de la cour, peut-être la décision d'aller à Saint-Denis et à Paris peu après doit-elle être associée avec un désir de renforcer son autorité (86). Ce n'est qu'une hypothèse et il va sans dire que ni le récit des cérémonies et des processions des 17 et 18 novembre 1504 de La Vigne, qui (82) Philippe de Commynes, Mémoires, éd. J. Calmette et G. Durville (3 vol., Paris, 1924-5), ii. 308. (83) Jean d'Auton, Chroniques de Louis XII, éd. R. de Maulde la Clavière (4 vol., Paris, 1889-95), iii. 350-1 ; Gabory, op. cit., pages 140-1. (84) Godefroy, op. cit., pages 686-9. (85) On peut trouver des détails sur l'entrée de 1504 dans ibid., pages 690-5 ; Stein, art. cit., pages 301-4, et Ch. Oulmont, « Pierre Gringore et l'entrée de la reine Anne de 1504 (d'après un document inédit) », Mélanges E. Picot, ii. 385-92. (86) Bridge, A History of France, iii. 204-51 ; Gabory, op. cit., pages 194-8.

390

The Création of Brittany

témoignent d'une observation attentive, ni aucun autre document ayant trait à leur préparation artistique et à l'apparat, ne révèlent la moindre chose sur les intrigues de la cour à cette période. Cependant, le récit du « Sacre » contribue bien à fournir un détail déterminant pour la biographie de La Vigne. Déjà très connu grâce à d'autres œuvres telles que Le Vergier d'honneur, qui relate des épisodes dont il avait été témoin lors de l'expédition de Charles VIII à Naples, et d'un mystère sur la vie de saint Martin, représenté en 1496, il a été associé à la reine dès cette époque par beaucoup d'auteurs (87). Certaines éditions du Vergier d'honneur portent une page de titre qui suggère qu'il était déjà son secrétaire avant 1500 (88). Le Roux de Lincy imprima un certain nombre de lettres d'Anne, signées par de la Vigne, qu'il data des années 1501-1505. Mais il y a de bonnes raisons de douter de l'exactitude des dates avancées (89), et la première preuve réellement positive qu'il ait détenu ce poste vers la fin de 1504 est donnée dans un acrostiche, à la fin de son récit du « Sacre », où il se décrit lui-même comme « vostre humble secrétaire » (90). Il se peut que, comme Jean d'Auton, un autre natif de Saintonge, de la Vigne fût entré au service de la reine après qu'elle avait pris possession de cette région comme douaire

(87) En plus des ouvrages cités n. 11, on peut trouver un résumé succinct de la carrière de De la Vigne dans Fleurs de Rhétorique, éd. K. Chesney (Oxford, 1950), pages 98-9. (88) La publication date des années 1498-1502 (cf. Becker, op. cit., page 3). (89) Le Roux de Lincy, iii. Appendice n os 12, 18, 19, datées par leur éditeur, respectivement de Grenoble le 18 juin 1501, le 11 juin 1505 et le 17 juin 1505. Il est tout à fait évident que toutes les lettres appartiennent à la même période de correspondance (traitant de la santé de Claude) que deux autres lettres signées par différents secrétaires et datées de Valence le 1er et le 26 juillet (ibid., n os 20, 21), et selon toute vraisemblance deux autres datées d'Angers (ibid., n os 24, 25) le 2 et le 3 avril. Elles sont toutes adressées à Madame du Bouchage, la gouvernante de Claude. L'année 1505 est incorrecte, car c'est durant les mois d'été de cette année qu'Anne entreprit sa célèbre visite dans son duché (La Borderie, Histoire, iv. 601-2). Que les dents de Claude, née le 14 octobre 1499, aient percé durant l'été 1501 est vraisemblable, mais c'est un processus de longue durée. Madame du Bouchage mourut en août 1511 (B. de Mandrot, Ymbert de Batarnay, seigneur du Bouchage (Paris, 1886), page 239). (90) Waddesdon Manor, MS. 22 f. 64 r et Catalogue (cité ci-dessous, Appendice I n. 13), pages 485-6.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

391

à la mort de Charles VIII (91). De la Vigne devait continuer à écrire de la poésie pendant qu'il était au service d'Anne ; une autre pièce de circonstance fut le Paternostre des Genevoys, publié en 1507 (92). La reine, en plus de sa double entrée dans Paris en 1492 et 1504, devait effectuer deux entrées dans Lyon comme reine, épouse de Charles VIII et ensuite de Louis XII ; en 1500, elle était également entrée dans Nantes en grande cérémonie et aussi, en 1508, dans Rouen (93). De tels événements procuraient souvent l'occasion de présenter ou de déclamer des vers et, à partir de 1500 environ, la reine commença à recevoir un nombre croissant de poèmes en latin et en français, écrits dans un style humaniste ou rhétorique par des poètes de la cour, tels que Faustus Andrelinus, Quintianus, Jean Lemaire de Belges et Jean Marot. Beaucoup de ces poèmes sont seulement connus par des versions publiées (94), mais, des copies manuscrites possédées par Anne, il existe encore l'impressionnant Voyage de Gennes (enluminé dans l'atelier de Bourdichon) de Marot qui accompagna Louis XII en Italie sur la demande de la reine, les Epistolae de Faustus Andrelinus et deux recueils de divers auteurs (95). Le premier comporte des traductions françaises du latin et y inclut un certain nombre de poèmes tirés des Champs-Elysées, provenant d'échanges entre les membres de l'entourage royal, pour le compte de leur maître et de leur (91) II y a quelques doutes quant à la ville d'où était originaire De la Vigne : La Rochelle en Saintonge ou le petit village du même nom en Haute-Saône (Fleurs, éd. Chesney, page 98), mais ces doutes devraient être levés grâce à la remarque explicite qui se trouve au début de ses chroniques de François Ier : « Je, André de la Vigne, natif de La Rochelle en Xaintonge, indigne chroniqueur du roy et secrétaire ordinaire de la royne... » (B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 794 f. 1 r) ; pour d'Auton, cf. Chronique, éd. de Maulde la Clavière, introduction, pages vi-xiv. (92) Becker, op. cit., page 5. (93) Pour les entrées dans Paris, voir notes 83-85 ; pour Lyon, cf. Ring, Burlington Magazine, xcii (1950), 256, 260 et plate 15 ; LabandeMailfert, op. cit., pages 152-3 et plate VII; Anne de Bretagne, nos 85, 88; pour Nantes, P. Lelièvre, « Entrées royales à Nantes à l'époque de la Renaissance (1500-1551) », Les Fêtes de la Renaissance, éd. J. Jacquot et E. Kônigson, iii (Paris, 1975), 80 ; pour Rouen, P. Le Verdier, L'entrée royale et magnifique du roi Louis XII et de la reine à Rouen (1508), précédée d'une introduction (Rouen, 1900). B. Guénée et F. Lehoux, Les entrées royales françaises de 1328 à 1515 (Paris, 1968), ne traitent d'aucune entrée de reines de France. (94) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 7-11 et iv. 212-4. (95) Appendice I n. 15, 16, 19 et 25.

392

The Création ofBrittany

maîtresse quand Anne était en France et que Louis XII faisait campagne contre Venise en 1509-1511 (96). Le second manuscrit, qui est complexe et dont l'apparence grossière a fait suggérer qu'il contient simplement une ébauche de travail qui devait être présentée à la reine dont il porte la devise, se trouve à la Bibliothèque Municipale de Nantes (97). Il contient La vie de Saincte Anne de Maximien, peut-être écrite dès 1498-1499 (98). Jean Lemaire de Belges qui, en 1504, avait dédié à Anne La Plainte du Désiré, son poème sur le comte de Ligny disparu, remania en 1511 son Epître de l'Amant vert pour lui être agréable et lui offrit un manuscrit du Dyalogue de vertu militaire et de jeunesse française, une œuvre qu'il avait terminée à Lyon le 1er juillet de cette même année (99). Bien que ses « XXIIII coupletz que j'ay faictz pour la convalescence de la royne » aient survécu dans son propre manuscrit autographe du second livre des Illustrations de Gaule et Singularitez de Troye, dédié à Claude de France (100), c'est surtout pour sa fonction potentielle d'historien officiel qu'Anne accueillit Lemaire de Belges à son service dès 1512. Elle le délégua peu après pour qu'il compose « les croniques de sa maison de Bretaigne et pour ce faire m'envoyé expressément par tout le pays de Bretaigne, affin que je m'enquière par les vieilles abbayes et maisons antiques de toute J'histoire britannique, laquelle encoires n'a esté mise en lumière entièrement jusques à ores que je l'ay entreprinse » (101). Durant sa visite au duché, Lemaire de Belges termina à Nantes, en décembre 1512, le troisième livre de ses Illustrations de France (96) Ibid., n. 16 et cf. JJ. Beard, « Letters from thé Elysian fields : a group of poems for Louis XII », Bibliothèque d'humanisme et renaissance, Documents et travaux, xxxi (1969), 27-38. Je suis très reconnaissant à Mrs Britnell (née Beard) pour le prêt d'un microfilm d'une partie du manuscrit de Leningrad contenant YEpistre élégiaque de Jean d'Auton appartenant à cette collection. Gabory, op. cit., pages 158-9. (97) Appendice I n . 19. (98) Jodogne, op. cit., page 138. (99) Appendice I n. 17; Jodogne, op. cit., pages 129-31, 204 et seq. pour les relations entre Lemaire de Belges et la reine. (100) Appendice I n . 37 ; J. Abélard, Les Illustrations de Gaule et Singularitez de Troye de Jean Lemaire de Belges. Etudes des éditions Genèse de l'œuvre (Genève, 1976), page 171. (101) Jodogne, op. cit., page 131, et cf. R. Grand, «Anne de Bretagne et le premier humanisme de la renaissance en France : miniature inédite des « Illustrations de Gaule et Singularitez de Troye » de Lemaire de Belges (1512)», M.S.H.A.B., xxix (1949), 45-70.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

393

qui est dédié à la reine (102). Malheureusement, il ne subsiste pas même une esquisse du projet des Illustrations de Bretagne, dont la compilation a probablement été interrompue par la mort d'Anne et celle de son « indiciaire », un titre que Lemaire de Belges avait rapporté avec lui de la cour de Bourgogne (103). De tous les érudits qui travaillèrent pour la reine, même pour peu de temps, Lemaire de Belges est de toute évidence le personnage le plus éminent d'un groupe qui « se considère en quelque sorte comme responsable de l'ordre religieux, politique, moral et culturel, non seulement de leur cercle social, mais de leur nation, voire de l'ensemble de la Chrétienté », et qui concevait le rôle de l'écrivain « comme un véritable devoir publique » (104). Parmi les poètes qui collaborèrent avec Lemaire de Belges dans les échanges littéraires durant les années qui suivirent la chute de Gênes, Jean d'Auton semble avoir eu une carrière littéraire qui a évolué dans le sens opposé à celle de Lemaire de Belges. Il commença à se faire connaître comme chroniqueur ou, selon les termes de de Maulde la Clavière, comme journaliste ou reporter, des événements qui eurent lieu dans les premières années du règne de Louis XII, en commençant avec la conquête de Milan ; d'Auton, malgré son titre ambitieux d'historiographe royal, ne mena pas au-delà de 1507 son histoire de France semi-officielle (105). Les œuvres littéraires des dernières années de sa vie sont principalement poétiques, avec une tendance polémique destinée à soutenir les prétentions françaises en Italie, ainsi L'Epître élégiaque par l'Eglise millitante transmise au roy treschrestien Loys douziesme composée par frère Jehan d'Auton, hystoriographe d'iceluy seigneur, qui est contenue dans le manuscrit possédé par Anne (106), et aussi son Epistre faite aux ChampsElysées par le preux Hector de Troye le Grant et transmise au treschrestien Roy Louis douziesme de ce nom, avec la réponse de Lemaire de Belges, au nom de Louis XII, et les traductions (102) Appendice I n. 38. (103) Jodogne, op. cit., pages 132-6. (104) Idem, « Les « Rhétoriquers » et l'humanisme. Problème d'histoire littéraire », Humanism in France ai thé end of thé Middle Ages and in thé Early Renaissance, éd. A.H.T. Levi (Manchester, 1970), pages 150-75 (citations pages 160-1). (105) Chroniques, éd. de Maulde la Clavière, introduction, passim, et Beard, art. cit. (106) Appendice I n . 16.

394

The Création of Brittany

de divers poèmes de Faustus Andrelinus, par Macé de Villesbresme (107). Un autre poète d'un certain renom, prêt à mettre son talent au service de l'Etat et qui composa, comme Lemaire de Belges, un poème célébrant la guérison de la reine après une maladie grave en 1512, fut son protégé Jean Marot. Mais le manuscrit de ce poème qui a subsisté n'est pas celui qui a été offert (108). Marot dédia aussi à Anne Le vray disant advocate des dames (109). Comme autre élément littéraire allant de pair avec l'intérêt qu'Anne prit à favoriser l'éducation, les mariages et le statut professionnel de ses dames d'honneur — Gabory l'appelle, à juste titre, «une féministe bien avant la naissance du mot» (110) — peut-être pouvons-nous citer son penchant pour la vie des femmes célèbres : elle possédait déjà une copie de Des nobles et célèbres femmes de Boccaccio ; son confesseur Du Four compila une Vie des femmes illustres contenant une gamme de remarques, éclectiques à souhait, sur la vie de quelque quatre-vingt-onze femmes, depuis la Vierge et Eve jusqu'à Jeanne d'Arc, y compris des déesses et des héroïnes classiques et médiévales, telles que Hélène, Théodelinde, Amalasonthe, Griseldis, Baptiste Malatesta et Jeanne de Naples. Le propre manuscrit d'Anne se trouve maintenant au Musée Dobrée à Nantes (111). Une dernière œuvre de ce genre élogieux, qui a pu être créée pour Louis et Anne, c'est les Vingt et une epistres des dames illustres d'Octovien de SaintGelais, un autre érudit de la cour, qui mourut en 1502 (112). Pour être complet, on peut mentionner que les armes et la devise Non mudera de la reine apparaissent aussi dans le manuscrit possédé par Louis XII, de la traduction du De excidio Troiae de Darès le Phrygien, par Robert Frescher, qui révèle la (107) Cf. ibid., n. 30. La bibliothèque à Blois, en 1518, possédait un certain nombre d'ouvrages d'Andrelinus (à ce sujet, voir Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 212-4, et A. Renaudet, Préréforme et humanisme à Paris pendant les premières guerres d'Italie, 1494-1517, 2e éd., Paris, 1953, pages 122-5). (108) Appendice I n. 35. (109) Ibid., n. 34. (110) Gabory, op. cit., page 173. (111) Appendice I n. 14. (112) Ibid., n. 29.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

395

fascination constante que les contes de Troie exerçaient sur cette génération d'humanistes de la Renaissance (113). A partir de cette revue des manuscrits possédés par Anne, composés pour elle ou dédiés à elle, ainsi que des parallèles tracés grâce à un rapide examen de certains des ouvrages imprimés associés à la reine de la même manière, un certain nombre de questions peuvent se poser. Tout d'abord, la tradition, déjà sévèrement remise en question par Gabory (114), qui voulait qu'Anne possédât bien les rudiments du latin et du grec, pour ne pas mentionner l'hébreu, n'est pas confirmée par les manuscrits. Une copie de la Gramatica hebraiqua de François Tissard, publiée à Paris aux alentours de 1507-1509, se trouve à la Bibliothèque Mazarine, reliée avec une couverture qui porte les armes de Louis XII et d'Anne (115). Mais le nombre de traductions de latin en français, à la fois d'œuvres païennes classiques et d'œuvres religieuses, et aussi de poésie et d'histoire du nouveau style Renaissance, semble suggérer que la reine préférait généralement des ouvrages dans la langue nationale, dont beaucoup de gens de son entourage étaient très soucieux de revendiquer le caractère savant (116). C'était, en grande partie, une question de vanité littéraire et de flatterie que d'adresser à la reine et ses suivantes des œuvres en latin. Elle-même, contrairement à Charles VIII, encouragea les historiens à écrire en français seulement (117). Son intérêt pour la culture espagnole et italienne en général ne l'a pas conduite non plus à tenter sérieusement d'apprendre ces langues modernes et elle ne semble pas avoir eu une quelconque connaissance du breton (118). Donc, Anne ne correspond pas au type du bas-bleu représenté par un certain (113) Ibid., n. 23. M. Segalen a signalé un manuscrit du poème de François Robertet sur « Non muderà », ibid., n. 40. (114) Gabory, op. cit., page 250. (115) Bibl. Mazarine, Res. 11578 (Anne de Bretagne, n. 28). Il y a un manuscrit, de la fin du quatorzième siècle, de Constitutiones du pape Clément V, relié avec une couverture semblable (Appendice I n. 26). (116) Jodogne, Humanism in France, éd. Levi, pages 163-4, et idem, Le maire de Belges, page 132. (117) Labande-Mailfert, op. cit., pages 491-2. (118) Brantôme raconte, probablement influencé par Octovien de SaintGeîais, l'histoire bien connue à propos du tour que M. de Grignols joua à Anne, lui apprenant « quelque petite sallaudrie » au moment où elle s'apprêtait à interviewer quelques ambassadeurs espagnols (Œuvres, éd. Lalanne, vii. 316-7; Gabory, op. cit., page 252).

396

The Création ofBrittany

nombre de femmes italiennes extraordinaires de son époque ou les filles de Thomas More (119). Mais avec les modifications qu'il convient d'y apporter, le fait, souligné par Le Roux de Lincy, que la bibliothèque d'Anne ait contenu une majorité d'ouvrages se rapportant à des sujets de piété, de science, de philologie et d'histoire plutôt que des œuvres profanes, des romans de chevalerie ou des fabliaux, renferme une observation importante sur l'évolution des modes et des goûts littéraires (120). Le nombre croissant de poésies originales, d'allégories politiques et spirituelles et d'ouvrages commémoratifs, même éphémères, rassemblés par la reine après 1500, de même qu'un intérêt grandissant pour l'histoire écrite de la manière la plus moderne et authentique qui soit, sont un trait caractéristique. Comme Gabory l'a signalé, Anne a souvent été accusée de mauvais goût parce qu'elle encourageait des écrivains comme les rhétoriqueurs, dont les efforts apparents pour créer des effets, étaler leur érudition et utiliser des rythmes barbares aux dépens de la beauté de la langue, ont rebuté la critique moderne jusqu'à une époque récente. Mais « on peut répondre qu'ils passaient pour être les meilleurs de leurs temps ; de leurs défauts, c'est l'époque qu'il faut accuser » (121). Les raisons pour lesquelles ils écrivaient de cette manière commencent maintenant à être mieux comprises ; ils trouvèrent chez la reine un éminent protecteur, même si beaucoup de poètes, d'artistes et d'écrivains n'ont peut-être été que très brièvement en relation avec elle. A mesure que les goûts de la reine changeaient, l'octroi de ses faveurs changeait aussi ; la carrière de Lemaire de Belges illustre admirablement ce point, de même que, à un moindre degré, celle de Jean Marot (122). Quelques-uns des personnages importants au service d'Anne, ses secrétaires ou hérauts, qui se trouvaient en présence de leur protectrice de façon plus permanente, ne ressentaient peut-être pas la même obligation d'attirer son attention sur eux grâce à la présentation d'œuvres littéraires. Les lamentations (119) Cf. les pages typiques de J. Burckhardt, The Civilization of thé Renaissance in Italy, trad. S.G.C. Middlemore (Londres, 1955), pages 240-3. (120) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 34. (121) Gabory, op. cit., page 160, et cf. l'importance de l'estime attribuée aux buts des rhétoriqueurs par Jodogne (ci-dessus n. 104). (122) Bien que Lemaire de Belges dédiât des œuvres à la reine dès 1504, il n'entra pas à son service avant 1512 (Jodogne, op. cit., pages 12931). Pour Marot, voir Fleurs, éd. Chesney, page 101. En 1507, la reine l'envoya en Italie en compagnie de Louis XII pour faire la chronique de la guerre contre Gênes (cf. Appendice I n. 15).

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

397

générales provenant de tant de plumes à la mort d'Anne en 1514 peuvent être interprétées, non seulement comme un signe d'affection envers la reine disparue, mais elles peuvent aussi être comprises comme une campagne concertée d'écrivains individuels pour s'attirer l'attention des successeurs d'Anne entre les mains de qui l'avenir se trouvait désormais (123). De toutes les reines de France, Anne semble être la première à avoir été une protectrice très recherchée ; par voie de conséquences, il paraît naturel qu'elle utilise ses ressources pour promouvoir l'art. Ceci marque une nouvelle étape dans le développement, à la cour royale, d'une vie plus riche, marchant sur les traces de la cour de Bourgogne (124). Ce qu'on pourrait appeler « un patronage passif » semble être reflété dans un certain nombre d'ouvrages dédiés à la reine, particulièrement ceux qui étaient imprimés, bien que, de toute évidence, elle ait entretenu des relations personnelles avec certains de ces imprimeurs qui lui procuraient, venues tout droit de leur imprimerie, des copies de luxe d'oeuvres sur vélin, ornées d'illustrations peintes à la main (125). Mais un patronage plus actif et des préférences plus personnelles sont clairement présents dans la composition de manuscrits. Le choix d'enlumineurs de premier ordre pour décorer certains d'entre eux et les dépenses considérables occasionnées par leur décoration soulignent l'étroite relation qui existait entre Anne et ses protégés (126). Ce détail est décelé de la même manière dans les manuscrits qui, par rapport à la qualité normale, présentent des idiosyncrasies ou un déclin dans la calligraphie et la qualité de la peinture parce qu'ils étaient entièrement créés ou supervisés par l'auteur lui-même pour être offerts à la reine comme cadeau (127). On s'attendait à ce qu'elle-même, en retour, témoigne quelque sentiment de gratitude face à de telles marques de considération, en négligeant certaines imperfections (123) Cf. Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 213-4, 221 et seq. ; Jodogne, op. cit., pages 136-7 ; M. M. de la Garanderie, « Les épitaphes latines d'Anne de Bretagne par Germain de Brie », Annales de Bretagne, Ixxiv (1967), 377-96. (124) Cf. Œuvres... de Brantôme, éd. Lalanne, vii. 314. Pour l'élaboration de la vie à la cour royale au XVIe siècle, voir Frances A. Yates, Astraea. The Impérial Thème in thé Sixteenth Century (Londres, 1975), pages 121-214. (125) Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 35-6. (126) Cf. Appendice I n08 1, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, etc... (127) Ibid., n09 10 et 13, par exemple.

398

The Création ofBrittany

du manuscrit achevé. Le mélange de naïveté et de complexité que renferment beaucoup de ces ouvrages, aussi bien dans le style de la décoration que dans le contenu, et les associations personnelles, est une autre observation sur la vie culturelle de la cour de France, à un niveau plus privé, et sur les goûts personnels de la reine. Tout autant que les princes italiens ou les gouvernements républicains, les rois et les reines de France appréciaient l'art pour les services qu'il pouvait rendre à l'Etat. Jean Perréal, un ami intime de Lemaire de Belges, fut responsable de l'organisation du cérémonial de beaucoup d'entrées d'Anne et de ses consorts, dont l'allégorie et le symbolisme sont encore un autre reflet de cet intérêt pour l'instruction et l'information de tous les niveaux de la société, grâce à des tableaux et d'autres expositions le long de l'itinéraire de tels défilés. Perréal créa aussi des médailles commémorant ces événements (128), une autre mode inspirée de l'Italie, mais il se plaça aussi dans une honorable tradition française quand il prépara la représentation, presque d'après nature, de la reine à l'occasion de ses funérailles (129). Le mélange de traditions françaises et italiennes, gothiques et classiques, qui est caractéristique de toutes les formes artistiques en France pendant cette période, devient de plus en plus visible dans le cas des œuvres créées pour Anne, et ses manuscrits n'en sont pas les moindres. Personnifiée dans les premiers poèmes comme sainte Anne, elle finit par être représentée, donnant une réception, symbolisée comme « Juno Regina Dearum » (130), dans un des derniers ouvrages produit pour elle, tant les tendances à s'inspirer du classique ont été poussées loin. Anne, donc, semble avoir été réceptive aux idées nouvelles et au remaniement des idées traditionnelles apportés par les humanistes rassemblés autour d'elle, même si son patronage ne fut pas aussi impérieux que celui de Marguerite d'Autriche, ni aussi judicieux que celui d'Isabella de Portugal, duchesse de Bourgogne, à la (128) Ci-dessus n. 93. (129) Giesey, op. cit., page 79 et seq. (130) Appendice I n . 38 ; Grand, M.S.H.A.B., xxix (1949), 45-70. Dans une version des Illustrations, livre 3, publiée par Geoffroy de Marnef à Paris en 1513, l'enluminure est inversée et simplifiée, et le message de l'inscription a été subtilement changé pour donner DIVE IVNONI ARMONICE SACRUM (Abélard, op. cit., page 113).

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

399

génération précédente (131). Et bien que des spéculations dans un tel domaine soient généralement hasardeuses, il est intéressant de méditer sur les formes que son patronage aurait pu prendre si elle avait vécu plus longtemps. Car comme le montre cet exposé limité de certains de ses nombreux intérêts, il est possible de suivre le cheminement d'un net progrès intellectuel au cours de la vie de la reine, comme l'illustre sa collection de manuscrits, sous réserve de toujours se souvenir que le rôle d'Anne dans l'élaboration de certains d'entre eux a été mineur. Cependant, il est bien évident qu'on prenait en général la peine de ne pas offrir à une protectrice ce qu'elle ne désirait pas et dans certains cas, quand nous avons une connaissance précise de la commande de la reine, toute équivoque disparaît (132).

(131) Jodogne, op. cit., pour Marguerite; C.C. Willard, « Isabel of Portugal, patronesse of Humanism ? », Miscellanea di studi e ricerche sut Quattrocento Francese, éd. Franco Simone (Torino, 1967), pages 517-44. (132) Je voudrais remercier Mlle Christiane Guillevin pour la traduction de cet article.

400

The Création ofBrittany

APPENDICE I A. - Manuscrits offerts à Anne ou contenant des indications qu'elle les possédait. 1. Très petites heures (vers 1492) - B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. latin 3120, 163 fos., 66 x 46 mm. MSS. à peintures n. 273 ; Le Livre (Bibliothèque Nationale, 1972), n. 215 ; Manuscrits offerts à la Bibliothèque Nationale par le comte Guy du Boisrouvray, n. 24 ; Enrichissements 1961-1973 (Bibliothèque Nationale, 1974), n. 647. 2. Heures, dites d'Anne de Bretagne (vers 1498) - Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 18, 115 fos., 120 x 80 mm. Anne de Bretagne, n. 65. Pour les opinions de Delisle, cf. Cabinet, iii. 346-7, et Grandes Heures, pages 54-5 ; Catalogue général, Nantes, pages 4-5. 3. Robert du Herlin, L'Acort des mesdisans et bien disans (terminé le 13 décembre 1493) - Bibl. de l'Arsenal, MS. 3658, 19 fos., 186 X 106 mm. Cabinet, iii. 343-4 ; M. Pecqueur, « Répertoire des manuscrits de la Bibl. de l'Arsenal peints aux armes de leur premier possesseur (XIIP-XVIP siècles) », Bull d'information de l'Institut de recherche et d'histoire des textes, 4 (1956), 127 ; Ch. Samaran et R. Maréchal, Catalogue des manuscrits en écriture latine portant des indications de date, de lieu ou de copiste ; Musée Condé et bibliothèques parisiennes (Paris, 1959), page 167. 4. Alberto Cattaneo, Histoire des rois de France de Francion à Charles VIII, en latin (fin du XVe siècle) - Bibl. de l'Arsenal, MS. 1096, 58 fos., 290 x 197 mm. Bull. Inst. textes, 4 (1956), 118; Samaran et Maréchal, op. cit., i. 133. 5. Guillaume Fillastre, Histoire de la Toison d'Or, livre I (vers 1492-vers 1498) - B.N., MS. fr. 138, 290 fos., 485 X 360 mm. MSS. à peintures n. 353 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 75 ; G. Doutrepont, La littérature française à la cour des ducs de Bourgogne, pages 161-70.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

401

6. Pièces piae (vers 1495) - New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, MS. M. 50, 31 fos., 120 X 80 mm. B. da Costa Greene et M.P. Harrsen, The Pierpont Morgan Library, Exhibition of llluminated Manuscripts held at thé New York Public Library, 1934, pages 55-6 ; Census, ii. 1375, n. 50, et cf. A. Richard, « Livre de prières attribué à Anne de Bretagne», B.E.C., xxxviii (1877), 389-93. Pour le texte, voir G. Pawlowski, Les Patenostres de la reine Anne de Bretagne (Paris, 1903). 7. Grandes Heures (vers 1500-vers 1508) - B.N., MS. latin 9474, 248 fos., 300 X 195 mm. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 46-83 ; Cabinet, iii. 345-7 ; Delisle, Grandes Heures, passim ; V. Leroquais, Les livres d'heures, i. 298-305 ; MSS. à peintures n. 349 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 53. Les miniatures ont été souvent reproduites - cf. H. Omont, Heures d'Anne de Bretagne (Paris, 1907) et E. Mâle, Les heures d'Anne de Bretagne (Paris, éditions Verve, 1946). 8. Petites heures (vers 1499-vers 1514) - B.N., MS. Nouv. acq. latin 3027, 78 fos., 170 X 120 mm. Leroquais, Supplément aux livres d'heures manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale (Maçon, 1943), 1-5 ; MSS. à peintures n. 358 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 71. 9. Plutarque, Le discours sur le mariage de Pollion et d'Eurydice (1499) - Leningrad, Bibl. publique de l'Etat Saltikov-Chtchédrine, MS. fr. Q. v. III. 3, 46 fos., 245 X 165 mm. Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 215 ; Laborde, ii. 132-3 ; Brayer, Bull. Inst. textes, 1 (1958). 10. Pierre Choque, Relation du voyage et du sacre de la reine d'Hongroie (1502) - British Library, Stowe MS. fols. 69-78, 185 X 260 mm (ms. coupé), dix feuilles séparées seulement du manuscrit terminé avec miniatures ; B.N., MS. français 90, 7 fols., 440/900 X 630/650 mm, brouillon original de l'auteur, avec le texte complété, mais manquant des miniatures et quelques écussons. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 43-5 ; iii. 201-5 (B.N., MS. seulement). Pour le texte, voir idem, « Discours des cérémonies du mariage d'Anne de Foix de la maison de France avec Ladislas VI, roi de Bohème, de Pologne et de Hongroie, précédé du discours du voyage de cette reine dans la seigneurie de Venise, le tout mis en écrit du commandement d'Anne, reine de France, duchesse

402

The Création ofBrittany de Bretagne par Pierre Choque dit Bretagne, l'un de ses rois d'armes (mai 1502) », B.E.C., xxi (1861), 156-185, 422-439. Il y a quelques petites omissions dans ce texte.

11. Olivier Le Rouyer, Traité de l'Eglise, de ses ministres et de la messe (avant le 17 juillet 1505) - Chantilly, Musée Condé, MS. 159, papier, 80 fos., 213 X 147 mm. Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques, Paris, Bibliothèques de l'Institut, Musée Condé à Chantilly ... (1928). 12. Pierre Le Baud, Le livre des cronicques des roys, ducs et princes de Bretaigne armoricane aultrement nommée la moindre Bretaigne (terminé avant le 19 septembre 1505) - British Library, Harleian, MS. 4371} 357 fos., 353 X 250 mm. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 37-8. Le texte fut édité par le sieur d'Hozier en 1638. 13. André de la Vigne, Commant la Roy ne à Sainct Denys sacrée... à Paris elle fit son entrée (vers 1505) - Waddesdon Manor, Buckinghamshire, MS. 22, 64 fos., 199 X 149 mm (a souffert de coupures). L.M.J. Délaissé, J. Marrow et J. de Wit, The James A. Rothschild Collection at Waddesdon Manor. llluminated Manuscripts (Londres-Fribourg, 1977), pages 471-86. Pour le texte, voir H. Stein, « Le sacre d'Anne de Bretagne et son entrée à Paris en 1504», Mémoires de la Société d'histoire de Paris et d'Ile-de-France, xxix (1902), 268-304. 14. Antoine du Four, Vie des femmes illustres (vers 1505) - Nantes, Musée Dobrée, MS. 17, 77 fos., 320 X 215 mm. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 39-40 ; iv. 216 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 76. Pour le texte, voir éd. G. Jeanneau, Genève, 1970. 15. Jean Marot, Le voyage de Gennes (après mai 1507) - B.N., MS. fr. 5091, 40 fos., 320 X 210 mm. B. de Montfaucon, Les monuments de la monarchie française (5 vol., Paris, 1729-33), iv. 96-103 ; Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 218-9 ; MSS. à peintures n. 352 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 56. Pour les miniatures, voir C. Couderc, Les miniatures du Voyage de Gênes de Jean Marot d'après le manuscrit fr. 5091 de la Bibliothèque Nationale (Paris, 1928). Pour le texte, voir éd. G. Trisolini, Genève, 1974.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

403

16. Auteurs divers, Epistres en vers français (vers 1509-vers 1511) - Leningrad, Bibl. publique de l'Etat Saltikov-Chtchédrine, MS. fr. F. v. XIV. 8, 112 fos., 295 X 195 mm. Montfaucon, op. cit., iv. 107-115 ; Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 217-8 ; Laborde, ii. 147-9 ; Gabory, pages 158-9 ; Beard, Bibl. d'humanisme et renaissance, xxxi (1969), 27-38. 17. Jean Lemaire de Belges, Le dyalogue de vertu militaire et de jeunesse française, et d'autres poèmes (vers 1511-2) - B.N., 25295, 22 fos., 200 x 130 mm. Cabinet, i. 125, n. 15. Pour les textes, voir K.M. Munn, A Contribution to thé study of Jean Lemaire de Belges (New York, 1936 - réédité, Genève, 1975), pages 158-77 ; Jodogne, Lemaire de Belges, pages 386-95. 18. Pierre Choque, La Cordelière (1513) - B.N., MS. fr. 13 fos., 293 X 201 mm.

1672,

Le Roux de Lincy, i. 188; iv. 220; Cabinet, i. 125, n. 13; C. de la Roncière, Histoire de la marine française, iii. 92-104. 19. Maximien, La vie de Saincte Anne, et d'autres poèmes à l'honneur d'Anne (vers 1499-vers 1515) - Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 652, 21 fos., 210 X 144 mm. Munn, op. cit., pages 91-2, 148-57 ; Jodogne, op. cit., page 138.

B. - Manuscrits contenant des indications d'une possession en commun avec Charles VIII ou Louis XII. 20. André de la Vigne, Ressource de la Chrétienté (ou Le Vergier d'Honneur) (vers 1495) - B.N., MS. 1687. Cabinet, i. 95-6. 21. La ressource de la Monarchie chrestienne promise (vers 1495) - B.N., MS. fr. 20055 fos. 1-51. Wickersheimer, Mélanges E. Picot, ii. 543-5. 22. Guilloche de Bourdeaux, La prophétie du roi Charles VIII, ensemble l'exercice d'icelle (vers 1495) - B.N., MS. fr. 1713. Cabinet, i. 95-6. Pour le texte, voir C.G. de Cherrier, Histoire de Charles VIII, roi de France (2 t., Paris, 1871), ii. 487-90.

404

The Création ofBrittany

23. Darès le Phrygien, De excidio Troiae, dans une traduction française par Maître Robert Frescher (vers 1500) - B.N., MS. fr. 9735. Cabinet, i. 124 ; Catalogue général, Bibliothèque Nationale (1896), 30-1. 24. Pontificale ad usum Gallicanum (fin du XVe siècle) - Edward Laurence, Doheny Mémorial Library, St John's Seminary, Camarillo, California, MS. 3929. C.U. Paye et W.H. Bird, Supplément to thé Census of Médiéval and Renaissance Manuscripts in thé United States and Canada (New York, 1962), page 12, n. 42, où on trouve les armes d'Anne, du dauphin et du roi de France. Mary Gayle, bibliothécaireconservateur de la collection Estelle Doheny, m'a gentiment envoyé des informations qui montrent que le manuscrit fut compilé à l'origine pour un évêque dont les armoiries apparaissent quatorze fois (Dans les quartiers 1 et 4, gueules, une croix anillée d'argent, 2 et 3, azur, une clé d'argent). Etant donné que le Pontifical comprend une version du sacre royal, son premier possesseur a peut-être assisté à celui de Charles VIII en 1484 ou à celui de la reine en 1492. Les armes d'Anne apparaissent quatre fois, celles du dauphin cinq fois et celles du roi huit fois. Ce qui laisse suggérer peut-être que le Pontifical était en possession de la famille royale aux alentours de 1495. Ensuite, il semble que le volume soit passé aux mains d'un membre de la famille de Pompadour, selon toute vraisemblance Geoffroi, évêque d'Angoulême (1465), de Périgueux (1472) et de Puy-en-Velay (1486), grand aumônier de France, qui mourut en 1514, parce que les armes (Dans les quartiers 1 et 4, azur, trois tours d'argent, 2 et 3, azur, un bras recouvert d'habit d'or, avec un manipule tenant une fleur-de-lis également d'or) ont été peintes par-dessus celles du possesseur original sur f. 3. 25. Epistolae P. Fausti Andrelini Forloviensis (vers 1510) - Chantilly, Musée Condé, MS. 890, fos. 1-20 v., 185 X 118 mm. Catalogue général... Musée Condé (1928). 26. Clément V, Constitutiones cum commenta Johannis Andreae (fin du XIVe siècle) - Philadelphia, Etats-Unis, Free Library, John Frederick Lewis Collection, MS. 65, 196 fos., 160 X 120 mm. Edwin Wolff II, The John Frederick Lewis Collection of European Manuscripts in thé Free Library of Philadelphia (Philadelphia, 1937), pages 71-2 - Manuscrit relié avec une couverture qui porte les armes d'Anne et de Louis XII.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

405

C. - Manuscrits maintenant perdus qui furent en possession d'Anne. 27. Heures - Jadis Lyon, Bibl. des Cordeliers. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 84-5 ; Delisle, Grandes heures, pages 53-4 ; Gabory, page 157. 28. Ancien testament, dans une traduction française d'Antoine du Four - Autrefois dans la Bibliothèque du Chancelier Séguier. Le Roux de Lincy, h'. 38-9 ; Cabinet, i. 124, n. 3 ; Gabory, page 163. 29. Vingt et une epistres des dames illustres, traduites par l'evesque à"Angoulesme [Octovien de Saint-Gelais] (avant 1502) - Jadis Collection Libri. Cabinet, iii. 347 (avec de grandes réserves). 30. Faustus Andrelinus, Poésies latines (vers 1509-10) - Jadis à Paris, Musée du Louvre, Collection Motteley. M. François Avril, conservateur de la Bibliothèque Nationale, a suggéré que ce manuscrit a été détruit durant l'incendie des Tuileries pendant la commune de Paris, 1870, mais cf. n. 25 ci-dessus aussi. Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 212, 220-1 ; Cabinet, i. 125, n. 9. 31. Antiphonaire - Fragmenté et dispersé dans différentes collections du XIXe siècle ; ce qu'il est maintenant advenu de ces feuillets est incertain. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 86 ; Cabinet, i. 124, n. 2. 32. Antoine du Four, Epistres de S. Jérôme (1505) - Jadis dans la Bibliothèque Impériale de Russie, Saint-Pétersbourg. Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 216-7 ; Cabinet, i. 124, n. 4 ; Laborde, ii. 146-7, où il est dit que le manuscrit a, par la suite, été envoyé à Moscou. N'est pas cité dans Bull. Inst. textes, 1 (1958), par Brayer. 33. Un livre d'heures enluminé par Jean Poyet (vers 1495-6) - Les tentatives d'assimiler ce livre d'heures à ceux qui existent encore ne sont pas convaincantes - Cf. Cabinet, i. 124, n. 1 ; iii. 345-7 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 26 ; Catalogue général, Nantes, pages 4-5.

406

The Création ofBrittany

D. - Des manuscrits autres que ceux qui ont été offerts, contenant des œuvres dédiées à Anne ou associées à elle. 34. Jean Marot, Le vray disant advocate des dames (1506) - B.N., MS. fr. 9225, f. 23-40. Pour le texte, voir A. de Montaiglon et J. de Rothschild, Recueil de poésies françaises des XV et XVIe siècles, x (Paris, 1875), 225-68. 35. Jean Marot, Prières sur la restauration et la sanctê de madame Anne de Bretaigne, royne de France (1512) - B.N., MS. fr. 1539. Le Roux de Lincy, ii. 197 ; iv. 213 ; Cabinet, i. 125, n. 12 ; Gabory, page 161 ; Jodogne, page 131, n. 3. 36. Jean Lemaire de Belges, La plainte du désiré (1504) - B.N., MS. fr. 1683. Jodogne, op. cit., page 129. 37. Jean Lemaire de Belges, Les XXII11 coupletz de la valitude de la Royne fait à Bloys le second jour d'avril l'an de grâce 1511 avant Pasques (1512) - Genève, Bibl. publ. et universitaire, MS. fr. 74, jadis MS. Petau 117, copie de l'auteur. B.E.C., Ixx (1909), 491-2 ; Jodogne, op. cit., page 129. 38. Jean Lemaire de Belges, Troisième livre des Illustrations de Gaule et Singularitez de Troye (1512) - Berne, Bibl. mun., MS. 241, copie de l'auteur, mais peut-être destinée à être présentée à la reine. Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 219-220 ; Cabinet, i. 124, n. 7 ; Munn, op. cit., pages 85-6 ; Grand, M.S.H.A.B., xxix (1949), 45-70 ; Abélard, op. cit., page 182. Je suis très reconnaissant, pour les informations concernant ce manuscrit, à M. C. Steiger, bibliothécaire de la ville de Berne. 39. Les Quatre Etats de la Société (vers 1500) - Paris, Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Beaux-Arts, Collection Masson, 1 f., 350 X 350 mm. G. Ring, A Century of French Painting 1400-1500 (Londres, 1949), page 241, n. 321 A ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 52. 40. François Robertet, Trois rondeaux sur « Non Muderà » (environ 1510) - B.N., MS. fr. 1717, fol. 12 v.-13 v., copie du milieu du XVIe siècle. Je dois ma connaissance de ce manuscrit à la communication de M. Segalen. Je voudrais le remercier pour ses aimables conseils et, sous le même titre, M. Brejon de Lavergnée.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

407

4l. Disarouez Penguern, La généalogie de treshaulte, trespuissante, tresexcellente et trescrestienne royne de France et duchesse de Bretaigne (1510) - B.N., MS. fr. 24043, 43 fos., 190 X 271 mm (quelques initiales décorées seulement, mais bien écrit comme copie de présentation). Le texte a été édité dans P. Le Baud, Le Uvre des Cronicques, éd. le sieur d'Hozier (Paris, 1638), 2e partie, 123-188.

APPENDICE

II

LA MORT ET LES FUNÉRAILLES DE LA REINE ANNE Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 224-5, relève onze copies dans la Bibliothèque Nationale de la Commémoration et advertissement de la mort de très crestienne, très haulte, très puissante et très excellante princesse, ma très redoublée et souveraine dame, madame Anne deux foys royne de France, duchesse de Bretaigne, seulle héritière d'icelle noble duché, comtesse de Monfort, de Richemont, d'Estampes et de Vertuz, ensaignement de sa progéniture et complaincte que fait Bretaigne son premier hérault et l'un de ses roys d'armes, et note l'existence d'au moins quatre autres copies dans différentes bibliothèques. Chesney (Fleurs de Rhétorique, page 98) a pu citer quelque dix-neuf copies et quand la meilleure copie fut exposée en 1972 quelque seize copies furent mentionnées (Le Livre, n. 573). On a compilé la liste suivante : B.N., MS. fr. 5094, copie élaborée pour Louise de Savoie, duchesse d'Angoulême (Le Livre, n. 573). Ibid., MS. fr. 5095, copie pour Catherine de Foix, reine de Navarre. Ibid., MS. fr. 5096, copie pour Charles de Bourbon. Ibid., MS. fr. 5097, une copie dédicatoire à une personne inconnue. Ibid., MS. fr. 5098, copie pour Jean d'Albret, seigneur d'Orval. Ibid., MS. fr. 5100, copie pour Renée de Bourbon, abbesse de Fontevrault. Ibid., MS. fr. 5101, copie pour Françoise d'Albret.

408

The Création ofBrittany

Ibid., MS. fr. 18537, copie pour Philippe de Gueldre, reine de Sicile. Ibid., MS. fr. 23936, copie pour Louise de Coëtivy, comtesse de Taillebourg. Ibid., MS. fr. 25158, copie pour Claude de France. Ibid., MS. Nouv. acq. fr. 74 (anc. Archives Impériales, MS. 913), copie pour Guy XVI, comte de Laval. Ibid., MS. Clairambault 483, copie sans dédicace. Bibl. de l'Arsenal, MS. 5224, copie pour Marie de Luxembourg. Paris, Musée du Petit Palais, Collection Dutuit, MS. 644. Paris, Ecole des Beaux-Arts, MS. 490, copie pour un comte (?). Nantes, Bibl. mun., MS. 653, copie pour une dame de la maison de Bourbon. Le Mans, Bibl. mun., MS. 208, copie pour Guillaume de Loyon, écuyer. Rennes, Bibl. mun., MS. 332, copie pour les gens de la Chambre des Comptes de Bretagne. Lyon, Bibl. mun., MS. 894, copie sans dédicace. Grenoble, Bibl. mun., MS. 1024, copie sans dédicace. Leningrad, Bibl. publ. Saltikov-Chtchédrine, MS. fr. Q. v. IV. 3. Ibid., MS. fr. Q. v. IV. 7 (Laborde, ii. n. 143). Venise, Bibl. Marciana, App. Cod. XII (CIV. 3 : Bernardo Nani), copie pour Henri VIII, roi d'Angleterre. Londres, British Library, Stowe MS. 584, copie pour le sire de Betton. Ibid., Additional MS. 6277, copie pour le comte de Vertuz. Ibid., Additional MS. 45131, fos. 96v-136r, une copie du XVIe s. d'après B.N., MS. fr. 5095. Ibid., Cotton. MS. Vespasian B iii, copie pour un duc inconnu. Jadis Phillipps, MS. 261. Vatican (j'ai tiré cette référence du livre de Chesney, sans autre indication). On peut trouver une version légèrement abrégée sans les rondeaux d'André de la Vigne dans : B.N., MS. fr. 5099. Une autre copie (Chartres, Bibl. mun., MS. 396) fut détruite pendant la guerre de 1939-45.

Les manuscrits d'Anne de Bretagne

409

On peut trouver un récit différent des funérailles dans Le trespas de l'Hermine regrettée : Paris, Musée du Petit Palais, Collection Dutuit, MS. 665 (Le Roux de Lincy, iv. 224-5 ; Ring, Burlington Magazine, xcii (1950), 258, n. 21 ; Anne de Bretagne, n. 42). Le texte de Choque a été publié dans Récit des funérailles d'Anne de Bretagne, précédé d'une complainte sur la mort de cette princesse et de sa généalogie. Le tout composé par Bretaigne, son héraut d'armes. Publié pour la première fois avec une introduction et des notes par L. Merlet et Max. de Gombert (Paris, 1858). Bibl. de l'Arsenal, MS. 1178, contient De obitu domine Anne, fronde regine compendium de Michel Lanier.

Additional Note In 'L'aptitude à lire et à écrire des ducs de Bretagne à la fin du Moyen Age et un usage précoce de l'imprimerie', MSHAB, Ixii (1985), 37-531 hâve examined thé cultural life of thé ducal family and court in greater détail. Of thé manuscripts listed in Appendice I above, no. 6 has recently been more fully described in The Last Flowering: French Painting in Manuscripts 1420-1530 from American Collections, compiled byJohn Plummer, New York & London 1982, pp. 88-9, where thé hand of Jean Poyet of Tours has been discerned in thé minatures and a date of 1490-1 assigned to thé manuscript. Poyet was also responsible for a now lost Book of Hours painted for Anne in thé period 1495-7 (Appendice I no. 33). A limited modem facsimile édition of thé Commémoration was printed from thé copy presented to thé countess of Tonnerre, thé whereabouts of which is at présent unknown. A copy of thé facsimile édition may be found in thé library of thé abbey of Landevénnec, référence B IV B 5. I am grateful to Brother Marc Simon, librarian, for allowing me to see it.

This page intentionally left blank

INDEX

Places now within the five modern departements which replaced the former province and duchy of Brittany in 1789 are identified by the abbreviations: CN (C6tes-du-Nord), F (Finistere), IV (Ille-etVilaine), LA (Loire-Atlantique) and M (Morbihan). Other places in France are indicated by departement and those in England by the traditional counties. Entries with the articles La and Le and the prefix Saint(e) are indexed separately. Within family entries general references are given first, then seriatim, holders of lordships, followed by other members of the family. References to Brittany have been subdivided into a number of sections, starting with its rulers by name, rights of the dukes, administration and institutions of the duchy, its military organisation and miscellaneous matters. Abelard, Peter 310, 313, 317 Acigne(IV) 47 Acre, Breton hospital at 107 Adela, see Rennes, abbey of St Georges Adobed, Ruald 83n Adour, river 184 Aesop 383 Agenais 57 Agincourt, battle of (1415) 79,263 Aides 9,51,228 —, royal 239, 242n, 245, 255-6 Aiselin, Geoffrey 74, 76n, 84n Alan, son of Guerech 25 Albret, Alain, lord of 354-5, 367 —, Frangois d' 407 —, Jean d', lord of Orval 407 Alengon, family of 106 —, Jean I, duke of 252, 256 —Jean II, duke of 45, 125, 252, 329n —, Pierre, count of 42, 252n, 256, 274n —, household of 259n Alet(IV) 17, 19 —, Benoit, bishop of 70n Alexander IV, pope 121n Alietar, Soloman 106 Alliance 226-7, 285n, 301 n, 315 Alnet, Yvo d' 301 Alverso, Ruelent de 82 Alyre, Gabriel 321 n Amboise (Loir et Cher) 345-6, 380 Amice, Oliver 45 Amiens (Somme) 305 Ancenis (LA) 25-6, 47-8, 51, 54-6, 363n

—, family of 25-6, 208 —, Geoffrey, lord of 104n —, Guihenoc, lord of 25 —, Guillaume d' 208 Andre, Guillaume 38, 134-5 Andreae, Ywain, son of 82 Andrelinus, Faustus 391, 394, 404-5 Angemont, lord of 194 Angers (Maine et Loire) 29, 34, 106, 132, 146, 203, 208, 295, 304-5 —, abbey of St Aubin d' 26 —, abbey of St Serge d' 87 —, cathedral of St Maurice d' 136 —, Dominicans of 106 —, Franciscans of 106, 305 —, merchants of 252 —, Sachets of 106 —, university of 137, 139n, 141, 285, 297-9, 318-25 Angevins 4, 5, 31, 105; see also England, kings of Angleterre, see England Angouleme (Charente), Geoffroi, bishop of 404 —, Louise de Savoie, duchess of 407 Anjou 21-3, 26, 29, 32, 45, 57, 76, 103-4,122, 221,288,353 —.counts of 4, 15,25,30 —, Fulke, count of 333 —, Geoffrey Martel, count of 25 —, customary law of 296, 318 —, dukes of 240, 257 —, Louis I, duke of 136, 241, 256, 258, 268,

412

The Création ofBrittany

297, 320, 324 —, —, Marie de Bretagne, wife of 268-9, 272, 274, 275n, 278, 281 —, René, duke of 376-7 Aquitaine 20 —, Commandery of 107 —, see also Gascony; Guyenne; Rainald Aragon 34 —, Ferdinand, king of 378 Arbalétrier, Hervé 1' 184 Arbre des Batailles, L' 318n, 379 Arc, Jeanne d' 394 Aremberg 25 Argentré, Bertrand d' 385 Arguenon, river lOln, 102 Armagnac, John V, count of 329n; see also Nemours Armorica 2, 73, 287 Arrouaise (Pas de Calais), abbey of St Nicolas d' 88 Artillery 9, 37-41, 55, 57-8,188,236, 345, 351, 354-5, 361-4, 369 —, inventories of 362 —, see also Brittany, army Artois 257 —, Robert of 201-2, 208, 213 Arthur, legends of King 72, 88, 206n, 304, 306n, 332, 384 Arundel (Sussex), earls of 77 —, Richard Fitzalan, earl of 180n, 270, 272, 275-7 —, William, earl of 78 Assise des Pledeours (1259) 122n Assise de Rachat (1276) 6, 98, 223; see also Rachat Assize of Count Geoffrey (1185) 84,108, 223-4 Aubigny, family of 74, 76, 78, 84, 86, 88 —, Guillaume d' 78, 84 —, Raoul d' 89 Auray (M) 31, 35, 130n, 206n, 260 —, battleof (1364) 35, 134, 159-61, 171, 182, 197, 201, 204, 208-9, 214, 250n, 266 —, St Michel d' 259 Austria, Marguerite of 398 Auton, Jean d' 390, 393 Auvergne 314, 364n Avaugour, family of 28, 106n, 123n —, Francis of 44, 58, 348, 360, 367 Aveley (Essex) 80n Avesbury, Robert of, chronicler 198, 210 Avéssac(LA) 328 Avignon (Vaucluse) 299, 318, 321 n Avranches (Manche) 47 —, diocèse of 29

Axholme (Lines), Isle of 74n Aydie, Odet d', lord of Lescun 146n, 359, 365-6 —, Perrot 366 Baderon, family of 74, 82; see also Monmouth Bagot.John 250n Baigorri (PBigorre), viscount of 194 Bail, rights of 5, 6, 97-8, 223; see also Rachat Ballon, Hamon de 74n Bangor, Hervé, bishop of 88 Barbelot, Michel 300n, 314n Bardoul, Olichon 31 In Barnstaple (Devon) 85, 87n Basic, council of 222 Basse-Bretagne 45 Bataille, Nicolas de 258 Batz(LA) 175, 181, 189n, 190n Baude, Bartholomew 280 Bayeux (Calvados) 363 —, tapestry 21-2 —, vicomte of 245n Bayonne (Pyrénées-Atlantiques) 45, 175, 179 183-90, 195 Béarn, vicomte of 9, 206, 208, 338; see also Foix Beauchamp, family of; see also Warwick —, Roger 268n —, William 275n, 278-9 Beaufort, Rogier de 285n Beaulieu, Guillaume de 366 Beaumanoir, Jean, lordof 108n, 226 —Jean Eder, lord of 108n —, Pierre, lord of 274n —, Jacques de, lord of Bois de la Motte 367 —, Jean de, lord of Bois de la Motte 232 Beaumanoir, Philippe de, jurist 332-3 Beaumont (Sarthe), viscounts of 105 Beauport (CN), abbey of 87, 102n Beauvais (Oise), Hugh, count of 333 Beauvoir (Vendée) 26 Bécherel (CN) 31, 37, 55, 160 Becdelièvre, Pierre 134n Bedale (Yorks), lords of 81 Bégard (CN), abbey of 87-8 Bego, see Château Bougon Belleville, Louis de 48 —, Maurice, lord of 99n Belvoir (Leics) 78, 80n, 88 Bennington, John 281 n Bentley, Sir Walter 202n Beré (LA), priory of 26, 103 Bérengar, Guillaume 135n, 323n Berkshire 79, 85, 86n Bermeo (Spain) 184 Berry, duchy of 122

Index —John (Jean), duke of 164n, 173, 258, 272, 274, 277, 279, 376 —, —, finances of 240-1, 255-6 —, —, household of 259n —, —, manuscripts of 318n Betton (IV), lord of 408 Bigorre, counts of 49 Billot 35-6, 51-2, 236 Billy, Girard de 130n Bily, Guillaume 129n Bino, Eon 245n Biscay, bay of 213 Blain (LA) 32, 42, 52, 54, 58 Blainville, lord of 274n Blaisy, Jean de 274n Blanchet, Jean 130n, 133n Blanot, Jean de 335 Blois (Loir et Cher) 25, 381, 389, 394n —, family of 209; see also Penthievre —, Guy, count of 203-4, 274n —, Louis, count of 203 —, Thibaud, count of 25 —, Henry of, see Winchester Blosset, Jean 357n Boccaccio, Giovanni 383, 394 Bocigne(CN) 102 Bocquen (CN), abbey of 102n, 122n Bodinjean 350 Bodmin (Cornwall), priory of 88 Bohemia, king of, see Hungary Bohun, see Northampton Bois de la Roche (M), manor of 131 Bois Onain (LA), lord of, see Machecoul Bonaguil (Lot) 57 Bon Repos (CN), abbey of 83n, 87 Bordeaux (Gironde) 19, 28, 248, 342n —, Arthur de Montauban, archbishop of 323 Boschet, see Quimper Boterel, Gaufridus 82 —Juliana 100 Botloy(CN) 100 Bouchage, madame de 390n Bochain (Nord) 347n Bouchard, Jean 184 Bouchart, Alain, chronicler 126, 128n, 142, 147n, 325-7, 354, 363, 364n, 375, 384-5 —Jacques 326 —, Nicolas 37, 243n Bouguenais (LA) 312n —, St Pierre de 247 Boulogne (Pas de Calais) 275 Bourbon, family of 126n, 408 —, dukes of 49, 124n, 257 —, Louis II, duke of 241, 256

413

—, Charles de, 407 —, Renee de, abbess of Fontevrault 407 Bourbriac (CN) 311 Bourchier, family of 201 —,John, lord 246n Bourdichonjean 385-6,391 Bourg des Moustiers (LA), priory of 299n Bourges (Cher) 318 Bourgneuf (LA) 47, 295, 310, 312n —, Franciscans of 317 Boutillier, Jean 336, 340 Bouvet, Honore 318n, 379; see also Arbre Bouzille (Maine et Loire) 288n Bovis, Mathieu 301 Brabanfons 22 Brabant (Belgium) 280n, 363n Brantome, Pierre, lord of Bourdeille 372-3, 395n Braose, family of 85 Brasca, Erasmo 388 Brech(M) 200n Breil, family of 138 —, Olivier du 146-7 Brest (F) 39, 45, 56, 197, 200, 212 —, castle of 34, 36, 45, 51, 177, 212-3, 251-2, 270, 272 —, —, siege of (1386-7) 251, 254, 271-2 Bretagne, family of; see also Penthievre —, Charles de 342-3 —, Francoise de 378 —, Edouard, bastard of 367 —, Gilles de 220, 344, 347 —, Guillaume de 343 —, Guy de 176, 266-9, 323n —, Isabelle de, countess of Laval 377 —, Marie de, abbess of La Magdalene, Orleans 378n —, Olivier de, see Penthievre Bretagne-Bretonnante 29, 305, 312-3, 319 Bretagne-Gallo 29, 313 Bretancourt, lady of 163n Bretigny, treaty of (1360) 266 Bretons, emigration of 70, 71 n, 72-3, 75-6 Brian, count, son of Eudo 74, 76 Brian FitzCount 90 Brian, Jordan, son of Raoul, son of 88 Briconnet, Guillaume, cardinal 126 —Jean 150 Brie, Germain de 387 Britannia major 3 Britannia minor 3 Brito, Ansgar 79 —, Herve, earl of Wiltshire 80 —, Mainfelin and sons 81

414

The Création ofBrittany

—, Ralph 89 —, Ranulfus 82 —, Robert and Henry 83 Britons, immigration of 3, 287 Brittany: see note at head of Index for subdivisions Brittany, duchy of, rulers of family of DreuxMontfort (1213-1514) 2, 9, 35, 54, 58, 140, 150, 176, 191, 197, 209-10, 221, 225, 265, 267-8,289,321,338,378 —, Alan, king of thé Bretons (d.907) 25 —, Alan Barbetorte (d.952) 3, 4, 15, 17, 25 —, Alan III (1008-40) 28, 74 —, Alan IV Fergent (1084-1113/6) 29, 73, 90 —, Anne (1488-1514) 7, 38, 47, 54-5, 58, 111, 114-5, 117, 126-7, 130, 150-1, 219, 232-3, 321n, 325, 327, 349, 357n, 360-1, 371-409 passim —, —, funeral of 372, 386-7, 398, 407-9 —, —, husbands of, see France, Charles VIII and Louis XII, kings of; Maximilian king of thé Romans —, —, manuscripts, list of 400-3 —, Arthur I (1186-1203) 4, 32 —, Arthur II (1305-12) 107, 148 —, Arthur III (1457-8) 114,123n, 145, 232, 359 —, —, as count of Richemont and constable of France 45, 48, 123n, 138, 139n, 234, 353-4, 359, 377n, 379 —, Charles de Blois (1341-64) 35, 113, 119-21, 123n, 124-5, 132,134-7,146,171n, 176,182, 197, 200, 203-5, 207n, 208-10, 212n, 213, 242, 264-7, 281, 291, 293-4, 295-8, 300n, 303, 305, 307n, 312n, 320, 323, 341 —, —, ransom of 264-7, 270, 281 —, —, sanctity of 203-4, 301, 303 —, —, —, inquiry into 132, 134-5, 146, 203, 295, 300 —, —, wife of, see Jeanne de Penthièvre below —, Conan I (970-92) 15 —, Conan II (1040-66) 4, 22, 26, 29, 30 —, —, Havoise, sister of 29 —, Conan III (1113/6-1148) 4, 31, 148 —, Conan IV (1154-71) 31, 99, 100 —, —, Constance, sister of 99 —, Constance (1171-1201) 4, 32, 100, 148 —, —, husbands of, see Geoffrey Plantagenet and Guy de Thouars below —, Francis I (1442-50) 10, 53, 114, 190, 231, 242n, 321 n, 324, 327n, 338, 344, 347, 354, 357, 359, 377, 379 —, —, Isabel of Scotland, wife of 190, 377-8 —, Francis II (1458-88) 10, 12, 38-9, 44, 47-9, 51, 55, 58, 112, 117, 122-3, 126-7, 128n,

129n, 130-2, 133n, 136, 138-9, 143-5, 146n, 147, 151, 157-8, 219, 221-2, 232-3, 235, 240, 257, 261n, 291, 321n, 324-5, 327n, 339, 345-9, 352, 354, 359-61, 363-5, 371, 374-8, 380, 383-4 —, —, béguin of 127, 128n, 130 —, —, engraved stamp of 122, 157-8 —, —, illegitimate daughter of, see Bretagne, Françoise de —, —, illegitimate son of, see Avaugour, Francis of —, —, Marguerite de Bretagne, first wife of 376-7, 383 —, —, Marguerite de Foix, second wife of 151, 327n, 371, 375, 379, 383 —, Geoffrey Plantagenet (1171-86) 4, 32; see also Assize of —, Grallon, mythical king of thé Bretons 259n, 303 —, Guy de Thouars (1203-13) 17, 32 —, Jeanne (Joan) de Penthièvre (d. 1384) 113, 123n, 135, 176, 197, 204, 209-11, 253, 265-6, 268-9, 293n, 298, 341 —, —, husband of, see Charles de Blois above —, —, Marie, daughter of, see Anjou, Louis, duke of —, John I (1237-86) 5, 6, 34-5, 96-9, 107, 116n, 117, 121-2, 140, 227n —John II (1286-1305) 5, 8, 17, 34, 96, 128n, 168n, 260, 291, 337 —John III (1312-41) 8, 34, 123-4, 144, 148, 160n, 168n, 197, 200, 209-11, 212n, 265, 287, 291-3, 296, 302-3, 341 —, —, Jeanne de Savoie, wife of 212n —John de Montfort (1341-5) 197, 200, 205-6, 209-13, 225, 265, 291, 293, 303-4, 312n, 327, 341 —, —Jeanne (Joan) de Flandre, wife of 197, 200, 202, 204-5, 207n, 210, 212-3, 265 —John IV (1345/64-99) 10, 36-40, 44-5, 48, 51-2, 113, 116n, 117, 121, 123n, 125, 127, 132n, 134-6, 138, 140, 142, 145,148,159-71, 175-8, 180, 183-4, 189n, 191-7, 204, 207-10, 214, 221-2, 225-6, 228, 235, 265-7, 271-3, 276-7, 281-4, 285n, 289-91, 293-4, 298-9, 300n, 302, 303, 306-7, 322-3, 326-7, 341-2 —, —, finances of 239-61 —, —, —, limitations of 258-61 —, —, —, sources of 241-2, 244-52 —, —, —, uses of 253-4 —, —, Jeanne, sister of 267 —, —, Joan Holland, second wife of 176-7, 267 —, —Joan (Jeanne Juana) of Navarre, third wifeof 123n, 136, 142n, 163n, 175, 177-80,

Index 183, 185-7, 189-96, 250, 277 —, —, —, dower lands of 246 —, —, —, manuscript of 258 —, —, interest in gardening 247, 260 —, —, love of music 259 —, —, Marie, daughter of 252 —, —, Mary, first wife of, see England, Edward III —, —, patronage of 258-60 —, —, relations with nobles 226-7 —, —, relations with Penthievre family 26582 passim —, —, seals of 159-81; see also Brittany, chancery —John V (1399-1442) 38, 41, 44-5, 47-8, 52-4, 113-4, 116-7, 121, 124-5, 131, 138, 142n, 143,160-1, 163-5, 168, 170n, 173-4, 192, 231-2, 242-3, 245n, 249, 252-3, 258n, 260, 282, 296n, 299, 306, 314, 317, 321n, 322-4, 342-4, 352, 356, 376n —, —, Jeanne de France, wife of 142n, 252, 343 —, Peter Mauclerc (1213-37) 5-7, 17, 32-3, 86n, 92, 96-7, 100, 111-3, 118, 121, 123, 168n,246 —, Peter II (1450-7) 48, 53, 114, 145, 149, 231-3, 235, 323, 357, 359, 369, 377 —, —, as count of Guingamp 53 —, Salomon, king of the Bretons (857-74) 29, 259n, 303 Brittany, dukes of, beguin of, see Brittany, funeral of dukes — brefs of, 245, 248 —, coronation of 10, 304, 339 —, crown of 10, 171n, 339 —, demesne of 32, 34, 44, 98, 108n, 211, 223, 241, 244-7, 253n, 259, 290 —, funeral of 10, 127, 128n, 151 —, Orders of 10; see also Epi; Ermine —, regalities of 8, 10-12, 112, 124, 139, 144, 245, 284, 292, 302-4, 321, 338-41 —, relations with France 1-12, 97-8, 115, 126-7, 139-40, 143-4, 150, 164-5, 174, 210, 219-37 passim, 283, 287-8, 290-2, 302, 330, 337-50 passim, 374-5 —, —, as peer of France 98, 204, 206, 212,221, 287, 290-2, 337 —, relations with dukes of Normandy 71, 287 —, relations with Breton nobility 96-9, 219-37 passim, 293-4 —, rights ofregaire (regale) 143, 144n, 245, 248-9, 293n, 339-40 — title of 123 —, —, on seals 159-81 passim —, —, par la grace de Dieu in 123, 144n, 148,

415

164-5, 192-3, 286n Brittany, duchy of, administration and institutions of: Chambre des comptes of 7, 9, 12, 119, 130n, 134n, 138, 228, 230, 241, 243, 253n, 289, 300n, 320n —, —, gens de 253, 408 —, —, seal of 170 —, chancellor of 11, 39, 112-4, 118, 120, 124-8, 130-2, 137-8, 140, 142, 146-7, 150, 157-8, 160, 166n, 177, 183, 253, 298, 299n, 322, 326 —, chancellors of, list of 152-4 —, chancery of 7,9, 10, 12,45, 111-58 passim, 192, 245, 286, 289, 339 —, —, diplomatic of 116-23, 144-6 —, —, irregularities in 146-9 —, —, organisation of 117-35, 144-6 —, —, political role of 139-42 —, —, records of 112-5, 130n, 131, 140-4 —, —, registration in 116, 142-4, 146, 155-6 —, —, seals of 116, 118-9, 121, 127-8, 130, 132, 144-6, 148 —, —, —, accounts 170 —, —, —, chancery 166, 170 —, —, —, departmental 169-70, 173 —, —, —, Great 121, 128, 159-66, 171, 172-4 —, —, —, Intaglio gem used as 171-2 —, —, —, majesty 121, 165 —, —, —, manufacture of 173 —, —, —, privy 121, 159, 165-9, 171, 173-4 —, —, —, secret 121, 159, 165-9, 173-4 _ _ _ signet 121, 159, 166, 170-4 —, contracts seals of 119n, 169-70, 245 —, council of 7,11, 12, 111-2,119,127-8,130, 132, 138-9, 141, 144, 147n, 148-9, 150, 157, 178, 183, 234, 253n, 269, 294, 298-9, 302, 321-5, 338, 345n, 346n, 347, 359, 365 —, court of 142, 191, 235, 258-60, 286, 300, 306, 325, 339,355-6, 374-5 —, Estates (Etats) of 9, 12, 111, 119, 127, 231-3, 289, 293, 321, 339, 343, 358 —, financial records of 242-3 —, grand maitre of 147n; see also Chastel, Tanguy du —, household of dukes 9, 10, 12, 131, 166,173, 180, 183, 191, 241, 243, 253, 259-60,355 —, —, size of 259n —, —, troops of 352, 355-9, 361 —, keeper (garde) of ducal archives of 113,128, 130n, 133n; see also Brittany, tresordes chartes of; BlanchetJ.; Le Grant, H.; Pontsal, Y. de —, Parlementof 6-9, 12, 98, 111, 119, 127, 144n, 148, 151, 230, 289, 293,321, 326, 337, 339, 343

416

The Creation of Brittany

—, —, greffier of, see Bouchart, Jacques —,—, seal of 151, 170 —, president of 53, 134n, 147n; see also Kerouzere, Eon de; Loisel, J. —, proctor-general of 146-7, 321n; see also Breil, O. du; Ferre, P.; La Lande, G. de —, receiver-general of 241, 243, 253 —, secretaries and clerks of 112-5, 119-20, 123-4, 127-30, 132-8, 140, 142, 157, 183, 230, 259, 295-6, 298, 322-3, 379 —, —, irregularities of 146-7 —, —, training of 135-9 —, taxation in 35, 228-9, 231, 236, 241-61 passim, 281, 290, 296, 339; see also aides; billot; fouages; impot —, tresorde I'epargne of 12, 229, 260 —, tresor des chartes des dues of 113, 148, 243 —, treasurer of 241, 243, 251n, 253n, 254; see also Lesmenez, R. de; Wyngreworth, G. de —, venality in 230 —, vicechancellor of 126n, 128, 131, 133, 136, 144-6, 151, 346 Brittany, duchy of, military organisation of: —, arms, manufacture of 364 —, army 9, 12, 339, 351-69 passim —, —, etats of 369 —, —, feudal resources of 352-3, 368 —, —, mercenaries in 354-5 —, —, morale of 364-5 —, —, numbers of troops 352-4 —, —, personnel, stability of 358-61 —, —, —, types of troops 353-6, 368 —, —, —, career structure of 355-8, 361, 364 —, artillery, clerk of 362; see also Gourdel, J. —, —, master of 39, 345, 347, 362 —, —, masters of, list of 369 —, Bon corps 353-5 —, castles 19-68 passim, 235-6, 254n, 265, 359 —, Francs archiers 347, 353, 355, 365 —, marshal of 39, 352, 355, 358; see also Rieux, Jean IV, lord of —, ordonnance companies 47-8, 126, 352-60, 365 —, —, captains of 366-7 —, prevot des marechaux 356n, 360; see also Kerazret, T. de; Coetlogon, Gilles de —, treasurer of wars 357 —, troops, rates of pay of 254, 353, 358n Brittany, duchy of, miscellaneous matters: —, arbitration of disputes in 98-9, 104 —, bishops of 8, 248; see also Dol; Nantes; Quimper; Rennes; St-Brieuc; St-Malo; St-Pol de Leon; Treguier; Vannes —, books in 300, 315-6, 326-7, 371-409 passim

—, castellan families in 25-31, 57, 103, 223 —, Celtic traditions in 304 —, civil war in (1341-64) 34-6, 49, 52, 54, 99, 113,125, 139,140,176,197-237 passim, 241, 246, 248, 266-8, 281-2, 289-91, 294, 302, 321, 341 —, —, divisions of parties in 225 —, —, origins of 209-12, 265, 293 —, —, reconstruction after 246-7, 289-90 —, coinage of 8, 11, 124, 164-5, 189n, 208, 245, 249, 286, 291, 304n, 340,353n —, commoners, status of 231-2 —, customary law of 12, 84, 124, 219, 223-4, 231, 288, 322-3; see also La tres ancienne coutume —, customs duty in 9, 247-8 —, education in 294-6, 300, 309-28 passim; see also Brittany, schools in; Nantes, university of —, ennoblement in 11, 124, 136, 228-33 —, feudal society of 3, 4, 24-31, 97, 101, 226, 351-2 —, forests, exploitation of 104, 247 —, forgeries in 148-9 —, frontiers of 44-9, 52, 57, 104-5, 234, 288, 339, 340n, 352, 363; see also Brittany, marches of —, greyhounds in 163-4 —, heraldry in 41, 144n, 148-9, 286 —, —, acquisition of arms 224 —, —, Brittany herald, see Choque, P. —, —, disputes over arms 233-4 —, —, ducal family arms 159-81 passim, 288, 303, 378, 381-2, 394-5, 404 —, —, march of 10, 339 —, —, Montfort herald 209 —, historical writing in 11, 141-2, 197-8, 205-6, 283-4, 302-4, 325-7, 340, 379, 383-4, 392-3, 395; see also Brittany, identity of; Brittany, propaganda in —, homage of 4, 8, 127, 140, 144, 197, 205, 213, 221, 265, 283, 287, 291, 303n, 337, 341 —, identity of 9, 140-2, 165, 234, 284-6, 288-9, 294, 296, 302-4, 307, 321, 337-8 —, 'kingdom' of 112, 292, 303, 321, 340 —, language of 3, 29-30, 141, 284, 304-5, 312-3, 395 —, —, division of 305, 313; see also BretagneBretonnante; Bretagne-Gallo —, libraries in 315-6, 376-9 —, licensing of castles in 32-3, 40-1, 49, 51-5, 57,97 —, lese-majeste, concept of 11, 124, 126, 147, 329-50 passim

Index —, literacy in 300-1, 309-28 passim, 364 —, manuscripts in 300, 315n, 316, 326-7, 371-409 passim; see also Brittany, books in —, manor houses in 24, 53, 235, 300 —, marches of 2, 15, 30, 32, 45, 47-8, 143-4, 288; see also Brittany, frontiers of —, military architecture in 13-68 passim, 260, 365 —, military obligations in 7, 134n, 344, 351-69 passim —, naming habits in 81-4, 224 —, navy of 12 —, Nine Barons of 149, 222, 233, 303n —, nobility of: —, —, attitudes towards French 219-37 passim, 301-2, 306 —, —, cultural interests 299-300 —, —, disputes among 233-4 —, —, derogation of 231 —, —, dormition of 231 —, —, economic position of 220-1, 224-5, 236 —, —, fiscal privileges 228-9, 242 —, —, legal status 219 —, —, literacy of 313-4 —, —, military obligations 227,229, 352-3, 356-60 —, —, numbers 221-2, 224n, 228, 352 —, —, promotion of 228-32 —, —, ranks of 232-3 —, —, recruitment rates 231-2 —, —, relations with dukes 219-37 passim —, —, successoral practices of 223-5, 229 —, —, survival rates of 228 —, —, tenurial holdings 222-3 —, —, university training of 323-4 —, noblesse de robe of 230 —, notaries in 11, 123n, 124, 128n, 135, 229, 298, 300, 315-6, 322, 328, 339 —, —, practices of 135, 141-2, 145, 313 —, paper, use of, in 134, 149n, 304n —, planned towns in 33 —, population of 227, 257 —, private wars in 98-9, 101-2, 342 —, propaganda in 11, 112, 139-42, 150, 286, 291, 302-4, 307, 321, 324, 326-7, 340, 379 —, regional sentiment in 283-307 passim, 325, 337; see also Brittany, identity of —, salines of 247 —, secheries in 247 —, schools in 109n, 294-5, 310-3, 316, 320n —, successoral practices in 84-6, 96-7, 103, 223-4, 229, 267, 292-3, 324n —, swimming in 182 —, treason in, see Brittany, lese-majeste

417

—, university students from 296-9, 315-24 —, wills in 95-109 passim, 223, 300, 313-4 —, xenophobia in 141, 284 Britto, Johannes 317n Brochereul, Robert, seneschal of Nantes and chancellor 136-8, 183-4, 190n, 195, 298n, 299n, 322-3, 324n Broerec (M) 6, 28, 53, 98 —, seneschal of, see Kerouzere, J. de Broons(IV) 52 —, Olivier de 48, 359, 366-7 Bruges (Belgium) 314n Bruneau, Guillaume 129 Bruni, Leonardo 384 Buckinghamshire 74n Buckland Denham (Somerset) 85n, 86n Buda (Budapest, Hungary) 387 Bur., Geoffrey and Guillaume de 106 Burgundy, duchy of 9, 10, 124, 137, 227n, 229, 231, 239, 257, 288, 292n, 332, 349-50, 352-3, 393, 397 —, dukes of 145n, 253n, 256, 322-4, 332, 376 —, Charles, duke of (1467-77) 346, 355, 361, 365 — John, duke of (1404-19) 343 —, Philip, duke of (1363-1404) 10, 113, 168n, 241, 255-6, 258, 259n, 272, 274, 276, 278-9, 280n, 339, 356 —, Philip, duke of (1419-67) 138, 231, 323-4, 349n, 363n —, —, Isabel, wife of 190n, 398 Buzay (LA), abbey of 122n Cachelart, Jean 318n Cador, Jean 129n —, Robert 129n Caen (Calvados) 29, 59, 212, 363 Cahors (Lot) 57 Calais (Pas de Calais) 45, 88, 273-80, 281n —, treaty of (1360) 207,266 Callou, Mahe 189n Camaret(F) 190n Cambridge, university of 320 Campel, Guillaume 106 Cancale(IV) 73n Cancouet, Pierre de 295 Cande (Maine et Loire) 103n Canterbury (Kent) 191 —, Lanfranc, archbishop of 75; see also Walden, Roger Caours, Raoul de 202n Capetian family 1, 7, 32, 120, 287, 331, 335, 342; see also France, kings of Caradeuc, Raoul (I) de 298, 299n, 322

418

The Creation of Brittany

—, Raoul (II) de 298 Carcassonne (Aude) 34 Carentan (Calvados) 363 Carhaix(F) 17,317 Carisbrooke (Isle of Wight) 24 Carne, family of 138, 230 —, Adele de 230 Carolingian Empire 2-3, 331-2 —, Charlemagne, emperor of 287, 303 —, Charles the Bald, emperor of 29 Cartae Baronum (1166) 75, 80

Castel Coz (Beuzec Cap Sizun, F) 19-20 Castel-Cran (Plelauff, M) 20 Castellec en Pluvigner (M) 23 Castle Rising (Norfolk) 44 Castile, kingdom of 183n —, Isabella, queen of 378 —Juan I, king of 194,272 Castillon (Gironde), battle of (1453) 264n Cattaneo, Alberto, archdeacon of Cremona 383, 400 Caumont, Bourc de 301 Cellierjeandu 128n Cerisy, Jean de 145n Cesson (CN), 38, 260 Chabannes, Antoine de, count of Dammartin 220 Chabot, family of 224; see also Rays, lords of Champagne 335 Champmol (Cote d'Or) 258 Champtoceaux (Maine et Loire) 26, 32, 170n —, Miles and Waleran, castellans of 200 Champvollon, Jean de 367 Chamtoce (Maine et Loire) 32 Channel, The 45, 213, 264, 277; see also La Manche Chanveron, Audoin 275n, 278n, 279n Charentais 122 Charles V, emperor (1519-56) 389 Charruel, Even 208 Chartres (Eure et Loir) 25 —, Fulbert, bishop of 33-4 Chastel, family of 23, 228, 234 —, Tanguy, lord of 315 —, Tanguy du (d.1457) 346n, 223 —, Tanguy du (d.1477) 147, 223, 344n, 346 Chastellain, Georges 375 Chastellier d'Yreac, Jean, lord of 226 Chateau Bougon (LA) 20, 25, 30 Chateaubourg (IV) 26 Chateaubriant (LA) 23, 26, 32, 34, 40, 44, 47-8, 51, 55, 310, 312n, 354, 363 —, Notre Dame de 109n —, Trinitarians of 102-4

—, family and lords of 51, 95, 103-5; see also Dinan, Bertrand de —, Brient I, lord of 103 —, Geoffroy I, lord of 103 —, Geoffroy IV, lord of 95, 99n, 102-4, 106-8 —, —, Aumaria, first wife of 103n —, —, second wife of 102 —, —, Guyote, daughter of 102 —, Geoffroy V, lord of 98n, 102, 104n —, —, Belleassez, wife of 103n —, Geoffroy VII, lord of 99n —, Sybilleof 100 Chateaugiron (IV) 26, 36, 42, 47-8, 51 —, family and lords of 149n —, Patry, lord of 38, 183 —, —, Armel, son of 183 Chateaugontier, family of 105 —, Emma de 105 Chateau Josselin (M) 22, 31, 32; see also Josselin Chateaulin (F) 55 Chateau Tro (M) 22 Chateauvillain, Guillaume, lord of 264 Chatillon en Vendelais (IV) 33, 247n Chatillon Coligny en Gatinais (Loiret) 23 Chauvete (Chamiete), Herve 184, 190n Chauvin, family of 138 —, Jean, lord of La Muce 348n —, Guillaume, chancellor 39, 112, 115, 125-6, 131, 145n, 146-7, 150, 345, 347-8, 375 —, Guillaume, notary 298n Chaveigne, Bertrand de, alloue of Rennes 119n Chefdubpis, Olivier du, notary 195 Cherbourg (Manche) 45, 177, 379 Chevigne, Guillaume 366 Chevre en la Bouexiere (IV) 23 Chichester, Nicholas, bishop of 83 Chinon (Indre et Loire) 25 Chiselborough (Somerset) 80n Cheque, Pierre, Brittany herald 126n, 151, 372, 386-7, 401-3, 407-9 Chrestien, Francois, chancellor 126-7 Chronicon Briocense 141-2, 198n, 254n, 284-5, 302-4, 325-6, 327n —, authorship of 141 Cinglais 21 Cistercians, order of 21, 89, 100, 102 Civitas capitals 2, 17 Cleder, Guy de 298, 299n, 322 Clement V, pope 34, 395n, 404 Clement VII, pope 37, 178, 269, 272n Clerk, Richard 136, 137n Clerkenwell (Middlesex), hospital of 88 Clermont (Mayenne) abbey of 106

Index Cleuze, Haynes de 363n Clisson (LA) 22-4, 30, 32, 40, 42-4, 48, 52, 55, 58, 312n, 363 —, family and lords of 30, 52, 99, 200, 282 —, Olivier I, lord of 98n —, Olivier III, lord of 44, 200, 202, 205, 268, 341 —, Olivier IV, lord of 42, 44, 52, 208, 221, 228, 234, 242, 250-2, 254n, 268-74, 275n, 277-82, 289 —, —, fortune of 28In —, Garnier de 200, 206 —, Gautier de 200, 206 —, Marguerite de 52, 269, 272, 274-5, 277, 282, 343 clouaison 35 Coaynon, Alain 129n Cocherel, battle of (1364) 208 Coëtanezré, Bertrand de 144n, 145n Coëtfrec(CN) 51 Coëtivy, family of 228, 234 —, Alain, lord of 228 —, Christophe, lord of 228, 366 —, Guillaume 228 —, Louise de, countess of Taillebourg 408 —, Olivier 223, 228 —, Prigent, lord of(fl.c. 1300) 228 —, Prigent, admirai of France (d.1450) 223, 228, 234 Coëtlogon, family of 138 —, Gilles de 360 —, Olivier de 144n, 147n, 360n Coëtmen(CN) 23 —, Jean, viscount of 54 —, Roland, viscount of 51 Coëtquen, family of 315 Coëtquis, Philippe de, bishop of St-Pol de Léon, archbishop of Tours, cardinal 222, 321n Coestelles, Roland de 135n, 136, 323n Coglais, family of 138 —, Geoffroy 298n Coille Avalle, Pierre 107 Coitiagu (Coëtjagu, CN) 101 Colombe, Michel 381 Colonna, Egidius 327, 378 Combour (IV) 26, 31, 36, 41-2, 51 —, family of 26 —, Rivallon I, lord of 26 —, see also Malestroit, Geoffroy de Commynes, Philippe de 346n, 350n, 359 Comper(IV) 51 Conan, Olivier 367 Concarneau (F) 19, 35-6, 40, 51; see also Conq

419

Conflans, arrêf of (1341) 197,341 Conq (F) 251 n, see also Concarneau Contarini, Zaccaria 371 Coppegorge, Guillaume 245n Corlay(M) 58 Cornouaille 6, 29, 98, 295 —, comital family of 3, 27, 29; see also Nantes, Hoël, count of —, Benedic, count of 27 —, —, Pérou, son of 27 —, seneschal of, see Poencé, R. de Cornwall 71, 76, 81, 85, 90n —John 254 Corron(CN) 101 Cotentin (Manche) 29, 30, 76 —, bailli of 288 Côtes du Nord 20-1, 28 Coucy, Enguerrand, lord of 274n, 275n, 280n Couëron(LA) 181,246 Couesnon (Coaynon), river 288 Coupegorge, Laurens 183 Courseule, lord of 280 Coutances (Manche), diocèse of 29 Couvran, Geoffrey de 48, 345-6, 359, 366 —, Jean de 367 Craon (Mayenne) 25-6, 47 —, family of 105 —, Jean de, archbishop of Reims 266n Crécy (Somme), battle of (1346) 79, 91n Crémenec (M), lord of 325n Cresolles, Giles de 147 Crèvccoeur, Philippe de 350n Crokart, routier 202 Croxton (Lines), abbey of 88n Croy, family of 349n Crusades 103, 105, 107 Cuvelier, Jean, writer 207, 214 Dagworth, Thomas 207n, 265, 281, 341 n Damery, Hugh 16ln Damme (Belgium) 271 n Dangers, Jean 181 Daniel, Olivier 101 —, Olivier, son of 101 Daoulas(F), abbey of 19 Darès le Phrygien 394, 404 Dartasso, Janico 276, 279 Dauphiné 350n David ap Gruffydd 331 n Daviet,Jean 245n Dénia, count of 265 Denis, Geoffrey 31 In Derbyshire 74n Derval (LA) 36, 51

420

The Creation of Brittany

—, family of 249 —, Bonabe, lord of 148 —Jean de Malestroit, lord of 148-9, 233 —, —, arms of 149n Desert, archdeacon of 298n Despenser, family of 201 —, Hugh, the younger 331 n —, Henry, see Norwich Des Bordes, Guillaume 274n, 276n Devizes (Wilts) 80 Devon 71, 74n, 77, 79n, 83n Dinan (CN) 19, 23, 39-40, 48, 55, 130n, 200, 260, 317, 360n —, archdeaconry of 353n, 368 —, captain of 356n —, castle of 22, 27, 38-9, 70n, 253n —, Franciscans of 102n —, priory of St Malo de 70n, 86n, 122n —, family and lords of 6, 31-2, 34, 69-70, 73, 79, 85-6, 90, 98 —, Geoffrey I, lord of 27, 69, 76n, 85 —, Geoffrey II, lord of 85n —, Josselin, lord of 69 —, Olivier I, lord of 69, 76n —, Olivier II, lord of 85n — Roland, lord of 315 —, —, Emma, daughter of 86 —, Alain de, lord of Becherel 79n, 85 —, Roland de, lord of Becherel 31, 85-6, 90n —, Bertrand de, lord of Chateaubriant 315 —, Jacques de, lord of Montafilant 315 —, family of, English branch 81, 85-6, 88, 90, 92 —, Havisa de 70n, 86 —, Josselin (Josce) de 69, 79, 86, 89n, 92 —, Sybilla de 86 —, see also Dinham —, Franfoise de, lady of, countess of Laval 375 Dinham, John, lord 69, 78 Dol (IV) 15, 22, 40, 47-9, 55, 76, 87, 130n, 143n,304n —, archbishops of 28, 69; also bishops of —, —, Junkuene, archbishop of 69 —, bishops of 48 —, —, regale of 248, 304n —, —, Le Briz, Guillaume 299 —, —, Tremaugon, Everart de 299 —, —, see also Lesmenez, R. de —, canons of 124 —, castle of 22, 31, 304n —, chapter of 316n —, hereditary steward (seneschal) of 87; see also Flaad; FitzFlaad, Alan; Jordan, Alan, son of

—, family and lords of 22, 26-7, 30 —, John, lord of 22 —, Rivallon (Rualentis) I, lord of 27 —, Rivallon II, lord of 27 —, Gautier de 76 —, Haimon, viscount of 28 Dole (Jura) 324 Domesday Book 29, 71, 74-5, 78-9, 81-2, 84, 87 Donges (LA) 26, 51 —, viscounts of 30 Donoal, see Tinteniac Dorenge, Pierre 300n Dorset 71n Douve, river 363 Dover (Kent) 214 Dreux (Eure et Loir) 137 —, family of 148, 168n; see also Brittany, rulers of Du Guesclin, family of 73, 106, 20In —, Bertrand, constable of France 207-8, 214, 228, 234, 269, 301 Dunois, Jean, count of 365 Du Paz, Augustin 95, 99, 104 Duretia (Rieux, M) 27 Dynaunt Fitzwaryn, alleged barony of 69 East Anglia 71 Earl's Colne (Essex) 280n Eder, family of, see Beaumanoir Ellis, Conan, son of 72n Elmenton, William 243n Eltham, John of 211 Ely, Herve, bishop of 88; see also Bangor England 1, 7, 15, 22-3, 25, 28-9, 34, 37, 42, 44-5, 49, 69-94 passim, 105, 119, 133n, 159-60, 173, 176-7, 191n, 197, 201-2, 204-6, 209, 211-5, 222, 225, 227, 240, 250, 253n, 261, 264-5, 267, 269-74, 277, 279-80, 282, 289, 306, 313, 319, 329, 334, 336 —, kings of: —, —, Athelstan 15 —, —, Edward the Confessor 73 —, —, Edward I 91, 119, 306, 335 —, —, Edward III 35, 57, 159, 162, 170n, 177, 204-5, 211-4, 263, 265-7, 268n, 270, 281, 290, 306, 341 —, —, —, campaign in Brittany (1342-3) 199, 204

—, —, —, Mary, daughter of 176, 259n, 267 —, —, Harold II 74 —, —, Henry I 30, 73, 76, 78n, 84, 90 —, —, —, Reginald, illegitimate son of 81 —, —, Henry II (also count of Anjou and duke of Normandy) 4, 21-3, 31, 86n, 89-90

Index —, —, —, Henry, son of 31 —, —, Henry III 86n, 87n —, —, Henry IV 187n, 190, 258 —, —, Henry V 91 n, 263 —, —, Henry VII 227, 264n —, —, Henry VIII 408 —, —John 90-2, 105n, 172, 227 —, —, Richard I 32, 172 —, —, Richard II 251n, 268, 270-6, 278-80 —, —, Stephen 76n, 80-1, 90 —, —, William I (also duke of Normandy) 4, 22,25,29,73-5,78,81,84,93 —, queens of: —, —, Elizabeth II 77 —, —, Matilda 70n, 80-1, 90 Epi, device of 10 Erdre, river 48 Ermine, Order of 10, 172, 259, 304, 339 Ermines, arms of Brittany 145n, 148-9, 159, 161-2, 166-71, 173, 189, 304 Espagnes, family of 82 Espinay(IV) 82 — Jean del' 360 Espine, Jacob de 1' 362-3 Esplechin, truce of (1340) 209 Essex 82 Etampes, count of 123n —, Richard, count of 44, 343n —, countess of, see Orleans, Marguerite de Eudo, count, see Rennes Even, Charles 228n Exeter (Devon) 74 Extraneus (Le Strange), Gwido 82 Faiaust, Henri 229 Fail, Noel du 314 Faou (F), viscounts of 27 Farnham (Surrey) 24 Fastolf, Sir John 264 Ferre, Jacques 321 n —, Pierre 147n, 321 n —, Robert 321 n Ferrers, Sir Henry 274, 281n Perron, family of 138 Fesini, Johannes 318n Field Calling (Norfolk) 78, 80n Fillastre, Guillaume 382, 400 Finistere 15, 17, 20-1, 27, 51, 59, 203n, 223, 225, 305 FitzAlan, family of 77-8, 91; see also Arundel, earls of —, William 82 FitzAlan of Bedale, family of 78n FitzFlaad, Alain 71,76,87,92

421

FitzHugh, family of 78n Fitzpayn, family of 91 FitzWarin (Fitzwaryn), family of 69-70, 79, 86, 91-2 FitzWimarc, Robert 75n, 81 Flaad, hereditary steward of Dol 88; see also FitzFlaad Flanders, county of 34, 166, 190n, 209, 227n, 257, 288, 304, 306, 364 —, Louis de Male, count of 214, 306 Flandre, Jeanne de, see Brittany, Jean de Montfort Florence (Italy) 19,284 Foix, counts of 142 —, Gaston HI, count of 9, 163, 246n, 251, 338 —, —, Litre de Chasse of 163, 378 —, Jean de, lord of Meille 357n —, Anne de, queen of Hungary 387, 401 —, Catherine de, see Navarre —, Marguerite de, see Brittany, Francis II Folgoet (F), Notre Dame de 318n Foliot, Gilbert, see London, bishop of Folvas, Alain 31 In Fontaine Haouis (Mayenne), abbey of 106 Fontenay (IV) 247n Fontenay (Vienne) 103n Forestz, Guillaume de 134n Fou (F), viscount of 250n —, Jacob du 264n —, Yvon du 346n Fouages 9, 47, 51, 228-30, 242, 244-5, 246n, 250, 251 n, 257, 311,342, 363 Fougeray (LA) 36, 41 Fougeres (IV) 19, 34, 36, 39-40, 45, 47-8, 51, 55, 76, 131n, 220, 319n —, castle of 23, 26, 31-3, 39-40, 45, 244n —, family and lords of 74, 87, 90n, 98, 105, 342 6,21,28-31, 59,77,79 —, Alfred, lord of 26 —, Henry, lord of 83 —, Main I, lord of 26, 28 —, Main II, lord of 26 —, Raoul II, lord of 22, 31, 83n, 87n, 90n —, —, Olive, mother of 87n —, Raoul III, lord of 5, 33, 97 —, Guillaume de 90n —, Juhel de 28 Fouke le FitzWaryn, Romance of 70, 91-2 Four, Antoine du 386, 394, 402, 405 France, kingdom of 1, 2, 6, 8, 9, 13, 15, 20, 27, 34, 37, 45, 47-9, 54-5, 57-8, 70,76,91, 95, 98, 103, 119, 122, 126, 140, 150, 164-5, 176-8, 197, 211-3, 215, 219-37 passim, 239-42, 244, 249, 258, 260-1, 263, 265, 267-73, 275-7,

422

The Creation of Brittany

280, 282-3, 285-7, 301-3, 306, 309, 311, 319, 327-50 passim, 352, 361, 363, 365 —, chancellor of 274n —, coronation of queens of 387-9 —, kings of: —, —, Charles IV 291n —, —, Charles V 45, 177, 197, 204, 208, 209n, 214, 221, 225n, 235, 250, 251n, 254, 258, 266-9, 283, 289, 300, 304n, 327n —, —, Charles VI 37-8, 45, 138, 163, 166, 170n, 177-8, 240, 250, 251n, 252, 254-6, 268, 271-6, 277n, 278-9, 290, 293, 299n —, —, —, Isabel of Bavaria, wife of 323 —, —, Charles VII 48, 220, 223n, 231, 329n, 343, 346n, 354, 359, 361 —, —, Charles VIII 12, 49, 54-5, 58, 114-5, 117n, 125, 130, 132, 230, 306n, 345, 348-9, 360n, 365, 371, 373-4, 380-3, 386n, 388, 390-1, 395, 403-4 —, —, —, wife of, see Brittany, Anne, duchess of —, —, Francis I 150, 230, 232 —, —, —, Claude, wife of 371, 379, 387, 389, 390n, 392, 408 —, —, John II 263-4, 266, 281n, 290 —, —, —, as duke of Normandy 213n —, —, Louis IV Outre-Mer 4 —, —, Louis VI 4, 120n —, —, Louis VII 120n —, —, Louis IX 5, 32-4, 97, 99, 103, 122 —, —, Louis X 335, 399n —, —, Louis XI 10, 11, 48-9, 53, 127, 138-9, 144, H6, 147n, 219-20, 222, 231, 234-5, 291, 324, 344-7, 350n, 351, 353, 359, 362, 364-5, 374, 382, 389 —, —, —, Margaret of Scotland, wife of 190 —, —, Louis XII 55, 371, 373, 380, 385-6, 388-9, 391-5, 396n, 403-4 —, —, —, as duke of Orleans 126n —, —, —, wife of, see Brittany, Anne, duchess of —, —, Louis XIII 164n —, —, Louis XIV 56 —, —, Philip II Augustus 4, 7, 32, 105, 120 —, —, Philip HI 35, 287 —, —, Philip IV the Fair 8, 9, 99n, 287, 291 n, 323, 335, 337, 339, 341, 342n, 350 —,—, Philip V 291 n —, —, Philip VI 44, 197, 203, 206, 207n, 211, 265, 268, 291 n, 293, 341, 342n —, —, Robert the Pious 164n France, Charles of, duke of Berry and Guyenne 139 France, Jeanne de, see Brittany, John V

Franche-Comte 357n Francmont, Jean de 364n Francois, Saturnin 381 French language, use of, in Brittany 122-3 Frescher, Robert 394, 404 Fresero, Jean 129n Fresnay (LA) lord of 233 Frinaudour (CN) 57 Froissart, Jean, chronicler 33, 36 —, account of Breton civil war by 197-218 passim Fronsac (Gironde), vicomte de 342n Frossay(LA) 30 Fulborne (Cambs) 83n Gabelle 256 Gael (IV) 51 —, lords of 25 —, Ralph the Staller, lord of 75 —, Raoul, lord of 73, 75-7 —, see also Norfolk Gage, Viscount 69 Gamier, Rolant 325 Garter, Order of 205 Gascons 301,354 Gascony, 357; see also Aquitaine; Guyenne Gaudin, Pean 345-7, 362, 369 Gaumont, Guillaume 128n Geneston (LA), abbey of 122n Gennes, Jean de 313 Genoa (Italy) 393, 396n Geoffrey of Monmouth, writer 285 Geoffrey, son of Salomon 26 Germans 220, 354, 361, 363 Germany 1, 120n, 146, 334, 364 Ghent (Belgium) 45, 349n Gibon, family of 138, 230 —, Jean, lord of Grisso 230 Gie, lord of, see Rohan, Pierre de Giffard, Olivier 366 Giffart, Barnabe 367 Gikel, Guillaume, seejekyll Girard, Regnault 190n Glamahoc, Eudes, son of 75 Glevian, lord of Chateau Bougon (LA) 30 Gloucester, parliament at (1378) 44-5 —, Thomas of Woodstock, duke of 270, 275 Glyn Dwr, Owen 306 Godart.Jamet 129n Godeile, Pierre, abbot of Monreal (Navarre) 185 Goello(CN) 315 —, seneschal of, see Kaercoent, J. de Golafre, John 273n

Index Golden Fleece, Order of 349n, 382, 400 Golden Legend 300n, 383 Goudelin(CN) 135,295 Goulaine, Christophe, lord of 55 Gourdel, Jean 362, 364n Gourin (F), viscounts of 27 Gregory of Tours, historian 3 Gregory IX, pope 119n Grignols, lord of 395n Gruel, Arthur 367 Gueguen, Guillaume see Nantes, bishops of Guelders, duchy of 277 —, duke of 276 Guemadeuc, Roland, lord of 356n, 366 —, Francois and Gilles 356n Guemene-Guingamp (Guigant) (now Guemene-sur-Scorff, M) 192-3, 200 —, lords of 344n, 353n; see also Rohan, Louis de —, seneschal of 326 Guenandeau, Mace 182 Guerande (LA) 35, 39-40, 47, 51, 181-2, 184, 187, 260, 361 —, pais de 285, 305 —, salines at 247 —, treaty (first) of (1364) 52, 176, 221, 241, 253, 266-7, 289, 298, 341 n —, treaty (second) of (1381) 52, 135n, 221, 251-2, 268-9, 289 Guerande, Bernard de 26 Guerche 21; see also La Guerche Guernsey 213 Guillaume de Poitiers, historian 73 Guillaume le conquerant, see England, William I Guillaume, Daniel 31 In Guilloche de Bourdeaux 382,403 Guingamp (CN) 28, 40, 45, 51-2, 130n, 135, 295, 312n, 314n, 317, 349n, 364n —, seneschal of 54, 135, 295, 322; see also Kaercoent, J. de Guiole, Eon 245n Guion, Petit 183 Gurant, Herbert, son of 82 Guyenne, duchy of 8, 44-5, 139, 176, 225-6, 249n, 276-7, 288, 338, 342, 358n; see also Gascony Guyse, lord of 123n Hagomar (Hauguemar), Jean de 355n Hainault 257, 362 Halouart, Jean, notary 123n Hambuye, lord of 274n, 280 Harcourt, count of 274n Hariulf de St Riquier (Pas de Calais) 75

423

Harpford (Devon) 86n Harscouet, family of 77-8 Hartland (Devon) 85n, 86n —, abbey of 88, 92n Hastelou, Guillaume 324n —, Reginald 324n Hastings, battle of (1066) 73 —, Rape of 123n Haughmond (Salop), priory of 88 Haute-Bretagne 76 Haya, Even de 305 Hearth tax, see Fouage Hede(IV) 31,34,40,48,311 Hellam, Jordan de 83 Hellez, O. 363n Helion, John de 91 —, Robert de 83, 91 —, Tihel de 79, 82 Helion's Bumpstead (Essex) 80n, 82 Helori, Saint Yves 295-6, 305, 310-1, 317-8, 322 Hennebont (M) 19, 33, 35, 40, 51, 197, 200n —, family of 6, 27, 98 Hequenoille, Guillaume 300n, 316n Herlin, Robert du 382, 400 Hereford, bishops of 70n —, Roger, earl of 78 Hevin, Pierre, jurist 245 Hilari.Jean 298n Holland, Joan, see Brittany, John IV Holland, Pietre de 363n Holies, Hance 363n Hommet, lord of 280 Honningham (Norfolk) 87n Hopital, Pierre del' 315 Houoet, Jean 260n Houx, Jean de 366 Huchet, Bertrand 129n Huet, Walter 36 Hungary, Ladislas VI, king of, and of Bohemia and Poland 387, 401 —, —, wife of, see Foix, Anne de Huntingdon, John Holland, earl of 251n Idrisi, geographer 19 Ille et Vilaine 21 Impot 35, 39, 51, 228, 260, 363; see also Brittany, administration Ingleby (Lines) 86n Inisan.Jean 145n Innocent III, pope 334 Ireland 279 —, Robert de Vere, duke of 270-1 Isidore of Seville 285

424

The Creation of Brittany

Italy 1, 268, 272, 364, 382-3, 389, 391, 393, 396n, 398 —, Bretons in 227, 318, 365n Ivette, Pierre 129n Jacme, Pierre 335 Jahou, Guillaume 229 Jaligny, chronicler 56 James of St Georges, architect 34 Jarret, Guyon 367 Jauquenec, Yves 31 In Jegado,Jean 366 Jekyll, family of 82 Jerusalem, kingdom of 107 —, Order of St John of 88 Jews, debts to 79, 106 —, doctors 321 n —, ordonnance expelling (1240) 140 Johannes Faber, jurist 11, 340 Jordan, Alain, son of 87 Josselin (M) 31-2, 51-4, 131n, 318n, 359n Jouguet, Jean 229 Jourdain, Marcus, admiral of Navarre 183 Joyeuses entrees 10

Juch, Jeandu 25In Jugon(CN) 51,347 Juhel of Totnes, see Totnes Juigne (LA), forges at 104 Julius Caesar 206n Junkuene, archbishop of Dol, see Dol Justinian, emperor 334 Juvenal des Ursins, Jean 334n Kaercoent, Jean de 322 Kaergaill (Kaergoal), Jean 318n Kaerloguen, Guillaume de 367 Keransquer, Marc 367 Kerazret, Thomas de 360, 367 —, Jeanne le Bart, wife of 360n Kergoet, Pierre de la Mote, lord of 149n Kergruz, Pierre de 311 Kermilien en Pleudaniel (CN) 100 Kermorvan, lords of 53 (F) Kermorz, Geoffrey de, lord of Hennebont 33 Keroulay, Hugues de 298-9, 322 Kerouzere en Sibiril (F) 24, 53 —, lords of 53 —, Eon, seneschal of Broerec 53 —, Jean, echanson 53 —, Jean, seneschal of Morlaix 53 Kerraoul, Constance de 137n Kirkstead (Lines), abbey of 89 Knighton, Henry, chronicler 198 Knolles, Robert 36

Labbe,Jean 369 Lagan (shipwreck), right of 5, 97; see also shipwreck Lai d'Eliduc 78n Laillier, Martin 245n Lamballe (CN) 28, 52, 55, 57, 76, 315, 317,363 —, comital family of 100 —, Rivallon, count of 100 —, —, Eline, daughter of 100 Lamber en Ploumoguer (F) 21 Lambourne (Berks) 79, 92n Lamouroux, Jamet, notary 123n Lancaster, Henry, duke of 214 — John of Gaunt, duke of 270-1, 276-7 Lancaster, John 274, 279-81 Landais (Landois, Landoys), Pierre, treasurer 125-6, 146n, 147, 348, 375 Landal(IV) 86n Landaul(M) 295,311 Landebia (CN) 100, 102 Landerneau (F) 55, 200 Lanfranc, see Canterbury Lanier, Michel 409 Lanmeur(F) 51, 100 Lanros, Bertran, lord of 366 Lanvalay, Robin de 285n Lanvallay, Guillaume de 79 Lanvaux (M) 6, 34, 98-9, 233n, 347n Lanvillau, Jean 367 Laon (Aisne), bishop of 213n —, canons of 88 Largoet en Elven (M) 32, 40-2, 54 Latimer, William, lord 259n Launay, Alain du 149n Launay, Jean de 366-7 Laval (Mayenne) 26, 47, 52, 59 —, family and lords of 105, 224, 315, 348, 379 —, Guy XII, lord of 274n —, Guy XIV, lord of 51, 315n, 327, 377 —, —, wife of, see Bretagne, Isabelle de —, Guy XV, lord of 348n —, Guy XVI, lord of 408 —, Anne, countess of 148 —, Francoise de Dinan, countess of 375 —, Andre de, lord of Loheac 233n, 234, 315n, 327, 347, 359, 366 —, Francis de, lord of Gavre 348n —, Jean de, lord of La Roche 48, 366-7 —, Louis de, lord of Chatillon 315n La Belliere (IV), vicomte de, see Chastel, Tanguy du (d. 1477) La Benaste (LA) 49, 104n La Borderie, Arthur de, historian 6, 13, 14, 22, 24-6, 29, 30, 38, 52, 56-7, 70, 96, 98-9, 128n,

Index 199, 200, 212, 242, 243n, 250, 251 n, 252n, 254, 258, 260, 310, 337 La Chapelle, family of 138 —, Jacques de 367 —, Pierre de 135n La Chapelle Glain (LA) 47 La Chatiere en Tremblay (IV) 24 La Cheze (M) 53, 131n La Clartiere, Gilles de 367 La Cordeliere, device and emblem of 10, 381 —, ship 387, 403 La Croix-Hellean (M) 82 La Feuillee, Silvestrede, chancellor 125, 247n, 327 La Fontaine, Jean de 248n La Foret-Landerneau (F) 36 La Garnache (Vendee) 26, 123n La Gravelle (Mayenne) 47 La Guerche (IV) 27, 30-1, 47, 55, 99n, 105, 164n, 246 —, Notre Dame de 105-6 —, Raoul, magister scolarum of 109n, 310 —, Temple at 107 —, lords of 27, 30, 74, 104-6 —, Geoffrey I, lord of 74, 77, 104 —, Geoffrey HI, lord of 95, 102-8, 109n, 310 —, —, Emma, wife of 105 —, —, Jeanne, daughter of 105-6 —, Guillaume I, lord of 27, 77n, 104 —, Guillaume II, lord of 105, 107 —, Mainguen of 30 —, Sylvestre de, see Rennes, bishops of La Haye, Louis de, lord of Chace 369 La Houssaie, Eustace de 253n La Hunaudaye (CN), castle of 52, 100 —, lords of 33 —, Geoffroy II, lord of 95, 99-103, 106, 108 —, —, Juliana Boterel, wife of 100 —, —, Sybille, mother of 100 —, Pierre, lord of lOOn —, Giles, lord of 48, 366-7 La Lande, Guillaume de 147n La Latte (CN), fort de 56; see also La Roche Guyon La Manche 69-70, 77, 86, 90, 92-3, 190; see also Channel, The La Marzeliere, Pierre de 45, 358n La Meilleraye (LA), abbey of 103, 104n La Motte-Glain (LA) 55 La Primaudiere (IV), priory of 103 La Riviere, Bureau de 274n, 276n —, Gilles de 126n, 145n, 146n —, Jean de, chancellor 125 La Roche, lord of 146n; see also Laval, Jean de

425

La Roche Bernard (LA) 26-7, 30, 312n —, Josselin, lord of 27 La Roche Derrien (CN) 6, 28, 34, 197, 202 —, battle of (1347) 34, 197, 203-4, 264-5 —, family and lords of 28, 34, 98-9 La Roche Guyon (CN) 56 La Roche Jagu (CN) 24 —, Alain du Pare, lord of 264n La Rochelle (Charente maritime) 248, 391 n La Roche Periou (Piriou) (M) 27, 200 La Roe (Mayenne), abbey of 30 La Sarzaye, Jeanne de 181 La Suze (Maine et Loire) Jean, lord of 138n —, lady of 320n La Tremoiille, Guy VI, lord of 256n, 274n —, Louis de 55, 365 La tres andenne coututne 296, 318, 326, 340; see also Brittany, customary law La Vache, Philip de 278n La Vigne, Andre de 371-2, 374, 382, 386-7, 389-91, 402-3, 408 Lege(LA) 106 Lehon(CN) 31-2 —, St Magloire de, priory of 122n Leicestershire 74n Lemaire des Beiges, Jean 384-5, 391-4, 396, 398, 403, 406 Leon (F) 6, 98 —, diocese of, see St-Pol de Leon —, family of 305 —, viscounts of 6, 27-8, 31, 34, 80, 98-9 —, —, Guihomar III 31,80 —,—, HerveIV 122n —, —, Herve VII 202, 21 In, 212 —, —, see also Brito, Herve, earl of Wiltshire Leon, Erard de, lord of Fremerville (Somme) 305 Lesardre(CN) 100 Lescoet, Jean de, lord of Villepie 369 Lescun, lord of, see Aydie, Odet d' Leskelen en Plabennec (F) 21-3 Lesmenez, Richard de, treasurer and bishop of Dol 161n, 243, 299 Lesnerac, family of 182 —, Charles de 182 —, Eon de 190n —, Pierre de 175-96 passim Lesneven (F) 130n Lespervier, family of 138-9 —, Arthur de 367 —.Jean 139 Levesque, Olivier 190n Le Bail, Richard 311 Le Baker, Geoffrey, chronicler 198

426

The Creation of Brittany

Le Barbu, Guillaume 172 —, Guy 299; see also St-Pol de Leon, bishop of —, Henri, chancellor, bishop of Vannes and Nantes 132, 142-3, 253n, 299 Le Bart, Jean, abbot of St Melaine de Rennes 298n —, Mace, chancellor 124 Le Bastle, Jamet 320n LeBaud, Pierre, chronicler 105n, 141n, 142, 198n, 325-7, 375, 379, 383-4, 402 Le Bel, Jean, chronicler 197, 199-203, 205-9, 211-3 Le Borgne, Guillaume, seneschal of Avaugour 96n, 106n Le Boteiller (Bouteiller), Pierre 146n Le Bouteiller, Jean, lord of Maupertuis 369 Le Breton, Manno 81 —, Ralph 83 Le Chen, Brian 82 Le Collet (LA) 36 Le Converse, Guillaume 106 Le Cozic, Pierre 147n Le Croisic (LA) 51, 175, 181-2, 184-5, 188n Le Fauchoms, Jean 304n Le Ferce, Philippe 106 Le Fevre, Geoffroy 135 Le Fevre, Jean, chancellor of Anjou 272 Le Gavre (LA) 33, 348n Le Gou7, Robert 129n Le Grant, Herve, keeper of Tresor des chartes 113n, 123, 138,140-2, 226, 243n —, as possible author of Chronicon Briocense 141-2, 303n Lejouvencel 229 Le Mans (Sarthe) 17, 135 Le Mestrier, Jean 149n Le Moine, Jacques 367 Le Pallet (LA) 313 LePeletier, Denis 179, 184 Le Pellerin (LA) 30, 181, 246 Le Pelletier, Herve 106 LePelotier, Olivier 149n Le Pintier, Mathieu 106 Le Prieur, Richard 311 LeRheu(IV) 311 Le Rotur, Gwomar 82 Le Rouge, Francois 384n Le Rouyer, Olivier 402 Le Roux, Olivier 139n Le Saux, Francois 320n Le Scrope, Richard, chancellor of England 45 Le Songe du Vergier 327, 336 Le Songe du Vieil Pelerin 300n Le Spicier, Robinet 188n

LeStang(M) 27 Le Thiec, Jean 295 Le Tur, Etienne 38 Le Verger (Maine et Loire) 54 Le Voyer, Auffroy 125n —, Bertran 367 —Jean 323, 324n Les Huguetieres (LA) 320n Liemer, Jean 173n Ligny, count of 392 Limoges, viscount of 123n —, viscounty of 125n, 212 Lincoln, Alured of 71, 88, 91 Lincolnshire 71-2, 74n, 89, 90n Lion d'Angers (Maine et Loire) 103n Livre des Ostz (1294) 134n, 140, 303n Livy 315n Lobineau, G. A., historian 95, 161, 198 Locmine (M) 31 In —, Jean de, archdeacon of Vannes 125 Locronan (F) 20 Loheac (IV), castle of 27 —, family and lords of 26-7 —, Herve, lord of 26 —, Judicael, lord of 27 —, —, Walter, son of 27 —, Riocus of 27 —, see also Laval, Andre de Loire, river 14, 15, 20, 26, 30, 37, 44, 48, 55, 57, 87, 99, 122, 175, 181-2, 235, 247, 288, 296, 318, 387 Loire-Atlantique 21 Loisel, Jean 147n Lombard, Peter 317 London 88 —, Gilbert Foliot, bishop of 89-90 Longjumeau (Seine et Marne), castellany of 245n Longueville, count of 264n Loppin, Jean 295,311 Lornay, lord of 367 Lorraine 29 Louet, Mace 137 Louvain (Belgium) 280, 323-4 Loyon, Guillaume de 408 Ludlow (Salop) 92 Lusignan, family of 34 —, Guy de, lord of Fougeres 342n Luxe, lord of 194 Luxembourg, Marie de 408 Luzuen en Nizon (F) 23 Lyon (Rhone) 34, 309, 380, 391-2 Machecoul (LA) 47-8, 310

Index —, castle of 27, 32, 99n —, school of 295, 312n —, family and lords of 99n —, Garsire, lord of 27 —, Olivier II, lord of 99n —, Jean de 99n —, Girard de, lord of Bois Onain 317 Machtiern 20 Maczault, Laurens 133n Madeuc, see Guemadeuc Mafeus Vegius 318n Maidon, Thomas 259n Maignelais, Antoinette de 375 Main, see Fougeres Maine 21, 26, 29, 32, 45, 74n, 76, 105, 221, 310,313 —, counts of 52 Malestroit (M) 48, 131n, 354 —, truce of (1343) 205, 207, 208n —, family of 40, 52 —Jean, lord of (d. 1416) 40,226 —, Jean, lord of, marshal of Brittany (d.1469) 233, 366 —, Alain de, lord of Oudon 40, 253n —, Geoffrey de, lord of Combour 36, 41 —, —, Jean, son of 36 —, Jean de, lord of Derval 148-9, 327, 366, 383 —, Jean de, bishop of St-Brieuc and Nantes, chancellor 125, 130, 136 Malet, Urveius 82 Malet de Graville, Louis, admiral of France 347n Malgault, Pierre 325 Maloinjean 179, 183, 187n, 188n Malpertus, Alan and Robert 83 Mamerot, Sebastien 315n Maminot, Walkelin 83 Mantes (Seine et Oise) 208 Marc, Robert 129n, 145n, 146n Marcille(IV) 47 Marmoutier (Indre et Loire), abbey of 26, 70n, 87 Marois, Philippe de 129n Marot, Jean, poet 391, 394, 396, 402, 406 Man., Geoffrey 106 Martigne(IV), St-Pierre de 106 Martin, barony of 69 Martin, Guillaume 270n Mauges(LA) 20 Mauhugeon, family of 138, 385n —Jean, lord ofThorigny (IV) 369 —, Jean, secretary 133n Mauleon, family of 103n, 138 — Jean 129n, 229

427

Mauron (IV), battle of (1352) 34, 202 Mauny, Olivier de 214 —, Walter 202 Maximien, writer 392, 403 Maximilian, king of the Romans 58, 117, 133n, 350n —, wife of, see Brittany, Anne, duchess of Mayenne 26, 28, 76 —, lords of 28-9, 77, 123n Meen, Roger, son of 83 Melbourne, Thomas de 170n Melece, Robert de 248n Mene (M), Notre Dame de 230 Mene, Morice du 359 Meneac (M) 247n Merciless Parliament (1388) 273, 280 Merk (Pas de Calais), castle of 278, 279n Meschinot, family of 357n —, Jean, soldier and poet 374-5, 377n, 379n, 380 Meucon(IV) 31 In Milan (Italy), duchy of 380, 393 —, ambassador of 261 n —, Ludovico Sforza, duke of 361 Milet, family of 138 —, Henri 129n, 133, 138-9 Millon, Etienne 146n —, Guillaume 356n Mills, fulling lOln Molac (M), lords of 146n, 226, 243 —, marquis of 243 Moleyns, Robert, lord 264n Monmouth 74n, 80n, 87 —, Baderon of 82, 87, 89n Montafilant, lord of, see Dinan, Jacques de Montaillou (Ariege) 311 Montargis, treaty of (1484) 348 Montauban (IV) 54 —, family of 138, 299n —, Guillaume, lord of 323, 324n —Jean, lord of, admiral of France 234, 323, 344n —, Olivier, lord of 226 —, Arthur de, see Bordeaux, archbishop of —, Esprit de 367 —, Philippe de, lord of Sens, chancellor 125-7, 131-2, 138, 150-1,356 Montbourchier, Pierre de 367 Monchet, Georges 243n Moncontour (CN) 28, 36, 51-2, 57 Montfort-sur-Meu (IV) 25, 48, 51 —, abbey of St Jacques de 143n —, family of 52, 57, 299n —, Geoffrey, lord of 31

428

The Creation of Brittany

—, Raoul, lord of (d. 1393) 226 —, Guillaume de, see St-Malo, bishop of Montfort 1'Amaury (Seine et Oise) —, county of 160, 163, 245n —, count of 123n; see also Brittany, dukes of, title of Montlhery (Seine et Oise), battle of (1465) 354 Montmor, Jacques de 274n Montmorency, family of 224; see also Laval, family of Montmuran (IV) 48, 54 Montonac (M), priory of 122n Montours (IV) 47 Montpellier (Herault) 209 —, university of 318 Mont St Michel (Manche), abbey of 28, 47, 259n Monts d'Aree (F) 311 Morbihan 21, 28, 59 More, Thomas 396 Moreau, Guillaume, receiver of Nantes 173n, 249n Morice, H., historian 95, 161, 198 Morlaix (F) 51, 130n, 135, 317 —, seneschal of, see Kerouzere, Jean de Mortain (Manche), counts of 28, 76n, 77n, 79, 172 Mortiercrolles (Maine et Loire) 54 Motte 20-5, 27, 56, 59 Mouche, Raoul, priest of, see Mousse Moulin, Andre du 252 Mousse (IV), Raoul, priest of 109n, 310 Mowbray, honour of 74n Much Marcle (Herefords) 74n, 80n Murimuth, Adam, chronicler 198 Murol, family of 314 Musard, family of 74 Musters of Kirklington, family of 78n Muzillac (Musillac, M) 295, 311, 325n Nangis, Guillaume de, chronicler 211, 327 Nantes (LA) 14-17, 19, 20, 35-7, 39-40, 44, 47-8, 55-6, 58, 77, 104, 115, 130-1, 134n, 135, 137, 149n,150n, 151,157-8,175,181-2, 195-6, 201, 203n,205-6, 208n, 212, 236, 244, 252n, 254, 260, 265, 300n, 310, 312n, 313, 314n, 317, 337, 353, 363, 364n, 378, 381, 391-2 —, bishops of 4, 15 —, —, Benedic 29 —,—, Fulcher 15 —, —, Gueguen, Guillaume 133n, 136-7, 145n,157 —, —, Quiriac 29

—, —, Rochefort, Bonabe de 299, 323, 324n —, —, Urbanist bishop of 270 —, —, see also le Barbu, H.; Malestroit, J. de —, captain 346n —, Carmelites of 126, 151, 376n, 378 —, castle of 25, 33 —, constable of, see Lesnerac, P. de —, contracts seal of 169-70 —, counts of 3, 29 —, —, Guerech 25 —, —, Hoel (also count of Cornouaille) 26, 29 —, —, Lambert 15 —, —, Salomon, mythical count of 148 —, county of 2, 15, 25, 246n, 313 —, dean of, see Paris, G. —, diocese of 297, 318n, 320, 328 —, —, baptismal registers of 143 —, Dominicans of 259n —, Franciscans of 106, 141n —, Joscelin, magister scholarum of 316n —, Katherine of 180-1 —, Le Bouffay, castle of 17 —, mint of 212n, 249n —, regale of 143, 173n, 248, 249n —, Roman walls of 15, 17 —, Ste Croix de 247 —, St Pierre de, cathedral church of 136, 325 —, —, dean and chapter of 164 —, seneschal of 184, 195, 299n; see also Brochereul, R. —, siege of (1487) 114,236 —, Tourneuveof 113, 128n, 130n, 181 —, —, library of 376 —, University of 10, 116, 139n, 296n, 317, 324-5, 339 Naples, kingdom of 380, 390 Navarre, kingdom of 137, 177, 191, 213 —, admiral of, seejourdain, M. —, mission of P. de Lesnerac to 175-96 passim —, Charles II, king of 136, 175-7, 183-5, 190, 192-5, 250n, 277n —, Charles III, king of 185, 193-5 —, Juana of, see Brittany, John IV —, Juana de, see Rohan, Jean, viscount of —, Catherine de Foix, queen of 407 Nemours, Jacques d'Armagnac, count of 329n Nesindre, Geoffroy 295, 311 Neufchastel, Jean de 367 Neuham, Elveredus de 82 Nevers (Nievre) 245n Neville, John, lord 25In Newton, John 274, 275n, 276, 280n, 281n Nicholas V, pope 317n Noial, Yvonde 119n

Index Nonant, family of 85 Norfolk 74n, 76 —, dukes of 77 —, Ralph, lord of 25, 75; see also Gael Normandy 21, 25, 29, 30, 45, 47, 85n, 89, 139n, 177, 245n, 250n, 309, 334, 357, 363n —, dukes of 4, 30, 49, 71, 287; see also England, William I; France, John II Normans 4, 15, 88-9 Northampton, William Bohun, earl of 205, 208 Northamptonshire 74n Norwich, Henry Despenser, bishop of 270 Notarial practice 120; see also Brittany, notaries in Nottinghamshire 74n Nourembourch, Hance de 363n Nourry, Pierre de 256n Noyon (Oise) 275n —, bishop of 213n Nulliaco (Noyal-sur-Seiche, IV) 26 Nutwell (Devon) 86n Odcombe (Somerset) 79, 80n Odet, river 38 Oleron (Charente maritime), laws of 185n Orange, Jean de Chalon, prince of 126n, 357n Orford (Lines), convent of 89 Oriflamme 303 Orleans (Loire), bastard of, see Dunois —, dukes of 376, 382 —, —, Charles 263 —, —, Louis (d.1407) 255-6 —, —, Louis (d.1515) 126n; see also France, Louis XII —, Marguerite d', countess of Etampes 44, 377 —, Theodulf, bishop of 309 —, University of 139n, 295-7, 318-9, 323, 325n, 332, 340 Orthez (Pyrenees-Atlantiques) 25In Orvault(LA) 365n Osismes 17 Osney (Oxon), canons of 89 Oswestry (Salop) 92 Oudon (LA) 32, 34, 40-2, 47, 253n —, lord of, see Malestroit, A. de Oust, river 28, 42 Ovid 313, 315n Oxford, Robert de Vere, earl of 270-1, 273-80; see also Ireland —, St Mary Magdalen at 89 —, University of 320 Paimboeuf(LA) 100

429

Paimpont (IV), abbey of 143n Paisley (Scotland), abbey of 88 Pamplona (Spain) 179, 183-4, 187, 189-90 Pare, Bertrand du 359, 364n, 366-7, 369 —, Charles du 360, 366-7 —, see also La Roche Jagu Parigne(IV) 47 Paris 8, 17, 19, 136, 143, 144n, 161n, 166, 173, 178, 197, 205-6, 208, 213, 223, 227, 252,265, 275, 278-80, 285, 300, 302, 309, 311-2, 324, 329n, 387, 389, 391,395 —, Carthusians of 300n, 314n —, ducal proctor at 112 —, Parlementof 5, 8, 52, 97, 112, 138, 139n, 234, 267, 288, 291, 299, 322, 324, 335n, 337-8, 342, 348n, 350n —, University of 139, 296-7, 301, 309n, 312n, 317-20, 322, 324-5 Paris, Guillaume 125n, 134-5 Parthenay (Deux-Sevres), lord of 123n Pasquier, Rene 129n Paynel, Foulques 280 —, Guyon 367 —, Nicolas 280 Pays de Galles, see Wales Pe, Jacques du 359n Penguern, Disarouez 385, 407 Pensions 58, 132-3, 136, 219, 225n, 226-7, 234-6, 239, 245, 253-6, 258, 302, 324, 345, 347n, 348n Penthievre, family of 27-9, 32, 52, 87, 100, 176, 221-2, 267-9, 281-2, 289, 343-4 —, Alain, count lOOn —, Charles, count of 213 —, Guy, count of 305 —, Jean de Bretagne, count of (d. 1404) 52, 176, 246n, 247n, 254n,323n —, —, ransom of 263-82 passim —, Jean de Bretagne, count of (d. 1454) 338n —, Olivier de Blois (Bretagne), count of 44, 52, 282, 342-3 —, Jeanne de, see Brittany, rulers of —, seneschal of lOOn Perche, count of 252; see also Alencon, counts of —, Nicolas du 298n Periou 27; see also La Roche Periou —, Jean 343n Perreal, Jean 387, 398 Perreau, student 324 Picardy 45, 257 Pirmil (LA), castle of 37 Pitti, Buonaccorso de 307n Pius II, pope 10, 317n, 339

430

The Creation of Brittany

Plaine, Dom Francois 199, 204 Plancoet (Plancoit) CN) 101-2 Plantagenet, family of 4, 5, 7, 32, 96,105,118, 120; see also Anjou, counts of; England, kings of Plantarosa, Guillem de 177, 192-4 Pleherel (CN) 100, 102 Plesse(LA) 312n Plessis, Geoffrey du 107 Plessis-Baliczon (CN), Jean du Perier, lord of 366 Plessis-Bonenffant (IV) 220 Pleubian (CN) 295, 310 Ploenouer(F) 311 Ploer, Rivalen de 226 Ploermel (M) 131n, 134n, 229 Plouay(M) 20 Plouzevede (F) 136 Pludelia(CN) 102n Plugenet, family of 79, 86, 91 —, Alan de 91 —, Hugh de 79, 89 —.Joscede 89 Plumaugat, Amaury de 369 Plutarch 401 Poence, Rolland 135, 295 Poher (F), archdeacon of 137n —, counts and viscounts of 15, 27 —, Matuedoi, count of 15 Poitiers (Vienne) 36, 301, 318, 324 Poitou 29, 45, 48, 103, 122, 288, 326n —, bailli of 288 —, seneschal of 301 Poland, king of, see Hungary Pole, Edmund de la 278 —, Michael de la, earl of Suffolk 270n, 278-9 Pommiers, Guillaume-Sanche de, vicomte de Fronsac 342n Pompadour, family of 404 Pont, family of 99 —, Eudo du 98 —Jean, lord of 359,366 Pontbriant, family of 235 —,Jean de 367 Pontchateau (LA) 26, 30 Pontivy (M) 40, 58 Pond'Abbe (F) 51 —, lords of 223 Pont Melvez (CN) 311 Pontorson (Manche) 47, 288 Porhoet (M), family of 22, 31, 33, 79 —, Eudo II, viscount of 31, 78, 99 —, Eudo III, viscount of 33 —, Geoffrey, viscount of 28

—, Guethenoc, viscount of 22, 24, 28 Pornic (LA) 30; see also Glevian —, Gourmaelon, lord of 30 Portsall (F) 23 Portzmoguer, Herve de 387 Pouance (Maine et Loire) 30-1, 47, 104-5, 344 —, Notre Dame de 106 —, St Pierre de 106 —, See also La Guerche, lords of Pouez, Bertrand du 45 Poulard, family of 137 —, Pierre 137 —, —, wife of, see Kerraoul, Constance de —, Roland 135n, 137n Poulglou, Geoffrey de 183-4, 190n, 195 Poyet.Jean 381,405 Preszeau, Perrot 245n Previn.Jean 38 Prevot, Guillaume 31 In Prieres (M), abbey of 259n Prior, Thomas 318n Provence 334 Pruche, Henri de 363n Prussia 187n Public Weal, war of (1465) 48-9, 261n, 344, 358, 363, 364n Quelen, Olivier de 369 Quelenec (Queleneuc), lord of 48, 360n —, Guyon, lord of 366 Querbloy, Yvon de 367 Querduel, lord of 326 Quemenet-Heboi (M), lord of 28 Quidallec, Geoffrey de 280 Quimper (F) 19, 35, 38, 51, 130n, 260, 307n —, bishops of 248, 307n —, —, Boschet, Guy de 133n, 136, 145n, 147n —, —, Le Marhec, Geoffroy 297n, 299, 320 —, —, Monceaux, Gacien 136, 299 —, —, Rainaud, chancellor 118, 119n, 120, 124 —.chapter of 316n, 320 —, diocese of 141, 297-8, 318n, 319-20 —, grammar school of 298n Quimperle(F) 55,317 —, abbey of Ste-Croix de 19, 29, 59 Quintin (CN), Tristan du Perier, lord of 233; see also Rohan, P. de Quintinanus 391 Quothells, Rolland de 269n Raboceau, Jacques 129n, 146n, 147 —, Pierre 129n, 148 Rachat 146n, 223, 234, 249; see also Assise de Rachat

Index Radcot Bridge (Oxon), battle of (1387) 275 Rainald, duke of Aquitaine 20 Raineval, lord of 274n Ralph the Staller 75, 81; see also Gael; Norfolk Raoul, Alain 135n, 136 Rannee(IV) 106 Ranroue't (LA) 41 Rays (LA), barony of 49, 246 —, lords of 27, 59, 95, 100, 138n, 224 —, Gestin, lord of 27 —, Gilles, lord of 138n, 221, 234, 311, 315 —, Girard I, lord of 98n —, Girard II, lord of 98n —, Girard III, lord of 99n —, John IV, duke of Brittany, lord of 123n, 246 —, Jeanne, lady of 246n —, pays de 20, 36, 137, 181, 285, 295, 299n Redon (IV) 35, 48, 55 —, abbey of St Sauveur de 19, 22, 25-6, 30, 59, 317 —, —, abbot of, see Treal, Jean de —, —, cartulary of 59 —, Franciscans of 106 Reginald, see England, Henry I Regnier, Jean 112n, 133n Reims (Marne) 389 —, archbishop of, see Craon, Jean de Rennes (IV) 15, 17-19, 22, 28, 31, 36, 39-40, 45, 47-8, 51, 55-7, 76-7, 130, 131n, 132n, 143n, 149, 201, 222, 247, 252n, 310, 312n, 313, 353, 364n, 378 —, abbey of St Georges de 26, 59, 102n, 324n —, —, Adela, abbess of 26 —, abbey of St Melaine de 87, 148 —, alloue of, see Chaveigne, B. de —, archdeacon of 146, 296 —, bishops of; Chantemerle, Anselme de, chancellor 132n —, —, La Guerche, Sylvestre de 31, 77n, 104-5 —, —, —, sons of 104 —, —, Thibaud 30; see also Poulard, family of —, cannons made at 39 —,canons of 124, 316n —, counts of 3, 15, 25, 28-30; see also Brittany, rulers of —, —, Eudo, count of 26, 74 —, count of 2, 3 —, diocese of 229, 297, 310-1, 319n, 320 —, Dominicans of 259n —, forest of 148 —, Franciscans of 317 —, gunners at 363 —, mint of 249n

431

—, regale 248, 249n, 253n —, rents of 247 —, seneschal of, see Brochereul, R.; Ferre, P. —, St Pierre, cathedral of 106 —, siege of (1356-7) 35, 197, 202, 208n, 209, 214 —, siege of (1489-90) 58, 363n —, town gate of 42 Rethel (Ardennes) 245n Rezay (Reze, LA) 247 Richart, Guyon 129n, 133n, 157 Richelieu, Cardinal 23, 42 Richemont, Arthur de, constable of France, see Brittany, Arthur III Richmond (Yorks), earldom and honour of 7, 71-2, 80, 86, 92, 123n, 159-60, 162, 211, 270, 272 —, value of 244 —, lords of 82, 87, 92 —, —, Alain le Roux 71 —, —, Alain (d.1146) 80-1, 87n, 88 —, —, Alan the Black 74, 76-8, 82, 84 —, —, Stephen (Etienne) 81, 87n —, seneschal of, see Scolland Rieux (M), castle of 27, 42, 54 —, family of 27, 40-1, 52, 222 —, Alain de 27 — Jean II, lord of 40-1, 234, 254n, 271n — Jean IV, lord of 39, 41, 51, 54, 348, 355, 359n, 366-7 —, Pierre, lord of, marshal of France 234 —, Rodaldus (Rouaud) de 27 Rille (IV), abbey and priory of 87, 143n, 317 Riou, Roland 149n' Riulfus, Henry, son of 79 Riviere, Poncet de 359 Robert of Torigny, historian 22, 31 Robertet, Frangois 395n, 406 Rochefort (M), castle of 54 —, lord of 271 n —, Jeanne, lady of 41 —, Rivalen de 226 Rocher, Jean 129n Rodemack, Jean, lord of 264 Roge, Galoys de 366 Rohan (M) 28 —, family of 33, 52, 55, 83, 86, 87n, 222, 224, 233 —, Alain I, lord of 28 —, Alain III, lord of 83n —, Alain V, lord of 33, 86n —, Alain VIII, viscount of 249 —, Alain IX, viscount of 53, 242n —.Jean I, viscount of 189n, 193, 269, 274n,300n

432

The Creation of Brittany

—, —, as chancellor 125, 166n, 17On, 111, 326 —, —, Juana de Navarre, wife of 177, 189n, 193, 300n — Jean II, viscount of 40, 52, 54, 58, 234, 337, 345-6, 348-9, 359n —, Jean de, lord of Gue de 1'Isle 326 —, Louis de, lord of Guemene, chancellor 125 —, Louis de, lord of Ramefort 367 —, Pierre de, lord of Gie 54-5, 234-5, 371 —, Pierre de, lord of Quintin 348n Roman du Ron 73, 74n Roman law 8, 9, 12, 120, 296, 318, 323 —, manuscripts of 300n, 316n —, treason concepts in 330-7, 344, 347, 349-50 Rome (Italy) 121n, 299, 318n —, St Peter's at 102 Rome, empire of 2, 3, 284, 330 —, Giles of, see Colonna, Egidius Romille,Jean 367 Rosnyvinen, family of 220, 228, 234 —, Guillaume de 58, 219-20, 228, 236, 349n, 359, 361 Rostrenen (CN) 51 —, Pierre, lord of 226 Rouen (Seine-maritime) 385, 391 Rouge, Eon de 312n Round, John Horace, historian 70-1, 73, 82 Rouville, Jean de, vicechancellor 133n, 145n, 147n, 346 Roux, Thomas 179, 190 Rozille, see Romille Ruffier,Jean 366 Rys, Antoine 253n Sable (Sarthe) 26, 173n, 245n, 252 Sadie (LA) 175, 181-2, 185, 188n Saintes (Charente-maritime) 317n Saintonge 122, 390 Salisbury, countess of 204-5 Samian, Girault de 362 San Sebastian (Spain) 175, 179, 184, 186-7, 189-90 Sarzeau(M) 325n Saumur (Maine et Loire) 40 —, abbey of St Florent de 87 Sauvage, Eon de, lord of Plessis Gueriff Savenay(LA) 312n Savigny (Manche), abbey of 30, 47, 77n, 87 Say,John 275n, 276n, 279n Scalars, family of 84 Scolland, seneschal of Richmond 81-2 Scotland 77, 88, 190, 204, 227, 306n —, David II, king of 263 —, James I, king of 263

—, Isabel of, see Brittany, Francis I —, Margaret of, see France, Louis XI Scliczon, Roland 133n Seals, see Brittany, chancery of Segre (Maine et Loire) 105n Seguier, chancellor of France 386 Seio (Plesse, LA) 25 Selby, Robert 280 Sele (Sussex), priory of 88 Senlis (Oise) 229, 326n Sens (IV), lord of, see Montauban, Philippe de Sept-Faux (LA), priory of 100 Septmaisons, lord of 141n Sevigne, Guillaume de 232 Shelford (Notts) 80n Shipwreck, rights of 245; see also lagan Shropshire 82 Sicily, kingdom of 268 —, king of, see Anjou, Rene, duke of —, Philippe de Gueldre, queen of 408 Sille, family of 105 Sluys (Belgium) 208 Soissons (Aisne), Jean Milet, bishop of 138 Solidor (IV), tour 37-8, 260 Somme le Roi 378 Song of Roland 329-31 Spain 175, 178-9, 227, 270-1, 276, 364 —, Louis of (de la Cerda) 204, 206, 213 Spinefort, Henry 200 —, Olivier 200, 341 n Spirewic, Eudo, son of 71, 83 Sporle (Norfolk), priory of 88 Stanton Fitzwarren (Wilts) 86n Staveley (Derbys) 80n Steir, river 38 Stenton, Sir Frank, historian 25, 29 Stewart, family of 77; see also Scotland Suffolk 74n Surienne, Francois de 45 Surrey 74n Sucinio (Suscinio, M) 33, 260 Sussex 83 Switzerland 227 St-Aubin des Bois (CN), abbey of 100-1, 102n, 122n St-Aubin du Cormier (IV) 33, 45, 47-8, 51, 55, 58, 130n, 220, 253n, 311,349n —, captain of, see Rosnyvinen, G. de —, battle of (1488) 40, 354, 365 St Augustine of Hippo 301, 315n St-Brieuc (CN) 15, 38, 130n, 260, 305 —, bishops of; see Malestroit, J. de —, —, La Rue, Alain de 136, 321 n —, cathedral of 102n

Index — diocese of 297, 319-20 —, regale of 249n St-Denis (Seine et Oise), abbey of 34, 197, 203, 205, 207, 213, 363n, 387-9 St Frideswide (Oxon), priory of 89 St-Gelais, Octovien de 394, 395n, 405 St-Gildas de Rhuys (M), abbey of 259n, 31 In, 313 St-Gilles, Jean de 253n St-Hilaire (Manche) 77; see also Harscouet, family of St-James de Beuvron (Manche) 245n St-Jean-Brevelay (M) 247n St Jean Pied de Port (Pyrenees-Atlantiques) 175, 179, 183, 185n, 190 St John, order of Hospital of 89; see also Jerusalem St-Leger(LA) 150 St-Liz, Regnierde 179, 183, 190 St-Malo 19, 37-40, 47, 55-6, 130n, 143n, 260, 290, 342, 344n, 347n, 363 —, bishops of 37-8, 248, 342 —, —, Chatillon, Jean de 19 —, —, Montfort, Guillaume de 38 —, —, Poulard, Guillaume 137n —, —, Rohan, Josselin de 342 —, captain of 195 —, diocese of 297, 318n, 319-20 St-Mathieu de Fineterre (F), abbey of 45 St-Meen(IV) 311 —,abbey of 19, 88 St-Mesmin, Guillaume de 209 St Michael, images of 161-2 St-Michel, Order of 347n St-Nazaire (LA) 47 St-Omer (Pas de Calais) 250n, 314 St-Paul (St Pol), Jean de, chronicler 198, 325, 375 St-Pere en Rays (LA) 30 St Pol (Pas de Calais), counts of 256n —, Marie, countess of 291 St-Pol de Leon (F) 55; 130n, 317 —, bishops of 21 In, 31 In —, —, Le Barbu, Guy 324n —, cathedral of 136 —, diocese of 136, 297, 301, 318n, 319-20, 322, 353n, 368 St Sauveur de Lege (LA) 106 St Yves, see Helori, St Yves Sancto Boco (CN) 102 Tallies 51, 104, 256,363 Talhoet, family of 325n —Jean 325

433

Tancarville, count of 256n Tanques, Colart de 275n Tanguy, Raoul 20In Tany, Hasculf de 80n Tardif, Alain 305 Tattershall (Lines) 80n, 83, 89 —, lords of 83 —, Hugh of 83, 89 —, Robert of 83, 91 Teillay (IV), priory of St Martin de 103 —, forges in wood of 104 Temple, Order of Knights of the, 89, 103, 107 109, 141n Terre-Vermeille, Jean de 340 Tertre, Olivier du 347n Therouanne (Pas de Calais) 314 Thirty, battle of the (1351) 197, 202, 207-8 Thomas, Jamet 147n Thoresway (Lines) 80n Thouars, Alienor, lady of 295n, 31 In —, Catherine de 32 —, Guy de 103n —, Hugues de 99n —, see also Brittany, rulers of, Guy de Thouars Tiercent, Jean du 369 —, Louis de 366 Tiffauges (Vendee) 20 Tinteniac (CN) 26, 31 —, lords of 6, 26, 98 —, —, Donoal, lord of 26 Tiron (Eure et Loir), abbey of 88, 100 Tissard, Francois 395 Tissue, Gilles de 367 —, Noel de 347n, 366-7 Toeni, Cecily de 78 —, Robert de 78 Tolosa (Spain) 187 Tonquedec (CN) 51,54 Totnes (Devon) 24, 80n, 87 —, Judicael (Juhel) of 29, 71, 74, 77, 85, 87 Touches, Jean, lord of 164n Touffou(LA) 247 Toulouse (Haute-Garonne) 318 Touraine 29-30, 122, 292, 318 —, bailli of 288 Tournemine, family of 99-102, 108; see also La Hunaudaye —, Edouard 99 —, Geoffroy I lord of 100 —, Guillaume, lord of 100 —, Margilie 101 —, Olivier, lord of 100 —, —, Sybille de Chateaubriant, wife of 100 —, Pierre, lord of lOOn

434

The Creation of Brittany

—, Pierre de 108n Tours (Indreet Loire) 3, 36, 106, 142n, 144, 163, 245n, 346, 381-2 —, archbishop of 321 n —, archdeacon of 321 n Traba, Raoul de 107 Tracy, family of 85 Trans (IV) 20 Treason 11; see also Brittany, lese-majeste, concept of; Roman law Treal, Bonabe de 183 —, Jean de, abbot of St Sauveur de Redon 35 —, Raoul 316n Treanna, Yvon de 366 Trecesson (M) 24 Tredias (CN) hospital of 259n Tregomar(CN) 102n Tregorrois (CN) 6, 54, 203n, 305 Treguier (CN) 98, 135, 192, 295-7, 310, 312n, 315, 318-20, 323, 353n —, bishops of 248, 296, 298; see also Keroulay, Hugues de —, —, Penmarch, Christophe de 316 —, regale of 249n —, seneschal of, see Le Cozic, P. Trelever, Prigent de 49 Tremaugon, Everart de, see Dol, bishops of Tremazan (F) 23-4, 51 Tressignaux (CN) 247n Trier (Germany) 277-8 Triquart, Guillaume 248n Tronchet (IV), abbey of 87, 143n Troy, legends of 284 Tuich, Yvo, notary 192 Uguet.Jean 369 Urban VI, pope 272n , Vaillant, Guillaume 133n Valenes, Alanus de 82 Valerius Maximus 315n Valois, family of 9, 10, 240, 258, 342; see also France, kings of —, Charles, count of 342n Vannes (M) 17, 19, 33, 35, 56, 128n, 130, 131n, 208, 260, 295, 305,310-1, 312n, 317, 364n —, archdeacon of, see Locmine, J. de; Louet,M. —, bishops of 17; see also Le Barbu, H. —, —, Le Parisi, Jean 31 In —, —, Pontsal, Yves de 130n, 144n, 145n —, —, St-Pern, Gautier de 124, 125n —, Chambre des comptes at 241 —, chapter of cathedral 259n, 295, 316n

—, —, treasurer of 137n —, county of 2, 3 —, diocese of 195, 295, 318n, 320, 325n, 368 —, Ermine castle at 17, 273 —, mint of 17 —, Porte de Greguinic at 17 —, St Patern de 305n, 31 In Varades (LA) 27, 47 —, Andre, lord of 96n —, Brient, lord of 27 Vauban, engineer 13, 56 Velut, Queso 362 Vendee 21 Vendel, Guyon, lord of 367 Vendelais (IV) 33 Venette, Jean de, chronicler 312 Venice (Italy) 387, 392 —, ambassador of, see Contarini, Z. Ventadour, Robert de 250n Verard, Antoine 386 Vern, Jamet de, notary 128n Vertou(LA) 181 —, St Martin de 337 Vertus (Vertuz), count of 123n, 408 Vicarius 20, 26, 28-9 Vicecomes 29 Viellevigne (LA) 47 Vienne, Girart de 332 —, Jean de, admiral of France 272, 274n Vikings 3, 14, 15, 17, 20-1, 29 Villeblanche, Henry de 366 —, Jean de 366 Villers-Coterets, ordonnance of (1539) 122 Villesbresme, Mace de 394 Viorel (LA), forest of 104n Vitre (IV) 13, 26, 28, 31-2, 34, 36, 40,45, 47-8, 51,55, 130n, 149n, 310, 312-3 —, castle of 54 —, family and lords of 30, 79, 105 —, Andre III, lord of 5, 32-3, 96n, 97 —, Rivallon, lord of 26, 28, 30-1 —, Alain de, lord of Dinan 86, 90n —, lordship of 30-1, 52, 108n, 148, 225n —, pays de 314 Visconti, Bonna 323 Vitrier( Vitman), Jean 135n, 136, 288n Vivonne, Isabeau de 343n Vouvantes (LA) 47 Wace, romancer 73, 74n Waddesdon manor (Bucks) 387-8 Walden, Roger 276n, 278-80 Wales 77,91,306 —, Edward, prince of 176

Index Walkern (Herts) 80n Wallace, William 333n Wallingford (Berks) 82 Walsingham, Thomas, historian 207n Warwick, Thomas Beauchamp, earl of 275, 278 —, Richard Neville, earl of 346 Warwickshire 74n Wax, use and colour of 121, 128n, 159-60; see also Seals Westminster, treaty of (1356) 266 Wihenoc, Domesday tenant 75 Wihenon, see Ancenis, Guihenoc, lord of

435

Wiltshire, Herve Brito, earl of, see Brito Winchester, Henry of Blois, bishop of 90 Windsor herald 209,214 Wolverton (Bucks) 80n, 81 Wrey, Sir Robert 69 Wyngreworth, Giles de 186n, 186n, 243-4, 249 York, Cecily, duchess of 377 Yorkshire 71-2, 74n Zebres, Hance, tent maker 364n Zouche, family of 79, 81, 86, 87n, 91 —, Alan de 78, 83