Duchy of Gascony Licences II 1290 - 1317 Charles Coulson
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Duchy of Gascony Licences II, 1290-1317 Duchy of Gascony Licences II 1290 - 1317 Charles Coulson Château de Villandraut, built c. 1305. The most important of the series of castles built by the de Got family from the proceeds derived from the papacy of Clement V. Built for Clement V himself, the castle bears resemblance to the castles built by Edward I in North Wales in the 1280s onwards, such as Beaumaris and most particularly Harlech, whose overall plan is almost identical. The castle was not finished by the time of the death of the pope, but the ruinous great hall, papal residence and personal chapel still clearly reveal the ambition of Clement. THE CASTLE STUDIES GROUP JOURNALTHE NO CASTLE 29: 2015-16230 STUDIES GROUP JOURNAL NO 29: 2015-16 Duchy of Gascony Licences II, 1290-1317 Duchy of Gascony Licences II, 1290-1317 elements; but specifying a pre-existing resi- dence, however normal it must have been (and Charles Coulson in the English texts it is all but invariable), and This sequel to CSG Journal 28 carries the using manerium instead of domus fortis are examination and analysis down to 1317, when phrases belonging to the kingdom, not the the 4th Volume of the Gascon Rolls/Rôles duchy. After this, the Chancery reverted, with (Yves Renouard, Paris 1962, 1307-17) ends. partial lapses, to the regular Gascon style. The After Edward I’s stay in 1289 and until the enrolment of Arnald de Blanquefort’s licence residence of Edward the Black Prince, under copies the full general address, to all officials Edward III, duchy affairs were again managed and subjects in the duchy, instead of ‘the king locally by the Seneschal or Lieutenant, with to all to whom, etc.’ The emphatic condition intervention from Westminster on request. that Arnald should make (written) securitas for the rendering is also unusual. It is all rather Only pertinacious, or eminent, individuals terse. Putting together a series of similar pat- obtained great seal licences entered on the ents helpfully puts superficially distinctive ele- Gascon Roll: certainly a minority.1 There are ments in due perspective – but it also throws up none between May 1293 and November 1304, idiosyncrasies which may sometimes be signif- the period of French partial fraudulent occupa- icant. What, in retrospect, overshadows the tion and desultory English and native resist- licence for Veyrines, is not so much its proxim- ance under Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln. ity to Bordeaux (the Bordelais was densely Edward I’s restoration was celebrated by no studded with mini-estate capitals) but the mem- fewer than ten licences (Nov. 1304-April ory of a serious fracas in 1244, when Blanque- 1305),2 but the first decade of his son’s reign fort castle itself in an outbreak of class-tension recorded only eighteen, all of them in the peri- was severely damaged in an attack by the citi- od 1312-17, when the modern printed edition zens. Count Bernard of Armagnac gave the of the Roll ceases. then Arnald de Blanquefort strong support, in The nature of the practice of licensing, a letter to Henry III, denouncing the citizens’ previously analysed, is greatly illuminated by arrogance and airing nobles’ general sense of the lengthy and comprehensive petition of grievance.4 c.1310, already examined in Part I. So wide is Attractive as it may seem to connect the its significance for the recognitory and compli- apparently restrictive elements in the Veyrines mentary motivation of applicants and likewise licence with this incident, such linkage is im- of the royal council or Chancery, that it seemed plausible. In particular, some sort of notifica- best to expound it at the start. The king-duke, tion to the citizens might have been expected. it is clear, may have been the source of the Unless a petitioner supplied information, the most prestigious licences for fortifying, but Chancery rarely recalled even what was con- other barons’ subjects would apply elsewhere. tained in its own records. Bureaucratic unfa- Far more work is needed. miliarity, by clerks now back in England, not in 1 Sensitive Lordship in Adversity attendance upon the king in Gascony, suffi- ciently accounts for the English phraseology Edward I’s licence in August 1290 to Arnald (including ‘manor’ for ‘strong-house’, and ‘en- de Blanquefort is in partly English style, name- close’ for fortify, etc).5 The emphasis put on ly, to enclose his manor(-house) of Veyrines Arnald’s guaranteeing to render Veyrines is with a wall of stone or of palisading (vel de countered by the omission of other formulae, palo). The site is only about eight miles WSW covered by the vague allusion to local custom. of Bordeaux. The wording of the grant, dated Although the Occitan ‘angered or appeased’ at Northampton, is hybrid being made ‘so far phrase is put in, it is misused. Some Gascon as we may’, and implying tenure-in-chief, and model was evidently available among the of- also with (terse) rendability clause (under writ- fice-formularies kept in Chancery – but it must ten guarantee) ‘according to the law and cus- 3 have been used conjointly with the standard tom of those parts’. These are Gascon form prevailing at home. The Chancery’s nor- THE CASTLE STUDIES GROUP JOURNALTHE NO CASTLE 29: 2015-16231 STUDIES GROUP JOURNAL NO 29: 2015-16 Duchy of Gascony Licences II, 1290-1317 mal mode was routine, reactive auto-pilot - but violence and injustice (injuria) ….[1270]’ We, not so in this exhortation sent in June 1294 ratifying and accepting the constructing or from Portsmouth to Arnald de Blanquefort, making of that house, confirm it to Arnald, son among numerous others: of the said Aycard, and to his heirs ….[1291].7 You will be well aware of the dispute The wording deserves care, since the 1270 between the king of France and us, and how letter is not strictly a ‘licence’ but an adminis- that king has wickedly deprived (maliciose trative mandate, pursuant to an atavistic oral decepit) us of our possessions, people and land but conditional permission. Edward then was of Gascony; on which account we require you, not acting as duke of Gascony, but technically as warmly (carius) as we may, and ask you that as Henry III’s lieutenant at Aigues Mortes en you help us to recover, keep and defend that route to Palestine. One of the local issues the land of ours, as you and your ancestors did to seneschal would have to check, was whether us and ours in all times past; so acting that we the place was held in-chief. If it was not then and ours may be obliged to you, as we recog- the mesne lordship would be impugned and nize we are for the good services you have Edward’s authority compromised. But if all rendered us hitherto.6 was in order, that authority as direct, legally Loyalty and rendability worked. Places competent overlord, in the form of a grant were taken over entirely locally. Three further (presumably in writing) from the seneschal, illuminating licences were granted before was to be upheld by him at law and otherwise. Philip IV provoked this war, by pretext by The actual place is not named but since Arnald feudal right of a nominal taking possession of was bailiff of Bourg (1283) and appointed for the duchy to symbolize his overlordship. He two years castellan of La Réole in October intended forcible seizure and occupation of the 1291, a site in the north of dép Gironde would chief places to effect a de facto conquest. Such be likely. There had seemingly been no hitch, treachery lay still in the future, a prelude to the so that the fortifying and/or original building Hundred Years War, when in May 1291 the by Aycard had been duly accomplished, and was ratified ex post facto, as usual no question king confirmed a licence he had granted as the 8 Lord Edward at Aigues Mortes, his Mediterra- as to expiry etc. being raised. nean port of embarkation on his way to the The condition of rendability was not (ex- Holy Land on Crusade. The patent is very plicitly) attached to this dwelling, or ‘unit of exceptional in that it recites a mandate from building’ (domus), but it is stipulated in regu- 1270, one of the many lost documents of the lar, perpetual form in the repeated licences for years 1255-72. The Lord Edward’s govern- Roquefort (dép. Gironde), to Gaillard de ment at that time had proceeded with especial- Grésignac (both petitioned for by Rostand De- ly pronounced caution: soler, of the prominent Bordeaux citizen fami- The king to everyone who shall inspect ly) in June 1291, and again in May 1293 these letters, greeting. Whereas we once grant- without allusion to the former grant. Licences ed our dilectus et fidelis Aycard Audoin, repeated after a brief interval raise particular knight, our letters thus – ‘Edward, firstborn questions, especially in England where they son of the illustrious king of England, to his are not uncommon. At first blush, some seneschal of Gascony, greeting. We commis- change of circumstances, or extreme caution sion (mandamus) you that, having seen and on the part of the petitioner, or hitch in imple- diligently inspected the place where our very mentation so that the licence needed affirma- dear (karissmus) Lord Aycard Audoin, knight, tion might be supposed. Expiry can be intends with our agreement (assensus) to make discounted: licences are often perpetual in ex- a strong house, if your inspection shows that it pression (to grantee ‘and heirs’; to corporate can be done without damage or risk to us or to head ‘and successors’), but nothing suggests our heirs, now or in the future, (then) you shall this was anything more than standard land- allow (concedatis) him to make that house, and grant phraseology.