Blood Cries Afar, page 39
15 J. Beeler, Warfare in Feudal Europe, 730–1200, Ithaca, 1971, xii.
16 For the priest at Le Puiset: Suger, Vita Ludovici Grossi Regis, ed. H. Waquet, Paris, 1964 edn., 138. For laws affecting the clergy: M. Keen, The Laws of War in the Late Middle Ages, London, 1965, 195; T. Meron, Henry’s Wars and Shakespeare’s Laws: Perspectives on the Law of War in the Later Middle Ages, Oxford, 1993, 96–101. Christopher Tyerman has observed ‘the clergy’s love of war in general’: C. Tyerman, England and the Crusades, 1095–1588, Chicago, 1988, 262. For aspects of the clergy and war in general: T. Reuter, ‘Episcopi cum sua militia: the Prelate as Warrior in the Early Staufer Era’, in T. Reuter (ed), Warriors and Churchmen in the High Middle Ages, London, 1992; the section on ‘Violence and the medieval clergy’ in D. J. Kagay and L. J Andrew Villalon (eds), The Final Argument: The Imprint of Violence on Society in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, Woodbridge, 1998, pp. 3–52; B. Arnold, ‘German Bishops and their Military Retinues in Medieval Europe’, German History, 7 (2), 1989, 161–83; M. Prestwich, Armies and Warfare in the Middle Ages: The English Experience, New Haven, 1996, 168–70; Kaeuper, Chivalry and Violence, 41–84; McGlynn, By Sword and Fire, 61–71; A. Murray, ‘Roles in Warfare of Clergy’, OEMW, i, 404–6. For a fuller discussion of what follows, see McGlynn, ‘Roger of Wendover’.
17 For Guérin’s career, see J. Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, Berkeley, 1986, 115–22.
18 Quoted in Contamine, War, 211.
19 Barbara English, ‘Towns, Mottes and Ring-works of the Conquest’, in A. Ayton and J. L. Price (eds), The Medieval Military Revolution: State, Society and Military Change in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, London, 1995, 45.
20 F. Paxton, ‘Power and the Power to Heal: The Cult of St Sigismund of Burgundy’, Early Medieval Europe, 2 (2), 1993, 101.
21 H. Cowdrey, ‘Pope Gregory VII’, Medieval History, 1 (1), 1991, 28.
22 Quoted by Timothy Reuter in Reuter, ‘Episcopi cum sua militia’, 93.
23 St Bernard, himself a son of a knight, was originally destined for the knighthood. There is a large literature on the military orders: M. Barber, The New Knighthood: A History of the Order of the Temple, Cambridge, 1994; A. Forey, The Military Orders: From the Twelfth to the Early Fourteenth Centuries, London, 1992; D. Selwood, Knights of the Cloister: Templars and Hospitallers in Central-Southern Occitania, 1100–1300, Woodbridge, 1999; J. M. Upton-Ward, ed. and trans., The Rule of the Templars, Woodbridge, 1992; H. Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights: Images of the Military Orders, 1128–1291, Leicester, 1995; idem., The Knights Templar: A New History, Gloucester, 2001; J. Upton-Ward, The Military Orders: Volume IV, Ashgate, 2008; L. Marvin, ‘Monastic Military Orders’, RGMH, 383–4; J. Porter, S. Cerrini and C. Jensen, ‘Military Orders’, OEMW, iii, 76–85. Brother Guérin was a Knight Templar (see n. 17 above).
24 C. Oman, The Art of War in the Middle Ages, Oxford, 1885; idem., revised and expanded 3rd edn., 2 vols., London, 1924.
25 H. Delbrück, Medieval Warfare, trans. W. J. Renfroe, Lincoln, 1982 (original German edn. 1924). For a very interesting but ultimately unconvincing reassessment of Delbrück and army sizes, see B. Bachrach, ‘Early Medieval Military Demography: Some Observations on the Methods of Hans Delbrück’, in D. J. Kagay and L. J. Andrew Villalon (eds), The Circle of War in the Middle Ages, Woodbridge, 1999.
26 R. C. Smail, Crusading Warfare, 1097–1193, Cambridge, 1956.
27 Note the reminisces of M. Keen, Nobles, Knights and Men-at-Arms in the Middle Ages, London, 1996, ix.
28 J. F. Verbruggen, The Art of Warfare in Western Europe During the Middle Ages From the Eighth Century to 1340.
29 Ibid., 16.
30 See ns. 7 and 14.
31 Critical evaluations of this expansive literature are to be found in: S. McGlynn, ‘Land Warfare, 1000–1500’, in C. Messenger (ed), Reader’s Guide to Military History, London, 2002; J. France, ‘Recent Writing on Medieval Warfare: From the Fall of Rome to c. 1300’, Journal of Military History, 65 (2), 2001 (my thanks to Prof France for forwarding an early copy of this comprehensive article). The literature on medieval warfare is also discussed in: M. Strickland, ‘Introduction’, in M. Strickland (ed), Anglo-Norman Warfare: Studies in Late Anglo-Saxon an Anglo-Norman Military Organization and Warfare, Woodbridge, 1992 (itself an invaluable collection of revisionist papers chiefly from the 1980s); A. Curry, ‘Medieval Warfare: England and Her Continental Neighbours, Eleventh to the Fourteenth Centuries’, JMH, 21 (3), 1997; S. McGlynn, ‘The Myths of Medieval Warfare’, History Today, 44 (1), 1994; idem., ‘Battle Honours’, Medieval World, no.7, 1992; idem., ‘Medieval Warfare’, European Review of History-Revue Européene d’Histoire, 4 (2), 1997.
32 See n.25.
33 John France, Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, 1000–1300, 1999.
34 William Blake, The Complete Poems, Harmondsworth, 1977, pp. 59–60.
1 Enemies: The Angevin-Capetian Struggle
35 Gesta Stephani, eds. K.R. Potter and R.H.C. Davis, Oxford, 1976, 224.
36 J.C Holt considers this treaty as neither a treaty nor a charter, but rather a ‘formal promulgation of terms previously agreed.’ (’The Treaty of Winchester’, in Edmund King (ed), The Anarchy of King Stephen Reign, Oxford, 1994, 293–5). Holt’s essay is one of a number of valuable pieces in this important collection. Stephen’s reign has seen a proliferation of significant recent studies, notably: Keith Stringer, The Reign of Stephen, London., 1993; R.H.C Davis, King Stephen, 3rd edn, Harlow, 1990; Jim Bradbury, Stephen and Matilda: The Civil War of 1139–53, Gloucester, 1996; David Crouch, The Reign of King Stephen, 1135–1154, Harlow, 2000; Donald Matthew, King Stephen, London, 2002; Paul Dalton and Graeme White (eds), King Stephen’s Reign, 1135–1154, Woodbridge, 2008.
37 The Capetian house ruled France from 987 to 1328. Louis has come in for much criticism for divorcing Eleanor and hence losing such a great amount of terroritory, but it should be noted that he did go on to produce a son and thus ensured uncomplicated further successions to the crown; France therefore avoided the strife caused by disputed successions in England. For Capetian France, see: Elizabeth Hallam, Capetian France, 987–1328, Harlow, 1980 (2nd edition with Judith Everard, 2001); Jean Dunbabin, France in the Making, 843–1180, Oxford, 1985; Robert Fawtier, The Capetian Kings of France: Monarchy and Nation, 987–1328, Basingstoke, 1960; Georges Duby, France in the Middle Ages, 987–1460, Oxford, 1991; Ivan Gobry, Les Capétiens, Paris, 2001; Jim Bradbury, The Capetians, 2007.
38 Ralph of Diss remarked on Henry’s itinerant kingship: ‘now in Ireland, now in England, now in Normandy, he must fly rather than travel by horse or ship’ (Radulphi de Diceto Opera Historica, ed. W.Stubbs, RS, 1876, i, 351
39 For Eleanor: Bonnie Wheeler and John C. Parsons, Eleanor of Aquitaine: Lord and Lady, Basingstoke, 2002; D.D.R. Owen, Eleanor of Aquitaine: Queen and Legend, Oxford, 1993. Her life is also comprehensively covered, if a little romantically, by Amy Kelly, Eleanor of Aquataine and the Four Kings, London, 1950; and more recently by Alison Weir, Eleanor of Aquataine: A Life, London, 2000. Two useful articles are: Jane Martindale, ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine: The last Years’, in Church, King John; and Ralph V. Turner, ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine and her Children’, JMH, 14 (3), 1998.
40 A.L. Poole covers these events and discusses the importance of the gains in From Domesday Book to Magna Carta, 1087–1216, 2nd edn, Oxford, 1955, 323–6. For these and other territories see Richard Couer de Lion, 25–33.
41 For Henry’s reign, the best account is the magisterial work by W.L.Warren, HenryII, London, 1973. For his early years, Emilie Amt’s The Accesion of Henry II in England, Royal Government restored, 1149–1159, Woodbridge, 1993, is very insightful. See also Richard Barber, Henry Plantagenet, Woodbridge, new edn, 2001. An excellent collection of papers has recently been published: Christopher Harper-Bill and Nicholas Vincent (eds), Henry II: New Interpretations, Woodbridge, 2007. Also of interest is Ruth Kennedy and Simon Meecham-Jones (eds), Writers of the Reign of Henry II,Basingstoke, 2006. Of relevance is John Gillingham, ‘Conquering Kings: Some Twelfth-Century Reflections on Henry II and Richard I, in Richard Couer de Lion. For a detailed account of events in 1173–4, see M. Thomas, War of the Generations: The Revolt of 1173–4, Michigan, 1980. Military aspects of this war are authoritatively dealt with in two papers by Matthew Strickland: ‘Securing the North: Invasion and the Strategy of Defence in Twelfth-Century Anglo–Scottish Warfare’, in ANW; ’Arms and the Men: Loyalty and Lordship in Jordan Fantasome’s Chronicle’, in Christopher Harper-Bill, Medieval Knightood, 4, Woodbridge, 1992. Also important here is John D. Hosler, Henry II: A Medieval Soldier at War, 1147–1189, Woodbridge, 2007. The danger of 1183 was further exacerbated by Lord Rhys of Wales, who had taken the opportunity of Henry’s distraction by these troubles to lead a Welsh Rebellion, as Gillingham explores in ‘Henry II, Richard I and the Lord Rhys’, Peritia, 10, 1996 (I am grateful to Prof Gillingham for allowing me to read an advanced copy of this paper).
42 W. Stubbs (ed), Itinerarium Regis Ricardi in Chronciles and Memorials of The Reign of Richard I, 2 vols, RS, 1864, i, xvii. The standard account of Richard’s reign, is John Gillingham’s Richard I, London, 1999. This is augmented by his Richard Couer de Lion, London, 1994. This can be usefully supplemented by Kate Norgate, Richard the Lionheart, London, 1924; Jean Flori, Richard the Lionheart: Knight and King, trans. Jean Birrell, Westport, 2006 and Janet Nelson (ed), Richard Coeur de Lion in History and Myth, London 1992. An important collection of articles on Richard is to be found in Louis Le Roc’h Morgère (ed), Richard Couer de Lion, Roi d’Angleterre, Duc de Normandie, Caen, 1999. Less favourable views of Richard are to be found in: Ralph V. Turner and Richard R. Heiser, The Reign of Richard Lionheart: Ruler of the Angevin Empire, 1189–1199, Harlow, 2000, which offers a measured alternative perspective; John Appleby, England Without Richard, 1189–1199, London, 1965; and especially James Brundage, Richard Lionheart, New York, 1973. The debate on Richard is continued in M.Markowski. ‘Richard Lionheart: Bad King. Bad Crusader?, Journal of Medieval History, 23, 1997. Ralph V. Turner’s ‘Good or Bad Kinsghip? The Case of Richard the Lionheart’, Haskin’s Society Journal, 8, Woodbridge, 1999, is a sustained critique of Gillingham’s defence of Richard; although extremely helpful in summarising the debate, the article, in common with all Ricardian studies, fails to consider the grand strategy addressed in this chapter and is thus too sympathetic to John’s predicament in 1203–04.
43 See Richard Benjamin, ‘A Forty Years War: Toulouse and the Plantagenets,’ Historical Research, 61 and P.N. Lewis, ‘The Wars of Richard I in the West,’ unpublished MPhil dissertation, University of London, 1977, for the military ramifications of this.
44 J.C. Holt, Magna Carta and Medieval Government, London, 1985, 82. Richard Heiser has demonstrated that Richard’s judicious appointments to shrievalties indicate care and foresight: ‘Richard I and His Appointments to English Shrievalties’, EHR, 112 (445), 1997. He also makes the valid point that Richard’s constant shuffling and exploitation of the sherrif’s office was common medieval practice and therefore not proof of Richard’s personal cupidity; Philip Augustus treated the office of bailli in a similar fashion and is praised for doing so (p.10).
45 J. Cookson, ‘What if Napoleon had Landed?’, History Today, 53 (9), 2003, 17.
46 Robert J. McMahon, The Cold War, Oxford, 2003, 12.
47 Anthony Tuck, Crown and Nobility, 1985, 186. See pp. 177–86 for a discussion of strategy during this period. Charles VI called off the invasion in November, probably due to financial reasons.
48 WB, i, 204.
49 Holt, Magna Carta and Medieval Government, 39.
50 His classic study, The Angevin Empire, reprinted in Richard Couer de Lion, discusses the economic issues, especially on 46–8. The Angevin Empire is also explored in Ralph V. Turner, ‘The Problem of Survival for the Angevin “Empire”: Henry’s II’s and his Sons’ Vision versus Late Twelfth-Century Realities, American Historical Review, 100 (1), 1995; John Le Patourel, ‘Angevin Succesions and the Angevin Empire’, in his Feudal Empires: Norman and Plantagent, London, 1984; Richard Benjamin, ‘The Angevin Empire’, in Nigel Saul (ed), England in Europe, 1066–1453, London, 1994; Robert Bartlett, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075–1225, Oxford 2000, 21–8; Warren, Henry II, 207–37; Donald Matthew, Britain and the Continent, 1000–1300, London, 2005, 88–128. Adam Smith, writing in 1776, noted the prerequisite importance of river systems to growing economies: ‘So it is upon the sea coast, and along the banks of navigable rivers, that industry of every kind naturally begins to divide and improve itself … A broad wheel wagon attended by two men and drawn by eight horses in about six weeks’ time carries and brings back between London and Edinburgh near four tons of goods. In about the same time a ship navigated by six or eight men and sailing between the ports of London and Leith frequently carries and brings back 200 ton weight of goods’ (Adam Smith The Wealth of Nations, Harmondsworth 1982, [originally published in 1776], 122. Thus the continental Angevin Empire, despite its disparate regions, distance from England and its separation from it by sea, was geographically and economically well-placed to be a thriving commercial entity. For geographical determinants of economic growth, see also Jeffery Sachs, ‘The Limits of Convergance: Nature, Nurture and Growth’, The Economist, 14 June, 1997. For the economy in Richard and John’s reign, additional to Gillingham above, see the essays by Jim Bolton and Paul Latimer in Church, King John. The most up-to-date survey is James Masschaele, ‘The English Economy in the Age of Magna Carta’, in Janet Loengard (ed), Magna Carta and the England of King John, Woodbridge, 2010.
51 RHF, 24, 758.
52 For example: Michael Clanchy, England and its Rulers, 1066–1272, London, 1983, 112; Gillingham, Richard Couer de Lion, 8.
53 The Song of Dermot and the Earl, ed. and trans. G.H. Opren, Oxford, 1892, 22.
54 Bartlett, England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 23.
55 Turner, ‘Survival of the Angevin “Empire”’, 88–9.
56 Good general surveys of this struggle are provided in the appropriate chapters of Poole, Domesday Book; Clancy, England and Its Rulers; Frank Barlow, The Feudal Kingdom of England, 1042–1216, 4th edn, Harlow 1998; Gillingham, Richard Couer de Lion; Kate Norgate, England Under the Angevin Kings, 2 vols, ii, London 1887; Hallam, Capetian France; Achille Luchaire Philippe Auguste et son Temp, Paris 1980 (originally published in 1902); Malcolm Vale, The Ancient Enemy: England, France and Europe from the Angevins to the Tudors, 2007.
57 There are a number of important accounts of John’s reign, analysing both his domestic and foreign policies in substantial details. W.L Warren offers the standard survey, on which I have relied heavily, King John, 3rd edn, London, 1998. To this may be added three differing but excellent surveys: R.V. Turner, King John, London, 1994; Kate Norgate, John Lackland, London, 1902; Sidney Painter, The Reign of King John, Baltimore, 1949. Also enjoyable, if less rigourous, is Alan Lloyd, King John, Trowbridge, 1973. A useful brief survey, with documents, can be found in J.A.P. Jones, King John and Magna Carta, Harlow, 1971. An important collection of conference papers has already been referenced for John’s reign, counter-revisionist in tone: Church, King John. Also of great value is the collection from Janet S. Loengard (ed) Magna Carta and the England of King John, Woodbridge, 2010. John’s rule is afforded much detailed discussions in Gillingham, Richard Couer de Lion and in the essential writings of J. C. Holt: Magna Carta and Medieval Government; Magna Carta, 2nd edn, Cambridge, 1992; idem, The Northerners, 2nd edn, Oxford 1992.
58 W.C. Sellar and R.J. Yeatman, 1066 and All That, Gloucester, 1993 [ 1930], 26–8.
59 Norgate, John, 286.
60 Lloyd, John, 392. This conclusion is based on Gervase of Canterbury’s contemporary opinion, expressed in The Historical Works of Gervase of Canterbury, ed. W. Stubbs, RS, 1880, ii, 92–3. Ralph Turner also argues that John deserves a favourable assessment of his generalship: Turner, ‘King John’s Military Reputation Reconsidered’, JMH, 19, 1993.
61 For an example of the extremes taken in nineteenth-century Britain by admirers of chivalry, see Ian Anstruther, The Knight and the Umbrella, London, 1963. For a brief discussion of this phenomenon, see my review article in History Today, 47 (2), 1997. A broad survey is given in Mark Girouard, The Return to Camelot, Yale, 1981.
62 Holt writes that John’s ‘total achievement was enormous, fit to stand alongside that of Henry II or Edward I. Together, these two and John represent a standard which was never again equalled in the medieval period’ (Magna Carta and Medieval Government, 96).
63 Colin Richmond, ‘Identity and Morality: Power and Politics During the Wars of the Roses’, in Power and Identity in the Middle Ages: Essays in Memory of Rees Davies, Oxford, 2007, 234.
64 Turner, King John, 3–4.
65 The collection is Church, King John. David Carpenter and Nicholas Vincent have engaged in a robust debate over 1199 and the origins of chancery rolls in Nicholas Vincent (ed), Records, Administration and Aristocratic Society in the Anglo-Norman Realm, Woodbridge, 2010, xvi-xviii, 1–28. See also Mark Hagger’s article in the same volume, ‘Theory and Practice in the Making of Twelfth-Century Pipe Rolls’, which raises questions over the reliability of even Pipe Rolls. The quotation is from David Crouch, ‘Baronial Paranoia in King John’s Reign’, in Leongard, Magna Carta and the England of King John, 51, 62.
66 Gerald of Wales in Giraldi Cambrensis Opera, (8 vols), eds. J.S. Brewer, J.F. Dimcock and G.F Warner, RS. 1861–91, viii, 214; Richard of Devizes in Chronicon, ed. and trans. J.T. Appleby, London, 1963, 32; the Barnwell chronicler (BC) in Memoriale Walteri de Coventria, ed. W. Stubbs, 2 vols, RS, 1879–80, ii, 232, Anonymous of Béthune in Histoire des Ducs de Normandie et des Rois d’Angleterre, ed. F. Michelet, Paris, 1840; the anonymous biographer of William Marshal (HWM) in History of William Marshal, 3 vols., ed. A. Holden, D. Crouch and S. Gregory, Anglo-Norman Text Society, 2002–2006, 124–7 (I will use page rather than line numbers); I am indebted to the kindness of Prof Holden, Dr Gregory and especially Prof Crouch for their kindness in allowing me to see draft versions of this invaluable edition.
