¹ This subject has recently been studied by Professor Charles H. Taylor in his article, ‘French Assemblies and Subsidy in 1321,’ Speculum 43 (1968) 217–244, and my work depends on his findings at every stage. Professor Taylor graciously permitted me to use his notes and microfilm relating to this and allied subjects and gave me valuable advice on this article. Professor John Henneman of the University of Iowa also offered helpful counsel; I am particularly grateful to him for bringing to my attention the account book of Najac. Professor Joan Ferrante of Columbia University assisted me with some obscure passages in the accounts, and M. François Maillard and Mr. Andrew Lewis made a number of useful suggestions.Google Scholar

² Taylor, , ‘1321’ 237.Google Scholar

³ Ibid. 228, 235, 237, 238.Google Scholar

⁴ Najac's account book is now found in the Archives départementales de l'Aveyron, 2E. 178.2. It covers the period 1289-1332, although the entries for the earlier period are sketchier and less legible than those for the years after 1295; for an analysis of the contents of the book, Bibliothèque Nationale ms. n.a.f. 564 (a 1575 inventory of the Najac archives) fol. 259-261 ^v. Claire and Jean Delmas, directors of the Aveyron archives, generously helped me to secure a microfilm copy of the accounts. A 1327 Rouergue reform ordinance divided the bailliatgie into two groups, those circa Ruthenam (Peyrusse, Villeneuve, Villefranche, Sauveterre, Najac, Verfeil and St-Antonin), and those ultra Ruthenam (Bibliothèque Nationale Doat 146 fol. 187; cf. pp. 402-03, below).Google Scholar

⁵ Archives communales de Millau CC 346 fol. 60-72 ^v; cf. Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 137, and also Taylor, ‘1321’ 228 n. 75, who suggested that Périgueux's accounts may lack any reference to regional meetings preceding Poitiers because such meetings were held in Périgueux; Millau may also have served as such a center. I would like to express my thanks to M. F. Girard, the municipal librarian of Millau and custodian of its archives, who has patiently helped me secure microfilm copies of the many interesting documents in those archives, to which Professor Taylor first directed me.Google Scholar

⁶ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 156. Trebessac had recently returned from a ninety-five day trip to Paris to discuss local business and the subsidy of 1319. For a royal privilege secured on November 14, 1320, see Bibliothèque Nationale ms. n.a.f. 564 fol 205 ^v; and cf. Archives départementales du Tarn-et-Garonne A 321 (1) fol. 3 for a royal mandate to the seneschal of Rouergue dated November 13, 1320. Romegos was involved in seeing that the letters obtained by Trebessae in Paris were implemented, and Belmont accompanied Romegos and Trebessac to Villefranche in February to discuss the subsidy protest with the seneschal (Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 156 ^v).Google Scholar

⁷ ‘Emai aportet alcunas autras letras clauzas al senescalc & al thezaurier sobrel fag del prest que era estatz faghs al rei edelas xlv lbr. tour. que auia agudas lo thezaurier dels cossols del an passat’ (ibid. fol. 156 ^v, where details of the mission are found). For a royal letter in favor of Najac, obtained from the king on April 28, 1321, see Bibliothèque Nationale ms. n.a.f. 564 fol. 205 ^v.Google Scholar

⁸ Millau, CC 346 fol. 133^r-v , and cf. M.-E. Carreau, ‘Les commissaires royaux aux amortissements et aux nouveaux acquěts sous les Capétiens, 1275-1328,’ Positions des théses de l'École des Chartes (1953) 38. Late in April the consuls of Millau informed their colleagues in Paris of the royal summons to Poitiers received by the town, which meant that the proctors could inquire about the assembly while they were in the capital (Millau CC 346 fol. 133).Google Scholar

⁹ Archives communales de Périgueux CC 42 fol. 6^v-7 ^v, and see also fol. 9 ^v for a special deputation sent to the king at Tours on May 3 to discuss the grave problem posed by the lepers in Périgueux. Cf. G. Lavergne, ‘La persécution et la spoliation des lépreux à Périgueux en 1321’ Recueil de travaux offerts à M. Clovis Brunel (Paris 1955) II 107-113.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 165^v for Belmont's negotiations, and fol. 162 ^v for Brossac's return before June 4. On chancery practice, see R.-H. Bautier, ‘Recherches sur la chancellerie royale au temps de Philippe VI.’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 123 (1965) 369-378.Google Scholar

¹¹ For Najac, see p. 404 below. Bertran Benezeg, one of the Millau consuls who was in Paris in the spring, was chosen to serve with two other Millau townsmen, Gui de Vonc, donzel, who had been consul in 1319-1320, and P. Daurlhac (Millau CC 346 fol. 133). Daulrhac's scribe (escriua) had prepared various documents which were sent to the two consuls in Paris (ibid. fol. 111, 122, 133, and cf. CC 345 fol. 61). A debt of 20 1. was credited to Daurlhac in the town's account for 1321, but although the entry indicates that he earned the money traveling for Millau, it does not say where he had gone or what he had done (Millau CC 345 fol. 62 ^v).Google Scholar

¹² Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 162 ^v, 164 ^v, and see Taylor, ‘1321’ 228-31, 235-36.Google Scholar

¹³ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164 ^v; Millau CC 346 fol. 133.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Archives communales de Martel CC 2 fol. 131 and fol. 127 for the offices held by the two delegates. Gui de Vonc, the third Millau deputy to Poitiers, went to Lodève for four days on May 8, just when proceedings concerning the future assembly were being conducted at Villefranche-de-Rouergue, and it is possible that Vonc was responding to a similar summons in journeying to Lodève (Millau CC 346 fol. 133). Google Scholar

¹⁵ Varin, P.-J., ed., Archives administratives de la ville de Reims: Documents inédits sur l'histoire de France (Paris 1839-1852) II 1 266-67.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164 ^v.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Ibid. fol. 156^v and 163 ^v.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Taylor, ‘1321’ 231; Périgueux CC 42 fol. 1 and 10 ^v. For a convenient summary of recent findings concerning travel time in France in the fourteenth century, see B. Guenée, ‘Espace et État dans la France du bas Moyen Age’ Annales: Économies — Sociétés — Civilisations 23 (1968) 751-752; and for its particular relevance to this study, A. Higounet-Nadal, ‘Le journal des dépenses d'un notaire de Périgueux en mission à Paris (janvier-septembre 1337),’ Annales du Midi 76 (1964) 379-402.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Brossac spent 14 1. 8 s. 5. d. and the three Millau agents 40 1. (Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163 ^v; Millau CC 346 fol. 134). The Périgueux deputation cost the city almost 80 1.t., for a far shorter journey (Taylor, loc. cit., but note that the expenses listed in Périgueux CC 42 fol. 10 ^v — 54 1. 10 s.t.; 19 s.t.; 13 s. pereg.; 75 s. pereg.; and 75 s.t. — must be increased by the 15 1.t. paid to the mayor of Périgueux: ibid. fol. 13).Google Scholar

²⁰ de Vic, Claude and J.- Vaissete, J., Histoire générale de Languedoc (ed. Auguste Molinier; Toulouse 1872-1893) (hereafter HL). X preuves 612-613, no. 221, and cf. the account of Jean de St-Victor, who noted that the towns were asked to send ‘pro ipsis aliquos … qui haberent pro omnibus respondendi potestatem': Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France XXI (ed. J.-D. Guigniaut and J.-N. de Wailly; Paris 1855) (hereafter HF) 675.Google Scholar

²¹ Périgueux CC 42 loc. cit., and cf. the entry on fol. 13: ‘la anada que fet a petioys quan rey mandet queom aues iiii prodomes a petioys per la viela.’ Google Scholar

²² Millau CC 346 fol. 133. Google Scholar

²³ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163 ^v.Google Scholar

²⁴ Taylor, ‘1321’ 228. Google Scholar

²⁵ For Taylor's conclusion that in the years before 1320 ‘the government had no definite methods of summoning assemblies, and that with regard to method and scope of summons this was a period of experimentation,’ see ‘Assemblies of French Towns in 1316,’ Speculum 14 (1939) 285-289. For the discretion given to local officials in 1302, 1308 and 1318, see C. H. Taylor, ‘Some New Texts on the Assembly of 1302,’ Speculum 11 (1936) especially 39, and ‘An Assembly of French Towns in March, 1318,’ Speculum 13 (1938) especially 295 n. 2.Google Scholar Narbonne, , Périgueux, Rodez, and Figeac, four of the leading southern towns which figure in the proceedings of 1321, were summoned individually to the large assemblies of 1316 and the smaller ones of 1317 and 1318 (Taylor, ‘1316’ 288 n. 1, 292, 294, 295; Archives Nationales JJ 54A fol. 2; HF XXIII 813-814). Martel was summoned to the assembly at Toulouse in December 1318 (ibid. 814), but the town was not called in 1317. Curiously, although Martel's name does not figure on the list of towns called to the large meetings held in 1316, the town accounts for December 1315 and January 1316 show that it was summoned to Orléans and that it sent two deputies (Martel CC 2 fol. 106 ^v, 108, and cf. Taylor, ‘1316’ 279 n. 5).Google Scholar Many Rouergue communities were summoned individually to the 1316 assemblies: Rodez, Millau, Villeneuve, St-Antonin, St-Affrique, Peyrusse, and surely Villefranche (ibid. 294-296, where the Villa Franca listed on p. 295, n. 16, as well as the Ville Franche found after La Petruce and Vile neuve on p. 281, n. 3, should be identified as Villefranche-de-Rouergue). In 1317 only Rodez was summoned; in 1318 individual summonses were sent to Rodez, Villefranche and Millau (HF XXIII 814). This suggests that in 1321 a master list similar to that employed in 1317 was used and that local officials were empowered to expand the list as they wished.Google Scholar In 1317 both Reims and Chǎlons-sur-Marne, the two Vermandois towns summoned to Laon by the royal commissioners in 1321, were included on the master list; see Jean Guerout, ed., Registres du Trésor des Chartes: II. Règnes des fils de Philippe le Bel, pt. 1, Règnes de Louis X le Hutin et de Philippe V le Long (Paris 1966) (hereafter RTC II¹) nos. 674-674 ^bis.Google Scholar

²⁶ Varin, , loc. cit., and cf. the preceding note.Google Scholar

²⁷ Taylor, , ‘1321’ 235.Google Scholar

²⁸ For assemblies held at Rodez under similar circumstances in 1316, see my forthcoming article, ‘Assemblies of French Towns in 1316: Some New Texts,’ Speculum 46 (1971) at notes 61, 62, 68. See RTC II ¹ no. 1923 for an act concluded by the seneschal and royal proctor at Bourg-de-Rodez in May 1318.Google Scholar

²⁹ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163 ^v; Millau CC 345 and CC 346. The Périgueux account (CC 42 fol. 15) contains the following puzzling entry: ‘Item baylien al messatgier qui aportet las 1 … as [probably letras] de petioys quan lo mayer e li cossól foren citat a pestion.’ The meaning of the entry evidently depends on the word pestion, which may mean petition, but which may also refer to a place.Google Scholar

³⁰ ‘Item anero avilafranca maestre G. W. en D. de brossac lodicmergue apres la S. benezeh dejulh per parlar ab lo senescalc que auia citatz los cossolatz per lo fah dels mezels eper far resposta dela demanda que lorei nos fazia et estero ii dias’ (Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163^v). Bartholmieu may have had a hand in securing the royal letter dated July 28, 1321, which commanded the seneschal of Rouergue to put a stop to the extortions committed by local officials in connection with the levy of the commune pacis (Archives départementales du Tarn-et-Garonne A 321 (1) fol. 3). For the burning of the lepers in Najac in 1321 and for Bartholmieu's mission, see Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164 ^v.Google Scholar

³¹ Ibid. fol. 149 ^v. On these negotiations, C.H. Taylor, ‘Assemblies of Towns and War Subsidy, 1318-1319,’ in: Studies in Early French Taxation (J.R. Strayer and C. H. Taylor edd.; Cambridge, Mass. 1939) 128–31.Google Scholar

³² Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164^v-165. In the Najac account book a rough chronological order was maintained even in the sections containing undated entries. Najac contributed 37 s. 6 d. to the mission (ibid. fol. 164 ^v). See n. 19 above for the comparative figures on which my calculations are based.Google Scholar

³³ Taylor, ‘1321’ 235, and Hellot, A., ‘Chronique parisienne anonyme de 1316 à 1339 précédée d'additions à la chronique française dite de Guillaume de Nangis (1206-1316).’ Mémoires de la Société de l'histoire de Paris et de l'Ǐle-de-France 11 (1884) 61 (hereafter cited as ‘Chronique parisienne'). The three royal ministers were Gaucher de Chǎtillon, count of Porcien and constable of France, Regnaut de Lor, and Raoul de Presles. For their careers see P. Lehugeur, Histoire de Philippe le Long, roi de France (1316-1322) II; Le mécanisme du gouvernement (Paris 1931) 51-52, 305-06, 310; F. J. Pegues, The Lawyers of the Last Capetians (Princeton 1962) 73-82, 163-91; A. Legoy, ‘Gaucher de Chǎtillon, comte de Porcien et connétable de France (1250-1329),’ Positions des thèses de l'École des Chartes (1928) 49-56; Ordonnances I 630; and also R. Cazelles, ‘Une exigence de l'opinion depuis Saint Louis: la réformation du royaume,’ Annuaire-bulletin de la Société de l'histoire de France (1962-1963) 93-96.Google Scholar On July 8 an even more impressive group of ministers addressed the assembly at Paris: it was headed by Raoul Rousselet, bishop of Laon and one of the king's two general state reformers; Guillaume Durand, the bishop of Mende; and Anseau, lord of Joinville, one of Philip's leading lay advisers and scion of the Champagne family which had long supported reform and limited monarchy (Lehugeur, op. cit. 51-52, 300-311, and cf. Cazelles, loc. cit., whose statements on p. 93 should be checked against Lehugeur, op. cit. 310).Google Scholar

³⁴ Martel CC 2 fol. 131. Google Scholar

³⁵ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 165. Google Scholar

³⁶ Ibid. fol. 163 ^v and cf. fol. 165 for the assembly date. For fuller discussion of the questions, see p. 418, below.Google Scholar

³⁷ Lehugeur, , Philippe le Long: I. Le règne (Paris 1897) 463-464; Taylor, ‘1321’ 236 and especially n. 134; J. Viard, ed., Les Grandes Chroniques de France (Paris 1920-1953) VIII 362.Google Scholar

³⁸ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 165. Google Scholar

³⁹ An entry in the Périgueux accounts (CC 42 fol. 9) refers to the citation ‘per anar a petiou ala trinitat,’ which fell on June 21, although the meeting was actually held on — and the summons probably issued for — the Sunday before Trinity, or June 14. Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Ibid. fol. 12 ^v.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Taylor, ‘1321’ 235 n. 126. Google Scholar

⁴² Martel CC 2 fol. 131 ^v; cf. Taylor, ‘1321’ 237-238. Jolias was paid 10 s. to draw the supplication, and a scribe received 12 d. to transcribe it (Martel CC 2 fol. 131 ^v-132). An entry on fol. 132 records the payment of 6 d. to a messenger sent by the consuls of Brive, but there is no indication of the purpose for which he came.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163 ^v. Aimeri de Cros, seneschal of Toulouse and Albi, who spent much of the summer of 1321 touring the southern provinces, met with the barons and the nobles of Beaucaire, as well as with the consuls of the bonnes villes, to discuss the questions to be raised at the Orléans assembly. Before the Poitiers meeting, however, he had canvassed only the towns of the districts of Carcassone and Béziers (J. Viard, ed., Les journaux du trésor de Charles IV le Bel [Paris 1917] no. 3582; cf. Taylor, ‘1321’ 227, 234).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See at n. 38 above. Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163^v and cf. fol. 165 ^v for the expense of preparing Solier's procuration for Orléans.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Périgueux CC 42 fol. 1, 12 ^v.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Martel CC 2 fol. 132. Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Martel, which had sent no representative to Poitiers, dispatched a deputy to Orléans; see n. 25 above for summonses sent directly to Martel in previous years. Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164. At Villefranche Brossac secured a letter from the seneschal dealing with the town's problem. Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Ibid. On September 15 Solier and Brossac had gone to St-Antonin to consider the establishment of a new fair with the consuls and seneschal, and the two men may have used this opportunity to discuss the coming meeting informally with the men of St-Antonin (ibid. fol. 163 ^v). Cf. another entry showing that at this time Brossac was protesting against an inquest involving Solier, which the town claimed infringed upon its liberties.Google Scholar

⁵¹ The Martel proctor earned 10 1., the Najac deputy almost 16 1. (Martel CC 2 fol. 132; Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164). Google Scholar

⁵² Ar. de Chatnel received a salary of 64 s. 8 d. for the trip, whereas the consular deputies to Poitiers had received 75 s. apiece for their fifteen-day mission (Périgueux CC 42 fol. 12 ^v, and cf. notes 18 and 19 above). See Higounet-Nadal, op. cit. 382 for variations in travel time between Paris and Périgueux, and note that five days was an extremely short time in which to cover the 360 kilometers between Périgueux and Orléans, even on horseback.Google Scholar

⁵³ D'Achéry, D'Achéry, Spicilegium sive Collectio Veterum Aliquot Scriptorum (Paris 1723) III 710.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Varin, , op. cit. 273.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164. For the meaning of canas, a measure, see F. J. M. Raynouard, Lexique roman ou dictionnaire de la langue des troubadours (Paris 1838-1844) I 307. Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Taylor, ‘1321’ 227, 233, 239, 243-44. Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164 ^v.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Périgueux CC 42 fol. 10 ^v and CC 43, fol. 20, also numbered x.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ ‘Premierement la monnaye universel, ou tout li peuples pert tant, remettre a estat deu, si comme entre vous scavez, a qui on en a eu les consaus … et poursuivre les causes de la seue faire bonne, si comme entre vous ly avez conseille’ (J. Petit, M. Gavrilovitch, Maury and Téodoru, Essai de restitution des plus anciens mémoriaux de la Chambre des Comptes de Paris [Bibliothèque de la Faculté des lettres de l'Université de Paris VII; Paris 1899] 147-148). Google Scholar

⁶⁰ ‘et toujours pense a le profict commun, et tres grandes missions en sont sur luy, lesquelles il nest tenu a faire, se il ne li plaisoit’ (ibid. 148). It is difficult to translate grandes missions, since, although mission was sometimes used to mean ‘mission’ (in the sense of Christ's mission on earth), it generally meant ‘expense;’ for a different interpretation see Taylor, ‘1321’ 230. Google Scholar

⁶¹ ‘… mais que ce soit si grandement, pour le bien commun que est, on ne doibt rien avoir chier’ (Petit, loc cit.). Google Scholar

⁶² '& vuoillons estre fait par si grant deliberation & si pourveuement, par le conseil des prelats, barons & bonnes villes…; … de faire aviser & accorder avecques nous…’ (HL X preuves 613, no. 221). Google Scholar

⁶³ Varin, , op. cit. 266–67.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ On the clear distinction drawn between counsel and consent, see G.I. Langmuir, ‘Counsel and Capetian Assemblies,’ Studies Presented to the International Commission for the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions XVIII (1958; Tenth International Congress of Historical Sciences; Rome 1955) passim, but especially 28, 32, 34; cf. Taylor, ‘1321’ 244 n. 182. The distinction was carefully maintained by Philip V when, on January 27, 1321, he announced the terms on which he had purchased the coinage rights of Louis of Clermont: ‘… nous et nostre dit cousin eu deliberation & conseil, auons sus ceste chose accorde en tel maniere que …’ (Archives Nationales J 459 no. 15), and cf. the identical phraseology in the similar agreement between Philip V and Charles of Valois dated May 1319 (Archives Nationales J 459 no. 13). Google Scholar

⁶⁵ ‘Chronique parisienne’ 61. Proceedings at Poitiers probably affected the approach taken by the royal ministers at the Paris assembly, and the government's failure to secure subsidy or pledges of support at Poitiers may have made the king's officers somewhat more abrupt than they were at Poitiers.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Viard, , Grandes Chroniques VIII 460; HF XX 630; HF XXI 57, 674-675; Bibliothèque Ste-Geneviève ms. 785 fol. 193 ^v.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ ‘nous ne faisons nulle imposition, ne nous ne demandons riens par exaction, mes nous faisons instance pour le commun profit, de quel nous devons estre menistre & aucteur’ (d'Achéry, loc. cit.). Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 163 ^v.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ For references to fealty and service in Philip's summonses to the towns, HL loc. cit. and Varin, loc. cit. For negotiations with the clergy, Taylor, ‘1321’ 232-33. Google Scholar

⁷⁰ ‘Chronique parisienne’ 62.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Varin, , op. cit. 273.Google Scholar

⁷² See n. 33 above, and on Sully, , Henneman, J. B., ‘“Enquěteurs-Réformateurs” and Fiscal Officers in Fourteenth-Century France,’ Traditio 24 (1968) 316 n. 24.Google Scholar

⁷³ Varin, , op. cit. 273-274. As Taylor pointed out (‘1321’ 237 n. 142), in 1314 townsmen used similar tactics to avoid responding directly to the king's demand for a commitment to support the Flemish campaign, and the phraseology used by the St-Denis chronicler to describe their answer is strikingly similar to that employed by the Vermandois townsmen in 1321 (Viard, Grandes Chroniques VIII 301). The same strategy was used by a large group of the king's subjects in 1318, when they offered, instead of money, ‘nobiscum venire et in prosequcione expeditionis finalis guerre illius personaliter nobis assistere in equis et armis ac alias sufficienter parati, … videlicet qualiter nobis prosequentibus in persona propria factum guerre valerent assistere’ (Taylor, in Strayer and Taylor, Studies 188, and cf. 158-159, where he suggested that the offer may have had some practical value).Google Scholar

⁷⁴ ‘Chronique parisienne’ 63, and cf. n. 37 above. In the will sealed at Conflans-Ste-Honorine on August 26, 1321 Philip stipulated that if, before his death, he could not accomplish the voyage to the Holy Land which he was bound to make, his brother, Charles of La Marche, would be obliged to go, or, if he could not, Charles of Valois — or Philip of Valois in his father's place — was to have 100,000 1. to do so (Archives Nationales J 403 no. 26). I have seen no evidence that this provision was ever carried out; the sum is, of course, but a fraction of the money, ostensibly collected for the Holy Land, which Philip V had received from the church to spend for his own purposes (RTC II ¹ no. 1959).Google Scholar

⁷⁵ See the exhaustive study of this subject by Kehl, Kehl, Die Steuer in der Lehre der Theologen des Mittelalters (Volkswirtschaftliche Studien 17; Berlin 1927) especially 55-56 and 137-38; cf. note 67 above.Google Scholar

For Philip's attitude to the crusade, see Taylor, ‘1321’ 220-23 and especially 223, notes 39, 42. In one letter relating to the general investigation of government finances which was conducted during the winter of 1320-1321 Philip stated that he was instituting the inquiry ‘a fin que du nre. estat et de celui de nre. royaume puissons auoir plus plaine instruccion et vraie congnoissance, par quoi alonneur et aide de dieu, ala pais et transquillite de Nous et de noz subgez puissons plus habundaument, agreigneur pais de conscience et plus deuotement faire le voiaige de la sainte terre doultre mer, Laquelle chose nous desirons mout affectueusement seur tout autre, … ace que nous puissons miex et plus euidaument congnoistre comment, de quoi et aquelle diligence il nous ont serui et comment nous pourrons plus proufitablement ledit saint voiaige faire et acomplir’ (Archives Nationales JJ 60 fol. 32 no. 66). In other letters relating to the inquest, however, the king did not refer to the crusade, which assumed crucial tactical importance only in his later negotiations with his subjects for subsidy.

⁷⁶ Petit, , loc. cit.; and note that in the summons to Narbonne Philip stated that he wished to reform the kingdom ‘pour profit commun & ou profit de nos subgiez,’ and in the letter of April 6, 1321 to the Vermandois towns he said that he was seeking counsel concerning ‘pluseurs choses touchans le profist commun de nous et de nostre peuple’ (HL X preuves 612 no. 221; Varin, op. cit. 267).Google Scholar

⁷⁷ D'Achéry, , loc. cit.,; p. 416, above. On necessity, E. Cortese, La norma giuridica: Spunti teorici nel diritto comune classico (Ius nostrum, Studi e testi pubblicati dall'Instituto di storia del diritto italiano dell'Università di Roma VI; Milan 1962-1964) 257-266; also G. Post, Studies in Medieval Legal Thought: Public Law and the State 1100-1322 (Princeton 1964) 8, 21, 258, 268, 318. The idea was given explicit expression in Louis X's summons to an assembly in March 1316: ‘juxta guerre huiusmodi necessitatem que nulli potest aut debet legi subici, propter quam etiam a singulis singula & ab uniuersis uniuersa exponenda sunt’ (Bibliothèque Nationale Doat 103 fol. 95; cf. Archives communales de Périgueux EE 7 no. 1). On April 13, 1317 commissioners of Philip V issued a tax exemption ‘sauue touteuois la general droiture a nre. sire le roy ou cas de necessite’ (Archives Nationales, JJ 59, fol. 61, no. 143; cf. RTC II ¹ no. 2863). For acceptance of the principle by the king's subjects, A. Artonne, Le mouvement de 1314 et les chartes provinciales de 1315 (Bibliothèque de la Faculté des lettres de l'Université de Paris XXIX; Paris 1912) 105.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ As Godefroid de Fontaines had written in 1294, ‘Cum enim in talibus princeps consueverit allegare quod tale onus imponitur pro necessitate rei publicae et pro utilitate omnium subditorum, si non est ita, non potest de iure hoc imponere. Cum autem subditus liber illud quod pro utilitate rei publicae impendit voluntarie et ex electione facere debeat si sit bonus, non coacte et per violentiam, debet ei constare aliquo modo probabiliter quod ita sit. Si dicatur quod sufficit quod princeps dicat ita esse et quod hoc facit bono et magno consilio, non valet’ (J. Hoffmans, ed., Les quodlibets onze-quatorze de Godefroid de Fontaines (texte inédit) [Les philosophes belges V; Louvain 1932-5] 77-78, quodlibet XI q. 17). For the date, see P. Glorieux, La littérature quodlibétique de 1260 à 1320, I (Bibliothèque thomiste V; Le Saulchoir 1925) 150. Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Cazelles, , op. cit. 91, 93, 96, who seems, however, to imply that it was not Philip himself but rather anonymous reformers from Champagne, Beauvaisis, Artois, Vermandois, Normandy, and Auvergne who were responsible for these reforms. On the general reformers of the kingdom and Philip's administrative changes, see Bautier, ‘Recherches sur la chancellerie,’ 366, 383, 388, 390; Lehugeur, op. cit. I 110-19 and II 306-09; Henneman, Traditio 24 (1968) 319. On the reform of justice which began in July 1316, see G. Tessier, ‘Lettres de justice,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 101 (1940) 105, and A. Lemaire, Les lois fondamentales de la monarchie française d'après les théoriciens de l'ancien régime (Paris 1907) 37-38. For the ordinance of March 1321 relating to local officials, see my unpublished doctoral dissertation, Charters and Leagues in Early Fourteenth Century France: The Movement of 1314 and 1315 (available at the Harvard College Library: Cambridge, Mass. 1960) 523-26.Google Scholar

For the announcement at Nǐmes on May 8, 1321 that royal debts would be repaid, see L. Ménard, Histoire civile, ecclésiastique et littéraire de la ville de Nismes (Paris 1750-1758) II 28-29 and preuves 30 no. xx. On October 17, 1317 Philip had named three special commissioners, including Regnaut de Lor, to discharge all obligations of his father, brother and himself, and the scribe who recorded the commission in the royal registers noted that it was authorized ‘per dominum regem, qui eam cum diligentia vidit et perlegit’ (RTC II¹ no. 633).

⁸⁰ Langlois, C.-V., ‘Registres perdus des archives de la Chambre des Comptes de Paris,’ Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque nationale et autres bibliothèques 40 (1917) 221-24 and F. Maillard, ed., Comptes royaux (1314-1328) (Recueil des historiens de la France, Documents financiers IV; Paris 1961) pt. 1 319. See Archives Nationales P 1398³ no. 720 for a survey of hearths in Beaucaire in August 1316, before Philip was king; and Bibliothèque Nationale Languedoc 159 fol. 12 ^v for the fact that Philip sent Gilles Aycelin to Rouergue ‘antequam esset rex ad recipiendum fidelitatis juramenta a nobilibus et aliis personis dicte senescallie et ad instituendum et destituendum quoscumque officiales regios dicte senescallie.’ For the orders of 1318, see Langlois, op. cit. 106-08, and Ordonnances I 665-68; cf. Ménard, op. cit. II preuves 25-26, 31-43 nos. xvi and xxii.Google Scholar

⁸¹ For 1318, see Langlois, , op. cit. 220, and P. Guérin, ‘Recueil des documents concernant le Poitou contenus dans les registres de la chancellerie de France,’ Archives historiques du Poitou 11 (1881) 189-90 no. Ixxxv. For 1319 and following years, C.-V. Langlois, ed., Inventaires d'anciens comptes royaux dressés par Robert Mignon sous le règne de Philippe de Valois (Recueil des historiens de la France, Documents financiers I; Paris 1899) 208, no. 1662; Bibliothèque Nationale ms. fr. 2755 fol. 374 ^v. For the action taken early in 1321, Langlois, ‘Registres perdus,’ 110, 112, 114-51; cf. also Archives Nationales JJ 60 fol. 29 no. 63 (RTC II¹ no. 3433), and JJ 60 fol. 30^v no. 64 (RTC II¹ no. 3434); and RTC II ¹ nos. 3435-3437, the last of which letters is printed by M. Boudet, ‘Étude sur les sociétés marchandes et financières au Moyen Age: Les Gayte et les Chauchat de Clermont,’ Revue d'Auvergne 33 (1916) 48-51; see also ibid. 28 (1911) 405-10. In one of these letters (JJ 60 fol. 30 no. 63) Philip distinguished these special commissioners from his ‘autre grant conseil'; cf. JJ 60 fol. 32 no. 66, which indicates that the commissioners were considered a special committee of the ‘grant conseil.’Google Scholar

For Philip's own permanent and temporary gifts of revenue, see Bibliothèque Nationale ms. fr. 32510 fol. 113-116^v. In 1316 he assigned almost 25,000 1.t. in hereditary, and only a little less in lifetime, annuities (ibid. fol. 113^r-v).

⁸² On the condition of the coinage at Philip's accession, see Cazelles, R., ‘Quelques réflexions à propos des mutations de la monnaie royale française (1295-1360),’ Le Moyen Age 72 (1966) 87, and Brown, Charters 111-117. Although Miskimin has suggested that neither the ordinance of June 1313 (reissued in April 1314) nor the ordinances of Louis X affected the inflation which had plagued France since 1311, it is interesting that in 1320 the town of Najac was discounting by a fifth debts incurred in 1310, 1311, and 1313, which suggests that Philip had done more than Miskimin implied: H. A. Miskimin, Money, Prices, and Foreign Exchange in Fourteenth-Century France (New Haven 1963) 163-65; Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 154, 158; cf. Borrelli de Serres, Recherces sur divers services publics du xiii^e au xvii^e siècle (Paris 1895-1909) III 460, 480, 499, and ‘Les variations monétaires sous Philippe le Bel et les sources de leur histoire,’ Gazette numismatique française (1902) 10-14.Google Scholar

For the events of 1317 and early 1318, Ordonnances I 755, and Taylor, Speculum 13 (1938) 295-303, and in Strayer and Taylor, Studies 111-12.

⁸³ Archives Nationales J 459 no. 13; A. Dieudonné, ‘L'ordonnance ou règlement de 1315 sur le monnayage des barons,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 93 (1932) 47, and Lehugeur op. cit. I 329. Charles received half the sum for his moneying rights and half in repayment of debts owed him by the crown. Google Scholar

⁸⁴ RTC II ¹ no. 2706; Dieudonné, loc. cit. Philip's attitude to coinage reform may perhaps have been affected by the oath which he took as king of Navarre on June 11, 1319, in which he promised to maintain the coinage in its current state for twelve years and never to issue more than one coinage in the kingdom of Navarre (A. Grunzweig, ‘Les incidences internationales des mutations monétaires de Philippe le Bel.’ Le Moyen Age 59 [1953] 136).Google Scholar

⁸⁵ The agreement concluded on January 27, 1321 at Paris is couched in precisely the same terms as Philip's agreement of 1319 with Charles of Valois (Archives Nationales J 459 no. 15, and cf. nos. 14 and 16, by which Charles and Louis respectively, approved the royal letters announcing the terms of the agreements). Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Albe, E., ‘Inventaire raisonné et analytique des archives municipales de Cahors. Deuxième partie,’ Bulletin trimestriel de la Société des études littéraires, scientifiques et artistiques du Lot 43 (1922) 9–10 no. 296; Viard, Charles IV loc. cit.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ For advice given in 1324, see Guilhiermoz, P., ‘Avis sur la question monétaire donnés aux rois Philippe le Hardi, Philippe le Bel, Louis X et Charles le Bel,’ Revue numismatique ser. 4, 31 (1928) 115-116, and cf. n. 83 above.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Quar se me semble estre folageGoogle Scholar

De donner les pais, les terres

Dont len doit deffendre ses terres.

Pour ce sunt au roy les contrees,

Terres & regions donnees:

Pour eus garder, pour eus deffendre

Qui au roy se sunt voulu rendre,

Et quil en soit plus poteiz

Se de nul estoit enueiz.

Trop du regne en a len desioint,

Que len a a genz autres ioint,

Dont le reaume en est plus feible

Car tel don, par tel astraleibe

Le roy plus poure & de la vient

Que taillier le reaume couuient.

De la viennent toustes & tailles,

Quant le roy cheuuauche en batailles.

Et quant au temple ne au louure

Riens na, sus sa gent se recouure.

Quar puisque li faillent ses rentes

Sus sa gent prent & los & ventes.

Pource, Phelippe, si te moines

Quaiez tex fiez & tes demoines,

Et de ton meuble soies larges,

Sauias escuz lances & targes

Et referas tauz ses pays

Et tes anemis esbahis:

Bibliothèque Nationale ms. fr. 146 fol. 53, edited by W. H. Storer and C. A. Rochedieu, Six Historical Poems of Geffroi de Paris (University of North Carolina, Studies in the Romance Languages and Literatures, no. 16; Chapel Hill 1950) 71–72. See G. de Lagarde, ‘La philosophie sociale d'Henri de Gand et de Godefroid de Fontaines.’ Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age 18 (1943-54) 111, for Henry of Ghent's similar ideas. For the general popularity of steps to recover domain lands, P. Viollet, Droit public. Histoire des institutions politiques et administratives de la France II (Paris 1898) 163.

⁸⁹ ‘les veut ravoir pour le bien commun, et que il ait mains causes, ne li autres qui apres luy vendront, de despendre sus les peuples’ (Petit, loc. cit.). Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Brussel, N., Nouvel examen de l'usage général des fiefs en France (Paris 1750) I 608, n. a; Ordonnances I 749-50, which I believe was issued in April 1321; Bibliothèque Nationale ms. lat. 9787 fol. 38 (ms. fr. 21857 fol. 130); Archives Nationales, JJ 60 no. 66 fol. 33 (RTC II ¹ no. 3436); R.-H. Bautier, ‘Inventaires de comptes royaux particuliers de 1328 à 1351,’ Bulletin philologique et historique (jusqu'à 1610) du Comté des travaux historiques et scientifiques (1960) 814-15 no. 236. This episode is discussed in greater detail in a study of Capetian taxation of Italians and Jews which I am now writing.Google Scholar

⁹¹ See n. 9 above. Google Scholar

⁹² ‘Chronique parisienne’ 56; cf. Petit, E., Histoire des ducs de Bourgogne de la race capétienne (Dijon 1885-1905) VIII 257 nos. 6919-6920; and Langlois, ‘Registres perdus’ 254, 268.Google Scholar

⁹³ Ibid. 264-65. These events, too, are discussed in the study referred to in n. 90 above.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Duplès-Agier, Duplès-Agier, ‘Ordonnance de Philippe le Long contre les lépreux (21 juin 1321),’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes ser. 4, 3 (1857) 270-272; and J.-M. Vidal, ‘La poursuite des lépreux en 1321,’ Mélanges de littérature et d'histoire religieuses publiés à l'occasion du jubilé épiscopal de Mgr. de Cabrières, évěque de Montpellier (Paris 1899) I 485-487; Edmond Albe, Les lépreux en Quercy (Paris 1908) 14-19 (originally in Le Moyen Age ser. 2, 12 [1908] 121 ff. at 132-137).Google Scholar

⁹⁶ On August 16, 1321 Philip restored all rights over leprosaries to those who had formerly held them, and on August 18 he abandoned his claims to jurisdiction over the lepers, saving that the validity of the treason charges had been challenged and that speedy prosecution was essential (Ordonnances I 814-15; cf. Bibliothèque Nationale ms. fr. 2755 fol. 355^v-356, and Duplès-Agier, op. cit. 269; Ordonnances XI 481-82). For attempts made by Cahors and Najac to recover their rights over leprosaries, see Albe, op. cit. 33 (151)-35 (153), and ‘Inventaire raisonné,’ 11-14; Aveyron 2E.178.2 fol. 164 and cf. fol. 165 ^v.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Viard, , Grandes Chroniques VIII 361.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Brown, , Charters 503-23, and cf. Ordonnances I 689, 696.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ See Cazelles, , ‘Une exigence’ passim. Philip had in his library a life of St. Louis, a handbook for princes, and various books of Roman law: A. de Boislisle, ‘Inventaire des titres de Nevers par l'abbé de Marolles…,’ Revue des Sociétés savantes ser. 6, 2 (1897) 89-90, and K. Wenck, Philipp der Schöne von Frankreich, seine Persönlichkeit und das Urteil der Zeitgenossen (Marburg 1905) 20. For references to St. Louis in Philip's ordinances, see, for example, Ordonnances I 652, 665.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ See p. 422, and note 98 above. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ See note 67 above. Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ As Henry of Ghent wrote, ‘Propter quod subditi debent tenere superiorum statuta in predictis etiam si ignorent, quod aut quomodo vergant in communem utilitatem, propter dubium de hoc, quia ex confidentia de prudentia ac bonitate principis ac suorum consiliariorum debent ei in hoc credere & supponere quod talia sint, quod vergant in publicam utilitatem, nisi constet de contrario’ (Henricus Goethals a Gandavo, Aurea quodlibeta [ed. V. Z. Patarini; Venice 1613] II fol. 352 ^v, quodlibet XIV q. 8; cf. Lagarde, op. cit. 113-15). For the opposing views held by Godefroid de Fontaines, see n. 78 above.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Langmuir, , ‘Counsel and Consent,’ 33-34, and also n. 64 above. See G. I. Langmuir, ‘“Judei Nostri” and the Beginning of Capetian Legislation,’ Traditio 16 (1960) passim; and Bautier, ‘Recherches sur la chancellerie,’ 368 on the continued importance of taking counsel in the mid-fourteenth century; cf. J. R. Strayer, ‘Consent to Taxation under Philip the Fair,’ in Strayer and Taylor, Studies 59-60; Brown, Charters 130-135; and Taylor, ‘1321’ 219 and n. 12.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Taylor, , in Strayer and Taylor, Studies 169 n. 126; P. Spufford, ‘Assemblies of Estates, Taxation and Control of Coinage in Medieval Europe,’ Studies Presented to the International Commission for the History of Representative and Parliamentary Institutions 31 (1965) 122; E. Boutaric, ‘Les premiers États généraux, 1302-1314,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes ser. 5, 1 (1860) 4-5, but note that the date 1303 should be changed to 1313; see also pp. 424, above. See Guilhiermoz, Revue numismatique ser. 4, 31 (1928) 106-18 for consultation of town representatives under Charles IV, and note that the entries in Martel CC 2 fol. 139 ^r-v support Guilhiermoz' hypothesis that the documents printed in Revue numismatique ser. 4, 30 (1927) 96-106 should be dated 1324; they show that men of Martel consulted with officials of Cahors and Limoges before sending a joint deputy to the king in 1324; cf. Guilhiermoz, op. cit. 101 ff., and Borrelli de Serres, ‘Variations monétaires’ 14-15 n. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Brown, , Charters 110-111, 135; Cazelles, ‘Mutations’ 257-58; Guilhiermoz, op. cit. 30 (1927) 98, 104; 31 (1928) 107-108, 110.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Petit, , op. cit. 148; cf. Taylor, ‘1321’ 230 n. 89.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Varin, , op. cit. 274.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ See the illuminating paper of Ward, P. L., ‘On the King 's Taking Counsel,’ (presented at the National Council on Religion in Higher Education at Carlisle, Pennsylvania in August 1958, revised in December 1960, but not yet published) p. 24.Google Scholar