Page images


precaution. Peter was warden in virtue of his position, and it is possible that important institutions which still survive in the islands can be traced to the period of his lordship. The strain upon Normandy was evidently too severe for the government, and John's recklessness hastened its disintegration. We reach the logical outcome of such a grant in the surrender of the important castle of Tenchebrai with its revenues to Fraeric or Frederick Malesmains "ad sustentandum se in servicio nostro et

ponendam uxorem suam." 2 The castle was in private hands for nine months and the exchequer lost the revenues of Tenchebrai during the interval. 3

Equally reminiscent of an earlier age were John's relations with his household. He relied very largely upon the young warriors in his train (bachelerii de familia nostra), and on one occasion definitely sought to pit their counsel against that of the barons.* In contemporary literature, and indeed in general fact, the bachelors were the landless unknighted youths of the court. John's bachelors appear to have been unknighted, but the king departed from usual custom by endowing them, at least in Normandy and his other continental possessions, with lands

1. For the royal administration of the isles through Peter of Preaux, see Rot. Pat., 3: regulations for the collection of an aid for the defence of the isles; ibid., 15, the inhabitants are to aid "servienti nostro custodienti insulas predictas ad jurandos malefactores et latrones manentes in insulis illis et ad evacuendos eos de eis." An inquest of 1248 ascribed the creation of the jurés to King John; see Havet, Bibliothèque (1877), xxxviii, 275–277.

2. Rot. Pat., 10b, May 12th, 1202.

3. Fraeric was ordered to give up the castle to the local bailiff on February 26th, 1203 (ibid., 26a). He received £65 during the financial year 1202-3 (Rot. Scacc., ii, 540). The bailiff had been instructed to leave an official to keep watch over the forest (Rot. Pat., 10b).

4. The incident is narrated in the Marshal's biography (iii, 181). John of Bassingbourne was spokesman for the bachelors.

5. Meyer, Guillaume le Maréchal, iii, 181, note.

which he definitely states to have been given to them in expectation of their service.1

Indeed John did not insist upon any qualification except that of personal dependence. In 1216 he retained in his service Thomas Malesmains, a man with marriageable sons and daughters and some claims to property. "And we will look upon him," adds the king, "as one of our bachelors." 2


The great majority, however, of the men in John's service were, apart from the mercenaries, knights and men-at-arms who fought for a fixed wage. The knight received six shillings a day in Angevin money, the mounted man-at-arms or serviens two shillings and sixpence, the unmounted from eightpence to a shilling. The occasional reference to terms of service (termini) implies that soldiers were hired for fixed renewable periods. In addition to their wages, they were often accommodated with loans, especially if they came from England. It must, indeed, have been very easy to run short of the means of subsistence among the hazards of war and distant service; and the king seems to have advanced money, when possible, as a matter

1. I have collected the passages in the English Historical Review, xxii, 42. The entries in Rot. de Lib., 212, suggest a distinction between the members of the familia and the knights in attendance upon John. If this be so, John of Bassingbourne had ceased to be a bachelor between 1205 and 1210 (Guill. le Maréchal, iii, 181; Rot. Lib., 183, 212) though he was still in John's intimate service (Rot. Lib., 182, 185; M. Paris, Chron. Maj., ii, 533). He had lands in Cambridgeshire in 1212 (Red Book, ii, 526).

2. Rot. Pat., 190b.

3. Rot. Scacc., ii, 513, 514: "in liberationibus iij militum, scilicet unicuique vj. so. in die. Et v. servientum equitum, scilicet unicuique ij. so. vjd. in die. Et xx servientum peditum, scilicet unicuique xij d. in die morantium apud Waureium a festo Sancti Ilarii usque ad festum Sancti Michaelis (i.e., January 13th to September 29th) de li. liij li. xix so. vj d." Eightpence was the more usual pay of a foot soldier (e.g., ibid., ii, 484, 502).

4. " de pluribus terminibus," ibid, i, 136; ii, 485.

of course.1 The evidence goes to show that wages were regularly paid, and were regarded as a first charge upon the revenue.2

These lists of wages prove the well-known fact that the armies of this period comprised hundreds rather than thousands; and I think they also point to a distinction between the permanent nucleus of knights and men-atarms, and a changing kaleidoscopic force by which they were accompanied. The former, drawn from England, Flanders and other lands as well as from Normandy, probably never numbered more than a few hundred. They were stationed in the castles and were moved about incessantly, or formed part of the royal retinue. The latter would be local and temporary, already armed in accordance with Henry II's assize, gathered together for a few weeks by the attraction of pay or possibly, as we have seen, in accordance with a definite local organisation. 3 Some such levy would perhaps explain the appearance of 890 foot soldiers at Andeli in 1197 or 1198, an unusually large body which received wages for eight days. It should be remembered that wages were high and that a permanent force even of this size would have cost more than £12,000 a year. In this year nearly £2,000 were raised by a tallage in the Côtentin to maintain men-at-arms in the March-a sum of £2,000, where a quarter of wheat only cost 4s. and where one could buy a

1. "de prestito super liberationes suas," ibid., 502; "de prestitis factis a Rege ultra mare," Rotulus Cancellarii 3 Joh., 302. The Rotulus de Prestito of 1210 gives a complete list of loans made during the expedition in Ireland (Rot. de Liberate ac de misis et prestitis, 172 segg).

2. See, for example, the accounts of Geoffrey the Money-changer in 1195 (Rot. Scacc., i, 136-138) and of Guérin of Glapion in 1200-1201 (ibid., ii, 501-2).

3. e.g., Rot. Scacc., ii, 327: "in liberationibus de cxl servientibus missis apud Vernolium de xx diebus."

4. Rot. Scacc., ii, 310.

cock for 1d. or a ram for 1s1-and yet a sum less than one-sixth of that required for the wages of 890 men during a twelvemonth. Such a study of prices precludes the conclusion that armies of any size could be permanently retained at such wages. The interests of the agricultural classes from which many of the knights and the majority of the men-at-arms were drawn, were also opposed to service far away from home or for a long period. The claims of the annual harvest were too pressing.


The foregoing analysis of the military strength of Normandy and of the operation of its feudal forces has necessarily been somewhat hypothetical. When we turn to the professional soldiers of the twelfth century we are on firmer ground, for, though the facts are few, they are not obscured by legal and economic issues.


In the first place must be distinguished the artificers, crossbowmen and archers in the royal service. These were the élite of the military profession. The artificers appear as a corps, the later Royal Engineers, in John's expedition to Ireland in 1210, and had probably been formed during the previous reign. The most conspicuous of these engine makers was Master Urric, who was endowed with lands by Richard and John, and was of sufficient social importance to hold lands by knight service. He accompanied John to Normandy in 1201 "ad facienda ingenia." 4 The name usually given to these artificers was that of ingeniator or enginneor, but Master Urric is also styled balistarius,


1. Ibid., 471, 473, 478. Prices varied so much that it is only safe to compare those of the same district for the same year. Unless otherwise stated, references are to Angevin money, the chief currency of Normandy.

2. The men who returned from the army at Aumâle (Rot. Scacc., ii, 480) and neglected to serve at Gaillefontaine (ibid, 478), were from the Côtentin.

3. Round, The King's Serjeants, p. 16.

4. Rot. de Lib., 14; Round, op. cit., p. 15.

5. e.g., William the Enginneor in Rot. Scacc., ii, 480; and John's ingenitor (Rot. Norm., 107).

6. Bracton's Note Book, case 1275, quoted Round, l. c.

a word which generally means a crossbowman who used a balista. The confusion arose from the fact that as well as the crossbow, the various large siege engines and stone throwers were generically described as balista.1 Hence it is probable that some of the more important balistarii in the service of Richard and John, such as Master Ivo and Lupillin, were artillerymen who worked the great engines rather than crossbowmen.2 Lupillin was even trusted with a Poitevin castle by King John.3 However this may be, the balistarii played a large part in the military operations of the time. They were endowed with lands and pensions, ranked immediately after the knights, and received in Normandy the handsome wage of four shillings a day. The crossbow was peculiarly an eastern and southern weapon and came into use slowly in France and Normandy, hence we find that Richard and his brother retained foreign arbalisters in their service,


1. The distinction, however, is apparent in the list of the furniture in the Norman castles, of about 1210 (Cartulaire Normand, nos. 214, 215, pp. 33, 34).

2. The reader will remember that another Ivo Balistarius, who was an engineer, founded the great house of Bellême (Stapleton, I, lxxi). He was master of the engines of Hugh the Great.

3. See John's letter of February 18th, 1203, to Lupillin the balistarius; 'Mandamus vobis quod liberetis castrum nostrum de Vouent cui dilectus et fidelis noster Robertus de Tornham senescallus Pictavie illud liberare preceperit" (Rot. Pat., 25b).

4. e.g., Rot. Norm., 62; Rot. Scacc., ii, 311, 481.

5. Rot. Pat., 12b: "rex . . . omnibus militibus, balistariis, servientibus existentibus in Marchiis Normannie."

6. This was the daily allowance of William Painchon at Vaudreuil in 1198 (Rot. Scacc., ii, 483, 484). On the other hand Roger of Genoa in 1204 received 44d. English money, or less than half as much as William Painchon (Rot. de Lib., 100).

7. Its use in war between Christians was condemned by the Lateran Council of 1139, and William the Breton pretends that it was unknown in France as late as 1185 (Phil., lib. ii, v. 316), but this is an exaggera. tion; see Delaborde's note (ii, 52, 53). Mr. Round has pointed out the existence of cross bow serjeanties in England as early as 1086 (The King's Serjeants, pp. 13, 14).

« PreviousContinue »