Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:54:18.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Matrimonial Politics in Thirteenth-Century Aragon: Moncada v. Urgel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

J. A. Brundage
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since apostolic times Christians have treated the family as a micro-community which reflects the values and problems of the larger Christian community as a whole. Most communities, including Christian ones, are reluctant to contemplate the possibility that their own existence will end. But although Jesus is said to have promised St Peter that His Church would survive death, and although the notion of the Church as a community that never dies became a commonplace in subsequent ecclesiology, there was no such guarantee of immortality to the individual family. The breakup and restructuring of family units through death or the dissolution of marriage was a reality which medieval Christian communities had to face in each generation. Even so, high-ranking social groups sought to minimise generational disruptions by adopting the fiction of the family that never dies, a notion that is especially familiar to historians of the theory of monarchy in the Middle Ages. The medieval Church was a keen champion of the continuity of domestic units. As Georges Duby has recently pointed out, the Church in the early Middle Ages struggled mightily to make its own theory of marriage prevail over the alternative marriage theory popular among the laity. The ecclesiastical model of marriage, which emphasised the free consent of the contracting parties and the indissolubility of unions, triumphed over the lay model of marriage, which, according to Duby, valued family concerns above the wishes of the individual at the end of the eleventh century in France. The pattern of marriage arrangements that Duby calls the lay model seems to have persisted vigorously until much later in other places, including Catalonia and Aragon. This paper will examine a case from mid-thirteenth century Arago-Catalonia in which the conflict of lay and ecclesiastical marriage ideals features prominently.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , July 1980 , pp. 271 - 282
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For the notion of the family as a model Christian community see especially 1 Cor. iv. 14-17; vii. 2-5; xi. 3, 7-9; 2 Cor. xi. 2-3; Col. iii. 18-24; Gal. iii. 29-4. 7; 1 Tim. iii. 2-6. On the Church as an eternal community see Matt. xvi. 18-19 ; Congar, Y., L'ecclésiolugie du haut moyen-age, Paris 1968, 104–13Google Scholar ; Kantorowicz, E. H., The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology, Princeton 1957, 176-7, 291–313Google Scholar.

2 , Kantorowicz, King's Two Bodies, 314–36.Google Scholar

3 Duby, G., Medieval Marriage: Two Models from Twelfth-Century France, trans. Forster, E., Baltimore 1978, 3-8, 15–18 and passim.Google Scholar

4 Duby's concept of the two models of marriage is a useful and important analytical tool for differentiating the conflicts between clashing ideas about marriage which occurred so frequently in medieval Europe. I am, however, sceptical abou t his claims that the ecclesiastical model triumphed so early or so completely as he seems to think.

5 Barcelona, Archivo de la Corona de Aragon (hereafter cited as ACA), Cancilleria, Procesos, serie 11, legajo 1-2 (Olim Urgel, E. 168-9). The documents are on paper and in very fragile condition; the papers uniformly measure 223 x 300 mm. The file is incomplete: legajo 2 begins with fo. 82. The old file 168 apparently consisted of 166 numbered folios, of which nearly half are missing; the surviving leaves have been severely damaged so that many of them are in tatters. The old file 169 contained four unnumbered folios of testimony by King James 1 of Aragon and the viscount of Cardona, plus five folders of procedural documents that are now reduced to an exceedingly fragile and fragmentary state.

6 Sors, D. Monfar y, Historia de los condes de Urgel, 2 vols, Barcelona 1853Google Scholar (Colección de documentos inéditos del Archivo general de la Corona de Aragón, vols ix-x), i. 530–1Google Scholar ; Marca Hispanica, sive limes hispanicus, Paris 1688, iv. 533Google Scholar ; Shneidman, J. L., The Rise of the Aragonese-Catalan Empire, 1250-1350, 2 vols, New York 1970, i. 154Google Scholar ; Vidal, S. Sobrequés i, Els barons de Catalunya, Barcelona 1957, 76–7Google Scholar ; Villanueva, Jaime, Memorias cronológicas de los condes de Urgel, ed. Cortes, C. and Gutiérrez, E. Corredera, Balaguer 1976, 28–9Google Scholar.

7 , Villanueva, Memorias cronológicas, 222Google Scholar ; Vidal, Sobreques i, Els barons, 77Google Scholar ; , Shneidman, Aragonese-Catalan Empire, i. 155Google Scholar ; James, King 1 of , Aragon, Cronica o llibre dels Jeils, $34Google Scholar , n. 31 , in Soldevila, F. (ed.), Les quatre grans croniques, Barcelona 1971, 214Google Scholar.

8 Sors, Monfa r y, Historia, i. 531–2.Google Scholar

9 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 532–4.Google Scholar

10 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 535–7Google Scholar ; Vidal, Sobreques i, Els Barons, 77Google Scholar ; Vic, C. de and Vaissete, J., Histoire générate de Languedoc, 10 vols, Toulouse 1840-6, vi. 731-2, 886Google Scholar ; Espeso, J. Paz y, Documentos relativos a España existentes en los Archivos Nacionales de Paris, Madrid 1934, xiv. doc. 75Google Scholar.

11 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 537Google Scholar ; Ferrando, J. E. Martinez, Catálogo de la documentation relativa al antiguo reino de Valentia contenida en los regislros de la canallcría real, 1, Jaime I el conquistador, Madrid, 1934, 23–4, no. 78Google Scholar.

12 Collel, A., ‘Raymundiana’, Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia, xxx (1957), 74–6Google Scholar , doc. 9. On Raymond's activities as a papal adviser and legal consultant at this period, see Baime, F. and Paban, C. (eds), Raymundiana, seu documenta quae pertinent ad S. Raymundi de Pennaforti vitam et scripta, Rome 1900 (Monumenta ordinis fratrum praedicatorum historica), vol. vi. fasc. 1-2, i. 13, 31Google Scholar.

13 La documentatión pontificia de Alejandro IV (1254-1261), ed. Lama, Ildefonso Rodriguez de, Rome 1976 (Monumenta Hispaniae Vaticana, seccion Registros, vol. v), 314Google Scholar , no. 333 ; Regesta de letras pontificias del Archivo de la Corona de Aragón, ed. Rosell, F. J. Miquel, Madrid 1948, 102, no. 182Google Scholar.

14 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 538–43.Google Scholar

15 Rosell, Miquel, Regesta, 106, no. 189Google Scholar ; Valls-Taberner, F., ‘El diplomatari de San Ramon de Penyafort’, Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia, v (1929), 37–8. no. 27Google Scholar ; Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 544–6Google Scholar.

16 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 547–8.Google Scholar

17 , Collel, ‘Raymundiana’, 77Google Scholar , no. 10 ; Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 548–9Google Scholar.

18 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 550–2.Google Scholar

19 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 552–3Google Scholar ; Corredera, E., El Archive de Agery Caresmar, no. 750, Balagucr 1978, 143–5Google Scholar.

20 , Collel. ‘Raymuncliana’, 78, no. 11.Google Scholar

21 Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 553–4.Google Scholar

22 , Valls-Taberner, ‘Diplomatari’, 41Google Scholar , no. 31 ; Sors, Montar y, Historia, i. 554–6Google Scholar.

23 Rosell, Miquel, Regesta, 107Google Scholar , no. 191–2 ; Sors, Monfar y, Historia, i. 556–8Google Scholar ; Viclal, Sobrequés i, Els barons, 78Google Scholar ; Linehan, Peter, ‘La carrera del obispo Abril de Urgel: la iglesia espanola en el siglo XIII’, Anuario de Estudios Medievales, viii (1972-1973), 162Google Scholar ; , Villanueva, Memórias cronológicas, 223Google Scholar ; , Corredera, Archivo de Ager, no. 754, pp. 145–6Google Scholar.

24 Villanueva, Memorias cronologicas, 223; Geronimo Zurita, Anales de la Corona de Aragon, iii. 73, ed. A. Canellas Lopez, i, Zaragoza 1967, 666. Corredera, Archivo de Ager, no. 763, pp. 146-7.

25 , Villanueva, Memória cronológicas, 223Google Scholar ; , Zurita, Anales, 665–6Google Scholar ; Soldevila, F., Vida de jaume I el conqueridor, 2nd edn, Barcelona 1969, 279Google Scholar ; , James 1, Cronica, $473Google Scholar , in Les quatre grans cróniques, 166 ; , Shneidman, Aragonese-Catalan Empire, i. 155Google Scholar.

26 Vidal, Sobreques i, Els barons, 78–80.Google Scholar

27 For the relevant law on exceptions see particularly X 2.1.19 ancl all of X 2.25. Canon law texts will be cited throughout this study from the standard edition of the Corpus iuris canonici by Friedbergj, E. 2 vols, Leipzig 1879Google Scholar , while the Corpus iuris civilis will be cited from the critical edition by P. Krueger, Th. Mommsen, R. Schoell and W. Kross, 3 vols, Berlin, 1872-95. The conventional legal citation systems of the two laws will be employed.

28 ACA, Canc, Proc., ser. II, leg. 1, fo. 30rb: ‘in prima ibi ubi dicitur quod auctoritate apostolica pronunciauit non tamen dicitur … cognomina; uide debent exprimi quia omnia debent esse clara et specificata in libello contenta, ut extra de libelli oblatione c. ii. X 2.3.2… Idem dicimus ubicumque ponitur in libello uerbum ‘dicitur’ uel hoc uerbum ‘dicuntur’ que uerba in pluribus locis posita in libello, unde in omnibus debet exprimere quid intendit per communem subper … allegatam.’

29 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 1, fo. 30rb-va.

30 ACA. Canc., Proc., ser. II, leg. 1, fo. sova: ‘Preterea omnes petitiones in libello contenta sunt prepostere et se inuicem impediunt et hoc patet quia prima ponitur restitutio ante quam aliquid petatur contra sententiam iudicis quorum amonitione dictum esse factam spoliatione, et hoc et expresse muniti ut in preallegate dicitur conquerente.’

31 ACA, Canc., Proe., ser. 11, leg. 1, fo. 30vb: ‘Ex premissis igitur apparet predictum libellum non posse procedere quam per procuratorem comitis et domine Cecilie nomine ipsorum dominam Constanciam et eius procuratorem nomine ipsius ad expensas habemus [?] condempnari quos paratus est taxare.’

32 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 1, unnumbered: ‘Non tenentur respondere primo generi positionum … in quo genere ennaratur de minore etati dicte domine et(co)mitis et quomodo comiti non placuit matrimonium contrahere et enarratur de aeliis predictis admittende dicte positiones cum in priori iudicio posi[tos] fuissent et sic nunc poni non debent cum semel tantum ponant et qu … de eodem no. fF. naute caupo. 1. licet in fine [Dig. 4.9.6].’ For the mid-thirteenth-century rules on res iudicata see X a.27.7, 11, so, as well as the Summa aurea of Hostiensis, lib. 2, De re iudicata, Lyon 1537, fo. 124V-1 a6r.

33 ACA, Canc., Proe., ser. 11, leg. 1, unnumbered: ‘Ad .xxij. sequentes positiones ubi ponitur de matrimonio Cecilie et de quisbusdam solemnitatibus habitis circa illud non tenere respondere quia per comitem coram oscensi dicta cecilia contumaciter absentata fuerit et posite et atestationis publicate et postmodum per dictum comitem et ceciliam coram barchinonensem et utroque habita sententia contra et omnia dicta superius intelligantur sed specialiter repetita.’ On contumacy see X 2.1.1. and 2.14.5-6.

34 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 1, unnumbered: ‘[Positiones] que sequuntur et sunt .xvj. ubi ponitur quod rex aragonie est auunculus … ipsc quam fi … Fauent domine constancie et rogauerunt dominum papam sunt …s cum non tangunt in aliquo id de quo agitur in libello et quidam earum eciam sunt al … posit … ra barch. quare ad eas non tenentur respondere.’

35 See X 1.29.19-20, 30.

36 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 1, unnumbered: ‘Ad sequentes .x. positiones ubi dicitur de barchinonensi [episcopo] et fratre Raymundo “processerunt et quod procedere non poterant cum mors pape preuenisset citationem” non respondent cum iam sit posite coram barchinone et fratre raymundo et habita interlocutoria quam et processum coram illis usque ad diffinitiua et dilatorie [exceptiones] post sententiam non uendicent sibi locum… Ad illud quod frater Raymundus procedere recusauit non teneatur respondere cum incontínentí; sit paratus ostendere quod episcopus solus poterat procedere iuxta formam rescriptì et quod excusauit se [scil.: Raymundus] propter inrirmitatem manifestam.’

37 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. i, unnumbered: ‘[E]t quicquid ponit… [ad]uersa pars ponit maliciose ad negocium differendum et restitutionem impediendam.’ On unreasonable delay see especially X 2.2 7.2.

38 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, unnumbered: ‘Dominus rex iuratus dixit quod .p. de moncada dixit sibi quod matrimonium [verte]batur inter comitem urgellensis et dominam constanciam filiam suam. Et post multa uerb a dixit quod non poterit matrimonium consummare sine adiutorio ipsius domini regis et dominus rex dixit quod placebat sibi multum matrimonium…’

39 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. s, lo. 87r-v: ‘(D)ixit se interluisse in ecdesia parochiali sancta marie de seros in hostio eiusdem ecclesie quando dominus .al. conies urgellensis et domina constancia filia nobilis .per. de monte catalano contraxerunt matrimonium adinuicem. Et uidit et audiuit quo d frater berengarius de gatello qu i celebrauit eis missam nupcialem dixit in hostio ecclesie, uos domine comes uultis dominam constanciam in uxorem, et ipse tacuit aliquantulum. Et Crater berengarius dixit, quare tacetis. Ego non procedam ultra nisi concedatis. Et tune comes respondit, ego concedo earn in uxorem meam. Et ipsa similiter dixit, ego accipio eum in uirum meum, et osculati fuerunt adinuicem, facta primo subarracione anulorum; post hoc intrauerunt ecclesiain et audierunt missam nupcialem.’

40 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 83r: ‘[Dlixit quod … uidit eos in hostio eiusdem ecclesie pro matrimonio contrahendo, uerba tame n matrimonii non intelligit nee in contractu interluit; fuit tamen et comedit in prandio nuptiarum et uidit ibi dictum comitem comedentem cum ilari uultu …’

41 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. II, leg. 2, fo. gov-gir: ‘Super .viii.o articulo interrogato dixit quod nesciebat quot annorum esset tune pris [?] dicto comitis, sed uidit quod erat magnus et apparebat ex aspectu persone quod erat maior .xiiii. annorum et ita audit et credit, et uidit plures etatis .xvii. annorum qui minores erant in persona quam erat dictus comes tempore dicti matrimonii. Et credit quod potens erat cognoscere mulieres… Super articulo interrogato dixit quod uidit quod magna erat Constanza et cognoscibilis et apta ad uiriles amplexus. Interrogato quomodo scit, dixit quia erat magna adeo quod sine periculo persone poterit bene cognosci. Et uidit plures que erant etatis .xv. annorum et ultra que erant minores in persona quam esset domina constancia tempore matrimonii supradicti. Et mater etiam domine constancie erat minori in persona quando fuit trad ita domino petro de montecatho, et fuit cognita per eundem. Interrogato si habebat mamillas apparentas dicta domina constancia tempore dicti matrimonii dixit quod sic, sed non magnas, sed aliquantulum apparentas, ita quod discerni poterant super uestibus et notari. Item interrogata dixit quod non multum macra nee multum peritus erat comes sed conueniens et habebat conuenientia membra.’

42 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 144V.

43 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 153r: ‘Super .xxviii.o articulo interrogato dixit quod audiuit dici a quibusdam filiis militum qui erant cum comite quod ipse comes non potuerit cognoscere mulieres et postea audiuit quod quedam soldadera berengarii .a. de anglia fuit introducta in lecto ipsius comitis de nocte, ipso comite dormiente et nesciente et .t. de cireua qui jacebat cum eo surrexit a lecto et audiuit iste .t. ab ipsa soldadera quia ipsa dixit ei quod nisi cognosceret carnaliter earn ipsa clamaret et dixit etiam dicta soldadera huic .t. quod adeo fuit ductus ueracundia exinde dictus comes quod sudauit antequam earn cognosceret carnaliter et quod postea cognouit earn ter sicut ipsa soldadera dicebat et hoc fuit post duos annos elapsos uel circiter post matrimonium quod dicitur fuisse contractum inter dictum comitem et dominam constanciam.’

44 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 125r, 144r.

45 ACA, Canc., Proe., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 122V, 144V.

46 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 1 19v.

47 ACA, Canc., Proc., ser. 11, leg. 2, fo. 143r, I45v-146r.

48 The requirement of marital consent is frequently referred to in canon law texts, e.g. C. 32 q. 2 pr.; C. 27 q. 2 c. 30; X 4.16.7. Some problems arising from this feature of the law are discussed by Donahue, Charles Jr, ‘The Policy of Alexander the Third's Consent Theory of Marriage’, Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, ed. Kuttner, S. G., Vatican City 1976, 251–81Google Scholar ; see also Sheehan, M. M., ‘Choice of Marriage Partner in the Middle Ages: Development and Mode of Application of a Theory of Marriage’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, N.S., i (1978), 3–33Google Scholar and Noonan, J. T. Jr, ‘Power to Choose’, Viator, iv (1973), 419–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Questions of impotence and consummation raise some complex issues, which I have dealt with in a chapter of a forthcoming book edited by Vem Bullough and J. A. Brundage. For some of the leading legal texts on these issues see C. 5 q. 3 c. 1; C. 27 q. 2 c. 29 and dictum post; C. 33 q. 1 throughout; X 4.1.13, 25, 26, 30; X 4.15. 1-7.