Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T19:42:51.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Customary Aids and Royal Fiscal Policy under Philip VI of Valois

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Elizabeth A. R. Brown  and
M. Henry
Elizabeth A. R. Brown
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
M. Henry
Affiliation:
Si placet
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1332 Philip VI of Valois set in motion a campaign to levy traditional aids in his kingdom. Although for a number of reasons the effort failed, the episode casts significant light on the development of royal fiscal policy in France. Its importance lies chiefly in the fact that it terminated, at least temporarily, a period of experimentation and indecision lasting since the time of Saint Louis, who had claimed as legally due to him by the general custom of the realm various traditional aids. These customary payments were fundamentally arbitrary levies which kings and other lords collected from their vassals and subjects on occasions and in amounts determined essentially by customary practice and by the extent of the lord's power over his dependents, rather than by the lord's evident and undeniable need for help. Some aids — those taken for crusading and to ransom the lord — were easier to justify than others—those collected for marrying a daughter or knighting a son, for example. The legitimacy or illegitimacy of the aids was not, however, of central importance, since custom was their chief justification, and it was long usage that Saint Louis emphasized in claiming the aids he sought. His success in implementing his demands was not great, thanks to the manipulability and vagueness of custom. Still, the conviction with which he voiced his claims was impressive.

Type
Articles
Information
Traditio , Volume 30 , 1974 , pp. 191 - 258
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

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 a brief survey of these events, see Viard, Jules, ‘Un chapitre d'histoire administrative. Les ressources extraordinaires de la royauté sous Philippe VI de Valois,’ Revue des questions historiques 44 (1888) 171–174. They have been examined most recently by Professor John Bell Henneman, who considers them in relation to the history of the development of royal taxation in his book, Royal Taxation in Fourteenth Century France: The Development of War Financing, 1322-1356 (Princeton 1971) 90-107. Although adopting a different approach and perspective, a detailed study focusing on an episode treated in a more comprehensive work will necessarily deal with many of the same events and with much the same evidence, but in this case my debt to Professor Henneman is greater than might be expected, for he not only stimulated my interest in the aids, but he also brought to my attention and graciously helped me locate many of the documents which I have used. At every point of my research I have been attentive to and stimulated by his reading of the evidence and his conclusions. Readers of the two treatments will readily perceive the areas in which our emphases and interpretations differ, which I have not enumerated in the notes. They will not, however, be aware of the warm good humor and courteous interest with which he has analyzed this paper. I have profited greatly from his suggestions and comments.Google Scholar

I am grateful to Professor Charles Radding for helpful advice, and I also appreciate the generous cooperation of Mme Lucie Favier and of M. Bernard Mahieu of the Archives Nationales in Paris, who assisted me in obtaining either the originals or photographs of documents kept in municipal and departmental archives. Mme Jacqueline Le Braz of the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes aided me with my work in the volumes of the Menant Collection, and the staff of the Bibliothèque Municipale of Rouen, where the collection is housed, supplied me with copies and answered several questions concerning the original transcriptions.Google Scholar

For background information on the traditional aids, see Stephenson, Carl, ‘The Aids of the French Towns in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,' published in French in Le Moyen Age in 1922 and now available in translation in Carl Stephenson, Mediaeval Institutions: Selected Essays, ed. Lyon, Bryce D. (Ithaca 1954) 1–40. I am completing a study of the marriage aid levied by Philip the Fair in 1308, and the policies and claims of Saint Louis and his successors are treated in some detail in an introductory chapter. In the preface I explain my avoidance of the term ‘feudal,’ which is often inaccurately used to describe the aids: ‘Since custom or agreement determined the incidence and the rate of the extraordinary taxes, and since they were paid by all sorts and conditions of men — there was no necessary connection between paying the levies and holding fiefs — the taxes should properly be termed customary, conventional, or traditional, rather than feudal, aids.’ Google Scholar

2 See Chronique de Guillaume de Nangis et de ses continuateurs , ed. Géraud, H., Société de l'histoire de France, Publications, Nos. 33 and 35 (Paris 1843) II 133-134; ‘Chronique parisienne anonyme de 1316 à 1339 précédée d'additions à la chronique française dite de Guillaume de Nangis (1206-1316),’ ed. Hellot, A., Mémoires de la société de l'histoire de Paris et de l'Île-de-France 11 (1884) 150; cf. Cazelles, Raymond, La société politique et la crise de la royauté sous Philippe de Valois (Paris 1958) 128; and, for the significance of these events, see. Henneman, , Royal Taxation 90-92. For Philip's earlier preparations for crusading, see. Dürrholder, Gottfried, Die Kreuzzugspolitik unter Papst Johann XXII (Strasbourg 1913) 58-68. Philip had taken the cross in 1313, but Dürrholder and other authors have alleged that he repeated the ceremony on 25 July 1332: Dürrholder, Die Kreuzzugspolitik 67. I have been unable to find any evidence that he did so, although in July 1332 he appointed five members of his council to supervise collection and storage of all tax money gathered by papal order for the Crusade. At the same time he made elaborate pledges of good faith, promising to urge his son and other members of the royal family to swear to observe his decree and to promise to oppose any attempt to divert crusading funds to other uses: Paris, Archives Nationales, K 42, no. 12; cf. Musée des Archives Nationales. Documents originaux de l'histoire de France exposés dans l'Hôtel Soubise (Paris 1872) 196, no. 339; de Boislisle, A., ‘Variétés. Le budget et la population de la France sous Philippe de Valois,’ Annuaire-Bulletin de la Société de l'histoire de France 1875 236, n. 4, continued from 235; Viard, Jules, ‘Philippe de Valois avant son avènement au trône,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 91 (1930) 308. On 20 March 1333 Philip confirmed these arrangements and named the same five councilors his proctors to ask the pope to proclaim the general passage to the Holy Land and then to swear in his name that he would undertake the passage within three years after 1 August 1333. On 22 March 1333 Prince Jean seconded his father's statements and promised to abide by the arrangements when he became king: Paris, Archives Nationales, JJ 66, fols. 662v-664, no. 1502; cf. Paris, Archives Nationales, J 1029, no. 5. For taxes and crusading privileges granted by the pope, probably in response to requests presented by the king at this time, Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2289, 700-703, copied from the Chamber of Accounts Register Noster, fol. 291v. Cf. n. 73 below.Google Scholar

3 Kehl, Paul, Die Steuer in der Lehre der Theologen des Mittelalters, Volkswirtschaftliche Studien, No. 17 (Berlin 1927) 136–137 for the ideas of Guillaume of Rennes, which were followed by Astesanus of Asti and were given popular expression in the fourteenth century in the Songe du Vergier: Astesanus, Summa de casibus conscientiae (Strasbourg ca. 1473) Book 1, tit. 32, a. 5; Traitez des droits et libertez de l'église gallicane , ed. Brunet, J.-L., 2 vols. (Paris 1731) II 139.Google Scholar

4 ‘Les subsides pour les guerres, pour la chevalerie et manages des enfans du Roy, dont l'en despent plus que ilz ne montent, quant le cas se offre que ilz se lièvent’: Boislisle, ‘Variétés,’ 93. Since this undated memorandum on the financial situation in France refers only to the collection of the knighting aid and does not mention the aid for Marie's marriage, it seems clear that it was drawn up after the beginning of 1334 and before 15 July 1335: see below, at notes 74 and 154, and cf. Boislisle, ‘Variétés,’ 89.Google Scholar

5 Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 7603 (Fontanieu 71) fols. 156-163. It was also stipulated that if her fiancé Jean died, Marie would marry the duke's second son; if the contract was not fulfilled, the injured party would receive 200,000 livres. Marie's dower was to consist of an annual allowance of 10,000 livres tournois of landed income until the death of the duchess of Brabant, when the duchess' lands would be assigned to Marie. The agreement was issued ‘par le roi en son grant conseil.’ For an identical letter issued by Jean, duke of Lorraine, Brabant, and Limbourg, father of Marie's future husband, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 7603 (Fontanieu 71) fols. 164-171.Google Scholar

6 For the knighting ceremonies, ‘Chronique parisienne,’ 150, and Chronique des quatre premiers Valois, ed. Luce, Siméon (Paris 1862) 3.Google Scholar

7 Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2291, 749, published in the Appendix, I, below. For other copies, Albi, Archives Municipales, CC 54; Millau, Archives Communales, CC 508, no. 129; Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3872; Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12 (cf. Berthelé, Joseph, Archives de la ville de Pézenas. Inventaires et documents, Vol. 1, Inventaire de F. Resseguier [Montpellier 1907] no. 1630); Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 1304. The mandate is summarized in royal letters addressed on 20 December 1332 to the bailli of Caux and on 5 January 1333 to the bailli of Chartres: Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2291, 743-744 and 751; see below, at notes 12, 13 and 16.Google Scholar

8 See Cazelles, , La société 140 for the jurisdictional relationship between the king and the duchy.Google Scholar

9 Paris, Archives Nationales, J 178A, no. 90; cf. Marchegay, Paul, Archives d'Anjou, 3 vols. (Angers 1843-1854) II 207–208, and ibid., 182-195 for descriptions of documents relating to the dispute between Charles of Valois and his subjects; this controversy is discussed in some detail in the monograph mentioned in n. 1 above; cf. also Petit, Joseph, Charles de Valois (1270-1325) (Paris 1900) 288-291 for an account of the episode which differs in many respects from the conclusions I will present in this article.Google Scholar

10 For litigation with bearing on this question, which took place between the duke of Burgundy and his subjects in the winter of 1310-1311, see Richard, Jean, ‘Droit d'indire et “subvention” ducale au début du xive siècle,’ Mémoires de la Société pour l'histoire du droit et des institutions des anciens pays bourguignons, comtois et romands 14 (1952) 173–181, and especially 181, item 7. In 1332 subjects of the counts of Rouergue were said to owe aids for the marriages of the counts' daughters and sisters: Aveyron, Archives Départementales, G 964, fol. 130.Google Scholar

11 The circumstances were similar to those faced by Philip the Fair in 1313, when an aid for the knighting of his son Louis, king of Navarre and count of Champagne, was collected in Champagne. In that case, however, Philip was foresighted enough to see that the aid was instituted and levied by order of Louis himself: n.b. the careful distinction drawn in the collectors' accounts, in Documents relatifs au comté de Champagne et de Brie, 1172-1361, ed. Longnon, Auguste, Vol. 3, Les comptes administratifs , ed. Berger, Élie (Paris 1914) 140 JK.Google Scholar

12 It seems clear that no subsidy was ever levied in Normandy for Marie's marriage. Some fifteen years later, in 1347, Jean himself imposed an aid in Normandy for the marriage of his own daughter Jeanne: Actes normands de la Chambre des Comptes sous Philippe de Valois (Actes normands de la Chambre des Comptes sous Philippe de Valois), ed. Delisle, Léopold, Société de l'histoire de Normandie (Rouen 1871) 356–361, 370-375, 381-384, 394-395, 403-408, 425. In the first instance this aid was taken only from Jean's immediate subjects; the authorization of overlords was sought before the aid was collected from other men: ibid. 357-358, 385-386.Google Scholar

13 Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2291, 751-752, printed in the Appendix, II, below.Google Scholar

14 ‘ Se lesd. opposans tant pour leur Cause de doubte Comme pour Eschiver la poine qu'il auroient et les despens qu'il feroient avenir en ladite Chambre, veulent Composer avec vous amiablement, vous Les Recevez a Composition, en fesant Retenir que ce ne porte prejudice au Roy, ne a eulx, Si vous mandons que vous le faciez en ceste guise, et les Induisez a ce amiablement et au plus bel que vous pourrez:’ Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2291, 743-744, a late copy of a royal letter found in Mémorial BB, fol. 11; cf. ibid. 747 for another copy.Google Scholar

For the mandate of Philip the Fair, issued either early in 1310 or possibly late in 1309, Les Olim …, ed. Beugnot, Arthur-Auguste, 4 vols. (Paris 1839-1848) II 508, no. vii, and cf. Boutaric, Edgard, Actes du Parlement de Paris, 1 er série, de l'an 1254 à l'an 1328, 2 vols. (Paris 1863-1867) II no. 3739; this letter is discussed in the monograph referred to in n. 1 above.Google Scholar

15 Neither the letter of 20 December 1332 nor the mandate of 4 February 1333 described below contains orders that plaintiffs should appear in person in Paris, but the letter of 5 January 1333 to the bailli of Chartres referred to the expense and difficulties which subjects would suffer when they appeared before the Chamber, and the letter sent to baillis and seneschals on 8 February 1333 stated explicitly that the royal officials had been commanded to instruct the parties to come to the Chamber: see above at n. 14 and below at n. 38; cf. especially Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 3402 (Leber 5870, Menant Vol. 5), fols. 2v-3v, printed in the Appendix, III, below. Thus, protesters from Senlis may have been required to journey to Paris to present their arguments there themselves.Google Scholar

16 No copy of these orders survives, but in a letter of 4 February 1333 addressed by officials of the Chamber of Accounts to the bailli of Senlis, the bailli was reminded, ‘… vous auez eu lettres du Roy Contenant que vous levissiez ledit subside ou demaine du Roy premierement. Et es autres lieux ou il a esté accoustumé a leuer tant seulement, et que se aucun qui ne vous apparust autrefois auoir payé en cas semblable, sopposoit, vous receussiez ses raisons fussent priuileges, ou autres choses, et aussy celles du Procureur et autres gens du Roy par lesquelles lon diroit lopposant estre tenus a paier ledit subside, et nous enuoissiez tout sous uostre scel, et entretant fut tenu en souffrance:’ Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2291, 755. It is impossible to determine whether these orders were issued before, after, or at the same time as the mandate to the bailli of Caux. For Chartres, see Paris, , Archives Nationales, P 2291, 743-744.Google Scholar

17 ‘Et sy entendons que vous et vos commissaires voulez prendre vos despens pour cuillir ledit subside sur les bonnes gens, la quelle chose vous ne deuez pas faire, quar cest és mettes de vostre bailliage et les despens de vos commissaires vous sont complez sur le Roy tele comme raison sera, si soiez certain que ceque vous ou eus en prendront Nous ferons rendre du vostre, et des dommages les bonnes gens:’ Paris, Archives Nationales, P 2291, 755-756.Google Scholar

18 The protest of Narbonne is undated, and it contains no indication of when it was to be presented to the seneschal: Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3872. As will be seen, however, the men of Albi had been summoned to appear before Gui on 22 December 1332, and the seneschal was probably dealing with Narbonne at approximately the same time: Albi, Archives Municipales, CC 54.Google Scholar

19 Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3872, an undated and incomplete draft of a protest prepared by the officials of Narbonne for their representatives to present to the seneschal and treasurer when they appeared before them. Cf. de Vic, Claude and Vaissete, J.-J., Histoire générale de Languedoc, ed. Molinier, Auguste, 15 vols. (Toulouse 1872-1893) IX 468, where it is suggested that the king ordered his agents to obtain the consent of the communities of the seneschalsy and that some of these places decided upon the sum of 20 sous per hearth themselves. The authors cited three documents of the archives of Montpellier to support their statements, but the document discussed in my text, Louvet 3872, is apparently the only one which has survived. The account of these events found in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Languedoc-Bénédictins 84, fols. 73-v, a draft of the version included in the Histoire générale, does not state that consent to the tax was sought or obtained, but says that the king himself imposed the aids. De Vic and Vaissete may have had at their disposal documents now lost which, like the document from the archives of Pézenas to be discussed below, reflected the seneschal's point of view: see the following note and n. 24.Google Scholar

20 Albi, Archives Municipales, CC 54, the protest of ‘Johannes Asserii, mercator Albie,’ dated at Carcassonne on 30 December 1332. For the tax being paid in Languedoc to secure abolition of a royal tax on cloth, see Boislisle, , ‘Variétés,’ 93 and 189, and see below, at notes 22 and 88.Google Scholar

As can be imagined, the official version of the seneschal's actions was quite different from Jean's. In the fall of 1334 the treasurer's lieutenant stated that Carcassonne and eleven other towns in the district voluntarily pledged lump sums ranging from Carcassonne's 3025 livres to Espondeilhan's 56 livres. Agents of the other localities in the seneschalsy were said to have offered voluntarily a hearth tax of 20 sous: Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630; Espondeilhan is located in Hérault, ar. Béziers, c. Servian. These statements are probably untrue, since the consuls of Albi and of other communities mentioned by the lieutenant soon appealed to Paris against the royal officers' efforts to force them to make pledges.Google Scholar

21 On 6 October 1333 Philip VI issued instructions to his officials in the seneschalsies of Toulouse, Carcassonne, and Beaucaire concerning the procedure to be observed in dealing with the piratical attacks being made by subjects of the kings of Aragon and Majorca and by Genoese and Sienese: Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 1558. The situation had been brought to his attention, he said, by the complaints ‘Consulum & habitatorum Biterr. Narbon. Montispli. Bellic. & plurium habitatorum aliarum Ciuitatum & villarum Regni nostri,’ who stated that these attacks were hampering their efforts to import grain from abroad to relieve the suffering caused by the year's poor harvests: ibid .Google Scholar

22 Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3872. For information concerning various items in this list, see Henneman, , Royal Taxation, 83–86.Google Scholar

23 If the protest was presented, the seneschal apparently succeeded in pacifying the townsmen of Narbonne at least temporarily, for they did not appeal to the king with the other leading towns of the seneschalsy in the winter of 1332-1333: see below, at n. 26.Google Scholar

24 Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Languedoc-Bénédictins 84, fols. 73-v, on which see n. 19 above. As evidence the author of the draft cited ‘un gros Registre de la Senechaussée de Carcassonne, 4me continuation, num. B. du Thr. des Chartes du Roy pour la Chambre des Comptes de Montpellier.’ See also de Vic and Vaissete Histoire générale IX 468, who cite the archives of the domain of Montpellier, the seneschalsy of Carcassonne, ‘4e continuation, n. 3, & actes ramassés des trois sénéchaussées, liasse 2, nos. 4 & 8.’ In editing their account, Molinier offered no more precise identification of these documents but indicated (ibid. IX 469, n. 3, col. 2) that Dom Vaissete was simply analyzing the protests of Narbonne which are still extant: Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3872. Vaissete must have consulted other documents as well, however, for the plea of Narbonne did not mention Saint Louis, nor did it include any reference to Roman law or to the writings of later legal theorists.Google Scholar

25 See n. 20 above.Google Scholar

26 The last community is called ‘Salsinhera’ in Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630. Salsigne is located 18 kilometers north of Carcassonne. The first three of these communities are referred to in the decree of Parlement of 6 December 1333, which suggests that they and the other communities pursued their appeal during the summer and fall of 1333: see the Appendix, VI, below. Of the eight localities, only Carcassonne was mentioned in the decree of 20 December 1334. At that point representatives of Carcassonne may have been acting for the other communities: see the Appendix, VIII, below, and cf. n. 92 below.Google Scholar

27 Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630. Cf. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Languedoc-Bénédictins 84, fol. 73v, where this letter is accurately summarized; the account of de Vic and Vaissete (see n. 19 above) does not allude to the mandate. The clause describing the procedure to be followed by the seneschal in receiving complaints was quoted by the seneschal at Béziers on 13 March 1333 and is transcribed in a public instrument recording the events of that day: Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 10, liasse 4, charte 7; Berthelé no. 1120; cf. n. 39 below.Google Scholar

28 Millau, , Archives Communales, CC 508, no. 129; cf. Aveyron, , Archives Départementales, 2 E. 178. 2, fol. 248v for evidence that the seneschal and treasurer dispatched these summonses and held the assembly.Google Scholar

29 For Najac, , see Aveyron, , Archives Départementales, 2 E. 178. 2, fol. 248v, and for Millau, see Millau, , Archives Communales, CC 345 (Liber taxatorum), fols. 76v .Google Scholar

30 Millau, , Archives Communales, CC 508, no. 123. See below, following n. 47 and following n. 141.Google Scholar

31 Périgueux, , Archives Municipales, CC 52, fol. 2v .Google Scholar

32 ‘ Item bailem qui foren donadas a i messatge que mossen phelip de gerals nos trames am ia letra clauza que no tramezessa conges a cahortz pel fach del subsidi. xii. mealhas dargen:’ ibid. fol. 3.Google Scholar

33 Tarn, ar. Albi, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

34 For the appeal made on 18 January 1335, see below, preceding n. 122. Since the consuls' first protest was directed against both the marriage and the knighting aids, it must have been made in the fall of 1333, before the marriage aid was suspended: see below, preceding n. 74. Cordes was one of the towns connected with the protest against the knighting aid and Parlement's decree of 1333: see the Appendix, VIII, at n. 28.Google Scholar

35 In their protest, the consuls of Cordes said that they were appealing to the king from the seneschal of Toulouse and Albi and from the judge of Albigeois ‘exeo videlicet et pereo quia Cum dudum per curiam Regiam literatorie mandatum extitisset dicto domino Senescallo seu eius predecessori ut subcidia domino nostro Regi debita occasione Militie domini Iohannis ducis normandie filii domini nostri Regis et occasione maridagii domine marie eius filie Inponere et leuare haberet diuisim ab illis qui ad dicta subcidia soluere tenebatur [sic] que quidem litere ad illos solum se Referebant et Referrunt qui ad dicta Subcidia tenebantur et tenentur exsoluenda et non ad alias [sic]. Cumque super premissis predecessores dictorum consulum et comproborum alie vniuersitates [et consules coram predecessore dicti domini senescalli euocati fuissent et cum pluribus — inserted from a notation at the end of the document] Rationibus coram eo propositis propter quas euidenter aparebat dicta Mandata de Iure non procedere nec per concequens ipsum dominum Senescallum virtute earum procedere ad exequtionem illarum quia idem dominus senescallus minus Iuste salua sui gracia dictas Rationes admittere cessauit ab ipso et grauaminibus per ipsum illatis et Inposterum Inferendis vniuersitatibus [predictis et a Iuris deneguacionibus tamquam ab Iniquis et Iniustis — inserted from a notation at the end of the document] Regiam magestatem fuerit etiam appellatum per vniuersitates predictas dictus dominus Senescallus et vos predicte domine Iudex non atendentes quod apellatione pendente nichil est Innouandum per Iudicem nec per partem nec atendentes quod nos consules predicti et nostra vniuersitas sumus et est In terra / que Regitur Iure scripto secundum quod de Iure quolibet presumitur nisi de contrario doceatur et sic Ius commune pro vniuersitate nostra predicta nosque sumus liberi et Inmunes et dicta nostra vniuersitas a prestatione Subcidiarum predictorum et In pocessione et sayzina uel quasi pacifica et quieta sumus et fuerimus et fuerit dicta nostra vniuersitas tam per se quam per suos predecessores a quibus causam habuerint per tantum tempus et a tanto tempore citra de cuius contrario hominum viuentium memoria non exstitit et absque quacumque Inquietatione …:’ Cordes, Archives Communales, CC 30.Google Scholar

36 ‘… priuilegia per dominos condam comites tholosanos consulibus et habitatoribus castri nostri et pertinenciis eiusdem fuerunt concessa ut ab omni seruitute sint liberi et Inmunes nisi gratis finare vellent que priuilegia per dominos condam Reges francie fuerunt confirmata que confirmaciones eorum Sigillo viridi fuerunt Sigillate …:’ Cordes, Archives Communales, CC 30. Sealing in green wax signified that the confirmations were to have perpetual validity: see Giry, Arthur, Manuel de diplomatique (Paris 1894) 643.Google Scholar

37 ‘Cumque per dominum philippum condam francie Regem patruum dicti domini nostri Regis nunc Regnantis ordinatum extiterit ut Senescallus tholose ad Requisitionem consulum locorum coram quodlibet [sic] dicte Senescallie deffendat ipsos consules et populares dictarum vniuersitatum a quacumque noua Inpositione seruient. facienda …:’ Cordes, Archives Communales, CC 30. For the ordinance of Philip the Fair, see Ordonnances des roys de France de la troisième race, ed. de Laurière, Eusèbe-Jacob et al., 22 vols. (Paris 1723-1849) I 401, clause 29, which should be emended in accordance with the readings of the royal registers (Paris, Archives Nationales, JJ 36, fol. 59v and JJ 35, fols. lxiiiv-lxiiii): ‘Item quod Senescallus ad requisitionem Consulum locorum quorumlibet defendat ipsos Consules et uniuersitates ac singulos a noua impositione seruitur. facienda per prelatos seu alias ecclesiasticas personas / & a noua exactione pasate prout de iure fuerit et hactenus est fieri consuetum.’ In Ordonnances, ‘in futurum’ appears for ‘seruitur.’ JJ 36 has in place of JJ 35's ‘a noua exactione pasate,’ ‘a noua exactione prestationis pasate.’ Google Scholar

38 Rouen, , Bibliothèque Municipale, MS. 3402 (Leber 5870, Menant Vol. 5), fols. 2v-3v, in the Appendix, III, below.Google Scholar

39 ‘Cui adherencie. seu content. in dicta cedula pro adherencia tradita. dictus dominus. Senescallus et bon. Iohannes de Vallonga locum tenens dicti thesaurarii Carc. Responderunt ut sequitur. Scilicet quod cum de Iure fines mandati diligenter seruandi sint et ad vnguem et in mandato dictis Senescallo et thesaurario directo inter cetera sit talis clausula. Et euls appelez et Aussi nre. procur. oyez et prenez leur Raysons que il voudront dire. et baillier sur ce que il maintienent. que il ne sont tenuz Apayer les diz Subcides et oyez et prenez aussi. les Raysons que nre. dit procur. voudra dire et baillier au contrayre et enuoiez tout enclos soucz vous seauls A noz ames et feals les gens de noz comptes Aparis A certaine Iournee. Que verba sunt exclusiua omnis vie processus et orditionis [sic] ipsius coram Senescallo et thesaurario predictis. Inchoandi dixerunt Respondentes dictam copiam se concedere non debuisse nec predictos appellantes ad probandum Ea que in facto consistebant admittere nec per verba contenta in clausula predicta astringebantur nec tenebantur omnes vniuersitates dicte Senescallie Simul et semel voccare. Cum etiam si voccassent opportuisset sigillatim [sic] et singulariter vnamquamque vniuersitatem per se in Suis Rationibus Audire et procuratorem Regium. econtra cum sepator. [sic] sit separata et esse debeat Ratio. et ideo ad parcendum laboribus et expensis non omnes simul et semi [sic] et vna vice dictas vniuersitates vocauerunt Set vicitim et gradatim ut alias in talibus in dicta Senescallia est fieri consuetum. Et licet concessa fuerit copia procuratori Regio Rationum traditarum per partem Appellantium predictorum. et dies ad deliberandum sibi assignata Tamen dictus procurator Regius nunquam habuit copiam Rationum predictarum per partem dictorum appellantium ut predicitur traditarum. Et sic ut seruaretur Equalitas que Iniudiciis et vbique seruanda est copiam Rationum traditarum per dictum procuratorem Regium tunc habere non debuerunt nec nunc habere debent Rationibus supradictis. Et quia dicti. Senescallus et. thesaurarius. per Remissionem et clausuram et adiornamentum dictorum appellantium et procuratoris Regii quam nuper die Quinta Marcii — fecerunt sunt potestate et officio Suis functi. Quare ex predictis dictam appellationem et in Ea contenta tanquam potestate et officio suis functi non Receperunt. presentem Responcionem concedendo apostolorum de Iure concedendorum loco:’ Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 10, liasse 4, charte 7; Berthelé no. 1120.Google Scholar

40 This man's name is given as Bon Iohannes de Vallonga in Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 10, liasse 4, charte 7; Berthelé no. 1120, and as Bonlohannes de Vallalonga in Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

41 Cf. n. 39 above, and note that Berthelé (no. 1120) misdated the document 1322.Google Scholar

42 Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Languedoc-Bénédictins 84, fol. 76, for which see the Appendix, V, below; cf. de Vic and Vaissete, Histoire générale IX 468.Google Scholar

43 The letter is dated 3 March 1333: Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS. 3402 (Leber 5870, Menant Vol. 5), fol. 17v, for which see the Appendix, IV, below.Google Scholar

44 Basses-Pyrénées, Archives Départementales, E 404, no. 121.Google Scholar

45 Basses-Pyrénées, Archives Départementales, E 404, no. 122, a vidimus made on 7 August 1333 by the seneschal of Toulouse and Albi. The letter was issued at ‘Suilli,’ either Sully-la-Chapelle, Loiret, ar. Orléans, c. Neuville-aux-Bois, which is 26 kilometers northeast of Orléans, or Sully-sur-Loire, Loiret, ar. Orléans, ch.l.c, which is 44 kilometers southeast of Orléans; cf. Viard, Jules, ‘Itinéraire de Philippe VI de Valois,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 74 (1913) 110, for evidence that Philip was at ‘Sully’ on 29 March 1333; cf. ibid. 616 for Viard's identification of this place as Sully-sur-Loire. Viard shows (ibid. 111) that Philip was at Chateauneuf-sur-Loire on 2 and 3 April.Google Scholar

46 ‘Affranchissement du subside de la chevalerie aux sujets et hommes des religieux abbé et couvent de St. Denis en France … [fol. 31];’ ‘Defenses aux collecteurs de la subvention es villes du port de Charenton, Clishy, Montreuil et Villeneuve le Roy de contraindre les hommes de Guillaume de Harecourt et de … de france au payement de la subvention pour le manage de la dushesse de Bourgogne … [31v]: Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 520, undated entries in an inventory of Mémorial BB of the Chamber of Accounts. I am grateful to Dr. Andrew Lewis for verifying some readings in this inventory.Google Scholar

47 See above at n. 28.Google Scholar

48 ‘Pro tallia sibi Indicta pro deffencione subcidii olim per dominum nostrum Regem Impositi pro milicia … et maritagio’: Aveyron, Archives Départementales, G 965bis, fol. 40v, an act of 11 October 1337 concerning collection of arrears of this tax, which was drawn up by a notary of the bourg of Rodez. Although the act was drafted in Rodez, it is possible that the tax had been levied in another community. Note that the tax was imposed before collection of the marriage aid was suspended: see below at n. 74.Google Scholar

49 The town accounts mention this rate for the first time in connection with the entry relating to the meeting of 25 January: Aveyron, Archives Départementales, 2 E. 178. 2, fol. 248v. For a discussion of the value of these accounts, see my article, ‘Subsidy and Reform in 1321: The Accounts of Najac and the Policies of Philip V,’ Traditio 27 (1971) 399–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

50 See the accounts for these years in Aveyron, Archives Départementales, 2 E. 178. 2.Google Scholar

51 The town accounts state, ‘quar los uolia forssar del Subsidi. non contrastan nostras costumas:’ Aveyron, Archives Départementales, 2 E. 178. 2, fol. 248v .Google Scholar

52 Ibid. Probably involved in the preparation of the protest was Master W. Rainal of Villefranche, a legal expert who regularly advised the town officials concerning their rights: ibid. fol. 250v, a partially obliterated entry. For the continuing relationship between the consuls and Rainal, ibid., and also fols. 251v for his services to the town in 1329.Google Scholar

53 Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Doat 146, fols. 79-80, a document which, according to the copyist, was in the archives of Najac in 1667; I was, however, unable to find any trace of the letter in the inventory of the Najac archives which was prepared in 1575: Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 564. Jean de Combelas had to pay 7 s. 6 d.t. for the letter; he himself received 60 sous tournois ‘per son trobalh’: Aveyron, Archives Départementales, 2 E. 178. 2, fol. 248v. The same liberties which had protected Najac in the past probably proved effective in 1333, but it is impossible to state with certainty that the town escaped payment, since the town accounts terminate in that year.Google Scholar

54 For a coinage-reform assembly, which was scheduled to begin on 14 March 1333 and which was in session for almost two weeks, see Paris, , Bibliothèque Nationale, Doat 119, fol. 70, and cf. Henneman, John B., Royal Taxation in France, 1322-1348, Diss. Harvard 1965 (hereafter Royal Taxation Diss.) 91-92; see also his book, Royal Taxation 95-97. It is not impossible that Jean de Combelas, who was in the north at this time, attended this assembly as Najac's delegate. See. Henneman, , Royal Taxation 96, for the king's announcement in mid-March 1333 that he was revoking all commissions for the investigation of illegally acquired fiefs; he later acknowledged that he had taken this step because his subjects were suffering from the monetary situation, the bad weather, and the knighting subsidy: Millau, Archives Communales, CC 509, no. 70, the transcript of a royal letter dated 28 February 1334; cf. Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3341, for a royal letter dated 28 April 1333 concerning the recall of commissioners investigating fiefs and the Jews.Google Scholar

55 See the Appendix, VIII, below, and cf. below at n. 141 and following.Google Scholar

56 Périgueux, Archives Municipales, CC 52, fol. 9. On the first occasion two consuls traveled first to Mont-de-Domme, one of the towns later involved in the appeal to Parlement, and thence to Cahors: see the Appendix, VIII, below, at n. 20.Google Scholar

57 Périgueux, Archives Municipales, CC 52, fol. 4 for the privileges sent to Paris. Just when they were dispatched is unclear; a number of representatives of Périgueux appeared in Paris in 1333, and some were there in April: ibid. fol. 9v .Google Scholar

58 Ibid. fol. 4.Google Scholar

59 Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 783, an undated draft of the protest, and cf. ibid. no. 1066 for a fragmentary contemporary copy of the petition. The appeal was addressed ‘a vous nous seigneurs / mons. le baillif & le Receueur du bailliage dauuergne’; in the final clause the consuls declared that they ‘ce baylent non Mie en signe de pleydierie / Mes en monstrant humblement A vous & par vous A nous granz seigneurs du conseil du Roy nres. / les chouses dessus dites’: Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 783.Google Scholar

60 ‘Ia Soyt ce que li seigneurs deladca. villa de Riom. Roys & autres ayent este chr. & fet leurs filz chrs. & marie leurs fillez plus. fois’: Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 783. Note, however, that in one draft of the statutes of Riom issued in March 1249 by Alfonse of Poitiers, the men of Riom were said to owe the traditional, licit aids, such as those for the marriage of the daughter, the knighting of the lord or his successors, and support of the Holy Land: Layettes du Trésor des Chartes , ed. Teulet, Alexandre et al., 5 vols. (Paris 1863-1909) III no. 3755, p. 60, col. 1. This provision must have been omitted from the version of the statutes which was actually adopted and enforced: Correspondance administrative d'Alfonse de Poitiers , ed. Molinier, Auguste, 2 vols. (Paris 1894-1900) I 462-463, no. 725, a letter of Alfonse concerning Riom's obligations for crusading aids, which does not refer to any such stipulation; for a different interpretation, Bisson, Thomas N., ‘Negotiations for Taxes under Alfonse of Poitiers,’ XII e Congrès International des Sciences Historiques. Études présentées à la Commission Internationale pour l'histoire des assemblées d'états 31 Vienna 1965 (Louvain and Paris 1966) 79, n. 7.Google Scholar

61 ‘Per nos vel successores nostros non fiat in dicta villa tallia siue questa vel Albergata nec Recipiemus ibidem mutuum / nisi gratis nobis mutuare voluerint habitantes in eadem villa’: Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 783.Google Scholar

62 These two clauses are canceled in the draft of the appeal in the Riom archives (no. 783), but they appear in the contemporary copy of the protest which is also there (no. 1066): cf. n. 59 above. Perhaps the consuls decided at some point that it might be safer to rely on actual instances of non-payment rather than reciting privilege clauses which could be challenged in the royal court.Google Scholar

63 ‘ Et dieus doynt Au dit duc bonne vie & longue / & que pour li li peuble du Roy nres. / franc ne soyt Asserui:’ Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 783.Google Scholar

64 De Vic and Vaissete, Histoire générale X preuves, cols. 473-475, no. 151; cf. Strayer, Joseph R., ‘Consent to Taxation under Philip the Fair,’ in Strayer, J. R. and Taylor, C. H., Studies in Early French Taxation (Cambridge, Mass. 1939) 78;Google Scholar

65 Archives anciennes de la ville de Saint-Quentin, ed. Lemaire, Emmanuel, 2 vols. (Saint-Quentin 1888-1910) II 62–63, no. 511.Google Scholar

66 Ibid. 64-66, no. 512; cf. Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 517, an inventory of the Chamber of Accounts Mémorial BB, which shows that this letter appeared on fol. 21v of that register. The inventory indicates that the 6000 livres tournois were owed for the knighting aid alone: Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, p. 516. By 12 June 1335, however, the town had paid the king 3000 livres tournois for this aid, and the royal order commanding restitution of all paid for the subsidy does not suggest that any more was owed: Lemaire, , Archives II, 89, no. 529.Google Scholar

67 Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 516-517. The brief descriptions given in this inventory do not indicate why the taxes were being levied, but the similarity of these two entries to the entry referring to the letter for Saint-Quentin, whose text survives, suggest that the taxes were being imposed for similar reasons: cf. n. 66 above.Google Scholar

68 See below, n. 74, for the government's suggestion that money paid for the aid might be returned. For Montferrand, see Clermont-Ferrand, , Archives Municipales, Montferrand CC 1, no. 6, a royal letter dated 22 March 1334 found in a vidimus of 1335. In this letter Philip told the bailli and receiver of Auvergne that if Montferrand had paid any part of the marriage aid and was liable for the knighting aid, the sum paid for the marriage aid was to be credited against the amount owed for the knighting subsidy, ‘pour ce que nous auons volu que len se deporte a present par tout nostre royaume de leuer ledit subside du mairage jusques a tant que autrement en aions ordene:’ ibid .Google Scholar

69 See n. 46 above.Google Scholar

70 See my article, ‘Cessante Causa and the Taxes of the Last Capetians: The Political Applications of a Philosophical Maxim,’ Studia Gratiana 15 Post Scripta (Rome 1972) 565–587.Google Scholar

71 See my article, ‘Taxation and Morality in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries: Conscience and Political Power and the Kings of France,’ French Historical Studies 8 (1973) 1–28 and especially 21-22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

72 Périgueux, Archives Municipales, CC 52, fol. 5, an entry which shows that sometime during July the consuls of Périgueux received from Cahors a royal letter concerning the Crusade; cf. ibid. fol. 10 for the entry concerning the assembly, which states that the king summoned ‘las communas’ to meet with him late in September.Google Scholar

73 Ibid. fol. 10, an entry which says that on St. Michael's Day ‘lo Reys am manches dautres barons pres la crotz’; cf. Luce, , Chronique 5-6. On 1 October 1333 the archbishop of Rouen delivered a sermon exhorting his audience to support the Crusade, and delegates to the assembly were probably among those who gathered in the meadows near Saint-Germain-des-Prés to hear him: Guillaume de Nangis II 134-135; cf. Dürrholder, Die Kreuzzugspolitik 69.Google Scholar

74 See n. 68 above, and note that the decree issued by Parlement in December 1333 referred only to the knighting aid, which indicates that the king was no longer attempting to collect the marriage aid: see the Appendix, VI, below.Google Scholar

75 This document is printed for the first time in the Appendix, VI, below. The decision states that the plaintiffs came from Carcassonne, Béziers, Limoux, and, vaguely, from ‘very many other towns and localities of the kingdom.’ There is no additional evidence, however that other townsmen had joined the eight southern communities to take formal steps against the aid, and the royal justices may have been purposely exaggerating the number of plaintiffs involved in the suit in order to justify the universal application of the decision: cf. above, at n. 26, and note the similarly vague phraseology employed in the letter quoted in n. 21 above. A royal mandate addressed to the seneschal and receiver of Toulouse on 8 October 1334 is even less precise than Parlement's decree. Indicating that communities throughout the kingdom had participated in the suit, it left no doubt that the decree was intended to apply to the whole realm: ‘plusors communautetz de vilas de nostre Reaume diserent emantanerent quil nostre [sic] [pas tenutz apayer subcidi per la chiualaria de nostre] treschr. efealz filh. Iohan duc de normandia les vnz per preuileges donnez denos predecessors les autres peur [sic] ce que en cas semblables il diserent que ou les ne leurs predecessors nouerent onques paye semblable sub side [sic] oyes lours Raysons et Receuez par estrientz et oy nre. procurant sur ce arreste [sic] pronuncie par arest de nre. courtz que touz nous sutgieus sems meyons sont tenutz Audit subcide’: Cordes, Archives Communales, CC 30; the bracketed portions were omitted from the text and added at the end of the instrument.Google Scholar

76 Clermont-Ferrand, , Archives Municipales, Montferrand CC 1, no. 6; cf. n. 68 above.Google Scholar

77 Montpellier, , Archives Municipales, Louvet 3301, for Beaucaire and Nîmes; Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630 for Carcassonne.Google Scholar

78 The protest of the Carcassonne towns dated 8 October 1334 indicates that the former seneschal, Guy de Vela, was involved in securing pledges in 1333 and in the negotiations preceding the decree of December 1333, but it contains no evidence of any activity on his part after this date: Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630; cf. Dupont-Ferrier, Gustave, Gallia Regia, 6 vols. (Paris 1942-1963) I no. 4861.Google Scholar

79 Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630, which contains the statement of the treasurer's lieutenant that the towns' offers were made after the decree of December 1333 and after the king had issued mandates ordering execution of this decree, which were sent to Carcassonne on 18 January, 7 and 30 July, and 10 September 1334.Google Scholar

80 Aude, , ar. Carcassonne, c. Alzonne. Note that Albi was apparently no longer actively involved in the protest: cf. above, at n. 26.Google Scholar

81 Montpellier, Archives Municipales, Louvet 3301. While he drew up a detailed list of instructions to accompany the formal mandate, the treasurer included in his official letter a reminder that collection of the aid was to be considered part of the rector's ordinary responsibility, not a special assignment for which he could demand expense money from the king's subjects for himself and his subordinates.Google Scholar

82 Ménard, Léon, Histoire civile ecclésiastique et littéraire de la ville de Nismes 7 vols. (Paris 1750-1758) II preuves 84–85, no. xlii, and cf. Ménard's excellent account of these events, based on the municipal records which he published, ibid. 71-76.Google Scholar

83 ‘Unam confessori domini regis, ut faceret conscientiam domino regi, ut subsidium nobis remitteret:’ Ménard, Nismes II preuves 85.Google Scholar

84 Ibid.Google Scholar

85 Ibid. 86. It seems clear that non should be inserted in the phrase ‘quod ad hujusmodi subsidium solvendum populus Nemausi tenebatur.’ The instruments and letters were eventually copied, and these copies were given to the seneschal's lieutenant.Google Scholar

86 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 86.Google Scholar

87 ‘Touz ceuls qui sont noz sugiez sainz moien’: Pezenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

88 Ibid.; for the gabelle owed by the region, see n. 20 above.Google Scholar

89 ‘En tele quantite que il doie sofire Au Roy nre. dit seigneur’: Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

90 Ibid. In this document it is noted that the letter of 30 July 1334 was sealed with six seals of Chamber of Accounts officials.Google Scholar

91 A few were strikingly reduced. The pledge of Abeilhan (Hérault, ar. Béziers, c. Servian) was changed from 75 livres to 22 1. 10 s.; that of Bassan (Hérault, ar. and c. Béziers) from 300 livres to 32 1. 10 s.: ibid .Google Scholar

92 It seems clear that the many towns named with Carcassonne and Nîmes as plaintiffs in the decree of 20 December 1334 were, like Nîmes, cited to appear in Parlement on or about 30 July 1334, after having taken part in the proceedings at court in the spring of 1334: see the Appendix, VIII, below, at notes 8 and 26. It is curious, however, that the protest formulated at Cordes in January 1335 does not allude to any such summons, although Cordes is listed as a plaintiff in the decision of 1334: Cordes, Archives Communales, CC 30, and see above at n. 37 and also the Appendix, VIII, below, at n. 28. It seems clear that Carcassonne was at this point acting for the other localities of its district which had participated in the original appeal against the aid: see n. 26 above.Google Scholar

93 Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630; and cf. Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 86.Google Scholar

94 Hérault, Archives Départementales, A 4, fols. 82v-83v ; cf. Vic, de and Vaissete, , Histoire générale, IX 469, especially n. 1.Google Scholar

95 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 86.Google Scholar

96 Cf. n. 92 above.Google Scholar

97 ‘Dicentes quod dicte littere Regie generales sunt et generalem iusticiam et ordinationem Regiam contineant / quantum ad omnes eonsulatus et vniuersitates Senescallie Carc, et bittr. et singulos ex eisdem et quantum ad omnes debent equaliter et equanimiter obseruari’: Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

98 Ibid. Only two sheets of this document survive; on them are transcribed the adherences of the consuls of Servian (Hérault, ar. Béziers, ch.l.c), Espondeilhan, and Abeilhan, who lodged a joint protest, and of Roujan (Hérault, ar. Béziers, ch.l.c.) and Bassan, who appeared together. A correction inserted at the end of the document indicates that consuls of other communities also participated in the appeal, which suggests that one or two sheets, now missing, contained a detailed record of the adherences of a number of other communities of the seneschalsy.Google Scholar

99 Pézenas, Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

100 Note that the treasurer's lieutenant did not produce as evidence the mandate addressed by Chamber of Accounts officials to Marquis Scatisse on 10 September 1334 until the confrontation in October: ibid .Google Scholar

101 Pézenas, , Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

102 Aude, , ar. Carcassonne, c. Monthoumet.Google Scholar

103 Hérault, , ar. and c. Béziers.Google Scholar

104 Hérault, , ar. Béziers, c. Servian.Google Scholar

105 Embres-et-Castelmaure, Aude, ar. Narbonne, c. Durban-Corbières.Google Scholar

106 Aude, , ar. Narbonne, c. Durban-Corbières.Google Scholar

107 See above, at n. 27.Google Scholar

108 Pézenas, , Archives Communales, layette 3, liasse 1, charte 12; Berthelé no. 1630.Google Scholar

109 Uzès, Gard, ar. Nîmes, ch.l.c; Blauzac, Gard, ar. Nîmes, c. Uzès, for which see Germer-Durand, E., Dictionnaire topographique du département du Gard (Paris 1868) 28.Google Scholar

110 Hérault, , Archives Départementales, A 4, fols. 82v-83v .Google Scholar

111 Ibid. According to an anonymous work of the early-eighteenth century, a charter of 6 April 1337 showed that inhabitants of Beaucaire made a gift to the king when his son was knighted: Recherches historiques et chronologiques sur la ville de Beaucaire (Avignon 1718; available at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris under the call number Lk7. 831) 28; cf. [Chevalier de Forton], Nouvelles recherches pour servir à l'histoire de la ville de Beaucaire (Avignon 1836; also available at the Bibliothèque Nationale, call number 8°Lk7.834) 70, which repeats this information without elaboration.Google Scholar

112 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 86.Google Scholar

113 Ibid. 92 and cf. 74. In 1301 the lawyers of Charles of Valois had argued on similar grounds that these aids could be imposed legitimately in all lands which the kings of France had conquered from the kings of England: Coutumes et institutions de l'Anjou et du Maine, ed. Beautemps-Beaupré, Charles-Jean, 8 vols. (Paris 1871-1897) Part 2 IV 31.Google Scholar

114 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 91–92.Google Scholar

115 Ibid. 86-87. Note that a vidimus of the privileges granted by the count of Toulouse, issued under the seal of the court of Nîmes, was actually used in Paris: ibid. 92.Google Scholar

116 See above, at notes 35-37 and 59-63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

117 See notes 59 and 62 above, and also the Appendix, VIII, below, at notes 17 and 28.Google Scholar

118 Millau, , Archives Communales, CC 508, no. 123, and see the Appendix, VIII, below, at n. 6. The document which contains the grounds for exemption does not indicate when they were formulated, but, since they do not refer to the marriage aid, they must have been prepared after that aid was canceled. There is no evidence that the men of Millau were involved in the suit lodged by the inhabitants of the seneschalsy of Carcassonne in 1333, and the document indicates that Millau's protest was answered by the decree of Parlement issued in December 1334.Google Scholar

119 See the Appendix, VIII, below, at n. 48.Google Scholar

120 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 87–88. The townsmen were forced to pay for a copy of the treasurer's letter two days later.Google Scholar

121 For the text of this mandate, issued ‘par lo Rey Gau.,’ see Cordes, , Archives Communales, CC 30.Google Scholar

122 Ibid.Google Scholar

123 Cf. Molinier in de Vic and Vaissete, Histoire générale IX 469, n. 3, and note the terms of the decree, printed in the Appendix, VIII, below. The version edited by Molinier in de Vic and Vaissete, Histoire générale X preuves, cols. 748-749, no. 290, contains several errors and omits the names of many towns and districts outside the south which participated in the protest. Cf. Furgeot, Henri, Actes du Parlement de Paris. Deuxième série — de l'an 1328 à l'an 1350. Jugés, 2 vols. (Paris 1920-1961) I no. 986, whose identification of place names is not entirely trustworthy.Google Scholar

124 Loiret, , ar. and c. Montargis.Google Scholar

125 For La Rochelle, , Barbot, Amos, Histoire de la Rochelle, ed. d'Aussy, Denys, Archives historiques de la Saintonge et de l'Aunis, Vols. 14, 17, 18 (Paris 1886-1890) I (Vol. 14 of Archives) 99, 136-137, and especially 140, where it is noted that in April 1334 Philip VI confirmed a charter of 1269 of Alfonse of Poitiers exempting La Rochelle from the payment of a double cens for the Crusade; the charter was described, according to Barbot, in an old inventory of the archives of La Rochelle. For Cépoy, see. Fawtier, Robert, Comptes royaux (1285-1314) Comptes généraux (Paris 1953) nos. 1156, 2614, and also III Introduction, Appendice, Supplément, Indices (Paris 1956) Index Nominum, s.v. Cepeium .Google Scholar

126 See the Appendix, VII, below, and cf. Furgeot, , Actes, no. 985. For La Rochelle's attempts to win exemption from the marriage aids of 1308 and 1318 and the knighting aid of 1313, see Guérin, Paul, ‘Documents relatifs à l'histoire de la Saintonge et de l'Aunis extraits des registres du Trésor des chartes,’ Archives historiques de la Saintonge et de l'Aunis 12 (1884) 69–71, no. xxxv, and 157-162, no. lxviii; Joseph Petit, Michel Gavrilovitch, Maury and Téodoru, Essai de restitution des plus anciens mémoriaux de la Chambre des Comptes de Paris (Paris 1899) 132-133; Boutaric, , Actes nos. 6119, 6408, 6822, 7253. None of these sources suggests that the town's claims were ever resolved, but Parlement's decree of 20 December 1334 indicates that at some point the court must have made a declaration in La Rochelle's favor.Google Scholar

127 Aveyron, , ar. Rodez, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

128 For these copies, Millau, Archives Communales, CC 508, no. 123, and Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Doat 185, fols. 264-270v; see also the introduction to the decree printed in the Appendix, IX, below.Google Scholar

129 ‘Non sint de nostro domanio in aliquo’: Cahors, Archives Municipales, Livre Noir, fol. 29v. I am grateful to the Director of the Archives Départementales du Lot, M. René Prat, for his generous assistance in copying this letter for me. See Albe, Edmond, ‘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) 27–28, no. 343, who indicates that the letter is dated 26 January 1335.Google Scholar

130 The letter was sealed in green wax with the seal of the Châtelet of Paris, in the absence of the great seal, since at this time the king was apparently away from Paris: Cahors, Archives Municipales, Livre Noir, fol. 29v ; Viard, , ‘Itinéraire,’ 116; cf. n. 36 above.Google Scholar

131 Marne, , ar. Épernay, c. Montmirail; see Cottineau, L.-H., Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés, 2 vols. (Mâcon 1935-1938) II 1961.Google Scholar

132 See the Appendix, VIII, below, for the letter in favor of the prior. The letter for Saint-Chély-d'Aubrac, like the letter for Cahors, was issued in Parlement and sealed with the seal of the Châtelet: Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Doat 185, fols. 291v-292; ef. n. 130 above. The letter was dated 1 February 1335.Google Scholar

133 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 88.Google Scholar

134 Ibid. 89–90.Google Scholar

135 For details, ibid. 89-91. Derro, Pierre, who had represented Nîmes in Paris, went to Avignon in February to defend the town; he took with him privileges issued by Alfonse of Poitiers and by the kings of France to prove that the ecclesiastics were bound to contribute to town taxes: ibid. 90.Google Scholar

136 Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 94.Google Scholar

137 ‘ Item et protestati fuerunt quod Si alii homines Seu vniuersitates locorum comunium domini Regis et aliorum condominorum dictorum locorum essent quitii Seu exempti de subsidio Supradicto Ratione Presentis conuentionis eis Remaneat Ius saluum quod debeant esse quitii et Immunes sicud et alii loci comunes Et eo casu nolunt nec Intendunt quod per Presentem conuentionem Possit eisdem consulibus et vniuersitati ville alesti Preiudicium aliquod generare’: Alès, Archives Communales, I.S. 12, no. 11. Jean Sablou, M., Director of the Archives Départementales du Gard, graciously located for me this and other documents of the town of Alès and permitted me to use them in Paris.Google Scholar

138 Bardon, Achille, Histoire de la ville d'Alais de 1250 à 1340, 2 vols. (Nîmes 1894-1896) I 87–88. Cf. Paris, Archives Nationales, JJ 60, no. 69, fol. 45v, a royal letter of July 1319 in which Philip V assigned the half of the rights over the town of Alès which he possessed to his wife Jeanne; cf. Guerout, Jean, Registres du Trésor des Charles II Part 1 (Paris 1966) no. 3439; note also Alès, Archives Communales, I.S. 1, no. 14, a letter of safeguard issued by Philip VI on behalf of the consuls of Alès on 10 March 1337. For the earlier history of the co-seigneurs of Alès, see. Bardon, Achille, ‘Listes chronologiques pour servir à l'histoire de la ville d'Alais. Les barons d'Alais,’ Mémoires de l'Académie de Nîmes 7th Ser. 15 (1892) 26-30, 51-52.Google Scholar

139 Alès, , Archives Communales, I.S. 12, no. 11.Google Scholar

140 See below, at notes 165-174 for these communities and their sites.Google Scholar

141 On Pierre de Ferrières, seneschal of Rouergue at this time, see Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia V, no. 19760. For the first confrontation between him and the consuls of Millau, Millau, Archives Communales, CC 508, no. 123.Google Scholar

142 Millau, Archives Communales, CC 512, no. 150. The consuls closed by saying that they would have presented their appeal to the seneschal and treasurer themselves, had these officials not been absent; since they were, the appeal was being made in a public place and would be presented to the king's agents in due course.Google Scholar

143 See above at notes 64-67.Google Scholar

144 Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 517.Google Scholar

145 For a royal letter of 14 October 1336 in favor of Péronne, see Paris, , Archives Nationales, JJ 70, fols. 81-v, no. 169, contained in a vidimus and confirmation dated 1336; see Tholin, G.-E., ‘Chartes d'Agen se rapportant au règne de Philippe de Valois,’ Archives historiques du département de la Gironde 33 (1898) 112–115 (also published separately, Bordeaux 1898 40-43), for a letter in favor of Agen dated January 1341, which promised that in the future no marriage or knighting aids would be levied in Agen.Google Scholar

146 Furgeot, , Actes, no. 2030.Google Scholar

147 ‘Chronique parisienne,’ 165, no. 268.Google Scholar

148 A detailed listing of the amounts the towns paid is found in Paris, Bibliothèque National, Clairambault 471, 183-227, the account of Étienne de Boulay, royal commissioner for the war subsidy of 1337 in the Paris region. The contributions to the knighting aid were deducted from the sums owed for the war tax: see below at n. 177.Google Scholar

149 See below at n. 179.Google Scholar

150 Guillaume de Nangis II 145.Google Scholar

151 Seine-et-Oise, , ar. Pontoise, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

152 Guillaume de Nangis II 145–148.Google Scholar

153 See above at n. 83.Google Scholar

154 See the royal mandate published in the Appendix, X, below. It is dated at Gournay-sur-Marne (Seine-et-Oise, ar. Pontoise, c. Le Raincy) on 14 July, with no indication of year. Philip's itinerary shows clearly that if the mandate was indeed issued on 14 July — or on the fourteenth of any month, even those which do not begin with the letter ‘j’ — it could only have been written in 1335. Thus, on the basis of this mandate alone, Viard indicated that Philip was at Gournay-sur-Marne on 14 July in 1335: Viard, ‘Itinéraire,’ 118, and cf. 118-123. This mandate does not seem to have been included in Cazelles, Raymond, Lettres closes, lettres ‘de par le roy’ de Philippe de Valois (Paris 1958).Google Scholar

155 See the document published in the Appendix, XI, below, and cf. Lemaire, , Archives II 90–91, no. 529. A well informed chronicler in Paris wrote that the knighting aid was remitted because of the processions made by the Parisians on Jean's behalf: ‘Chronique parisienne,’ 165, no. 268.Google Scholar

156 The letter to the receiver of Paris ordered him to appear on the fourteenth day (‘le xiiiie jour’) after the feast of Mary Magdalene: Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 3402 (Leber 5870, Menant Vol. 5) fol. 5. The mandate addressed to Auvergne, however, stated that the receiver was to be there on the fourth day (‘le .iiii. Iour’) after the feast: Riom, Archives Communales, CC 9, unnumbered. This must be a copyist's error, since a letter sent out from Paris on 15 July 1335 could hardly have been expected to reach Auvergne in time to permit the receiver to collect his records and journey to Paris before 26 July. It is possible, however, that when they received the king's original orders, Chamber officials planned to hold hearings on 26 July, and that the Auvergne mandate reflects this earlier intention, which would have been altered because of their dilatoriness in executing their schemes.Google Scholar

Although these two mandates for Paris and Auvergne are the only surviving copies of the royal orders, the notation ‘multiplicata’ on the Auvergne letter suggests that similar mandates were dispatched throughout the realm.Google Scholar

157 Cazelles, , La société 115.Google Scholar

158 Rouen, , Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 3399 (Leber 5870, Menant Vol. 2) fol. 7v; copied in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 7603 (Fontanieu 72) fols. 159-160v .Google Scholar

159 Lemaire, , ed., Archives II 89–90, no. 528.Google Scholar

160 Ibid. 90–91, no. 529.Google Scholar

161 Ibid. 90, n. 1.Google Scholar

162 ‘Pour le subcide leué aparis et aillieurs pour la cheuallerie M. le duc de Normandie. Le 24 Iour doctobre 1335. Mess. Lar. de Roan, Daux, Leu. darras, le Chancellier, Mess. Cheur, Guy, de Cruiz, H., des Ess, M., Billouan, J. [sic], Maistr. J. Just., G. de St. Just., A. de la Charm., J. Mignon, Et M. de frignicourt accorderent que le subcide leué en la ville de paris pour la cheuallerie Mons. le duc de Normendie fut rendu en la maniere que le Roy la voulu et comandé deduis les despens qui pour ce ont este faicts. Et que tout prem. len baillera pardeuers la cham. la Assiette dud. subside telle comme elle a este faicte, Et le Compte de ce qui en a esté leué, Et de queles personnes, Et a qui len a deliuré les den. &c. / Et ainsy de toutes les autr. villes et en donra les lettres du Roy de mand. sur ce a ceux qui les requerront’: Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 3398 (Leber 5870, Menant Vol. 1) fols. 19-v, an entry in Mémorial BB of the Chamber of Accounts, fol. 62. See also Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 438-439, a brief notice referring to this discussion. For information concerning the officials mentioned in the account, see Cazelles, , La société 68, 111-112 and 186, especially n. 10.Google Scholar

163 See below at n. 177, and for the discussion held in the Chamber of Accounts on 8 August 1336 concerning the payment of the 700 livres , see Paris, , Archives Nationales, PP 117, 442, referring to an entry in Mémorial BB, fol. 75.Google Scholar

164 The letter also contained instructions concerning the money owed by the inhabitants of Carcassonne for the revocation of the cloth tax. See Edgard Boutaric, ‘Vidimus, lettres et documents des xiiie, xive, xvie et xviie siècles,’ Revue des Sociétés savantes des departements 6th Ser. 2 (1875) 409-410, summarizing a document from the municipal archives of Béziers communicated to him by M. Soucaille. Boutaric reported that the mandate, issued at Paris, commanded the levy of the knighting subsidy, but it must have been simply another of the form letters commanding restitution. According to M. Gouron, the Director of the Archives Départementales de l'Hérault, the document is now missing from the archives of Béziers. Cf. Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 516, the analysis of a letter ordering the seneschal and receiver of Carcassonne to have restored to the consuls and inhabitants of Carcassonne, Béziers, Caux (Hérault, ar. Béziers, c. Pézenas), and other towns of the seneschalsy all they had contributed to the knighting aid. The analysis in the inventory unfortunately omits the date of this mandate. For the significance of Philip's perambulation of the kingdom, see Boislisle, , ‘Variétés,’ 90.Google Scholar

165 Gard, , ar. Nîmes, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

166 Gavernes was a small hamlet in the commune of Aubais (Gard, ar. Nîmes, c. Sommières), located on the site of the rural priory of Saint-Saturnin-de-Gavernes; the community of Gavernes was mentioned in a document of 1674: Germer-Durand, , Dictionnaire 98, s.v. Gavernes, and 226, s.v. Saint-Saturnin-de-Gavernes.Google Scholar

167 The consuls of Périgueux sent two deputies to Cahors to lodge a petition with the king on the town's behalf: Périgueux, Archives Municipales, CC 54, fol. 9. Since the town was apparently not compelled to contribute to the knighting aid, the mission could not have been connected with the problem of restitution.Google Scholar

168 See the document published in the Appendix, XII, below.Google Scholar

169 The letter was issued at Avignon and commanded the royal treasurers in Paris to enforce ‘lordenance que nous auons faite de grace especial / de non leuer le subside deu a Nous en nre. Royaume de france pour la cheualerie de nre. tres chiers filz … & de Rendre & restituer ce que leue en a este du dit subside / ou vous leur faciez telle / & si conuenable assignation / que il en puissent estre briefmént paiez / et faites cessier de les molester en oultre pour ceste cause. Mes nre. entente nest pas / que ce porte preiudice / ou temps auenir / a nous ne a noz successeurs Roys de france en semblable subside’: Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 20025, no. 128; cf. Viard, ‘Itinéraire,’ 120.Google Scholar

170 Card, , ar. Nîmes, c. Beaucaire.Google Scholar

171 The mandate was issued on 18 March 1336 at Villeneuve-lès-Avignon (Gard, ar. Nîmes, ch.l.c): Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fr. 25698, no. 59.Google Scholar

172 Gard, , ar. Nîmes, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

173 ‘Si vous mandons que ce que vous apparra auoir este receu par vous des diz habitanz pour la cause dessusdite / vous leur assignez a prendre sur les vielz debtes deues du petit Seel de Montpeslier commises a leuer a meistre Bernart Carabulle Auquel nous mandons par ces lettres / que il tiegne & acomplisse la dite Assignation ainsi faite par vous Pourueu touteuois par vous receueur / que ce qui Sera paie bailie ou assigne / aus diz habitanz pour ceste cause soit distribue & baillie a chascun deux la Somme par li baillee ou paiee pour ce par quoi chescun deux en ont Iustement ce que paie en a / selonc la forme & teneur de la dite ordenance. Et ou cas que vous Receueur nauriez renduz au Roi nres. les deniers receuz par vous pour la dite cause / rendez les en voz premiers Comptes et parmi ces choses en raportant les dites lettres du Roi nres. lettres de quitance neccessaires ace auec ces presentes et en rendant au Roi en voz diz Comptes les Sommes que assigne leur aurez / Desquel. donnez au dit meistre Bernart tieux lettres comme il appartient pour sa descharge. Nous le vous ferons allouer & passer en voz Comptes & Rabatre de vre. Recepte’: Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 20025, no. 129.Google Scholar

174 Thorus de Puy, the receiver of Nîmes, wrote to Bernard on 5 April 1336. He quoted Guete's letter and told him to send appropriate receipts and testimonials to be included in the accounts due to the king: Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, n.a.f. 20025, no. 130. In this letter Bernard was called a royal commissioner ‘ad leuandum & Recipiendum decimas dicto domino nostro Regi debitas Ratione clamorum viribus sigilli Regis montispessulani olim Expositorum.’ Google Scholar

175 Paris, Archives Nationales, PP 117, 441, a description of a letter contained in Mémorial BB, fol. 72v .Google Scholar

176 Henneman, , Royal Taxation 351–353.Google Scholar

177 For Saint-Quentin, see above, at n. 161. For Paris, see Paris, , Bibliothèque Nationale, Clairambault 471, 183-227. The title of the account indicates that the collector received part of the war tax in cash and that part had been ‘deduite & rabatue par vertu des mandemenz a lui fez tant du Roy nre. dit seigneur Comme de Nos seigneurs des comptes & Tresoriers Pour ce qui auoit este leue des villes de ladite preuoste & viconte pour le subside de la cheuallerie de Mons. Iehan defrance filz du Roy nre. dit seigneur duc de Normendie. Le quel subside de la cheuallerie Le Roy nre. dit seigneur auoit quite generalment de grace especial par tout son Royaume Et voulu que ce qui en auoit este leue fust rendu si comme il est ci desouz en despens Pour ce que le dit Estienne les rent aussi en recepte ’: ibid. 183.Google Scholar

178 Longnon, , Documents III 292 K, 312 K, 328 M, 364 J.Google Scholar

179 Riom, , Archives Communales, CC 9, no. 60. Cf. the assurances included in the letter quoted in n. 173 above.Google Scholar

180 Millau, , Archives Communales, CC 509, no. 70.Google Scholar

181 ‘Qui ivit Parisius pro facto nundinarum & ad excusandum nos de subsidio passagii Terre sancte, ut non daremus:’ Ménard, , Nismes II preuves 89. The two deputies, Bernard Noguerii and Master Raymond Rubei, left Nîmes on 27 February 1335, but preparations for their departure were being made by 16 February: ibid. 88-89. Bernard returned to Nîmes on 11 April 1335: ibid. 91. For Philip's crusading plans and the aid he attempted to levy, see Viard, , ‘Un chapitre,’ 173-174.Google Scholar

182 ‘A cueillir tantost comme il se mouveroit a aller oultre mer:’ ‘Chronique parisienne,’ 165, no. 269.Google Scholar

183 ‘Summam quadringentarum librarum turonensium nobis nomine regio liberaliter oblatam ad Iuuamen dicti passagii per consules de petrag. pro se et vniuersitate dicti [sic] \ sub et cum earum protestationibus & retentionibus Infrascriptis \ semel soluendam mediam videlicet cum dominus noster rex mare Intrauerit pro dicto passagio faciendo et aliam mediam anno tunc Reuoluto duximus nomine Regis acceptandam videlicet quod nisi dictus dominus rex transeat Indicto passagio ipsi consules dictam Summam soluere minime teneantur nec per oblationem predictam \ ipsi consules & vniuersitas seruituti alicui supponantur nec eciam eadem oblatio & promissio ad consequenciam possit trahi & quod in casu inquo vnus aut plures de dicta vniuersitate In dicto transirent passagio quod impositiones pro dicta summa eisdem transeuntibus quotquo essent faciende Rationabiliter \ de dicta summa promissa seu oblata per dictos consules deducantur’: Périgueux, Archives Municipales, CC 9, a letter of Bérengar Frédol recording his acceptance of the town's offer on 15 December 1335. For the meetings held to discuss the subsidy, Périgueux, Archives Municipales, CC 54, fol. 3v. See Henneman, , Royal Taxation 104-105, and Royal Taxation Diss. 102, for other instances of resistance and conditional offers.Google Scholar

184 In the lengthy document they prepared to defend their position the men of Reims blamed their poverty largely on the royal government, complaining of the money they had had to spend on royal coronations and on the cases they were pleading in court — some against the royal procurator; they also stressed the damage they had suffered from monetary mutations and the lack of readily available cash: Archives administratives de la ville de Reims, ed. Varin, Pierre-Joseph, (Paris 1843) Vol. II, Part 2 664–665, no. CXV, dated 1332 by Varin, but surely to be associated with the campaign of 1335.Google Scholar

185 In 1347 and following years, Jean, duke of Normandy, asserted his right to collect an aid for his daughter's marriage only from his immediate subjects, but his council decreed that with their consent he could take the aid from their subjects, who were not under the duke's direct jurisdiction. Nothing was said of ducal territory or possessions: Delisle, Actes normands 357, 385-386; see n. 12 above.Google Scholar

186 See the preceding note, and cf. Henneman, , Royal Taxation 239–240.Google Scholar

187 Henneman, , Royal Taxation 240, n. 5.Google Scholar

188 Henneman, John B., ‘The French Ransom Aids and Two Legal Traditions,’ Studia Gratiana 15 Post Scripta (Rome 1972) 623, 628-629.Google Scholar

189 Note the arguments advanced by the royal court in 1270 and 1271: Les Olim, I 832, no. xliii; 848-849, no. xviii. The latter case was a special one, however, since the plaintiffs were townsmen and the court was arguing that, having been released from servitude, they could enjoy only those rights granted them by their lord: ibid. For similar contentions made by Alfonse of Poitiers when he was levying a crusading aid, see Molinier, , Correspondance administrative I 407, no. 651, and 488, no. 756.Google Scholar

For the claim made in 1360 in the instructions issued to the ransom aid commissioners, see Richard, Jules-Marie, ‘Instructions données aux commissaires chargés de lever la rançon du roi Jean (1360),’ Bibliothèque de l'École des chartes 36 (1875) 83, article [III], and Henneman, , ‘French Ransom Aids,’ 621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

190 Richard, , ‘Instructions,’ 83–87, and especially article XIII.Google Scholar

191 Henneman, , ‘French Ransom Aids,’ 620-622. See also Mouradian, Georges, ‘La rançon de Jean II le Bon,’ École Rationale des chartes. Positions des thèses (1970) 151–156, and especially 152; unlike Henneman, Mouradian is apparently more concerned with the mechanics of tax collection than with the rationale for the subsidy.Google Scholar

192 Rey, Maurice, Le domaine du roi et les finances extraordinaires sous Charles VI 1388-1413 (Paris 1965) 326–327.Google Scholar

1 The seneschalsies of Bigorre and Toulouse: see Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia I 401–404 and n. 32 below.Google Scholar

2 Although the text of the decree clearly reads ‘Iudicature,’ it should doubtless be emended to ‘Iudicaturarum,’ as is suggested by Molinier in his edition of the text: de Vic and Vaissete, Histoire générale X preuves col. 748. For the judicial districts of Rivière, Albigeois, Lauraguais, Rieux and Villelongue, all of which were in the seneschalsy of Toulouse, see Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia V nos. 21514-21544; 21554-21561; 21564-21566; 21567-21573; 21589-21591. For the location of Rivière, ibid. 508, n. 2, and Fawtier, Comptes royaux III Index Nominum, s.v. Ripparia; for Lauraguais, ibid. s.v. Lauraguesium, and also ibid. I nos. 10067, 12026, 12041.Google Scholar

3 Toulouse, , Haute-Garonne, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

4 Villefranche, , Aveyron, ch.l.ar.Google Scholar

5 Villeneuve, , Aveyron, Villefranche-de-Rouergue, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

6 Millau, , Aveyron, ch.l.ar.Google Scholar

7 Saint-Antonin, , Tarn-et-Garonne, ar. Montauban, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

8 Carcassonne, Aude, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

9 Saint-Rome-de-Tarn, Aveyron, ar. Millau, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

10 Troyes, Aube, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

11 Bar-sur-Aube, Aube, ch.l.ar. Google Scholar

12 Provins, Seine-et-Marne, ch.l.ar. Google Scholar

13 Fismes, Marne, ar. Reims, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

14 Chaumont, Haute-Marne, ch.l.d.; for the pays of Bassigny, see Fawtier, , Comptes royaux III Index Nominum, s.v. Bassigni.Google Scholar

15 Chartres, , Eure-et-Loir, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

16 Montferrand, Puy-de-Dome, com. Clermont-Ferrand.Google Scholar

17 Riom, Puy-de-Dome, ch.l.ar.Google Scholar

18 Figeac, , Lot, , ch.l.ar.Google Scholar

19 Montcabrier, Lot, ar. Cahors, c. Puy-l'Évêque; cf. Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia V nos. 18795-18796, 18872.Google Scholar

20 Mont-de-Domme, (Mons de Doma), near Domme, Dordogne, ar. Sarlat; cf. Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia IV 435, n. 1, to no. 17359, and. Fawtier, , Comptes royaux III Index Nominum s.v. Mons Dome; and n.b. especially entry no. 28784.Google Scholar

21 Orléans, Loiret, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

22 Lagny-sur-Marne, Seine-et-Marne, ar. Meaux, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

23 Meaux, Seine-et-Marne, ch.l.ar. Google Scholar

24 Cahors, , Lot, , ch.l.d. Google Scholar

25 Fons, Lot, ar. Figeac, c. Figeac-Ouest; see Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia V no. 18776.Google Scholar

26 Nîmes, Gard, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

27 Sommières, Gard, ar. Nîmes, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

28 Cordes, Tarn, ar. Albi, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

29 Saint-Affrique, Aveyron, ar. Millau, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

30 Mâcon, Saône-et-Loire, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

31 Cintegabelle, Haute-Garonne, ar. Muret, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

32 Tarbes, Hautes-Pyrénées, ch.l.d. Tarbes was the administrative center of the seneschalsy of Bigorre.Google Scholar

33 Bazas, Gironde, ar. Langon, ch.l.c. It is curious that Bazas, a city within the duchy of Gascony and subject to the duke of Gascony, should have been a party to the suit; perhaps Vasati is a slip of the pen for another place name.Google Scholar

34 Langres, Haute-Marne, ch.l.ar. Google Scholar

35 Lorris, Loiret, ar. Montargis, ch.l.ar. Lorris and the five following towns were all part of the royal domain in the bailliage of Orléans: cf. Fawtier, , Comptes royaux I 57 ff. and 113 ff.; on Lorris, see. Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia IV no. 16359.Google Scholar

36 Janville, Eure-et-Loir, ar. Chartres, ch.l.c; see Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia IV no. 16358.Google Scholar

37 Vitry-aux-Loges, Loiret, ar. Orléans, c. Châteauneuf-sur-Loire.Google Scholar

38 Montargis, Loiret, ch.l.ar.Google Scholar

39 Probably a contracted form of Boscus Communis, Boiscommun, Loiret, , ar. Pithiviers, c. Beaune-la-Rolande; cf. Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia IV no. 16356.Google Scholar

40 Yèvre-la-Ville, , Yèvre-le-Châtel, , Loiret, , ar. and c. Pithiviers; cf. Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia IV no. 16364.Google Scholar

41 Beaugency, Loiret, ar. Orléans, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

42 The position of this town in the list suggests that it might be either Chaussy, Loiret, , ar. Pithiviers, c. Outarville, or Chézy, Allier, ar. Moulins, c. Chevagnes (cf. notes 45-46 below); there is also a Chessy in Seine-et-Marne, ar. Meaux, c. Lagny-sur-Marne; see n. 22 above.Google Scholar

43 Narbonne, Aude, ch.l.ar. Google Scholar

44 Moissac, Tarn-et-Garonne, ar. Castelsarrasin, ch.l.c. Google Scholar

45 Saint-Pierre-le-Moûtier, Nièvre, ar. Nevers, ch.l.c; cf. Dupont-Ferrier, , Gallia Regia V 354-382; Philip VI was at Saint-Pierre-le-Moûtier between 20 and 22 January 1335: Viard, ‘Itinéraire,’ 116.Google Scholar

46 See Fawtier, , Comptes royaux III Index Nominum for Paluellum, which is identified with Paluet, Allier, ar. Moulins, c. Saint-Pourçain-sur-Sioule.Google Scholar

47 Montpellier, Hérault, ch.l.d. Google Scholar

48 Alès, Gard, ch.l.ar.Google Scholar

49 Tauriac, Lot, ar. Figeac, c. Bretenoux; cf. Fawtier, , Comptes royaux III nos. 28791, 28806.Google Scholar

50 In the Menant copy the following phrase is inserted: ‘lequel de nostre droit Nous fesions leuer.’ Google Scholar

51 In the Menant transcription, ‘le 14 Iour.’ Google Scholar

52 This notation does not appear in the Menant transcription.Google Scholar