Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T06:10:14.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Empress Matilda and Church Reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Marjorie Chibnall
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

MATILDA'S epitaph, proclaiming her the daughter, wife and parent of a Henry, great by birth, greater in marriage, and greatest of all in her offspring, epitomises her standing among her contemporaries. It also explains some of the difficulty any historian must experience in attempting to penetrate her character and motives. Her role was seen essentially as an auxiliary one. The relatively few years when she played a leading part in English politics as ‘domina Anglorum’, with one very brief and ill-advised attempt to act as ‘regina Anglie’, years to which modern historians have devoted most of the pages they have allowed her, counted for virtually nothing in the summing up of her influence made in 1167. As a woman involved in politics she was assigned a woman's place: important and influential, but limited, variable, and always secondary.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 38 , December 1988 , pp. 107 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1988

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 Matthaei Parisiensis monachi sancti Albani Chronica majora, ed. Luard, H. R. (Rolls ser. lvii, 1872–1883), ii, 324Google Scholar.

2 Schnith, Karl, ‘Regni et pacis inquietatrix’, Journal of Medieval History, ii (1976), 136–7Google Scholar, comments on the contrasting views. The most violent criticism is in the Gesta Stephani, ed. Potter, K. R., intro. Davis, R. H. C. (Oxford Medieval Texts, 1976), 121–3Google Scholar. Henry, of Huntingdon (Henrici archidiaconi Huntendunensis Historia Anglorum, ed. Arnold, T. (Rolls ser. lxxiv, 1879), 58Google Scholar, wrote, ‘Erecta est autem in superbiam intolerabilem’; and there is malicious later gossip in Map, Walter, De Nugis Curialium, ed. James, M. R., revised Brooke, C. N. L. and Mynors, R. A. B. (Oxford Medieval Texts, 1983), 478–81, 484–5Google Scholar. William, of Malmesbury, Historia Novella, ed. Potter, K. R. (Nelson's Medieval Texts, 1955) 58Google Scholar, is more restrained. Norman chroniclers were laudatory; see Robert, of Torigny's interpolations in the Gesta Normannorum ducum of William of Jumièges, ed. Marx, J. (Soc. de l'Hist. de Normandie, Rouen, 1914), 280–1, 299–300Google Scholar; Le Dragon Normand el autres poèmes d'Étienne de Rouen, ed. Omont, H. (Soc. de l'Hist. de Normandie, Rouen 1884), 120–2Google Scholar. For favourable German comment see Schmale, F. J. et Schmale-Ott, I.Anonymi Chronica Imperatorum Henrico V dedicata (Ausgewählte Quellen zur Deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters, xv, Darmstadt, 1972), 262Google Scholar.

3 Urraca was denounced as Jezebel by the author of the Historia Compostelana (Florez, E., España Sagrada (Madrid, 1747–1879), xx), 204, 324, 333Google Scholar. For the Merovingian queens see Nelson, J. L., ‘Queens as Jezebels: the careers of Brunhild and Bathild in Merovingian history’, Medieval Women, ed. Baker, Derek (Studies in Church History, Subsidia I, 1978), 31–78Google Scholar.

4 The story was told in detail by Theodore Mayer in his inaugural lecture to the University of Freiburg (translated by Barraclough, Geoffrey, Medieval Germany 911–1250 (2 vols., Oxford, 1938), ii. 182–9Google Scholar.

5 Bates, David, Normandy before 1066 (1982), 177Google Scholar; Chibnall, M., The World of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford, 1984), 51–2Google Scholar.

6 See for example King, E., ‘The Anarchy of King Stephen's reign’, T.R.H.S., 5th ser. xxxiv (1984), 133–54Google Scholar. There is some discussion of the problem in Hill, Bennett D., English Cistercian Monasteries and their patrons in the twelfth century (Urbana, 1968), 36–41Google Scholar; though unfortunately he confuses the Empress Matilda with Stephen's queen Matilda (p. 182).

7 Some charters were a response to special circumstances; Matilda's writ to the barons and sheriff of London confirming a pension of 50 marks in silver from the ferm of London to the nuns of Fontevrault, (Regesta Region Anglo-Normannorum, ii. ed. Johnson, Charles and Cronne, H. A., iii. ed. Cronne, H. A. and Davis, R. H. C. (Oxford, 1956, 1968), iii, no. 328)Google Scholar may, as the editors suggest, have been ‘a desperate command to a rebellious city’. But Matilda may have been given some rights over city ferms when her father was grooming her for succession; his original charter to Fontevrault (Regesta, ii. no. 1581; Calendar of Documents preserved in France, ed. Round, J. A. (1899), no. 1052)Google Scholar was separately confirmed by Matilda, and a grant to Cluny out of the ferms of London and Lincoln (Regesta, ii. no. 1691; CDF no. 1387) received her separate subscription; such special notice by her was unusual in Henry I's charters.

8 For the foundation of Abbey, Bordesley see V.C.H. Wores. ii. 154Google Scholar; Crouch, David, The Beaumont Twins (Cambridge, 1986), 39–40, 51CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Regesta, iii. nos. 114, 115, 116.

9 Regesta, iii. no. 68.

10 Crouch, , Beaumont Twins, 69–71Google Scholar.

11 See Cowley, F. G., The Monastic Order in South Wales 1066–1349 (Cardiff, 1977), 25, 38Google Scholar; Crouch, D., ‘The slow death of kingship in Glamorgan, 1067–1158’, Morgannwg, xxxix (1985), 35Google Scholar.

12 Regesta, iii. passim. There is a fairly wide dating limit for some of the charters, which makes it difficult to determine whether Stephen's or Matilda's came first. In Shropshire, where Matilda slowly regained some influence after Stephen's initial victory at Shrewsbury in 1138, the later dating of two Shrewsbury charters (The Cartulary of Shrewsbury Abbey, ed. Rees, Una (Aberystwyth, 1975), nos. 40, 50Google Scholar) is to be preferred to the dating in Regesta, iii. nos. 820, 821.

13 Regesta, iii. nos. 838, 839, 840.

14 Regesta, iii. nos. 460, 461, 462; V.C.H. Shropshire, ii. 70–1.

15 Regesta, iii. no. 88, correcting date in Walne, P., ‘A “Double Charter” of the Empress Matilda and Henry, duke of Normandy c. 1152’, E.H.R., lxxvi (1961), 649–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Regesta, iii. nos. 836, 837; V.C.H. Wilts, iii. 269.

17 Regesta, iii. 168; Gallia Christiana, xi. Instr. 229; CDF nos. 933–8.

18 CDFno. 934; Regesta, iii. no. 607.

19 Porée, A. A., Histoire de l'Abbaye du Bec (2 vols., Évreux, 1901), i. 650–1Google Scholar, prints the list of treasures given to Bec.

20 It is dealt with in my paper, ‘The Empress Matilda and Bec-Hellouin’, forthcoming in Anglo-Norman Studies, x (1988)Google Scholar.

21 Torigny, Interpolations, ed. Marx, 304–5.

22 Morgan, M., The English Lands of the Abbey of Bec (Oxford, 1946), 31 and passimGoogle Scholar.

23 Her mother, Queen Matilda, had actively furthered the foundation of Merton (Dickinson, J. C., The Origin of the Austin Canons and their Introduction into England (1950), 117Google Scholar; and her chaplain Ernisius, was one of the first religious at Llanthony (Cowley, , Monastic Order, 30Google Scholar) Nostell was founded with the help of Adelulf, chaplain of Henry I, who became the first bishop of Carlisle, King Henry's new bishopric established with a chapter of Augustinian canons. See Brett, M., The English Church under Henry I (Oxford, 1975), 25–6Google Scholar); and for the patronage of Augustinian houses by Matilda's uncle, King David of Scotland, Barrow, G. W. S., The Kingdom of the Scots (1973), 178–84Google Scholar.

24 There is a full account in Stapleton, Thomas, Magni Rotuli Scaccarii Normanniae sub regibus Angliae (2 vols., 1840), i. pp. lxix–lxxGoogle Scholar. For charters see Regesta, iii. nos. 824–6.

25 Regesta, iii. 607; GC xi. App. 133, where it is wrongly dated 1144.

26 The two main documents issued at Worms in 1122 are printed MGH Const. I, nos. 107–8, pp. 159–61. For some assessments of the Concordat see Hofmeister, Adolf, ‘Das Wormser Konkordat: Zum Streit und seine Bedeutung’, Forschungen und Versuche zur Geschichte des Mittelalters und der Neuzeil: Festschrift Dietrich Schäfer (Jena, 1915), 64–148Google Scholar; Benson, R. L., The Bishop-Elect (Princeton, 1968), 228–37Google Scholar; Leyser, Karl, ‘England and the Empire in the early twelfth century’, TRHS, 5th ser. x (1966), 61–83Google Scholar.

27 Benson, , Bishop-Elect, 251–6Google Scholar; Speer, Lothar, Kaiser Lothar III und Erzbischof Adalbert I von Mainz (Cologne, Vienna, 1983), 59–66Google Scholar.

28 See Howell, M. E., Regalian Right in Medieval England (1962), 24–9Google Scholar.

29 Saltman, A., Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury (1956), 95–7Google Scholar; Placita Anglo-Normannica, ed. Bigelow, M. M. (London, 1879), 147Google Scholar; Migne, , PL, clxxx. 1248–9Google Scholar.

30 Florentii Wigorniensis monachi Chronicon ex Chronicis, ed. Thorpe, B. (2 vols. 1849), ii. 131Google Scholar (continuation of John of Worcester).

31 S. Bernardi Opera ed. Leclercq, J., Talbot, C. H., Rochais, H. M. (8 vols. in 9, Rome, 1957–1977), viii. 70 (ep. 211)Google Scholar, ‘antiquus amicus, fidelis servus, devotus filius’; Eugenius, III (Migne PL, clxxx, 1248–9), ep. 199Google Scholar, ‘vir sapiens et honestus et religionis amator’; Henrici Hunt. 316, ‘vir animo magnus’; John of Hexham, who wrongly calls him Henry, I's chancellor, ‘vir bonus’ (Symeonis monachi opera omnia, ed. Arnold, T. (Rolls ser. 1882–1885), ii. 309Google Scholar.

32 Canterbury Professions, ed. Richter, M. (Cant. and York Soc. 1973), 42 (no. 84)Google Scholar.

33 Bernard, , Opera, viii. 70 (ep. 211)Google Scholar.

34 Eugenius, III, ep. 199, 200 (Migne, PL, clxxx, 1248–9)Google Scholar; Jaffé, 9088–9).

35 Sym. mon. i. 143–8 (Continuatio prima). There is a later, shorter account (ibid., 161–7), written probably thirty or forty years later. As Benson, observed (Bishop-Elect, 256 n. 20)Google Scholar, ‘Most of the evidence for investiture with ring and staff after 1133 is questionable’. He merely refers to Davis, R. H. C., King Stephen (1967), 61Google Scholar, for Matilda's threatened investiture with ring and staff of Cumin; and in fact the evidence for this is as questionable as the rest.

36 Although Stephen's capture led to complications over the installation of the bishop of St Asaph's, Matilda had no influence in north Wales (Saltman, , Theobald, 94–5Google Scholar).

37 The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, M. (Oxford Medieval Texts, 1969–1980), vi. 536Google Scholar; Gleason, S. E., An Ecclesiastical Barony of the Middle Ages (Cambridge, Mass., 1936), 27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Saltman, , Theobald, 97–8Google Scholar; Orderic, vi. 536 n. 4; Morey, A. and Brooke, C. N. L., Gilbert Foliot and his Letters (Cambridge, 1965), 55–6Google Scholar.

39 The Letters and Charters of Gilbert Foliot, ed. Morey, A. and Brooke, C. N. L. (Cambridge, 1967), no. 31Google Scholar.

40 Richter, , Canterbury Professions, 43, no. 85Google Scholar.

41 Regesta, iii. nos. 791–4, VCH Wilts., x. 237–8.

42 The Historia Pontificalis of John, of Salisbury, ed. Chibnall, M. (Oxford Medieval Texts, 1986), 47–51Google Scholar; Saltman, , Theobald, 107–10Google Scholar.

43 Cf. Foreville, R., L'Église et la Royauté en Angleterre sous Henri II Plantagenet (Paris, 1943), 11Google Scholar.

44 On the position of Henry I in Normandy see Hollister, C. Warren, ‘Normandy, France and the Anglo-Norman Regnum’, Speculum, li (1976), 202–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 Henrici Hunt., 260; Robert, of Torigny, Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. Howlett, R. (Rolls ser. 4 vols. 1884–1889), iv. 132Google Scholar.

46 Haskins, C. H., Norman Institutions (Harvard Historical Series, xxiv, 1925), 127–35Google Scholar.

47 Orderic, vi. 550–3.

48 For the Lisieux election see The Letters of Arnulf of Lisieux, ed. Barlow, F. (Camden 3rd ser. lxi, 1939), pp. xix–xx, 209Google Scholar; Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, new edn, ed. Delisle, L. (Paris, 1869–1904), xv. 582–5, 603–4Google Scholar. By 1143 Arnulf dated his charters from Geoffrey's reign, not Stephen's.

49 Suger, Abbot was also involved in the negotiations (Recueil des historiens, xv. 520–2)Google Scholar.

50 Letters of Arnulf, 7 (no. 4).

51 Letters of Arnulf, p. xxxii and passim.

52 Letters of Arnulf, 4–5 (no. 3), 21–2 (no. 16).

53 Gleber, H., Papst Eugen III (Jena, 1936), 71Google Scholar.

54 See Böhmer, H., Kirche und Staat in England und in der Normandie im XI und XII Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1899), 310–25Google Scholar.

35 Haskins, , Norman Institutions, 135Google Scholar.

56 Reilly, Bernard F., The Kingdom of León-Castilla under Queen Urraca 1109–1126 (Princeton, 1982), 364Google Scholar.

57 The dates of proceedings in the papal court have been the subject of much debate; see the recent assessment by Constable, Giles, The Letters of Peter the Venerable (2 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 1967), ii. 252–6Google Scholar. The events at the Lateran Council are described by Gilbert Foliot in a letter to Count, Brian fitz (Letters of Gilbert, 65–6)Google Scholar, and by John, of Salisbury, Historia Pontificalis, 83–5Google Scholar, discussed by Chibnall, M., ‘John of Salisbury as historian’, The World of John of Salisbury, ed. Wilks, M. (Studies in Church History, Subsidia 3, 1984), 172–4Google Scholar.

58 Both Lambert, cardinal-bishop of Ostia (later Pope Honorius II), and Gregory, cardinal-deacon of S. Angelo (later Pope Innocent II), had been legates in Germany in 1122 (von Knonau, G. Meyer, Jahrbücher des Deutschen Reiches unter Heinrich IV und Heinrich V (7 vols., Leipzig, 1890–1909), vii. 199–206Google Scholar.

59 Historia Pontificalis, 85–6.

60 Gleber, , Papst Eugen III, 71, 96–7Google Scholar.

61 For the York election see Knowles, David, The Historian and Character (Cambridge, 1963), 76–97Google Scholar; Gleber, , Papst Eugen III, 163–4Google Scholar. St Bernard's attitude is discussed by Holdsworth, Christopher, ‘St Bernard and England’, Anglo-Norman Studies, viii (1986 for 1985), ed. Brown, R. Allen, 149–52Google Scholar.

62 StBernard, , Opera, viii. 291–3 (ep. 348)Google Scholar.

63 StBernard, , Opera, viii. 480–1 (ep. 520)Google Scholar; Holdsworth, , ‘St Bernard and England’, 149Google Scholar.

64 Pattison, R. B., Earldom of Gloucester Charters (Oxford, 1973), no. 119Google Scholar.

65 Letters of Gilbert Foliot, 98 (no. 63), App. III, 507–9. The editors suggest that the monks of Cerne probably enlisted the help of Nivard, who was abbot of Clairvaux, on their way back from the papal curia; but since he visited England at the time of the dispute it is more likely that the meeting took place on his way to or from Margam.

66 Historia Pontificalis, 83; Gleber, , Papst Eugen III, 163–5Google Scholar.

67 Regesta, iii. 97–9, no. 272.

68 Eyton, R. W., Court, Household and Itinerary of King Henry II (1878), 78Google Scholar; Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, ed. Robertson, J. C. et al. (7 vols. Rolls ser. 1875–1885), vi. 80Google Scholar.

69 Materials, v. 194–5.

70 Schnith, Karl, Journal of Medieval History, ii (1976), 135–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71 Torigny, Interpolations, ed. Marx, 280–1.

72 Anonymi Chronica Imperatorum ed. Schmale, , 262Google Scholar; Florentii Wigorn., ii. 67.

73 von Knonau, Meyer, Jahrbücher, vii. 30–3Google Scholar; Hefele, C. J., Histoire des Canciles, ed. Leclercq, H. (Paris, 1907 ff.), v (i), 553–62Google Scholar.

74 Schnith, , Journ. Med. Hist., 148Google Scholar: idem.‘Domina Anglorum, Zur Bedeutungstreite eines hochmittelalterlichen Herrscherinentitels’, Festschrift für Peter Achl (Münchener Historische Studien, Abt. Geschicht. Hilfswissenschaften 15, 1972), 101–11Google Scholar. Benson, R. L., ‘Political Renovatio: Two models from Roman Antiquity’, Renaissance and Renewal in the twelfth century, ed. Benson, R. L. and Constable, Giles (Cambridge, Mass., 1982), 373Google Scholar. I shall discuss Matilda's title more fully in my forthcoming book on the Empress Matilda.

75 Torigny, Interpolations, ed. Marx, 304–5; the Worcester chronicler wrote that she was crowned empress in 1114 (‘et in imperatricem est coronatus’, Florentii Wigorn, ii. 67). In Germany the Annales Patherbrunnenses, ed. Scheffer-Boichorst, P. (Innsbruck, 1870), 334Google Scholar, gave her the title of empress, ‘Godeboldus Traectensis episcopus gratiam imperatoris per interventum imperatricis … obtinet’.

76 Reilly, , Urraca, 334Google Scholar.

77 Schnith, , Journ. Med. Hist., 149Google Scholar; Regesta, iii. no. 343, a charter for Glastonbury, c. 3 March 1141 (a cartulary copy, so even here the title may not be authentic). The title regina is also used in no. 699, but the authenticity of the charter is doubtful. According to Ashmole the legend on the seal (now lost) of her first charter to Geoffrey de Mandeville was ‘REGINA ANGLIÆ’ (Regesta, iii. no. 274).

78 Schnith, , Journ. Med. Hist., 148Google Scholar; Regesta, iii. no. 270.

79 Stubbs, W., The Constitutional History of England (3rd edn, 3 vols., 1880–1884), i. 339–40Google Scholar.

80 Materials, v. 410. Thomas replied (ibid., v. 516–17) that if the Empress had raised any objections they had never been made public.

81 Hausmann, F., Reichskanzlei und Hofkapelle unter Heinrich V und Konrad III (Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Stuttgart, 1956), 25–35Google Scholar.

82 Barlow, F., Thomas Becket (1986), 44–5Google Scholar.

83 Materials, v. 201; The Letters of John of Salisbury, ii, ed. Miller, W. J. and Brooke, C. N. L. (Oxford Medieval Texts, 1979), pp. xxvii, xxx, nos. 144, 157, 179Google Scholar.

84 Materials, vi. 128–9.

85 Barlow, , Becket, 127Google Scholar.

86 Barlow, , Becket, 161Google Scholar.

87 Materials, v. 148–50.

88 Haskins, , Norman Institutions, 30–8Google Scholar; Orderic, iii. 25–35.

89 Delisle, L., Introduction, Recueil des Actes de Henri II, roi d'Angleterre et duc de Normandie (Chartes et Diplómes relatifs à l'Histoire de France, 1909), 139Google Scholar.