Advertisement

The Relationship Between William the Conqueror and Abbot William of Saint-Florent of Saumur

  • George Beech
Part of the The New Middle Ages book series (TNMA)

Abstract

Though the Historia Sancti Florentii (HSF) provides convincing evidence for the importance of this Loire valley abbey as a center for ornamental cloth production in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, it does not so much as hint at a Norman patron having commissioned the Bayeux Tapestry there in the 1070s and 1080s. (For a possible reservation about this assertion see appendix B: Could Queen Mathilda have commissioned the Bayeux Tapestry? p. 109.) The case for this having happened rests on circumstantial evidence of other kinds and to this the argument now turns.The first of these was the personal relationship which existed between the abbot of Saint-Florent and the royal couple William and Mathilda in the years after the Conquest, a relationship centering on their mutual long-term interests and leading to the bestowal of gifts and compensations which conceivably included the Bayeux Tapestry.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 20.
    H. Guillotel, “Des vicomtes d’Alet aux vicomtes de Poudouvre,” Société d’histoire et d’archéologie de l’arrondissement de Saint-Malo (1988), 210–15; “Combour: proto-histoire d’une seigneurie et mis en oeuvre de la réforme grégorienne,” Family Trees and the Roots of Politics. The Prosopography of Brittany and France from the Tenth to the Twelfth Centuries, ed. K. Keats-Rohan (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 1997), 269–98.Google Scholar
  2. 21.
    Fr. Duine, La métropole de Bretagne. Chronique de Dol composée au Xle siècle et catalogue des dignitaires (jusqu’à la revolution) (Paris: H. Champion, 1916), 85.Google Scholar
  3. 22.
    J.-P. Leguay,”Une ville épiscopale: Dol des origines au XVIe siècle,”Mémoires de la Société d’histoire et d’archéologie de Bretagne LXXIX (2001), 1–73.Google Scholar
  4. 25.
    Cartulaire de Saint-Michel de V’abbayetteprieuré de l’abbaye du Mont-Saint-Michel (997–1421), éd. B. de Broussillon (Paris: Picard, 1894), no. 5, 15–16.Google Scholar
  5. 27.
    P. Gallion and M. Jones, The Bretons (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 177; G. Devailly, “Les dépendances bretonnes des abbayes normandes (Xe–XIIIe siècles),” Aspects du monachisme en Normandie (IVe–XVIIIe siècle), Actes du colloque scientifique de l’année des abbayes normandes, Caen October 18–20,1979, ed. L. Musset (Paris: J.Vrin, 1982), 115–24.Google Scholar
  6. 31.
    O. Guillot, Le comte d’Anjou et son entourage au Xle siècle (Paris, 1972), I, 181–93; “A Reform of Investiture before the Investiture Struggle in Anjou, Normandy, and England,” The Haskins Society Journal 3 (1991), 81–100; Guillotel, “Combour,” 290–93.Google Scholar
  7. 34.
    D. Bates, Normandy before 1066 (New York: Longman, 1982), 65–80.Google Scholar
  8. 35.
    C. Potts, Monastic Revival and Regional Identity in Early Normandy (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 1997).Google Scholar
  9. 39.
    A. Chédeville and Y. Tonnerre, La Bretagne féodale XI–XIIIe siècles (Rennes: Ouest France, 1987), 43–45; M. de Bouard, Guillaume le Conquérant (Paris: Fayard, 1984), 224–45; A. de la Borderie, Histoire de Bretagne (Rennes: J. Plihon, L. Hervé, 1896–1914), III, 14–16.Google Scholar
  10. 42.
    H. Guillotel,”Une famille bretonne au service du Conquérant: les Baderon,” Droit privé et institutions régionales. Études offertes à Jean Yver (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1976), 363–67; Keats-Rohan, “William I and the Breton Contingent,” 164–66.Google Scholar
  11. 43.
    H. Guillotel, “Bretagne et la papauté au Xle siècle,” L’église de France et la papauté (Xe–XIIIe siècle), ed. R. Grosse (Bonn: Bouvier, 1993), 265–86 at 276–77; P. de Fougerolles,”Pope Gregory VII, the Archbishopric of Dol, and the Normans,” Anglo-Norman Studies XXI (1999), 47–66.Google Scholar
  12. 44.
    D. C. Douglas, William the Conqueror. The Norman Impact on England (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964), 231–35; Keats-Rohan, “William I and the Breton Contingent,” 167–68.Google Scholar
  13. 46.
    A larger number of French monasteries also received benefactions in the form of lands, revenues and the like. D. Matthew, Norman Monasteries and Their English Possessions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), 13–14.Google Scholar
  14. 47.
    L. Guilloreau, “Les possessions des abbayes mancelles et angevines en Angleterre d’après le Domesday Book,” Revue archéologique et historique du Maine 54–60 (1906), 6–23.Google Scholar
  15. 48.
    Marmoutiers of Tours had thirteen English priories. M. Chibnall, “Monastic Foundations in England and Normandy 1066–1189,” England and Normandy in the Middle Ages, ed. D. Bates and A. Curry (London: Hambledon Press, 1994), 37–50 at 41.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© George Beech 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Beech

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations