Queen’s Gold and Intercession - The Case of Eleanor of Aquitaine

7/23/2019 Queens Gold and Intercession - The Case of Eleanor of Aquitaine

1/24

I

MFF, vol. 46 no. , 010: 1033

http://ir.uiowa.edu/m/vol46/iss2/

Queens Gold and Intercession:The Case of Eleanor of Aquitaine

Kristen Geaman

7, Philippa of Hainault threw herself at the feet of her husband

Edward III pleading for the lives of the burghers of Calais. The

English had just conquered the city, and the king demanded thedeaths of several prominent citizens in retribution for the citys obstinateresistance. Impervious to the entreaties of his councilors to be merciful to

the condemned men, the king could only be moved by Philippas pleas;her direct intercession saved the burghers lives. Or so the chroniclersFroissart and Jean le Bel recorded. Whether Philippa actually intercededso dramatically on behalf of the burghers is immaterial, for the account

still powerfully illustrates the importance of intercession in the construc-tion of queenship. Even if Philippa did not behave in that exact way, shewas supposed to behave that way, and chroniclers did not have a diculttime believing that she would.1

Historians of queenship continue to debate the nature of queenshipin the central Middle Ages. An older narrative, heavily inuenced by thework of Jo Ann McNamara and Suzanne Wemple, contended that queens

were slowly pushed out of royal governance by the growth of bureaucratickingship.2Marion Facingers scholarship is a classic example. She arguedthat Capetian queens lost their ocial, public status (based on theirdeclining appearances in charters) and were reduced to private individuals

Authors note: I would like to thank my advisor, Judith M. Bennett, for herassistance and helpful remarks on earlier dras of this paper. I also want to

thank the anonymous reviewer of Medieval Feminist Forumfor her insightfulcomments. Finally, I greatly appreciate the nancial assistance I have receivedom the USC Provosts Fellowship Program and the Roberta PersingerFoulke Graduate Research Fellowship.


2/24

MFF, geamanhttp://ir.uiowa.edu/m/vol46/iss2/

able to exert inuence only through their personal relationships withtheir husbands.3Facinger prioritized the queen as the kings wife, whichMiriam Shadis has argued was only part of the story. Queenship was also

a type of motherhood which allowed queens such as Blanche of Cas-

tile to exert public power. Shadis does not completely reject Facingerswork though; she agrees that medieval queens made fewer appearancesin French royal charters, yet calls for Facingers work to be reconsideredand revised in order to account for queenship as motherhood and toinclude the study of rituals.4Other scholars dispute, rather than revise,the claim of decline, with some arguments claiming queenship simplyunderwent an alteration in form and style (but not power) and others

maintaining that queenship was necessary to complement and completeeective kingship.5While debate abounds, scholars who have focused onintercession usually depict the central Middle Ages as a time of decreas-ing formal powers for queens.6For these scholars, intercession tookon an increasingly prominent role, remaining an acceptable avenue ofqueenly inuence because it stressed the feminine roles of mother andwife.7Intercession was expected of queens, particularly since it played

a variety of useful roles for the king. Intercession not only armed thegender hierarchy, it also allowed men to change their minds withoutappearing weak. In addition, female intercession could supply a malelack by exempliing mercy in the face of a kings stern justice.8Whileintercession thus gave queens an acceptable avenue of power, it alsopromoted kings power by emphasizing their masculine strength thatcould only be mitigated by womanly pleas.

Scholars studying the symbolism and power dynamics of intercessionhave emphasized its role as an act of informal power that still permittedthe queen a small, but usually accepted, voice in government.9They have

regarded intercession as a private and informal type of power, one thatqueens developed as they were excluded om the kings public authority.

In England, though, intercession was also public and formal due to itsconnection with queens gold. Queens gold was a ten percent surcharge

that the exchequer levied and collected on all voluntary nes made tothe king. Since the exchequer was involved, queens gold was every bitas public and formal as nes to the king, and both kinds of nes wereimportant sources of revenue for the crown. Just as intercession allowed


3/24


the queen to supply a male lack, queens gold permitted the king tosupply a female lack. The queen did not have access to wealth beyondwhat her husband oered her; by setting up a surcharge on nes theking remedied the queens lack, just as she did for him during interces-

sion. Scholars have investigated the scal and administrative aspects ofqueens gold but never its connection with intercession.10Among otherthings, the link between the two might explain the confusing originsof queens gold.

This essay will consider basic questions about queens gold and inter-cession. First it will address the mechanics of the levy and collectionof queens gold, beginning with fundamentals such as the nature of

the levy and who paid. An investigation into the origins of queensgold will follow. The experiences of Eleanor of Aquitaine and three ofher successors will then be used to elucidate the connection betweenqueens gold and intercession. This paper focuses mainly on Eleanor of

Aquitaine (queen , died ), wife of Henry II (r. )and mother of Richard I (r. ) and John (r. ), althoughthe experiences of her successors will also be referenced. These succes-

sors are: Isabella of Angoulme (queen , died ), secondwife of John; Eleanor of Provence (queen , died ), wifeof Henry III (r. ); and Eleanor of Castile (married , died), rst wife of Edward I (r. ).11

The Nature of Queens Gold:

What It Was, Who Paid It, and an Explanation of FinesAccording to the Dialogus de Scaccario, written by Richard Fitz Nigel

during the reign of Henry II, those who owed voluntary nes (or reliefson inheritance) to the king were also obligated to pay a ne to thequeen, which was called queens gold (Fig ). This ne was automaticbecause debtors had to pay even if their obligation to the queen was notmentioned at the time of contracting the ne.12For queens gold, the

amount due was one mark of gold for every one hundred marks of silverowed to the king. One mark of gold equaled ten marks of silver, mean-ing that queens gold was a ten percent levy.13Even if the king remittedhis ne, queens gold was still owed unless the queen also pardoned her


4/24


ne. When Fitz Nigel wrote, the clerks of the exchequer were unclearif nes of less than one hundred marks also owed queens gold, and FitzNigel suggested that an ounce of gold might be due for a mere ten-mark ne.14Although Fitz Nigel never provided the verdict, the issuewas resolved in a manner favorable to the queen. From the beginning of

Johns reign, the Rotuli de Oblatis et Finibus in Turri Londinensi, a rollrecording nes paid to the king, indicates that clerks collected queensgold on nes even lower than ten marks. In addition, the clerks tendedto list the amount of queens gold due as a straightforward ten percentof the payment to the king.15A few examples om theRotuli de Oblatisillustrate the collection of lesser nes and the use of silver as payment.

Notations such as four marks or gold and two marks or gold appear,as does another entry, om Staordshire, reading ten shillings or gold.The entries indicate that debtors owed payment on nes for forty marks,

twenty marks, and ve pounds respectively.16The Staordshire entrysuggests that collection of queens gold had expanded to nes well belowthe level that Fitz Nigel had suggested.17

Nowhere did Fitz Nigel speci the categories of people who had to

pay queens gold. It would seem that anyone who paid a voluntary neto the king was also indebted to the queen, although the nature of thenes suggests that most people who paid them were members of thelanded elite. The tenants-in-chief certainly paid these nes and perhapslesser landholders as well; however, Georey de Luvers managed tohave his queens gold excused because he did not hold his land directlyom the king.18Aside om the secular elites, burgesses and clerics also

paid. The Rotuli de Oblatisrecords nes of queens gold for the citizensof Lincoln, Oxford, London, and Worcester, among others, oen duefor charters conrming each citys liberties.19Clerics such as the abbotof Dore and the abbot and canons of Cirencester paid queens gold aswell in counction with grants or conrmations of land.20Women alsoowed queens gold, as evidenced by Hawise de Curten, who repeatedlydelayed paying, thus earning herself an entry in the pipe rolls (royal audit

accounts made annually at the exchequer) year aer year.21The variety ofpeople paying queens gold indicates that the type of ne mattered morethan the circumstances of the individual paying. Hawise de Curten andthe abbot of Cirencester paid for essentially the same reason, for the king


5/24


had favored both with conrmation of their land. Fitz Nigel thus had areason not to speci who paid queens gold: anyone who entered into avoluntary ne had to pay. It was the ne that mattered, not the payee.

Petitioners paid queens gold on voluntary nes, which fell into threebroad categories: those for grants and conrmations of liberties, those forlegal proceedings, and those for miscellaneous favors. The rst categoryoen included grants conrming the liberties of cities or of landowners or

to gain or maintain title to land. The second category consisted of a varietyof nes to obtain justice, such as nes to receive a favorable settlement;obtain, expedite, or delay writs and pleas; and nes due on recovered debts.

The nal category was a bit of a catchall, including nes for marriage,

seisin, acquittal, licenses, oce holding, the kings favor, the kings aidand protection, and the kings mediation.22As can be seen, voluntary nes(also called oblations) were a broad category, liberally interpreted, whichgave the queen the potential to raise a good deal of money.

Equally important, though, were the sources of royal income forwhich queens did not receive gold. On subsidies (rather like taxes) suchas tenths, eenths, and twentieths, queens could not levy gold (not that

they did not try).23These aids were usually approved by the magnatesor the clergy, and the money was generally for a campaign (secular or acrusade). The king would propose the aid, and the magnates or bishops,or both depending on om whom the money was sought, would grantor reject the tax. Later, parliaments granted taxation, and they too might

explicitly prevent the queen om collecting queens gold. For instance,in and 7, when Parliament granted ninths and a eenth respec-

tively, both statutes stated that the money was not subject to queensgold.24This type of payment appears to be a favor to the king, rather thanthe monarch granting a favor to a subject. Since those paying the tenthsdid not seek a specic favor om the king in return for their money, thequeens intercession was of little use. Her pleadings could not persuadethe king to grant the petitioners request or make the transaction morefavorable to the payee because the king had technically petitioned for

the aid. Without the need for intercession, the queen had no role to playin the granting of subsidies; her lack of symbolic involvement justiedthe decision of the peers (and later the Crown itself ) to prevent queensom collecting gold on tenths, eenths, and twentieths.25


6/24


Fitz Nigel presented queens gold as an automatic ne that the queencontrolled, but evidence suggests that the queen consort did not alwaysdirectly control this resource. The right to collect it, however, was notquestioned. When debtors wished to avoid payment of queens gold,they generally claimed their ne was not voluntary (and thus not subjectto queens gold) rather than criticizing the system.26Queens gold wasthus an accepted levy on nes in which the queen could intervene orinuence the kings decision, but was resented if applied to any othersource of income. Apparently, the queen needed to actually, or at leasthave the ability to, inuence the decisions to which her gold was tied.Otherwise, clerics and laity alike protested the queens rapaciousness.

The Precursor to Queens Gold

The roots of queens gold were in the Anglo-Saxon period when elitespaid the queen for her advocacy, which consisted of formal intercessionin legal matters in the kings court. lhryth, wife of Edgar (7),received payments of coin and moveables for her advocacy, a stark con-

trast with the land men usually received as advocacy payments. Theabbot of Ramsey gave her ve marks for advocating on his monastery sbehalf, while litigants in a land dispute bequeathed the queen an arm-let of thirty mancuses of gold and, a stallion, for her advocacy that thewill might stand.27Bishop thelwold of Winchester also paid thequeen mancuses of gold for her help securing the eedom of somechurch properties; in exchange for this favor, the bishop also gave King

Edgar four times as muchtwo hundred mancuses and a silver cup.28thelwolds payments were similar to nes in post-Conquest England

when many abbots and magnates paid the king to secure conrmationof their estates and rights pertaining thereto (such as the eedom tohold fairs). Although lhryths receipt of thelwolds gis (andother such oerings) suggests that her payment was the result of directintercession, it reveals that even before queens could expect that

their intercession would be rewarded with gis and gold.29Edith, wife of Edward the Confessor, also received payment for her

advocacy, again less than her husband. In return for a land transaction onbehalf of St. Marys in Evesham, Edith received one mancus of gold to


7/24


the kings six.30In this instance, Edith received a payment of somewhatless than lhryth received om Bishop thelwold (seventeen percentvs. twenty-ve percent). Despite this disparity these cases suggest thatadvocacy payments oen exceeded the later rate of ten percent of the

ne paid to the king. Aer , if not before, though, the rate appearsto have standardized at ten percent. Lois Huneycutt, in her biographyof Matilda of Scotland, has identied an instance in which queens goldwas oered, but seemingly not paid. According to the chronicler Hughthe Chanter, the bishop of Durham oered Henry I one thousand marksof silver and Matilda one hundred to obtain a favorable resolution tothe Canterbury-York primacy issue (which was concerned with whether

York owed allegiance to Canterbury). Even more pertinent, the bishopoered Matilda the money to encourage her to use her inuence withthe kingin essence, to intercede for him.31These examples show thatpaying the queen for her services was not unheard of before the reignof Henry II, thus indicating that Eleanor of Aquitaine was probablynot the rst queen to receive payments of gold that were related to herintercession.32However, there is no evidence that these earlier queens

had a right to queens gold.33The Anglo-Saxon payments for interces-sion suggest the possibility, but it is not until Fitz Nigels Dialoguethatwe have rm evidence of xed concessions.

Domesday Book also sheds some light on the precursor of queensgold. One entry, om Herefordshire, relates specically to conditionsbefore . The reeve of the manor of Eardisland, previously held byEarl Morcar, would give his lady, when she came to the manor, eigh-

teen oras of pence to make her of happy mind (ipsa laeto animo).34Although this payment was to a noblewoman and not to the queen, it

suggests a widespread association of womanly favors with monetarypayment. Presumably, the reeve would want his lady (and DomesdayBook includes the word sua, emphasizing the relationship between thetwo people) to be happy so that he could win her favor. Because of hersuperior status and connection to his lord, the lady could be a powerful

ally for the reeve, interceding with her husband on his behalf or otherwisefavoring his endeavors. The behavior of the reeve of Eardisland not onlysuggests that queens gold had a link with intercession but also that thislink held true lower down the social scale.


8/24


Other manors oered payments specically to the queen. In War-wickshire the revenue of the royal manors and county pleas paid shillings yearly in nes to the queen.35The reason for these nes wasnot specied, but they might also have served to support the queen and

obtain her favor. This payment to the queen appears to have originatedaer the Norman Conquest. The dues paid by the county, boroughs,and manors of Warwick before make no mention of gis to thequeen, focusing instead on the money and honey paid to the king. Aer, the entry contains no mention of honey (or the involvement ofthe borough) but does provide money to the queen. The queens due,however, was only . percent, for she was to receive a mere shil-

lings (equivalent to ) to the kings .36Despite the rather smallsize of her payment in relation to the kings portion, having her moneypaid in counction with the kings bears a similarity to queens gold,especially since it was a ne, just as queens gold was. This suggests thatthe money was used to obtain favor or thank the queen for her (nowhidden) action, particularly since some of it came om the court, ratherthan simply being om land.37

Queens gold likely represents an expansion and codication of theearlier practice of compensating the queen for her advocacy and interces-sion. In this sense, queens gold might have developed om customarygi-giving and counter-giving, exchanges that created or articulatedbonds between giver and receiver. Queenly advocacy was a sort of giwhich not only created an alliance between the queen and whomevershe helped, but also emphasized the queens greater power. In return

for their advocacy, Anglo-Saxon queens received counter gis, fulllingthe exchange.38Even before Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Dialogue of theExchequerthere was a clear connection between queenly intercessionand payment.

The Case of Eleanor of Aquitaine

Generally, only the queen consort could claim queens gold because itwas her due while she was married and under coverture.39Once widowed,dowager queens right to queens gold ended save only for the collectingof debts still owed to them om before the death of their husbands.40


9/24


Eleanor of Provence, wife of Henry III (a grandson of Eleanor of Aqui-taine), did not receive any queens gold for nes contracted with her son,Edward I.41Instead, Eleanor of Castile, Edwards wife and the new queen

consort, received the money. This was also the case in the later Tudor

period, when queens gold was suspended during the reign of EdwardVI. Queens gold was not collected during this reign because there wasno queen consort, Edward VI dying before he married.42KatherineParr, the nal queen of Henry VIII, did survive, for a short time, intoEdwards reign, but queens gold was not part of her dower. She mighthave collected arrears, but no new nes were levied.

Eleanor of Aquitaine was the rst post-Conquest queen who clearly

received queens gold. In the third year of the reign of her husbandHenry II, the Pipe Roll records Telarius of Oxford as owing one markof queens gold on a ne of six pounds, which is roughly ten percent.43

Around Richard de Anesty, a nobleman, also gave the queen onemark of gold, while presenting Henry with one hundred silver marks.This transaction shows queens gold in operation at the exact ratio (onemark gold to one hundred marks silver) specied in the Dialogue of the

Exchequer. The dry accounts do not explain why Anesty oered a markof gold to Eleanor, but they do reveal that he also paid all the men whohad petitioned and interceded for him.44Anestys gi to Henry was astraightforward payment for recognition of his seisin, but his other gisrecognized something elsethat Eleanor and others had helped himto secure that recognition.

Those are the only extant examples of Eleanor receiving queens

gold during Henrys reign. According to Fitz Nigels Dialogue of theExchequer, she was supposed to receive this money on every voluntaryne, so scholars couldassume that she did. Such an assumption cannotbe conrmed, however, namely because of Fitz Nigels evident confu-sion in composing the Dialogue. The Dialoguewas likely written in twoparts, one circa and another ten years later. H. G. Richardson hassuggested that the section on queens gold was a later addition written

aer a period of non-collection. A gap in the collection of queens goldcould help explain Fitz Nigels uncertainty whether nes of fewer thanone hundred marks also owed queens gold.45Fitz Nigels confusion over

what nes to assess with the charge suggests, however, that queens gold


10/24


was not completely codied by the latter part of Henrys reign.Fitz Nigels uncertainty might indicate that the section on queens

gold was written aer the resumption of payments. In Eleanor wasimprisoned, a punishment for her role in her sons rebellion. During

her captivity, Henry II might have suspended the collection of queensgold or taken the money for himself. If the king permitted Eleanor toregain her resources aer this interlude (perhaps in the mid-s, whenshe had more eedom), Fitz Nigel could have been unclear about all ofthe details of the process.46Although the entire argument is based onthe uncertain dating of the Dialogue, it is a plausible suggestion. In herdisgrace, Eleanor would have had few opportunities to intercede with

Henry, and he would have had little reason to give formal recognitionto her power.

The possibility that Eleanor of Aquitaine lost her queens gold whilein connement is especially plausible given the later experience of Elea-nor of Provence, wife of Henry III. In she briey lost control overher queens gold when she irritated her husband. Eleanor, apparentlyoverstepping her rights, had presented a candidate to the living of Flam-

stead in Hertfordshire. Angered by this action, Henry seized for a fewweeks all revenues om both Eleanors queens gold and the lands sheheld in custody.47While Eleanor was deprived for only a short time,the lesson was a sharp one: Henry had powerfully reminded her of herdependence on him.48As his action suggests, queens gold was not aright but a gi of a king contented with his wife. Just as intercessionwas subject to the ups and downs of the relationship between king and

queen, so was queens gold. If the queen displeased the king, she wasunable to obtain her gold.

While Eleanor of Aquitaine might have lost her right to queensgold for part of Henrys reign, she received it during the reign of herson Richard I, despite being the queen dowager. This was unusualbecause subsequent queens only received queens gold as wives. Eleanorof Aquitaines atypical collection helps illustrate the connection between

queens gold and intercession: Eleanor received the gold because she wasthe intercessory female during Richards reign.

The pipe rolls for Richards reign are not helpful, but a chronicle omthe Abbey of Bury St Edmunds provides clear evidence that Eleanor was


11/24


receiving new levies of queens gold during Richards reign. In , theabbot of the monastery wanted to purchase the manor of Mildenhall,Suolk, for which King Richard desired one thousand marks. This

demand is followed by the comment that when Queen Eleanor was owed

one hundred marks, according to the custom of the kingdom, when theking received one thousand, she magnanimously accepted a golden cup,

worth one hundred marks, instead of cash.49Since the amount due wasexactly ten percent of the kings ne and a gold cup was substituted forgold coins, the custom to which the chronicle refers must be queensgold. Nowhere is it suggested that the abbot had initially asked HenryII for this favor before the old kings death, so this was not an unpaid

debt le over om Eleanors days as a wife. It was, instead, a new levyof queens gold om a ne due to her son.

That ne was probably not the only one. Eleanor clearly had a decentamount of revenue to receive, as she had a clerk appointed by AbbotWalter of Waltham to collect, along with her other clerks, her gold atthe exchequer. The charter recording this transaction indicates that theappointment was om Richards coronation in September 1189 until

Christmas . The charter does not specically mention queens gold,instead referring to what was collected as our [Eleanors] gold (aurumnostrum).50Presumably the reference to gold would indicate queensgold, although the charter still does not reveal whether Eleanor wasreceiving new payments or collecting arrears. It could take years to settleoutstanding debts, as an entry om the pipe rolls illustrates. In ,the exchequer demanded payment om Jurnet, a Jew of Norwich, for

queens gold he owed Eleanor of Aquitaine. Jurnet, however, produceda charter om Eleanor stating that he had paid his debt, which datedom the reign of Henry II, around .51Apparently, late payment wascommon, meaning Eleanor might have had many arrears. Given theevidence om Bury St Edmunds, though, Eleanor was also receivingnew payments.

But why did Eleanor receive this money? H. G. Richardson and

Nicholas Vincent have suggested that queens gold was a part of Elea-nors widows dower.52Unfortunately, references to Eleanors dower failto provide substantive details. According to two dierent chroniclers,Richard conrmed the widows dower Henry II had granted Eleanor,


12/24


which was the same dower granted to the rst wife of Henry I andStephens queen.53Both of these queens died before their husbandsthough, so their dowries were never activated and cannot be traced. Inlater centuries, queens ceased to receive new levies of queens gold in

their widowhood, so we have no evidence om either her predecessorsor successors to suggest that Eleanor received queens gold because itwas part of her dower.

It is likely that the Abbey of Bury St. Edmunds payment to Eleanorwas related not to dower but to her inuence with Richard. In 1189,Richard was unmarried, at the beginning of his reign, and still on thecontinent. Eleanor exerted a great deal of inuence over her son and his

new realm, so it would have been natural for her to play an intercessoryrole. Even aer Richard married Berengaria of Navarre in the situ-ation changed little. Berengaria never visited England, while Eleanorspower and inuence waxed strong. Although Eleanor was never ociallymade regent, she exercised viceroy-like powers early in the reign andgenerally strove to uphold Richards interests.54Berengaria never receivedany money om queens gold, so presumably the money was going to

Eleanor, who continued to fulll queenly duties, even reconciling Rich-ard to his brother John.55Eleanor was the primary intercessor, morevisible and more powerful than Berengaria. Therefore, Eleanor likelyreceived queens gold because she was the one who was interceding withthe king, the role to which queens gold was linked. Since Eleanor wasthe intercessor, she kept the rewards.

Eleanor might even have continued to receive queens gold during the

reign of her younger son, John. The notes in the margins of the Rotulide Oblatisindicate that clerks collected queens gold om the beginningof the reign, in , a year before John married Isabella of Angoulme.Who was receiving this gold? The obvious answer is Johns mother,Eleanor of Aquitaine. Even aer Isabella was on the scene, Eleanormight have continued to receive queens gold until her death in .The evidence is unclear, but the collection of queens gold changed

dramatically in . On November of that year, John informed thebarons of the exchequer that the payment of queens gold was returningto the exchequer, to be accounted for in the same way as other debts.Furthermore, John appointed a keeper for the queens gold, Alexander


13/24


de Refham, described as his faithful servant ordelis.56How the goldwas accounted for before is not specied, but notes in the margin ofthe Rotuli de Oblatissuggest that queens gold might have been paid atthe Chancery earlier in Johns reign. It seems telling that this move to

separate accounting of queens gold occurred shortly aer the birth ofJohn and Isabellas rst child, the future Henry III. This action might

have been a reward or acknowledgement of Isabellas fecundity, since, byseparating queens gold om other income, Isabella was gaining her own

source of revenue. Perhaps John was rewarding his wife, acknowledgingher importance as the mother of his heir, by granting her more nan-cial independence.57Whatever happened, it is clear that the situation

changed for Isabella aer she had given birth to a male heir.During these last years of her life, Eleanor might have been seen by

petitioners as the more natural intercessor with her youngest son. Otherqueen mothers were also inuential intercessors, and the clearest examplecomes om later in the thirteenth century, as studied by John CarmiParsons. Eleanor of Castile, queen of Edward I om 7 until her death

in , was not a prominent intercessor during the early part of her

husbands reign. In fact, Edwards mother, Eleanor of Provence, was farmore active as an intercessor than her daughter-in-law, suggesting thatperhaps she was seen as a more natural intercessor. In addition, Eleanorof Castile had a rather negative image (she was seen as harsh and greedyand blamed for Edwards severity) making Eleanor of Provence seemlike a gentler, more eective petitioner.58A similar dynamic could haveoccurred seventy years earlier, especially since Eleanor of Aquitaine had

been so visible in Richards reign.Eleanor of Aquitaines experience with queens gold belies the idea

that the levy was only for queen consorts. Wives could lose it, as HenryIIs probable denial of queens gold and Henry IIIs clear denial show,and mothers could gain it, as Richards grant of it shows. The king hadan important role to play, for queens gold was seemingly in his gi. Ifthe king wanted to deny his wife the revenue (as Henry II, Henry III,

and Richard did), he could do so. By granting the revenues to his motherinstead of his wife, Richards action illustrates the link between queensgold and kingly prerogatives. Granting the money to the more powerfulqueen shows that queens gold was not just a nancial expedient but a


14/24


symbol of the queens inuence over the reigning king, whether he washer husband or son.

Epilogue:The Cases of Eleanor of Provence and Eleanor of Castile

Despite the practices of Richards reign, collecting queens gold when theking was unmarried was not always deemed acceptable. On December

, the year Henry III and Eleanor of Provence married, Henry par-doned the queens gold owed by John de Balun. The reason: de Balunhad contracted the ne before Henry had married Eleanor; thus no

queens gold was due.59While it initially seems inherently obvious thatno queens gold should be due when England lacked a queen consort, lessthan forty years before Eleanor of Aquitaine had collected queens gold asa queen dowager. Furthermore, Henrys mother, Isabella, was still alive,albeit not living in England. Perhaps Isabellas residence in Angoulmehelped de Balun argue his case for a reprieve, for her extended absencehighlighted Englands lack of a woman who could perform queenly

duties of which intercession was one. Although intercession was notinherently feminine, the submissive nature of the act made it a suitable,even expected, role for women (especially wives) to fulll.60Without aproper intercessor present, de Balun might have felt he was paying for aservice that was not provided. The potential connection with intercessory

services is especially prominent because Henry excused the ne aerhis marriage at a time when he had a queen who probably would have

appreciated the income. Since Eleanor of Provence had done nothing toearn the ne (however nominal her actions might technically be), shewas not to receive any payment. Clearly, the queens inuence at thetime of the transaction mattered.

Aer the Lord Edward (the future Edward I) married Eleanor ofCastile in 1, provision needed to be made for two royal consorts.This resulted in a division of queens gold. Just before the marriage,

Henry III granted his son a substantial apanage, or landed settlement,which included both Gascony and Ireland (although Henry still retainedultimate sovereignty).61Since Edward was then Lord of Ireland, HenryIII issued a special patent stating that Eleanor of Castile would receive


15/24


the queens gold in Ireland, just as Eleanor of Provence did in England.62

Although this patent was not issued until , fourteen years aer themarriage, it shows that queens gold could also be collected by a consortapparent, albeit seemingly only at the gi of the reigning king. The act

also indicates a connection between active lordship and queens gold.Edward was directly ruling Ireland, rather than Henry, suggesting thatIrish petitioners would have found it more expedient to appeal to Eleanorof Castile since her husband was now the one in charge. If Eleanor ofCastile was the more natural intercessor, she was also the more naturalrecipient of Irelands queens gold.63

ConclusionWith the passage of time, queens gold became a standardized ne thatwas codied and strictly regulated. It became only loosely connected withthe actions of the queen and the whims of the king. Queens gold, in later

centuries, seems largely to have been a ne, a nancial expedient, andnot a formal, symbolic recognition of the queens intercessory inuenceover the king. By the late eenth century when, as Joanna Laynesmith

relates, the importance of queenly intercession declined, queens receivedconsiderably less revenue om queens gold than before.64

Nevertheless, queens gold originated as a way to acknowledge andreward the queens intercessory inuence, which, in turn, helps explain(and perhaps justi) the very existence of the ne. Furthermore, even ifthe meaning of queens gold changed over time, its original connectionswith intercession permit scholars to reevaluate the informal nature of

intercession and think more deeply about the power of queens in thecentral Middle Ages.

Queens gold therefore oers two lessons. First, it expands scholarsunderstanding of queens formal powers. Queens gold was formal andocial because it was collected at the exchequer by salaried clerks. Inessence, English queens made bureaucracy work for them instead ofbeing marginalized by it. The links between intercession and queens

gold also imply that intercession was a formal power, not mere informalinuence. Intercession was not merely a way for the queen to make hervoice heard; it was an institutionalized activity for which she expected,and received, monetary compensation.


16/24


Second, the links between queens gold and intercession provide sup-port for scholars reevaluation of the narrative of queens marginalizationin the central Middle Ages. As a formal power, the intercession recog-nized by queens gold did not wane with the rise of bureaucratic kingship

providing one instance of ocial queenly power that did not move inthe downward trajectory outlined by Marion Facinger in .65Thekings bureaucrats did not steal the queens role, but were instead putto work enforcing her prerogatives. The powers of queenship changedmore than they disappeared.

University of Southern California

*Eleanor of Aquitaine was regent several times between 11 and 11 when

Henry II was on the continent. She was given vice-regal powers by Richard I,

which she exercised at various times until her retirement to Fontevrault in .

Appendix: Queens of England

birth marriage regencies widowed death

Eleanor ofAquitaine ca. May *

Isabella ofAngoulme ca. August ----

Eleanor ofProvence ca. January

Eleanor ofCastile November ---- ----


17/24


Sources: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography[online edition];H. G. Richardson, The Letters and Charters of Eleanor of Aquitaine,The English Historical Review, no. (April ), .

Figure 1: Ideal Circuit of Queens Gold

Petitioner

Voluntary fine 10% surcharge on

voluntary fine

Exchequer Monies received by Keeper of Queens Gold

(at Exchequer)

King Monies are used by Queen

Governmental and

Household expenses To pay for Household expenses


18/24


endnotes

. Paul Strohm, Queens as Intercessors, in Hochons Arrow: The SocialImagination of Fourteenth-Century Texts(Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress, ), -, -.

. Jo Ann McNamara and Suzanne Wemple, The Power of Womenthrough the Family in Medieval Europe, -, Feminist Studies ():-. Reprinted in Women and Power in the Middle Ages, ed. Mary Erlerand Maryanne Kowaleski (Athens: University of Georgia Press, ), -.I have focused on studies of English and French queenship for which evensome recent work argues for decline. See Ralph Turner, Eleanor of Aquitaine:Queen of France, Queen of England(New Haven: Yale University Press,). Lois Huneycutts biography of Matilda of Scotland implies agreement(although it does not directly argue for or against decline) because she main-tains that Matilda was queen during the apogee of opportunity for womento exercise public authority. See Lois Huneycutt, Matilda of Scotland: AStudy in Medieval Queenship (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, ), .Margaret Howell,Eleanor of Provence: Queenship in Thirteenth-CenturyEngland(Oxford: Blackwell, ), argues against decline using Eleanor ofProvence as a case study.

. Marion Facinger, A Study of Medieval Queenship: Capetian France,-, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History (): -.. Miriam Shadis, Blanche of Castile and Facingers Medieval

Queenship: Reassessing the Argument, in Capetian Women, ed. KathleenNolan (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, ), -, especially (quote),, .

. Howell, Eleanor of Provence; J. L. Laynesmith, The Last MedievalQueens: English Queenship 14451503(Oxford: Oxford University Press,

). Queens seemingly had even greater scope for action in Iberia; oneexample is the oce of the queen-lieutenant in Aragon. The power ofSpanish queens is not explored in this article because Spanish queenshipwas quite dierent om that of northern Europe. See Queenship in Medievaland Early Modern Spain, ed. Theresa Earenght (Aldershot: Ashgate,), especially Earenghts contributions Partners in Politics, xiii-xxviiiand Absent Kings: Queens as Political Partners in the Medieval Crown of

Aragon, -.. For some examples, see Strohm, Queens as Intercessors and thework of John Carmi Parsons, such as Parsons, The Queens Intercessionin Thirteenth-Century England, in Power of the Weak: Studies on


19/24


Medieval Women, ed. Jennifer Carpenter and Sally-Beth Maclean (Urbana:University of Illinois Press, ), -; The Intercessory Patronage ofQueens Margaret and Isabella of France, Thirteenth Century England (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, ), -; and The Pregnant Queen

as Counsellor and the Medieval Construction of Motherhood, in MedievalMothering, ed. John Carmi Parsons and Bonnie Wheeler (New York: GarlandPublishing, ), -. Interpreting intercession as a substitute for lostocial powers is not universal. Anneke B. Mulder-Bakker contends thatmediation and intercession are expressions of female princely power. See

Anneke B. Mulder-Bakker, Jeanne of Valois: The Power of a Consort, inCapetian Women, -, .

. Parsons, The Queens Intercession, ; Strohm, Queens as

Intercessors, -.. Strohm, Queens as Intercessors, -.. Parsons, The Queens Intercession, -. For the link between

intercession and the biblical Esther, see Lois L. Huneycutt, Intercessionand the High Medieval Queen: The Esther Topos, in Power of the Weak,-.

. Prynne noted the link between queens gold and intercession in

but no one has spoken of it since. See William Prynne,Aurum reginae: or acompendious tractate and chronological collection of records concerning the queensgold (London, ), -.

. Please see the appendix for a table containing the important dates inthe lives of these queens.

. Richard tz Nigel [Richard Fitzneale], The Course of the Exchequer,trans. Charles Johnson (London: T. Nelson, ), -. Fitz Nigel occa-sionally uses the term debtors, so I have used it here. Usually he uses more

convoluted phrasing such as those who voluntarily engage to pay coinedmoney ().

. Prynne,Aurum reginae, , suggests that one mark of gold equaled tenmarks of silver maintaining the ten percent ratio.

. Fitz Nigel, Exchequer, -.. Thomas Du Hardy, ed., Rotuli de Oblatis et Finibus in Turri

Londinensiasservati(London: G. Eyre and A. Spottiswoode, ), -,-. A clerk went through the ne roll for - and marked theamount of queens gold due for each subject ne in the margin.

. Ibid., , .. Ibid., .


20/24


. Thomas Madox, The History and Antiquities of the Exchequer. . .(London, ; rpt. New York: Greenwood Press, ), :.

. Rotuli de Oblatis, , , , .. Ibid., , .

. Patricia M. Barnes, ed., The Great Roll of the Pipe for the SixteenthYear of the Reign of King John, Michaelmas 1214(London: J. W. Ruddock &Sons Ltd, ),;E. PaulineEbden, ed., The Great Roll of the Pipe for theSecond Year of the Reign of King Henry III, Michaelmas 1218(London: J. W.Ruddock & Sons Ltd, ), ; B. E. Harris, ed.,The Great Roll of the Pipefor the Third Year of the Reign of King Henry III, Michaelmas 1219(London:

J. W. Ruddock & Sons Ltd, ),. Hawise died between Michaelmas and Michaelmas because in the pipe roll her son Robert was

responsible for her debt, which concerned her manor of Okehampton.. Rotuli de Oblatis, preface, xviii-xxviii.. Hilda Johnstone, The Queens Household, in T. F. Tout, ed,

Chapters in the Administrative History of Mediaeval England: The Wardrobe,

the Chamber, and the Small Seals, vol. (Manchester: Manchester UniversityPress, ), -, at -; Margaret Howell, The Resources of Eleanorof Provence as Queen Consort, TheEnglish Historical Review , no.

(April ): -, .. Hilda Johnstone, The Queens Household, inCentral andPrerogative Administration, ed. James F. Willard and William A. Morris,vol. of The English Government at Work, 13271336, ed. James F. Willard(Cambridge, MA: The Medieval Academy of America, ), -, and n, citing Statutes of the Realm, :, .

. Howell, Resources, . Howell mentions that even the Crownrejected Eleanor of Provences claims to queens gold on these sources of

income.. Johnstone, The Queens Household, The English Government at

Work, -.. Andrew Rabin, Female Advocacy and Royal Protection in Tenth-

Century England: The Legal Career of Queen lhryth, Speculum ,no. (April ): -, ; Dorothy Whitelock,Anglo-Saxon Wills(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ), ;Pauline Staord, QueenEmma and Queen Edith: Queenship and Womens Power in Eleventh-Century

England(Oxford: Blackwell, ), . A mancus was worth thirty pence.. Rabin, Female Advocacy, ; A. J. Robertson,Anglo-Saxon

Charters (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ), #, p. ;Staord, Emma and Edith, .


21/24


. Rabin, Female Advocacy, - discusses how male advocateswould receive land while the queen received moveables. He suggests this wasa function not only of who she represented but also of gendered forms oflandholding. Perhaps there is also a link between gender and payment in coin

for queens gold.. Staord, Emma and Edith, ; P. H. Sawyer,Anglo-Saxon Charters:

An Annotated List and Bibliography, Royal Historical Society Guides andHandbooks; no. (London: Royal Historical Society, ), #, p. .Staord also mentions other payments made to Edith and some to Emma,but she does not provide any detail about these. Staord discusses advocacyas being similar to intercession.

. Huneycutt, Matilda of Scotland, .

. Eleanor might have been the rst queen to receive these paymentsunder the name queens gold and under a regularized system.

. H. G. Richardson, The Letters and Charters of Eleanor ofAquitaine, The English Historical Review , no. (April ): -,

n.. Domesday Book, vol. : Herefordshire, ed. Frank and Caroline Thorn

(Chichester: Phillimore, ), d. An orais a Saxon coin worth between

and pence.. Domesday Book, vol. : Warwickshire, ed. John Morris (Chichester:Phillimore, ), a. Although the translator has used gis, the Latinin Domesday Book isgersumawhich can mean premium, ne, payment, ormerchet. This implies the payment is somewhat more ocial than a gi.Sincegersuma can also mean ne the queen might have been receiving anocial precursor to queens gold.

. Domesday Book: Warwickshire, a.

. There are also two examples om Bedfordshire which reveal thequeen receiving money om the kings lands. However, no reason for thismoney is provided. Domesday Book, vol. : Bedfordshire, ed. John Morris(Chichester: Phillimore, ), b, b, c.

. sa Dahlin Hauken, Gi-exchange in Early Iron Age Norse Society,in Social Approaches to Viking Studies, ed. Ross Samson (Glasgow: CruithnePress, ), -, especially ; Elisabeth Vestergaard, Gi-giving,Hoarding, and Outdoings, Social Approaches to Viking Studies, -,especially . For a political, rather than social, approach to gi giving, seeFlorin Curta, Merovingian and Carolingian Gi Giving, Speculum , no. (): -. Gi giving also promoted stability and upheld the social


22/24


system of reciprocal relationships between those of dierent status. For moreon this and Anglo-Saxon gi giving in general, see John M. Hill, Beowulfand the Danish Succession: Gi Giving as an Occasion for ComplexGesture, Medievalia et Humanistica, n.s., no. (), -, especially -

; and John-Henry Wilson Clay, Gi-giving and Books in the Letters ofSt Boniface and Lul,Journal of Medieval History (): -, especially-.

. William Prynne,An Additional Appendix toAurum Reginae (London,), . Under coverture, a woman had no independent legal identity. Shewas covered by her husband.

. Prynne,Aurum reginae, makes it clear that old debts could be col-lected by either the king or queen aer the others death.

. Ibid.,. See also p. for Margaret, widow of Edward I.. Ibid., .. The Great Rolls of the Pipe for the Second, Third, and Fourth Years of

the Reign of King Henry the Second(London: George E. Eyre and AndrewSpottiswoode, ), . Prynne,Appendix, claimed there were no examplesin the pipe rolls.

. Francis Palgrave, The Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth,

Part (London: John Murray, ), v-ix, xxiv.. Fitz Nigel, Exchequer, -.. Richardson, Letters and Charters, -.. Howell, Resources of Eleanor, -, om Close Rolls, 1251-53, ,

; Matthew Paris, Matthaei Parisiensis, monachi Sancti Albani. Chronicamajora, vol. , ed. Henry Richard Luard (London: Longman & Co., ), (for preferment tale).

. Howell, Resources of Eleanor, .

. Jocelyn de Brakeland, CronicainMemorials of St. Edmunds Abbey,ed.Thomas Arnold, vol. (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, ), -.

. Rosalind Ransford, ed., The Early Charters of the Augustinian Canons ofWaltham Abbey, Essex, 10621230(Woodbridge:The Boydell Press, ), .

. Doris M. Stenton, ed.,The Great Roll of the Pipe for the Tenth Year ofthe Reign of King John, Michaelmas 1208(London: J. W. Ruddock & SonsLtd, ), . The debt also might have been paid in . The charteris dated een days aer the Pentecost nearest to the death of Henry deCornhill. Cornhill died between Michaelmas and Michaelmas .Eleanors charter also refers to auro nostro, suggesting that was her termfor queens gold.


23/24


. Richardson, Letters and Charters, . Nicholas Vincent, Isabellaof Angoulme: Johns Jezebel, in King John: New Interpretations, ed. S. D.Church (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, ), -, -, n agrees.

. Roger of Hovedon, Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene, vol. ,

ed. William Stubbs (London: Longman & Co., ), and Benedictof Peterborough, Gesta Regis Henrici Secundi Benedicti Abbatis, vol. , ed.William Stubbs (London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, ),. Both chroniclers misname Stephens wife, calling her Alicia instead ofMatilda, suggesting that one might have obtained the information om theother.

. Jane Martindale, Eleanor, suo jure duchess of Aquitaine (c.), in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, ed. H. C. G. Matthew

and Brian Harrison (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ); online ed.,ed. Lawrence Goldman, May , .John Gillingham, Richard I(NewHaven: Yale University Press, ), discusses Eleanors political actions butnever suggests she had an ocial role in Richards government.

. Richardson, Letters and Charters, .. Thomas Du Hardy, ed., Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum in Turri

Londinensi, vol. (London: G. E. Eyre and A. Spottiswoode, ), .. Nicholas Vincent gives this action a negative cast, suggesting thatJohn did this because, now that he had a legitimate heir, he no longer felt

responsible for maintaining Isabellas income or comfort. See Vincent,Isabella of Angoulme, .

. Parsons, The Intercessory Patronage of Queens Margaret and Isabellaof France, .

. Close Rolls of the Reign of Henry III (1234-1237)(London: His

Majesty s Stationery Oce, ), .. Strohm, Queens as Intercessors, ; Parsons, The Intercessory

Patronage, .. Howell, Eleanor of Provence, .. Prynne,Aurum Reginae, - (Latin patent on ); Calendar of Patent

Rolls, 12661272(London: Hereford Times Limited, ), .. This might seem to run counter to Eleanor of Castiles lack of inter-

cession, but queens gold was linked with the queens duty of intercessionand was, by this time, not necessarily directly linked with its performance.Intercession was expected of queens (which was why Eleanor of Castile wascriticized for Edwards harshnessshe was doing nothing to tame it), andqueens gold eventually became a routine ne.


24/24

MFF, geaman

. Laynesmith, The Last Medieval Queens, , , -.. Facinger, A Study of Medieval Queenship.

Queen’s Gold and Intercession - The Case of Eleanor of Aquitaine

Documents

Transcript of Queen’s Gold and Intercession - The Case of Eleanor of Aquitaine