The Celtic Revival

Folk often look to the past as a "Golden Age," or even just as having facets that fascinate the current era. There was a "Celtic Revival" that started in the 19th century that became enamored of a highly polished view of the stories and artifacts of the distant past. (There was a similar Gothic Revival that started in the 18th century, extended into the next century by Pugin.)

A large part of this was "insular art"; that is, arts and crafts of Early Medieval Ireland, Britain, and Wales. Archaeology was becoming a popular pastime—alas, without the rigor of modern scholars: sites were frequently simply "bulldozed" to reveal treasure, and careful mapping and cataloguing was unknown—and the artifacts discovered were sought after and duplicated, as mentioned in yesterday's post on Irish Treasures.

One lasting effect of this is the ubiquity of the High/Celtic/Irish cross (pictured), with knotwork inscribed in the verticals and horizontals. That knotwork found its way into some Art Nouveau designs by Irish-American designers, such as are found in Old Saint Patrick's Church in Chicago, and the designs of Chicago Architect Louis Sullivan [link], whose father was a traditional Irish musician.

Another lasting effect was created by Welsh antiquarian and author Iolo Morganwg (Edward Williams, 1747 - 1826), a collector of Welsh literature who portrayed himself as an expert on Welsh culture and a reviver of druidism, although after his death it was discovered that he had forged many documents he passed off as historical.  The idea of druidism, however, is still with us, and we should talk about that a little more.

Irish Treasures

In yesterday's post about the Ardagh Hoard it was compared to the Book of Kells as prime examples of early Irish art, but then mentioned the Derrynaflan Chalice  and the Tara Brooch.

The Derrynaflan Chalice was discovered rather recently, in 1980, as part of a hoard of five liturgical vessels found in County Tipperary on the site of an early Irish abbey. Unlike the accidental discovery at Ardagh when the boys were digging for potatoes, the Derrynaflan discoverers were exploring the abbey site with a metal detector. Similar to the Ardagh situation, ownership of the find was disputed. The discoverers,  father and son, were given permission to wander the land, but the ruins were protected under the National Monuments Act of 1930, and digging up anything on the site was not permitted. They kept their find secret for weeks before revealing it and trying to claim ownership and trying to sell it for £5,000,000. They were unsuccessful, and the find went to the National Museum of Ireland.

The Derrynaflan Hoard is of the same vintage (8th - 9th centuries) as the Ardagh Hoard, displaying the same intricate detail. It included a silver paten, a hoop that may have been intended to support the paten, and a strainer. A bronze basin was inverted on top of the four items, suggesting it was deliberately buried that way to keep the items preserved.

The Tara Brooch was a little earlier (late-7th - early-8th centuries). It is so finely detailed that a magnifying glass is needed to appreciate parts of the design. It was found c.1850 on a beach on the east coast of Ireland, 25 miles from Tara, and despite its name has no real connection to the Hill of Tara. It was given that name by a Dublin jeweler named George Waterhouse who wanted to make and sell copies during the Celtic Revival and thought the name would add mystique and grandeur and create more customers.

Although it is impossible to know the origin of these items, there are occasional random hints about them in history. As I mentioned in the post on St. Brigid, Gerald of Wales makes a reference to a book at Kildare that might just be the Book of Kells. The Book of Leinster (12th century) mentions an elaborate brooch buried after a defeat. Historians wonder if the burial of the Tara Brooch was deliberate to commemorate a tragedy, and not an accidental loss.

What was the Celtic Revival? Although it was well past the Middle Ages, let's talk about it tomorrow.

The Ardagh Hoard

In 1868, two boys were digging in a potato field west of Ardagh in County Limerick when they struck something solid that was definitely not a potato. Clearing some earth and reaching his hand down, he discovered the long pin of a broach. Realizing that there might be more buried there, he dug down three feet and found a space shaped with round stones, inside of which was a large cup which contained a smaller cup and some brooches. A flat stone that had shifted sideways suggested that the items were deliberately buried in a stone-lined chamber with a flagstone on top.

The boys had unwittingly uncovered what became known as the Ardagh Hoard. It included four broaches, a plain chalice, and an elaborate chalice called the Ardagh Chalice. The Chalice is a two-handed size made of beaten silver and decorated with gold, bronze, brass, and pewter, with enamel designs. Around the bowl it is inscribed with the names of the apostles. It is clearly a Christian chalice, but the fine brooches suggest use by wealthy people, and are reminiscent of later Viking designs, suggesting that the hoard was not buried until about 900CE.

The land was rented by the mother of one of the boys, who sold the items to the Bishop of Limerick, George Butler. Butler had the items cleaned up by a jeweler. Because the objects seemed to have been hidden away carefully, as if the owner were protecting them and intended to retrieve them, they would qualify as a "treasure trove" and by law become the property of the Crown. Bishop Butler denied that they were a treasure trove, but did eventually hand them over to the National Museum of Ireland in Dublin.

The Ardagh Chalice is considered one of the finest examples of early Irish craftsmanship, rivaling the Book of Kells. Tomorrow we'll look at a couple of comparable examples of Early Irish art, the Tara Brooch and the Derrynaflan Chalice.

Ardagh History

Legend says that St. Patrick arrived in Ardagh c.434 and created a Christian settlement over which he put his nephew, Mel of Ardagh, in charge as bishop. The village is beside Ardagh Mountain (Irish Árd Archadh means "high field"), a hill 650 feet high.

The mountain was originally known as Brí Leith. One of the High King's rights was bilberries from Brí Leith for his traditional harvest meal. (Bilberries look like blueberries of North America but are not the same species. In Ireland they are gathered on the last Sunday of July, and at Lughnasadh.) Brí Leith was the legendary home of Midir, a king and son of Dagda of the Tuatha Dé Danann.

After Patrick, it became an important part of Ireland's early Christian history, but there are no records of Mél's successors as bishop of Ardagh until the reign of Henry II and the arrival in Ireland of the English. Brigid of Kildare was said to have spent her earliest years as a nun in the Ardagh monastery, under the mentorship of Mél.

The English attempt to take over Ireland (one of many) caused the burning of the original church and town. In 1230, after being restored, there was further trouble over choosing a bishop. The disagreement turned to violence, and part of the cathedral was once again destroyed. Another dispute over episcopal control in 1496 again destroyed the entire church, leaving only an altar standing. The illustration above shows what little remains of the Church of Mél behind some gravestones.

There was more than one location in Ireland named Ardagh. We've been talking about Ardagh in County Longford, but there was another in County Limerick, in which a treasure hoard was discovered in 1868 in a potato field. Tomorrow we'll show off the Ardagh Hoard.

Mél of Ardagh

St. Patrick had sisters. One of them was discussed yesterday, Derarca, called the "mother of saints" because she had so many children who became saints and or bishops. Four of her sons were named Mél, Melchu, Munis, and Rioch. (Some historians think Mél and Melcghu ere the same person.) They went with their uncle Patrick to Ireland tp help with his mission.

Patrick established a church at Ardagh and made Mél its bishop. (The illustration is of Patrick consecrating Mél.) Mél was a "traveling bishop," supposedly never staying in one place long but always moving to spread his missionary message. He performed manual labor to earn his living as he went. He spent part of his time living on the farm of his aunt Lupait, during which rumors spread to discredit him that he and she were living an inappropriate and scandalous life together. Patrick himself went to investigate, but Lupait and Mél proved their innocence by performing miracles. Lupait survived a Trial by Ordeal by carrying hot coals without harm. Mél produced a live fish by ploughing it up in a field.

In contrast to this reported wandering life, he also is said to have built a monastery at Ardagh, and was its abbot as well as a bishop (difficult to do if you aren't around much). Brigid of Kildare visited Ardagh for a time, and Mél was her mentor there. He granted her the authority of an abbess, which was a benefit when she established her own monastery.

Mél is remembered these days in a cathedral at Longford dedicated to St. Mél, as well as a college. His feast day is 7 February, and has taken on an unusual observance. It is seen as a holiday for single people (perhaps as a rebellion against all the fuss of St. Valentine's Day a week later). On 7 February in Longford, single people celebrate the benefits of being single, and even send cards and host parties for singles.

Ardagh was important as an early Christian diocese in Ireland, but its history traces back longer than that. Let's talk about its folkloric traditions tomorrow.

St. Patrick's Family

Whether Brigid of Kildare was an early Irish saint or a pre-Christian goddess, her legend says that her mother was a slave baptized by St. Patrick, and that she was mentored by Patrick's nephew, Mél of Ardagh. As it turns out, Patrick had more than a few nephews who followed in his footsteps.

Patrick had a sister, Derarca, known as St. Derarca and the "mother of saints" because of her children's careers. Our first indication of her comes from the Vita tripartita Sancti Patricii (Tripartite Life of Saint Patrick), which is believed to have been written within a century of Patrick's death. It mentions that Patrick had two sisters, and when he came to County Derry for an ordination he found three deacons there who were his nephews. (To be honest, Patrick's own very brief account of his life mentions no sisters.)

Legend says that Derarca married twice. Her first husband was purported to be Conan Meriadoc; she bore him Gradlon Mawr, later King of Brittany. (Another legend says that her first husband was Restitutus the Lombard.) Her second husband was Conis the Briton. If you add up all the children attributed to her, you have 17 sons—all of whom became bishops and/or saints—and at least two daughters. (The illustration shows where her house is said to have stood, on Valentia Island in Kerry, of which she is the patron.)

Her daughters were Saint Eiche of Kilglass and Saint Lalloc of Senlis. Her other children included Saint Sechnall of Dunshaughlin; Saint Nectan of Killunche; Saint Auxilius of Killossey; Saint Diarmaid of Druim-corcortri; Dabonna, Mogornon, Drioc, Luguat, and Coemed Maccu Baird.

The three deacons Patrick encountered in Derry, however, were Saint Reat, Saint Nenn, and Saint Aedh. They are commemorated on 3 March, 25 April, and 31 August. Some records say Patrick had several sisters, and I am not certain of the mother of these three. 

There was one child in particular, son of Derarca and Conis, of whom we do hear more, and that is the Mél of Ardagh mentioned above. I'll tell you about him tomorrow.

St. Brigid Cross

It is not unusual for Christian symbols of the cross to have variation. We all recognize the two straight lines perpendicular to each other, with a horizontal one shorter than the vertical one, and spaced about one-quarter to one-third from the top of the vertical.

There is, however, an upside-down or inverted cross in Christian tradition, the Cross of St. Peter. In Catholic tradition, when Peter was to be crucified he requested that the cross be upside-down. This comes from the "Acts of Peter," a 2nd-century Greek apocryphal work. The author says that Peter's request was to make a point that the beliefs of his persecutors were opposite of what they should be.

But there is also St. Andrew's Cross, the shape called saltire. It most resembles the letter "X"; it is named for St. Andrew because of the tradition that he was martyred by being bound to an X-shaped crucifix.

With those examples in mind, let's look at St. Brigid's Cross, associated with Brigid of Kildare. (The image above is from a site that will show you how to make it.) traditionally, Brigid's Cross is made from freshly cut reeds on 1 or 2 February, the cross-quarter festival of Candlemas. The rushes or reeds were pulled on the eve of her day, then crosses were made the next day to protect the home during the coming year.

I think this cross is just one more piece of evidence that Brigid was a legend, not a living person. Despite the stories—and even physical relics that exist but only appeared centuries after she supposedly lived—it seems more likely, as some historians believe, that the stories of St. Brigid are a Christianization of the Celtic goddess Brigid, a member of the Tuatha Dé Danann.

There is no real evidence for her existence. The miracles attributed to her parallel some stories out of folklore. Kildare, where she established a monastery, comes from Gaelic Cill Dara, "Church of the Oak," an oddly pagan-sounding name for a Christian church. Her feast day is Imbolc, the pre-Christian calendar's start of spring. She was raised in the house of a druid (!), and a white cow magically appeared to provide milk for her—not a unique animal to show up in times of need in Celtic folklore. St. Brigid and the goddess Brigid have some of the same associations: healing, metalwork, dairy workers, farming.

Her cross is different from other Christian cross variations, not just by its shape, but because the shape seems secondary to its construction from natural materials, still green, and re-created annually to ensure protection. Certainly, crosses and crucifixes are worn for protection, as are other amulets and talismans, but the Brigid Cross is so connected to Nature that it allies more closely to the pre-Christian traditions in Ireland than the later introduction of Christianity.

There are historical figures tied to her legend though, like the King of Leinster and St. Patrick. That king and Brigid's mother Broicsech were both baptized by Patrick. The Book of Armagh, relied on for its early texts about Patrick, clearly states the important friendship between Patrick and Brigid. Patrick died c.461, however, and the best sources for St. Brigid claim she was born c.451.

Speaking of the two, however: the Brigid story also states that her mentor was Mél of Ardagh, who was Patrick's nephew. I have to confess that in none of the reading I have done about St. Patrick have I seen references to his extended family—and it turns out it was pretty extensive! Tomorrow we'll look at the relatives of St. Patrick.

St. Brigid

When the King of Leinster, Crimthann Mac Énnai (died 483) told his vassal Dubhthach to free a young girl from slavery, he knew she was special, but could not predict that Brigid of Kildare (c.451 - c.525) would grow up to be a saint.

Tradition says that Brigid founded a monastery at Kildare  (Cill Dara, "church of the oak"), with seven companions. She became a "consecrated virgin"; that is, she pledged to live a life of virginity as a bride of Christ. This was confirmed (according to the stories) by either a bishop who became St. Mac Caille or by Saint Mél of Ardagh (a nephew of St. Patrick by Patrick's sister Darerca).

Brigid invited a hermit, Conleth from Connell, to help her, and they founded two institutions: one for women and one for men. Conleth became the first bishop of Kildare. Kildare was ruled for hundreds of years by co-equal abbess-bishops and abbot-bishops, became an important center of religious learning, and developed into a cathedral city.

Conleth, who was a metalsmith and illuminator, oversaw a school of art at Kildare. A Gospel book made there was praised by Gerald of Wales in the 12th century. His description of it matches what we now know as the Book of Kells.

Miracles attributed to Brigid include turning water to beer, calming the wind and rain, and healing wounds. A more unusual miracle took place when she asked the King of Leinster for the land to build the monastery and was denied. After praying, she asked the king if he would grant her as much land as her cloak would cover. The king, of course, agreed. She handed her cloak to four women, asking them to each take a corner and run off in the four cardinal directions. The cloak expanded more and more, threatening to cover hundreds of acres.

The panicked king asked what she was doing, and Brigid told him she intended to cover his whole kingdom in response to his stinginess. He pleaded with her to call the women back and he would give her a suitable plot of land.

Brigid's Feast day is 1 February, the same date as the pre-Christian festival of Imbolc that heralds the start of spring, and involves weaving Brigid crosses. I want to talk about the Brigid cross tomorrow, and whether it is a clue to Brigid's existence as, not a saint, but a goddess. See you then.

The King of Leinster

The Annals of Ulster mention that, in the Battle of Áth Dara in 458, Crimthann mac Énnai led the Laigin forces against high king Lóegaire mac Néill, resulting in Leinster not having to pay the high king a levy of cattle tribute after that.

Crimthann came from a highly respected lineage, the Uí Cheinnselaig, a Leinster dynasty that traced its line all the way back to the legendary Niall of the Nine Hostages, ancestor of the Uí Néill ("O'Neill") dynasties that ruled Ireland from the 6th to the 10th centuries.

If he had the throne by the time of that battle, he held it for a decent amount of time (for a culture fraught with fighting): he died in 483 after being wounded in a battle with those who were also Laigin from south of Leinster.

He had at least two children from his marriage. His son, Nath Í mac Crimthann, became king after him. He also had a daughter, Eithne Uatahach, who married Óengus mac Nad Froích (d.490), the first Christian king of Munster.

The reason that Crimthann's daughter was willing to marry a Christian in the 5th century was because she had been raised as a Christian. Crimthann had been converted and baptized by St. Patrick himself, a significant occurrence for an early Irish king.

Because Crimthann was a Christian, when one of his vassals brought him a problem girl named Brigid, and Crimthann saw that Brigid was inclined to give away her master's property to aid the poor, Crimthann recognized in her something special. Rather than support the idea of punishing her, he suggested to his vassal, Dubhthach, that the girl be freed from bondage. This was, of course, Brigid of Kildare, whose story we began yesterday, and which we will continue tomorrow.

Brigid of Kildare

Ireland has three national saints. Besides St. Patrick and St. Columba there is St. Brigid of Ireland, also called Brigid of Kildare.

Kildare Abbey in County Kildare was said to be founded by Brigid in the 5th century, first as a small oratory but growing into a double monastery, housing both women and men. A monk at Kildare in the 7th century, Cogitosus, wrote a Vita Sanctae Brigidae ("Life of St. Brigid"), probably drawn from earlier documents and stories passed down at the monastery. There was an earlier biography, possibly written by a lector at Kildare named St. Aleran (who also wrote a biography of St. Patrick).

Brigid was born c.451 as a Fothairt, one of the Irish tribes based in Leinster, to a chieftain named Dubhthach and a slave who had been baptized by St. Patrick. When Dubhthach's wife learned of the pregnancy, she forced her husband to sell the slave to a druid. At a moment when Brigid's mother was bringing milk into the house, she went into labor and Brigid was born on the threshold. When the druid tried to feed her, she vomited because of his paganism, but a white cow appeared that provided the babe with milk. The druid, realizing that the child was special, eventually freed her and her mother from slavery.

According to the Cogitosus' biography, she performed farming chores, watching the flocks and churning butter. She cared for the poor, and one day after she gave away all of her mother's butter to a needy person, the butter miraculously replenished itself after Brigid prayed. When she was ten, she went to work in her father's house, where she gave his belongings to the poor.

Dubhthach, annoyed, took her to the King of Leinster to sell her into slavery once more. While Dubhthach was talking to the king, Brigid gave Dubhthach's jeweled sword to a beggar so that he could barter it for food for his family. Seeing this, the king made a decision that would change Brigid's life.

Before I tell you what the king said to Dubhthach, I want to tell you more about the king. This was Crimthann Mac Énnai, who died in 483. This helps us settle the legend of Brigid in these decades of the 5th century—if she existed, that is. We'll talk about that after we look at Crimthann Mac Énnai and why he may have decided to be kind to Brigid.

Candlemas

Yesterday's post mentioned Candlemas among the cross-quarter days. It takes place on 2 February, and has taken on Christian associations, most notably the day when Christians take their candles to Church and have them blessed for use in the coming year. For Christianity, Candlemas is also called the Feast of the Presentation of Jesus Christ, or the Feast of the Holy Encounter. These names arise from the Gospel of Luke Chapter 2 in which Jesus is brought to the Temple and Simeon recognizes that Jesus is special.

The date of 2 February was noted outside of Christianity as well. The Celtic feast of Imbolc was celebrated on 1 or 2 February, marking the start of spring. It is mentioned in early Irish literature as the start of lambing season, and the Christian association of 2 February with St. Brigid is thought to be a Christianization of the pre-Christian Irish goddess Brigid, associated with domestic animals among other things.

Tradition in France, Belgium, and other countries stated that this was the date when Christmas decorations should be put away (a custom I would like to see followed in my neighborhood). In France making crepes is associated with the day; flipping a crepe while holding a gold coin in the other hand is supposed to ensure good luck for the year.

In Germany, Candlemas is associated with payments and rents, as we saw connected with Quarter Days. The Candlemas prediction in Catalonia was that, if there is bad weather on Candlemas, good weather will follow for the coming year.

In Hungary, the tradition has children dress as bears and eat honey. This is because it is the date that bears come out of their den to see if winter is over; they see their shadows because of the sun, and are frightened by it and return to hibernate for a time. This is the origin of the Pennsylvania Dutch tradition of Groundhog Day that took root in North America.

Was St. Brigid a real Christian saint, or a Christianization of an Irish legend? Tomorrow we'll look at the stories and see what evidence there may be.

Cross-Quarter Days

The post about Quarter Days promised an explanation for Cross-Quarter Days, and here it is. Just as the Quarter Days are the solstices and equinoxes, Cross-Quarter Days are the midpoints between those. They are 2 February, 1 May, 1 August, and 1 November.

A modern audience might recognize 1 May and 1 November as May Day and All Saints Day, respectively. The other two dates also had their own names: 1 or 2 February was Candlemas and 1 August was Lammas. But what was the significance of those dates?

Prior to the Christianization of Celtic Britain, their names in chronological order were Imbolc, Beltane, Lughnasadh, and Samhain. Imbolc marked the beginning of spring, Beltane marked the beginning of summer, Lughnasadh marked the beginning of the harvest season, and Samhain marked the end of the harvest season and the start of the "dark half" of the year. Christianity matched these events with Christian significance.

Imbolc may be recognized in North America as Groundhog Day, based on a Pennsylvania Dutch superstition that a groundhog will wake up from hibernation, see its shadow, and flee back into its burrow for six more weeks of sleep (an extended winter). Older European tradition ascribed this behavior to a hibernating bear, but as hunting over the centuries made them scarce, the Dutch brought the idea of a smaller animal to the New World.

In Scotland, these cross-quarter days were the "Old Scottish Term Days" and were slightly different. Candlemas and Lammas were the same, but instead of May Day they celebrate(d) Whitsunday on 15 May and Martinmas on 11 November. Whitsunday was supposed to be Pentecost, the 7th Sunday after Easter, which of course was a "floating" holy day and could take place over a several-week period, but it was legislatively established as 15 March for convenience.

Candlemas had its own history, which I'll talk about next time.

Quarter Days

I mentioned yesterday that Lady Day was one of the Quarter Days, and that I would explain them.

As you might guess, Quarter Days are a British and Irish tradition that take place every three months throughout the year—well, almost every three months. A couple days ago we covered equinoxes and solstices, and the quarter days approximately match those four events.

Christmas on 25 December is one, and Lady Day on 25 March is another. The summer solstice, 24 June (of course technically the 24th is a few days after the solstice, for reasons explained here) was called Midsummer Day, but also for the Roman Catholic Church it was the Feast of the Nativity of John the Baptist; "midsummer" seemed too pagan.

The last one would be the autumnal equinox, 24 September, but the Church already had a day at the end of September, the Feast of Michael and All Angels, also called Michaelmas. Instead of celebrating two big days so close together, the fourth Quarter Day was the 29th of September. Just as Lady Day was the start of contracts with tenant farmers, Michaelmas was the end of the harvest season, when accounts would be settled and tithes from the harvest collected. In Ireland, Michaelmas was a day the rents were due.

There were also cross-quarter days, called so because they fell between the Quarter Days. They were four other holidays that existed before Christianity came to the British isles. They should get their own post, and they will...tomorrow.

Lady Day

Yesterday's post on the new year mentioned the solstices and equinoxes and their significance in the calendar year. The winter solstice was used to celebrate (among other festivals) Christmas, and 25 March (right after the vernal equinox) was considered New Year's Day in many cultures, especially those focused on an agrarian lifestyle.

Another religious celebration attached to one of these calendar events was Lady Day, also called the Feast of the Annunciation, the day the the archangel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary and told her that she would be the mother of the son of God. (Leonardo DaVinci's portrayal of this event is shown above.) It was convenient that this day fell nine months prior to 25 December, and that nine months was the period of human gestation. It seemed logical that 25 March was the day of Mary's conception, and therefore the story told in the Gospel would take place on that date.

This became more than just a day to celebrate the Annunciation, however. Because it was treated as the start of a new year, in England it was the day that contracts between landowners and their tenant farmers would begin. If a tenant were to start farming a new plot, this was the day he would "move in." (Even as late as the 18th century in England, the tax year for Land Tax and Window Tax ran from 25 March. A proposal and investigation in 2018 about moving that date to 31 December decided to leave well enough alone.)

When the British Empire in 1752 decided—along with most of Western Europe—to switch from the Julian to Gregorian calendar, there was an adjustment of 11 days. 25 March became 5 April which was referred to as "Old Lady Day," leaving Lady Day to the (now adjusted and astronomically correct) 25 March.

Lady Day was one of the "quarter days" of the calendar, which did not exactly fall on the solstices and equinoxes. I'll talk about them next time.

The New Year

Yesterday's post briefly pointed out the confusion over how to state the year that legislation took place when the date of the start of the year was different. What if a date falls after the start of the year for one country, but before the start of the year in another? When did the year start, and why?

I suppose many readers of this blog are aware of solstices and equinoxes, but let's review: A solstice is the time when the Sun reaches its maximum or minimum declination (the angular distance north or south of the equator), marking the longest or shortest days of the year. The winter solstice takes place about December 20-21, the summer solstice about June 20-21.

An equinox ("equal night") is the day halfway between solstices when the length of day and night is the same. We have a vernal (spring) equinox about March 20-21, and an autumnal equinox about September 20-21.

Note the proximity of the winter solstice to Christmas. With a lack of instruments to measure length of day/night, four days is a good length of time for the human eye and brain to see in December that the days are, in fact, getting longer, and winter will eventually end. This has a lot to do with why so many festivals in the Classical Era were established on or around 25 December. The Romans followed this with calling 1 January the start of the new year, Janus being the god of beginnings.

But 1 January did not suit everyone as the start of the new year. For some cultures, winter was the end of the year, and until the world started growing again, it wasn't "new." Spring was therefore the beginning of a new year. But if that were the case, what day would you pick so that everyone could celebrate at the same time? Well, how about when the day was longer than the night, and more sun and warmth for growing things and for, say, sheep to be able to find grass to eat? 25 March was considered the logical start of the New Year for many.

So to bring us back to yesterday's post: the Statute of Rhuddlan was superseded by some later acts. The Laws in Wales Acts of 1535/6 under Henry VIII was listed that way because it happened to be decided between 1 January and 25 March, and so it was decided as far as England was concerned in 1536, but when proclaimed in Wales for the first time, it was still 1535.

We don't pay much attention to the solstices and equinoxes in the Modern Era except when the weather people point them out, but those dates were turned into other festivals with religious significance in the Middle Ages, and we'll take a Quick Look at them tomorrow.

Statute of Rhuddlan

With Dafydd ap Gruffudd executed for high treason and Wales under his control, it was time for Edward to establish the government he wanted. Prior to this, Wales was governed by the Laws of Hywel Dda, and the country was ruled by separate principalities. Edward introduced England's shire system, and introduced English common law, although he allowed some Welsh legal practices.

Edward had built Rhuddlan Castle in the north of Wales in 1277 after the first war between Edward and Wales. The Statute of Rhuddlan was issued from there, dividing the country into the the counties of Anglesey, Merionethshire, Caernarfonshire, and Flintshire, and revenues from them would now be collected by a new office, the Chamberlain of North Wales, who sent them to the Exchequer at Westminster. The English offices of sheriff and coroner and bailiff were established in each county.

Not everything about local law was changed, so there were differences when you crossed the border from England to Wales. Murder, larceny, and robbery were treated the same. The Laws of Hywel Dda used arbitration to settle disputes, not proclamations from a judge, and that system was maintained.

Inheritance laws were also different from England, where primogeniture was important to keep estates intact. When dealing with land, Wales followed partitive or partible inheritance, with property being divided among heirs. Some changes were made to align with England, however: if there were no son, a daughter could inherit; an illegitimate child could not inherit; widows were entitled to a third of their husband's estate.

The Statute of Rhuddlan was superseded by the Laws in Wales Acts of 1535/6 and 1542/3 under Henry VIII, or, more formally: An Act for Laws and Justice to be ministered in Wales in like Form as it is in this Realm and An Act for Certain Ordinances in the King's Majesty's Dominion and Principality of Wales. Henry wanted the law in Wales to match those of England exactly, and also desired to force English as the official language in a country that almost exclusively spoke Welsh. The 16th century is not really pertinent to this blog, however, so we won't go into any more of that.

Instead, let's ask why I indicated the Acts above as 1535/6 and 1542/3? Wasn't it clear what year they were established? It is, or was, but that depends on when you consider the year to start. Tomorrow let's talk about when the Middle Ages celebrated the "new" year.

The First High Treason

With Llywelyn ap Gruffudd dead in December of 1282, the title Prince of Wales went to his younger brother, Dafydd ap Gruffydd. Dafydd was not to enjoy the title for very long, however. Edward I of England had Dafydd surrounded in the mountainous Snowdonia by January 1283. With resources dwindling, Dafydd managed to sneak downhill to another castle, Castell y Bere, but that was besieged in April. Dafydd escaped that siege and holed up at a guard post further north, but in May had to flee into the mountains.

Dafydd and a few companions had no food or shelter, and had to stay on the run from English soldiers. On 22 June he was captured along with one of his sons, Owain ap Dafydd. (Owain and a brother who was captured later would remain in captivity for the rest of their lives, even being locked into a cage at night so there was no chance of escape.)

Dafydd was taken to the encampment of Edward, who summoned Parliament to Shrewsbury to determine the traitor's fate. He was convicted of High Treason against his king—the first time such a verdict had been brought in England. His punishment needed to be significant to match the crime. On 3 October the sentence was carried out. Let me quote myself from 2013:

He was tied to a horse's tail and dragged through the streets to the place where he was hanged. His body was cut down before death was certain; he was revived, then he was cut open and his entrails pulled out and set afire so that he could see it all happening. His body was then cut into 4 pieces, the parts going to different parts of the kingdom to be put on display. The person given the task of seeing all this done, Geoffrey of Shrewsbury, was paid 20 shillings for the job.

Part of the viciousness of the punishment was because of the sacrilege that Dafydd committed by starting his rebellion on Palm Sunday, desecrating Holy Week.

His daughter and Llywelyn's infant daughter were sent to convents in Sixhills and Sempringham, respectively. There were a few relatives that survived capture, who actually tried rebelling years later, but Wales was now under English rule, and therefore was going to be subject to English rules. Tomorrow we'll see the attempt to replace the Laws of Hywel Dda with the Statute of Rhuddlan.

The Death(s) of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd

It is not that surprising that the details of one particular death during a battle is not noticed, but when that person is the highest ranked figure on his side of the battle, you would think he would be recognized. In the case of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd at the Battle of Orewin Bridge, however, we have options from which to choose.

Llywelyn had come from the north, leaving his brother's forces. Llywelyn was drawn into an ambush near the market town of Builth in Powys on 11 December 1282. The first story is that he left his main force with his chief minister and, while crossing the Orewin Bridge, heard the sounds of battle and turned back to join the army. A lone lancer from the English forces of Edmund Mortimer chased him down and killed him. An English knight a day later recognized the body. His head was cut off and taken to London. This account was made about 50 years later.

Another version was recorded by English monks who got it from Llywelyn's daughter Gwenllian and Dafydd's daughter Gwladys. Their version claims that Llywelyn was at the head of his army and approached the foe, on the assumption that they were going to treat him with respect and even pay homage. A battle began immediately between the Welsh and the combined forces of Edmund and Roger Mortimer, Hugo le Strange, and Gruffydd ap Gwenwynwyn, son of Gruffydd ap Gwenwynwyn, who had allied with Edward in 1274. In the battle, Llywelyn and some retainers got separated and were chased into a wood. Llywelyn was a struck down, and asked for a priest. When he identified himself, he was immediately decapitated. The body was searched, revealing some papers—a list of co-conspirators—and the privy seal. 

A letter from Archbishop of Canterbury John Peckham, who had tried to negotiate a truce between the Welsh and Edward, was dated six days later to the Bishop of Bath and Wells, stating:

If the king wishes to have the copy [of the list] found in the breeches of Llywelyn, he can have it from Edmund Mortimer, who has custody of it and also of Llywelyn’s privy seal and certain other things found in the same place.

This gives credence to the list of names.

The two women were not likely to have been anywhere near the battle—Gwenllian had been born the previous June. Did they hear the story from those who were present? Was it designed to make Llywelyn more heroic, at the head of his army?

Edward's forces could now concentrate on fighting Dafydd in the north. Dafydd, now Prince of Wales, engaged in guerrilla warfare for several months, but he destined to lose against superior forces. We'll finish him off tomorrow.

Welsh Rebellion in 1282

The Treaty of Aberconwy in 1277 was supposed to make everyone happy. Dafydd ap Gruffydd (his coat of arms is shown here) was out from under his brother Llywelyn's control—as were leaders of other Welsh kingdoms—and Llywelyn was allowed to retain the title Prince of Wales, recognized by Edward I of England, who now had much of Wales under his control.

Dafydd decided he wasn't happy with his lot, however—even though he had been given part of eastern Gwynedd by Edward. Edward was also antagonizing the Welsh by imposing English law to replace the Laws of Hywel Dda. Dafydd allied himself with some of the other Welsh lords (Deheubarth and North Powys) whose overlord had switched from Llywelyn to Edward to attack English holdings. The first strike was on Palm Sunday in 1282 when they captured Hawarden Castle and laid siege to Rhuddlan Castle. The Lanercost Chronicle described it:

...the Welsh nation, unable to pass their lives in peace, broke over their borders on Palm Sunday, carrying fire and sword among the people engaged in procession, and even laid siege [to Flint and Rhuddlan]; whose Prince Llywelyn, deceived (more's the pity) by the advice of his brother David, fiercely attacked his lord the King;

This success emboldened other Welsh territories to rise up against the English overlords. Llywelyn himself joined in, after sending a letter to Archbishop of Canterbury John Peckham, stating that he was not involved in planning the revolt, but now felt he needed to take steps to support his brother.

Peckham tried to mediate, suggesting Llywelyn be offered some lands in England as a reward for standing down, and Dafydd should agree to go on Crusade as penance. Neither man accepted this suggestion, however, and Edward was not willing to give up anything as a "reward" for rebellion. Five years earlier, Edward had entered Wales with an army intended to punish the uprising and put it to rest. Now he wanted a more decisive conclusion. Nothing but complete conquest of Wales would satisfy him.

This would be the end of Llywelyn and Dafydd. There was one positive for Dafydd: he became Prince of Wales for a little over half a year upon Llywelyn's death. How did Llywelyn die? There are a few stories about that. Tomorrow I'll explain the many deaths of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd.

The Conquest of Wales

Hostilities between Wales and anyone living to the east who wanted to control them was ongoing for centuries, but it wasn't until Edward I of England that Wales became part of a United Kingdom. Edward's father, Henry III, was not a very effective ruler when it came to war, but Edward was prepared, after Henry's death in 1272, to make great strides in asserting the power of England on the island (and on the continent).

Henry wasn't completely ineffective on the Welsh issue. In 1267 the Treaty of Montgomery was signed by Llywelyn ap Gruffudd (1223 - 1282), Prince of Gwynedd—who held the largest unified part of Wales at the time—and Henry to stop recent hostilities and acknowledge Llywelyn as Prince of Wales—the only time a king of England established a Welsh leader's right to that title. All Llywelyn had to do was acknowledge the king of England as his liege. Llywelyn was willing to do that if it meant England left him alone. (The illustration shows Llywelyn on the left, Edward on the right.)

In 1274, the leader of Powys, Gruffydd ap Gwenwynwyn, and Llywelyn's younger brother, Dafydd ap Gruffydd, decided to throw their lot in with Edward for protection against some of the English lords (Roger Mortimer was one) who were attacking Welsh lands. Edward commanded Llywelyn to come to pay homage—as required by the Treaty of Montgomery. Llywelyn refused, and further angered Edward by arranging marriage (without Edward's blessing) to Simon de Montfort's daughter Eleanor. de Montfort had started a rebellion against Edward's father in 1263, trying to expand the statutes of Magna Carta and take more power from the Crown. This marriage would be advantageous to Llywelyn, and might mean de Montfort's descendant would rule (at least part of) Wales, but Edward saw it as an insult to his family.

Favorable to Edward was the fact that many nobles of Wales did not appreciate Llywelyn's heavy-handed overlordship. As the English started smaller incursions into Welsh territory, long before a major push with the main army, they were joined by the Welsh rulers who saw a path to having more freedom if Llywelyn were thrust from power. In July 1277, Edward's army marched north into Gwynedd with 6000 English troops and 9000 Welsh.

There is no battle named for what happened next, because there was no battle. The invading army never had to fight: Llywelyn realized he was outnumbered, and disliked by his own people, and accepted Edward's negotiation in order to avoid damage to the population and the countryside. This led to the Treaty of Aberconwy in November 1277. The Treaty left Llywelyn with the western part of Gwynedd and the title Prince of Wales, but the eastern part was divided between Llywelyn's brother David and Edward himself. With very little effort, Edward now controlled much of Wales.

This arrangement lasted five years, until David decided he wasn't happy with the little he was given, but that's a story for tomorrow. (Spoiler alert: I wrote about the result of Dafydd's efforts over a decade ago, if you aren't squeamish.)

The Laws of Hywel Dda

Yesterday we learned about Hywel Dda ("Howell the Good"), the 10th-century Welsh ruler, and mentioned that the parliament of Wales is housed in a building called "Hywel's House." The reason for this millenia-old tribute is Hywel's legacy in transforming Welsh law.

Wales was originally a number of small kingdoms with their own laws and practices. Hywel brought most of the kingdoms under one rule. For the sake of convenience and fairness, he created a set of laws that would apply to all the territories over which he had influence. Or did he?

Known in Welsh as Cyfraith Hywel, the Laws of Hywel (the earliest copies we have are Latin versions from the early 13th century) have a prologue that explains how Hywel called on priests and lawyers to meet in Dyfed and create a common set of laws. This anecdote might not be true: since we have no earlier Welsh versions, there is a theory that the story of the gathering of lawyers and priests was created specifically to counter the objections of the then-current Archbishop of Canterbury, John Peckham. Peckham, acting on behalf of King Edward I, was very critical of the Welsh, their ruler Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, and the bishop of St. David's in Wales. The gathering of priests might have been a story concocted to suggested that Wales' legal system had Christian influence at the foundation.

Whatever the origin of these laws, cultural memory attributes them to Hywel. One of the features that stands out is recognition of the rights of women. A small sample from a 1915 English translation:

Chap. i. The laws of the women.

1. The first of them is: if a woman be given in marriage, she is to abide by her agweddi (marriage portion) unto the end of the seventh year; and if there be three nights wanting of the seventh current year, and they separate, let them share into two portions everything belonging to them.

54. If a man willeth to separate from his wife, and after he shall have separated, willet another wife; the first, that has been divorced, is free: for no man is to have two wives.

55. Every woman is to go the way she willeth, freely, for she is not to be revenant; and nothing is due from her, except her amobyr (marriage fee), and only one amobyr; for a woman owes no ebedi (a relief payable to the superior lord), only her amobyr; therefore, as a man is to pay only one ebediw, in like manner, a woman is to pay only one amobyr; for there is no ebediw from her, only her amobyr. [link]

Hywel died in 950, but the Law lived on...until 1284 and the Statute of Rhuddlan, that is, which was established by Edward I of England. To do that, however, Edward would have to conquer Wales, but that's a story we'll start tomorrow.

Hywel Dda

Hywel ap Cadell was known as Hywel Dda ("Howel the Good"), a Welsh king who accomplished so much that his name is attached to the government of Wales even now.

His father was Cadell ap Rhodri (854–909), king of Seisyllwg from 872 until his death in 909, when it passed to Hywel. A few years before Cadell's death, he and Hywel had conquered the kingdom of Dyfed, and Hywel ruled a combined Seisyllwg and Dyfed, calling it Deheubarth.

Controlling a large part of Wales made Hywel a force to be reckoned with, but rather than fight the Anglo-Saxons, he made an alliance with them. Edward the Elder (King of the Anglo-Saxons from 899 to 924) and Hywel joined forces to fight Vikings. Another first for a Welsh leader was Hywel's pilgrimage to Rome in 928.

He continued an alliance with Edward the Elder's son, Æthelstan. Æthelstan wanted to rule the entire island of Britain, but Hywel's voluntary alliance or "submission" to Æthelstan meant he was not subject to attack or even scrutiny, while Æthelstan focused on conquering the territories to the north. Hywel supported Æthelstan's invasion of Scotland in 934, for instance.

When another of Edward the Elder's sons, Edmund, became king, Hywel's cousin Idwal, King of Gwynedd, took a stand for Welsh independence and raised an army against English forces in 942. Idwal was killed fighting against Edmund, and Hywel was able to prevent (with Edmund's approval) the throne of Gwynedd from going to Idwal's sons. Hywel exiled the sons and made himself ruler of Gwynedd, putting him in control of almost all of Wales.

The modern Welsh parliament, the Senedd Cymru, is housed in a building called Tŷ Hywel, which means "Hywel House." The original assembly chamber (now outgrown) is Siambr Hywel ("Hywel's Chamber"). Why is his name honored this way a thousand years after he ruled? I'll explain his impact on Welsh governance tomorrow.

Fighting the Welsh

When the people of Northern Europe sailed westward and landed in the island of Great Britain, there were already people living there. These Brythonic people were slowly driven westward by the increasingly numerous Anglo-Saxons, until they were pushed into the farthest western part of Britain. The Anglo-Saxons called these natives Wīelisċ, from which comes the modern word "Welsh"; the area in which they settled was called Wales.

One of the first recorded battles between the Anglo-Saxons and those who would later settle in Wales was the Battle of Crayford. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle wrote:

A.D. 456.  This year Hengest and Aesc his son fought with the Britons on the spot that is called Crayford, and there slew 4000 men, and the Britons then left the land of Kent, and in great fear fled to London.

About 10 years later, the Britons had a victory against Hengist and his son at Wippidsfleet, but the Anglo-Saxons regained ground in Kent. They ultimately captured the castle of Anderida on the Saxon Shore (south coast) and the leader Aelle established the kingdom of Sussex ("South Saxon"). This was in 491 according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but historians think it took place in 471. Another Anglo-Saxon, Cerdic, established the kingdom of Wessex ("West Saxons") after driving Britons away from the Bournemouth area.

It is around this time that the legends of Arthur, King of the Britons, gain popularity. He is a leader who opposes (successfully) the Anglo-Saxon invaders. The Historia Brittonum ("History of the Britons") by Nennius (borrowing from Bede, and Gildas' De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, "On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain") lists several battles, none of which can be historically proven.

Over the centuries, it is no exageration to say that scores of battles—and probably hundreds, counting skirmishes too small to gain the attention of contemporary chroniclers—took place between Britons and the invaders. Until, that is, a kind of peace was managed by a Welsh leader powerful enough to unite the various kingdoms of Wales and form an alliance with the kingdom of Wessex. That was Hywel Dda ("Howel the Good"), and I'll tell you about him tomorrow.

The Next Earl(s) of Chester

Ranulf de Blondeville died in October 1232 without leaving an heir to the title Earl of Chester, so King Henry III needed to choose one. Fortunately, the 5th Earl, Hugh de Kevelioc (Ranulf's father), had more than one child. Unfortunately, the other child he had besides Ranulf was female, Matilda (or Maud) of Chester (1171 - 1233). Fortunately, she had a few sons, the eldest of which was John of Scotland, born 1207. Why "of Scotland'?  Matilda had been married to David of Scotland, the 8th Earl of Huntingdon (1152 - 1219).

When Ranulf died, Matilda inherited (along with three sisters) a part of his estates, but as the eldest she inherited the earldom suo jure, Latin for "in [his/her] own right," meaning the title is hers and not derived from marriage to the earl. Matilda at the time was about 60 years old, and so one month after she inherited the title, she gave it (with King Henry's permission) to her son, and the title of 7th Earl went to John of Scotland. Matilda died 6 January 1232.

John died in 1237, and following the accidental family pattern left no heirs but had sisters. The sisters inherited his estates, and agreed among them that the eldest sister's son should become the 8th Earl. That would have been William de Forz. Henry did not like this solution: he saw estates being divided among women and perhaps didn't want the earldom being run by an increasingly Scottish dynasty. Henry purchased the honor (estate) of Chester from the sisters in 1246.

In 1254 there was a Third Creation. Henry gave the title to his son Edward. Since Edward would later become King Edward I, in 1264 there was a Fourth Creation and the new Earl of Chester was Simon de Montfort, who was the 6th Earl of Leicester but now became the 1st Earl of Chester of the Fourth Creation.

King Edward I followed in his father's footsteps and gave his son, who would later become King Edward II, the title. Edward of Caernarvon was Earl of Chester of the Fifth Creation.

As Edward II, the Sixth Creation was made for his son, Edward Plantagenet, who would later become King Edward III.

The Earldom of Chester (seen in the map above in the top right, in purple) was a powerful entity and valuable as a staging for some of the wars against the Welsh. Tomorrow we'll start looking at conflicts between England and Wales.

The 4th and 6th Earl

Ranulf de Blondeville was the 6th Earl of Chester, but also (sort of) the 4th. The Earldom of Chester was created in 1067 by William the Conqueror and the title given to Gerbod the Fleming, the 1st Earl. He ultimately became a monk after feeling guilt over killing Arnulf III, Count of Flanders. Although Gerbod had children, none of them succeeded as earl.

So in 1071, William created a new Earl, Hugh d'Avranches, who was then called the 1st Earl of Chester. This made him, in the language of such things, the "1st Earl of the Second Creation." Unfortunately for d'Avranches, he and his family were aboard the White Ship, and perished in that disaster, in 1120.

A new earl had to be created, and that was Ranulf le Meschin, both of whose parents were from powerful Norman families and had ties to William the Conqueror's son Henry. He was now the 3rd earl, and the title passed from him to his son and then grandson, and then his great-grandson, Ranulf de Blondeville. Ranulf was therefore the 6th Earl of the Second Creation. Because he was only the fourth in the dynasty begun by Ranulf le Meschin, he was sometimes referred to as the 4th Earl.

Ranulf de Blondeville supported King John and his successor, Henry III, working with William Marshal against the rebellious barons and against the French who invaded during the civil upheaval.

He joined the Fifth Crusade, and was in favor of ending it when the Sultan of Damietta offered them Bethlehem, Nazareth, Jerusalem, central Palestine and Galilee if they would just give up attacking Damietta and get out of Egypt. The papal legate leading the Crusade, Pelagius, refused the offer.

Ranulf returned to an England under the control largely of Hubert de Burgh, who was managing things for the young Henry III. Loyal to the person wearing the crown, Ranulph clashed with de Burgh's policies. He was a witness to the re-issuing of Magna Carta in 1225 and led the English army in 1230-31 into Poitou against Philip II. He died on 26 October 1232, about 60 years old.

Because of his sentimental attachment to different places, his remains were divided. He had been briefly made the castellan of Wallingford Castle (the remains of Wallingford are seen above), and his viscera were buried there. His body went to Chester, to be interred in St. Werburg's. His heart was buried at Dieulacres Abbey, which he founded.

He did not have a son to become the 7th (or 5th) Earl, so what happened next? The king did not have to create a new earl, because there was a way around the situation. I'll explain that tomorrow.

Ranulf de Blondeville

Yesterday I mentioned how Roger de Lacy was required, as Constable of Chester, to support Ranulf de Blondeville. Ranulph was his overlord, being the Earl of Chester (the 4th Earl or the 6th Earl, depending on how you counted). He was born in 1170, and became earl on the death of his father when Ranulph was only 11 years old.

He came into his majority in 1188 or 1189, and was knighted. In 1189 he also married Constance, Duchess of Brittany. She had been married to Henry II's son Geoffrey II, who had died in 1186 at 27 years of age. Henry wanted Brittany under his control, so pushed the marriage to one of his vassals. Through this marriage Ranulph also became the Earl of Richmond.

Ranulph styled himself "Duke of Brittany," but he had no real influence there and no one else considered him to be the duke, nor did he spend a lot of time there. When Henry's son Richard was in power, he summoned Constance and her son by Geoffrey, Arthur, to Rouen. Arthur had, however, been quietly taken to the court of Philip II of France, Richard's rival, to be raised with Philip's son Louis VIII. The people of Brittany did not want England dictating their duchess's husband or trying to rule them, especially in absentia. Constance requested a divorce on the grounds of desertion, and got it in 1199.

In 1200 Ranulph married Clemence of Fougères, of a Norman family, to extend his contacts in Normandy. King John was suspicious of him, especially since Ranulph had opposed Prince John's power grab while King Richard was on Crusade, but John overcame concerns about Ranulph by first confiscating his estates and then, after deeming Ranulph had learned his lesson, returning them and showering Ranulph with gifts to further ensure loyalty. Ranulph became a strong supporter of John afterward, supporting him in the First Barons War.

Ranulph was a witness to the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 and, because he had barons under his earldom, created his own "Magna Carta of Chester" to appease them. (Magna Carta dd not apply to the earldom of Chester, which was a separate feudal domain.)

There was a lot of fighting to come, even after Magna Carta, and I'll go into that and Ranulph's death and his burial in three separate places, but ponder this question between now and next time: how was he either the 4th or the 6th earl?

See you here tomorrow.

Roger de Lacy

Roger de Lacy is one of those people for whom I started this blog: a person not famous enough to be of interest to the Modern Age but who was significant in his time.

Born in 1170 to the Baron of Halton John Fitz Richard and Alice of Essex, he was also known as Roger Fitz John, but also went by Roger de Lisours for a time, hoping he might inherit the de Lisours lands after the current holder (his paternal grandmother) died. She held a barony because of her relationship to its previous owner, Robert de Lacy, the Baron of Pontefract.

Robert de Lacy died in 1193, and Roger agreed to change his name to de Lacy as part of the agreement with his grandmother to give up his desire for the de Lisours lands but inherit the de Lacy-connected Pontefract. This agreement also made him Lord of Bowland and Lord of Blackburnshire. He was also hereditary Constable of Chester.

The problem with Pontefract was that Robert de Lacy had not supported King Henry I in the power struggle with his brother, Robert Curthose. Henry confiscated Pontefract Castle as a result, and Roger had to pay King Richard I 3000 marks for the "Honour of Pontefract"; Roger could live in the castle and take care of it, but its owner was still the Crown.

Roger stayed in England during the Third Crusade, although he was a powerful noble with several lands from which he could draw men to accompany Richard. His father went along, however, and died at the Siege of Acre.

When John became king, Roger was part of the noble escort to bring King William "the Lion" of Scotland to John. John trusted Roger to be commander of Château Gaillard, the fortress built by Richard as a staging point in his quest to re-take lands in Normandy that Philip of France had conquered while Richard was in the Holy land and imprisoned. That put Roger in charge during the siege by Philip, which was discussed yesterday.

de Lacy survived the siege and returned to England, where he worked to reinforce Pontefract Castle. Meanwhile, there was trouble in Wales. The Earl of Chester, Ranulph by name, took a small army into Wales and, finding himself opposed and outnumbered, was besieged in Rhuddlan Castle, whence he sent a message to the Constable of Chester for military support. Roger de Lacy gathered a bunch of minstrels and other sketchy figures and led them to Rhuddlan. It was a very large group, and seeing it approach frightened the Welsh, thinking they were about to face a fierce army. The Welsh fled. Ranulph conferred upon de Lacy the patronage of minstrels, an "honor" which de Lacy gave away to his steward.

Roger de lacy married Maud de Clere and had two children. John de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, and a daughter who married a Scottish lord of Galloway.

So what was Ranulph doing in Wales? Why did he think going there was a good idea? Let's look into his life tomorrow.

Château Gaillard After Richard

Château Gaillard had a long history after its creation by Richard I, and what remains can still be visited today.

Richard I built it in Normandy as a staging site for his war with Philip II of France, but died shortly after its completion. His younger brother and successor, John, was unsuccessful in defending his lands against Philip, and lost Gaillard along with Normandy in 1204.

After capturing several other Norman castles, Philip besieged Gaillard in September 1203. The castle might have survived a prolonged siege, being well-provisioned. The citizens of Andeli—the town that grew up at the base of the hill on which Gaillard was situated—fled to the castle to escape the Normans, and the additional mouths that needed food and water stretched the supplies thin. Furthermore, John did not send any troops that winter to help the garrison, and Gaillard fell into Philip's hand in March of 1204.

The castellan, Roger de Lacy, requested of the surrounding French that the civilians be given safe passage. Over the course of two days, about 1000 civilians departed the castle and went safely through the French army. When Philip found out, he was furious, and forbade any more leniency. He knew that more people to feed would shorten the ability to withstand a siege. When de Lacy sent out the rest of the civilians, the French attacked them. Hundreds of non-combatants found themselves attacked by soldiers on one side, and up against locked gates on the other. They huddled at the base of the outer walls, and many starved over the winter. In February 1204, Philip arrived on the scene, and ordered that the remaining civilians be fed and let go.

The French got through the defenses in stages: first the outermost wall was breached by undermining it, then an inner barrier was breached by finding a latrine that allowed them to enter the chapel. Once the French were inside, they lowered the drawbridge for the rest of the army. de Lacy kept retreating to inner defenses, but finally surrendered on 6 March.

Gaillard was useful for many purposes. It was the prison for Margaret of Burgundy in the Tour de Nesle Affair. During hostilities between England and Scotland, King David II of Scotland fled to France and was hosted at Gaillard with some retainers from 1333, when he was only nine years old, until his return to Scotland in 1341.

The castle switched from English to French possession several times during the Hundred Years War, until the last switch in 1449 when the French took it and have had possession ever since. By 1573, however, it was uninhabited and in need of radical repair. Henry IV of France ordered it demolished in 1599.

Poor Roger de Lacy, who did his best but had no support from his king. I'll tell you abut him tomorrow.

Château Gaillard

It was called the Bellum Castrum de Rupe ("the Fair Castle at the Rock"), and has a fascinating history, starting with the illegal seizure of the site.

It was built on a hill overlooking the River Seine in the Andeli territory of Walter de Coutances, Archbishop of Rouen. Richard I of England, King of England and Duke of Normandy, wanted the site for a fortress from which he could mount a campaign against King Philip II of France, who was encroaching on Richard's continental possessions. The archbishop refused, but Richard seized it anyway, causing a controversy that was explained here.

Although a treaty with Philip agreed that neither of them would attempt to build on the site, Richard went ahead anyway, and created a magnificent fortress in a mere two years. Richard's father, Henry II, had spent enormous sums building castles to protect the royal possessions, and Richard's efforts in building were significantly reduced, but Château Gaillard cost £12,000 from 1196-98, whereas only £7,000 was spent on construction in England.

Some of the earliest information we have on castle construction is recorded concerning Gaillard. We see lists of payments to miners, quarrymen, and the carters who brought stone to the site; stonecutters, masons, and lime workers for mortar; carpenters, smiths, assistants, and even water carriers; and soldiers who guarded the site while the work went on. Missing is mention of a master mason, who would have overseen the project, and it is suggested that Richard himself chose and ordered the design. Richard spent a lot of time during the two years of construction on the site.

It was designed with three enclosures separated by dry moats, and with machicolations, which were protected openings above the outside edge of the walls so that defenders could shoot down on anyone reaching the base of the wall [link].

There were incidents during construction. William of Newburgh wrote of a "rain of blood" that fell in May 1198, that alarmed the men as a bad omen, but Richard did not let it stay the work. Also, when some Welsh mercenaries were ambushed by the French, three French soldiers were captured and thrown off the walls to execute them.

Richard did not have much opportunity to enjoy his creation, dying less than a year after it was finished. The history of Gaillard did not stop there, however, and tomorrow I'll tell you how his successor, John, lost it (as he lost so many things), not long after.

Walter and King John

Walter de Coutances was a courtier and then Archbishop of Rouen whose life was tied up in the careers of three kings of England: Henry II, Richard I, and lastly John.

When Richard died and the throne passed to his younger brother, the Archbishop of Rouen had the privilege of investing him as the new Duke of Normandy (on 25 April 1199). John initially pledged to protect and support the Norman church, and he confirmed Rouen's possession of the important seaport of Dieppe (granted by Richard in recompense for appropriating Andeli against Walter's wishes). On the other hand, John took issue with some of Walter's other rights over Rouen's territory, and forced Walter to pay money to retain some of those rights.

In May 1200, Walter was asked to mediate between John and Philip II of France. Although the two men had worked in concert while Richard was king, as king in his own right John became Philip's rival, starting hostilities that would go very badly for John and England. (The illustration is of a clash between Philip and Richard from a 14th century chronicle.)

Walter had a later problem over an issue that numerous kings and prelates clashed over: the election of clergy. A bishop in Normandy died and the cathedral chapter elected their own successor. Walter wanted a different man to get the position (with John's agreement), since it was a bishop under his jurisdiction. There were two sides to the ensuing conflict, and Pope Innocent III stepped in to make a choice, but did not go with the choice of Walter and John, instead choosing an archdeacon named Silvester. Walter refused to consecrate him. Innocent chose another archbishop to perform the ceremony, but John prevented Silvester from assuming his role. In a typical move, Innocent pronounced an Interdict for Normandy, so no religious services or sacraments could be performed. This move always horrified the Christian populace, so John finally relented.

Innocent did not always clash with Walter and John. In 1202 he authorized Walter to use his role as archbishop to punish those in Normandy who would rebel against John's commandments. John lost Normandy to Philip in 1204, and Walter simply shifted his loyalty to Philip, who supported Walter.

Walter de Coutances died on 16 November 1207, and was buried in Rouen Cathedral. He was possibly not even 50 years old at the time. His desire for wealth meant he left behind a large library or religious and legal books, as well as classical authors. He also had a large number of jewels and vestments.

I want to talk more about the clash between Walter and Richard over Andeli, and the glorious fortress built by Richard on the site. Tomorrow we will visit the Château Gaillard!