11THE RETURN GIVING THE RESULTS OF THE INQUEST IS SPECI®CALLY DAT...

1181.

¹¹

The return giving the results of the inquest is speci®cally datedafter the marriage of Geoffrey and Constance. It is possible, however,that the writ ordering the inquest was issued by Henry II and Geoffreybefore the marriage and hence before Geoffrey began to rule Brittanyindependently. If so, it would have been consistent with the policyadopted by the royal chancery, of issuing writs containing Henry II'sorders to agents in Brittany in the joint names of the king and Geoffrey`comes Britannie'. The inquest must be understood, in any event, in thewider context of Henry II's support for the cause of the archbishop ofDol against the archbishop of Tours, which had less to do with Henry'spolicy towards Brittany than with his relations with the king ofFrance.

¹²

The second example is the subjection of the monastery of Saint-Magloire de Lehon to the abbey of Marmoutier, which was negotiatedduring 1181 and was con®rmed by a charter of Henry II made atChinon in 1182. Although the monastery of Saint-Magloire de Lehon

10

Le Patourel, `Henri II', p. 104±5; cf. B.A. Pocquet du Haut-JusseÂ, `Les PlantageneÃts et la

Bretagne',

AB

53 (1946), 2±27 at 11±12.

11

EnqueÃte, pp. 32±77.

¹²

See pp. 69±75.

was situated in Brittany, the other parties were in Tours (the abbey ofMarmoutier) and the French royal principality (the abbey of Saint-Magloire de Paris). This fact alone explains the involvement of HenryII, along with Philip Augustus, in ratifying and con®rming the ®nalsettlement. Henry II also acted as arbitrator in a subsidiary disputebetween Albert, bishop of Saint-Malo, and the abbot of Marmoutier.Comparison of the charters of Henry II, Philip Augustus and Geoffrey,all con®rming the agreed terms of the transfer, indicates that Geoffreywas the lord who had the closest interest in the subject-matter of theagreement and the enforcement of its terms. Geoffrey's charter wasissued in 1181, notifying all concerned of the agreement. The con®rma-tion charters of the two kings, in contrast, were not issued until 1182.

¹³

Subsequently, there are two occasions on which Henry II appears tohave used or threatened military sanctions against Geoffrey withinBrittany. Around 1182, according to Robert de Torigni, the city ofRennes was seized and occupied by royal troops, then forcibly retakenby Geoffrey. Torigni unfortunately gives no explanation of theseevents. All that can be said is that, since Geoffrey also attacked Becherelin the course of these hostilities, Rolland de Dinan may have beeninvolved in an assertion of royal authority which con¯icted withGeoffrey's authority. Torigni receives some corroboration from amiracle-story cited by Le Baud, which describes the burning of a village`outre Dinan' at the time when Geoffrey `embrassa' the city ofRennes.

¹⁴

Roger of Howden records that, after Geoffrey had made peace withhis father following the 1183 rebellion, Henry II seized all of Geoffrey'scastles and forti®cations in Brittany `in misericordia sua'.

¹⁵

It is dif®cultto see how the king could, in practice, have disseised Geoffrey of all ofhis castles in Brittany. Moreover, by Michaelmas that year, they werereconciled to the extent that Henry had allowed Geoffrey into posses-sion of the honour of Richmond.

¹⁶

It is more likely that the seizure wasordered in theory, or threatened, but not carried out in practice.Henry II's point must have been that his sons ultimately held theirlands of him, with Geoffrey holding Brittany of the king as duke ofNormandy. This does not prove that, after 1181, Henry II normally hadany involvement in the government of Brittany beyond sovereigntyover the duke. It seems more probable that, as Henry II granted to

13

Actes d'Henri II, nos.

dcxv

and

dcxvi; BN ms latin 12879, f. 182;

Preuves, col. 690;

Charters, nos.

Ge4 and 5.

14

RT,

ii, p. 115; C. d'Hozier (ed.),

Histoire de Bretagne, avec les chroniques des maisons de Vitre et de

Laval par Pierre Le Baud, Paris, 1638, p. 196.

15

Gesta, p. 304.

¹⁶

See p. 128.

Geoffrey each piece of the ducal inheritance, starting with most ofBrittany in 1181, he granted the right to govern autonomously, withoutpaternal interference, at least as long as Geoffrey's exercise of authoritydid not con¯ict with the king's interests.geoffrey `dux britannie', 1181±1186`The [grand] ceremony which marked Geoffrey's accession to thecounty of Brittany in 1180 (sic) ± for which ChreÂtien de Troyes wroteErec,' remains, alas, a historical fantasy.

¹⁷

Details of the marriage and anyinvestiture ceremony are completely lacking, but there is ®rm evidencethat Geoffrey and Constance were married in 1181, before the end ofAugust. The only contemporary chronicler to record the event isRobert de Torigni, who records it brie¯y under the rubric for 1182, butfollowing immediately after a record of Henry II's crossing to Englandin late July 1181.

¹⁸

A charter of Fontevraud, dated `1181' and during theponti®cate of Alexander III (died 30 August 1181) refers to Geoffrey as`dux Britannie'.

¹⁹

The wedding had certainly taken place by October,since an act of the seneschal of Rennes is dated `mclxxxi menseOctobri . . . anno videlicet quo predictus comes [Britannie] duxituxorem'.

²⁰

It is also certain that in 1181 Geoffrey became duke of Brittany,jureuxoris. This is made clear from the terms of a charter which is the earliestknown to have been issued by Geoffrey as duke, in the last months of