. 13
( 55 .)


at Montmirail early in 1169, the young King Henry did homage to
Louis VII for Anjou and Brittany, and in turn, Geoffrey did homage to
his eldest brother for Brittany.51 The effect was that the Breton barons'
pact with Louis VII was nulli®ed and they were obliged to submit to
Angevin rule.
Notwithstanding the events of 1166, contemporary sources variously
place the submission of Brittany to the direct rule of Henry II between
the years 1167 and 1170. According to the chronicle of Saint-Etienne de
Caen, in 1167, `subjugavit sibi rex Henricus totam Britanniam'. The
chronicle of the Breton abbey of Saint-Gildas de Rhuys recorded, for
1168, `Henricus rex Anglie minorem Britanniam subjugat dominio'.
Sometimes, not unreasonably considering the extraordinary fact of
Conan's abdication, chroniclers con¯ate Henry II's domination of
Brittany with the death of Conan IV, placing both around 1168±69, as
for example, Ralph of Diss and the annals of the abbey of Saint-Serge
d'Angers, `mclxix . . . Conanus junior comes Britannie . . . moriuntur.
Unde Henricus rex Anglie totam Britanniam sue ditioni subjugavit
. . .'.52
The duchy of Brittany was now recognised as forming part of the
Angevin empire. This is demonstrated by the fact that, when he seemed
mortally ill in 1170, Henry II included the duchy amongst the lands to
be divided between his sons. Speci®cally, he bequeathed Brittany, with
its heiress, to Geoffrey.53 `Jordan Fantosme's Chronicle' has Henry II
declare, at the outbreak of the revolt in 1173, `Les baruns de Bretaine
. . . Tresqu'en Finebusterre sunt en mes poestez'.54
The extent of the submission of Brittany after the treaty of Montmi-
rail is illustrated by the fact that no further military action was necessary
and Henry II was con®dent enough to send Geoffrey to Brittany by
himself, although he was only ten years of age. In May 1169, Geoffrey
visited Rennes and was received in the cathedral by Stephen de
Fougeres, now bishop of Rennes, Albert, bishop of Saint-Malo, and
Robert de Torigni, the abbot of Mont Saint-Michel. There Geoffrey
received the homage of the barons of Brittany. That August, the
Bretons obeyed Henry II's summons to muster in Normandy.55

RT, ii, pp. 11±2.

RHF, xii, p. 780; Preuves, col. 151; RD, p. 332; Ann. ang., p. 104 (events of 1169±71).

RH, ii, pp. 5±6; Gesta, p. 7; Ann. ang., p. 16.

R. C. Johnston (ed.), Jordan Fantosme's chronicle, Oxford, 1981, pp. 12±3, lines 139±40.

RT, ii, pp. 13±14.

Brittany and the Angevins
Henry II held his Christmas court of 1169 at Nantes, with Geoffrey
present, and there the bishops and barons of Brittany swore their
®delity. After Christmas, Henry II and Geoffrey `circuierunt castella
Britannie, accipientes ®delitates et obligantias a comitibus et baronibus
et liberis hominibus Britannie de quibus antea non acceperant'. Pre-
sumably, Eudo de Porhoet declined to render this homage because,
according to Roger of Howden, Henry II impleaded him and seized
`fere . . . tote honore et potestate quam prius in Britannia habuit'.56
Other contemporary sources indicate that Henry II actually took
military action against Eudo in the early months of 1170.57
Conan IV's death in February 1171 must have come as a relief to
Henry II. `Conanus dux Britannie moritur', wrote Robert de Torigni,
`et tota Brittannia . . . in dominio regis transierunt'.58 Although there is
no evidence that Conan organised or even inspired any of the opposition
between 1166 and 1171, his continued presence within the duchy and
use of the ducal title must have been awkward. Henry II hastened to
Pontorson, on the threshold of the duchy, and stayed there for fourteen
days. He was probably joined by the young Geoffrey.59 From Pontorson,

the king launched a campaign against Guihomar de Leon, destroying his
castles and retaining three in his own hand. Either Conan IV had been
unsuccessful in suppressing Guihomar the previous year, or the latter had
been ready to rebel as soon as Conan died. En route to the barony of

Leon, Henry II probably visited Guingamp to attend to other matters
arising from Conan's death.61 Back at Pontorson, in early May, he
received Guihomar's formal submission. The king ordered Guihomar to
give back the lands he had taken from his neighbours (`de feudis
vicinorum') or submit to judgement `coram rege' over these, and to give
back the lands he had taken from his own men or do right to them in his
own court if the king should so order by royal writ.62 Subsequent events
Gesta, p. 5; RD, i, p. 337; RW, p. 64.

RH, ii, p. 3; RHF, xii, p. 564; Preuves, col. 153. The latter source, the annals of the abbey of

Paimpont, seems to describe the 1168 campaign. Whatever action Henry took against Eudo de
Porhoet in 1170 must have been brief, because the king was in Normandy by 2 February (Gesta,
p. 5).

Conan died on 18 or 20 February 1171 (Cart. Quimperle, p. 108; necrology of the abbey of

Landevennec (BN ms fr. 22337, f. 55v)). Torigni (ii, p. 25±6) records Conan's death in 1171,
and the context of the entry suggests that Conan died before Lent.
Charters, pp. 6±7.

J. C. Robertson (ed.), Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, Rolls Series, London, 1885, vii,

pp. 485±6, letter no. dcclvi.
The editors of the Actes d'Henri II attributed a charter made by Henry II at Guingamp (no.

cclxxiv) to the 1168 campaign. There is no evidence that Henry travelled so far to the north-

west in 1168, and arguably this charter was made in 1171, when Henry's route towards Leon
would have taken in Guingamp.
RT, ii, p. 26; Robertson (ed.), Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, letter no. dcclvi.

Henry II and Brittany
would prove that Guihomar had no intention of respecting these terms,

but for the time being Henry II could feel that the Leon problem was
solved and that Brittany was settling down under Angevin rule.
The king's sense of relief is manifested by the fact that, within a few
months, he had withdrawn William de Lanvallay back to England,
replacing him with a seneschal of Rennes who was not a royal curialis.63
Henry II visited Brittany again in September 1172, apparently with
entirely peaceful purposes. He left just before Michaelmas, having
convened a council of the bishops of Normandy and Brittany at
Avranches, on the frontier between the two duchies. In the same year,
at Le Mans, Henry II con®rmed the privileges of the nunnery of
Locmaria at Quimper in the presence of the bishops of Rennes, Nantes
and Quimper.64
After two years of apparent peace in Brittany, the marches with
Normandy, Maine and Anjou became a major theatre of the 1173
revolt.65 According to Roger of Howden, Henry II sent orders to his
castellans, including those in Brittany, to strengthen and hold their
castles.66 The Breton whose participation in the revolt is best recorded
is Ralph de Fougeres. First he planned to hold the castle of Fougeres
against the king, but ¯ed when Henry II arrived there. Ralph escaped to
the barony of Combour, where the castle of Combour was handed over
to the rebels by the king's men, as was the town of Dol. In August
1173, Henry II sent a formidable contingent consisting of Norman
knights and mercenaries, led by William du Hommet, against the rebels
at Dol. The rebels sortied out to meet them on 20 August, but were
overwhelmed, and those unable to ¯ee withdrew into the keep of Dol,
where they were besieged. The siege lasted until Henry II himself
arrived from Rouen on 26 August, whereupon the defenders surren-
dered to him.67
Meanwhile, Eudo de Porhoet had returned from the Ile-de-France.
Instead of joining the rebels at Dol, he returned to his own lands,
refortifying the castle of Josselin and taking the ducal castle of
William de Lanvallay became castellan of Winchester between September 1171 and September

1172 (Pipe Roll 18 Henry II, pp. 78, 84).
Gesta, p. 31; RT, ii, p. 33; Actes d'Henri II, no. ccccxlix; C. Fagnen, `Etude d'un privilege

‚ Á
d'Henri II en faveur du prieure de Locmaria, a Quimper', Gwechall, le Finisterre Autrefois: Bulletin
‚‚ ‚
de la Societe Finisterienne d'Histoire et d'Archeologie 1 (1978), 37±64.
Á ‚
Ralph de Fougeres, William de Tinteniac, Guethenoc d'Ancenis and `Gwenis' de Palvel are the

only Bretons named in the two lists of supporters of the young King Henry at the beginning of
the revolt given in Gesta (pp. 45±7).
Gesta, p. 42.

RT, ii, pp. 42±6; Gesta, pp. 56±8; RH, pp. 51±3. The siege of Dol is described in `Jordan

Fantosme's Chronicle' (pp. 13±9). See also the briefer accounts in Roger of Wendover (RW,
pp. 96±7) and the annals of the abbey of St-Aubin d'Angers (Ann. ang., p. 37).

Brittany and the Angevins
Ploermel.68 Henry II did not, however, take action against Eudo at this
stage. His priority was the security of the Breton marches.
Having secured Combour and Fougeres, the two Breton baronies
marching with Normandy, the king's action in Brittany for the
remainder of the revolt was concentrated on the frontier south of the

barony of Vitre. Probably in 1173, Henry II's mercenaries destroyed the
marcher castle of La Guerche. According to Robert de Torigni,
‚ ‚ ‚
Geoffrey de Pouance-La Guerche, Bonabbe de Rouge `et alii exher-
edati de Media', then carried on a guerilla campaign from the forests.69
Further south still, in the spring of 1174, Henry II launched an attack
from Anjou against the barony of Ancenis. In mid-June, the king took
the castle of Ancenis, reforti®ed it and appointed Maurice de Craon
royal castellan. Royal troops ravaged the surrounding `provincia',
destroying vineyards and orchards.70
There is no evidence that the young Geoffrey led, or was even
involved with, those Breton barons who joined the revolt, spending this
period with his brothers at the Capetian court. Since the death of
Conan IV, however, Geoffrey's situation had come to resemble that of
his eldest brother, in that he had been associated with Henry II in ruling
the duchy of Brittany since 1169, but lacked any land or independent
When the kings met at Gisors in September 1173, Henry II offered
Geoffrey the land which was Constance's inheritance, provided papal
dispensation was granted for their marriage, so at least this much must
have been demanded by Geoffrey or on his behalf.71 Unfortunately for
Geoffrey, the ®nal settlement in fact was less favourable to him than the
terms of this initial offer. The Treaty of Falaise provided only that
Geoffrey should receive the revenues of half of Constance's maritagium
in Brittany until their marriage, and all the revenues of the maritagium in
Brittany after the marriage.72 The ®nal settlement was especially
unfavourable to Geoffrey since Constance's inheritance was the duchy

of Brittany (including Treguier) and the honour of Richmond. Her
maritagium, in contrast, was limited to the territory granted by Conan IV

RT, ii, p. 44; Preuves, col. 104.

RT, ii, pp. 45±6. A third rebel named by Robert de Torigni, Raher de `Haia Normannus', is

tentatively identi®ed by Meuret as a castellan of the barony of La Guerche (Meuret, Marche

Anjou-Bretagne, pp. 448±9). See also Gesta, i, pp. 62±3 for rebels including a Walter de Pouance
and his man, Brito.

Gesta, p. 71; N.-Y. Tonnerre, `Les debuts de la seigneurie d'Ancenis', BSAN 123 (1987), 47±68

at 59.
‚ Ã
Gesta, p. 59; RH, ii, p. 53. See also B.A. Pocquet du Haut-Jusse, `Les Plantagenets et la

Bretagne', AB 53 (1946), 2±27 at 11.
RH, ii, p. 69; Gesta, p. 78.

Henry II and Brittany

to Henry II in 1166, that is, only the duchy of Brittany (less Treguier).
This would explain the express grant, in the Treaty of Falaise, of
revenues from the maritagium `in Britannia'. Another version of the
treaty allowed Geoffrey half of the revenues of Brittany, except
`Media'.73 `Media' was presumably excepted because it was not in
Conan IV's possession in 1166 and therefore could not form part of his
daughter's maritagium or inheritance. As will be seen, Henry II later
relented, because Geoffrey ultimately enjoyed considerably more than
just the revenues of parts of Brittany.
After the 1173 revolt, Henry II retired from campaigning in Brittany.
Henceforth he relied upon Geoffrey to undertake military campaigns
on his orders. In April 1175 the king sent Geoffrey to Brittany, with
orders to restore castles to the condition they were in ®fteen days before
the revolt. This campaign was apparently directed against Eudo de
Porhoet, because Robert de Torigni records that Geoffrey recovered


. 13
( 55 .)