. 46
( 55 .)


Mauricio Namnetensis electo, Radulpho de Filgeris, comite Eudone, Rollandi de
Dinan, Alano ®lius comitis, Henrico ®lius alterius, abbate Tudi et pluribus aliis
Datum apud Redonas, anno Domini millesimo centesimo octuagesimo quinto.
Line 1 ± `Notum . . . quod' omitted from R and V.
Line 2 ± `terre' omitted from D and P; Cb ± `terris'; R ± `detrimentum plurimum terre
. . . `; Cb and L ± `solebat' for `soleat'.
Line 3 ± L ± `utilitatem'; R ± `u i ± e' (`universe'?) substituted for `terre'; L ± `ejusdem'
after `providere'.
Line 4 ± L, V and A ± `omnium baronum'; L ± `Britannie' omitted; R ± `eorum'
omitted: Cb and L ± `cum' substituted for `communi': V ± `communi eorum assensu': A
-'cum eorum assensu': Cg `o le commun assentement'.
Line 5 ± R, P and L ± omit `tempore . . . permansuram'; Cb substitutes `perpetuo
permansuram'; Cg ± `a durier en nostre temps e de nos successors'.
Line 6 ± Cb ± `militibus'; L ± `ulterius `omitted; A ± `inter fratres' inserted after
`divisiones'; Cb ± `terre integr'.
Line 7 ± L ± `domanium obtineret'; L and A ± `minoribus' for `junioribus'; For
`invenirent' ± D ± `ministrarent', P ± `juvenirent', L ± `ut viverent'; Cb ± `invenirent

The `Assize of Count Geoffrey'
. . . suum' omitted and `necessaria sua juxta posse suum eis honori®ce inveniret'
Line 8 ± for `juniores' ± L ± `minores', V ± `junioribus', A ± `et juniores'; V and A ±
`quamdiu viverent tenerent', A adds `et'.
Line 9 ± Cb ± `quid terris tenentium illud possidetur imperpetuum'; D ± `illas
possiderent'; P ± `quidem terra tenentium illas possiderent in perpetuum'; L ± `quidem
tenentium terras illas possidebunt in perpetuum'; V and A omit `quidem', `terras
(de)tenentium in perpetuum illas possiderent'; Cg, D and R ± `heredes vero' omitted
here and `heredes' placed after `habentium'.
Line 10 ± R, D, L and P ± `et non terras' omitted, `autem' substituted; L ± `post ipsos
non sunt': V and A ± `minime post patres haberent'.
Line 11 ± P ± `junioris': L ± `terras minoris': V ± `majoris'; D and P ± `baillivum': L ± `in
baillium devenerit'; For `eum' ± Cb ± `ipsum': V ± `ea': A ± `illum'.
Line 12 ± L ± `baillium habebit; et si fratrem non habebit ille de amicis habebit
baillium'; Cb, L and A ± `descendens': D ± `decidens'.
Line 13 ± R ± `eam commendabit': Cb ± `voluerit eam poterit commendare': P ±
`voluerit eam commendare': L -'noluerit commodare'.
Line 14 ± R ± `habebit', L ± `®liam habuit'; Cb ± `®lias' inserted after `juniores'; Cb ±
`ipsa ad' omitted and `illa per' substituted.
Line 15 ± Cb and L ± `sui' inserted after `domini'.
Line 16 ± Cb ± `maritagium' omitted, `menagium id est domus vacans' substituted; D ±
`decidere' for `accidere'; L ± `minori' for `juniori'.
Line 17 ± D ± `major alii'; Cb ± `ne alii major conferre non poterit . . . `; D, V and A ±
`junior' for `minor'; L and V ± `habere velit'; P ± `si' omitted.
Line 18 ± L and A -'voluerit'; Cb ± `de rebus suis et castellis': L and A ± `castellis'
substituted for `catallis'.
Line 19 ± Cb ± `procurabit': P ± `proquirat': L ± `conquirat': A and Cb ± `procuret' (in
Cb the verb is near the end of the clause, `amicorum procuret propinquorum'); L ±
`suo' omitted; A ± `propinquorum et amicorum'.
Line 20 ± V and A ± `dederit juniore terram': L ± `juniori in terram dederit'; L and V ±
`receperit': D ± `in hominem recipiat'; Cb and A ± `junior' inserted after `et'.
Line 21 ± L and V ± `qui' substituted for `cui'; L ± `terram' substituted for `eam'.
Line 22 ± L ± `heredem' substituted for `dominum': A ± `ad' and `dominum' omitted; R
and V -'redibit' for `redeat'; After `autem' ± L ± `eum', V and A ± `de terra illa'; D ±
`ceperit' for `reciperit'.
Line 23 ± P ± `assisam'.
Line 24 ± R. ± `decernimus'; P ± `decrevimus esse necessarium'; L ± `et' inserted after
`tenere' and `necessarium' omitted; V -'tenere juravimus et necessarium decrevimus';
A ± `juravimus et necessarium? decrevimus'; L, V and A ± `et' omitted after `ut'.
Line 25 ± L ± `et juniores' omitted: A ± `minores jurant' substituted for `juniores eam
jurarent'; L ± `si' omitted: Cb and V ± `eam' inserted after `juniores'; R ± `jurare
noluissent': D ± `nollent jurare': L ± `quod si nollent jurare': A ± `voluissent jurare'.
Line 26 ± A ± `habuerit' (end of text); D ± `igitur' inserted after `hanc'; Cb, D and P ±
`institutionem sive assisiam'; L ± `constitutionem seu assisiam'; V ± `assisiam . . .
nominatim' omitted and `igitur assisiam precipue concessi et con®rmavi' substituted; Cg
± `cet establissement e assise'.
Line 27 ± R ± `Alano de Rohan'; Cb ± `Gaufrido de Castrobrientii'; D ± (`nominatam'
omitted) `Rollando de Dinanno'; Porhoet ± `E. comiti'; L ± `Guidomaro de Leonia'; V
± `Andrea de Vitreio'; Cg ± `Jacques e Alain de Chasteau Giron'; V ± after `heredibus',
`in posterum futuram' inserted; L ± `terram suam' omitted and `Britannium' substituted.

Appendix 1
Line 28 ± V ± `concessimus permansuram' omitted; D ± `permaneat': L ± `permaneret et
®rmum stabile': V ± `esset'; V ± `attestatione' and `volumus roborari' omitted,
`attestatione con®rmatum fuit' substituted.
Line 29 ± L ends at `roborari'.
Line 32 ± D ± omits `baronibus' and ends at `Redonas'; Cb ± `Redonen'; the location
and date appear only in Cb and V.

Appendix 2


The family of the seneschals of Rennes begins with the seneschal Main®nit (c.
1060±95), but the counts of Rennes/dukes of Brittany employed a household
seneschal from the ®rst half of the eleventh century, and the of®ce seems have
become hereditary by the middle of the century. This is the conclusion to be
drawn from the fact that Main®nit acquired his of®ce by marrying Commater
`senescalca', the widow of the seneschal Geoffrey son of Glai, so that `redditus est
ei omnis honor' qui ad senescalciam Gauffredi pertinebat' (BN ms fr. 22331, p.
Main®nit in fact originated in Nantes and possibly joined the comital
household when Conan II was brie¯y acknowledged as count of Nantes

from 1050 to 1054 (Preuves, cols. 409, 484; A. Chedeville and N.-Y.
‚ Á
Tonnerre, La Bretagne feodale XIe-XIIIe siecle, Rennes, 1987, pp. 42±3).
Main®nit ®rst appears with the title `siniscaldus Redonensis' in the reign of
Count Geoffrey Grennonat (1066±84) (Preuves, col. 428), presumably fol-
lowing his marriage to the widow of Geoffrey son of Glai. Main®nit had at
least three sons: William, Walter (the name of Main®nit's brother) and Agaat
(Preuves, cols. 428, 463, 484, 566). Main®nit disappears after going on the
First Crusade in the entourage of Duke Alan IV (Preuves, col. 484). On the
duke's return there appears a new seneschal, William (Preuves, cols. 504±5,
By c. 1106, William's own son Sylvester was old enough to join him in
escorting Duchess Ermengard and the young Conan on a visit to Marmou-
tier, and perhaps as far as Flanders (Preuves, col. 512). There is no record of
Sylvester as seneschal. William was alive in 1141, but the same year was
succeeded by Guy (AE, vi, p. 121±2; `Cart. St-Melaine', f.183r.). Around
this time, Maria, widow of William `dapifer' made a grant to Saint-Georges
de Rennes of rents from her own land (`Cart. St-Georges', p. 288, no. LXII).
Guy was in fact William's grandson. A charter of the last William,
seneschal of Rennes (c. 1187±1229), refers to his father Guy and grandfather
Sylvester (AD Ille-et-Vilaine, 1F 180). Since William had been in of®ce for
forty years, since c. 1100, it is possible that his son Sylvester predeceased him,
and his grandson Guy was already of age to inherit the of®ce.
Despite the political upheavals of the period from the death of Duke

The hereditary seneschals of Rennes
Conan III in 1148 to 1166, Guy appears throughout as seneschal of Rennes.
In 1153, Guy attested a charter of Hoel, count of Nantes, at Nantes (Preuves,
col. 617). It is possible that Guy was in exile from Rennes during the regime
of Eudo de Porhoet, and had allied with Count Hoel. Alternatively, Guy
may have been at Hoel's court on Eudo's business. Guy continued (or was
reinstated) as seneschal of Rennes, when Conan IV succeeded in 1156 (EYC,
iv, no. 44; Preuves, col. 632). As discussed at p. 86, Guy actually continued in
of®ce under Henry II after 1166, but probably subject to the royal seneschals,
William de Lanvallay and Reginald Boterel.
Guy is last recorded in 1179 x 1181, but since, like his grandfather, he had
by then held of®ce for 40 years, this is not surprising. As discussed at p. 101
there is a lacuna in dated references to the seneschals of Rennes for the
period 1181±7, the reign of Duke Geoffrey. In 1187, appears `W. Ragot'
seneschal of Rennes (Charters, no. C13). Possibly `W. Ragot' should be
identi®ed with the hereditary seneschal, William son of Guy. The earliest
dated documents referring to this William are two charters of Duchess
Constance made in 1193, but four of William's own charters, which are not
dated, could have been made as early as 1184 or even 1181 (`Cart. St-
Georges', Appendix, no.VIII (1181 x 1203); `Cart. St-Melaine', fols. 23r,
105v; AD Ille-et-Vilaine 23H2 (all 1184 x 1198)).
In four documents concerning his own private business, William used, or
was accorded, the title `seneschal of Rennes': AN ms L973 (undated charter
of Guy de Thouars for Savigny), AD Ille-et-Vilaine 1F180 (copy of a charter
dated 1205), AD Ille-et-Vilaine 1F502 (published in A. Oheix, Essai sur les
‚‚ Á
senechaux de Bretagne des origines au XIVe siecle, Paris, 1913, p. 200), and BN
ms latin 5331(3), p. 407 (Preuves, col. 825).
William is last recorded in 1229 (AD Ille-et-Vilaine, 4H23A, original
charter in chirograph form of the Of®cial of Rennes and William `senescallus
Redon'), and had been succeeded by one Oliver Guernier by 1237 (Actes

inedits, no. CIX). He died before 1241 (L.-J. Denis (ed.), Chartes de l'abbaye
de St-Julien de Tours (1002±1227), Societe des Archives historiques du Maine,
xii, Paris, 1912±13, no. 248).
Compared with William's administration, references to seneschals of
Rennes are much rarer in the succeeding decades. In 1237, the seneschal was

Olivier Guernier, in 1241, Geoffrey Blandin (Actes inedits, no. CIX; BN ms
latin 5441 (3), f. 196v.). These are not known to have had any connection
with William, and it would seem that the dynasty of hereditary seneschals of
Rennes ended with him.

Fig. 2 Genealogy of the Seneschals of Rennes

Appendix 3


royal seneschals of nantes

William ®tzHamo (1158±1172)
William's origins are obscure, but may have been in the honour of
Richmond. He held the soke of Hough-on-the-Hill, Lincs., probably by
a grant of Conan IV's father (EYC, iv, p. 80; Societe Jersiaise (ed.),
Cartulaire des Iles Normandes: Recueil de documents concernant l'histoire de ces
Ãles, Jersey, 1924, no. 252). He may also be identi®ed with William son of
Hamo dispensator of Hudswell, near Richmond (Monasticon, iii, p. 602).
William also had some connection with the Channel Islands, where he

founded the abbey of Saint-Helier (RT, ii, pp. 134±5; Cartulaire des Iles
Normandes, p. 307). He also held lands in Normandy (RT, ii, p. 135 note;
Cartulaire des Iles Normandes, no. 239). William served Henry II for some
years before he became king, and was rewarded with lands in the south of
England, at Salisbury and Warminster (Pipe Rolls 2±18 Henry II; for the
signi®cance of these grants, see T.K. Keefe, `Place-date distribution of
royal charters and the historical geography of patronage strategies at the
court of king Henry II Plantagenet', Haskins Society Journal 2 (1990),
179±88 at 184).
William played a prominent role in Henry II's regime in Brittany from
the outset, acting as principal royal agent in Nantes from 1158. On at least
one occasion between 1160 and August 1167, he visited Conan IV at
Guingamp (EYC, iv, p. 60), no doubt on the king's business. At the same
time, during the 1160s, William was principal royal agent in Angers and
Tours (for the counties of Anjou and Touraine?), styled `senescallus' or
`dapifer regis' (see above p. 81 and Everard, `The "Justiciarship" in Brittany
and Ireland under Henry II', Anglo-Norman Studies 20 (1998), 87±105 at 95).
William died in 1172. His widow is recorded at Warminster, but there is no
record of his heirs.
See J. Le Patourel, `Guillaume ®lsHamon, le premier senechal de Bretagne
(1171±1172)', Annales de Normandie 29 (1979), 376±7.

Appendix 3

Peter ®tzGuy (?1172±c. 1184)
Peter ®tzGuy (¯. 1152±c. 1202) belonged to an old Le Mans family, being
the great-grandson of a `Count Guy'. He ®rst appears attesting a charter of
William, bishop of Le Mans, with his father, Guy son of Hugh (son of Count
Guy), in 1152 (Benedictins de Solesmes (ed.), Cartulaire de St-Pierre de la
Couture, Le Mans, 1881, pp. 38, 52, 65, 82±4; Cart. Saint-Victeur au Mans, pp.
20, 22±3). Peter evidently had a role in Angevin royal government of the
city of Le Mans (Cart. St-Pierre de la Couture, pp. 87, 93, 99, 114±6, 124, 187)
under Henry II and his sons, attesting one charter of Henry II styled
`custodus turris Cenomannensis', c. 1161 (Actes d'Henri II, no. cxcix). At
some time during Henry II's reign, Peter presided over a determination of
the banlieu of Le Mans (Cart. St-Pierre de la Couture, p. 187). A charter of
Peter's, dated 13 May 1190, shows him exercising jurisdiction in Le Mans,
but not apparently as royal seneschal of Le Mans, this of®ce being held by
Geoffrey Mauchien (Cart. St-Pierre de la Couture, pp. 124, 126±7, 130).
Between 1200 and 1203, at Le Mans, Peter attested a charter of Queen

Isabella (A. Chedeville (ed.), Liber controversiarum Sancti Vincenti Cenomanensis,
Paris, 1968, pp. 150±1). In addition to his role at the comital/royal curia in
Le Mans, Peter ®tzGuy also attested a large number of Henry II's charters,
both in England and on the Continent, with no of®cial title (Actes d'Henri II,
passim). The charter of Queen Isabella (1200 x 1203) is the latest record of
Peter's colleague in the administration of Nantes, Robert de Doniol
(above, p. 81), may be identi®ed with Robert Doisnel, whose daughter
married William ®tzAldelin, another of Henry II's seneschals/`dapifers' (Actes
d'Henri II, `Introduction', p. 478; Everard, `Justiciarship', pp. 91±2),
suggesting an esprit de corps among these professional royal administrators. A
John Doisnel was a priest in Le Mans c. 1200±1208 (Cart. de St-Victeur au
Mans, pp. 33±5, 38, 43±6, 48, 51, 60), which may indicate a Le Mans
connection between Robert Doisnel and Peter ®tzGuy.


. 46
( 55 .)