Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2016
The attitude of the Limousin pope Clement VI to the early stages of the Hundred Years War between France and England occasioned conflicting verdicts. These varied predictably according to the nationality of their authors. One of the pope’s biographers, the Frenchman Jean la Porte, hailed him as a creator of concord, a lover of peace. By contrast the Englishman William of Ockham accused Clement of being ‘schismatic’, in the sense that he deliberately provoked hostilities between the two countries and favoured one side against the other. The German Conrad of Megenberg tried to adopt a via media. Replying to Ockham he claimed that he had himself seen Clement sending out cardinals to conduct peace negotiations between the kings of France and England. On the other hand, he was driven to admit Clement’s partiality, excusing it somewhat feebly on the grounds that the Holy See had always adhered more to France than to other nations, so one read. Some impression of the truth of these differing judgements can be gleaned from the registers of Clement’s correspondence, from the political collationes he delivered both as pope and earlier as Pierre Roger, the trusted counsellor and official of Philip VI, Valois, and from contemporary accounts of a peace conference over which the pope presided at Avignon in 1344.
1 Tertia Vita dementis VI in S. Baluzius, Vitae Paparum Avenionesium ed G. Mollat (Paris 1914-27) 1 p 288. On its authorship see Mollat, Etude critique sur les ‘Vitae Paparum Avenionensium’ (Paris 1917) pp 34-40.
2 [William of Ockham, De Eìectione Karoli IV in] Conrad of Megenberg, Tractatus [contra Wilhelmum Occam ed R. Scholz Unbekannte Kirchenpolitische Streitschriften aus der Zeit Ludwigs des Bayern, 1327-54 (Rome 1911-14) 2] p 352.
3 Conrad of Megenberg, Tractatus p 381.
4 On the causes of the war see le Patourel, J., ‘Edward III and the kingdom of France’ History 43 (1958) pp 173–89 CrossRefGoogle Scholar and ‘The origins of the war’ in The Hundred Years War ed Fowler, K. (London 1971) pp 28–50 Google Scholar; J. Palmer, ‘The war aims of the protagonists and the negotiations for peace’ ibid pp 51-74.
5 For these events see [J. E.] Wrigley, ‘Clement VI [before his pontificate; the early life of Pierre Roger, 1290/91-1342’ Catholic Historical Renew 56 (1970)] pp 456-7, 461-6; [E.] Déprez, Les préliminaires [de la gumě de cent ans. La papauté, la France, et l’Angleterre (Paris 1902)] pp 39-41, 148, 171; [E.] Perroy, [The] Hundred Years War [trans by W.B. Wells (London 1951)] pp 33-123.
6 Wrigley, ‘Clement VI’ pp 467, 472.
7 [Clément VI, Lettres closes, patentes et curiales se rapportant à la France edd E.] Déprez [J. Glennison and G. Mollai, 3 vols (Paris 1901-61)] 1 no 4.
8 Déprez, 2 no 2726, letter of 14 August 1346.
9 See his letters of 10 May 1342 to Philip VI of France and to queen Joan, ed E. Déprez, ‘La guerre de cent ans à la mort de Benoît XII: l’intervention des cardinaux avant le conclave et du pape Clément VI avant son couronnement’ RH 87 (1903) pp 58-76 at pp 73 and 75 respectively.
10 See for example, Déprez, 1 nos 94, 178, 292, 326, 1155. 1326, 1462, 1590.
11 Ibid no 94.
12 [Paris, Bibliothèque] S[ain]t[e] G[eneviève MS] 240, fol 449v: ‘De isla etiam contrarietate loquitur Augustinus xvii° De Civitate Dei cap° xvi°. Dicit enim quod chitas Dei, que per Iherusalem significatur, inimica est civitas dyaboli Babilon que confusio interpretatur . . . Et videtur michi . . . quod iste due civitates habent x contrarías condiciones .... Primo in Babilonia est confusio, sed in Iherusalem ordinano . . . Quinto in Babilonia est spallato, sed in Iherusalem fida possessio . . . Septimo in Babilonia est contumnacia inpugnacio, sed in Iherusalem mutuo dilectio, Octavo in Babilonia est dyabolica tirannizatio, sed in iherusalem divina dominano . . . Decimo in Babilonia est dampnatio, sed in Iherusalem salvano .... Modo videtur michi quod per istas duas civitates. . . recte significantur due forme valde contrarie, videlicet bellica conmotio et pacis adeptio’. Compare Augustine, De Civitate Dei, bk 17 cap 16, CC 48 p 581.
13 St G 240 fol 450r: ‘Rex enim Babilonis dyabolus est et instigator belike conmotionis dyabolus est’. Compare MGH Const viii no 90, p 115.
14 Ibid no 23, p 44. Compare I Timothy, 2, 4.
15 St G 240, fols 308r-14r. The dating given by Wrigley, ‘Clement VI’ p 4M, n 1, seems preferable to that given by G. Mollat, ‘L’oeuvre oratoire de Clément VI’ Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age 3 (1928) p 252 no 49.
16 St G 240, fols 310v-llv: ‘Nec enim sunt milites propter hastiludia пеC propter omeamenta [sic] sed illa eis permittunlur ut sint magis exercitati ad defensionem reipublice, pro qua debent militare’.
17 Perroy, Hundred Years War p 93.
18 St G 240, fol 309r. Compare Augustine, Contra Faustum bk 22, cap 74 in CSEL, 25 p 672.
19 St G 240, fol 311v.
20 Ibid fol 313r-v.
21 Ibid fol 311v.
22 Ibid fol 309r
23 Ibid fol 311v
24 Ibid fol 31lv: ‘. . . ordinavit ducatum Aquilani? ad manum suam realiter poni, non ad finem ipsum suo dominio appropriandi, sed sibi ad finem iustitiam faciendi, sicut domini consueverunt ponere manum in feudis suis. Quorum edam habent de iure dominium directum, licet eciam vasalli habeant dominium utile . ... Et certe, domini, bene scitis, quod eciam si dominus ponat manum in feudo minus iuste, vasallus non debet propter hoc contra dominum rebellare, sed requirere quod iustitia sibi fiat, quam dominus rex paralus est facere cuicumque. Patet ergo quomodo dominus rex habet iustam causam et ipsi iniustam’.
25 Ibid fol 31lv. Compare Psalm 117, 7.
26 Letter of 8 May 1342, Foedera, 5 (London 1708) p 311; ‘. . . credimus vestram serenitatem non potuisse pro nunc meliorem habere et minus intendentem ad actus partiales faciendum’.
27 Déprez, Les préliminaires pp 389-92.
28 Miret, J. y Sans, , ‘Lettres closes des premiers Valois’ Moyen Age 29 (1917-18) p 69.Google Scholar
29 For a full account see Déprez, [E.], ‘La conference [d’Avignon (1344): l’arbitrage pontifical entre la France et l’Angleterre’ in Essays presented to T.F. Tout (Manchester 1925)] pp 301-20Google Scholar.
30 Déprez, 1 no 812.
31 For its use during the fourteenth century see Chaplais, P., ‘Reglement des conflits internationaux au XlVe siècle (1293-1377)’ Moyen Age 57 (1951) pp 269-302 esp 286-8.Google Scholar
32 See his letters of 20 May 1343 and 29 August 1343, Foedera 5 pp 366 and 382 respectively.
33 [John Offord [?]], Journal des conférences [d’Avignon (22 octobre-29 novembre 1344) ed K. de Lettenhove, Oeuvres de Froissart 18 (Brussels 1874)] p 251: ‘. . . venimus coram domino nostro papa solo sine aliquo cardinali sibi assistente’.
34 Ibid pp 235, 237, 238, 240, 241, 245, 248, 250, 254.
35 See the letter of one of the English envoys (probably John Offord, dean of Lincoln) to the archbishop of Canterbury, in which he reports Clement’s accusations against Edward, ed [K.] de Lettenhove, Lettres [des ambassadeurs anglais envoyés à Avignon (septembre-novembre 1344) in Oeuvres de Froissart 18 (Brussels 1874)1 p 216. In general see [G.] Mollat, Les papes [d’Avignon, 1305-78 10 ed (Paris 1964)] pp 431-4; Pantin, W. The English Church in tlie Fourteenth Century (Cambridge 1955) pp 81–7.Google Scholar
36 Mollat, Les papes p 432.
37 De Lettenhove, Lettres p 226: ‘. . . en taunt que est dist en meysme le brief: “A toy Gaillard de La Mote”, sauna plus cortoysement parler, et hier fust leu ledit brief en consistoire . . .’.
38 Ibid p 227.
39 Ibid p 228.
40 For Clement’s authorisation see Zunzunegui, J., ‘Los origines de las misiones en las islas Canarias’ Revista española de teología 1 (Madrid 1940-41) no 16 p 393 Google Scholar. On Louis see G. Daumet, ‘Louis de la Cerda ou d’Espagne’ Bulletin Hispanique 15 (1913) pp 38-63.
41 Adam Murimuth, Continuano Chronicarum ed E.M. Thompson (RS 93) p 163. For England’s attitude to the papacy see Barnie, J., War in Medieval Society. Social Values and the Hundred Years liar, 1337-99 (London 1974) pp 52–3.Google Scholar
42 Weckmann, L., Las bulas alejandrinas de 1493 γ la teoria politica del papado medieval (Mexico 1949) p 61 Google Scholar n 2.
43 De Lettenhove, Lettres pp 216-7.
44 Journal des conférences p 236. This statement was repeated at intervals throughout the conference: see ibid pp 237 and 238.
45 Ibid p 237.
46 Déprez, ‘La conférence’ pp 318-20.
47 Déprez, 2 no 1844.
48 Ibid no 3742. See also no 3812.
49 Fowler, K., The King’s Lieutenant: Henry of Grosmont, First Duke of Lancaster, 1310-1361 (London 1969) p 92.Google Scholar
50 Lucas, H.S., The Low Countries and the Hundred Years War (Michigan 1929) pp 474–80.Google Scholar
51 Becween 26 November 1345 and the end of February 1350 Clement and his family lent Philip VI 592,000 gold florins and 5,000 écus: see Faucon, M., ‘Prêts faits aux rois de France par Clément VI, Innocent VI et le comte de Beaufort (1345-60)’ BEC 40 (1879) p 571.Google Scholar
52 Ibid.
53 See Clement’s grant to Philip of 16 November 1344, for example; Déprez, 1 no 1250. See also Déprez, 2 no 3812, where Edward’s request is refused.
54 See Pierre Roger’s sermon on the crusade preached before John XXII in 1333, St G 240, fol 299v: ‘Est enim negotium istud specialiter ex duobus: prima ex potestatis plenitudine, quia nullus aìius polest passagium generalis indicete. ..’. For the similar views of the canonists see M. Villey, ‘L’idée de la croisade chez les juristes du moyen âge’ Relazioni del X congresso intemazionale di scienze storiche 3 (Florence 1955) pp 569-80, and in general see Russell, F.H., The Just War in the Middle Ages (Cambridge 1975) pp 115–16, 123-5, 200-01.Google Scholar
55 For the situation at the start of Clement’s pontificate seej. Gay, Le pape Clément VI et les affaires d’Orient (Paris 1904) pp 15-31.
56 Déprez, 1 no 1582.
57 Ibid nos 1326, 1462, 1590; 2 no 1844.
58 Déprez, 1 no 914.
59 See Pierre Roger’s sermon before John XXII of 1333, St G 240, fols 307r-v.
60 Wrigley, ‘Clement VI’ p 463.
61 Déprez, 1 no 1704.
62 Klicman, Ed L., Acta dementis VI, Monumenta Vaticana Res Gestas Bohemiae Wustrantia 1 (Prague 1903) no 721, p 431.Google Scholar
63 Déprez, 2 no 2760.
