Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
2016.
La dernière croisade.
p.
281.
Article contents
Temporal and Spiritual Regalia during the Reigns of St. Louis and Philip III
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2017
Extract
The Gregorian reform of the eleventh century mounted a massive attack on lay control over churches and church appointments, yet the degree to which this attack succeeded in attaining its objectives varied from country to country. Local conditions and personalities were important in determining the outcome of the struggle over investiture and other related questions, but neither side achieved a complete victory, because the final agreements between clerical and lay leaders were a compromise which produced the usual mixture of satisfaction and disappointment. The church gained the most substantial victory, for the smothering stranglehold of the laity over the church and churchmen was broken, nevermore to be restored in the Middle Ages. Increased spiritual freedom for the church in subsequent centuries resulted from the struggle of the mid-eleventh century. Nevertheless, the church had not broken completely from its close ties with the world of feudalism. If bishoprics, abbeys, and parish churches were not feudal possessions of kings and nobles, laymen still retained many rights reminiscent of the earlier days when laymen claimed a proprietary right over the churches in their areas. The purpose of this paper is to consider one of these remnants of earlier days: the right of regalia I will examine the right of regalia, temporal and spiritual, together with some related institutions during the reigns of St. Louis and Philip III of France.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Fordham University Press
References
1 Gaudemet, J. has presented a very useful treatment of the entire subject in his article “Régale (Droit de)”, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, 7, 493–532. Most of the article is devoted to the right of spiritual and temporal regalia in the various periods of French history. Gaudemet also provides enough information on this right in other parts of Europe to institute comparisons with French practice.Google Scholar
2 Lesne, E., ‘Les Origines du droit de Régale’ Nouvelle revue historique de droit français et étranger 45 (1921) 5–52; also Lesne, E., Histoire de la propriété ecclésiastique en Franc (Lille 1926) 2. 102-123; 172-184. What is said of a bishopric and episcopal properties should be understood to be generally applicable to abbeys as well. The main concern of this paper is with bishoprics. Temporal regalia applied to many abbeys in the area in which the kind had such rights over bishoprics. Spiritual regalia did not apply to abbeys.Google Scholar
3 Luchaire, Achille, Manuel des institutions françaises (Paris 1892)245–249; a more complete treatment is given in Phillips, G. J., Das Regalienrecht in Frankreich (Halle 1873 44ff.Google Scholar
4 Ibid. 59–60, lists the places in which the king held the regalia at the beginning of the fourteenth century.Google Scholar
5 See the striking assertion of the king's rights over church properties made in the protes sent by St. Louis to Innocent IV in 1247: ‘Dominus rex, cujus antecessores fundaverun ecclesias regni et de bonis suis eas dotaverunt specialiter pro divini cultus obsequio, iden honorifice faciendo, hoc proprium et speciale sibi et haeredibus suis retinuerunt, et sempe habuerunt in eisdem ecclesiis quae tenent de ipsis temporalia sua bona, quando temporali ecclesiarum jure humano, id est, jure regio possidentur, quod praeter spiritualia quae ta [multa] et magna servitia [habent] ad quae domino regi tenentur, istud etiam juris habe quod omnes ecclesiarum thesauros et omnia temporalia ipsorum pro sua et pro sui regr necessitate potest accipere sicut sua.’ Matthaei Parisiensis, Monachi sancti Albani, Chrnica maiora, (ed. Luard, H. R., London 1882) 6. 110. For a discussion of this entire document, see my article, ‘The Protest of Saint Louis,’ Traditio 15 (1959) 405-418.Google Scholar
6 The history of episcopal elections is dealt with at length in Imbart de la Tour, P., Les élections épiscopales dans l'église de France du IXe au XIIe siècle (Paris 1890). The canonical theory of episcopal elections by cathedral chapters in the thirteenth century has been treated in Desprairies, André, L'Élection des évêques par les chapitres au XIIIe siècle (Paris 1922). The history of the progressive monopolization of episcopal elections by cathedral chapters has been described by Roland, E., Les Chanoines et les élections épiscopales du XIe au XIVe siècle (Aurillac 1909). The fullest text which presents the actual procedures followed in an episcopal election is contained in the narration of the election of Guillaume le Maire as bishop of Angers in 1291: ‘Livre de Guillaume le Maire’ (ed. Port, Celestin), Collection de documents inédits sur l'histoire de France, mélanges historiques II (Paris 1877) 209-242. Ursmer Berlière has treated of abbatial elections in ‘Les Élections abbatiales au Moyen Age’ Académie Royale de Belgique (Deuxième Série) 20 (1927) 1-100.Google Scholar
7 Luchaire, , 31–32.Google Scholar
8 H. F. 13. 735. Louis VII indicated that he gave permission for the chapter of Bourges to elect as archbishop anyone but Pierre de Châtre; this, however, did not prevent his election and confirmation by Innocent II. Louis refused to receive him, and his case became a source of trouble between the king and the pope.Google Scholar
9 Teulet, A. et al. edd., Layettes du Trésor des Chartes (5 vols. Paris 1862-1909) 2. no. 3353. The king was sensitive about Châlons because of the trouble which he had had over the election of the previous bishop, Geoffrey de Grandpré.Google Scholar
10 Ibid., 2. no. 2940. In this case the dean and chapter were pointing out to the king that they had asked such permission before they elected Geoffrey de Grandpré.Google Scholar
11 March 1246, Ibid., 2. no. 3472.Google Scholar
12 Ibid., 3. no. 3906, October 1250.Google Scholar
13 Ibid., 3. no. 4102, 9 June 1254.Google Scholar
14 Olim, 1. 35, 12 May 1258.Google Scholar
15 Philip Augustus had granted such an exemption to the dean and chapter of Mâcon in 1209, Gallia Christiana, 4. Instrumenta c. 288. In the Layettes and Delisle's, L. Cartulaire Normand (Paris 1852), there is considerable evidence of bishoprics and abbeys asking permission to elect. From these sources I have been able to compile a list of fifteen bishoprics which were obliged to seek the licentia eligendi: Angers, Auxerre, Avranches, Châlons-sur-Marne, Coutances, Évreux, Laon, Le Mans, Meaux, Nevers, Rheims, Rouen, Séez, Térouanne Troyes. All of these were north of the Loire. While this list is undoubtedly incomplete, it does give a good indication of the general area in which the king's rights were concentrated. Besides these bishoprics, many abbeys were subject to the obligation; most of the available evidence concerns abbeys in the North, the majority of which were Benedictine.Google Scholar
16 Roland, , op. cit. (n. 6 supra) 176–179.Google Scholar
17 E. g., Gallia Christiana 12. Instrumenta c. 74, June 1257, Henry, archbishop of Sens, did liege homage to the king for the house of Noolon.Google Scholar
18 Ordonnances des Rois 1. 60, June 1248.Google Scholar
19 Langlois, C., Le Règne de Philippe III le hardi (Paris 1887) 438, pièces justificatives, no XVIII.Google Scholar
20 Cange, Du, Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis 3. 488 s.v. fidelitas. Google Scholar
21 Lottin, René, ed. Chartularium insignis ecclesiae Cenomanensis (Le Mans 1869), 20.Google Scholar
22 Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 927.Google Scholar
23 Layettes, 2. no. 2246; 4. no. 5554.Google Scholar
24 Kleinclausz, A., Histoire de Lyon (Lyon 1939) 1. 183.Google Scholar
25 Gaudemet, Jean, La Collation par le roi de France des bénéfices vacants en régale des origines à la fin du xive siècle (Paris 1935) 63–66.Google Scholar
26 Olim, 1. 570–571.Google Scholar
27 This was ten pounds of Paris. Since 1191 the office of seneschal was open, and the king claimed for himself the revenues which this official usually received.Google Scholar
28 Olim, 1. 573.Google Scholar
29 Olim, 1. 624–625.Google Scholar
30 1266, Olim, 1, 654.Google Scholar
31 Olim, 1. 570.Google Scholar
32 1276, Olim, 2. 77. Note that the schedule of payments is slightly different here. I*** the case of Guillaume d'Auxerre, ten pounds were specified for the chamberlain; here five pounds went to the chamberlain and five pounds were divided among his assistants. I the former case, it might have been assumed that this type of division would be made by the chamberlain himself after he received the ten pounds.Google Scholar
33 Olim, 2. 162.Google Scholar
34 Olim, 2. 182–183.Google Scholar
35 H. F. 21. 254.Google Scholar
36 Ibid., 255.Google Scholar
37 Ibid., 258.Google Scholar
38 Ibid., 259.Google Scholar
39 Ibid., 24. 296.Google Scholar
40 Brussel, , Nouvel Examen de l'usage général des fiefs en France (Paris: 1727, 2 vols.) 1. 469, note a.Google Scholar
41 H. F 21. 282.Google Scholar
42 Ibid., 22. 739.Google Scholar
43 Brussel, , 1. 470, note.Google Scholar
44 H. F. 22. 663.Google Scholar
45 Layettes, 3. no. 2045.Google Scholar
46 30 January 1252, Layettes, 3, no. 3976.Google Scholar
47 Martène, et Durand, , Thesaurus novus anecdotorum (5 vols. Paris 1717) 1, 1001–1002 Google Scholar
48 Auvray, Lucien, ed., Les Registres de Grégoire IX (Paris: 1896-1955) no. 5983; Layettes 2, no. 3150; Berger, Élie, ed., Les Registres d'Innocent IV (Paris 1884-1919) nos. 287, 316 Google Scholar
49 Berger, Élie, Saint Louis et Innocent IV (Paris 1893) 42.Google Scholar
50 de Sainte-Marie, Anselme, Histoire généalogique et chronologique de la maison royale de France (3rd edition, 9 vols. 1726-1733) 2. 314–319. d'Arbois de Jubainville, H., Histoir des ducs et des comtes de Champagne (6 vols., Paris 1859-1866) 4. 274-75.Google Scholar
51 1259-1260, Layettes, 5, no. 704.Google Scholar
52 13 June 1270, Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 795.Google Scholar
53 Ibid., no. 856.Google Scholar
54 E.g., Olim, 1. 275, 466-467, 842-843, 856-857, 885; 2. 57, 59, 122, 157, 183, 193, 210; Delisle, L., Essai de restitution d'un volume perdu des Olim (Paris 1863) nos. 306, 400, 451, 504.Google Scholar
55 As we have seen above, the amount reported in 1278 for Sens was slightly higher, i. e., 61 1. 19s. 6d.Google Scholar
56 1267, Olim, 1. 678–679.Google Scholar
57 Brussel, 1. 543.Google Scholar
58 E.g. Reg. Innocent IV, no. 1151; Brussel, 1. 472; Olim, 1. 570, 622-623. When Phili III was crowned, the archbishopric was vacant and the regalia in the king's hands; the bailli of Vermandois made the burghers of Rheims contribute to the expenses of the king crowning. The archbishop had customarily paid the expenses and then compensated himself from his people. On this occasion, the see was vacant and affairs were in disorder. The expenses ran up to 5000 pounds or more. (Varin, Pierre Joseph, Archives administratives de lville de Reims (Paris 1839) 1. pt. 2, 919-923. An appeal to Paris was of no avail and the burghers had to pay the sum.Google Scholar
59 Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 887; Brussel, 1. 472; Reg. Innocent IV, no. 6131 Olim, 1. 18; 2. 122.Google Scholar
60 Olim, 1. 247–248.Google Scholar
61 E.g. Varin, , Arch. Admin. 1, pt. 2, 989–992; Olim, 2. 59.Google Scholar
62 Olim, I, 52.Google Scholar
63 Layettes, 4. nos. 4822, 4907; Olim, 1. 561-562.Google Scholar
64 Layettes, 3. no. 3976.Google Scholar
65 Layettes, 4. no. 5296; H. F. 21. 255.Google Scholar
66 E.g. Layettes, 2. no. 2206; Brussel, 1, 471; Langlois, Charles, Inventaire d'anciens royaux dressé par Robert Mignon (Paris 1899) 54–55, nos. 239-241.Google Scholar
67 Isambert, , Recueil général des anciennes lois Françaises (Paris 1822) 1. 158–160.Google Scholar
68 E.g., Delisle, , Essai de Restit. no. 306; Boutaric, E., Les Actes du Parlement de Paris (Paris 1863) 1. 1994; Delisle, , Fragments inédits du registre de Nicolas de Chartres, 20-21; 53-54, 54-55.Google Scholar
69 Layettes, 2. nos. 1983-1984; Potthast 20652; Langlois, Charles, Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 55-56, nos. 249-253.Google Scholar
70 Layettes, 5, no. 704.Google Scholar
71 Reg. Innocent IV, no. 3640.Google Scholar
72 Olim, 1. 570–571. See also, Langlois, , Inventaire de Robert Mignon. 58, no. 270.Google Scholar
73 Luchaire, Achille, Manuel des institutions françaises (Paris 1892) 512, n. 2. Langlois, , Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 50, no. 210: ‘Creditur quod capitulum habet litteras regias de quittancia regalie ibi.’ Google Scholar
74 Olim, 1, 678–679; Brussel, 1. 470, note.Google Scholar
75 H.F. 21. 282; Olim, 1. 466-467; Delisle, , Essai de Restit. no. 451. Olivier-Martin, F., ed., Registres de Martin IV, no. 159.Google Scholar
76 H. F. 21. 254; Olim, 2. 157, 193.Google Scholar
77 Gallia Christiana 12, Instrumenta 147.Google Scholar
78 H.F. 19. 498–499.Google Scholar
79 Lot, F. et Fawtier, R., Histoire des institutions Françaises au moyen âge (Paris 1962) 3. 249.Google Scholar
80 Quantin, Maximilien, Recueil de pièces pour faire suite au cartulaire général de l'Yonne, xiiie siècle (Auxerre et Paris 1873) lvii.Google Scholar
81 Reg. Innocent IV, no. 2386.Google Scholar
82 Lebeuf, Jean, Mémoires concernant l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile d'Auxerre (2 vols. Paris 1743) 1. 400.Google Scholar
83 Brussel, 1. 292-293; Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants, 63–66. Langlois, , Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 50-51, no. 211: ‘Dicitur tamen quod modo non habet rex regale ibi, quia quittati sunt pro excambio vel ex alia causa. Sciatur et habeatur deliberatio super hoc.’ Google Scholar
84 Lebeuf, 1. 480, 571, 600, 650.Google Scholar
85 H.F. 24. preuves, 296.Google Scholar
86 H.F. 23. 739.Google Scholar
87 Brussel, 1. 469, note a. Luchaire claims that Philip Augustus renounced his regalian rights in Rouen. (Op. cit. 512, n. 2.) He quotes Delisle, , Catalogue des Actes de Philippe-Auguste, no. 1042. The reference is faulty because the act cited has nothing to do with Rouen or the regalia. In the same work (no. 1109) there is a declaration by Vivien, bishop of Coutances, (around 1208) to Philip Augustus that during the vacancy of the see of Rouen the administration of the temporal and spiritual affairs of the archbishopric belonged to the cathedral chapter. This document was been printed by Abbé Lecanu (Histoire des évêques de Coutances [Coutances 1839] 165-166.) When Philip heard this claim, he designated thirteen knights to conduct an inquest; the results showed Vivien to be in error. There was evidently no difficulty in getting the chapter to accept this decision, for in 1222 they wrote to the king and told him of their election of a new archbishop and asked him to return the regalia. (Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 298.) Google Scholar
88 Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 512; Layettes, 3. no. 4077; 4. no. 5593; Lecanu, , Histoire du diocèse de Coutances et Avranches (2 vols. Coutances 1877-1878) 1. 315.Google Scholar
89 Layettes, 3, no. 3914; Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 937; Langlois, , Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 69.Google Scholar
90 Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 272.Google Scholar
91 Layettes, 2. no. 2176; 4, no. 4843; Brussel, 1. 472; Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, nos. 390, 844.Google Scholar
92 Olim, 1. 275, 900-901.Google Scholar
93 Layettes, 3, no. 4498; 4, no. 5652; Brussel, 1. 472; Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, no. 43.Google Scholar
94 Delisle, , Cartulaire Normand, nos. 795, 856.Google Scholar
95 Layettes, 3, no. 3975; Brussel, 1. 472; H. F. 22. 663.Google Scholar
96 d'Achery, Luc, Spicilegium (Paris 1723) 3. 623.Google Scholar
97 Lottin, René, Chartularium insignis ecclesiae Cenomanensis, 20; Layettes, 2, nos. 2146, 2315; 3. no. 4450; 4. nos. 5619, 5620; Gallia Christiana 14, Instrumenta 142.Google Scholar
98 Gallia Christiana, 4 Instrumenta, c. 197 Google Scholar
99 Reg. Innocent IV, no. 1056; on the other hand, Robert Mignon found no accounts for Langres, Langlois, Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 72, no. 429: ‘Nihil.’ Google Scholar
100 Gallia Christiana 4, Instrumenta 288; Brussel, 1, 306-307, note.Google Scholar
101 For example in 1262 the archbishop of Lyons notified the king that a new bishop of Mâcon was elected and confirmed, but the archbishop did not use the formula usually used when the king's men had been administering the regalia, Layettes, 4, no. 4768.Google Scholar
102 Layettes, 2. no. 2137.Google Scholar
103 There are many documents that present the facts of this case. The whole question is explored by Gaudemet, Jean, ‘Les origines de la régale réciproque entre Lyon et Autun,’ Mémoires de la société pour l'histoire du droit et des institutions des anciens pays bourguignons, comtois et romands 5 (1938) 21–48.Google Scholar
104 Olim, 1. 881–882.Google Scholar
105 Devic, C. et Vaissette, J., Histoire Générale de Languedoc (Revised Edition, Toulouse 1879) 1447.Google Scholar
106 Gallia Christiana 2, Instrumenta 24; Brussel, 1. 469, note a; Layettes, 2, no. 2755.Google Scholar
107 Delisle, , Frag. du Reg. de Nic. de Chart. 56–57; Olim, 2. 183-185.Google Scholar
108 Layettes, 3. nos. 3894, 3906; Langlois, , Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 60 no. 293.Google Scholar
109 Gallia Christiana 4, Instrumenta 197.Google Scholar
110 H.F. 21. 258.Google Scholar
111 Brussel, , 1. 469, note a.Google Scholar
112 Olim, 1. 399.Google Scholar
113 This whole question has been dealt with by Devic, et Vaissette, , (Op. cit.) 6. 838–839.Google Scholar
114 Layettes, 3, no. 4102.Google Scholar
115 Ibid. no. 4119.Google Scholar
116 Ibid. no. 4268.Google Scholar
117 Olim, 1. 35.Google Scholar
118 Layettes, 3, no. 4505.Google Scholar
119 Devic et Vaissete, 7. 533.Google Scholar
120 Ibid., 6. 838, note 3.Google Scholar
121 To the king: Reg. Grégoire IX, no. 4189; to the prelates: de Marca, Pierre, De concordia sacerdotii et imperii (Frankfurt 1708) 1187–1188.Google Scholar
122 Boutaric, E., Saint Louis et Alfonse de Poitiers (Paris 1870) 436.Google Scholar
123 Devic, et Vaissette, , 8. 1196.Google Scholar
124 Potthast 21231.Google Scholar
125 Devic et Vaissette, 5. 1443. Robert Mignon found no accounts for Béziers, Langlois, , Inventaire de Robert Mignon, 71, no 412.Google Scholar
126 Ibid. 5, 1262–1264, this is a vidimus in 1464 by Louis XI of Louis VII's grant.Google Scholar
127 Layettes, 3, no. 4208.Google Scholar
128 Ibid. 5, no. 780.Google Scholar
129 Ibid. no. 781.Google Scholar
130 Ibid. 783.Google Scholar
131 Gallia Christiana 6. 547.Google Scholar
132 Brussel, , 1. 287, note.Google Scholar
133 Ibid., 288–289, note.Google Scholar
134 Olim, 1. 829, 880-881; 2. 107-108; Delisle, , Essai de Restit. no. 295.Google Scholar
135 Mansi, , 24, c. 90, cap. XII.Google Scholar
136 Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants, 15.Google Scholar
137 The best treatments of this problem are contained in Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants , and Mollat, G., 'L'Application du droit de régale spirituelle en France du xiie au xive siècle, Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique 25 (1929) 425–446; 645-676.Google Scholar
138 Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants, 20.Google Scholar
139 H.F. 19. 488–489.Google Scholar
140 Gallia Christiana 12, Instrumenta 147; H.F. 19. 498-499.Google Scholar
141 Feb. 1208, Gallia Christiana 12, Instrumenta 283-285.Google Scholar
142 Gaudemet has suggested that Innocent might have shown some moderation here because he needed Philip's support against Otto IV, Lot, et Fawtier, , Histoire des institutions françaises au moyen âge, 3. 253.Google Scholar
143 ‘Vita Sancti Ludovici, auctore Gaufrido de Belloco,’ H.F. 20. 12.Google Scholar
144 Ordonnances des Rois, 1. 60.Google Scholar
145 Ibid. 11. 347.Google Scholar
146 Layettes, 2, no. 2468.Google Scholar
147 Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants, 28.Google Scholar
148 Layettes, 2, no. 3213.Google Scholar
149 Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants, 29.Google Scholar
150 Layettes, 2, no. 2880; Potthast 10819.Google Scholar
151 Boutaric, , Actes du Parlement, 1. CCCXIX; Baluzius, Stephanus, Miscellanea (2nd edition, 4 vols. Lucca 1761) 3. 101.Google Scholar
152 Reg. Innocent IV no. 6972.Google Scholar
153 Olim, 1. 35.Google Scholar
154 Guiraud, Jean, Les Registres d'Urbain IV (Paris 1901-1929) no. 2448.Google Scholar
155 27 November 1263 Ibid. no. 2243.Google Scholar
156 18 or 23 December 1266, Jourdan, Edouard, Les Registres de Clément IV (Paris 1893-1945) no. 1159.Google Scholar
157 13 September 1267, Gallia Christiana 10, Instrumenta 66.Google Scholar
158 Matthaei Parisiensis 6. 99–112.Google Scholar
159 Sextus, Lib. III, tit. IV, cap. II; Friedberg, 2. 1021.Google Scholar
160 11 March 1268, Martène et Durand, 2. 580; Potthast 20288.Google Scholar
161 13 June 1268, Martène et Durand, 2. 607–608.Google Scholar
162 Ibid. 2. 608.Google Scholar
163 Potthast 20561. It is possible that Gregory X did not have much enthusiasm for Clement's decree, or it may have been that widespread complaints had arisen because of it. At any rate, during the Second Council of Lyons (1274) the decree was modified. Henceforth the ordinary collator of a benefice was authorized to make an appointment to the office if, after a month, it remained vacant, Mansi, 24. 95, cap. XXI; Sextus, Lib. III, tit. IV, cap. III; Friedberg, 2. 1021.Google Scholar
164 Olim, 2. 125.Google Scholar
165 Delisle, , Essai de Restit. no. 346. In 1209 Richard, bishop of Amiens, had declared to Philip Augustus that prebends which became vacant during regalia were reserved to the future bishop, Phillips, 76.Google Scholar
166 Clim, 2. 106.Google Scholar
167 Possibly some of the trouble that arose over the prebend of Laon can be explained by the circumstances on the international scene when Nicholas was elected. Philip and Alphonse, king of Castille and Leon, were at the point of war and Nicholas was desperately anxious to prevent a clash. He was obviously quite angry with Philip; it is worthy of note that before he had sent Philip a formal notice of his election, Nicholas wrote to both kings to try to avoid a conflict, Potthast 21259-21260. He also wrote to the Master General of the Dominicans and the Minister General of the Franciscans and told them to use persuasion and even excommunication and interdict against the kings, if that would be necessary, Potthast 21261. This was all the more unusual because Nicholas, no friend of the Angevins, had sent notice of his election to Charles of Anjou in the beginning of December, Potthast 21258.Google Scholar
168 23 August 1278, Gay, Jules, ed, Registres de Nicolas III, no. 298: ‘Nam cum canonicatus et prebende collatio spirituale jus indubitanter existat et per eam spiritualia utpote jus eligendi prelatum et alia similia conferantur nec pro eo quod personis secularibus forsan ex privilegio sit concessa vel in eis per patientiam tolerata desinat spirituale jus esse, non est dubium quando laici ad se ilium asserunt pertinere non esse a plenitudine apostolice potestatis exempta nec ab ejusdem libera in omnibus spiritualibus administrationem subtractam.’ Google Scholar
169 Ibid. no. 299.Google Scholar
170 Ibid. no. 300 Google Scholar
171 Langlois, C., Le Règne de Philip III le Hardi 230, note 2.Google Scholar
172 11 October 1285, Prou, Maurice, Registres de Honorius IV, no. 488.Google Scholar
173 Lecanu, , Histoire du diocèse de Coutances et Avranches 1. 315.Google Scholar
174 Gaudemet, , Collation des bénéfices vacants 36–39.Google Scholar
175 E.g. Phillips, , 76.Google Scholar
176 Mollat, , 675–676.Google Scholar
177 Matthaei Parisiensis Chronica Maiora 6. 110.Google Scholar
178 Gaudemet, , Collation de bénéfices vacants, 21–22. Howell, Miss Margaret (Regalian Right in Medieval England [London 1962] 187–200) has discussed this question from the English standpoint and concludes: ‘From the king's point of view advowsons of churches were feudal perquisites; they were in every way an integral part of the temporalities of the see. It may be argued that the claim to present to prebends, one of the most highly valued of all the king's sede vacante rights, cannot possibly be included in this category. But what is significant is that the king strove hard to force the claim into this category, that he classed it with the claim to advowsons of churches as annexed to the temporalities and that he would not allow a bishop to collate to a prebend until he had done fealty for the temporalities.’ Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by