This is how obsessive French feudal can look

For anyone who spends a lot of time with earlier French feudal, the deniers in the name of Herbert I, Eveille-chien /’Wakedog,’ Count of Maine /Le Mans (c. 1015-1035) are as iconic as they are ubiquitous in the market. On one hand, their origin, in a comital reign funly contemporaneous to Cnut, is still remarkably early for the series. In this capacity, the distinctive, neocarolingian ‘ERBERTVS’ monogram crosses a key divide from immobilizations of Carolingian issues, to ones explicitly in the count’s name. On the other hand, immobilization of the coins persisted into the mid-13th century, by which time the county had been awarded to Louis IX’s brother, Charles of Anjou, as an appanage. Making all but the original issue kind of thick on the ground.

The one below is an earlier immobilization, from the 11th century.

Obv. ‘ERBERTVS’ monogram. (Large capital “E,” with “R” and “B” to either side of the central vertical; “T” and partially elided “V” in the upper right; “S” below.) +COMES CENOMAN[N/I]S. (‘Count of Maine.’)
Rev. Cross, ‘Alpha’ and ‘Omega’ suspended from either arm.
‘SIGNVM DEI VIVI.’ (Sign of the Living God.) (Boudeau 170, Duplessy 398A, Legros 568, Poey d’Avant 1548, Roberts 4121.)

...Complemented by one from the same interval (vague as it is), but with a very cool variation. Here, the ‘ERBERTVS’ monogram has what looks like an “H” (also partially elided) to its immediate left.





Here’s one c. late 11th -early 12th century. The legends are still in what translates, in this medium, to Romanesque -era calligraphy, but as such, much more standardized, and less evocative of the more spidery lettering on the Bayeux Tapestry (Duplessy 399).




Then there’s this one, demonstrating the adoption of fully-realized Gothic capitals.



(Duplessy 400. While dating this variant to the ‘milieu du XIIeme siecle,’ Duplessy notes that it ‘est continue jusqu’en 1266.’)

Finally, here is one of the relatively scarce examples which, on the basis of hoard evidence, can be securely dated to the lifetime of Herbert. (I landed this one only a few months ago. Unattributed as a lifetime issue; otherwise overpriced for the condition, but Hey, who’s arguing? It wasn’t much….)








Here, according to Duplessy (397), the ‘tell’ is the distinctive “M” in “CENOMANIS,” looking more like “O).” This letter form appears as late as the 13th century, notably on ecclesiastical issues of Reims, but it’s not common. Since, according to his own bibliography, Duplessy wrote the article on the hoard in question, I’m happy to take his word for it.

Since I’m sure that, by this time, everyone in videoland is waiting to hear how the original Herbert got his sobriquet, here’s what was happening. Sorry for the less than great map.

Northwestern Francia in the mid-11th century, showing Maine's awkward position between the larger feudal powers of Normandy, Brittany, Anjou (having earlier absorbed Touraine), and Blois (including the dynastically associated county of Chartres). (From Wikimedia Commons.)

The county of Maine had the misfortune to be located directly between the regional superpowers of Normandy and Anjou, with the no less formidable dual county of Blois-Chartres directly to the east. Over the course of the following century, each of the latter three would go on to leave their dynastic mark on post-Conquest England, respectively in the persons of William I, Henry II, and Stephen. Prior to this, however, their rivalry was pronounced. Le Patourel describes the situation, as of the ducal reign of Guillaume ‘le Batarde’ (later William I of England) as “analogous to that of the Vexin between the [Capetian French] Royal Domain and the duchy [of Normandy]” –which is to say, a volatile frontier, unresolved over several generations (p. 85). Throughout the 11th century, Maine alternated between the status of a semi-autonomous buffer state, as during Herbert’s comital reign, and a political football, more and less directly appropriated by one or the other of its more powerful neighbors. Charles Cawley quotes the chronicler Orderic Vitalis, asserting that Heribert’s nickname arose from his “constant need to ‘resist the harrying of his neighbours in Anjou’” (http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/MAINE.htm#_Toc216685780). In light of Orderic’s pronounced Norman bias, one might be tempted to speculate whether, over the longer term, the truth may have been more complicated, if not necessarily more nuanced. Granted, Herbert’s own career tends to verify Orderic’s assessment. The onset of his reign saw him actively assisting his suzerain, Foulques ‘Nerra’ of Anjou, in an early attempt by Foulques to wrest Tours from the hegemony of Eudes II of Blois (Bachrach pp. 148-9). Less than a decade later, in 1025, Foulques briefly imprisoned Heribert, in an attempt “to gain direct control of Maine” (pp. 173-4).

Further into the 11th century, Geoffroy ‘Martel’ of Anjou maintained feudal hegemony over Maine to his death in 1060, after which Guillaume ‘le Batarde’ occupied Le Mans, and assumed suzereignty over the county (Douglas pp. 71-3, 173-4; Dunbabin p. 188). As a vassal county of Normandy, Maine continued its tenuous semi-autonomy through the comital reign of Helie de la Fleche (1093-1110), after which it “was absorbed into domain of the counts of Anjou” (Barton 199; cf. 210). Through the reign of King Richard (1189-1199), Maine would remain within the Angevin orbit.

The late 11th -early 12th-century example corresponds, more or less, to Helie de La Fleche, was a maternal grandson and heir of Heribert I. As such, he inherited a county which remained, as Bartlett puts it, “the chief theatre of Norman-Angevin conflict” during the later 11th and early 12th centuries (p. 19). Dunbabin notes that “[his] title to the office was through marriage [i. e., maternal] and was unacceptable to [William II] Rufus [of England and Normandy; eldest son of William ‘the Conqueror’]” (p. 324). William Rufus went on to occupy Maine from 1098-1100 (Le Patourel p. 86). In 1100, on the accession of Henry I as King of England, with his older brother Robert ‘Curthose’ as Duke of Normandy, Helie used the ensuing dynastic rivalry as a “breathing space to reestablish himself in the county and reassert links with Anjou. Fulk [IV of Anjou, father of Foulques V] greeted this development with enthusiasm” (Dunbabin p. 324). As Le Patourel elaborates, “[d]uring the last years of his life [Helie] seems to have tried to balance the competing pressures of Anjou and Normandy,“ conspicuously by active support of Henry I against William Rufus, eventuating in Henry’s defeat and deposition of his elder brother as Duke of Normandy (p. 86; see esp. pp. 186-7 for the outcome for Henry and Rufus). Meanwhile, negotiations with Fulk IV bore fruit in a more literal sense. In 1109, after Helie’s death, his daughter and heir, Erembourg, became the first wife of Foulques V of Anjou (p. 86). As Bartlett notes, “[f]rom 1110, the county was clearly part of the ‘Greater Anjou’ made up of Anjou proper, Maine and Touraine” (p. 19).


However, as Le Patourel continues, even though from this point, “the union of the two comtes, after a century of effort on the part of [the Angevin counts] seemed assured [….], this prospect did not extinguish the Norman interest in Maine by any means” (p. 86). It took the conquest of Normandy itself by Geoffroy ‘Plantagenet’ in 1144 for Maine to become a permanent constituent of greater Anjou (p. 87 for the politico-dynastic background; cf. Matthew pp. 116-7 for Geoffroy’s conquest of Normandy). Geoffroy’s son, Henry II, would go on to inherit England, Normandy, ‘Greater Anjou’ and, by marriage, the key Aquitainian part of the Angevin Empire. (Dunbabin 324, 334-5.

But this was not the end. By 1204, Philippe II of France had overrun Maine, along with the better part of the ‘Angevin Empire’ (Hallam 131; cf. Powicke 154,158). The last phase of immobilization largely dates from this point. After 1266, Philippe’s great-grandson, Charles d’Anjou, was issuing deniers of Le Mans in his own name (cf. Duplessy 401).

References.

Bachrach, Bernard S. Fulk Nerra: the Neo-Roman Consul, 987-1040: A Political Biography of the Angevin Count. 1993.
Bartlett, Robert. England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings: 075-1225. 2000.
Barton, Richard. Lordship in the County of Maine, c. 890-1160. 2004.
Bates, David. Normandy Before 1066. 1982.
Cawley, Charles. Medieval Lands (genealogical website). On the website of the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy: https://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/mainintro.htm
Douglas, David. William the Conqueror. Berkeley: U of California P, 1993.
Dunbabin, Jean. France In the Making: 843-1180. First ed., 1985.
Hallam, Elizabeth. Capetian France: 987-1328. 1980.
Le Patourel, John. The Norman Empire. 1976. 1997.
Matthew, Donald. King Stephen. 2002.
Powicke, Maurice. The Loss of Normandy: 1189-1204. 1960.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks, @lordmarcovan, especially for the link! ...Honest, No Joke, I thought about trying some quick definition in parentheses, but it would've been shoddy, and made the prose only worse than it is by default. :<}

 

Nice write-up and coins. Sure learned a lot.

 

Excellent coins and some very interesting history! I have yet to pick anything from Maine, but I’ll throw my lone Angevin coin into the mix:
French Feudal - Anjou
Fulk V or Geoffrey V, r. 1109-1129 or 1129-1151
AR Denier, 18.92 mm x 0.9 grams
Obv.: +FVLCO COMES starting at 3hr. cross pattée, omega in quadrant 3, alpha in quadrant 4
Rev.: + VRBS AIDCCSV. Around Fulk’s monogram
Ref.: Duplessy 375, Roberts 4114

 

Very cool! I'd try and collect as many as you have... but it'd be feudal to try
My favorite French feudal is an ex Bing!:

FRANCE, FEUDAL, Valence, Bishops of Valence (1157-1276), Silver Denier, 0.71g., stylized angel facing, +VRBS VALENTIAI, rev., cross annulet in fourth quadrant, +S APOLLI NARS, (Boudeau 1021), fine. Ex CT pal Bing


Feudal coins
AUVERGNE - BISHOPRIC OF LE PUY - ANONYMOUS
Obole AR, 1200-1290 CE, Mint name / Town : Le Puy, 18 mm
1 h. 1,00 g.
Rarity : R3
Obverse : + POIES, Croix aux bouts arrondis
Reverse: .+. DELPVEI, Rosace à six feuilles
Bd.374 (5 f.) - PA.2238 (49/3)
Ex: Zeus

 

Great write-up. Nice to read the history behind the coins!

France, Feudal, Maine. Herbert I Eveille-Chien (Wakedog), AD 1015-1035. AR Denier (20mm, 1.08g, 12h). Cenomanliis (Le Mans) mint. Obv: + SIGNVM DEI VIVI; Cross pattee withing dotted circle; pellet in each of upper two quadrants; in lower two quadrants Λ - ω. Rev: + CO(NE)S C(NE)ONΛNIS; "Hubertus" monogram within dotted circle. Ref: Poey d'Avant 1562; Roberts 4122.

 

Many thanks, @Edessa ...and everybody else.
Um, Edessa, I'm sorry to do this, but the Advancement of Science constrains me somewhat. Your example is much closer to Duplessy 399, c. late 11th-early 12th c., circa Helie de La Fleche. For the whole series, Duplessy has a total of six variants and subvariants, arranged chronologically. Without fiddling with Poey on Google Books, I suspect even he wasn't as thourough as that. Boudeau, the early-20th-c. equivalent of Duplessy, only lists two (170, 171), the original and all subsequent issues. --And I cited the wrong one for my first example, the initial posthumous 11th-century one. ...Because, Wait for it, when I first catalogued it, I was sure it was a lifetime issue. Nope, just the same century. Missed that during the writeup; dumbly, since the whole impetus of the article was finally getting a 'real' one.
But it sounds like you can appreciate the coolness of the entire range of the history.

 

Thanks for the clarification! I don't have Duplessy and was struggling with the Poey listings (numbers 1546 to 1598). But understanding that at a couple of points in the listing Poey says that "After Hebert, this coin type becomes banal and any further classification would be illusory". And later "It would be difficult, in my opinion, and of little benefit to science to seek order in this chaos". Such a great post to show that Chaos has succumbed to Order through the great research of Duplessy. The immobilization of types is an interesting field of study.

 

@Edessa, Very, Very Cool. Thanks Lots for going into the weeds with Poey. I wouldn't have guessed he'd've been as adamant about it as that. Wow. ...And he was What, the Audubon of French feudal. Lots of people still revere him for how incredibly comprehensive he did manage to get. Shoulders of giants, and so forth.

 

Well, I blame you, but this discussion is going to force me to submit an order for the two volumes of Duplessy Feudal. Thank you for the post that encouraged me to further fill up my remaining bookshelf space!

 

Thanks, @Edessa. ...And, Oh, nnnNo, Don't Get Me Started about remaining bookshelf space! Let's Just Not Go There.

 

Poey, Boudeau and Duplessy all seem rushed and needed to keep it 100% to fit their knowledge into a limited space (even though Poey did at times go awol). At the same time, only Poey dwells seriously on "style" and letter shapes to determine a relative chronology inside an immobilized issue. This type of posts is clarifying and focused enough to make a large immobilization that spans from around the 1020s (I think the likely date for the beginning of this issue under Herbert is around 1020-1025) to 1266 seem less chaotic, by bringing some skeletal points that need to be made (and are often skipped by French numismatists for some reason) in the chronology.

There's also another aspect that was scarcely touched upon: in the first half of the 11th century the denier was still tributary to the Carolingian grand denier -- so around 20-22mm ca. 1.20g+. By the time Charles d'Anjou mints at Le Mans -- in part to sustain his endeavors in Italy -- the regular denier is at 18mm although de jure still a moneta septena and thus worth 2 deniers tournois. So besides the style that is definitely specific to age, metrology helps us also determine the place a certain piece has inside this immobilization.