Charters relating to Judicial Duels, 11th - 12th Century
Duel between Engelardus and the monks of Saint-Serge of Angers, c.1100
Abbots Daibert and Otbrannus prevent a battle between their monks, 27
and 28 April, 1064
Trouble between St Martin of Tours and Holy Cross of Talmont leads to a
judicial battle, 1098
Abbot Robert of Mont-Saint-Michel seeks the right to determine where duels
1. Duel between Engelardus and the monks of Saint-Serge
of Angers, c.1100
Notice concerning Engelardus:
The concord of brothers and the love of neighbors, as wisdom proves, is pleasing to God
and men. On account of which, lest the concord which we made with Engelardus and his
friends, namely Arnaldus and Bovellus, concerning mills be obscured by an intervening
cloud of oblivion, let it [the concord] be made known to everyone. John of Avrilleo, whose
daughter was the wife of Engelardus, held a place on the river Loire from the abbot of
Saint-Serge of Angers, to which place were joined two mills; the whole parcel brought four
deniers [pennies] in rent. The land, truly, on both banks was not John's, but was held
directly by the monks of Saint-Serge. After John had died, it happened that the river
Loire in its impetuosity consumed the solidity of the banks [ate away the banks], so that
after an interval of time the place suitable for two mills now included space sufficient
for five. Engelardus, moreover, claimed as the heir of the above-mentioned John to possess
the entire river-landing [portus] with the five mills through hereditary right. The monks,
however, were reclaiming that part of the portus which the river Loire had seized in their
The quarrel concerning this matter dragged out to the point that lord Geoffrey of
Mayenne, bishop of Angers, came to inspect the place in question. And, when he was unable
to peacefully impose an end to the contentious quarrel, he determined that a judicial
battle [duellum] ought to be fought concerning this matter between Engelardus and the
monks at the villa which is called Vi, doing so under his [the bishop's] judgment. In
which place, after neither the bishop nor the great lords who had gathered there were able
to bring concord, they [the bishop and lords] observed, against their will, the two
champions taking an oath on the sacrament and deciding [the issue] with shields and staves
[scutis et bacculis] for most of the day. And just as it is written that God opposes the
prideful, so he weakened the champion of Engelardus, so that the enemies of the holy
martyrs [saints] Sergius and Bacchus were utterly terrified; where these enemies had
previously not wanted to make peace [with the monks], now they themselves were the ones
who suggested it. They offered to the monks as a means of concord the entire tithe [ten
percent] of the mills and the fish caught there, as well as four deniers in rent from
every mill that either existed there now or would exist there in the future. Truly, prior
to this the monks had possessed nothing but four deniers in rent. When the lord Abbot
Bernard had accepted this offer with the counsel of the bishop, the monks, and their
friends, he conceded to them [Engelardus and his friends] the entire [portion of the]
river [in the following way], namely so that they could construct up to six mills there
without trouble, and so that they should render [to the monastery] the tithe of the mills,
the tithe of fish, and four deniers in rent for each mill. In return for this peace
agreement, first Ernaldus, and then Arnaldus and Bovellus, kissing the hand of Abbot
Bernard, made a gift of this matter with a certain little plowshare [cultellus]; they also
promised to depute millers by means of oaths and sacraments from the side of the monks as
well as from their own. Lest this [decision] seem [unduly] harsh to them, lord Abbot
Bernard and the monks who were with him conceded to them and to their wives the benefit of
Saint-Serge and promised that the days of their deaths would be recorded in the [monks']
martyrology for anniversary commemorations.
Witnesses: Bishop Geoffrey, Warner the archdeacon [of Angers], Albericus the chaplain,
Richard of Valle, Fulk of Mathefelon, Mainardus Bovet, Geoffrey of Briollay, Abbo his
brother, Warin of Bremo, Hildebert his nephew, Burchard of Greio, Mauritius of Escharbot,
Aimery Avalon, Hugh of Clefs, Fulk of Muris, Anquitillus, Rainaldus, Burgevinus, Geoffrey
his son, Gerald the prefect, Ratfredus, Albert Malus Michinus, Robert of Albergiis, and
[the charter, as well as the dispute, continues]
Source: Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Serge, 2 vols., ed.
Yves Chauvin, Memoire dactylographie soutenu devant la Faculte des Lettres de Caen (1969),
vol. 1, no. 244, pp. 285- 288.
2. Abbots Daibert and Otbrannus prevent a battle between
their monks, 27 and 28 April, 1064
Concerning the concord made between the monks of Saint Aubin and the monks of Saint
Serge concerning the weir of the mill of Varennes
Let it be known to all faithful of the holy church of God, and especially to our
successors, that a serious altercation arose between the monks of Saint-Serge [of Angers]
and the monks of Saint-Aubin [of Angers] over the land to be used for the weir at the mill
of Varennes. The monks of Saint Serge affirmed that ancient custom required that the weir
be constructed from the [plot of] land placed in front of the mill. The monks of Saint
Aubin, however, did not want to concede that the land placed around the mill was to be
used for building a weir. The dispute concerning this matter grew so great that the
members of the household of each monastery were preparing to contend with staves and
shields against each other concerning this matter. Such a turn of events disheartened
abbot Daibert of Saint Serge beyond measure, especially since it might cause monks to want
to fight against other monks. He [Abbot Daibert], employing the greatest supplication,
sent word to Abbot Otbrannus of Saint Aubin [to warn him] lest such an unheard of evil as
this occur and lest monks, who ought to show the example of concord and peace to others,
become the cause of perdition. He [Otbrannus], complying with Daibert's healthy
suggestions, did not delay in coming meet Daibert. Otbrannus decided, for the sake of the
bond of peace and love that ought to be observed [between them], to give four arpents of
land for the building of the weir; the four arpents were worth sixteen pennies, which were
collected in Angers on the feast of Saint-Aubin. Otbrannus gave two of the four arpents to
Saint-Serge, one to Aimery, the brother of Andefredus, and the fourth to Goslin Tardivus
(for which the abbot accepted five shillings from Goslin). For the stone necessary to
build the weir at the mill, he [Daibert] accepted from the abbot [Otbrannus] or his
friends twenty shillings according to the following agreement, so that if they [the monks
of Saint Serge] desire it, they [the monks of Saint-Aubin] shall approve as much work as
will be all around the weir, and that they [the monks of Saint-Aubin] shall pay a rent
each year of four pennies along with the aforesaid [land]. Beyond those twenty pennies,
six pennies are to be paid to the abbot of Saint Serge or his friends as the anciently
instituted rent for the mooring dues of the weir and the half-arpent of land belonging to
the mill - one quarter of land above [the mill] and the other below; this is to be paid at
the vicus of Leionis on the feast of Saint Martin of Vertavensis.
This agreement was made in the cloister of Saint Maurice [the cathedral-chapter of
Angers] on April 27; on the next day it was re-affirmed and authorized in the
chapter-house of Saint Aubin, with all the monks, and others who had gathered there for
that reason, listening. This was done in the year of the lord 1064.
The names of the witnesses are described below: lord Daibert, abbot of Saint Serge;
Otbrannus abbot of Saint Aubin; Durandus, monk of Saint Aubin and scribe; Ivo; Walter;
Ernald; Rainald the Grammarian; Ansierus the dean; Warin the canon; Berno the vicar; Warin
the cellarer of the count; Gerald Calvellus; Fulcherius son of Rainald; Robert his
brother; Sigebrannus, vassal of the bishop; Andefredus; Ansaldus; Ralph; Odenellus;
Dagobertus the merchant; John of Bonne Valle; Richard Mesle Bien; Achard vassal of the
bishop; Primald the forester; Rivallon Guenchia; Giraldus; Adam.
Source: Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Serge, 2 vols., ed.
Yves Chauvin, Memoire dactylographie soutenu devant la Faculte des Lettres de Caen (1969),
vol. 1, no. 216, pp. 263-265.
3. Trouble between St Martin of Tours and Holy Cross of
Talmont leads to a judicial battle, 1098
Notice relating how the monks of Fontaines [a priory of St Martin of Tours] recovered
their marsh at Angles through the proof of a judicial battle held against the monks of
Lest devouring age succeed in destroying or abolishing the memory of the most important
things, the pious and clement authority of our ancestors decided that whatever might be
necessary for posterity to know ought to be written down under the seal of letters. Surely
those things which are surrendered to the divine cult and which are distributed by
God-fearing men and by those descending into the tomb for the sake of their own souls and
the souls of their kin, saving the administrators of churches, if they are not announced
by the notice of written documents, will be forgotten through idleness and shall be
overwhelmed over time by oblivion. But because a written list of many reasons intended to
banish quarrels is wont to be seen as truth by those ignorant [of the truth], these things
which by reason of utility should not be cut off from the notice of our successors should
be transmitted by us through written charters. [a rough translation of the first
This therefore is the explanation of the controversy which the monks of Saint Martin of
Tours, who lived at Fontaines serving God and His beloved Saint John the Baptist, had
waged with the monks of the Holy Cross of Talmont, with the canons of Angles, and with all
others who had attempted to seize with violent hands the entire marsh of Angles, which was
bounded by the canal of the river Chaionis and the canal of Saint Mary. The efforts of
these enemies to seize the marsh, whether by [citing] the unjust gift of Pippin son of
Chalo or by [engaging] in simple fraud, were proved false by the prior donation of the
marsh to St Martin by William the Youth of Talmont.
The above-mentioned Pippin, since he was nephew and heir of the late William the Youth,
did not, in truth, maintain William's alms as a distinct unit, as would have been just;
[instead], violently seizing the aforesaid marsh, he retained the greater part of it as
his private reserve and stubbornly distributed the remainder [of the marsh] to the canons
of Angles and to whomever he pleased.
When, truly, Ainulfus, who was then the prior of Fontaines, and the other brothers
[ie., monks] who were with him, strenuously complained to the said Pippin and others
concerning this violent invasion, he in the end, was moved by their complaint. Thus he
gave the tithe of his enclosure, which came from the very marsh which he, as was already
related, had seized, equally to Saint Martin and Saint John the Baptist; [but] he conceded
and offered the same enclosure to the monks in the following way, such that if he should
want to alienate it from himself, he would give it to no one save Saint Martin and his
monks, who held right to it.
Yet after only a few days had passed, Pippin, on his deathbed, relinquished the
aforesaid enclosure to [the monastery of] the Holy Cross of Talmont; the monks of Holy
Cross affirmed the truth of this gift.
The monks of Fontaines, however, after they had heard of this [new] gift, disputed it
as unjust. Yet because their complaint about the gift was going nowhere, the monks
approached Count William of Poitou, lamenting and promising [him] money so that he might
make right to them concerning the monks of Talmont, who, relying on the gift of Pippin,
were fraudulently keeping hold of the marsh at Angles.
He [the count] forthwith commanded the abbot of Holy Cross of Talmont to appear before
him to answer [literally "to make right"] concerning this matter. And when the
claims of both parties had been narrated before the count, Odo de Roches, at the request
both of the count and of everyone else, judged that the monks of Saint Martin, according
to the charter of prior donation which had been read out there, namely the donation made
by the late William, ought to demonstrate through the approbation of judicial combat
[duellum] that the marsh, concerning which such a great contention had arisen, had been
given to Saint Martin and Saint John in the same [initial charter of] donation.
And then they came to Moutiers-les-Maufaits at the count's command to decide the issue
between them through a judicial combat. Finally the armed champions were both led to the
church, where they both pronounced themselves ready to take the oath.
But the champion of Saint Martin, who agreed to go first in swearing the oath with his
hand being held, swore to the aforesaid Odo the following oath so that all could hear:
"When William the Youth of Talmont, about whom I am capable of speaking, gave the
land of Fontaines and the land of Angles to Saint Martin and Saint John in his charter and
gift, he included the marsh in that gift." Then, truly, the other champion claimed
that he had perjured himself with this oath.
When everyone hurried to reach the area where champions habitually were led to decide
such matters through judicial combat, the canons of Angles came to Prior Ainulfus and the
other monks of Fontaines, asking that they [the monks of Fontaines] include them in the
trial by combat against the monks of Holy Cross. He [Ainulfus] freely agreed to their
request, and not only accepted them jointly in this proof by combat but also accepted all
others who were known to hold anything in that marsh.
And when the champions came together to do combat, the injustice [done by the monks of
Holy Cross] did not remain in doubt for very long, but was quickly revealed by the Lord.
In fact the champion of the monks of Holy Cross and their allies was shamefully defeated
and laid low without delay, and he thus acquired nothing else for the monks of Holy Cross
save the highest shame and the greatest harm. Weighed down with shame and sadness on
account of this defeat, they [the monks of Holy Cross], weeping and overcome with sadness,
departed along with those others who had wanted to seize the marsh belonging to Saint
Martin. The monks of Fontaines and their champion, on the other hand, offering immense
thanks to the most just judges, God and their patron saint, Saint Martin, returned quickly
and joyfully to their house in order to take possession of their rights.
So that the truth of these things which are recorded above might be believed, not one
but a large number of proper witnesses were introduced to strengthen the testimony of the
Sign of Odo de Roches; Sign of Bernard his brother; Sign of Gilbert de Veluire; Sign of
Peter de Bullo; Sign of William son of Herbert; Sign of Hugh his son; Sign of Engelbald
Buzanus; sign of Peter Maschinoth; sign of William his brother; sign of Peter son of
Robert; sign of Bernard Bardeth; sign of Ralph de Forte; sign of William de Forte; sign of
Gobinus de Olone; sign of Ascelin Porcerius; sign of William son of Hugh; sign of Leovinus
Maschinus; sign of Rannulf son of Engoffridus; sign of Alexander his brother; sign of
Rannulf Robelinus; sign of Pagan Caboth; sign of Goslin son of Achardus; sign of Gerald
son of Hugh; sign of Pagan his brother; sign of William Salcinus; signo f Peter de Peroso;
sign of Rainald Buchardus; sign of Ainulf the prior [of Fontaines]; sign of Robert the
monk; sign of William the monk; sign of Walter the monk; sign of Alfred the monk; sign of
Gerald the Bearded; sign of Martin the famulus [member of the household, probably of the
monks' household]; sign of John the famulus; sign of Bernard son of Noel of Angles; sign
of Oldrea Thionis.
Source: Paul Marchegay, "Duel judiciaire entre des communautes
religieuses, 1098," Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Chartes, 1 (1839-1840):
552-564. Marchegay provides the Latin text and a commentary.
4. Abbot Robert of Mont-Saint-Michel seeks the right to
determine where duels are held.
In the 1155th year from the incarnation of the lord, namely the second year of the
reign of Henry king of the English, in the same year in which Abbot Robert [of Torigny]
was called to the rule of the monastery of Saint-Michael [ie., in the year he became abbot
In the same year when Abbot Robert wanted to hold a [judicial] duel [duellum]
concerning the honor [estate] of Saint Paternus at Mont-Saint-Michel, William of
Saint-John prohibited any judicial battle [bellum] concerning the honor of Saint-John to
be held in any place outside the same honor. The same abbot, at the [royal] assize at
Domfront, presented this ruling to Arnulf, bishop of Lisieux, and Robert de Neubourg, who
were the royal justices; with the consideration of the royal court it was judged that all
the barons of Normandy who held [their fiefs] directly from the lord of Normandy, just as
the abbot of Mont-Saint-Michel did, were able, if they wanted, to hold all their judicial
battles, even those stemming from their most remote fiefs, at their primary residence.
[Done] with Robert de Neubourg, Hasculf de Sollegn..., and Gilbert de Campell... as
Source: Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, MS. lat. 5430A, p. 15.
© All texts translated by Richard Barton, 1998
The text is copy-permitted for educational and non-commercial use; it can be used in
class course packets, but cannot be printed or otherwise distributed in print form
(including by university presses), or used commercially, without permission from the
translator. Since these texts might be revised, users should not mount these texts
permanently (for more than one semester) on other websites.
This text is part of the Internet
Medieval Source Book. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and
copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history.
Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright.
Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational
purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No
permission is granted for commercial use.
Paul Halsall, October 1998