The Life and Afterlife of Isabeau of Bavaria

• Notes
• Chapter
• Johns Hopkins University Press
• pp. 257-301
• View Citation
• Additional Information

NOTES

Introduction

1. In 1991, Maureen Quilligan drew attention to the fact that historians recognize that the story of Isabeau’s adultery is a fiction in The Allegory of Female Authority, 246–47. Quilligan explained that “the rumors about an affair date only from many decades later” (247). Still, the myth of the debauched queen continues to crop up in Christine and other related studies. For post-Quilligan examples, see Jane H. M. Taylor, The Making of Poetry, who asserts, without citation, “Isabeau of Bavaria was, according to gossip, thought to be Louis d’Orléans’ mistress” (27); Rosalind Brown-Grant, who writes of Christine de Pizan, “It is also possible that she is here making an oblique criticism of Louis d’Orléans, who was rumoured to be having an affair with his sister-in-law, Isabeau de Bavière.” Brown-Grant cites Jean Favier’s La Guerre de cent ans, 415–16. However, on those pages, Favier only asserts without citation that Louis and Isabeau were having an affair. Brown-Grant also cites the passage from Pintoin, discussed in this introduction. Brown-Grant, Christine de Pizan and the Moral Defence, 104. The idea of the adulterous Isabeau in Christine studies derives from the influential biography of Charity Cannon Willard, who asserts without footnote that all of Paris knew that Louis and Isabeau were lovers. The “summer of 1405,” Willard wrote, “was the time when gossip began to circulate in Paris about the relations between the queen and the duke of Orleans, a liaison that lasted until the duke’s assassination in a Paris street near the queen’s residence in November 1407.” Willard, Christine de Pizan, 150.

2. Adams, “Love as Metaphor,” 160–61. I describe Christine de Pizan as addressing her pleas to a “capricious mediator who may or may not reward her efforts.”

3. Minois, La Guerre de cent ans, 270.

4. See Caron, Noblesse et pouvoir royal, 188.

5. Tuilier, Histoire de l’Université de Paris, 1:186.

6. Poulet, “Capetian Women and the Regency,” 115.

7. Guenée, Un meurtre, une société, 147–48.

8. Journal d’un bourgeois de Paris, 208n7.

9. Erlanger, Charles VII et son mystère, 2.

10. Patterson, Joan of Arc, 4. The book is a collection of excerpts from John A. Mooney’s 1919 biography of Joan of Arc, with a bibliography of recent scholarship.

11. Gordon, Joan of Arc, 33.

12. Verdon, Isabeau de Bavière, 179.

13. Legrand’s most important work, the incomplete L’Archiloge sophie, which was intended to set out in twelve books everything that was known of science, was effusively dedicated to Louis of Orleans. See the introduction to Jacques Legrand, Archiloge sophie, livre de bonnes moeurs.

14. Pintoin, 3:268.

15. Ibid.

16. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 42. No twentieth-century historian who has studied the documents associated with the queen (as opposed to those who have simply asserted the charge without citation) has argued for the truthfulness of the charge. See Rachel C. Gibbons’ several articles, cited in the bibliography; Straub, “Isabeau de Bavière”; Yann Grandeau’s numerous articles, also cited in the bibliography; Kimm, Isabeau de Baviere; Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau; and Champion, Vie de Charles d’Orléans, 41.

17. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 43.

18. On soi-disant as an insult see Gibbons, “Isabeau of Bavaria,” 70. See also Charles VI, 588–89. Marina Warner shows the falseness of the story of Charles VII’s supposed illegitimacy in her Joan of Arc, 57–59.

19. Cosneau, Les Grands traités, 113.

20. Pintoin, 6:886.

21. “Le Dauphin Jean,” 667.

22. Royal Intrigue. See also Familiglietti, “The French Monarchy Crisis.”

23. Gibbons, “Isabeau of Bavaria,” x. I would also like to acknowledge Karen Green’s “Isabeau de Bavière and the Political Philosophy of Christine de Pizan.” Although this article appeared after I had already completed most of the research for this study, it reinforces many of my own conclusions.

24. Schechter, “Gothic Thermidor,” 88.

25. See Sutherland, “Catherine de Medici”; Knecht, “Catherine de Médicis,” 1–16; and Crawford, “Catherine de Médicis.”

26. See, for example, Weber, Queen of Fashion; Kaiser, “Who’s Afraid of Marie-Antoinette?”; and Goodman, Marie-Antoinette.

27. See Maurer, Margaret of Anjou, esp. 1–13 and 127–42. Patricia-Ann Lee offers a somewhat different view of Margaret’s mediation and a review of the chronicles, many of which describe the queen as an extremely active political figure in “Reflections of Power: Margaret of Anjou and the Dark Side of Queenship.”

28. Even the revered Queen Blanche of Castile was rumored to have had affairs. See Berger, Histoire de Blanche de Castille, 82–83.

29. For discussions of the queen’s role as mediator or intercessor, see Maurer, Margaret of Anjou, 1–13; Parsons, “Intercessionary Patronage” and “The Queen’s Intercession”; Huneycutt, “Intercession and the High-Medieval Queen,” 126–46; Strohm’s chapter “Queens as Intercessors,” in his Hochon’s Arrow, 95–120. See also Fradenburg’s “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship.”

30. See Huneycutt, Matilda of Scotland; Cosandey, La Reine de France and “De Lance en quenouille”; Howell, Eleanor of Provence; Parsons, “Of Queens, Courts, and Books,” and Eleanor of Castile, and “Mothers, Daughters, Marriage, Power.”

31. Fradenburg, “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship,” 5.

32. This is especially noticeable in Thibault. But see also Vallet de Viriville, Isabeau de Bavière.

33. Mooney, “Queenship in Fifteenth Century France,” 20.

34. See Famiglietti, for example, Solterer, “Making Names, Breaking Lives.”

35. See Royal Intrigue, 42–43; Gibbons, “Isabeau of Bavaria,” 62–63; and Straub, “Isabeau de Bavière,” 134.

36. A second chronicle, attributed to Juvénal des Ursins, offers one negative passage about the queen, but up until the year 1411, according to Peter Lewis, or 1413, according to René Planchenault, this chronicle is largely an abridged translation of that of Pintoin. Most important, the negative passage is clearly an abridged translation of one of the four negative passages in Pintoin. Thus it cannot be taken as independent corroboration. See P. S. Lewis, Écrits politiques, 1:88, and Planchenault, “La ‘Chronique de la Pucelle,’” 95. We are left, then, with a single chronicler reporting that the queen was unpopular. Although the work attributed to Jean Juvénal des Ursins was almost certainly not written by him, I will nonetheless refer to it as the chronicle of Juvénal des Ursins, because it is widely known under this title.

37. Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin.”

38. Barry, La Reine de France, 308.

39. Pintoin, 6:432.

40. See Mark Warner, “The Anglo-French Dual Monarchy”; and Curry, “La Traité de Troyes,” 13–26.

41. See Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 642.

42. I have examined all the documents cited in this study but have cited in each case the secondary sources in which I found the references.

43. Spiegel, The Past as Text, 55.

Chapter One: Isabeau of Bavaria: Her Life

Epigraph. See Carroll, Blood and Violence, 7.

1. For a discussion of feuding and its use in recent scholarship, see Pollack-Lagushenko, “The Armagnac Faction,” 1–94. Also relevant to the discussion of integrative factionalism are studies of individual households and their clienteles. For the Duke of Orleans, see Gonzalez, Un Prince en son hôtel; for the Dukes of Burgundy, see Schnerb, Etat bourguignon; for the Dukes of Bourbon, see Mattéoni, Servir le prince.

2. The schema of Isabeau’s career is my own. However, the information for the chapter was drawn from a range of excellent histories available on the period, including Rivalité, Vaughan, Philip the Bold and John the Fearless, Autrand, Charles VI, and Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue. My presentation of the period differs in seeking to understand the place of Isabeau throughout, something that is of minor or no interest to these studies.

3. Isabel was a French form of Elisabeth, and Isabeau was a common variation of Isabel. Although she designated herself Isabel or Ysabel, the queen is referred to by both forms in different sources. For example, she is called “La Reyne Ysabeau” in the inventory of the royal treasury of 1438. See Alcouffe, “Gemmes anciennes.” It has been suggested that referring to the queen as Ysabeau, as does the “Songe véritable,” was intended to insult. However, the form is so common that it is difficult to see why its use would have been injurious.

4. See Thibault, 203.

5. See Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 21.

6. Froissart, 10:346–47.

7. The marriage between Anne of Bohemia and Richard II was contracted on September 1, 1380, just before the death of King Charles V on September 16, although not performed until 1382. On the negotiations surrounding the marriage, see Tuck, “Richard II and the House of Luxembourg,” 205–29.

8. Froissart, 10:344. The alliance of these two pro-Roman powers was a serious threat to Charles V, who supported the Avignon pope. See Valois, La France et le grand schisme, 1:300–2.

9. See Vaughan, Philip the Bold, 11, and Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 1. William V was the grandson of Isabeau’s great-grandfather, Holy Roman Emperor Louis IV of Bavaria, and thus a cousin of Isabeau’s father.

10. See Thibault, 38.

11. The standard text for French-Italian relations is Bueno de Mesquita. But see also Jarry, “La ‘Voie de fait’”; and Rivalité, 76–110. These works offer somewhat different interpretations of the documents.

12. See Bueno de Mesquita, 31–34.

13. Bueno de Mesquita, 12.

14. See Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 1–4.

15. See Froissart, 10:344–47.

16. Autrand, Charles VI, 145–49.

17. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 4–5.

18. See Bueno de Mesquita. “Louis, with the strength of France behind him, could safeguard the Milanese state, and by the natural development of his own ambitions would keep the Piedmontese princes fully occupied. He would be the instrument of Visconti policy in Piedmont, holding the important Genoese passes open for Giangaleazzo” (67).

19. Jarry, “La ‘Voie de fait,’” 217.

20. Ibid., 218.

21. On French policy toward the Schism, see Kaminsky, “The Politics of France’s Subtraction of Obedience,” 366–97.

22. Bueno de Mesquita explains that during marriage negotiations, Giangaleazzo had given verbal assurance that he would support the French Church policy (64).

23. See the letter sent by Carlo Visconti announcing his safe arrival at the court in Ingolstadt, printed in Simonsfeld, “Beiträge zur Bayersichen,” 302; see also Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 5.

24. Bueno de Mesquita, 63.

25. See Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 7.

26. See Louis d’Orléans, 64. The document with instructions on how to approach Isabeau can be found in Bibliothèque Nationale française (BN) fonds italien 1682, f. 23. See Bueno de Mesquita, 118–24, on the Florentine envoy. Desjardins and Canestrini publish a summary of the envoy’s instructions but do not mention Isabeau; Négociations diplomatiques, 1:29.

27. Bueno de Mesquita, 107–10; Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 5–6.

28. See Bueno de Mesquita, 107.

29. Jarry, “La ‘Voie de fait,’” 223.

30. Ibid., 224.

31. Ibid., 240–45. Pintoin mentions the three-year truce with the king of England, 2:130. The final result of the rapprochement was the marriage between Richard II of England and the daughter of Charles and Isabeau, Isabelle, in 1396. See Pintoin, 2:456–62.

32. Rivalité, 76–110.

33. Bueno de Mesquita, 188.

34. Pintoin describes the incident, 2:404–6, as does Froissart, 15:352–55. For the date of Valentina’s departure, see Louis d’Orléans, 168, and Collas, Valentine de Milan, 219–27. Giangaleazzo sent ambassadors to the French court to intervene on his daughter’s behalf, but to no avail. Froissart, 15:354. The matter of witchcraft is taken very seriously by Pintoin. Although he does not believe Valentina guilty of casting spells on the king, he describes the energy expended on trying cure the king in the years leading up to Valentina’s expulsion. See 2:24, 2:86–94, 2:542–46, and 3:114–16. The dukes of Orleans and Burgundy accused each other of casting malevolent spells on on the king. See Boudet, “Les Condamnations.” In 1398, the University of Paris condemned magic for any purpose, good or evil; Boudet, “Les Condamnations,” 121.

35. Pintoin, 2:464–66.

36. See the account of the ambassador, Buonaccorso Pitti, in Two Memoirs, 54–55. Michael Nordberg, in Rivalité, 96–102, argues convincingly that the treaty of Florence against Milan was due to the intervention of Isabeau alone. See also Louis d’Orléans, 167. Certainly Pitti’s memoir gives the impression that this was the case.

37. See Valois, La France et le grand schisme, 2:155. Papal bulls of November 6 and 7, 1389, grant Isabeau the right to name sixty clerical benefices; others are granted to the king, to Louis of Orleans, and to the king’s maternal uncle, Louis of Bourbon.

38. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 13, 22–23.

39. “Active Queenship,” 75. Gibbons cites Archives Nationales (AN) Series KK 45, f. 3–5.

40. See Rivalité, 152–53.

41. Regarding the Bavarian attitude toward Wenscelas, see Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 14. Ruprecht solicited Isabeau regularly for support. See Weizsäcker, Deutsche Reichstagsakten, 4:162, no. 113; 4:163–64, no. 116; 4:198–99, no. 157; 4:285, no. 208; 4:337–38, no. 255; 4:391–92, no. 289; and 4:394, no. 290.

42. See Carroll, Blood and Violence, 223.

43. See Cosandey, La Reine de France, 131–32.

44. For Madame de la Rivière, see Grandeau, “Les Dames.” Grandeau also notes that Isabeau supported the careers of her sons. For Olivier de Clisson, see Thibault, 276.

45. Thibault, 272.

46. Ibid., 346.

47. Ibid., 360. See the record of the event in Douët-d’Arcq, Comptes de l’Hôtel, 170–71.

48. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:205.

49. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 29n58.

50. Henneman, Olivier de Clisson, 131.

51. Ibid., 129.

52. Ibid., 131.

53. Carroll, Blood and Violence, 9. Guy Halsall discusses and defines feuding in “Violence and Society,” 1–45; see esp. 19–35.

54. Carroll, Blood and Violence, 11.

55. Christine de Pizan, Le Livre des fais, 145.

56. On how the dukes held their lands, see Rivalité, 4–38. The king was not the only “prince.”

57. Christine de Pizan, Le Livre du corps de policie, 14, lines 12–23.

58. R. C. Famiglietti argues, in Royal Intrigue, that Charles VI’s insanity was directly responsible for the feud, as does, more recently, Sizer in “Making Revolution Medieval.” The best-known proponent of the view that the feud was the inevitable result of factionalism is Cazelles, La Société politique.

59. Autrand, Charles VI, 20–21.

60. See Ordonnances 6, 45–49.

61. See Radding, “The Estates of Normandy,” 80. Why did the king eliminate the fouage? Did he believe that it was no longer necessary because the kingdom was in good order? Or was he worried that his brothers would attempt to expand their empires at the expense of the French? See also Miskimin, “The Last Act of Charles V.” But it seems hard to believe that Charles V did not support Louis of Anjou’s incursions into Italy, for Charles supported Pope Clement VII, who on accession in 1379 infeudated Adria, the territories north of Rome, to Anjou. See Jarry, “La ‘Voie de fait.’”

62. Charles VI, 3–4. Cohn, Lust for Liberty, 74, and Popular Protest, 261–62.

63. On the reasons for the revolts see Radding, “The Estates of Normandy.”

64. Demurger, Temps de crises, 88. On the marmousets’ agenda, see Charles VI, 205–13. For a less glowing assessment, see Sizer, “Making Revolution Medieval,” 368–74.

65. Demurger, Temps de crises, 82

66. Charles VI, 205–13, and Sizer, “Making Revolution Medieval,” 369–74.

67. Demurger, Temps de crises, 83.

68. See Lehoux, Jean de France, 2:292–93, for a description of the chaos that followed Philip’s assumption of power.

Parmi les conseillers les plus en vue, ce fut un sauve-qui-peut général: Clisson était immédiatement parti pour Josselin, Jean le Mercier pour le Dauphiné, et Bureau de la Rivière pour son château d’Auneau, tandis que Jean de Montaigu et le Bègue de Villaines se réfugiaient, l’un auprès du pape d’Avignon, l’autre en Castille. Aucun d’eux, néanmoins, ne put échapper aux poursuites et tous furent condamnés. Le 19 décembre, Clisson, banni du royaume, était frappé d’une amende de 10.000 francs et déchu de ses fonctions; le connétable passait au comte d’Eu, Philippe d’Artois, futur gendre du duc de Berri. La Rivière et Jean le Mercier, condamnés également, après avoir été incarcérés à la Bastille Saint-Antoine, ne bénéficièrent d’une relative clémence que grâce à l’intervention de la jeune duchesse de Berri; et si Montaigu et le Bègue de Villaines devaient, dans l’avenir, reparaître au Conseil, ils n’y occuperaient jamais plus une place prépondérante.

[Among the most visible counselors, it was each man for himself: Clisson left immediately for Josselin, Jean le Mercier for the Dauphiné, and Bureau de la Rivière for his chateau d’Auneau, while Jean de Montaigu and le Bègue de Villaines found refuge, one with the Pope in Avignon, the other in Castile. None of them, however, could escape the fall-out and all were condemned. On December 19, Clisson, banished from the kingdom, was struck with a fine of 10,000 francs and relieved of his functions; Philip of Artois, Count of Eu and future son-in-law of the Duke of Berry, was named constable. La Rivière and Jean le Mercier [Seigneur of Nouvion or Noviant], also condemned, after being incarcerated in the Bastille Saint-Antoine, enjoyed relative clemency thanks to the intervention of the young Duchess of Berry; and if Montaigu and le Bègue de Villaines returned to the Council, they never again occupied an influential position.]

69. Froissart recounts the story of Philip’s coup, 3:164.

70. See Rivalité, 95.

71. Demurger, Temps de crises, 87.

72. See Rivalité, 12–23.

73. See Kaminsky, “The Politics of France’s Subtraction,” 366–67.

74. Autrand, Charles VI, 200.

75. See Rivalité, 162–84.

76. Vaughan, Philip the Bold, 99.

77. Ibid., 104.

78. Henneman, Clisson, 183–84.

79. See Rey, Le Domaine du roi, 327.

80. See Rivalité, 57

81. Lehoux, Jean de France, 2:461n5.

82. Halsall, “Violence and Society,” 23.

83. Thibault cites the document from the National Archives describing the situation, AN Series J 359, no. 23.

84. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:220–26.

85. Pintoin, 3:116–18.

86. Thibault, Isabeau de Bavière, 301

87. It is important to note that throughout I refer to Charles as if he were an independent agent during his periods of sanity. However, it is not well-understood to what extent the king was ever capable of thinking fully for himself after the initial onset of his mental illness. His ordinances may have been produced entirely by his counselors.

88. See Ordonnances, 7:518–22.

89. Ibid., 7:530–35.

90. Ibid., 7:535–38. This ordinance was overridden by one of 1403 that stipulated a ruling college composed of the queen, the dukes, princes of the blood, and councillors to govern during a minority. See Ordonnances, 8:581–83.

91. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:227–39.

92. Ibid. 1:240–43.

93. See Ordonnances, 8:581–83.

94. See Vaughan, Philip the Bold, 40–41. The Duke of Berry had always taken a back seat to his older brother. Nothing indicates that he was interested in asserting himself on Philip’s death.

95. Although Jean sans Peur did not receive the nickname by which he is commonly known until 1413 with the battle of Othea. See Monstrelet, 1:371 and 389.

96. For the Duke of Burgundy’s relationship with the university, see Tournier, “Jean sans Peur,” 299–318.

97. Bernard Guenée has argued that the Valois kings calculated noble status as a function of proximity of relation to the king. Thus Louis, the king’s brother, far outranked Jean, his cousin. See Guenée, “Le Roi, ses parents et son royaume.”

98. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 40.

To these ends, she would use all her power against everyone except the king, her children, and all those to whom by “reason and honesty” she was more obliged because they were more closely related to her than John was. In other words, she would be unable to help John against the duke of Orléans, since, as her brother-in-law, he was more closely related to her, and she would be unable to help him against such personages as the king’s uncles, the dukes of Berry and Bourbon. Isabeau was also implying to Duke John that the interests of her brother, Louis of Bavaria, would necessarily receive more support from her than would his own.

This treaty can be usefully compared with one signed by Charles of Orleans with Bernard of Armagnac on October 24, 1409, for it uses a similar structure. Charles of Orleans promises to serve Bernard of Armagnac against everyone but the king, the queen, and the Duke of Guyenne. See AN Series K 56, no. 257.

99. See, for example, Henneman, Royal Taxation in Fourteenth Century France: The Development of War Financing, 1322–1356 and Royal Taxation in Fourteenth Century France: The Captivity and Ransom of John II, 1356–1370; Rey, Domaine du roi and les finances royales.

100. Wolfe, “French Views on Wealth,” 467.

101. Pintoin, 3:738.

102. Vaughan, John the Fearless, 47.

103. Ordonnances, 9:267–69, here 268.

104. Ibid., 268

105. See Royal Intrigue, where Famiglietti argues the existence of such an ordinance based on Juvénal des Ursins, 66.

106. Ordonnances, 8:578.

107. See Royal Intrigue, 66; for the étrenne, see Hirschbiegel, Etrennes, 465.

108. Printed in Ordonnances 9:279–89.

109. Ibid., 287.

110. Pollack-Lagushenko, “The Armagnac Faction,” 236.

111. Ibid., 239.

112. Ibid., 236–37.

113. Printed in Plancher 3, no. 256.

114. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 67.

115. Pintoin, 3:766

116. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 69.

117. See Bernier, Histoire de Blois, preuves, 133.

118. Printed in Bernier, Histoire de Blois, 32.

119. Ibid.

120. Monstrelet, 1:267.

121. Juvénal des Ursins, 447. Pintoin makes the powers granted to the queen—and to the dauphin, jointly—sound more extensive. See 4:90.

122. See Juvénal des Ursins, 449.

123. Printed in Ordonnances, 12:227–29, here 228.

124. Ibid., 12:228.

125. Vaughan, John the Fearless, 74–75.

126. See John the Fearless, 75–76, for a translation of part of the letter in which Pons de Perellos refers to Isabeau’s state of mind at the time. For the original, see Calmette, “Contribution à l’histoire des relations.”

127. On the Peace of Chartres, see Mirot, “Autour de la Paix de Chartres”; Vaughan, John the Fearless, 75–78; Autrand, Charles VI, 435–37; Journal d’un bourgeois de Paris, 32.

128. Guenée, Un meurtre, une société, 186.

129. As Halsall concludes in “Violence and Society,” 19–32.

130. See Pintoin, 4:272–73.

131. The document awarding the tutelle to the Duke of Burgundy is printed in Plancher, 3:261.

Comme aprez ce que nostre trez chiere avancement.

[In response to the statement of our very dear and much loved companion, the Queen, that by our ordinance she has long watched over and raised our very dear and much loved oldest son, Louis, Duke of Guyenne, Dauphin of the Viennois, and has had guardianship and government over him, and kept him and raised him and watched over him to the point where he is grown to such an age that it is fitting that from now on he learn to know people of all the estates of the realm, and the tasks and affairs of it, and because our said companion, considering her illness and the problems that she often has and will continue to have, because of the great number of children it has pleased the Lord to send us, and which she carried, as well as the fact that she cannot always from now on be present in the places in which she needs to be for the final training and introduction of our son, whose good and advancement she desires with all her heart.]

132. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 101. See also Royal Intrigue, 83–84.

133. See Vaughan, John the Fearless, 82–83; Royal Intrigue, 88–89.

134. Monstrelet, 2:91–92.

135. Pintoin, 372.

136. On the futility of the Peace of Bicêtre see D’Avout, La Querelle des Armagnacs, 82–84.

137. For the first accusation see Juvénal des Ursins, 467. For the others see Monstrelet, 2:241–42.

138. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, and “The French Monarchy Crisis.” Gibbons offers an excellent chapter on the relationship between Isabeau and Louis during this time, in “Active Queenship,” 206–48. See also Demurger, Temps de crises, 98–100.

139. See Plancher, 3:287.

140. Christine de Pizan, Livre de paix, 200–201.

141. Ibid, translation 58, 200.

142. D’Avout, La Querelle des Armagnacs, 158.

143. Vaughan, John the Fearless, 138.

144. On the historical context of the work, see Karen Green’s introduction to the English edition of Livre de paix, translation 65, 206.

145. Christine de Pizan, Livre de la Paix, 63.

146. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 80.

147. Monstrelet, 2:334.

148. According to Monstrelet, both Isabeau and Jean sans Peur attempted to soothe the dauphin, 2:334; Juvénal des Ursins reports that Isabeau engaged Jean de Vailly for the dauphin at the suggestion of her brother, 480.

149. Monstrelet, 2:335.

150. See Coville, Les Cabochiens, 103.

151. Ibid., 105.

152. Juvénal des Ursins, 467.

153. McGuire, Jean Gerson, 201.

154. Pintoin, 5:130, and Coville, Les Cabochiens, 109.

155. Pintoin, 5:130.

156. On the dauphin’s troubled relationship with the Armagnacs, see Mirot, “Autour de la paix d’Arras,” 272–73.

157. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 137.

158. Journal d’un bourgeois, 71.

159. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 138.

160. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 138–39.

161. Vaughan, John the Fearless, 205.

162. See Pintoin, 5:586–90.

163. On this period, see “Le Dauphin Jean.”

164. “Le Dauphin Jean,” 682–84; Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 175–77.

165. Pintoin, 6:52.

166. On attitudes toward Bernard of Armagnac, see Journal d’un bourgeois, 112.

167. Pintoin, 6:50.

168. “Le Dauphin Jean,” 710-12; Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 176–77.

169. The story is reminiscent of that of the queen’s contemporary, Jeanne of Navarre, one-time Duchess of Brittany who became queen of Henry IV. After the death of the king, she was charged with witchcraft and having “imagined the death of the king.” According to Henry V, her dower was too great an expense at a time when he needed the funds to conquer France. See Strohm, England’s Empty Throne, 163–66.

170. Pintoin, 6:80.

171. Monstrelet, 3:227–28.

172. Pintoin, 6:138–40.

173. Published in Plancher, 3:302, and Ordonnances 10:436–43.

174. Pintoin, 6:253.

175. See “Entrée de la Reine Isabeau,” 105.

176. Juvénal des Ursins, 548.

177. Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:43–44.

178. See Pintoin, 6:382–84, who describes the king’s displeasure and the public censures of Charles’s actions.

179. Allmand, The Hundred Years War, 29.

180. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 121.

181. Mark Warner, “The Anglo-French Dual Monarchy,” 204.

182. On this period see Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années.”

183. Ibid., 413.

184. Journal d’un bourgeois, 208.

185. See Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 212–17.

186. See Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années,” 414.

187. Pons, “Intellectual Patterns,” 55.

Chapter Two: Isabeau of Bavaria: Her Afterlife

Epigraph. Sellers, “The Lurid Career,” 55.

1. Nora, Realms of Memory, 1:1. Isabeau does not figure in Nora’s work.

2. See the review article by Tai, “Remembered Realms.”

Today, viewers look at religious paintings of the Renaissance as desacralized objects of beauty. But as Yates showed in The Art of Memory, at the time they were painted, they were mnemonic devices that drew on viewers’ familiarity with biblical stories and at the same time reinforced their recollection of these stories: they were sites that both were saturated with memory and worked to promote memory. In the Renaissance, then, one may claim that lieux and milieux coexisted and reinforced each other. The same can be said about Verdun. Proust laments that, with the passing away of veterans of the Great War, Verdun will lose its potency as a site of memory. Until then, it will be a lieu de mémoire because there still is a milieu de mémoire… . As William Faulkner wrote in Requiem for a Nun, “In the South, the past is never dead. It’s not even past.”

3. Kelley, “Jean du Tillet,” 339.

4. See Gilli, “L’Epopée de Jeanne d’Arc,” 11

5. Brandon, “Chroniques des religieux des Dunes,” 1:110.

6. Ibid.

7. See Wood, Joan of Arc and Richard III, 125–51. On the “affair” rumor, see Famiglietti, 42–45, and Gibbons, “Isabeau of Bavaria,” 62–67.

8. Chartier, Chronique de Charles VII, 1:viii and 1:209.

9. Chartier, Chronique de Charles VII, 1:209–10.

10. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 133.

11. See the document in Chaplais, English Medieval Diplomatic Practice, 1:648–52.

12. See Craig Taylor, “Sir John Fortescue,” 113–14. On Richard II, Strohm, England’s Empty Throne, 23–25.

13. Basin, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:132.

14. Le Pastoralet. For an example of how the Pastoralet has been read as evidence of a liaison, see Coville, Les Cabochiens, 22n7. “L’argument le plus sérieux que l’on pourrait invoquer pour prouver la liaison du duc d’Orléans et de la reine est ce passage du Pastoralet.” (The most serious argument in favor of a liaison between the Duke of Orleans and the queen is the passage in the Pastoralet.)

15. Metzer Chronik, 362.

16. Ibid., 496.

17. Metzer Chronik, 357.

Lequeil n’y mourit point; dont moult de mal en vinssent en France. Car il tuait le duc Loys d’Orliens per MCCCC et VII et lui meysme en fuit mors et tues per XVIIII per les amis dudit duc d’Orliens, dont main grans malz s’en sunt ensuis et advenus on reaumme de France; et valcist muez qu’il n’eust onque estez nes que lez malz qui en sont estez advenus.
[Who did not die; for which cause much woe came to France. For he killed Louis the Duke of Orleans in 1407, and he himself was killed in 1419 by the friends of the Duke of Orleans, which caused much trouble to pass in the realm of France, and it would have been better had he never been born for all the trouble that he caused.]

18. Chastellain, Œuvres, 1:50–51.

19. Gilles, Les Annales, 1:211.

20. Gaguin, Sommaire historial, 211.

21. Piccolomini, De Viris Illustribus, 134.

22. Piccolomini, Commentarii, 1:1084–85.

23. Brachet, Pathologie mentale, 82.

24. Thomas, “Le ‘Signe royal.’”

25. Brantôme, Œuvres complètes, 3:80–81.

26. Ibid., 10:219.

27. Beaune, Naissance, 220.

28. Testimony of Durandus Laxart in article 10, “Item, inquiratur de modo recessus a patria, et progressus per viam,” Duparc, Procès en nullité, 1:251.

29. Duparc, Procès en nullité, 1:296.

30. France, The Life of Joan of Arc, 1:59–60.

31. See, for example, “Sur le carème,” by Deschamps, 1392. Deschamps refers to Eve, who brought about “nostre perdicion,” and Marie, “nostre recouvrement,” without inserting any contemporary figures into the binary. In Deschamps, Oeuvres complètes, 3:79–81, here 79, lines 21–22.

32. Fraioli, “Literary Image of Joan of Arc,” 825. See also Gambero, Mary and the Fathers of the Church, 47.

33. Fraioli, “Literary Image of Joan of Arc,” 821–22nn46–47.

34. Brown, “Allegorical Design,” 393.

35. Astell, “The Virgin Mary,” 43.

36. Available at www.stejeannedarc.net/chroniques/clerc_spire.php#notes.

37. Barry, La Reine de France, 308.

38. See Kelley, “Jean du Tillet,” 43.

39. Du Tillet, Pour l’Entiere majorité.

40. Ibid., f. 501.

41. Ibid., verso.

42. Du Tillet, Les Mémoires, 125–26.

43. Choppin, Trois livres, 403.

44. See Ordonnances, 11:375. Philip stipulates that Jeanne will have regency of the realm and tutelle of the heir to the throne: “Regni regimen, administrationem exerceat.”

45. Choppin, Trois livres, 405.

46. Dupuy, Traité de la majorité, 83–93.

47. Du Haillan, L’Histoire de France, 2.

48. Ibid., 38.

49. Ibid., 84–85.

50. Ibid., 140–41.

51. Ibid., 118.

52. Kaminsky, “The Noble Feud,” 83. For more on the subject of attutides toward feuding in the sixteenth century, see Carroll, Blood and Violence, who writes that “what happened in early modern France was not the pacification of a warrior class into factions of intriguing courtiers, but the more systematic redeployment of those whose profession was arms, who claimed the right to violence, in the service of the monarchy” (332). See also Bartlett, Mortal Enmities.

53. Hotman, Francogallia.

54. Ibid., 494, translation 495.

55. Ibid.

56. Du Bosc de Montandré, La Regence des Reynes. The work has been attributed to both Du Bosc de Montandré and Luyt.

57. Ibid., no pagination, introduction.

58. Du Bosc de Montandré, La Regence des Reynes, 8.

59. Ibid., 56.

60. Quoted in Straub, “Isabeau de Bavière,” 132–33.

61. Quoted in Piaget, “Un manuscrit de la Cour amoureuse,” 418.

62. Ibid., 419.

63. Keralio, Les Crimes des reines.

64. Ibid., 118

65. Ibid., 139.

66. Ibid., 143.

67. See Schaeffer, The Marquis de Sade, 505–6. See also Pauvert’s introduction to vol. 12 of the complete works, Œuvres complètes du marquis de Sade.

68. Sade, Histoire secrète d’Isabelle de Bavière, 26.

69. Michelet, Histoire de France, 5:159–60.

70. Ibid., 5:161.

71. Ibid., 5:185.

72. Ibid.

73. Guizot, L’Histoire de France, 2:234.

74. Ibid., 2:261–62.

75. Martin, Histoire de France, 1:427.

76. Ibid.

77. Ibid., 1:448.

78. Ibid., 1:456.

79. Coville, Les Cabochiens, 21.

80. Ibid., 21–22.

81. Ibid., 22n7.

82. Thibault, 207.

83. Ibid., 242.

84. Ibid., 311.

85. Ibid., 298.

86. Ibid., 373.

87. Ibid., 420.

88. Ibid., 425.

89. Ibid., 424.

90. Ibid., 315.

91. See Hunt, “Many Bodies of Marie-Antoinette,” 108–30.

92. Thibault, 107.

93. Guenée, Un meurtre, une société, 147–48.

94. Tuchman, A Distant Mirror, 515. For more imagery of Isabeau in the popular imagination, see, for example, Plaidy’s Epitaph for Three Women, a historical romance about Joan of Arc. Here Isabeau’s son, the dauphin Charles is depicted as anxious about his paternity and Isabeau herself as promiscuous and a bad mother:

Charles was unsure whether he would live through one day to the next; he was unsure of those about him; he lived in fear of what awful fate might overtake him; but what he was most unsure of was whether he was his father’s son. He had been so ever since his mother—surely the most wicked Queen France had ever known—had told him that he was a bastard… . His life had been haunted by that fear. Had he no right to the throne of France? The King had been mad, passing clouded years of his life in the Hôtel de St Pol. The fertile Queen had taken a succession of lovers. How could any of her children be sure who their father was? Moreover, she seemed to hate her children—not all the time, for when she had seen a chance of marrying Katherine to the King of England she had seemed positively to love the girl. When the Dauphin’s two elder brothers had died mysteriously it was thought that the Queen wanted the crown for her youngest son. But she turned against him, and had taunted him with the doubt which had haunted him ever since. (186)

Marcantel’s An Army of Angels makes the same allegation although in less scandalized tones: “While the English and their ally, the traitorous duc de Bourgogne, schemed to divide the fractured realm further, the Dauphin Charles lived in exile from Paris, rejected by his mother and deprived of his place as the rightful ruler of the kingdom. In a pact with the goddon devils, the Queen Mother had declared her son a bastard and enticed the witless King to leave his throne to Henry V of England” (38). One particularly fantastical and yet long-held myth claims that Joan of Arc was actually the daughter of Louis of Orleans and Isabeau. Sermoise makes the case for Joan’s royal parentage in Joan of Arc and Her Secret Missions. Marina Warner notes the persistence of this myth in Joan of Arc, 59.

Chapter Three: Isabeau Mediatrix

1. See Fradenburg’s “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship,” 5.

2. See Wisman’s edition of “The Epistle of the Prison of Human Life,” 76, in which Christine explains that it is fitting that a princess be a “moyennerresse de traictié de paix” (mediator of a peace treaty). Christine refers to the princess as moyenne de paix at numerous points in the Trois vertus.

3. Facinger, “A Study of Medieval Queenship,” 3–48.

4. Ibid., 39.

5. Ibid., 40.

6. Ibid.

7. Strohm, Hochon’s Arrow, 96.

8. In response to Marion F. Facinger’s seminal article, which argued that queens had seen their power diminish to the merely ritualistic by 1230, many historians have made the case that they continued to influence by indirect but effective means. See, for example, the articles of Fradenburg’s Women and Sovereignty; Parsons’s Medieval Queenship; and Nolan’s Capetian Women, esp. Shadis, “Blanche of Castile,” 137–61.

9. Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, esp. chap. 6, “The King’s New Men,” 101–36.

10. Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, 106.

11. On Isabelle of Hainaut, see Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, 80-86, and Hornady, “Capetian Queen as Street Demonstrator, 77–98. On Ingeborg, see Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, 206–7, and Showalter, “The Ingeborg Psalter,” 99–136.

12. See Berger, Histoire de Blanche de Castile, 60.

13. Printed in Heckmann, Stellvertreter, 2:735–36.

14. See Shadis, “Blanche of Castille,” 142.

15. See Sivéry, Blanche de Castile, 95.

16. Heckmann, Stellvertreter, 1:79–85.

17. See Ordonnances, 12:45–46.

18. Ordonnances, 6:49.

19. On the burgeoning of Mariology, see Marina Warner, Alone of All Her Sex; Gold, The Lady and the Virgin; and Pelikan, Mary through the Centuries.

20. Parsons, “The Pregnant Queen as Counsellor,” 40.

21. See Kipling, Enter the King, 289–356, on the symbolism of the queen’s entrance. It should be noted that the influence between the earthly and heavenly registers was mutual. The Church depicted the Virgin Mary in the characteristic clothing of the twelfth-century queen, costume by which we recognize her still today, to augment her prestige. Cosandey writes:

C’est alors à la reine que furent empruntés les attributs de la majesté divine. Quel modèle pouvait mieux illustrer la supériorité et la perfection de la plus sainte des femmes du Nouveau Testament que celui de la plus noble et de la plus glorieuse des femmes de ce monde? Princesse élevée au sommet de la hiérarchie sociale, la reine apparaissait comme la référence la mieux adaptée à l’image que l’Eglise voulait donner de Marie.
[It was thus from the queen that the attributes of divine majesty were borrowed. What model could better illustrate the superiority and perfection of the holiest of women of the New Testament than that of the noblest and most glorious of the women of this world? Princess elevated to the summit of the social hierarchy, the queen seemed be to the reference best adapted to the image that the Church wished to give Marie.] La Reine de France, 279.

22. Jackson, Ordines coronationis Franciae, 2:511.

23. De Mérindol, “La Femme et la paix, 204.

24. Huneycutt, “Intercession and the High-Medieval Queen,” 126–46, 130.

25. Zaeske, “Unveiling Esther,” 202. For further on Esther, seee Hochner, “Imagining Esther.”

26. Zaeske, “Unveiling Esther,” 202.

27. Strohm, Hochon’s Arrow, 97.

28. De Joinville, Histoire de Saint Louis, 24.

29. Fradenburg, “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship,” 5.

30. Aram, Juana the Mad, 12.

31. See Baldwin, The Government of Philip Augustus, 18 and 357.

32. See Pintoin, 5:588. Monstrelet, 3:76, describes ambassadors of the Duke of Burgundy going to see the dauphin in 1415 to request that he renounce his mistress and live again with his wife.

33. See Vaughan, John the Fearless, 194.

34. Trois vertus, 32.

35. Ibid.

36. Ibid., 35.

37. Ibid.

38. Ibid., 34–35.

39. Ibid., 35.

40. Ibid., 55.

41. Ibid., 63.

42. Ibid., 84.

43. See Christine de Pizan, Le Livre de la mutacion de fortune, 1:46–53.

44. Earl Jeffrey Richards has written a series of articles exploring how Christine imagines female regency, particularly Isabeau’s, through imagery of the Virgin. See “Les Enjeux du culte mariale, 141–66; “Justice in the Summa of St. Thomas Aqui-nas,” 95–114; and “Political Thought as Improvisation, 1–22.

45. Christine de Pizan, Cité des dames, 430–32.

46. Richards, “Les Enjeux du culte mariale,” 146.

47. On the development of medieval diplomacy, see Queller, The Office of Ambassador in the Middle Ages. John Watkins has recently called for renewed attention to premodern diplomacy, observing that “relationships between and among polities have remained under-investigated and under-theorized.” Watkins, “Toward a New Diplomatic History,” 1–14. On diplomacy specifically during the reign of Charles VI, see Le Bis, “Pratique de la diplomatie; and Autrand, “L’enfance de l’art diplomatique,” 207–24.

48. Froissart, 5:215.

49. See Moranvillé, “Une lettre à Charles le Mauvais,” 91–94.

50. Pintoin, 2:726.

51. Strohm, England’s Empty Throne, 162.

52. Froissart, 15:69.

53. Froissart, 15:70.

54. Le Fèvre de Saint Rémy, Choix de chroniques, 306.

55. Journal d’un bourgeois, 338.

56. See Sommé, Isabelle de Portugal, 363.

57. Cited in Pélicier, Essai sur le gouvernement, 166.

58. Catherine Bell, Ritual Theory, 204–5.

59. Hyams, Rancor and Reconciliaton, 201–2.

60. Offenstadt, “Les Femmes et la paix,” 333. See also his “The Rituals of Peace,” 88–100.

61. Turner, The Ritual Process, 95.

62. Ibid., 128–29.

63. See Fradenburg, “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship,” 4–5.

64. Sommé, “Les Délégations de pouvoir,” 289. See also her book Isabelle de Portugal, 385–87.

65. Dickinson, The Congress of Arras, 66n4: “The part played by the duchess Isabella at the Congress appears to have been that of a spectator, in contrast with her role as mediator in 1439, at which time her husband was not acceptable to the English as negotiator.”

66. Offenstadt, “Les Femmes et la paix,” 332.

67. Cited in Contamine, “Le Royaume de France,” 79n30.

68. Coville, Les Cabochiens, 23.

69. Carroll, “The Peace in the Feud,” 7.

70. Halsall, “Violence and Society,” 21.

71. Ibid., 20.

72. Kaminsky, “The Noble Feud,” 56.

73. Ibid., 58. See also Carroll, Blood and Violence; Smail, The Consumption of Justice; Bartlett, Mortal Enmities; Halsall, ed., Violence and Society; Caron, La Noblesse dans le duché de Bourgogne; and White, “Feuding and Peace-making.”

74. Kaminsky, “The Noble Feud,” 80.

75. Ibid., 58.

76. Vale, “Seigneurial Fortifications,” 141.

77. Pollack-Lagushenko, “The Armagnac Faction,” 238. See also Vale, “Seigneurial Fortifications,” 133–48.

78. White, “Feuding and Peace-making,” 263.

79. See Little, The Parlement of Poitiers.

80. See Pollack-Lagushenko, “The Armagnac Faction,” 471–72.

81. Ibid., 236.

82. Ibid., 237.

83. See Emily J. Hutchison’s study of the increasing impossibility of remaining above the fray as of 1410-11. “The symbols used, the violence faced and the implications of being called an ‘Armagnac’ or a ‘Burgundian’ forced ordinary people of the realm to join one faction or the other. Both the Armagnacs and the Burgundians continued to foster hatred for the ‘other,’ irrevocably altering the course of the private dispute.” “Partisan Identity in the French Civil War,” 274.

84. Trois vertus, 35.

85. For example, on fixing the age of majority, set by Philip III at 14 and reiterated by Charles V in 1374. On regency in France, see Olivier-Martin, Les Régences et la majorité. On use of the term régent, see Berger, “Le Titre de régent.”

86. On regency, see Ordonnances 6:45–48; on tutelle, see 6:49–53.

87. Ordonnances, 6:26–30.

88. See Henneman, Olivier de Clisson, 103–113; Charles VI, 19–21; Jean de France, 2:11–17.

89. Jean de France, 2:292–93. With Charles’s first episode of insanity, the royal uncles returned, routing the marmousets, the king’s counselors, and reestablishing themselves in the government.

90. The ordinance is printed Ordonnances, 7:530–35.

91. See ibid., 535–38.

92. The ordinance specifies that Louis “ait le gouvernement, Garde an de son aage,” Ordonnances, 7:535. On Louis’s use of it to defend his claim to power when Charles was indisposed, see, Rivalité, 71. See also Louis’s own evaluation of his role in the government. Monstrelet reports that during the kidnapping crisis, Louis reminds delegates from the University of Paris that he is son and brother of a king, who has also been given control (baillé) of the realm when the king is unable to function, because of the youth of the dauphin. While this is not strictly true according to the ordinances, it seems to have been true in practice. Monstrelet, 1:122. Surprisingly little has been written on the career of Louis of Orleans; see Louis d’Orléans and the sections devoted to Louis in Jean sans Peur. Although dedicated to the entourage of all the dukes of Orleans, Gonzalez’s Un Prince en son hôtel offers insight into Louis’s career.

93. See Henneman, Olivier de Clisson, 158–59.

94. Heckmann, Stellvertreter, 1:324. As Heckmann explains, a regent ruling in the name of the king is a bit of a fiction, but it is a useful one, less likely to result in usurpation than a regent ruling in his own name.

95. These accusations are clearly present in the series of public letters exchanged between Louis of Orleans and Jean sans Peur in 1405, printed in Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin.” On Louis’s plan for disseminating his influence throughout the realm, see Demurger, Temps de crises, 86–90, and also the dissertation of Shultz, “The Artistic and Literary Patronage of Louis of Orléans.”

96. These are printed in Choix de pièces inédites, 1:227–39 and 1:240–43.

97. See Ordonnances, 7:530.

98. Pintoin, 3:12.

99. See, for example, Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 27. The ordinance of 1402 “increased her authority. From now on Isabeau was empowered in the king’s absence to deal with governmental business of any type with the aid of the dukes and whichever councillors she wished.”

100. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:241.

101. “Sed dum jurgiis sepius terunt tempus quam consiliis, regina, ducibus Biturie et Borbonii mediantibus, ambo regiis uti cessaverunt, donec rex incolumitatem recepisset” (But as long as they spent the time more often in quarrelling than in advising, the queen and Dukes of Berry and Bourbon arbitrated that both cease to come to the Royal Council until the king had recovered his health). Pintoin, 3:36.

102. Ordonnances 7:535–38.

103. Ordonnances, 12:45–46. Compare also the specific powers delegated to Isabelle of Portugal by Philip the Good of Burgundy as described by Sommé, Isabelle de Portugal, 378–85.

104. See Lot and Fawtier, Histoire des institutions françaises, 75–84.

105. Pintoin, 3:36.

106. Cousinot, 108.

107. “Et specialiter ducem Aurelianis, tunc regni rectorem precipuum” (And especially the Duke of Orleans, then the foremost regent of the realm). Pintoin, 3:188. Besides registering Louis’s perceived power, the passage also demonstrates his unpopularity, among some Parisians, at least. Nicolas Baye, greffier for the Parlement of Paris, notes that on July 27, 1404, a royal decree was delivered to the court by a provost regarding some defamatory cédules targeting the Duke of Orleans placed by persons of bad will on the walls of Notre-Dame and other churches. The decree threatened that anyone daring to repeat the act would be made an example of for others. Journal de Nicolas de Baye, 1:94–95. The list of events at the end of Baye’s journal specifies that the cédules in question targeted the Duke of Orleans. See 2:288.

108. The classic study on the loyalties of the different members of Charles VI’s Royal Council is that of Valois, Le Conseil du roi. Both Nordberg and Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, dispute the attachments of some of the individuals considered by Valois, but all agree that Louis possessed the greater influence over the Council. On the loyalties of the sénéchaux and baillis, see Demurger “Guerre civile.”

109. Ordonnances, 8:577. Famiglietti sees the 1403 ordinance as reining in Isabeau’s power. See Royal Intrigue, 28. Gibbons disagrees. Rather,

the ordinance of 26 April 1403 should not be viewed in isolation, but recognised as the final stage in a developing process that began in March 1402 with the king’s confirmation of Isabeau’s authority as his replacement as an arbiter between the royal dukes. This power was greatly enhanced in July 1402 when her remit was extended to encompass all government business that needed to be dealt with during the emergency situations of Charles’ debilitating relapses. Then, in April 1403, the queen’s position was not so much the subject of a ‘very significant restraint’ as provided with a legislative context and the security of being underpinned by an inclusive Council. (“Active Queenship,” 110)

110. Ordonnances, 8:587.

111. Ibid, 8:581.

112. Ibid., 8:582.

113. Guenée, La Folie de Charles VI, 295.

114. See Isambert, Recueil général, 7:59, for the letter patent.

115. Ibid., 8:578.

116. Cosandey, La Reine de France, 37.

117. Heckmann, Stellvertreter, 2:735–36; Ordonnances, 11:323. On Blanche’s coregency, see Stellvertreter, 1:65–84. Miriam Shadis also argues for regarding Blanche’s reign as a type of corule in “Blanche of Castile.”

118. Ordonnances, 12:227–29.

119. Ordonnances, 9:488–89.

120. Monstrelet prints the letter Isabeau sent out to the cities of the realm, 3:230–36. See also Isabeau’s ordinances establishing her regency: Ordonnances 10:429–34, 10:436–43, and 10:449–53.

121. Monstrelet, 3:233.

122. Pintoin, 1:687.

123. Ibid., 3:4–8.

124. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:36. The charter is printed in Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:35–45.

125. “Le Livre de la trahison envers la maison de Bourgogne,” 67.

126. Ibid., 67.

127. Ibid., 69.

128. Ibid., 70.

129. Pintoin, 4:358.

130. Monstrelet, 2:92.

131. See Offenstadt, “La Paix proclamée,” 201–24.

132. Pintoin, 4:724.

133. Juvénal des Ursins, 465.

134. Ibid.

135. Pintoin, 4:93.

136. Kipling, Enter the King, 47.

137. Cosandey, La Reine de France, 137–38.

138. Ibid., 138.

139. Pintoin, 1:610

140. Cosandey, La Reine de France, 165.

141. Ibid., 129–30.

142. See Bryant, The King and the City, 81.

143. Ribémont, “L’Entrée d’Isabeau,” 515–25.

144. Kipling, Enter the King, 294. See also 78–85 for a detailed description of other pageants relating Isabeau to the Virgin Mary and stressing her status as mediator.

145. Kipling, Enter the King, 294.

146. Froissart, 14:9–10.

147. Ibid., 14:13.

148. On this point, see Kahsnitz, “Kleinod und Andachtsbild, 70–71.

149. Marina Warner, Alone of All Her Sex, 114.

150. The scene is depicted as well on the Coronation Portal, located on the front of the cathedral. On the iconography of the Porte Rouge, see Gaposchkin, “The King of France.”

151. Froissart, 14:13.

152. See in particular McCartney, “Ceremonies and Privileges of Office.”

153. See Kahsnitz, “Kleinod und Andachtsbild,” 58.

154. See Willibald Sauerländer, “Kinder als Nothelfer,” 90–101.

155. On the date of the manuscript, see Laidlaw, “The Date of the Queen’s MS.”

156. Le Débat sur le “Roman de la Rose,” 5.

Chapter Four: Isabeau’s Contemporary Reputation

Epigraphs. Viennot, La France, les femmes et le pouvoir, 361. Coville, Les Cabochiens, 88.

1. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 42–43; Gibbons, “Isabeau of Bavaria,” 62–63; and Straub, “Isabeau de Bavière,” 134.

2. “Le Songe véritable.”

3. Autrand, Charles VI, 485–86.

4. On the development of the king’s nickname, see Guenée, La Folie de Charles VI, 263–71.

5. The document is edited by Moranvillé, “Remonstrances de l’Université.”

6. See Coville’s edition of L’Ordonnance cabochienne.

7. Marchello-Nizia, “Entre l’histoire et la poétique,” 53.

8. Grandeau, “Isabeau de Bavière ou l’amour conjugale,” 142.

9. William Chester Jordan, “Anti-corruption Campaigns,” 208–9.

10. Krynen, L’Empire du roi, 419.

11. Ibid.

12. “La fin du XIVe et le début du XVe représentent au contraire un épilogue où l’exigence des réformes sert surtout de prétexte à l’assouvissement des rancunes des partis” (The end of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth [centuries] represent in contrast an epilogue when demands for reform served as pretexts to satisfy rancor among factions). Cazelles, “Une Exigence de l’opinion depuis saint Louis,” 95.

13. Fletcher, “Crisis and Luxuria,” 30.

14. Wolfe, “French Views,” 467.

15. Ibid.

16. Fletcher, “Crisis and Luxuria,” 30-31.

17. See, for example, Miskimin, “The Last Act of Charles V”; and Elizabeth A. R. Brown, “Taxation and Morality.”

18. Radding, “Royal Tax Revenues,” 366 and 368.

19. Ibid., 366.

20. Cohn, Popular Protest, 261–337.

21. Krynen, L’Empire du roi, 417.

22. Contamine, “Le Vocabulaire politique,” 155. See also Cazelles, Société politique et la crise de la royauté, 428; and Cazelles, Société politique, noblesse et couronne, 28–31.

23. Gauvard, “Le Roi de France et l’opinion publique,” 365.

24. Autrand, “Offices et officiers,” 333.

25. Ibid., 332–33. See also Contamine, “Le Vocabulaire politique,” 150.

26. Autrand, “Offices et officiers,” 333–38.

27. Paravicini, “Administrateurs professionnels,” 177.

28. Ibid.

29. Le Songe du vergier, 2:123.

30. Of course, as Marcel Mauss has argued, the gift is a form of self-deception: in gift societies, the domination created through gift-giving is mostly disguised. Mauss, “Gift, Gift,” 28–32.

31. Weiner, Inalienable Possessions, 6.

32. Buettner, “Past Presents,” 598.

33. Hirschbiegel, Etrennes.

34. Gauvard, “Le Roi de France et l’opinion publique,” 355.

35. Krynen, L’Empire du roi, 432.

36. Ibid., 434.

37. Ibid., 435.

38. Gauvard, “Les Officiers royaux et l’opinion publique,” 590.

39. Fletcher, “Crisis and Luxuria,” 36.

40. Radding, “Royal Tax Revenues,” 366.

41. “In ambos procul dubio plebs maledictiones jaculare publice non verebatur.” (Without a doubt, the people did not fear casting aspersions on them in public), Pintoin, 3:266; Juvénal des Ursins: “Et assez hautement par les ruës on les maudissoit … (And [the public] cast aspersions on them quite clearly in the streets), 434.

42. See Lewis, ed., Écrits politiques, 1:88, and René Planchenault, “La ‘Chronique de la Pucelle,’” 95.

43. On Monstrelet, see Boucquey, “Enguerran de Monstrelet.”

44. Le Fèvre de Saint-Rémy, Chronique de Jean le Fèvre; Chronique des Cordeliers, vol. 6; Cochon.

45. Nordberg demonstrates that a principal source for Pintoin’s information on Louis of Orleans was Jean Petit’s defense of Jean sans Peur’s assassination of Louis. Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes.”

46. Cousinot, 109.

47. On Pintoin, see Bernard Guenée’s introduction to the reprint of Bellaguet’s edition of the Chronique du Religieux de Saint-Denis. On the identity of the monk, see Grévy-Pons and Ornato, “Qui est l’auteur.”

48. Guenée, L’Opinion publique, 12.

49. The subject of the circulation of rumor in the public space and whether or not this constitutes a form of public opinion has attracted substantial interest in recent decades. See Beaune, “La Rumeur,” 191–203; Gauvard, “Rumeur et stéréotypes” and “Le Roi de France et l’opinion publique,” 353–66; Contamine, “Aperçus sur la propagande,” 5–27; Guenée, “Les Campagnes de lettres”; Danbury, “English and French Artistic Propaganda”; Lewis, “War Propaganda”; Hale, “War and Public Opinion”; Pons, “Informations et rumeurs.”

50. Guenée, L’Opinion publique, 30–31 and 60.

51. Stahuljak, “Neutrality Affects,” 137–56.

52. Pintoin, 1:54.

53. Valois, “Jacques de Nouvion,” 238.

54. Guenée, L’Opinion publique, 178.

55. Guenée, “Fiction et réalité.”

56. Gonzalez, Un Prince en son hôtel, 13.

57. Ibid., 14.

58. Ibid., 13.

59. Ibid., 14.

60. Pintoin, 3:55.

61. Pintoin, 3:36.

62. Ordonnances, 8:494.

63. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:241.

64. Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes,” 97; see also Delaborde, “La Vraie chronique.”

65. Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes,” 86–87.

66. Guenée, L’Opinion publique, 61.

67. It should be noted that Nordberg makes a typographical error, attributing the passage to Monstrelet, although in his text he attributes it correctly to Cochon. The passage can be found in Cochon, 387.

68. Pintoin, 3:284.

69. Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes,” 92–93.

70. See Louis d’Orléans, 308, and Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes,” 93. Louis makes reference to the position in a letter printed in Choix des pièces inédites, 281. His job was to see that the borders were guarded against the English.

71. Pintoin, 3:330.

72. Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes,” 91.

73. Rey, Le Domaine du roi, 338–39.

74. Ibid., 339.

75. Pintoin, 1:687.

76. See the ordinances of Charles V and VI, awarding Philip a central role in the guardianship of the dauphin and administration of the realm when the king was indisposed.

77. See Nordberg, “Les Sources bourguignonnes,” 187–88. Nordberg compares Jean’s justificatory letter of September 8 with the account of Pintoin. As for the position of Monstrelet, Nordberg demonstrates that he mirrors Pintoin to a large extent but adds details not found in Pintoin.

78. See Pintoin, 5:18. “Inde procul dubio tristantur cum venerabili regina matre vestra omnes lilia deferentes de regio sanguine procreati, verentes ne, dum ad virilem perveneritis etatem, indignum vos faciant auctoritate sceptrigera” (For that reason, without doubt, all the princes of the blood along with the venerable queen, your mother, fear that when you have reached the age of manhood, they [evil counselors] will have caused you to be unworthy of reigning).

79. Coville, Les Cabochiens, 2.

80. Pintoin, 3:228.

81. See Vaughan, Philip the Bold, 226–36, and John the Fearless, 103–52.

82. Pintoin, 3:230.

83. Rey, Les Finances royales, 39–40.

84. Pintoin, 3:266.

85. See Beltran, “Un Sermon français.”

86. Pepin, Literature of Satire.

87. See the introduction to Jacques Legrand, Archiloge sophie.

88. See Phillpotts, “The Fate of the Truce of Paris.”

89. Walsingham, Chronica maiora, 248.

90. Chartier, Le Quadrilogue invectif, 17–21.

91. Pintoin, 3:266.

92. Vale, The Princely Court, 22.

93. Pintoin, 3:288–90.

94. Ibid., 3:330-31.

95. See Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 206–7.

96. Ibid., 227.

97. On the skill of Jean of Burgundy as propagandist, see Willard, “The Manuscripts of Jean Petit’s Justification.”

98. Guenée, L’Opinion publique, 12.

99. Ibid., 63, 65, 90.

100. Guenée, “Fiction et réalité,” 11.

101. Guenée, “Michel Pintoin,” 51.

102. Daly, “Private Vice, Public Service?” 99–118.

103. Fenster and Smail, Fama, 3.

104. Ibid., 7–8.

105. See Habermas, Structural Transformation. Although Habermas’s description of the evolution of the modern public sphere is controversial—see Sizer’s critique, “Making Revolution Medieval,” 231–43—his notion that during the Middle Ages no public existed, but only public display, so to speak, is popular.

106. Habermas, Lennox, and Lennox, “The Public Sphere,” 51.

107. Zaret, Origins of Democratic Culture, 50.

108. Guenée, L’Opinion publique, 32.

109. Arnade, Realms of Ritual, 129.

110. Symes, A Common Stage, 130.

111. Oliver, “A Political Pamphleteer.”

112. Coville, Les Cabochiens, 93.

Chapter Five: Isabeau of Bavaria and the Cour amoureuse

Epigraph. Boulton, The Knights of the Crown, 26.

1. Quoted in Piaget, “Un manuscrit de la Cour amoureuse,” 418. Moreau de Mautour discovered in the manuscript now known as 10469 of the fonds français of the Bibliothèque Nationale Française, collated along with a “traité du blazon, l’armorial des chevaliers et rois de l’Espinette, une ordonnance de Philippe, duc de Bourgogne” and the names and arms of the members of the Cour amoureuse.

2. Scholarship on the increasingly negative attitudes toward the royalty during the eighteenth century is vast; for a recent perspective, see Schaich, Monarchy and Religion.

3. Piaget, “Un manuscrit de la Cour amoureuse,” 418. More generally on anti-Paméla writings, see Hartmann, “La Réception de Paméla en France,” 47.

4. Piaget, “Un manuscrit de la Cour amoureuse,” 419.

5. De Keralio, Les Crimes des Reines de France, 143.

6. Straub, “Die Grundung.”

7. See Bozzolo and Ornato, “Princes, prélats, barons et autres gens,” 162.

8. Bozzolo and Loyau, La Cour amoureuse, dite de Charles VI, 1:35–45. A number of purposes have been suggested for the Cour amoureuse by scholars who believe the institution to have existed in fact. Recently, Jane H. M. Taylor has observed: “Human beings in general, and poets in particular, are necessarily participants within a field, a structured site of essentially competitive relations which offers a range of social, intellectual, or aesthetic positions, structures of possibility which can be deployed strategically, competitively, for individual advantage.” The Making of Poetry, 13–18, 34. Jacqueline Cerquiglini writes that the institution was conceived of “as a therapy that would permit an entire society in crisis to escape a sentiment—melancholy—that was becoming predominant in both life and aesthetics.” The Color of Melancholy, 47. See also her entry on St. Valentine’s Day 1401 in A New History of French Literature, 114–18. Bernard Guenée, too, emphasizes the seriousness of purpose of the institution, writing:

Ces laïcs qui cultivaient la joie, l’amour et la poésie étaient pourtant moins frivoles qu’il n’y paraît d’abord. Ils n’étaient pas si loin des clercs. Ils avaient de la religion…. Les membres de la cour d’Amour entendaient aussi honorer Dieu et ses saints, et d’ailleurs plusieurs prelates de grandes familles en faisaient partie. Comme les clercs, les laïcs estimaient l’éloquence, et ils aimaient les livres.

[These lay people who cultivated joy, love and poetry, were nonetheless less frivolous than it might appear at first sight. They were not so far from clerics. They had religion…. The members of the Cour amoureuse intended to honor God and the saints, especially the many prelates of important families

who took part. Like clerics, these lay people held eloquence in esteem, and they loved books.] (Guenée, Un meurtre, une société, 149)

9. See, for example, Scott and Sturm-Maddox, Performance, Poetry and Politics; Crawford, Perilous Performances. See also ffolliott’s work on Catherine de Médicis, including “Women in the Garden of Allegory, 207–24; “Make Love Not War,” 213–32; “Catherine de’ Medici as Artemisia,” 227–41.

10. See Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:7–34, for a description of the manuscripts.

11. Ibid., 1:18.

12. The charter is printed in Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:35–45.

13. A number of references within the charter specify that the date in question is February 14. This date correlates with what Henry Ansgar Kelly has shown, that although earlier celebrated on May 3, Valentine’s Day came to be celebrated on February 14 in the late fourteenth century. See his Chaucer and the Cult of Saint Valentine.

14. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:45.

15. Ibid., 1:36.

16. Straub, “Die Grundung des Pariser Minnehofs,” 7–8.

17. See Straub, “Die Grundung des Pariser Minnehofs,” 8–11. Based on the itineraries of Charles VI, Louis of Orleans, Philip of Burgundy, and Isabeau of Bavaria, he concludes that only Isabeau was present at the court during the composition of the charter of the Cour amoureuse.

18. Grandeau, “L’Intinéraire,” 582.

19. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:36, lines 21–23.

20. Straub, “Die Grundung des Pariser Minnehofs,” 8.

21. Petit, Itinéraires de Philippe le Hardi, 293–95.

22. See Grandeau, “L’Itinéraire,” 599n3.

23. Petit, Itinéraires de Philippe le Hardi, 293.

24. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:35. On Pierre de Hauteville, see 1:59.

25. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:37. Louis II of Bourbon is described by Autrand, Charles VI, as an ideal prince, loyal throughout his life to the crown (194–98). Louis later took sides with the Orleanists against Jean sans Peur.

26. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:37. The dates given in the charter are a bit confusing. Later, it is announced that on Valentine’s Day (“au jour de monseigneur saint Valentin, .XIIIIe. de fevrier prochain venant”) a mass will be sung at the church of St. Catherine du Val des Ecoliers (near the royal residence of the Hôtel St. Pol). The twenty-four ministers will be required to attend along with all those who will present their poetry that day. 1:39.

27. See Boulton, The Knights of the Crown, 1–26.

28. Bozzolo and Loyau, Cour amoureuse, 1:36.

29. Ibid., 1:162.

30. Ibid., 1:40.

31. Ibid., 1:39.

32. Ibid., 1:38.

33. On Louis as a patron of Humanists, see Schultz, “The Artistic and Literary Patronage,” 368–94; and Ouy, “Paris.”

34. See Small, “The Centre,” 145–74. See also Bozzolo and Ornato, “Princes, prélats, barons et autres gens,” 167–68.

35. See Poems of Cupid.

36. Piaget, “Un manuscrit de la Cour amoureuse.” The fact that the Treaty of Gien was signed and sealed by the Armagnac faction, united to avenge the assassination of Louis of Orleans and chase Jean sans Peur from power, on April 15, 1410, may be a further indication that the purpose of the Burgundian Cours amoureuse was not merely literary, but that it also served to represent Burgundian power.

37. In Le Paris de Charles V, 82–166.

38. See Piaget, “Un manuscrit de la Cour amoureuse,” 450–54.

39. Cayley, Debate and Dialogue, 13.

40. Taylor, “The Making of Poetry,” 34.

41. Le Débat sur le “Roman de la Rose,” 5.

42. Quotations and translations from Christine de Pizan, “The Epistle of the Prison of Human Life,” 70–73.

43. Christine de Pizan, Cité des dames, 422.

44. Marchello-Nizia, “Amour courtois,” 969–82.

45. See Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:220–26, esp. 225.

46. See Chattaway, The Order of the Golden Tree, 21.

47. Ibid., 113.

48. Ibid., 85.

49. Scott and Sturm-Maddox, Performance, Poetry and Politics, 211. Also on Catherine’s use of rhetoric in mediation, see Crouzet, “ ‘A Strong Desire,’” 103–18.

Chapter Six: Reinterpreting the Enlèvement du dauphin

Epigraph. Heng, “Feminine Knots,” 501.

1. Stafford, “Emma,” 10.

2. Ibid., 10–11.

3. See Rivalité, 187–88.

4. On Jean’s titles, see Vaughan, John the Fearless, 6–8.

5. See Jean’s justificatory letter published in Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 396.

6. As for the Duke of Burgundy’s reason for going to Paris, see Monstrelet, 1:108. “Mais aux ambaxadeurs dessusdiz fut par le duc d’Orleans et autres du conseil baillé response négative. Et pour tant, ledit duc de Bourgogne, oye la response devant dicte par sesdiz ambaxadeurs, se disposa d’aler à Paris devers le Roy pour mieulx expédier et conduire ses besognges” (But the Duke of Orleans and others of the Council gave a negative response to the ambassadors. Hearing the said response from his ambassadors, the Duke of Burgundy decided to go to Paris to the king to better take care of and conduct his business). Monstrelet continues on the same page: “En après, quant ledit Duc de Bourgogne eut conclud dedens Arras sur ces afaires, il se parti, à tout plusieurs hommes d’armes, jusques à huit cens combatans, couvertement armez, la vigile de l’Asumpcion Nostre-Dame, pour aler à Paris” (Afterward, when the Duke of Burgundy had concluded his affairs in Arras, he left, with many men at arms, as many as eight hundred soldiers, covertly armed, the evening before the Assumption of Our Virgin, to go to Paris).

7. Pintoin, 3:230.

8. See Vaughan, John the Fearless, 41, and Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 156–58.

9. Vaughan reports that Philip received 188,600 francs in gifts and pensions from the royal treasury, compared with the 37,000 francs that Jean was assigned (although not paid in full) during the first year of his reign and the 2,000 francs he received in the second year. John the Fearless, 42.

10. See Chousat’s letter describing the affair, in Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 395–96.

11. Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 157, on Jean’s nonpayment; on Louis’s annual income from the treasury, see Vaughan, John the Fearless, 42–43.

12. Monstrelet, 1:98.

13. See chapter 3, note 91, above.

14. See Isambert, Recueil général, 7:59, for the letter patent. If the king had created

par le conseil de ceux qui lors estoient entour nous certains testamentz, codicilles et autres ordennances entre vifs, lesquels aucuns pourroient presumer estre derogés aux droits, prerogatives et honneurs qui y appartiennent et ou tems avenir pourroient et devroient appartenir de droit et raison commune, coustume et usage de nostre royaume ou autrement à nostre frere dessusdit
[according to the advice of those close to us, testaments, codicils, and other ordinances among which some might be understood to have damaged the rights, prerogatives, and honors now belonging or that will belong by law and common reason, custom and usage, to our kingdom or to our brother]

they were to be considered invalid. As for the ordinance of April 26, 1403, see Ordonnances, 8:582.

15. See Rivalité, 193. Nordberg notes that John’s written request for reforms that was presented at the Louvre by Jean Nielles makes no mention of the dauphin who in fact presided over the presentation of the request, but refers instead to Charles VI, who was indisposed at the time. The presentation took place on August 21, well after the king’s latest lapse, which had taken place on August 16 or 17. This strongly suggests that the request was written ahead of time, before Jean’s arrival in Paris. Also, the dramatic events surrounding the abduction of the dauphin are not mentioned, once again suggesting that the request was written before these events occurred. Finally, Jean himself admits that he came to Paris with the intention of promoting reforms in his first public letter justifying the kidnapping. He writes that he made the trip “pour le [roi] visiter et aviser, comme l’en disoit, du petit gouvernement de ce royaume.” De Baye, Journal, 1:137.

16. The Burgundian affectation of reformer and the bad faith with which it was affected has been acknowledged by modern historians, who recognize that the medieval route to power—the amassing of territory and influence—was inherently rapacious, expansionist, and self-interested, and that Philip and Jean were as active in the game as Louis, the object of their reformist propaganda. When it suited him, Jean supported the war against the English, a primary reason for the disaster of France’s finances. Furthermore, the moment Jean gained power he installed his own cronies in important positions, despite his criticisms of Louis for doing just that. See Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 169, where the motivation behind the Burgundian tendency to fashion themselves as men of the people is described. Earlier historians were more willing to accept the Burgundian self-representation at face value.

17. Guenée, La Folie de Charles VI, 295. Guenée writes that Pintoin, Nicolas Baye, Juvénal des Ursins, and Monstrelet all mention this episode of mental illness. Unlike Monstrelet and Juvénal des Ursins, however, Guenée continues, Pintoin mistakenly believes that the king remains in a state of mental incapacity throughout the entire crisis of the “enlèvement du dauphin.” Monstrelet reports that Charles enjoyed a brief recovery beginning August 25, when he received hommage from the Duke of Burgundy and his brothers and presided over some sessions of the royal council. See also Juvénal des Urins, 432. Guenée notes that the recovery lasted until September 23.

18. Printed by Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 396–97.

19. Ibid., 396.

20. De Baye, Journal, 1:139.

21. Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 403.

22. The discourse is printed in Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 399–403.

23. Rey, Le Domaine du roi, 338–39.

24. See Gross, “The Political Influence of the University of Paris,” 440–45.

25. On the Duke of Burgundy’s relationship with the University of Paris, see, in addition to Gross, “The Political Influence of the University of Paris,” Tournier, “Jean sans Peur et l’Université de Paris,” 30–31, on privileges; Tuilier, Histoire de l’Université de Paris. For more on Jean’s popularity with the university, see Richard Vaughan, John the Fearless, 32, 43, and Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 553. On the political influence of the University of Paris during the early fifteenth century, see Coville, Les Cabochiens, 114–35.

26. On the motivations behind support for different solutions to the Schism on the parts of the university and the princes of the blood, see Kaminsky, “The Politics of France’s Subtraction of Obedience,” 366–97.

27. See Douët-d’Arcq, Choix des pièces inédites, 1:270, for the letter of August 25 of Olivier de Mauni to the King of Castile:

mais je cuide que le Roy et son conseil y remédieront, tèlement qu’ils demourront bons amis, de Dieu plaist. Et a len défendu à mondit seigneur de Bourgogne et crié partout Paris de par le Roye, qu’il n’assemble ne tiengne nulles gens d’armes pour ceste cause. Et aussi mon très redoubté seigneur vous plaise sçavoir que monseigneur de Bourbon et autres du conseil du Roy sont alez à Meleun pardevers mondit seigneur d’Orliens pour lui faire semblable deffense que l’on a fait à mondit seigneur de Bougogne.
[but I believe that the king and his Council will take care of it, so that they will remain friends, God willing. And it was forbidden Monsieur of Burgundy, and cried everywhere in Paris on behalf of the king, that he not assemble or keep any soldiers for any reason. And also, my mighty Lord, I would like you to know that Monsieur of Boubon and the others of the Royal Council went to Melun to Monsieur of Orleans to forbid him to do the same to Monsieur of Burgundy.]

28. See Rivalité, 201. The Chambre des comptes document is preserved in BN fonds français 10237 ff. 53 and 53v.

29. See Rivalité, 195.

30. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix des pièces inédites, 1:273–83.

31. Ibid., 1:274 and 276.

32. Ibid., 1:275.

33. Ibid., 1:282.

34. Printed in Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 405–13.

35. Letter printed in Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 397–99, here 398.

36. See Valois, Le Conseil du roi.

37. See Pintoin, 3:309. See also Lehoux, Jean de France, 3:51, esp. n5: the king’s treasurer, Hemon Raguier, writes Lehoux, records expenses for an “armée faite à Paris pour la garde et deffence de ladite ville, sous le gouvernement de Monseigneur le duc de Berry, garde et gouverneur de la ditte ville, pour raison du debat et descort entre Monseigneur le duc d’Orleans, d’une part, et Monseigneur le duc de Bourgogne.” (army assembled in Paris for the guard and defense of the said city, under the government of Monsieur the Duke of Berry, guardian and governor of the said city, because of the debate and discord between Monsieur the Duke of Orleans, on the one hand, and Monsieur the Duke of Burgundy, on the other.)

38. Pintoin, 3:340.

39. Juvénal des Ursins, 437.

40. Cochon, 373.

41. See Rivalité, 201–2.

42. Ibid., 202.

43. Mirot, “L’Enlèvement du dauphin,” 349.

44. Ibid., 336–37.

45. Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 172–77.

46. Verdon, Isabeau de Bavière, 143. The recent assessment of the incident by Françoise Artrand casts no new light on it. Autrand, Christine de Pizan, 265–75.

47. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix des pièces inédites, 1:234.

48. Guenée, La Folie de Charles VI, 206–8.

49. Ibid.

50. Juvénal des Ursins, 432.

51. Ibid.

52. Pintoin, 3:312–14.

53. Ibid., 3:310-12.

54. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pièces inédites, 1:240.

55. Pintoin, 3:342.

56. Ibid., 3:342–44.

57. AN KK 46, f. 94.

58. Monstrelet, 1:124.

59. Juvénal des Ursins, 433.

60. Ibid.

61. Ibid.

62. Ordannance, 12:222

63. Ibid., 2:223.

64. Ibid.

65. Pintoin, 3:310–14.

66. See Rey, Les Finance royales sous Charles VI, 187–88, 228.

67. This impression is corrected by Christine’s more recent biographer, Suzanne Roux in Christine de Pizan: Femme de tête, dame de coeur.

68. Quotations and translations from Christine de Pizan, The Epistle of the Prison of Human Life, 72–73.

69. Jarry, Louis d’Orléans, 331.

70. McLeod, The Order of the Rose, 117.

71. Rey, Les Finance royales sous Charles VI, 187.

72. On Christine’s understanding of the role of female mediator in “An Epistle,” see D’Arcens, “Petit estat vesval,” 201–26.

73. Constable, Letters and Letter-Collections, fasc. 17, 11.

74. Ibid., 54.

75. Camargo, Ars dictaminis, ars dictandi, fasc. 60, 18.

76. See Willard, “An Autograph Manuscript of Christine de Pizan?”

77. Richards, “Seulette a part,” 162.

78. See Rouse and Rouse, Manuscripts and Their Makers and Busby, Codex and Context, 2:714–36.

79. Little is known about the audiences for Christine’s political writings, but given what Joyce Coleman has called the “aural” state of the fourteenth- and fifteenth-century courts, it seems unlikely that only the addressee of a given manuscript, be it the queen, the Duke of Berry, or Louis, would have read the works addressed to him or her. See Coleman’s Public Reading, esp. 95–97. Further on the difficulty of ascertaining the audiences for Christine’s political works, see Hicks, “The Political Significance of Christine de Pizan,” 1–15.

80. Blanchard, “L’Entrée du poète,” 44.

81. Scanlon, “The King’s Two Voices,” 217.

82. Staley, “Gower,” 71.

83. Christine de Pizan, “An Epistle,” 70-73.

84. On Christine’s use of maternal imagery to describe Isabeau, see also Delogu, “Christine de Pizan’s Elaboration of Female Authority,” 57–67. Also on Isabeau as maternal figure in this poem, see Bozzolo, “Familles éclatées,” 1:119–21; 1:123.

85. Christine de Pizan, “An Epistle,” 72–73.

86. Ibid., 76.

87. Ibid.

88. Ibid., 78.

89. Christine de Pizan, Cité des dames, 430.

90. Christine de Pizan, “An Epistle,” 72.

91. Ibid., 80.

92. Christine de Pizan, Cité des dames, 94.

93. As can be seen in the south portal of the west façade, the portal of the Mère de Dieu, of the Amiens Cathedral, where Solomon and the Queen of Sheba reflect Christ and Mary. Like the Virgin, the Queen of Sheba—often depicted with the Christ-figure Solomon, whose wisdom she tried to prove through riddles—was associated with Ecclesia and the Bride of Christ. See Rickard, “The Iconography of the Virgin Portal,” 153; Ostoia, “Two Riddles,” 78–79; and Watson, “The Queen of Sheba,” 115–45.

94. Watson, “The Queen of Sheba,”117.

95. On this group of women as a sort of ideal Royal Council, see Richards, “Political Thought as Improvisation,” 12–13. Christine Clark-Evans has written on Nicaula in the Cité des dames but does not mention Christian interpretations of the figure. “Nicaula of Egypt and Arabia,” 1:287–300.

96. Christine de Pizan, Cité des dames, 104.

97. AN, KK 43, fol. 81v and 82v. I would like to thank James Laidlaw for first drawing my attention to these items in Isabeau’s accounts and for generously lending me his personal notes of the accounts relevant to Christine de Pizan.

Chapter Seven: Revisiting the Treaty of Troyes

Epigraph. Barbey, Lois fondamentales, 7

1. Gordon, Joan of Arc, 33.

2. Ibid., 34–35.

3. Sullivan, The Interrogation of Joan of Arc, 67.

4. Allmand, The Hundred Years War, 29.

5. Fenin, “Mémoires de Pierre de Fenin,” 5:385–86.

6. Pintoin, 6:586–88.

7. Royal Intrigue, 155.

8. Ibid.

9. Grandeau, “Le Dauphin Jean,” 683.

10. Pintoin, 6:50.

11. Ibid., 6:52.

12. Ibid., 6:2–10.

13. See Pétigny, “Charte inédite.”

14. Grandeau, “Le Dauphin Jean,” 689.

15. Ibid., 689.

16. Monstrelet, 3:165–66.

17. Grandeau, “Le Dauphin Jean,” 708.

18. Ibid., 711–12.

19. Ibid., 713.

20. Monstrelet, 3:168.

21. Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:67.

22. Monstrelet, 3:176.

23. Fradenburg, “Introduction: Rethinking Queenship,” 5.

24. Ordonnances, vol. 10:424–26.

25. Letter printed in Monstrelet, 3:230–35.

26. Monstrelet, 3:231.

27. Ordonnances 10:427–29.

28. Monstrelet, 3: 237–40.

29. Plancher, Histoires général, preuves, 3, no. 302.

30. Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 76.

31. Ibid., 85.

32. Ibid.

33. Ibid., 86.

34. Fauquembergue, Journal, 1:135.

35. Pintoin, 6:253.

36. See “Entrée de la Reine Isabeau,” 105.

37. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 3.

38. Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:120.

39. Fauquembergue, Journal, 1:225.

40. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 13.

41. See Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 190.

42. Pintoin, 6:332.

43. Monstrelet prints the accord, 3:324–29.

44. Letter to Henry V by Isabeau, printed in Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:187.

45. Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:149.

46. Pintoin, 6:98.

47. Printed in Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, vol. 1. Isabeau refers to Charles’s voies obliques (186).

48. Fauquembergue, Journal, 1:317.

49. Although Fresne de Beaucourt sees the hesitation as coming from the Duke of Burgundy. See 1:156–61.

50. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 15.

51. Ibid., 19.

52. Fauquembergue, Journal, 1:318.

53. Monstrelet, 3:356.

54. Fauquembergue, Journal, 1:318.

55. Letter printed in Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 1:186–89.

56. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 32.

57. Report of the conversations held between the Count of St. Pol, the Royal Council, and the English embassy printed in Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 193.

58. Printed in Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 193.

59. Ibid., 78–81.

60. Ibid., 80.

61. Ibid., 24.

62. See Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 85; the letter patent, printed in Rymer, Foedera, 9:820-21, clearly grants Philip only the power to negotiate truces, not the power to sign a final peace accord.

63. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 87.

64. Ibid., 88.

65. Document printed in Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 232–33.

66. Ibid., 91.

67. Printed in Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 237.

68. Calmette and Déprez. “Un Essai d’union nationale.”

69. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 100–1.

70. Ibid., 101.

71. Ibid., 128.

72. In Pons, L’Honneur de la couronne de France, 124.

73. Pons, “Intellectual Patterns,” 58.

74. Pons, L’Honneur de la couronne de France, 123.

75. Printed in Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 232.

76. See the case made by Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 98–100.

77. Ibid., 119.

78. Ibid., 126.

79. Ibid., 127.

80. Fauquembergue, Journal, 1:358.

81. Ibid., 1:360-61.

82. Ibid., 1:362.

83. Calmette and Déprez, “Un Essai d’union nationale,” 345.

84. See Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 642.

85. On the hatred between Louis II of Anjou and Jean of Burgundy, see Vaughan, John the Fearless, 194.

86. See Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII, 60-61, and Vale, Charles VII, 24.

87. Vale, Charles VII, 24.

88. Ibid., 22.

89. Ibid., 24.

90. Bonenfant, Du meurtre de Montereau, 105–7.

91. Printed in Fresne de Beaucourt, 1:94. Armagnac, located in the foothills of the Pyrenees, possessed its own dialect.

92. Pollack-Lagushenko, “The Armagnac Faction,” 228.

93. Juvénal des Ursins, 533.

94. See Schnerb, Jean sans Peur, 642.

95. Balibar, “The Nation Form,” 88.

96. David Bell, The Cult of the Nation in France, esp. 59–62.

97. Giesey, “The Juristic Basis,” 3.

98. Ibid., 12.

99. Heckmann, Stellvertreter, 1:306.

100. Mark Warner, “The Anglo-French Dual Monarchy,” 104.

101. Pintoin, 6:480-82.

102. See Armstrong, “La Double Monarchie,” 343–45.

Chapter Eight: Wife, Mother, Friend

Epigraph. Christine de Pizan, Oeuvres poétiques, 1:227–28.

1. Grandeau, “Isabeau de Bavière,” 117–48, and Famiglietti, Tales of the Marriage Bed, 188–95.

2. See Vaughan, John the Fearless, 75–76, for a translation of part of the letter, which is printed in Calmette, “Contribution à l’histoire des relations.”

3. Froissart, 10:350.

4. Ibid.

5. See Hindman, “The Iconography of Queen Isabeau de Baviere,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 102–10.

6. Le Pastoralet, 43, line 151.

7. Brachet, Pathologie mentale, 44. Isabeau’s accounts show the purchase of a wheelchair; this may also have contributed to the legend of her obesity. However, one might purchase a wheelchair for various maladies, not necessarily because one is too large to walk.

8. Pintoin, 4:285.

9. Pintoin, 1:356–58.

10. Grandeau, “L’Intinéraire.”

11. Froissart, 10:349.

12. Autrand, “‘Hôtel de seigneur,’” 51–61.

13. Grandeau remarks that the notables of Senlis gathered on July 23 to discuss a gift for the queen when she entered the city. Grandeau, “L’Intinéraire,” 579.

14. Pintoin, 1:360, recounts that the king left his new bride in the custodie of the Duchess of Orleans and the Count of Eu, both of them mature (“ambo mature etatis errant”).

15. Pintoin, 1:610.

16. See Grandeau, “Isabeau de Bavière ou l’amour conjugale,” 120–21.

17. Grandeau, “L’Intinéraire,” 579.

18. The Froissart story can be found in 14:80; the article verifying the essentials of the story is Moranvillé, “Une Course,” 718–20.

19. See Grandeau, “Isabeau de Bavière ou l’amour conjugale,” 139; Grandeau cites KK 41, f. 187.

20. Catherine, born October 27, 1401, would have been conceived in late January; the king suffered a crisis between January 19 and February 25; Charles, born February 22, 1403, would have been conceived in in late May 1402; Charles was insane from mid-May until early June. See Guenée, La Folie de Charles VI, 294–96, for the dates of the king’s insanity.

21. Juvénal des Ursins, 445.

22. Pintoin, 1:566.

23. Ibid., 2:88.

24. Pintoin, 2:90-92.

25. Gibbons, “The Piety of Isabeau of Bavaria,” 222; Gibbons cites AN JJ 161, f. 21.

26. Froissart, 15:431.

27. On the woman who has come to be known as “la petite reine,” see Vallet de Viriville, “Odette ou Odinette,” 171–81.

28. Pintoin, 6:486.

29. Grandeau, “L’Amour conjugale,” 147n87.

30. See Gibbons, 223; she cites AN KK32, f. 24.

31. Thibault, 253–54.

32. AN KK 18, f. 42v. On Isabeau’s library, see Vallet de Vivirille, “La Bibliothèque d’Isabeau de Bavière,” 663–78.

33. Grandeau, “Les Dames qui ont servi la reine,” 233.

34. Grandeau, “L’Exercice de la piété,” 149–152. See also Gibbons, 222. For the Passion Isabeau, see DuBruck’s edition of the work.

35. Grandeau, “L’Exercice de la piété,” 150. See also Mooney, “Queenship in Fifteenth Century France,” 369. Franciscan friar Michel le Doyen served as her confessor from 1398 to 1411; Guillaume de Boisratiers, archbishop of Bourges in 1413; Franciscan friar Guillaume de la Haye, from 1415 to 1417.

36. Grandeau, “L’Exercice de la piété,” 150–52.

37. Gibbons, “The Piety of Isabeau of Bavaria,” 218–19.

38. Hoüel, Mémoires et recherches, 25.

39. See Grandeau, “Les Enfants de Charles VI,” 812.

40. Ibid.

41. Ibid., 814.

42. Ibid., 824.

43. Ibid.

44. Thibault, 445–46; he cites AN K 180, f. 16.

45. Gibbons, “The Queen as ‘Social Mannequin,’” 382–92.

46. For further information, see the collection of essays, Sheingorn and Ashley, Interpreting Cultural Symbols.

47. Gibbons, “The Queen as ‘Social Mannequin,’” 389.

48. Mirot, “Isabelle de France,” 5–6.

49. Ibid., 46.

50. Gibbons, “The Queen as ‘Social Mannequin,’” 390. See also Grandeau, “Les Enfants de Charles VI,” 826–30, for descriptions of the royal children’s wardrobes.

51. Pintoin, 3:393–95.

52. Ibid., 3:739.

53. “Active Queenship,” 58.

54. Thibault, 330-31.

55. Douët-d’Arcq, Choix de pieces inédites, 1:194.

56. Pintoin, 4:6.

57. Juvénal des Ursins records Isabelle’s tears throughout the wedding, 438.

58. See Thibault, 33, and Lehoux, Jean de France, 3:153.

59. “Active Queenship,” 58.

60. Monstrelet, 3:320.

61. Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années,” 419–20; the will, cited by Grandeau, is in AN K 63, ff. 16 and 16 verso.

62. Thibault, 207.

63. Pintoin, 1:598.

64. Ibid., 1:586.

65. Ibid., 2:64.

66. Ibid., 2: 66–68. The story is recounted in Pintoin, 2:64–70, and Froissart, 15:84–92.

67. Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 130.

68. Paravicini, Invitations au mariage, 36.

69. Froissart, 15:83.

70. The illumination can be viewed on a Web site devoted to the Harley 4431 at www.pizan.lib.ed.ac.uk/context.html.

71. Autrand, “‘Hôtel de seigneur ne vaut rien sans dame,’” 51.

72. Ibid.

73. Grandeau, “L’Intinéraire d’Isabeau de Bavière,” 572.

74. In particular, see Mooney, “Queenship in Fifteenth Century France,” 313–57, and Grandeau, “Les Dames.”

75. Gibbons, “Active Queenship,” 315

76. Ibid., 330.

77. Ibid., 331. See Mooney, “Queenship in Fifteenth Century France,” 371–75, for the names of Isabeau’s officers.

78. Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 133–35.

79. Trois vertus. Christine praises the Countess of Eu for her wise managerial skills and her honesty.

Et ceste voye tenir a sage mainagiere rent aucunes fois plus de prouffit que meismes la droicte revenue de la terre, si comme le savoit bien faire la sage et prudent mainagiere, contesse de Eu … qui n’avoit point de honte de s’emploier elle meismes en tout honneste labeur de mainage… . Et de tel femme se puet bien dire la louenge que recite l’epistre Salemon de la sage femme.
[And the practice of managing wisely sometimes renders more profit even than revenues from the land, as so well knew that sage and prudent manager, the Countess of Eu … who was not above taking on the honest work of household chores herself… . And the letter of Solomon about the wise woman can well be applied to such a woman.] (156).

80. Pintoin, 2:524. See Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 203–5.

81. See Cité des dames, 420. Christine remarks: “Ne fu ce pas grant liberalité que la Dame de la Riviere, nommee Marguerite, qui ancores est en vie et femme fu jadis de messire Burel de la Riviere, premier chanberlan du sage roy Charles?” (Wasn’t the liberality demonstrated by the dame de la Rivière, named Marguerite, who is still alive and was once the wife of Monsieur Bureau de la Rivière, first chamberlin of the wise King Charles V great?) She then goes on to tell the story of how Madame de la Rivière rescued a valiant old knight from debtor’s prison.

82. Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 217–18.

83. Thibault, 275.

84. Froissart, 15:54.

85. Chamberlin, The Count of Virtue, 176.

86. See Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 237–38.

87. Printed in Simonsfeld, “Beiträge zur Bayersichen,” 306.

88. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 2.

89. Ibid., 186.

90. For details and clarification on the supposedly shady financial dealings between Isabeau and her brother, see Straub’s Herzog Ludwig, 185–264. Eva Kovacs argues that Isabeau feared that she would be left penniless in France after the king’s death, believed by many to be imminent. Thus she was preparing to return to Bavaria. She lent 57,000 francs to Louis of Bavaria to

racheter des terres engagées, sous réserve de garanties fournies par trois membres de la Maison de Bavière, en vertu desquelles la propriété et les revenues de ce domaine devaient lui revenir au cas où elle déciderait de retourner dans son pays…. Nous sommes persuadée que les joyaux mentionnés passèrent au duc Louis parce qu’elle s’attendait à une telle éventualité.

[to buy back the territories, guaranteed by three members of the House of Bavaria that ownership and the revenus of the domain would return to her if she decided to return to her home…. We are persuaded that the jewels mentioned above went to Louis because she was expecting such an event to take place.] (Kovacs, L’Age d’or, 100)

91. Although Louis of Bavaria did take a leading role after the fall of the Cabochians in 1413 when the Armagnacs took power. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 160–83.

92. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 43.

93. Famiglietti, Royal Intrigue, 27–28.

94. Straub, Herzog Ludwig, 46.

95. Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années,” 415–16.

96. Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années,” 414, and “Les Dames,” 158.

97. Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années,” 427n49; AN XIA 8853, f. 327 v.

98. Grandeau, “Les Dernières Années,” 413.

99. Solterer, “Making Names, Breaking Lives,” 204.

100. Ibid., 215.

101. For accounts of the arrest of the queen’s entourage, see Monstrelet, 2:352–54; Fèvre de Saint Rémy, Choix de chroniques, 80–82; Pintoin, 5:44–46.

102. Juvénal des Ursins, 488.

103. Froissart, 15:96.

104. Hirschbiegel, Etrennes, 383.

105. See Jarry, “La ‘Voie de fait,’” 535–49.

106. Grandeau, “Les Dames,” 57.

107. Ibid., 157.

108. Clin, Isabeau de Bavière, 258.

Conclusion

1. Isabeau does not figure either in the translation of Nora’s Realms of Memory or in the French original, a significantly more substantial work with its more numerous entries. Joan of Arc, however, does receive a chapter. Winock’s article on the maid appears in 3:433–482 of the English version, Realms of Memory, and in the third section of Les Lieux de mémoire, 3:674–733.

2. Nora, Realms of Memory, 1:xxiv.

3. Crawford, Perilous Performances.

4. Ibid., 206.

5. On ownership of tapestries illustrating the Cité des dames, see Susan Groag Bell, The Lost Tapestries.

6. See Willard, “Anne de France,” 59–70 and, also by the same author, “The Manuscript Tradition,” 433–44.

7. On the circulation of the Trois vertus, see Willard, “The Manuscript Tradition.”

8. See Christine de Pizan, Le Livre des fais et bonnes meurs, 1:xli–xlvi.

9. Even after the principle received the name by which it is known today, its association with the De allodis clause of the Lex Salica, code of law compiled by Clovis, bothered many commentators. For the clause did not exclude women from the throne: it has nothing to do with royal succession but rather with the transmission of property. When was the Salic Law proclaimed a fundamental law of the kingdom? Possibly Richard Lescot had already claimed that the De allodis clause excluded women from succession to the French throne in 1358. However, the attribution is not certain, for it may be a later insertion. See Giesey, “The Juristic Basis of Dynastic Right,” 17. The Salic Law as the mode of devolution of the throne to the nearest male heir is mentioned unmistakeably only around 1409–13 in Jean de Montreuil’s A Toute la chevalerie, where he specifically cites the De allodis clause as support for the exclusion of women from the French throne. See Beaune, Naissance de la nation France, 252–64. See also Jean de Montreuil, Opera, 2:7–17. The fundamental study on the exclusion of women from the French throne is Viollet, “Comment les femmes ont été exclues.” See also Taylor, “The Salic Law, French Queenship and the Defence of Women” and “The Salic Law and the Valois Succession to the French Crown.” See also Taylor’s introduction to his Debating the The Hundred Years War: Pour ce que plusieurs (La Loi Salicque) and A Declaracion of the Trew and Dewe Title of Henry VIII, 1–49, where he describes the malaise of Jean de Montreuil regarding use of the Lex Salica as the source of female exclusion. Viennot offers a different story of the law’s development, arguing that it arose out of a tradition of misogyny. See Viennot, La France, 347–90.

10. Christine de Pizan, Le Livre du corps de policie, 93.

11. See Dulac, “Entre héroïsation et admonestation,” 91–113, esp. 96–97, for the numerous places in Christine’s works where the poet emphasizes the Valois’ unbroken lineage reaching back to the Trojans.

12. Luyt, Le Sceptre de France en quenouille, cited in Cosandey, “De Lance en quenouille,” 815–16.

13. Heckmann, Stellvertreter, 1:306.

14. See Girard, The Scapegoat, esp. chaps 2 and 3. Girard’s analysis of Marie Antoinette offers an interesting parallel with Isabeau: “The queen belongs to several familiar categories of victims of persecution; she is not only a queen but a foreigner. Her Austrian origin is mentioned repeatedly in the popular accusations against her. The court that condemns her is heavily influenced by the Paris mob” (20).