[9] The Montcada family did not exist before the eleventh century. The family's ancestors surely belonged to the cohesive aristocracy that supported the rule of Barcelona's early counts, but they derived their identity from their functions as viscounts and vicars. Only after the weakening of the count's legal authority in the early eleventh century did the first Montcada associate his family and fortune to the castle that guards the narrow pass leading from the western Valles into the plain of Barcelona.

The Montcada lineage was founded during a period of political turmoil that followed the death of Count Ramon Borrell in 1017 and the accession of a weak count in Barcelona.⁽¹⁾ Magnates now seized a larger share of the profits that peasants drew from the land. They brushed aside the institutional restraints that had made them the instruments rather than the masters of the count's administrative system, and they claimed greater rights and authority than they had exercised as viscounts and vicars. The unity of the aristocracy and the integrity of the Visigothic legal system were seriously breached; and they remained impaired until mid-century, when Ramon Berenguer I contained opposition from the new class of castle lords and refashioned his authority by imposing new feudal relationships.

Among the leading families that participated in these momentous events was one whose first historical member was Guillem de Montcada, the descendant of a respected line of vicars and viscounts whose last representative in the tenth century was named [10] Seniofred.⁽²⁾ Guillem founded the Montcada dynasty in the years when individual magnates were first beginning to create territorial lordships around a castle and a district whose care had traditionally been a public trust. Guillem's successors were not members of the aristocratic faction whose break with Ramon Berenguer continued openly until 1060; but after mid-century they increasingly distanced themselves from his administration, taking advantage of his weakened authority to strengthen their prestige as territorial lords of Montcada.

Ramon Berenguer ultimately managed to reassert his authority by acknowledging the gains that castle lords had made over the preceding generation. In return, these magnates agreed to recognize him as the principal leader of the region -- as his allies rather than as subordinates. This made an important difference in the political structure of Catalonia, for Ramon Berenguer began then to rely mainly upon a more restricted group of nobles, known as his mennada or household, who were drawn from among his "best men."⁽³⁾

Since approximately 1040, the office of seneschal had been occupied by one of the chief supporters of comital authority. This office, first conferred upon a conservative magnate from Osona, was awarded in 1068 to a new man in the count's entourage, Guillem Ramon [I]. More active than most territorial lords in the political affairs of the counts, Guillem Ramon gained increasing political stature during his fifty years as seneschal, both by association with comital authority and by acquisition of important fiefs. These legacies alone could have secured for his son a significant place in local politics. But the future of the seneschal's heirs was [11] radically transformed by the marriage of Guillem Ramon [II] to Beatriu de Montcada, an event that merged two noble lineages of local importance into one that would acquire great regional significance.

The documented career of the first Montcada began in 1002, when Guillem "de Vacarisses" appeared as "noble and witness" in a judicial assembly in Vic.⁽⁴⁾ By that time he was probably already a vicar or local administrator of a castle district.⁽⁵⁾ In 1014, as vicar of Vacarisses and Muntanyola, he was fulfilling responsibilities as an official of the count when he attended a suit by Vicar Ermir.⁽⁶⁾ In the same period his brother Bernat Ruvira was a familiar figure at the count's palace.⁽⁷⁾ Another brother, Ramon, was archdeacon of Barcelona. But after Count Ramon Borrell's death in 1017, Guillem began to advance his interests.⁽⁸⁾ In 1017 he appeared in Barcelona immediately after the count's death. There his name is linked to the acts of Countess Ermessenda, in whose hands Ramon Borrell had placed the governance of Barcelona, Manresa, Osona, and [12] Girona.⁽⁹⁾ The countess' circle of supporters included Guillem's brother Bernat, who was one of the executors of the late count's testament,⁽¹⁰⁾ and other primatus -- that is, leading figures -- of the palace.⁽¹¹⁾

The influence of these advisers, and Ermessenda's considerable power, may have aggravated her son Berenguer Ramon when he came of age early in the 1020s.⁽¹²⁾ But, in a gesture of compromise, Ermessenda promised to yield to her son twenty-nine fortresses, including the castle of Montcada, should she not redress his accusations of wrongdoing within forty days. Ermessenda and her brother, Bishop Pere of Girona, subscribed (had their names placed on) the written accord, as did a group who were undoubtedly her partisans in the dispute. Among them was Guillem "de Muntanyola."⁽¹³⁾

Whatever wounds had been opened in the controversy between Ermessenda and her son did not appear to affect the position of Guillem "de Muntanyola." Nor, apparently, was his political influence weakened when Bishop Oliba of Vic denounced him and his brother Bernat as usurpers of church lands at the provincial synod of Narbonne in 1022.⁽¹⁴⁾ In that same year he appeared on behalf of Oliba before the counts of Barcelona⁽¹⁵⁾ and joined again in a judicial act with Ermessenda and Count Berenguer Ramon.⁽¹⁶⁾ At this time he was also about to procure the two largest plums of his twenty-year career: the castle of Montcada and a profitable marriage. These two events were probably close in time for although the marriage cannot be documented until 1035, it seems to have [13] occurred by the mid-1020s.⁽¹⁷⁾ Guillem's betrothed was Adelaida, daughter of the magnate Bonucio de Claramunt. An heiress whose widowed mother; Senegundis, held an important patrimony in the western Vallès and lower Llobregat,⁽¹⁸⁾ Adelaida required a husband of equal or near-equal rank.⁽¹⁹⁾ She found him, between 1023 and 1025, in the person of Guillem de Montcada, who had probably by then acquired the castle of Montcada.⁽²⁰⁾

It is possible that Countess Ermessenda had a hand in the advancement and marriage of Guillem de Montcada, but the evidence is only circumstantial. Ermessenda was apparently lord of the castles she pledged to her son in 1022; she counted Guillem "de Muntanyola" among her advisers, for he had been one of the persons to join her in making the settlement of 1022; and she had participated in land transactions in the western Valles together with her late husband⁽²¹⁾ and was doubtless well acquainted with Adelaida's family. Because Adelaida's father was dead, Ermessenda would have been attractive as a patron for the young heiress and as a go-between for Guillem.

[14] The bestowal of the castle of Montcada marked the beginning of a new period in Guillem's political life. Although he had been a vicar at Vacarisses and Muntanyola before 1017, he no longer bore the title after the death of Count Ramon Borrell. Was he now a vicar for the third time, at Montcada, or did his new position convey a different title? In terms of administrative authority, the new order of the day made the point moot. As master of an important stronghold, Guillem could profit from the example of other barons, who in this decade of comital debility were finding the local independence and personal power of a castle lord more rewarding than service to the count.⁽²²⁾ Though he appeared twice with his brother Ramon Archdeacon in attempts to negotiate a settlement between the family of the viscount of Barcelona, and Sant Cugat, a monastery located near Montcada,⁽²³⁾ he played a reduced role in the affairs of Ermessenda and Berenguer Ramon. In the decade ending in 1035, his name was affixed to only one document drawn up by the pair, a pious donation to the Valles monastery of Sant Llorenç del Munt.⁽²⁴⁾ His name does not appear on a number of important documents issued during the minority of Ramon Berenguer I.⁽²⁵⁾ It reappears only in November 1039, when the new count, now of age, acknowledged that his marriage to Elisabet, a descendant of a viscount of Narbonne, had come about "through the will of God and the election of magnates."⁽²⁶⁾

Guillem de Montcada died in 1040 just as Ramon Guillem de Montcada, the eldest of his six sons, came of age. As heir to the castle of Montcada, Ramon Guillem also assumed a role in the court of Count Ramon Berenguer, his close contemporary. Perhaps because of a friendship nurtured in youth, Ramon Guillem stood by the count in the turbulent decade of the 1040s, as he [15] struggled against the military and political challenges of such men as Count Ramon Guifred of Cerdanya and Mir Geribert.

Faced with a challenge from the north by the count of Cerdanya, Ramon Berenguer and Elisabet hastened to conclude mutual pacts of alliance with Ramon's cousin, Count Ermengol of Urgell.⁽²⁷⁾ The exchange of conventions, or agreements,⁽²⁸⁾ which probably dated from 1043 or 1044, committed the count and countess of Barcelona to aid Ermengol "as best as they be able" from the first day of the anticipated war with the count of Cerdanya.⁽²⁹⁾ To back up their promise, Ramon Berenguer and Elisabet named five "hostages" as guarantors of a pledge of 20,000 sols indemnity to be paid to Ermengol in case of default. One of the five was Ramon Guillem de Montcada.⁽³⁰⁾

Ramon Guillem de Montcada probably remained loyal to Count Ramon Berenguer during the next year or two when the count's leadership was openly challenged by leading magnates in Barcelona, especially Bishop Guislabert and his nephew Udalard II, viscount of Barcelona. It can be assumed that Ramon Guillem joined the comital host (military expedition) that Ramon Berenguer launched against Count Ramon Guifred of Cerdanya, even though historians know of that campaign only through the accusation of incitement to desertion leveled against Bishop Guislabert by Ramon Berenguer in 1044.⁽³¹⁾ Did Ramon Guillem de Montcada continue to support the count in this period when the opposition of the viscount and his family led to an attack against the count's palace in Barcelona? The continued favor of the Montcadas with the count suggests that Ramon Berenguer's confidence in them was unmitigated, although the evidence is uncertain. Whatever [16] case could be made for doubting Ramon Guillem's fidelity would stem from his inclusion in 1044 in a list of guarantors given to the count by Udalard II.⁽³²⁾ In that pact, seven persons agreed to ensure Udalard's payment to the count and countess for the damages incurred by his assault on the comital residence. Why would Ramon Guillem's name appear unless he, too, had been compromised in the rebellion? A possible answer is that he was, simply, a magnate trusted by both sides.

For the next decade Ramon Guillem de Montcada participated now and again in the political life of the comital palace and probably encouraged the introduction of his younger brothers there. In 1046 he subscribed a pious donation made by the count and countess.⁽³³⁾ He was present with his brother Berenguer Guillem, now archdeacon, in 1048 when witnesses gathered to make a sworn legal record of the last will and testament of Bernat Ermengol.⁽³⁴⁾ Further evidence of trust came in 1050, when Ramon Berenguer concluded an agreement with his brother Sanç. This convention was no doubt drawn up as an annex to Sanç's renunciation of his rights in the Penedes. In it Ramon Berenguer commended (made over as a vassal) two of his men to Sanç. One of these, Adalbert Guitard, the count commended with the honor (the holdings of lands, castles, rights, etc.) that he held from the count in the counties of Barcelona and Osona. The other man Sanç was left to choose from a list of six other vassals that included Ramon Guillem de Montcada.⁽³⁵⁾ Ramon Guillem's subscription followed closely that of the count in Ramon Berenguer's important convention with Ermengol of Urgell, which reaffirmed Ermengol's status as a "man" of the count of Barcelona.⁽³⁶⁾ And in 1054 Ramon Guillem, joined by two younger brothers, Renard Guillem⁽³⁷⁾ and Reambau Guillem, subscribed the donations offered by Count Guillem de Besalú as dowry for his projected marriage to Ramon Berenguer's sister-in-[17] law, Llúcia.⁽³⁸⁾ After the marriage proposal was dropped some time later, Ramon Guillem again was present to witness an end to the dispute this caused.⁽³⁹⁾

Ramon Guillem's appearances in the acts of Ramon Berenguer point to a bond of confidence and trust. The relationship became more formal in the early 1060s, when the count began a systematic process of purchasing major castles and returning them as feudal concessions. This new style of commendation was reflected in Ramon Guillem de Montcada's sale of his castle of Montcada to Ramon Berenguer in 1062.⁽⁴⁰⁾ The sale no doubt resembled many other such comital transactions that Ramon de Montcada and his younger brothers subscribed during this period.⁽⁴¹⁾ Thus as a family the Montcadas built an impressive record of attendance on the count during the years when Ramon Berenguer sealed pacts of vassalage with the most important barons of the land. Serving probably as counselors and companions, sometimes as arbiters or advocates, and when necessary as defenders of the count's person or property, these four Montcada brothers -- Ramon Guillem, Renard Guillem, Reambau Guillem, and Guillem Guillem -- alternately occupied what could almost be characterized as the "Montcada seat" in the count's suite, or retinue.⁽⁴²⁾ The four brothers, [18] generally appearing alone but occasionally together in twos or threes, subscribed fifteen comital acts of Ramon Berenguer in the period 1061-1067, visibly associating their names with his politics and contributing to the validation and public reception of each document.⁽⁴³⁾

The support of Ramon Guillem de Montcada, along with that of other magnates, played a significant role in the 1050s and early 1060s in Ramon Berenguer's effort to win acceptance of his political leadership by the castle lords of Catalonia. His success, facilitated by Ermessenda's death and by the neutralization of Mir Geribert, closed a period of embattled rule and gave him an opportunity to strengthen his political control over Catalonia's ruling class. His reforms included the creation of a privy council or group of intimate counselors -- of which Ramon Guillem de Montcada was not a part. The council, comprised instead of second-ranking barons, gave the count a body of advisers whose interests were not so sharply divided between the administration of large territorial lordships and the needs of the count. Among the members of this group were the newly designated seneschal, Guillem Ramon, and perhaps the younger brother of Ramon Guillem de Montcada, Renard Guillem de La Roca. Both appeared in comital charters during the last ten years of Ramon Berenguer's countship, and both were named by the count in 1076 as testamentary executors. The more prominent of the two was Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal.

The Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal who became part of the comital suite of Ramon Berenguer I in 1068 was a new figure in the court society of Barcelona; he was not the son of Ramon Guillem de Montcada, as most modern historians have assumed. He came instead from a second-ranking noble family whose ancestry is difficult to trace for lack of patrimonial identification, but [19] that may well have originated in the county of Girona.⁽⁴⁴⁾ Because so many scholars have accepted the genealogical conclusions of Rubió y Lluch, Miret y Sans, and their successors, it is appropriate to list the reasons that compel rejection of this "majority view":

1) Guillem Ramon [I] possessed no fiefs or allods known to have been held by any earlier member of the Montcada family. His will of 1120 mentions, in addition to fiefs held in the counties of Osona and Barcelona, possessions in Girona. The early Montcadas had no known links to Girona or to the seneschal's fiefs in the counties of Osona and Barcelona.

2) Guillem Ramon [I] elected the monastery of Santa Maria d'Amer (Girona) as burial site. Early Montcadas had relations with the monastery of Santa Maria de l'Estany, which was adjacent to their castle district of Muntanyola (Osona), and Berenguer Ramon de Montcada chose to be buried there.

3) Guillem Ramon [I] had two brothers, Arbert Ramon and Bernat Ramon. Neither bore the name Montcada, nor were they associated with any known eleventh-century Montcada possessions. Neither Guillem Ramon [I] nor his two brothers were ever identified as relatives of the Montcadas in documents or associated with transactions concerning their properties. By contrast, the La Roca lineage, founded by a younger son of Guillem de Montcada, was linked several times in documents of the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries to the Montcada family and its possessions.

4) Berenguer Ramon de Montcada had no direct heirs in 1101. At that time he reached an agreement with his cousins, Ramon Renard and Guillem Renard de La Roca, providing for their succession to the Montcada patrimony should he die without heirs. Had Guillem Ramon [I] been a Montcada (and, a fortiori, brother of Berenguer Ramon de Montcada), he would have had prior rights of succession to the Montcada patrimony. Moreover, he probably would have inherited the Montcada lordship circa 1080 (date of Ramon Guillem de Montcada's death). The fact that Berenguer Ramon de Montcada, who -- had been destined to become archdeacon of Barcelona, succeeded his father and a brother and not Guillem Ramon [I] makes it highly improbable that Guillem Ramon [I] was a son of Ramon Guillem de Montcada.

[20] 5)The solution adopted by some scholars to explain certain anomalies in the Montcada genealogy was to postulate a death for Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal circa 1099-1103. There is no evidence for his death and the supposed succession by sons named Guillem Ramon "de Montcada" and Arbert Ramon.

6) The genealogies advanced for the period 1080-1120 by previous historians attribute the Montcada patronymic to historical figures who were never called by that name in documents (e.g., Guillem Ramon "de Montcada"), hypothesize filiations that contradict customary name patterns, and invent individuals for which no corroborating evidence exists.

7) Historians have accepted the divorce of Guillem Ramon [II] Seneschal and Beatriu de Montcada as evidence of consanguinity. But the reasons for the divorce are not given in documents; and in any case, the Church in the 1130s no longer favored dissolution of otherwise canonical marriages on such grounds.⁽⁴⁵⁾

Ramon Berenguer's choice of a "new man" for the position of seneschal made good political sense in the late io6os. Because the count had recently overcome the resistance of members of the older aristocratic lineages to his exercise of superior comital rights over their lands, he needed now to secure the support of the vassals of those magnates. By winning the fidelity of the knights who controlled, for themselves and their lords, the castle districts of the land, Ramon Berenguer hoped to limit the power of the territorial magnates. This goal prompted him to appoint Guillem Ramon to a prestigious comital office in preference to the son of his former seneschal, Amat Eldric.

Amat Eldric was descended from a line of vicars in the county of Osona, north of Barcelona.⁽⁴⁶⁾ Political conservatism prevailed [21] in this region in the early eleventh century, and supporters of the comital house of Barcelona were numerous.⁽⁴⁷⁾ Amat Eldric had been named seneschal by Countess Ermessenda during the minority of Ramon Berenguer I. Ermessenda may have been prompted to institute the office by the defection from the comital palace of the viscount of Barcelona and other magnates, who after 1020 began to exploit the profits, power; and independence that their castles afforded them. By emulating the Carolingian practice in which seneschals were aristocrats rather than domestic servants,⁽⁴⁸⁾ Ermessenda created a reflection of that potestas regia to which she aspired.⁽⁴⁹⁾ This could be achieved better through the institution of a new office than through the promotion in status of palatine officials of traditionally minor distinction. For example, although the provost of the comital table, the butler; the constable, and the palace guard occasionally appeared in historical records, they left no evidence to suggest that they hailed from upper levels of the nobility.⁽⁵⁰⁾

Amat Eldric did, however, bring the honor of aristocracy to the new office.⁽⁵¹⁾ He performed his job of seconding the count's interests with devotion, even to the extent of incurring the wrath of the powerful rebel Mir Geribert.⁽⁵²⁾ Though he owed his charge as [22] seneschal to the initiative of the count's grandmother; and though he was probably at least twenty years the senior of Ramon Berenguer, Amat Eldric commanded the respect of the young count, who consented in 1055 to transfer the office to Ramon Mir d'Aguda, the seneschal's brother-in-law.⁽⁵³⁾ This arrangement, probably occasioned by the seneschal's advancing age, gave the seneschalcy to Ramon Mir in return for his undivided fealty and military aid in defense of the count's honor in both Christian and Muslim lands, for his service to the count and countess, and for his declaration of homage to Amat Eldric. Thus, twenty years or so after he had become seneschal, Amat Eldric might well have believed that he had succeeded in making a high comital office a hereditary fief. But future events would prove otherwise.

By the time the seneschalcy had been in the hands of Ramon Mir d'Aguda for slightly more than two years, Ramon Berenguer and his wife, Almodis, had some doubts about the situation, and late in 1057 they replaced the contract of succession with a new accord. This convention bound Ramon Mir to the terms of the prior agreement "as long as the aforesaid Ramon shall hold the said seneschalcy," but it placed on the commendation an expiration date two years thence. At that time the counts could dismiss Ramon Mir and reassign the office at their pleasure, or they could retain him on condition that he be "solid" -- Catalan terminology for liege homage -- and serve them as originally agreed. The counts concluded with a clause stating their right to recover the seneschalcy "at whatever time they shall want to, without the hindrance and ire of the aforesaid Ramon Mir or that of any man for him."⁽⁵⁴⁾ This cautious language was either already justified or prophetic, or both: within a year following the renewal Ramon Mir, called to account for disloyalty, risked losing his office.

The circumstances leading to Ramon Mir's renunciation of loyalty to the count and countess were not revealed in the record of his appearance before a tribunal of barons, but perhaps they were related to problems that arose during the expedition in fall [23] 1058 against the Saragossan ruler known as Alhagib.⁽⁵⁵⁾ In that campaign -- for which preparations were concluded in a convention of 5 September 1058 with Count Ermengol of Urgell⁽⁵⁶⁾ -- the unity of the comital forces was marred by the actions of an Arnau Mir who, among other things, attacked the Muslim leader after Ramon Berenguer had made his peace.⁽⁵⁷⁾ Perhaps in connection with these events, Ramon Mir "took anger in the host when they returned from the bank of the river Ebro."⁽⁵⁸⁾

This manifestation of anger was not taken lightly by Ramon Berenguer and Almodis, who summoned Ramon Mir to defend himself before eight judges or arbiters, five of whom they elected themselves.⁽⁵⁹⁾ Stating that Ramon Mir would lose his rights to the seneschalcy if he were found to have wrongly defied the counts (i.e., Ramon Berenguer and Almodis), the arbiters provided for two solutions to the conflict. Either the counts would accept Ramon Mir's oath that he had not intended to breach his fidelity and would receive his homage, or they could leave his fate to a trial by combat. Should his knight win, Ramon Mir would return to the homage and fidelity of the counts, recover the seneschalcy, and be liable only to make amends for the rancor of the counts. But should his knight lose, Ramon Mir would relinquish the seneschalcy and return all property given him by the counts.⁽⁶⁰⁾ Was Ramon Mir's fate determined by the prowess of an untried knight standing to battle with staff and shield? Though the sources are mute on the immediate sequel, it can be inferred from later documents that Ramon Mir's star quickly plummeted.⁽⁶¹⁾ Although he [24] retained the guardianship of Amat Eldric's minor son and widow, Ramon Mir withdrew from the count's entourage, as if in exile, for seven years.⁽⁶²⁾

The departure of Ramon Mir d'Aguda in the mid-1060s coincided with Ramon Berenguer's restructuring of the comital entourage, which resulted in the promotion of advisers more in tune with the count's thinking.⁽⁶³⁾ These advisers included Guillem Ramon [II, who in 1067 or 1068 received the vacant office of seneschal.⁽⁶⁴⁾ The appointment advanced the stature of a man whose qualifications for the office centered less on aristocratic heritage than on personal loyalty.⁽⁶⁵⁾ For it was personal loyalty that counted at this juncture, as Ramon Berenguer swept away the vestiges of the old-style comital court of the post-Carolingian era and broke ground for the formulation of a twelfth-century feudal monarchy.

The last decade of the countship of Ramon Berenguer marked a turning point in relations between the Montcadas and the count. Ramon Guillem de Montcada and his brothers, prominent among nobles who attended the recording of comital acts until 1066, nearly dropped from sight, as if Guillem Ramon Seneschal and his brothers, Arbert and Bernat, simply had taken their places. During [25] this period Ramon Guillem's name appeared on only two documents, both from 1072.⁽⁶⁶⁾ The names of his youngest brothers, Guillem Guillem and Reambau Guillem, did not appear again linked to the count's affairs. An explanation for these developments may be that, as Ramon Berenguer shifted his attention in the mid-1060s from confronting his barons to pursuing an expansionist policy in Languedoc and Roussillon and achieving administrative and legislative reforms, he found a smaller cadre of advisers more helpful than councils of magnates.⁽⁶⁷⁾ Perhaps as a result of these changes, Ramon Guillem de Montcada reduced his involvement at the comital palace and placed greater emphasis on exploiting his lordship. For Renard Guillem de la Roca, however -- who was a direct vassal of the count for one half of his castle at La Roca -- these changes were a signal to involve himself more intimately with the count's concerns.

When Count Ramon Berenguer named the executors of his will, Guillem Ramon Seneschal and Renard Guillem de La Roca were among the eleven chosen. They faced a difficult task in trying to implement the will because smooth succession to the comital inheritance depended upon an amiable accommodation of the co-heirs, Ramon Berenguer II (Cap d'Estopes) and Berenguer Ramon II (later El Fratricida). Rancor prevailed in the negotiations, and Berenguer Ramon, who felt that his brother's hand was heavier than his own, called for a division of the inheritance.⁽⁶⁸⁾ But concessions by the Cap d'Estopes did not avert a confrontation, and by 1080 at the latest, though probably earlier; Guillem Ramon Seneschal and Renard Guillem de La Roca, whether by personal disposition or as a result of numerous divisions of Ramon Berenguer I's honor; were committed to the Cap d'Estopes, who listed them as two of his "ten best men." Ramon Berenguer II offered these men to his brother Berenguer Ramon II as guarantors [26] for his accepting the terms of a further division of their father's legacy. It was stipulated that unless Ramon Berenguer provided four mutually agreeable arbiters within forty days to judge his brother's complaints, the ten men were to be released to Berenguer Ramon.⁽⁶⁹⁾

Though no document attests to the implementation of these provisions, there is evidence of continued partisanship by the Cap d'Estopes and his supporters. For it was also in this period that Ramon Berenguer commended Renard Guillem, along with the castle of Font Rubí, to Bernat Guillem de Queralt so that Bernat Guillem would be "solid" and "faithful" to him, his countess, and their mennada. In this convention Bernat Guillem, obviously the object of partisan recruitment, promised not to acquire any honor from another count or countess without Ramon Berenguer's consent.⁽⁷⁰⁾

In the last two years of Count Ramon Berenguer's life, the solidarity of Guillem Ramon Seneschal, Renard Guillem de La Roca, and the count's other vassals was probably never tested by any open resistance from lierenguer Ramon. Their solidarity did not become crucial until Berenguer Ramon sought a permanent solution for the conflict with his brother by having him murdered.⁽⁷¹⁾ The dead count's men were slow to orchestrate their efforts, but they eventually managed to challenge Berenguer Ramon's assumption of undivided authority.

The reaction of Guillem Ramon Seneschal was immediate. With his friend Mir Foguet, he turned to the bishop of Vic, Berenguer Seniofred de Lluçà, who granted to them and to Guillem Ramon's brother Arbert the churches of Orís and Besora and two-thirds of the church of Sant Pere de Torelló. In return, Mir Foguet promised to aid the bishop with his knights in military campaigns and expeditions, agreeing that if he himself did not participate, either Guillem Ramón or his brother would perform the service. The transaction was completed with Mir Fouget's transfer of property to the See of Sant Pere and an additional promise to defend the bishop's honor against anyone.⁽⁷²⁾ Guillem Ramon, in a separate [27] oath that probably dates from this period, swore to be faithful "as a man should be to his good lord," not to betray the bishop in body or property, and to aid him in defense and war against anyone who might attack his person or property.⁽⁷³⁾ The agreement clearly indicates that Guillem Ramon was master of his own movements, and that support for men closely identified with the slain -- count was readily available.

In fact, the situation did not turn out well for Berenguer Ramon, who found it hard to consolidate political power in a land thrown into confusion after the death of the Cap d'Estopes.⁽⁷⁴⁾ No one opposed Guillem Ramon and Arbert, less than two months after the fratricide, when they lent the sizable sum of 1,000 mancusos of gold to the widowed Countess Mahalta.⁽⁷⁵⁾ They received as collateral the comital tenths, usages, and services that she and her son, the infant Ramon Berenguer III, levied in the nominally free peasant holdings of the seneschal's castle district of Sentmenat.⁽⁷⁶⁾ The loan confirmed the brothers' commitment to the party of the Cap d'Estopes, which in the aftermath of the murder directed its loyalty toward Mahalta and the recently born male heir.

The first objective of the slain count's followers was to revenge his death. This led to an agreement by 1084 with Count Guillem of Cerdanya, who pledged to help the Ramondine party avenge by war "the unjust and iniquitous death" of their count in return for a promise to invest Count Guillem with Berenguer Ramon's inheritance once he had defeated the foe. As part of the pact, Guillem received the guardianship of Mahalta, of Ramon Berenguer III, and of the noble men of Barcelona and "all other groups of inhabitants who were or ought to be from the honor of Count Ramon."⁽⁷⁷⁾ This blend of interests, so potentially dangerous to the future of the Barcelona line of counts,⁽⁷⁸⁾ soon lost its appeal, perhaps from lack of [28] action by Count Guillem or perhaps from waning interest on the part of its chief instigator, Ramon Folc de Cardona.⁽⁷⁹⁾

Within two years a new strategy had been adopted by the Ramondine party, now led in part by Guillem Ramon Seneschal. As a result of negotiations with El Fratricida -- concluded by Guillem Ramon; Ponç and his son Guerau Ponç, viscounts of Girona; and Berenguer Seniofred, the bishop of Vic and a party to the first arrangement -- a compromise was reached in 1086 whereby Berenguer Ramon was named guardian of his nephew's honor for the next eleven years.⁽⁸⁰⁾ The vassals of the Cap d'Estopes pledged to perform military and other services for Berenguer Ramon "just as the count ever had and just as a man should do for his best lord." The path to this reconciliation was probably cleared by the marriage of Countess Mahalta to Aimeri I, viscount of Narbonne.⁽⁸¹⁾ Count Berenguer Ramon, for his part, issued a companion convention reiterating the conditions of the first  one.⁽⁸²⁾ This rapprochement benefited both the partisans of Ramon Berenguer and El Fratricida, for it gave him the security he needed after three and a half years of uncertainty to continue his war with the Muslim governors on Catalonia's southern flank. At the same time it enabled Ramon Berenguer's men to pursue their own affairs more normally.

The political crisis that erupted after Ramon Berenguer II's death proved beneficial in the long run to Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal, who during this period laid the foundation for the future Montcada lordship in Vic. His involvement in Osona was first recorded a month after the fratricide, when Bishop Berenguer gave [29] him in fief churches in the -- patrimony that had belonged to the first seneschal of Barcelona.⁽⁸³⁾ This enfeoffment inaugurated a political alliance between the pair that was reaffirmed following the death of Pere Amat in 1088, when the bishop transferred to Guillem Ramon the castles of Orís, Voltrega, and Solterra, formerly held by Amat Eldric's son.⁽⁸⁴⁾ Guillem Ramon thus received lordships associated with the office of seneschal from the bishop of Vic, who had held them in place of the count since 1058 or 1059.⁽⁸⁵⁾ The grants did not yet give Guillem Ramon a lordship in Vic, but it did contain an offer to enfeoff him with the "comital tower" of Vic if he would first obtain approval from the count. The approval was apparently forthcoming, perhaps after the compromise of 1086 with El Fratricida, for within a few years the door was opened for a further extension of Guillem Ramon's lordship rights within the city. He was installed as lord in a castle that had once served as the residence in Vic of the viscounts of Osona.⁽⁸⁶⁾

Guillem Ramon would naturally have sought to associate to his lordship the rights of secular authority that earlier in the eleventh century had merged with those traditionally held by bishops in Vic, when one individual bore both the miter and the vicecomital title.⁽⁸⁷⁾ This ambition could hardly have been encouraged by Bishop Berenguer, however; who saw the seneschal more as a protector and vassal of the church than as a political rival. From the episcopal point of view, the lordship of the city was a joint domain of the count and the bishop. This notion derived both from early royal privileges and from eleventh-century comital concessions to episcopal authority.⁽⁸⁸⁾ It was one step removed from the [30] idea that all power lay in the hands of the count, who was recognized as the secular lord of both county and bishopric.⁽⁸⁹⁾ But as political theory its days were numbered. With the introduction of secular lords other than the count to the city's administration, bishops would find maintaining their authority more difficult. The outcome, in the case of Vic, would be a division of power.⁽⁹⁰⁾

Whether as a result of further episcopal grants of castles or from an earlier commendation, by May 1089 Guillem Ramon and Arbert, with Mir Foguet, were exercising rights of lordship over the nearby castle of Besora.⁽⁹¹⁾ It is likely that the seneschal obtained the lordship of the comital tower in Vic around this time. This tower, eventually rechristened the "Montcada castle," became symbolic of the success with which the seneschal and his heirs vied with bishops for lordship in the city.⁽⁹²⁾ The earliest evidence for an increase in the seneschal's authority, however; came in 1104, when it was recorded that Guillem Ramon Dapifer (another term meaning seneschal) won market rights in the upper part of Vic near the castle.⁽⁹³⁾ Having demanded these rights unsuccessfully from Archbishop Berenguer;⁽⁹⁴⁾ Guillem Ramon obtained from Bishop Arnau the reluctant donation of the leudes and dragma arising from the [31] Quintana in Vic.⁽⁹⁵⁾ The rights, which pertained to the dominicatura (lordship) of the See of Sant Pere, were granted only when Guillem Ramon promised to be "most faithful" to Sant Pere, to the cathedral canons, and to the inhabitants of Vic in all rights that he held or would acquire in the future. Guillem Ramon acknowledged, moreover, that he would retain these rights only during his lifetime, and he agreed to subinfeudate them only to a resident of the city who was not a knight. Finally, he pledged to God, Sant Pere, and all clerics in the canonry that he would aid them in defending all of their honor through justice; and he gave up all the rents that his ancestors had drawn from lands belonging to the canons or that he had justly or unjustly taken from properties left to Sant Pere by clerics.⁽⁹⁶⁾

Guillem Ramon's gain of the market and coinage rights of the Quintana promised a greater role for his heirs in the lordship of Vic but does not prove that at this date the seneschal was co-lord of the city with the bishop.⁽⁹⁷⁾ Rather; it implies that the efforts of Berenguer Seniofred de Lluçà to create an alliance between the See of Vic and Guillem Ramon had been successful, and on terms that benefited both. Although the seneschal had improved his position [32] in Vic, the grant of these fiscal rights had not altered his relation to the see, which was a feudal alliance based more on the holding of lordship around Vic than within it. Guillem Ramon, invested by 1100 with the castles of Voltregà, Orís, Solterra, and Besora, added before his death (circa 1120) those of Malla and Tord.⁽⁹⁸⁾ He had become, thanks largely to Bishop Berenguer; a formidable member of the Osona political scene.

The bishop of Vic did not hesitate to ask Guillem Ramon for iaid in return. In the early twelfth century, the bishop found both the material and moral foundations of his authority under attack.⁽⁹⁹⁾ The extent of his troubles is revealed by a list of grievances compiled between 1091 and 1099. This document contained nine specific accusations against individuals who had stolen property or rights belonging to the see, the most spectacular of which was the castle of Montbui, which had belonged to the bishop. It also alleged that certain priests and clerics had purchased ecclesiastical honors or held capellanie (income from a church benefice) from lay persons, and that knights had held for their own benefit property that rightly belonged to the church. There were charges of sacrilege in the see, and of breaking the truce of God, as well as complaints about immorality and promiscuity. Finally, the document cited the misdeeds of an archdeacon and threatened a cleric who had left one church for another with interdiction from divine office and from entry into any church if he did not return to his former parish.⁽¹⁰⁰⁾ In the face of these troubles, Bishop Berenguer turned to Guillem Ramon for assistance.

Though it is impossible to know how great a role the seneschal played in creating conditions ofjustice, the fact of his participation in legal proceedings is established. At least twice during this period Guillem Ramon appeared with the bishop, the first time with his brother Arbert as judge in the trial of Pere Ramon de Tous.⁽¹⁰¹⁾[33] The second instance was again with Arbert, at a public proceeding in Vic in which Guilia, the widow of Pere Amat d'Orís-Manlleu, returned to the see the property that had been the cause of her excommunication.⁽¹⁰²⁾ These appearances attested to the growing influence of the seneschal in the lordship of Vic and foreshadowed an increased political role there for his heirs, as episcopal power in the city and county continued to erode during the twelfth century.

When young Ramon Berenguer III began to rule as count of Barcelona in 1096 or 1097, he naturally welcomed to his household the seneschal who had served his father faithfully and had protected him in his infancy. From a cadet branch of the Montcada lineage he called upon Ramon Renard de La Roca and his brother Guillem -- sons of Renard Guillem de La Roca -- who also became mainstays in his entourage. This group, which included other barons who had upheld Ramon Berenguer's rights to succession even while helping to implement the compromise of 1086, thus retained political continuity with the past. Would these men of a former era attempt to maintain the policies of the previous period? Or would they be led by the young count in a new direction?

Certainly the problems that Berenguer Ramon II had faced were not resolved by his departure in 1096 or 1097. For nearly a century Catalan counts had promoted Christian settlement in the south and asserted political leadership over satellite Muslim rulers who paid tribute in gold. But recently the frontier between the two cultures had so narrowed that further expansion of settlement became problematical. At the same time, the intervention of the Cid in Valencia had frustrated Berenguer Ramon's political objectives with neighboring Muslim leaders. On a quite different front, relations between Catalonia and Rome had recently become strained over the attempt by Abbot Frotard of Saint Pons de Thomières to gain control over the Benedictine monasteries of Sant Cugat del Valles and Sant Llorenç del Munt. This episode, which arose both as a natural outgrowth of the reform of the Catalan [34] church and from the inherent weakness of Berenguer Ramon, struck at the heart, of episcopal and comital control of Barcelona church affairs. A third problem concerned the role of the Catalan count in the Pyrenees and Languedoc. This matter had been left in abeyance since the fratricide, when Bernat Ató de Beziers had forced the residents of Carcassonne to acknowledge his lordship, to the detriment of Barcelona's influence there.

Three major challenges thus faced Ramon Berenguer III and his counselors. These challenges were met aggressively in the next two decades, as the count consolidated his power. In this period the groundwork was also laid for more tangible achievements in the latter half of Ramon Berenguer III's countship and in that of his son.

Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal was an early supporter of Ramon Berenguer's policies in the Pyrenees and Languedoc. Ample evidence for this is found in subscriptions to comital acts in the early years of the twelfth century. In 1108, when Ramon Berenguer gave his daughter in marriage to Bernat of Besalú, Guillem Ramon's subscription appeared right after that of the count.⁽¹⁰³⁾ A few days later the seneschal subscribed charters recording Bernat of Besalú's bequest of his county to Ramon Berenguer in case he (Bernat) should die without heirs, as well as an exchange of oaths of fidelity.⁽¹⁰⁴⁾ In I 112 Guillem Ramon, together with Ramon Renard and Guillem Renard de La Roca, appeared on behalf of Ramon Berenguer at a placitum (settlement of legal questions) brought by the count against Bernat Ató de Béziers, and at Ramon Berenguer's renunciation of his possession of Carcassonne and the Razes.⁽¹⁰⁵⁾ Guillem Ramon also subscribed numerous other acts of Ramon Berenguer; especially grants of castles to members of the comitor class of feudal lords.⁽¹⁰⁶⁾ In one instance the seneschal, again with [35] Ramon Renard de La Roca and his brother Guillem, subscribed documents that recorded the count's restoration in 1114 of "power" (control) over the castle of Arraona and his termination of quarrels with Ricard Guillem.⁽¹⁰⁷⁾ In another; he witnessed a renewal of fidelity by Dalmau to the count for the castle of Begur.⁽¹⁰⁸⁾ These subscriptions, in addition to those on three documents (of 1101, 1105, and 1109) by which Ramon Berenguer sold or pledged property to raise money,⁽¹⁰⁹⁾ show that Guillem Ramon was an active member of the count's inner circle.

The venerable seneschal, by now at the height of his career; engaged in his final major campaign when hejoined Ramon Berenguer's attack on the Balearic islands. The pope had already blessed an assault by the Pisans, who, like most Christians located along the Mediterranean, chafed under relentless Muslim piracy from these isles. The retaliatory raids turned into a full-scale expedition once Ramon Berenguer and his men had been enrolled. The participation of all the knights named by Tomic in his Histories is unlikely if not impossible.⁽¹¹⁰⁾ But the tradition of a distinguished role by Guillem Ramon Dapifer; as reported by Zurita,⁽¹¹¹⁾ is at least partially confirmed by his presence at the act of alliance and friendship concluded by the count with the Pisans in autumn 1113 at Sant Feliu de Guíxols.⁽¹¹²⁾

Another early contributor to the count's efforts to address the unfinished business of Berenguer Ramon II was Ramon Renard de La Roca, son of Renard Guillem de La Roca and grandson of Guillem de Montcada [I]. As early as January 1097 he subscribed the count's enfeoffment of the castles of Amposta, Granyena, and [36] Tàrrega to Count Artaú of Pallars.⁽¹¹³⁾ He and his brother Guillem, as members of Ramon Berenguer's mennada, pledged to help recover Tarragona for Archbishop Berenguer.⁽¹¹⁴⁾ In connection with these efforts, Ramon Renard also subscribed, with his cousin Berenguer Ramon de Montcada, the count's pledge of four mills to Sant Cugat -- for which the monastery gave him forty pounds of silver "on account of necessity [caused] by the Saracens and for the defense of the Christians to construct a castle in the place called Amposta."⁽¹¹⁵⁾ The same subscribers appeared again in early 1098, this time with Guillem Ramon Seneschal, when the count, in a political move directed against Gallic influence in Catalonia, confirmed Sant Cugat's title to the monastery of Sant Llorenç del Munt.⁽¹¹⁶⁾

Alone among the descendants of the first Montcadas, Ramon Renard and Guillem Renard de La Roca regularly supported Count Ramon Berenguer III in his early twelfth century efforts to control magnate holders of fiefs and honors. Thus in 1106 Guillem Renard appeared as a signatory to the convention and oath of Guerau Ponç, viscount of Girona, to Ramon Berenguer.⁽¹¹⁷⁾ In 1110 he signed the convention by which the count commended the castle of Casteil Veil of Barcelona to Guilabert Udalard.⁽¹¹⁸⁾ Both brothers subscribed the voluntary renunciation in 1111 by Bernat of Besalú of his castles and honors of Besalú, Vallespir, and Fenouillèdes to the count of Barcelona.⁽¹¹⁹⁾ Both also subscribed a convention between Jordà de Sant Martí and Ramon Berenguer concerning the viscounty of Barcelona.⁽¹²⁰⁾ In 1111 Ramon Renard and Guillem Renard were present when Ramon Berenguer and his mother Mahalta settled disputes with a certain Garsendis and her sons.⁽¹²¹⁾ But the La Rocas also had a special role in the comital administration: they assumed their new function around March 1113, when the count enfeoffed them with all or part of the castle of Castel Veil of Barcelona and made Guillem Renard the vicar of Barcelona.⁽¹²²⁾

[37] The count's reassignment of the Castell Vell ended a long dispute that had focused on the refusal of Berenguer Ramon de Castellet, the former vicar of Barcelona, to bring certain persons to justice. Divested of his honor by the count, Berenguer Ramon de Castellet and his men had rebelled. When the war went badly for him, he decided to give himself up and settle on the count's terms. The terms included the institution of Ramon Renard and Guillem Renard as his immediate lords in the Castell Vell, and the temporary exercise of his vicar's office by Guillem Renard.⁽¹²³⁾ In his new role, Guillem Renard renounced to the bishop of Barcelona a one-third share in the leudes which "certain vicars have wrongly appropriated."⁽¹²⁴⁾ Guillem Renard's tenure in the office of vicar was short-lived, however; within a few years it was again in the hands of Berenguer Ramon de Castellet.

Both Guillem Renard and Ramon Renard de La Roca continued to serve Ramon Berenguer during the second half of his countship (1115-1131). In this period of stalemates on the frontiers with Islam, steps were taken to reaffirm the 'position of the counts of Barcelona as leaders of the Catalan nobility. These steps included formulating the bulk of the feudal code, which later became known as the Usatges of Barcelona, and securing guarantees of fidelity to the count from both magnates and second-ranking castle holders.⁽¹²⁵⁾ A modest castle lord was Bernat Berenguer; who became Ramon Renard's "solid man" in 1124. In return Ramon Renard granted him the count's castle of Font Rubí. Their pact stipulated that Bernat Berenguer should join Ramon Renard's son or the count or Berenguer de Queralt in military expeditions if Ramon Renard could not go personally and ordered him to participate.⁽¹²⁶⁾ Further evidence of a bond of trust between the La Rocas and the count is Ramon Berenguer's grant to Ramon and his son of the honor of Castell Nou of Barcelona.⁽¹²⁷⁾ Ramon Renard [38] also assumed, with other members of the comital curia, the role of judge in cases brought by nobles before the count.⁽¹²⁸⁾ He was named testamentary executor by Ramon Berenguer III,⁽¹²⁹⁾ and his subscription appeared on a significant number of comital acts of the period.⁽¹³⁰⁾

Despite his closeness to two counts, Ramon Renard remained a baron of second rank as the end of his career approached in the 1140s.⁽¹³¹⁾ He was endowed with an assortment of castles and fiefs held in homage from the count of Barcelona, but he did not control an important territorial lordship, as did many descendants of eleventh-century viscounts or vicars. Though he had married a widow of independent means by 1109, Ramon Renard could hope to pass on to his son, Ramon, a heritage of only moderate political and economic importance.⁽¹³²⁾ But by the time of his death in the 1140s Ramon Renard's son had faded from the scene. The new heir was his son-in-law, Pere Bertran de Bell-lloc, perhaps a vassal from the Valles castle of Bell-lloc near La Roca.⁽¹³³⁾ It was he who around mid-century became vassal to both Count Ramon Berenguer IV and to Guillem Ramon [II] Seneschal, who was heir to the [39] patrimony of Ramon Renard de La Roca's first cousin, Berenguer Ramon de Montcada.

Unlike his cousins Ramon Renard and Guillem, Berenguer Ramon de Montcada, a territorial lord since 1085 through the death of his brother;⁽¹³⁴⁾ stood aloof from comital affairs. He appeared in the entourage of Ramon Berenguer III only when its business concerned the monastery of Sant Cugat del Valles. A signatory to the pledge of four mills by Ramon Berenguer to Sant Cugat in January 1097, he was also present, this time with Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal and the La Roca brothers, when the count confirmed Sant Cugat's title to the monastery of Sant Llorenç del Munt in 1098.⁽¹³⁵⁾ A year and a half later, when the persistent claims of Abbot Frotard at the monastery of Saint Pons de Thomières necessitated restatement of the comital position concerning the two Benedictine monasteries, Berenguer Ramon subscribed the count's donation of the monastery of Sant Llorenç to Sant Cugat. The donor specifically repudiated a former gift by Berenguer Ramon II to the abbot of Thomieres because it had been made after the fratricide.⁽¹³⁶⁾ Finally, in 1108, Berenguer Ramon de Montcada and "Guillem Ramon" (the seneschal?) witnessed a judgment in which Arnau, the bishop of Vic, declared that rights to the monastery of Santa Cecilia de Montserrat belonged to the monastery of Sant Cugat.⁽¹³⁷⁾

[40] What made Berenguer Ramon de Montcada follow so closely the affairs of Barcelona's foremost monastic establishment? One could surmise that his past associations with Barcelona churchmen played a part, or that he sided with Sant Cugat against the Gallo-papal reform structure. The deciding factor, however, was probably his position as lord of the Montcada patrimony, whose geographical limits embraced Sant Cugat, as well as Sant Llorenç del Munt. Because this made the abbot a lord within the Montcada lordship districts, Berenguer Ramon would have taken a keen interest in the affairs of the monastery.

This interest could have provided grist for many jurisdictional conflicts. Yet skirmishes between Berenguer Ramon and the abbot remained remarkably few. To credit this tranquillity to the continuation of joint comital-episcopal control over the monastery would be to exceed the evidence, though that explanation is attractive. In any case, only one dispute between the abbot and the lord of Montcada has been recorded during this period, and it ended peacefully when Berenguer Ramon renounced his right to levy a tax on property bequeathed to Sant Cugat.⁽¹³⁸⁾ These contacts with the monastery provide the sole documentation for the public activities of Berenguer Ramon, whose few recorded initiatives concerned the Montcada patrimony. One of these initiatives was undertaken to secure a successor to that heritage.

As early as 1101, Berenguer Ramon de Montcada had considered the matter of succession and had designated his cousins Ramon Renard and Guillem Renard de La Roca as heirs to his fiefs should he die without a legitimate heir.⁽¹³⁹⁾ But this pact had been superseded by 1117, when Berenguer Ramon arranged the marriage of his daughter Beatriu to Guillem Ramon [II] Seneschal, the son of Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal.⁽¹⁴⁰⁾

What developments prompted this marriage? First, the birth to Berenguer Ramon and his wife, Ermessenda, of a daughter, Beatriu, assured the lord of Montcada at least one heir. To be sure, Berenguer Ramon could have betrothed this child to her first cousin once removed, Ramon Renard de La Roca; but he may have been deterred by canonical prohibitions against consanguineous [41] marriages. This option was closed to Berenguer by 1109 at the latest, when Solasten began to appear in documents as Ramon Renard's wife. Another solution to the succession became imperative, and Berenguer Ramon turned to the young son of the seneschal, whose lordship of the castle of Sentmenat gave him a foothold of power near the Montcada patrimony.

This marriage to Beatriu was a major turning point for future Montcada descendants, who would inherit the combined resources of two locally important patrimonies. But it also presented a challenge to Beatriu's husband: could Guillem Ramon [II] Seneschal avoid the potential for conflict with the count that was inherent in his dual role as seneschal and territorial lord? Over the course of his career he managed to do so, thus earning the sobriquet of nineteenth-century historians, the Great Seneschal.⁽¹⁴¹⁾

1. The early history of Catalonia has been described by Pierre Bonnassie in Catalogne, vol. 1, esp. chs. 1-6. For an account of the rule of Ramon Borrell, see Santiago Sobrequés Vidal, Els grans comtes de Barcelona, 2nd ed. (Barcelona, 1970), pp. 15-34.

2. For the social status of vicars, see Catalogne, p. 288. Antoni Pladevall i Font has speculated that Guillem's father may have been viscount of Girona (Els castells catalans, 6 vols. [Barcelona, 1968-79], 4: 820). Seniofred, the name occasionally used as a patronymic by Bernat Ruvira, a brother of the first Montcada, was almost certainly Guillem's father. Extant documentation does not permit the sure identification of this figure, who probably died around 1002, the date of the first appearance of his son and principal(?) heir, Guillem.

3. The term "best men" refers to the count's entourage by the time of Count Ramon Berenguer at the latest. In this context it refers to knights drawn primarily from second-ranking noble families. These figures were the successors to palatine personnel who as late as the first quarter of the eleventh century bore such titles as "butler" and "provost of the count's table."

4. Antoni Pladevall i Font, "Els origens de la familia Montcada," in Ausa (1968-71), 6:311. In this article Pladevall identifies as the same person Guillem "de Vacarisses," Guillem "de Muntanyola," and Guillem "de Montcada."

5. See the discussion of vicars in Catalogne, p. 286.

6. Pasqual, "Sacra," 3:15. Guillem's brother Ramon Archdeacon was also present.

7. Bernat Ruvira, also known as Bernat Seniofred, appeared as a "bonus homo" in 1006 (ACB Lib. ant. 3:27v-28r:79 [Mas 9:105:247] and with the count in 1013 (ACA R Borrell: 104; ACA S. Llorenç:65).

8. The precise date of the count's death is unknown. Antoni Pladevall i Font (Ermessenda de Carcassona: Comtessa de Barcelona, Girona i d'Osona [Barcelona, 1975], p. 38 and n. 52) suggests that he died on 8 Sept. 1017 on his return to Barcelona from a campaign to Cordova, but the date must be moved up to at least 5 Oct. 1017, when the count appeared in a purchase with the countess. He had probably died by 11 Oct. 1017, however, when Ermessenda appeared with her son Berenguer "marchio comes Barchinone" (CSC 2:119-20:470).

9. Próspero de Bofarull y Mascaró, Los condes de Barcelona vindicados, 2 vols. (Barcelona, 1836), 1:231, and Pladevall, Ermessenda, pp. 40, 59.

10. Bernat's identity as an executor is revealed in a document of 1034 (ACV C.6:2147).

11. The primatus named were: Gombau de Besora; Hug de Cervelló; Amat, viscount of Girona; Ot d'Aguda; Gual, "preposito comitalis mense"; Seniofred; and (another) Bernat (ACB Lib. ant. 1:151:396 [Mas 9:176:389]).

12. Pladevall, Ermessenda, p. 48: "La presència abassegadora de la seva mare, tan avesada al govern dels comtats, devia tot seguit fer nosa al jove comte, i per aixè no tardaren en esclatar les tivantors entre mare i fill."

13. LFM I:232-33:223.

14. The document, ACV C.9 Eps. 2:33, is described by Pladevall in "Origens," p. 311.

15. MH 1035-37:195.

16. CSC 2:146-48:496.

17. The approximate date can be estimated from the years in which Guillem's eldest son first became active. The name of Ramon, "proles Guilelmi de Monte catani," who was perhaps then about twenty, appears with other court notables in a donation of Ramon Berenguer I and Ermessenda to the See of Barcelona on 12 Aug. 1046 (ACB Lib. ant. 1:4r-5r:5 [Mas 9:272:586]). Had Ramon been only sixteen, for example, his birth would have occurred in 1030, leaving only ten years for Adelaida to bear the other five Montcada sons and at least one daughter who survived to adult age, in addition to other children who miscarried or died in infancy. For these reasons a marriage date in the mid-1020s seems probable.

18. The patrimony included the castle district of Castellar, sold by Senegundis and her son Isnart and two daughters in 1017 to Count Ramon Borrell (ACA S. Llorenç :74), and the castles and districts of Esparraguera, Ullastrell, and Terrassa (Mondéjar, "Historia," 72v-73r).

19. José E. Ruiz Domènec (in a paper entitled "Sistemas de filiación y teoría de la alianza en la sociedad catalana," read on 5 July 1977 at a Cursillo of the Instituto Universitario de Estudios Medievales in Barcelona) theorized that nobles' daughters frequently married men a step lower in social rank than they.

20. Guillem was granted the castle between 1022, when his name was recorded as Guillem "de Muntanyola," and 1032, when, as witness to a comital donation, his name was written as Guillem "Monte catano" (LFM 1:232-33:223 and ACA S. Llorenç: 105).

21. Bofarull, Condes, 1:215.

22. See Catalogne, pp. 539-74.

23. CSC 2:165-66:512 and 2:180-83:527.

24. ACA S. Llorenç: 105.

25. See CSC 2:203-06:545 for a concord of 1037 attended by Guillem's brother, Ramon Archdeacon; and Pladevall, Ermessenda, p. 56, for the recopying in Vic of Ramon Borrell's will and for the consecrations of the cathedrals of Vic and Girona in 1038.

26. Bofarull, Condes, 2:8.

27. ACA s.f. RB I:1; LFM 1:141-42:146.

28. On conventions see Pierre Bonnassie, "Les conventions féodales dans la Catalogne du XI^e siècle," in Les structures sociales de l'Aquitaine, du Languedoc et de l'Espagne au premier âge féodal (Paris, 1969), pp. 187-208.

29. See Catalogne, pp. 637-38. The campaign against Ramon Guifred and the Muslims occurred between June 1043, the date by which Ramon Berenguer apparently was reconciled with Ermessenda (ibid., p. 638 and n. 70), and June 1044, the date of an act of the counts subscribed by Udalard II (ACV C.6:974).

30. The others were Amat Eldric, Mir Guifred, Gerbert Mir, and Berenguer Ramon.

31. Accounts of ACA s.f. RB I:391 are in Bofarull, Condes, 2:16; Sobrequés. Grans comtes, p. 60; and Catalogne, pp. 638-39.

32. ACA s.f. RB I:39².

33. ACB Lib. ant. 1:4r-5r:5 (Mas 9:272:586).

34. ACA RB I:96.

35. ACA RB I:110. Both this document and the renunciation were made on the fifth of the ides of June in the nineteenth year of King Henry, or 9 June 1050. The year was mistakenly given as 1049 in the printed edition of the LFM.

36. ACA RB I:120; described in Bofarull, Condes, 2:27-28.

37. Renard Guillem had probably begun serving the count before this. At a point before 1052/53 (date of the first judgment against Mir Geribert), Renard Guillem, perhaps on a mission from the count, had an encounter with the rebellious magnate who committed "mala et onta" toward him. An account of the incident is in ACA s.f. RB 1:38 (published by Francesch Carreras y Candi in "Lo Montjuích de Barcelona," MRABLB [1903], 8:403-13:19).

38. ACA RB I:156, 157.

39. ACA s.f. RB I:5.

40. The document recording this sale has been lost, though its earlier existence in the "royal archive of Barcelona" (ACA) was attested in the eighteenth century by the Marqués de Mondéjar, who also noted Ramon Guillem's subscription on a similar sale that year by Arnau Mir de Sant Martí. See Mondéjar, "Historia," f°76v.

41. Besides Renard Guillem de La Roca, the brothers included Reambau Guillem and Guillem Guillem de Montcada. The first mention of Guillem Guillem came in a convention of Ramon Berenguer I in 1058 (ACA RB I:225). The only extant eleventh-century Montcada oath of fidelity to the count was made by Guillem Guillem between 1052 and 1071 (ACA s.f. RB I:121).

42. The existence at this time of a comital curia, like that later developed by Ramon Berenguer III, is doubtful. Fernando Valls Taberner ("La cour comtale barcelonaise," in Obras selectas de Fernando Valls Taberner, 2 [Madrid-Barcelona, 1954], pp. 258-75), believed that Ramon Berenguer I's court was an imitation of the Capetian court reduced in scale. Though the analogy may be useful, Valls Taberner's conclusions are probably overdrawn. In fact, the comital "court" of Ramon Berenguer I varied in composition and purpose; see Catalogue, p. 709.

43. ACA RB I:268, 279, 287, 297, 298, 299, 308, 320, 321, 326, 331, 353, 358; ACA chancellery transcriptions, RB I, ed. Ribera: 2:415-17; ACV Lib. dot. 137v-138 r.

44. See ch. 2.

45. Although these reasons are not proofs in the formal sense, they do give greater verisimilitude to the hypothesis of two separate lineages -- a hypothesis that has the advantage of not being contradicted by any known facts.

46. On Amat Eldric, see Antoni Pladevall i Font, "Els senescals dels comtes de Barcelona durant el segle XI," in Anuario de estudios medievales (1966), 3:111-21.

47. See Catalogne, pp. 632-35.

48. The seneschal Alard, e.g., who played an influential role in the courts of Louis the Pious, Charles the Bald, and Lothair was a nephew of Odo, count of Orléans. See Ferdinand Lot, "Note sur le sénéchal Alard," in Le moyen âge (1908), 21:185-201.

49. Pladevall, Ermessenda, p. 59.

50. This is not to maintain, as does Bonnassie (Catalogne, p. 286 and n., 130), that they were mere domestic servants. The subscriptions of Gual, provost of the comital table, and Borrell, butler, which appear with those of three nobles in ajudicial sentence of 1013 (ACA R Borrell:104), as well as the qualification with other nobles of Gual as a primatus of the palace (ES 29:461), suggest a higher social status.

51. The exact duties of the seneschal are difficult to discern. Later French tradition, reflected in Zurita's description of the office (Anales, I:101) and in Pladevall's discussion ("Senescals," pp. 115-16), mayor may not be accurate for mid eleventh-century Catalonia.

52. Sobrequés, Grans comtes, p. 64: "[Mir Geribert i els seus fills] depredaven reiteradament els béns dels súbdits fidels del comte, especialment els del senescal Amat Eldric (jutge del tribunal de 1052), i de Ramon Guifred, les cases dels quals enderrocaren..."

53. Pladevall, "Senescals," pp. 116-17, and ACA RB I:174. Pladevall (ibid., p. 127, doc. i), misreading the year of King Henry's reign (xxi for xxv), dated the document in 1051. The event is also noted by Zurita in Anales, I :100.

54. ACA RB I:214. Published by Pladevall, "Senescals," p. 128, with the incorrect date of 1058.

55. This is the Christians' name for al-Muqtadir of Saragossa (Sobrequés, Grans comtes, p. 70).

56. LFM I:144-46: 148. The document is discussed in Bofarull, Condes, 2:78 and in Catalogne, pp. 673-74.

57. ACA s.f. RB I:32. The exact identity of this Arnau Mir is uncertain.

58. ACA s.f. RB I:40.

59. ACA s.f. RB I:40. The counts chose Bishop Guislabert, Amat Eldric, Bernat Amat, Abbot Berenguer, and Mir Riculf. Ramon Mir chose Count Artau of Pallars-Sobirà, Pere Mir, and Dalmau Isarn. The role of these judges is described in Catalogne, p. 730.

60. ACA s.f. RB I:40. This document, not cited by Pladevall in "Senescals," is to my knowledge unpublished.

61. LFM I:440-42:419-20. The first document was almost certainly executed at the same time as the second, on 14 Apr. 1060.

62. Ramon Mir next appeared subscribing a comital document in Feb. 1067 (LFM 1:307-8:282).

63. Pladevall, "Senescals," p. 121, suggests that Ramon Guillem de Montcada occupied the office of seneschal during the minority of Pere Amat. But there is no proof for this, and the idea is not echoed in earlier historians of the Montcada family (e.g., Sobrequés, Miret y Sans).

64. Guillem Ramon [I] Seneschal first subscribed comital acts in Mar. 1068 (e.g., LFM 2:299-300:816). Because these documents set down the results of what may have been lengthy negotiations with the great men of Carcassonne-Narbonne, it is possible that Guillem Ramon had become seneschal as early as 1067.

65. Speculation about Ramon Berenguer's motive for conferring the seneschalcy on a new man has centered on negative attributes of Pere Amat: that he was thick-headed (Pladevall, "Senescals," p. 121) or that he came from a family feared to be too powerful (Catalogne, p. 710). Either or both hypotheses may have some value, but it seems to me more likely that Ramon Berenguer was drawn to Guillem Ramon [I] for his personal merits.

66. LFM 1:298-99:274; ACA RB I:442.

67. Compare Bonnassie's remarks in Catalogne, pp. 709-11.

68. He had reason, for though the inheritance was to be shared jointly, Berenguer Ramon did not acquire lordship. This was the apparent meaning of the clause of Ramon Berenguer's will stating: "Et totum ipsum honorem et omnes res pertinentes ad iam dictos honores et terras habeat Berengarius, filius eius, simili modo sicut Raimundus, frater eius, excepto hoc quod non faciat de ipsas terras atque honores ullum seniorem" (my emphasis; LFM 1:524-27:492).

69. Bofarull, Condes, 2:114-15, publishing ACA RB II:48.

70. LFM I:446-47:425, an act dating from 1078-1082.

71. The evidence is reviewed in Bofarull, Condes, 2:116-24.

72. Moncada, Episcopologio, 1:330-31.

73. ACV C.9 Eps. 2:87. The oath, undated, probably goes back to Guillem Ramon's first dealings with the bishop.

74. Bofarull, Condes, 2:120 "Ipso quippe interfecto...unde Catalonia in tantum turbata fuit quod longum esset narrare." The source is from the reign of Alfons I (1162-1196).

75. Assuming a ratio common to the late eleventh century of 10 mancusos to the ounce of gold (Catalogne, p. 899), these 1,000 "mancusos ex auno de Valencia" would buy approximately five horses (ibid., p. 930).

76. ACA BR II:2.

77. Bofarull, Condes, 2:131-33.

78. Sobrequés, Grans comtes, 131-32.

79. His name headed the list of magnates responsible for the deal with Count Guillem de Cerdanya (Bofarull, Condes, 2:132).

80. ACA BR II:34. This document, despite statements to the' contrary by Bofarull (Condes, 2:134-35) and Sobrequés (Grans comtes, p. 132), did not confer on Berenguer Ramon the guardianship of Ramon Berenguer III himself, but only of his honor. It is logical to suppose that the child stayed with his mother during her marriage to the viscount of Narbonne.

81. Sobrequés, Grans comtes, p. 132. The date given for the marriage, 1082, has to be a misprint for 1085.

82. ACA BR II:35.

83. Moncada, Episcopologio, I:330-31, and Pladevall, "Senescals," p. 123.

84. Moncada, Episcopologio, 1:345-46, and Pladevall, "Senescals," p. 123.

85. Pladevall, "Senescals," p. 118: " [After the death of the first seneschal] els comtes cregueren que el millor que podia tutelar els béns deixats pel difunt, bona part d'ells situats a Ausona, era el bisbe de Vic, Guillem de Balsareny, gran amic dels comtes i d'Amat Eldenic."

86. Eduard Junyent, Jurisdiccions i privilegis de la ciutat de Vich, Publicacions monogràfiques del Patronat d'estudis Ausonencs, no. 6 (Vic, 1969), p. 31.

87. Odilo Engels, "Die weltliche Herrschaft des Bischofs von Ausona-Vich, 889-1315," in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kulturgeschichte Spaniens, 1st ser. (1968), 24: 15.

88. By mid-century the bishops of Osona were acting as lords alongside the counts. In a return of castles by Mir Geribert to Count Ramon Berenguer Tin 1059, the baron and his family had to promise not to make any acquisitions from the honor held by the bishop from the count and countess without their permission (LFM 1:323-24:296). In practice, however, the count's authority in Vic was in serious trouble, and only the bishops were available to fill the void. That they did is evidenced by their grant to Guillem Ramon [I]. his brother Arbert, and Mir Foguet of castles that earlier in the century were held directly from the counts of Barcelona.

89. This idea was still prevalent in this period and was still largely accurate for Barcelona, where eleventh-century counts clearly controlled elections to that see. The counts commonly listed bishoprics as elements of their honor (in wills, oaths of fidelity, etc.).

90. See ch. 5 and my article, "Les tactiques politiques des Montcada, seigneurs de Vic du début du XIII^e siècle" in Ausa (1981), 9:329-42. On divided urban lordship, see also the remarks ofJacques Flach in Les origines de l'ancienne France, vol. 2 (Paris, 1893), pp. 280-85.

91. ACA BR II:58.

92. Moncada, Episcopologio, I:346.

93. This is the first occasion on which the title "dapifer" was used instead of "seneschal."

94. The mention of Berenguer as archbishop indicates that the seneschal's demands came late in the prelate's incumbency as bishop of Vic (Berenguer was archbishop only from 1091 to 1099).

95. Moncada (Episcopologio, I :399) defines leudes as a kind of imposition on market measures and on meat sold in the town square; the dragma as a small coin worth less than a diner used to acquit coinage fees to the See of Vic.

96. ACV C.6 Eps. I : 17, a document described by Moncada (Episcopologio, 1:399-401). Moncada, a seventeenth-century cathedral Dean of Vic, identified Guillem Ramon Dapifer was a nephew of the first seneschal, for had he been the son of Arbert Ramon (brother of Guillem Ramon [I]) as is sometimes alleged, his claim. Whatever Guillem Ramon [I]'s ancestry, there is no evidence to support the notion that he died circa 1100 and was succeeded in office by a nephew of the same name, who in turn engendered a third Guillem Ramon, the "Great Seneschal." In my view, Guillem Ramon [I] was the husband of Agnes and the father of Guillem Ramon [II], who married Beatriu, daughter of Berenguer Ramon de Montcada. This revision separates the seneschal's ascendance from the Montcada family, fusing into one person Guillem Ramon [I] and his purported nephew. On that point, it is more plausible to believe that the Guillem Ramon Dapifer who won market rights in 1104 from Arnau, bishop of Vie, was the same person who had appeared frequently with Berenguer Seniofred since 1082. It is unlikely that the 1104 Guillem Ramon Dapifer was a nephew of the first seneschal, for had he been the son of Arbert Ramon (brother of Guillem Ramon [I]) as is sometimes alleged, his name probably would not have been Guillem Ramon, but Guillem Arbert or Arbert Ramon [II].

97. The contrary is implied by Moncada (Episcopologio, I:399).

98. ACV Lib. dot. 123v-24r, 124r; ACV Lib. dot. 116r-v.

99. See Paul H. Freedman, "Church and Society in the Diocese of Vich in the Twelfth Century" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1978).

100. ACV C.9 Eps. 2:90. The undated document can be attributed to the years 1091-1099 from a reference to assaults against "nostrum sedem et archiepiscopum" (my emphasis), and from the dates of activity of the persons accused by name.

101. ACV C.9 Eps. 2: 85 (or duplicate parchment, 2:89). This document can also be dated to this period by a reference to the archbishop.

102. ACV Lib. dot. 114r-v.

103. ACA RB III: 103. Published without the subscription of Guillem Ramon (and others) in MH 1230-31:337.

104. LFM 2:20-21:506; ACA RB III:105, 106.

105. ACA RB III:151 (dupl.), 152.

106. The term comitor described, around the year 1100, that class of castle holders whose origins reached back to the aristocracy of the early eleventh century, when their ancestors had generally held vice-comital or vicarial offices. See Catalogne, pp. 785-97.

107. ACA RB III:173.

108. LFM 1:503:472².

109. ACA RB III:67, 88, 112.

110. See Sobrequés, Gratis comtes, p. 177.

111. Anales, 1:162.

112. The meeting is described in a narrative record made not long after the event that is published by Pau Piferrer in Recuerdos y bellezas de España (1842), vol. 4, Mallorca, pp. 110-11.

113. ACA RB III:51.

114. ACV C.9 Eps. 2:82.

115. CSC 2:424:765.

116. CSC 2:427:769.

117. LFM 1:429-31:407-08.

118. LFM 1:362-64:339.

119. LFM 2:21:507.

120. ACA RB III:159.

121. ACA RB III:150.

122. The office of vicar in the late eleventh century and the twelfth century was not the same comital office as that of vicar before 1050. See Catalogne, pp. 708-9.

123. LFM 1:400-401:382. Guillem Renard is first attested as vicar of Barcelona in Oct. 1113 (ADB Santa Anna, carp. 6, n. 2).

124. ACB Lib. ant. 4:210r:475 (Mas 10:270-71:1275).

125. E.g. ACA RB III:241¹; ACA RB IV:15, 19, 106.

126. ACA RB III:261.

127. ACA RB III:303.

128. ACB Lib. ant. 2:125v:371 (Mas 10:301:1340). In Apr. 1131 Ramon Renard appeared as "fideiussor" for Vicar Berenguer [Ramon], whom Ramon Berenguer III had accused of a variety of misdeeds, supposedly including a remark made by Berenguer to the count that "for all I hold from you, I would not thank you with one fart" (DI 4:281-84:113). In 1129 Ramon Renard appeared as judge in a case involving the monastery of Sant Cugat (ACB Div. C/c/18, capsa 4).

129. In both the early (ACA RB III:238) and later LFM 1:527-32:493) versions of the will.

130. ACA RB III:244; CSC 3:93-94:903; ACA RB IV:5 LFM 1:480-81:457; DI 4:29-33:11.

131. Pious donations made by Ramon Renard for the remission of sins in 1136 (ACV C.6:2473) and 1137 (ACB Lib. ant. 1:225v-26r:610 [Mas 11:40-41:1473]) may indicate advancing age, though subscriptions on documents in 1141, 1144, and 1145 establish that he lived at least until 1145.

132. Ramon Renard's wife, was Solasten, who brought to her husband property in Barcelona that she had received through rights of her (late?) husband, Berenguer Bernat (ACB Lib. ant. 1:285r-v:762 [Mas 10:249:1230]). My research has not yet established the parentage of Solasten, though it is likely that she was descended from a class of urban nobles or affluent burghers.

133. The origins of the Bell-lloc lineage are obscure. See Castells Catalans, 2:263.

134. Evidence for the existence of this elder son of Ramon Guillem is scant. The only reference occurs in a copy, made in 1133, of a donation in 1122 of the honor of Berenguer Ramon de Monteada to Guillem Ramon [II] Seneschal and his wife Beatriu. In this text Berenguer gave the couple his honor of allods, fiefs, and castle wardships "just as I Berenguer now have and hold all my honor and [as] my father and brother had and held [the honor]" (emphasis mine; ACA RB IV: 357). This fraternal heir to the Monteada patrimony must have died before Feb. 1085, when Berenguer Ramon put an end to disputes with his uncles concerning the inheritance. As for the name of Berenguer's brother, "Guillem" would have been most appropriate because it was the name of the child's grandfather who founded the Montcada line. "Berenguer," on the other hand, was the name of a younger brother (and archdeacon) of Ramon Guillem de Montcada and was appropriate for a son destined for a career in the church.

135. CSC 2:424-25:765; 2:427:769.

136. CSC 2:435-36:777.

137. CSC 2:451-52:797.

138. CSC 3:25-26:822.

139. ACA RB III:66.

140. ACA RB III:199.

141. The first known reference to Guillem Ramon [II] as the Great Seneschal is in Rubió y Lluch, D. Guillermo Ramón, p. 5.