[20] In 1228 the torpid contentment of the Spanish Church was shattered when Gregory IX sent a legate, the cardinal-bishop of Sabina, John of Abbeville. John was a Frenchman⁽¹⁾who before his promotion had been archbishop of Besançon, and before that had made a name for himself as a theologian at Paris.⁽²⁾ Historians from the thirteenth century onwards have stressed the importance of his mission for the prosecution of the Reconquista⁽³⁾ and his concern with the pacification of Portugal during the minority of Sancho II.⁽⁴⁾ Until the end of that century, however, it was as a draconian disciplinarian that John was remembered, if he was remembered at all; and when Spaniards referred to him then they recalled -- and not infrequently bewailed -- the reformer rather than the warrior or the diplomat. In this sense, for ninety years after his departure, he was the legate.

Yet this side of his activity has attracted hardly any attention ;⁽⁵⁾and what little has been written on the subject is derived from the testimony of Archbishop Rodrigo, to whom the legate's stay, which must have been something of a nightmare for him, seemed to drag on for [21] three years,⁽⁶⁾ though in fact John was in Spain and Portugal for only half that time. Modern historians have added further complications to the chronology. Having failed to make allowance for the Year of the Incarnation, Herculano concluded that John was at Coimbra both in January 1228 and in January 1229, from which he deduced that Portuguese affairs were uppermost in the legate's mind.⁽⁷⁾

The author of the anonymous Latin chronicle -- Bishop Juan of Osma, in all probability -- stated quite explicitly that the legate entered 'Spain' in August 1228, at about the feast of the Assumption.⁽⁸⁾ But whatever he may have meant by 'Spain', and despite the fact that his is the most circumstantial account that has survived,⁽⁹⁾ he was quite clearly wrong on this point, for by then John had been there for at least two months. On 10 June he was at the monastery of San Pedro de Cardeña, Burgos,⁽¹⁰⁾ and he may even have arrived earlier, before 28 March when the chapter of Calahorra provided him with their reply to an enquiry which he had instituted there.⁽¹¹⁾ Thereafter, between June 1228 and September 1229, it is possible to chart his progress in some detail, and in view of the confusion created by previous writers and the unique importance of his legation there is a strong case for reviewing the evidence.⁽¹²⁾

John spent the year 1228 in the kingdoms of Leon and Castile. The [22] arrangements at Burgos Cathedral, apparently his first port of call, were not perfect, but he found much there that was good and laudable, and his only unfavourable comment concerned nothing worse than absence from choir.⁽¹³⁾ There were more shocking revelations than that in store for him, and having struck south to visit both Segovia, where he attended the consecration of the new cathedral church, and Ávila, before returning to Burgos, he set off westwards in pursuit of unrighteousness.⁽¹⁴⁾ On 20 August he was at Carrión de los Condes, to the north of Palencia,⁽¹⁵⁾ and it is highly likely, though it cannot be demonstrated, that he visited Palencia itself⁽¹⁶⁾ and Zamora also.⁽¹⁷⁾ This period was, moreover, presumably the occasion of the Valladolid Council, to which we shall return. Sometime, certainly, in the month of September he reached Astorga Cathedral, in qua nulla erat ordinatio, and on discovering, not for the last time during his legation, that the distribution of income was quite scandalously unfair, he amended the statutes, as well as reminding the canons of their solemn obligation to attend the services.⁽¹⁸⁾ At the end of that month, on the29th, he was apud populum de Gordon (the modern La Pola de Gordón)⁽¹⁹⁾ to the north of León on the way to Oviedo, where, on arrival, he gave instructions concerning the office of dean and provided a constitution requiring the bishop to distribute vacant prebends among the canons -- a constitution which the bishop subsequently sought to evade.⁽²⁰⁾ By way of the Cistercian house of Villabuena⁽²¹⁾ and, probably, Lugo⁽²²⁾, he [23] proceeded westward and by 3 November had reached Santiago de Compostela.⁽²³⁾ We then lose sight of him for a couple of months, but since at the very beginning of 1229 he was at the Cortes of Coimbra⁽²⁴⁾ it is probable that he had spent at least part of the intervening period in Portugal. He definitely visited Guimarães and Porto and provided both churches with sets of statutes,⁽²⁵⁾ and before arriving at Coimbra he had already penetrated as far south as Tojal, near Lisbon,where the inhabitants had neither church nor priest and wanted both.⁽²⁶⁾ At the half-way stage of his legation he had covered a very considerable amount of ground.

He was still at Coimbra on 7 January 1229, after which he moved off up the valley of the Mondego by way of Celorico da Beira,⁽²⁷⁾ and reached Salamanca by 5 February where he presided over a council of the bishops of the kingdom of Leon -- a council of which the constitutions have not survived and which has generally been ascribed to the previous year.⁽²⁸⁾ He was still at Salamanca on the 7th,⁽²⁹⁾ but by then he had probably concluded his most important business, for on the next day King Alfonso IX departed for Ciudad Rodrigo.⁽³⁰⁾

Within five weeks the legate had crossed the Peninsula and was at Zaragoza. What took him there was either a new papal commission directing him to preside over the annulment of the marriage of King Jaime of Aragon and Leonor, daughter of Alfonso VIII of Castile,⁽³¹⁾ or alternatively a turn for the worse in the negotiations with the Moorish king of Valencia, which, according to the anonymous Latin chronicler, were the main purpose of John's legation.⁽³²⁾ King Jaime,[24] therefore, now redirected the Aragonese war effort towards the Balearics -- a project which had the legate's blessing⁽³³⁾ -- while discussions over the terms of the annulment dragged on. They were not concluded until the end of April at a council held at Tarazona and attended by contingents of prelates from both Aragon and Castile.⁽³⁴⁾ But John did not waste these weeks. The Lérida Council occurred at the end of March,⁽³⁵⁾ and, in addition, the churches of Zaragoza, Huesca and Calatayud,⁽³⁶⁾ as well probably as those of Tarragona and Calahorra,⁽³⁷⁾ received visits from him.

Archbishop Rodrigo of Toledo was at the Tarazona Council and, after a brief detour to Tudela,⁽³⁸⁾ John seems to have accompanied him back into Castile. At Ocaña (some 50 kilometres east of Toledo) on 3 June he published a set of constitutions for Toledo Cathedral which penalised absenteeism and condemned the subdivision of benefices 'contra statuta concilii Turonensis': his two constant preoccupations.⁽³⁹⁾ Nineteen days later apud Pariliam (San Lorenzo de la Parrilla) he issued similar instructions for the church of Cuenca and urged it to model its organisation on that of Toledo 'which you are accustomed to imitate '.⁽⁴⁰⁾

Then, moving north, he came to Sigüenza, where on 17 [25] July, he gave judgement on the age-old boundary dispute between that see and Osma;⁽⁴¹⁾ after which he struck west. He was at León, from where he despatched his constitutions for Guimarães, on 6 August, and at Lerma, to the south of Burgos, on the 17th.⁽⁴²⁾ That is the last glimpse we catch of him in Castile, and, as far as the anonymous Latin chronicler was concerned, his mission closed at the end of August and he returned to Rome.⁽⁴³⁾

But the chronicler was wrong again. For the Catalan Church had still to be dealt with, and the last lap of the legate's marathon took him to Catalonia by way of the area where he had spent the previous spring, through Agreda on 26 August⁽⁴⁴⁾ and Zuera on the 31st.⁽⁴⁵⁾ When he reached the Mediterranean coast a further papal mandate was awaiting him, containing the pope's reply of the previous March to a number of queries concerning parochial organisation in the province of Tarragona, marriages within the forbidden degree, and the decayed state of the Cluniac Order in those parts. From Martorell, on 10 September, he forwarded his instructions on these points to Archbishop Sparago and his suffragans.⁽⁴⁶⁾ On the following day he entered Barcelona and sent the archbishop another letter, ordering him to attend without delay to the particular reforms which he had specified during his earlier visit to Tarragona.⁽⁴⁷⁾ He then spent a week in Barcelona, at the end of which he publicly reprimanded Bishop Berenguer on account of his unjust exactions from the property of deceased canons,⁽⁴⁸⁾ and issued a set of constitutions for the cathedral which embodied all his objectives as legate.⁽⁴⁹⁾

That was on 19 September. [26] The next day found him at Vich;⁽⁵⁰⁾ and on the 25th and 26th he was at Gerona.⁽⁵¹⁾ His final port of call seems to have been the Pyrenean see of Urgel where, in the absence of Bishop Pedro de Puigvert, he expanded the size of the chapter.⁽⁵²⁾ In each of these places his memory was destined to linger on and to haunt the easy-going canons long after his final departure from Spanish territory, for which relief the Spanish Church had cause to be thankful probably at about the beginning of October. His legatine authority was certainly a thing of the past by 29 November, and he had returned, breathless presumably, to the Curia.⁽⁵³⁾

In the course of little more than eighteen months the legate had covered the greater part of Christian Spain and Portugal -- no mean feat at a time when, 'tum propter alpes et portus et loca periculosa, tum propter fluvios et inundationes aquarum', the comparatively short journey from León to Lugo might take all of five days, even in the summer.⁽⁵⁴⁾ The fellow traveller who follows in his footsteps seven centuries after very soon comes to appreciate John of Abbeville's considerable energy. Experto credite. And the volume of business with which he dealt as he went was enormous. He intervened in the affairs of the diocese of Calahorra where Fernando III and the local nobility were bent upon frustrating the desire of the canons to move to Santo Domingo de la Calzada where, in a kinder climate and away from the turbulent border area, they might be able -- they claimed, among other things -- to hold synods.⁽⁵⁵⁾ Nor was the bishop of Calahorra, Juan Pérez, the only recently reinstated episcopal exile to receive comfort and assistance from John, and to experience a change for the worse when that support was withdrawn.⁽⁵⁶⁾Bernardo of Segovia, who had [27] shared Juan Pérez's exile, was another,⁽⁵⁷⁾ while in Portugal the legate was closely concerned with the promotion of the canonist Vincentius Hispanus to the see of Guarda.⁽⁵⁸⁾

Various disputes, both weighty and trivial, were referred to him. He supervised a settlement between the Master of the Order of Santiago and the Convent of Uclés.⁽⁵⁹⁾ In the expectation of his arrival in the north-west, the archbishop of Compostela and the bishop of Astorga delayed their territorial litigation in October 1228 so that either he or, failing him, Cardinal Gil Torres, might give judgement.⁽⁶⁰⁾ And while he was in those parts, in the following December, the sacrist of Barcelona and the cantor of Tarragona, far away to the east, chose him as mediator of their own private quarrel.⁽⁶¹⁾ The pressure of purely routine business of this sort was such that he was obliged on occasion to subdelegate his authority both to members of his own entourage and to trustworthy Spaniards. The hearing of a tithe dispute between the church of Albelda and the clergy of Sojo was entrusted to his dilectus clericus Master P. ;⁽⁶²⁾ and a couple of cases concerning the monastery of Olla to the bishop of Burgos and canons of that church.⁽⁶³⁾

For his main concern was not with these minutiae, but with reform in head and members and, as has been said of the theme of his legislation, with securing 'the rigorous observance of all the rules of the Fourth Lateran Council.'⁽⁶⁴⁾ Absolute devotion to those rules inspired everything that John did while he was in Spain. They were reflected in the statutes given to particular churches -- to Toledo, Burgos, Cuenca and Astorga in Castile -- Leon, to Porto and Guimarães [28] in Portugal, and to Barcelona, Gerona and Vich in Aragon. And they were the guiding light of the provincial councils over which he presided.

Unhappily, we are rather ill-informed about John's councils. We may be sure about three, held at Valladolid in the autumn of 1228, at Salamanca in the following February, and at Lérida a month later, for the provinces of Toledo, Compostela and Tarragona respectively, though the anonymous Latin chronicler hints at many more. ⁽⁶⁵⁾Yet of these three the constitutions of one only, the Lérida Council, have survived.⁽⁶⁶⁾ Nothing is known of the Salamanca Council beyond the fact that it took place,⁽⁶⁷⁾ and the proceedings of the Valladolid Council are recorded only in a later (and perhaps incomplete) Spanish translation which Risco discovered in a León manuscript and published in 1787.⁽⁶⁸⁾

Still, this material can be supplemented. There are good grounds for treating the constitutions entitled by Martène concilium incerti loci as those of the monastic general chapter of the kingdom of León which was summoned at the legate's behest,⁽⁶⁹⁾ and, further, for regarding them as to some extent the equivalent of the lost Latin text of the Valladolid constitutions, to the vernacular version of which they bear as marked an affmity as they do to the Lérida constitutions.⁽⁷⁰⁾

[29] The Church and clergy in Spain were in a condition of general decay because, according to the legate's diagnosis, the constitutions of the Fourth Lateran Council had been almost entirely neglected there,⁽⁷¹⁾ and for their recovery they therefore needed a pretty stiff dose of Lateran medicine. Thus, the provisions of the Valladolid and Lérida Councils on a number of issues -- annual communion and confession, matrimony, payment of tithes, lay patrons of churches, simony, procedural matters, clerical and episcopal comportment, and triennial monastic chapters -- were derived, often verbatim, from the 1215 Council.⁽⁷²⁾ The interest of the legate's programme, however, lies rather in the extent to which it departed from rather than adhered to the Lateran precedent, since these variations highlight the distinctive shortcomings of the Spanish Church. There were no distinctive merits.

One instance may be noted of what appears to have been soft-pedalling in response to secular opposition to an item of reform. The wearing by Jews of special clothes is not mentioned in the Valladolid constitutions. Instead, a prohibition on the use of cappae clausae of clerical cut was substituted, in deference perhaps to Fernando III's known view that discrimination had serious political consequences.⁽⁷³⁾ Otherwise, though, the legate's departures from the Lateran norm were all in the direction of greater stringency. The Spanish clergy, as John of Abbeville found them, were incontinent, largely uneducated and total strangers to the discipline of council and synod. Innocent III had certainly been concerned with clerical morality, yet even that pontiff paled in comparison with John of Abbeville and the vigour 'with which he terrorised the miscreants.' In 1215 clerici concubinarii had been threatened with canonical sanctions, but only in general terms. After the Valladolid and Lérida Councils they were left in no doubt about the severity of these sanctions: excommunication, suspension, loss of benefices, and the burial of their consorts -- called barraganas in [30] Castile -- with the beasts.⁽⁷⁴⁾ In other respects the Spanish clergy seem to have erred neither more nor less than the clergy elsewhere. They were not remarkable drinkers. Nor, apart from the excessively provocative dress of the Aragonese, which showed rather too much leg for the legate's liking, and the preposterous coiffure of the Castilians which had drawn Diego Garcia's fire ten years before, did their outward appearance merit special criticism.⁽⁷⁵⁾ On these issues, therefore, the Lateran legislation was sufficient.⁽⁷⁶⁾ But in their fondness for women they were in a class apart, and, even allowing for the fact that virtue brings its own reward but not much publicity, it seems that they always had been and that they always would be. In the eighth century when King Fruela I had attempted to impose celibacy upon them, and both before and since, down to the present century, observers have noted their disregard for ecclesiastical discipline on this point.⁽⁷⁷⁾ Indeed, only twenty years after John of Abbeville's councils, the pope himself would feel bound to accept them for what they were.⁽⁷⁸⁾

Diego García had described the Castilian bishops as a bunch of philistines, and to judge by the legate's strictures, their Aragonese brethren and the lower clergy of both nations were just as bad.⁽⁷⁹⁾ Of course, if it were allowed to obliterate the achievement of Archbishop Rodrigo and of those many others who, while not shining themselves, at least assisted others who had the capacity to do so, then John of Abbeville's charge would be monstrously unfair; and, indeed, in modern times the legate has been taken to task for his remarks about Spanish culture.⁽⁸⁰⁾

Yet John's observations were concerned not with [31] the gifted élite but with the mass of parish clergy whom in 1225 a Spanish bishop had described as 'pre aliis regionibus inscii litterarum'. The bishop was Tello of Palencia, the very region to which, on account of its nascent university, Beltrán points in rebuttal of John's charge.⁽⁸¹⁾ The rest of Beltrán's case for the defence is hardly less unconvincing,⁽⁸²⁾ but the point of substance is that it was with the condition of these, the lower clergy, that John was concerned, and for their benefit that at Lérida he went beyond the provision of 1215 for the establishment of schools in such diocesan centres 'quarum sufficere poterunt facultates' and issued instructions for the endowment of scholae de grammatica and magistri in every archdeaconry, 'ad multiplicem ignorantiam extirpandam'.⁽⁸³⁾ These schools would at least provide the parish clergy with a smattering of Latin,⁽⁸⁴⁾ while, on a rather higher level, the churches of Barcelona, Astorga and Guimarães were reminded of their existing obligation to provide for a master of grammar,⁽⁸⁵⁾ and, by having their income guaranteed for a period of three years, student canons were encouraged to take advantage of the opportunity. In order to promote the University of Palencia this period was increased to five years in Castile.⁽⁸⁶⁾

Education costs money, and all the legate's educational reforms were doomed to failure unless the clergy could be established on secure economic foundations. There were too many clergy to provide for. Fewer would perhaps mean better, for the majority simply could not afford not to be pluralists, and with so many of them in quest of a fixed stock of benefices the latter had been devalued by division, thus creating further inflation. Subdivision and pluralism were twin evils: the elimination of the one hinged upon the eradication of the other. The Fourth Lateran Council had railed against [32] pluralism,⁽⁸⁷⁾ but John of Abbeville was determined to deal with its causes.

The ideal was parity between the number of clerics and the number of benefices, and to achieve this the legate invoked Alexander III's constitution which made bishops responsible for providing for clerics whom they ordained sine titulo.⁽⁸⁸⁾ But remedial as well as preventive action was called for, and as a means of revaluing the benefice John intervened at Toledo and Cuenca, taking as his text canon i of the Tours Council of 1163.⁽⁸⁹⁾ One cure of souls, one caretaker: that was the legate's aspiration. However, departure from this rule was common in Spain where, as he lamented, churches were shared by many men, like whores. Both at Valladolid and at Lérida, therefore, he did what he could to make this ecclesiastical polyandry respectable by directing that in each place there should be appointed as chief husband one priest who would take precedence over the rest at the public ministry.⁽⁹⁰⁾ Conditions in Castile and Aragon, though, were evidently not identical, for whereas at Valladolid he explicitly forbade subdivision of benefices, at Lérida he was forced to acknowledge that the rents of some parish churches were too meagre for the support of a priest and that, consequently, some degree of pluralism was inevitable.⁽⁹¹⁾ That no such concession had been made at Valladolid in the previous year⁽⁹²⁾ suggests that the demand for benefices was greater in Aragon and that subdivision had advanced further there than in Castile. To this scramble for income at the parochial level the exclusiveness of the Aragonese cathedral chapters may have contributed, if only marginally. It is striking that whereas in Castile, at Toledo and Cuenca, it was a question of revaluing the canonries and prebends, in Aragon six cathedrals -- Tarragona, Barcelona, Gerona, Vich, Urgel and Zaragoza -- were either instructed or encouraged to increase the size of their chapters.⁽⁹³⁾

[33] His policy of streamlining the Spanish Church, not to mention his sense of fair play, also prompted the legate to correct the inequitable distribution of rents in the cathedrals of Astorga and Barcelona where, while some canons and dignitaries were drunk with wealth, others were left to go thirsty.⁽⁹⁴⁾ Reforms such as these, though ancillary, were essential to the success of John of Abbeville's master-plan -- that of providing the Spanish churches with literate, continent and suitably endowed ministers capable of administering the sacraments and performing the public office. It was in this spirit that he stressed the importance of keeping vestments, fonts and other such paraphernalia clean and decent,⁽⁹⁵⁾ and emphasised, wherever he went, that the canons were to attend High Mass and the canonical hours or lose their clothing allowance, the vestiarium, and their daily portions of bread, wine, meat and money.⁽⁹⁶⁾

The keystone of John's reforming programme was the institution of provincial councils and diocesan synods, for only by dint of constant pressure from above might the clergy be made to accept this novel régime. And that his constitutions did strike the Spanish clergy as novelties and as the personal lucubrations of an enthusiast -- quedam nova. . . iuxta sapientiam sibi a Deo datam -- rather than as an expression of the universal law of the Church, we may infer from the account provided by the anonymous Latin chronicler. From the same source we learn also of the unparalleled sedicio of both bishops and clergy in response to his instructions about exchanging the pleasures of dalliance for those of learning and the divine office.⁽⁹⁷⁾ Knowledge of the extent of resistance to reform was, doubtless, what caused the legate to leave instructions for the more frequent holding of diocesan synods than had been prescribed at the Fourth Lateran Council. A single annual gathering would not suffice. The Castilian dioceses were in need of two a year, and the Aragonese of 'at least one'. [34] Leaving nothing to chance, John moreover specified the days upon which they were to be held: in both kingdoms on the feast of St Luke in October and, additionally, on the Second Sunday after Pentecost in Castile.⁽⁹⁸⁾

This was indeed the point, and although the Spanish Church during the eleventh and twelfth centuries had not been so totally unaccustomed to councils and synods as has sometimes been supposed,⁽⁹⁹⁾ the measure of activity implied by John's prescription, as well as the very content of his reforms, assumed a change of heart among the Spanish clergy for which there was scant evidence when, at the conclusion of his virtuoso performance, the legate returned to the Roman Curia in the late autumn of 1229, reflecting no doubt that the world was a wicked place. The following decade would show the extent to which their capacity for turning a deaf ear to papal and legatine fiats had been impaired.

1. In the early eighteenth century Thomas ab Incarnatione claimed him as Portuguese, although his true origins had been correctly described almost a hundred years before by Macedo: Historia ecclesiae Lusitanae, IV, 275-9; Macedo, Lusitania Infulata,69-71,78-9.

2. Histoire littéraire de la France, XVIII, 162-77; Feret, Faculté, I, 228-31; Glorieux, Répertoire, 272-3; Smalley, TRHS, 4th ser., XXX, I ff.; Stegmüller, Repertorium, III, 340-4.

3. Lucas of Túy, Chronicon Mundi, 114; Zimmermann, Die päpstliche Legation, 106-8.

4. Herculano's belief that this was his motivo principal stems in part from a misunderstanding about the length of his stay in Portugal: História de Portugal, IV, 346. Similarly, Reuter, Königtum und Episkopat,27.

5. Valls i Taberner has remarked upon his influence on the legislation of the provincial councils of Tarragona, and elsewhere has provided a summary account of the legation: AST, XI, 255-6; San Ramón de Penyafort, 230 ff. Cf. Gams, Kirchen- geschichte, III, i, 143-4, 221-4. Almeida has little or nothing to say: História da Igreja em Portugal, I, 397-8.

6. De Rebus Hispaniae, 202: '...vir bonus, sapiens, litteratus, qui celebratis in singulis regnis conciliis, postquam monita salutis proposuit, ad sedem apostolicam est reversus, tribus annis legationis expletis.

7. Herculano, 203 ff., 346, following Thomas ab Incamatione, IV, 277. But the dates of the documents -- publ. Santa María, Chronica, II, 439-41 -- are 'pridie nonis ianuarii' and 'idibus ianuarii anno domini'1228, i.e. 1229. For further examples of this usage in the Peninsula at this time cf. Alamo, CD Oña, II, 553-4, 600: on the latter occasion Alamo has noted as an error the identification of anno domini 1238 with era 1277 'in mense ianuarii', but his misguided acuity has deserted him in dealing with the former. The legate was certainly at Coimbra in January 1229: PMH, I, 613, 616.

8. CLI: B. Hisp., XV, 273-4. The attribution of the chronicle to Juan of Osma is suggested by Lomax, BHS, XL, 205 ff.

9. Ibid. 272-5.

10. Serrano, Don Mauricio, 141.

11. Letter dated 'año de Cristo' 1228, publ. González Texada, Historia de Santo Domingo de la Calzada, 203-4. He had not left Rome before 22 February, despite Serrano's unsupported allegation that he was in Spain by then: Thorkelin, Diplomatarium Arna-Magnaeanum, I, 108 (=Potthast, 8131); Serrano, Hispania, III, 572, n. 10. Serrano may have been misled by López Ferreiro.

12. The partial itinerary in Valls i Tabemer, San Ramón, 231, seems to have been derived from Risco, ES, XXXVI, 214-15, via Puig y Puig, Episcopologio, 217. But Puig's account is confused, owing to his cavalier use of the calendars of the Papal Registers.

13. Serrano, Don Mauricio, 140-1.

14. Segovia, 16 July: Colmenares, Historia, 192; Avila, 20-1 July: AC Segovia, doc.144, 311; San Pedro de Cardeña, 8 Aug: Berganza, Antigüedades, 143.

15. Archivo Colegial, Logroño, doc. 18 (reg. Bujanda, Inventario, 18).

16. He granted the Dominicans there his protection: AHN, 1724/15 (Potthast, 8782). Cf. RAH, MS. 9-24-5/4558, fo. 194v. It may be presumed that he visited the schools there.

17. He excommunicated the rebellious clergy of Toro, and, as Bishop Martín complained in May 1233, demanded benefices at the cathedral for a number of his clerics: Sua nobis, 27 March 1230: AC Zamora, II.i/8; Reg. Greg. IX, 1318.

18. AD Astorga, 2/41: publ. Flórez, ES, XVI, 503-5; Rodríguez López, Episcopologio asturicense, II, 589-97.

19. Bullarium de Calatrava, fos. 153-6. Cf. Rades de Andrada, Historia de las tres ordenes, fo. 27rv.

20. AC Oviedo, Plomados, I/6 (reg. García Larragueta, Catálogo, 343). Cf. Reg. Alex. IV, 1854; BAV, Cod. Lat. 3976. fo. 38v (Schillmann, Formularsammlung, 45).

21. Manrique, Cisterciensium, IV, 433; Serrano, Hispania, III, 572.

22. On 3 July 1234 Bishop Miguel of Lugo was empowered to absolve certain clerics excommunicated by John: Exhibita nobis: AC Lugo, 21/3/17.

23. López Ferreiro, Historia de Santiago, V, 135.

24. PMH, I, 613, 616.

25. Jesus da Costa, RPH, III, 569; publ. Chartularium Universitatis Portugalensis, I, 22-3; Censual do Cabido da Sé do Porto, 12-13.

26. Santa María, Chronica, II, 439-40.

27. Ibid. 441.

28. 'Anno domini .MCCXXVIII. in festo beate Agathe virginis, mense februarii.' Cf. López Ferreiro, V, appendix XV, 46-7; González, Alfonso IX, II, 619-20.

29. Sousa Costa, Mestre Silvestre, 164.

30. 8 González, Alfonso IX, II, 686-8.

31. Tejada y Ramiro, Colección, III, 344-8. On 16 March he was attended at Zaragoza by the papal subdeacon G. de Almaguera, possibly the frater Willelmus from whom the pope had received a progress report on the legation in the previous month. A papal cursor of that name had delivered a bull of April 1228 to the church of Huesca, and it is conceivable that it was he who delivered the papal document of Feb. 1229 which approved the royal divorce: Reg. Greg. IX, 266; letter Conquestus est: note on dorse: AC Huesca, Extravagantes (reg. Durán Gudiol, AA, VII, No. 59); Reg. Greg. IX,267.

32. CLI: B. Hisp., XV, 274. Cf. Chabás, El Archivo, V, 143 ff.

33. Desclot, Chronicle,I,88.

34. Tejada, III, 344-8; Crónica de San Juan de la Peña, 148. The archive of Tarazona Cathedral was destroyed in the fourteenth century, and no record of this assembly has survived there: Lafuente, BRAH, XXIV, 209-15; A. Gutiérrez de Velasco, 'La Conquista de Tarazona en la Guerra de los dos Pedros, Jeróniino Zurita, X-XI (1960), 69ff.

35. Tejada, III, 329 ff.

36. Reg. Greg. IX, 386; Durán Gudiol, HS, XII, 297-8 (the documents in AC Huesca do not mention the date of John's visit, but it was certainly before the end of May); Chabás, El Archivo, V, 147-51 (John was at Calatayud on 20 May); Zurita, Anales, I, 125rb.

37. John referred to his visit to Tarragona, for which this would seem the likeliest date, in his letter of 11 Sept. 1229 to the archbishop and chapter. Text: AC Seo de Urgel, cod. 2119, fo. 10r--v; date: RAH, MS. 9-24-5/4558, fo. 192r--v; AHA, Index dels Indices, fo. IV. For his motives for visiting Calahorra, if he did, see below. He was never within easier range.

38. On 1-2 May: Tejada, III, 341, 348.

39. AHN, cod. 987B, fos. 29v-30r; BN, MS. 8997, fo. 26r. The reference is to canon i of the Tours Council, 1163: Hefele-Leclercq, V, ii, 971.

40. AC Cuenca, 5-20-275. San Lorenzo de la Parrilla is some 30 kilometres to the south-west of Cuenca. In 1750 Ascensio de Morales mentioned, but did not transcribe, a document of 14 June 1229 in which the legate confirmed a Cuenca constitution of 1190: BN, MS. 13071, fo. 54V. The original could not be found at Cuenca in the summer of 1966.

41. AC Sigüenza, doc. pontificio, 18=Reg. Greg. IX, 2298-9: publ. Auvray, Mél. d'arch. et d'hist., XVI, 105-9. Cf. Minguella, Hístoria, I, 30-2; Reg. Hon. III, 806, 5652; AC Sigüenza, doc. pontificio, 13 (MDH, 92, 573, 460). The dispute flared up again in 1267: AC Toledo, X.I.F.2.6.

42. Chartularium Universitatis Portugalensis, I, 23; AC Segovia, doc. 226. For the request for absolution made to John by certain laymen of León who had hanged a criminous clerk, see Lea, Formulary of the Papal Penitentiary,22.

43. CLI: B. Hisp., XV, 275.

44. 20 kilometres to the west of Tarazona: González Texada, 205.

45. On the road to Zaragoza: AC Segovia, doc. 184.

46. VL, XVII, 208-9. Texts in Villanueva's papers: RAH, MS. 9-24-5/4558, fos. 193v-5r. Martorell is about 30 kilometres to the west of Barcelona, on the road from Lérida.

47. AC Seo de Urgel, cod. 2119, fo. 10r-v.

48. AC Barcelona, Liber I Antiquitatum, fo. 238va. Cf. Puig y Puig,191. The bishop was away, at the siege of Mallorca.

49. Publ. Martène-Durand, Thesaurus, IV, 595-9, whence Mansi, Conciliorum...Supplementum, II,959-64.

50. AC Vich, 37-6-45.

51. AC Vich, 37-6-60; AC Barcelona, Liber I Antiquitatum, fo. 238va; AC Gerona, Causa del Any 1240.

52. To thirty-three: Reg. Inn. IV, 186.

53. On that day Gregory IX referred to him as 'tunc apostolice sedis legatus: VL, XXI, 252.

54. AHN, cod. 267B, fo. 278V. This was in 1247.

55. Mansilla, Iglesia, 160-1, 169-70; Pérez Alhama, REDC, XV, 396 ff; Lecuona, Scriptorium Victoriense, I, 136 ff.; letter Gravi nobis, 2 Jan. 1225: AC Calahorra, doc. 240; Reg. Hon. III, 5154 (MDH, 526).

56. González Texada, 201-2; Reg. Greg. IX, 247. Juan Pérez was at the Curia in Oct. 1224 and semi-permanently thereafter for the rest of Honorius's pontificate; and, despite Gregory IX's instruction of Feb. 1233 that he be represented by a proctor at any further hearings there of his case against the king, he was back by Sept. 1234 and died there in Jan. 1237: Reg. Hon. III, 5117, 5922, 6190 (MDH, 520,600, 625); Reg. Greg. IX, 1113, 2104, 3470 (=AC Calahorra, doc. 266). In his absence the king pillaged his see, and during his brief return he was forced to sell property to pay his Roman debts: ibid. 594 (publ. Sousa Costa, 146-7).

57. Mansilla, Iglesia, 168-9; Reg. Hon. III, 6242 (MDH, 639). The legate's indulgences in favour of Bemardo's new cathedral were published by the bishop in July 1232: AC Segovia, doc. 144, 311, 177.

58. Sousa Costa, 158 ff.

59. Lomax, Orden de Santiago, 61.

60. López Ferreiro, Historia V, 125; Quintana Prieto, AA, XI, nos. 49, 52-3.

61. AC Barcelona, Diversarum B, 787.

62. Archivo Colegial, Logroño, doc. 18.

63. Alamo, CD Oña, II, 559, 567.

64. Hefele-Leclercq, V, ii,1502.

65. No notice has survived of any council in the fourth province, Braga.

66. Publ. Tejada y Ramiro, III, 329 ff., and Sáinz de Baranda, ES, XLVIII, 308 ff. The system of numbering canons 15-25 varies in the two versions. Reference hereafter is to the latter, which is cited as Lér.

67. In a synod of 1248 Bishop Aires Vasques of Lisbon referred to a constitution of this council 'in qua cavetur quod pro benedictionibus nubentium et pro annalibus et triceinnalibus nichil exigatur': publ. Rosa Pereira, Lumen (May 1961), 5. Cf. Lér. c. 21.

68. ES, XXXVI, 216 ff.; cited hereafter as Vall. They appear to be incomplete, ending abruptly and containing no indication of date.

69. Martène-Durand, IV, 167 (whence Mansi, XXII, 1090-4: ed. cit. hereafter) 'ex MS. ecclesie Belvacensis. The internal evidence of its Spanish provenance was noted by Martène (1091), and the note on the dorse of the membrane (1090) points to a connexion with the legate's appointment of the abbots of Samos and Celanova as monastic visitors of the León province: Reg. Greg. IX, 1756.

70. There is almost total identity between these constitutions and Lér. c. 12 sqq., except for c. 13 which recalls VaIl. 225, De praebendis. The incomplete state of Martènes MS. would account for the absence of any parallel for Lér. c. 1-11. It may be concluded that the original Valladolid constitutions were the model for this chapter; that it met, probably at Villafranca del Vierzo (north-west of Ponferrada) between 1228 and 1233 (cf. Mansi, 1090: 'post annum MCCXV; Berlière, RB, XIX, 374: c. 1220); and that, in general, the Valladolid canons were identical with those of Lérida.

71. Vall 216;Lér.c. I.

72. IV Lat. c. 21; Vall, 221; Lér. c.II (sacraments); IV Lat. c. 50-I; not in Vall., but concilium incerti loci (hereafter CIL), c. 4; Lér. c. 14 (matrimony); IV Lat. c. 53; CIL, c. 5;Lér.c. 15 (tithes); III Lat. c. 14; IV Lat. c. 45; Vall. 223, 226; CIL, c. 15; Lér.C. 19, 30 (lay patrons); IV Lat. c. 63-6; Vall. 223; CIL, c. 7 Lér. c. 21 (simony); IV Lat. c. 8; Vail. 224-5; CIL, c. 11-12; Lér. c. 27-8 (procedure); IV Lat. c. 17; Vall. 226; CIL, c. 16; Lér. c. 31 (comportment); IV Lat. c. 12; Vail. 223-4; CIL, c. 8; Lér. c. 23 (monastic chapters).

73. IV Lat. c. 68; Cf. Vall. 222; Lér. c. 16; above, p. 18.

74. Vall. 218-19; Lér.c.8. Cf. IV Lat. c. 14. For the meaning of barraganas see Part. 4.14.1 (Academy ed. III, 85).

75. Vall. 219-20; Lér. c. 9; Diego García, Planeta, 194. The following century brought scant improvement, if the testimony of Alvarus Pelagius may be relied upon: De Planctu Ecclesiae, II, fo. 205ra-b.

76. IV Lat. c. 15, 16, 18. Cf.Lér. c. 9: 'Clausa desuper deferant indumenta, nimia brevitate vel longtitudine non notanda [thus far as IV Lat. c. 16]. . . vel supertunicis sic apertis ut ostendant latera, sed astrictis ut femoralia non demonstrent . . . non utantur.

77. Crónica de Alfonso III, ed. Z. García Vilada (Madrid, 1918), 118-19; Thompson, Goths in Spain, 304; Gerald Brenan, The Spaish Labyrinth (Cambridge, 1962), 49.Cf. Lea, Sacerdotal Celibacy, 302 ff.

78. Below, Ch. 3.

79. Planeta, 197, 405. Lér. c. 5: 'Attendentes quod in partibus Hispaniae, ex defectu studiorum et litteraturae, multa et intolerabilia detrimenta animarum proveniunt.

80. By Beltrán de Heredia in RET, VI, 336, 340-I. On this point cf. Linehan, Studia Albornotiana, II.

81. Reg. Hon. III, 5273 (MDH, 533); Beltrán, 336.

82. For example, he deduces from the fact that John held no councils at Santiago, Salamanca, Zamora or León that 'en este sector del reino de León encontró las necesidades suficientemente atendidas, p. 337. But this is not a fact. See the report of the anonymous Latin chronicler: 'Currensque per provinciam convocavit sinodos...':CLI: B. Hisp., XV, 274.

83. IV Lat. c. II, (cf. III Lat. c. 18); Lér.c. 5-6; Vall. 217, ordering the establishment of these centres in all conventual churches.

84. Lér. c. 7; Vall. 217. However, it was recognised that the ignorance of the elderly was invincible.

85. Martène-Durand, IV, 598; Rodríguez López, 11, 592; Chartularium Universitatis Portugalensis, 22.

86. Lér.c.5;Vall.217-18.

87. IV Lat.c.29.Cf. III Lat.c. 13.

88. III Lat. c. 5 Lér. c. 13; Vall. 221-2; CIL, c. 3. Cf. P. Hinschius, Das Kirchenrecht der Katholiken und Protestanten in Deutschland, I (Berlin, 1869), 63 ff.

89. At Porto, likewise, he fixed the numbers of canons and portionaries at fourteen and six respectively: Censual do Cabido da Sé do Porto, 12.

90. Vall. 222; CIL, c. 6; Lér. c. 18.

91. Vall. 225; CIL, c. 13 ; Lér. c. 17.

92. Nor, moreover, in CIL.

93. AC Seo de Urgel, cod. 2119, fo. 10v; Martène-Durand, IV, 595; VL, XII, 150; AC Vich, 37-6-60; Reg. Inn. IV, 186; Reg. Greg. IX, 386 (cf. Reg. Hon. III, 1114, 1396; MDH, 160, 173).

94. Rodríguez López, II, 593; Martbne-Durand, IV, 598: 'unde requirit aequitas et hoc ipsum postulat necessitas...'.

95. Vall.220; Lér. c.10; Cf. IV Lat. c. 20.

96. Serrano, Don Mauricio, 141; AHN, cod. 987B, fo. 30r; Chartularium Universitatis Portugaiensis, 22 (Burgos, Toledo, Guimarães); AC Cuenca, 5-20-275. At Barcelona the scale of penalties was regulated by the degree of lateness, while at Astorga the Epistle of the Mass and the Gloria of the first psalm at matins and vespers were established as the points of no return: Rodríguez López, II, 591; Marténe-Durand, IV, 596-7.

97. CLI:B. Hisp., XV, 274.

98. IV Lat. c. 6; Lér.c. 3; Vall. 216.

99. Raymundo Guise in the eighteenth century thought that John of Abbevile's Lérida Council was the first council in the Tarragona province since the year 614: BN, MS. 11263, unpaginated. Cf. Valls i Taberner in AST, XI, 251ff.; and, for the kingdoms of Leon and Castile, the various pieces by Fidel Fita in BRAH and Mr R. A. Fletchers forthcoming Oxford D.Phil. dissertation.