[68]Many times during its history, the chapter of Vic was promised a share in the public revenues collected by the church, but, as has been shown, this promise went unfulfilled. The proceeds of tolls, judicial fines, market and construction taxes, and coinage are collectively known as regalia, because of their origin as royal taxes. Originally the prerogative of the Carolingian authorities, the regalia were, by the late ninth century, shared by the church and the counts of Barcelona.⁽¹⁾As the delegate of the public authority, the church collected and used the regalia in keeping with the secular responsibilities entailed by its partnership with the counts.

The acts by which the count donated the regalia include the chapter of Vic as a recipient along with the bishop.⁽²⁾ However, the bishop did not effectively share this income with the chapter, perhaps because the regalia were the most visible and lucrative evidence of lordship. Despite the expressed intentions of the reorganizations undertaken by the bishop in 957 and 1098, the chapter never received significant amounts from the incidents of urban lordship. Individual canons were enriched by other privileges, such as nonregalian gifts and exemption from construction taxes and market restrictions, but they did not receive a major share of the judicial, market, or coinage revenues. When the episcopal [70] monopoly over public revenue ended, it would be laymen who benefited, not the chapter.

Until 1100 the regalia were the prerogative of episcopal office, distinct from such corporate revenues as tithes and seigneurial dues, and distinct as well from other signs of lordship (such as castles) by reason of identification with the town of Vic. The early regalian powers had not been so geographically focused but included rights throughout the entire county of Ausona.⁽³⁾ By the eleventh century, however, the regalia consisted of profits from the mint located in Vic, tolls on produce entering the market of Vic, revenue from taxes paid by participants in the market (including taxes on commodities and regulatory taxes on weights and measures), construction taxes, and judicial revenues (fines and surety payments). The regalia, although not defined as such, were rights concentrated in Vic itself. They served as evidence for the church's secular lordship in general and over the city especially.

Three factors undermined the urban lordship of the cathedral: the division of Vic into two sectors, the ability of laymen to annex public revenues, and the assertiveness of townsmen. Of these, the last two were developments of the twelfth century. As previously noted, the Taradell and Lluçà families were able to infringe on episcopal monopolies during the last years of Bishop Berenguer and the early years of Bishop Arnau. Later, townsmen would demand privileges in the market, diminution of episcopal taxes, and the right to limited self-government.

The first problem, on the other hand -- the division of Vic into two sectors, episcopal and vicomital -- was implicit in the reestablishment of the town. There was no immediate threat to the church while the upper, vicomital town was subject to the distant viscounts of Cardona, who took little active interest in Vic. Near the end of the eleventh century, however, when the upper town passed to the seneschals, the division of the city and its consequent ambiguities began to pose difficulties for the bishops at a time when their authority was being questioned on other fronts as well.

[71]

THE DIVIDED CITY

We have spoken several times about the partnership between the counts and the bishops of Vic, an alliance symbolized in the dual lordship over the restored town. This arrangement, despite its appropriate symbolism, contained implicit uncertainties regarding the extent of ecclesiastical power over the entire city and the degree of independence enjoyed by the vicomital half. When the secular and ecclesiastical spheres drew apart at the end of the eleventh century, a corresponding division occurred within Vic, and what had been ideally a form of cooperation became a source of potential conflict.

The upper town was originally entrusted to the viscounts of Ausona, whose power after 1000 was based not in Vic but to the northwest, in their castle of Cardona, the great frontier fortress of the Segarra district. According to Odilo Engels, Bishop Arnulf's membership in the Cardona family led to confusion between private and institutional authority.⁽⁴⁾ Because the viscount and the bishop were members of the same family, the entire city was controlled by Bishop Arnulf. Although this circumstance might imply a triumph for the church, the real effect of dissolving the link between the office of viscount and the upper city was to make the upper city look like a private, familial possession. The upper town was considered the property of the Cardona family, independent of whatever public or ecclesiastical function its members might have.

Engels contends that in the mid-eleventh century, when the seneschals of the count of Barcelona succeeded to domination over the upper town, they retained the Cardona's habit of regarding the upper town as completely independent of eccleslastical authority.⁽⁵⁾ The bishops, in turn, recalling the recognition made to Bishop Arnulf as overlord by his younger brother the viscount, assumed that the vicomital half was a close dependency of the church, while the lower part was under direct episcopal control. Arnulf's leadership of the Cardona family ended by serving the claims of both bishop and seneschal. In the thirteenth [72] century these contradictory interpretations would finally clash in open warfare, but there was already considerable uneasiness in the early years of the relationship between the bishop of Vic and the count's seneschals.⁽⁶⁾

The first seneschal of the count of Barcelona was Amat Eldric (died 1058), an important figure of the period of upheaval and civil rebellion. He was part of the conservative party of Dowager Countess Ermessenda, the faction supported by the bishops of Vic.⁽⁷⁾ The bishops considered Amat Eldric as their protector, in keeping with their usual inclination to identify the interests of the church with the support of well-disposed leaders of the secular order.

Amat Eldric held three castles in the diocese of Vic: Orís, Voltregà, and Solterra. These were attached to the office of seneschal, but after Amat Eldric's death the bishop of Vic received them to be held during the minority of Amat's son. When none of Amat's descendants proved capable of carrying out the responsibilities of the seneschal's office, the bishop searched for another protector. After a brief experiment with the lords of Gurb-Queralt, Bishop Berenguer settled on Guillem Ramon, seneschal of the count since at least 1068. In approximately 1082 the bishop gave the seneschal and two associates rights over churches in Orís, Santa Maria de Besora, and Torelló in return for a promise of military aid. In 1088 Guillem Ramon was invested with the three castles identified with his position, and the bishop also gave him (subject to the count's approval) the fortified tower built on the site of the Roman temple in the upper city.⁽⁸⁾ This was, of course, the former vicomital castle of Vic. Guillem Ramon swore an oath of fidelity to Bishop Berenguer for all these fortresses,⁽⁹⁾ an oath that made it inevitable that Guillem's role (and that of his descendants) as seneschal and as lord of the upper town would henceforth be confused. The bishop conferred the castles and was ultimate lord of the entire city, yet the seneschals, as royal servants, were not inclined to accept episcopal suzerainty.

It has been thought that Guillem Ramon's family already controlled the upper town before the infeudation of 1088, creating additional confusion in relations with the bishop.⁽¹⁰⁾ This opinion [73] is related to the assumption that Guillem Ramon was a member of the Montcada, who may have had interests in Vic before 1088 and who were the hereditary seneschals of the counts in the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Although most of the Montcada seneschals were also named Guillem Ramon, the exhaustive research of John Shideler has demonstrated that the family of the Guillem Ramon seneschal of 1088 must be separated from that of the Montcada.⁽¹¹⁾ The sons of Guillem Ramon II used "de Montcada" as their family name, but the Montcadas active in the courts of the count-kings are not to be confused with the seneschals of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries. The implication for Vic is that there was no connection between the seneschal Guillem Ramon and Vic prior to 1082. Even assuming an earlier Montcada interest in Vic, which is unlikely, there is no reason to believe that the family of Guillem Ramon had lands or rights there. It was, therefore, the grants made in 1082 and 1088, and perhaps a memory of the confusion under Bishop Arnulf, that made episcopal control over the upper town a matter of so much ambiguity and later conflict.

The terms of the crucial partition of 1088 were not well defined. The bishop handed over the fortress of Vic, but the transaction needed the approval of the count to be considered fully legitimate. There would always remain a measure of doubt over the degree to which the seneschal owed his position in Vic to the bishop or to his own office. So long as the bishop and count were allied, there was little trouble. When their interests diverged, however, the seneschals identified themselves with the count, and the approval clause of the 1088 agreement allowed later seneschals to derive their authority from the count's generosity, not from the favor of the bishop. ⁽¹²⁾

For the twelfth century the issue of subordination was significant, but not vital. What most undermined the bishop in relation to the seneschals was the peculiarity of overlapping rights between the two jurisdictions.⁽¹³⁾ A market called the Quintana was held in the upper town on a site roughly corresponding with the modern Plaça Vella. The Quintana was distinct from the larger market located in the episcopal sector, the Mercadal. Although [74] the Quintana was located within the old city, the bishop retained a right to merchandise and regulatory taxes from it, taxes called collectively the leuda. In 1104 Guillem Ramon seneschal demanded ("requisiuit") the leuda on measures and meat.⁽¹⁴⁾ Bishop Arnau responded that this right was a historic privilege granted to the church by the Carolingian King Louis (d'Outremer)⁽¹⁵⁾ and he thoughtfully pointed out that the charter enabling the church to collect the leuda in the Quintana required that anyone who presumed to take it away should be excommunicated.⁽¹⁶⁾ Guillem Ramon nevertheless repeated his demands and promised to hold the leuda in fealty to the church, whereupon Bishop Arnau reluctantly conceded a life grant of taxes on the sale of meat from Monday to Friday and of profits derived from the enforcement of standards for weights and measures.⁽¹⁷⁾

The bishop had to accede to the seneschal's insistence because he lacked the support of the count. As the count's chief court official, the seneschal could pressure the bishop of Vic. Similar demands were made on the bishop of Barcelona by another comital representative, the veguer of Barcelona, Guillem Renart. In this instructive case, however, Bishop Oleguer of Barcelona was so closely identified with the count's circle that the episcopal right to the leuda of Barcelona was restored after a brief period of alienation in 1114, and the church thereby turned back an attack on its revenue and authorty.⁽¹⁸⁾

In the "relaxation" (laxatio) of 1104, the bishop of Vic gave up some more of his already diminished profits from the mint at Vic. The seneschal received an unspecified amount of the dragma -- the silver retained by the bishop when the mint was operated -- which, like the leuda, was granted away for the lifetime of the recipient only. We have already seen the limited effectiveness of such provisions, and it should come as no surprise to learn that the seneschals never returned these rights.

The capitulation of Bishop Arnau meant that a part of the bishop's power in the upper town was eliminated. The overlapping authority between the sectors was now reversed: the seneschal was permitted a share of a former episcopal monopoly, the coinage. This right was not, as the Quintana rights had been, a[75] geographical expression of control, but it did represent an invasion of episcopal lordship and a further weakening of ecclesiastical control within Vic.
 

CLAIMS BY LOCAL MAGNATES

As has already been shown, the seneschals were not the first to break into the episcopal monopoly over regalia. The chapter had futilely tried to hold onto revenues from judgment, the market, and coinage received in the last years of Bishop Berenguer. Guillem Ramon de Taradell obtained a portion of the coinage struck, and the Lluçà, by 1104 at least, had one-third of the judicial revenues in Vic and in episcopal lands elsewhere, four pigs from the toll on produce entering the Mercadal, and permission to coin money using the episcopal mint.⁽¹⁹⁾

Between 1097 and 1104 the bishop lost his income from the Quintana, was forced to share profits from the Mercadal with the Lluçà, alienated the coinage to the Lluçà, the Taradell, and the seneschals, and had to share judicial fines with the Lluçà. This sudden decline did not, of course, benefit the chapter.⁽²⁰⁾ It was rather a reward to the magnates of Ausona for the cold relations between the count and the bishop. After 1104, however, although preoccupations elsewhere continued to divert the counts' attention from their seneschals' doings, the bishops stabilized their position and retained significant revenues from the regalia and a monopoly on the exercise of justice if not on its revenues. Only in the thirteenth century would renewed threats not be met effectively.
 

THE MARKET AND COINAGE

The first partition of the Mercadal came when the Lluçà obtained the right to part of the toll and taxes during the pontificate of Berenguer. This arrangement was confirmed in 1104 and again in 1171. The Lluçà were induced, for monetary compensation, to give up their irksome privilege of "guarding" the episcopal palace, a privilege that had in effect given them claims to lodging [76] and maintenance at the bishop's expense.⁽²¹⁾ The Gurb-Queralt also controlled part of the market in the twelfth century. How they achieved this right is unknown, but it was among the many disputes between the bishops of Vic and this family. On the occasion of the mortal illness of Berenguer de Queralt in 1164-1165, a number of issues were resolved, including this one. In 1165 Berenguer recognized that he held title to an area of the market only as a fief of the bishop.⁽²²⁾

Late in the century at least two families of lesser station possessed small privileges in the Mercadal. Guillem de Tenes collected the tax on weights and measures (five sous annually) from a stand in the market, which he used as security for a loan in 1178.⁽²³⁾ In 1197 Pere Gros of the Santa Eugenia clan gave his stand and its revenue from weights and measures to Ponç de Lunell in return for twenty-six sous plus an annual sum of ten sous (beginning after four years).⁽²⁴⁾ Both of these cases concerned essentially private transactions over space in the Mercadal, but they encroached on episcopal jurisdiction over weights and measures, a regalian right. By the end of the twelfth century it was not only the Lluçà or the Queralt that received a portion of episcopal revenues but distinctly minor figures such as Ponq de Lunell as well.

Despite these encroachments, the bishop retained extensive powers over the Mercadal, which he defended and largely maintained during the period of rapid commercial expansion in the late twelfth century. The exercise of episcopal jurisdiction in the market is shown in some detail in the course of a deposition made by the sacristan Pere de Tavertet in 1209 during one of the disputes between Bishop Guillem de Tavertet and the Montcada lords.⁽²⁵⁾ In addition to citing particular instances of episcopal jurisdiction over the punishment of crime, Pere de Tavertet recalled some examples of episcopal control over commerce, including the bishop's responsibility to punish the use of fraudulent weights and measures of wine, meat, cloth, leather, bread, oil and land. In one case, during a royal visit to Vic, the king's butler arrested a merchant for selling false measures of wine. The bishop informed King Alfonso that punishment of such crimes [77] pertained exclusively to the bishop and that the king was entitled only to restitution.⁽²⁶⁾

The bishop, according to Pere de Tavertet, was accustomed to render judgment over all men who came into the Mercadal, but the Montcada market, the Quintana, remained outside episcopal jurisdiction.⁽²⁷⁾ By the early thirteenth century episcopal power had eroded to the extent that the Montcada seneschals owned part of the leuda in the Mercadal, thereby reversing the situation before 1104, when the bishop had received part of the leuda in the Quintana.⁽²⁸⁾ Nevertheless, throughout the twelfth century the bishop remained the source of judicial authority over the main market of Vic. He might share out certain revenues, but he successfully defended the actual exercise of justice.

The bishop was also able to retain a major role in the minting of coins, but his control of the lucrative profits of this right was more severely undermined than in the case of market jurisdiction. In 1176, in the course of a reorganization of the mint, testimony given by Ramon de Pou, in charge of distributing the mint's revenue, regarding the division of spoils shows the bishop in control of half of this revenue.⁽²⁹⁾ The Montcada seneschal had the right to receive 20 percent of the total profit (the seneschal's share in 1104 had not been specified). Some new beneficiaries included the viscount of Cardona, the sacristan, and Ramon de Pou, each of whom received 10 percent of the profit. The sacristan may have held his share in memory of the grant made by Bishop Berenguer in his last year to his canons, but it is not likely that he actually shared this income with the chapter in 1176. The Taradell family, which had received revenue from the mint at the beginning of the century, were edged out by 1176.

The division sworn to by Ramon de Pou in 1176 was said to be the long-established custom of Vic, but in fact the coinage had been reformed only two years previously. The money of Vic had been, in Thomas Bisson's words, "ageing and unreliable" and not popular in the region.⁽³⁰⁾ Bishop Pere de Redorta (1147-1185), under whom a number of rationalizations (such as the provosts) were instituted, established a standard ratio of eighteen sous to the mark in 1174. The bishop and two canons swore not [78] to diminish the value of the money and established penalties for using other currencies for transactions within the city. This reform demonstrates the bishop's ability to retain control of the coinage -- more evidence that episcopal privileges, although challenged and eroded, were not vanishing in the twelfth century.
 

ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY

The exercise of nonregalian rights must be considered in order to evaluate how much power the church retained within the city of Vic during the twelfth century. The church not only collected taxes as the lord of the city, but it also owned urban land. In the latter half of the century church land was divided into sectors, each of which was termed a seigneury (senioratus), subject to the bishop or a canon.⁽³¹⁾ Within a seigneury private parties could buy and sell property, provided the usual rent (census) was paid.

The founding of the seigneuries may represent another attempt to share the cathedral's wealth more equitably by diminishing the bishop's share in favor of the leading members of the chapter. Monsignor Junyent believed that the seigneury was the descendant of the privilege of 1010, which exempted the canons from the construction tax (the tercium).⁽³²⁾ According to Junyent, this exemption established fourteen privileged islands (franqueses is his term) within the city and encouraged the canons to set themselves up as landlords. But, since the seigneury is first encountered in 1159,⁽³³⁾ this explanation leaves 150 years unaccounted for. In addition, the unique example of a seigneury in the process of formation involved houses recently purchased by the bishop and thus not previously exempt. Here the seigneury was an episcopal gift, not a rearrangement of privileged property.⁽³⁴⁾ Even if the seigneuries in fact descended from what might have been franqueses, it is not clear how they were bestowed. Did the bishop appoint certain canons? Or were the seigneuries associated with certain families that were normally represented in the chapter by one or more members? That family names were later transferred to street names argues for permanent identification of neighborhoods with family control.⁽³⁵⁾ Yet the bishop retained ultimate [79] jurisdiction over a large number of these immunities, which would not have been the case had they been earlier assimilated into familial control. With one exception, all seigneuries were owned by canons, a fact that militates against explaining their existence by reference to local oligarchical power. If families had controlled them, one would expect a number of disputes between the church and those families in keeping with the common confusion between capitular and private property. That there were no such disputes, that the seigneury remained clearly ecclesiastical (sometimes attached to capitular office), and that the term appeared suddenly argues for some deliberate episcopal policy to divide urban land and reward certain canons. The innovation of the seigneury meant not an alienation of chapter property but a change in its administration, perhaps another aspect of the administrative efforts of Bishop Pere de Rodorta.

The cathedral appears to have rented out and bought other land and property as a matter of routine. Furthermore, the church was successful in limiting the influence of the region's magnates over urban property. Several documents reporting transactions within the city include a clause prohibiting any alienation to a knight (miles) or cleric.⁽³⁶⁾ This regulation, common in medieval towns, was designed to prevent property from falling into the hands of persons immune from the jurisdiction of the governing authorities.⁽³⁷⁾ Although it is often thought to represent the desires of the bourgeoisie, the limits on alienating urban property were, in Vic, welcomed by the cathedral, always with the understanding that "cleric" meant those belonging to institutions other than the cathedral and did not include its canons. The church's lordship within the city was protected by the prohibition clause to the degree that, while magnates held part of the regalia and competed with the church over suburban land, within the town boundary there was little that was owned by aristocrats or other clerical establishments.⁽³⁸⁾

Prominent laymen and other churches were active on the outskirts of town. As the city expanded, meadows such as the so-called Prat de Vic and Prat Narbonès became very desirable and the objects of contention. In 1164 Berenguer de Queralt [80] renounced claims to dues from the Prat de Vic, where knights and peasants had recently begun to cultivate the land.⁽³⁹⁾
The Sentfores family quarreled with the cathedral over the boundaries of influence in the Prat Narbonès that lay southwest of the city, between Vic and Sentfores.⁽⁴⁰⁾ That family also owned fields at the western and northern edge of town. Bertran de Sentfores gave these to the Knights Hospitaller, leading to a violent dispute between Pere de Sentfores (along with his sons) and the order in the last years of the century.⁽⁴¹⁾ The counts of Barcelona owned several pieces of land near Vic, including the fields of Emposta, west of the town, which Ramon Berenguer IV gave to the cathedral in 1132.⁽⁴²⁾ The canon in charge of Emposta, Joan Bacó admitted in 1166 that he had committed numerous "injuries" in his stewardship of Emposta and had not rendered all that was due to the chapter.⁽⁴³⁾ It was this sort of problem that made the provost system so appealing. In another suburb, Socarrats, the monastery of Sant Pere de Roda and the canons of l'Estany shared a piece of land.⁽⁴⁴⁾

The cathedral, in sum, had lost much, but not all, control over regalian income, had maintained preponderant ownership of land within the city, and was an effective competitor in the volatile suburban real estate market. The twelfth-century church remained moderately resourceful and innovative in meeting these developments, but perhaps more significant was its response to the demands of a new group, the urban elite.
 

TOWNSMEN OF VIC

Vic expanded during the twelfth century. Vineyards and gardens still stood within its walls, but extensive building was going on in the episcopal sector, especially in the Calle Nou (New Street) near the market place.⁽⁴⁵⁾ The Mercadal stood where the main plaza of the city is now located, and, as with most early medieval markets, it remained just outside the town in order to allow a substantial open market space without the burden of expanding the walls. As it adjoined the episcopal town, the Mercadal was, in a sense, the vicus of the vicus -- the suburb of what had begun [81] as a subsidiary of the Roman core. In the eleventh century, the Calle Nou had been a path between gardens, leading from the town to the Mercadal. It was designated as "New Street" in the mid-twelfth century, when houses were built along it, creating a built-up area bordering the market.⁽⁴⁶⁾

The vicomital sector also experienced growth, eastward in the direction of the Mèder river. In 1147 the count gave his seneschal territory between the castle and the river for cultivation and settlement.⁽⁴⁷⁾ It was almost certainly here that in 1194 Guillem Ramon de Montcada gave a manse to a group of families on what was by then populated and cultivated land.⁽⁴⁸⁾ New farms were also founded on the fields adjoining the southern edge of town, as evidenced in the disputes involving the cathedral and the Queralt and Sentfores families.⁽⁴⁹⁾

The urban economy expanded along with the growth in population, but only later would Vic be sufficiently important and cosmopolitan to have a role in Mediterranean trade. For our period the economy was centered in the markets. Profits were to be made from buying and selling produce and the one great international article of manufacture, woolen cloth. The market had existed since the beginning of the repopulation effort, and by the time Oliba's cathedral was consecrated in 1038 it seems to have amounted to more than a place to exchange a few necessities.⁽⁵⁰⁾ In the early twelfth century the first annual fairs were established in Catalonia, and the region of Vic was served by the Fair of Moià, which opened opportunities for extensive international trade.⁽⁵¹⁾

The class that developed from the commercial expansion was not exclusively mercantile. Families of military status, such as the Tenes, held commercial interests, while the Cloquer, an urban family, owned land outside the town. As was the case elsewhere in Catalonia, the fortunes of urban entrepreneurs were built not by the highly unpredictable long-distance trade but by combinations of local land speculation, rents, moneylending, and activities in the market.⁽⁵²⁾ In the twelfth century both commerce and real estate interests prospered and encouraged the formation of a patriciate capable of soliciting benefits from the church.

The first evidence of merchants forming an organized group [82] occurs in a market privilege of 1138, in which the bishop answered the entreaties of men described as burgenses for a prohibition on foreign merchants wishing to deal in cut woolen cloth or red dye (grana de vermei).⁽⁵³⁾It has been noted above that the canons of Vic were exempted from these provisions and that they further obtained the right to buy cloth at cost from the merchants.⁽⁵⁴⁾ It would appear that by 1138, the Mercadal had acquired enough importance to attract other merchants to compete. The petition of the burgenses also shows that the volume of imported cloth was now such as to place the Mercadal well above the rank of a merely local entrepôt.

A recognized group of town leaders existed in 1138, although no individuals were singled out among the burgenses in the privilege. Anonymous though they were, the group of townsmen was sufficiently worthy to enter into a conveniencia with the bishop and chapter, much as an individual aristocrat might, and they promised to aid and be faithful to the cathedral.⁽⁵⁵⁾

After 1138 specific commercial families became visible, their names appearing frequently in documents as town leaders, entrepreneurs, perpetrators of commercial fraud, and mediators in disputes. The Espanyol, who would be active in the Mediterranean during the next century, are first encountered in 1154.⁽⁵⁶⁾ The Cloquer, Coc, Bacó, Mercadal, and Palaçiol (some of whose names indicate the origins of their wealth), were active in market transactions and as dealers in town and suburban property. It is also during the last third of the century that these families entered their sons into the cathedral chapter.

The role of these men as municipal leaders is reflected in the degree to which they were consulted in important matters affecting the town. Guillem d'Illa, for example, was involved in local property exchanges and witnessed a number of private and public acts. He bought urban land in 1175 and acquired additional property from the bishop and chapter in 1192.⁽⁵⁷⁾ He had some of his goods confiscated by the archdeacon of Vic as a result of charges that he used a false measure in selling cloth.⁽⁵⁸⁾ Guillem d'Illa also attested to a number of transactions in which his direct interests were not involved. In 1166, along with many others of [83] the nonclerical urban elite, Guillem attested to the admission by the canon Joan Bacó that he had injured the chapter in his stewardship over the field of Emposta. Guillem was among those present at the oath of Ramon de Pou in 1176 regarding the division of coinage profits.⁽⁵⁹⁾ He witnessed an audit of royal revenues from Vic made in 1189.⁽⁶⁰⁾ Guillem also appeared in a donation to the Hospitallers, two mediated disputes between the church and its secular opponents, and a sale within the town.⁽⁶¹⁾ Members of the Cloquer family also witnessed ecclesiastical acts within the city, mediated disputes, and attested to other transactions.⁽⁶²⁾

The prominence of men such as Guillem d'Illa and Pere Berenguer de Cloquer in networks of relationships may be a more impressive indication of the emergence of a new class than is the privilege of 1138. These men had attained, informally, a voice in urban government. In the Mediterranean part of Europe there had for some time been boni homines, men often (although not always) of urban background who served frequently as mediators, witnesses, and representatives.⁽⁶³⁾ José María Font Rius has pointed out the importance of the boni homines, or probi homines (as the same class later came to be called), in the development of municipal government.⁽⁶⁴⁾ In Italy, and to a degree in southern France, the merchant class expelled its episcopal or noble lords and governed itself through elected consuls, much as the northern commune later did.⁽⁶⁵⁾ Catalonia, and Spain in general, provide relatively few examples of such violent mistrust of ecclesiastical or aristocratic government.⁽⁶⁶⁾ In a setting of cooperation between the king and his townsmen or between episcopal lords and their towns, the informal role of the probi homines was enhanced and took the place of appointment or election to independent office. The frontier has often received credit for fostering a certain harmony between the townsmen and other classes.

Boni homines appear occasionally in eleventh- and twelfth-century documents from Vic.⁽⁶⁷⁾ After 1150, disputes were frequently settled by probi homines acting as mediators, or at least as witnesses encouraging a resolution.⁽⁶⁸⁾ In this activity they resemble the Castilian boni homines, the leading citizens of the frontier [84] villages (concejos).⁽⁶⁹⁾ Unlike the Castilian concejos, however, Vic was not a frontier town and did not enjoy anything approaching self-government. The exchange of military service for autonomy that worked to the mutual advantage of the king and townsmen of Castile did not take hold in the older, seigneurial north. Nevertheless, even here the growth of an urban economic elite was translated into political power, and, it should be noted, Catalan towns such as Vic were economically more powerful than the small frontier communities of Castile.

At Vic men such as the Cloquer formed the class of probi homines. They were townsmen with interests in trade and land, they acted as mediators and witnesses, their opinion on important matters was solicited, they were becoming important within the chapter, and they might act as representatives of the town, or at least of its mercantile elite.⁽⁷⁰⁾ Vic was unusual not in having such men but in defining them as a formal class. In the coinage reform act of 1174 the bishop included a provision enjoining a fine for using currency that was not that of Vic. The scale of fines was to vary: ten sous for a probus homo, five for a "mediocris homo."⁽⁷¹⁾ The graduated penalties imply the existence of a recognized body of leading citizens. The probi homines were becoming a patriciate.
 

AN ATTEMPT AT CONSULAR GOVERNMENT

The ascent of the bourgeoisie was never inevitable, continuous, or untroubled. It was not possible to transform economic power automatically into political independence, and the one recorded effort to throw off church jurisdiction for a consular regime on the Italian or southern French model was a failure.⁽⁷²⁾ In 1185, or shortly before, the men of Vic refused to pay the bishop the judicial tax known as the firmanciae.⁽⁷³⁾Firmanciae were levies paid by townsmen as evidence of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in disputes and as surety to guarantee compliance with any possible future judgment. These levies were symbolic of subordination, and, as was true for many communal rebellions elsewhere, it was resistance to a degrading, although long-standing, seigneurial right that prompted the formation of an association among equals attempting [85] to overthrow the town lord.⁽⁷⁴⁾ Some of the men of Vic soon regretted their temerity and paid the firmanciae. Others, according to the bishop, not only persisted in their refusal but pledged oaths of solidarity with one another, forming a sworn association (coniuratio) and electing representatives (probably called consuls) in place of the legitimate episcopal authority.⁽⁷⁵⁾

At this point the townsmen crossed from forceful demands to open defiance, constituting a threat to church suzerainty greater in theoretical significance than all the previous aristocratic usurpations of the regalia. Unlike the other challenges, however, the town revolt was firmly resisted and quelled -- so effectively, in fact, that it has left no trace other than one parchment reporting the judgment against the townsmen, a document buried in the archive of the Crown of Aragon.

The account of the incident does not say who the rebels were, as the church was reluctant to dignify them with any other title than the dismissive "men of Vic." They must have included members of the urban leadership, the probi homines, in order to resist the bishop, elect representatives, and make the demands they did. The scope of their demands is not absolutely certain, but the refusal to pay the firmanciae and the appointment of representatives makes it clear that they envisioned a new government that would replace the bishop's jurisdiction. Whether or not the elected representatives were designated as consuls,⁽⁷⁶⁾ the demands and actions of the townsmen placed them in the ranks of Mediterranean citizens who forcibly acted to set up urban self-government. Consuls were known elsewhere in Catalonia (as at Cervera in 1182, where the term was first used), but consular government was generally semiautonomous, set up with the king's blessing, often to assume the defense of the frontier.⁽⁷⁷⁾ The Iberian norm was to allow a degree of independence to communities in return for military service to the crown.

Vic was not unique as an example of urban defiance within the Spanish kingdoms. At Santiago de Compostella and Sahagún, townsmen rebelled against ecclesiastical lords in the twelfth century.⁽⁷⁸⁾ What is unusual about Vic is that rebellion was otherwise unknown in Catalonia before the thirteenth century (and [86] remained rare even then) and that the consular government was born not out of cooperation with the crown, as at Cervera, but independently.⁽⁷⁹⁾ The coniuratio of Vic had more in common with the antiepiscopal consular movements of Italy than with the friendly indulgences by the crown to other Catalan towns. The brief uprising at Vic, although a failure, demonstrates the spread of the consular movement, calls into question claims that Catalonia was the scene of harmonious urban development, and undermines attempts to link self-government inevitably to royal favor.

Abortive though it was, the consular movement provides a unique example of how the bishop defined his control over the city. Nowhere else does such a concise yet varied defense of ecclesiastical lordship appear. In the first place, the bishop referred to the antique privileges received from the Carolingian kings, privileges granting lordship (dominium) over Vic.⁽⁸⁰⁾ In the reference to royal concession there is a resemblance to the defense that Bishop Arnau futilely offered in 1104 for his rights to taxes on the Quintana market. Again, near the end of the century, in repressing the disorders committed by the canons' entourages, Bishop Guillem would use language derived from early medieval secular formulations in referring to his bannum (power of command) and jurisdiction over "invasions of the town".⁽⁸¹⁾

In the judgment regarding the coniuratio of the men of Vic, however, a new vocabulary of lordship was elucidated not by the bishop but by the judges, who were the archdeacon and precentor of Vic and the sacristan of Girona. In a precocious, and rather pedantic, display of legal knowledge, the three judges invoked Roman law to describe the implications of the townsmen's acts.⁽⁸²⁾ The judges reminded the men that no license is given to coerce miscreants except as conceded by the public power.⁽⁸³⁾ In an interesting, if forced, commercial analogy, the judges noted that if the relatively minor crime of forming an association to monopolize a commodity were punishable by exile and confiscation (as established in the Codex), the townsmen merited at least that much retribution for their conspiracy to monopolize the exercise of justice.⁽⁸⁴⁾ They were also guilty of ingratitude toward [87] their lord, the bishop. Like freemen who were to be degraded into servitude if they were ungrateful to their patron, the men of Vic deserved to be deprived of their (unspecified) privileges received from the church.⁽⁸⁵⁾

The above analogies were lifted directly or indirectly from the Corpus Juris Civilis. Terms such as tutela publica were also interspersed to display the learning of the judges. Such knowledge probably had arrived quite recently. Normally the reception of Roman law in the major centers of the Hispanic peninsula is situated by modern historians between 1150 and 1200. Its presence in Vic near 1185 is extremely early for a provincial town. Perhaps Pere de Cardona, the canon of Vic who had lectured on Roman law at Montpellier, was the conduit for the entrance of the new learning that was already well established in the Midi.⁽⁸⁶⁾

This isolated instance does not make Vic a center of legal scholarship in the twelfth century, but the appearance of Roman law in a document justifying an ecclesiastical seigneury is significant for two other reasons. It serves as a reminder of the peculiar distribution of innovation. At the time, nothing could have been more modern or creative than this early example of Roman law applied to a specific situation, notwithstanding the unprogressive use to which it was put. This particular innovation appeared not on the frontier or in the royal court but in the isolated intellectual climate of the pre-Pyrenees.

The use of Roman law also reveals something about the self-image of the church. Its argument against the townsmen was based on the hoary appeal to Carolingian privileges, but bolstered by the abstractions of the Corpus Juris regarding challenges to public authority. Nothing in the document refers to the power of the count-kings in this matter or to the count as originator of the secular lordship of the bishop. Nor is there any reference to the Peace and Truce of God. In the eleventh century these would have provided an argument against usurping the right of coercion. By 1185, however, the Peace and Truce were firmly identified with the rights of the count-kings and were therefore irrelevant to justifying the jurisdiction of the bishop of Vic.⁽⁸⁷⁾ The cathedral was true to its traditions in defining its power by reference [88] to secular rather than spiritual sanctions, but it was inventive in divorcing these sanctions from the House of Barcelona and in employing the revived Roman law.

The effectiveness of the bishop's resistance was such that nothing further was heard of consuls or municipal self-government. Yet, despite the forceful tone of their condemnation, the judges did not severely penalize the men of Vic. They were allowed to swear that they had not persisted in forming coniurationes after the bishop's express prohibition.⁽⁸⁸⁾ Although a manifest untruth, their oath allowed the incident to be considered something less than an act of outright rebellion.

Despite the destruction of their formal government, the commercial class retained its strength and unity. In 1198 a group of townsmen protested to the bishop about the customary but irritating tax levied when houses were built (the tercium).⁽⁸⁹⁾In the document the townsmen in the delegation were collectively termed probi homines and were listed separately. The probi homines here appeared as informal representatives, but unlike the anonymous group that petitioned in 1138, they negotiated with Bishop Guillem de Tavertet as virtual equals and managed to wrest some concessions from the normally intransigent prelate. These were neither the suppliants of 1138 nor the rebels of ca. 1185. Although probi homines was a title less impressive than that of consul, these men functioned as representatives -- as recognized, if informal, urban leaders.
 

At the beginning of the thirteenth century the bishop would become locked in a struggle with the Montcada seneschals over jurisdiction. Such problems as criminals fleeing from one sector to the other and the question of whether the upper town was held of the church led to confrontations that the bishop could not win. In 1315 he ceded his authority in the city to the king.⁽⁹⁰⁾ Already by 1200, after a century of neglect, the royal position in Vic was growing, and the struggles between the cathedral and the Montcada only enhanced royal supremacy.

The church had fared better during the twelfth century, considerably better than might have been expected, given the [89] debacle of 1098-1104, when it lost monopolies over the regalia. During the twelfth century it proved capable of resisting the demands of townsmen and prevented aristocrats from controlling urban property. It retreated when necessary over such issues as the seneschal's demands in the Quintana, but it could negotiate successfully with powerful families, such as the Lluçà, and recognized the usefulness of supporting the economic power of the mercantile elements, as in 1138. Although its urban lordship would not survive the open confrontation of the thirteenth century, the church did respond energetically to the array of threats and new situations brought about in the twelfth century.

1. On regalia, particularly in Germany and Italy, see A. Pöschl, Die Regalien der mittelaiterlichen Kirchen (Graz, 1928).

2. For example, Guifré II left one-third of the mint to the bishop and canons in 911; Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no 55: "Et iterum precipio vobis meos elemosinarios predictos . . . ut de ipsa moneta quod ego per donitum regis tenebam in villa Vico, ipsam tertiam partem similiter donare faciatis ad domum Sancti Petri apostoli vel in manus predicto episcopo, kannonicos adque successores eorum. . . ."

3. The privilege of King Odo, issued in 889, and subsequent expansion of episcopal rights included control over such things as tolls and coinage throughout the diocese (Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no 12; Ordeig, Els origens històrics, pp. 63-64).

4. Engels, "Die weltliche Herrschaft," pp. 14-16. On the early viscounts see Manuel Rovira i Solà, "Noves dades sobre els primers vescomtes d'Osona-Cardona," Ausa 9 (1981), 249-260.

5. Engels, "Die weltliche Herrschaft," pp. 14-16.

6. For descriptions of the thirteenth-century jurisdictional conflicts, see J. Gudiol, "Les bregues sobre lo senyoriu de Vich en temps del rey En Jaume I," in Congrès d'historia, 1:194-218; John C. Shideler, "Les tactiques politiques des Montcada, seigneurs de Vic du début du XIII^e siècle," Ausa 9 (1981), 329-342; Francesch Carreras y Candi, Notes dotzecentistes d'Ausona (Barcelona, 1906), pp. 380-400; Engels, "Die weltliche Herrschaft," pp. 20-22, 28-31.

7. A. Pladevall, "Els senescals dels comtes de Barcelona durant el segle XI," AEM 3 (1966), 121-123; idem, Ermessenda, pp. 40-41, 55-58.

8. For the agreement of 1082, see J. Shideler, A Medieval Noble Catalan Family: The Montcadas, 1000-1230 (Berkeley, 1983), chap. 1. The agreement of 1088 is AME 9, 12.

9. ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 85.

10. Engels, "Die weltliche Herrschaft," pp. 14-16. Pladevall, "Els senescals," pp. 122-123, considers it more likely that the grant of 1088 began the seneschals' involvement in the affairs of Vic. Shideler finds no evidence, prior to 1082, of interests in Vic on the part of either the Montcada or the family of Guillem Ramon seneschal (Medieval Catalan Family, chap. 1).

11. Shideler, Medieval Catalan Family. Shideler has traced the true Montcada genealogy and their eventual merger with the earlier family of seneschals. The Montcada were figures of some importance in the eleventh century but were not associated with the seneschals until the marriage (in 1117) of Beatriu de Montcada to the non-Montcada "Great Seneschal" Guillem Ramon II (following Shideler's revised enumeration of the bearers of this name).

12. Pladevall, "Els senescals, " p. 123; Junyent, La ciutat, pp. 65-66.

13. See Garcia, "Origens," pp. 131-134.

14. ACV, c. 6, 1977; Gudiol, Las monedas, pp. 17-18. The document opens: "Sit notum omnibus hominibus qualiter Guillelmus Raimundi dapifer multociens requisiuit domnum Arnallum uenerabilem Ausonensem episcopum ut daret ei ipsam leddam et dragmam quod habebat in ipsa moneta de Chintana uille Uici."

15. In fact that grant (Catalunya carolingia, ed. Abadal, vol. 2, pt. 2, p. 300),whose authenticity is not proven, only confirmed the one-third share of the coinage given by Count Guifré II in 911. As is made clear later in ACV, c. 6, 1977, the seneschal also demanded rights to the mint's profits.

16. ACV, c. 6, 1977.

17. Ibid.: "Ad ultimum . . . iam dictus uero episcopus cum consilio et assensu omnium suorum clericorum laxauit tenere ei ipsam leddam de Chintana de ipsis scilicet mensuris et de carne a feria ii. usque ad feriam vi. non per donum nec per assensum sed per solam tantummodo laxationem. "

18. Joseph Mas, Notes històriques del Bisbat de Barcelona, 12 vols. (Barcelona, 1906-1921), 10: 270-271.

19. ACV, c. 6, 1977 (1104); AME 13, 11 (1104).

20. There is a possibility that the chapter retained some mint income. In 1174 two canons were among those who guaranteed the amount of silver in the reformed coinage (ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 160). The sacristan was among those profiting from the coinage in 1176 (ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 194), and he may have done so as the chapter's representative.

21. AME 13, 11 (1104), 12 (1171). In 1171 their right to coin money was confirmed, and they received an outright gift of 50 gold morabetins.

22. AME 9, 35: "et ipsam partem de foro Uici . . . et alios feuos . . . possessuri sunt per ecclesiam Sancti Petri Uici."

23. AME 2, 158.

24. AME 2, 152.

25. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 83; Shideler, "Les tactiques," pp. 338-341. I am grateful to Professor Shideler for calling this document to my attention.

26. ACV, c. 6. Ep. I, 83: "Dixit etiam se uidisse quod tempore domini Ildefonso rege patris istius erat ipse rex apud Vicum in domibus eiusdem testis et botellarius rege cepit quondam hominem de Vico nomine Lobetum propter uinum quod ei uendiderat ad falsam mesuram. Et episcopus dixit domino regi quod non erat suum punire huiusmodi falsitates in villa Vici, sed quod restitueretur ei dampnum quod passus fuerat per falsam mesuram."

27. Ibid.: "Requisitus si omnes predictas iusticias et iurisdictiones exercuit et fecit episcopus et baiuli eius tam in hominibus episcopi et ecclesie quam in hominibus Guillelmi Raimundi et in tota villa Ulci, dixit quod sic . . . Dixit etiam quod nunquam uidit nec audiuit quod episcopus uel sui tenuissent aliquod placitum uel habuissent aliquam iusticiam de aliquo contractu uel delicto aut iniuria siue forfetura que fierent in predicto loco qui dicitur Quintana."

28. Garcia, "Origens," p. 134.

29. ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 194; Botet y Sisó, Les monedes, 1:ap. 15. See also Bisson, Conservation, pp. 78-80.

30. Bisson, Conservation, p. 79. The reform document is ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 160 (1174); VL, 6:ap. 1; Gudiol, Las monedas, P. 20; Botet y Sisó, Les monedes, 1:ap. 16.

31. One urban seigneury was owned by the castellan Guillem de Eures, who in 1182 sold the bishop his seigneury, which encompassed houses occupied by canons of the Tenes family, for the substantial sum of 120 sous (AME 2, 94). The price probably reflects the anxiety of the bishop to end Guillem's possession of something normally reserved for important canons and the bishop.

32. Junyent, La ciutat, p. 78.

33. AME 10, 31 (1159).

34. ACV, c. 6, 2571 (1194). The bishop gave the sacristan the seigneury encompassing houses recently purchased from Berenguer de Olost, which were therefore not part of the traditional church patrimony. The bishop also held the seigneury over parts of the Calle Nou, a newly developed part of the city that could not have had houses or _franqueses before 1100 (AME 1, 18 [1183], 22 [1177]).

35. For the street names, see Junyent, La ciutat, p. 78.

36. Font Rius, Origenes del régimen, p. 138, note 352.

37. The restriction was practiced in the Narbonnais; see Georges Duby, "La diffusion du titre chevaleresque sur le versant méditerranéen de la Chrétienté latine," in Philippe Contamine, ed., La noblesse au Moyen Age, XI^e-XV^e siècles: Essais à la mémoire de Robert Boutruche (Paris, 1976), p. 52.

38. Exceptions: the monastery of Sant Pere de Casserres owned urban land adjacent to a seigneury of the bishop and a seigneury belonging to the canon Guillem Guerau (ACV, LD, f. 105 [1163]); the Knights Hospitaller were given houses in Vic in 1140 (ACV, c. 6, 2298), and they acquired land in 1172 in order to build a regional headquarters (ACV, c. 6, 2413). According to Junyent, La ciutat, p. 392, their house was located in the present Carrer de Cardona. It was abandoned in the thirteenth century. The building was constructed before 1196, when it was designated as bordering land sold to the bishop and sacristan (AME 11, 5). The monastery of Sant Joan de les Abadesses received revenue from property in Vic (ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 318 [1181]). The Gurb family sold houses in 1196 (AME 11, 5) and collected revenue from others in 1198 (AME 5, 66). Ramon de Tous, a castellan of the bishop, owned houses in Vic (ACV, c. 6, 1746 [1174]).

39. AME 9, 37: "Primum itaque iamdictus Berengarius de Cheralto et mater sua Sancia concenserunt, diffinierunt ac laudauerunt Domino Deo et eidem ecclesie Sancti Petri de Uico ipsam totam decimam ipsius porcionis de ipso Prato de Uico quam nouiter tam milites quam rustici ad culturam deduxerant."

40. ACV, c. 6, 2397 (1171). Oliva, wife of Bernat de Sentfores, ceded land formerly belonging to Guerau de Santa Eugenia to the church and agreed to cease encroachment in the Prat Narbonès. The meadow called the Prat Narbonès had been divided between the church and the Sentfores while still uncultivated: "in Prato Narbonensi ab illo scilicet termino enaual uersus Uicum qui assignatus est inter nos et nos."

41. ACV, c. 6, 2502 (1187); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 57 (1199); ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 92 (between 1194 and 1199).

42. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 27 and 29. Other comital and royal lands in the parish included territory mentioned in ACV, c. 6, 2407 (1172); land between the vicomital castle and the river given to the seneschals (ACV, 1597bis [1145]); and the manse of Terrades (ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 271 [1179]).

43. ACV, c. 6, 382.

44. ACV, c. 6, 2659F (1115).

45. Vineyards and gardens within the city are mentioned in ACV, LD, ff. 89-89v (1159); AME 9, 37 (1161); ACV, c. 6, 2505 (1187). For the expansion of Vic see Junyent, La ciutat, pp. 78-79, 363, 370-373.

46. Junyent, La ciutat, pp. 371-373.

47. ACV, c. 6, 1597, which also contains the count's donation of castles to his seneschal, made in 1136.

48. ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 694. The land is said to be not only part of the royal seigneury (that is, the vicomital city) but part of the episcopal sseigneury as well, which may imply recognition of loyalty owed to the bishop for the upper town. One of the rare admissions of fealty to the bishop had been given by Guillem Ramon de Montcada in 1191 (AME 6, 79), and it might have still exerted some influence in 1194.

49. See above, notes 39 and 40. The rapid pace of suburban development during the twelfth century makes questionable Cuvillier's assertion that the Plain of Vic, even near the city, was sparsely cultivated until the thirteenth century (Cuvillier, "Les communautés," pp. 73-75).

50. 50.Oliba's consecration act may be considered the first evidence for a major market at Vic. The act is ACV, c. 37 (unnumbered); ES, 28:ap. 13; VL, 6:ap. 26. Vilà Valentí, El món rural, p. 45, gives 1038 as the date by which the market was important.

51. Vilà Valentí El món rural, pp. 61-62.

52. P. Bonnassie, "Une famille de la campagne barcelonaise et ses activités économiques aux alentours de l'An Mil," Annales du Midi 76 (1964), 261-303, translated in Sylvia Thrupp, ed., Early Medieval Society (New York, 1967), pp. 103-123; José Enrique Ruiz Domenec, "The Urban Origins of Barcelona: Agricultural Revolution or Commerical Development?" Speculum 52 (1977), 265-286.

53. 53.ACV, c. 6, 1644 and 1654; Font Rius, Orígenes del régimen, pp. 473-474; Garcia, "Origens," p. 166.

54. Compare the case of Toul, where in 1069 the bishop granted market privileges to the townsmen similar to those made at Vic, and where twelfth-century merchants were unhappy over the exemptions and privileges the canons enjoyed in the market; see Jean Schneider, "Toul dans la seconde moitié du XII^e siècle," in Die Stadt in der europaïschen Geschichte. Festschrift Edith Ennen (Bonn, 1972), pp. 185-187.

55. Significant evidence for the townsmen as a recognized community comes in the privilege of Ramon Berenguer IV in 1148, cited in Chapter 2, note 95. The count acknowledged the existence of a corporate body of townsmen whose legal standing could be considered independent of the bishop. A similar privilege for Barcelona is discussed in Francesch Carreras y Candi, "Los ciutadans de Barcelona en 1148," BRABLB 9 (1917), 137-140 (incorrectly ascribed to J. Miret y Sans).

56. ACV, c. 6, 2336, a sale of property in Vic by Ramon Espanyol. For the thirteenth-century activities of this family, see A. Garcia, "Els Espanyol, una familiar" pp. 165-185; idem, "Els Espanyol a València," Ausa 6 (1968-1971), 301-307.

57. ACV, c. 6, 2426 (1175), 2551 (1192).

58. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 83 (1209), a report of earlier incidents (also in Shideler, "Les tactiques"): "Dixit etiam se uidisse quod quia Guillelmus de Yla habitator Vici noluit firmare directum propter Guillelmo Casulis, archidiacono dicte ecclesie, propter cannam falsam quam dicebatur tenere, idem archidiaconus iuit ad tabulam dicti Guillelmi de Yla et apportauit inde in collo muli sul unam peciam de gordo."

59. Admission by Joan Bacó: ACV, c. 6, 382. Ten clerics and eight laymen signed. Most, if not all, of the latter were townsmen. Coinage oath: ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 194; Botet y Sisó, Les monedes, ap. 15.

60. ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 526.

61. ACV, c. 6, 2413 (1172); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 50 (1185); AME 11, 5 (1 196); ACV, c. 9, PGT, June 22, 1196, Nov. 16, 1198.

62. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 31C (1159), 382 (1166), 1758 (1176); ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 194 (1176). ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 83 (1209), mentions an incident of the late twelfth century in which Ferrer de Cloquet was caught in possession of false measures for wine.

63. They appear as witnesses (but not as active mediators) in early documents, for example, Cart. Saint-Victor, 1:no. 26 (845).

64. Font Rius, Origenes del régimen, pp. 242-304.

65. Italy: Edith Ennen, The Medieval Town (Amsterdam, 1979; German ed., Göttingen, 1975), pp. 113-123; Gina Fasoli, "Governanti e governati nei comuni cittadini italiani fra l'XI ed il XIII secolo, " in Fasoli, Scritti di storia medievale (Bologna, 1974), pp. 199-228. SouthernFrance: A. R. Lewis, "The Development of Town Government in Twelfth-Century Montpellier," Speculum 22 (1947), 59; A. Gouron, "Diffusion des consulats méridionaux et expansion du droit romain aux XII^e et XIII^e siècles," Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 121 (1963), 33-34, 70; John Mundy, Liberty and Political Power in Toulouse,1050-1230 (New York, 1954), pp. 53-66.

66. On the cooperation of Iberian townsmen with royal authority in establishing urban self-government, see Luis García de Valdeavellano, Origenes de la burguesia en la España medieval (Madrid, 1969), pp. 188-193; María del Carmen Carlé, Del concejo medieval castellano-leonés (Buenos Aires, 1968); Carmela Pescador, "La cabellería popular en

'León y Castilla," Cuadernos de historia de España 33-34 (1961), 101-238; 35-36 (1962), 56-201; 37-38 (1963), 88-198; 39-40 (1964), 169-260. For Catalonia, see J. M. Font Rius, "Un problème de rapports: Gouvernements urbains en France et en Catalogne (XII^e et XIII^e siècles)," Annales du Midi 69 (1957), 296-299; idem, Origenes del régimen, pp. 367-368.

67. For example, ACV, c. 6, 5 (1000); J. M. Font Rius, "En torno a la aplicación del derecho visigodo durante la reconquista: La tutela altomedieval catalana," Revista portuguesa de história 5 (1951), 361-378; ACV, LD, f. 112 (1125).

68. ACV, c. 6, 2291 (1136); ACV, LD, f. 90 (1161); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 57 (1199).

69. For Castilian boni homines, see M. del Carmen Carlé, "Boni homines y hombres buenos," Cuadernos de historia de España 39-40 (1964), 133-168.

70. It should be noted that originally not all probi homines were townsmen. In ACV, c. 6, 2291 (1136), there are probi homines who supported the claims of the knight Risbal de Font: "Adfuerunt etiam ibi exparte Risballi tam milites quam alii probi homines." The latter were probably not townsmen. In later records, such as ACV, c. 9, PGT, Nov. 16, 1198, where the probi homines are named, they are all townsmen. Elsewhere in Spain probus homo might be applied to a noble; Evelyn S. Proctor, "The Interpretation of Clause 3 of the Decrees of León (1188)," English Historical Review 85 (1970), 45-53.

71. ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 160 (see above, note 30 for editions of this text):"donet pro iustitia x solidos si probus homo est et potens; si vero mediocris est donet v solidos pro iustitia. . . ." Pointed out by Font Rius, Orígenes del régimen, p. 297.

72. For a fuller account of this incident see P. Freedman, "An Unsuccessful Attempt at Urban Organization in Medieval Catalonia," Speculum 54 (1979), 479-491.

73. A report of the dispute is contained in ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146; Freedman, "An Unsuccessful Attempt," pp. 490-491. The document bears no date but refers to events taking place during the pontificate of Pere de Redorta (died 1185). From the list of judges and comparison with their appearance in other documents, this case was heard between 1175 and 1185, with the later years within this decade more likely (see Freedman, pp. 480-481).

74. Thus, for example, the rebellion in Cologne began when the townsmen refused to tolerate any longer the degrading custom of sequestrating their boats for the bishop's personal use; see Paul Strait, Cologne in the Twelfih Century (Gainesville, 1974), p. 25.

75. ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146: "Alii uero ipsas firmancias prout moris est ei deuote exibuissent ad terminandam litam motam inter se [the bishop] et eos [the townsmen]. . . . In primis domnus episcopus per se et ecclesiam . . . conquestus est de ipsis hominibus quod preter assensum suum sese coniurauerant cum aliis ut consules haberent et eorum imperio starent."

76. The text does not state explicitly that the men called those they elected as their representatives "consuls. " The bishop in his complaint said that the men elected consuls, and the men admitted that they had acted "sicut domnus episcopus dicebat." However, the love of Roman legal jargon displayed elsewhere by the judges may have led them to use the word to describe the leaders of sworn associations. The consular title or its absence is irrelevant to the substance of urban governments of this sort (see Gouron, "Diffusion," pp. 29-30).

77. A list of Catalan consular regimes is given in Font Rius, Origenes del régimen, pp. 353-364 (some corrections were made by Gouron, "Diffusion," pp. 38-39). The only certain examples of twelfth-century Catalan consulates are Cervera (1182), Barcelona (1183), Perpignan (l197), and Lleida (1197). The existence of consuls in Barcelona has been discovered by T. N. Bisson from ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3425 (1183); see his forthcoming Fiscal Accounts of Catalonia under the Early Count-Kings (1151-1213). I am grateful to Professor Bisson for this information. On the importance of the frontier for urban liberties in Spain, see J. M. Font Rius, "Les villes dans I'Espagne du moyen âge: histoire de leurs institutions administratives et judiciaires, " Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin 6 (1954), 263-295; James F. Powers, "The Origins and Development of Municipal Military Service in the Leonese and Castilian Reconquest, 800-1250," Traditio 26 (1970), 91-111; idem, "Townsmen and Soldiers: The Interaction of Urban and Military Organization in the Militias of Mediaeval Castile," Speculum 46 (1971), 641-655.

78. Luis Vázquez de Parga, "La revolución comunal de Compostela en los años 1116 y 1117," AHDE 16 (1945), 685-703; Torquato de Sousa Soares, "Dois casos de constituição urbana: Santiago de Cormpostela e Coimbra," Revista portuguesa de história 5 (1951), 499-513; Julio Puyol y Alonso, El Abadengo de Sahagún (Madrid, 1915), pp. 55-78.

79. Antiseigneurial rebellions occurred in twelfth-century León, Asturias, and Galicia (Valdeavellano, Orígenes, p. 197), but none took place in Catalonia before 1200, so far as is known, except in Vic. Even after 1200, such open conflicts were rare (Font Rius, "Un problème," pp. 304-306). There may, however, have been more, whose traces, as at Vic, survive in obscure archival corners. Thus Carme Batlle has found a previously unknown example for Tarragona that occurred in 1276: "Una conjura dels Tarragonins contra l'autoritat (1276)," Boletín arqueológico [de Tarragona], fasc. 133-140 (1976-1977), 203-207.

80. ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146: "et quia dominium ipsius uille et jus preture ad ecclesiam Uicensem de concessione regia pertinebat.. . . "

81. These expressions appear in ACV, c. 9, PGT, Apr. 15, 1199.

82. The simultaneous and sudden appearance in Vic of the word consules and Roman legal terms confirms the observation of Gouron ("Diffusion," pp. 54-69) that "consul" spread with the diffusion of Roman law.

83. ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146: "Nam nemini licencia conceditur cohercendi aut animaduertendi infacinorosos homines uel alias obnoxios nisi ei cui de publico potestas est indulta." Cf. Dig. 2.1.3.

84. ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146: "Item siqui monopolium, quod minus est, pro sua auctoritate aut sacro iam elicito rescripto ausi fuerint exercere uel habitis conuentionibus coniurare ut species diuersorum corporum non minoris quam inter se statuerint uenunduntur, bonis omnibus spoliate, perpetuitate exilii dampnari merentur." Cf. Cod. 4.59.

85. ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146: "Item sicut liberti non debent aliquid facere uel dicere quod suggillet famam patroni ita homines ecclesie non debent aliquid facere quod sit in lesionem et diminutionem iuris ecclesie et si fecerint quemadmodum liberti ex causa ingratitudinis in seruitutem reuocantur, ita ipsi benefitio ecclesiastics priuari merentur." Cf. Dig. 37.14.1, 37.14.19.

86. For Pere de Cardona, see Chapter 2, note 53, and Joseph F. O'Callaghan, "The Beginnings of the Cortes of León-Castile," American Historical Review 74 (1969), 1509.

87. Use of the Peace and Truce in eleventh-century disputes: decree of the Council of Narbonne (1055) against invaders of property of the church of Vic (VL, 6:ap. 33); ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 90 (between 1091 and 1097), against usurpers of episcopal castles. For royal assumption of the Peace and Truce, see Chapter 1, note 92.

88. ACA, perg. Extrainventario 3146: "Preterea iudicauerunt ipsos homines debere iurare episcopo quod post prohibitionem suam neque iurauerunt neque ab aliis iuramenta acceperunt."

89. ACV, c. 9, PGT, Nov. 16, 1198.

90. ACV, c. 37, Privilegis 4, 69; cited in Jurisdiccions, ed. Junyent, no.183.