4.4 ELABORACIÓN DE GUIA DE CRITERIOS AMBIENTALES
5.1.6 Efectos sobre la fauna marina de los campos electromagnéticos
Cuvelier starts his story of the second campaign to Spain with telling about Bertrand's ransom. After Bertrand's ransom is determined and he is set free to go and collect the money. He travels to Tarascon and Arles and takes both cities. After traveling to Bretagne, Bertrand returns to Bordeaux and pays his ransom. He then returns to his duchy of Molina in Spain and to Toledo, where don Henry is laying a siege. He defeates don Pedro's 'Saracen' troops there. Don Pedro flees to Montesclaire, Montjardin and Port Sainte Marie. Don Henry constantly follows him - but it is not clear if Bertrand does as well. Don Pedro reassembles troops and returns to Toledo. After Bertrand again defeats don Pedro's troops, don Pedro now flees to Seville, again reassembles troops, and marches to Toledo. Bertrand and don Henry meet him at Montiel. Don Pedro retreats to the castle of Montiel, and don Henry lays a siege before it. Don Pedro tries to escape one night, but is
captured by Bègue de Villaines. Don Henry orders his brother's execution and don Pedro's head is sent to Seville. Don Henry and Bertrand re-assume the siege of Toledo. Tolede surrenders
eventually and Bertrand returns to France. On route to France Bertrand stops to lay siege before Soria.
Cuvelier puts Bertrand's ransom at 100.000 doubles d'or: 'Ceu que je vous donray pour moy a delivrer: cent mille doubles d'or vous feray compter'.184 D'Ayala however speaks of 100.000 francs.185 He makes Bertrand state: '“Yo só bien cierto que vos estos cien mil francos non los prometistes salvo en mi esfuerzo: é por ende yo quiero pagarlos por vos, é quiero que se quiten los sellos de los Señores, Varones é Caballeros de Bretaña.”'186 The chronicle en prose also mentions a different amount: 70.000 florins.187 In a letter remaining, from Bertrand to Edward, we find the amount named indeed by Cuvelier: 100.000 doubles: 'paier pour delivrance de nostre personne cent mil doubles d'or'.188
According to a very extensive list of currencies in the Middle Ages by Peter Spufford, a double or dobla in Castille had a weight of 4,6 grams pure gold until 1497.189 A French franc however, had
184Cuvelier, La chanson, verses 14.529-14.530.
185D'Ayala, Crónicas 1, 468: 'le daré cien mil francos de oro por mi cuerpo'.
186D'Ayala, Crónicas 1, 470.
187Richou, La chronique, 189.
188Archives Nationales, Paris, J 381 no 7. Printed in Cuvelier and Charrière, Chronique de Bertrand 2, 402-403 and in Jones, Letters, 74, no 209.
according to the same list from the 1360s on a weight of 3,89 grams.190 The florins the en prose chronicle mentions are more difficult, since it is not clear which florins are meant here. A French florin had a weight of 3,55 from 1290s on.191 An Aragonese florin had a weight of 3.48 grams from 1369 onwards.192 We do not know what the weight was before 1369. Fortunately for Edward, he was probably indeed paid in doubles, as Bertrand writes to his king Charles V and mentions the same amount: 'paier pour la délivrance de nostre personne cent mile doubles d'or du coing, du pois et de l'aloy et qui ont eu et ont cours au dit royaume de Castelle [...]'.193
As said before, for the second campaign, Cuvelier mentions the cities of Tarascon (verses 14.715- 14.997), Arles (verse 14.814) - then a return to France: Bordeaux (verses 15.178-15.301) – and back in Spain to Molina (verses 15.321-15.323), Toledo (verses 15.328-15.742), Montiel (verses 16.777-17.779), Toledo again (verses 17.780-17.983) and Soria (verses 18.198-18.296) – see the map on page 50. The cities Montesclaire, Montjardin and Porte Sainte Marie are not in this list because Cuvelier is not clear on whether or not he thinks Bertrand accompanied don Henry here. We know that Bertrand was indeed in the Tarascon area in July 1368, since he sent two letters there. The first is a letter to Louis d'Anduse, seigneur de la Voulte (1335-1408) about his troop's movements in the area. This letter was signed 'Escript a Maillonne, le mercredi Ve jour de juillet'. Maillonne is probably Maillanne, a village in the Tarascon area. Tarascon is specifically mentioned: 'Savoye fut issu de Tarrasconne, que aucunes gens de mes compaignies voulerent y entrer par force...'.194 The second letter is sent to Hugh de Calveley, concerning the obligations of their former collaboration. This letter was signed 'Escrit au sige devant Tarascon', without a date.195 Jones dates this letter on March 19, but does not give any reasons for doing so.196
According to a chronicle called Le Petit Thalamus, Bertrand was at Tarascon a little while earlier, from March 4 onwards.197 Most historians take Le Petit Thalamus as true and indeed state that he
190Ibidem, Money, 408.
191Ibidem, 407.
192Ibidem, Money, 407.
193Printed in: Cuvelier and Charrière, Chronique de Bertrand 2 – 402-403.
194Jones, Letters, 82 no 239.
195Ibidem, 78-79 no 221.
196Ibidem, 78 no 221.
197Thalamus parvus: le petit thalamus de Montpellier, publié par le première fois d'après les manuscripts originaux (Montpellier 1840) 382.
began the siege of Tarascon on March 4. However, they do so while referring to one another and to Cuvelier, but Cuvelier does not give us a specific date.198 This date should therefore not be
assumed without any further notice.
Cuvelier's account of the siege of Arles also seems to be correct: manuscripts from the religious order at Arles, the Trinitaires, tell us:
'L'an M IIIc LXVIII, lo jorn XI d'abril que fon lo ters jorn de Pasquos, monssen Lois ducs d'Ango, frayre del rey de Fransa, asetiet la sieutat d'Arles et aqui tem per el seti monssen Bertran de Cliquin entro lo jorn premier del mes de may et aquel jorn s'en aneron, exeptat aquels que resteron mortz.'199
After the sieges of Tarascon and Arles, we have again a 'gap' of information in the winter of the year 1368, in which we do not know Bertrand's whereabouts. It may be possible he traveled to Bretagne and Bordeaux, but we have no proof of him doing so. The next thing we know, he was in Borja in February 1369.
In Borja, on February 4, 1369, Olivier de Mauny (1320?-1389), Bertrand's cousin wrote about a negotiation between him, Bertrand and king Charles II of Navarra, aiming to gain Navarra as an ally for France and for don Henry.200 We also have an acte notairié which confirms that Bertrand was indeed at Borja: Bertrand pays hommage to Charles of Navarra 'pour le château de Tinchebrai et une rente de deux mille livres'201.
We do not have anything that proves a visit to Molina, as Cuvelier describes. Delachenal and Jones both do accept Bertrand's presence at the siege of Toledo, although we have no proof here by correspondence. While these historians refer to d'Ayala's chronicle, d'Ayala does not mention Bertrand here, only don Henry's troops.202 He however does not exclude Bertrand, he just does not
198V-L. Bourrilly, 'DuGuesclin et le duc d'Anjou en Provence (1368)', in: Revue historique 152 (1926) 161-180, see 164, referring to Cuvelier and Charrière, Chronique de Bertrand, verses 13.802-13.889, these are verses 14.712-14.799 in the Faucon edition; Delachenal, Histoire de Charles V 3, 459; Jones, Letters, 78 no 220.
199F. Novati, 'Le livre de Raisons de B. Boysset d'après le MS. Des Trinitaires d'Arles actuellement conservé à Gênes', in: Romania xxi (1892) 528-556, see 537.
200Du Coëtlosquet, 'Chartres inédits' (1890) 598-599. Du Coëtlosquet uses the wrong date here (February 4, 1368), but has corrected himself later in J-G. Du Coëtlosquet, 'Appendice', in: Revue historique de l'Ouest 7-Notices et mémoires (1891) 97-100, see 98-99.
201A. Brutails, Documents des archives de la Chambre des comptes de Navarre (1196-1384) (Paris 1890) 165-170.
mention him.203 Roland Delachenal tells us Bertrand must have been at Toledo after February 4, 1369, because of the acte Bertrand signed with the king of Navarra, which I have mentioned above.204 This makes sense but only when assumed that Bertrand was at Toledo at all. Michael Jones thinks Bertrand arrived at Toledo around March 10, but does not give any reasons for doing so either.205
It should also be noted that Cuvelier makes a mistake when describing the city of Toledo this second time. He places it 'au bord de la mer', by the sea.206 Toledo is not situated at the sea, as can clearly be seen on the maps. There is a river however. Funnily enough, we find the same mistake in
La Chronique normande.207 The two works may have some kind of relationship.
The three cities don Pedro flees to, after the second siege by Toledo, are harder to identify. Faucon thinks 'Montesclaire' may have Cuveliers French degeneration of Manzanares, 'Montjardin' in stead of Jaén and 'Port Sainte Marie' in stead of Puerto de Santa Maria.208 Especially the last one would be a simple translation, and makes sense. These three cities would make a logical route to the south, but we do not know which city is supposed to be Belle-marine. It would make sense to assume that Belle-marine is supposed to be a place by the sea, due to its name. If Faucon is right, and Montesclaire, Montjardin and Port Sainte Marie are supposed to be Manzanares, Jaén and Puerto de Santa Maria, then don Pedro must have reassembled his troops in the area south of Séville. This would make sense since we have seen don Pedro fleeing to Séville once before, it may be well possible he had a stronghold there. This assumption would agree with d'Ayala's version of events, who makes don Pedro indeed flee to Séville: 'El Rey Don Enrique, estando en el Real que tenia sobre la cibdad de Toledo, sopo que el Rey Don Pedro queria partir de la cibdad de Sevilla'.209
203D'Ayala, Crónicas 1, 529-546.
204Delachenal, Histoire de Charles V 3, 469.
205Jones, Letters, 97 no 270.
206Cuvelier, La chanson, verse 15.707.
207Chronique normande, 343. Faucon again makes a mistake here by referring to page 301: Cuvelier and Faucon, La chanson 2, 111.
208Cuvelier and Faucon, La chanson 2, 112.
This map is a piece of the copy from Faucon, La chanson 3, p.12. The cities of Manzares and Puerta de Santa Maria have been added by me and have been underlined, and so is the city of Jaen.
On this map above, Manzares is placed south of Toledo. However, there is also a Manzares just north of Madrid. South of Toledo makes more sense if we are to believe Cuvelier – and Faucon – but we have no guarantee and this Manzanares is the place don Pedro fled to.
Then Montiel. This episode has caused quite some consternation amongst historians. What happened here? We have no other sources than chronicles on this question. According to the
Chronique de Jean II et Charles V Bertrand was at Montiel on March 14, 1369.210 D'Ayala confirms Bertrand's presence, but fails to give us a date.211 Don Pedro's death is supposed to have been around March 22 or 23.212 According to Cuvelier, don Pedro tried to sneak out at night, perhaps as another attempt to flee. He is captured by Bègue de Villaines, who turns a deaf ear to his attempts to seduce him with riches, and leads him straight to the camp.213 When informed, don Henry arrives on the scene and tries to kill his brother. Bègue de Villains defends his prisoner, but after don Henry buys don Pedro from him, the two brothers do start to fight each other.214 Bertrand arrives and pulls the brothers apart. Don Henry then orders his brother's execution and don Pedro's head is sent to Seville.215 The en prose-chronicle tells us much the same and that don
210Delachenal, Les Grandes chroniques 2, 68-70.
211D'Ayala, Crónicas 1, 551-557.
212Jones, Letters, 99 no 275.
213Cuvelier, La chanson, verses 17.488-17.655.
214Cuvelier, La chanson, verses 17.656-17.695.
Pedro tried to flee with his treasury.216
However, d'Ayala accused Bertrand du Guesclin of setting up a trap: Bertrand is supposed to have been contacted by a certain Men Rodriguez de Sanabria - sent by don Pedro to convince Bertrand to choose his side in this conflict - to leave don Henry and to support don Pedro for the throne in exchange for a great reward. Bertrand would have refused, but later, after encouragement by don Henry, have acted as though he was interested, as long as don Pedro came to discuss the terms of Bertrand's service himself. Bertrand would have guaranteed don Pedro's safety. However, when don Pedro left the castle at night to visit Bertrand, he was taken prisoner, leading to his end:217
'E asi como alli llegó descavalgó del caballo ginete en que venia dentro en la posada de Moson Beltran, é dixo á Mosen Beltran: “Cavalgad, que va es tiempo que vayamos.” E non le respondió ninguno, porque ya lo avian fecho sabar al Rey Don Enrique como el Rey Don Pedro estaba en la posada de Mosen Beltran. Quando esto vió Don Pedro dubdó, é pensó que el fecho iba á mal 7, é quiso cavalgar en el su caballo ginete en que avia venido; é uno de los que estaban con Mosen
Beltran travó dél, é dixole: “Esperad un poco.” “E tóvole, que non le dexó partir. E venian con el Rey Don Pedro esa noche Don Ferrando de Castro, é Diego Gonzalez de Oviedo fijo del Maestre de Alcántara, é Mon Rodriguez de Senabria, é otros. E luego que alli llegó el Rey Don Pedro, é le detovieron en la posada de Mosen Beltran, como dicho avemos, sópolo el Rey Don Enrique, que estaba ya apercebido é armado de todas sus armas, é el bacinete en la cabeza, esperando este fecho. E vino alli armado, é entró en la posada de Mosen Beltran: é asi como llegó el Rey Don Enrique, travó del Rey Don Pedro. E él non le conoscia, ca avia grand tiempo que non le avia visto: é dicen que le dixo un Caballero de los Mosen Beltran: “Catad que este es vuestro enemigo.” E el Rey Don Enrique aun dubdaba si era él: é dicen que dixo el Rey Don Pedro dos veces: “Yo só, yo só.” E estonce el Rey Don Enrique conoscióle, é firióle con una daga por la cara: é dicen que amos á dos el Rey Don Enrique le firió estando en tierra de otras feridas.'218 The chronicle of Pere IV of Aragon, which we have seen many times before, blames Bertrand for don Pedro's death:
216Richou, La chronique, 217.
217D'Ayala, Crónicas 1, 551-557.
'King En Pedro was defeated in battle and retreated into the castle of Montiel. While he was there he negotiated with Mossèn Bertran of Claquí, who gave him his word that he had nothing to fear. King Pedro left the castle under the surety that had been given him by Mossèn Bertran. When he was outside, coming to complete his treaty with Mossèn Bertran, some men rushed against the king and took him prisoner. King Enrique, knowing that King En Pedro was in his hand and within lodging where he found him, put hands on him to kill him. King Pedro tried to defend himself but, finally, those who were with Don Enrique killed him.'219
Most historians nowadays merely accept Ayala as truth, probably by lack of information220 and since d'Ayala is often considered a very reliable source.221 Although not present, the English seem to have thought of betrayal too. This verse is part of the Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, who was an esquire at the royal court of Edward III at the time:
O noble Petro, glorie of Spayne!
Whom fortune held so heigh in mageste, Wel oughte men thy pitous deth complayne; Thy bastard brother made the to fle,
And after, at a sege, by subtilte,
Thow were bytrayed and lad to his tente Wheras he with his oughne hond slough the, Succedyng in thy lond and in thy rent.222
After don Pedro's death, Cuvelier tells us Bertrand went to Toledo until the city surrendered and then laid siege for the cities of Soria and Molina, which rebelled against him. We have a indeed lot of letters containing warnings that Bertrand is on his way to Soria, to the viscount of Castelbó and Molina and planning to attack these cities: from June 4 to July 2, 1369.223 Strange enough, these letters are all written by Pere IV of Aragon, ordering the cities to take defensive measures.
219Hillgarth, Pere III 2, 581.
220Du Coëtlosquet sees this as a reason not to blame Bertrand, see Du Coëtlosquet, 'Du Guesclin et le drama du château de Montiel', in: Revue historique de l'Ouest 5 (1889) 250-265.
221Delachenal, Histoire de Charles V 3, 483-486; Dupuy, Bertrand du Guesclin, 256-263; Jones, Letters, 99 no 275.
222Chaucer and L.A Coote, The Canterbury tales, 382 and 567-600.
223 Jones, Letters, 104-105 no 283-284; 105 no 285; 106 no 288-289; 107 no 290-292; 109 no 295-296; 112-115 no 300; 116-117 no 305 and 117 no 308-309.
Apparently he was no longer prepared to seduce this army by financial means, perhaps because don Henry was now crowned king – the purpose of the mission had been completed – or by lack of efficiency? In the end however, Bertrand was still paid before he left Spain: a letter of don Henry to the city of Murcia confirms so – no amounts are given, but he was 'well paid', 'bien pagado'224 - and Pere IV again gives them clear passage and provisions.225 However, it is not clear whether or not an attack on the cities of Molina and Soria actually happened.
We do know for a fact that Bertrand has been in Soria, because on June 26, 1369 he did sign a confirmation of the privileges of the clergy of Soria, of which he was now the new lord:
Sepan quantos esta carta vieren como Nos Da Beltran de Claquin, duc de Molina, et Conde de Longavilla et de Borja et de Magallon, et Senor de Soria, por facer bien et merced a los Clerigos de el Cabildo de la Ciudat de Soria et de sus terminos,
otorgamosles et confirmamosles todas la cartas et fueros et buenas costumbres que han, et la que hovieron, de que usaron, et acostrumbraron en tiempo de todos los Reyes de Casteilla. […] Dada en la nuestra Ciudat Soria, veinte y seis dias Junio, de Eira de Mil et quatrocientos et siete anos. Yo Juan Fernandez, Escribano de Mosen Beltran, lo fice escrivir por su mandado. Beltran.226
This does not tell us whether Bertrand laid siege for the city. Michael Jones cites Froissart (1337?- 1405?) here, a contemporary of Cuvelier, who stated that Soria was worth 100.000 francs a year to Bertrand.227 One can imagine the connétable would go to great length's to obtain his hold on a city