Kings, Queens, and the Way of Things:
A comparative study of two twelfth century queens
Mary McCarthy, Class of 2011
Sweet Briar College
Medieval scholarship has increased its focus on women, especially queens, in recent
years. Academics such as Pauline Stafford, Janet L. Nelson, and John Carmi Parsons, have
devoted several essays and books to the relatively new study of “queenship.” Yet, while they
have evaluated some of the most prominent queens of Western Europe, they have neglected one
very important figure: Urraca of Leon-Castile. Urraca‟s seventeen year reign in the twelfth
century marks a turning point for medieval queens. She was, as this study will show, the first
western queen regnant. . To better understand this Iberian queen in context, she will be
juxtaposed with a contemporary Capetian queen, Bertrade of Montfort1, who played a traditional
queenly role.
Queens in Europe prior to the twelfth century generally functioned only in relation to
men. They occupied the role of either queen consort or queen mother. If a queen was fortunate
enough to act as a regent, either while a king was away or too young to take full command, it
was only because of her connection to the royal male that she was given any power.
The roots of this masculine majority go far beyond the scope of this paper, though an
examination of some early medieval texts may shed light on the particular situation of medieval
queens.
The importance of the Roman Catholic Church is obvious throughout the middle ages,
and the use of biblical images played a vital role in medieval politics; from the use of nimbi and
aureoles in physical art, to the likening of a royal to a Biblical character. This is demonstrated
1
Bertrade is also called Bertrada in some sources.
1
most obviously when European queens were compared to one of two biblical characters. Queens
were likened either to Esther, being a pious, beautiful, and devoted servant; or Jezebel, a wicked
temptress. If a medieval queen was considered to have too much power and influence, she was
called a Jezebel, if she stayed quietly by the king‟s side she was praised as an Esther.2
Along with the importance of Biblical characters was the notion of purity and virginity.
Isidore of Seville wrote in the sixth century that, “in choosing a wife, four things impel a man to
love: beauty, family, wealth, and character.3” He continues, in his section On marriages to write
that,
There are three reasons to marry a wife; the first is for the sake of offspring, about which
we read in Genesis (1:28). . . . The second reason is for a help. . . . The third reason is
lack of self-restraint, whence the apostle Paul says, for example (I Corinthians 7:9): “Let
the man who cannot contain himself marry.4”
It was also in the sixth century that the Salian Franks created a series of laws, the Salic
Laws, which in addition to addressing the rights of freemen and legal procedures, expressly
forbade women from inheriting positions of power.
1. If any man die and leave no sons, if the father and mother survive, they shall inherit
[private property]. 2. If the father and mother do not survive, and he leave brothers or
sisters, they shall inherit. 3. But if there are none, the sisters of the father shall inherit. . . .
6. But of Salic land no portion of the inheritance shall come to a woman: but the whole
inheritance of the land shall come to the male sex.5
The Franks, under the Merovingian dynasty, also adapted horizontal inheritance rather
than vertical, further reducing the power of queens. As power was inherited by brothers or male
cousins rather than sons, a queen had less of an opportunity to influence the future king as it was
2
For more information on women in the Bible and the Middle Ages, see R.R. Ruether‟s Religion and Sexism:
Images of Women in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974
3
Isidore of Seville, Etymologies, “on marriage and men and women” reprinted from S.A. Barney, W.J. Lewis et al
The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville on p 1 in Queens and Queenship in Early Mediaeval Europe Sourcebook
compiled by Elina Screen (University of St Andrews, 2010).
4
Ibid.
5
“The Law of the Salian Franks,” Internet Medieval Source Book, Paul Halsall, 1996.
2
not likely to be her son. It was not until the end of the Merovingian period that vertical
inheritance became favored.6
In the ninth century, the Irish monk Sedulius Scottus wrote On Christian Rulers and
specified what qualities a king should look for in a wife. His explains that, “A pious and wise
kings performs the office of ruling in three ways: . . . he should first rule himself . . . second, his
wife, his children, and his household; and third, the people.7” After all, he implies, a kingdom is
like a large household and if a king cannot rule his household, he cannot rule his kingdom. A
queen, then, should be non-aggressive and help her husband to maintain peace in the household
and the kingdom at large. “A ruler, therefore, should perspicaciously endeavor to have a wife
who is not only noble, beautiful, and wealthy, but also chaste, prudent, and compliant in holy
virtues.8”
In this text, Scottus also suggests that a queen “be an inventress of prudent counsels” and
guide her husband. This represents a change in attitude. Previously, many Merovingian queens
had been dissuaded from offering advice. The ninth century represented a new interpretation of
gender and the crown, in large part because of Charlemagne.9
Charlemagne has become famous for uniting many „Barbarian Kingdoms,‟ and for
beginning the Carolingian Renaissance. For the first time there is evidence of female secular
education. As Charlemagne‟s chronicler, Einhard, writes,
Charles believed that his children, both his daughters and his sons, should be educated,
first in the liberal arts. . . . Then he saw to it that when his boys had reached the right age
they were trained to ride in the Frankish fashion, to fight, and to hunt. But he ordered his
daughters to learn how to work with wool, how to spin and weave it, so that they might
6
For more information see, J.A. Brundage, Law, Sex and Christian Society in Medieval Europe. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1987.
7
Sedulius Scottus, “On Christian Rulers” reprinted from E.G. Doyle‟s Sedulius Scottus. On Christian Rulers and the
Poems in Queens and Queenship in Early Mediaeval Europe Sourcebook, pp 10-11
8
Ibid.
9
See Rulers and Ruling Families in Early Medieval Europe by Janet L. Nelson (London: Ashgate Publishing, 1999)
for more information on Charlemagne.
3
not grow dull from inactivity and instead might learn to value work and virtuous
activity.10
Charlemagne‟s love for his daughters is also well known. Einhard reports that they often
accompanied him when he rode with his sons, and that he “never wanted to give any of them
away in marriage . . . instead he kept them close beside him at home until his death.11”
Charlemagne even placed one of his wives, Fastrada, in charge of the realm while he was
away in battle. Unfortunately for Fastrada, she was not extremely popular and contemporary
chroniclers, including Einhard, call her „cruel‟ and accuse her of conspiring against Charlemagne
while he was away. Despite Charlemagne‟s fondness for royal women12, women were nothing
without their male counterparts.
Salic legal tradition continued through the Carolingian era and into the German Ottonian
and French Capetian dynasties as well. Queens should be advisers, but little more.
In Iberia, while there were less legal constraints on women inheriting positions of power,
queens rarely ruled alone. The Visigothic tradition often followed the Roman, putting women in
the pre-made mold created by the pater familias system. Yet the circumstances of Iberia were
unique. Iberia was, towards the seventh century, almost entirely under the command of Moorish
emirates. In 681, the Liber Judiciorum was published as a set of laws guiding the Christian
Visigoths in situations with Moors, and others.13 It was further refined a couple of years later, in
683, to better reflect the rights of the royal family, including queens. Bernard F. Reilly writes
that, “it was specifically prohibited that the widowed queen should be remarried or forced into
10
Einhard, “Life of Charlemagne” reprinted from P.E. Dutton‟s Charlemagne’s Courtier in Queens and Queenship
in Early Medieval Europe, pp. 13-14
11
Ibid.
12
Including his six wives
13
Joseph O‟Callaghan, A History of Medieval Spain. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1975.
4
concubinage,14” thus blocking the throne from those outside of the royal family. Under this law,
queens could not be used to gain access to the throne; it did not necessarily protect a daughter,
however, and access could be gained if the only remaining heir was female, a situation which
will be considered more completely later.
Christian Iberia did allow women to rule as regents, however, as was the case of Elvira
Ramirez in Leon at the beginning of the 10th century. Infanta15 Elvira had been a nun when her
brother, the King, died. She left the convent to become regent for her nephew, Ramiro III before
returning to her previous situation in 975.16
It was into these traditions that Bertrade de Montfort and Urraca were born.
Betrade was born around the year 1070 to Simon de Montfort, a minor lord, and Agnes,
the Countess d‟Evreux.17 Some accounts, such as Alfonse Jouet‟s Un Beau Divorce au MoyenAge suggest that Bertrade was orphaned, and whether or not this is true, Orderic Vitalis writes
that she was the ward of her uncle, Amaury, Count of Evreux. Orderic Vitalis, a contemporary
chronicler, first introduces Bertrade around the age of seventeen when her uncle is being
approached for her hand in marriage.18
At this time, William the Conqueror was king of England and maintained his right to
Normandy as well; however, many French nobles disagreed with this, as he had captured and
claimed rights to some of their lands as well. Duke Robert of Maine19 worried that William
would eventually try to seize his lands, so he approached Fulk IV (le Réchin), Count of Anjou, in
the hope of forming an alliance. Vitalis writes that Fulk, whom he describes as “a man with
14
Bernard F. Reilly, Medieval Spains.New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993. p 46
The Spanish term Infanta indicates daughter of the king. Likewise, the term Infans indicates son of the king.
16
A History of Medieval Spain.
17
A county in present day Normandy.
18
Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History Vol. IV, Book VII p 185, ed. by Marjorie Chibnall. Oxford: The
Clarendon Press, 1973.
19
A province neighboring Normandy
15
5
many reprehensible, even scandalous habits, and . . . pestilential vices,20” bartered with the Duke
of Maine, saying he would attempt to oust William from Normandy (and England) if the Duke
helped him to attain Bertrade‟s hand in marriage. Bertrade‟s uncle, Count Amaury, had also lost
lands to William and so negotiated the marriage. Bertrade was around seventeen years old when,
in 1087, she married Fulk and became Countess of Anjou.21
Bertrade was married to Fulk four years, giving birth to Fulk V sometime during those
years. Vitalis writes that in 1092,
Bertrade, countess of Anjou, feared that her husband might treat her as he had already
treated two wives, and that if she were deserted she would be despised by all like a low
harlot. Being fully conscious of her high birth and beauty she, she sent a loyal messenger
to King Philip of France, to tell him what she had in mind; for she thought it better to
desert her husband voluntarily and seek another than to be deserted by him and exposed
to public scorn.22
He continues, describing Philip as a “weak prince” who willingly left his wife for Bertrade.
Vitalis suggests that Bertrade proposed that Philip abduct her.23
Philip had previously been unpopular in the Roman Church because of his resistance to
clerical reform, and his adulterous relationship with Bertrade further frustrated the Pope. The
situation was doubly grave because Philip and Fulk were cousins, and in the eyes of the Church
once Bertrade had married Fulk she had become Philip‟s cousin. They were committing both
adultery and incest.24
20
Ibid., 187
Where Bertrade was before she married Fulk, no one recorded, however, her age and unmarried status might
indicate that she was intended for the veil rather than for marriage.
22
Ibid. 261
23
Vitalis, I would argue, is a somewhat unreliable source, despite being the most elaborate. His opinion of Bertrade
quickly changes from a pitying tone to an accusatorial one; he attributes little to no power to Bertrade in her
marriage contract with Fulk, but here suggests that she orchestrated an elaborate plan for her own abduction.
Strangely enough, none of the secondary sources which I encountered evaluated Vitalis‟ merit as a reliable narrator.
This is not entirely surprising, however, since few Western medieval historians have looked at Bertrade in-depth.
24
Alphonse Jouet, Un Beau Divorce au Moyen-Age. Paris: P. Jeyronnet, 1924. p 55. Ironically, Jouet also writes
that Fulk was accused, by some clergymen, of committing adultery and incest with Bertade (p. 54), though he does
not verify it.
21
6
It is of no wonder, then, that the couple reportedly had trouble finding an officiating
priest. Orderic Vitalis cites one man, Odo of Bayeux, while William of Malmesbury cites
William Bonne-Ame as the officiate. As Marjorie Chibnall writes in her translation of The
Ecclesiastical History, though, it was conclusively Ursion, bishop of Senlis, who performed the
ceremony in 1092.25 The debate is relevant because, merely two years later, Pope Urban II
excommunicated Bertrade, Philip, and the officiating bishop.
Excommunication was particularly dangerous for Philip. The French regent had very
little power before being excommunicated, controlling only a sixth of Capetian France,26 and the
act of excommunication risked further disrupting the power of the monarch. It meant that all
subjects within the borders of the king‟s lands were forbidden to participate in religious
activities, like Mass, which ran the risk of open rebellion against the king. Also, it decreased the
king‟s standing amongst the nobles since he did not have the support of the Pope. Vitalis writes
that, “as soon as the clergy heard of the king of France approaching any town or city, all the bells
stopped ringing and all sung offices were silenced.27”
Luckily, the Pope forgave Philip two years later. Then, in 1100, he was excommunicated
again,28 but given the option that if he left Bertrade he would be welcomed with open arms.
Though he did not leave Bertrade, he was silently welcomed back for the second, and final, time.
This may have been because a new pope, Paschal II, had come to power in Rome.29
Bertrade and Philip had at least two sons together, Philip and Florus, and a daughter,
Cecilia.30 Philip had had, by his first wife, another son, Louis, who was heir presumptive.
25
Orderic Vitalis, Vol. IV, Book VIII, pp 260-261, foot note 3
Rough estimate based on map “France, 1154-1184” from The Historical Atlas by William Shepherd. New York:
Holt and Company, 1911
27
Orderic Vitalis, Vol. IV, Book VIII, pp 261-265
28
For reasons not documented by any of the sources covered in this paper
29
Jouet, p. 40
30
Orderic Vitalis Vol. IV, Book VIII, pp 262-3
26
7
Bertrade is accused, in Vitalis‟ chronicle, of scheming against Louis and attempting to have him
assassinated.31 The bitterness between the son and step-mother seems to have been ongoing,
resulting in accusations, by chronicler Abbot Suger,32 of sorcery.
When Philip died in 1108, Louis VI was crowned. It was not, however, until 1111 that
Bertrade retired, as was the custom for widowed queens. She retired to Fontevrault Abbey,
where she died in 1117.33
Three contemporary sources mention Bertrade: Vitalis‟ Ecclesiastic History, William of
Malmesbury‟s English Chronicle, and Abbot Suger‟s Life of Louis the Fat. Malmesbury, an
English monk, never mentions Betrade by name, referring to her as “countess of Anjou 34”; as the
woman who “enslaved” and “oppressed” Louis. He mentions her taking of the veil as an action
better suited to her than previous ones.35 Suger, in contrast, mentions her by name but only to
say that she was the wife of Philip I, and that her children were not considered contenders for the
crown.36
Vitalis is the most detailed primary source. He mentions Bertrade in Books VIII and XI.
He provides telling information about her first husband, Fulk, her family, and her second
husband, Philip. He describes her beauty, her actions (be they true or not), and her character, to a
certain extent.
Bertrade has also captured the attention of modern scholars. In particular, French
medievalists have examined her life and her influence as a queen. Alphonse Jouet wrote, in
1924, Un Beau Divorce au Moyen-Age, highlighting possible situations surrounding Bertrade‟s
31
Ibid., Vol. VI, Book XI, pp 51-55
Abbot Suger, author of The Life of Louis the Fat, is considered to be Bertrade‟s harshest critic by many modern
scholars, however, I can find no evidence to corroborate that opinion.
33
William of Malmesbury, William of Malmesbury‟s English Chronicle. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1847 p 438
34
Ibid.
35
“She acted with better grace and better success; as she sought the veil of a nun at Fontevrault, while yet possessed
of strength and health, and undiminished beauty.” Ibid.
36
Abbot Suger, “ Life of King Louis the Fat,” The Internet Medieval Sourcebook, Paul Halsall, 1999.
32
8
life, such as plotting to have her sons with Philip inherit the throne, and her success in having
Fulk V inherit Anjou instead of an earlier son. While his sources may seem dubious, Jouet paints
a fairytale picture, even going so far as to begin with “Il y avait une fois une jeune princesse. . .
.37 ”
Other books, such as Fawtier‟s The Capetian Kings of France, mentions Bertrade only
once, in a long list with other briefly mentioned queens. He writes only that, “Bertrada de
Montfort‟s influence over Philip I had been notorious, and so had her hostility to the heir to the
throne, whom she had even been accused of trying to poison.38” Her husband, however, is
mentioned on some twenty-plus pages. This is perhaps less astonishing when the year of its
publication is taken into consideration. In the 1960s the study of women in history was still a
rarity; queenship as a topic finds its serious academic origins in this decade.
Unlike Fawtier‟s study Capetian France 987-1328 by Elizabeth M. Hallam, does allot a
fair amount of space to Bertrade. Philip I is given three pages in the three hundred pages of the
book which examines not only the monarchy, but the events of the Capetian period. Bertrade‟s
story is mentioned relatively extensively, and Hallam does a good job of explaining the
intricacies of dynastic ambition. She highlights Bertrade‟s attempts to further her family‟s
position, such as by making her brother “the new bishop of Paris.39”
The drama Bertrade‟s marriages is explored in-depth in Georges Duby‟s The Knight, The
Lady, and the Priest. For Duby, Bertrade‟s marriages exemplified the evolution of marriage as a
legal concept during the medieval period. His first chapter, “The Marriages of King Philip I”
explicitly examines the use of excommunication to increase Pope Urban II‟s popularity,
furthering exposing Bertrade‟s position as a pawn, never to exist outside of male power. Duby
37
“Once upon a time, there was a princess…” Jouet, p 14
Robert Fawtier, The Capetian Kings of France. London: Macmillan & Co., 1960, p 27
39
Elizabeth M. Hallam, Capetian France 987-1328. London: Longman, 1980 p 77
38
9
poses, and explores, questions concerning motives and concludes that King Philip‟s marriages,
and thus Bertrade‟s were used largely as political tools.
A more recent compilation of essays, edited by Kathleen Nolan, addresses the precise
subject of Capetian Women; however, none of the authors included in the anthology address
Bertrade in any way. There is an essay devoted to an earlier Capetian queen, Constance of Arles,
and another two devoted to Philip‟s daughter-in-law, Adelaide of Maurienne. While the
collection of critical essays is the first to study Capetian queens, it is incomplete.
Anne Elizabeth Moss wrote a Master‟s thesis entitled Determination of Queenly Position
in Early Capetian France, which eagerly makes up for what Capetian Women lacked. Moss
examines two case studies, Constance of Arles and Bertrade de Montfort, in her attempt to
determine their roles as queens. She explores a variety of definitions for queenship, settling on a
condensed version of Pauline Stafford‟s six factors “which determined the position of any royal
wife:40” nobility, family, fertility, formal recognition, Church sanctioned marriage, and “the
force of her personality.41” These qualifications are almost identical to those of Sedulius Scottus
and Isidore of Seville. Moss evaluates Bertrade in regards to each of these six factors and
concludes that Bertrade was fully accepted as queen in France as “there is . . . no mention of
noble disapproval in the sources.42” Bertrade was able to fully satisfy the six requirements and
not be repudiated, despite Pope Urban II‟s attempts.
Bertrade is noticed, by both her contemporaries and modern historians, primarily because
of her marital drama. Her position as a queen was restricted. Moss writes that her name does
appear in some charters with Philip, and Hallam proposes that she furthered her family through
40
Ann Elizabeth Moss, Determination of Queenly Position in Early Capetian France. University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill: 1986 p 6
41
Ibid.
42
Ibid., p. 50
10
her position as queen. The Salic Laws which Capetian France adhered to prohibited her from
inheriting power specifically, but barely any evidence of power can be seen in her biographies at
all. She occupied a traditional queenly role; that of wife, mother and, perhaps, adviser.
Interestingly, her son by her first marriage, Fulk V, took Queen Melisande of Jerusalem
as his second wife in 1131. Melisande is considered to be, strictly speaking, a queen regnant; that
is, she inherited the throne, so Bertrade‟s son became the King Consort of Jerusalem, at least in
title. In practice, he was also the commander of her armies.43
Philip‟s eldest son, Louis, also married an interesting woman. His second wife was
Adelaide de Maurienne, who is considered to be the most politically active Capetian queen. She
signed over forty charters with Louis, though she, like Bertrade, occupied a strictly consort role44
during her marriage to Louis, from 1115 to 1137.45
In stark comparison with Bertrade, Urraca of Leon-Castile occupied a new role for
medieval queens.
Urraca was the daughter of King Alfonso VI46 and his second wife, Constance of
Burgundy. She was born in 1079 or 1080 and was Alfonso‟s only legitimate child for several
years. Alfonso had five wives but no sons by them. He did have a son with a Moorish concubine,
whom he later married, making the son, Sancho, legitimate heir presumptive. In addition to
Sancho, Alfonso had at least one other illegitimate child, Teresa, his eldest daughter.47
43
Sharan Newman, The Real History Behind the Templars. New York: Berkley Books, 2007. Melisande reigned
from 1131-1161, acting as a regent for her son from 1153-1161.
44
Lois L. Honeycutt “The Creation of a Crone: The Historical Reputation of Adelaide of Maurienne” in Capetian
Women ed. Kathleen Nolan. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003, pp 27-43.
45
There are no contemporary sources which indicate whether or not Bertrade had any influence on either her son, or
step-son marrying these notable women. It would not be hard to imagine that Bertade at least knew Adelaide, since
Adelaide was queen consort while Bertrade was at Fontevrault (from 1111-1117).
46
Alfonso VI is the victorious king presented in La Cantar de Mio Cid, or the Poem of the Cid. With Roderigo de
Vivar, or El Cid, Alfonso captured the Moorish city of Toledo and expanded the realm of Leon-Castile further south.
47
Maria de Carmen Pallares, and Ermelindo Portela La Reina Urraca. Nerea, 2006, p 29
11
When Urraca was nine years old she was married to a cousin on her mother‟s side,
Raymond of Burgundy. He was most likely chosen by Urraca‟s mother to further her Burgundian
family‟s claim in Iberia. Constance also arranged for her illegitimate step-daughter, Teresa, to
marry a Burgundian named Henry.
Urraca and Raymond had at least two children together, Alfonso and Sancha, and were
given the territory of Galicia, in Northwestern Leon-Castile, to govern on behalf of King
Alfonso.48
In 1107, Raymond died and Urraca, in her widowhood, continued to govern Galicia.49
Unfortunately, Crown Prince Sancho died the following year in the Battle of Uclés, leaving King
Alfonso with only one legal heir. He declared Urraca his heir presumptive, but also began
arrangements for her to remarry. The Leonese and Castilan nobles recommended Count Pedro
Gonzalez de Lara as a suitor, however Alfonso chose Alfonso I of Aragon, el Batallador.
Urraca‟s father died, in July 1109, before the marriage contract could be finalized and
Urraca came into power alone. No nobles seem to have objected to this, however, and this may
be because the marriage was imminent, taking place sometime before September of that year.
Within a year of their marriage, however, Urraca and el Batallador separated. Alfonso
then began to wage war against Urraca, claiming that his right to the throne of Leon-Castile was
greater than hers. In order to raise money quickly and pay her military, Urraca broke a cardinal
rule against the Roman Catholic Church; she took tax money from San Pelayo and several other
churches. The result was that some members of the clergy started to move against her.50
48
Bernard Reilly, The Kingdom of Leon-Castilla Under Queen Urraca: 1109-1126. New York: Princeton University
Press, 1982.
49
Ibid., pg 43, Reilly lists 1107 as the first instance when “the Infanta Urraca, issued a charter in her own name.”
50
Ibid., pp 225-250
12
One such man was Bishop Diego Gelmirez, Bishop of Santiago de Compostela, the most
important bishopric in Christian Iberia. Gelmirez was also the guardian of Urraca‟s son, Alfonso
Raimundo. In 1111 Gelmirez crowned Alfonso Raimundo king of Galicia, at the age of five or
six. Gelmirez may have intended for Alfonso Raimundo to unite the Galician nobles against
Urraca, or against el Batallador. Shortly after Alfonso Raimundo was crowned, Urraca donated
territory to her son, and lands and money to the church at Santiago de Compostela. Within the
next year, Urraca signed charters asking Bishop Gelmirez to further her cause in Galicia.51
In 1114, Urraca‟s second marriage was officially annulled. She and Alfonso began,
several years later in 1117, a series of peace treaties which would be renewed every three years
until her death.52
In addition to Urraca‟s children with her first husband, Raymond, she had several
illegitimate children with at least two different lovers. One lover, Count Gomez de Candespina,
was killed in battle against el Batallador and he is believed to be the father of Urraca‟s
illegitimate daughter Elvira. Her second lover was Count Pedro Gonzales de Lara, ironically the
same Astorian nobleman who was recommended to marry her in 1109. Urraca never remarried,
despite her sexual relations. She died, in 1126, near the age of fifty, in childbirth.53
Urraca‟s reign is well documented. Over a hundred charters remain from her reign, and
Bishop Gelmirez, in his commissioned work Historia Compostellana praises Urraca. More than a
dozen chronicles and cartularies refer to her. She had also been the subject of several modern
Spanish studies, though she has gone relatively unnoticed by other Western scholars.
51
Irene Ruiz Albi, La Reina Dona Urraca (1109-1126) Concilleria y Coleccion Diplomatica. Leon: Universidad de
Valladolid, 2003, pp 389-90, 425.
52
The Kingdom of Leon-Castilla Under Queen Urraca pp 119-152.
53
Ibid., p 201. Reilly treats his source for this fact dubiously, saying that the Historia Compostellana (HC) is
extremely hostile towards Urraca. Many modern historians have continued to take the HC at its word, yet they have
not evaluated her power in regards to taking lovers and having illegitimate children. Without reading the HC myself,
I can only pose questions: if Urraca‟s „indiscretions‟ were publically known, how were they received? Was she
powerful (influential) enough to silence her critics? These are all questions well worth exploring.
13
Bernard F. Reilly, in 1982, wrote the first serious English-language study of Urraca. His
biography extensively explores her abilities as a military commander, specifically in a growing
Christian hegemony. He also examines the inner workings of the state during her reign,
measuring the influence of nobles and clergymen at court. He highlights the most important
events from her reign as,
(1) the decision in 1110-1112 to break with the Aragonese marriage in favor of her own,
personal rule; (2) the decision in 1111, and more fully in 1116, formally to associate her
son with herself in the government of her realm; (3) the policy of truce with Aragon from
1117 in order to secure the remainder of the realm; and (4) the attempt to resolve the
political tangle in Galicia by the seizure of Arbishop Gelmirez in 1120.54
Reilly‟s relatively extensive biography is a welcome change from the previous trend in
English-language medieval Iberian scholars. Joseph O‟Callaghan, in his 1975 survey of medieval
Spain dedicates barely two pages to Urraca‟s seventeen year reign. He passes from “Alfonso VI,
the Taifas, and the Almoravids” to “Alfonso VII and the Leonese Empire,” mentioning Urraca
only briefly as being the daughter of Alfonso VI, then mother of Alfonso VII. He does point out,
however, what many Western queenly scholars seem to have missed, that “the first female to rule
in her own right was Urraca. . . . Even during her marriage to Alfonso I she retained full rights of
sovereignty in her kingdom.55”
Therese Martin, in 2006, wrote an in-depth examination of Urraca under the title of
Queen as King. She highlights Urraca‟s role as an architectural patron. Martin stresses the
relationship Urraca had with the Church, as exemplified by her relationship with Bishop
Gelmirez.
Maria del Carmen Pallares and Ermelindo Portela, in La Reina Urraca, greatly condense
the information provided by the primary sources, and architectural evidence dating from
54
55
Ibid., p 354
A History of Medieval Spain p 258
14
Urraca‟s reign. Their Spanish-language study provides for an understandable and comprehensive
dissection of Urraca‟s reign. They address critical themes which recur in queenship studies as
well as in Urraca‟s case: the mother who reigns, the patron, the kingdom, and the feudal queen.56
Urraca differs from Bertrade on a fundamental level. She is, strictly speaking, a queen
regnant, which is very simply defined as a woman who has inherited the crown in her own right.
This definition is, however, too broad. Under this definition a woman could, and usually was,
just the vessel which the crown passed through. The husband of a queen regnant could easily be
the true force behind the throne, which really makes a queen regnant, in this sense, nothing more
than a queen consort but with the added protection of never being threatened with divorce or
abandonment because she legitimized her husband‟s position.
Urraca was a queen regnant in the greatest sense;57 she not only inherited the crown but
also kept it. She is, arguably, the very first woman to rule of her own right in all of Western
Europe. Considering this, it is surprising that relatively few medieval queenly scholars have
noticed her.
In John Carmi Parsons‟ Medieval Queenship, several essays address factors which Urraca
faced during her reign; from the introductory essay on family, sex, and power; to “QueensDowager and Queens-Regent in Tenth-Century Leon and Navarre” by Roger Collins. The essays
tackle the position of queens through the twelfth century, however not a single essay addresses a
true queen regnant.
If queens regnant are truly an anomaly of the Middle Ages, then why have so few
scholars tackled their histories? Lisa M. Bitel‟s exploration of Women in Early Medieval Europe
400-1100 addresses queens only when they are present as consorts or regents. Her conclusion,
56
57
“La Mujer que reino . . . la patria . . . el reino . . . la reina feudal,” Pallares and Portela, Indice p 9
And I would argue the only sense
15
entitled, “Concerning famous women before and after 1100” explores “famous” women such as
Eleanor of Aquitaine and Joan of Arc, both of whom were popularized during the Feminist
Revolution of the 1960s. Yet both of these women were constricted by their connection to men,
and their power always originated from a male; Eleanor of Aquitaine‟s power originated in her
position as a queen consort, and Joan of Arc as a publicity stunt by the Dauphin of France.
Perhaps, then, the reason why Urraca remained in the shadows during the Feminist Revolution is
because she did not have a male from which her power originated. Alfonso VI‟s making his
daughter heir was the extent of male influence on Urraca‟s reign. She signed her own charters,
her name was always first.58
Urraca of Leon-Castile was the first queen regnant in medieval Iberia, and arguably in all
of Western Europe. Her reign is stark in comparison with other, typical, medieval queens, like
Bertrade de Montfort. Unlike other queens, Urraca operated outside of the roles of a king‟s wife,
or a king‟s mother. She also exemplifies the very best that a queen regnant could be, she was not
simply the heir to the throne, she was the power behind it as well.
58
In the case of some charters, Urraca signed with her husband Alfonso, or with her son; but the majority she signed
as the sole regnant.
16
Works Cited
Albi, Irene Ruiz. La Dona Urraca (1109-1126) Cancilleria y Coleccion Diplomatica. Leon:
Universidad de Valladolid, 2003.
Bitel, Lisa M. Women in Early Medieval Europe, 400-1100. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2002.
Duby, Georges. The Knight, the Lady, and the Priest: The Making of Modern Marriage in
Medieval France. Trans. Barbara Bray. New York: Pantheon Books, 1983.
Fawtier, Robert. The Capetian Kings of France. London: Macmillan & Co, 1960.
Hallam, Elizabeth M. Capetian France 987-1328. London; New York: Longman, 1980.
Jouet, Alphonse. Un Beau Divorce Au Moyen-Âge: Bertrade De Montfort. Paris: J. Peyronnet,
1924.
“The Laws of the Salian Franks” from The Internet Medieval Source Book (Online Source:
<http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/salic-law.html> )
Malmesbury, William. . William of Malmesbury's Chronicle of the Kings of England : From the
Earliest Period to the Reign of King Stephen. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1847.
Martin, Therese. Queen as King : Politics and Architectural Propaganda in Twelfth-Century
Spain. Boston: Brill, 2006.
Moss, Anne Elizabeth. The Determination of Queenly Position in Early Capetian France :
Constance of Arles and Bertrada De Montfort. University of North Carolina- Chapel Hill:
1986.
Nelson, Janet L. Rulers and Ruling Families in Early Medieval Europe: Alfred; Charles the Bald,
and Others. London: Ashgate Publishing, 1999.
Newman, Sharan. The Real History Behind the Templars. New York: Berkley Books, 2007.
17
Nolan, Kathleen, ed. Capetian Women. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Pallares, Maria del Carmen, and Ermelindo Portela. La Reina Urraca. Nerea, 2006.
Parsons, John Carmi. Medieval Queenship. New York: St Martins Press, 1993.
Queens and Queenship in Early Medieval Europe: Sourcebook. Comp. by Elina Screen. St
Andrews: University of St Andrews, 2010
Reilly, Bernard F. The Kingdom of Leon-Castille Under Queen Urraca. New York: Princeton
University Press, 1982.
---. The Medieval Spains. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Ruether, R.R. Religion and Sexism: Images of Women in the Jewish and Christian Traditions.
New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974.
Shepherd, William R. The Historical Atlas. New York: Holt and Company, 1911 (Online
Source: <http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/history_europe.html>)
Suger, Abbot. “The Life of Louis the Fat” from the Internet Medieval Source Book. (Online
Source <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/suger-louisthefat.html>)
Vitalis, Orderic. The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis. Trans. Marjorie Chibnall. Ed.
Marjorie Chibnall. Vol. IV, VI. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1973.
18