A letter of arbitration

Translated letter:

B[artholomew], deacon of St. Stephen (Etienne) of Troyes, P. archdeacon of Meaux, greetings in the Lord to all who will look at the present letters.  – You should know that since between Blanche, countess of Champagne, on the one hand and William, bishop of Meaux, on the other, the dispute over certain complaints contained in their letters, was brought to us for arbitration, finally, on the complaints of the merchants, men of the bishop of Meaux living at Meaux, with the consent of the parties, we settled it in this manner:  namely, that the men of the bishop, merchants living in Meaux, could be summoned by the provost of the countess as often as the provost wished, about those things which pertain to trades made in the market on Saturday, and those things which pertain to protection of the town, according to the form written below.  And if they did not come at the said summons, they [must give] excuse that they did not hear the summons, or will make amends that they did not come.  If however they come to the summons, they [must] satisfy or will amend what was objected to them by the provost about those things which pertain to the trade done in the market on Saturday or those things which pertain to protection of the town, according to the form written below.  – The form however according to which the provost of the countess will summon the men of the bishop, merchants living at Meaux, for the protections of the town is this:  if there were a general edict that all men must protect the town, all said men of the bishop will be held to go.  If however the men of one office or only two, for instance skinners or bakers, or such, were summoned to protect the town, all said men merchants of the bishop of that office or those offices living in Meaux will be held to go.  – Moreover the provost of Meaux will be able to summon all men merchants of the bishop living in Meaux generally three times a year, when he summons men of other churchs and, if they do not come, they must excuse/satisfy or make amends, as is written above about others summoned.  And if they come, what was objected to them by the provost about what pertains to trade or protection of the town, they must satisfy or amend according to what was said above about the others summoned.  – Moreover if the provost accuses them of some injury to his person or his servants, whenever or wherever it was done, they must satisfy or emend. – If however said men of the bishop, merchants, did not want to be sentenced by the provost in the manner described, he will prohibit the market to them. – And if after the prohibition is made in this way he should find their things in the market, he may lawfully seize them.  – And as to the possession of the aforesaid, with the consent of the parties, we have ordered in good faith, saving the right of property and of possession of each party, if the bishop of Meaux, when the heir of Champagne reaches maturity, or the heir of Champagne, when he reaches maturity, wished to claim it.  – About the complaint of the cloister of St. Celine [mother of St. Remy], we have pronounced our decision thus:  that the countess of Champagne has justice in the said cloister, save for the bishop’s share, and save that noone dare to remove the grape-harvest until the bishop has his share of it.  – Also, about the complaint of captured horses at Congyac/Cognac? and the sentence of the place where the said horses were captured, we pronounce the great justice of the place to be the countess’s; and as with the complaint we pronounced on the cloister, so this complaint, as to the possession, saving the right of property and of possession of each party, if the bishop of Meaux, when the heir of Champagne reaches maturity, or the heir of Champagne, when he reaches maturity, wished to claim it.  – In memory of which we have had the present letters fortified with the affixing of our seals. – Enacted in the 1218th year of the Lord, in the month of March.

Original letter:

B[artolomeus] Beati Stephani Trecensis decanus, P. archidiaconus Meldensis, omnibus presentes litteras inspecturis, in Domino salutem. — Noveritis quod, cum inter Blancham, comitissam Campanie, ex una parte, et Willelmum, Meldensem episcopum, ex alia, super certis querelis, in eorum litteris con­tentis, coram nobis ex compromisso questio verteretur, tandem super querela mercatorum hominum episcopi Meldensis manentium apud Meldas, de consensu partium composuimus[compromisimus] in hunc modum: videlicet, quod homines episcopi mercatores, Meldis manentes, poterunt submoneri per prepositum comitisse, quotiens voluerit prepositus, de hiis que per­tinent ad mercaturam factam in mercato, in die sabbati, et de hiis que pertinent ad custodiam ville, secundum formam infrascriptam. Et, si ad submonitionem predictam non venerint, escondient quod non audierunt submonitionem, vel emendabunt quod non venerint. Si autem venerint ad submonitionem, escondient vel emendabunt illud quod eis obicietur a preposito de hiis que pertinent ad mercaturam factam in mercato in die sabbati, vel de hiis que pertinent ad custodiam ville secundum formam in­frascriptam. — Forma autem secundum quam prepositus comitisse submonebit homines episcopi mer­catores Meldis manentes pro custodia ville hec est: si factum fuerit generale edictum ut omnes homines custodiant villam, omnes dicti homines episcopi tenebuntur ire. Si autem homines unius officii vel duorum tantum, puta pellipariorum vel pistorum, vel hujus modi, submoniti fuerint ad custodiam ville, omnes dicti homines episcopi mercatores illius officii vel illoram officiorum, Meldis manentes, tenebuntur ire. — Preterea prepositus Meldensis poterit submonere omnes homines episcopi mercatores, Meldis manentes, generaliter ter in anno, quando submonebit homines aliarum ecclesiarum, et, si non venient, escondient vel emendabunt, sicut superius dictum est de aliis submonitionibus. Et si venerint, hoc quod eis obicietur a proposito de pertinentibus ad mercaturam vel ad custodiam ville, escondient vel emendabunt secundum quod supradictum est de aliis submonitionibus. — Pre­terea si prepositus eis obiciat aliquam injuriam persone sue vel servientibus suis, quandocumque vel ubicumque factam, escondient vel emendabunt. — Si autem dicti homines episcopi mercatores noluerint se justiciare per prepositum modo supradicto, pre­positus eis inhibebit mercatum. — Et si post inhibitionem taliter factam res eorum invenerit in mercato, licite capiet eas. — Et hec quantum ad possessionem predictorum, de consensu partium, ordinavimus bona fide, salvo jure proprietatis et etiam possessionis utriusque partis, si Meldensis episcopus, cum heres Campanie ad etatem venerit, vel heres Campanie, cum ad etatem venerit, voluerit reclamare. — De querela vero clausi Sancte Celinie, ita pronuntiavimus dictum nostrum: quod comitissa Campanie habet justiciam in predicto clauso, salva vinatione episcopi, et eo salvo quod nullus audet removere vindemiam donec episcopus habuerit vinationem suam. — Item, de querela equorum captorum apud Congyacum et de justicia loci ubi capti fuerint predicti equi, pronuntiamus magnam justiciam illius loci esse comitisse; et tam de ista querela quam de querela clausi pronuntiavimus quantum ad possessionem tantum, salvo jure proprietatis et etiam possessionis utriusque partis, si Meldensis episcopus, cum heres Campanie ad etatem venerit, vel heres Campanie, cum ad etatem venerit, voluerit reclamare. — In cujus rei memoriam, presentes litteras sigillorum nostrorum appensione fecimus communiri. — Actum anno Do­mini millesimo ducentesimo octavodecimo, mense martio.

Historical context:

This records the arbitration of a dispute between the countess and the bishop of Meaux, over the bishops’ merchants and her rights to summon them.

Printed source:

Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, 1.476-77. #1336.  (1218-)19, March; also in Evergates, Cartulary, 323-24, #368.  The text is the same except for one word, the Layettes has composuimus, the Cartulary compromisimus.

Date: