![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
One of the most famous works in Portuguese Medieval History and, certainly, the most well-known outside Portugal, the De Expugnatione Lyxbonensi purports to furnish a contemporary eye-witness account of Portuguese King Afonso Henriques’s 1147 conquest of Lisbon accomplished in combination with a passing fleet of Anglo-Norman, German and Flemish crusaders on their way by sea to Palestine and the Second Crusade. For over a quarter of a century, most commentators have accepted without demur the late Harold Livermore’s assertion that the author of the Lyxbonensi, identified in the text only as “R”, could be none other than the Anglo-Norman crusader-priest, Raul, who donated the battlefield church founded by him during the siege of Lisbon to the royal monastery of Santa Cruz de Coimbra, as recorded in a deed dated April of 1148. This article will argue that such identification must now be rejected, or at least substantially qualified, in the light of more recent scholarship and following a comprehensive consideration of the likely circumstances subsisting in Portugal around the time of Afonso Henriques’s Lisbon campaign. Examining previously over-looked complexities in the relationship between Afonso Henriques’s war on the Saracens of al-Andalus and the conduct of the “crusades” taking place both in the East and in other parts of Iberia, this article suggests an alternative and more likely authorship than that proposed by Livermore, and puts forward the case for the true purpose behind the construction of this extraordinary text, which has, until now, remained something of an enigma.
Notes on contributor
Jonathan Wilson ([email protected]) is a researcher in Hispanic Medieval History in the University of Liverpool and the Instituto de Estudos Medievais, Universidade Nova, Lisbon. His work focuses, inter alia, on Portugal’s relationship with Northern maritime crusaders, with crusading ideology, with the religious orders especially the Cistercians, and on Western Iberian literary/historiographical production during the long twelfth century. His most recent publication is “Tactics of Attraction: Saints, Pilgrims and Warriors in the Portuguese Reconquista”, Portuguese Studies vol. 30 no. 2 (2014). He is currently preparing editions and translations with attendant studies of two important manuscripts from the Cistercian Abbey of Alcobaça, the De Expugnatione Scalabis and the Gosuini De Expugnatione Salaciae Carmen, respectively recounting the conquests of Santarém in 1147 and Alcácer do Sal in 1217, for the series Dallas Medieval Texts and Translations (Peeters Publishers, Leuven).
ORCID
Jonathan Wilson http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3223-3514
Notes
1 De Expugnatione Lyxbonensi, The Conquest of Lisbon, ed. and trans. C.W. David (hereafter, “DEL”).
2 Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo (ANTT), N°3, n°8; Livermore, “Conquest of Lisbon and its Author”.
3 Riley-Smith, What Were the Crusades, 2; Jotischky, Crusading and the Crusader States, 6; Housley, Contesting the Crusades, 7; Constable, Crusaders and Crusading,18; Markowski. “Crucesignatus”.
4 For a useful survey of the historiography, see Housley's Contesting.
5 Tyerman, “Were There any Crusades in the Twelfth Century?”, 562; Phillips, Crusades, 1095-1197, 6.
6 Here I use the terms suggested by Housley, Contesting, 20.
7 Erdmann, A Ideia de Cruzada, 44–5. The assertions of Joseph F. O’Callaghan in Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain at 182–3, that Portuguese kings Afonso Henriques and Sancho I took the cross, are without foundation and should be rejected. If such an extraordinary thing had occurred, it is virtually certain to have been reported. Instead, all contemporary documentation, foreign and Portuguese, is silent on the matter; cf., inter alia, Phillips, The Second Crusade, Extending the Frontiers of Christendom (hereafter, “SCEC”) at 246–7, and 324 note 25; and Purkis, Crusading Spirituality at 171.
8 Housley, “Jerusalem and the Development of the Crusade Idea”, 31–2.
9 For a definition of the term Reconquista (or “Reconquest”), as used herein, see Lomax, Reconquest of Spain, 1–4; also González Jiménez, “Re-conquista? Un estado de la cuestión”, esp. 157, and 175–8. Cf., more generally, Martín, “Reconquista y Cruzada”; also Valdeón Baruque, La Reconquista. El Concepto de España.
10 Riley-Smith, “Peace Never Established”.
11 McCrank, Restoration and Reconquest; see also Jarrett, Rulers and Ruled.
12 Price, “Alfonso I and the Memory of the first Crusade”.
13 Liber maiolichinus, ed. Calisse; Heywood, A History of Pisa; Doxey, Christian Attempts to Reconquer the Balearic Islands.
14 Lema Pueyo, “El itinerario de Alfonso I ‘El batallador’”; Stalls, Possessing the Land; Price, ‘Alfonso I and the Memory’; Lacarra, Alfonso el Batallador.
15 See, inter alia, Lay, Reconquest Kings, 32–69; Mattoso, Afonso Henriques, 25–58.
16 Mattoso, Afonso Henriques, 61–80.
17 The expression “total war” is of course not free from controversy; however, as used herein, it is the definition of Trutz von Trotha that shall be preferred, and which was conveniently summarized by Thomas Rohkrämer as “a mobilization of all members of the societies involved and a dehumanization of the enemy that results in the war aim of complete annihilation or expulsion”, in Boemeke, Chickering and Forster, eds. Anticipating Total War, 190, note 4; for von Trotha's full contribution see, Ch.18, “The Fellows Can Just Starve”, of the same volume.
18 Lourie, “Society Organised for War”, 68–9; Mattoso, Ricos Homens, 195–6. For the importance of booty and the strict rules governing its distribution as “community property” see Powers, “Spoils and Compensation: Municipal, Warfare as an Economic Enterprise”. In idem, A Society Organised for War, Ch. 7 esp. 165.
19 Liber Maiolichinus, vv. 427–44; Brevarium Pisanae Historiae, ed. Lodovico Muratori, cols. 163–98; Heywood, History of Pisa, 68.
20 On this aspect of royal policy see, inter alia, Serrão and Oliveira Marques, Portugal em Definição de Fronteiras, 33–4.
21 Cf. Boissellier, “Reflexions sur l’idéologie portugaise de la Reconquête: XII-XIV siècles”, 51–3.
22 Snorre Sturlason, Heimskringla 606 et seq.
23 Ibid.
24 The predominance in the literature of the theme of Muslims as polluters was surveyed by Cole, “O God, the Heathen”.
25 Cole, “O God the Heathen”, 86.
26 On the early cultural legacy of the First Crusade see Phillips, SCEC, 17–36; also Edgington, “First Crusade: reviewing the evidence”.
27 The Historia Iherosolimitana of Robert the Monk, ed. D. Kempf and M.G. Bull; trans. Carol Sweetenham. Robert the Monk's History of the first Crusade. Cf. Sweetenham, ‘Introduction,’ Robert the Monk's History, 59–60.
28 Kempf and Bull, ‘Introduction’, Historia Iherosolimitana of Robert the Monk, xliv; For Germans and the call to the Second Crusade see Phillips, SCEC, 80–97, 102, 128–35.
29 Wilson. “Tactics of Attraction”.
30 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade and Holy War in De Expugnatione Lyxbonensi”, 124.
31 DEL, 39. That the unique Ms containing the text is a copy, see C.W. David's ‘Introduction’, ibid., 32–40.
32 On the 1147 conquest of Lisbon, see Phillips’s comprehensive rendering of the event in SCEC, 136–67.
33 DEL, 4–16.
34 Bennett, “Military aspects of the conquest of Lisbon”.
35 Cf. Lay, “Reconquest as Crusade”; also Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade and Holy War”, 123–41.
36 Livermore, “Conquest of Lisbon and its Author”, 1–7.
37 Ibid. 13–14.
38 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade and Holy War”, 123–41; Branco, “A conquista de Lisboa revisitada”, 220–2 and, idem, “Introdução”, in Nascimento, A Conquista de Lisboa aos Mouros, 9–51, esp. 11.
39 The three versions are as follows: the letter of Arnulf, PMH Scriptores, I, 406–7, and RHGF vol. 14, 325–27; that of Winand in E. Dümmler, Brief des kölnischen Priesters Winand an Arzbischof Arnold II von Koln nebst dem Fragmente eines Briefs kolnischer Peregrini an denselben aus einer Wiener Handshrift XVI saec., Vienna: 1851; and the letter of Duodechin, “Annales Sancti Disibodi”, ed. G. Waitz, MGH Scriptores, XVII, 27–8; cf. DEL, 48–9 and 52–7, where the base text of the three letters is referred to as the “Teutonic Source”, and see also Edgington, “The Lisbon Letter”.
40 There are also passages resembling sailing directions and several observations regarding natural history and geography which are taken from Solinus; cf. Edginton, “Lisbon Letter”, 335.
41 Pierre David dismissed the possibility tentatively advanced by C.W. David of a possible dating as late as the early thirteenth century; “Sur la relation de la prise de Lisbonne”; Livermore, “Conquest of Lisbon and its author”, 3; DEL, 32.
42 Picoito, “O Rei, o Santo e a Cidade”.
43 DEL, 45; Constable, “Second Crusade as seen by Contemporaries”, 221, where he also observes, rather incongruously, “His remarkable and vivid narrative is perhaps the most detailed surviving record of any military expedition in the twelfth century”. Cf. Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 124, and, idem, “Foreword”, DEL, xx–xxv.
44 Ibid.
45 DEL, 71–85.
46 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 128–9.
47 Phillips opines that Guibert may be the most likely source here on account of the parallels with his descriptions of the Scots as barbarians (DEL, 107); cf. Guibert of Nogent, Dei gesta per Francos, at 132, 156; Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 129, note 25.
48 Medieval canonists found the Augustinian doctrine of Just War summarized in the Ettymologiae of Isidore of Seville (c. 560–636). On St Augustine and the Just War see, inter alia, Russell, Just War in the Middle Ages, 16–39; Markus, “Saint Augustine's Views on the ‘Just War’”; Brundage, Medieval Canon Law, 19–20.
49 DEL, 80–1; Phillips, ‘Ideas of Crusade’, 132; cf. Nussbaum, “Just War. A Legal Concept?” at 456.
50 DEL, 81–3; Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 130. Isidore's summary of Augustine's formulation of the Just War was incorporated by Ivo of Chartres into both his Decretum and his Panormia, and was transmitted through these collections to Gratian's Decretum; Isidore of Seville, Ettymologiae, 18.1.2; Ivo of Chartres, Decretum, 10.116, PL, 161:727; Panormia, 8.54, PL, 161:1315; Gratian, Decretum Magistri Gratiani, ed. by Emil Friedberg, in Corpus Iuris Canonici, vol. 1 (Leipzig: Berhard Tauchnitz, 1879), Clausa 23, Questio II, c.1 “Quid sit iustum bellum”; Brundage, Medieval Canon Law, 20.
51 DEL, 78–9.
52 Ibid., 105–7; Phillips, “Foreword”, DEL, xxv.
53 Lay, Reconquest Kings, 81; Mattoso, Afonso Henriques, 210–13.
54 Mattoso, “Dois séculos de vicissitudes políticas”, 78.
55 Annales D. Alfonsi Portugallensium Regis, ed. Blöcker-Walter; also PMH, Scriptores, I, 15; Pierre David, Études Historiques sur la Galice et le Portugal, 261–90.
56 DEL, 16; Villegas-Aristizábal, “Revisiting the Anglo-Norman Crusaders’ Failed Attempt to Conquer Lisbon”.
57 Branco, “Introdução”, 9–10.
58 The text exists in a unique exemplar in a manuscript contained in a codex, part of the collection of Archbishop of Canterbury, Matthew Parker (1504–1574), housed in the Parker Library, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; Ms N°. 470, fols. 125r–146r. The best study of the manuscript in English is that by C.W. David, DEL, 26–40.
59 Branco, “Introdução”, 9–10.
60 Moreira, Afonso Henriques e a Primeira Crónica Portuguesa.
61 Crónicas Breves e Memórias Avulsas de Santa Cruz de Coimbra, ed. Peixoto, 65–74, at 70; cf. Mattoso, “As Três Faces de Afonso Henriques”, 34–6.
62 PMH, Scriptores, I, 91–3; see also Phillips, SCEC, 142.
63 Mattoso, “As Três Faces de Afonso Henriques;” and see idem, Afonso Henriques, 108.
64 Branco, “Introduçao”, 11. An extensive list of the various coeval or near-coeval reports in annals and chronicles is given by Machado, “Os ingleses em Portugal”, 559–63, and is supplemented by that given by Mattoso in a note in Herculano's, Historia de Portugal, ed. Mattoso, vol. I, 677–8; see also Constable, “Second Crusade as seen by contemporaries”, 226, note 70.
65 Branco, “Introdução”, 11.
66 DEL, 103–4.
67 Branco, “Introdução”, 30–1. Robert appears as dean of Lisbon at the same time that Estevão, author of the account of the report of the 1173 translation of the relics of St Vincent to the city, occupied the office of cantor.
68 However, there is no explicit reference to Robert having been a canon of S Vicente de Fora. The entry given by Branco, ibid., is: Obiit ( … ) Robertus, qui fuit decanus Ulixbone; Ms. British Museum, add. Mss. 1544, f.54v., but see now Um obituário medieval, ed. Santos, 152–3.
69 DEL, 56–7.
70 Ibid., 68–9.
71 Ibid., 70–1.
72 Ibid., 98–9.
73 Ibid., 110–11.
74 Ibid., 136–7.
75 Ibid., 138–9.
76 Ibid., 146–7.
77 Ibid., 170–1.
78 Ibid., 180–1.
79 Ibid., 104–5.
80 Ibid., 114–15.
81 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 126.
82 Ibid., 139–40.
83 Ibid., 140; and see Riley-Smith, “Crusading as an Act of Love”, in particular at 185: “Love of neighbour was always treated in crusade propaganda in terms of fraternal love for fellow-Christians, never in terms of love shown for enemies as well as friends. And this one-sided view of love did not properly reflect Christian teaching in the past or at the time.”
84 Branco, “Introdução”, 30–1; idem, “A conquista de Lisboa revisitada”, 221–6.
85 Branco, “Reis, Bispos e Cabidos”, at 56–64.
86 Cf. DEL, 37.
87 Branco, “Introdução”, 10.
88 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 126; idem, SCEC, 137.
89 Wilson, “Tactics of Attraction”; Branco, “A conquista de Lisboa revisitada”, 219–20.
90 Mula, “Geography and the Early Cistercian Exempla collections”; Newman, “Making Cistercian Exempla”.
91 La Documentación Pontifica hasta Inocencio III (965-1216), ed. Mansilla, doc. 26, p. 44, doc. 45 (a.1101) p. 65, doc. 101 (a.1156) p. 121.
92 Kedar, Crusade and Mission, at 44–8, esp. 47.
93 “ … ita tamen quod caus rapinae vel crudelitatis, eorum terram non predentur, vel quicquid contra eos fecerint pro exaltation nominis Christi faciatur, vel ut chistianos ab eorum impugnatione defendant, vel ad culturam christianae fidei valeant provocare”; ed. Blanco, The rule of the Spanish Military Order of St. James, 110–11; Kedar, Crusade and Mission, 48; cf. Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 140.
94 Documentos correspondientes al reinado de Sancho Ramírez, vol. 2, N° 49, at 134; on the date see Bull, Knightly Piety, 83.
95 Bull, Knightly Piety, 82–3.
96 Ibid.; see also Ferreiro, “The siege of Barbastro”.
97 Some precedent for the use of the Lyxbonensi in this manner is provided in the letter of Everwin of Steinfeld, prior of a Premonstratensian house near Cologne, to Bernard of Clairvaux requesting that the Cistercian abbot provide a work including orthodox arguments and authorities that preachers and debaters could employ for the refutation of heretics who were often well-versed in the scriptures; PL, 182: 676–80; Kienzle, Cistercians, Heresy and Crusade, 82–3. On early preaching tools, see Rouse and Rouse, Preachers, Florilegia and Sermons, 48–51.
98 DEL, 35.
99 Ibid., 115–25.
100 Ernst-Dieter Hehl has exhaustively catalogued the impressive array of canon law, particularly from Ivo of Chartres, and from Gratian's famous Clausa 23, in the speech of the Bishop of Porto; Hehl, Kirche und Krieg, Appendix I, 259–61; Phillips, “Foreword”, DEL, xxiii–xxiv. On the circulation of legal texts in Portugal see Rosa Pereira, “Livros de Direito na Idade Media”.
101 DEL, 116–17.
102 Ibid., 114–15.
103 Ibid., 118–19.
104 Ibid., 118–19.
105 Ibid., 120–1.
106 Ibid., 120–1.
107 Ibid., 124–5.
108 See for example the charter of “fidelity and steadfastness” (carta fidelitatis et firmitudinis) granted by Afonso Henriques to the “Free Moors” of Lisbon, Almada, Palmela and Alcácer; PMH, Leges, 396; see also Serrão and Oliveira Marques, Portugal em definição de Fronteiras, 33–4; Barros, Tempos e Espaços de Mouros, 41.
109 DEL, 165–73.
110 De Itinere Navali, ed. C. W. David (hereafter, “DIN”), at 628–32. King Sancho I famously offered the crusaders substantial sums of money if they would agree to forego the, necessarily destructive, sack of the conquered city. The offer was refused.
111 Gesta Francorum, 92.
112 Fulcher of Chartres, Historia Hierosolymitana, ed. H. Hagenmeyer; A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem, 1095-1127, trans. Ryan, quotation at 123.
113 Cf. Norman Housley, Fighting for the Cross, p.218; also, Köhler, Alliances and Treaties. trans. by Holt, esp. at 55. On possible exaggerations of numbers killed, see Hay, “Gender Bias and Religious Intolerance” and Kedar, “The Jerusalem Massacre of July 1099”, which includes an analysis of the historiography.
114 Epistolae et Privilegia, N° 21 PL, 163.42 C-D; JL 5835, quoted by Gilchrist, “The Papacy and War against the ‘Saracens’, 795–1216”, at 191 and see also his comment, “There is something frightening and unwholesome in the language of the crusade popes as they address the Christian army in its moments of triumph or defeat … ” at 190.
115 Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the Expedition, 154–5.
116 Ibid.,166.
117 Ibid.,176; Albert of Aachen, IX, 27–9.
118 Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the Expedition, 195–6.
119 Cf. Mayer, “Latins, Muslims and Greeks”, 180.
120 Hartigan, “St Augustine on War and Killing”, at 203; Russell, “Love and Hate in Medieval Warfare”, at 111.
121 Gilchrist, “The Erdmann Thesis and the Canon Law, 1083–1141”.
122 Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens; The Origin of the Idea of Crusade. trans. Baldwin and Goffart. Page references will hereafter follow the Eng. trans.
123 Gilchrist, “Erdmann Thesis”, 38.
124 Gilchrist, “Erdmann Thesis”, 43, note 20; Somerville, “The Council of Clermont”.
125 Gilchrist, “Erdmann Thesis”, 38; Brundage, “Holy War and the Medieval Lawyers”, at 118; idem, “The Hierarchy of Violence”, at 676, where Brundage notes a process of “intellectual and institutional bifurcation: a rapidly widening disjunction between the interest of theologians and canon lawyers”.
126 Augustine of Hippo, Questiones in Heptateuchum PL, 34, Liber vi, para 10; Gilchrist, “Erdmann Thesis”, 45, note 83; Riley-Smith, Review of Kirche und Krieg, 290–1. See also the bibliography given in Gilchrist, “The Papacy and War against the ‘Saracens’”, at 174, note 1 and 197, note 181. The point appears to have been overlooked by some modern commentators; cf. Powell, “Rereading the Crusades”, at 665 and Lay, “Reconquest as Crusade”.
127 DEL, 116–7.
128 Kennedy, Muslim Spain, 30–8.
129 On conversion and the Arab expansion see Donner, Muhammad and the Believers. On the Yahsubi rebellions, see Picard, Le Portugal Musulman, 29–35; also, Macias. “O Garbe-al-Andaluz”, at 420.
130 DEL, 78–9; Odber de Baubeta, “Toward a history of preaching in Medieval Portugal”, at 5–6.
131 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 130.
132 Erdmann, Idea de Crusada, 23.
133 DEL, 176–7.
134 DIN, 628–9. It is perhaps of some note that the “Lisbon Letter” makes no mention of the Lisbon massacre. On failures of leadership and difficulties in controlling crusader violence, see Riley-Smith, “Christian Violence and the Crusades”, esp. 12–14.
135 Epistolae et privilegia, PL, 180:1203; see Phillips SCEC, 134.
136 Wilson, “Tactics of Attraction”, esp. 211–13; Purkis, Crusading Spirituality, 131 et seq.; O’Banion, “What has Iberia to do with Jerusalem?”; Martín, “Reconquista y Cruzada”, 227–8.
137 DEL, 147–59; First to identify the cleric as “R” was Reinhold Pauli in 1885 in MGH, Scriptores, XXVII, 5–10 at 5 note 3, followed by C.W. David, DEL, 41.
138 DEL, 98–101.
139 Ibid., 98–9.
140 Ibid.
141 Ibid., 100–1.
142 Ibid.
143 Ibid., 56–7.
144 Ibid.
145 Ibid., 110–13.
146 Ibid., 104–11.
147 Ibid., 102–3.
148 Ibid.
149 Ibid., 104–5.
150 Ibid., 106–7.
151 Ibid., 102–3.
152 Ibid.
153 Ibid.
154 Ibid., 108–9.
155 Ibid. 110–11.
156 Ibid., 116–19.
157 Ibid. Mention is also made of St James, his disciples and successors by Bishop Pedro of Porto, ibid., 78–9, and also by Archbishop João Peculiar, ibid., 116–17.
158 Pedro Picoito has made a persuasive case for the retrieval of St Vincent in 1173 being the initiative, not of Afonso Henriques, but of the disgruntled Mozarabs of the city unhappy about the suppression of their liturgy in favour of the Roman rite promoted by the conquerors; Picoito, “A Trasladação de S. Vincent”.
159 S.Vicente de Lisboa e Seus Milagres Medievais, ed. and trans. Nascimento and Gomes.
160 Phillips, “Ideas of Crusade”, 127; Smail, “Latin Syria and the West”, esp. 5–16.
161 Tyerman, England and the Crusades 1095-1588, 40.
162 Cf. Mayer's observations on the capitulation of Sidon in 1110 and the peasants, described by Fulcher of Chartres as ruricolae and agricolae, who remained in the land with the result that agricultural production was firmly in the hands of the Syro-Christians and the subjected Muslim population; “Latins, Muslims and Greeks”, 181.
163 Indiculum Fundationis Monasterii Beati Vincentii Ulixbone ed. and trans. Nascimento, in A Conquista de Lisboa, 178–201.
164 DEL, 172–3.
165 Cf. Branco, “A conquista de Lisboa revisitada”, 229, note 35.
166 Mattoso, “As Três Faces de Afonso Henriques”, 31.
167 It is in the anticipation of a sea-faring audience perhaps that we find so much attention given to the voyage from Dartmouth to Lisbon, which contains detailed sailing directions in the manner of a periplus or portolano.
168 Mattoso, Afonso Henriques, 152.
169 Mattoso, Afonso Henriques, 153–4; Lay, Reconquest Kings, 88–9.
170 Ibid.; Reilly, The Kingdom of León-Castilla under King Alfonso VII, 81.
171 For Afonso Henriques's letter of homage, Claves regni, see Documentos medievais portugueses, N° 202, p. 250. Pope Lucius II's letter of reply and acceptance is to be found in Epistolae et privilegia, PL, 179:860–1.
172 See, for example, Das Register Gregors VII, ed. Caspar, vol. 2, VIII, 2, 517–18.
173 Bull, “The Roots of Lay Enthusiasm for the First Crusade”, at 357; Robinson, ‘Gregory VII and the Soldiers of Christ.’
174 Pradalié, “Les faux de la Cathédrale”; Serrão and Oliveria Marques, Portugal em Definição de Fronteiras, 340–9.
175 Indeed, there appears to be some evidence of Mozarab dissatisfaction in Lisbon in the years following the conquest; cf. Picoito, “A Trasladação de S. Vicente”, and idem, “O Rei, o Santo e a Cidade”.
176 Mattoso, Afonso Henriques, 130–5.
177 Cf. Smith, “Pope Alexander III and Spain”.