Constant prayers for those who trouble thee.

Columcille, The Rule of Colmcille

Written in the 1280s, The Murthly Hours is one of the earliest surviving examples of a book of hours, which was an innovative type of devotional book for Christain laity. During the medieval period, books of hours were predominantly prepared for affluent laypeople, more often than not for women. Such is the case for The Murthly Hours, as historian John Higgitt posits in his detailed analyses of the beautifully illuminated text. However, in the thirteenth century, these books were not as common as they would later become. Thus, books from the mid to late 1200s are a rarity. Surviving examples show a great variety of content and decoration. Rediscovered in the 1980s, The Murthly Hours is an exquisite example of an early form of the book of hours. The date for the creation of the text is estimated to around 1208. Given the early date, there has been much debate about whether the original female owner could read the Latin text of the book and comprehend the meanings connected to the prayers.

Naturally, one cannot know with absolute certainty about the degree of literacy amongst the laity during this period. Nevertheless, recent scholarship trends take a more sanguine view of literacy during the medieval period. These scholars contend that a decent portion of the populace could read dominate languages of the period and a significant minority had the capacity to read Latin.[1] This new confidence in literacy, practically among women, is based on the fact that the affluent upper rungs of medieval society had access to private tutors, the motivation, and the resources to procure educational texts with which to educate their children. Furthermore, there has been renewed attention to the veneration of St. Anne and the Virgin Mary, which suggest that there is substantial evidence that women took a particular interest in the education of their daughters based on the example of these prominent religious figures.[2] 

Despite the revelations of recent scholarship, the social and spiritual interests of these noble women are not as thoroughly document as opposed to their male counterparts. With that in mind, Higgitt contends that the original owner of The Murthly Hours, Joan de Valence, might have been able to read Latin but she could not have understood the multi-layered meaning of the text.[3] While Higgitt’s assertion may be correct, he does not account for the veneration of the Virgin Mary, which made these books of hours extremely popular among affluent women. Moreover, Higgitt neglects to consider that functional literacy during this period was not akin to modern conceptions. As a consequence, Higgitt may have taken a blatantly negative view of the owner’s capacity to understand the text.  Given his stance on the issue of literacy, it is prudent to counter his argument with an equally plausible assertion. Thus, in order to present an alternative argument, one must consider three crucial points of contention. 

Firstly, Joan de Valence was a highborn noblewoman with links to the Plantagenet Kings of England, which may have given her access to more significant opportunities for learning and the funds to buy such luxurious text from Pairs. The second point concerns the circumstantial evidence from The Murthly Hours and the work of other academics suggests that Joan and her mother, Joan de Munchensy, were followers of the veneration cult of the Virgin Mary. If that proves to be accurate, it infers that Joan’s mother placed a great emphasis on the education of her children. The third point to consider is that Joan’s mother was a force to be reckoned with in her time. Joan de Munchensy was a dynamic and intelligent woman; whose life stands as an example of what she might have expected of her daughter. With that in mind, it stands to reason that Joan de Munchensy would have taken a keen interest in the welfare and education of her children.[4] Accordingly, these three points lend greater credence to the assertion that Joan de Valence could understand the text and that she was part of the first wave of Books of Hours owners who made them so prevalent in the fourteenth-century.

Books of Hours

Before we begin exploring the arguments above, it is prudent for one to have a decent grounding in what a book of hours is and what purpose did they serve in the life of the laity. Books of Hours began to emerge on the Continent in the thirteenth century as an outgrowth of a great religious revival in Europe. The Books of Hours are physical representations of the laity’s desire to emulate monastic communities. These books are probably the most common surviving form of medieval manuscript. Books of Hours were frequently written between the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries. Crafted in large quantities, predominantly in Italy, France, and the Netherlands.[5] Often, the texts were highly decorated and contained very elaborate works of art. Although costly to make, they were owned by a vast section of the affluent members of the laity, especially women. While the plushest examples attract most of the attention, every literate person in the medieval period would have aspired to own one of these books. The illiterate would want to own one as well because they were status symbols and are often mentioned explicitly in wills as being bequeathed as parts of a person’s personal property.[6]  From this facts it is reasonable to conclude that these books were significantly valued items. 

Accordingly, the amount of usage each one displays varies from book to book. It is most likely the case that the most luxurious examples were kept as valuable items and more practical examples were used in daily prayer. These everyday versions of texts would be carried around in a small bag attached to a belt, which a person could then take out and read at the appropriate hour.[7] Books of Hours contain a series of prayers, psalms, and recitations, which are read at the eight canonical hours of the day in honour of the Virgin Mary. The canonical hours are times at which monastic communities recited individual psalms in accordance with the monastic rule, based on the Rule of St. Benedict or one of the variations. The hours are Matins, Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers, and Compline.[8] The central text of the Book is the Hours of the Virgin, from whence the book derives its name, a book of hours. Frequently, before the hours section, there are a series of miniatures from the Old and New Testament.[9] Each division within the hours would have elaborate historiated drawings in the initials.[10] Even a person who could not read the text, they could glean mnemonic association with the miniatures and historiated initials then recite prayers orations that were associated with the hours.[11]   In addition to Hours of the Virgin, another essential portion of the text was the liturgical calendar. In some books, one finds pictures associated with the labours of the month that decorate the border. The calendar sets out the feast days of the Saints. The text can be written in red, blue, or gold ink. However, red is usually reserved for important feast days. The other part of the calendar is ‘Golden Number’ and the ‘Dominical Letter,’ which are used to calculate the sequences of the feast days by relating them to the date of Easter.[12]

Other texts contained within the book would depend on the affluence of the person requesting its illumination.[13] These extravagantly adorned texts, of small proportions, varied in content according to the owners’ desires. When ordering a Book of Hours from an artisan, one would specify how much money they wanted to spend and what text they want to be concluded in the book. Additionally, a person would state how they wanted them adorned and the extent of the decoration. Usually, each section in the hours would have contained historiated initials with miniatures that would depict the content of the text. An example from The Murthly Hours can be observed at the beginning of The Office of the Dead in Appendix D. Another interesting point about the illuminations is that the owner is often depicted at some point within the book.[14] The text is transcribed on treated calfskin called vellum and probably took between six to eight months to produce in an artisans workshop.[15] Each shop had a master copy of the text and would have loosely affiliated copyists who would work from the original. By employing this process, they could produce these pages relatively quickly and ones that were similar in design. One scribe would write out the text, another would perform the rubrication, and then illuminators would decorate the pages.[16]

Description & Palaeography of The Murthly Hours

The outside dimensions of the leaves contained within the Murthly Hours are commonly 192 X 125 mm. Rebound in the late 1500s and repaired in the mid-1800s. The original text was bound with a modest leather binding placed over wooden boards.  The miniatures and the books of hours were bound together at some point after the text was made. During the 1500s binding was replaced. During that process, the vellum was cropped, which cut into some of the illuminations and trimmed away most of the original margins. The binding was removed in 1987 and is kept separately.[17]

The ruling, layout, and script are different in the Calendar section. This distinction is due to the need for the calendar to accommodate up to 31 lines for the days and months with their corresponding titles; the lines are made from red ink. Conversely, the rulings for the devotional texts are made in lead point. Pairs of horizontal rulings and two vertical rulings comprise the margins, while the primary textual rulings vary depending on the section. Generally, there are 15 rulings for the central body of the text.[18]

The calendar is written in a less formal Gothic style, and the feet of the minims are less consistent than the devotional text.[19] Conversely, the main body of the devotional text is written in two sizes of Formal Gothic script in brown-black ink. The large bold Gothic minuscule script is used for the major texts. The minor script is used for shorter text or rubrics.[20] The scribes were consistent in truncating the feet and took care to correct the text of mistakes. An example is found within fol. 36v, where the last five lines are corrected with the appropriate text and pasted on with a piece of vellum. In other instances, the rubricator cancelled incorrect letters in red ink, which can be observed on fols. 113v, 163r, and 175r.[21]

The Book of Hours section is thought to be of Parisian origin based on the style and French rubrics. There is also a hierarchy of adornment that serves to direct the reader through the distinctive portions of the text. Initials are contained within blocks of text highlighted with red. The animated paintings in the bas-de-page and historiated drawings in the initials are superior to the full-page miniatures. The embellishment arrangement is most luxuriant at the start of new texts. The images contain engaging depictions of tendrils, hybrid dragons, and scenes of interactions between various fauna. It is with these depictions of the marginal fauna that one might be able to identify the artists who illuminated the main body of the text.[22] The images are similar to ones found in Montellier Chansonnier and Aristotle’s Metaphysics, which belong to ‘Cholet Group.’ The resemblances of the fauna found within these texts demonstrates that it is highly likely that the same ‘school’ of artists created these texts in Paris around 1280.[23]

The Full-page Miniatures at the start of the book contain depictions of Old and New Testament scenes and are the work of three different English artists. The artists’ style is similar to that of the ‘William of Devon Group,’ and some images contain Insular script. The Genesis and Infancy miniatures are from an earlier period, 1260-1270, before the book of hours was commissioned.[24] The Passion miniatures could be from a different artist who seems to be emulating the William of Devon Group and dates from 1260-1290.[25] The miniatures are framed with gold outer strips and corner pieces. All have a distinct characteristic of dense black lines that form the outlines of the figures. Moreover, the images are flat with little sense of a second dimension.[26] Two artists might have painted the Genesis and Infancy scenes within a similar location. However, the Passion scenes have a more nuanced style and, possibly, were painted shortly after the Genesis and Infancy scenes.[27] Consequently, the stylistic evidence points to three artists being English in origin and the full-page miniatures were created between 1260-1290.

In addition to the images, there are added flyleaves that contain Latin, French, and Gaelic writings. The front flyleaf contains suffrages in Latin are devoted to two Scottish saints, Duthac and Boniface or Curitin. The script is in a ‘secretarial’ hand and was possibly written in the 1400s.[28]  Additionally, the second flyleaf contains lines of Gaelic, fol. iv.  Sadly, it seems that the text might have been subjected to a re-agent in the 1800s, which has rendered that text essentially illegible.[29] The final flyleaf contains Gaelic-healing charms. The script is created with an early form of Scots as opposed to traditional Gaelic spelling practices of the period. The use of Scots and faded condition of the flyleaf makes the translation challenging to decipher, but the text is some sort of healing charm.[30]  Lastly, the flyleaf contains Gaelic-healing charms.  The script is created with Scots as opposed to traditional Gaelic spelling practices of the period.  The use of Scots and faded condition of the flyleaf makes the translation difficult to decipher, but the text is some sort of healing charm.[31] The Gaelic lines are historically significant because they are the second oldest example of written Scottish Gaelic to survive the all-consuming fires of the Reformation. The curious non-standard Gaelic script used in The Murthly Hours is derived from the Lowland Scots language that dominated the administration apparatus of the Scottish State. The Gaelic scripts are an outgrowth of bilingual scribes attempting to sound out the Gaelic words and then transcribing the oral phrase.[32]

Rediscovered in the 1980s, The Murthly Hours has had a fascinating journey to its final resting place at the National Library of Scotland. The textual evidence demonstrates that the manuscript was made for a woman who lived in England. The female owner is depicted reading her Book of Hours in the historiated to the Gradual Psalms on folio 149v.[33] Further evidence of a female owner is found within The Litany of the Saints one finds that the owner corrected the text to remove plural words and replaced them with feminine singular.[34] Moreover, Higgitt argues the based on the calendar, and it is the saint feast days that the women resided somewhere in the region of Worcester.[35] Additional proof of its English owner is found within The Hours of the Virgin and the Office of the Dead. Within these sections, the presence of English saints and martyrs can be observed.[36] astly, using genealogical data, Higgitt argues that The Murthly Hours belonged to a woman of Anglo-Norman lineage, who might have been Joan de Valence. Higgitt puts forth a rather persuasive case of Valence ownership based on how the text made its way to Scotland through her matrimonial links to the MacDougall clan.[37] Coupled with the genealogical data, Higgitt asserts that Joan’s father, William, served as an agent to Edward I in 1286, which places him in France at the central time when the text could have been created.[38] Linking the evidence together, Higgitt puts forth a rather convincing case for the original owner of The Murthly Hours. With that said, assuming Higgitt has correctly identified the original owner, the question now become could Joan de Valence read and understand the text that her father had given to her?

Joan de Valence’s Literacy

Returning to the debate over literacy during the medieval period, Higgitt’s contends that the original owner of the Murthly Hours, Joan de Valence, might have been able to read Latin. However, she could not have understood the multi-layered meaning of the text. Higgitt’s supports his claim by stating that, while the original owner could read French, the text does not contain a French rubric, which was commonly found in other texts during this period.[39] Additionally, Higgitt re-enforces his assertion by stating that French is only pithily used twice in the book of hours and that the full-page miniatures with French captions were meant to aid the owner in her comprehension of the text.  However, historian M. Clanchy contends that the use of French was a “convention of presentation” and does not indicate the owner was illiterate.[40]  Nonetheless, Higgitt concludes his argument by stating, “Mere ownership of an attractively illuminated book of Hours like The Murthly Hours proves neither literacy nor piety.”[41]  Evidently, Higgitt has some serious doubts about the original owner’s abilities and level of education.

Aristocracy

On the surface, Higgitt’s argument is entirely plausible, given his assumptions about literacy during this period. However, Higgitt’s research suggests that Joan de Valence could have had ample opportunity to learn a type of functional Latin and most definitely would have understood the meaning of the text. Even without formal religious instruction, if she coupled her practical literacy and, with the aid of mnemonic association of the miniatures, she certainly would have grasped the underlying currents of the scripture. Moreover, Joan would likely have had access to some form of education based on her social rank within the Anglo-Norman aristocracy. Higgitt’s detailed genealogical research into Joan’s family is revealing and brings this fact to light. Joan’s father was William de Valence, who was the half-brother of King Henry III by way of his mother’s, Isabella of Angoulême, marriage to King John. William de Valence married the wealthy heiress to the earldom of Pembroke, Joan de Munchensy.[42] Additionally, this marriage meant that Joan’s grandfather was the renowned William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke, who is better known as William the Marshal. The Marshal served five English Kings and acquired a significant fortune during his service to the Crown.[43]

From the evidence it is logical to conclude that this advantageous marriage gave Joan’s father access to the inner circles of power. Indeed, William de Valence was one of the most trusted attendants of King Henry III, his half-brother, and later to King Edward I, his nephew.[44] It is through this royal relationship that Higgitt argues that William de Valence commissioned the book of hours for Joan during the period when he was accompanying Edward I in Paris in 1286.[45]  Higgitt’s contends that the time frame stands as compelling evidence for Joan’s ownership. Moreover, Higgitt suggests that Joan would have been near or at the age of betrothal, which would have given her father the motivation for ordering the book of hours. Regardless, of the motivations behind the commissioning, the de Valence family’s social standing and William’s marriage to Joan de Munchensy provides ample evidence that Joan would have had access to educational opportunities. Whether Joan’s education was through a private tutor, family chaplain, or her mother, it matters not because her family would have placed a high value on her literacy. This emphasis on her education may have been for religious reasons, but it may be more likely Joan was educated so that she could become an asset to the family.

To serve her dutiful function of furthering familial alliances, Joan was married to John Comyn in 1294 or 95. [46] Better known as Red Comyn, he was from a prominent family of Norman-French origin in the Lowlands of Scotland. Later Edward I sponsored Comyn as Guardian of Scotland in the aftermath of the First Scottish War of Independence (1296-1304). Comyn played a central role in the intrigues and power struggles during that tumultuous period. After Wallace’s defeat at Falkirk and his flight to France, Comyn was the master of Scotland. It was under Comyn’s able leadership that a negotiated peace with Edward I was settled in 1304.[47] However, Robert de Brus infamously murdered the Red Comyn before the high altar at Greyfriars Kirk in 1306.  Upon hearing of Comyn’s death, Edward I sent Aymer de Valence, Joan’s eldest surviving brother, to hunt down the Brus.[48] From this brief historical context, one can observe the fact that Joan’s marriage to Comyn was a strategic decision, possibly made at the behest of Edward I. By strengthening Comyn’s ties to the English crown, Edward would ensure his loyalty and commitment to the interests of English Crown. In this unstable environment, Joan would have needed of her courtly skills, religious conviction, and some form of academic ability to survive. Joan’s influential mother, Joan de Munchensy, would have imparted all the necessary skills in her daughter that would enable Joan to succeed in such a situation.

Veneration of Mary

With the aforementioned points on the necessity of courtly skills, it is prudent to discuss another point concerning the reasons why it is likely that Joan had some form of education. First one has to recall that the central function of literacy during this period was one of prayer.  Instruction in reading was primarily performed at home by from mother to child.[49]  While there were no known grammar schools for girls, constant recitation of the prayers would have made the text familiar to the reader.[50]  Noblewomen, such as Joan de Munchensy, had chaplains that could elaborate on the historical, allegorical, topological, and anagogical significance of the prayers with The Murthly Hours.[51] Hence, the literal reading of the Latin was only the first step in one’s comprehension of the text.[52] Miniatures, coupled with the text, aided the medieval reader’s ability to understand the multi-layered meaning of each prayer. Furthermore, reading for women in thirteenth-century England was a demanding task because most noblewomen were required to learn French, English, and Latin.[53]

Recent scholarship suggests that the impetus for this maternal instruction has its roots in the veneration of St. Anne and the Virgin Mary. Around the beginning of the eleventh century, the concept of Mary’s divinity as both spiritually and intellectually exceptional began to take shape.[54] Various images began to appear depicting Mary at study in the temple learning the Psalter. From there, the depictions begin to show Mary’s mother, Anne, teaching the Psalter to her.[55] St. Anne’s gestures, in these images, indicate the mother is the teacher of the child. It is interesting to note that St. Anne, as the teacher of Mary, has no foundation in the biblical texts. Regardless, the concept of Mary as divinely intelligent or educated by St. Anne suggest a significant shift in medieval culture toward some form of prescribed education for girls through the efforts of their mother.[56]   While the full evolution of this concept would not reach maturity until the fourteenth-century, one can observe the roots of this veneration of the Virgin Mary in the twelfth-century. Such evidence can also be seen in The Murthly Hours. On Annunciation to Mary miniature (f.9r), Mary is depicted holding a book as the Holy Spirit whispers in her ear.[57]  This image is notable because, in the eleventh-century, the Annunciation Mary miniature Mary was usually portrayed spinning or weaving.[58] he transition to the book demonstrates the shift in the conceptualisation Mary from weaver to educated and literate. Moreover, this point is significant, given the fact that The Murthly Hours forward miniatures must have been created before the book of hours portion. Nevertheless, images inclusion suggests that Joan or her mother were cognizant of these ideas and no doubt put them into practice.

Joan de Munchensy

The last point to consider is Joan’s mother, Joan de Munchensy.  Historian Linda Mitchell writes a compelling account of de Munchensy in her revealing book, Joan de Valence: The Life and Influence of a Thirteenth-Century Noblewoman. Joan de Munchensy was an important actor in the volatile political world of thirteenth-century England. Mitchell recounts that Joan was an efficient ruler with a firm grasp of the family affairs and the administration of her family’s vast estate. Joan was the heiress to one of the wealthiest and massive estates in England. King Henry III chose his youngest half-brother, William de Valence, as her husband, and arranged her marriage. Joan was constantly embroiled in complex land disputes that required careful attention to legal documents and knowledge of the judicial system.[59] Mitchell argues that Joan was able to impress her will upon others by the use of her seal. Through the styling “S’ Johanne dñe d’ Penbroc uxor’ W’ d Valencia” on her seal, Joan was able to communicate her impressive heritage and connection to the royal family.[60]

Joan’s power and influence grew when her husband died in 1296, leaving her in command of their vast estate.[61] Joan held the reins of power within the earldom, and her son Aymer would not succeed to the title until after her death in 1307. Furthermore, Mitchell contends that the sheer number of legal documents with her seal emblazed on them stands as the most persuasive evidence of her capabilities. Such was her involvement in the day to day matters of her estate and family that when her youngest daughter’s husband, John Comyn, was murdered, Edward I instructed Joan to send Comyn’s son to be educated with the royal family at Northampton.[62] What is interesting about this situation is that the King commanded Joan de Munchensy to perform this task and not young John Comyn’s mother, Joan Comyn (formally Joan de Valence). What one can infer from this is unclear, but one can see that the Edward I trusts Joan’s ability and that he is concerned for the wellbeing of her family.

While Joan’s influence is impressive, Mitchell admits that she can only make inferences about Joan’s education.[63] Nevertheless, Mitchell provides a fascinating account of the material facets of Joan’s domiciliary. A particular account is pertinent to the veneration of the Virgin discussion.  Within the account, one finds a repair expense for “an image of the Blessed Virgin Mary.”[64] While this does not prove that Joan followed the veneration of Mar, it does serve as circumstantial evidence that she might have been a devotee. Regardless, the general impression that Mitchell presents of Joan is that she was an industrious and decisive woman, who was undeterred in the single-minded pursuit of her objectives. With this in mind, one has to ask the question; would such motivated and commanding women have left the education of her daughters to chance? The answer to that question remains to be discovered, but from the evidence, one can infer that Joan wanted her daughters to be strong and self-willed women. In order to be such, Joan would have taught her daughters or, given their wealth, would have engaged a tutor for her children. 

Was Joan de Valence Literate?

Recalling Higgitt’s assertion that the Joan de Valence could not have understood the multi-layered meaning of the text. As one can perceive from the pieces of evidence provided in this paper, Higgitt’s argument, though plausible, can be refuted by other proofs. Higgitt’s argument is based on what is ultimately unknowable. Nevertheless, one can make inferences based on recent scholarship and by pulling together the threads of what evidences in order to formulate a decent counterargument. It is clear that Joan’s family was substantially wealthily and maintained a social position close to the royal family based on familial bonds. Joan’s mother was the heiress to the estate of William the Marshal and her father was the half-brother of King Henry III. Such family associations suggest that Joan would have been afforded the opportunity to have some form of education, whether through her mother or a private tutor. Next, one must consider the popularity of the veneration of the Virgin Mary among women during this period.  Inferred evidence from The Murhtly Hours and Joan de Munchensy’s household accounts links her family to the veneration of the Virgin Mary, which carries with it the underlying current of child education through the mother. Lastly, one must consider the character of Joan’s mother, Joan de Munchensy. From the evidence of her acumen and ability to run a vast estate, all the while holding male rivals at bay. Indicates that Joan de Munchensy was a strong and confident woman who would have had her daughters educated in order to effectively increase the family’s fortunes.

These pieces of evidence suggest that it was highly probable that Joan de Valence (Comyn) had some form of education that would have included a basic instruction in Latin and the multifaceted meanings of the prayers. In addition to Latin, Joan would have been required to learn French and English; it is even a possibility that she would have attempted to learn Gaelic after her marriage to John Comyn. Ultimately, the answer to the question of whether Joan de Valence’s (Comyn) had a mastery of the written word and could comprehend those words cannot be determined at this stage in medieval scholarship. However, with each passing year, new research emerges from the dusty archives of Europe that challenge current notions and force us to re-examine what we once thought was possible. Accordingly, the critical point to remember is that the only thing that separates Joan from us is time. The human condition has changed little since the medieval period, and that means Joan had all the mental faculties that the modern person does. Thus, given the right set of circumstances, Joan de Valence would have achieved anything that she set her mind to, as her mother certainly demonstrated. In the end, however, the truth about women’s literary during this period may be a story that remains untold. As a consequence, the debate will continue rage.     

Bibliography

Asbridge, Thomas S. The Greatest Knight: The Remarkable Life of William Marshal, the Power behind Five English Thrones. New York, NY: Ecco, an Imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers, 2014.

Barron, Evan M. The Scottish War of Independence. London: J. Nisbet, 1914.

Branner, Robert. Manuscript Painting in Paris During the Reign of St.Louis. Vol. 18.

Study in the History of Art. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1977.

Clanchy, M. T. From Memory to Written Record: England, 1066-1307. 3rd ed. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Balcwell, 2013.

Clemens, Raymond, and Timothy Graham. Introduction to Manuscript Studies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2007.

Duffy, Eamon. Marking the Hours: English People and Their Prayers, 1240-1570. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006.

Erler, Mary Carpenter., and Maryanne Kowaleski. Gendering the Master Narrative: Women and Power in the Middle Ages. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003.

Harthan, John P. The Book of Hours. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1977.

Higgitt, John. The Murthly Hours: Devotion, Literacy and Luxury in Paris, England and the Gaelic West. London: British Library, 2000.

____. “The Murthly Hours – National Library of Scotland.” The Murthly Hours. Accessed October 11, 2016. http://www.nls.uk/murthlyhours/.

Meek, Donald E. “The Scots-Gaelic Scribes of Late Medieval Perthshire: An Overview of the Orthography and Contents of the Book of the Dean of Lismore.” In Bryght Lanternis: Essays on the Language and Literature of Medieval and Renaissance Scotland., edited by J. Derrick McClure and Michael R G Spiller, 387-404. Aberdeen, UK: Aberdeen University Press, 1989.

Mitchell, Linda Elizabeth. Joan De Valence: The Life and Influence of a Thirteenth-century Noblewoman. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.

Morgan, Nigel. Early Gothic Manuscripts. 1250-1285 (II). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Pelikan, Jaroslav Jan. The Growth of Medieval Theology: 600-1300. Chicago, Ill.: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1999.

Ridegway, H.W. ‘Valence, William de, earl of Pembroke (d. 1296),’ ODNB, online ed., Jan 2008 (www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/29481, accessed 19 November 2016).

Wieck, Roger S., Virginia Reinburg, John Plummer, and Lawrence R. Poos. Time Sanctified: The Book of Hours in Medieval Art and Life. New York: Gerorge Braziller, 1988.

Foot Notes

[1] See, M. T Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England, 1066-1307. 3rd ed. (Chichester, UK: Wiley-Balcwell, 2013), and Erler, Mary Carpenter., and Maryanne Kowaleski. Gendering the Master Narrative: Women and Power in the Middle Ages. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003).

[2] Mary Carpenter Erler and Maryanne Kowaleski, Gendering the Master Narrative: Women and Power in the Middle Ages. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003), 105-134.

[3] John Higgitt, The Murthly Hours: Devotion, Literacy and Luxury in Paris, England and the Gaelic West. (London: British Library, 2000.) 175.

[4] Linda E. Mitchell, Joan De Valence: The Life and Influence of a Thirteenth-Century Noblewoman. (London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019).

[5] Eamon Duffy, Marking the Hours: English People and Their Prayers, 1240-1570. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 6, 20.

[6] Duffy, Marking the Hours, 4, 13, 14, 23, 46.

[7] Duffy,19.

[8] Duffy, 5.

[9] Duffy, 15-16.

[10] Duffy, 11.

[11] Duffy, 12-13.

[12] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 6-11.

[13] Duffy, Marking the Hours, 18-20.

[14] Duffy, 36.

[15] Duffy, 24.

[16] Higgitt, 48-101.

[17] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 32-35.

[18] Higgitt, 50.

[19] Higgitt, 56.

[20] Higgitt, 53.

[21] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 56.

[22] Higgitt, 56-69

[23] Robert Branner, Manuscript Painting in Paris During the Reign of St.Louis. Vol. 18.

Study in the History of Art. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1977) 130–36, 237-38, figs 384-94.

[24] Higgitt, 213

[25] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 227.

[26] Higgitt, 212.

[27] Higgitt, 217.

[28] Higgitt, 27, 331-32.

[29] Higgitt, 15.

[30] Higgitt, 331.

[31] Higgitt, 15, 336-344.

[32] Donald E. Meek, “The Scots-Gaelic Scribes of Late Medieval Perthshire: An Overview of the Orthography and Contents of the Book of the Dean of Lismore.” In Bryght Lanternis: Essays on the Language and Literature of Medieval and Renaissance Scotland., edited by J. Derrick McClure and Michael R G Spiller. (Aberdeen, UK: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), 387-404.

[33] See, Appendix B for image of folio 149v.

[34] Higgitt, 12.

[35] Higgitt 6-10.

[36] Higgitt 12-14.

[37] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 14-24.

[38] Higgitt, 24.

[39] Higgitt, 175.

[40] Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record, 191.

[41] Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record, 191

[42] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 23-4.

[43] See., Thomas S. Asbridge, The Greatest Knight: The Remarkable Life of William Marshal, the Power behind Five English Thrones. (New York, NY: Ecco, an Imprint of Harper Collins Publishers, 2014).

[44] See., H.W. Ridegway, ‘Valence, William de, earl of Pembroke (d. 1296),’ ODNB, online ed., Jan 2008 (www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/29481, accessed 19 November 2016).

[45] Higgitt, The Murthly Hours, 24.

[46] Higgitt, 23.

[47] Evan M. Barron, The Scottish War of Independence. (London: J. Nisbet, 1914), 122-149.

[48] Barron, The Scottish War of Independence, 178-187.

[49] Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record, 13.

[50] Clanchy,191.

[51] Jaroslav, Jan Pelikan, The Growth of Medieval Theology: 600-1300. (Chicago, Ill.: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1999), 40.

[52] Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record, 192.

[53] Clanchy,196.

[54] Mary Carpenter Erler and Maryanne Kowaleski. Gendering the Master Narrative: Women and Power in the Middle Ages. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003), 105-107.

[55] Erler, and Maryanne, Gendering the Master Narrative, 105-107.

[56] Erler, and Maryanne,110.

[57] See, Appendix C.

[58] Erler, and Maryanne, Gendering the Master Narrative, 106.

[59] Mitchell, Joan De Valence: The Life and Influence of a Thirteenth-century Noblewoman. (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019), 107-144.

[60] Mitchell, Joan De Valence, 57.

[61] Mitchell, Joan De Valence, 69-101.

[62] Mitchell, 69-101.

[63] Mitchell, 12-15.

[64] Mitchell, 101.