Henry I of France

It really doesn't work this way in the XIth century :for the reign of Henri I, giving a fief to a mistress would be more or less impossible politically or socially. Royal favourites being gifted a castles or property was essentially something appearing in the Early Modern Era.
 
Ok... if not a Mistress how about a Knight who did something spectacular? Or maybe a man is the 3rd son of a count and he cozied up with Henri I?
 
Knights (or rather miles) weren't that usually gifted with lands, as they were up to the XIIIth century only the lower bar of nobility (or even something in-between nobility and the rest) with even a small castellan having 4 or 5 miles at his service.
Now, you could see an equivalent to Guillaume Maréchal in France, as royal networks usually included unlanded miles as trusted men as they depended more on royal support, and had less conflicting interest overall (to not mention a certain cultural-political mindset of service). But I think that for the mid-XIth, it may requires some changes, especially as Capetians didn't had much lands and titles to give away.
 
Now, you could see an equivalent to Guillaume Maréchal in France, as royal networks usually included unlanded miles as trusted men as they depended more on royal support, and had less conflicting interest overall (to not mention a certain cultural-political mindset of service).

This guy is perfect, except that he served Henry Fitzpress not Henri of France. Does Henri I of France have anyone like that? Alternately, is there a battle Henri personally fought in where he could have conceivably met someone like Guillaume? Alternately, was there anyone who was a son, but not the first and therefore not going to inherit, who happened to have a good relationship with Henri?
 
This guy is perfect, except that he served Henry Fitzpress not Henri of France.
I know : it's why I said "you could see an equivalent". Which would have significant differences (socially and culturally wise) for the following reasons.

Does Henri I of France have anyone like that?
Similarily, I pointed that it was maybe a bit too early to see milites arising as landed vassals : at this point they were essentially trusted familiars (milites castri) or territorial auxiliaries (vicarii) respnsible of the maintain of senioral power, but not recieving senioral power themselves.
It doesn't help milites had in the XIth a poor reputation, for exemple by clergy (that saw them as little more than violent bullies, that had to be forgiven for the life they lived) : you really have to wait the end of the century with milites supporting the Church and the Crusades to have a general social conciliation.
How the Capetian conquest of Sens was managed, trough viscounts tied to the nobiliar and clerical elite, is a good illustration of the social differenciation there.

In addition, Henri's royal demesne was particularily reduced compared to his immediate predecessors, and he simply didn't have much to give away, even if he would want so. The tendency for Early Capetians was more to gain lands from minor lords, not giving them away. At the very least, you'd need Henri I keeping Burgundy (against his brother and mother's opposition) and pulling more energetic policies, as his son's, to have something to be trusted to someone (probably more akin to the Viscounty of Sens, meaning less a personal favourite of his own court, but rather a supporter among the local elite; even if a minor title isn't to be written-off with the caveats mentioned in this post).

Alternately, was there anyone who was a son, but not the first and therefore not going to inherit, who happened to have a good relationship with Henri?
Milites weren't nobiliar cadets : while after the XIIth century the notion of chivalry (being praised as a christian way-of-life for nobles) began to really spread among nobility as a social-military ethos, as knights became less and less of a distinct social class and more merged with the nobiliar estates; the societal, cultural and political changes happening with the Renaissance of the XIIth century dealt with the necessity of milites as a special sub-class of warring nobility, and (christianized, valorized, laregly re-written) knighthood became a cultural model for aristocracy as well.
But by the XIth century, milites are still the lowest form of nobility (if even counted as such) being issued from a Xth century mix-up of small vassality, rich rural owners, not-so-rich familiars or private policing forces into a service warring sub-class. Their relation to feudality is essentially based on their personal relation to their suzerain, and not the relation to land (they could obtain beneficii from, as part or not of a vicarian service).

While it wouldn't be impossible to have Henri I (even if it'd be more plausible in the latter part of the century) to have a trusted man among his castellan vassals (it's more or less the definition of vassal, technically), and to award him with not only beneficii, but as well with honores and feoda, it would require some important geopolitical changes for Early Capetians, and a somehow (but again, doable) early take on chivalric service announcing the XIIth/XIIIth situation (possibly without much follow-up, given the context).
 
Top