[1265] Otto seems to have occasionally styled himself duke of Aquitaine but never in his uncle’s presence. Richard, _Comtes_, ii, 300, 301, 312, 313. [1266] _Ib._, 300, 301. [1267] R. Howden, iii. 308. [1268] Cf. R. Coggeshall, 94, and _Mag. Vita S. Hugonis_, 280. [1269] Cf. Rigord’s description, 144, with the story of the discovery in W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v. vv. 492-9. I suppose _census_ in l. 498—“Census absconsos in arato repperit agro”—stands for coins. As to the figures and the “table,” M. Richard (_Comtes_, ii. 322 note) suggests that the treasure was a gilded shield—the “table” being the central knob or _umbo_, with the figures arranged round it—buried for safety in the time of the Bagaudes or of the Barbarian invasion, and that Châlus was chosen as a safe hiding-place because “Châlus, c’est le _castrum luci_, le château du luc, autrement dit du bois sacré.” [1270] Of La Boissière, according to G. Guiart, _Branche des Royaux Lignages_, l. 2601. [1271] Cf. W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v. vv. 499-508; Rigord, _l.c._; and R. Howden, iv. 82, 83. [1272] R. Howden, iv. 82. [1273] Cf. _ib._, with R. Coggeshall, 94, and W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v. vv. 509-12. Gervase of Canterbury, i. 593, calls the place “Nantrun”; a mistake which is explained by a “Fragmentum aliunde assutum” to the chronicle of Geoffrey of Vigeois, Labbe, _Thesaur._, ii. 342, where we are told that Richard while lying sick before Châlus sent some of his troops to besiege two other castles in the Limousin, Nontron and Montagut. [1274] Rigord, _l.c._ [1275] W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v. vv. 513-19. [1276] Addition to Geoff. Vigeois, 342. W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v., v. 529, says there were six knights and nine “clientes.” [1277] R. Coggeshall, 94, 95. [1278] R. Howden, iv. 82. [1279] R. Coggeshall, 95. [1280] W. Arm., _Phil._, lib. v, vv. 572-6; cf. R. Howden, iv. 82. [1281] R. Coggeshall, _l.c._; cf. R. Howden, _l.c._; Gerv. Cant., i. 592, and W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v. v. 589. [1282] R. Howden, iv. 82. [1283] R. Coggeshall, 95; cf. R. Howden, iv. 83. [1284] “Rege ... præcepta _medicorum_ non curante.” R. Coggeshall, _l.c._ [1285] R. Coggeshall, 95, 96; W. Armor., _Phil._, lib. v. vv. 600-5. [1286] R. Howden, _l.c._ [1287] Addition to G. Vigeois, 342. [1288] R. Coggeshall, 96. [1289] R. Howden, iv. 83.