•p/A Cornell University Library DA 32.G22 1898 Students history of Engand, from the ea Q c?**^ y^'?^ 3 1924 027 973 084 oijn CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY GIFT OF Estate of Preserved Smith 5«>.l X, Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924027973084 STUDENT'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND WORKS BY SAMUEL RAWSON GARDINER, D.C.L. LL.D. «_' »^ ' ■» .-"-./X > X/ ^ .' HISTORY OF ENGLAND, from the Accession of James I. to the Outbreak of the Civil War, 1603-1642. 10 vols, crown 8vo. 6s. each. . A HISTORY OF THE GREAT CIVIL WAR, 1642-1649. 4 vols, crown 8vo. 6s. each. A HISTORY OF THE COMMONWEALTH AND PROTECTORATE. 1649-1660. Vol. I. 1649-1651. With 14 Maps. 8vo. 21s. Vol. II. 1651-1654. With 7 Maps. 8vo. 21s. WHAT GUNPOWDER PLOT WAS. With 8 Illustrations and Plates. Crown 8vo. 5s. CROMWELL'S PLACE IN HISTORY. Founded on Six Lectures delivered in the University of Oxford. Crown 8vo. 3J. 6cl. A STUDENT'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND. From the Earliest Times to 1885. Vol. I. (b.c. 55-A.D. 1509.) With 173 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 45'. Vol. II. (1509-1689.) With 96 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 4.V. ^'ol- III. (ii).'--9' 1885.) With 109 Illustratiuii^. Crown 8vo. 4^. *jjf' Complete in One iolume, ivith 378 Ilhcstrations, croTvn 8vo. 12s. A SCHOOL ATLAS OF ENGLISH HISTORY. Edited by Samuel Rawson Gardiner, D.C.L. LL.D, With 66 Coloured Maps and 22 Plans of Battles and Sieges. Fcp. 4to. 5^. *ijt* This Atlas is intended to serve as a companion to Mr. S. R. Gardiner's 'Student's History of England.' In addition to the historical maps of the British Isles, in whole or in part, are others of Continental countries or districts which were the scenes of events connected more or less closely with English History. Indian and Colonial development also obtain due recognition. THE FIRST TWO STUARTS AND THE PURITAN REVOLUTION, 1603-1660. 4 Maps. Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d. THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR, 1618-1648. With a Map. Fcp. 8vo. 2.y. 6d. OUTLINE OF ENGLISH HISTORY, B.C. S5-A.D. 1895. With 67 Woodcuts and 17 Maps. Fcp. 8vo. 2^-. 6d. THE FRENCH[ REVOLUTION, 1789-1795. By Mrs. S. R. Gardiner. With 7 Maps. Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d. "» *-\ *-\ _#-».»-•. iT^.t V • \> \^*y\^* LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO. 39 Paternoster Row, London New York and Bombay. STUDENT'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO 1885 BY SAMUEL R. GARDINER, D.C.L, LL.D. FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD ETC. NEW EDITION LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO • 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON NEW YORK AND BOMBAY 1898 Wo All Ttpht!! 1' r x ^ r "" ^ ^- PREFACE The present Work is intended for such students as have already an elementary knowledge of the main facts of English history, and aims at meeting their needs by the use of plain language on the one hand, and by the avoidance, on the other hand, of that multiplicity of details which is apt to overburden the memory. At the close of the book I have treated the last eleven years, 1874 to 1885, in a manner which precludes all expression of my own views, either on the characters of the actors or on the value of the work performed by them ; and something of the same reticence will be observe^ in the pages dealing with the years immediately preceding 1874. We have not the material before us for the formation of a final judgment on many points arising in the course of the narrative, and it is therefore better to abstain from the expression of decided opinion, except on matters so completely before the public as to leave no room for hesitation. Especially is this rule to be observed in a book addressed to those who are not yet at an age when independent investigation is possible. • I hope it will be understood that in my mention of various authors I have had no intention of writing a history of litera- ture, however brief. My object has been throughout to exhibit VI PREFACE that side of literature which connects itself with the general political or intellectual movement of the country, and to leave unnoticed the purely literary or scientific qualities of the writers mentioned. This will explain, for instance, the total omission of the name of Roger Bacon, and the brief and, if regarded from a different point of view, the very unsatisfactory treatment of writers like Dickens and Thackeray. Those of my readers who have complained that no maps were to be found in the book may now be referred to a ' School Atlas of English History,' recently edited by me for Messrs. Longmans & Co. To include an adequate number of maps in this volume would have increased its size beyond all fitting limits. In the spelling of Indian names I have not adopted the modern and improved system of transHteration. Admirable as it is when used by those who are able to give the right sound to each letter, it only leads to mispronunciation in the mouths of those who are, as most of the readers of this volume will be, entirely in the dark on this point. The old rough method of our fathers at least ensures a fair approximation to the true pronunciation. My warmest thanks are due to Mr. George Nutt, of Rugby, and to the Rev. W. Hunt. Mr. Nutt not only looked over the proof-sheets up to the death of Edward I. with ex- cellent results, but gave me most valuable advice as to the general arrangement of the book, founded on his own long experience of scholastic teaching. The Rev. W. Hunt looked over a considerable portion of the remaining proof-sheets, and called my attention to several errors and omissions which had escaped my eye. The illustrations have been selected by Mr. W. H. St. John PRE FA CE vii Hope, Assistant-Secretary of the Society of Antiquaries. He wishes to acknowledge much valuable assistance given to him in the choice of portraits by George Scharf, Esq., C.B., F.SA., who is recognised as the highest authority on the subject. I am indebted to Her Majesty the Queen for permission to engrave two of the portraits appearing in the following pages — viz., those of Bishop Fisher, on p. 393, and the Duke of Norfolk, on p. 410 — the originals in both cases being at Windsor Castle. I have to thank Earl Spencer for permission to engrave the portrait on p. 362 ; the Earl of Essex for that on p. 476 ; the Earl of Warwick for that on p. 403 ; the Earl of Carlisle for that on p. 459 \ the Viscount Dillon, F.S.A., for that on p. 376 ; the Hon Sir Spencer Ponsonby-Fane, K.C.B., for that on p. 365 ; Sir John Farnaby Lennard, Bart., for that on p. 463 ; Dr. Evans for those on pp. 2, 4, 6 ; Edward Huth, Esq., for that on p. 387 ; Mrs. Dent, of Sudeley, for that on p. 395 ; H. HucKS GiBBS, Esq., for that on p. 419 ; T. A. Hope, Esq., for that on p. 487 ; E. B. Nicholson, Esq., for the portrait of Lord Burghley in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, engraved at p. 479 ; the authorities of the University of Cam- bridge for that on p. 477 ; of Jesus College, Cambridge, for that on p. 414 ; and of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, for that on p. 567 ; and the Treasurer of Christ's Hospital, London, for the portrait of Charles H. on p. 579. I have also to thank Mr. John Murray for permission to engrave the figures on pp. 130, 150, 160, 166, 177, 188, 260 ; Messrs. Parker & Co., Oxford, for those on pp. 19, 51, 75, 91, 107, 128, 170, 192, 197, 230, 245, 246, 247, 253, 409, 451 ; Mr. W. NiVES for those at pp. 381, 409, 451 ; Mr. J. G. Waller for those on pp. 219, 229, 292, 298, 515 ; Mr. Bruce for those on pp. 17, 18, 21 ; Messrs. Poulton & Sons, Lee, for those on pp. 7, viii PREFACE 132 ; Mr. G. A. Nichols, Stamford, for those on pp. 311, 316 ; Mr. G. T. Clarke, for that on p. 74 ; Messrs. Carl Norman & Co., Tunbridge Wells, for that on p. 171 ; Mr. R. Keene, Derby, for that on p. 318 ; the Rev. H. H. Henson, Vicar of Barking, Essex, for the photograph of the monument of Sir Charles Montague on p. 507 ; the Science and Art Department for those on pp. 371, 440, 518, 612 ; Mr. W. H. Wheeler, of Oxford, for those on pp. 319, 384; Messrs. Valentine & Sons, Dundee, for those on pp. 109, 206, 213, 238, 244. 276, 355» 378, 485, 662, 666, 668, 683, 907, 919, 937, 942 ; and Mr. R. Keene, Derby, for those on pp. 466, 467, 469, 471. CONTENTS PART I ENGLAND BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST CHAPTER I PREHISTORIC AND ROMAN BRITAIN PAGE I. Palaeolithic Man of the River- Drift .... I Cave-dwelling Palaeolithic Man Neolithic Man Celts and Iberians The Celts in Britain Goidels and Britons Phoenicians and Greeks Gauls and Belgians in Britain Culture and War , Religion of the Britons The Romans in Gaul B.C. 55 Caesar's First Invasion, b.c 55 • Caesar's Second Invasion B.C. 54 . • • South-eastern Britain after Caesar's Departure, B.C. 54 -A.D. 43 . The Roman Empire . The Invasion of Aulus Plautius. A.D. 43 . The Colony of Camulodunum 18. The Conquests of Ostorius Scapula . , . -14 2. 3- 4- 5- 6. 7- 8. 9- 10. II. 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. 17 2 3 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 10 II II 12 12 12 13 PAGE 19. Government of Suetonius Paullinus. 58 . . .14 20. Boadicea's Insurrection. 61 15 21. The Vengeance of Suetonius 15 22. Agricola in Britain. 78-84 16 23. Agricola's Conquests in the North . . . .16 24. The Roman Walls . . 17 25. The Roman Province of Bri- tain . . . . -19 26. Extinction of Tribal Antago- nism . . . .21 27. Want of National Feeling . 22 28. Carausius and Allectus. 288 -296 . . . .22 29. Constantius and Constantine. 296-337 . . . .22 30. Christianity in Britain . . 23 31. Weakness of the Empire . 23 32. The Picts and Scots . . 23 33. The Saxons . . . -24 34. Origin of the Saxons . . 24 35. The Roman Defence . . 24 36. End of the Roman Govern- ment. 383-410 . . 25 j; CONTENTS CHAPTER II THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 1. Britain after the Departure of the Romans. 410-449 ? 2. The Groans of the Britons 3. The Conquest of Kent. 449 4. The South Saxons. 477 5. The West Saxons and the East Saxons 6. The Anglian Settlements 7. Nature of the Conquest •6. The Cultivators of the 9. Eorls, Ceorls, Gtesiths . 10. The Gesiths and the Vil lagers 11. English and Welsh Soil PAGE 26 26 27 27 28 28 28 29 29 30 31 12. 13- 14. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- PAGE The Township and the Hun dred. Weregild Compurgation and Ordeal Punishments The Folk-moot The Kingship The Legend of Arthur . The West Saxon Advance Repulse of the West Saxons The Advance of the Angles The Kymry . . . Britain at the End of the Sixth Century . 31 32 32 32 33 33 33 34 35 36 36 37 CHAPTER III THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 1. England and the Continent 2. ^thelberht's Supremacy 3. Gregory and the English Augustine's Mission. 597 Monastic Christianity . The Archbishopric of Can- terbury Death of .Ethelberht. 616 The Three Kingdoms op posed to the Welsh . i^thelfrith and the Kymry ^thelfrith's Victories . The Greatness of Eadwine Eadwine's Supremacy Character of the later Con quests Political Changes . Eadwine's Conversion and Fall .... Oswald's Victory at Heaven field .... 4- 5- 6. 7- 8. 9- 10. II. 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. 38 38 17- 18. 39 19. 39 20. 40 21. 41 22. 41 23- 41 42 24. 43 44 25- 26. 27. 44 45 28. 46 47 29. Oswald and Aidan Oswald's Greatness and Overthrow Penda's Overthrow The Three Kingdoms and the Welsh The English Missionaries Dispute between Wilfrid and Colman." 6$4 • Archbishop Theodore and the Penitential System Ealdhelm and Caedmon Bede. 673-735 . Church Councils . Struggle between Mercia and Wessex Mohammedanism and the Carolingian Empire . Ecgberht's Rule. 802-839 47 47 48 48 49 49 50 51 52 52 52 54 54 CHAPTER IV THE ENGLISH KINGSHIP AND THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 1. The West Saxon Supremacy 55 2. The Coming of the North- men . . . - • 56 3. The English Coast Plun- dered .... 4. The Danes in the North 57 .S7 CONTENIS XI 6. 7- 8. lO. Alfred's Struggle in Wessex 871-878 . The Treaty of Chippenham, and its Results. 878 Alfred's Military Work His Laws and Scholarship Eadward the Elder. 901- 925 • Eadward' s Conquests . PAGE 58 59 60 60 62 62 n. Eadward and the Scots 12. ^thelstan, 925-940 13. Eadmund (940-946) Eadred (946-955} 14. Danes and English 15. Eadwig. 955-959 16. Dunstan 17. Archbishop Oda . 18. Eadwig" s Marriage and I'AGE 63 63 ^3 64 64 65 65 67 2. 4- 5- 6. CHAPTER V EADGAR'S ENGLAND Eadgar and Dunstan. 959- 975 67 The Cession of Lothian . 68 Changes in English Institu- tions . . . .69 Growth of the King's Power 69 Conversion of the Freemen into Serfs . . . .69 The Hundred-moot and the Lord's Court . . .72 7. 8. 9- 10. II. 12. 13- The Towns . The Origin of the Shires The Shire-moot . The Ealdormen and Witenagemot . The Land Domestic Life Food and Drink . ihe 72 73 73 75 75 75 CHAPTER VI ENGLAND AND NORMANDY I. Eadward the Martyr. 975- 13- 979 78 2. ^thelred's Early Years. 979 14. -988 .... 79 3- The Return of the Danes. 15- 984 79 16. 4. The Norman Dukes. 912- 1002 .... 80 17- 5- Political Contrast between Normandy and England . 81 18. 6. Svend's Conquest. 1002- 1013 .... 81 19. 7- ^thelred Restored. 1014- 1016 82 20. 8. Eadmund Ironside. 1016 . 83 21. 9- Cnut and the Earldoms. 22. 1016-1035 83 23- 10. Cnut's Empire 84 II. Cnut's Government 84 24. 12. The Sons of Cnut. 1035- 25- 1042 85 Eadward the Confessor and Earl Godwine. 1042-105 1 86 The Banishment of Godwine. 1051 . . . -87 Visit of Duke William. 1051 88 William and the Norman Church . . . ,88 The Return and Death of Godwine. 1052-1053 . 89 Harold's Greatness. 1053- 1066 ... .89 Harold and Eadward, 1057 -1065 . . . .90 Death of Eadward, 1066 . 90 Harold and William. 1066. 91 22. Stamford Bridge 1066 . 93 The Landing of William. 1066 . . . -96 The Battle of Senlac. 1066. 96 William's Coronation. 1066. 98 xu CONTENTS PART II THE NORMAN AND ANGEVIN KINGS CHAPTER VII WILLIAM L 1066— 1087 PAGE 1. The First Months of the Conquest, 1066-1067 . loi 2. The Conquest of the West and North. 1067-1069 . 102 3. The Completion of the Con- quest. 1070 . . .103 4. Hereward's Revolt and the Homage of Malcolm. 1070- 1072 . . . 103 5. How William kept down the English . . . 104 6. How William kept down the Normans . . . 105 7. Ecclesiastical Organisation 8. Pope Gregory VIL 9. William and Gregory VII. 10. The Rising of the Earls 1075 11. The New Forest 12. Domesday Book. 1085 1086 13. William's Great Councils 14. The Gemot at Salisbury, 1086 15. William's Death. 1087 PAGE 106 107 108 no no III 112 "3 114 CHAPTER VIII WILLIAM n. 1087— IIOO 1. The Accession of the Red King. 1087 . . .114 2. The Wickedness of the Red King .... 115 3. Ranulf Flambard . .116 4. Feudal Dues . . .116 5. Archbishop Anselm . . 117 6. The Council of Rockingham 1095 .... 118 7. William II, and his Bro- thers .... 118 8. WiUiam and Scotland. 1093-1094 . . .119 9, Mowbray's Rebellion. 1095, 120 10. The First Crusade, 1095- 1099 .... 120 11. Normandy in Pledge. 1096, 121 12. The Last Years of the Red King . . . .121 13. The Death of the Red King. 1100 . . . .122 CHAPTER IX HENRY I. AND STEPHEN HENRY I , 1 100— 1 135. STEPHEN, 1135—1154. 1. The Accession of Henry I. iioo .... 122 2. Invasion of Robert, iioi . 124 3. Revolt of Robert of Belleme, 1102 .... 124 4. The Battle of Tinchebrai. 1106 .... 5. Henry and Anselm. 1100- 1107 , . , . 6. Roger of Salisbury 124 125 126 CONTENTS ••• ■ xiu 7. Growth of Trade 8. The Benedictines 9. The Cistercians . 10. The White Ship . 11. The Last Years of Henry I. 12. Stephen's Accession. 1135 13. Civil War .... 14. Stephen's Quarrel with the Clergy. 1139 PAGE 127 128 129 129 133 134 15. Anarchy. 1139 . . . 134 16. The End of the War. 1141- 1148 .... 135 17. Henry, Duke of the Nor- mans. 1149 . . . 136 18. The Last Days of Stephen. "53-1154 • . 137 CHAPTER X HENRY II. II 54— 1 1 89 I. 2. 3- 4- 5- 6. 8. 10. II. 12. 13- 14. Henry's Accession. 1154 . Pacification of England Henry and Feudality . The Great Council and the Curia Reg^s . Scutage .... Archbishop Thomas. 1162 Breach between Henry and Thomas .... The Constitutions of Claren- don. 1 164 The Persecution of Arch- bishop Thomas. 1164 . The Assize of Clarendon. 1166 .... Recognitions The Germ of the Jury . The Itinerant Justices vived The Inquisition of Sheriffs. 1170 Re- the 138 138 140 141 141 142 143 143 145 146 147 147 148 T48 15- 16. 17- 18. 19- 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 25- 26. 27. The Nobles and the Church The Coronation of Young Henry. 1170. The Return of Archbishop Thomas. 1170 Murder of Archbishop Thomas. 1170 Popular Indignation. 117 1 State of Ireland . Partial Conquest of Ireland. 1166-1172 Young Henry's Coronation and the Revolt of the Barons. 1172-1174 The Assize of Arms. 1181 . Henry II. and his Sons The Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. 1187 . The Last Years of Henry II. 1188-1189 The Work of Henry II. 149 149 149 149 151 151 152 153 154 15s 156 157 157 CHAPTER XI RICHARD I. 1 1 89— 1 199 159 1. Richard in England. 1189 2. William of Longchamps. 1189-1191 3. The Third Crusade. 11 89- 1192 .... 4. The Return of Richard 1192-1194 5. Heavy Taxation . 6. The Administration of Hu- bert Waher. 1194-1198 163 159 161 161 162 7- 8. 9. 10. II. 12. 13- Death of Richard. 11 99 . Church and State under the Angevin Kings Growth of Learning . The University of Oxford Country and Town Condition of London . Architectural Changes 165 165 167 167 i68 169 170 XI V CONTENTS PART III THE GROWTH OF THE PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUTION. 1 1 99— 1 399 CHAPTER • XII JOHN. II99- -1216 PAGE PAGE r. The Accession of John. 10. John Excommunicated. 1199 .... 173 1209 .... 178 2. John's First War with II. The Pope threatens John Philip II. 1199-1200 . ^12> with Deposition. 1212- 3- John's Misconduct in Poitou 1213 .... 179 1200-1201 174 12. John's Submission. 1213 . 180 4- The Loss of Normandy 13- The Resistance of the and Anjou, 1202-1204 . 174 Barons and Clergy. 12 13 180 5- Causes of Philip's Success . 176 14. The Battle of Bouvines. 6. The Election of Stephen 1214 .... 181 Langton to the Arch- 15- The Struggle between John bishopric of Canterbury. and the Barons. 1214- 1205 .... 176 1215 .... 181 7- Innocent III. and Stephen 16. Magna Carta. 1215 . 182 Langton. 1206 177 17- War between John and the 8. John's Quarrel with the Barons. 1215-1216 184 Church. 1206-1208 178 18. Conflict between Louis and 9- England under an Inter- dict. 1208 178 John. 1216 . 184 I. 4- 5- 6. 8. 9- CHAPTER XIII HENRY III. 1216— 1272 Henry III. and Louis. 1216-1217 . . . 185 The Renewal of the Great Charter. 1216-1217 . 185 Administration of Hubert de Burgh. 1219-1232 , 186 Administration of Peter des Roches. 1232-1234 . 188 Francis of Assisi . . . 190 St. Dominic . . . 190 The Coming of the Friars. 1220-1224 . . . 191 Monks and Friars . . 191 The King's Marriage. 1236 192 10. The Early Career of Simon de Montfort. 1231-1243 11. Papal Exactions. 1237-- 1243 .... 12. A Weak Parliamentary Opposition. 1244 . 13. Growing Discontent. 1244- 1254 .... 14. The Knights of the Shire in Parliament. 1254 15. Fresh Exactions. 1254- 1257 . . . . 16. The Provisions of Oxford. 1258 . . . . 193 194 194 196 196 198 CONTENTS XV 1 7- The Expulsion of the For- eigners. 1258 18. Edward and the Barons. 1259 . . . . 19. The Breach amongst the Barons. 1259-1261 20. Royalist Reaction and Civil War. 1261 . 21. The Mise of Amiens. 1264 PACE 199 199 199 200 200 22. The Battle of Lewes. 1264 23. Earl Simon's Government. I 264-1 265 24. The Battle of Evesham. 1265 . . . . 25. The Last Years of Henry in, 1 265-1 272 26. General Progress of the Country .... PAGE 201 201 203 204 206 I. 2. 3- 4- CHAPTER XIV EDWARD I. AND EDWARD II. EDWARD I., 1272— 1307. EDWARD IT., 1307 — 1327 8. 10. II. 12. 14. The First Years of Edward I. 1 272-1 279 Edward I. and Wales 1276-1284 Customs Duties. 1275 Edward's Judicial Reforms 1274-1290 Edward's Leg^lation. 1279 -1290 Edward as a National and as a Feudal Ruler . The Scottish Succession 1285-1290 Death of Eleanor of Castile 1290 The Award of Norham 1291-1292 Disputes with Scotland and France. 1293-1295 The Model Parliament. 1295 The First Conquest of Scotland. 1296 The Resistance of Arch- bishop Winchelsey. 1296 -1297 . . . . The ' Confirmatio Carta- rum.' 1297 . 208 210 210 212 212 212 214 214 216 218 219 220 220 I 16. 17- 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 25- 26. Wallace's Rising. 1297- 1304 .... The Second Conquest of Scotland. 1 298-1304 The Incorporation of Scot- land with England, 1305 Character of Edward's Deal- ings with Scotland . Robert Bruce. 1306 . Edward's Third Conquest of Scotland and Death I 306- I 307 Edward II. and Piers Gaves ton. 1307-1312 Success of Robert Bruce 1307^1314 Lancaster's Government 1314-1322 A Constitutional Settlement 1322 The Rule of the Despensers 1322-1326 The Deposition and Mur- der of Edward II 1327 221 221 222 222 223 224 224 226 228 228 228 229 CHAPTER XV FROM THE ACCESSION OF EDWA.RD III. TO THE TREATY OF BRETIGNI. 1327— 1360 1. Mortimer's Government. I 327-1 330 . . .231 2. The French Succession. 1328-1331 . . .232 3, Troubles in Scotland. 1331- 1336 . . . .232 4. Dispute with France. 1336- 1337 • • 234 XVI CONTENTS 5- Edward's Allies. 1337- 1338 6. Chivalry and War 7. Commerce and War . 8. Attacks on the North of France. 1338-1340 9. Battle of Sluys. 1340 10. Attacks on the West of France. 1341-1345 11. The Campaign of Crefy 1346 12. The Tactics of Cre9y. 1346 13. The Battle of Cre9y. Au- gust 26, 1346 . 14. Battle of Nevill's Cross, and the Siege of Calais. 1346-1347 15. Constitutional Progress. 1337-1347 PAGE 235 235 236 237 239 240 240 241 242 242 243 PAGIi 16. Edward's Triumph. 1347. 246 17. The Black Death. 1348 . 248 18. The Statute of Labourers. 1349 . . . .248 19. The Statute of Treasons. 1352 .... 250 20. The Black Prince in the South of France. 1355 . 251 21. The Battle of Poitiers. 1356 . . . .251 22. The Courtesy of the Black Prince .... 252 23. Misery of France. 1356- 1359 . . . .252 24. Edward's Last Invasion. I 359-1360 . . . 252 25. The Treaty of Bretigni. 1360 . . . -253 CHAPTER XVI REIGN OF EDWARD III. AFTER THE TREATY OF BRETIGNI 1360— 1377 1. The First Years of Peace. 1360-1364 . . .254 2. The Spanish Troubles. 1364-1368 . . .254 3. The Taxation of Aquitaine. 1368-1369 . . .256 4. The Renewed War. 1369- 1375 . • • .256 5. Anti-Papal Legislation. 1351-1366 . . .257 6. Predominance of the Eng- lish Language . . 258 7. Piers the Plowman. 1362 . 258 8. The Anti-Clerical Party. 1371 • . . -259 9. The Duke of Lancaster. 1374-1376 . . .260 10. John Wycliffe. 1366-1376 261 11. Lancaster and the Black Prince. 1376. . . 261 12. The Good Parliament. 1376. 262 13. The Last Year of Edward III. 1376-1377 . , 262 14. Ireland from the Reign of John to that of Edward II. . . • . . 264. 15 The Statute of Kilkenny. 1367 • . . .265 16. Weakness of the English Colony. 1 367-1 377 • 265 CHAPTER XVII RICHARD II. AND THE SOCIAL REVOLUTION 1377— 1381 1. The First Years of Richard II. 1377-1378 . . 266 2. Wycliffe and the Great Schism. 1378-1381 . 266 3. The Poll Taxes. 1379- 1381 .... 267 4. The Peasants' Grievances . 268 5. The Peasants' Revolt. 138 1 268 6. The Suppression of the Re- volt .... 7. Results of the Peasants' Revolt .... 8. Chaucer's 'Canterbury Tales' . . . . 9. The Prologue of the ' Can- terbury Tales ' 269 269 270 270 CONTENTS xvii 10, Chaucer and the Clergy 11. Roads and Bridges r2. Modes of Conveyance 13. Hospitality and Inns . PAGE 271 272 273 274 14. Alehouses . 15. Wanderers. 16. Robbers and Criminals 17. Justices of the Peace . PAGE 274 274 277 I. 2. 8. CHAPTER XVIII RICHARD II. AND THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION 1382 — 1399 Richard's Foreign Policy. 1389-1396 . . . 282 Richard's Coup d'Etat. 1397 282 The Parliament of Shrews- bury. 1398 . . . 283 The Banishment of Here- ford and Norfolk. 1398 . 283 Richard's Despotism. 1398- 1399 . . . .283 Henry of Lancaster in Eng- land. 1399 . . . 284 The Deposition of Richard and the Enthronement of Henry IV. 1399 . . 285 Nature of the Claim of Henry IV. . . .286 Progress of the War with France. 1 382-1 386 Richard's Growing Unpopu- larity. 1385-1386 The Impeachment of Suffolk and the Commission of 278 278 9- 10. II. 12. Regency. 1386 The Lords Appellant and the Merciless Parliament. 279 13. 1387-1388 Richard's Restoration to 279 14. Power. 1389. Richard's Constitutional 280 IS- Government. 1 389-1396 Livery and Maintenance. 280 16. 1390 .... Richard's Domestic Policy. 281 1390-1391 281 I. 2. 3- 4- 6. PART IV LANCASTER, YORK, AND TUDOR, I399-I509 CHAPTER XIX HENRY IV. AND HENRY V. HENRY IV., 1399— 1413. HENRY V., 1413— 1422 Henry's First Difficulties. 1399-1400 . - ■ 289 Death of Richard II. 1400 291 Henry IV. and the Church . 291 The Statute for the Burning of Heretics. 1401 . . 292 Henry IV. and Owen Glen- dower. 1400-1402 . 292 The Rebellion of the Percies. 1402-1404 . 293 the 8. The Commons and Church. 1404 . . 294 The Capture of the Scottish Prince. 1405. . . 295 9. The Execution of Arch- bishop Scrope. 1405 . 296 10. France, Wales, and the North. 1405-1408 . 296 Henry, Prince of Wales, 1409-1410 . . . 297 a II. xvm CONTENTS 12. The Last Years of Henry IV. 1411-1413 Henry V. and the Lollards. 1413-1414 . Henry's Claim to the Throne of France. 1414 The Invasion of France. 14 15 The March to Agincourt, 1415 .... The Battle of Agincourt. October 25, 1415 . 13 15 16, 17 PAGE 298 299 300 301 302 302 18. 19. 20. 21. PAGE Henry's Diplomacy. 1416- 1417 • • • • 3<^3 Henry's Conquest of Nor- mandy. 1417-1419 . 303 The Murder of the Duke of Burgundy and the Treaty of Troyes. 1419-1420 . 304 The Close of the Reign of Henry V. 1420-1422 . 306 CHAPTER HENRY VI. AND THE LOSS OF 1. Bedford and Gloucester 1422 2. Bedford's Success in France 1423-1424 3. Gloucester's Invasion of Hainault. 1424 4. Gloucester and Beatifort 1425-1428 5. The Siege of Orleans 1428-1429 6. Jeanne Dare and the Relief of Orleans. 1429 . 7. The Coronation of Charles * VII. and the Capture of the Maid. 1429-1430 8. The Martyrdom at Rouen, 1431 . . . . 9. The Last Years of the Duke of Bedford. 1431-1435 . 307 307 308 308 309 310 311 312 312 10. II. 12. 13- 14. IS- 16. 17- XX FRANCE. 1422 — 145 1 The Defection of Burgundy. 1435 • • • -313 The Duke of York in France. 1436-1437 . . .313 The English Lose Ground. 1437-1443 . . .313 Continued Rivalry of Beaufort and Gloucester. 1439-1441 . . . 314 Beaufort and Somerset. 1442-1443 . . .317 The Angevin Marriage Treaty. 1444-1445 . 317 Deaths of Gloucester and Beaufort. 1447 . -318 The Loss of the French Provinces. 1448-1449 . 318 CHAPTER XXI THE LATER YEARS OF HENRY VL I450— 1461 Increasing Power of the I. The Growth of Inclosures 2. Nobility . 3. Case of Lord Molynes and John Paston . 4. Suffolk's Impeachment and Murder. 1450 5. Jack Cade's Rebellion. 1450 .... 6. Rivalry of York and Somer- set. 1450-1453 7. The First Protectorate of the Duke of York, 1453- 1454 .... 8. The First Battle of St. Al- )3ans , and the Duke of 320 321 321 322 322 323 323 York's Second Protector- ate 9. Discomfiture of the York- ists. 1456-1459 10. The Battle of Northampton and the Duke of York's Claim to the Throne. 1460 .... 11. The Battle of Wakefield. 1460 .... 12. The Battle of Mortimer's Cross and the Second Battle of St. Albans. 1461 13. The Battle of Towton and the Coronation of Edward IV. 1461 . 324 325 326 327 328 328 CONTENTS XIX CHAPTER XXII . THE YORKIST KINGS. 1461 — 1485 1. Edward IV. and the House of Commons. 1461 2. Loss of the Mediaeval Ideals 3. Fresh Efforts of the Lancas- trians. 1462-1465 4. Edward's Marriage. 1464. 5. Estrangement of Warwick. 1465-1468 6. Warwick's Alliance with Clarence. 1469— 1470 7. The Restoration of Henry VI. 1470 8. Edward IV. recovers the Throne. 147 1 9. Edward IV. prepares for War with France. 1471- 1474 .... 10. The Invasion of France. 1475 .... PAGE II. 329 330 12. 331 13. 331 14. 332 IS- 332 16. 333 17- 334 18. 19- 334 336 20. Fall and Death of Clarence, 1476-1478 The Last Years of Edward IV. 1478-1483 Edward V. and the Duke of Gloucester. 1483 Fall of the Queen's Relations. 1483 .... Execution of Lord Hastings Deposition of Edward V. 1483 . . . . Buckingham's Rebellion. 1483 .... Murder of the Princes. 1483 Richard's Government. 1484- 1485 Richard Defeated and Slain at Bosworth. 1485 PAGE 336 336 337 338 338 340 341 342 342 343 CHAPTER XXIII HENRY VII. 1485— 1509 1. The First Measures of Henry VII. 1485-1486 . 343 2. Maintenance and Livery . 345 3. Lovel's Rising, i486 . 346 4. Lancaster and York in Ire- land. 1399-1485 . . 346 5. Insurrection of Lambert Simnel. 1487 . . 347 6. The Court of Star Chamber. 1487 • • • -348 7. Henry VII. and Brittany. 1488-149^ . . . 348 8. Cardinal Morton's Fork. 1491 . . . .349 9. The Invasion of France. 1492 349 10. Perkin Warbeck. 149 1- 1494 . . . - 350 n. Poynings' Acts. 1494 . 350 12. Perkin's First Attempt on England. 1495 . .351 13, The Intercursus Magnus. 1496 .... 351 14. 15- 16. 17- 18. 19- 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 25- Kildare Restored to the Deputyship. 1496 . Perkin's Overthrow. 1496- 1497 .... European Changes. 1494- 1499 .... Execution of the Earl of Warwick. 1499 . Prince Arthur's Marriage and De-ith. 1501-1502 . The Scottish Marriage. 1503 .... Maritime Enterprise . Growth of the Royal Power 356 Empson and Dudley . . 357 Henry and his Daughter-in- law. 1502-1505 . . 357 The Last Years of Henry VII. 1505-1509 . . 357 Architectural Changes and the Printing Press . . 358 352 352 352 354 354 356 356 a2 XX CONTENTS PART V THE RENASCENCE AND THE REFORMATION 1509 — 1603 CHAPTER XXIV HENRY VIII. AND WOLSEY. 1509 — 1 527 PAGE 1. The New King. 1509 . 361 2. Continental Troubles. 1508-15 I I . . . 363 3. The Rise of Wolsey. 1512 363 4. The War with France. 1512-1513 . . .364 5. Peace with France. 15 14 . 364 6. Wolsey's Policy of Peace. 1514-1518 . . .364 7. Wolsey and the Renascence 366 8. The Renascence in Eng- land .... 367 9. The Oxford Reformers . 367 10. 'The Utopia.' 1515-1516. 11. More and Henry VIII. 12. The Contest for the Empire. 1519 . . . . 13. The Field of the Cloth of Gold. 1520 . 14. The Execution of the Duke of Buckingham. 1521 , 15. Another French War. 1522-1523 16. The Amicable Loan. 1525 17. Closing Years of Wolsey's Greatness. 1525-1527 . PAGE 368 369 369 369 369 372 372 CHAPTER XXV THE BREACH WITH THE PAPACY. 1 527— 1 534 1. The Papacy and the Rena- scence .... 374 2. Wolsey and the Papacy . 375 3. Wolsey's Legatine Powers , 375 4. Henry VIII. and the Clergy 377 5. German Lutheranism . . 377 6. Henry's Controversy with Luther .... 379 7. Queen Catharine and Anne Boleyn .... 379 8. Henry's Demand for a Divorce. 1527-1528 . 382 9. The Legatine Court. 1529 . 382 10. The Fall of Wolsey. 1529- 1530 383 II'. The House of Commons and the Clergy. 1529 . 385 12. The Universities Consulted. 1530 • ... 385 13. The Clergy under a Prae- munire. T530-1531 . 385 14 The King's Supreme Head- ship acknowledged by the Clergy. 1531 The Submission of the Clergy. 1532. Sir Thomas More and the Protestants. 1529-1532, Resignation of Sir Thomas More. 1532 . The First Act of Annates.* 1532 .... The Kmg's Marriage and the Act of Appeals. 1 533 Archbishop Cranmer and the Court at Dunstable. 1533 .... 21. Frith and Latimer. 1533 22. Completion of the Breach with Rome. 1533-1534. 15 16 17 18, 19, 20, 386 386 386 388 388 388 389 389 390 CONTENTS XXI CHAPTER XXVI THE ROYAL SUPREMACY. 1 534—1 547 1. The Act of Succession 1534 2. The Acts of Treason and Supremacy. 1534 . 3. The Monks of the Charter- house. 1534 . 4. Execution of Fisher and More. 1535 . 5. The Dissolution of the Smaller Monasteries 1536 6. The Execution of Anne Boleyn. 1536 7. The Ten Articles. 1536 8. The Translation of the Bible authorised. 1536 9. The Pilgrimage of Grace . 1536-1537 10. Birth of a Prince. 1537 11. The Beginning of the At- tack on the Greater Monasteries. 1537-1538 12. Destruction of Relics and Images. 1538 13. The Trial of Lambert. 1538 ... I'AGE 392 392 393 394 394 395 395 396 396 397 397 398 399 14- 15- 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 25. 26. The Marquis of Exeter and the Poles. 1538 . The Six Articles. 1539 Completion of the Suppres- sion of the Monasteries. 1539-1540 Anne of Cleves and the Fall of Cromwell. 1539- 1540 . . . . Catherine Howard and Catherine Parr. 1540- 1543 Ireland. 1534 . The Geraldine Rebellion 1534-1535 Lord Leonard Grey. 1536- 1539 Henry VIII. King of Ire land. 1541 . Solway Moss. 1542 . War with Scotland and France. 1542- 1546 The Litany and the Primer 1544-1545 The Last Days of Henry VIII. 1545-1547 . PAGE 399 399 400 400 401 401 402 402 404 404 405 409 410 CHAPTER XXVII EDWARD VI. AND MARY EDWARD VI., 1547— 1553. MARY, 1553" 1558- 1. Somerset becomes Protec- tor. 1547 . . . 412 2. The Scotch War. 1547- 1548 .... 412 3. Cranmer's Position in the Church of England. 1547 . . .413 4. Ecclesiastical Reforms. 1547-1548 . . .414 5. The First Prayer Book of Edward VI. 1549 . . 415 6. The Insurrection in the West. 1549 . . .415 7. Ket's Rebellion. 1549 . 415 8. The Fall of Somerset. 1549 . . . .416 9. Warwick and the Ad- vanced Reformers. 1549 416 10. Latimer's Sermons. 1548- 1550 . . . ' . 417 11. Warwick and Somerset 1550-1552 12. The Second Prayer Book of Edward VI. 1552 . 13. The Forty-two Articles 1553 14. Northumberland's Conspi racy. i553 • 15. Lady Jane Grey. 1553 16. Mary restores the Mass 1553 17. Mary's First Parliament 1553 ... 18. Wyatt's Rebellion. 1554 19. The Queen's Marriage 20. The Submission to Rome 1554 21. The Beginning of the Per secution. 1555' 22. Death of Cranmer. 1556 417 418 419 421 421 422 422 423 423 424 424 425 XXIJ CONTENTS 23. Continuance of the Persecu- tion. 1556-1558 . 24. The Queen's Disappoint- ment. 1555-1556 . PAGE 426 426 25- 26. PAGE War with France and the Loss of Calais. 1557- 1558 .... 427 Death of Mary. 1558 . 427 CHAPTER XXVIII THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT IN CHURCH AND STATE 1558— 1570 End of the Council of Trent. 1563 . The Jesuits The Danger from Scotland. 1561-1565 The Darnley Marriage. 1565 .... The Murder of Rizzio. 1566 The Murder of Darnley. 1567 .... 18. The Deposition and Fhght of Mary. 1567-1568 Mary's Case before English Commissioners. 1568- 1569 .... The Rising in the North. 1569 .... The Papal Excommunica- tion. 1570 . I. Elizabeth's Difficulties. 12, 1558 . . . . • 428 2. The Act of Uniformity and 13- Supremacy. 1559 • 429 14. *•> The new Bishops and the Ceremonies. 1559-1564 429 15- 4- Calvinism .... 430 5- Peace with France. 1559 . 431 16. 6. The Reformation in Scot- 17- land. 1559 . 432 7- The Claims of Mary Stuart. 18. 1559 .... 432 8. The Treaty of Edinburgh. 19. 1560 .... 433 9- Scottish Presbyterianism 1561 .... 434 20. 10. Mary and Elizabeth. 1561 435 II. The French War. 1562- 21. 1564 .... 436 436 436 437 438 438 439 439 440 441 441 CHAPTER XXIX ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT. 1570^1587 1. The Continental Powers. 1566-1570 2. The Anjou Marriage Treaty and the Ridolfi Plot. 1570-1571 3. Elizabeth and the Puritans. 4. Elizabeth and Parliament. 1566 .... 5. A Puritan Parliament. 157 1 6. The Duke of Norfolk's Plot and Execution. 157 1- 1572 .... 7. The Admonition to Parlia- ment. 1572 . 8. Mariners and Pirates . 9. Westward Ho ! . 10. Francis Drake's Voyage to Panama. 1572 Ti. The Seizure of Brill, and the Massacre of St. Bar- tholomew. 1572 . 442 443 444 444 445 445 446 446 447 448 449 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 The Growth of the Dutch Republic. 1572-1578 Quiet Times in England 1572-1577 Drake's Voyage. 1577 1580 ... Ireland and the Reformation 1547 Ireland under Edward VI and Mary. 1547-1558 Elizabeth and Ireland ^ 1558-1578 . The Landmg at Smerwick and the Desmond Rising 1579-1583 The Jesuits in England 1580 . . . 20. The Recusancy Laws. 1581 21. Growing Danger of Eliza- beth. 1580-1584 . 449 450 450 451 451 452 452 453 454 454 CONTENTS 4*4 xxm PAGE 22. The Association. 1584- 1585 . . . .456 23. Growth of Philip's Power. 1584-1585 . . . 456 24. Babington's Plot, and the PAGE Trial of Mary Stuart. 1586 .... 457 25. E.xecution of Mary Stuart. 1587 • • • ♦458 CHAPTER XXX ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH. I 587 — 1603 1. The Singeing of the King of Spa! n' s Beard. 1587. 2. The Approach of the Ai-- mada. 1588 . 3. The Equipment of the Ar- mada. 1588 . 4. The Equipment of the English Fleet. 1588 5. The Defeat of the Armada. 1588 .... 6. The Destruction of the Ar- mada. 1588 . 7. Philip II. and France. 1588-1593 • 8. Maritime Enterprises. 1589- 1596 .... 9. Increasing Prosperity. 10. Buildings .... 11. Furniture .... 12. Growing Strength of the House of Commons 13. Archbishop Whitgift and 458 458 459 460 462 462 464 464 464 465 465 468 the Court of High Com- mission. 1583 . . 468 14. The House . of Commons and Puritanism. 1584 . 470 15. The Separatists . . . 47q 16. Whitgift and. Hooker . . 472 17. Spenser, Shakspere, and Bacon .... 473 18. Condition of the Catholics. 1588-1603 . . .475 19. Irish Difficulties. 1583- 1594 • • • • -475 20. O'Neill and the Earl of Essex. 1595-1600 . . 475 21. Essex's Imprisonment and Execution. 1599-1601 . 476 22. Mountjoy's Conquest of Ire- land. 1600-1603 . . 478 23. Parliament and the Mono- polies. 1601 . . . 478 24. The Last Days of Eliza- beth. 1601-1603 . . 479 PART VI THE PURITAN REVOLUTION. 1603— 1660 CHAPTER XXXI JAMES I. 1603— 1625 1. The Peace with Spain. 1603-1604 . . ,481 2. The Hampton Court Con ference. 1604 . .481 3. James and the House of Commons . • • 482 Gunpowder Plot. 1604-1605 483 The Post-nati. 1606-1607. 483 Irish Difficulties. 1603- 1610 .... 483 4 5 6 7. Bate's Case and the New Impositions. 1606-1608. 484 8. The Great Contract. 1610- 1611 . . . • 484 9. Bacon and Somerset. 1612- 1613 . . ■ .486 10. The Addled Parliament. 1614 . • • .486 11. The Spanish Alliance. 1614-1617 . . ► 488 XXIV CONTENTS PAGE 12. The Rise of Buckingham. 1615-1618 . . . 488 13. The Voyage and Execution of Raleigh, 1617-1618 . 489 14. Colonisation of Virginia and New England. 1607- 1620 .... 489 15. The Beginning of the Thirty Years' War. 1618- 1620 .... 490 16. The Meeting of James's Third Parliament. 162 1 490 17. The Royal Prerogative. 1616-1621 . . . 492 18. Financial Reform. 1619 . 492 19. Favouritism and Corrup- tion .... 494 PAGE 20. The Monopolies Con- demned. I 62 I . . 494 21. The Fall of Bacon. 1621 . 495 22. Digby's Mission, and the Dissolution of Parlia- ment. 1621 . . • 49^ 23. The Loss of the Palatinate. 1622 . . . .497 24. Charles's Journey to Madrid. 1623 . . . .497 25. The Prince's Return. 1623 498 26. The Last Parliament of James L 1624 . . 500 27. The French Alliance . . 501 28. Mansfeld's Expedition, and the Death of James I. 1624-1625 . . . 501 CHAPTER XXXII THE GROWTH OF THE PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1625 — 1634 I. Charles I. and Bucking- 14. Religious Differences. 1625- ham. 1625 . 502 1628 .... 511 2. Charles's First Parliament. 15- The King's Declaration. 1625 .... 502 1628 .... 512 3- The Expedition to Cadiz. 16. The Second Session of the 1625 .... 503 Third Parliament of 4- Charles's Second Parlia- Charles I. 1629 512 ment. 1626 . 503 17- Breach between the King 5- The Forced Loan. 1626 . 505 and the Commons. 1629 S^Z 6. The Expedition to R6. 18. The Constitutional Dispute. 1627 .... 506 1629 .... S13 7- The Five Knights' Case. 19. The Victory of Personal 1627 .... 506 Government. 1629-1632 514 8. Wentworth and Eliot in 20. Star Chamber Sentences. the Third Parliament of 1630-1633 514 Charles I. 1628 . 508 21. Laud's Intellectual Position. 9- The Petition of Right. 1628 508 1629-1633 515 10. Tonnage and Poundage. 22. Laud as the Upholder of 1628 .... 509 Uniformity 516 II. Buckingham's Murder. 1628 510 23- The Beginning of Laud's 12. The Question of Sovereignty. Archbishopric. 1633- 1628 .... Sio 1634 .... 517 13- Protestantism of the House 24. Laud and Prynne. 1633- •w* * of Commons. 1625-1628 5" 1634 .... S19 CHAPTER XXXIII THE OVERTHROW OF THE PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1634 — 164I 1. The Metropohtical Visita- tion. 1634-1637 . . 520 2. Prynne, Bastwick, and Bur- ton. 1637 . . . 521 3. Financial Pressure. 1635- 1637 . . . .521 4. Ship-money. 1634-1637 . 523 5. Hampden's Case. 1637-1638 523 CONTENTS XXV 6. Scottish Episcopacy. 1572- 1612 .... 7. The Scottish Bishops and Clergy. 1612-1637 8. The Riot at Edinburgh and the Covenant. 1637-1638 9. The Assembly of Glasgow, and the Abolition of Episcopacy. 1638 , 10. The First Bishops' War. 1639 . • . • . 11. Wentworth in Ireland. 1633-1639 PAGE 524 525 525 526 526 527 PAGE 12. The Proposed Plantation of Connaught . . . 528 13. The Short Parliament. 1640 528 14. The Second Bishops' War. 1640 .... 529 15. The Meeting of the Long Pailiament. 1640 . . 529 16. The Impeachment of Straf- ford. 1641 , . . 530 17. Strafford's Attainder and Execution . . . 530 18. Constitutional Reforms. 1641 . . ■ . .531 CHAPTER XXXIV THE FORMATION OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES AND THE FIRST YEARS OF THE CIVIL WAR. 1641 — 1644 1. The King's Visit to Scot- land. 1641 . 2. Parties formed on Church Questions. 1641 . 3. Irish Parties. 164 1 . 4. The Irish Insurrection. 1641 .... 5. The Grand Remonstrance. 1641 .... 6. The King's Return. 1641 . 7. The Impeachment of the Bishops. 1 641 The Impeachment of the Five Members. 1642 The Attempt on the Five Members. 1642 . The Commons in the City. 1642 .... The Struggle for the Militia. 1642 .... Edgehill and Turnham Green. 1642 . The King's Plan of Cam- paign. 1643 . Royalist Successes. 1643 . 8 10 II 12 13 14 15. The Siege of Gloucester. 1643 .... 16. The First Battle of Newbury. 1643 .... The Eastern Association. 1643 .... Oliver Cromwell. 1642- 1643 .... The Assembly of Divines. 1643 .... The Solemn League and Covenant. 1643 . The Irish War. 1641-1643 Winceby and Arundel. 1643-1644 The Committee of Both Kingdoms. 1644 . 536 I 24. The Campaign of Marston Moor. 1644 . Presbyterians and Indepen- dents. 1644 . Essex's Surrender at Lost- withiel. 1644 The Second Battle of New- bury. 1644 . 532 532 533 533 534 534 535 535 536 536 537 538 17- i8. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 25- 26. 27. 538 539 539 539 540 540 541 542 542 542 543 54+ 544 CHAPTER XXXV THE NEW MODEL ARMY. 1644— 1649 1. The Self-denying Ordinance and the New Model. 1645 2. Milton's ' Areopagitica. 1644 3. The Execution of Laud 1645 545 54^ 546 4. Montrose and Argyle. 1644 546 5. Montrose and the High- lands. 1644-1645 . . 547 6. The New Model Army in the Field. 1645 • . -547 7. The Battle of Naseby. 1645 . . . -548 XXVI CONTENTS 9- lO. II, 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. The Results of Naseby. 1645 . . . . Charles's Wanderings. 1645 Glamorgan in Ireland. 1645-1646 The King's Fhght to the Scots. 1646 . Charles at Newcastle. 1646 The Removal of the King to Holmby. 1647 . Dispute between the Presby- terians and the Army 1647 Cromwell and the Army 1647 The Abduction of the King 1647 PAGE 549 549 550 551 553 553 554 554 17- 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 25- The Exclusion of the Eleven Members. 1647 The Heads of the Proposals. 1647 .... The King's Flight to the Isle of Wight. 1647 The Scottish Engagement, and the Vote of No Ad- dresses. 1647-1648 The Second Civil War. 1648 .... Pride's Purge. 1648 . The High Court of Justice. 1649 .... The King's Trial and Exe- cution. 1649 . Results of Charles's Execu- tion. 1649 PAGE 555 555 556 556 556 557 557 559 560 CHAPTER XXXVI THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROTECTORATE. 1649 — 1660 6. 7- 9- 10. II. 12. 13- 14. Establishment of the Com- monwealth. 1649 . Parties in Ireland. 1647- 1649 .... Cromwell in Ireland. 1649- 1650 .... Montrose and Charles II. in Scotland. 1650 Dunbar and Worcester. 1650-1651 The Navigation Act. 1651 The Dutch War. 1652- 1653 .... Unpopularity of the Parlia- ment. 1652-1653 . Vane's Reform Bill. 1653 . Dissolution of the Long Parliament by Cromwell. 1653 . . . . The so-called Barebone's Parliament. 1653 . The Protectorate, and the Instrument of Govern- ment. 1653 . Character of the Instrument of Government Oliver's Government. 1653- 1654 .... 15- 561 16. 562 17- 562 18. 563 19. 563 564 20. 565 21. 565 566 22, 23- 566 24. 566 25- 26. 568 27. 28. 568 569 The First Protectorate Parliament. 1654-1655 . The Major-Generals. 1655 Oliver's Foreign Policy. 1654-1655 The French Alliance. 1655 .... Oliver's Second Parliament, and the Humble Petition and Advice. 1656 . The Dissolution of the Se- cond Protectorate Parlia- ment. 1658 . Victory Abroad and Failure at Home. 1657-1658 OHver's Death. 1658. Richard Cromwell. 1658- 1659 .... The Long Parliament Re- stored. 1659 . Military Government. 1659 Monk and the Rimip. 1660 End of the Long Parliament. 1660 .... The Declaration of Breda. 1660 .... 570 570 571 572 572 573 573 574 574 575 575 575 576 576 CONTENTS XXVll PART VII THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION. 1660—1689 CHAPTER XXXVII CHARLES II. AND CLARENDON. 1660—1667 1. Return of Charles XL 1660 2. King and Parliament. 1660 3. Formation of the Govern ment. 1660 . 4. The Political Ideas of the Convention Parliament. 1660 .... 5. Execution of the Political Articles of the Declara- tion of Breda. 1660 Ecclesiastical Debates. 1660 Venner's Plot and its Results 1661 .... The Cavalier Parliament, and the Corporation Act. 1661 .... 9. The Savoy Conference, and the Act of Uniformity. 1661-1662 10. The Dissenters. 1662 11. The Parliamentary Presby- terians. 1662, 12. Profligacy of the Court. 1662 13. Marriage of Charles II, and Sale of Dunkirk. 1662 . 6. 7- 8. PAGE 579 580 580 581 583 584 585 585 585 586 586 587 The Question of Toleration Raised. 1662-1663 The Conventicle Act. 1664 The Repeal of the Triennial Act. 1664 Growing Hostility between England and the Dutch. 1660-1664 Outbreak of the First Dutch War of the Restoration. I 664-1 665 The Plague. 1665 The Five Mile Act. 1665 . Continued Struggle with the Dutch. 1665- 1666 . The Fire of London. 1666 Designs of Louis XIV, 1665-1667 24. The Dutch in the Medway, and the Peace of Breda. 1667 .... Clarendon and the House of Commons. 1667 The Fall of Clarendon. 1667 Scotland and Ireland. 1660 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 25- PAGE 587 588 588 26. 27. 589 589 590 590 590 592 592 593 593 594 595 I. 2. 3- 4- 6. 7- 8. 9- 10. II. 12. CHAPTER XXXVIII CHARLES II. AND THE CABAL. 1667— 1674 Milton and Bunyan . Butler and the Dramatists Reason and Science . Charles II. and Toleration 1667 Buckingham and Arlington 1667-1669 The Triple AlHance. 1668 Charles's Negotiations with France. 1 669-1 670 The Treaty of Dover. 1670 The Cabal, 1670 Ashley's Policy . Buckingham's Sham Treaty 1671 The Stop of the Exchequer, 1672 . . 596 596 598 599 599 600 600 602 602 603 603 13' 14. 598 ! IS The Declaration of Indul- gence. 1672 , . . 604 The Second Dutch War of the Restoration, 1672 . 605 ' Delenda est Carthago.' 1673 .... 606 Withdrawal of the Declara- tion of Indulgence. 1673 606 The Test Act. 1673 . . 606 Results of the Test Act. 1673 .... 607 Continuance of the Dutch War. 1673 . . . 607 20. The Duke of York's Mar- riage and Shaftesbury's Dismissal, 1673 , . 608 21. Peace with the Dutch, 1674 608 16 17- 18. 19 XXVIU CONTENTS CHAPTER XXXIX danby's administration and the three short parliaments. 1 675— 1 68 1 1. Growinglnfluenceof Danby. 1675 . . . . 2. Parliamentary Parties. 1675 . . . . 3. The Non-Resistance Bill. 1675 . . . . 4. Charles a Pensionary of France. 1675-1676 5. Two Foreign Policies. 1677 6. The Marriage of the Prince of Orange. 1677 . 7. Danby's Position. 1677 8. The Peace of Nymwegen 1678 . . . 9. The Popish Plot. 1678 10. Growing Excitement. 1678 11. , Danby's Impeachment and the Dissolution of the Cavalier Parliament. 1678-1679 PAGE 610 610 6ii 611 612 613 613 614 615 61:; 616 12. 13- 14. IS- 16. 17- 18. 19. 20. I 21. PAGE The Meeting of the First Short Parliament. 1679 616 The Exclusion Bill and the Habeas Corpus Act. 1679 617 Shaftesbury and the King. 1679 .... 617 Shaftesbury and Halifax. 1679 .... 618 The Divine Right of Kings. 1679 .... 619 The Highland Host. 1677- 1678 .... 619 Drumclog and Bothwell Bridge. 1679 . . 619 Petitioners and Abhorrers. 1680 .... 620 The Second Short Parlia- ment. 1680-1681 . . 620 The Third Short Parlia- ment. 1681 . . . 621 I. 2. 4- 5- 8. 9- 10. CHAPTER XL THE LAST YEARS OF CHARLES IL 1681 — 1685 Tory Reaction. 168 1 . 622 ' Absolom and Achitophel.' 1681 .... 623 The Scottish Test Act and the Duke of York's Re- turn. 1681-1682 . . 623 The City Elections. 1682 . 623 Flight and Death of Shaftes- bury, I 682- 1683 . . 624 The Attack on the City. 1682-1683 . , , 624 The Remodelling of the Corporations. 1683-1684 625 The Rye House Plot/ 1683 625 The Whig Combination. 1683 .... 625 Trial and Execution of Lord Russell. 1683 . . 625 II. 12. 14. IS- 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- Algernon Execution of Sidney. 1683 Parties at Court. 1684 Death of Charles II. 1685 Constitutional Progress. 1660-1685 Prosperity of the Country . The Coffee Houses . The Condition of London . Painting . . . . Architecture Science . . . . Difficulties of Communica- tion . . . . The Country Gentry and the Country Clergy Alliance between the Gentry and the Church CHAPTER XLI JAMES II. 1685— 1689 626 626 627 627 628 630 631 63 r 631 632 632 633 633 1. The Accession of James II. 1685 . . . .634 2. A Tory Parliament. 1685. 636 3. Argyle's Landing. 1685 . 636 4. Monmouth's Landing. 1685 637 5. The Bloody Assizes. 1685 637 6. The Violation of the Test Act. 1685 . . .638 CONTENTS XXIX PAGE 7. Breach between Parliament and King. 1685 , . 638 8. The Dispensing Power. 1686 638 9. The Ecclesiastical Commis- sion. 1686 . . . 639 10. Scotland and Ireland. 1686- 1687 . . . 639 11. The Fall of the Hydes. 1686-1687 . . . 640 12. The Declaration of Indul- gence. 1687 . . . 640 13. The Expulsion of the Fel- lows of Magdalen. 1687 641 14. An Attempt to pack a Par- liament. 1687 , . 641 15. A Second Declaration of Indulgence. 1688 . . 642 16. Resistance of the Clergy. 1688 .... 17. The Trial of the Seven Bishops. 1688 18. Invitation to William of Orange. 1688 19. Landing of William. 20. William's March London. 1688 21. A • Convention Parliament Summoned. 1688 . 22. The Throne Declared Vacant. 1689 23. William and Mary to be Joint Sovereigns. 1689 . 24. Character of the Revolution. PAGE 1688 upon 642 643 643 644 64s 646 646 647 647 PART VIII THE RISE OF CABINET GOVERNMENT. 1689— 1754 CHAPTER XLII WILLIAM III. AND MARY IL WILLIAM in. 1689 — 1702. MARY II. 1689— 1694. 1. The new Government and the Mutiny Act. 1689 . 2. The Toleration Act and the Nonjurors. 1689 . 3. Locke's Letters on Tolera- tion, 1689 4. Establishment of Presbyte- rianism in Scotland. 1689 .... 5. Killiecrankie. 1689 . 6. The Pacification of the Highlands. 1691-1692 . 7 The Massacre of Glencoe. 1692 .... 8. The Siege of Londonderry. 1689 .... 9. The Irish Parliament. 1689 10. Schomberg sent to Ireland. 1689 .... The Bill of Rights and the Dissolut\-/n of the Convention Parliament. 1689-169O .X. II. 649 650 652 652 652 653 654 654 65s 655 656 12. ^3- 14. 15- 16. 17- 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. Settlement of the Revenue. 1690 .... The Conquest of Ireland. 1690-1691 War with France. 1689- 1690 .... Disgrace of Marlborough. 1691-1692 La Hogue, Steinkirk, and Landen. 1692-1693 Beginning of the National Debt. 1692 . Disorder in the Government. 1693 .... The Whig Junto. 1693- 1694. .... The Junto the Beginning of the Modern Cabinet The Bank of England, 1694 The Place Bill. 1694 . The Second Triennial Act. 1694 .... Death of Mary. 1694 656 656 657 657 658 658 659 659 660 660 661 661 661 XXX CONTENTS I. 2. 5- 6. 7- 8. CHAPTER XLIII WILLIAM III. {alone). 1694— 1702 10. PAGE The Liberty of the Press, 1695 • • • -663 The Surrender of Namur. 1695 .... 663 The Restoration of the Cur- rency and the Treason Trials Act. 1696 . . 664 Ministerial Corruption. I 695-1696 . . . 664 The Assassination Plot. 1696 .... 664 The Peace of Rys wick. 1697 667 Reduction of the Army. 1698-1699 . . . 667 Signature and Failure of the First Partition Treaty. 1698-1699 . . . 667 Break-up of the Whig Junto. 1699 .... 669 The Irish Grants and the Fall of Somers. 1700 . 670 II. E^fpedition. The Darien 1698-1700 12. The Second Parti tion Treaty. 1700 .... 13. Deaths of the Duke of Glou- cester and of the King of Spain. 1700 . 14. A Tory Ministry. 1700- 1701 . . . . 15. The Act of Settlement and the Succession. 170 1 16. The Act of Settlement and the Crown. 1701 . 17. The Act of Settlement and the Ministers. 1701 18. The Tory Foreign Policy. 1701 . . . . 19. The Kentish Petition. 1701 20. The Grand Alliance. 1701 21. Death of James II. 1701 . 22. Death of William. 1702 . PAGE 671 671 671 672 672 672 674 674 675 675 676 CHAPTER XLIV ANNE. 1702 — 1714 I. 4. c. 10. II. Marlborough and the Tories. T702 .... Louis XIV. and Marl- borough. 1702 Marlborough's First Cam- paign in the Netherlands. 1702-1703 The Occasional Conformity Bill. 1702-1703 Progress of the War in Italy, Spain, and Germany. 1702-1703 Ministerial changes. 1703- 1704 .... The Campaign of Blenheim. 1704 .... Operations in Spain. 1704- 1705 .... A Whig Parliament. 1705- 1706 .... The Campaign of 1706 in the Netherlands and in Italy. 1706 . Campaign of 1706 in Spain. 1706 .... 676 678 678 680 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. 17- 680 18. 680 682 19. 20, 682 21. 684 22. 684 23- 684 24. 25- The Union with Scotland. 1702-1707 The Irish Penal Laws Irish Commerce Crushed . Gradual formation of a Whig Ministry. 1705- 1708 .... Progress of Cabinet Govern- ment. 1708 . Progress of the War. 1707- 1708 . . , _ The Conference at the Hague and the Battle of Malpla- quet. 1709 The Sacheverell Trial. 1710 The Fall of the Whigs. 1710 . . . _ A Tory Parliament and Ministry. 1710 Brihuega and ViUa Viciosa 1710. Overtures to France. 1710- 1711 I iterature and Politics! 1710 Jonathan Swift 685 686 686 687 687 689 690 690 691 691 692 692 692 693 26. The Imperial Election. 1711 27. The Occasional Conformity Act and the Creation of Peers. 171 1 . 28. The Armistice and the Treaty of Utrecht. 1712- 1713 ... 29. Terms of the Treaty oif Utrecht. 1713 30. Effect of the Treaty of CONTENTS PAGE 695 Utrecht on Internal ional relations .... 31, England as a sea-pow^2r. 695 1713 . . . . 32. Position of the Tories. 1711- 1713 . . . . 696 33. The Last Days and Death of Anne. 17T4 696 34. Politics and Art . XXXI PAGE 697 697 699 699 701 CHAPTER XLV TOWNSHEND, SUNDERLAND, AND WALPOLE. 1714—1737 * Quieta non movere ' . . 716 The Prime Ministership . 716 Walpole and Carteret. 1723 -1724 .... 718 Wood's Halfpence. 1724 . 718 The Last Years of George I. 1724-1727 . . . 718 George II. and Walpole. 1727 .... 718 Breach between Walpole and Townshend. 1730 . . 720 Bolingbroke as Organiser of the Opposition. 1726- 1732 .... The Excise Bill, 1733 The Defeat of the Excise Bill. 1733 . Disruption of the Opposi- tion. 1734-1735 . The Family Compact. 1773 Dissensions in the Royal Family. 1737 I. George I. and the Whigs. 15. 2. 1714 .... The Whigs and the Nation. 702 16. 17- 3. 1714 .... The Whigs and Parliament, 704 18. 4- 5. 6. 7- 1715 .... Mar's Rising. 1715-1716 . The Septennial Act. 1716 England and France. 1716 The Whig Schism. 1716- 704 705 706 707 10. > 20. 21. 8. 1717 .... The Quadruple Alliance. 708 22. 9- 1718-1720 The Relief of the Dissenters, 709 10. and the Peerage Bill, 1719 The South Sea Bubble. 1720 710 711 23. 24. II. The Bursting of the Bubble. 12. 1720-1721 Walpole called to the Rescue. 712 25- 13- 14. 1721-1722 Corruption under W^alpole . Walpole and Corruption 712 713 714 26. 27. 720 722 724 724 724 725 2. 3- 4- CHAPTER XLVI WALPOLE, CARTERET, AND THE PELHAMS. 1737—1754 The Reign of Common Sense Smuggling Indies Walpole and Spain William Pitt. 1738 Impending War. 1739 .... The Spanish War and the Resignation of Walpole. I 739-1742 The New Administration. 1742 .... in the West 1738- 726 726 728 728 729 730 730 8. Carteret and Newcastle. 1742 9. Beginning of the War of the Austrian Succession 1740-1742 10. Carteret's Diplomacy. 1742- 1744 Carteret and the Family Compact. 1743-1744 Carteret's Fall. 1744 . The Broad-bottomed Ad ministration. 1744 The Young Pretender in Scotland. 1745 II. 12. 13- 14. 732 732 735 737 738 739 739 XXXll CONTENTS PAGE 15. The March to Derby. 1745 740 16. Falkirk and Culloden. 1746 740 17. The Pelhams and the King. 1745 • • • -743 PAGE 18. 19- End of the War, 1746- 1748 . . . -743 End of Henry Pelham's Ministry. 1748-1754 • 743 PART IX THE FALL OF THE WHLGS AND THE RISE OF THE NEW TORYISM. 1754- 1789 CHAPTER XLVII NEWCASTLE AND PITT. 1754—1760 1. Butler, Wesley, and White- field. 1736-1754 . 2. Fielding and Hogarth 3. -Newcastle, Pitt, and Fox 1754-1755 4. The French in America 1754 5. Newcastle's Blundering 1754-1756 6. The Loss of Minorca, 1756 7. Beginning of the Seven Years' War. 1756 . 8. Ministry of Devonshire and Pitt, 1756-1757 • 9. Pitt's Dismissal, 1757 10. Nature of Pitt's Popularity 1757 11. Coalition between Pitt and Newcastle, 1757 . 12. Military Disasters. 1757 13. Pitt and Frederick the Great 1757-1758 14. Fighting in France and America, 1757-1758 15. The Campaign in Canada 1759 16, 745 746 746 747 748 749 749 749 750 750 751 752 752 753 753 17- 18, 19- 20, 21. 22. 23- 24. 25- 26. 27. The Conquest of Canada. 1759-1760 . . .755 The War in Europe ; Naval Successes. 1759 . . 756 Progress of the War in Germany. 1759 . . 756 The East India Company. 1600-1698 . , . 758 Break-up of the Empire of the Great Mogul. 1658- 1707 . . . .758 The Mahratta Confederacy. I 707-1 744 . . .759 Le Bourdonnais and Du- pleix. 1 744- 1 750 . . 760 Dupleix and Clive. 1751- 1754 ■ . . .761 The Black Hole of Calcutta. '756 . . . .762 The Battle of Plassey. 1757 762 The Battle of Wandewash and the capture of Pondi- cherry. 1760-1761 . 764 Death of George IL 1760 . 764 CHAPTER XLVIII THE BREAK-UP OF THE WHIG PARTY. 1760— 1770 1. Character of George \\\. 1760 .... 765 2. The Fall of Pitt, 1761 . 766 2. Resignation of Newcastle and the Peace of Paris. 1762-1763 . . ] 4. The King and the Tories." 1762-1763 766 767 CONTENTS xxxiii PAGE PAGE 5- The King's Friends 767 12. Pitt and Burke. 1766 772 6. The Three Whig Parties. 13- The Chatham Ministry. 1763 .... 768 1766-1767 773 7- Grenville and Wilkes. 1763- 14. American Import Duties. 1764 .... 769 1767 . . . . 773 8. George III. and Grenville. , IS- The Middlesex Election. 1763-1764 . 770 1768- 1769 774 9- The Stamp Act. 1765 770 i6. ' Wilkes and Liberty. ' lO. The Rockingham Ministry 1769 . . . . 774 1765 .... 771 17- Lord North Prime Minister. II. The Rockingham Ministry and the Repeal of the Stamp Act. 1766 . 771 1770 . . . . 776 CHAPTER XLD i\. THE STRUGGLE FOR AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE. 1770 — 1 783 5- 6. 8. 1. North and the Opposition. 1770 . . . '777 2. North and the Tea Duty. 1770 .... 778 3. The Freedom of Reporting. 1771 . . . . 779 4. Continued Resistance in America. 1770-1772 . 780 The Boston Tea Ships. 1773 780 Repressive Measures. 1774 780 The Congress of Philadelphia and the British Parlia- ment. 1774 . . . 782 Lexington and Bunker's Hill. 1775 . . . 782 9. Conciliatory Efforts. 1775 783 10.. George Washington in Com- mand. 1775 . . . 783 11. Progress of the War. 1775- 1776 . . . .784 12. The Declaration of Indepen- dence and the Struggle in H* NevkT Jersey. 1776-1777 784 13. FrenchAssistance toAmerica. 1776-1777 . . . 786 14. Brandywine and Saratoga. 1777 .... 786 15. The French Alliance vi^ith America and the Death of Chatham. 1778 . 786 16. Valley Forge. 1777-1778 787 17. George III. and Lord North. 1779 . . . .787 18. The French in the Channel. 1779 . . . . 788 19. English Successes in America 1779-1780 . . . 788 19A. Economical Reform. 1779- 1780 .... 789 20. Parliamentary Reform and the Gordon Riots . . 789 The Gordon Riots. 1780 . 790 The Armed Neutrality. 1780 .... 792 The Capitulation of York- town. 1781 . . . 792 American Success. 178 1 . 794 The Last Days of North's Ministry. 1781-1782 . 794 26. The Rockingham Ministry. 1782 . . . .795 Irish Religion and Com- merce. 1778 . . . 795 The Irish Volunteers. 1778- 1781 .... 796 Irish Legislative Indepcn- • dence. 1782 . . . 796 The Shelburne Ministry and the Peace of Paris. 1782- 1783 .... 796 Tenns of the Treaty of Paris. 1783 .... 798 21. 22. 23- 24. 25. 27; 28, 29 30 31 CHAPTER L PITT AND FOX. 1782—1789 1. The Younger Pitt. 1782- 1783 • • • -799 2. Resignation of Shelburne. * 1783 • • • -799 C 3. The Coalition Ministry. 1783 .... 800 4. The English in Bengal. i7S7--'^77^ . . . 801 b XXXIV CONTENTS 6. 8. lO. II. 12. 14. 15- 16. 17- PAGE Warren Hastings, Governor of Bengal. 1772-1774 . 8:2 The Regulating Act and its Results. 1773-1774 • 3o2 Hastings and Nuncomar. 1775 . . . .803 War with the Mahrattas and Hyder Ali. 1777-1779 • 803 Cheyt Singh and the Begums of Oude. 1781-1782 . S03 Restoration of Peace. 1781- 1782 .... 805 Hastings as a Statesman. 1783 . . . .805 The India Bill of the Coali- tion. 1783 . . . 806 The Fall of the Coalition. 1783 .... 806 Pitt's Struggle with the Co- alition. 1783-1784 . 807 Pitt's Budget and India Bill. 1784 . . . .808 Pitt's Reform Bill. 1785 . 808 Failure of Pitt's Scheme for a Commercial Union with Ireland. 1785 . .810 PAGE 18. French Commercial Treaty, 1786 . . . .810 19. Trial of Warren Hastings. 1786-1795 . . .811 20. The Regency Bill. 1788- 1789 .... 811 21. Thanksgiving at St. Paul's. 1789 . . . .812 22. Growth of Population. 1700- 1801 . . . - 813 23. Improvements in Agriculture 813 24. Cattle-breeding . . . 813 25. The Bridgewater Canal. 1761 .... 813 26. Cotton-spinning. 1738 . 814 27. Hargreaves' Spinning-jenny. 1767 .... 815 28. Arkwright and Crompton. 1769-1779 . . . 815 29. Cartwright's Power-loom. 1785 .... 816 30. Watt's Steam-engine. 1785 816 31. General Results of the Growth of Manufactures . 817 PART X THE CONFLICT WITH DEMOCRACY. 1789— 1827 CHAPTER LI ENGLAND AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. 1 789— 1 795 1. Prospects of Pitt's Ministry. 1789 .... 819 2. Material Antecedents of the French Revolution . . 820 3. Intellectual Antecedents of the French Revolution . 820 4. Louis XVI. 1772-1789 . 821 5. The National Assembly, 1789 • . . .821 6. England and France. 1789- 1790 • • • .822 7. Fox, Burke, and Pitt. 1789- 1790 • . ... 822 8. Clarkson and the Slave Trade. 1783-1788 . 823 10. II. 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. Pitt and the Slave Trade. 1788-1792 Rise of a Warlike Feeling in France. 1791-1792 . The French Republic. 1792 .... Breakdown of Pitt's Policy of Peace. 1 792-1 793 French Defeats and the Reign of Terror. 1793 French Successes. 1793 Progress of the Reiscn oif Terror. 1793-1794 Reaction in England. 1792- 1793 ' . . . 823 824 824 825 826 826 827 827 CONTENTS XXXV PAGE 17. End of the Reign of Terror. 1794 .... 828 18. Coalition between Pitt and the majority of the Whigs. 1794 .... 828 PAGE 19. The Treaties of Basel. 1795 829 20. The Establishment of the Directory in France. 1795 829. 21. The Treason Act and the Sedition Act. 1795 . 830 CHAPTER LII THE U^ION WITH IRELAND AND THE PEACE OF AMIENS. 1795— 1804 1. The Irish Government and 1 Parliament. 1785-1791 . 831 | 2. The United Irishmen and j Parliamentary Reform. 1791-1794 . .832 3. The Mission of Lord Fitz- william. 1794-1795 832 4. Impending Revolution. 1795-1796 . . -833 5. Bonaparte in Italy. 1796- 1797 . . . .834 6. Pitt's First Negotiation w^ith the Directory. 1796 . 834 7. Suspension of Cash Pay- ments. 1797 . . . 835 8. Battle of St. Vincent. 1797 835 9. Mutiny at Spithead. 1797 . 836 10. Mutiny at the Nore. 1797 . 836 11. Pitt's second Negotiation with the Directory. 1797 836 12. Bonaparte's Expedition to Egypt. 1798 . . .837 13. The Battle of the Nile. 1798 838 14. Bonaparte in Syria. 1799 . 838 IS- 16. 17- 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 26. 27 Foundation of the Consulate. 1799- I 800 An Overture for Peace. 1799 The Campaign of Marengo and the Peace of Lun^ville 1800-1801 The Irish RebeUion. 1798 An Irish Reign of Terror. 1798-1799 The Irish Union. 1800 Pitt's Resignation. 1801 . The Addington Ministry. i8qi .... Malta and Egypt, 1800 . The Northern Confederacy and the Battle of Copen- hagen. 1801 . The Treaty of Amiens. 1802 .... Rupture of the Treaty of Amiens. 1803 The last Months of the Ad- dington Ministry. 1803- 1804 .... 838 840 840 840 841 842 842 843 843 844 846 846 848 CHAPTER LHI THE ASCENDENCY OF NAPOLEON. 1 804— 1 807 1. The Napoleonic Empire. 1804 .... 849 2. A Threatened Invasion. 1804-1805 . . -851 3. The Trafalgar Campaign. 1805 . . . .851 4. The Battle of Trafalgar. 1805 854 5. The Campaign of Austerlitz. 1805 . . . -854 6. Pittas Death. 1806 . . 854 7. The Ministry of All the Talents. 1806 . . 855 8. The Overthrow of Prussia. 1806 . . - .856 9. The End of the Ministry of All the Talents. 1807 . 857 10. The Treaty of Tilsit. 1807. 858 11. The Colonies. 1804-1807 . 858 12. The Overthrow of the Mah- rattas. 1802-1806 . 859 13. Wellesley's Recall. 1805 . 859 14. The Continental System. 1806-1807 . . .859 15. Effects of the Continental System. 1807 . . 860 16. The Bombardment of Co- penhagen. 1807 . . 860 b2 XXXVl CONTENTS CHAPTER LIV THE DOWNFALL OF NAPOLEON. 1807— 1814 PAGE 1. Napoleon and Spain. 1807- 1808 . . . .862 2. The Dethronement of Charles IV. 1808 . 863 3. The Capitulation at Baylen. 1808 . . .863 4. Battle of Vimeiro and Con- vention of Cintra. 1808. 863 5. Sir John Moore's Expedi- tion and the Battle of Corunna. 1 808-1809 . 864 6. Aspern and Wagram. 1809. 865 7. Walcheren and Talavera. 1809 .... 865 8. Torres Vedras. 1810-1811 . 867 9. The Regency and the As- sassination of Perceval. 1811-1812 . . . 867 10. Napoleon at the Height of Power. 181 1 . . . 868 II. 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. 17- 18. 19- 20. 21. 22. Resources. 1811 Wellington's 1811 WelHngton's Advance -1812 . . . . The Battle of Salamanca. 1812 . . . . Napoleon in Russia. 1812. Napoleon driven out of Ger- many and Spain. 1813 . The Restoration of Louis XVIII. 1814 Position of England War with America. 1814 ... The Congress of Vienna 1814-1815 The Hundred Days. 1815 The Waterloo Campaign The Second Restoration of Louis XVIH. 1814 1812- PAGE 868 869 869 870 871 871 872 872 873 874 874 875 CHAPTER LV ENGLAND AFTER WATERLOO. 1815 — 1827 I. 4. 5- 7. 8. 9- 10. II. The Corn-Law and the Abo- lition of the Property Tax. 1815-1816 . . .875 Manufacturing Distress. 1816 . . . .876 The Factory-System. 181 <;- 1816 . . . ^. 876 The Radicals. 1816-1817. 877 Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. 1817-1818 . 877 A Time of Prosperity. 1818- 1819 .... 879 Renewal of Distress. 18 19. 879 The ' Manchester Massacre, ' 1819 . . . .879 The Six Acts. 1819 . . 880 Death of George HL and the Cato-Street Conspi- racy. 1820 . . . 880 Queen Caroline. 1820- 1821 . . . .881 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. 17- 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. The Southern Revolutions. 1820-1823 Castlereagh and Canning. 1822-1826 National Uprising in Greece. 1821-1826. Peel as Home Secretary. 1821-1827 Criminal Law Reform. 1823 .... Huskisson and the Combi- nation Laws. 1824- 1825 .... Robinson's Budgets. 1823- 1825 .... The end of the Liverpool Ministry. 1 826-1827 Burns, Byron, and Shelley . Scott and Wordsworth Bentham . 882 882 884 884 885 885 886 887 887 889 890 CONTENTS XXXVll PART XI THE GROWTH OF DEMOCRACY CHAPTER LVI CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION AND PARLIAMENTARY REFORM 1827 — 1832 1. Questions at Issue. 1827 . 2. Canning Prime Minister. 1827 .... 3. The Battle of Navarino and the Goderich Ministry. 1827 .... 4. Formation of the Welling- ton Ministry. 1828 5. Lord John Russell and Par- liamentaryReform. 1819- 1828 . . . . 6. Repeal of the Test and Cor- poration Acts. 1828 7. Resignation of the Canning- ites. 1828 8. The Catholic Association, 1823-1828 9. O'Connell's Election. 1828 10. Cathohc Emancipation. 1829 . . . . 11. Death of George IV. 1830 PAGE 891 12. 892 13- 892 14. IS- 16. 893 17- 18. 894 19. 894 20. 89s 21. 895 896 22. 896 898 23- William IV, and the Second French Revolution. 1830 The End of the Wellington Ministry. 1830 Lord Grey's Ministry, 1830 The Reform Bill, 1831 . The Bill Withdrawn. 1831 The Reform Bill Re-intro- duced. 1831 . Public Agitation. 1831 The Reform Bill becomes Law. 1831-1832 . Character of the Reform Act. 1832 Roads and Coaches. 1802- 1820 . . . . Steam Vessels and Loco- motives. 1811-1825 The Liverpool and Man- chester Railway, 1825- 1829 . . . . PAGE 898 900 901 902 902 903 903 905 905 905 906 907 CHAPTER LVII THE REFORMERS IN POWER. 1832— 184I 1. Liberals and Conservatives. 1832 . . . , 2. Irish Tithes. 1831-1833 . 3. Abolition of Slavery, 1833 4. The First Factory Act. 1833 .... 5. The New Poor Law. 1834 6. Break-up of the Ministry. 1834 . . . • 7. Foreign Policy of the Re- formers. I 830-1 834 8. Peel's First Ministry. 1834- 1835 . • • ,• 9. Beginning of Melbourne's Second Ministry. 1835- 1837 .... 909 909 910 911 911 912 912 913 913 10. Queen Victoria, 1837 11, Canada, 1837-1841 . 12, Ireland. 1835-1841 . 13. The Bedchamber Question. 1839 .... Post Office Reform. 1839 . Education. 1833-1839 16. The Queen's Marriage. 1840 .... Palmerston and Spain. 1833-1839 Palmerston and the Eastern Question. 1831-1839 Threatened Breach with France. 1839-1841 14 IS 17 18 ^9 914 914 916 918 918 920 920 920 921 922 XX will CONTENTS 20. 21. Condition of I 837-1 841 The People's I 837- I 840 the Poor. • • • Charter, PAGE 922 923 PAGE 22. The Anti-Com-Law League. 1838-1840 . . .924 23. The Fall of the Melbourne Ministry. 1841 . . 925 CHAPTER LVIII FREE TRADE. 184I— 1852 I. 2. 6, 7- 9- 10. II. 12, 13- 14. Peel's New Ministry, 1841 Peel's First Free-trade Budget. 1842 Returning Prosperity. 1843- 1844 .... Mines and Factories. 1842- 1847 .... Aberdeen's Foreign Policy. 1841-1846 Peel and O'Connell. 1843 Peel's Irish Policy. 1843- 1845 .... Peel's Second Free-trade Budget. 1845 Peel and Disraeli. 1845 Spread of the Anti-Corn- Law League. 1845 The Irish Famine. 1845 . The Abolition of the Corn Law. 1 845-1 846 . The Close of Peel's Ministry. 1846 .... The Russell Ministry. 1846- 1847 .... 926 926 926 927 927 928 928 929 929 930 931 931 931 932 15. Irish Emigration. 1847 . 933 16. Landlord and Tenant in Ireland, 1847 . . 933 17. The Encumbered Estates Act. 1848 . . .933 18. European Revolution. 1848 934 19. Renewed Trouble in Ireland. 1848 . . . .935 20. The Chartists on Ken- nington Common. 1848 935 21. European Reaction. 1848- 1849 . . . .936 22. The Decline of the Russell Ministry. 1848-1851 . 936 23. The Great Exhibition. 1851 . , . - 937 24. The End of the Russell Ministry. 1851-1852 . 938 25. The First Derby Ministry. 1852 . . . '. 938 26. The Burial of Protection. 1852 .... 938 CHAPTER LIX THE CRIMEAN WAR AND THE INDIAN MUTINY. 1852— 1858 1. Expectation of Peace. 1852 939 2. Church Movements. 1827- 1853 . . . .940 3. Growth of Science. 1830- 1859 . . , .940 4. Dickens, Thackeray, and Macaulay. 1837-1848 . 940 5. Grote, Mill, and Carlyle. 1833-1856 . . .941 6. Tennyson. 1849 . . 943 7. Turner. 1775-1851 . . 943 8. The Beginning of the Aber- deen Ministry. 1852- 1854 .... 943 9. The Eastern Question. 1850-1853 . . .943 TO. War between Russia and Turkey. 1853— 1854 . 944 II Resolution of the Allies. 1854 .... 944 12. Alma and Sebastopol. 1854 945 13. Balaclava and Inkerman. 1854 .... 14. Winter in the Crimea. 18^4- 1855 . . . 15. The Hospital at Scutari. ^'^55 .... 16. The Palmerston Ministry 1855 . . . . 17. The Fall of Sebastopol and the End of the War. 1855-1856 18. India after Wellesley's Recall. 1806-1823 19. The North-Western Fron- tier. I 806-1 83 5 946 946 947 947 947 948 q48 CONTENTS xxxix 20. Russia and Afghanistan 1835-1838 21. The Invasion of Afghanistan 1839-1842 22. The Retreat from Cabul 1842 23. Pollock's March to Cabul 1842 24. Conquest of Sindh. 1842 25. The First Sikh War. 1845 1846 . 26. The Second Sikh War 1848-1849 PAGE 949 949 950 9SO 950 951 951 27. Lord Dalhousie's Adminis- tration. 1848-1856 28. The Sepoy Army. 1856- 1857 .... 29. The Outbreak of the Mutiny. 1857 .... 30. Cawnpore. 1857 31. The Recovery of Delhi and the Relief of Lucknow. 1857 .... 32. The End of the Mutiny. 1857-1858 PACE 951 952 953 953 953 954 CHAPTER LX ANTECEDENTS AND RESULTS OF THE SECOND REFORM ACT. 1857— 1874 5- 6. 8. 9- 10, II. 12. 13- 14. Fall of the First Palmerston Ministry. 1857-1858 The Second Derby Ministry and the Beginning of the SecoDd Palmerston Minis try. 1858-1859 . Italian War of Liberation 1859 . The Kingdom of Italy 1859-1861 . . The Volunteers. 1 859-1 860 The Commercial Treaty with France, i860 The Presidential Election in America, i860 . England and the American Civil War. 1861-1862 . The 'Alabama.' 1862 The Cotton Famine. 1861- 1864 .... End of the American Civil War. 1864 . The Last Days of Lord Pal- merston. 1865 The Ministry of Earl Rus- sell. 1865-1866 . The Third Derby Ministry 955 956 956 957 957 957 958 958 959 959 960 960 960 15- 16, 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22, 23- 24. 25- 26. 27. 28. and the Second Reform Act. 1866-1868 . . 961 Irish Troubles. 1867 . 962 The Gladstone Ministry and the Disestablishment of the Irish Church. 1868- 1869 .... 962 The Irish Land Act. 1870 . 962 The Education Act. 1870 . 963 The War between Prussia and Austria. 1866 . 963 War between France and Germany. 1 870-1 871 . 963 Abolition of Army-Pur- chase. 1871 . . . 965 The Ballot Act. 1872 , 965 Foreign Policy of the Minis- try. 1871-1872 . 965 Fall of the First Gladstone Ministry. 1873-1874 . 966 Colonial Expansion. 1815- 1874 .... 966 The North-American Colo- nies. I 841-1874 . , 967 Australasia. 1788-1874 . 967 South Africa . . . 968 Summary of Events. 1874 — 1885 I. The Disraeli (Beaconsfield) Ministry. 1874-1880 . 969 2. The Second Gladstone Ministry. 1880-1885 970 INDEX . 973 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIG I. 2. PAGE 2 Palaeolithic flint scraper from Icklingham, Suffolk . Palaeolithic flint implement from Hoxne, Suffolk . . .2 {From Evans's 'Ancient Stone Implements') 3. Engraved bone from Cresswell Crags, Derbyshire . . .3 {From the original in the British Museum) 4. Neolithic flint arrow-head from Rudstone, Yorks . . ,3 5. Neolithic celt or cutting instrument from Guernsey . . .3 6. Neolithic axe from Winterbourn Steepleton, Dorset . , 4 {From. Evans's ' Ancient Stone Implements ') 7. Example of early British pottery ..... 4 8. 9. Examples of early British pottery . . . . .5 {Front Greenwelts ' British Barrows ') 10. Bronze celt from the Isle of Harty, Kent . . . ,6 11. Bronze lance-head found in Ireland ..... 6 12. Bronze caldron found in Ireland . . . . .6 {From Evans s ' Ancient Bronze Implements ') 13. View of Stonehenge ....... 7 {From a photograph) 14. Part of a British gold corselet found at Mold, now in the British Museum ........ 9 {From the ' ArchaEologia ') 15. Bust of Julius Csesar ....... 10 {Frovt the original in the British Museum) 16. Commemorative tablet of the Second Legion found at Halton Chesters on the Roman Wall . . . . .17 17. View of part of the Roman Wall . . . . .18 18. Ruins of a mile-castle on the Roman Wall . . . .18 {Frojn Bruce s ' Handbook to the Roman Wall,' 2nd edition) 19. Part of the Roman Wall at Leicester . . . -19 {From Rickmans ' Gothic Architecture,' 6th edition, by J. H. Parker) 20. Pediment of a Roman Temple found at Bath . .20 {Reduced f7'oin the * Archaeologia ') 21. Roman altar from Rutchester . . . . .21 {From Bruce s ' Handbook to the Roman Wall,' 2nd edition) 22. Plan of the city of Old Sarum . . • . -34 {From the Ordfiance Survey Plan) xlii ILLUSTRATIONS FIG. 23. View of Old Sarum ...... ^Reduced from Sir R. C. Hoare's 'History of Modern Wiltshire Old and New Sarum ') 24. 5a-xon church at Bradford-on-Avon, Wilts . {Fro77t Rickvians ' Gothic Architecture,' 6th edition, by J. H. Parker 25. Saxon horsemen ...... 26. Group of Saxon warriors ..... {_Fro7n Harl. MS. 603) 27. Remains of a viking ship from Gokstad {From a photograph of the original at Christiana) 28. Gold ring of ^thelwulf ..... 29. Gold jewel of i^lfred found at Athelney {From ' Archaeological Journal ') 30. An English vessel ...... 31. A Saxon house ...... {From Harl. MS. 603) 32. A monk driven out of the King's presence . {From a drawing belonging to the Society of A ntiquaries) 33. Rural life in the eleventh century. January to June 34. Rural life in the eleventh century. July to December {From Cott. MS. Julius A. vi.) 35. Plan and section of a burh of the eleventh century at Laughton-en le-Morthen, Yorks ...... {From G. T. Clark's ' Mediaeval Military Architecture ') 37. Glass tumbler ....... 38. Drinking-glass ...... 39. Comb and case of Scandinavian type found at York {Fro7n the origitials in the B^'itish Miiseuvi) 40. Martyrdom of St. Edmund by the Danes {From a drawing belonging to the Society of Antiquaries) 41. First Great Seal of Eadward the Confessor (obverse) {Fro7n an 07'iginal i77tpressio7i) 42. Hunting. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) {Reduced from ' Vetusta Monumenta,' vol. vi.) 43. Tower in the earlier style, church at Earl's Barton . 44. Tower in the earlier style, St. Benet's church, Cambridge . {Fro77i Rick77ians 'Gothic Architecture,' 6th edition, by J. H. Parker) 45. Building a church in the later style .... {Fro77i a drawiyig belo7tging to the Society of Afttig7iaries) 46. Normans feasting; with Odo, bishop of Bayeux, saying grace (From the Bayeux Tapestry) .... 47. Harold swearing upon the relics. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) 48. A Norman ship. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) 49. Norman soldiers mounted. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) 50. Group of archers on foot. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) 51. Men fighting with axes. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) 52. Death of Harold. (From the Bayeux Tapestry) {Reduced fro7n ' Vetusta Monumenta,' vol. vi.) 53. Coronation of a king, tejtip. William the Conqueror {From a draivittg belofiging to the Society of Antiovaries) 54. Silver penny of William the Conqueror, struck at Romney . {From an origi^ial specime7i) PAGE 35 51 S3 53 56 57 59 60 61 66 70 71 74 76 76 n 82 86 87 91 91 92 93 94 95 95 96 97 98 99 lOI ILL USTRA TIONS xliii FIG. 55. East end of Darenth church, Kent . {From Rickmans ' Gothic Architecture,' 6th*edition,*by J. H Parker) 56. Part of the nave of St. Alban's abbey church {From a photograph by Valentine &> Sons, Dundee) ' 57. Facsimile of a part of Domesday Book relating to Berkshire {From the original MS. in the Public Record Office) 58. Henry I. and his queen Matilda {From Mollis' s ' Monumental Effigies ') ' * 59. Seal of Milo of Gloucester, showing mounted armed figure in the reign of Henry I. . {From an original impression) 60. Monument of Roger, bishop of Salisbury, died 1139 {Fro7n Stothard's * Monumental Effigies ') 61. Porchester church, Hampshire, built about 1135 , {From Rickmans ' Gothic Architecture,' 7th edition, by J. H. Parker) 62. Part of the nave of Durham cathedral, built about 1130 {From Scott's ' Mediaeval Architecture,' London, J. Murray) 63. Keep of Rochester castle, built between 1126 and 1139 {Fro7ti a photograph by Poulton &^ Sons, Lee) 64. Keep of Castle Rising, built about 1140-1150 {From a photograph) 65. Tower of Castor church, Northamptonshire, built about 1145 {From Brittons ' Architectural Antiquities ') 66. Effigies of Heniy H. and queen Eleanor {From Stothard's ' Monumental Effigies ') 67. Ecclesiastical costume in the twelfth century {From Cott. MS. Nero C. iv. f. 37) 68. A bishop ordaining a priest . 69. Small ship of the latter part of the twelfth century . {Frofu ' Harley Roll,' Y. 6) 70. Part of the choir of Canterbury cathedral, in building 1175-1184 {From Scott's 'Mediaeval Architecture,' London, J. Murray) 71. Mitre of Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury, preserved at Sens {Frofn Shaw's ' Dresses and Decorations ') 72. Military and civil costume of the latter part of the twelfth century {From ' Harley Roll,' Y. 6) 73. Royal arms of England from Richard I. to Edward IIL {Fro7n the wall arcade, south aisle o/nave, Westminster Abbey) 74. The Galilee or Lady chapel, Durham cathedral, built by bishop Hugh of Puiset, between 1 180 and 1 197 {From Scott's ' Mediaeval Architecture,' London, J. Murray) 75. Effigy of a knight in the Temple church, London, showing armour of the end of the twelfth century .... {From Mollis' s ' Monumental Effigies ') 76. Effigies of Richard L and queen Berengaria {From Stothard's ' Monumental Effigies') 77. Part of the choir of Ripon cathedral, built during the last quarter of the twelfth century ...... {From Scott's ' Mediaeval Architecture,' London, J. Murray) 78. Lay costumes in the twelfth century . 79. Costume of shepherds in the twelith century {From Cott. MS. Nero C. iv. ff. 11 and 16) 80. Hall of Oakham castle, Rutland, built about 1185 . {From Mudson Turner's * Domestic Architecture ') PAGE 107 109 112 123 125 127 128 130 132 133 136 142 144 146 153 159 160 162 164 166 168 168 170 xhv ILLUSTRATIONS 8i. Norman house at Lincoln, called the Jews' House . . • 171 {From a photograph by Carl Norman^ Tu7ibridge Wells) 82. Effigies of king John and queen Isabella .... ^75 {From Stothard's ' Monumental Effigies ') 83. Effigy of bishop Marshall of Exeter, died 1206 . . • ^77 {From Murray's ' Handbook to the Southern Cathedrals ') 84. Parsonage house of early thirteenth-century date at West Dean, Sussex ....... 179 {From Hudson Turne7-s * Domestic Architecture ') 85. Effigy of a knight in the Temple church, London, showing armour worn between iigo and 1225 . . . . ■ 182 {From Stothard's ' Monumental Effigies ') 86. Silver penny of John, struck at DubHn .... 184 {From an original example) 87. Effigy of Henry III. (From his tomb at Westminster) . . 186 88. Effigy of William Longesp^e, earl of Salisbury, died 1227, from his tomb at Salisbury, showing armour worn from about 1225 to 1250 . 187 {From Stothard's ' Monumental Effigies ') 89. Effigy of Simon, bishop of Exeter, died 1223 . . . 188 {From Murray's ' Handbook to the Southern Cathedrals ') 90. Beverley Minster, Yorkshire, the south transept ; built about 1220- 1230 ......... 189 {From Britton's ' Architectural Antiquities ') 91. Longthorpe manor-house, Northamptonshire, built about 1235 . 192 {From Hudson Turner's ' Dome stic Architecture ') 92. A ship in the reign of Henry III. ..... 193 93. A bed in the reign of Henry III. ..... 196 {From Cott. MS. Nero D. i. flf. 21 and 22 b) 94. Barn of thirteenth-century date at Raunds, Northamptonshire . 197 {From Hudso7i Tur7ie7's ' Domestic Architecture ') 95. A fight between armed and mounted knights of the time of Henry III. ......... 201 {From Cott. MS. Nero D. i. f. 4) 96. Seal of Robert Fitzwalter, showing a mounted knight in complete mail armour ; date about 1265 ..... 202 {From a7i original i77tpression) 97. Effigy of a knight at Gosperton, showing armour worn from about 1250 to 1300 ; date about 1270 ..... 203 {Fro77t Stothard's * Monumental Effigies ') 98. Building operations in the reign of Henry III., with the king giving directions to the architect . .... {F7-07n Cott. MS. Nero D. i. f 23 ^) 99. East end of Westminster abbey church ; begun by Henry III. in 124s ••-...... {Fro7n a photograph) 100. Nave of Salisbury cathedral church, looking west ; date, between 1240 and 1250 . . . . . . .206 {Frotn aphotog7-aph by \'alc7iti7ie ^ So7ts, D7indee) loi. A king and labourers in the reign of Henry III. . 007 {From Cott. MS. Nero D. i. f. -zx b) ' ' ' 102. Great Seal of Edward I. (slightly reduced) . . . 20Q {F7-om rt« origi7ial i7>ipressio7i) ' 204 205 103. Group of armed knights and a king in ordinary dress ; date, teTn-b Edward I. . . . . . ^ , {Frotn Arundel MS. 83, f. 132) 211 ILLUSTRATIONS xlv FIG. PAGE 104. Nave of Lichfield cathedral church, looking east ; built about 1280 . 213 {From a photograph by Valentine &^ Sons, Dundee) 105. Effigy of Eleanor of Castile, queen of Edward I. , in Westminster abbey . . . . , . . . 215 {From Stothard's * Monumental Effigies ') 106. Cross erected near Northampton by Edward I. in memory of queen Eleanor ........ 217 {From a photograpli} 107. Sir John d'Abernoun, died 1277, from his brass at Stoke Dabernon ; showing armour worn from about 1250 to 1300 . . . 219 {From Wallers ' Monumental Brasses') 108. Edward II. from his monument in Gloucester cathedral , . 225 {Frovi Stothard's ' Monumental Effigies ') 109. Lincoln cathedral, the central tower ; built about 1310 . . 227 {From Brittons 'Architectural Antiquities') iio. Sir John de Creke, from his brass atWestley Waterless, Cambridge- shire ; showing armour worn between 1300 and 1335 or 1340 ; date, about 1325 . . . . . . . 229 {From Waller's ' Monumental Brasses ') 111. Howden chuich Yorkshire, the west front .... 230 {From Rickman's ' Gothic Architecture,' 7th edition, by J. H. Parker) 112. Effigies of Edward III. and queen Philippa, from their tombs in Westminster abbey . . • . . . . , . 233 {From Blores ' Monumental Remains ') 113. A knight — Sir Geoffrey Luttrell, who died 1345 — receiving his helm and pennon from his wife ; another lady holds his shield . . 236 {From, the Luttrell Psalter, ' Vetusta Monumenta ') 114. William of Hatfield, second son of Edward III., from his tomb in York Minster ........ 237 {From Stoihards ' Monumental Effigies ') 115. York Minster, the nave, looking west .... 238 {From a photograph py Valentine &= Sons, Dundee) 116. Royal arms of Edward III., from his tomb .... 239 {From, a photograph) 117. Shooting at the butts with the long bow .... 241 118. Contemporary view of a fourteenth-century walled town . . 243 {From the Luttrell Psalter, ' Vetusta Monumenta ') 119. Gloucester cathedral church, the choir, looking east . . . 244 {From a photograph by Valentine <5t^ Sons, Dundee) 120. The lord's upper chamber or solar at Sutton Courtenay manor-house date, about 1350 ....... 245 121. Interior of the hall at Penshurst, Kent ; built about 1340 . . 246 122. A small house or cottage at Meare, Somerset ; built about 1350 , 247 123. Norborough Hall, Northamptonshire ; built about 1350 . . 247 {From Hudson Tiirners ' Domestic Architecture ') 124. Ploughing - . . . • . . ■ 248 125. Harrowing ; and a boy slinging stones at the birds . . 248 126. Breaking the clods with mallets ..... 249 127. Cutting weeds ....... 249 128. Reaping ........ 249 129. Stacking corn ........ 250 130. Threshing corn with a flail ...... 250 {From the Luttrell Psalter, 'YctustSL Monumenta.') xlvi ILLUSTRATIONS FIG. PAGE 131. West front of Edington church, Wilts ; built about 1360 {From Ricknian's ' Gothic Architecture,' 7th edition, by J. H. Parker) 132. Gold noble of Edward III. ...... 255 (Frovi an original example) 133. Effigy of Edward the Black Prince ; from his tomb at Canterbury . 256 {From Stothards ' Monumental Effigies ') 134. William of Wykeham, bishop of Winchester, 1367-1404 ; from his tomb at Winchester ...... 260 (From Murray's ' Handbook to the Southern Cathedrals ') 135. Tomb of Edward III. in Westminster abbey . 263 {Frofn Blorcs ' Monumental Remains ') 136. Figures of Edward the Black Prince and Lionel duke of Clarence ; from the tomb of Edward III. . . . . . 264 {From Mollis s ' Monumental Effigies ') 137. Richard II. and his first queen, Anne of Bohemia ; from their tomb in Westminster abbey .... {From Mollis s ' Monumental Effigies ') 138. Portrait of Geoffrey Chaucer .... {From Harl. MS. 4866) 139. A gentleman riding out with his hawk 140. Carrying corn, a cart going uphill 141. State carriage of the fourteenth century 142. Bear-baiting ...... {From tlie Luttrell Psalter, ' Vetusta Monumenta ') 143. West end of the nave of Winchester cathedral church {F7'om a photograph by I 'alcjitine &= Sons, Dundee) 144. Meeting of Henry of Lancaster and Richard II. at Fhnt 145. Henry of Lancaster claiming the throne {From Harl. MS. 13 19) 146. Effigy of a knight at Clehonger, showing development of plate armour ; date about 1400 ...... 287 {From Mollis s ' Monumental Effigies ') 147. Henry IV. and his queen Joan of Navarre ; from their tomb in Canterbury cathedral church • • . . . 200 {From Stothards ' Monumental Effigies ') 148. Royal arms as borne from about 1408 to 1603 . . . 201 {From a fifteenth-cc7itury seal) ' ' 149. Thomas Cranley, archbishop of Dublin ; from his brass at New College, Oxford, showing the archiepiscopal costume {From IVallers ' Monumental Brasses') 150. The Battle of Shrewsbury . . . _ 151. Fight in the lists with poleaxes {Frotn Cott. MS. Julius E. iv. fF. 4 and 7) 267 270 271 272 273 27s 276 284 285 292 294 297 298 300 152. Costume of a judge about 1400 ; from a brass at Deerhurst {From IVallers ' Monumental Brasses ') 153. Henry V. •••... {From an original portrait belonging to the Society of Antiquaries) 154. Effigy of William Phelip, lord Bardolph ; from his tomb at Den nmgton, Suffolk . . . , {Ff'om Stothards ' Monumental Effigies ') ' ' ' ' 3°*^ 155. Marriage of Henry V. and Catherine of France {FroTH Cott. MS, Julius E. iv. f. 22) ' * " 30S 156. Henry VI. . . . {From an original Mdure in the National Portrait Gallery) ' ' ^°^ ILLUSTRATIONS xlvii FIG. I'AGE 3" 157. Fotheringay church, Northamptonshire ; begun in 1434 (^Frotn a photograph by G. A. Nichols, Staiujord) 158 and 159. Front and back views of the gilt-lattea effigy of Richard Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, died 1439; from his tomb at War- wick ....... 314, 315 {From Stothards ' Monumental Effigies ') 160. Tattershall castle, Lincolnshire ; built between 1433 and 1455 {From a photograph by G. A. Nichols, Stamford) 161. Part of Winfield manor-house, Derbyshire ; built about 1440 {From a photograph by R. Kecnc, Derby) 162. The Divinity School, Oxford ; built between 1445 and 1454 {From aphotog^-aph by VV. H. PV heeler, Oxford) 163. A sea-fight ....... {From Cott. MS. Julius E. iv. f. 18 b) 164. Effigy of Sir Robert Harcourt, K.G., showing armour worn from about 1445 to 1480 ..... {From atothards ' Monumental Effigies ') 165. Edward IV. ....... {From an original portrait belonging to the Society of Antiquaries) 166. A fifteenth-century ship {From Harl. MS. 2278, f. 16) 167. Large ship and boat of the fifteenth century {Frotn Cott. MS. Julius E. iv. f. 5) 168. Richard III. ....... {From an original portrait belonging to the Society of Antiquaries) 169. Henry VII. ....... 170. Elizabeth of York, queen of Henry VII. . {From original pictures in the National Portrait Gallery) 171. Tudor Rose ; from the chapel of Henry VII., Westminster 172. Tower of St. Mary's church, Taunton ; built about 1500 {From Brittoiis * Architectural Antiquities ') 173. King's College Chapel, Cambridge ; interior, looking east . {From a photograph by Valentine &^ Softs, Dundee) 174. flenry VIII. ...•••• {From a painting by Holbein about 1536, belonging to Earl Spencer) 175. Cardinal Wolsey ....•• {From an original picture belonging to the Hon. Sir Spencer Ponsonby Fane, IT.C.B.) 176. The embarkation of Henry VIII. from Dover, 1520 ... {From t/te Society of Antiquaries' engraving of the original picture at Hampton Court) 177. Silver-gilt cup and cover, made at London in 1523 ; at Barber Surgeons' Hall, London . . • • {From Crippss * College and Corporation Plate ') 178. Part of Hampton Court ; built by Cardinal Wolsey ; finished in 1526 373 {From a photograph) 179. Portrait of William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury. 1503-1532. showing the ordinary episcopal dress, with the mitre and archi- episcopal cross - • • • ' • " r c ^ {From a painting by Holbein, belonging to Viscount Diilon, F.S.A., dated 15^7) 180. Tower of Fountains Abbey chutch ; built by Abbot Huby, 1494- 1526 ,...••••• {From a photograph by Valentine d^ Sons, Dundee) 181. Catharine of Aragon ...•••• {From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery) 316 318 325 326 330 333 339 341 344 345 346 353 355 362 365 370 371 376 378 380 xlviii ILL USTRA TIONS FIG. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187, 188. 189. 190, 192. 193- 194. 195- 196, 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 384 387 393 395 403 405 406 PAGE The gatehouse of Coughton Court, Warwickshire ; built about 1530 381 {From Nivens ' Illustrations of Old Warwickshire Houses ') Hallof Christchurch, Oxford; built by Cardinal Wolsey ; finished in 1529 ......•• {JFroni a photograph by IF. H. Wheeler, Oxford) Sir Thomas More, wearing the collar of SS. .... {FrofH an original portrait painted by Holbein in 1527, belongifig to Edivard Hitth, Esq.) John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, 1504-1535 {Frotn a drawing by Holbein in the Royal Library, Windsor Castle) Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, brother of Jane Seymour, after- wards Duke of Somerset, known as ' the Protector,' at the age of 28, 1507-1552 ....... {FrojH a painting at Sudeley Castle) Henry VIH. ........ {Front a pAintifig by Holbein, belonging to the Earl 0/ Warwick) Angel of Henry VIH., 1543 ...... {From an original example) Part of the encampment at Marquison, 1544, showing military equipment in the time of Henry VHI. .... 191. Part of the siege of Boulogne by Henry VHI., 1544, showing military operations ...... 407, 40S {From the Society of Antiquaries' engravings, by Vertite, of the now destroyed paint itigs fomnerly at Cowdray Hotise, Stcssex) Armour as worn in the reign of Henry VHI. ; from the brass of John Lymsey, 1545, in Hackney chm-ch .... Margaret, wife of John Lymsey ; from her brass in Hackney church showing the costume of a lady circa 1545 , {F?-om Haities's ' Manual of Monumental Brasses ') Thomas Howard, third Duke of Norfolk, 1473 (?)-i554 {From a painting by Holbeiti at Windsor Castle) Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1533-1556 . {From a painting by Holbein dated 1547, at Jesus College, Cambridge) Nicholas Ridley, Bishop of Lpndon, 1550-1553 {From the National Portrait Gallery) King Edward VI. . .. .... {From a picture belojiging to H. Hncks Gibbs^ Esq.) Queen Mary Tudor ....... {From a painting by Lncas de Heej-e, dated 1554, belofiging to the Society of Antiq7caries) Hugh Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, 1535-1539, burnt 1555 {From the National Portrait Gallery) A milled half-sovereign of Elizabeth, 1562-1568 {From an origitial example) Silver-gilt standing cup made in London in 1569-70, and given to Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, by Archbishop Parker {From Crippss ' College and Corporation Plate ') Sir Francis Drake in his forty-third year {From the engraving by Elstrackc) Armour as worn during the reign of Elizabeth ; from the brass of Francis Clopion, 1577, at Long Melford, Suffolk . {From Haines's ' Manual of Monumental Brasses ') Hall of Burghley House, Northamptonshire, built about 1580 {From Drummonds ' Histories of Noble British Families ') Sir Martin Frobisher, died 1594 .... {From a picture belonging to the Earl of Carlisle) 409 409 410 414 417 419 422 425 435 440 448 451 455 459 ILLUSTRATIONS xlix ^'IG. PAGE 206. The Spanish Armada. Fight between the English and Spanish fleets off the Isle of Wight, July 25, 1588 .... 461 {From Pine's engravings of the tapestry formerly in the House of Lords) zcyj. Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618), and his eldest son Walter at the age of eight ........ 463 {From a picture dated 1602, belonging to Sir y. F. Lennard, Bart.) 208. A mounted soldier at the end of the sixteenth century , . 465 {From a broadside printed in 1596, in the Society of Antiquaries' collection) 209. Wollaton Hall, Nottinghamshire ; built by Thorpe for Sir Francis Willoughby, about 1580-1588 ..... 466 {From a photograph by R. KeenCy Derby) 210. Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire ; built by Ehzabeth, Countessof Shrews- bury, about 1597 . . . . . . . 467 {From a photograph by R. Kecnc, Derby) 211. E^shaped house at Beaudesert, Staffordshire ; built by Thomas, Lord Paget, about 1601 ....... 469 {From a photograph by R. Kecnc, Derby) 212. Ingestre Hall, Staffordshire ; built about 1601 . . . 471 {From a photograph by R. Keene^ Derby) 213. Coaches in the reign of Elizabeth ..... 473 {From ' Archaeologia,' vol. xx. pi. xvlii.) 214. William Shakspere ....... 474 {From the bust on his tomb at Strat/ord-oii-Avon) 215. Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex. K.G., 1567-1601 . . 476 {From apaintitig by Van Somcr^ dated 1 599, belonging to theEarl of Essex) 216. Queen Elizabeth, 1558-1603 . . . . _ . . 477 {From a painting belongings to the University of Cambridge) 217. William Cecil, Lord Burghlcy, K.G., 1520-1591 . . -479 {From a painting in the Bodleian Library, Oxford) 218. Royal arms borne by James L and succeeding Stuart sovereigns . 482 {From BoutelVs ' English Heraldry ') 219. North-west view of Hatfield House, Herts ; built for Robert Cecil, first Earl of Salisbury, between 1605 and 161 1 . . .485 {From a photograph, by Valentine df So7is, Dundee) 320. Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk ..... 487 {Fro}n a painting belonging to T. A. Hope, Esq.) •22.\. King James L . . . • • ' , \r • '1 ^'^^ {From a painting by P. Van Soiner, dated 1621, in the JSationaL Portrait Gallery) i-z-z. Civil costume, about 1620 . . • ' ^ , o . ., V ^^^ {From a contemporary broadside tn the collection of the Society of Antiquaries) 223. The banqueting-hall of the Palace of Whitehall (from the north- east) ; built from the designs of Inigo Jones, 1619-1621 . . 493 {From a photograph) 224. Francis Bacon, Viscount St. Alban, Lord Chancellor . • 495 {From a painting by P. Van Somer in the National Portrait Gallery) 225. Costume of a lawyer . . • ,;,.', ^/ r ,. ^> "^^^ {From a broadside dated 1623, in the collection of the Society of A ntiquarics) 226. The Upper House of Convocation . - • • -498 227. The Lower House of Convocation . • • • . • 499 {From a broadside dated 1623, in the collection of the Society 0/ Antiquaries) C c. 1 ILLUSTRATIONS FIG. PAGE 228. King Charles I. ...... . 5^4 {Frotn a painting by Van Dyck) 229. Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles L . . . • 5^5 {From a painting by Van Dyck) 230. Tents and military equipment in the early part of the reign of Charles I. . . . . . - • • 5<^ {Front the 7nonuinent of Sir Charles Mofitague {died iit 1625), in the church of Barkings Essex) 231. George Villiers, first duke of Buckingham, 1592-1628 . . 509 {From the painting by Geraf'd Honthorst in the National Portrait Gallery) 232. Sir Edward and Lady Filmer ; from their brass at East Sutton, Kent, showing armour and dress worn about 1630. . . 515 {From Wallers * Monumental Brasses ') 233. Archbishop Laud . . . . . . -5^7 {From a copy in the National Portrait Gallery by Hetiry Stone, from the Van Dyck at Lambeth) 234. Silver-gilt tankard made at London in 1634-5 ; now belonging to the Corporation of Bristol . . . . . -518 {From Crippss ' College and Corporation Plate ') 235. The ' Sovereign of the Seas, ' built for the Royal Navy in 1637 . 522 {From a contemporary engraving by yohn Payne) 236. Soldier armed with a pike ...... 527 237. Soldier with musket and crutch ..... 527 {From a broadside printed about 1630, in the collection of the Society of A ntiq naries) 238-243. Ordinary civil costume, temp. Charles I., viz. : — A gentleman and a gentlewoman . . . . . 550 A citizen and a citizen's wife ..... 551 A countryman and a countrywoman .... 552 {From Speed's map of ' The Kingdom of England,' 1646) 244. View of the west side of the Banqueting-House, Whitehall, dated 1713, showing the window through which Charles L is said to have passed to the scafifold ••.... 558 {From an engraving by Terasso?i) 245. Execution of King Charles I. , January 30, 1649 {From a broadside in the collection of the late Richard Fisher Esq. F.S.A.) 246. A coach in the middle of the seventeenth century {From an engraving by John Dunstall) 247. Oliver Cromwell ...... {From the padtiting by Savniel Cooper, at Sidney Sttssex College, Cam bridge) 248. Charles II {From the portrait by Sir Peter Lely in Christ's Hospital, London) 249. Edward Hyde, first Earl of Clarendon, 1608-1674 • {From an engraving by Loggait) 250. A mounted nobleman and his squire {From Ogilbys ' Coronation Procession of Charles II.') 251. Dress of the Horseguards at the Restoration . {From Ogilbys ' Coronation Procession of Charles II. ) 252. Yeoman of the Guard ...... {Fro7n Ogilby's ' Coronation Procession of Charles II.'*) 253. Shipping in the Thames, circa 1660 .... {From Prickes ' South Prospect of London ') 559 564 567 579 S81 582 583 583 584 ILL US TRA TIONS a FIG. pAQg 254. Old St. Paul's, from the east, showing its condition just before the Great Fire . . . . . . . . 59r {From an engraving by Hollar) 255- John Milton in 1669 . . . . . . -597 {From the engraving by Faithorne) 256. Temple Bai-, London, built by Sir Christopher Wren in 1670 . 601 {From a photograpli) 257. Anthony Ashley-Cooper, first Earl of Shaftesbury, 1621-1683 . 604 {Front the painting by John Grcenhillin the National Portrait Gallery) 258. Ordinary dress of gentlemen in 1675 . . . . .611 {From Loggans 'Oxonia Illustrata ') 259. Cup presented, 1676, by King Charles II. to the Barber Surgeons' Company ........ 612 {Front Crippss ' College and Corporation Plate ' ) 260. Steeple of the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, London, built by Sir Christopher Wren between 167 1 and 1680 .... 614 {From a photograph) 261. Dress of ladies of quality ...... 628 {From Sandford's 'Coronation Procession of James II.') 262. Ordinary attire of women of the lower classes . . 628 {From. Sand/ord's ' Coronation Procession of Jamee II.') 263. Coach of the latter half of the seventeenth century . . . 629 {From Loggans * Oxonia Illustrata ') 264. Waggon of the second half of the seventeenth century . . 629 {From Loggans * Oxonia Illustrata ') 265. Reaping and harvesting in the second half of the seventeenth cen- tury ......... 630 {From Loggans ' Cantabrigia Illustrata ') 266. Costume of a gentleman ...... 632 {From Sandfords ' Coronation Procession of James II.') 267. James II. . . ...... 635 {From the painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller in 1684-5 in the National Portrait Gallery) 268. Yeomen of the Guard . . . . • . • 636 {From Sand/ord's ' Coronation Procession of James II.') 269. Dress of a bishop in the second half of the seventeenth century . 642 {From Sand/ord's ' Coronation Procession of James II. ) 270. William III. ....-.•• 650 271. Mary II. . . • • _ • • • • ^S^ {From engravings a/ter portraits by % H. Brandon) •2.^2.. Royal arms as borne by William III. . . • • 652 273. I, Bayonet as made in 1686 . . • ■ • . • ^53 2, Bayonet of the time of William and Mary . . . 653 {From ' Archaeologia,' vol. xxxviii.) • 274. Part of Greenwich Hospital. Built after the design of Sir Christo- pher Wren . . • • • • • • ""^ {From a photograph by Valentine &r> Sons, Dundee) 275. Front of Hampton Court Palace ; built by Sir Christopher Wren for William III. .....•• 665 {From a photograph) 276. Part of Hampton Court ; built for William III. by Sir Christopher Wren ...••••• {From a photograph by Valentine &* Sons, Dundee) 277. West front of St. Paul's Cathedral Church ; built by Sir Christopher Wren ......•• {From a photograph by Valentine &^ Sons, Dundee) c 2 666 668 lii ILL US TRA TIONS FIG. PAGE 278. Queen Anne ; from a portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller . ■ 677 {From aft engraving after Sir Godfrey Kneller) 279. The first Eddystone Lighthouse, erected in 1697 ; destroyed in 1703 . 679 {From an engraving by Sturt) 280. Steeple of St. Bride's, Fleet Street, London ; built by Sir Christopher Wren, 1701-1703 ....... 681 {Ff-oin an original engraving) 281. Part of Blenheim ; built by Vanbrugh in 1704 . . . 683 {From a photograj>h by Valentine &" Sons, Dundee) 282. Royal arms, as borne by Anne ..... 685 283. Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough ; from a portrait by Sir G. Kneller, belonging to Earl Spencer, K.G. . . . . . 688 284. John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough ; from a portrait belonging to Earl Spencer, K. G. . . . . . . . 689 {Both from. Dibdins ' iEdes Althorpianas') 285. Jonathan Swift, D.D. , Dean of St. Patrick's, Dublin . 694 {From a painting by C. fenias in the National Portrait Gallery) 286. Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke ; from an engraving after a picture by Sir Godfrey Kneller ..... 698 {From Lodge s ' British Portraits') 287. The Choir of S^. Paul's Cathedral Church, looking west, as finished by Sir Christopher Wren ...... 700 {From, an engraving by Trez'it, about 17 10) 288. George L ...... . {From an engraving by Vertue) 289. A coach of the early part of the eighteenth century . {From an engraving by Kip) 290. An early form of steam-pump for mines {From an engraving dated 1717) 291. Group showing costumes and sedan-chair about 1720 292. View of the Game of Pall-Mall .... {Both from Kip's ' Prospect of the City of London, Westminster, and St. James's Park ') 293. The interior of St. Marti n's-in-the-Fields, London ; built by James Gibbs, 1 722-1726 ...... {From a contemporary engraving) 294. Ploughing with oxen in the eighteenth century 295. Mowing grass in the eighteenth century {Bothf-om Hearnes ' Ectypa Varia,' 1737) 296. Church of St. Mary Woolnoth, London ; finished in 1727 from the designs of Nicholas Hawksraoor .... {From a photograph) 297. Sir Robert Walpole ...... {From the picture by Van Loo in the National Portrait Gallery) 298. Vessels unloading at the Custom House, at the beginning of the eighteenth century ...... {From an original engravittg) 299. George IL ...... , {From the portrait by Thomas Hudson in the Natiofial Portrait Gallery') 300. Coach built for William Herrick, of Beaumanor, in 1740 {From, a lithograph) 301. A sitting in the House of Commons in 1741-42 {From an engraving by Pine) •^02. Election Scenes — The Canvass 703 706 708 711 712 715 716 717 719 721 723 727 729 ILL USTRA TIONS liii FIG. PAGE 303. Election Scenes — The Poll .... 304. Election Scenes — The Chairing of the Member 305. Election Scenes — The Election Dinner (From engravitigs after the pictures by Hogarth) 306. Grenadier of the First Regiment of Footguards, 1745 307. Uniform of the Footguards, 1745 {Both from Sir S. Scott's * History of ihe British Army ') 308 The March to Finchley, 1745 {Frbm the engraving by Luke Sullivan after the painting by Hogarth) 309. The Right Hon. William Pitt, Paymaster of the Forces, afterwards Earl of Chatham ....... (jFroyn the mezzotint by Houston after a painting by Hoare) 310. A view of Cape Diamond, Plains of Abraham, and part of the town of Quebec and the river St. Lawrence ; drawn by Lieutenant Fisher ....... (From an engraving in the British Museunt) 311. Wolfe ........ {From the painting by Schaak in the National Portrait Gallery) 312. A naval engagement ; defeat of the French off Cape Lagos, August 1759 ........ {From a picture by R. Paton) 313. Officer with fusil and gorget ..... {From Sir S. Scott's * History of the British Army *) 314. Uniform of Militia, 1759 ..... {From Raikess ' First Regiment of Militia') 315. Uniform of a Light Dragoon, about 1760 {From Grose's ' Military Antiquities ') 316. The third Eddystone Lighthouse ; built by Smeaton in 1759 {From ' European Magazine,' vol. xix.) 317. Silver coifee-pot belonging to the Salters' Company, 1764 . {From Crippss ' College and Corporation Plate ') 318. Edmund Burke . • ■ ' , „ ' • -^ ,7* s {From a painting by Reynolds in the National Portrait Uallery) 319. George I IL in 1767 . . • • • ."^ ,, x {From a painting by A llan R amsay in the National Portrait Gallery) 320. Lord North . . • • ' , 7-,' x ' {From the engraving by Burke after a painting by Dance) 321. Distribution of His Majesty's Maundy {From the engraving by Basire, 1773) 322. Part of Somerset House ; built by Sir William Chambers, 1776-80 {From a photograph) 323. Charles James Fox as a young man . . . {From Watsons mezzotint after a painting by Reynolds) 324. The Gordon Riots, 1780 . . . • ^ • ^, ^ {From an engraving by Heath after the picture by IVheatley) 325. Newgate Prison ; rebuilt in 1782 after the Gordon Riot I^From a photograph) 326. The Siege of Gibraltar, 1781 -„ • {Fro?n ' European Magazine,' vol. ii.) 327. Costumes of persons of quality, about 1783 . {Fro7n ' European Magazine,' vol. v.) 328. Costumes of gentlefolk, about 1784 . {From ' European Magazine,' vol. v.) 329. Society at Vauxhall . . • : ^ ' {From an aquatint after T. Rowlandson, 1785) 734 735 736 738 738 741 742 754 755 757 758 759 760 763 769 772 775 778 781 785 790 791 793 797 800 807 809 liv ILLUSTRATIONS FIG. PAGE 330. Regulation musket, 1786, popularly known as Brown Bess . .811 {From Sir S. Scott's ' History of the British Army ') 331. Pitt speaking in the House of Commons .... 812 {From HickeVs painting in the National Portrait Gallery) 332. Lock on a Canal . . . . . . . 814 {From Elmess ' Metropolitan Improvements,' 1827) 333. James Brindley ....... 815 {From the po7-trait by Parsons engraved in Taylor s ' National Biography ') 334. Arkwright . . . . . . . , 816 {From a painting by Upright of Derby in the National Portrait Gallery) 335. Crompton . . . . . . . .817 {From a painting by Allinghafu engraved in Taylors 'National Biography ') 336. Uniform of sailors about 1790 ..... 829 {From a caricature by Rowlandson, and a broadside of 1790) 337. Head-dress of a lady (Mrs. Abington) about 1778 . . . 839 {From ' European Magazine,' vol. xxxiii.) 338. The Union Jack in use since 1801 ..... 842 {From BoutelVs ' English Heraldry ') 339. William Pitt . . . . . . . . 843 {Fro77t the bust by Nollekens in tJie National Portrait Gallery) 340. Royal arms as borne from 1714 to 1801 .... 844 341. Royal arms as borne from 1801 to 1816 .... 844 342. Royal arms as borne from 1816 to 1837 .... 844 343. Greathead's lifeboat, 1803 ...... 845 {From ' European Magazine,' vol. xliii.) 344. The Old East India House in 1803 • • . . . 846 {From ' European Magazine,' vol. xliii.) 3+5. The old Houses of Parliament and Westminster Abbey, 1803 . 847 {FroDi a contemporary engraving) 346. The King in the House of Lords, 1804 .... 8i;o {From ' Modern London ') 347. Napoleon's medal struck to commemorate the invasion of England 851 {From a cast in the British Museum) 348. Hyde Park on a Sunday, 1804 • • . . , 852 {From ' Modern London ') 349. Lord Nelson . . . . . . , . 8c;'5 {From the picture by L. F. Abbott in the National Portrait Gallery) 350. Fox . . . . . . . , . 8t:6 {From his bust by Nollekens in the National Portrait Gallery) 351. The taking of Curasao in 1807 .... 861 {From an engraving of 1809) 352. The Court of King's Bench in 18 10 . . . . 355 {From Pennant's ' Some Account of London ') 353. Grenadier in the time of the Peninsular War . . 3„q {From Raikess ' First Regiment of Militia ') 354. Waterloo Bridge ; opened June 18, 1817, built by Rennie . . 878 {Fy'ovi Elmes's ' Metropolitan Improvements ') ' 355. George HI. in old age ..... 00, {From C. Turner's mezzotint) 356. George IV ^ go {From an unfinished portrait by Lawrence in the National Portrait Gallery) ILL US TRA TIONS Iv ^^G* PAGE 357. Lord Byron ........ 886 {Frotn an engraving after a painting by Sanders) 358. Sir Walter Scott ....... 888 (JFrom a photograph of a painting by Colvin Smith in Scott Memorials) 359. Wordsworth at the age of 28 . . . . . , 889 {From a drawing by R. Hancock in the National Portrait Gallery) 360. Canning ; from Stewardson's portrait .... 892 {From Taylors * National Biography ') 361. Apsley House, the residence of the Duke of Wellington, in 1829 897 {From Elmess ' Metropolitan Improvements') 362. William IV. ; from a portrait by Dawe .... 899 {From Taylors ' National Portrait Gallery ') 363. The Duke of Wellington ...... 900 {From a bust by J, Francis in the National Portrait Gallery) 364. Earl Grey ........ 901 365. Viscount Melbourne ....... 902 366. Lord Palmerston ....... 904 {All from, Hayters picture of ' The Meeting of the First Reformed Parliament^ Feb. 5, 1833,' in the National Portrait Gallery) ojSj. An early steamboat ....... 906 {From, the ' Instructor ' of 1833) 368. Engine employed at the Killingworth Colliery, familiarly known as ' Puffing Billy '....... 907 {From a photograph by Valentine S^ Sons, Dundee) 369. No. I Engine of the Stockton and Darlington Railway . . 907 {From a photograph by Valentine &^ Sotts, Dundee, of the original at Gateshead) 370. St. Luke's, Chelsea, designed by Savage, and built in 1824 . 908 {From Elmess ' Metropolitan Improvements ') 371. Banner of the Royal arms as borne since 1S37 {From BoutelVs ' English Heraldry ') 372. Queen Victoria : after a portrait by Lane {From the engraving by Thompson) 373. Lord John Russell ..... {From a painting by Sir F. Grant) 374. The New Houses of Parliament {From a palatograph by Valentine 6^ Sons, Dundee) 375. Sir Robert Peel . .... {From the bust by Noble in the National Portrait Gallery) 376. The Britannia Tubular Railway Bridge, opened in 1850 {From a photograph by Valentine 6^ Sons, Dundee) 377. St. George's Hall, Liverpool, completed in 1859 {From a photograph by Valentine dr* Som, Dundee) 378. The Victoria Cross, instituted in 1856 {From BoutelVs ' English Heraldry ') 914 917 919 932 937 942 947 GENEALOGICAL TABLES I ENGLISH KINGS FROM ECGBERHT TO HENRY I. ECGBERHT 802-830 iETHELWULF 839-858 I ^THELBAOJ 8s8-a6o ^THELBERHT 860-866 iETHELRED 866-871 Kaidwasd tbe£Mer Q01-C124 iELFRED 871-goi I i^thelflaed = ^thelred, (the Lady of Ealdorman the of the Mercians) Mercians jEthelstaj: 9247-9^ Eadmund 940-946 Eadred 946-955 Eadwtg 953-^9 -^ijieldasd = Eadgar = iEIfthryth ' 959-975 EAEm'AED the Mart>T 975-979 I Eadmund Ironside 1016 Eadmund Eadward the iEtheling Richard I. Duke of Normandy Svend iElfled = iETHELRED the Unready 979-1016 Eadgar the iEtheling I iElfred the iEtheling Emma = Cnut 1016-1035 I I Harold Harthacnut 1036-1039 1039-104 2 Godwine I Eadward = Eadgyth the Confessor I 042- 1066 Harold 1066 Margaret = Malcolm Canmore Eadgyth = Henry I. (MatiMa) 1100-T135 Iviii GENEALOGICAL TABLES II GENEALOGY OF THE NORMAN DUKES AND OF THE KINGS OF ENGLAND FROM THE CONQUEST TO HENRY VI r. Hrolf 912 -927 (?) William Longsword 927 (?)-943 Richard I., the Fearless 943-996 Richard II., the Good 996-1026 Richard III. 1026-1028 Robert 1028-1035 Emnna=(r) iEthelred the Unready Eadward the Confessor Robert Duke of Normandy 1087-1106 William I. 1035-1087 King of England 1066-1087 William II. 1087-1100 Henry I. 1100-1135 Henry V. - Matilda = Geoffrey Emperor Count of Anjou Henry II. 1154-1189 Adela=SteDhen Count of Blois Stephf.n "35-1154 GENEALOGICAL TABLES lix Henry Henry II. {continued) Geoffrey Richard I. 11S9-1199 Edward I. 1272-1307 Edward II. 1307-1327 Edward III. 1327-1377 I John 1199-1216 Henry III 1216-1272 Edward the Black Prince I Richard II. I 377- I 399 Lionel John o Duke of Clarence Duke of ' Philippa = Edmund Mortimer Earl of March Roger, Earl of March Gaunt Lancaster I Henry IV. 1399-1412 Henry V. 1413-1422 Henry VI. 1422-1461 Edmund Earl of March Anne = Richard Earl of Cambridge Richard, Duke of York Edward IV. 1461-1483 Richard III. 1483-1485 I Edward V. 1483 Eliz.TLbeth= Henry VII. 1485-1509 (Descended from John of Gaunt by Catherine Swynford) Edmund Duke of York Ix GENEALOGICAL TABLES III GENEALOGY OF THE KINGS OF SCOTLAND FROM DUNCAN I. TO JAMES IV. ' Duncan I. (died 1057) Margaret = Mat.colM III sister of Canmore Edgar 1057-1093 iEtheling I I I Edgar Alexander I. David I. 1098-1107 1107-1124 1124-1153 Henry Duncan II. 1094-1095 Donald Bane 1093-1094, restored 1095-1098 Malcolm IV. 1153-1165 William the Lion 1165-1214 I David Earl of Huntingdon Alexander II. 1214-1249 I Alexander III. 1249-1285 Margaret = Eric, King of Norway Margaret (the Maid of Norway) Margaret I Devorguilla=John Balliol John Balliol 1292-1296 Edward Balliol David II. 1329-1370 I Robert II., Stewart or Stuart 1370-1390 Robert III. I 350- I 406 James I. 1406-1437 I James II. 1437-1460 James III. 1460-1488 James IV. 1488-1513 I Isabella I Robert Bruce I Robert Bruce I Robert Bruce 1306-1329 I Margaret =Walter Stewart GENEALOGICAL TABLES Ixi IV KINGS AND QUEENS OF ENGLAND (AFTER 1541 OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND) FROM HENRY VII TO ELIZABETH. Henry VII. = Elizabeth 1 485-1 509 of York Arthur = Prince of Walts Catharine = Henry VIII. = (2) Anne Boleyn = (3) Jane Seymour of Aragon 1509-1547 Mary I. 1553-1559 Elizabeth 1558-1603 Edward VL I 547-1 553 V KINGS OF SCOTLAND FROM JAMES IV. TO JAMES VI Henry VIL, king of James IV, king of Scotland 1488-1513 England Margaret = Archibald, Earl ot Angus Tames V. = Mary of Guise Margaret Douglas = Matthew Stuart jA.wc^ 3 Earl of Lennox 1513-1542 king (i) Francis II. = Mary =(2) Henry Stuart e of France 1542-1567 (Lord Darnley) James VI. 1567-1625 king of Great Britain as James I. 1633-1625 Ixii GENEALOGICAL TABLES VI KINGS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND FROM JAMES /. TO GEORGE I. James I. = Anne of Denmark 1603-1625 Henry Prince of Wales Charles I. = Henrietta 1625-1649 Charles II = Catharine (nominally) of 1649-1660 Braganza (actually) 1660-1685 Maria of France Elizabeth = Frederick V. Elector Palatine Mary=WiLLiAM II. Prince of Orange (i) Anne Hyde = J AMES II. = (2) Mary William III. Prince of Orange, king of Great Britain and Ireland 1689-1702 Mary II. 1689-1694 1685-1689 Anne 1702-1714 of Modena James (The Old Pre- tender) Charles Edward (The Young Pretender) Charles Lewis Elector Palatine Prince Rupert Sophia George I. 1714-1727 GENEALOGICAL TABLES Ixiii VII KINGS AND QUEENS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND FROM GEORGE I. TO VICTORIA George IV. 1820-1830 'Princess Charlotte George I. 1711-1727 George II. 1727-1760 Frederick William Duke of Cumberland Prince of Wales George III. 1760-1820 Frederick Duke of York William IV, 1830-1837 Edward Duke of Kent Victoria. 1837- Ixiv GENEALOGICAL TABLES VIII GENEALOGY OF THE KINGS OF FRANCE FROM HUGIT CAPET TO LOUIS XII Hugh the Great (died 956) Hugh Capet 987-996 I Robert 996-1031 I Henry I. 1031-1060 I Philip I. 1060-1108 I Louis VI. 1108-1137 I Louis VII. 1137-1180 I Philip IL 1 180-1223 , I Louis VIII. I22'?-I226 I (St.) Louis IX. 1226-1270 I Philip III. 1270-1285 I Philip IV. 1283-1314 Louis X. 1314-1316 Jeanne John (died seven days old) Philip V. 1316-1322 1 Two daughters Charles IV. 1322-1328 Isabella in. Edward II. I Edward III. Charles V. 1364-1380 I I Charles VI. 1380-1422 Charles VII. 1422-1461 Louis XI. 1461-1483 Charles VIII. 1483-1498 Louis Duke of Orleans I Charles Duke of Orleans I Louis XIL 1498-1519 I Charles of Valois Philip VL 1328-1350 John 1350-1364 Dukes 0/ Burgundy Philip I • John I Philip I Charles GENEALOGICAL TABLES Ixv IX. GENEALOGY OF THE AT/NGS OF FINANCE FROM LOUIS XII TO LOUIS XIV., SHOWING THEIR DESCENT FROM LOUIS IX. Philip IV. 1283-1314 (For descen- dants of Philip IV. see Table VIII.) Francis II. 1559-^560 (St.) Louis IX. 1226-1270 Philip III. 1270-1285 Charles of Valois Philip VI. 1328-1350 John 1350-1364 Charles V. 1364-1380 Charles VI. 1380-1422 Chaki-es VII. 1422-1461 Louis XI. 1461-1483 Charles VIII. 1483-1498 Robert of Clermont I I Louis I. Duke of Bourbon Louis Duke of Orleans Charles John Duke of Orleans Count of Angouleme Louis XII. 1498-1515 Charles Francis I. 151S-1547 Henry II. 1547-1559 Charles IX. 1560-1574 I . Francis Duke of Alengon Henry III. 1574-1589 Antony = Jeanne d'Albret, queen of Navarre Henky IV. 1589 1610 Louis XIII. 1610-1643 I Louis XIV, 1643-1715 Ixvi GENEALOGICAL TABLES X KINGS OF FRANCE FROM HENRY IV. TO LOUIS PHILIPPE Louis XllI 1610-1643 Louis XIV. I 643-1715 1. Louis the Dauphin Louis Duke of Burgundy Louis XV. T715-1774 I. Louis the Dauphin Louis XVI. 1774-' 792' Louis (imprisoned till his death in 1795 ; called Louis XVIL) Henky IV. 1589-1610 Louis XVIII. 1814-1824 Henrietta = Charles I. Maria king of England (2) Elizabeth = Philip = (i) Henrietta d. of Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine Louis Duke of Angouleme Duke of Orleans Philip Duke of Orleans, Regent Louis Duke of Orleans Louis Philippe Duke of Orleans I Charles X. 1824-1830 Charles Duke of Berri Henry Count of Chambord Philip Duke of Orleans (Egalit6) Louis Philippe king of the French 1830-1848'' I .. Louis Philippe Count of Paris XI THE BONAPARTE FAMILY Charles Buonaparte Joseph Bonaparte king of Spain I (2) Maria = Napoleon I. = (i) Josephine Lucien Louisa Emperor 1804-1814-15 in. (i) General Beauharnais I Napoleon Duke of Reichstadt (called Napoleon II.) I Eugene Viceroy of Italy I. Louis king of Holland Jerome king of West- phalia Hortense in. Louis king of Holland Napoleon III. 1852-1870 * Republic 1792-1799. nominally to 1804. ^ Republic 1848-1851, nominally to 1852. GENEALOGICAL TABLES Ixvii XII GENEALOGY OF THE KINGS OF SPAIN FROM FERDINAND AND ISABELLA TO CHARLES II. Maximilian I. Emperor Ferdinand = Isabella. king of Aragon 1479-1516 queen of Castile 1474-1504 Philip I. = Juana Archduke of Austria, king of Castile 1504-1506 Catharine=(i) Arthur, Prince of Wales (2) Henry VIII. king of England Charles I. (the Emperor Charles V.) king of Castile, 1506-1556, king of Aragon, 1516- 1556 Philip II. 1556-1598 Philip III. 1598-1621 Philip IV. 1621-1665 Charles II. 1665-1700 Ferdinand I. Emperor Ixvni GENEALOGICAL TABLES XIII KINGS OF SPAIN FROM PHILIP V. Philip V. 1700-1724 (abdicates) (resumes the crown) 1725-1746 I Luis 1724-1725 Ferdinand VI. 1746-1759 Gharles III, 1759-1788 Charles IV. 1788-1808 Ferdinand VII. 1814-1833 1 Isabella 1833-1868' Alfonso XII. 1874-1885 Alfonso XIII. 1886- XIV GENEALOGY OF THE GERMAN BRANCH OF THE HOUSE OF AUSTRIA FROM FERDINAND I. TO LEOPOLD I. (The dates given are those during which an archduke was emperor.) Ferdinand I. 15:6-1564 Rudolph II. 1576-1612 Maximilian II. 15^4-1576 I Matthias 1612-1619 Charles Duke of Styria Verdinand II. 161Q-1635 Ferdinand III. 1635-T658 Leopold I. 1658-1705 ' Provisional Government i368 Regency of Marshal Serrano iggg KingAMADEO 1870-73 Republic . 1873-74 GENEALOGICAL TABLES Ixix XV THE GERMAN BRANCH OF THE HOUSE OF AUSTRIA FROM LEOPOLD I. (The dates given are those during which an archduke was empero".) Leopold T. I 658- I 705 (2) Cunigunda = Max Emanuel = (i) Mary Sobieski Elector of Bavaria Charles VIL 1742-1745 Joseph Ferdinand Electoral Prince of Bavaria Joseph I. 1705-1711 Fiancis I. 1745-1765 Charles VI. 1711-1740 Maria Theresa died 1780 Joseph 1 1. 1765-1790 Leopold II. 1790-1792 Marie = Louis XV L Antoine tie king of France Francis II. I 792-1 806 (The Empire dissolved in 1806) Emperor of Austria 1804-1835 Ferdinand T Emperor of Austria 1835- 1843 Francis Charles Francis Joseph. E-mperor of Austria, King of Hungary &c. 1848- Ixx GENEALOGICAL TABLES XVI KINGS OF PRUSSIA AND GERMAN EMPERORS Frederick I. king of Prussia 1700-1713 Frederick William I. king of Prussia 1713-1740 Frederick II. king of Prussia I 740- I 786 Augustus William Fredekick William II. king of Prussia 1786-1797 Frederick William III. king of Prussia 1797-1840 Frederick William IV. king of Prussia 1840-1861 William I. king of Prussia 1861-1888 German Emperor i87c>-i888 Frederick III. king of Prussia and German Emperor 1888 William II. king of Prussia and German Emperor 1888- GENEALOGICAL TABLES Ixx) XVII KINGS OF ITALY Charles Albert king of Sardinia 1831-1849 Victor Emmanuel king of Sardinia I 849-1861 king of Italy 1861-1878 Humbert king of Italy 1878- XVIII THE TZARS OR EMPERORS OF RUSS/A FROM ALEXIS Alexis 1645-1676 Theodore Ivan V. 1676-1682 1682-1689 I Eudocia = Peter I. (The Great) = Catharine I. 1689-1725 1725-1727 Alexander I. 1801-1826 Catharine Anne Alexis 1730-1740 Anne Peter II. 1725-1730 Ivan VI. 1740-1741 Constantine Anne Peter III. 1762 Elizabeth 1741-1762 Catharine II. I 762-1 796 Paul 1796-1801 Nicholas 1825-1855 Alexander II. 1855-1881 Alexander III 1881- Ixxii GENEALOGICAL TABLES XIX GENEALOGY OF THE PRINCES OF ORANGE FROM WILLIAM . TO WILLIAM III. William I. (The Silent) 1558-1584 Philip William Maurice Frederick Henry 1584-1618 1618-1625 1625-1647 William II. 1647-1650 I William III. 1650-1702 SHORTER AND SOMETIMES MORE DETAILED GENEALOGIES will be foujid ill the following pages. PAGJ Genealogy of the principal Northumbrian kings ... ... 4: „ „ English kings from Ecgberht to Eadgar 51 ,, ,, English kings frorri Eadgar to Eadgar the ^Etheling . . 7I ,, ,, Danish kings 8; Genealogical connection between the Houses of England and Normandy . . 8, Genealogy of the Mercian Earls ........... Bj „ ,, family of Godwine 8( ,, ,, Conqueror's sons and children 13] ,, sons and grandchildren of Henry II. ...... i5( ,, John's sons and grandsons 20J ,, ., claimants of the Scottish throne 2i( ,, ,, more important sons of Edward III, ...... 26' ,, ,, claimants of the throne in 1399 28( „ ,, kings of Scotland from Robert Bruce to James 1 29t ,, ,, Nevills .'.... 32i( „ ,, Houses of Lancaster and York 32; „ ,, Beauforts and Tudors ......... 33; „ ,, House of York 035 >> Woodvilles and Greys •••...... oog Abbreviated genealogy of Henry VII. and his competitors •yAA Genealogy of the Houses of Spain and Burgundy o^r ,, Poles .... ,, children of Henry VIII. . „ Greys .... ,, last Valois kings of France ,, Guises . . ' . of Mary and Darnley ^^g of the descendants of Charles I. . . , ei cxjg „ claimants of the Spanish monarchy ..... 55Q ,, first three Hanoverian kings ... ' ° • • > . 702 family of Louis XIV • . . . 707 ,, principal descendants of Queen Victoria . . 39S 411 421 433 435 HISTORY OF ENGLAND PART I ENGLAXD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONOUEST CHAPTER I PREHISTORIC AND ROM\N BRITAIN LEADING DATES Caesar's first invasion n.c, 55 Invasion of AuIlis Plautius a.d, 43 Recall of Agricola 84 Severus in Britain 208 End of the Roman Government 410 I. Palaeolithic Man of the River- Drift. — Countless ages ago, there was a period of time to which geologists have given the name of the Pleistocene Age. The part of the earth's surface afterwards called Britain was then attached to the Continent, so that animals could pass over on dry land. The climate was much colder than it is now, and it is known from the bones which have been dug up that the country was inhabited by wolves, bears, mammoths, woolly rhinoceroses, and other creatures now extinct. No human remains have been found amongst these bones, but there is no doubt that men existed contemporaneously with their deposit, because, in the river drift, or gravel washed down by rivers, there have been discovered flints sharpened by chipping, which can only have been produced by the hand of man. The men who used them are known as Palaeolithic, or the men of ancient stone, because these stone im- plements are rougher and therefore older than others which have PREHISTORIC BRITAIN Paljeolithic flint scraper from I cklingbain, Suffolk. (Evans.) been discovered. These Palaeolithic men of the river drift v^ere a race of stunted savages who did not cultivate the ground, but lived on the animals which they killed, and must have had great difficulty in procuring food, as they did not know how to make handlesfor their sharpened flints, and must therefore have had to hold them in their hands. 2. Cave-dwelling Palaeolithic Man. — This race was succeeded by another which dwelt in caves. They, as well as their prede- cessors, are known as Palaeolithic men, as their weapons were still \'ery rude. As, however, they had learnt to make handles for them, they could construct arrows, harpoons, and javelins. They also made awls and needles of stone ; and, what is more re- markable, they possessed a decided artistic power, which enabled them to indicate by a few vigorous scratches the forms of horses, mammoths, rein- deer, and other animals. Vast heaps of rubbish still exist in various parts of Europe, which are found to consist of the bones, shells, and other refuse thrown out by these later Palaeolithic men, who had no reverence for the dead, casting out the bodies of their relations to decay with as little thought as they threw away oyster-shells or Paleolithic flint implement from Hoxne, Suffolk THE STONE AGE 3 reindeer-bones. Traces of Palaeolithic men of this type have been found as far north as Derbyshire. Their descendants are no longer to be met with in these islands. The Eskimos of the extreme north w^^f^^/sfim ^-ywr^^^ ^m ^jg|[j.n^i(^Hi^llllllilJUlMAm^ Engraved bone from Cresswell Crags, Derbyshire, now in the British Museum (full size). of America, however, have the same artistic faculty and the same disregard for the dead, and it has therefore been supposed that the cave-dwelling men were of the race to which the modern Eskimos belong. 3. Neolithic Man.— Ages passed away during which the climate became more" temperate, and the earth's surface in these regions sank to a lower level. The seas afterwards known as the North Sea and the English Channel flowed over the depression ; and an island was thus formed out of land which had once been part of the con- tinent. After this process had taken place, a third race appeared, which must have crossed the sea in rafts or canoes, and which took the place of the Palaeolithic men. They are known as Neo- Neolithic flint arrow-head from Rud- stone, Yorks. (Evans.) Neolithic celt or cutting in- strument from Guernsey. (Evans.) lithic, or men of the new stone age, because their stone implements were of a newer kind, being polished and more efficient than those of their predecessors. They had, therefore, the advantage of supe^ 6 3 4 PREHISTORIC BRITAIN rior weapons, and perhaps of superior strength, and were able to overpower those whom they found in the island. With their stone axes they made clearings in the woods in which to place their* settlements. They brought with them do- mestic animals, sheep and goats, dogs and pigs. They spun thread with spindle and distaff, and wove it into cloth upon a loom. They grew corn and manufactured a rude kind of potteiy. Each tribe lived in a state of war with its neighbours. A tribe when attacked in force took shelter on the hills in places of refuge, which were surrounded by lofty mounds and ditches. Many of these places of refuge are still to be seen, as, for instance, the one which bears the name of Maiden Castle, near Dorchester. On the open hills, too, are still to be found the Neolithic axe from Winterbourn Steepleton, Dorset. (Evans.) Early British Pottery. long barrows which the Neolithic men raised over the dead. There is little doubt that these men, whose way of life was so superior to that of. their Eskimo-like predecessors, were of the race now known SUCCESSIVE RACES as Iberian, which at one time inhabited a great part of Western Europe, but which has since mingled with other races. The Basques of the Pyrenees are the only Iberians who still preserve anything like purity of descent, though even the Basques have in them blood the origin of which is not Iberian. 4. Celts and Iberi- ans. — The Iberians were followed by a swarm of new-comers called Celts. The Celts belong to a group of races sometimes known as the Aryan group, to which also belong Teutons, Slav- onians, Italians, Greeks, and the chief ancient races of Persia and In- dia. The Celts were the first to arrive in the West, where they seized upon lands in Spain, in Gaul, and in Britain, which the Iberians had occupied before them. They did not, however, destroy the Iberians altogether. However careful a conquering tribe maybe to preserve the purity of its blood, it rarely succeeds in doing so. The con- Early British Pottery PREHISTORIC BRITAIN querors are sure to preserve some of the men of the conquered race as slaves, and a still larger number of young and comely women who become the mothers of their children. In time the slaves and the children learn to speak the language of their masters or fathers. Thus every European population is derived from many races. 5. The Celts in Britain. — The Celts were fair-haired and taller than the Iberians, whom they conquered or displaced. They had the advantage of being possessed of weapons of bronze, for which even the polished stone weapons of the Iberians were no match. They burned instead of burying their dead, and raised over the ashes those round barrows which are still to be found intermingled with the long barrows of the Iberians. 6. Goidels and Britons. —The earliest known name given to this island was Albion. It is un- certain whether the word is of Celtic or of Iberian origin. The later name Britain is derived from a second swarm of Celts called Brythons or Britons, who after a long interval followed the first Celtic immigration. The descendants of these first immigrants are distinguished from the new-comers by the name of Goidels, and it is probable that they were at one time settled in Britain as well as in Ireland, and that they were pushed across the sea into Ireland by the stronger and more civilised Britons. At all events, when history begins Goidels were only to be found in Ireland, though at a Bronze cell from the Isle of Harty, Kent (4). Bronze lance- head found m Ireland. Bronze caidroii found in Ireland. SUCCESSIVE RACES 7 later time they colonised a part of what is now known as Scotland, and sent some offshoots into Wales. At present the languages derived from that of the Goidels are the Gaelic of the Highlands, the Manx of the Isle of Man, and the Erse of Ireland. The only language now spoken in the British Isles which is derived from that of the Britons is the Welsh ; but the old Cornish language^ which was spoken nearly up to the close of the eighteenth century, came from the same stock. It is therefore likely that the Britons pushed the Goidels northward and westward, as the Cioidels had View of Stonehenge. (From a photograph.) formerly pushed the Iberians in the same directions. It was most likely that the Britons erected the huge stone circle of Stonehenge on Salisbury Plain, though it is not possible to speak with cer- tainty. That of Avebury is of an earlier date and uncertain origin. Both were probably intended to serve as monuments of the dead, though it is sometimes supposed that they were also used as temples. 7. Phoenicians and Greeks. — The most civilised nations of the ancient world were those which dwelt round the Mediterranean Sea. It was long supposed that the Phoenicians came lo Britain 8 PREHISTORIC BRITAIN B.C. 330-55 from the coast of Syria, or from their colonies at Carthage and in the south of Spain, for the tin which they needed for the manu- facture of bronze. The peninsula of Devon and Cornwall is the only part of the island which produces tin, and it has therefore been thought that the Cassiterides, or tin islands, which the Phoenicians visited, were to be found in that region. It has, how- ever, been recently shown that the Cassiterides were most probably off the coast of Galicia, in Spain, and the belief that Phoenicians visited Britain for tin must therefore be considered to be very doubtful. The first educated visitor who reached Britain was Pytheas, a (ireek, who was sent by the merchants of the Greek colony of Massalia {Marseilles) about 330 B.C. to make discoveries which might lead to the opening across Gaul of a trade-route between Britain and their city. It was probably in consequence of the information which he carried to Massalia on his return that there sprang up a trade in British tin. Another Greek, Posidonius, who came to Britain about two centuries after Pytheas, found this trade in full working order. The tin was brought by land from the present Devon or Cornwall to an island called Ictis, which was only accessible on foot after the tide had ebbed. This island was probably Thanet, which was in those days cut off from the mainland by an arm of the sea which could be crossed on foot at low water. From Thanet the tin was carried into Gaul across the straits, and was then conveyed in waggons to the Rhone to be floated down to the Mediterranean. 8. Gauls and Belgians in Britain. — During the time when this trade was being carried on, tribes of Gauls and Belgians landed in Britain. The Gauls were certainly, and the Belgians probably, of the same Celtic race as that which already occupied the island. The Gauls settled on the east coast as far as the Fens and the Wash, whilst the Belgians occupied the south coast, and pushed northwards towards the Somerset Avon. Nothing is known of the relations between the new-comers and the older Celtic inhabitants. Most likely those who arrived last contented them- selves with mastering those whom they defeated, without attempt- ing to exterminate them. At all events, states of some extent were formed by the conquerors. Thus the Cantii occupied the open ground to the north of the great forest which then filled the valley between the chalk ranges of the North and South Downs ; the Trinobantes dwelt between the Lea and the Essex Stour ; the Iceni occupied the peninsula between the Fens and the sea which was afterwards known as East Anglia. {Norfolk and B.C. 55 CMSAR IN GAUL AND BRITAIN Suffolk) ; and the Catuvellauni dwelt to the west of the Trino- bantes, spreading over the modern Hertfordshire and the neigh- bouring districts. 9. Culture and War. — Though there were other states in Britain, the tribes which have been named had the advantage of being situated on the south-eastern part of the island, and therefore of being in commercial communication with the continental Gauls of their own race and language. Trade increased, and brought with it the introduction of some things which the Britons would not have invented for themselves. For instance, the inhabitants of the south- east of Britain began to use gold coins and decorations in imita- Part of a British gold corselet found at Mold. tion of those which were then common in Gaul. Yet, in spite of these improvements, even the most civilised Britons were still in a rude and barbarous condition. They had no towns, but dwelt in scattered huts. WHien they were hard pressed by an enemy they took refuge in an open space cleared in the woods, and surrounded by a high earthwork crowned by a palisade and guarded by felled trees. When they went out to battle they dyed their faces in order to terrify their enemies. Their warriors made use of chariots, dashing in them along the front of the enemy's line till they espied an opening in his ranks. They then leapt down and charged on foot into the gap. Their charioteers in the 10 ROMAN BRITAIN B.C. 55 meanwhile drove off the horses to a safe distance, so as to be ready to take up their comrades if the battle went against them. 10. Religion of the Britons. — The Celtic races worshipped many gods. In Gaul, the Druids, who were the ministers of reli- gion, taught the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, and even gave moral instruction to the young. In Ireland, and perhaps in Britain, they were conjurers and wizards. Both in Gaul and Britain they kept up the traditional belief which had once been prevalent in all parts of the world, that the gods could only be appeased by human sacrifices. It was supposed that they needed either to drink human blood or to be supplied with human slaves, and that the only way to give them what they wanted was to de- spatch as many human beings as possible into the other world. The favourite way of doing this was to construct a huge wicker basket in the shape of a man, to cram it with men and women, and to set it on fire. At other times a Druid would cut open a single human victim, and would imagine that he could foretell the future by inspecting the size and ap- pearance of the entrails. 1 1 . The Romans in Gaul. B.C. 55.— In the year 55 B.C. the Celts of south-eastern Britain first came in contact with a Roman army. The Ro- mans were a civilised people, and had been en- gaged for some centuries in conquering the peoples living round the Medi- terranean. They pos- sessed disciplined armies, and a regular government. By the beginning of the year the Roman general, Gains Julius Csesar, had made himself master of Gaul. Then, after driving back with enormous slaughter two Gennan tribes which had invaded Gaul, he crossed the Rhine, not because he wished to concfuer Germany, but because he wished to strike Julius Caesar. (From a bust in the British Museum.) B-C- 55-54 CMSAR IN BRITAIN II terror into the Germans in order to render them unwilling to renew their attack. This march into Germany seems to have suggested to Caesar the idea of invading Britain. It is most unlikely that he thought of conquering the island, as he had quite enough to do in Gaul. What he really wanted was to prevent the Britons from coming to the help of their kindred whom he had just subdued, and he would accomplish this object best by landing on their shores and showing them how formidable a Roman army was. 12. Caesar's First Invasion. B.C. 55.— Accordingly, towards the end of August, Caesar crossed the straits with about 10,000 men. There is some uncertainty about the place of his landing, but he probably first appeared off the spot at which Dover now stands, and then, being alarmed at the number of the Britons who had crowded to defend the coast, made his way by sea to the site of the modern Deal. There, too, his landing was opposed, but he managed to reach the shore with his army. He soon found, how- ever, that- the season was too advanced to enable him to accom- plish anything. A storm having damaged his shipping and driven off the transports on which was embarked his cavalry, he returned to Gaul. 13. Caesar's Second Invasion. B.C. 54 — Caesar had hitherto failed to strike terror into the Britons. In the following year he started in July, so as to have many weeks of fine weather before him, taking with him as many as 25,000 foot and 2,000 horse. After effecting a landing he pushed inland to the Kentish Stour, where he defeated the natives and captured one of their stockades. Good soldiers as the Romans were, they were never quite at home on the sea, and Caesar was recalled to the coast by the news that the waves had dashed to pieces a large number of his ships. As soon as he had repaired the damage he resumed his march. His principal opponent was Cassivelaunus, the chief of the tribe of the Catuvellauni, who had subdued many of the neighbouring tribes, and whose stronghold was a stockade near the modern St. Albans. This chief and his followers harassed the march of the Romans with the rush of their chariots. If Cassivelaunus could have counted upon the continued support of all his warriors, he might perhaps have succeeded in forcing Cassar to retreat, as the country was covered with wood and difficult to penetrate. Many of the tribes, however, which now served under him longed to free themselves from his rule. First, the Trinobantes and then four other tribes broke away from him and sought the protection of Caesar. Caesar, thus encouraged, dashed at his stockade and 12 ROMAN BRITAIN B.C. 54— a.d. 43 carried it by storm. Cassivelaunus abandoned the struggle, gave hostages to Caesar, and promised to pay a yearly tribute. On this Caesar returned to Gaul. Though the tribute was never paid, he had gained his object. He had sufficiently frightened the British tribes to make it unlikely that they would give him any annoyance in Gaul. 14. South-eastern Britain after Caesar's Departure, h.c. 54 — A.D. 43. — For nearly a century after Caesar^s departure Britain was left to itself The Catuvellauni recovered the predominance which they had lost Their chieftain, CunobeHn, the original of Shakspere's Cymbeline, is thought to have been a grandson of Cassivelaunus. He established his power over the Trinobantes as well as over his own people, and made Camulodunum, the modern Colchester, his headquarters. Other tribes submitted to him as they had submitted to his grandfather. The prosperity of the inhabitants of south-eastern Britain increased more rapidly than the prosperity of their ancestors had increased before Caesar's invasion. Traders continued to flock over from Gaul, bringing with them a knowledge of the arts and refinements of civilised hfe, and those arts and refinements were far greater now that Gaul was under Roman rule than they had been when its Celtic tribes were still independent. Yet, in spite of the growth of trade, Britain was still a rude and barbarous country. Its exports were but cattle and hides, corn, slaves, and hunting dogs, together with a few dusky pearls. 15. The Roman Empire. — The Roman state was now a mon- archy. The Emperor was the head of the army, as well as the head of the state. Though he was often a cruel oppressor of the wealthy personages who lived in Rome itself, and whose rivalry he feared, he, for the most part, sought to establish his power by giving justice to the provinces which had once been conquered by Rome, but were now admitted to share in the advantages of good govern- ment which the Empire had to give. One consequence of the con- quest of nations by Rome was that there was now an end to cruel wars between hostile tribes. An army was stationed on the frontier of the Empire to defend it against barbarian attacks. In the in- terior the Roman peace, as it was called, prevailed, and there was hardly any need of soldiers to keep order and to maintain obedience. 16. The Invasion of Aulas Plautius. a.d. 43. — One question which each Emperor had to ask himself wns whether he would at- tempt to enlarge the hmits of the Empire or not. Yox a time each Emperor had resolved to be content with the frontier which Csesar 43-51 THE ROMAN CONQUEST 13 had left. There had consequently for many years been no thought oi again invading Britain. At last the Emperor Claudius reversed this policy. There is reason to suppose that some of the British chiefs had made an attack upon the coasts of Gaul. However this may have been, Claudius in 43 sent Aulus Plautius against Togidumnus and Caratacus, the sons of Cunobelin, who were now ruling in their father's stead. Where one tribe has gained supremacy over others, it is always easy for a civilised power to gain allies amongst the tribes which have been subdued. Caesar had overpowered Cassivelaunus by enhsting on his side the revolted Trinobantes, and Aulus Plautius now enlisted on his side the Regni, who dwelt in the pre- sent Sussex, and the Iceni, who dwelt in the present Norfolk and Suffolk. With their aid, Aulus Plautius, at the head of 40,000 men, defeated the sons of Cunobelin. Togidumnus was slain, and Cara- tacus driven into exile. The Romans then took possession of their lands, and, stepping into their place, established over the tribes chieftains who were now dependent on the Emperor instead of on Togidumnus and Caratacus. Claudius himself came for a brief visit to receive the congratulations of the army on the victory which his lieutenant had won. Aulus Plautius remained in Britain till 47. Before he left it the whole of the country to the south of a line drawn from the Wash to some point on the Severn had been sub- jugated. The mines of the Mendips and of the western peninsula were too tempting to be left unconquered, and it is probably their attraction which explains the extension of Roman power at so early a date over the hilly country in the west. 17. The Colony of Camulodunum. — In 47 Aulus Plautius was succeeded by Ostorius Scapula. He disarmed the tribes dwelling to the west of the Trent, whilst he attempted to establish the Roman authority more firmly over those whose territory lay to the east of that river. Amongst these later were the Iceni, who had been hitherto allowed to preserve their native govern- ment in dependence on the Roman power. The consequence was that they rose in arms. Ostorius overpowered them, and then sought to strengthen his hold upon the south-east of Britain by founding (51) a Roman colony at Camulodunum, which had formerly been the headquarters of Cunobelin. Roman settlers — for the most part discharged soldiers — established themselves in the new city, bringing with them all that be- longed to Roman life with all its conveniences and luxuries. Roman temples, theatres, and baths quickly rose, and Ostorius might fairly expect that in Britain, as in Gaul, the native chiefs 14 ROMAN BRITAIN 51-61 would learn to copy the easy life of the new citizens, and would settle their quarrels in Roman courts of law instead of taking arms on their own behalf 18. The Conquests of Ostorius Scapula. — Ostorius, however, was soon involved in fresh troubles. Nothing is more difficult for a civilised power than to guard a frontier against barbarous tribes. Such tribes are accustomed to plunder one another, and they are quick to perceive that the order and peace which a civilised power establishes offers them a richer booty than is to be found elsewhere. The tribes beyond the line which Ostorius held were constantly breaking through to plunder the Roman territory, and he soon found that he must either allow the lands of Roman subjects to be plundered, or must carry war amongst the hostile tribes. He naturally chose the latter alternative, and the last years of his government were spent in wars with the Ordovices of Central Wales, and with the Silures of Southern Wales. The Silures were not only a most warlike people, but they were led by Caratacus, who had taken refuge with them after his defeat by Aulus Plautius in the east. The mountainous region which these two tribes de- fended made it difficult to subdue them, and though Caratacus was defeated (50), and ultimately captured and sent as a prisoner to Rome, Ostorius did not succeed in effectually mastering his hardy followers. The proof of his comparative failure lies in the fact that he established strong garrison towns along the frontier of the hilly region, which he would not have done unless he had considered it necessary to have a large number of soldiers ready to check any possible rising. At the northern end of the hne was Deva {Chester\ at the southern was Isca Silurum {Caerleo7i upon Usk\ and in each of which was placed a whole legion, about 5,000 men. Between them was the smaller post of Uriconium, or more properly Viriconium ( Wroxeter)^ the city of the Wrekin. 19. Government of Suetonius PauUinus. 58.— When Suetonius Paullinus arrived to take up the government, he resolved to com- plete the conquest of the west by an attack on Mona {Anglesey). In Mona was a sacred place of the Druids, who gave encourage- ment to the still independent Britons by their murderous sacrifices and their soothsayings. When Suetonius attempted to land (61), a rabble of women, waving torches and shrieking defiance, rushed to meet him on the shore. Behind them the Druids stood callino- down on the intruders the vengeance of the gods. At first the soldiers were terrified and shrunk back. Then they recovered courage, and put to the sword or thrust into the flames the priests 6r THE ROMAN CONQUEST 15 and their female rout. The Romans were tolerant of the religion of the peoples whom they subdued, but they could not put up with the continuance of a cruel superstition whose upholders preached resistance to the Roman government. 20. Boadicea's Insurrection. 61. — At the very moment of success Suetonius was recalled hurriedly to the east. Roman officers and traders had misused the power which had been given them by the valour of Roman soldiers. Might had been taken for right, and the natives were stripped of their lands and property at llie caprice of the conquerors. Those of the nati\'es to whom anythino- was left were called upon to pay a taxation far too heavy for their means. When money was not to be found to satisfy the tax- gatherer, a Roman usurer was always at hand to proffer the required sum at enormous interest, after A\'hich the unhappy borrower who accepted the proposal soon found himself unable to pay the debt, and was stripped of all that he possessed to satisfy the cravings of the lender. Those who resisted this oppression were treated as the meanest criminals. Boadicea, the widow of Prasutagus, w^ho had been the chief of the Iceni, was publicly flogged, and her two daughters were subjected to the vilest out- rage. She called upon the whole Celtic population of the east and south to rise against the foreign tyrants. Thousands answered to her call, and the angry host nished to take vengeance upon the colonists of Camulodunum. The colonists had neglected to fortify their city, and the insurgents, bursting in, slew by the sword or by torture men and women alike. The massacre spread wherever Romans were to be found. A Roman legion hastening to the rescue was routed, and the small force of cavaliy attached to it alone succeeded in making its escape. Every one of the foot soldiers was slaughtered on the spot It is said that 70,000 Romans perished in the course of a few days. 21. The Vengeance of Suetonius.- -Suetonius was no mean general, and he hastened back to the scene of destruction. He called on the commander of the legion at I sea Silurum to come to his help. Cowardice was rare in a Roman army, but this officer was so unnerved by terror that he refused to obey the orders of his general, and Suetonius had to march without him. He won a decisive victory at some unknown spot, probably not far from Camulodunum, and 80,000 Britons are reported to have been slain by the triumphant soldiery. Boadicea committed suicide by poison. The commander of the legion at Isca Silurum also put an end to his own life, in order to escape the punishment which he deserved. i6 ROMAN BRITAIN 61-84 Suetonius had restored the Roman authority in Britain, but it was to his failure to control his subordinates that the insurrection had been due, and he was therefore promptly recalled by the Emperor Nero. From that time no more is heard of the injustice of the Roman government. 22. Agricola in Britain. 78— 84. — Agricola, who arrived as governor in 78, took care to deal fairly with all sorts of men, and to make the natives thoroughly satisfied with his rule. He com- pleted the conquest of the country afterwards known as Wales, and thereby pushed the western frontier of Roman Britain to the sea. Yet from the fact that he found it necessary still to leave garrisons at Deva and I sea Silurum, it may be gathered that the tribes occu- pying the hill country were not so thoroughly subdued as to cease to be dangerous. Although the idea entertained by Ostorius of making a frontier on land towards the west had thus been aban- doned, it was still necessary to provide a frontier towards the north. Even before Agricola arrived it had been shown to be impossible to stop at the line between the iNIersey and the Humber. Beyond that line was the territory of the Brigantes, who had for some time occupied the position which in the first years of the Roman conquest had been occupied by the Iceni — that is to say, they were in friendly dependence upon Rome, without being actually controlled by Roman authority. Before Agricola's coming disputes had arisen with them, and Roman soldiers had occupied their territory. Agricola finished the work of conquest. He now governed the whole of the country as far north as to the Solway and the Tyne, and he made Ebora- cum, the name of which changed in course of time into York, the centre of Roman power in the northern districts. A garrison was estabhshed there to watch for any danger which might come from the extreme north, as the garrisons of Deva and I sea Silurum watched for dangers which might come from the west. 23. Agricola's Conquests in the North.— Agricola thought that there would be no real peace unless the whole island was subdued. For seven years he carried on warfare with this object before him. He had comparatively little difficulty in reducing to obedi- ence the country south of the narrow isthmus which separates the estuary of the Clyde from the estuary of the Forth. Before proceed- ing further he drew a line of forts across that isthmus to guard the conquered country from attack during his absence. He then made his way to tlie Tay, but he had not marched far up the valley of that river before he reached the edge of the High- lands. The Caledonians, as the Romans then called the 84-119 AG RICO LA AND HADRIAN ^7 inhabitants of those northern regions, were a savage race, and the mountains in the recesses of which they dwelt were rugged and inaccessible, offering but little means of support to a Roman army. In 84 the Caledonians, who, like all barbarians when they first come in contact with a civilised people, were ignorant of the strength of a disciplined army, came down from their for- tresses in the mountains into the lower ground. A battle was fought near the Graupian Hill, w^hich seems to have been situated at the junction of the Isla and the Tay. Agricola gained a complete victory, but he was unable to follow the fugitives into their narrow glens, and he contented himself with sending his fleet to circum- navigate the northern shores of the island, so as to mark out the limits of the land which he still hoped to conquer. Before the fleet returned, however, he was recalled by the Emperor Domitian. It has often been said that Domitian was jealous of his success ; but it is possible that the Emperor really thought that the advantage to be gained by the conquest of rugged mountains would be more than counterbalanced by the losses w^hich would certainly be incurred in consequence of the enormous difliculty of the task. 24. The Roman Walls.— Agricola, in addition to his line of forts between the Forth and the Clyde, had erected detached forts at the mouth of the valleys which issue from the Highlands, in order to hinder the Caledonians from plundering the lower country. In 119 the Emperor Hadrian visited Britain. He was more disposed to defend the Em- pire than to extend it, and though he did not abandon Agricola's forts, he also built further south a continuous earth work between the Solway and the Tyne. This wall, which formed a far stronger line of de- fence than the more northern forts, was intended to serve as a second barrier to keep out the wild Cale- donians if they succeeded in breaking through the first. At a later time a lieutenant of the Emperor, Antoninus Pius, who after- wards became Emperor himself, connected Agricola's forts between c •JiSTOSEt 0£l Commemorative tablet of the Second Legion found at Halton Chesters on the Roman Wall. i8 ROMAN BRITAIN 119 View of part of the Roman Wall. Ruins of a Turret on the Roman Wall. 208-288 THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT 19 the Forth and Clyde by a continuous earthwork. In 208 the Emperor Severus arrived in Britain, and after strengthening still further the earthwork between the Forth .and Clyde, and adding a stone wall to the more southern work of Hadrian, attempted to carry out the plans of Agricola by conquering the land of the Cale- donians. Severus, however, failed as completely as Agricola had failed before him, and he died soon after his return to Eboracum. 25. The Roman Province of Britain. — Very little is known of the history of the Roman province of Britain, except that it made considerable progress in civilisation. The Romans were great road-makers J and though their first object was to enable their Part of the Roman Wall at Leicester. soldiers to march easily from one part of the country to another, they thereby encouraged commercial intercourse. Forests were to some extent cleared away by the sides of the new roads, and fresh ground was thrown open to tillage. Mines were worked and country houses built, the remains of which are in some places still to be seen, and bear testimony to the increased well-being of a population which, excepting in the south-eastern part of the island, had at the arri\'al of the Romans been little removed from savagery. Cities sprang up in great numbers. Some of them were at first garrison towns, like Eboracum, Deva, and I sea Silurum. Others, like Verulamium, near the present St. Albans, occupied the sites of the old stockades once used as places of refuge by the Celts, c 2 20 ROMAN BRITAIN 208-288 or, like Lindum, on the top of the hill on which Lincoln Cathedral now stands, were placed in strongly defensible positions. Aqua^ Sulis, the modern Bath, owes its existence to its warm medicinal springs. The chief port of commerce was Londinium, the modern London. Attempts which have been made to explain its name by the Celtic language have failed, and it is therefore possible that an inhabited post existed there even before the Celts arrived. Its im- portance was, however, owing to its position, and that importance was not of a kind to tell before a settled system of commercial inter- Pediment of a Roman temple found at Bath. course sprang up. London was situated on the hill on which St Paul's now stands. There first, after the Thames narrowed into a river, the merchant found close to the stream hard ground on ^^•hich he could land his goods. The valley for some distance above and below it was then filled with a wide marsh or an expanse of water. An old track raised above the marsh crossed the riAer by a ford at Lambeth, but, as London grew in importance, a ferry was esta- blished where London Bridge now stands, and the Romans, in course of time, superseded the ferry by a bridge. It is, therefore 208-288 THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT 21 no wonder that the Roman roads both from the north and from the south converged upon London. Just as Eboracum was a fitting centre for miUtary operations directed to the defence of the northern frontier, London was the fitting centre of a trade carried on with the Continent, and the place would increase in importance in proportion to the increase of that trade. 26. Extinction of Tribal Antagonism. — The improvement of communications and the growth of trade and industry could not fail to influence the mind of the population. Wars between tribes, which before the coming of the Romans had been the main em- ployment of the young and hardy, were now things of the past. The mutual hatred which had grown out of them had died away, and even the vei*y names of Trinobantes and Brigantes were almost forgotten. Men who Uved in the valley of the Severn came to look upon themselves as belonging to the same people as men who lived in the valleys of the Trent or the Thames. The active and enter- prising young men were attracted to the cities, at first by the novelty of the luxurious habits in which they were taught to indulge, but after- wards because they were allowed to take part in the management of local business. In the time of the Emperor Caracalla, the son of Se- verus, every freeman born in the Empire was declared to be a Roman citizen, and long before that a large number of natives had been ad- mitted to citizenship. In each dis- trict a council was formed of the wealthier and more prominent in- habitants, and this council had to provide for the building of temples, the holding of festivals, the erection of fortifications, and the laying out of streets. Justice was done between man and man according to the Roman law, which was the best law that the world had seen, and the higher Roman officials, who were appointed by the Emperor, took care that justice was done between city and city. No one Roman altar from Rutchester. 22 ROMAN BRITAIN 288-325 therefore, wished to oppose the Roman government or to bring back the old times of barbarism. 27. Want of National Feeling-. -Great as was the progress made, there was something still wanting. A people is never at its best unless those who compose it have some object for which they can sacrifice themselves, and for which, if necessary, they will die. The Briton had ceased to be called upon to die for his tribe, and he was not expected to die for Britain. Britain had become a more comfortable countiy to live in, but it was not the business of its own inhabitants to guard it. It was a mere part of the vast Roman Empire, and it was the duty of the Emperors to see that the frontier was safely kept. They were so much afraid lest any particular province should wish to set up for itself and to break away from the Empire, that they took care not to employ soldiers born in that province for its protection. They sent British recruits to guard the Danube or the Euphrates, and Gauls, Spaniards, or Africans to guard the wall between the Solway and the Tyne, and the entrenchment between the Forth and the Clyde. Britons, therefore, looked on their own defence as something to be done for them by the Emperors, not as something to be done by themselves. They lived on friendly terms with one another, but they had nothing of what we now call patriotism. 28. Carausius and Allectus. 288— 296.- In 288 Carausius, with the help of some pirates, seized on the government of Britain and threw off the authority of the Emperor. He was succeeded by Allectus, yet neither Carausius nor Allectus thought of making himself the head of a British nation. They called themselves Emperors and ruled over Britain alone, merely because they could not get more to rule over. 29. Constantius and Constantine. 296 — 337. — Allectus was over- thrown and slain by Constantius, who, however, did not rule, as Ca- rausius and Allectus had done, by mere right of military superiority. The Emperor Diocletian (285—305) discovered that the whole Em- pire, stretching from the Euphrates to the Atlantic, was too extensive for one man to govern, and he therefore decreed that there should in future be four governors, two principal ones named Emperors {Augiisti\ and two subordinate ones named Ccesars. Constan- tius was first a Caesar and afterwards an Emperor. He was set to govern Spain, Gaul, and Britain, but he afterwards became Emperor himself, and for some time established himself at Eboracum ( York). Upon his death (306), his son Constantine, after much fighting, made himself sole Emperor (325), overthrowing the system of Dio- 314-383 DECLINE OF THE EMPIRE 23 cletian. Yet in one respect he kept up Diocletian's arrangements. He placed Spain, Gaul, and Britain together under a great officer called a Vicar, who received orders from himself and who gave orders to the officers who governed each of the three countries. Under the new system, as under the old, Britain was not treated as an in- dependent counti-y. It had still to look for protection to an officer who lived on the Continent, and was therefore apt to be more interested in Gaul and Spain than he was in Britain. 30. Christianity in Britain. — When the Romans put down the Druids and their bloody sacrifices, they called the old Celtic gods by Roman names, but made no further alteration in religious usages. Gradually, however, Christianity spread amongst the Romans on the Continent, and merchants or soldiers who came from the Con- tinent introduced it into Britain. Scarcely anything is known of its progress in the island. Alban is said to have been martyred at Verulamium, and Julius and Aaron at I sea Silurum. In 314 three British bishops attended a council held at Aries in Gaul. Little more than these few facts have been handed down, but there is no doubt that there was a settled Church established in the island. The Emperor Constantine acknowledged Christianity as the re- hgion of the whole Empire. The remains of a church of this period have recently been discovered at Silchester. 31. Weakness of the Empire. — The Roman Empire in the time of Constantine had the appearance rather than the reality of strength. Its taxation was very heavy, and there was no national enthusiasm to lead men to sacrifice themselves in its defence. Roman citizens became more and more unwilling to become soldiers at all, and the Roman armies were now mostly composed of bar- barians. At the same time the barbarians outside the Empire were growing stronger, as the tribes often coalesced into wide con- federacies for the purpose of attacking the Empire. 32. The Picts and Scots. — The assailants of Britain on the north and the west were the Picts and Scots. The Picts were the same as the Caledonians of the time of Agricola. We do not know why they had ceased to be called Caledonians. The usual deriva- tion of their name from the Latin Pictus^ said to have been given them because they painted their bodies, is inaccurate. Opinions differ whether they were Goidels with a strong Iberian strain, or Iberians with a Goidelic admixture. They were probably Iberians, and at all events they were more savage than the Britons had been before they were influenced by Roman civilisation. The Scots, who afterwards settled in what is 24 ROMAN BRITAIN 325-383 now known as Scotland, at that time dwelt in Ireland. Whilst the Picts, therefore, assailed the Roman province by land, and stro\-e, not always unsuccessfully, to break through the walls which defended its northern frontier, the Scots crossed the Irish Sea in light boats to plunder and slay before armed assistance could arrive. ^i"^. The Saxons. —The Saxons, who were no less deadly enemies of the Roman government, were as fierce and restless as the Picts and Scots, and were better equipped and better armed. At a later time they established themselves in Britain as conquerors and settlers, and became the founders of the English nation ; but at first they were only known as cruel and merciless pirates. In their long fiat-bottomed vessels they swooped down upon some unde- fended part of the coast and carried off not only the property of wealthy Romans, but even men and women to be sold in the slave- market. The provincials who escaped related with peculiar horror how the Saxons were accustomed to torture to death one out of every ten of their captives as a sacrifice to their gods. 34. Orig"in of the Saxons. — The Saxons were the more dan- gerous because it was impossible for the Romans to reach them in their homes. They were men of Teutonic race, speaking one of the languages, afterwards known as Low German, which were once spoken in the whole of North Germany. The Saxon pirates were probably drawn from the whole of the sea coast stretching from the north of the peninsula of Jutland to the rniouth of the Ems, and if so, there were amongst them Jutes, whose homes were in Jutland itself; Angles, w^ho inhabited Schleswig and Holstein ; and Saxons, properly so called, who dwelt about the mouth of the Elbe and further to the west. All these peoples afterwards took part in the conquest of southern Britain, and it is not unlikely that they all shared in the original piratical attacks. Whether this was the case or not, the pirates came from creeks and inlets outside the Roman Empire, whose boundary was the Rhine, and they could therefore only be successfully repressed by a power with a good fleet, able to seek out the aggressors in their own homes and to stop the mischief at its source. 35. The Roman Defence.— The Romans had always been weak at sea, and they were weaker now than they had been in earlier days. They were therefore obliged to content themselves with standing on the defensive. Since the time of Severus, Britain had been divided, for purposes of defence, into Upper and Lower Britain. Though there is no absolute certainty about the matter 383-410 BREAK-UP OF THE EMPIRE 25 it is probable that Upper Britain comprised the hill country of the west and north, and that Lower Britain was the south-eastern part of the island, marked off by a line drawn irregularly from the Humber to the Severn.' Lower Britain in the early days of the Roman conquest had been in no special need of military protection. In the fourth centuiy it was exposed more than the rest of the island to the attacks of the Saxon pirates. Fortresses were erected between the Wash and Beachy Head at every point at which an inlet of the sea afforded an opening to an invader. The whole of this part of the coast became known as the Saxon Shore, because it was subjected to attacks from the Saxons, and a special officer known as the Count of the Saxon Shore was appointed to take charge of it. An officer known as the Duke of the Britains {Dux Britanniaruni) commanded the armies of Upper Britain ; whilst a third, who was a civilian, and superior in rank over the other two, was the Count of Britain, and had a general supervision of the whole countiy. 36. End of the Roman Government. 383 — 410. — In 383 Maxi- mus, who was probably the Duke of the Britains, was proclaimed Emperor by his soldiers. If he could have contented himself with defending Britain, it would have mattered little whether he chose to call himself an Emperor or a Duke. Unhappily for the inhabi- tants of the island, not only did every successful soldier want to be an Emperor, but every Emperor wanted to govern the whole Empire. Maximus, therefore, instead of remaining in Britain, carried a great part of his army across the sea to attempt a conquest of Gaul and Spain. Neither he nor his soldiers ever returned, and in consequence the Roman garrison in the island was deplorably weakened. Early in the fifth century an irruption of barbarians gave full employment to the army which defended Gaul, so that it was impossible to replace the forces which had followed Maximus by fresh troops from the Continent. The Roman Empire was in fact breaking up. The defence of Britain was left to the soldiers who remained in the island, and in 409 they proclaimed a certain Constantine Emperor. Constantine, like Maximus, carried his soldiers across the Channel in pursuit of a wider empire than he could find in Britain. He was himself murdered, and his soldiers^ like those of Maximus, did not return. In 410 the Britons implored the Emperor Honorius to send them help. Honorius had enough 1 There were also four smaller divisions, ultimately increased to five. All that is known about their position is that they were not where they are placed in our atlases. 26 THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 410-449? to do to ward off the attacks of barbarians nearer Rome, and announced to the Britons that they must provide for their own defence. From this time Britain ceased to form part of the Roman Empire. CHAPTER II THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS LEADING DATES Landing of the Jutes in Thanet . . . . The West Saxons defeated at Mount Badon The West Saxons take Sorbiodunum Battle of Deorham The West Saxons defeated at Faddiley A.n. 449 ? . 520 . 552 • 577 . 584 1. Britain after the Departure of the Romans. 410 — 449? — After the departure of the Romans, the Picts from the north and the Scots from Ireland continued their ravages, but though they caused terrible misery by slaughtering or dragging into slaveiy the inhabi- tants of many parts of the country, they did not succeed in making any permanent conquests. The Britons were not without a govern- ment and an armed force ; and their later history shows that they were capable of carrying on war for a long time against enemies more formidable than the Picts and Scots. Their rulers were known by the British title Gwledig, and probably held power in different parts of the island as the successors of the Roman Duke of the Britains and of the Roman Count of the Saxon Shore. Their power of resistance to the Picts and the Scots was, how- ever, weakened by the impossibility of turning their undivided attention to these marauders, as at the same time that they had to defend the Roman Wall and the western coast against the Picts and Scots, they were exposed on the eastern coast to the attacks of the Saxon pirates. 2. The Groans of the Britons. — In their misery the thoughts of the Britons turned to those Roman legions who had defended their fathers so well. In 446 they appealed to Aetius, the com- mander of the Roman armies, to dehver them from their destroyers. " The groans of the Britons " was the title which they gave to their appeal to him. *' The barbarians," they wrote, '^ drive us to the sea ■ the sea drives us back to the barbarians ; between them we are 449?-49i JUTES AND SAXONS 27 exposed to two sorts of death : we are either slain or drowned." Aetius had no men to spare, and he sent no help to the Britons. Before lon^^ the whole of Western Europe was overrun by barbarian tribes, the title of Emperor being retained only by the Roman Emperor who ruled from Constantinople over the East, his autho- rity over the barbarians of the West being no more than nominal. 3. The Conquest of Kent. 449?— It had been the custom of the Roman Empire to employ barbarians as soldiers in their armies, and Vortigern, the British ruler, now followed that bad example. In or about 449 a band of Jutish sea-rovers landed at Ebbsfleet, in the Isle of Thanet. According to tradition their leaders were Hengist and Horsa, names signifying the horse and the mare, which were not very likely to have been borne by real warriors. Whatever may have been the names of the chiefs, Vortigern took them into his service against the Picts, giving them the Isle of Thanel as a dwelling-place for themselves. With their help he defeated the Picts, but afterwards found himself unable to defend himself against his fierce auxiliaries. Thanet was still cut off from the mainland by an arm of the sea, and the Jutes were strong enough to hold it against all assailants. Their numbers rapidly increased as shiploads of their fellows landed, and they crossed the strait to win fresh lands from the Britons on the mainland of Kent. In several battles V'ortigem was overpowered. His rival and suc- cessor, Ambrosius Aurelianus, whose name makes it probable that he was an upholder of the old Roman discipline, drove back the Jutes in turn. He did not long keep the upper hand, and in 465 he was routed utterly. The defeat of the British army was followed by an attack upon the great fortresses which had been erected along the Saxon Shore in the Roman times. The Jutes had no means of carrying them by assault, but they starved them out one by one, and some twenty-three years after their first landing, the whole of the coast of Kent was in their hands. 4. The South Saxons. 477. — The conquests of the Jutes stopped at the inlet of the sea now filled by Romney Marsh. To the south and west was the impenetrable Andred's Wood, which covered what is now known as the Weald. At its eastern extremity stood by the sea the strong fortified town of Anderida, which gave its name to the wood, the most westerly of the fortresses of the Saxon Shore still unconquered by the Jutes. It was at last endangered by a fresh pirate band — not of Jutes but of Saxons — which landed near Selsey, and fought its way eastwards, conquering the South Downs and the flat land between the South Downs and the sea, till it reached 28 THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 491 -520 Anderida. Anderida was starved out after a long blockade, and the Saxons, bursting in, 'slew all that dwelt therein, nor was there henceforth one Briton left.' To this day the Roman walls of Anderida stand round the site of the desolated city near the modern Pevensey. Its Saxon conquerors came to be known as the South Saxons, and their land as Sussex. 5. The West Saxons and the East Saxons. — Another swarm also of Saxons, called Gewissas, landed on the shore of Southamp- ton Water. After a time they were reinforced by a body of Jutes, and though the Jutes formed settlements of their own in the Isle of Wight and on the mainland, the difference of race and language between them and the Gewissas was not enough to prevent the two tribes from coalescing. Ultimately Gewissas and Jutes became known as West Saxons, and established themselves in a dis- trict roughly corresponding with the modern Hampshire. Then, having attempted to penetrate further west, they were de- feated at Mount Badon, probably Badbury Rings in Dorsetshire. Their overthrow was so complete as to check their advance for more than thirty years. Whilst the coast line from the inlet of the sea now filled by Romney Marsh to the western edge of Hampshire had thus been mastered by Saxons, others of the same stock, known as East Saxons, seized upon the low coast to the north of the Thames. From them the land was called Essex. Neither Saxons nor Jutes, however, were as yet able to penetrate far up the valley of the Thames, as the Roman settlement of London, surrounded by marshes, still blocked the way. 6. The Anglian Settlements. — The coast-line to the north of the East Saxons was seized at some unascertained dates by different groups of Angles. The land between the Stour and the great fen which in those days stretched far inland from the Wash was occupied by two of these groups, known as the North folk and the South folk. They gave their names to Norfolk and Suffolk, and at some later time combined under the name of East Anglians. North of the Wash were the Lindiswara — that is to say, the settlers about the Roman Lindum, the modern Lincoln, and beyond them, stretching to the Humber, were the Gainas, from whom is derived the name of the modern Gainsborough. To the north of the Humber the coast was fringed by Angle settlements which had not yet coalesced into one. 7. Nature of the Conquest. — The three peoples who effected this conquest were afterwards known amongst themselves by the common name of English, a name which was originally equivalent 449?-520 NATURE OF THE CONQUEST 29 to Angle, whilst amongst the whole of the remaining Celtic popula- tion they were only known as Saxons. The mode in which the English treated the Britons was very different from that of the Romans, who were a civilised people and aimed at governing a conquered race. The new-comers drove out the Britons in order to find homes for themselves, and they preferred to settle in the country rather than in a town. No Englishman had ever lived in a town in his German home, or was able to appreciate the advantages of the commerce and manufacture by which towns are supported. Nor were they inclined to allow the inhabitants of the Roman towns to remain unmolested in their midst. When Anderida was captured not a Briton escaped ahve, and there is good reason to believe that many of the other towns fared no better, especially as the remains of some of them still show marks of the fire by which they were consumed. What took place in the country can- not be certainly known. Many of the British were no doubt killed.. Many took refuge in fens or woods, or fled to those portions of the island in which their countrymen were still independent. It is diffi- cult to decide to what extent the men who remained behind were spared, but it is impossible to doubt that a considerable number of women were preserved from slaughter. The conquerors, at their landing, must ha\e been for the most part young men, and when they wanted wives, it would be far easier for them to seize the daughters o^ slain Britons than to fetch women from the banks of the Elbe. 8. The Cultivators of the Soil. — When the new-comers planted themselves on British soil, each group of famihes united by kinship fixed its home in a separate village or township, to which was given the name of the kindred followed by ' ham ' or ' tun,' the first word meaning the home or dwelling, the second the earthen mound which formed the defence of the community. Thus Wokingham is the home of the Wokings, and W^ellington the ' tun ' of the Wel- lings. Each man had a homestead of his own, with a strip or strips of arable land in an open field. Beyond the arable land was pasture and wood, common to the whole township, every villager being entitled to drive his cattle or pigs into them according to rules laid down by the whole township. 9. Eorls, Ceorls, Gesiths. — The population was divided into Eorls and Ceorls. The Eorl was hereditarily distinguished by birth, and the Ceorl was .a simple freeman without any such dis- tinction. How the difference arose we do not know, but we do know that the £orl had privileges which the Ceorl had not. Below 30 THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 449?-520 the Ceorls were slaves taken in war or condemned to slavery as criminals. There were also men known as Gesiths, a word which means ' followers,' who were the followers of the chiefs or Ealdormen {Eldermen) who led the conquerors. The Gesiths formed the war-band of the chief. They were probably all of them Eorls, so that though every settler was either an Eorl or a Ceorl, some Eorls were also Gesiths. This war-band of Gesiths was composed of young men who attached themselves to the chief by a tie of personal devotion. It was the highest glory of the Gesith to die to save his chiefs life. Of one Gesith it is told that, when he saw a murderer aiming a dagger at his chief, he, not having time to seize the assassin, threw his body between the blow and his chief, and perished rather than allow him to be killed. It was even held to be disgraceful for a Gesith to return from battle alive if his chief had been slain. The word by which the chief was known was Hlaford {Lord), which means a giver of bread, because the Gesiths ate his bread. They not only ate his bread, but they shared in the booty which he brought home. They slept in his hall, and were clothed in the garments woven by his wife and her maidens. A continental writer tells how a body of Gesiths once approached their lord with a petition that he should take a wife, because as long as he remained unmarried there was no one to make new clothes for them or to mend their old ones. lo. The Gesiths and the Villagers. — At the time of the English settlement, therefore, there were two sorts of warriors amongst the invaders. The Ceorls, having been accustomed to till land at home, were quite ready to till the lands which they had newly acquired in Britain. They were, however, ready to defend them- selves and their lands if they were attacked, and they were under the obligation of appearing in arms when needed for defence. This general army of the villagers was called the Fyrd. On the other hand, the Ge^^iths had not been accustomed to till land at home, but had made fighting their business. War, in short, which was an unwelcome accident to the Ceorl, was the business of life to the Gesith. The exact relationship between the Gesiths and the Ceorls cannot be ascertained with certainty. It is not improbable that the Gesiths, being the best warriors amongst their countrymen, some- times obtained land granted them by their chiefs, and were expected in consequence to be specially ready to sen-e the chief whom they had followed from their home. It was from their relation to their chief that they were called Gesiths, a name gradually abandoned for that of Thegns,or servants, when they- as was soon the case — 449?-520 SOCIAL AND POLITICAL DIVISIONS 31 ceased to live with their chief and had houses and lands of their own, though they were still bound to military service. How these Thegns cultivated their lands is a question to which there is no certain answer. In later days they made use of a class of men known as bondmen or villeins. These bondmen were not, like slaves, the property of their masters. They had land of their own, which they were allowed to cultivate for themselves on con- dition of spending part of their time in cultivating the land of their lords. It has been supposed by some writers that the Thegns employed bondmen from the earliest times of the conquest. If, however, this was the case, there arises a further question whether the bondmen were Englishmen or Britons. The whole subject is under investigation, and the evidence which exists is excessively scanty. It is at least certain that the further the conquest piogressed westwards, the greater was the number of Britons preserved alive. 11. English and Welsh. — The bulk of the population on the eastern and southern coasts was undoubtedly English. English institutions and English language took firm root. The conquerors looked on the Britons with the utmost contempt, naming them Welsh, a name which no Briton thought of giving to himself, but which Germans had been in the habit of applying somewhat con- temptuously to the Celts on the Continent. So far as British words have entered into the English language at all, they have been words such as gown or curd, which are likely to have been used by women, or words such as cart or pony , which are likel)' to have been used by agricultural labourers, and the evidence of language may therefore be adduced in favour of the view that many women and many agricultural labourers were spared by the conquerors. 12. The Township and the Hundred. — The smallest political community of the new settlers was the village, or, as it is com- monly called, the township, which is still represented by the parish, the parish being merely a township in which ecclesiastical institu- tions have been maintained whilst political institutions have ceased to exist. The freemen of the township met to settle small questions between themselves, under the presidency of their reeve or head- man.- More important cases were brought before the hundred- moot, or -meeting of the hundred, a district which had been in- habited, or was supposed to have been inhabited, either by a hundred kindred groups of the original settlers or by the families of a hun- dred warriors. This hundred-moot was held once a month, and was 32 THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 449?_520 attended by four men and the reeve from every township, and also by the Eorls and Thegns living in the hundred. It not only settled disputes about property, but gave judgment in criminal cases as well. 13. Weregild. — In early days, long before the English had left their lands beyond the sea, it was not considered to be the business of the community to punish crime. If any one was murdered, it was the duty of the kinsmen of the slain man to put to death the murderer. In course of time men got tired of the continual slaughter produced by this arrangement, and there sprang up a system according to which the murderer might offer to the kinsmen a sum of money known as weregild, or the value of a man, and if this money was accepted, then peace was made and all thought of vengeance was at an end. At a later time, at all events after the arrival of the English in this country, charges of murder were brought before the hundred-moot whenever the alleged mur- derer and his victim lived in the same hundred. If the accused person did not dispute the fact the moot sentenced him to pay a weregild, the amount of which differed in proportion to the rank of the slain man, not in proportion to the heinousness of the offence. As there was a weregild for murder, so there was also a graduated scale of payments for lesser offences. One who struck off a hand or a foot could buy off vengeance at a fixed rate. 14. Compurgation and Ordeal. — A new difficulty was introduced when a person who was charged with crime denied his guilt. As there were no trained lawyers and there was no knowledge of the principles of evidence, the accused person was required to bring twelve men to be his compurgators — that is to say, to hear him swear to his own innocence, and then to swear in turn that his oath was true. If he could not find men willing to be his com- purgators he could appeal to the judgment of the gods, which was known as the Ordeal. If he could walk blindfold over red- hot ploughshares, or plunge his arm into boiling water, and show at the end of a fixed number of days that he had received no harm, it was thought that the gods bore witness to his innocency and had as it were become his compurgators when men had failed him. It is quite possible that all or most of those who tried the ordeal failed, but as nobody would try the ordeal who could get com- purgators, those who did not succeed must have been regarded as persons of bad character, so that no surprise would be expressed at their failure. 15. Punishments.— When a man had failed in the ordeal there was a choice of punishments. If his offence was a slight one, a 449?-S2o POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS 3^^ fine was deemed sufficient. If it was a very disgraceful one, such as secret murder, he was put to death or was degraded to slavery, in most cases he was declared to be a ' wolf s-head ' — that Is to say, he was outlawed and driven into the woods, where, as the protection of the community was withdrawn from him, anyone might kill hirn without fear of punishment. 16. The Folk-moot. — As the hundred-moot did justice between those who lived in the hundred, so the folk-moot did justice between those who lived in different hundreds, or were too important to be judged in the hundred-moot. The folk-moot was the meeting of the whole folk or tribe, which consisted of several hundreds. It was at- tended, like the hundred-moot, by four men and the reeve from each township, and it met twice a year, and was presided over by the chief or Ealdorman. The folk-moot met in arms, because it was a muster as well as a council and a court. The vote as to war and peace was taken in it, and while the chief alone spoke, the warriors signified their assent by clashing their swords against their shields. 17. The Kingship. — How many folks or tribes settled in the island it is impossible to say, but there is little doubt that many of them soon combined. The resistance of the Britons was desperate, and it was only by joining together that the settlers could hope to overcome it. The causes which produced this amalgamation of the folks produced the king. It was necessary to find a man always ready to take the command of the united folks, and this man was called King, a name which signifies the man of the kinship or race at the head of which he stood. His authority was greater than the Ealdorman's, and his warriors were more numerous than those which the Ealdonnan had led. He must come of a royal family— that is, of one supposed to be descended from the god Woden. As it was necessary that he should be capable of leading an army, it was impossible that a child could be king, and therefore no law of hereditary succession prevailed. On the death of a king the folk-moot chose his successor out of the kingly family. If his eldest son was a grown man of repute, the choice would almost certainly fall upon him. If he was a child or an invalid, some other kinsman of the late king would be selected. 18. The Legend of Arthur. —Thirty-two years passed away after the defeat of the West Saxons at Mount Badon in 520 (see p. 28) before they made any further conquests. Welsh legends represent this period as that of the reign of Arthur. Some modem inquirers have argued that Arthur's kingdom was in the north, whilst others have argued that it was in the south. It is quite 34 THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 520-55^ possible that the name was given by legend to more than one champion ; at all events, there was a time when an Ambrosius, probably a descendant of Ambrosius AureHanus (see p. 27), pro- tected the southern Britons. His stronghold was at Sorbiodunum, the hill fort now a grassy space known as Old Sarum, and his great church and monastery, where Christian priests encouraged the Christian Britons in their struggle against the heathen Saxons, was at the neighbouring Ambresbyrig {the fortress of Ambrosius), now •.35 i^'a • "-'^!?ff!f»'C«KW O ICX) ' ■ Scale of Feet 300 500 700 _j QOO 1000 _Zj i A. Keep or Inner Ward B. Outer Ward C. Main Gate D. West Gate E. Cathedral and Cloisters. PValker GrBoutallse^ Plan of the city of Old Sarum, the ancient Sorbiodunmn. The Cathedral is of later date. modernised into Amesbury. Thirty-two years after the battle of Mount Badon the kingdom of Ambrosius had been divided amongst his successors, who were plunged in vice and were quarrelling with one another. 19. The West Saxon Advance. —In 552 Cynric, the West Saxon king, attacked the divided Britons, captured Sorbiodunum, and made himself master of Sahsbury Plain. Step by step he fought his way to the valley of the Thames, and when he had reached it, he turned eastwards to descend the river to its mouth. 552-584 CONQUESTS OF THE WEST SAXONS 35 Here, however, he found himself anticipated by the East Saxons, who had captured London, and had settled a branch of their people under the name of the Middle Saxons in Middlesex. The Jutes of Kent had pushed westwards through the Surrey hills, but in 568 the West Saxons defeated them and drove them back. After this battle, the first in which the conquerors strove with one another, the West Saxons turned northwards, defeated the Britons in 571 at Bedford, and occupied the valleys of the Thame and Cherwell and the upper valley of the Ouse. They are next heard of much further west, and it has been supposed that they turned in that direction because they found the lower Ouse already held by Angle tribes. Old Sarum from an engraving published in 1843, showing mound. (It is now obscured by trees from this point of view.) However this may have been, they crossed the Cotswolds in 577 under two brothers, Ceawlin and Cutha, and at Deorham defeated and slew three kings who ruled over the cities of Glevum {Gloucester)^ Corinium {Cirencester), and Aqu^e Sulis {Bath). They seized on the fertile valley of the Severn, and during the next few years they pressed gradually northwards. In 584 they destroyed and sacked the old Roman station of Viriconium. This was their last victory for many a year. They attempted to reach Chester, but were de- feated at Faddiley by the Britons, who slew Cutha in the battle. 20. Repulse of the West Saxons.— After the defeat at Faddiley the West Saxons split up into two peoples. Those of them who D 2 35 THE ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS 547-597 settled in the lower Severn valley took the name of Hwiccan, and joined the Britons against their own kindred. This alliance could hardly have taken place if the Hwiccan, in settling in the Severn valley, had destroyed the whole, or even a considerable part, of the Celtic population, though there can be little doubt that there was still slaughter when a battle was fought or a town taken by storm ; as it is known that the magnificent Roman buildings at Bath \\ ere standing in ruins and the city untenanted many years after the capture of the city. At all events, the Britons, now allied with the Hwiccan, defeated Ceawlin at Wanborough. After this disaster though the West Saxon kingdom retained its independence, it was independent within smaller limits than those which Ceawlin had wished to give to it. If he had seized Chester he would have been on the way to gain the mastery over all England, but he had tried to do too much in a short time. His people can hardly have been numerous enough to occupy in force a territory reaching from South- ampton Water to Bedford on one side and to Chester on another. 21. The Advance of the Angles. — Whilst the W^est Saxons were enlarging their boundaries in the south, the Angles were gradually spreading in the centre and the north. The East Anglians were stopped on their way to the west by the great fen, but either a branch of the Lindiswara or some new-comers made their way up the Trent, and established themselves first at Nottingham and then at Leicester, and called themselves the Middle English. Another body, known as the Mercians, or men of the mark or border-land, seized on the upper valley of the Trent. North of the H umber the advance was still slower. In 547, five years before the West Saxons attacked Sorbiodunum, Ida, a chieftain of one of the scattered settlements on the coast, was accepted as king by all those which lay between the Tees and the Forth. His new kingdom was called Bernicia, and his principal fortress was on a rock by the sea at Bamborough. During the next fifty years he and his successors enlarged their borders till they reached that central ridge of moorland hill which is sometimes known as the Pennine range. The Angles between the Tees and the Humber called their country Deira, but though they also united under a king, their progress was as slow as that of the Bernicians. Bernicia and Deira together were known as North-humberland, the land north of the Humber, a much larger territory than that of the modern county of Northumberland. 22. The Kymry.— It is probable that the cause of the slow advance of the northern Angles lay in the existence of a strong 597 THE KYMRY 37 Celtic state in front. Welsh tradition speaks of a ruler named Cunedda, who after the departure of the Roman legions governed the territory from the Clyde to the south of Wales, which formed the greater part of what had once been known as Upper Britain. (See p. 25.) This territory was inhabited by a mixed population of Britons and Goidels, with an isolated body of Picts in Galloway. A common danger from the English fused them together, and as a sign of the wearing out of old distinctions, they took the name of Kymry, or Comrades, the name by which the Welsh are known amongst one another to this day, and which is also preserved in the name of Cumberland, though the Celtic language is no longer spoken there. 23. Britain at the End of the Sixth Century.— During the sixth century the Kymry ceased to be governed by one ruler, but the chieftains of the various territories all acknowledged the supremacy of a descendant of Cunedda. For purposes of war they combined together, and as the country which they occupied was hilly and easily defended, the northern English discovered that they too must unite amongst themselves if they were to overpower the united resistance of the Kymry. CHAPTER III THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS LEADING DATES . Augustine's mission 597 /Ethelfrith's victory at Chester 613 Penda defeats Eadwine at Heathfield 633 Penda's defeat at Winwaed ,.,..., 655 Theodore Archbishop of Canterbury 668 Offa defeats the West Saxons at Bensington . . 779 Ecgberht returns to England 800 Death of Ecgberht 839 T. England and the Continent. — Whatever may be the exact truth about the numbers of Britons saved alive by the English con- querors, there can be no doubt that English speech and English customs prevailed wherever the English settled. In Gaul, where the German Franks made themselves masters of the country, a different state of things prevailed. Roman officials continued to govern the country under Frankish kings, Roman bishops con- 38 THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 584 verted the conquerors to Christianity, and Roman cities main- tained, as far as they could, the old standard of civilisation. All commercial intercourse between Gaul, still comparatively rich and prosperous, and Britain was for some time cut off by the irrup- tion of the EngUsh, who were at first too rude and too much en- gaged in fighting to need the products of a more advanced race. Gradually, however, as the English settled down into peaceful industry along the south-eastern shores of the island, trade again sprang up, as it had sprung up in the wild times preceding the landing of CcEsar. The Gaulish merchants who crossed the straits found themselves in Kent, and during the years in which the West Saxon Ceawlin was struggling with the Britons the communica- tions between Kent and the Continent had become so friendly that in 584, or a little later, ^thelberht, king of Kent, took to wife Bertha, the daughter of a Prankish king, Charibert. Bertha was a Christian, and brought with her a Christian bishop. She begged of her husband a forsaken Roman church for her own use. This church, now known as St. Martin's, stood outside the walls of the deserted city of Durovernum, the buildings of which were in ruins, except where a group of rude dwellings rose in a corner of the old fortifi- cations. In these dwellings /Ethelberht and his followers lived, and to them had been given the new name of Cantwarabyrig or Canterbury [the dwelling of the men of Kent). The EngHsh were heathen, but their heathenism was not intolerant. 2. iEthelberht's Supremacy. — ^Ethelberht's authority reached far beyond his native Kent. Within a few years after his marriage he had gained a supremacy over most of the other kings to the south of the Humber. There is no tradition of any war between ^thelberht and these kings, and he certainly did not thrust them out from the leadership of their own peoples. The exact nature of his supremacy is, however, unknown to us, though it is possible that they were bound to follow him if he went to war with peoples not acknowledging his supremacy, in which case his position towards them was something of the same kind as that of a lord to his gesiths. 3. Greg-cry and the English. — yEthelberht's position as the over- lord of so many kings and as the husband of a Christian wife drew upon him the attention of Gregory, the Bishop of Rome, or Pope. Many years before, as a deacon, he had been attracted by the fair faces of some boys from Deira exposed for sale in the Roman slave-market. He was told that the children were Angles. " Not Angles, but angels," he replied. " Who," he asked, " is their 597 AUGUSTINE'S LANDING 39 king?" Hearing that his name was ^Ua, he continued to play upon the words. " Alleluia," he said, " shall be sung in the land of ^lla." Busy years kept him from seeking to fulfil his hopes, but at last the time C£ime when he could do something to carry out his intentions, not in the land of yElla, but in the land of ^thelberht He became Pope. In those days the Pope had far less authority over the Churches of Western Europe than he after- wards acquired, but he offered the only centre round which they could rally, now that the Empire had broken up into many states ruled over by different barbarian kings. The general habit of look- mg to Rome foi' authority, which had been diffused over the whole Empire whilst Rome was still the seat of the Emperors, made men look to the Roman Bishop for advice and help as they had once looked to the Roman Emperor. Gregory, who united to the tender- heartedness of the Christian the strength of will and firmness of purpose which had marked out the best of the Emperors, now sent Augustine to England as the leader of a band of missionaries. 4. Augustine's Mission. 597. — Augustine with his companions landed at Ebbsfleet, in Thanet, where ^Ethelberht's forefathers had landed nearly a century and a half before. After a while .^thelberht arrived. Singing a litany, and bearing aloft a painting of the Saviour, the missionaries appeared before him. He had already learned from his Christian wife to respect Christians, but he was not prepared to forsake his own religion. He welcomed the new- comers, and told them that they were free to convert those who would willingly accept their doctrine. A place was assigned to them in Canterbury, and they were allowed to use Bertha's church. In the end ^thelberht himself, together with thousands of the Kentish men, received baptism. It was more by their example than by their teaching that Augustine's band won converts. The missionaries lived ' after the model of the primitive Church, giving themselves to frequent prayers, watchings, and fastings ; preaching to all who were within their reach, disregarding all worldly things as matters with which they had nothing to do, accepting from those whom they taught just what seemed necessary for livelihood, living themselves altogether in accordance with what they taught, and with hearts prepared to suffer every adversity, or even to die, for that truth which they preached.' 5. Monastic Christianity. — These missionaries were monks as well as preachers. The Christians of those days considered the monastic life to be the highest. In the early days of the Church, when the world was full of vice and cruelty, it seemed hardly 40 THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 597-616 possible to live in the world without being dragged down to its wickedness. Men and women, therefore, who wished to keep them- selves pure, withdrew to hermitages or monasteries, where they might be removed from temptation, and might fit themselves for heaven by prayer and fasting. In the fifth century Benedict of Nursia had organised in Italy a system of life for the monastery which he governed, and the Benedictine rule, as it was called, was soon accepted in almost all the monasteries of Western Europe. The spec ial feature of this rule was that it encouraged labour as well as prayer. It was a saying of Benedict himself that ' to labour is to pray.' He did not mean that labour was good in itself, but that monks who worked during some hours of the day would guard their minds against evil thoughts better than if they tried to pray all day long. Augustine and his companions were Benedictine monks, and their quietness and contentedness attracted the popu- lation amidst which they had settled. The religion of the heathen English was a religion which favoured bravery and endurance, counting the warrior who slaughtered most enemies as most highly favoured by the gods. The religion of Augustine was one of peace and self-denial. Its symbol was the cross, to be borne in the heart of the believer. The message brought by Augustine was very hard to learn. If Augustine had expected the whole English population to forsake entirely its evil ways and to walk in paths of peace, he would probably have been rejected at once. It was perhaps be- cause he was a monk that he did not expect so much. A monk was accustomed to judge laymen by a lower standard of self-denial than that by which he judged himself. He would, therefore, not ask too much of the new converts. They must forsake the heathen temples and sacrifices, and must give up some particularly evil habits The rest must be left to time and the example of the monks. 6. The Archbishopric of Canterbury. — After a short stay Augustine revisited Gaul and came back as Archbishop of the English, ^thelberht gave to him a ruined church at Canterbury, and that poor church was named Christ Church, and became the mother church of England. From that day the Archbishop's See has been fixed at Canterbup/. If Augustine in his character of monk led men by example, in his character of Archbishop he had to organise the Church. With /Ethelberht's help he set up a bishopric at Rochester and another in London. London was now again an important trading .city, which, though not in /Ethelberht's own kingdom of Kent, formed part of the kingdom of Essex, which was dependent on Kent. More than these three Sees Augustine was 588-593 ^i^i^ GKEATNESS OF NOR'JH-HUMHERLAND 41 unable to establish. An attempt to obtain the friendly co-operation of the Welsh bishops broke down because Augustine insisted on their adoption of Roman customs ; and Lawrence, who succeeded to the archbishopric after Augustine's death, could do no more than his predecessor had done. 7. Death of iEthelberht. 616.— In 616 .^thelberht died. The over-lordship of the kings of Kent ended with him, and Augustine's church, which had largely depended upon his influence, very nearly ended as well. Essex relapsed into heathenism, and it was only by terrifying yEthelberht's son with the vengeance of St. Peter that Lawrence kept him from relapsing also. On the other hand, Rsedwald, king of the East Anglians, who succeeded to much of /Ethelberht's authority, so far accepted Christianity as to worship Christ amongst his other gods. 8. The Three Kingdoms opposed to the Welsh. — Augustine's Church was weak, because it depended on the kings, and had not had time to root itself in the affections of the people, ^thelberht's supremacy was also weak. The greater part of the small states which still existed — Sussex, Kent, Essex, East Anglia, and most of the small kingdoms of central England — were no longer bordered by a Celtic population. For them the war of conquest and defence was at an end. If any one of the kingdoms was to rise to perma- nent supremacy it must be one of those engaged in strenuous warfare, and as yet strenuous warfare was only carried on with the Welsh. The kingdoms which had the Welsh on their borders were three — Wessex, Mercia, and North-humberland, and neither Wessex nor Mercia was as yet very strong. Wessex was too distracted by conflicts amongst members of the kingly family, and Mercia was as yet too small to be of much account. North- humberland was therefore the first of the three to rise to the foremost place. Till the death of ^lla, the king of Deira, from whose land had been carried off the slave-boys whose faces had charmed Gregoi-y at Rome, Deira and Bemicia had been as separate as Kent and Essex. Then in 588 .-Ethelric of Bernicia drove out Ella's son and seized his kingdom of Deira, thus joining the two kingdoms of Deira and Bernicia (see p. 36) into one, under the new name of North-humberland.' g. ^thelfrith and the Kymry. — In 593, four years before the landing of Augustine, ^thelric was succeeded by his son ^thel- frith. ^thelfrith began a fresh struggle with the Welsh. We * Genealogy of the principal Northumbrian kings t — \^Noie. — The nnmes of kings are in capitals. The figures denote the order of succession of those who 42 THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 593-603 know little of the internal history of the Welsh population, but what we do know shows that towards the end of the sixth century there was an improvement in their rehgious and political existence. The monasteries were thronged, especially the great monastery of Bangor-iscoed, in the modern Flintshire, which contained 2,000 monks. St. David and other bishops gave examples of piety. In fighting against ^thelfrith the warriors of the Britons were fighting for their last chance of independence. They still held the west from the Clyde to the Channel. Unhappily for them, the Severn, the Dee, and the Solway Firth divided their land into four portions, and if an enemy coming from the east could seize upon the heads of the inlets into which those rivers flowed he could prevent the defenders of the west from aiding one another. Already in 577, by the victory of Deorham (see p. 35;, the West Saxons had seized on the mouth of the Severn, and had split off the West Welsh of the south-western peninsula, ^thelfrith had to do with the Kymry, whose territories stretched from the Bristol Channel to the Clyde, and who held an outlying wedge of land then known as Loidis and Elmet, which now together form the West Riding of Yorkshire. 10. iEthelfrith's Victories. — The long range of barren hills which separated ^thelfrith's kingdom from the Kymry made it difficult for either side to strike a serious blow at the other. In the extreme north, where a low valley joins the Firths of Clyde and Forth, it was easier for them to meet. Here the Kymry found an ally outside their own borders. Towards the end of the fifth century a colony of Irish Scots had driven out the Picts from the modern Argyle. In 603 their king, Aedan, bringing with him a vast army, in which Picts and the Kymry appear to have taken part, invaded the northern part of ^thelfrith's country. .'Ethelfrith defeated him at Degsastan, which was probably ruled over the whole of North-humberland. Those whose names are followed by a B. or D. ruled only over Bernicia or Deira respectively.] House of Bern icia House of Deira Ida B. Iff^ Y). I. ^THELRIC ^LLA D. ^^Ifric 2. ^THELFRITH = Acha 3. EaDWINE OSRIC D. 4. Oswald 5. Oswiu Oswini D. 603-625 ^THELFRITH AND E AD WINE 43 Dawstone, near Jedburgh. ' From that time no king of the Scots durst come into Britain to make war upon the EngUsh.' Having freed himself from the Scots in the north, ^thelfrith turned upon the Kymry. After a succession of struggles of which no record remains, he forced his way in 613 to the western sea near Chester. The Kymry had brought with them the 2,000 monks of their great monastery Bangor-iscoed, to pray for victory whilst their warriors were engaged in battle. ^Ethelfrith bade his men to slay them all. ' Whether they bear arms or no,' he said, ' they fight against us when they cry against us to their God.' The monks were slain to a man. Their countrymen were routed, and Chester fell into the hands of the English. The capture of Chester split the Kymric kingdom in two, as the battle of Deorham thirty-five years before had split that kingdom off from the West Welsh of the south- western peninsula. The Southern Kymry, in what is now called Wales, could no longer give help to the Northern Kymry between the Clyde and the Ribble, who grouped themselves into the king- dom of Strathclyde,. the capital of which was Alcluyd, the modern Dumbarton. Three weak Celtic states, unable to assist one another, would not long be able to resist their invaders. II. The Greatness of Eadwine. — Powerful as ^thelfrith was, he was jealous of young Eadwine, a son of his father's rival, ^Ua of Deira. For some years Eadwine had been in hiding, at one time with Welsh princes, at another time with English kings. In 617 he took refuge with Raedwald, the king of the East Angles. yEthel- frith demanded the surrender of the fugitive. Raedwald hesitated, but at last refused, ^thelfrith atacked him, but was defeated and slain near the river Idle, at some point near Retford. Eadwine the Deiran then became king over the united North-humberland in the place of ^thelfrith the Bemician, whose sons fled for safety to the Picts beyond the Forth. Eadwine completed and consolidated the conquests of his predecessors. He placed a fortress, named after himself Eadwinesburh, or Edinburgh, on a rocky height near the Forth, to guard his land against a fresh irruption of Scots and Picts, such as that which had been turned back at Degsastan. He conquered from the Kymry Loidis and Elmet, and he launched a fleet at Chester which added to his dominions the Isle of Man and the greater island which was henceforth known as Anglesea, the island of the Angles. Eadwine assumed unwonted state. Wherever he went a standard was borne before him, as well as a spear decorated with a tuft of feathers, the ancient sign of Roman authority. It has been thought by some that his meaning was that 44 THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 625-626 he, rather than any Welshman, was the true Gwledig, the successor of the Duke of the Britains {Dux Brltawtiarufn), and that the name of Bretwalda, or ruler of the Britons, which he is said to have borne, was only a translation of the Welsh Gwledig. It is true that the title of Bretwalda is given to other powerful kings before and after Eadwine, some of whom were in no sense rulers over Britons ; but it is possible that it was taken to signify a ruler over a large part of Britain, though the men over w horn he ruled were English, and not Britons. \2. Eadwine's Supremacy.— Eadwine's immediate kingship did not reach further south than the Humber and the Dee. Ikit before 625 he had brought the East Angles and the kingdoms of central England to submit to his over-lordship, and he hoped to make himself over-lord of the south as well, and thus to reduce all Enghmd to dependence on himself. In 625 he planned an at- tack upon the West Saxons, and with the object of winning Kent to his side, he married vEthelburh, a sister of the Kentish king. Kent was still the only Christian kingdom,, and Eadwine was obliged to promise to his wife protection for her Christian worship. He was now free to attack the West Saxons. In 626, before he set out, ambassadors arrived from their king. As Eadwine was listening to them, one of their number rushed forward to stab him. His life was saved by the devotion of Lilla, one of his thegns, who threw his body in the way of the assassin, and was slain by the stroke intended for his lord. After this Eadwine marched against the West Saxons. He defeated them in battle and forced them to acknowledge him as their over-lord. He was now over-lord of all the English states except Kent, and Kent had become his ally in consequence of his marriage. 13. Character of the later Conquests. — Eadwine's over-lordship had been gained with as little difficulty as ^^thelberht's had been. The ease with which each of them carried out their purpose can only be explained by the change which had taken place in the con- dition of the English. The small bodies of conquerors which had landed at different parts of the coast had been interested to a man in the defence of the lands which they had seized. Every freeman had been ready to come forward to defend the soil which his tribe had gained. After tribe had been joined to tribe, and still more after kingdom had been joined to kingdom, there were large numbers who ceased to have any interest in resisting the Welsh on what was, as far as they were concerned, a distant frontier. Thus, when Ceawlin was fighting to extend the West Saxon frontiers 626 CONQUEST AND KINGSHIP 45 in the valley of the Severn, it mattered little to a man whose own allotted land lay on the banks of the Southampton Water whether or not his English kinsmen won lands from the Welsh near Bath or Gloucester. The first result of this change was that the king's war-band formed a far greater proportion of his military force than it had formed originally. There was still the obligation upon the whole body of the freemen to take arms, but it was an obligation which had become more difficult to fulfil, and it must often have happened that very few freemen took part in a battle except the local levies concerned in defending their own im- mediate neighbourhood. A military change of this kind would account for the undoubted fact that the further the English con- quest penetrated to the west the less destructive it was of British hfe. The thegns, or warriors personally attached to the king, did not want to plough and reap with their own hands. They would be far better pleased to spare the lives of the conquered and to compel them to labour. Every step in advance was marked by a proportionately larger Welsh clement in the population. 14. Political Changes. — The character of the kingship was as much affected by the change as the character of the population. The old folk-moots still remained as the local courts of the smaller kingdoms, or of the districts out of which the larger kingdoms were composed, and continued to meet under the presidency of ealdornien appointed or approved by the king. Four men and a reeve, all of them humble cultivators, could not, however, be expected to walk up to York from the shores of the Forth, or even from the banks of the Tyne, whenever Eadwine needed their counsel. Their place in the larger kingdoms was there- fore taken by the Witenagemot (Z"/^^ moot of the wise nien\ composed of the ealdormen and the chief thegns, together with the priests attached to the king's service in the time of heathendom, and, in the time of Christianity, the bishop or bishops of his kingdom. In one way the king was the stronger for the change. His counsellors, like his fighting force, were more depen- dent on himself than before. He was able to plan greater designs, and to carry out military enterprises at a greater distance. In another way he was the weaker for the change. He had less support from the bulk of his people, and was more likely to undertake enterprises in which they had no interest. The over-lordships of .^thelberht and Eadwine appear very imposing, but no real tie united the men of the centre of England to those of Kent at one time, or to thof^e of North-humberland at another. Eadwine was 46 THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 627-633 supreme over the other kings because he had a better war-band than they had. If another king appeared whose war-band was better than his, his supremacy would disappear. 15. Eadwine's Conversion and Fall. — In 627 Eadwine, moved by his wife's entreaties and the urgency of her chaplain, Paulinus, called upon his Witan to accept Christianity. Coifi, the priest, declared that he had long served his gods for naught, and would try a change of masters. ' The present life of man, O king,' said a thegn, ' seems to me in comparison of that time which is unknown to us like to the swift flight of a sparrow through the room where- in you sit at supper in winter, with your ealdormen and thegns, and a good fire in the midst, and storms of rain and snow without. ... So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before or what is to follow we are utterly ignorant. If there- fore this new doctrine contains something more certain, it seems justly to deserve to be followed.' On this recommendation Christi- anity was accepted. Paulinus was acknowledged as Bishop of York. The new See, which had been originally intended by Pope Gregory to be an archbishopric, was ultimately acknow- ledged as such, but as yet it was but a missionary station. Paulinus converted thousands in Deira, but the men of Bernicia were unaffected by his pleadings. Christianity, like thje ex- tension of all better teaching, brought at first not peace but the sword. The new religion was contemptible in the eyes of warriors. The supremacy of Eadwine was shaken. The men of East Anglia slew their king, who had followed his over-lord's example by accepting Christianity. The worst blow came from Mercia. Hitherto it had been only a little state on the Welsh border. Its king, Penda, the stoutest warrior of his day, now gathered under him all the central states, and founded a new Mercia which stretched from the Severn to the Fens. He first turned on the West Saxons, defeated them at Cirencester, and in 628 brought the territory of the Hwiccas under Mercian sway. On the other hand, East Anglia accepted Eadwine's supremacy and Christianity. Penda called to his aid Caedwalla, the king of Gwynnedd, the Snowdonian region of Wales. That he should have done so shows how completely yEthelfrith's victory at Chester, by cutting the Kymric realm in two, had put an end to all fears that the Kymry could ever make head against England as a whole. The alliance was too strong for Eadwine, and in 633, at the battle of Heathfield— the modern Hatfield, in Yorkshire— the great king was slain and his army routed. 635 THE COLUMBAN MISSIONARIES 47 16. Oswald's Victory at Heavenfield. — Penda was content to split up Bernicia and Deira into separate kingdoms, and to join East Anglia to his subject states. Caedwalla had all the wrongs of his race to avenge. He remained in North-humberland burning and destroying till 635, when Oswald, who was a son of yEthelfrith and of Eadwine's sister, and therefore united the claims of the rival families^ gathered the men of Bernicia round him, overthrew Caedwalla at Heavenfield, near the Roman Wall, and was grate- fully accepted as king by the whole of North-humberland. 17. Oswald and Aidan.— In the days of Eadwine, Oswald, as the heir of the rival house of Bernicia, had passed his youth in exile, and had been converted to Christianity in the monastery of Hii, the island now known as lona. The monastery had been founded by Columba, an Irish Scot. Christianity had been intro- duced into Ireland by Patrick early in the fifth century. Ireland was a land of constant and cruel war between its tribes, and all who wished to be Christians in more than name withdrew them- selves into monasteries, where they lived an even stricter and more ascetic life than the monks did in other parts of Western Europe. Bishops were retained in the monasteries to ordain priests, but they were entirely powerless. Columba's monastery at Hii sent its missionaries abroad, and brought Picts as well as Scots under the influence of Christianity. Oswald now requested its abbot, the suc- cessor of Columba, to send a missionary to preach the faith to the men of North-humberland in the place of Paulinus, who had fled when Eadwine was slain. The first who was sent came back reporting that the people were too stubborn to be converted. " Was it their stubbornness or your harshness ? " asked the monk Aidan. " Did you forget to give them the milk first and then the meat ? " Aidan was chosen to take the place of the brother who had failed. He estabHshed himself, not in an inland town, but in Holy Island. His life was spent in wandenng amongst the men of the valleys opposite, winning them over by his gentleness and his self-denying energy. Oswald, warrior as he was, had almost all the gentleness and piety of Aidan. ' By reason of his con- stant habit of praying or giving thanks to the Lord he was wont whenever he sat to hold his hands upturned on his knees.' On one occasion when he sat down to a feast with Aidan by his side, he sent both the dainties before him and the silver dish on which they had been served to be divided amongst the poor. " May this hand," exclaimed the delighted Aidan, " never grow old ! " 18. Oswald's Greatness and Overthrow. — As a king Oswald 48 THE STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 635-659 based his power on the acknowledgment of his over-lordship by all the kingdoms which were hostile to Penda. In 635 Wessex accepted Christianity, and the acceptance of Christianity brought with it the acceptance of Oswald's supremacy. Penda was thus surrounded by enemies, but his courage did not fail him, and in 642 at the battle of Maserfield he defeated Oswald. Oswald fell in the battle, begging with his last words for God's mercy on the souls of his followers. 19. Penda's Overthrow. -After Oswald's fall Bernicia was ruled by his brother Oswiu. Deira, again divided from it, was governed first by Eadwine's cousin Osric, and then by Osric's son, Oswini, who acknowledged Penda as his over-lord. Oswini was a man after Aidan's own heart. Once he gave a horse to Aidan to carry him on his mission journeys. Aidan gave it away to the first beggar he met. " Is that son of a mare," answered Aidan to the reproaches of the king, " worth more in your eyes than that son of God?" Oswini fell at the bishop's feet and entreated his pardon. Aidan wept. " I am sure," he cried, " the king will not live long. I never till now saw a king humble." Aidan was right. In 651 Oswini was slain by the order of King Oswiu of Bernicia, who had long engaged in a struggle with Penda. Penda had for some years been burning and slaughtering in Bernicia, till he had turned a quarrel between himself and Oswiu into a national strife. Oswiu rescued Bernicia from destruction, and after Oswini's murder joined once more the two kingdoms together. Oswini was the last heir of Ella's house, and from that time there was but one North-humber- land. In 655 Oswiu and Penda met to fight, as it seemed for supremacy over the whole of England, by the river Winwasd, near the present Leeds. The heathen Penda was defeated and slain. 20. The Three Kingdoms and the Welsh. — For a moment it seemed as if England would be brought together under the rule of Oswiu. After Penda's death Mercia accepted Christianity, and the newly united Mercia was split up into its original parts ruled by several kings. The supremacy of Oswiu was, however, as little to be borne by the Mercians as the supremacy of Penda had been borne by the men of North-humberland. Under Wulfliere the Mercians rose in 659 against Oswiu. All hope of uniting England was for the present at an end. For about a century and a half longer there remained three larger kingdoms— North-humberland, Mercia, and Wessex, whilst four smaller ones — East AngHa, Essex, Kent, and Sussex— were usually attached either to Mercia or to Wessex. The failure of North-humberland to maintain the power 664 ENGLISH CHRISTIANITY 49 was, no doubt, in the first place owing to the absence of any common danger, the fear of which would bind together its populations in self-defence. The northern Kymry of Strathclyde were no longer formidable, and they grew less formidable as years passed on. The southern Kymry of Wales were too weak to threaten Mercia, and the Welsh of the south-western peninsula were too weak to threaten Wessex. It was most unlikely that any permanent union of the English states would be brought about till some enemy arose who was more terrible to them than the Welsh could any longer be. 21. The English Missionaries. — Some preparation might, how- ever, be made for the day of union by the steady growth of the Church. The South Saxons, secluded between the forest and the sea, were the last to be converted, but with them English heathenism came to an end as an avowed religion, though it still continued to in- fluence the multitude in the form of a belief in fairies and witchcraft. Monasteries and nunneries sprang up on all sides. Missionaries spread over the country. In their mouths, and still more in their lives, Christianity taught what the fierce English warrior most wanted to learn, the duty of restraining his evil passions, and above all his cruelty. Nowhere in all Europe did the missionaries appeal so exclusively as they did in England to higher and purer motives. Nowhere but in England were to be found kings like Oswald and Oswini, who bowed their souls to the lesson of the Cross, and learned that they were not their own, but were placed in power that they might use their strength in helping the poor and needy. 22. Dispute between Wilfrid and Colman. 664. — The lesson was all the better taught because those who taught it were monks. Monasticism brought with it an extravagant view of the life of self- denial, but those who had to be instructed needed to have the lesson written plainly so that a child might read it. The rough warrior or the rough peasant was more likely to abstain from drunkenness, if he had learned to look up to men who ate and drank barely enough to enable them to live ; and he was more likely to treat women with gentleness and honour, if he had learned to look up to some women who separated themselves from the joys of married life that they might give themselves to fasting and prayer. Yet, great as the influence of the clergy was, it was in danger of being lessened through internal disputes amongst themselves. A very large part of England had been converted by the Celtic missionaries, and the Celtic missionaries, though their life and teaching was in the main the same as that of the Church of Canterbury and of the Churches of the Continent, differed from them in the shape of 50 STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 664-668 the tonsure and in the time at which they kept their Easter. These things were themselves unimportant, but it was of great importance that the young EngUsh Church should not be separated from the Churches of more civilised countries which had preserved much of the learning and art of the old Roman Empire. One of those who felt strongly the evil which would follow on such a separation was Wilfrid. He was scornful and self-satisfied, but he had travelled to Rome, and had been impressed with the ecclesiastical memories of the great city, and with the fervour and learning of its clergy. He came back resolved to bring the customs of England into con- formity with those of the churches of the Continent. On his arrival, Oswiu, in 664, gathered an assembly of the clergy of the north headed by Colman, Aidan's successor, to discuss the point. Learned arguments were poured forth on either side. Oswiu listened in a puzzled way. Wilfrid boasted that his mode of keep- ing Easter was derived from Peter, and that Christ had given to Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Oswiu at once decided to follow Peter, lest when he came to the gate of that kingdom Peter, who held the keys, should lock him out. Wilfrid triumphed, and the English Church was in all outward matters regulated in conformity with that of Rome, 23. Archbishop Theodore and the Penitential System. — In 668, four years after Oswiu's decision was taken, Theodore of Tarsus was consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury at Rome by the Pope himself When he arrived in England the time had come for the purely missionary stage of the English Church to come to an end. Hitherto the bishops had been few, only seven in all England. Their number was now increased, and they were set to work no longer merely to convert the heathen, but to see that the clergy did their duty amongst those who had been already converted. Gradually, under these bishops, a parochial clergy came into existence. Sometimes the freemen of a hamlet, or of two or three hamlets together, would demand the constant residence of a priest. Sometimes a lord would settle a priest to teach his serfs. The parish clergy attacked violence and looseness of life in a way different from that of the monks. The monks had given examples of extreme self-denial. Theodore introduced the penitential system of the Roman Church, and ordered that those who had committed sin should be excluded from sharing in the rites of the Church until they had done penance. They were to fast, or to repeat prayers, sometimes for many years, before they were readmitted to communion. Many centuries afterwards good men objected that these penances were only bodily actions, and 668 THEODORE AND EALDHELM SI did not necessarily bring with them any real repentance. In the seventh century the greater part of the population could only be reached by such bodily actions. They had never had any thought that a murder, for instance, was anything more than a dangerous action which might bring down on the murderer the vengeance of the relations of the murdered man, which might be bought off with the payment of a weregild of a few shillings. The murderer who was required by the Church to do penance was being taught that a murder was a sin against God and against himself, as well as an offence against his fellow-men. Gradually — very gradually — men would learn from the example of the monks and from the discipline of penance that they were to live for something higher than the gratification of their own passions. — —^v^^/^** Saxon church at Bradford-on-Avon, Wilts. 24. Ealdhelm and Csedmon. — When a change is good in itself, it usually bears fruit in unexpected ways. Theodore was a scholar as well as a bishop. Under his care a school grew up at Canterbury, full of all the learning of the Roman world. That which distin- guished this school and others founded in imitation of it was that the scholars did not keep their learning to themselves, but strove to make it helpful to the ignorant and the poor. They learnt archi- tecture on the Continent in order to raise churches of stone in the place of churches of wood. One of these churches is still standing at Bradford-on-Avon. Its builder was Ealdhelm, the abbot of Malmesbury, a teacher of all the knowledge of the time. Ealdhelm, learned as he was, let his heart go forth to the unlearned. Finding that his neighbours would not listen to his sermons, he sang to them E 8 52 STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 673-735 on a bridge to win them to higher things. Like all people who cannot read, the English of those days loved a song. In the north, Caedmon, a rude herdsman on the lands of the abbey which in later days was known as Whitby, was vexed with himself because he could not sing. When at ale-drinkings his comrades pressed him to sing a song, he would leave his supper unfinished and return home ashamed. One night in a dream he heard a voice bidding him sing of the Creation. In his sleep the words came to him, and they remained with him when he woke. He had become a poet — a rude poet, it is true, but still a poet. The gift which Casdmon had acquired never left him. He sang of the Creation and of the whole course of God's providence. To the end he was unable to compose any songs which were not religious. 25. Bede. 673 — 735. — Of all the English scholars of the time Bccda, usually known as 'the venerable Bede,' was the most remark- able. He was a monk of Jarrow on the Tyne. From his youth up he was a writer on all subjects embraced by the knowledge of his day. One subject he made his own. He was the first English historian. The title of his greatest work was the Ecclesiastical History of the EngHsh Nation. He told how that nation had been converted, and of the fortunes of its Church; but for him the Church included the whole nation, and he told of the doings of kings and people, as well as of priests and monks. In this he was a true interpreter of the spirit of the English Church. Its clergy did not stand aloof from the rulers of the state, but worked with them as well as for them. The bishops stepped into the place of the heathen priests in the Witenagemots of the kings, and counselled them in matters of state as well as in matters of religion. 26. Church Councils.— Bede recognised in the title of his book that there was such a thing as an English nation long before there was any political unity. Whilst kingdom was fighting against kingdom, Theodore in 673 assembled the first English Church council at Hertford. From that time such councils of the bishops and principal clergy of all England met whenever any ecclesi- astical question required them to deliberate in common. The clergy at least did not meet as West Saxons or as Mercians. They met on behalf of the whole English Church, and their united con- sultations must have done much to spread the idea that, in spite of the strife between the kings, the English nation was really one. 27. Struggle between Mercia and Wessex.— Many years passed away before the kingdoms could be brought under one king. North-humberland stood apart from southern England, and during 7IO-779 MERCIANS AND WEST SAXONS 53 Saxon horsemen. (Had. MS. 603.) the latter half of the seventh century Wessex grew in power. Wessex had been weak because it was seldom thoroughly united- Each district was presided over by an ^theling, or chief 01 royal blood, and it was only occasionally that thesei^thehngSjSubmitted to the king. From time to time a strong king com- pelled the obedience of the ^thelings and carried on the old struggle with the western Welsh. It was not till 710 that Ine suc- ceeded in driving the Welsh out of Somerset, --. and about the same time a body of the West Saxons advancing through Dorset reached Exeter. They took possession of half the city for them- selves, and left the remainder to the Welsh. Ine was, however, checked by fresh outbreaks of the subordinate ^thelings, and in 726 he gave up the struggle and went on a pilgrimage to Rome, ^thel- bald, king of the Mercians, took the opportunity to invade Wessex, and made himself master of the country and over-lord of all the other king- doms south of the H umber. In 754 the West Saxons rose against him and defeated him at Burford. After a few years his successor, Offa, once more took up the task of making the Mercian king over-lord of southern England. In 775, after a long struggle, he brought Kent as well as Essex under his sway. In 779 he defeated the West Saxons at Bensington, and pushed the Mercian frontier to the Thames. Further than that Offa did not venture to go, and, great as he was, the West Saxons within their shrunken Group of Saxon warriors. MS. 603.) (Harl. 54 STRIFE OF THE ENGLISH KINGDOMS 711-802 limits continued to be independent of him. He turned his arms upoh the Welsh, and drove them back from the Severn to the embankment which is known from his name as Offa's Dyke. The West Saxons, being freed from attack on the side of Mercia, overran Devon. Then there was a contest for the West Saxon crown between Beorhtric and Ecgberht. Beorhtric gained the upper hand, and entered into alliance with Offa by taking his daughter to wife. Ecgberht fled to the Continent. 28. Mohammedanism and the Carolingian Empire.— A great change had passed over Europe since the days when a Frankish princess, by her marriage with the Kentish Ethelberht, had smoothed the way for the introduction of Christianity into England. In the first part of the seventh centuiy Mohammed had preached a new religion in Arabia. He taught that there was one God, and that Mohammed was his prophet. After his death his Arab followers 'spread as conquerors over the neighbouring countries. Before the end of the century they had subdued Persia, Syria, and Egypt, and were pushing westwards along the north coast of Africa. In 711 they crossed the Straits of Gibraltar. All Spain, with the exception of a hilly district in the north, soon fell into their hands, and in 717 they crossed the Pyrenees. There can be little doubt that, if they had subdued Gaul, Mohammedanism and not Christianity would for a long time have been the prevailing religion in Europe. From this Europe was saved by a great Frankish warrior, Charles Martel {the Hammer)^ who in 732 drove the invaders back at a great battle between Tours and Poitiers. Charles's son, Pippin, dethroned the reigning family and became king of the Franks. Pippin's son was Charles the Great, who before he died ruled over the whole of Gaul and Germany, over the north and centre of Italy, and the north-east of Spain. His rule was favoured both by the Frankish warriors and by the clergy, who were glad to see so strong a bulwark erected against the attacks of the Mohammedans. At that time the Roman Empire, which had never ceased to exist at Constantinople, fell into the hands of Irene, the murderess of her son. In 800 the Pope, refusing to acknowledge that the Empire could have so unworthy a head, placed the Imperial crown on the head of Charles as the successor of the old Roman Emperors. 29. Ecgberht's Rule. 802-839.— Though Charles did not directly govern England, he made his influence felt there. Offa had claimed his protection, and Ecgberht took refuge at his court. Ecgberht doubtless learned something of the art of ruling from him, and in 802 he returned to England. Beorhtric was by this time dead, 802-839 ENGLAND UNDER ECGBERHT 55 and Ecgberht was accepted as king by the West Saxons. Before he died, in 839, he had made himself the over-lord of all the other kingdoms. He was never, indeed, directly king of all England. Kent, Sussex, and Essex were governed by rulers of his own family appointed by himself. Mercia, East Anglia, and North-humberland retained their own kings, ruling under Ecgberht as their over-lord. Towards the west Ecgberht's direct government did not reach beyond the Tamar, though the Cornish Celts acknowledged his authority, as did the Celts of Wales. The Celts of Strathclyde and the Picts and Scots remained entirely independent. CHAPTER IV THE ENGLISH KINGSHIP AND THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES LEADING DATES First landing of the Danes 787 Treaty of W^edmore 878 Dependent alliance of the Scots with Eadward the Elder . 925 Accession of Eadgar g5g I. The. West Saxon Supremacy. — It was quite possible that the power founded by Ecgberht might pass away as completely as did the power which had been founded by ^Ethelfrith of North- humberland or by Penda of Mercia. To some extent the danger was averted by the unusual strength of character which for six generations showed itself in the family of Ecgberht. For nearly a century and a half after Ecgberht's death no ruler arose from his line who had not great qualities as a warrior or as a ruler. It was no less important that these successive kings, with scarce!)' an exception, kept up a good understanding with the clergy, and especially with the Archbishops of Canterbury, so that the whole of the influence of the Church was thrown in favour of the political unity of England under the West Saxon line. The clergy wished to see the establishment of a strong national government for the protection of the national Church. Yet it was difficult to establish such a government unless other causes than the goodwill of the clergy had contributed to its maintenance. Peoples who have had little intercourse except by fighting with one another rarely unite 56 THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 787 heartily unless they have some common enemy to ward off, and some common leader to look up to in the conduct of their defence. ' Remains of a Viking ship, from a cairn at Gokstad. (Now in the University at Christiania.) 2. The Coming of the Northmen. — The common enemy came from the north. At the end of the eighth centuiy the inhabitants I Genealogy of the English kings from Ecgberht to Eadgar:— ECGBERHT 802-8-30 I .Ethelwulf 839-858 ^^THELBALD 858-860 Eadward 901-925 -^THELSTAN 925-940 ^THELBERHT 860-866 ^fHELRED 866-871 .Alfred 871-901 ^thelflasd = ^thelred (the Lady of the Mercians) Eadmund 940-946 Eadred 946-955 Eadwig 955-959 Eadgar 959-975 787-866 PIRA C Y AND PL UNDER 57 of Norway and Denmark resembled the Angles and Saxons three or four centuries before. They swarmed over the sea as pirates to plunder wherever they could find stored-up wealth along the coasts of Western Europe. The Northmen were heathen still, and their religion was the old religion of force. They loved battle even more than they loved plunder. They held that the warrior who was slain in fight was received by the god Odin in Valhalla, where immortal heroes spent their days in cutting one another to pieces, and were healed of their wounds in the evening that they might join in the nightly feast, and be able to fight again on the morrow. He that died in bed was condemned to a chilly and dreary existence in the abode of the goddess Hela, whose name is the Norse equivalent of Hell. 3. The English Coast Plundered. — Since Englishmen had settled in England they had lost the art of seamanship. The Northmen therefore were often able to plunder and sail away. They could only be attacked on land, and some time would pass before the Ealdorman who ruled the district could gather together not only his own war-band, but the fyrd, or levy of all men of fighting age. When at last he arrived at the spot on the coast where the pirates had been plundering, he often found that they were already gone. Yet, as time went on, the Northmen took courage, and pushed far enough into the interior to be attacked before they could regain the coast. Their first landing had been in 787, before the time of Ecgberht. In Ecgberht's reign their attacks upon Wessex were so persis- Gold ring of ytthdwuif. tent that Ecgberht had to bring his own war-band to the succour of his Ealdormen. His son and successor, ^thelwulf, had a still harder struggle. The pirates spread their attacks over the whole of the southern and the eastern coast, and ventured to remain long enough on shore to fight a succession of battles. In 851 they were strong enough to remain during the whole winter in Thanet. The crews of no less than 350 ships landed in the mouth of the Thames sacked Canterbury and London. They were finally de- feated by ^thelwulf at Aclea {Ockley), in Surrey. In 858 ^thel- wulf died. Four of his sons wore the crown in succession ; the two eldest, iEthelbald and ^thelberht, ruling only a short time. 4. The Danes in the North.— The task of the third brother, 58 THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 866-878 ^thelred, who succeeded in 866, was harder than his father's. Hitherto the Northmen had come for plunder, and had departed sooner or later. A fresh swarm of Danes now arrived from Denmark to settle on the land as conquerors. Though they did not themselves fight on horseback, they seized horses to betake themselves rapidly from one part of England to the other. Their first attack was made on the north, where there was no great affection for the West Saxon kings. They overcame the greater part of North-humberland. They beat down the resistance of East Anglia, and, fastening its king, Eadmund, to a tree, shot him to death with arrows. His countrymen counted him a saint, and a great monastery arose at Bury St. Edmunds in his honour. Everywhere the Danes plun- dered and burnt the monasteries, because the monks were weak, and their houses were rich with jewelled service books and golden plate. They next turned upon Mercia, and forced the Mercian under-king to pay tribute to them. Only Wessex, to which the smaller eastern states of Kent and Sussex had by this time been completely annexed, retained its independence. 5. iElfred's Struggle in Wessex. 871— 878.— In Wessex ^thel- red strove hard against the invaders. He won a great victory at iEscesdun {Ashdoivn, near Reading), on the northern slope of the Berkshire Downs. After a succession of battles he was slain in 871. Though he left sons of his own, he was succeeded by Alfred, his youngest brother. It was not the English custom to give the crown to the child of a king if there was any one of the kingly family more fitted to wear it. vElfred was no common man. In his childhood he had visited Rome, and had been hallowed as king by Pope Leo IV., though the ceremony could have had no weight in Eng- land. He had early shown a love of letters, and the story goes that when his mother offered a book with bright illuminations to the one of her children who could first learn to read it, the prize was won by Alfred. During ^thelred's reign he had little time to give to learning. He fought nobly by his brothei-'s side in the battles of the day, and after he succeeded him he fought nobly as king at the head of his people. In 878 the Danish host, under its king, (kithrum, beat down all resistance. .Elfred was no longer able to keep in the open country, and took refuge with a few chosen warriors in the little island of Athelney, in Somerset, then surrounded by the waters of the fen country through which the Parret flowed. After a few weeks he came forth, and with the levies of Somerset and Wilts and of part of Hants he utterly de- feated Guthrum at Ethandun i^tEdington, in Wiltshire), and stormed his camp. S7S-SS6 ALFRED'S GREATNESS 59 6. The Treaty of Chippenham, and its Results. 878.— After this defeat Guthrum and the Danes swore to a peace with yElfred at Chippenham. They were afterwards baptised in a body at Aller, not far from Athelney. Guthrum with a few of his companions then visited yElfred at Wedmore, a village near the southern foot of the Mendips, from which is taken the name by which the treaty is usually but wrongly known. By this treaty Alfred retained no more than Wessex, with its dependencies, Sussex and Kent, and the western half of Mercia. The remainder of England as far north as the Tees was Gold jewel of yElfred found at Athelney. (Now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.) surrendered to the Danes, and became known as the Danelaw, be- cause Danish and not Saxon law prevailed in it. Beyond the Tees Bernicia maintained its independence under an English king. Though the English people never again had to struggle for its very existence as a political body, yet, in 886, after a successful war, yElfred wrung from Guthrum a fresh treaty by which the Danes surrendered London and the surrounding district. Vet, even after this second treaty, it might seem as if yElfred, who only ruled over 6o THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 886-901 a part of England, was worse off than his grandfather, Ecgberht, who had ruled over the whole. In reality he was better off. In the larger kingdom it would have been almost impossible to produce the national spirit which alone could have permanently kept the whole together. In the smaller kingdom it was possible, especially as there was a strong West Saxon element in the south- west of Mercia in consequence of its original settlement by a West Saxon king after the battle of Deorham (see p. 35). Moreover, Alfred, taking care not to offend the old feeling of local indepen- dence which still existed in Mercia, appointed his son-in-law, ^thel- red, who was a Mercian, to govern it as an ealdorman under himself 7. iElfred's Military Work. — Alfred would hardly have been able to do so much unless his own character had been singularly attractive. Other men have been greater warriors or legislators or scholars than v^lfred was, but no man has ever combined in his own person so much excellence in war, in legislation, and in scholarship. As to war, he was not only a daring and resolute commander, but he was an or- ganiser of the military forces of his people. One chief cause of the defeats of the English had been the difficulty of bringing together in a short time the ' fyrd,' or general levy of the male population, or of keeping it long together when men were needed at home to till tlie fields. yElfred did his best to overcome this difficulty by ordering that half the men of each shire should be always ready to fight, whilst half remained at home. This new half-army, like his new half-kingdom, was stronger than the whole one had been before. To an improved army Alfred added a navy, and he was the first English king who defeated the Danes at sea. ' 8. His Laws and Scholarship.— Alfred was too great a man to want to make every one conform to some ideal of his own choosing. It was enough for him to take men as they were, and to help them to become better. He took the old laws and customs, and then, suggesting a few improvements, submitted them to the approval of his Witenagemot, the assembly of his bishops and warriors. He knew also that men's conduct is influenced more by what they think than by what they are commanded to do. His whole land was steeped in ignorance. The monasteries had been the schools of learn- ing ; and many of them had been sacked by the Danes, their books An English vessel. (Harl. MS. 603.) 886-901 ^.LFRED A^ A I£lACHER 6i burnt, and their inmates scattered, whilst others were deserted, ceasing to receive new inmates because the first duty of EngHsh- men had been to defend their homes rather than to devote them- selves to a hfe of piety. Latin was the language in which the services of the Church were read, and in which books like Bede's Ecclesiastical History were written. Without a knowledge of Latin there could be no intercourse with the learned men of the Conti- nent, who used that language still amongst themselves. Yet when the Danes departed from Alfred's kingdom, there were but very few priests who could read a page of Latin. Alfred did his best to remedy the evil. He called learned men to him wherever they could be found. Some of ^ these were English; others, like Asser, who wrote J^\- fred's life, were Welsh ; others again were Ger- mans from beyond the sea. Yet Alfred was not con- tent. It was a great thing that there should be again schools in England for those who could write and speak Latin, the language of the learned, but his heart yearned for those who could not speak any- thing but their own native tongue. He set himself to be the teacher of these. He himself translated Latin books for them, with the object of imparting knowledge, not of giving, as a modem translator would do, the exact sense of the author. When, therefore, he knew anything which was not in the books, but which he thought it good for Englishmen to read, he added it to his translation. Even with this he was not content. The books of Latin writers which he translated taught men about the history and geo- graphy of the Continent. They taught nothing about the history of England itself, of the deeds and words of the men who had ruled the EngHsh nation. That these things might not be forgotten, he bade his learned men bring together all that was known of the history of his people since the day when they first landed as pirates on the coast of Kent. The Chronicle, as it is called, is the earliest history which any European nation possesses in its own tongue. A Saxon house. (Harl. MS. 603.) 62 THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 901-925 Yet, after all, such a man as Alfred is greater for what he was than for what he did. No other king ever showed forth so well in his own person the truth of the saying, ' He that would be first among you, let him be the servant of all.' 9. Eadward the Elder. 901— 925.— In 901 Alfred died. He had already fortified London as an outpost against the Danes, and he left to his son, Eadward, a small but strong and consolidated kingdom. The Danes on the other side of the frontier were not united. Guthrum's kingdom stretched over the old Essex and East Anglia, as well as over the south-eastern part of the old Mercia. The land from the H umber to the Nen was under the rule of Danes settled in the towns known to the English as the Five boroughs of Derb)', Leicester, Lincoln, Stamford, and Notting- ham. In the old Deira or modern Yorkshire was a separate Danish kingdom. Danes, in short, settled wherever we now find the place- names, such as Derby and Whitby, ending in the Danish termina- tion 'by' instead of in the English terminations 'ton' or 'ham,' as in Luton and Chippenham. Yet even in these parts the bulk of the population was usually English, and the English population would everywhere welcome an English conqueror. A century earlier a Mercian or a North-humbrian had preferred independence to submission to a West Saxon king. They now preferred a West Saxon king to a Danish master, especially as the old royal houses were extinct, and there was no one but the West Saxon king to lead them against the Danes. 10. Had ward's Conquests.— Eadward was not, like his father, a legislator or a scholar, but he was a great warrior. In a series of campaigns he subdued the Danish parts of England as far north as the Humber. He was aided by his brother-in-law, ^thelred, and after vEthelred's death by his own sister, ^thelred's widow, /Ethelflaed, the Lady of the Mercians, one of the few warrior-women of the world. Step by step the brother and sister won their way, not contenting themselves with victories in the open country, but securing each district as they advanced by the erection of 'burhs' or fortifications. Some of these ' burhs ' were placed in desolate Roman strongholds, such as Chester. Others were raised, like that of Warwick, on the mounds piled up in past times by a still earlier race. Others again, like that of Stafford, were placed where no fortress had been before. Towns, small at first, grew up in and around the ' burhs,' and were guarded by the courage of the towns- men themselves. Eadward, after his sister's death, took into his own hands the government of Mercia, and from that time all 925-940 E AD WARD AND HIS SONS 63 southern and central England was united under him. In 922 the Welsh kings acknowledged his supremacy. 11. Eadward and the Scots. — Tradition assigns to Eadward ii wider rule shortly before his death. In the middle of the ninth century the Picts and the intruding Scots (see p. 42) had been amalgamated under Keneth MacAlpin, the king of the Scots, and the new kingdom had since been welded together, just as Mercia and Wessex were being welded together by the attacks of the Danes. It is said that in 925 the king of the Scots, together with other northern rulers, chose Eadward ' to father and lord.' Pro- bably this statement only covers some act of alliance formed by the English king with the king of Scots and other lesser rulers. Nothing was more natural than that the Scottish king, Constan- tine, should wish to obtain the support of Eadward against his enemies ; and it was also natural that if Eadward agreed to support him, he would require some acknowledgment of the superiority of the English king ; but what was the precise form of the acknow- ledgment must remain uncertain. In 925 Eadward died. 12. .^thelstan. 925 — 940. — Three sons of Eadward reigned in succession. The eldest, of illegitimate birth, was yEthelstan. Sihtric, the Danish king at York, owned him as over-lord, and on Sihtric's death in 926, ^Ethelstan took Danish North-humberland under his direct rule. The Welsh kings were reduced to make a fuller acknow- ledgment of his supremacy than they had made to his father. He drove the Welsh out of the half of Exeter which had been left to them, and confined them to the modern Cornwall beyond the Tamar. Great rulers on the Continent sought his alliance. The empire of Charles the Great had broken up. One of ^thelstan's sisters was given to Charles the Simple, the king of the Western Franks ; another to Hugh the Great, Duke of the French and lord of Paris, who, though nominally the vassal of the king, was equal in power to his lord, and whose son was afterwards the first king of modem France. A third sister was given to Otto, the son of Henry, the king of the Eastern Franks, from whom, in due time, sprang a new line of Emperors, ^thelstan's greatness drew upon him the jealousy of the king of the Scots and of all the northern kings. In 937 he defeated them all in a great battle at Brunanburh, of which the site is unknown. His victory was celebrated in a splendid war-song. 13. Eadmund (940—946) and Eadred (946— 955).— ^Ethelstan died in 940. He was succeeded by his young brother, Eadmund, who had fought bravely at Brunanburh. Eadmund had to meet a 64 THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 940-955 general rising of the Danes of Mercia as well as of those of the north. After he had suppressed the rising he showed himself to be a great statesman as well as a great warrior. The relations between the king of the Enghsh and the king of the Scots had for some time been very uncertain. Little is definitely known about them, but it looks as if they joined the English whenever they were afraid of the Danes, and joined the Danes whenever they were afraid of the English. Eadmund took an opportunity of making it to be the interest of the Scottish king permanently to join the English. The southern part of the kingdom of Strathclyde had for some time been under the English kings. In 945 Eadmund overran the remainder, but gave it to Malcolm on condition that he should be his fellow-worker by sea and land. The king of Scots thus entered into a position of dependent alliance towards Eadmund. A great step was thus taken in the direction in which the inhabitants of Britain afterwards walked. The dominant powers in the island were to be English and Scots, not English and Danes. Eadmund thought it worth while to conciliate the Scottish Celts rather than to endeavour to cx^nquer them. The result of Eadmund's statesmanship was soon made manifest. He himself did not live to gather its fruits. In 946 an outlaw who had taken his seat at a feast in his hall slew him as he was attempting to drag him out by the hair. The next king, Eadred, the last of Eadward's sons, though sickly, had all the spirit of his race. He had another sharp struggle with the Danes, but in 954 he made himself their master. North-humberland was now tho- roughly amalgamated with the English kingdom, and was to be governed by an Englishman, Oswulf, with the title of Earl, an old Danish title equivalent to the English Ealdorman, having nothing to do, except philologically, with the old English word Eorl. 14. Danes and English.— In 955 Eadred died, having com- pleted the work which Alfred had begun, and which had been carried on by his son and his three grandsons. England, from the Forth to the Channel, was under one ruler. Even the contrast between Englishmen and Danes was soon, for the most part, wiped out. They were both of the same Teutonic stock, and therefore their languages were akin to one another and their institutions veiy similar. The Danes of the north were for some time fiercer and less easily controlled than the English of the south, but there was little national distinction between them, and what little there was gradually passed away. 15. Eadwi^. 955— 959-— Eadred was succeeded by Eadwig, the 955-959 DUNSTAN AND ODA 65 eldest son of his brother Eadmund. Eadwig was hardly more than fifteen years old, and it would be difficult for a boy to keep order amongst the great ealdormen and earls. At his coronation feast he gave deep offence by leaving his place to amuse himself with a young kinswoman, ^^Ifgifu, in her mother's room, whence he was followed and dragged back by two ecclesiastics, one of whom was Dunstan, Abbot of Glastonbuiy. 16. Dunstan.— Dunstan in his boyhood had been attached to Eadmund's court, but he had been driven off by the rivalry of other youths. He was in no way fitted to be a warrior. He loved art and song, and preferred a book to a sword. For such youths there was no place amongst the fighting laymen, and Dunstan early found the peace which he sought as a monk at Glastonbury. Eadmund made him abbot, but Dunstan had almost to create his monastery before he could rule it. Monasteries had nearly vanished from England in the time of the Danish plunderings, and the few monks who remained had very little that was monastic about them. Dunstan brought the old monks into order, and attracted new ones, but to the end of his days he was conspicuous rather as a scholar than as an ascetic. From Glastonbury he carried on the work of teaching an ignorant generation, just as i^lfred had done in an earlier time. Alfred, however, was a warrior and a ruler first, and then a teacher. Dunstan was a teacher first, and then a ruler. Eadred took counsel with him, and Dunstan became thus the first example of a class of men which afterwards rose to power —that, namely, of ecclesiastical statesmen. Up to that time all who had governed had been warriors. 17. Archbishop Oda. — Another side of the Church's work, the maintenance of a high standard of morality, was, in the time of Eadred, represented by Oda, Archbishop of Canterbury. The accepted standard of morality differs in different ages, and, for many reasons, it was held by the purer minds in the tenth century that celibacy was nobler than marriage. If our opinion is changed now, it is because many things have changed. No one then thought of teaching a girl anything, except to sew and to look after the house, and an ignorant and untrained wife could only be a burden to a man who was intent upon the growth of the spiritual or intel- lectual hfe in himself and in others. At all times the monks, who were often called the regular clergy, because they lived according to a certain rule, had been unmarried, and attempts had frequently been made by councils of the Church to compel the parish priests, or secular clergy, to follow their example. In England, however, F 66 THE STRUGGLE WITH THE DANES 955-959 A monk driven out of the King's P--- (F.on. a drawing belonging to the Society 955-975 DUNSTAN AND E AD WIG 67 and on the Continent as well, these orders were seldom heeded, and a married clergy was everywhere to be found. Of late, however, there had sprung up in the monastery of Cluny, in Burgundy, a zeal for the establishment of universal clerical celibacy, and this zeal was shared by Archbishop Oda, though he found it impossible to overcome the stubborn resistance of the secular clergy. 18. Eadwig's Marriage.— In its eagerness to set up a pure standard of morality, the Church had made rules against the marriage of even distant relations. Eadwig offended against these rules by marrying his kinswoman, yElfgifu. A quarrel arose on this occount between Dunstan and the young king, and Dunstan was driven into banishment. Such a quarrel was sure to weaken the king, because the support of the bishops was usually given to him, for the sake of the maintenance of peace and order. The dispute came at a bad time, because there was also a quarrel among the ealdormen and other great men. At last the ealdor- men of the north and centre of England revolted and set up the king^s brother, Eadgar, to be king of all England north of the Thames. Upon this, Oda, taking courage, declared Eadwig and his young wife to be separated as too near of kin, and even seized her and had her carried beyond sea. In 959 Eadwig died, and Eadgar succeeded to the whole kingdom. CHAPTER V EADGAR'S ENGLAND I. Eadgar and Dunstan. 959-975.— Eadgar was known as the Peaceful King. He had the advantage, which Eadwig had not, of having the Church on his side. He maintained order, with the help of Dunstan as his principal adviser. Not long after his ac- cession Dunstan became Archbishop of Canterbury. His policy was that of a man who knows that he cannot do everything and is content to do what he can. The Danes were to keep their own laws, and not to have English laws forced upon them. The great ealdormen were to be conciliated, not to be repressed. Eveiything was to be done to raise the standard of morality and knowledge. Foreign teachers were brought in to set up schools. More than thi:i Dunstan did not attempt. It is true that in his time an effort was F 3 68 EADGAR'S ENGLAND 959-975 made to found monasteries, which should be filled with monks living after the stricter rule of which the example had been set at Cluny, but the man who did most to establish monasteries again in England was not Dunstan, but ^thelwold, Bishop of Winchester, ^thelwold, however, was not content with founding monasteries. He also drove out the secular canons from his own cathedral ot Winchester and filled their places with monks. His example was followed by Oswald, Bishop of Worcester. Dunstan did not introduce monks even into his own cathedrals at Worcester and Canterbury. As far as it is now possible to understand the matter, the change, though it provoked great hostility, was for the better. The secular canons were often married, connected with the laity of the neighbourhood, and living an easy life. The monks were celibate, living according to a strict rule, and conforming them- selves to what, according to the standard of the age, was the highest ideal of religion. By a life of complete self-denial they were able to act as examples to a generation which needed teaching by example more than by word. How completely monasticism was associated with learning is shown by the fact that the monks now established at Worcester took up the work of continuing the Chronicle which had been begun under Alfred (see p. 6i). 2. The Cession of Lothian. — It is said that Eadgar was once rowed by six kings on the river Dee. The story, though probably untrue, sets forth his power not only over his own im- mediate subjects but over the whole island. His title of Peaceful shows that at least he lived on good terms with his neighbours. There is reason to believe that he was able to do this because he followed out the policy of Eadmund in singling out the king of Scots as the ruler whom it was most worth his while to conciliate. Ead- mund had given over Strathclyde to one king of Scots. Eadgar, it is said— and probably with truth— gave over Lothian to another. Lothian was then the name of the whole of the northern part of Bernicia stretching from the Cheviots to the Forth. In Eadred's time the Scots had occupied Eadwinesburh {Edi7iburgh\ the northern border fortress of Bernicia (see p. 43), and after this the land to the south of that fortress must have been difficult to defend against them. It is therefore likely that the stoiy is true that Eadgar ceded Lothian to Kenneth, who was then king of the Scots, especially as it would account for the peaceful character of his reign. Kenneth in acceptino- the gift no doubt engaged to be faithful to Eadgar, though it is inv possible to say what was the exact nature of his obligation. It is of more importance that a Celtic king ruled thenceforward over an 959-975 SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CHANGES 69 English people as well as over his own Celtic Scots, and that ulti- mately his descendants became more English than Celtic in character, through the attraction exercised upon them by their EngUsh subjects. 3. Changes in English Institutions. — The long struggle with the Danes could not fail to leave its mark upon English society. The history of the changes which took place is difficult to trace ; in the first place because our information is scanty, in the second because things happened in one part of the country which did not happen in another. Yet there were two changes which were widely felt : the growth of the king's authority, and the acceleration of the process which was reducing to bondage the ceorl, or simple freeman. 4. Growth of the King's Power. — In the early days of the English conquest the kings and other great men had around them their war-bands, composed of gesiths or thegns, personally at- tached to themselves, and ready, if need were, to die on their lord's behalf. Very early these thegns were rewarded by grants of land on condition of continuing military service. Every extension of the king's power over fresh territory made their services more im- portant. It had always been difficult to bring together the fyrd, or general army of the freemen, even of a small district, and it was quite impossible to bring together the fyrd of a kingdom reaching from the Channel to the Firth of Forth. Alfred's division of the fyrd into two parts, one to fight and the other to stay at home, may have served when all the fighting had to be done in the western part of Wessex. ^thelstan or Eadmund could not possibly make even half of the men of Devonshire or Essex fight in his battles north of the H umber. The kings therefore had to rely more and more upon their thegns, who in turn had thegns of their own whom they could bring with them ; and thus was formed an army ready for military service in any part of the kingdom. A king who could command such an army was even more powerful than one who could command the whole of the forces of a smaller territory. 5. Conversion of the Freemen into Serfs. — It is impossible to give a certain account of the changes which passed over the English freemen, but there can be Httle doubt that a process had been for some time going on which converted them into bondmen, and that this process was greatly accelerated by the Danish wars. When a district was being plundered the peasant holders of the strips of village land suffered most, and needed the protection of the neighbouring thegn, who was better skilled in war than themselves, 70 EADGAR'S ENGLAND •o ^^^ o o • v^ ^ > b/) « .S ^ 4-* 3 ^ U ;s 1 •«4 1 ■^ 4) ■>* 3 is C/D O U c ;3 c c > (D .5^ 5 959-975 RURAL LIFE 71 _n-i t>A (3 "S -—— C ■ ^H G > n ^' a <-> 54 e <* V !^ C ^ H 1 C/2 V S u Q u u ^ St. Edmunds. A legend soon arose as to the manner of his death. St. Edmund himself, the East Anglian king Eadmund who had once been martyred by Danes (see p. 58), now appeared, it was said, to protect the monastery founded in his honour. ' Help, fellow soldiers ! ' cried Svend, as he caught sight of the saint. ' St. Edmund is coming to slay me.' St. Edmund, we are told, ran his spear through the body of the aggressor, and Martyrdom of St. Edmund by the Danes. (From a drawing belonging to the Society of Antiquaries.) 1014-IOI6 THE STRUGGLE AGAINST CNUT 83 Svend died that night in torments. His Danish warriors chose his son Cnut king of England.^ The EngHsh Witenagemot sent for .Ethelred to return. At last, in 1016, ^Ethelred died before he had conquered Cnut or Cnut conquered him. 8. Eadmund Ironside. 1016. — ^thelred's eldest son— not the son of Emma — Eadmund Ironside, succeeded him. He did all that could be done to restore the English kingship by his vigour. In a single year he fought six battles ; but the treachery of the ealdormen was not at an end, and at Assandun Q Ashtngiott)^ in Essex, he was completely overthrown. He and Cnut agreed to divide the kingdom, but before the end of the year the heroic Eadmund died, and Cnut the Dane became king of England with- out a rival. 9. Cnut and the Earldoms. 1016 — 1035. — Cnut was one of those rulers who, like the Emperor Augustus, shrink from no barbarity in gaining power, but when once they have acquired it exercise their authority with moderation and gentleness. He be- gan by outlawing or putting to death men whom he considered dangerous, but when this had once been done he ruled as a thoroughly English king of the best type. The Danes who had hitherto fought for him had come not as settlers, but as an army, and soon after Eadmund's death he sent most of them home, re- taining a force, variously stated as 3,000 or 6,000, warriors known as his House-carls {House-men)^ who formed a small standing army depending entirely on himself. They were not enough to keep down a general rising of the whole of England, but they were quite enough to prevent any single great man from rebelling against him. Cnut therefore was, what ^thelred had wished to be, really master of his kingdom. Under him ruled the ealdormen, who from this time were known as Earls, from the Danish title of Jarl (see p. 64), and of these Earls the principal were the three who governed jMercia, North-humberland, and Wessex, the last named now including the old kingdoms of Kent and Sussex. There was a fourth in East Anglia, but the limits of this earldom varied from time to time, and 1 Genealogy of the Danish kings : — Svend I (i) iElfgifu = CNUT = (2) Emma I 1016-1035 Harold Harthacnut Harefoot 1040-1043 1035-1040 G 2 84 ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1016-1035 there were sometimes other earldoms set up in the neighbouring shires, whereas the first-named three remained as they were for some time after Cnut's death. It is characteristic of Cnut that the one of the Earls to whom he gave his greatest confidence was God- wine, an Englishman, who was Earl of the West Saxons. Another Englishman, Leofwine, became Earl of the Mercians. A Dane obtained the earldom of the North-humbrians, but the land was barbarous, and its Earls were frequently murdered. Sometimes there was one Earl of the whole territory, sometimes two. It was not till after the end of Cnut's reign that Siward became Earl of Deira, and at a later time of all North-humberland as far as the Tweed. The descendants of two of these Earls, Godwine and Leofwine, leave their mark on the history for some time to come. 10. Cnut's Empire. — Beyond the Tweed Malcolm, king of the Scots, ruled. He defeated the North-humbrians at Carham, and Cnut ceded Lothian to him, either doing so for the first time or repeating the act of Eadgar, if the story of Eadgar's cession is true. At all events the king of the Scots from this time ruled as far south as the Tweed, and acknowledged Cnut's superiority. Cnut also became king of Denmark by his brother's death, and king of Norway by conquest. He entered into friendly relations with Richard II., Duke of the Normans, by marrying his sister Emma, the widow of ^thelred.' 11. Cnut's Government. — Cnut had thus made himself master of a great empire, and yet, Dane as he was, though he treated English- men and Danes as equals, he gave his special favour to Englishmen He restored, as men said, the laws of Eadgar — that is to say, he kept peace and restored order as in the days of Eadgar. He 1 Genealogical connection between the Houses of England and Nor- mandy : — Dukes of Nonnandy Richard I. the Fearless Richard 11. (i) .4iTHELRED--Emnia-(2) Cnut, 1016-ioqc; the Good the Unready I 979-1016 Godwine I > I I I i I Richard 111. Robert Alfred EADvvARD = Eadgyth Harold I the Confessor xo66 William 1042-1066 the Conqueror 1066-1087 IOI6-I035 CNUrs PILGRIMAGE aND DEATH 85 reverenced monks, and once as he was rowing on the waters of the fens, he heard the monks of Ely singing. He bade the boatmen row him to the shore that he might listen to the song of praise and prayer. He even went on a pilgrimage to Rome, to humble himself in that city which contained the burial places of the Apostles Peter and Paul. From Rome he sent a letter to his subjects. ' I have vowed to God,' he wrote, ' to live a right life in all things ; to rule justly and piously my realms and subjects, and to administer just judgment to all. If heretofore I have done aught beyond what is just, through headiness or negligence of youth, I am ready^ with God's help, to amend it utterly.' With Cnut these were not mere words. It is not likely that there is any truth in the story how his flattering courtiers told him to sit by the sea-shore and bade the in- flowing tide refrain from wetting his feet, and how when the waves rose over the spot on which his chair was placed he refused to wear his crown again, because that honour belonged to God alone, the true Ruler of the world. Yet the story would not have been invented except of one who was believed to have been clothed with real humihty. 12. The Sons of Cnut. 1035 — 1042. — Cnut died in 1035. God- wine and the West Saxons chose Harthacnut, the son of Cnut and Emma to take his fathei-'s place, whilst the north and centre, headed by Leofwine's son, Leofric,' Earl of the Mercians, chose Harold, the son of Cnut by an earlier wife or concubine. Godwine perhaps hoped that Harthacnut would make the West Saxon earl- dom the centre of the empire which had been his father's. Cnut's empire was, however, breaking up. The Norwegians chose Magnus, a king of their own race, and Harthacnut remained in Denmark to defend it against the attacks of Magnus. In Normandy there were two English Ethelings, Alfred and Eadward, the sons of yEthelred by Emma, who seem to have thought that the absence of Plarthacnut gave them a chance of returning to England. Alfred landed, but was seized by Harold. He was blinded with such 1 Genealogy of the Mercian earls :— Leofwine Leofric ^Ifgar 1 Eadwine, Earl of Mercia Morkere, Earl of North-hur 86 ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1035-1042 cruelty that he died. His death was, truly or falsely, attributed to Godwine. As Harthacnut still remained in Denmark, the West Saxons deposed him and gave themselves to Harold, since which time England has never been divided. In 1040 Harold died, and Harthacnut came at last to England to claim the crown. He brought with him a Danish fleet, and with his sailors and his house-carls he ruled England as a conquered land. He raised a Danegeld to satisfy his men, and sent his house-carls to force the people to pay the heavy tax. Two of them were killed at Worcester, and he burnt First Great Seal of Eadward the Confessor (obverse). Worcester to the ground. In 1042 he died *as he stood at his drink ' at a bridal. 13. Eadward the Confessor and Earl Godwine. 1042— 1051.— The Enghsh were tired of foreign rulers. ' All folk chose Eadward king.' Eadward, the son of ^thelred and the brother of the mur- dered Alfred, though an Englishman on his father's side, was also the son of the Norman Emma, and had been brought up in Nor- mandy from his childhood. The Normans were now men of French speech, and they were more polite and cultivated than Eno-lish- 1 042-105 1 GREATNESS ^ BANISHMENT OF GOD WINE Sy men. Eadward filled his court with Normans. He disliked the roughness of the English, but instead of attempting to improve them as the great ^Elfred had formerly done, he stood entirely aloof from them. The name of the Confessor by which he was afterwards known was given him on account of his piety, but his piety was not of that sort which is associated with active usefulness. He was fond of hunting, but was not active in any other way, and he left others to govern rather than himself. For some years the real governor of England was Earl Godwine, who kept his own earldom of Wessex, and managed to procure other smaller earldoms for his sons. As the Mercia over which Leofric ruled was only the north-western part of the old kingdom, and as Siward (see p. 84) had enough to do to keep the fierce men of North- humberland in order, Godwine had as yet no competitor to fear. In 1045 he became the king's father-in-law by the marriage of Eadward with his daughter, Eadgyth. Eadward, however, did his best for his Norman favourites, and appointed one of them, Robert Hunting. (From the Bayeux Tapestry.) of Jumi^ges, to the bishopric of London, and afterwards raised him to the Archbishopric of Canterbury. Between Godwine and the Normans there was no goodwill, and though Godwine was himself of fair repute, his eldest son, Swegen, a young man of brutal nature, alienated the goodwill of his countrymen by seducing the Abbess of Leominster, and by murdering his cousin Beorn. Godwine, in his bhnd family affection, clung to his wicked son and insisted on his being allowed to retain his earldom. 14. The Banishment of Godwine. 1051.— At last, in 1051, the strife between the king and the Earl broke out openly. Eadward' s brother-in-law, Eustace, Count of Boulogne, visited England. On his return his men made a disturbance at Dover, and in the riot which ensued some of the townsmen as well as some of his own men were slain. Eadward called on Godwine, in whose earldom Dover was, to punish the townsmen. Godwine refused, and Eadward summoned him to Gloucester to account for his refusal. He came attended by an armed host, but Leofric and Siward, who were jealous of Godwine's power, came with their armed followers to support the king. Leofric mediated, and it was arranged that the 88 ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 105 1 question should be settled at a Witenagemot to be held in London. In the end Godwine was outlawed and banished with all his family. Swegen went on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem and died on the way back. 15. Visit of Duke William. 1051. — In Godwine's absence Eadward received a visit from the Duke of the Normans, William, the bastard son of Duke Robert and the daughter of a tanner of Falaise. Robert was a son of Richard II., and William was thus the grandson of the brother of Eadward's mother, Emma. Such a relationship gave him no title whatever to the English throne, as Emma was not descended from the English kings, and as, even if she had been, no one could be lawfully king in England who was not chosen by the Witenagemot. Eadward, however, had no children or brothers, and though he had no right to give away the crown, he now promised William that he should succeed him. William, indeed, was just the man to attract one whose character was as weak as Eadward's. Since he received the dukedom he had beaten down the opposition of a fierce and dis- contented nobility at Val-^s-dunes (1047). From that day peace and order prevailed in Noi-mandy. Law in Normandy did not come as in England from the traditions of the shire-moot or the Witena- gemot, where men met to consult together. It was the Duke's law, and if the Duke was a strong man he kept peace in the land. If he was a weak man, the lords fought against one another and plundered and oppressed the poor. William was strong and wily, and it was this combination of strength and wiliness which enabled him to bear down all opposition. 16. William and the Norman Church.— An Englishman, who saw much of William in after-life, declared that, severe as he was, he was mild to good men who loved God. The Church was in his days assuming a new place in Europe. The monastic revival which had originated at Cluny (see p. 67) had led to a revival of the Papacy. In 1049, for the first time, a Pope, Leo IX., travelled through Western Europe, holding councils and inflicting punishments upon the married clergy and upon priests who took arms and shed blood. With this improvement in discipline came a voluntary turning of the better clergy to an ascetic life, and increased devotion was accompanied, as it always was in the middle ages, with an mcrease of learning. William, who by the strength of his will brought peace into the state, also brought men of devotion and learning into the high places of the Church. His chief confidant was Lanfranc, an Italian who had taken refuge in 1052-1057 BAD WARD AND GOD WINE 89 the abbey of Bee, and, having become its prior, had made it the central school of Normandy and the parts around. With the improvement of learning came the improvement of art, and churches arose in Normandy, as in other parts of Western Europe, which still preserved the old round arch derived from the Romans, though both the arches themselves and the columns on which they were borne were lighter and more graceful than the heavy work which had hitherto been employed. Of all this Englishmen as yet knew nothing. They went on in their old ways, cut off from the European influences of the time. It was no wonder that Eadward yearned after the splendour and the culture of the land in which he had been brought up, or even that, in defiance of English law, he now promised to Duke William the succession to the English crown. 17. The Return and Death of God wine. 1052 — 1053. — After William had departed Englishmen became discontented at Ead- ward's increasing favour to the Norman strangers. In 1052 Godwine and his sons — Swegen only excepted— returned from exile. They sailed up the Thames and landed at Southwark. The foreigners hastily fled, and Eadward was unable to resist the popular feeling. Godwine was restored to his earldom, and an Englishman, Stigand, was made Archbishop of Canterbury in the place of Robert of Jumi^ges, who escaped to the Continent. As it was the law of the Church that a bishop once appointed could not be deposed except by the ecclesiastical authorities, offence was in this way given to the Pope. Godwine did not long outHve his restoration. He was struck down by apoplexy at the king's table in 1053. Harold, who, after Swegen's death, was his eldest son, succeeded to his earldom of Wessex, and practically managed the affairs of the kingdom in Eadward's name.^ 18. Harold's Greatness. 1053— 1066.— Harold was a brave and energetic man, but Eadward preferred his brother Tostig, and on the death of Siward appointed him Earl of North-humberland. A little later Gyrth, another brother of Harold, became Earl of East Anglia, together with Bedfordshire and Oxfordshire, and a 1 Genealogy of the family of Godwine : — Godwine Sweeen Harold Tostig Leofwine Gyrth Wulfnoth Eadgyth = Eadward 1066 ^ V Confessor go ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1057-1065 fourth brother, Leofwine, Earl of a district formed of the eastern shires on either side of the Thames. All the richest and most thickly populated part of England was governed by Harold and his brothers. Mercia was the only large earldom not under their rule. It was now under ^^Ifgar, the son of Leofric, who had lately died. 19. Harold and Eadward. 1057— 1065. — It became necessary to arrange for the succession to the throne, as Eadward was child- less, and as Enghshmen were not likely to acquiesce in his bequest to WiUiam. In 1057 the ^theling Eadward, a son of Eadmund Iron- side, was fetched back from Hungary, where he had long lived in exile, and was accepted as the heir. Eadward, however, died almost immediately after his arrival. He left but one son, Eadgarthe^Ethel- ing (see genealogy at p. 78), who was far too young to be accepted as a king for many years to come. Naturally the thought arose of looking on Harold as Ead ward's successor. It was contrary to all custom to give the throne to any one not of the royal line, but the custom had been necessarily broken in favour of Cnut, the Danish conqueror, and it might be better to break it in favour of an English earl rather than to place a child on the throne, when danger threatened from Normandy. During the remainder of Eadward's reign Harold showed hnnself a warrior worthy of the crown. In 1063 he invaded Wales and reduced it to submission. About the same time ^Ifgar died, and was succeeded by his son, Eadwine, in the earldom of the Mercians. In 1065 the men of North-humberland revolted against Tostig, who had governed them harshly, and who was probably unpopular as a West Saxon amongst a population of Danes and Angles. The North-humbrians chose Eadwine's brother, Morkere, as his successor, and Harold advised Eadward to acquiesce in what they had done. Northamptonshire and Huntingdonshire were committed to Waltheof, a son of Siward (see p. 84), and the modern Northumberland was committed to a native ruler, Oswulf. 20. Death of Eadward. 1066. —England was therefore ruled by two great families. Eadwine and Morkere, the grandsons of Leofric, governed the Midlands and almost the whole of North- humberland. Harold and his brothers, the sons of Godwine, governed the south and the east. The two houses had long been rivals, and after Eadward's death there would be no one in the country to whom they could even nominally submit. Eadward, whose life was almost at an end, was filled with gloomy forebodings! His thoughts, however, turned aside from the contemplation of earthly things, and he was only anxious that the great abbey church I065-66 FOUNDATION OF WESTMINSTER ABBEY 91 of Westminster, which he had been building hard by his own new palace on what was then a lonely place outside London, should be consecrated before his death. The church, afterwards superseded by the structure which now stands there, was built in the new and hghter form of round-arched architecture which Eadward had learned to admire from his Norman friends. It was consecrated on December 28, 1065, but the king was too ill to be present, and ^^ 0»7iM«~l ( ft Nt k-* > L.3 Tower in the earlier style. Church at Earl's Barton. (The battlements are much later.) Tower in the earlier style. St Benet's Church, Cambridge. on January 5, 1066, he died, and was buried in the church which he had founded. Harold was at once chosen king, and crowned at Westminster. 21. Harold and William. 1066.— WiUiam, as soon as he heard of his rival's coronation, claimed the crown. He was now even mightier than he had been when he visited Eadward. In 1063 he had conquered Maine, and, secure on his southern frontier, he was able to turn his undivided attention to England. Accord- 92 ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1066 ing to the principles accepted in England, he had no right to it whatever ; but he contrived to put together a good many rea- sons which seemed, in the eyes of those who were not English- men, to give him a good case. In the first place he had been Building a church in the later style. (From a drawing belonging to the Society of Antiquaries.) selected by Eadward as his heir. In the second place the depriva- tion of Robert of Jumi^ges was an offence against the Church law of the Continent, and William was therefore able to obtain from the Pope a consecrated banner, and to speak of an attack upon io66 WILLIAM AND HAROLD 93 England as an attempt to uphold the righteous laws of the Church. In the third place, Harold had at some former time been wrecked upon the French coast, and had been delivered up to William, who had refused to let him go till he had sworn solemnly, placing his hand on a chest which contained the relics of the most holy Norman saints, to do some act, the nature of which is diversely related, but which Harold never did. Consequently William could speak of himself as going to take vengeance on a perjurer. With some difficulty William persuaded the Norman barons to follow him, and he attracted a mixed multitude of adventurers from all the neighbouring nations by promising them the plunder of Eng- ET hlC'EPISCOPVSCIBViET^ PO' Normans feasting ; with Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, saying grace. (From the Bayeux Tapestry.) land, an argument which every one could understand. During the whole of the spring and the summer ships for the invasion of England were being built in the Norman harbours. 22. Stamford Bridge. 1066. — All through the summer Harold was watching for his rival's coming. The military organisation of England, however, was inferior to that of Normandy. The Norman barons and their vassals were always ready for war, and they could support on their estates the foreign adventurers who were placed under their orders till the time of battle came. Harold had his house-carls, the constant guard of picked troops which had been instituted by Cnut, and his thegns, who, like the Norman 94 ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1066 barons, were bound to serve their lord in war. The greater part of his force, however, was composed of the pea- sants of the fyrd, and when September came they must needs be sent home to attend to their harvest, which seems to have been late this year. Scarcely were they gone when Harold received news that his brother Tostig, angry with him for having consented to his depo- sition from the North- humbrian earldom, had allied himself to Harold Hardrada, the fierce sea-rover, who was king of Norway, and that the two, with a mighty host, after wasting the York- shire coast, had sailed up the Humber. The two Northern Earls, Eadwine and Morkere, were hard pressed. Harold had not long before married their sister, and, whatever might be the risk, he was bound as the king of all England to aid them. Marching swiftly northwards with his house-carls and the thegns who joined him on the way, he hastened to their succour. On io66 STAMFORD BRIDGE 95 the way worse tidings reached him. The Earls had been defeated? and York had agreed to submit to the Norsemen. Harold hurried on the faster, and came upon the invaders unawares as they lay A Norman ship. (From the Bayeux Tapestry.) heedlessly on both sides of the Derwent at Stamford Bridge. Those on the western side, unprepared as they were, were soon over- powered. One brave Norseman, like Horatius and his comrades Norman soldiers mounted. (From the Bayeux Tapestry.) in the Roman legend, kept the narrow bridge against the army, till an Englishman crept under it and stabbed him from below through a gap in the woodwork. The battle rolled across the Derwent, and 96 THE BATTLE OF SENLAC 1066 when evening came Harold Hardrada, and Tostig himself, with the bulk of the invaders, had been slain. For the last time an English king overthrew a foreign host in battle on English soil. 23. The Landing of William. 1066.— Harold had shown what an English king could do, who fought not for this or that part of the country, but for all England. It was the lack of this national spirit in Enghshmen which caused his ruin. As Harold was feasting at York in celebration of his victory, a messenger told him of the landing of the Norman host at Pevensey. He had saved Eadwine and Morkere from destruction, but Eadwine and Morkere gave him no help in return. He had to hurry back to defend Sussex without a single man from the north or the Midlands, except those whom he collected on his line of march. The House of Leofric bore no goodwill to the House of Godwine. England was a king- dom divided against itself 24. The Battle of Senlac. 1066. — Harold, as soon as he reached the point of danger, drew up his army on the long hill of Senlac on which Battle Abbey now stands. On Octo- ber 14 WiUiam marched forth to attack him. The military equip- ment of the Normans was better than that of the English. Where the weapons on either side are unlike, battles are decided by the mo- mentum—that is to say, by the combined weight and speed of the weapons employed. The English fought on foot mostly with two- handed axes ; the Normans fought not only on horseback with lances, but also with infantry, some of them being archers. A horse the principal weapon of a horseman, has more momentum than an armed footman, whilst an arrow can reach the object at which it is aimed long before a horse. Harold, however, had in his favour the slope of the hill up which the Normans would have to ride, and Group of archers on foot. (From the Bayeux Tapestry.) io66 THE BATTLE OF SEN LAC 97 he took advantage of the lie of the ground by posting his men with their shields before them on the edge of the hill. The position was a strong one for purposes of defence, but it was not one that made it easy for Harold to change his arrangements as the fortunes of the day might need. William, on the other hand, had not only a better armed force, but a more flexible one. He had to attack, and, versed as he was in all the operations of war, he could move his men from place to place and make use of each opportunity as it arrived. The English were brave enough, but William was a more intelligent leader than Harold, and his men were better under control. Twice after the battle had begun the Norman horsemen charged up the hill only to be driven back. The wily William, finding that the hill was not to be stormed by a Men fighting with axes. ( From the Bayeux Tapestry.) direct attack, met the difficulty by galling the English with a shower of arrows and ordering his left wing to turn and fly. The stratagem was successful. Some of the English rushed down the hill in pursuit. The fugitives faced round and charged the pursuers, following them up the slope. The English on the height were thus thrown into confusion ; but they held out stoutly, and as the Norman horsemen now in occupation of one end of the hill charged fiercely along its crest, they locked their shields together and fought desperately for life, if no longer for victory. Slowly and steadily the Normans pressed on, till they reached the spot where Harold, surrounded by his house-carls, fought beneath his standard. There all their attacks were in vain, till William, calling for his bowmen, bade them shoot their arrows into the air. Down came the arrows in showers upon the herrJs of the English warriors, and H 98 ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1066 one of them pierced Harold's eye, stretching him Hfeless on the ground. In a series of representations in worsted work, known as the Bayeux Tapestry, which was wrought by the needle of some unknown Woman and is now exhibited in the museum of that city, the scenes of the battle and the events preceding it are pictorially recorded. 25. William's Coronation. 1066.— William had destroyed both the English king and the English army. It is possible that England, if united, might still have resisted. The great men at London chose for their king Eadgar the yEtheling, the grandson of Eadmund Ironside. Eadwine and Morkere were present at the election, but left London as soon as it was over. They would look 'L/D>REX>1NTERF6C rV5°EST Death of Harold, who is ai tempi insc to \\i\\ the arrow from his eye. (From the Bayeux I'apestry.) nfter their own earldoms ; they would not join others, as Harold had done, in defending England as a whole. Divided England would sooner or later be a prey to William. He wanted, however, not merely to reign as a conqueror, but to be lawfully elected as king, that he might have on his side law as well as force. He first struck terror into Kent and Sussex by ravaging the lands of all who held out against him. Then he marched to the Thames and burnt South wark. He did not, however, try to force his way into London, as he wanted to induce the citizens to submit voluntarily to him, or at least in a way which might seem voluntary. He therefore marched westwards, crossed the Thames at Wallingford, and wheeled round to Berkhampstead, His presence there made io66 WILLIAM'S CORONATION 99 h?? pypy?????? yv??y??Yrv\ Coronation of a king, temp. William the Conqueror. (From a drawing in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries.) H 2 -lOO ENGLAND AND NORMANDY 1066 the Londoners feel utterly isolated. Even if Eadwine and Morkere wished to do anything for them, they could not come from the north or north-west without meeting William's victorious army. The great men and citizens alike gave up all thought of resistance, abandoned Eadgar, and promised to take William for their king. On Christmas Day, 1066, William was chosen with acclamation in Eadward's abbey at W^estminster, where Harold had been chosen less than a year before. The Normans outside mistook the shouts of applause for a tumult against their Duke, and set fire to the houses around. The English rushed out to save their property, and William, frightened for the only time in his life, was left alone with the priests. Not knowing what was next to follow, he was crowned king of the English by Ealdred, Arch- bishop of York, in an empty church, amidst the crackling of flames and the shouts of men striving for the mastery. Books recommended for further study of Part I. Dawkins, W. Boyd. Early Man in Britain. Rhys, J. Early Britain. Elton, C. J. Origins of English History. Guest, E. Origines Celticae. Vol. ii. pp. 121-408. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest, Vols, i.-iii. Green, J, R. The Making of England. The Conquest of England. History of the English People. Vol. i. pp. 1-114. Bright, W. Chapters of Enghsh Church History. Sturbs, W. The Constitutional History of England, Chaps, I. -IX. Cunningham, W. The Growth of English Industry and Commerce during the Early and Middle Ages, pp. 1-128. lOI PART II THE NORMAN AND ANGEViN KINGS [y CHAPTER VII WILLIAM I. 1066— 1087 LEADING DATES William's coronation 1066 Completion of the Conquest . loyo The rising of the Earls 1075 The Gemot at Salisbury 1086 Death of W^illiam I. 1087 I. The First Months of the Conquest. 1066-1067.— Though at the time when WiUiam was crowned he had gained actual possession of no more than the south-eastern part of England, he claimed a right to rule the whole as lawful king of the English, not merely by Eadward's bequest, but by election and coronation. In reality, he came as a conqueror, whilst the Normans by whose aid he gained the victory at Senlac left their homes not merely to turn their Duke into a king, but also to acquire lands and wealth for themselves. Wil- liam could not act justly and kindly to his new subjects even if he wished. What he * ^''-^ "'"Xl'If^^rey.^™'"'"'' did was to clothe real vio- lence with the appearance of law. He gave out that as he had been the lawful king of the English ever since Eadward's death, Harold and all who fought under him at Senlac had forfeited their lands by their treason to himself as their lawful king. These lands he distri- buted amongst his Normans. The English indeed were not entirely I02 WILLIAM I. 1066-1069 dispossessed. Sometimes the son of a warrior who had been slain was allowed to retain a sm.all portion of his father's land. Some- times the daughter or the widow of one of Harold's comrades was compelled to marry a Norman whom William wished to favour. Yet, for all that, a vast number of estates in the southern and eastern counties passed from English into Norman hands. The bulk of the population, the serfs— or, as they were now called by a Norman name, the villeins — were not affected by the change, except so far as they found a foreign lord less willing than a native one to hearken to their complaints. The changes which took place were limited as yet to a small part of England. In three months after his coronation William was still without authority beyond an irregular line running from the Wash to the western border of Hampshire, except that he held some outlying posts in Hereford- shire. It is true that Eadwine and Morkere had acknowledged him as king, but they were still practically independent. Even where William actually ruled he allowed all Englishmen who had not fought on Harold's side to keep their lands, though he made them redeem them by the payment of a fine, on the principle that all lands in the country, except those of the Church, were the king's lands, and that it was right to fine those who had not come to Senlac to help him as their proper lord. 2. The Conquest of the West and North. 1067 — 1069. — In March 1067 William returned to Normandy. In his absence the Nor- mans left behind in England oppressed the English, and were sup- ported in their oppression by the two regents appointed to govern in William's name, his half-brother, Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, whom he had made Earl of Kent, and William Fitz-Osbern, Earl of Hereford. In some parts the English rose in rebellion. In December William returned, and after putting down resistance in the south-eastern counties, set himself to conquer the rest of England. It took him more than two years to complete his task. Perhaps he would have failed even then if the whole of the uncon- quered part of the country had risen against him at the same time. Each district, however, resisted separately, and he was strong enough to beat them down one by one. In the spring of 1068 he besieged and took Exeter, and subdued the West to the Land's End. When this had been accomplished he turned northwards against Eadwine and Morkere, who had declared against him. William soon frightened them into submission, and seized on York and all the country to the south of York on the eastern side of England. In 1069 the English of the North rose once more and summoned to 1069-1072 END OF THE CONQUEST 103 their aid Svend, king of Denmark, a nephew of the great Cnut. Svend sent a Danish fleet, and the Danes were joined by Eadgar the i^theUng and by other EngHsh chiefs. They burnt and plun- dered York, but could do no more. Their great host melted dway. The Danes went off with their booty to their ships, and the English returned to their homes. William found no army to oppose him, and he not only regained the lands which he had occupied the year before, but added to them the whole country up to the Tweed. 3. The Completion of the Conquest. 1070. — William was never cruel without an object, but there was no cruelty which he would not commit if it would serve his purpose. He resolved to make all further resistance impossible. The Vale of York, a long and wide stretch of fertile ground running northwards from the city to the Tees, was laid waste by William's orders. The men who had joined in the revolt were slain. The stored-up crops, the ploughs^ the carts, the oxen and sheep were destroyed by fire. Men, women, and children dropped dead of starvation, and their corpses lay unburied in the wasted fields. Some prolonged life by feeding on the flesh of horses, or even of men. Others sold themselves into slavery, bowing their heads, as was said, in the evil days for meat. " Waste ! waste ! waste ! " was the account given long afterwards of field after field in what had once been one of the most fertile districts in England. William's work of conquest was almost over. Early in 1070 he crossed the hills amidst frost and snow, and descended upon Chester. Chester submitted, and with it the shires on the Welsh border. The whole of England was at last subdued. 4. Hereward's Revolt and the Homage of Malcolm. 1070 — 10^2. — Only one serious attempt to revolt was afterwards made, but this was no more than a local rising. The Isle of Ely was in those days a real island in the midst of the waters of the fens. Hereward, with a band of followers, threw himself into the island, and it was only after a year's attack that he was driven out. When the revolt was at its height, Eadwine and Morkere fled from WilHam's court to join the insurgents. Eadwine was murdered by his own attendants. Morkere reached Ely, and when resistance was at an end was banished to Normandy. No man ever deserved less pity than these two brothers. They had never sought any one's advantage but their own, and they had been faithless to every cause which they had pretended to adopt. Before Hereward was overpowered, Malcolm, king of the Scots, ravaged northern England, carrying off with him droves of English slaves. In 1072 William, 104 WILLIAM L 1072 who had by that time subdued Hereward, marched into Scotland as far as the Tay. Malcolm submitted to him at Abernethy, and acknowledged him to be his lord. Malcolm's acknowledgment was only a repetition of the acknowledgment made by his predecessors, the Scottish kings, to Eadward and Cnut (see pp. 63, 84; ; but William was more powerful than Eadward or Cnut had been, and was likely to construe the obligation more strictly. 5. How William kept down the English.— William, having conquered England, had now to govern it. His first object was to keep the English in subjection. \a) The Confiscation of Land.— In the first place he continued to treat all who had resisted him as rebels, confiscating their land and giving it to some Norman follower. In almost every district there was at least one Norman landowner, who was on the watch against any attempt of his English neighbours to revolt, and who knew that he would lose his land if William lost his crown. {b) Building Castles. — In the second place William built a castle in every town of importance, which he garrisoned with his own men. The most notable example of these castles is the Tower of London. (r) The Feudal Army. — In the third place, though the diffusion of Norman landowners and of William's castles made a general, revolt of the English difficult, it did not make it impossible, and WiUiam took care to have an army always ready to put down a revolt if it occurred. No king in those days could have a constantly paid army, such as exists in all European countries at the present day, because there was not much money anywhere. Some men had land and some men had bodily strength, and they bartered one for the other. The villein gave his strength to plough and reap for his lord, in return for the land which he held from him. The fighting man gave his strength to his lord, to serve him with his horse and his spear, in return for the land which he held from him. This system, which is known as feudal, had been growing up in England before the Conquest, but it was perfected on the Continent, and WiUiam brought it with him in its perfected shape. The warrior who served on horseback was called a knight, and when a knight received land from a lord on military tenure — that is to say, on con- dition of military service — he was called the vassal of his lord. When he became a vassal he knelt, and, placing his hands between those of his lord, swore to be his man. This act was called doing homage. The land which he received as sufficient to maintain him was called a knight's fee. After this homage the vassal was I072 NORMANS AND ENGLISH 105 bound to serve his lord in arms, this service being the rent pay- able for his land. If the vassal broke his oath and fought against his lord, he was regarded as a traitor, or a betrayer of his trust, and could be turned out of his land. The whole land of Eng- land being regarded as the king's, all land was held from the king. Sometimes the knights held their fees directly from the king and did homage to him. These knights were known as tenants in chief {in capite)^ however small their estates might be. Usually, however, the tenants in chief were large landowners, to whom the king had granted vast estates ; and these when they did homage engaged not merely to fight for him in person, but to bring some hundreds of knights with them. To enable them to do this they had to give out portions of their land to sub-tenants, each engaging to bring himself and a specified number of knights. There might thus be a regular chain of sub-tenants, A engaging to serve under B, B under C, C under D, and so on till the tenant-in-chief was reached, who engaged to bring them all to serve the king. Almost all the larger tenants-in-chief were Normans, though Englishmen were still to be found amongst the sub-tenants, and even amongst the smaller tenants-in-chief The whole body, however, was pre- ponderantly Norman, and William could therefore depend upon it to serve him as an army in the field in case of an English rising. 6. How William kept down the Normans. — William was not afraid only of the English. He had cause to fear lest the feudal army, which was to keep down the English, might be strong enough to be turned against himself, and that the barons — as the greater tenants-in-chief were usually called — might set him at naught as Eadwine and Morkere had set Harold at naught, and as the Dukes of Normandy had set at naught the kings of France. To prevent this he adopted various contrivances. {a) Abolition of the great Earldoms. — In the first place he abolished the great earldoms. In most counties there were to be no earls at all, and no one was to be earl of more than one county. There was never again to be an Earl of the West Saxons like God- wine, or an Earl of the Mercians like Leofric. ib) The Estates of the Barons scattered. — Not only did William diminish the official authority of the earls, he also weakened the territorial authority of the barons. Even when he granted to one man estates so numerous that if they had been close together they would have extended at least over a whole county, he took care to scatter them over England, allowing only a few to be held by a single owner in any one county. If, therefore, a great baron took io6 WILLIAM I. 1072 it into his head to levy war against the king, he would have to collect his vassals from the most distant counties, and his intentions would thus be known before they could be put in practice, {c) The Fyrd kept in readiness. — St\\\ more important was William's resolution to be the real head of the English nation. He had weakened it enough to fear it no longer, but he kept it strong enough to use it, if need came, against the Norman barons. He won Englishmen to his side by the knowledge that he was ready to do them justice whenever they were wronged, and he could therefore venture to summon the fyrd whenever he needed support, without having cause to fear that it would turn against him. 7. Ecclesiastical Organisation. — Before the Conquest the English Church had been altogether national. Its bishops had sat side by side with the ealdormen or earls in the shire-moots, and in the Witenagemot itself They had been named, like the ealdormen or earls, by the king with the consent of the Witenagemot. Eccle- siastical questions had been decided and ecclesiastical offences punished not by any special ecclesiastical court, but by the shire- moot or Witenagemot, in which the laity and the clergy were both to be found. William resolved to change all this. The bishops and abbots whom he found were Englishmen, and he replaced most of them by Normans. The new Norman bishops and abbots were dependent on the king. They looked on the English as barbarians, and would certainly not support them in any revolt, as their English predecessors might have done. Thurstan, indeed, the Norman Abbot of Glastonbury, was so angry with his English monks because they refused to change their style of music that he called in Norman archers to shoot them down on the steps of the altar. Such brutality, however, was exceptional, and, as a rule, even Norman bishops and abbots were well disposed towards theii' English neighbours, all the more because they were not very friendly with the Norman nobles, who often attempted to encroach on the lands of the Church. Many a king in William's position would have been content to fill the sees with creatures of his own who would have done what they were bidden and have thought of no one's interest but his. William knew, as he had already shown in Normandy, that he would be far better served if the clergy were not only dependent on hmiself but deserving the respect of others. He made his old friend Lanfranc (see p. 88) Archbishop of Can- terbury. Lanfranc had, like William, the mind of a ruler, and under him bishops and abbots were appointed who enforced dis- cipline. The monks were compelled to keep the rules of their I066-I073 THE CHURCH OF THE CONQUEST 107 order, the canons of cathedrals were forced to send away their wives, and though the married clergy in the country were allowed to keep theirs, orders were given that in future no priest should marry. Everywhere the Church gave signs of new vigour. The monasteries became again the seats of study and learning. The sees of bishops were transferred from villages to populous towns, as when the Bishop of Dorchester, in Oxfordshire, migrated to Lincoln, and the Bishop of Thetford to Norudch. New churches were built and old ones restored after the new Continental style, which is known in England as Norman, and which Eadward had introduced in his abbey of Westminster. The Church, though made dependent on William, was independent, so far as its spiritual rights were concerned, of the civil courts. Ecclesiastical matters were discussed, not in the Witenagemot, but in a Church synod, and, in course of time, punishments were in- flicted by Church courts on ecclesiastical offenders. The power of William was strength- ened by the change. That power rested on three supports — the Norman conquerors, the English nation, and the Church, and each one of these three had reason to distrust the other two. 8. Pope Gregory VII. — The strength which William had acquired showed itself in his bearing towards the Pope. In 1073 Archdeacon Hildebrand, who for some years had been more powerful at Rome than the Popes themselves, himself became Pope under the name of Gregory VII. Gregory was as stern a ruler of the Church as William was of the State. He was an uncom- promising champion of the Cluniac reforms (see p. 67). His object was to moderate the cruelty and sinfulness of the feudal warriors of Europe by making the Church a light to guide the world to piety and self-denial. As matters stood on the Continent, it had been impossible for the Church to attain to so hi^h a standard. The clergy bought their places and fought and killed like the East end of Darenth Church, Kent. Built about 1080. io8 WILLIAM L io73 laymen around them. The Cluniac monks, therefore, thought it best to separate the clergy entirely from the world. In the first place they were to be celibate, that they might not be entangled in the cares of life. In the second place they were to refrain from simony, or the purchase of ecclesiastical preferment, that they might not be dependent on the great men of the world. A third demand was added later, that bishops and abbots should not receive from lay- men the ring and staff which were the signs of their authority — the ring as the symbol of marriage to their churches ; the staff or crozier, in the shape of a shepherd's crook, as the symbol of their pastoral authority. The Church, an fact, was to be governed by its own laws in perfect independence, that it might become more pure itself, and thus capable of setting a better example to the laity. As might have been expected, though the internal condition of the Church was greatly improved, yet when Gregory attempted entirely to free ecclesiastics from the influence and authority of the State, he found himself involved in endless quarrels. Clergy and laity alike resisted him, and they were supported by the Emperor Henry IV., whose rule extended over Germany and the greater part of Italy. Gregory next claimed the right of excommunicating kings and emperors, and of deposing them if they did not repent after excommunication. The State, he declared, was as the moon, re- ceiving light from the Church, which shone like the sun in heaven. The whole of the remainder of Gregory's life was spent in a struggle with the Emperor, and the struggle was carried on by the successors of both. 9. William and Gregory VII. — It is remarkable that such a Pope as Gregory never came into conflict with William. William appointed bishops and abbots by giving them investiture, as the presenting of the ring and staff was called. He declared that no Pope should be obeyed in England who was not acknowledged by himself, that no papal bulls or letters should have any force till he had allowed them, and that the decrees of an ecclesiastical synod should bind no one till he had confirmed them. When, at a later time, Gregory required William to do homage to the see of Rome William refused, on the ground that homage had never been ren- dered by his predecessors. To all this Gregory submitted. No doubt Gregory was prudent in not provoking William's anger ; but that he should have refrained from even finding fault with WiUiam may perhaps„be set down to the credit of his honesty. He claimed to make himself the master of kings because as a rule they did not iSglt alk care to advaMp the purity of the Church. William did care to I073 GREGORY VIL 109 Part of the rave of St. Alban's Abbey Church. 1077 and 1093. Built by Abbcmraul between w* no WILLIAM I. 1075 advance it. He chose virtuous and learned bishops, and defended the clergy against aggression from without and corruption within. Gregory may well have been content to leave power over the Church in the hands of a king who ruled it in such a fashion. 10. The Rising of the Earls. 1075. — Of the three classes of men over which William ruled, the great Norman barons imagined themselves to be the strongest, and were most inclined to throw off his yoke. The chief feature of the reigns of William and of his successors for three generations was the struggle which scarcely ever ceased between the Norman barons on the one side, and the king supported by the English and the clergy on the other. It was to the advantage of the king that he had not to contend against the whole of the Normans. Normans with small estates clung for support, like their English neighbours, to the crown. The first of many risings of the barons took place in 1075. Roger, Earl of Hereford, in spite of William's prohibition, gave his sister in marriage to Ralph of Wader, Earl of Norfolk, who, though of English birth on his father's side, had fought for William at Senlac, and may practically be counted as a Norman. As the chronicler expressed it : There was that bride-ale To many men's bale. The two earls plotted a rising against William and the revivals of the old independent earldoms. They took arms and were beaten. Ralph fled the country, and Roger was condemned to perpetual imprisonment. His followers were blinded or had their feet cut off. It was the Norman custom not to put criminals to death. To this rule, however, William made one exception. Waltheof, the last earl of purely English race, had been present at the fatal bride-ale, but though he had listened to the plottings of the con- spirators, he had revealed all that he knew to William. His wife Judith, a niece of the Conqueror, accused him of actual treason, and he was beheaded at Winchester. By the English he was regarded as a martyr, and it was probably his popularity amongst them which made William resolve upon his death. 11. The New Forest.— Only once did William cause miseiy amongst his subjects for the sake of his own enjoyment. Many kings before him had taken pleasure in hunting, but William was the first who claimed the right of hunting over large tracts of country exclusively for himself He made, as the chronicler says, ' mickle deer-frith '—a tract, that is to say, in which the deer might I07 5-1085 DOMESDAY BOOK in have peace — ' and laid laws therewith that he who slew hart or hind that man should blind him. ... In sooth he loved the high deer as though he were their father.' He forbade, in short, all men, except those to whom he gave permission, to hunt within the limits of the royal forests. In the south-west of Hampshire, near his favourite abode at Winchester, he created the New Forest. The soil is poor, and it can never have been covered by cultivated fields, but here and there, by the sides of streams, there were scattered hamlets, and these were destroyed and the dwellers in them driven off by William's orders, that there might be a ' mickle deer-frith.' We may be sure that there was not nearly as much misery caused by the making of the New Forest as was caused by the harrying of the Vale of York, but popular tradition rightly held in more abhorrence the lesser cruelty for the sake of pleasure than the greater cruelty for the sake of policy. It told how the New Forest was accursed for William's family. In his own lifetime a son and a grandson of his were cut off within it by unknown hands, probably falling before the vengeance of some who had lost home and substance through the creation of the Forest, and in due time another son, who suc- ceeded him on the throne, was to meet with a similar fate. 12. Domesday Book. 1085 — 1086. — It was to William's credit that his government was a strong one. In William's days life and property and female honour were under the protection of a king who knew how to make himself obeyed. Strong government, however, is always expensive, and William and his officers were always ready with an excuse for getting money. " The king and the headmen loved much and overmuch covetousness on gold and on silver, and they recked not how sinfully it was gotten, if only it came to them. . . . They reared up unright tolls, and many other unright things they did that are hard to reckon." Other men, in short, must observe the law ; William's government was a law to itself It was, however, a law, and not a mere scramble for money. Though there were no Danish invaders now, William continued to levy the Danegeld, and he had rents and payments due to him in many quarters which had been due to his predecessors. In order to make his exactions more complete and more regular, he resolved to have set down the amount of taxable property in the realm that his full rights might be known, and in 1085, " He sent over all Eng- land into ilk shire his men, and let them find out how many hun- dred hides were in the shire, or what the king himself had of land or cattle in the land, or whilk rights he ought to have. . . . Eke he let write how mickle of land his archbishops had, and his bishops, 112 WILLIAM T. 1085- 1086 and his abbots and his earls, and what or how mickle ilk man had that landholder was in England in land and in cattle, and how mickle fee it was worth. So very narrowly he let speer it out that there was not a single hide nor a yard of land, nor so much as — it is a shame to tell, though he thought it no shame to do — an ox nor a cow nor a swine was left that was not set in his writ." The chronicler who wrote these words was an English monk of Peterborough. Englishmen were shocked by the new regularity •muxcAcx^x'lck icp j^.ci. m;. moW utu.^(Sa. V^dluttr- att»tit. rOo^o/c. Coh3L' ^ 01 x5 •Jq* * tilt- can 1'" ^nt^-2^t*tTwl, 7m. utux r.utu cair. oaa. c2o/ Reduced facsimile of part of Domesday Book. of taxation. They could hardly be expected to understand the advantages of a government strong enough through regular taxa- tion to put down the resistance of rebellious earls at home and to defy invasion from abroad. The result of the inquiries of the king's commissioners was embodied in Domesday Book, so called because it was no more possible to appeal from it than from the Last Judgment. 13. William's Great Councils—Though William was himself io86 THE GREAT GEMOT "3 the true ruler of England, he kept up the practice of his prede- cessors in summoning the Witenagemot from time to time. In his days, however, the name of the Witenagemot was changed into that of the Great Council, and, to a slight extent, it changed its nature with its name. The members of the Witenagemot had at- tended because they were officially connected with the king, being ealdormen or bishops or thegns serving in some way under him. Members of the Great Council attended because they held land in chief from the king. The difference, however, was greater in appearance than in reality. No doubt men who held very small estates in chief might, if they pleased, come to the Great Council, and if they had done so the Great Council would have been much more numerously attended than the Witenagemot had been. The poorer tenants-in-chief, however, found that it was not only too troublesome and expensive to make the journey at a time when all long journeys had to be made on horseback, but that when they arrived their wishes were disregarded. They therefore stayed at home, so that the Great Council was regularly attended only by the bishops, the abbots of the larger abbeys, and certain great landowners who were known as barons. In this way the Great Council became a council of the wealthy landowners, as the Witenagemot had been, though the two assemblies were formed on different principles. 14. The Gemot at Salisbury. 1086. — In 1086, after Domesday Book had been finished, William summoned an unusually numerous assembly, known as the Great Gemot, to meet at SaHsbury. At this not only the tenants-in-chief appeared, but also all those who held lands from them as sub-tenants. " There came to him," wrote the chronicler, ". . . all the landowning men there were over all England, whose soever men they were, and all bowed down before him and became his men, and swore oaths of fealty to him, that they would be faithful to him against all other men." It was this oath which marked the difference between English and Continental feudalism, though they were now in other respects alike. On the Continent each tenant swore to be faithful to his lord, but only the lords who held directly from the crown swore to be faithful to the king. The consequence was that when a lord rebelled against the king, his tenants followed their lord and not the king. In England the tenants swore to forsake their lord and to serve the king against him if he forsook his duty to the king. Nor was this all. Many men break their oaths. WiUiam, however, was strong enough in England to punish those who broke their I 114 WILLIAM L 1087 oaths to him, whilst the king of France was seldom strong enough to punish those who broke their oaths to him. 15. William's Death. 1087.— The oath taken at Salisbury was the completion of William's work in England. To contemporaries be appeared as a foreign conqueror, and often as a harsh and despotic ruler. Later generations could recognise that his supreme merit was that he made England one. He did not die in England. In 1087 he fought with his lord, the king of France, Philip I. In anger at a jest of Philip's he set fire to Mantes. As he rode amidst the burning houses his horse shied and threw him forward on the pommel of his saddle. He was now corpulent and the injury- proved fatal. On September 9 he died. When the body was carried to Caen for burial in the abbey of St. Stephen, which William himself had reared, a knight stepped forward and claimed as his own the ground in which the grave had been dug. It had been taken, he said, by William from his father. "In the name of God," he cried, " I forbid that the body of the robber be covered with my mould, or that he be buried within the bounds of my inheritance." The bystanders acknowledged the truth of his accusation, and paid the price demanded. CHAPTER VIII WILLIAM II. 1087 — IIOO LEADING DATES Accession of William IT. 1087 Norman rebellion against William II 1088 Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury . . . ^ . 1093 The Council of Rockingham, and the First Crusade . 1095 Conquest of Jerusalem by the Crusaders .... logg Death of William II uoo I. The Accession of the Red King. 1087. — In Normandy the Conqueror was succeeded by his eldest son, Robert. Robert was sluggish and incapable, and his father had expressed a wish that England, newly conquered and hard to control, should be ruled by his more energetic second son, William. To the third son, Heniy, he gave a sum of money. There was as yet no settled rule of succession to the English crown, and William at once crossed the sea and was crowned king of the English at Westminster, by Lan- 1007-1005 itlK KMJU KING 115 franc. William Rufus, or the Red King, as men called him, feared not God nor regarded man. Yet the English rallied round him, because they knew that he was strong-willed, and because they needed a king who would keep the Norman barons from oppressing them. For that very reason the more turbulent of the Norman barons declared for Robert, who would be too lazy to keep them in order. In the spring of 1088 they broke into rebellion in his name. William called the English people to his help. He would not, he said, wring money from his subjects or exercise cruelty in defence of his hunt- ing grounds. On this the English rallied round him. At the hea(J, of a great army he marched to attack the rebels, and finally laid siege to Rochester, which was held against him by his uncle Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, whom he had released from the imprisonment in which the Conqueror had kept him. William called upon yet greater numbers of the English to come to his help. Every one, he declared, who failed him now should be known for ever by the shameful name of Ni things or worthless. The English came in crowds. When at last Odo surrendered, the English pleaded that no mercy should be shown him. " Halters, bring halters ! " they cried ; " hang up the traitor bishop and his accomplices on the gibbet." William, however, spared him, but banished him for ever from England 2. The Wickedness of the Red King. — William had crushed the Norman rebels with English aid. When the victory was won he turned against those who had helped him. It was not that he oppressed the EngUsh because they were English, but that he op- pressed English and Normans alike, though the English, being the weaker, felt his cruelty most. He broke all his promises. He gathered round him mercenary soldiers from all lands to enforce his will. He hanged murderers and robbers, but he himself was the worst of robbers. When he moved about the country with the ruffians who attended him, the inhabitants fled to the woods, leaving their houses to be pillaged. William allowed no law to be pleaded against his own will. His life, and the life of his courtiers, was passed in the foulest vice. He was as irreligious as he was vicious. It was in especial defiance of the Christian sentiment of the time that he encouraged the Jews, who had begun to come into England in his father's days, to come in greater numbers. They grew rich as money-lenders, and William protected them against their debtors, exacting a high price for his protection. Once, it is said, he in- vited the Jewish rabbis to argue in his presence with the bishops on the merits of their respective creeds, and promised to become 12 ii6 WILLIAM IL 1088 a Jew if the rabbis had the better of the argument. ^^ His own mouth was filled with outrageous blasphemies. " God," he said, " shall never see me a good man. I have suffered too much at His hands." 3. Ranulf Flambard.— The chief minister of the Red King was Ranulf Flambard, whom he ultimately made Bishop of Durham. He was one of the clerks of the king's chapel. The word 'clerk' properly signified a member of the clergy. The only way in which men could work with their brains instead of with their hands was by becoming clerks, the majority of whom, however, only entered the lower orders, without any intention of becoming priests or even deacons. Few, except clerks, could read or write, and whatever work demanded intelligence naturally fell into their hands. They acted as physicians or lawyers, kept accounts, and wrote letters. The clerks of the king's chapel were the king's secretaries and men of business. These ready writers had taken a leading part in the compilation of Domesday Book, and they were always active in bringing in money. Under the Conqueror they were expected to observe at least something of the rules of justice. Under the Red King they were expected to disregard them entirely. Of all the clerks Ranulf Flambard was the most unscrupulous ; therefore he rose into the greatest favour. The first William had appointed high officers, known as Justiciars, to act in his name from time to time when he was absent from England, or was from any cause unable to be present when im- portant business was transacted. Flambard was appointed Justiciar by the second William, and in his hands the office became per- manent. The Justiciar was now the king's chief minister, acting in his name whether he was present or absent. Flambard used his power to gather wealth for the king on every side. "He drave the king's gemots," we are told, " over all England ; " that is to say, he forced the reluctant courts to exact the money which he claimed for the king. 4. Feudal Dues. — It was Flambard who systematised, if he did not invent, the doctrine that the king was to profit by his position as supreme landlord. In practice this meant that he exacted to the full the consequences of feudal tenure. If a man died who held land by knight service from the crown, leaving a son who was a minor, the boy became the ward of the king, who took the profits of his lands till he was twenty-one, and forced him to pay a reHef or fine for taking them into his own hands when he attained his majority. If the land 1089-1092 FLAMBARD AND ANSELM ny fell to an heiress the king claimed the right of marrying her to whom he would, or of requiring of her a sum of money for permission to take a husband at her own choice, or, as was usually the case, at the choice of her relations. Under special circumstances the king exacted aids from his tenants-in-chief If he were taken prisoner they had to pay to ransom him from captivity. When he knighted his eldest son or married his eldest daughter they had to contribute to the expense. It is true that this was in accordance with the principle of feudality. Neither a boy nor a woman could render service in the field, and it was therefore only fair that the king should hold the lands at times when no service was rendered to him for them ; and it was also fair that the dependents should come to their lord's help in times of special need, especially as all that the king took from them they in turn took from their own sub-tenants. Flambard, however, did not content himself with a moderately harsh exaction of these feudal dues. The grievance against him was that he made the king *to be every man's heir, whether he were in orders or a layman,' that is to say, that Flambard so stripped and exhausted the land belonging to the king's wards as to make it almost worthless, and then demanded reliefs so enormous that when the estate had at last been restored, all its value had passed into the hands of the king. When a bishop or an abbot died, the king appointed no successor, and appropriated the revenues of the vacant see or monastery till some, one chose to buy the office from him. The king alone grew rich, whilst his vassals were impoverished. 5. Archbishop Anselm. — In 1089 Lanfranc died, and the arch- bishopric of Canterbury was then left vacant for nearly four years. The Archbishop of Canterbury was more than the first of English bishops. He was not only the maintainer of ecclesiastical discipline, but also the mouthpiece of the English people when they had com- plaints to make to the king. Men turned their thoughts to Anselm, the Abbot of Bee. Anselm was a stranger from Aosta, on the Italian side of the Alps. He was the most learned man of the age, and had striven to justify the theology of the day by rational arguments. He was as righteous as he was learned, and as gentle as he was righteous. Tender to man and woman, he had what was in those days a rare tenderness to animals, and had caused astonishment by saving a hunted hare from its pursuers. In 1092 the king's vassals assembled in the Great Council urged William to choose a successor to Lanfranc, and asked him to allow prayers to be offered in the churches that God might move his heart to select a worthy ii8 WILLIAM IL 1093-1097 chief pastor. " Pray as you will," said the Jcing, scornfully. " I shall do as I think good ; no man's prayers will do anything to shake my will ! " In the spring of 1093 William fell sick. Believing himself to be a dying man, he promised to amend his life, and named Anselm archbishop. On his refusal to accept the nomina- tion, Anselm was dragged to the king's bedside, and the pastoral staff, the symbol of the pastoral office of a bishop, was forced into his hands by the bystanders. 6. The Council of Rockingham. 1095.— To this well-meant violence Anselm submitted unwillingly. He was, he said, a weak old sheep to be yoked with an untamed bull to draw the plough of the Enghsh Church. Yet, gentle as he was, he was possessed of indomitable courage in resistance to evil. William recovered, and returned to his blasphemy and his tyranny. In vain Anselm warned him against his sins. A fresh object of dispute soon arose between the king and the new archbishop. Two Popes claimed the obedience of Christendom. Urban II. was the Pope acknowledged by the greater part of the Church. Clement III. was the Pope supported by the Emperor. Anselm declared that Urban was the true Pope, and that he would obey none other. William asserted that his father had laid down a rule that no Pope should be acknowledged in England without the king's assent, and he proposed to act upon it by acknowledging neither Clement nor Urban. His object was, perhaps, to prevent the enforcement of eccle- siastical discipline by temporarily getting rid of the papal authority. Anselm wanted the authority of the Pope to check vice and disorder. The question was set aside for a time, but in 1095 Anselm, tired of witnessing William's wicked actions, asked leave to go to Rome to fetch from Urban the pallium, a kind of scarf given by the Pope to archbishops in recognition of their office. William replied that he did not acknowledge Urban as Pope. A Great Council was summoned to Rockingham to discuss the question. The lay barons, who liked to see the king resisted, were on Anselm's side. The bishops, many of whom were creatures of William, appointed from amongst his clerks, took the side of the king. Anselm stated his case firmly and moderately, and then, caring nothing for the angry king, retired into the chapel and went quietly to sleep. The king, finding that the barons would give him no support, was unable to punish Anselm. Two years later, in 1097, Anselm betook him- self to Rome, and William at once seized on his estates. 7. William II. and his Brothers.— Normandy under Robert was even worse off than England under William. William was I09I-I093 NORMANDY AND SCOTLAND 119 himself a tyrant, but in Normandy there were at least a hundred tyrants because Robert was too easy-tempered to bring any one to justice. The land was full of violence. Each baron made war on his neighbour, and, as usual, the peasant suffered most Robert's own life was vicious and wasteful, and he was soon in debt. He sold the Cotentin and the territory of Avranches to his youngest brother, Henry. Henry was cool-headed and prudent, and he kept order in his new possession better than either of his elder brothers would have done. The brothers coveted the well- ordered land, and in 1091, two years before Anselm became arch- bishop, they marched together against Henry. Henry was besieged on St. Michael's INIount, a rocky island surrounded by the sea at high water. After a time water ran short. The easy-tempered Robert sent in a supply. " Shall we let our brother die of thirst ? " he said to William. Henry was in the end forced to surrender, and the land which he had purchased was lost to him for a time. In 1095 Henry was again in Nonnandy. Robert of Belleme, the lord of Domfront, was the most cruel of the cruel barons. Once he had torn out with his own hands the eyes of his godson, merely because the child's father had displeased him. The people of Domfront called on Henry to deliver them from such a monster. Henry seized Domfront, ruled its people with justice, and soon recovered the possessions from which his brothers had driven him. 8. William and Scotland. 1093— 1094.— William's attention was at this time drawn to the North. Early in his reign he annexed Cumberland, and had secured it against the Scots by fortifying Carlisle, which had been desolate since the Danish inva- sion in the reign of Alfred. Malcolm, king of the Scots, was a rude warrior who had been tamed into an outward show of piety by his saintly wife, Margaret, the sister of Eadgar the ^theling. Though he could not read her books of devotion, he Hked to look at the pictures in them and to kiss the relics which she honoured. Margaret gathered Englishmen round her, and spread abroad something of southern piety and civilisation amongst the fierce Celtic warriors of her husband. She could not teach them to change their natures. In 1093 Malcolm burst into Northumberland, plun dering and burning, till an Englishman slew him at Alnwick. Queer. Margaret died broken-hearted at the news, and was before long counted as a saint. For the moment the Scottish Celts were weary of the English queen and her English ways. They set up Malcolm's brother, Donald Bane, as their king, refusing to be 120 WILLIAM IL 1094- 1096 governed by any of Margaret's sons. Donald at once ' drave out all the English that before were with King Malcolm.' In 1094 Duncan, Margaret's step-son, gained the crown from Donald with the aid of a troop of EngHsh and Norman followers. The Celts soon drove out his followers, and after a while they slew him and restored Donald. 9. Mowbray's Rebellion. 1095. — William had as yet too much to do at home to interfere further in Scotland. The Norman barons hated him, and in 1095 Robert of Mowbray, Earl of Northum- berland -the name was now confined to the land between the Tweed and the Tyne — refused obedience. William at once marched against him, and took from him the new castle which he had built in 1080, and which has ever since been known as Newcastle-on- Tyne. Robert held out long in his stronger fortress of Bam- borough, which was only taken at last by fraud. He was condemned to a lifelong imprisonment, and it is even said that the Pope, seeing his case hopeless, allowed his wife to marry again as though her husband had been dead. Mowbray's rebellion, like the conspiracy of the Earls against the Conqueror, shows how eagerly the Nor- man barons longed to shake off the yoke of the king, and how readily Englishmen and the less powerful Normans supported even a tyrannical king rather than allow the barons to have their way. 10. The First Crusade. 1095 — 1099. — These petty wars were interrupted by a call to arms from the Pope. For centuries Chris- tians had made pilgrimages to Bethlehem and Jerusalem, the holy places where their Lord had been born and had been crucified. When the Arabs conquered the Holy Land, Mohammedans as they were, they gave protection to the pilgrims from the West. The Turks, who were also Mohammedans, had lately obtained the mastery over the Arabs, and had secured dominion over the Holy Land. They were fierce warriors, ignorant and cruel, who either put the pilgrims to death or subjected them to torture and ill-usage. In 1095 Pope Urban II. came to Clermont to appeal to the Chris- tians of the West to set out on a Crusade — a war of the Cross to deliver the Holy City from the infidel. After he had spoken the multitude burst out with the cry, " It is the will of God ! " Men of every rank placed on their garments a cross, as the sign of their devotion to the service of Christ. In 1096 a huge multitude set forth under Peter the Hermit, who had been active in urging men to take part in the Crusade. They believed it to be unnecessaiy to take money or food, trusting that God would supply His warriors. 1096 -1099 THE FIRST CRUSADE 121 All these perished on the way. A better-equipped body of knights and nobles set out later under Godfrey of Bouillon. They fought their way through Asia Minor and Syria to Jerusalem, and in 1099 the Holy City was taken by storm. Godfrey, though he became its first Christian king, refused to be crowned. " I will not," he said, " wear a crown of gold where my Saviour wore a crown of thorns." The piety of the Christian warriors was not accompanied by mercy to the vanquished. Holding Mohammedans to be the special enemies of God, they treated them as no better than savage beasts. There was a terrible butchery when Jerusalem was taken, and Christian men fancied that they did God service by dashing out the brains of Mohammedan babes against the v/alls. 11. Normandy in Pledge. 1096.— Robert was amongst the Crusaders. To raise money for his expedition he pledged Normandy to his brother William. WiUiam had no wish to take part in a holy war, but he was ready to make profit out of those who did. Normandy was the better for the change. It is true that William oppressed it himself, but he saved the people from the worse oppression of the barons. 12. The Last Years of the Red King.— The remaining years of William's reign were years of varying success. An English force set up Eadgar, the son of Malcolm and Margaret, as king of the Scots, and Eadgar consented to hold his crown as William's vassal. William's attempts to reduce the Welsh to submission ended in failure, and he was obliged to content himself with hemming them in with castles. In 1098 the wicked Robert of Belleme succeeded his brother as earl of Shrewsbury. Robert robbed and tortured Englishmen as he had robbed and tortured Normans. He was a great builder of castles, and at Bridgenorth he raised a fortress as the centre of a group of strong places which could defy the Welsh and form the basis of his operations against them. In the same year William raptured Le Mans, the capital of Maine, which had recovered its independence from Robert, which was held against him by Helie de la Fleche, one of the few unselfish men of the day. Unlike his father, the Red King often began enterprises which he did not finish. In 1099 he had all his work to do over again. He was hunting in the New Forest when he heard that Helie had regained Le Mans. He rode hard to Southampton, and, leaping on board a vessel, bade the sailors put to sea. A storm was raging, and the sailors prayed him to wait till the wind fell. " I never heard," he answered, " of a king being drowned." The next morning he was in Normandy. He 122 WILLIAM II. recovered Le Mans, but returned to England without conquering Maine. 13. The Death of the Red King. iioo. — On August 2, iioo, the Red King went out to hunt in the New Forest. In the evening his body was found pierced by an arrow. Who his slayer was is unknown. The blow may have been accidental. It is more likely to have been intentional. In every part of England were men who had good cause to hate William, and nowhere were his enemies in greater numbers than round the New Forest. Whoever was his slayer, the body of the tyrant was borne to the cathedral of Win- chester and buried as the corpse of a wild beast, without funeral rites or weeping eyes. When, after a few years had passed, the tower above the unhallowed tomb fell in, men said that it had fallen because so foul a body lay beneath it. CHAPTER IX HENRY I. AND STEPHEN HENRY I, 1100—1135. STEPHEN, II35— II54 LEADING DATES The Accession of Henry I jjqq Battle of Tinchebrai jjQg Death of Henry I. and Accession of Stephen nor The Civil War ' ^^^ Treaty of "Wallingford jj_^ Death of Stephen ^^-. I. The Accession of Henry I. iioo.— When the news spread that the Red King had been slain in the New Forest, his younger brother, Henry, hastened to Winchester, where he was chosen king by the barons who happened to be there. At his coronation at Westminster he swore to undo all the evil of his brothei-'s reicxn. The name by which he came to be known— the Lion of Justice- shows how well he kept his promise. He maintained order as his father had done, and his brother had not done. Flambard, the wicked minister of the Red King, was imprisoned in the Tower, and Anselm, the good archbishop, recalled to England. Henry's chief strength lay in the support of the English. To please them he married Eadgyth, the daughter of Malcolm and Margaret, the descendant through her mother of the old English kings. Through IIOO HENRY I. AND THE ENGLISH 123 Eadgyth the blood of Alfred and Ecgberht was transmitted to the later kings. It was, however, necessary that she should take another 1;:^ 'iS:. ml\ /i W 7)\\\ !'-l!l I , Wi ^ w '■a; Henry i. and his queen Matilda. (From the west front of Rochester Cathedral.) 124 HENRY L 1101-1106 name. Every one at Henry's court talked French, and ' Eadgyth ' was unpronounceable in French. The new queen was therefore known as Matilda, or Maud. The English called her the good queen. The Normans mocked her husband and herself by giving them the English nicknames of Godric and Godgifu. 2. Invasion of Robert, iioi. — One danger at least Henry had to face. The Norman barons yearned after the weak rule of Robert, who was again in possession of NoiTnandy. Once, we are told, he had to stay in bed till noon, because his favourites had carried off his clothes, and he had no* others to put on. A duke who could not keep his own clothes was not likely to be able to rule his duchy, and Normandy was again the scene of fightings and plunderings which he made no effort to suppress. Flambard, having escaped from prison, fled to Normandy, and urged Robert to claim England as the heritage of the eldest son of the Conqueror. Robert listened to the tempter and sailed for England. When he landed at Porchester he found that the Church and the English had rallied to Henry. Robert's position was hopeless, and he made a treaty with his brother, abandoning all claim to the crown. 3. Revolt of Robert of Bcll^me. 1102. — Henry knew that the great barons wished well to Robert, and on one pretext or another he stripped most of them of power. Robert of Belleme, the strongest and wickedest of them all, rose in revolt. After cap- turing many of his castles, Henry laid siege to his great fortress at Bridgenorth. The barons who served under Henry urged him to spare a rebel who was one of their own class. The Englishmen and the inferior Norman knights thought otherwise. " Lord King Heni-y," they cried, "trust not those traitors. They do but strive to deceive you, and to take away from you the strength of kingly justice. . . . Behold, we all stand by you faithfully ; we are ready to serve and help you in all things. Attack the castle vigorously ; shut in the traitor on all sides, and make no peace with him till you have him alive or dead in your hands." Bridgenorth was taken and Robert of Belleme, having been stripped of his English land, was sent off to Normandy. Henry was now, in very truth, king of the English. " Rejoice, King Heniy," ran a popular song, " and give thanks to the Lord God, because thou art a free king since thou hast overthrown Robert of Belleme, and hast driven him from the borders of thy kingdom." Never again during Henry's reign did the great Norman lords dare to lift hand against him. 4. The Battle of Tinchebrai. 1106.— It was impossible for Henry to avoid interference in Normandy. Many of his vassals in II06-II07 CONQUEST OF NORMANDY 125 England possessed lands in Normandy as well, where they were exposed to the violence of Robert of Belleme and of others who had been expelled from England. The Duke of the Normans would do nothing to keep the peace, and Henry crossed the sea to protect his own injured subjects. Duke Robert naturally resisted him, and at last, in 1 106, a great battle was fought at Tinchebrai, in which Robert was utterly de- feated. Duke Robert was kept for the re- mainder of his life a prisoner in Cardiff Castle, where he died after an imprisonment of twenty-eight years. Henry became Duke of the Normans as well as king of the English, and all Normandy was the better for the change. Robert of Belleme was thrown into prison, and the cruel oppressor thus shared the fate of the weak ruler whose remissness had made his oppressions possible. 5. Henry and Anselm. iioo — 1107. — Though Anselm had done everything in his power to support Henry against Robert oi Belleme, he was himself engaged in a dispute with the king which lasted for some years. A bishop in Anselm's time was not only a great Church officer, whose duty it was to maintain a high standard of religion and morality amongst the clergy. He was also one of the king's barons, because he was possessed of large estates, and was therefore bound like any other baron to send knights to the king when they were needed. Consequently, when Anselm became arch- bishop he had not only received investiture from WilHam II. by accepting from him the ring and the staff which were the signs of ecclesiastical authority, but also did homage, thus acknowledging himself to be the king's man, and obliging himself, not indeed to fight for him in person, but to send knights to fight under his orders. When, however, Henry came to the throne, and asked Anselm to repeat the homage which he had done to William, Seal of Milo of Gloucester, showing mounted armed figure in the reign of Henry I. 126 HENRY L 'iio7 Anselm not only refused himself to comply with the king's request, but also refused to consecrate newly-chosen bishops who had re- ceived investiture from Henry. During the time of his exile Anselm had taken part in a council of the Church, in which bishops and abbots had been forbidden by the Pope and the council either to receive investiture from laymen or to do homage to them. These decrees had not been issued merely to serve the purpose of papal ambition. At that time all zealous ecclesiastics thought that the only way to stop the violence of kings in their dealings with the Church was to make the Church entirely independent. Anselm's experience of the Red King's wickedness must have made him ready to concur with this new view, and there can be no doubt that it was from the most conscientious motives that he refused to do homage to Henry. On the other hand, Henry, wishing to rule justly, thought it very hard that the archbishop should insist upon the independence of the bishops, especially as in consequence of their large estates they had so many knights to send into the field. Though the dispute was a hot one, it was carried on without any of the violence which had characterised the dispute between Anselm and the Red King, and it ended in a compromise. Henry abandoned all claim to give the ring and the pastoral staff which were the signs of a bishop's or an abbot's spiritual jurisdiction, whilst Anselm consented to allow the new bishop or abbot to render the homage which was the sign of his readiness to employ all his temporal wealth and power on the king's behalf. The bishop was to be chosen by the chapter of his cathedral, the abbot by the monks of his abbey, but the election was to take place in the king's presence, thus giving him influence over their choice. Whether this settlement {vould work in favour of the king or the clergy depended on the character of the kings and the clergy. If the kings were as riotous as the Red King and the clergy as self-denying as Anselm, the clergy would grow strong in spite of these arrangements. If the kings were as just and wise as Henry, and the clergy as wicked as Ralph Flambard, all advantage would be on the side of the king. 6. Roger of Salisbury. — After the defeat of the Norman barons the Great Council ceased for a time to have any important influence on the government. Henry was practically an absolute king, and it was well that he should be so, as the country wanted order more than discussion. Henry, however, loved to exercise absolute power in an orderly way, and he chose for his chief minister Roger whom he made Bishop of Salisbury. Roger had first attracted his notice when he was going out hunting, by saying mass in a shorter time U07-II35 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER 127 than any other priest, but he retained his favour by the order and system which he introduced into the government. A special body of officials and councillors was selected by the king — perhaps a similar body had been selected by his predecessor — to sit in judg ment over cases in which tenants-in-chief were concerned, as well as over other cases which were, for one reason or another, trans- ferred to it from the Baronial Courts. This council or committee was called the Curia Regis (the King's Court). The members of this |' Curia Regis met also in the Exche- quer, so called from the chequered cloth which covered the table at which they sat. They were then known as Barons of the Exchequer, and controlled the receipts and out- goings of the treasury. The Justiciar presided in both the Curia Regis and the Exchequer. Amongst those who took part in these proceedings was the Chancellor, who was then a secretary and not a judge, as well as other superior officers of the king. A regular system of finance was introduced, and a regular sys- tem of justice accompanied it. At last the king determined to send some of the judges of his court to go on circuit into distant parts of the kingdom. These itinerant Justices {Justitiarii errantes) brought the royal power into connection with the local courts. Their business was of a very miscellaneous charac- ter. They not only heard the cases in which the king was concerned— the pleas of the crown, as they were called— but they made assessments for purposes of taxation, listened to complaints, and conveyed the. king's wishes to his people. 7. Growth of Trade.— Though Henry's severe disciphne was not liked, yet the law and order which he maintained told on the prosperity of the country, and the trade of London flourished so Monument of Roger, Bishop of Salis- bury (died 1139), in his cathedral church. 128 HENRY L I107-1135 much as to attract citizens from Normandy to settle in it. Flemings too, trained in habits of industry, came in crowds, and with the view of providing a bulwark against the Welsh, Henry settled a colony of them in South Pembrokeshire, which has since been known as Little England beyond Wales. The foreigners were not popular, but the Jews, to whom Henry continued the protection which William had given them, were more unpopular still. Porchester Church, Hampshire. Built about 1135. 8. The Benedictines.— In the midst of this busy life the Bene- dictine monasteries were still harbours of refuge for all who did not care to fight or trade. They were now indeed wealthier than they had once been, as gifts, usually of land, had been made to the monks by those who reverenced their piety. Sometimes these gifts took a shape which afterwards caused no little evil. Landowners who had churches on their lands often gave to a monastery the tithes which had hitherto been paid for the support of the parish priest, and the monastery stepped into the place of the parish priest II07-II35 MONASTIC ORDERS 129 sending a vicar to act for it in the performance of its new duties. As the monks themselves grew richer they grew less ascetic. Their life, however, was not spent in idleness. They cared for the poor, kept a school for the children, and managed their own property. Some of their number studied and wrote, and our knowledge of the history of these times is mainly owing to monastic writers. When Henry I. came to the throne the Chronicle was still being written in the English tongue by the monks of Worcester, and for some years after his death was still carried on at Peterborough. The best historical compositions were, however, in Latin, the language under- stood by the clergy over all Western Europe. Amongst the authors of these Latin works, the foremost was William of Malmesbury. 9. The Cistercians.— Useful as the Benedictines were, there were some monks who complained that the extreme self-denial of their founder, St. Benedict, was no longer to be met with, and the complainants had lately originated a new order, called the Cistercian, from Citeaux, in Burgundy, the site of their first abbey. The Cistercians made their appearance in England in 1128. Their buildings and churches were simpler than those of the Benedic- tines, and their life more austere. They refused to receive gifts of tithes lest they should impoverish the parish clergy. They loved to make their homes in solitary places far from the haunts of men, and some of the most beautiful of the abbeys which remain in ruins — those, for instance, of Fountains and Tintem — were Cistercian abbeys. They are beautiful, not because the Cistercians loved pleasant places, but because they loved solitude, whilst the Benedic- tines had either planted themselves in towns or had allowed towns to grow up round their monasteries. 10. The White Ship. — Henr)^, in consequence of the possession of Normandy, had been frequently involved in war with France. Robert's son, William Clito, claimed Normandy, and his claim was supported by Louis VL the Fat, who was styled king of France, though the territory which he actually ruled was no larger than Normandy. In these wars Henry was usually successful, and at last, in 1 127, William was killed, and Henry freed from danger. His own son, also named William, had already been drowned on the voyage between Normandy and England in 1120. The ship in which he sailed ran upon a rock, and the young man was placed in a boat, and might have escaped if he had not returned to save his half- sister, the Countess of Perche, who was still on board. As soon as he approached the sailors and passengers crowded into the boat and swamped it. Only one man, a butcher, was saved, by clinging K 130 HENRY I. 1 120 to the mast of the ship when it sank. The captain, who was with him on the mast, threw himself off as soon as he learned that the king's son had been drowned, and perished in the water. It is- said Part of the nave of Durham Cathedral. Built about 1130, II20-II35 MATILDA AND STEPHEN 131 that no man dared to tell Henry that his son was drowned, and that at last a little child was sent to inform him of his misfortune. 11. The Last Years of Henry I.— Heniyhad many illegitimate children, but after William's death the only lawful child left to him was Matilda. She had been married as a child to the Emperor Henry V., but her husband had died before she was grown up, and she then returned to her father, as the Empress Matilda. There had never been a queen in England, and it would have been very hard for a woman to rule in those times of constant war and blood- shed. Yet Henry persuaded the barons to swear to accept her as their future sovereign. He then mamed her to Geoffrey, Count of Anjou, who came of a brave and active race, and whose lands, which lay to the south of Normandy, would enlarge the French possessions of Henrys descendants. In 1135 Henry died. The great merit of his English government was that he forsook his brother's evil ways of violence, and maintained peace by erecting a regular administrative system, which kept down the outrages of the barons. One of the English chroniclers in recording his death prayed that God might give him the peace that he loved. ^ 12. Stephen's Accession. 1135. — Among the barons who had sworn to obey Matilda was Stephen of Blois, a son of the Conqueror's daughter Adela, and a nephew of Henry I. As soon as Heniys death was known Stephen made his way to London, where he was joyfully received as king. The London citizens felt that their chief interest lay in the maintenance of peace, and they thought that a man would be more likely than a woman to secure order. The barons chose Stephen king at Winchester, where his brother, Henry of Blois, was the bishop. Shortly afterwards some of these very barons rose against him, but their insurrection was soon repressed. More formidable was the hostility of David, 1 Genealogy of the Conqueror's sons and grandchildren : — William I. = Matilda of Flanders T066-1087 I ' Robert, Duke of William II. Henry I. Adela = Stephen of Blois Normandy 1087-1 100 1 loo-i 135 William Cliio Wilham Stephen 1135-1154 (i) The Emperor Henry V. = Matilda={2) Geoffrey Plantagenet Henry II. I 154-1189 K 2 132 STEPHEN 1135-1138 king of the Scots. David was closely connected with the family of Henry I., his sister having been Henry's wife, the Empress Matilda being consequently his niece. He also held in right of his own wife the earldom of Huntingdon. Under the pretext of taking up Matilda's cause he broke into the north of England. Though he himself carried on the work of introducing English Keep of Rochester Castle." Built between 1126 aVid 1139. civilisation into Scotland, his Celtic followers were still savage, and massacred women and infants. In 1137 Stephen drove David back. In 1138 David reappeared, and this time the aged Thurstan Archbishop of York, sent the levies of the North against him. In the midst of the Enghsh army was a cart bearing a standard, at the top of which the banners of the three great churches of St. Peter's of York, St. John of Beverley, and St. Wilfrid of Ripon, waved round II38 STEPHEN AND THE BARONS 133 the consecrated Host. The battle which ensued, near Northallerton, has consequently been known as the battle of the Standard. The Scots were completely defeated, but Stephen, in spite of the victory gained for him, found himself obliged to buy peace at a heavy price. He agreed that David's son, Henry, should hold Northumberland, with the exception of the fortresses of Bamborough and of New- castle, as a fief of the English Crown. David himself was also allowed to keep Cumberland without doing homage. Keep of Castle Rising. Built about 1140-50. 13. Civil War. — It would have been well for Stephen if he had learnt from the men of the North that his strength lay in rallying the English people round him against the great barons, as the Red King and Hemy I. had done when their right to the crown had been challenged by Robert. Instead of this, he brought over mer- cenaries from Flanders, and squandered treasure and lands upon his favourites so as to have little left for the hour of need. He made friends easily, but he made enemies no less easily. One of the most powerful of the barons was Robert, Earl of Gloucester, an illecritimate son of Henry I., who held the strong fortress of 134 STEPHEN 1138-1139 Bristol, and whose power extended over both sides of the lower course of the Severn. In 1138 Stephen, who distrusted him, ordered his castles to be seized. Robert at once declared his half-sister Matilda to be the lawful queen, and a terrible civil war began. Robert's garrison at Bristol was a terror to all the country round. He, too, gathered foreign mercenaries, who knew not what pity was. Other barons imitated Robert's example, fighting only for themselves whether they nominally took the part of Stephen or of Matilda, and the southern and midland counties of England were preyed upon by the garrisons of their castles. 14. Stephen's Quarrel with the Clergy. 1 139. —Evil as were the men who fought on either side, it was to Stephen and not to Matilda and Robert that men as yet looked to restore order. The port towns, London, Yarmouth, and Lynn, clung to him to the last. Unfortunately Stephen did not know how to make good use of his advantages. The clergy, like the traders, had always been in favour of order. Some of them, with the Justiciar, Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, at their head, had organised the Exchequer of Henry I., had gathered in the payments due to the Crown, or. had acted as judges. Yet with all their Leal in the service of the Crown, they had not omitted to provide for their own interests. Roger in particular had been insatiable in the pursuit of wealth for himself and of promotion for his family. One of his nephews, Nigel, Bishop of Ely, was Treasurer, whilst another, Alexander, was Bishop of Lincoln, and his own illegitimate son, Roger, was Chancellor. In 1 139 Stephen, rightly or wrongly, threw him into prison with his son and Alexander of Lincoln. The other nephew, Nigel, escaped to his uncle's castle at Devizes, in which was the younger Roger's mother, Matilda of Ramsbury. Stephen brought her son before the castle, and put a rope round his neck to hang him unless the castle was surrendered. The unhappy mother could not bear the sight, and opened the gates to Stephen. It might have been wise to deprive a too ambitious bishop of his castle, but it was not wise personally to maltreat the clergy. Every priest in England turned against Stephen. His own brother, Henry, Bishop of Win- chester, declared against him, and Stephen was obliged to do penance for his offence. The administration of the Exchequer was shattered, and though it was not altogether destroyed, and money was brought to it for the king's use even in the worst times, Stephen's financial resources were from henceforth sadly diminished. 15. Anarchy. 1 139. —The war now lapsed into sheer anarchy. The barons on either side broke loose from all restraint. " They 1139-1148 ANARCHY 135 fought amongst themselves with deadly hatred ; they spoiled the t fairest lands with fire and rapine; in what had been the most fertile of counties they destroyed almost all the provision of bread." All goods and money they carried off, and if they sus- pected any man to have concealed treasure they tortured him to oblige him to confess where it was. " They hanged up men by the feet and smoked them with foul smoke ; some were hanged up by their thumbs, others by their head, and coats of mail were hung on to their feet. They put knotted strings about men's heads, und twisted them till they went to the brain. They put men into prisons where adders and snakes and toads were crawling ; and so they tormented them. Some they put into a chest, short and narrow and not deep, and that had sharp stones within ; and forced men therein, so that they broke all their limbs. In many of the castles were hateful and grim things called neckties, which two or three men had enough to do to carry. This instrument of torture was thus made : it was fastened to a beam, and had a sharp iron to go about a man's neck and throat, so that he might no way sit or lie or sleep, but he bore all the iron. Many thousands they starved with hunger. . . . Men said openly that Christ and His saints were asleep." \ 16. The End of the War. 1141— 1148. — In the autumn of 1 139, Matilda appeared in England, and in 1141 there was a battle at Lincoln, in which Stephen was taken prisoner. Henry of Win- chester (see p. 131) acknowledged Matilda as queen, and all England submitted to her, London giving way most reluctantly. Her rule did not last long. She was as much too harsh as Stephen was too good-natured. She seized the lands of the Church, and ordered the Londoners to pay a heavy fine for having supported Stephen. On this the Londoners rang their bells, and the citizens in arms swarmed out of their houses ' like bees out of a hive.' Matilda fled to Winchester before them. Bishop Henry then turned agamst her. Robert of Gloucester was taken prisoner, and after a while Matilda was obliged to set free King Stephen in exchange for her brother. Fighting continued for some time. On all sides men were longing for peace. The fields were untilled because no man could tell who would reap the harvest. Thousands perished of starvation. If peace there was to be, it could only come by Stephen's victory. It was now known that Matilda was even less fit to govern than Stephen. Stephen took one castle after another. In 1147 Earl Robert died, and in 1148 Matilda gave up the struggle and left England. 136 STEPHEN 1147-1149 17. Henry, Duke of the Normans. 1149.— Whilst Matilda had been losing England her husband had been conquering Normandy, Tower of Castor Church, Northamptonshire. Built about 1145. (The parapet and spire are later.) and for a little while it seemed possible that England and Normandy would be separated ; England remaining under Stephen and his 1147-1154 iiTEPHEN AND HENRY 137 heirs, and Normandy united with Anjou under the Angevin Geoffrey and his descendants. That the separation did not yet take place was partly owing to the different character of the two heirs, Stephen's son, Eustace, was rough and overbearing. Geoffrey's son, Heniy, was shrewd and prudent. Henry had already been in England when he was still quite young, and had learnt something of English affairs from his uncle, Robert of Gloucester. He returned to his father in 1147, and in 1149 Geoffrey gave up to him the duchy of Normandy. He was then sent to try his fortune in England in his mother's stead, but he was only a boy of sixteen, and too young to cope with Stephen. In 1150 he abandoned the struggle for a time. In his absence Stephen had still rebels to put down and castles to besiege, but he had the greater part of the kingdom at his back, and if Henry had continued to leave him alone he would probably haAe reduced all his enemies to submission. 18. The Last Days of Stephen. 1 153— 1 154. — In 1150 Geoffrey died, and Henry became Count of Anjou as v/ell as Duke of Nor- mandy. Before long he acquired a much wider territory than either Anjou or Normandy. Louis VII. of France had to wife Eleanor, the Duchess of Aquitaine, and through her had added to his own scanty dominions the whole of the lands between the Loire and the Pyrenees. Louis, believing that she was unfaith- ful to him, had divorced her on the pretext that she was too near of kin. Henry was not squeamish about the character of so great an heiress, and in 1152 married the Duchess of Aquitaine for the sake of her lands. Thus strengthened, he again returned to England. He was now a young man of nineteen ; his vigour was as great as that of Stephen, and his skill greater. He won fortress after fortress. Before the end of 1153 Eustace died, and Stephen had no motive for prolonging the strife if his personal interests could be saved. It was arranged by the treaty of Wallingford that Stephen should retain the crown for life, and that Henry should be his heir. The castles which had sprung up during the civil war without the licence of the king — the 'adulterine castles,' as they were called— and there were no less than 365^ of them— were to be destroyed, and order and good government were to return. For five months Henry remained in England. The robber barons could not hold out against the two rivals nowunited. Many of the castles were demolished, and ' such good peace as never was here' was established. In 1154 Stephen died, and young Henry ruled England in his own name. I The number usually given, ' 1,115/ '^ probably an error. 138 CHAPTER X HENRY II. II54— II89 LEADING DATES Accession of Henry II. ii54 Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury .... 1162 The Constitutions of Clarendon 1164 Murder of Archbishop Thomas 1172 The Assize of Arms ■> 1181 Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem 1187 Death of Henry II 1189 1. Henry's Accession. 1154. — Henry H. was but twenty-one when he returned, after Stephen's death, to govern England. He had before him the difficult task of establishing order where anarchy had prevailed, but it was a task for which he was specially suited. His frame was strong and thick-set, and he was as active as he was strong. His restlessness was the dismay of his courtiers. Eager to see everything for himself, and having to rule a territory extend- ing from the Pyrenees to the Scottish border, he was always on the move. His followers were not allowed to know till he started in the morning where he intended to sleep at night, and he frequently changed his mind even afterhe had set out. He was as busy with his mind as he was with his body, as fond of a book as of a horse, and ready to chat with any one of whatever rank. Even when he was at mass he either drew pictures to amuse himself or conversed in whispers with his neighbours. His ceaseless energy was combined with a strong will, a clear perception of the limits beyond which action would be unwise, a good eye for ability in others, and a power of utilising their abihty in his own service. On the Continenthis saga- city appeared in his resolution to be content with the dominions which he had acquired without making further conquests. In England his main object was the same as that of his predecessors, to establish the king's authority over the great barons. What especially distin- guished him was his clear perception of the truth that he could only succeed by securing, not merely the passive goodwill, but the active co-operation of those who, whether they were ofNorman or of English descent, were inferior in wealth and position to the great barons. 2. Pacification of England. — Henry's first year was spent in completing the work which he had begun after the treaty of Wallingford. He sent Stephen's mercenaries over the sea and HJils/KY IL 139 Effigies of Henry 11. and Queen Eleanor at Fontevrault I40 HENRY 11. 1154-1162 completed the destruction of the ' adulterine castles.' One great rebel after another was forced to submit and have his strong walls pulled down. There were to be no more dens of robbers in England, but all men were to obey the king and the law. What castles remained were the king's, and as long as they were his re- bellions would not be likely to be successful. Henry even regained from Malcolm IV., king of the Scots, Northumberland and Cumber- land, which had been surrendered by Stephen (see p. 133). In his government Henry did his best to carry out the plans of his grand- father, Henry I. It was perhaps because he was afraid that one Justiciar would be too powerful, that he appointed two, Richard de Lucy and the Earl of Leicester, to see that justice was executed and the government maintained whether the king were absent or present. The old Bishop Nigel of Ely was reappointed Treasurer, and pre- sided over the Exchequer at Westminster. Thomas of London, known in later times by the name of Becket,^ an active and vigorous man, fifteen years older than the king, who had been ordained a deacon, but had nothing clerical about him except the name, was made Chancellor. Thomas was the king's chosen friend, and the two together delighted in the work of restoring order. Thomas liked sumptuous living, and the magnificence of his housekeeping and of his feasts was the talk of the whole country. Yet though he laughed and jested in the midst of his grandeur, he kept himself from every kind of vice. Henry was fond of horseplay, and once on a bitter wintei-'s day, when he was riding with Thomas, he snatched at a fine new scarlet mantle from the Chancellor's neck to throw to a beggar. Thomas struggled hard, and the two men nearly pulled one another off their horses, but in the end the beggar got the mantle. 3. Henry and Feudality.— It was principally with Thomas the Chancellor that Henry consulted as to the best means of esta- blishing his authority. He resolved not only to renew but to ex- tend the administrative system of Henry I. The danger which threatened him came from the great barons, and as the great barons were as dangerous to the lesser ones and to the bulk of the people as they were to the king, Henry was able to strengthen himself by winning the affections of the people. Feudality in itself was only a method of owning land ; but it was always threatening to pass into a method of government. In France the great feudal 1 His father's name was Becket, but at that time hereditary surnames had not come into use. He was once called Thomas Becket in his hfetime by one of his murderers as an insult. 1154-1162 HENRY AND THE BARONS 141 lords ruled their own territories with very little regard for the wishes of the king, and the smaller feudal lords had their own courts in which they hanged and imprisoned their villeins. In Stephen's time an attempt had been made to introduce this system into England, with evil consequences both to king and people. Before the Conquest great landowners had often received permission from the king to exercise criminal jurisdiction in the Manor Courts on their own estates, whilst the vast extent of their landed property gave them a preponderant voice in the proceedings of the shire- moots, now known by the Normans as County Courts. Henry resolved to attack the evil at both ends : in the first place to make the barons support the king's government instead of setting up their own ; in the second place, to weaken the Manor and County Courts and to strengthen courts directly proceeding from himself. 4. The Great Council and the Curia Regis. — Henry in the early years of his reign revived the importance of the Great Council, taking care that it should be attended not only by the great barons, but by vassals holding smaller estates, and therefore more depen- dent on himself. He summoned the Great Council often er than his predecessors had done. In this way even the greater barons got the habit of sharing in the government of England as a whole, instead of seeking to split up the country, as France was split up, into different districts, each of which might be governed by one of themselves. It was in consequence of the increasing habit of con- sulting with the king that the Great Council, after many changes, ultimately grew into the modern Parliament. It was of no less im- portance that Henry II. strengthened the Curia Regis^ which had been established in the reign of Henry I. (see p. 127) to collect the king's revenue, to give him political advice, and to judge as many questions as it could possibly get hold of. It was especially by doing justice that the Curia Regis was likely to acquire strength, and the strength of the Curia Regis was in reality the strength of the king. 5. Scutage. — If Henry was to carry out justice everywhere it would be necessary for him to weaken still further the power of the barons. Before long he hit upon a plan which had the double merit of strengthening the king upon the Continent and of weaken- ing the barons in England. Henry needed an army to defend his Continental possessions against the king of France. The fyrd, or general levy of Englishmen, was not bound to fight except at home, and though the feudal vassals were liable to serve abroad, they could only be made to serve for forty days in the 142 HENRY II. 1154-1162 year, which was too short a time for Henry's purposes. He accord- ingly came to an agreement with his vassals. The owner of every knight's fee was to pay a sum of money known as scutage {shield- money) in lieu of service. Both parties gained by the arrangement. The king got money with which he paid mercenaries abroad, who would fight for him all the year round, and the vassal escaped the onerous duty of fighting in quarrels in which he took no mterest- Indirectly the change weakened the feudal vassals, because they had now less opportunity than before of acquiring a military tram- ing in actual war. Ecclesiastical costume in the twelfth century. 6. Archbishop Thomas. 1162. — Henr)% who meditated great judicial reforms, foresaw that the clergy would be an obstacle in his way. He was eager to establish one law for his whole kingdom, and the clergy, having been exempted by the Conqueror from the jurisdiction of the ordinary law courts in all ecclesiastical matters, had, during the anarchy of Stephen's reign, encroached on the royal authority, and claimed to be responsible, even in criminal cases, only to the ecclesiastical courts, which were unable to inflict the penalty of death, so that a clerk who committed a murder could not be hanged like other murderers. As large numbers of clerks were only in the lower orders, and as many of them had only taken those orders to escape from the hardships of lay life, their morals were often no better than those of their lay neighbours. A 1 162-1 164 HENR V AND THOMAS 143 vacancy occurring in the Archbishopric of Canterbury, Henry, who wished to make these clerks punishable by his own courts, thought that the arrangement would easily be effected if Thomas, who had hitherto been active as a reformer in his service, were Archbishop as well as Chancellor. It was in vain that Thomas remonstrated. " I warn you," he said to Heniy, " that, if such a thing should be, our friendship would soon turn to bitter hate." Henry persisted in spite of the warning, and Thomas became Archbishop. 7. Breach between Henry and Thomas. — The first act of the new Archbishop was to surrender his Chancellorship. He was unable, he said, to serve two masters. It is not difficult to under- stand his motives. The Church, as the best men of the twelfth century believed, was divinely instituted for the guidance of the world. It was but a short step for the nobler spirits amongst the clergy to hold it necessaiy that, in order to secure the due per- formance of such exalted duties, the clergy should be exempted from the so-called justice of laymen, which was often only another name for tyranny, even if the exemption led to the infliction upon wicked clerks of lesser punishments than were meet. In this way the clergy would unconsciously fall into the frame of mind which might lead them to imagine it more to the honour of God that a wicked clerk should be insufficiently punished than that he should be punished by a layman. Of all men Archbishop Thomas was the most likely to fall into this mistake. He was, as Chancellor, prone to magnify his office, and to think more of being the originator of great reforms than of the great reforms themselves. As Archbishop he would also be sure to magnify his office, and to think less, as Anselm would have thought, of reconciling the true interests of the kingdom with the true interests of the Church, than of making the Arch- bishop's authority the centre of stirring movement, and of raising the Church, of which he was the highest embodiment in England, to a position above the power of the king. All this he would do with a great, if not a complete, sincerity. He would feel that he was himself the greater man because he believed that he was fighting in the cause of God. 8. The Constitutions of Clarendon. 1164.— Between a king eager to assert the rights of the crown and an archbishop eager to assert the rights of the clergy a quarrel could not be long deferred. Thomas's first stand, however, was on behalf of the whole country. At a Great Council at Woodstock he resisted the king's resolution to levy the old tax of Danegeld, and in consequence Danegeld was never levied again. Henry had for some time been displeased 144 HENRY IL 1 164 because, without consulting him, the Archbishop had seized on lands which he claimed as the property of the see of Canter- bury, and had excommunicated one of the king's tenants. Then a clerk who had committed a rape and a murder had been acquitted in an ecclesiastical court. On this, Henry called on the bishops to promise to obey the customs of the realm. Thomas, being told that the king merely wanted a verbal promise to save his dignity, A bishop ordaining a priest. (From a MS. of the latter part of the twelfth century.) with some reluctance consented. He soon found that he had been tricked. In 1164 Henry summoned a Great Council to meet at Clarendon, and directed some of the oldest of his barons to set down in writing the customs observed by his grandfather. Their report was intended to settle all disputed points between the king and the clergy, and was drawn up under sixteen heads known as the Constitutions of Clarendon. The most important of them de- ii64 CONSTITUTIONS OF CLARENDON J45 dared that beneficed clergy should not leave the realm without the king's leave ; that no tenant-in-chief of the king should be excom- municated without the king's knowledge ; that no villein should be ordained without his lord's consent ; that a criminous clerk should be sent to the ecclesiastical court for trial, and that after he had been there convicted or had pleaded guilty the Church should deprive him and leave him to the lay court for further punishment. It was for the Citrla Regis to determine what matters were pro- perly to be decided by the ecclesiastical courts, and no appeal to Rome was to be allowed without its permission. To all this Thomas was violently opposed, maintaining that the sentence of deprivation, whicli was all that an ecclesiastical court was empowered to inflict, was so terrible, that one who had incurred it ought not to be sen- tenced to any further penalty by a lay court. After six days' struggle he left the Council, refusing to a^isent to the Constitutions. 9. The Persecution of Archbishop Thomas. 1164.— Unluckily for himself, Henry could not.be content firmly and quietly to enforce the law as it had been declared at Clarendon. He had in his character much of the orderly spirit of his grandfather, Henry I., but he had also something of the violence of his great- uncle, William H. A certain John the Marshal had a suit against the archbishop, and when the archbishop refused to plead in a lay court, the king's council sentenced him to a fine of 500/. Then Henry summoned the archbishop to his castle at Northampton to give an account of all the money which, when he was Chancellor, he had received from the king — a claim which is said to have amounted to 30,000/., a sum equal in the money of these days to not much less than 400,000/. now. Thomas, with the crucifix in his hand, awaited in the hall the decision of Henry, who with the council was discussing his fate in an upper chamber. When the Justiciar came out to tell him that he had been declared a traitor he refused to listen, and placed himself under the Pope's protection. Hot words were bandied on either side as he walked out of the hall. " This is a fearful day," said one of his attendants. " The Day of Judgment," replied Thomas, " will be more fearful." Thomas made his way to the coast and fled to France. Henry in his wrath banished no less than four hundred of the archbishop's kinsmen and friends. Thomas found less help in France than he had expected. There were once more two rival Popes— Alexander III,, who was acknow- ledged by the greater part of the clergy and by the kings of England and France, and Calixtus III., who had been set up by the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. Alexander was too much afraid L 146 HENRY 11. 1164-1166 lest Henry should take the part of Calixtus to be very eager in supporting Thomas. He therefore did his best to effect a recon- cihation between Henry and Thomas, but for some years his efforts were of no avail. 10. The Assize of Clarendon. 1 166.— Henry, being temporarily disembarrassed of Thomas's rivalry, was able to devote his time to carrying out still further the judicial organisation of the country. Small ship of the latter part of the twelfth century. In ii66he held a Great Council at Clarendon, and with its approval issued a set of decrees known as the Assize of Clarendon. By this assize full force was given to a change which had for some time been growing in the judicial system. The old English way of dealing with criminals had been by calling on an accused person to swear to his own innocence and to bring compurgators to swear that his oath was true. If the accused failed to find compurgators he was sent to the ordeal. According to the new way there was to ii66 JUDICIAL REFORMS 147 be in each county juries consisting of twelve men of the hundred and of four from each township in it to present offences — felotiies, murders, and robberies — and to accuse persons on common report. They were sworn to speak the truth, so that their charges were known as verdicts iver'^ dicta). No compurgators were allowed, but the accused, after his offence had been presented, had to go to the ordeal, and even if he succeeded in this he was, if his character was notoriously bad, to abjure the realm — that is to say, to be banished, swearmg never to return. If he came back he was held to be an outlaw, and might be put to death without mercy by any one. 1 r. Recognitions. — A very similar system to that which was thus adopted in criminal cases had already in the early part of Henry's reign been widely extended in civil cases. When, before the Conquest, disputes occurred amongst the English as to the posses- sion of property, each party swore to the justice of his own case, brought compurgators, and summoned witnesses to declare in his favour. There was, however, no method of cross-examination, and if the hundred or shire court was still unsatisfied, it had recourse to the ordeal. The Noimans introduced the system of trial by battle, under the belief that God would intervene to give victory to the litigant whose cause was just. This latter system, however, had never been popular with the Enghsh, and Henry favoured another which had been in existence in Nbrmandy before the Conquest, and was fairly suited to English habits. This was the system of recog- nitions. Any freeholder who had been dispossessed of his land might apply to the Curia Regis^ and the Curia Regis ordered the sheriff of the county in which was the land in dispute to select four knights of that county, by whom twelve knights were chosen to serve as Recognitors. It was the business of these Recognitors to find out either by their own knowledge or by private inquiry the truth of the matter. If they were unanimous their verdict was ac- cepted as final. If not, other knights were added to them, and when at last twelve were found agreeing, their agreement was held to settle the question. 12. The Germ of the Jury. — Thus, whilst in criminal cases the local knowledge of sworn accusers was treated as satisfactory evidence of guilt, in civil cases a system was growing up in which is to be traced the germ of the modern jury. The Recognitors did not indeed hear evidence in public or become judges of the fact, like the modern jury ; they were rather sworn witnesses, allowed to form an opinion not merely, like modern witnesses, on what they L 3 148 HENRY 11, 1166-1170 had actually seen or heard, but also on what they could gather by private inquiry. 13. The Itinerant Justices Revived. — To carry out this system Henry renewed his grandfather's experiment of sending members of the Curia Regis as itinerant justices visiting the counties. They held what were called the pleas of the crown— that is to say, trials which were brought before the king's judges instead of being tried either in the county courts or the manorial courts. Both these judges and the king had every interest in getting as much business before their courts as possible. Offenders were fined and suitors had to pay fees, and the best chance of in- creasing these profits was to attract suitors by administering justice better than the local courts. The more thronged were the king's courts, the more rich and powerful he became. The consequent growth of the influence of the itinerant justices was no doubt offensive to the lords of the manor, and especially to the greater landowners, as diminishing their importance, and calling them to account whenever they attempted to encroach on their less powerful neighbours. 14. The Inquisition of the Sheriffs. 1170. — It was not long before Henry discovered another way of diminishing the power of the barons. In the early part of his reign the sheriffs of the counties were still selected from the great landowners, and the sheriff was not merely the collector of the king's revenue in his county, but had, since the Concjuest, assumed a new importance in the county court, over which in the older times the ealdorman or earl and the bishop had presided. Since the Conquest the bishop, having a court of his own for ecclesiastical matters, had ceased to take part in its proceedings, and the earl's authority, which had been much lessened after the Conquest, had now dis- appeared. The sheriff, therefore, was left alone at the head of the county court, and when the new system of trial grew up he as well as the itinerant justices was allowed to receive the presentments oi juries. When, in the spring of 1170, the king returned to England after an absence of four years, he held a strict inquiry into the conduct of them all, and deposed twenty of them. In many cases, no doubt, the sheriffs had done things to displease Henry, but there can be no doubt that the blow thus struck at the sheriffs was, in the main, aimed at the great nobility. The successors of those turned out were of lower rank, and therefore more submissive. From this time it was accepted by the kings of England as a principle of government that no great noble should serve as sheriff. IT70 RETURN OF ARCHBISHOP THOMAS 149 15. The Nobles and the Church.—Henry knew well that the great nobles were indignant, and that it was possible that they might rise against him, as at one time or another they had risen against eveiy king since the Conquest. He knew too that his predecessors had found their strongest support against the nobles in the Church, and that the Church was no longer unanimously on his side. He could indeed count upon all the bishops save one. Bishops who were or had been his officials, bishops envious of Thomas or afraid of himself, were all at his disposal, but they brought him no popular strength. Thomas alone amongst them had a hold on the imagination of the people through his austerities and his daring. Moreover, as the champion of the clergy, he was regarded as being also the champion of the people, from whose ranks the clergy were recruited. 16. The Coronation of Young- Henry. 1170. — At the moment of Henry's return to England he had special need of the Church. He wished the kingdom of England to pass at his death to his eldest son, Henry, and since the Conquest no eldest son had ever succeeded his father on the throne. He therefore determined to adopt a plan which had succeeded with the kings of France, of having the young Henry chosen and crowned in his own lifetime, so that when he died he might be ready to step into his father's place. Young Heniy was chosen, and on June 14, 1170, he was crowned by Roger, Archbishop of York ; but on the day before the coronation Roger received from Thomas a notice of his excommunication of all bishops taking part in the ceremony, on the ground that it belonged only to an Archbishop of Canterbury to crown a king, and this excommunication had been ratified by the Pope. It was therefore possible that the whole ceremony might go for nothing. 17. The Return of Archbishop Thomas. 1170. — To obviate this danger Henry again sought to make peace with Thomas. An agreement was come to on the vague terms that the past should be forgotten on both sides. Henry perhaps hoped that when Thomas was once again in England he would be too wise to rake up the question of his claim to crown the king. If it was so he was soon disappointed. On December i, 1170, Thomas landed at Sandwich and rode to Canterbury amidst the shouts of the people. He refused to release from excommunication the bishops who had taken part in young Henry's coronation unless they would first give him satisfaction for the wrong done to the see of Canterbur^^, thus showing that he had forgotten nothing. 18. Murder of Archbishop Thomas. 1170. — The aggrieved ISO HENRY IT. 1 170 bishops at once crossed the sea to lay their complaint before Henry. " What a parcel of fools and dastards," cried Henry impatiently, " have I nourished in my house, that none of them can be found to Part of the choir of Canterbury Cathedral (in building from 1175-1184). 1170-1171 MURDER OF THE ARCHBISHOP 151 avenge me on one upstart clerk ! " Four of his knights took him at his word, and started in all haste for Canterbury. The Arch- bishop before their arrival had given fresh ofifence in a cause more righteous than that of his quarrel with the bishops. Ranulf de Broc and others who had had the custody of his lands in his absence refused to surrender them, robbed him of his goods, and maltreated his followers. On Christmas Day he excommunicated them and repeated the excommunication of the bishops. On December 29 the four knights sought him out. They do not seem at first to have intended to do him bodily harm. The excommunication of the king's servants before the king had been consulted was a breach of the Constitutions of Clarendon, and they bade him, in the king's name, to leave the kingdom. After a hot altercation the knights retired to arm themselves. The archbishop was persuaded by his followers to take refuge in the church. In rushed the knights crying, "Where is the traitor? Where is the archbishop?" " Be- hold me," replied Thomas, " no traitor, but a priest of God." The assailants strove to lay hands upon him. He struggled and cast forth angry words upon,.them. In the madness of their wrath they struck him to the ground and slew him as he lay. 19. Popular Indignation. 1171. — Archbishop Thomas did not die as a martyr for any high or sacred cause. He was not a martyr for the faith, like those who had been thrown to the lions by the Roman emperors. He was not a martyr for righteousness, like Archbishop i^lfheah. He was a martyr for the privileges of his order and of his see. Yet if he sank below the level of the great martyrs, he did not sink to that lowest stage at which men cry out for the preser- vation of their own privileges, after those privileges have ceased to benefit any but themselves. The sympathy of the mass of the population shows the persistence of a widespread belief that in maintaining the privileges of the clergy Thomas was maintaining the rights of the protectors of the poor. This sentiment was only strengthened by his murder. All through Europe the news was received with a burst of indignation. Of that indignation the Pope made himself the mouthpiece. In the summer of 1171 two Papal legates appeared in Normandy to excommunicate Henry unless he was able to convince them that he was guiltless of the murder. Henry was too cautious to abide their coming. He crossed first to England and then to Ireland, resolved to have something to offer the Pope which might put him in a better humour. 20. State of Ireland. — In the domain of art, Ireland was inferior to no European nation. In metal-work, in sculpture, and in the 152 HENRY II. 1 1 54-1 172 skilful Illumination of manuscripts it surpassed them all. It had no mean school of music and song. In political development it lagged far behind. Ireland was still in the tribal stage, and had never been welded into unity by foreign conquerors, as Gaul had been welded into unity by the Romans, and as England had been welded into unity by the Normans. Tribe warred with tribe and chief with chief The efforts of chiefs to attain supremacy over the whole island had always ended in partial or complete failure. The Danes had made settlements in Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, and Limerick, but though the native Celtic popu- lation was not strong enough to expel them, neither were they strong enough to conquer the Celts. The Church was as dis- organised as the State, and there was little discipline exercised outside the monasteries. For some time the Popes and the Arch- bishops of Canterbury had been anxious to establish a better regu- lated Church system, and in 1 154 Adrian IV. — the only Englishman who was ever Pope— hoping that Heniy would bring the Irish Church under Papal order, had made him a present of Ireland, on the ground that all islands belonged to the Pope. 21. Partial Conquest of Ireland. 1 166— 1 172. — Henry, however, had too much to do during the earher years of his reign to think of conquering Ireland. In 1166 Dermot, king or chief of Leinster, having been driven out of his dominions, appealed to Henr)^ for aid. Henry gave him leave to carry over to Ireland any English knights whom he could persuade to help him. On this a number of knights from South Wales, of whom the most important was Richard de Clare, afterwards known as Strongbow, flocked across the Irish Sea (1169 — 1170). They fought and conquered, and Strongbow, who married Dermot's daughter, gave himself the title of Earl of Leinster. The rule of these knights was a rule of cruelty and violence, and, what was more, it might well become dangerous to Henr)^ himself. If feudal nobles established themselves in Ireland, they might soon be holding out a hand to help the feudal nobles who were Henry's worst enemies in England. When Henry landed in Ireland in 1171 he set himself to restore order. The Irish welcomed him because he alone could bridle the invaders, and the invaders submitted to him because they dared not resist him. He gathered a synod of the clergy at Cashel, and arranged for the future discipline of the Church. Unhappily he could not remain long in Ireland, and when he left it the old anarchy and violence blazed up again. Though Henry had not served Ireland, he had gained his own personal ends. He had frightened Strongbow and his followers, and had 1172-1174 YOUNG HENRY AND THE BARONS 153 shown the Pope, by his proceedings at Cashel, that his friendship was worth having. 22. Young Henry's Coronation and the Revolt of the Barons. 1172 — 1174.— In the spring of 1172 Henry was back in Normandy. The EngHsh barons were longing to take advantage of his quarrel with the Church, and his only chance of resist- ing them was to propitiate the Church. He met the Papal legates at Avranches, swore that he was innocent of the death of Thomas, and renounced the Constitutions of Clarendon. He then proceeded to pacify Louis VH., whose daughter was married to the younger Henry, by having the boy recrowned in due form. Young Heniy was -a foolish lad, and took it into his head that because he had been crowned his father's reign was at an end. In 1173 he fled for support to his father-in-law and persuaded him to take up his cause. "Your master," said Louis to the ambassadors of the father, " is king no longer. Here stands the king of the English." These words were the signal for a general attack on the elder king. Headed by Louis, his neighbours and discontented subjects took arms against him, and it was not till Sep- tember that he prevailed over them. In July the great English barons of the north and centre rose in insur- rection, and William the Lion, king of the Scots, joined them. De Lucy, the Justiciar, stood up for Henry ; but, though he gained ground, the war was still raging in the following year, 1174. the rebels were gaining the upper hand, and the younger Henry was preparing to come to their help. In July the elder Henry landed in England. For the first and only time in his life he brought to England the mercenaries who were paid with the scutage money. At Canterbury he visited the tomb of Thomas, now ac- Mitre of Archbishop Thomas of Canterbury preserved at Sens. In the spring of that year 154 HENR V //. 1174-1181 knowledged as a martyr, spent the whole night in prayer and tears, and on the next morning was, at his own request, scourged by the monks as a token of his penitence. That night he was awakened by a messenger with good news. Ranulf de Glan- vile had won for him a great victory at Alnwick, had dispersed the barons' host, and had taken prisoner the Scottish king. About the same time the fleet which was to bring his son over was dispersed Military and civil costume of the latter part of the twelfth century. by a storm. Within a few weeks the whole rebellion was at an end. It was the last time that the barons ventured to strive with the king till the time came when they had the people and the Church on their side. William the Lion was carried to Normandy, where, by the treaty of Falaise, he acknowledged himself the vassal of the king of England for the whole of Scotland. 23. The Assize of Arms. 1181.— In September 1174 there was a general peace. In 1181 Henry issued the Assize of Arms, 1172-1181 MILITARY ORGANISATION 155 organising the old fyrd in a more serviceable way. Every English freeman was bound by it to find arms of a kind suitable to his property, that he might be ready to defend the realm against rebels or invaders. The Assize of Arms is the strongest possible evidence as to the real nature of Henry's government. He had long ago sent back to the Continent the mercenaries whom he had brought with him in the peril of 1174, and he now entrusted himself not to a paid standing army, but to the whole body of English freemen. He was, in truth, king of the English not merely because he ruled over them, but because they were ready to rally round him in arms against those barons whose ancestors had worked such evil in the days of Stephen. England was not to be given over either to baronial anarchy or to militaiy despotism. 24. Henry II. and his Sons.— In England Henry ruled as a national king over a nation which, at least, preferred his govern- \ ment to that of the barons. The old division between English and Norman was dying out, and though the upper classes, for the most part, still spoke French, intermarriages had been so frequent that there were few amongst them who had not some English ancestress and who did not understand the English language. Henry was even strong enough to regain much that he had sur- rendered when he abandoned the Constitutions of Clarendon. In his Continental possessions there was no such unity. The inhabi- tants of each province were tenacious of their own laws and customs, and this was especially the case with the men of Aquitaine, the country south of the Loire, who differed in habits, and even in lan- guage, from the Frenchmen of Normandy and Anjou. They there- fore found it difficult to give a share of the allegiance which they owed to their own duchess, Eleanor, to her Angevin husband, the king of England. Henry in 1172 having appointed his eldest son, Henry, as the future ruler of Normandy and Anjou as well as of England, thought it wise to recognise this feeUng by giving to his second son, Richard, the immediate possession of Eleanor's duchy of Aquitaine. In 1181 he provided for his third son, Geoffrey, by a marriage with Constance, the heiress of Brittany, over which country he claimed a feudal superiority as Duke of the Normans. Yet, though he gave away so much .to his sons, he wished to keep the actual control over them all. The arrangement did not turn out well. He had set no good example of domestic peace. His sons knew that he had married their mother for the sake of her lands, that he had subsequently thrown her into prison and had been faith- less to her with a succession of mistresses. Besides this, they were 156 HENRY II. 1173-1187 torn away from him by the influence of the men whom they were set to rule. Richard was dragged away from his father by the inter- ests and feehngs of the men of Aquitaine, Geoffrey by the interests and feehngs of the men of Brittany. John, the fourth son, who was named Lackland from having no territory assigned to him, was, as yet, too young to be troublesome.^ Both Richard and Geoffrey had taken part with their brother Henry in the great revolt of 1173. In 1 177 they were again quarrelling with their father and with each other. " Dost thou not know," was the message which Geoffrey sent to his father, " that it is our proper nature, planted in us by inheritance from our ancestors, that none of us should love the other, but that ever brother should strive with brother and son against father ? I would not that thou shouldst deprive us of our hereditary right nor vainly seek to rob us of our nature." Henry loved his children, and could never bring himself to make war very seriously against them. Henry died young in 1183, and Geoffrey in 1185. Richard was now the heir of all his father's lands, from the Tweed to the Pyrenees. Henry made an effort to provide for John in Ireland, and in 1185 he sent the youth — now eighteen years old — to Dublin to rule as king of Ireland. John soon showed his incompetence. He was rude to the English barons, and still ruder to the Irish chiefs, amusing himself by laughing at their dress and pulling the hairs out of their beards. Before the end of the year his father was obliged to recall him. 25. The Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. 1187. — The divi- sions in Henry's family were stirred up afresh by the new king of France, Philip II., who had succeeded his father, Louis VII., in 1179. Philip was resolved to enlarge his narrow dominions at the expense of Henry. He was Henry's feudal lord, and he was crafty enough to know that by assisting Henry's sons he might be able to convert his nominal lordship into a real power. News, however, arrived in the midst of the strife which for a little time put an end to the discords 1 Genealogy of the sons and grandchildren of Henry II. ; — Henry II. 1154-1189 Henry ^ Richard j3eoffrey _ John = (1) Avice of ^ ■ ' Gloucester m. Margaret of 1189-1199 vi. Constance of 1199-1216 France m. Berengaria of Brittany Navarre (2) Isabella of Angoul^me Arthur HENRY III. 1216-1272 1 1 87-1 1 89 DEATH OF HENRY 11. 157 of men and peoples. The Latin kingdom of Jerusalem, which had been established after the first crusade, had only maintained itself because the Mahommedan rulers of Egypt were the rivals and enemies of the Mahommedan rulers of Syria. Yet even with the advantage of divisions amongst their enemies, the Christians had only defended themselves with difficulty, A second crusade which had gone out to relieve them in Stephen's reign, under the Emperor Conrad III. and Louis VI L of France, had accomplished nothing. Their real defenders were two bodies of soldiers, known as the Knights Templars and the Knights of St. John, who were bound, like monks, to vows of celibacy, so that they might always be free to de- fend Jei*usalem. At last a great Mahommedan warrior, Saladin, arose, who ruled both Egypt and Syria, and was therefore able to bring the united forces of the two countries against the Christian colony. In 1187 he destroyed the Christian army at Tiberias, and in the same year took Jerusalem and almost every city still held by the Christians in the East. Tyre alone held out, and that, too, would be lost unless help came speedily. 26. The Last Years of Henry II. 1188 -1189. — For a moment the rulers of the West were shocked at the tidings from the East. In 1188 Philip, Henry, and Richard had taken the cross as the sign of their resolution to recover the Holy City from the infidel. To enable him to meet the expenses of a war in the East, Henry im- posed upon England a new tax of a tenth part of all movable property, which is known as the Saladin tithe, but in a few months those who were pledged to go on the crusade were fighting with one another— first Henry and Richard against Philip, and then Philip and Richard against Henry. At last, in 1189, Henry, beaten in war, was forced to submit to Philip's terms, receiving in return a list of those of his own barons who had engaged to support Richard against his father. The list reached him when he was at Chinon, ill and worn out. The first name on it was that of his favourite son John. The old man turned his face to the wall. " Let things go now as they will," he cried bitterly. " I care no more for myself or for the world." After a few days of suffering he died. The last words which passed his lips were, " Shame, shame upon a conquered king." 27. The Work of Henry II.— The wisest and most powerful ruler can only assist the forces of nature ; he cannot work against them. Those who merely glance at a map in which the political divisions of France are marked as they existed in Henry's reign, cannot but wonder that Henry did not make himself master of the 158 HENRY II. "89 small territory which was directly governed, in turn, by Louis VII. and PhiHp II. A careful study of the political conditions of his reign shows, however, that he was not really strong enough to do anything of the kind. His own power on the Continent was purely feudal, and he held authority over his vassals there because they had personally done homage to him. Henry, however, had also done homage to the king of France, and did not venture, even if he made war upon his lord, the king of France, to push matters to extremities against him, lest his sons as his own vassals might push matters to extremities against himself. He could not, in short, expel the king of France from Paris, lest he should provoke his own vassals to follow his example of insubordination and expel him from Bordeaux or Rouen. Moreover, Henry had too much to do in England to give himself heart and soul to Continental affairs, whilst the king of France, on the contrary, who had no foreign possessions, and was always at his post, would be the first to profit by a national French feeling whenever such a feeling arose. Eng- land under Henry II. was already growing more united and more national. The crown which Henry derived from the Conqueror was national as w^ell as feudal. Henry, like his predecessors, had two strings to his bow. On the one hand he could call upon his vassals to be faithful to him because they had sworn homage to him, whilst he himself, as far as England was concerned, had sworn homage to no one. On the other hand, he could rally round him the national forces. To do this he must do justice and gain the goodwill of the people at large. It was this that he had attempted to do, by sending judges round the country and by improving the law, by establishing scutage to w^eaken the power of the barons, and by strengthening the national forces by the Assize of Arms. No doubt he had little thanks for his pains. Men could feel the weight of his arm and could complain of the heavy fines exacted in his courts of justice. It was only a later generation, which enjoyed the benefits of his hard discipline, which understood how much England owed to him. 159 CHAPTER XI RICHARD I. II89 — II99 LEADING DATES Accession of Richard I Richard's Return to England from the Crusade Death of Richard I ii8g "94 1199 I. Richard in England. 1189 — Richard was accepted without dispute as the master of the whole of the Angevin dominions. He was a warrior, not a statesman. Impulsive in his generosity, he was also impulsive in his passions. Having determined to embark on the crusade, he came to England eager to raise money for its ex- penses. Witli this object he not only sold offices to those who wished to buy them, and the right of leaving office to those who wished to retire, but also, with the Pope's consent, sold leave to remain at home to those who had taken the cross. Regard- less of the distant future, he abandoned for money to William the Lion the treaty of Falaise, in which William had engaged to do homage to the English king. 2. William of Long- champs. 1189 — 1191. — To secure order during his absence Richard appoint- ed two Justiciars — Hugh of Puiset, Bishop of Durham, and William of Lonechamps, Bishop of Ely. At the same time he attempted to conciliate all who were likely to be dangerous by making them lavish grants of land, especially giving what was practically royal authority over five shires to his brother John. Such an arrangement Royal arms of England from Richard I. to Edward III. (From the wall arcade, to uth aisle of nave, Westminster Abbey.) i6o RICHARD L 1189 was not likely to last. Before the end of 1189 Richard crossed to the Continent. Scarcely was he gone when the populace in many towns turned savagely on the Jews and massacred them m crowds. The Jews lived by money-lending, and money-lenders are never The Galilee or Lady Chapel, Durham Caiheclral. Built by Bishop Hugh of Puiset between 1180 and 1197. popular. In York they took refuge in the castle, and when all hope of defending themselves failed, slew their wives and children, set fire to the castle, and perished in the flames. The Justiciars were too much occupied with their own quarrels to heed such matters. Hugh was a stately and magnificent prelate. William was lame 1189-1192 RICHARD IN THE HOLY LAND 161 and misshapen, quick of wit and unscrupulous. In a few weeks he had deprived his rival of all authority. His own power did not last long. He had a sharp tongue, and did not hesitate to let all men, great and small, know how meanly he thought of them. Those whom he despised found a leader in John, who was anxious to suc- ceed his brother, and thought that it might some day be useful to have made himself popular in England. In the autumn of 1191 William of Longchamps was driven out of the country. 3. The Third Crusade. 1189 — 1192. — Richard threw his whole heart — his lion's heart, as men called it — into the crusade. Alike by sea and by land, he knew better than any other leader of his age how to direct the operations of war. He was too im- petuous to guard himself against the intrigues and personal rancour of his fellow-Crusaders. At Messina he quarrelled with the wily Philip II. of France, while he gave offence to all Germans by up- holding the claims of Tancred to the crown of Sicily, which was also claimed by the German king, who afterwards became the Emperor Henry VI. In the spring of 1191 Richard sailed from Sicily for the Holy Land, conquering Cyprus on the way, where he married Beren- garia of Navarre. Passing on to the coast of Syria, he found the Crusaders besieging Acre, and his own vigour greatly contributed to its fall. When Acre was taken Philip slipped home to plot against Richard, and Richard found every French Crusader and every Ger- man Crusader banded together against him. When he advocated the right of Guy of Lusignan to the crown of Jerusalem, they advo- cated the claim of Conrad of Montferrat. Jerusalem was not to be had for either of them. Twice Richard brought the Crusading host within eight miles of the Holy City. Each time he was driven to retreat by the failure of the Crusaders to support him. The last time his comrades invited him at least to reach a spot from which a view of the city could be gained. Richard refused. If he was not worthy, he said, to regain the city, he was not worthy to look on it. 4. The Return of Richard. 1192 — 1194.— In 1192 there was nothing for it but to return home. Enemies were watching for him on every shore. Landing at the head of the Adriatic, he attempted to make his way in disguise through Germany. With characteristic want of reflection, he roasted his meat at a village inn near Vienna with a jewelled ring on his finger. Attention was aroused, and he was arrested and delivered up to Leopold, Duke of Austria, who had been his bitter antagonist in the Holy Land, and Leopold de- livered him up to his own feudal superior, the Emperor, Henry VI. 1 62 RICHARD I. 1192-1194 Effigy of a knight in the Temple Church, London, showing armour of the end of the twelfth century. The imprisonment of Richard • was joyful news to Philip and John. John did his best to get into his hands all the English and Continental dominions of his brother. His meanness was, however, by this time well known, and he was repelled on all sides. At last in 1193 the Emperor consented to let Rich- ard go on payment of what was then the enormous ransom of 150,000 marks, or 100,000/. " Beware," wrote Philip to John when he heard that the Em- peror's consent had been given ; "the devil is loose again.*' Philip and John tried to bribe the Emperor to keep his pri- soner, but in February 1194 Richard was Hberated, and set out for England. 5, Heavy taxation. — Before Richard reappeared in England each tenant-in-chief had to pay the aid which was due to deliver his lord from prison (see p. 1 17), but this was far from being enough. Besides all kinds of irregular expedients the Dane- geld had been practically re- vived, and to it was now given the name of carucage, a tax of two shillings on every plough- land. Another tax of a fourth part of all movable goods had also been imposed, for which a precedent had been set by Henry II. when he levied the Saladin tithe (see p. 157). Richard had now to gather in what was left unpaid of these 1194-1198 HUBERT WALTER 163 charges. Yet so hated was John that Richard was welcomed with every appearance of joy, and John thought it prudent to submit to his brother. Phihp, however, was still an open enemy, and as soon as Richard had gathered in all the money that he could raise in England he left the country never to return. On the Continent he could best defend himself against Philip, and, besides this, Richard was at home in sunny Aquitaine, and had no liking for his English realm, 6. The Administration of Hubert Walter. 1194— 1198.— For four years the administration of England was in the hands of a new Justiciar, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Hubert Walter. He was a statesman of the school of Henry II., and he carried the jury system yet farther than Henry had done. The immense increase of taxation rendered it the more necessary to guard against unfair- ness, and Hubert Walter placed the selection of the juries of presentment (see p. 147) in the hands of four knights in every shire, who, as is probable, were chosen by the freeholders in the County Court, instead of being named by the sheriff. This was a further step in the direction of allowing the counties to manage their own affairs, and a still greater one was taken by the frequent employ- ment of juries in the assessment of the taxes paid within the county, so as to enable them to take a prominent part in its financial as well as in its judicial business. In 1198 there was taken a new survey of England for taxable purposes, and again elected juries were employed to make the returns. In this year Archbishop Hubert retired from the Justiciarship, and was succeeded by Geoffrey Fitz-Peter. Archbishop Hubert's administration marks a great advance in constitutional progress, though it is probable that his motive was only to raise money more readily. The main con- stitutional problem of the Norman and Angevin reigns was how to bring the national organisation of the king's officials into close and constant intercourse with the local organisation of the counties. Henry I. and Henry 11. had attacked the problem on one side by sending the judges round the country to carry the king's wishes and commands to each separate county. It still remained to devise a scheme by which the wishes and complaints of the counties could be brought to the king. Hubert Walter did not contrive that this should be done, but he made it easy to be done in the next genera- tion, because before he left office he had increased the powers of the juries in each county and had accustomed them to deal indepen- dently with all the local matters in which the king and the county were both interested. It only remained to bring these juries together in one place where they might join in making the king aware of the M 2 164 RICHARD r 1 199 !ii :N'uii^ll .•iJ,.vVx "Ir Pl^ Hili.::. illirM, —jrXix.'L 'i-j^iis: Richard I. From his tomb at Fontevrault. Berengaria. From her tomb at Espan, 1 199 THE ANGEVIN KINGS 165 wishes and complaints of all counties alike. When this had been accomplished there would, for the first time, be a representative assembly in England. 7. Death of Richard. 1199. — It was not only Richard's love for his old home which fixed him on the Continent. He knew that the weakest part of his dominions was there. His lands beyond sea had no natural unity. Normans did not love Angevins, neither did A.ngevins love the men of Poitou or Guienne. Philip was willingly obeyed in his own dominions, and he had all the advantage which his title of king of the French could give him. Richard fought desperately, and for the most part successfully, against the French king, and formed alliances with all who were opposed to him. He built on a rock overhanging the Seine above Les Andelys a mighty fortress — the Chiteau Gaillard, or Saucy Castle, as he called it in jest. With characteristic haste he completed the build- ing in a few months. " How fair a child is mine ! " he called to his followers, " this child but a twelvemonth old." Other child he had none, and he had but the miserable John to look to to hold his dominions after he was gone. He did not live long enough to see whether his new castle could stand a siege. A peasant dug up a treasure on the land of the lord of Chalus in the Limousin. Richard claimed it as his right because he was the over-lord. On the refusal of the lord to surrender it he laid siege to Chalus. An arrow from the castle struck him on the shoulder. The wound rankled, and mortification followed. As Richard lay dying the castle sur- rendered, and the man who had aimed the fatal shot was brought before him. " What have I done to thee," asked Richard, " that thou shouldest slay me ? " " Thou hast slain my father and two of my brothers with thy own hand," said the prisoner, *'and thou wouldest fain have killed me too. Avenge thyself upon me as thou wilt. I will gladly endure the greatest torments thou canst devise, since I have seen thee on thy deathbed.'^ Richard, generous to the last, bade his attendants set the prisoner free. They kept him till Richard was dead, and then tortured him to death. 8. Church and State under the Angevin Kings. — During the forty-five years of the reigns of Richard and his father the chief feature of English history is the growth of the power of the state. There was more justice and order, and also more taxation, at the end of the period than at the beginning. During the same period the influence of the Church grew less. The character of Thomas's resistance to the king was lower than that of Anselm, and not long 1 66 THE ANGEVIN KINGS "99 after Thomas's murder Henry indirectly regained the power which he had lost, and filled the sees with officials and dependents who cared little for the higher aims of religion. The evil consequences ^ ., Pa/t of the choir of Ripon Cathedral: built during the last quarter of the twelfth century. II 54-1 199 LITERATURE AND KNOWLEDGE 167 of making the Church dependent on the king were at least as great as those of freeing the political and social life of the clergy from the control of the State. Even monasticism ceased to afford a strong example of self-denial. The very Cistercians, who had begun so well, had fallen from their original purity. They were now owners of immense tracts of pasture-land, and their keenness in money- making had become notorious. They exercised great influence, but it was the influence of great landlords, not the influence of ascetics. 9. Growth of Learning. — The decay of asceticism was to some extent brought about by the opening of new careers into which energetic men might throw themselves. They were needed as judges, as administrators, as councillors. A vigorous literature sprung up in the reign of Henry II., but a. the end of the reign most of it was connected with the court rather than with the monasteries. Henry's Justiciar, Ranulf de Glanvile, wrote the first English law-book. His Treasurer, Richard Fitz- Nigel, set forth in the Dialogus de Scaccario the methods of his financial administra- tion, and also produced 'The Deeds of King Henry and King Richard.' WilUam of Newburgh, indeed, the best historian of these reigns, wrote in a small Yorkshire monastery, but Roger of Hoveden and Ralph de Diceto pursued their historical work under the influence of the court. Still more striking is the universality of the intellectual inquisitiveness of Walter Map. On the one hand, in his De Nugis Curialium he chattered over the manners of his con- temporaries, and in his satirical poems scourged the greed and vices of the clergy, whilst on the other hand he took a principal part in spreading a knowledge of the legend of the high-souled King Arthur and of the quest of the Holy Grail. Giraldus Cambrensis again, or Gerald of Wales, wrote on all sorts of subjects with shrewd humour and extensive knowledge. 10. The University of Oxford. — There was already in England a place where learning was cherished for its own sake. For some time there had been growing up on the Continent gatherings for the increase of learning, which ultimately were known as universi- ties, or corporations of teachers and scholars. One at Bologna had devoted itself to the study of the civil or Roman law. Another at Paris gave itself to the spread of all the knowledge of the time. In these early universities there were no colleges. Lads, very poor for the most part, flocked to the teachers and lodged themselves as best they could. Such a university, though the name was not used till later, had been gradually forming at Oxford. Its origin and i68 THE ANGEVIN KINGS 1154-1199 early history is obscure, but in 1186 Giraldus, wishing to find a cul- tivated audience for his new book on the topography of Ireland, read it aloud at Oxford, where, as he tells us, ' the clergy in England chiefly flourished and excelled in clerkly lore.' It appears that there were already separate faculties or branches of study, and per- sons recognised as doctors or teachers in all of them. II. Country and Town. — Intellectual progress was accompanied by material progress. In the country the old system of cultivation by the labour service of villein-tenants still prevailed, but in many parts the service had been commuted, either for a money payment or for payments in kind, such as payments of a fixed number of eggs or fowls, or of a fixed quantity of honey or straw. Greater pro- gress was made in the towns. At the time of the Conquest there were about eighty towns in England, most of them no larger than villages. The largest towns after London were Winches- ter, Bristol, Norwich, York, and Lincoln, but even these had not a population much above 7,000 apiece. In the smaller towns trade . was sufficiently pro- vided for by the establishment of a market to which countiy people brought their grain or their cattle, and where they provided them- selves ni turn with such rude household necessaries as they required. Even before the Conquest port towns had grown up on Lay costumes in the twelfth century. Costume of shepherds in the twelfth century. II54-II99 COMMERCE AND TOWNS 169 the coast, but foreign trade was slight, imports being almost entirely confined to luxuries for the rich. The order introduced by the Normans and the connection between England and the king-'s Continental possessions was followed by an increase of trade, and there arose in each of the larger towns a corporation which was known as the Merchant Gild, and which was, in some instances at least, only a development of an older association existing in the times before the Conquest. No one except the brothers of the Merchant Gild was allowed to trade in any article except food, but any one living in the town might become a brother on payment of a settled fee. The first Merchant Gild known was constituted in 1093. A little later, Henry I. granted charters to some of the towns, conferring on them the right of managing their own affairs ; and his example was followed, in far greater profusion, by Henry II. and Richard I. Though the organisation of the Merchant Gild was originally distinct from the organisation of the town, and the two were in theory kept apart, the Merchant Gild, to which most of the townsmen belonged, usually encroached upon the authorities of the town, regulated trad^ to its own advantage, and practically controlled the choice of officers, the principal officer being usually styled an Alderman, with power to keep order and generally to provide for the well-being of the place. In this way the trades- men and merchants of the towns prepared themselves uncon- sciously for the time when they would be called on to take part in managing the affairs of the country. Even in these early times, however, the artisans in some pf the trades attempted to combine together. 12. Condition of London. — Of all the towns London had been growing most rapidly in wealth and population, and during the troubles in which John had been pitted against William of Long- champs it had secured the right of being governed by a Mayor and Aldermen of its own, instead of being placed under the jurisdiction of the King's sheriff. The Mayor and Aldermen, however, did not represent all the townsmen. In London, though there is no evidence of the existence of a Merchant Gild, there was a corporation com- posed of the wealthier traders, by which the city was governed. The Mayor and Aldermen were chosen out of this corporation, as were the juries elected to assess the taxes. Artisans soon came to believe that these juries dealt unfairly with the poor. One of the Aldermen, WilHam Longbeard, made himself the mouthpiece of their complaints and stirred them up against the rest, Hubert Walter sent a messenger to seize him, but William Longbeard slew the I/O THE ANGEVIN KINGS 1154-1199 messenger and fled into the church of Mary-at-Bow. Here, accord- ing to the ideas of his age, he should have been safe, ao every church was considered to be a sanctuary in which no criminal could be arrested. Hubert Walter, however, came in person to seize him, set the church on fire, and had him dragged out. William Longbeard was first stabbed, and then tried and hanged, and for the time the rich tradesmen had their way against the poorer artisans. 13. Architectural Changes.— Even in the most flourishing towns the houses were still mostly of wood or rubble covered Hall of Oakham Castle, Rutland : built about 1185 with thatch, and only here and there was to be found a house of stone. So slight, indeed, were the ordinaiy buildings, that it was provided by the Assize of Clarendon that the houses of certain offenders should be carried outside the town and burnt. Here and there, however, as in the case of the so-called Jews' house at Lincoln, stone houses were erected. In the larger houses the arrangements were much as they had been before the Conquest, the large hall being still the most conspicuous part, though another apart- ment, known as the solar, to which an ascent was made by steps from the outside, and which served as a sitting-room for the master 1 1 54-1 199 ARCHITECTURE £71 of the house, had usually been added. The castles reared by the king or the barons were built for defence alone, and it was in the great cathedrals and churches that the skill of the architect was shown. An enormous number of parish churches of stone were raised by Norman builders to supersede earlier buildings of wood. For some time the round-arched Norman architecture which had been introduced by Eadward the Confessor was alone followed, such Norman House at Lincoln, called the Jews' House, Built about 1140. The square windows are of later date. as may be studied in the Galilee of Durham (see p. i6o) the nave of St. Albans (see p. 109) and the tower of Castor (see p. 136). Gradu- ally the pointed arch of Gothic architecture took its place, and after a period of transition, of which the nave of Durham, and the choirs of Canterbury and of Ripon afford examples (see pp. 130, 15O5 i^^), the graceful style now known as Early EngHsh was first used on a large scale in 1192 in the choir of the cathedral of Lincoln. 172 THE ANGEVIN KINGS n 54-1^99 Books recommended for further study of Part II. Stubbs, W. (Bishop of Oxford). Constitutional History of England. Vol. i. chaps, ix.-xiii. Freeman, E. A. History of the Norman Conquest. Vols. iv. and v. History of William P ufus. Green, J. R. History of the English People. Vol. i. pp. 115-189. NORGATE, Miss K, England under the Angevin Kings, Vols. i. and ii. pp. 1-388. Cunningham, W. Giowth of English Industry and Commerce during the Early and Middle Ages, pp. 129-173. Wakeman, H. O. , and Hassall, A. Constitutional Essays. 173 PART III THE GROWTH OF THE PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUTION. 1 199— 1399 CHAPTER XII JOHN. II99— 1216 LEADING DATES Accession of John iigg Loss of Normandy 1204 England under an Interdict , . 1208 Magna Carta 1215 Death of John 1216 1. The Accession of John. 1199. — After Richard's death there were living but two descendants of Henry II. in the male line — John, Richard's only surviving brother, and Arthur, the young son of John's elder brother, Geoffrey. The English barons had to make their choice between uncle and nephew, and, as had been done in the days of iElfred, they preferred the grown man to the child. It was the last time when that principle of election was confessedly acted on. Archbishop Hubert in announcing the result used words which seem strange now : " Forasmuch," he declared to the people assembled to witness John's coronation, "as we see him to be prudent and vigorous, we all, after invoking the Holy Spirit's grace, for his merits no less than his royal blood, have with one consent chosen him for our king." In reality, John was of all men most unwonthy. He was without dispute the worst of the English kings. Like William II. he feared not God nor regarded man. Though William indeed was more vicious in his private life, John's violence and tyranny in public life was as great as William's, and he added a meanness and frivolity which sank him far below him. 2. John's First War with Philip II. 1199— 1200.— On the Con- 174 JOHN 1 199-1203 tinent John had a difficult game to play. Normandy and Aquitaine submitted to him, but Anjou and its dependent territories declared for Arthur, who was Duke of Brittany in right of his mother. Philip II., who had long been the rival of Richard, now took the field in 1199 as the rival of John in support of Arthur ; but for the moment he ruined his chance of success by keeping in his own hands the castles which he took from John instead of making them over to Arthur. Arthur's supporters took offence, and in 1200 Philip made peace with John. Philip acknowledged John as Richard's heir, but forced him in return to pay a heavy sum of money, and to make other concessions. 3. John's Misconduct in Poitou. 1200— 1201. — John did not know how to make use of the time of rest which he had gained. Being tired of his wife, Avice of Gloucester, he persuaded some Aquitanian bishops to divorce him from her, though he took care to keep the lands which he had received from her at her marriage. He then married Isabella of Angouleme, though she was betrothed to a Poitevin noble, Hugh of Lusignan. Hugh was enraged, and, together with many of his neighbours, took arms against John. In 1201 John charged all the barons of Poitou with treason, and bade them clear their character by selecting champions to fight with an equal number of English and Norman knights. 4. The Loss of Normandy and Anjou. 1202 — 1204. — The Poitevin barons, instead of accepting the wager of battle, appealed to Philip as John's over-lord, and in 1202 Philip summoned John to answer their complaints before his peers. John not only did not appear, but made no excuse for his absence ; upon which the peers adjudged him to have forfeited all the lands held by him as Philip's vassal. After this Philip, in aUiance with Arthur, invaded Normandy. John's aged mother, Eleanor, who was far more able and energetic than her son, took up his cause agamst her grandson Arthur. She was besieged by Arthur at Mirebeau when John came to her help, and not only raised the siege, but carried off Arthur as a prisoner. Many of his vassals rose against him, and findino- himself unable to meet them in the field he wreaked his vengeance on his helpless prisoner. A little before Easter 1203 Arthur ceased to live. How the boy died has never been known, but it was generally believed that he was drowned in the Seine near Rouen- some said by his uncle's own hands. The murderer was the first to suffer from the crime. Philip at once invaded Normandy The Norman barons had long ceased to respect John, and very few of them would do anything to help him. Philip took castle after castle. John was indeed capable of:, sudden outbreak of violence 1203 JOHN AND HIS SECQND WIFE 175 Effigy of King John on his monument in Worcester Cathedral Isabella, wife of King John. From her monument at Fontevrault. 176 ,, JOHN 1204-1205 but he was incapable of sustained effort. He now looked sluggishly on, feasting and amusing himself whilst Philip was conquering Nor- mandy. " Let him alone," he lazily said ; " I shall some day win back all that he is taking from me now." His best friends dropped off from him. The only fortress which made a long resistance was that Chateau Gaillard which Richard had built to guard the Seine. In 1204 it was at last taken, and before the end of that year Normandy, Maine, Anjou, and Touraine, together with part of Poitou, had submitted to Philip. 5. Causes of Philip's Success. — It was not owing to John's vigour that Aquitaine was not lost as well as Normandy and Anjou. Philip had justified his attack on John as being John's feudal lord, and as being therefore bound to take the part of John's vassals whom he had injured. Hitherto the power of the king over his great vassals, which hadbeen strong in England, had been weak in France. Philip made it strong in Normandy and Anjou because he had the support there of the vassals of John. That these vassals favoured him was owing partly to John's contemptible character, but also to the growth of national unity between the inhabitants of Normandy and Anjou on the one hand and those of Philip's French dominions on the other. Normans and Angevins both spoke the same language as the Frenchmen of Paris and its neighbourhood. Their manners and characters were very much the same, and the two peoples very soon blended with one another. They had been separated merely because their feudal organisation had been distinct, because the lord over one was John and over the other was Philip. In Aquitaine it was otherwise. The language and manners there, though much nearer to those of the French than they were to those of the English, differed considerably from the language and manners of the Frenchmen, Normans, and Angevins. What the men of Aquitaine really wanted was independence. They therefore now clung to John against Philip as they had clung to Richard against Henry 11. They resisted Heniy II. because Henry II. ruled in Anjou and Normandy, and they wished to be free from any con- nection with Anjou and Normandy. They resisted Philip because Philip now ruled in Anjou and Normandy. They were not afraid of John any longer, because they thought that now that England alone was left to him, he would be too far off to interfere with them. 6. The Election of Stephen Langton to the Archbishopric of Canterbury. 1205.— In England John had caused much discontent by the heavy taxation which he imposed, not with the regularity of Heni-y II. and Hubert Walter, but with unfair inequality. In I205-I206 JOHN'S QUARREL WITH THE POPE 177 1205 Archbishop Hubert Walter died. The right of choosing a new archbishop lay with the monks of the monastery of Christchurch at Canterbury, of which every archbishop, as the successor of St. Augustine, was the abbot. This right, however, had long been exercised only according to the wish of the king, who practically named the archbishop. This time the monks, without asking John's leave, hurriedly chose their sub- prior Reginald, and sent him off with a party of monks to Rome, to obtain the sanction of the Pope. Reginald was directed to say nothing of his election till he reached Rome ; but he was a vain man, and had no sooner reached the Continent than he babbled about his own dignity as an arch- bishop. When John heard this he bade the monks choose the Bishop of Norwich, John de Grey, the king's treasurer ; and the monks, thoroughly frightened, chose him as if they had not already made their election. J ohn had, however, forgotten to consult the bishops of the province of Can- terbury, who had always been con- sulted by his father and brother, and they too sent messengers to the Pope to complain of the king. 7. Innocent III. and Stephen Langton. 1206. — The Pope was Innocent III., v/hoat once deter- mined that John must not name bishops whose only merit was that they were good state officials. Being an able man, he soon dis- covered that Reginald was a fool. He therefore in 1206 sent for a fresh deputation of monks, and, as soon as they arrived in Rome, bade them make a new choice in the name of their monastery. At Innocent's suggestion they chose Stephen Langton, one of the most pious and learned men of the day, whose greatness of character was hardly suspected by anyone at the time. Bishop Marshall of Exeter, died 1206 ; from his tomb at Exeter, showing a bishop vested for mass. 178 JOHN 1206-1209 8. John's Quarrel with the Church. 1206— 1208.— The choice of an archbishop in opposition to the king was undoubtedly something- new. The archbishopric of Canterbury was a great national office, and a king as skilful as Heniy II. would probably have succeeded in refusing to allow it to be disposed of by the Pope and a small party of monks. John was unworthy to be the champion of any cause whatever. In 1207, after an angry correspondence with Innocent, he drove the monks of Christchurch out of the kingdom. Innocent in reply threatened England with an interdict, and in the spring of 1208 the interdict was published. 9. England underian Interdict. 1208.— An interdict carried with it the suppression of all the sacraments of the Church except those of baptism and extreme unction. Even these were only to be received in private. No words of solemn import were pronounced at the burial of the dead. The churches were all closed, and to the men of that time the closing of the churCh-doors was like the closing of the very gate of heaven. In the choice of the punishment inflicted there was some sign that the Papacy was hardly as strong in the thirteenth as it had been in the eleventh century. Gregory VII. had smitten down kings by personal excommunication ; Innocent III. found it necessary to stir up resistance against the king by inflicting sufferings on the people. Yet there is no evidence of any indignation against the Pope. The clergy rallied almost as one man round Innocent, and songs proceeded from the monasteries which mocked the few official bishops who took John's side as money-makers who cared more for marks than for Mark, and more for lucre than for Luke, whilst John de Grey was branded with the title of that beast of Norwich.' John taking no heed of the popular feeling, seized the property of the clergy who obeyed the interdict. Yet he was not without fear lest the barons should join the clergy against him, and to keep them in obedience he compelled them to entrust to him their eldest sons as hostages. One lady to whom this order came replied that she would never give her son to a king who had murdered his nephew. 10. John Excommunicated. I209.~ln 1209 Innocent excommu nicated John himself John cared nothing for being excluded from the senices of the Church, but he knew that if the excommunication were published in England few would venture to sit at table with him, or even to speak with him. For some time he kept it out of the countiy, but it became known that it had been pronounced at Rome, and even his own dependents began to avoid his company He feared lest the barons whom he had wearied with heavy fines 1209-1213 A FRENCH ARMY OF INVASION 179 and taxes might turn against him, and he needed large sums of money to defend himself against them. First he turned on the Jews, threw them into prison, and after torturing those who refused to pay, wrung from them 40,000/. The abbots were next summoned before him and forced by threats to pay 100,000/. Besides this the wealthy Cistercians had to pay an additional fine, the amount of which is uncertain, but of which the lowest estimate is 27,000/ In I2II some of the barons declared against John, but they were driven from the country, and those who remained were harshly treated. Some of their sons who had been taken as hostag-es were hanged or starved to death. II. The Pope threatens John with Deposition. 1212— 1213.— In Parsonage house of early thirteenth-century date at West Dean, Sussex, I2I2 Innocent's patience came to an end, and he announced that he would depose John if he still refused to give way, and would transfer his crown to his old enemy, Philip II. The English clergy and barons were not likely to oppose the change. Philip gathered a great army in France to make good the claim which he expected Innocent to give him. John, indeed, was not entirely without re- source. The Emperor Otto IV. was John's sister^s son, and as he too had been excommunicated by Innocent he made common cause with John against Philip. Early in 1213 John gathered an army of 60,000 men to resist Philip's landing, and if Otto with his N 2 i8o JOHN 1213 Germans were to attack France from the east, a French army would hardly venture to cross into England, unless indeed it had no serious resistance to fear. John, however, knew well that he could not de- pend on his own army. Many men in the host hated him bitterly, and he feared deposition, and perhaps death, at the hands of those whom he had summoned to his help. 12. John's Submission. 1213. — Under these circumstances John preferred submission to the Pope to submission to Philip or his own barons. He invited Pandulf, the Pope's representative, to Dover. He swore to admit Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, to restore to their rights all those of the clergy or laity whom he had banished, and to give back the money which he had wrongfully exacted. Two days later he knelt before Pandulf and did homage to the Pope for England and Ireland. He was no longer to be an independent king but the Pope's vassal. In token of his vassalage he agreed that he and his successors should pay to Innocent and his successors 1,000 marks a year, each mark being equal to 1 3^, 4^., or two-thirds of a pound. Innocent had reached his aim as far as John was concerned. In his eyes the Papacy was not merely the guide of the Church, it was an institution for controlling kings and forcing them to act in accordance with the orders of the Popes. It remained to be seen whether the Pope's orders would be always unselfish, and whether the English barons and clergy would submit to them as readily as did this most miser- able of English kings. 13. The Resistance of the Barons and Clergy. 1213. — At first John seemed to have gained all that he wanted by submission. Pandulf bade Philip abandon all thought of invading England, and when Philip refused to obey, John's fleet fell upon the French fleet off the coast of Flanders and destroyed it. John even pro- posed to land with an army in Poitou and to reconquer Normandy and Anjou. His subjects thought that he ought to begin by ful- filling his engagements to them. John having received absolu- tion, summoned four men from each county to meet at St. Albans to assess the damages of the clergy which he had bound himself to make good. The meeting thus summoned was the germ of the future House of Commons. It was not a national political assembly, but it was a national jury gathered together into one place. The exiled barons were recalled, and John now hoped that his vassals would follow him to Poitou. They refused to do so, alleging their poverty and the fact that they had already fulfilled their feudal obligation of forty days' service by attending him at Dover. They had, in 1213-1214 THE CHARTER OF HENRY /. i8i fact, no interest in regaining Normandy and Anjou for John. Though the Enghsh barons still spoke French, and were proud of their Norman descent, they now thought of themselves as English- men and cared for England alone. John turned furiously on the barons, and was only hindered from attacking them by the new Archbishop, who threatened to excommunicate everyone who took arms against them. It was time tor all Englishmen who loved order and law to resist John. Stephen Langton put himself at the head of the movement, and at a great assembly at St. Paul's pro- duced a charter of Henry I., by which that king had promised to put an end to the tyranny of the Red King, and declared amidst general applause that it must be renewed by John. It was a memor- able scene. Up to this time it had been necessary for the clergy and the people to support the king against the tyranny of the barons. Now the clergy and people offered their support to the barons against the tyranny of the king. John had merely the Pope on his side. Innocent's view of the situation was very simple. John was to obey the Pope, and all John's subjects were to obey John. A Papal legate arrived in England, fixed the sum which John was to pay to the clergy, and refused to listen to the complaints of those who thought themselves defrauded. 14. The Battle of Bouvines. 1214. — In 1214 John succeeded in carrying his barons and their vassals across the sea. With one army he landed at Rochelle, and recovered what had been lost to him on the south of the Loire, but failed to make any permanent conquests to the north of that river. Another army, under John's illegitimate brother, the Earl of Salisbury, joined the Emperor Otto in an attack on Philip from the north. The united force of Germans and English was, however, routed by Philip at Bouvines, in Flanders. " Since I have been reconciled to God," cried John, when he heard the news, " and submitted to the Roman Church, nothing has gone well with me." He made a truce with Philip, and temporarily renounced all claims to the lands to the north of the Loire. 15. The Struggle between John and the Barons. 1214 — 1215. When John returned he called upon all his vassals who had re- mained at home to pay an exorbitant scutage. In reply they met at Bury St. Edmunds. The charter of Henry I., which had been produced at St. Paul's the year before, was again read, and all present swore to force John to accept it as the rule of his own government. John asked for delay, and attempted to divide his antagonists by offering to the clergy the right of free election to bishoprics and abbacies. Then he turned against the barons. Early 1 82 JOHN 1215 Effigy of a knight in the Temple Church , London, showing armour worn be- tween 1 190 and 1225. in 1215 he brought over a large force of foreign mercenaries, and per- suaded the Pope to threaten the barons with excommunication. His attempt was defeated by the con- stancy of Stephen Langton. The demands of the barons were placed in writing by the archbishop, and, on John's refusal to accept them, an army was formed to force them on the king. The army of God and the Holy Church, as it was called, grew rapidly. London admitted it within its walls, and the accession of London to the cause of the barons was a sign that the traders of Eng- land, were of one mind with the barons and the clergy. John found that their force was superior to his own, and at Runnimede on June 15, 1215, confirmed with his hand and seal the articles of the barons, with the full intention of breaking his engagement as soon as he should be strong enough to do so. 16. Magna Carta. 1215. — Magna Carta^ or the Great Charter, as the articles were called after John con- firmed them, was won by a combi- nation between all classes of free- men, and it gave rights to them all. [a) Its Concessions. — The Church was to be free, its privileges were to be respected, and its right to free elections which John had granted earlier in the year was not to be in- fringed on. As for the laity, the tenants-in-chief were to pay only fixed reliefs when they entered on their estates. Heirs under age were to be the king's wards, but the king was to treat them fairly, and do I2I5 THE GREAT CHARTER 183 nothing to injure their land whilst it was in his hands. The king might continue to find husbands for heiresses and wives for heirs, but only amongst those of their own class. The tenants-in-chief again were bound to pay aids to the king when he needed ransom from imprisonment, or money to enable him to bear the expenses of knighting his eldest son or of manying his eldest daughter. For all other purposes the king could only demand supplies from his tenants-in-chief with the consent of the Common Council of the realm. As only the tenants-in-chief were concerned, this Common Council was the Great Council of tenants-in-chief, such as had met under the Norman and Angevin kings. A fresh attempt, however, was made to induce the smaller tenants-in-chief to attend, in addition to the bishops, abbots, and barons, by a direction that whilst these were to be summoned personally, the sheriffs should in each county issue a general summons to the smaller tenants-in-chief. Though the sub-tenants had no part in the Common Council of the realm, they were relieved by a direction that they should pay no more aids to their lords than their lords paid to the king, and by a general declaration that all that had been granted to their lords by the king should be allowed by their lords to them. The Londoners and other townsmen had their privileges assured to them ; and all free- men were secured against heavy and irregular penalties if they committed an offence. {b) Its Securities. — Such were the provisions of this truly national act, which EngHshmen were for ages engaged in maintaining and developing. The immediate question was how to secure what had been gained. The first thing necessary for this purpose was to make the courts of law the arbitrators between the king and his subjects. In a series of articles it was declared that the sworn testimony of a man's peers should be used whenever fines or penalties were imposed, and this insistence on the employment of the jui-y system as it then existed was emphasised by the strong words to which John placed his seal : " No freeman may be taken, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or banished, or in any way destroyed, nor will we go against him, or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. To none will we sell or deny or delay right or justice." It was a good security if it could be maintained, but it would avail nothing against a king who was willing and able to use force to set up the old tyranny once more. In the first place John must dis- miss all his foreign mercenaries. So little, however, was John trusted that it was thought necessary in the second place to esta- i84 JOHN 1215-1216 blish a body of twenty-five— twenty- four barons and the Mayor of London — which was to guard against any attempt of the king to break his word. . If John infringed upon any of the articles of the Charter the twenty-five, with the assistance of the whole community of the kingdom, had the right of distraining upon the king's lands till enough was obtained to make up the loss to the person who had suffered wrong. In other words, there was to be a permanent organisation for making war upon the king. 17. War between John and the Barons. 1215 — 1216.— John waited for the moment of vengeance. Not only did he refuse to send his mercenaries away, but he sent to the Continent for large reinforcements. Pope Innocent declared the barons to be wicked rebels, and released John from his oath to the Great Charter. War soon broke out. John's mercenaries were too strong for the barons, and in the beginning of 1216 almost all England with the exception of London had been overrun by them. Though the Pope laid London under an interdict, neither the citizens nor the barons paid any attention to it. They sent to Louis, the eldest son of Philip of France, to invite him to come and be their king in John's stead. Louis was married to John's niece, and might thus be counted as a member of the English royal family. The time had not yet come when a man who spoke French was regarded as quite a foreigner amongst the English barons. On May 21, 1216, Louis landed with an army in the Isle of Thanet. 18. Conflict between Louis and John. 1216. — John, in spite of his success, found himself without sufficient money to pay h'S mer- cenaries, and he therefore retreated to Winchester, Louis entered London in triumph, and afterwards drove John out of Winchester. Innocent indeed excommunicated Louis, but no one took heed of the excommunication. Yet John was not without support. The A silver penny of John, struck at Dublin. trading towns of the East, who probably regarded Louis as a foreigner, took his part, and many of his old officials, to whom the victory of the barons seemed likely to bring back the ararchy of I2i6 A BOY-KING 185 Stephen's time, clung to him. One of these, a high-spirited and strong-willed man, Hubert de Burgh, held out for John in Dover Castle. John kept the field and even won some successes. As he was crossing the Wash the tide rose rapidly and swept away his baggage. He himself escaped with difficulty. Worn out in mind and body, he was carried on a litter to Newark, where on October 19, 1216, he died. CHAPTER XHI HENRY III. 1216— 1272 LEADING DATES Accession of Henry III 1216 The Fall of Hubert de Burgh , 1232 The Provisions of Oxford 1248 Battle of Lewes 1264 Battle of Evesham 1265 Death of Henry III 1272 I. Henry HI. and Louis. 1216 — 1217. — Henry III., the eldest son of John, was but nine years old at his father's death. Never before had it been useful for England that the king should be a child. As Henry had oppressed no one and had broken no oaths, those who dared not trust the father could rally to the son. The boy had two guardians, one of whom was Gualo, the legate of Pope Honorius HI., a man gentler and less ambitious than Innocent III., whom he had just succeeded ; the other was William the Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, who had been constant to John, not because he loved his evil deeds, but because, like many of the older officials, he feared that the victory of the barons would be followed by anarchy. These two had on their side the growing feeling on behalf of English nationality ; whereas, as long as John lived, his opponents had argued that it was better to have a foreign king like Louis than to have a king like John, who tyrannised over the land by the help of foreign mercenaries. Henry's followers daily increased, and in 1217 Louis was defeated by the Marshal at Lincoln. Later in the year Hubert de Burgh, the Justiciar, sent out a fleet which defeated a French fleet off Dover. Louis then submitted and left the kingdom. 2. The Renewal of the Great Charter. 1216 — 1217.— The 1 86 HENRY in. 1216-1219 Effigy of Heno' III. ; from his tomb in Westminster Abbey. principles on which WiUiam the Marshal intended to govern were signified by the changes made in the Great Charter when it was renewed on the king's accession in 1216, and again on Louis's ex- pulsion in 1217. Most of the clauses binding the king to avoid oppression were allowed to stand ; but those which prohibited the raising of new taxation without the authority of the Great Council, and the stipulation which established a body of twenty-five to distrain on John's property in case of the breach of the Charter, were omit- ted. Probably it was thought that there was less danger from Henry than there had been from John ; but the acceptance of the compro- mise was mainly due to the feeling that, whilst it was desirable that the king should govern with mode- ration, it would be a dangerous ex- periment to put the power to con- trol him in the hands of the barons, who might use it for their own ad- vantage rather than for the advan- tage of the nation. The whole histoi-y of England for many years was to turn on the difficulty of weakening the power of a bad king without producing anarchy. 3. Administration of Hubert de Burgh. 1219— 1232.— In 1219 William the Marshal died. For some years the government was mainly in the hands of Hubert de Burgh, who strenuously main- tained the authority of the king over the barons, whilst at the same time he set himself distinctly at I2I9-I232 HUBERT DE BURGH 1S7 the head of the growing national feeling against the admission of foreigners to wealth and high position in England. As a result of the disturbances of John's reign many of the barons and of the leaders of the mercenaries had either fortified their own castles or had taken possession of those which belonged to the king. In 1220 Hubert demanded the surrender of these castles as Henry 1 1, had done in the begin- ning of his reign. In 1221 the Earl of Aumale was forced to surrender his castles, and in 1224 Faukes de Breaute, one of the leaders of John's mercenaries who had received broad lands in England, was reduced to sub- mission and was banished on his refusal to give up his great castle at Bedford. As long as Hubert ruled, England was to belong to the English. His power was endangered from the very quarter from which it ought to have received most support. In 1227 Henry declared himself of age. He was weak and untrustworthy, always ready to give his confidence to unworthy favourites. His present favourite was Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester. The bishop was a greedy and unscrupulous Poite- vin, who regarded the king's favour as a means of enriching himself and his Poitevin relatives and friends. Henry was always Effigy of William Longesp^e, Earl of Salis- 1 , r J bury (died 1227) ; from his tomb in short of money, and was per- Salisbury Cathedral : showing armour suaded by Peter that it was ^o*^ f""*^"^ ^^o"' ^"5 to 1250. 1 88 HENRY riL I 232- I 234 Hubert's fault. In 1232 Hubert was charged with a whole string of crimes and dismissed from office. 4. Administration of Peter des Roches. 1232 -1234.— Henry was now entirely under the power of Peter des Roches. In 1233 he ordered Hubert to be seized. Though Hubert took sanctuary in a chapel, he was dragged out, and a smith was ordered to put him in fetters. The man refused to obey. " Is not this," he said, " that most faithful and high-souled Hubert who has so often saved England from the ravages of foreigners, and has given England back to the Eng- lish ? " Hubert was thrown into the Tower, and was never again employed in any office of state. As long as Peter des Roches ruled the king it would be hard to keep Eng- land for the English. Poitevins and Bretons flocked over from the Continent, and were appointed to all the influential posts which fell vacant. The barons had the national feeling behind them when they raised complaints against this policy. Their leader was Earl Richard the Marshal, the son of the Earl William who had governed England after the death of John. Without even the semblance of trial Henry declared Earl Richard and his chief supporters guilty of trea- son. At a Great Council held at Westminster some of the barons remonstrated Peter des Roches replied saucily that there were no peers in England as in France, meaning that in England the barons had no rights against the king. Both Henry and Peter could, however, use their tongues better than their swords. They failed miserably in an attempt to overcome the men whom they had unjustly accused, till in 1234 Peter stirred up some of the English lords in Ireland to seize on Earl Richard's possessions there. The Earl hurried over to defend his estates. Amongst Simon, Bishop of Exeter (died 1223) ; from his tomb at Exeter, showing rich mass- vestmen ts. 1234 EDMUND RICH 189 his followers were many of Peter's confidants, who, treacherously deserting him in the first battle, left him to be slain by his enemies. Peter at least gained nothing by his villainy. Edmund Rich, a saintly man, who had recently become Archbishop of Canterbury, protested against his misdeeds. All England was behind the Archbishop, Beverley Minster, Yorkshire— the south transept ; built about 1220-1230. and Henry was compelled to dismiss Peter and then to welcome back Peter's enemies and to restore them to their rights. It was of no slight importance that a man so devoted and unselfish as Edmund Rich had put himself at the head of the movement. It was a good thing, no doubt, to maintain that wealth should be in the hands 190 HENRY III, 1209 rather of natives than of foreigners ; but after all every contention for material wealth alone is of the earth, earthy. No object which appeals exclusively to the selfish instincts can, in the long run, be worth contending for. Edmund Rich's accession to the national cause was a guarantee that the claims of righteousness and mercy in the management of the national government would not altogether be forgotten, and fortunately there were new forces actively at work in the same direction. The friars, the followers of St. Francis and St. Dominic, had made good their footing in England. 5. Francis of Assisi. — Francis, the son of a merchant in the Tuscan town of Assisi, threw aside the vanities of youth after a serious illness. He was wedded, he declared, to Poverty as his bride. He clothed himself in rags. When his father sent him with a horseload of goods to a neighbouring market, he sold both horse and goods, and offered the money to build a church. His father was enraged, and summoned him before the bishop that he might be deprived of the right of inheriting that which he knew not how to use. Francis stripped himself naked, renouncing even his clothes as his father's property. " I have now," he said, " but one Father, He that is in heaven." He wandered about as a beggar, subsisting on alms and devoting himself to the care of the sick and afflicted. In his heroism of self-denial he chose out the lepers, covered as they were with foul and infectious sores^ as the main objects of his tending. Before long he gathered together a brotherhood of men hke-minded with himself, who left all, to give not alms but themselves to the help of the poor and sorrowful of Christ's flock. In 1209 Innocent III. constituted them into a new order, not of monks but of Friars {Fr aires or brethren). The special title of the new order, which after ages have known by the name of Franciscans, was that of Minorites {Fratres Mtnores), or the lesser brethren, because Francis in his humility declared them to be less than the least of Christ's servants. Like Francis, they were to be mendicants, begging their food from day to day. Hav- ing nothing themselves, they would be the better able to touch the hearts of those who had nothing. Yet it was not so much the humility of Francis as his loving heart which distinguished him amongst men. Not only all human beings but all created things were dear to him. Once he is said to have preached to birds. He called the sun and the wind his brethren, the moon and the water his sisters. When he died the last feeble words which he breathed were, " Welcome, sister Death ! " 6. St. Dominic.- Another order arose about the same time in I220-I224 INK J'KIAK^ I91 Spain. Dominic, a Spaniard, was appalled, not by the misery, but by the ignorance of mankind. The order which he instituted was to be called that of the Friars Preachers, though they have in later times usually been known as Dominicans. Like the Franciscans they were to be Friars, or brothers, because all teaching is vain, as much as all charitable acts are vain, unless brotherly kindness be at the root. Like the Franciscans they were to be mendicants, because so only could the world be convinced that they sought not their own good, but to win souls to Christ. 7. The Coming of the Friars. 1220— 1224. — In 1220 the first Dominicans arrived in England. Four years later, in 1224, the first Franciscans followed them. Of the work of the early Domini- cans in England little is known. They preached and taught, appealing to those whose intelligence was keen enough to appreciate the value of argument. The Franciscans had a different work before them. The misery of the dwellers on the outskirts of Eng- lish towns was appalling. The townsmen had made provision for keeping good order amongst all who shared in the liberties,^ or, as we should say, in the privileges of the town ; but they made no provision for good order amongst the crowds who flocked to the town to pick up a scanty living as best they might. These poor wretches had to dwell in miserable hovels outside the walls by the side of fetid ditches into which the filth of the town was poured. Disease and starvation thinned their numbers. No man cared for their bodies or their souls. The priests who served in the churches within the town passed them by, nor had they any place in the charities with which the brethren of the gilds assuaged the misfor- tunes of their own members. It was amongst these that the Fran- ciscans lived and laboured, sharing in their misery and their diseases, counting their lives well spent if they could bring comfort to a single human soul. 8. Monks and Friars. — The work of the friars was a new phase in the history of the Church. The monks had made it their object to save their own souls ; the friars made it their object to save the bodies and souls of others. The friars, like the monks, taught by the example of self-denial ; but the friars added active "well-doing to the passive virtue of restraint. Such examples could not fail to be attended with consequences of which those who set 1 A phrase which may serve to keep in mind the medieval meaning of ' libirias ' is to be found in the statement that a certain monastery kept up a pair of stocks 'pro libertate servandd' — that is to say, to keep up its franchise of putting offenders into the stocks. 192 HENRY III. 1236 them never dreamed, all the more because the two new orders worked harmoniously towards a common end. The Dominicans quickened the brain whilst the Franciscans touched the heart, and the whole nation was the better in consequence. 9. The King's Marriage. 1236. — In 1236 Henry married Eleanor, the daughter of the Count of Provence. The immediate consequence was the arrival of her four uncles with a stream of Provencals in their train. Amongst these uncles William, Bishop- elect of Valence, took the lead. Henry submitted his weak mind entirely to him, ana distributed rank and wealth to the Provencals Longthorpe Manor House, Northampton ; built about 1235. Some of the larger windows are later- with as much profusion as he had distributed them to the Poitevms m the days of Peter des Roches. The barons, led now by the kmg's brother, Richard of Cornwall, remonstrated when they met m the Great Council, which was gradually acquiring the rio-ht of grantmg tresh taxes, though all reference to that right was dropped out of all editions of the Great Charter issued in the reign of Heniy. For some time they granted the money which Henry con- tinuahy asked for, coupling, however, with their grant the demand hat Henry should confirm the Charter. The king never refused to confirm It. He had no difficulty in making promises, but he never troubled himself to keep those which he had made. .1231-1242 SIMON DE MONTFORT 193 10. The Early Career of Simon de Montfort. 1231 — 1243. — Strangely enough, Simon de Montfort, tlie man who was to be the chief opponent of Henry and his foreign favourites, was himself a foreigner. He was sprung from a family established in Normandy, and his father, the elder Simon de Montfort, had been the leader of a body of Crusaders from the north of France, who had poured over the south to crush a vast body of heretics, known by the name of Albigeois, from Albi, a town in which they swarmed. The elder Simon had been strict in his orthodoxy and unsparing in his cruelty to all who were unorthodox. From him the younger Simon inherited his unswerving religious zeal and his constancy of purpose. There was the same stern resolution in both, but in the younger man these qualities were coupled witha statesmanhke instinct, which was want- A ship in the reign of Henry III. ing to the father. Norman as he was, he had a claim to the earl- dom of Leicester through his grandmother, and in 1231 this claim was acknowledged by Henry. For some time Simon continued to live abroad, but in 1236 he returned to England to be present at the king's marriage. He was at once taken into favour, and in 1238 married the king's sister, Eleanor. His marriage was received by the barons and the people with a burst of indignation. It was one more instance, it was said, of Henry's preference for foreigners over his own countrymen. In 1239 Henry turned upon his brother- in-law, brought heavy charges against him, and drove him from his court. In 1240 Simon was outwardly reconciled to Henry, but he was never again able to repose confidence in one so fickle. In 1242 Henry resolved to undertake an expedition to France to O 194 HENRY III. 1243- 1244 recover Poitou, which had been gradually slipping out of his hands. At a Great Council held before he sailed, the barons, who had no sympathy with any attempt to recover lost possessions in France, not only rated him soundly for his folly, but, for the first time, absolutely refused to make him a grant of money. Simon told him to his face that the- Frenchman was no lamb to be easily subdued. Simon's words proved true. Henry sailed for France, but in 1243 he surrendered all claims to Poitou, and returned dis- comfited. If he did not bring home victory he brought with him a new crowd of Poitevins, who were connected with his mother's second husband. All of them expected to receive advancement in England, and they seldom expected it in vain. 11. Papal Exactions. 1237— 1243.— Disgusted ^^ ^^^^ ^^ English landowners by the preference shown by the king to foreigners, the English clergy were no less disgusted by the ex- actions of the Pope. The claim of Innocent III. to regulate the proceedings of kings had been handed down to his successors and made them jealous of any ruler too powerful to be con- trolled. The Emperor Frederick II. had not only succeeded to the government of Germany, and to some influence over the north of Italy, but had inherited Naples and Sicily from his mother. The Pope thus found himself, as it were, between two fires. There was constant bickering between Frederick and Gregory IX., a fiery old man who became Pope in 1227, and in 1238 Gregory excommunicated Frederick, and called on all Europe to assist him against the man whom he stigmatised as the enemy of God and the Church. As the king of England was his vassal m consequence of John's surrender, he looked to him for aid more than to others, especially as England, enjoying internal peace more than other nations, was regarded as especially wealthy. In 1237, the year before Frederick's excommunication, Gregory sent Cardinal Otho as his legate to demand money from the English clergy. The clergy found a leader in Robert Grossetete, Bishop of Lincoln, a wise and practical reformer of clerical disorders ; but though they grumbled, they could get no protection from the king, and were forced to pay. Otho left England in 1241, carrying immense sums of money with him, and the promise of the king to present three hundred Italian priests to English benefices before he presented a single Englishman. In 1243 Gregory IX. was succeeded by Innocent IV., who was even more grasping than his predecessor. 12. A Weak Parliamentary Opposition. 1244.— Against these evils the Great Council strove in vain to make head. It was now I244-I254 THE RISE OF PARLIAMENT 195 beginning to be known as Parliament, though no alteration was yet made in its composition. In 1244 clergy and barons joined in remonstrating with the king, and ^ome of them even talked about restraining his power by the establishment of a Justiciar and Chancellor, together with four councillors, all six to be elected by the whole of the baronage. Without the consent of the Chancellor thus chosen no administrative act could be done. The scheme was a distinct advance upon that of the barons who, in 1215, forced the Great Charter upon John. The barons had then proposed to leave the appointment of executive officials to the king, and to appoint a committee of twenty-five, who were to have nothing to do with the government of the country, but were to compel the king by force to keep the promises which he had made. In 1244 they proposed to appoint the executive officials themselves. It was the beginning of a series of changes which ultimately led to that with which we are now familiar, the appointment of ministers responsible to Parliament. It was too great an innovation to be accepted at once, especially as it was demanded by the barons alone. The clergy, who were still afraid of the disorders which might ensue if power were lodged in the hands of the barons, refused to support it, and for a time it fell to the ground. At the same time Richard of Cornwall abandoned the baronial party. He had lately married the queen's sister, which may have drawn him over to the king ; but it is also probable that his own position as the king's brother made him unwilling to consent to a scheme which would practically transfer the government from the king to the barons. On the other hand Earl Simon was found on the side of the barons. He held his earldom by inheritance from his English grandmother, and the barons were willing to forgive his descent from a foreign grandfather when they found him prepared to share their policy. 13. Growing Discontent. 1244 — 1254. — The clergy had to learn by bitter experience that it was only by a close alliance with the barons that they could preserve themselves from wrong. In 1244 a new envoy from the Pope, Master Martin, travelled over England wringing money from the clergy. Though he was driven out of the country in 1245, the Papal exactions did not cease. The Pope, moreover, continued to present his own nominees to English benefices, and in 1252 Grossetete complained that these nominees drew three times as much income from England as flowed into the royal exchequer. For a time even Henry made complaints, but in 1254 Innocent IV. won him over to his side. Frederick II. had died in 1250, and his illegitimate son, Manfred, a tried warrior and 02 196 HENRY in. 1254-1255 an able ruler, had succeeded him as king of Sicily and Naples. Innocent could not bear that that crown should be worn by the son of the man whom he had hated bitterly, and offered it to Edmund, the second son of Henry III. Henry lept at the offer, hopmg that England would bear the expense of the undertakmg. England was, however, in no mood to comply. Henry had been squandering money for years. He had recently employed Earl Simon in Gascony, where Simon had put down the resistance of the nobles with a heavy hand. The Gascons complained to Henry, and Henry quarrelled with Simon more bitterly than before. In 1254 Henry crossed the sea to restore order in person. To meet his expenses he borrowed a vast sum of money, and this loan, which he expected England to meet, was the only result of the expedition. 14. The Knights of the Shire in Parliament. 1254.— During the king's absence the queen and Earl Rich- ard, who were left as re- gents, and who had to collect money as best they might, gathered a Great Council, to which, for the first time, repre- sentative knights, four from each shire, were summoned. They were merely called on to re- port what amount of aid their constituents were willing to give, and the regents were doubt^ less little aware of the importance of the step which they were taking. It was only, to all appearances, an adaptation of the summons calling on the united jury to meet at St. Albans to assess the damages of the clergy in the reign of John. It might seem as if the regents had only summoned a united jury to give evidence of their constituents' readiness to grant certain sums of money. In reality the new scheme was sure to take root, because it held out a hope of getting rid of a constitutional difficulty which had hitherto proved insoluble — the difficulty, that is to say, of weakening the king's power to do evil without establishing baronial anarchy in its place. It was certain that the representatives of the free-holders in the counties would not use their influence for the destruction of order. 1 5. Fresh Exactions. 1254— 1257.— At the end of 1254 Henry re- turned to England. In 1255 a new Pope, Alexander IV., confirmed A bed in the reign of Henry III. 1255 THE KING AND THE POPE 197 his predecessor's grant of the kingdom of Sicily to Edmund, on condition that Henry should give a large sum of money for the expenses of a war against Manfred. To make it easy for Henry to find the money, Alexander gave him a tenth of the revenues of the English clergy, on the plea that the clergy had always borne their share of the expenses of a crusade, and that to fight for the Pope against Manfred was equivalent to a crusade. Immense sums were wrung from the clergy, who were powerless to resist Pope and king combined. Their indignation was the greater, not only because they knew that rehgion was not at stake in the Pope's effort to secure his political power in Italy, but also because the Papal Barn of thirteenth-century date at Raunds, Northamptonshire. court was known to be hopelessly corrupt, it being a matter of common talk that all things were for sale at Rome. The clergy indeed were less than ever in a condition to resist the king without support. Grosset^te was dead, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, the queen's uncle, Boniface of Savoy, whose duty it was to maintain the rights of the Church, was a man who cared nothing for England except on account of the money he drew from it. Other bishoprics as well were held by foreigners. The result of the weakness of the clergy was that they were now ready to unite with the barons, whom they had deserted in 1244 (seep. 195). Henry's misgovemment, in fact, had roused all classes against him, as the townsmen and the smaller landowners had been even worse treated than the greater 198 . HENRY III. 1257-1258 barons. In 1257 one obstacle to reform was removed. Richard of Comwallj the king's brother, who was formidable through his wealth and the numbers of his vassals, had for some time taken part against them. In 1257 he was chosen king of the Romans by the German electors, an election which would make him Emperor as soon as he had been crowned by the Pope. He at once left England to seek his fortunes in Germany, where he was well received as long as he had money to reward his followers, but was deserted as soon as his purse was empty. 16. The Provisions of Oxford. 1258. — The crisis in England came in 1258, whilst Richard was still abroad. Though thousands were dying of starvation in consequence of a bad harvest, Henry demanded for the Pope the monstrous sum of one-third of the revenue of all England. Then the storm burst. At a Parliament at West- minster the barons appeared in arms and demanded, first, the expulsion of all foreigners, and, secondly, the appointment of a committee of twenty -four — twelve from the king's party and twelve from that of the barons — to reform the realm. The king unwil- lingly consented, and the committee was appointed. Later in the year Parliament met again at Oxford to receive the report of the new committee. The Mad Parliament, as it was afterwards called in derision, was resolved to make good its claims. The scheme of reinforcing ParHament by the election of knights of the shire had in- deed been suffered to fall into disuse since its introduction in 1254, Y^t every tenant-in-chief had of old the right of attending, and though the lesser tenants-in-chief had hitherto seldom or never exercised that right, they now trooped in arms to Oxford to support the barons. To this unwonted gathering the committee produced a set of pro- posals which have gone by the name of the Provisions of Oxford. There was to be a council of fifteen, without the advice of which the king could do no act, and in this council the baronial party had a majority. The offices of state were filled in accordance with the wishes of the twenty-four, and the barons thus entered into pos- session of the authority which had hitherto been the- king's. The danger of the king's tyranny was averted, but it remained to be seen whether a greater tyranny would not be erected in its stead. One clause of the Provisions of Oxford was not reassuring. The old Parliaments, which every tenant-in-chief had at least the customary right of attending, were no longer to exist. Their place was to be taken by a body of twelve, to be chosen by the barons, which was to meet three times a year to discuss public affairs with the council of fifteen. 1258-1259 THE PROVISIONiS Ui^ OXFORD 199 17. The Expulsion of the Foreigners. 1258.— The first diffi- culty of the new government was to compel the foreigners to sur- render their castles. William de Valence, the king's half-brother, headed the resistance of the foreigners. The barons swore that no danger should keep them back till they had cleared the land of foreigners and had obtained the good laws which they needed. Earl Simon set the example by surrendering his own castles at Kenilworth and Odiham. " The national feeling was with Simon and the barons, and at last the foreigners were driven across the sea. For a time all went well. The committee of twenty-four continued its work and produced a further series of reforms. All persons in authority were called on to swear to be faithful to the Provisions of Oxford, and the king and his eldest son, Edward, complied with the demand. 18. Edward and the Barons. 1259.— Early in 1259 Richard came back to England, and gave satisfaction by swearing to the Provisions. Before long signs of danger appeared. The placing complete authority in the hands of the barons was not likely to be long popular, and Earl Simon was known to be in favour of a wider and more popular scheme. Hugh Bigod, who had been named Justiciar by the barons, gave offence by the way in which he exercised his office. Simon was hated by the king, and he knew that many of the barons did not love him. The sub-tenants — the Knights Bachelors of England as they called themselves — doubting his power to protect them, complained, not to Simon, but to Edward, the eldest son of the King, that the barons had obtained the redress of their own grievances, but had done nothing for the rest of the community. Edward was now a young man of twenty, hot-tempered and impatient of control, but keen-sighted enough to know, what his father had never known, that the royal power would be increased if it could establish itself in the affections of the classes whose interests were antagonistic to those of the barons. He therefore declared that he had sworn to the Provisions, and would keep his oath ; but that if the barons did not fulfil their own pro- mises, he would join the community in compelling them to do so. The warning was effectual, and the barons issued orders for the redress of the grievances of those who had found so high a patron. 19. The Breach amongst the Barons. 1259 — 1261. —Simon had no wish to be involved in a purely baronial policy. He had already fallen out with Richard de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, the leader of the barons who had resisted the full execution of the promises made at Oxford in the interest of the people at large. 200 HENRY III. 1261-1264, "- With such fickle and faithless men," said Simon to him, " I care not to have ought to do. The things we are treating of now we have sworn to carry out. And thou, Sir Earl, the higher thou art the more art thou bound to keep such statutes as are whole^ some for the land." The king fomented the rising quarrel, and in 1261 announced that the Pope had declared the Provisions to be null and void, and had released him from his oath to observe them. 20. Royalist Reaction and Civil War. 1261.— Henry now ruled again in his own fashion. Even the Earl of Gloucester discovered that if the king was to be resisted it must be by an appeal to a body of men more numerous than the barons alone. He joined Simon in inviting a Parliament to meet, at which three knights should appear for each county, thus throwing over the unfortunate narrowing of Parliament to a baronial committee of twelve, which had been the worst blot on the Provisions of Oxford. In the summer of 1262 the Earl of Gloucester died, and was suc- ceeded by his son, Earl Gilbert, one of Simon's warmest personal admirers. In 1263 Simon, now the acknowledged head of the barons and of the nation, finding that the king could not, be brought to keep the Provisions, took arms against him. He was a master in the art of war, and gained one fortified post after another. Henry, being, as usual, short of money, called on the Londoners for a loan. On their refusal Edward seized a sum of money which belonged to them, and so exasperated them that, on the queen's passing under London Bridge, the citizens reviled hei and pelted her with stones. The war was carried on with doubtful results, and by the end of the year both parties agreed to submit to the arbitration of the king of France. 21. The Mise of Amiens. 1264. — The king of France Louis IX., afterwards known as St. Louis, was the justest and most unselfish of men. In 1259 he had surrendered to Henry a considera- ble amount of territory in France, which Henry had been unable to re-conquer for himself ; and was well satisfied to obtain from Henry in return a formal renunciation of the remainder of the lands which Philip II. had taken from John. Yet, well-intentioned as Louis was, he had no knowledge of England, and in France, where the feudal nobility was still excessively tyrannical, justice was only to be obtained by the maintenance of a strong royal power. He therefore thought that what was good for France was also good for England, and in the beginning of 1264 he relieved Henry from all the restrictions which his subjects had sought to place upon I 264- I 265 THE BARONS' WARS 201 him. The decision thus taken was known as the Mise, or settlement, of Amiens, from the place at which it was issued. 22. The Battle of Lewes. 1264.— The Mise of Amiens re- quired an unconditional surrender of England to the king. The Londoners and the trading towns were the first to reject it. Simon put himself at the head of a united army of barons and citizens. In the early morning of May 14 he caught the king's army half asleep at Lewes, Edward charged at the Londoners, against whom he bore a grudge since they had ill-treated his mother, and cleared them off the field with enormous slaughter. When he returned the battle was lost. Henry himself was captured, and Richard, king of the Romans, was found hiding in a windmill. Edward, in spite of his success, had to give himself up as a prisoner. A fight between armed and mounted knights of the time of Henry III. 23. Earl Simon's Government. 1264 — 1265. — Simon followed up his victory by an agreement called the Mise of Lewes, according to which all matters of dispute were again to be referred to arbitration. In the meantime there were to be three Electors, Earl Simon himself, the Earl of Gloucester, and the Bishop of Chichester. These were to elect nine councillors, who were to name the ministers of state. To keep these councillors within bounds a Parliament was called, in which with the barons, bishops, and abbots there sat not only chosen knights for each shire, but also for the first time two representatives of certain towns. This Parliament met in 1265. It was not, indeed, a full parliament, as only Simon's partisans amongst the barons were summoned, 202 HENRY III. 1265 but it was the fullest representation of England as a whole which had yet met, and not a merely baronial committee like that pro- posed in 1258. The views of Simon were clearly indicated in an argumentative Latin poem written after the battle of Lewes by one of his supporters. In this poem the king's claim to do as he likes with his own is met by a demand that he shall rule according to law. Such a demand was made by others than the poet. *' The king," a great lawyer of the day had said, " is not subject to any man, but to God and the law." The difficulty still remained of Seal of Robert Fitzwalter, showing a mounted knight in complete mail armour. Date, about 1265. ascertaining what the law was. The poet did not, indeed, anticipate modern theories, and hold that the law was what the representatives of the people made it to be ; but he held that the law consisted in the old customs, and that the people themselves must be appealed to as the witnesses of what those old customs were. " Therefore," he wrote, " let the community of the kingdom advise, and let it be known what the generality thinks, to whom their own laws are best known. Nor are all those of the country so igno- rant that they do not know better than strangers the customs of their own kingdom which have been handed down to them by 1265 THE OVERTHROW OF EARL SIMON 203 their ancestors." * The poet, in short, regarded the Parliament as a national jury, whose duty it was to give evidence on the laws and cus- toms of the nation, in the same way that a local jury gave evidence on local matters. 24. The Battle of Evesham. 1265. — Simon's constitution was premature. Men wanted a patriotic king who could lead the nation in- stead of one who, like Henry, used it for his own ends. The new rulers were sure to quarrel with one another. If Simon was still Simon the Righteous, his sons acted tyran- nically. The barons began again to distrust Simon himself, and the young Earl of Gloucester, like his father before him, put himself at the head of the dissatisfied barons, and went over to the king. Edward escaped from confinement, by urging his keepers to ride races with one another, and then galloping off when their horses were too tired to follow him. Edward and Gloucester com- bined forces, and, falling on Earl Simon at Evesham, defeated him utterly. Simon was slain in the fight and his body barbarously mu- tilated ; but his memory was trea- sured, and he was counted as a saint by the people for whom he had worked. Verses have been pre- served in which he is compared to ' ' ' Igitur communitas regni consulatur ; Et quid universitas sentiat, sciatur, Cui leges propriae maxima sunt notae. Nee cuncti provinciae sic sunt idiotae, Quin sciant plus caeteris regni sui mores, Quos relinquunt posteris hii qui sunt priores," Effigy of a knight at Gosperton, showing armour worn from about 1250 to 1300. Date, about 1270 204 HENRY III. 1265-1272 Archbishop Thomas, who had given himself as a sacrifice for the Church, as Simon had given himself as a sacrifice for the nation. 25. The Last Years of Henry III. 1265— 1272.— The storm which had been raised was some time in calming down. Some of Earl Simon's followers continued to hold out against the king. When at last they submitted, they were treated leniently, and in 1267, at a Parliament at Marlborough, a statute was enacted embodying most of the demands for the redress of grievances made by the earlier reformers. The kingdom settled down in peace, be- Building operations in the reign of Henry III., with the king giving directions to the architect cause Henry now allowed Edward to be the real head of the govern- ment. Edward, in short, carried on Earl Simon's work in ruling justly, with the advantage of being raised above jealousies by his position as heir to the throne. In 1270 England was so peaceful that Edward could embark on a crusade. At Acre he very nearly fell a victim to a fanatic belonging to a body which counted assassi- nation a religious duty. His wife, Eleanor of Castile, who was tenderly attached to him, had to be led out of his tent, lest her bitter grief should distract him during an operation which the surgeons held to be necessary. In 1272 Henry III. died, and 1272 LAST DAYS OF HENRY TIT 20< East end of Westminster Abbey Church : begun by Henry Til in 1245. 2o6 HENRY III. 1272 his son, though in a distant land, was quietly accepted as his successor. Nave of Salisbury Cathedial Church, looking west. Date, between 1240 and 1250. 26. General Progress of the Country.— In spite of the turmoils of Henry's reign the country made progress in many ways. Men busied themselves with replacing the old round-arched churches by 1216-1272 ARCHITECTURE AND LANGUAGE 207 large and more beautiful ones, in that Early English style of which Lincoln Cathedral was the first example on a large scale. In 1220 it was followed by Beverley Minster (see p. 189). The nave of Salisbury Cathedral was begun in 1240 (see p. 206), and a new Westminster Abbey grew piecemeal under Henry's own supervision during the greater part of the reign (see p. 205). Mental activity accompanied material activity. At Oxford there were reckoned 1 5,000 scholars. Most remarkable was the new departure taken by Walter de Merton, Henry's Chancellor. Hitherto each scholar had shifted for himself, lived where he could, and been subjected to little or no discipline. In founding Merton College, the first college which existed in the University, Merton proposed not only to erect a A king and labourers in the reign of Henry III. building in which the lads who studied might be boarded and placed under supervision, but to train them with a view to learning for its own sake, and not to prepare them for the priesthood. The eagerness to learn things difficult was accompanied by a desire to increase popular knowledge. For the first time since the Chronicle came to an end, which was soon after the accession of Henry II., a book— Layamon's ^r?^/— appeared in the reign of John in the Enghsh language, and one at least of the songs which witness to the interest of the people in the great struggle with Henry III. was also written in the same language. Yet the great achievement of the fifty-six years of Henry's reign was— to use the language of the smith who refused to put fetters on the limbs of Hubert de Burgh (see p. i88)-the giving of England back to the Enghsh 2o8 HENRY III. 12 16-1272 In 1216 it was possible for Englishmen to prefer a French-born Louis as their king to an Angevin John. In 1272 England was indeed divided by class prejudices and conflicting interests, but it was nationally one. The greatest grievance suffered from Henry III. was his preference of foreigners oyer his own countrymen. In resistance to foreigners Englishmen had been welded together into a nation, and in their new king Edward they found a leader who would not only prove a wise and thoughtful ruler, but who was every inch an Englishman. Genealogy of yohn's Sons and Grandsons. John, 1199-1216 I Henry III. = Eleanor of Richard, Eleanor = Simon de Mont- Provence Earl of Cornwall fort and King of the Romans 1216-1272 Edward L Edmund, titular King of Sicily 1272-1307 CHAPTER XIV EDWARD I. AND EDWARD IL EDWARD I., 1272— 1307. EDWARD IL, 1307— 1327 LEADING DATES Accession of Edward I 1272 Death of Alexander III 1^85 The Award of Norham 1292 The Model Parliament 1295 The First Conquest of Scotland 1296 Confirmatio Cartarum 1297 Completion of the Second Conquest of Scotland . 1304 The Incorporation of Scotland with England . . 1305 The Third Conquest of Scotland 1306 Accession of Edward II. ... . , . . 1-07 Execution of Gaveston J2i2 Battle of Bannockburn , ^ j-j^ Execution of Lancaster J022 Deposition of Edward II , 1037 I. The First Years of Edward I. 1272— 1279.— Edward I., though he inherited the crown in 1272, did not return to England till 1274, being able to move in a leisurely fashion across Europe without fear of disturbances at home. He fully accepted those articles of John's 1274 EDWARD AS A LEGISLATOR 209 Great Charter which had been set aside at the beginning of the reign of Henry III., and which required that the king should only take scutages and aids with the consent of the Great Council or Parliament. The further requirement of the barons that they should name the ministers of the crown, was allowed to fall asleep. Edward was a capable ruler, and knew how to appoint better ministers than the barons were likely to choose for him. Great Seal of Edward I. It was Edward's peculiar merit that he stood forward not only as a ruler but as a legislator. He succeeded in passing one law after another, because he thoroughly understood that useful legislation is only possible when the legislator on the one hand has an intelligent perception of the remedies needed to meet existing evils, and on the other hand is willing to content himself with such remedies as those who are to be benefited by them are P 2IO EDWARD I. 1 276- 1 284 ready to accept. The first condition was fulfilled by Edward's own skillas a lawyer, and by the skill of the great lawyers whom he employed. The second condition was fulfilled by his determination to authorise no new legislation without the counsel and consent of those who were most affected by it. He did not, indeed, till late in his reign call a whole Parliament together, as Earl Simon had done. But he calle d the barons together in any matter which affected the barons, and he called the representatives of the townsmen together in any matter which affected the townsmen, and so on with the other classes. 2. Edward I. and Wales. 1276 — 1284. — Outside England Edward's first difficulty was with the Welsh, who, though their Princes had long been regarded by the English Kings as vassals, had practically maintained their independence in the mountainous region of North Wales of which Snowdon is the centre. Between them and the English Lords Marchers, who had been established to keep order in the marches, or border-land, there was nothing but hostility. The Welshmen made forays and plundered the English lands, and the English retorted by slaughtering Welshmen whenever they could come up with them amongst the hills. Naturally the Welsh took the side of any enemy of the English kings with whom it was possible to ally themselves. Llewelyn, Prince of Wales, had joined Earl Simon against Henry HL, and had only done homage to Henry after Simon had been defeated. After Henry's death he refused homage to Edward till 1276. In 1282 he and his brother David renewed the war, and Edward, determined to put an end to the independence of such troublesome neighbours, marched against them. Before the end of the year Llewelyn was slain, and David was captured in 1283, and executed in 1284. Wales then came fully under the dominion of the English kings. Edward's second son, afterwards King Edward IL, was born at Carnarvon in 1284, and soon afterwards, having become heir to the crown, upon the death of his elder brother, was presented to the Welsh as Prince of Wales, a title from that day usually bestowed upon the king's eldest son. At the same time, though Edward built strong castles at Conway and Carnarvon to hold the Welsh in awe, he made submis- sion easier by enacting suitable laws for them, under the name of the Statute of Wales, and by establishing a separate body of local officials to govern them, as well as by confirming them in the possession of their lands and goods. 3. Customs Duties. 1275.— Though Edward I. was by no means extravagant, he found it impossible to meet the expenses of govern- 1275 THE ENGLISH WOOL TRADE 211 ment without an increase of taxation. In 1275 he obtained the consent of ParUament to the increase of the duties on exports and imports which had hitherto been levied without Parliamentary sanction. He was now to receive by a Parliamentary grant a fixed export duty of 6^. Zd. on every sack of wool sent out of the country, and of a corresponding duty on wool-fells and leather. Under ordinary circumstances it is useless for any government to attempt to gain a revenue by export duty, because such a duty only raises the price abroad of the products of its own country, and foreigners will therefore prefer to buy the articles which they need from some country which does not levy export duties, and where, therefore, the articles are to be had more cheaply. England, however, was, in Edward's time, and for many years afterwards, an exception to the rule. On the Continent men could not pro- duce much wool or leather for sale, be- cause private wars were constantly oc- curring, and the fighting men were in the habit of driving off the sheep and the cattle. In England . there were no private wars, and under the kmg's protection sheep and cattle could be bred in safety. There were now growmg up manufactures of cloth in the fortified towns of Flanders and the manufacturers there were obliged to come to England for the greater part of the wool which they used. They could not help paying not only the price of the wool, but the king's export duty as well, because if they refused they could not get sufficient wool m any other country. ^^ Group of armed knights, and a king in ordinary dress. Date. temj). Edward I. 212 EDWARD /. . 1279-1290 4. Edward's Judicial Reforms. 1274— 1290.— Every king of England since the Norman Conquest had exercised authority in a twofold capacity. On one hand he was the head of the nation, on the other hand he was the feudal lord of his vassals. Edward laid more stress than any former king upon his national headship. Early in his reign he organised the courts of law, completing the division of the Curia Regis into the three courts which existed till recent times : the Court of King's Bench, to deal with criminal offences reserved for the king's judgment, and with suits in which he was himself concerned ; the Court of Exchequer, to deal with all matters touching the king's revenue ; and the Court of Common Pleas, to deal with suits between subject and subject. Edward took care that the justice administered in these courts should as far as possible be real justice, and in 1289 he dismissed two Chief Justices and many other officials for corruption. In 1285 he improved the Assize of Arms of Henry II. (see p. 154), so as to be more sure of securing a national support for his government in time of danger. 5. Edward's Legislation. 1279 — 1290. — It was in accordance with the national feeling that Edward, in 1290, banished from England the Jews, whose presence was most profitable to him- self, but who were regarded as cruel tyrants by their debtors. On the other hand, Edward took care to assert his rights as a feudal lord. In 1279, by the statute De religiosis^ commonly, known as the Statute of Mortmain, he forbade the gift of land to the clergy, because in their hands land was no longer liable to the feudal dues. In 1290, by another statute. Quia emptores, he forbade all new sub-infeudation. If from henceforth a vassal wished to part with his land, the new tenant was to hold it, not under the vassal who gave it up, but under that vassal's lord, whether the lord was the king or anyone else. The object of this law was to increase the number of tenants-in-chief, and thus to bring a larger number of land-owners into direct relations with the king. 6. Edward as a National and as a Feudal Ruler. — In his govern- ment of England Edward had sought chiefly to strengthen his position as the national king of the whole people, and to depress legally and without violence the power of the feudal nobility. He was, however, ambitious, with the ambition of a man conscious of great and beneficent aims, and he was quite ready to enforce even unduly his personal claims to feudal obedience whenever it served his purpose to do so. His favourite motto, ' Keep troth ' {Pactum serva)^ revealed his sense of the inviolability of a personal engage- ment given or received, but his legal mind often led him into I276-I290 NATIONALITY AND FEUDALITY 213 construing in his own favour engagements in which only the letter of the law was on his side, whilst its spirit was against him It was chiefly in his relations with foreign peoples that he fell into Nave of Lichfield Cathedral, looking east. Built about ,.8o. 214 EDWARD I. 1285- 1 290 this error, as it was here that he was most strongly tempted to lay- stress upon the feudal tie which made for him, and to ignore the importance of a national resistance which made against him. In dealing with Wales, for instance, he sent David to a cruel death, because he had broken the feudal tie which bound him to the king of England, feeling no sympathy with him as standing up for the independence of his own people. 7. The Scottish Succession. 1285 — 1290. — In the earlier part of Edward's reign Alexander III. was king of Scotland, Alex- ander's ancestors, indeed, had done homage to Edward's ancestors, but in 1189 William the Lion had purchased from Richard I. the abandonment of all the claim to homage for the crown of Scotland which Henry II. had acquired by the treaty of Falaise (see pp. 154, 159). WilHam's successors, however, held lands in England, and had done homage for them to the English kings. Edward would gladly have restored the old practice of homage for Scotland itself, but to this Alexander had never given way. To Edward there was something alluring in the prospect of being lord of the whole island, as it would not only strengthen his own personal posi- tion, but would bring two nations into peaceful union. Between the southern part of Scotland, indeed, and the northern part of England there was no great dissimilarity. On both sides of the border the bulk of the population was of the same Anglian stock, whilst, in consequence of the welcome oifered by the Scottish kings to persons of Norman descent, the nobility was as completely Norman in Scotland as it was in England, many of the nobles indeed possessing lands on both sides of the border. A prospect of effecting a union by peaceful means offered itself to Edward in 1285, when Alexander III. was killed by a fall from his horse near Kinghorn. Alexander's only descendant was Margaret, a child of his daughter and of King Eric of Norway. In 1290 it was agreed that she should marry the Prince of Wales, but that the two kingdoms should remain absolutely independent of one another. Unfortunately, the Maid of Norway, as the child was called, died on her way to Scotland, and this plan for establishing friendly relations between the two countries came to naught. If it had succeeded three centuries of war and misery might possibly have been avoided. 8. Death of Eleanor of Castile. 1290.— Another death, which happened in the same year, brought sorrow into Edward's domestic life. His wife Eleanor died in November. The corpse was brought for burial from Lincoln to Westminster, and the I29I A DISPUTED CROWN 215 bereaved husband ordered the erection of a memorial cross at each place where the body rested. 9. The Award of Norham. 1291 — 1292. — Edward, sorrow- ing as he was, was unable to neglect the affairs of State. On the death of the Maid of Norway there was a large num- ber of claimants to the Scottish crown. The hereditary prin- ciple, which had long before been adopted in regard to the succession to landed property, was gradually being adopted in most kingdoms in regard to the succession to the crown There were still, however, differences of opinion as to the manner in which heredi- tary succession ought to be reckoned, and there were now many claimants, of whom at least three could make out a plausible case. David, Earl of Huntingdon, a brother of Wil- liam the Lion, had left three daughters. The grandson of the eldest daughter was John Balliol ; the son of the second was Robert Bruce ; the grand- son of the third was John Hast- ings. Balliol maintained that he ought to succeed as being descended from the eldest : Bruce urged that the son of a younger daughter was nearer to the common ancestor, David, than the grandson of the elder : whilst Hastings asked that Scotland should be divided Effigy of Eleanor of Castile, queen of Edward I., in Westminscer Abbey. 2l6 EDWARD L 1291-1293 into three parts — according to a custom which prevailed in feudal estates in which the holder left only daughters— amongst the repre- sentatives of David's three daughters. • Every one of these three (Claimaints was an English baron, and Bruce held large estates in both countries. The only escape from a desolating civil war seemed to be to appeal to Edward's arbitration, and in 1291 Edward sum- moned the Scots to meet him at Norham. He then demanded as the price of his arbitration the acknowledgment of his position as lord paramount of Scotland, in virtue of which the Scottish king, when he had once been chosen, was to do homage to himself as king of England. Edward, who might fairly have held that, in spite of the abandonment of the treaty of Falaise by Richard, he had a right to the old vague overlordship of earlier kings, appears to have thought it right to take the opportunity of Scotland's weakness to renew the stricter relationship of homage which had been given up by Richard. At all events, the Scottish nobles and clergy accepted his demand, though the commonalty made some objection, the nature of which has not been recorded. Edward then investigated carefully the points at issue, and in 1292 decided in favour of Balliol. If he had been actuated by selfish motives he would certainly have adopted the suggestion of Hastings that Scotland ought to be divided into three kingdoms. 10. Disputes with Scotland and France. 1293 — 1295. — The new king of Scotland did homage to Edward for his whole kingdom. If Edward could have contented himself with enforcing the ordinary obligations of feudal superiority all might have gone well. Unfor- tunately for all parties, he attempted to stretch them by insisting in 1293 that appeals from the courts of the king of Scotland should lie ' Genealogy of the claimants of the Scottish throne : — David I. I 124 1153 Henry MALCOLM IV. 1153-1165 William THE Lion 1165-1214 1 Alexander II. 1214 1249 Alexander III. 1249-1285 I Margaret vt. Eric, king of Norway I Margaret, The Maid of Norway I Margaret 7)1. Alan, Lord of Galloway I Devorguilla m. John Balliol David, Earl of Huntingdon Isabella m. Robert Bruce Robert Bruce the Claimant I Margaret m. John, the Black Comyn John, tne Red Comyn I JOHN Balliol 1292 1296 1 Edward Balliol I Ada in. Henry Hastings I Henry Hastings I Henry Hastings , John Robert Bruce Hastings, 1306 1329 the Claimant Robert Bruce I29I-I294 AN ELEANOR CROSS SI7 Cross erected near Northampton by Edward I. in memory of Queen Eleanor built between 1291 and 1394. 2T8 EDWARD I. 1293- 1 295 to the courts of the king of England. Suitors found that their rights could not be ascertained till they had undertaken a long and costly journey to Westminster. A national feeling of resistance was roused amongst the Scots, and though Edward pressed his claims courteously, he continued to press them. A temper grew up in Scotland which might be dangerous to him if Scotland could find an ally, and an ally was not long in presenting himself Philip IV. now king of France, was as wily and unscrupulous as Philip II. had been in the days of John. Edward was his vassal in Guienne and Gascony, and Philip knew how to turn the feudal relation- ship to account in France as well as Edward knew how to turn it to account in Scotland. The Cinque Ports^ along the south-eastern shore of England swarmed with hardy and practised mariners, and there Itad often been sea-fights between French and English sailors quite independently of the two kings. In 1293 thei-e was a great battle in which the French were worsted. Though Edward was ready to punish the offenders, Philip summoned him to appear as a vassal before his lord's court at Paris. In 1294, hov/ever, an agreement was made between the two kings. Edward was for mere form's sake to surrender his French fortresses to Philip in token of submission, and Philip was then to return them. Philip, having thus got the fortresses into his hands, refused to return them. In 1295 a league was made between France and Scotland, which lasted for more than three hundred years. Its permanence was owing to the fact that it was a league between nations more than a league between kings. II. The Model Parliament. 1295. — Edward, attacked on two sides, threw himself for support on the English nation. Towards the end of 1295 he summoned a Parliament which was in most respects the model for all succeeding Parliaments. It was attended not only by bishops, abbots, earls, and barons, by two knights from every shire, and two burgesses from every borough, but also by representa- tives of the chapters of cathedrals and of the parochial clergy. It can- not be said with any approach to certainty, whether the Parliament thus collected met in one House or not. As, however, the barons and knights offered an eleventh of the value of their movable goods, the clergy a tenth, and the burgesses a seventh, it is not unlikely that there was a separation into what in modern times would be called three Houses, at least for purposes of taxation. At all events, ^ Sandwich, Dover, Hythe, Romney, Hastings ; to which were added Winchelsea and Rye as 'ancient towns," besides several 'limbs' or depen- dencies. 1296 JOHN BALLIOL DEPOSED 219 the representatives of the clergy subsequently refused to sit in Parliament, preferring to vote money to the Crown in their own convocations. 12. The first Conquest of Scotland. 1296. — In 1296 Ed- ward turned first upon Scotland. After he crossed the border Balliol sent to him renouncing his homage. " Has the felon fool done such folly ? " said Ed- ward. " If he will not come to us, we will go to him." He won a decisive victory over the Scots at Dunbar. Balliol surrendered his crown, and was carried off, never to reappear in Scotland. Edward set up no more vassal kings. He declared himself to be the immediate king of Scot- land, Balliol having forfeited the crown by treason. The Scottish nobles did homage to him. On his return to England he left behind him the Earl of Surrey and Sir Hugh Cressingham as guardians of the kingdom, and he carried off from Scone the stone of destiny on which the Scottish kings had been crowned, and concerning which there had been an old prophecy to the effect that wherever that stone was Scottish kings should rule. The stone was placed, where it still remains, under the coro- nation-chair of the English kings in Westminster Abbey, and there were those long after- wards who deemed the prophecy fulfilled when the Scottish King Sir John d'Abernoun, died 1277 : from his brass at Stoke Dabernon : showing armour worn from about 125010 1300. 220 EDWARD AND THE CLERGY 1296-1297 James VI. came to take his seat on tliat chair as James I. of England. 13. The Resistance of Archbishop Winchelsey. 1296 — 1297. — The dispute with France and the conquest of Scotland cost much money, and Edward, finding his ordinaiy revenue insufficient, had been driven to increase it by unusual means. He gathered as- semblies of the merchants, and persuaded them without the leave of Parliament to increase the export duties, and he also induced the clergy in the same way to grant him large sums. The clergy were the first to resist. In 1296 Boniface VIII., a Pope who pushed to the extreme the Papal claims to the independence of the Church, issued the Bull, Clericis laicos^ in which he declared that the clergy were not to pay taxes without the Pope's consent ; and when at the end of the year Edward called on his Parliament to grant him fresh sums, Winchelsey, the Archbishop of Canterbury, refused, on the ground of this Bull, to allo^v a penny to be levied from the clergy. Edward, instead of arguing with him, directed the chief justice of the King's Bench to announce that, as the cjergy would pay no taxes, they would no longer be protected by the king. The clergy now found themselves in evil case. Anyone who pleased could rob them or beat them, and no ledtess was to be had. They soon therefore evaded their obligation to obey the Bull, and paid their taxes, under the pretence that they were making presents to the king, on which Edward again opened his courts to them. In the days of Henry I. or Henry II. it would not have been possible to treat the clergy in this fashion. The fact was, that the mass of the people now looked to the king instead of to the Church for protection, and therefore iisespected the clergy less than they had done in earlier days. 14. The * Confirmatio Cartarum.* 1297. — In 1297 Edward, having subdued the Scots in the preceding year, resolved to conduct one army to Flanders, and to send another to Gascony to maintain his rights against Philip IV. He therefore called on his barons to take part in these enterprises. Amongst those ordered to go to Gascony were Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, and Humfrey Bohun, Earl of Hereford. They declared that they were only bound to follow the king himself, and that as Edward was not going in person to Gascony they would not go. " By God, Sir Earl," said the king to one of them, " you shall either go or hang." " By God," was the reply, " I will neither go nor hang." The two earls soon found support. The barons were sore because Edward's reforms had diminished their authority. The clergy were sore because of their recent treatment. The merchants were sore because of the exac- 1297-1298 WILLIAM WALLACE 221 tions to which they had been subjected. Archbishop Winchelsey bound the malcontents together by asking Edward to confirm Magna Carta and other charters granted by his predecessors, and by adding other articles now proposed for the first time, so as to preclude him from demanding taxes not granted by Parliament. Edward found that the new articles restricted his action more than it had been restricted by the older charters. He was deeply vexed, as he thought that he deserved to be trusted, and that, though he had exacted illegal payments, he had only done so out of necessity. He saw, however, that he must yield, but he could not bring himself to yield in person, and he therefore crossed the sea to Flanders, leaving the Prince of Wales to make the required concession. On October 10, 1297, the Confirtnatio Cartarum^ as it was called, was issued in the king's name. It differed from Magna Carta in this, that whereas John had only engaged not to exact feudal revenue from his vassals without consent of Parliament, Edward I. also engaged not to exact customs duties without a Parliamentary grant. From that time no general revenue could be taken from the whole realm without a breach of the law, though the king still continued for some time to raise tallages, or special payments, from the tenants of his own demesne lands. 15. Wallace's Rising. 1297 — 1304« — Whilst Edward was con- tending with his own people his officers had been oppressing the Scots. They had treated Scotland as a conquered land, not as a country joined to England by equal union. Resistance began in 1297, and a rising was headed by Wallace, a gentle- man of moderate fortune in the western lowlands. Wallace's bold and vigorous attacks gained him the confidence of the lesser gentry and the people, though the nobles, mostly of Norman descent, supported the English government, and only joined Wal- lace when it was dangerous to stand aloof. In the autumn, an English army advancing into Scotland reached the south bank of the Forth near Stirling. Wallace, who showed on that day that he was skilful as well as brave, drew up his army on the north bank at some little distance from the narrow bridge over which the English must come if they were to attack him. When half of them had crossed, he fell upon that half before the troops in the rear could advance to its succour. Wallace's victory was complete, and he then invaded England, ravaging and slaughtering as far as Hexham. 16. The Second Conquest of Scotland. 1298— 1304.— In 1298 Edward, who had been unsuccessful on the Continent, made a truce with Philip. Returning to England, he marched against Wallace, 222 EDWARD I. 1 298-1 305 and came up with him at Falkirk. The battle which ensued, like William's victory at Senlac (see p. 96), was a triumph of inven- tive military skill over valour content to rest upon ancient methods. The Scots were hardy footmen, drawn up in three rings, and pro- vided with long spears. Against such a force so armed the cavalry of the feudal array would dash itself in vain. Edward, however, had marked in his Welsh wars the superiority of the long-bow drawn to the ear — not, as in the case of the shorter bows of older times, to the breast of the archer — and sending its cloth-yard shaft with a strength and swiftness hitherto unknown. He now brought with him a large force of bowmen equipped in this fashion. At Falkirk the long-bow was tried for the first time in any considerable battle. The effect was overwhelming : a shower of arrows poured upon a single point in the ring of the spearmen soon cleared a gap. Edward's cavalry dashed in before the enemy had time to close, and the victory was won. Wallace had had scarcely one of the Scottish nobles with him either at Stirling or at Falkirk, and unless all Scotland combined he could hardly be expected to succeed against such a warrior as Edward. Wallace's merit was that he did not despair of his country, and that by his patriotic vigour he prepared the minds of Scotsmen for a happier day. He himself fled to France, but Scotland struggled on without him. Some of the nobles, now that Wallace was no longer present to give them cause of jealousy, took part in the resistance, and only in 1304 did Edward after repeated campaigns complete his second conquest of the country. 17. The Incorporation of Scotland with England. 1305. — In 1305 Wallace, who had returned from France, but had taken no great part in the late resistance, was betrayed to the English. His barbarity in his raid on Northumberland in 1297 (see p. 221) had marked him out for vengeance, and he was executed at Tyburn as a traitor to the English king of Scotland^ whose right he had never acknowledged. Edward then proceeded to incorporate Scot- land with England. Scotland was to be treated very much as Wales had been treated before. There was to be as Httle harsh- ness as possible. Nobles who had resisted Edward were to keep their estates on payment of fines, the Scottish law was to be observed, and Scots were to be chosen to represent the wishes of their fellow-countrymen in the Parliament at Westminster. On the other hand, the Scottish nobles were to surrender their castles, and the country was to be governed by an EngHsh Lieutenant, who, together with his council, had power to amend the laws. 1 8. Character of Edward's Dealings with Scotland. — Edward's 1 305-1306 EDWARD I. AJNU Ci^OTLAND, 223 dealings with Scotland, mistaken as they were, were not those of a self-willed tyrant. If it be once admitted that he was really the lord paramount of Scotland, everything that he did may be justified upon feudal principles. First, Balliol forfeited his vassal crown by breaking his obligations as a vassal. Secondly, Edward, through the default of his vassal, took possession of the fief which Balliol had forfeited, and thus became the immediate lord of Balliol's vassals. Thirdly, those vassals rebelled— so at least Edward would have said— against their new lord. Fourthly, they thereby forfeited their estates to him, and he was therefore, according to his own view, in the right in restoring their estates to them — if he restored them at all — under new conditions. Satisfactory as this argument must have seemed to Edward, it was weak in two places. The Scots might attack it at its basis by retorting that Edward had never truly been lord paramount of Scotland at all ; or they might assert that it did not matter whether he was so or not, because the Scottish right to national independence was superior to all feudal claims. It is this latter argument which has the most weight at the present day, and it seems to us strange that Edward, who had done so much to encourage the national growth of England, should have entirely ignored the national growth of Scotland. All that can be said to palliate Edward's mistake is that it was, at first, difficult to perceive that there was a Scottish nationality at all. Changes in the political aspect of affairs grow up unobserved, and it was not till after his death that all classes in Scotland were completely welded together in resistance to an English king. At all events, if he treated the claim of the Scots to national independence with contempt, he at least strove, according to his own notions, to benefit Scots and English alike. He hoped that one nation, justly ruled under one government, would grow up in the place of two divided peoples. 19. Robert Bruce. 1306. — It was better even for England that Edward's hopes should fail. Scotland would have been of little worth to its more powerful neighbour if it had been cowed into subjection ; whereas when, after struggling and suffering for her independence, she offered herself freely as the companion and ally of England to share in common duties and common efforts, the gift was priceless. That Scotland was able to shake off the English yoke was mainly the work of Robert Bruce, the grandson of the Robert Bruce who had been one of the claimants of the Scottish crown at Norham. The Bruces, like Balliol, were of Norman descent, and as Balliol's rivals they had attached them- selves to Edward. The time was now come when all chances of 224 EDWARD I. 1306-1307 Balliol's restoration were at an end, and thoughts of gaining the crown stirred in the mind of the younger Bruce. After Edward's last settlement of Scotland it was plain that there was no longer room for a Scottish vassal king, and Bruce was therefore driven to connect his own aspirations with those of the Scottish nation. He had, however, one powerful rival amongst the nobles. John Comyn —the Red Comyn, as he was called— had been one of the many claimants of the throne who appeared before Edward at Norham, and he still looked with a jealous eye upon all who disputed his title. He was, however, persuaded in 1306 to meet Bruce in the Grey Friars Church at Dumfries. As Bruce pleaded his own right to the crown, Comyn denounced him as a traitor to Edward. Bruce answered by driving his dagger into him. " I doubt," cried Bruce, as he rushed from the church, '' that I have slain the Red Comyn." "I will mak sicker " {make sure), said Kirkpatrick, who was in atten- dance upon him, and, going in, completed the murder. Bruce made for Scone and was crowned king of Scotland in the presence of many of the chief nobility. 20. Edward's Third Conquest of Scotland and Death. 1306 — 1307. — Edward, to whom Bruce was but a rebel and a murderer, followed hard on his heels, and routed his forces at Methven. Scotland was for a third time conquered, and Bruce's supporters were carried off to English prisons, and their lands divided amongst English noblemen. The Countess of Buchan, who had taken a prominent part in Bruce's coronation, was placed in an iron cage, which was hung high up on the outer wall of the castle of Berwick. Bruce almost alone escaped. He knew now that he had the greater part of the nobility as well as the people at his side, and even in his lonely wanderings and hairbreadth escapes he was, what neither BaUiol nor Wallace had been, the true head of the Scottish nation. Before the end of 1306 he reappeared in Carrick, where his own possessions lay, and where the whole population was on his side. He inflicted heavy losses on the English garrisons, and in 1307 Edward once more set out for Scotland ; but he was now old and worn out, and he died at Burgh on Sands, a few miles on the English side of the border. 21. Edward II. and Piers Gaveston. 1307 — 1312. — The new king, Edward II., was as different as possible from his father. He was not wicked, like William II. and John, but he detested the trouble of public business, and thought that the only advantage of being a king was that he would have leisure to amuse himself. During his fathers life he devoted himself to Piers Gaveston, a I307-I3IO PIERS GAVESTON 225 Gascon, who encouraged him in his pleasures and taught him to mistrust his father. Edward I. banished Gaveston ; Edward II., im- mediately on his accession, not only recalled him, but* made him regent when he himself crossed to France to be married to Isabella, the daughter of Philip IV. The barons, who were already in- clined to win back some of the authority of which Ed- ward I. had deprived them, were very angry at the place taken over their heads by an upstart favourite, especially as Gaveston was ill-bred enough to make jests at their expense. The barons found a leader in Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, the son of that Edmund, the brother of Ed- ward I., who had received the title of king of Sicily from the Pope (see p. 197). Thomas of Lancaster had very large estates. He was an ambitious man, who tried to play the part which had been played by Earl Simon without any of Simon's qualifications for the position. In 1308 the king yielded to the barons so far as to send Gaveston out of the country to Ireland as his Lieutenant. In 1309 he recalled him. The barons were exasperated, and in the Parliament of 1310 they brought forward a plan for Edward II. ; from his monument in Gloucester Cathedral. 226 EDWARD II. 1310^1314 taking the king's government out of his hands, very much after the fashion of the Provisions of Oxford. Twenty-one barons were ap- pointed Lords Ordainers, to draw up ordinances for the govern- ment of the country. In 1311 they produced the ordinances Gaveston was to be banished for Hfe. The king was to appoint officers only with the consent of the barons, without which he was not to go to war nor leave the kingdofti. The ordinances may have been justified in so far as they restrained the authority of a king so incapable as Edward II. Constitutionally their acceptance was a retrograde step, as, like the Provisions of Oxford, they placed power in the hands of the barons, passing over Parliament as a whole. Edward agreed to the ordinances, but refused to surrender Gaveston. The barons took arms to enforce their will, and in 1312, having captured Gaveston, they beheaded him near Warwick with- out the semblance of a trial. 22. Success of Robert Bruce. 1307— 1314. — Whilst Edward and the barons were disputing Bruce gained ground rapidly. In 1313 Stirling was the only fortress of importance in Scotland still garrisoned by the English, and the English garrison bound itself to surrender on June 24, 1314, if it had not been previously relieved. Even Edward II. was stirred by this doleful news, and in 1314 he put himself at the head of an army to relieve Stirling. Lancaster, how- ever, and all whom he could influence refused to follow him, on the ground that the king had not, in accordance with the ordinances, received permission from the barons to go to war. On June 24 Edward reached Bannockburn, within sight of Stirling. Like his father, he brought with him English archers as well as English horsemen, but he foolishly sent his archers far in advance of his horsemen, where they would be entirely unprotected. Bruce, on the other hand, not only had a small body of horse, which rode down the archers, but he strengthened the defensive position of his spearmen by digging pits in front of his line and covering them with turf. Into these pits the foremost horses of the English cavalry plunged. Edward's whole array was soon one mass of confusion, and before it could recover itself a body of gillies, or camp-followers, appearing over a hill was taken for a fresh Scottish army. The vast English host turned and fled. Stirling at once surrendered, and all Scotland was lost to Edward. Materially, both England and Scotland suffered grievously from the result of the battle of Bannockburn. English invasions of southern Scotland and Scottish invasions of northern England spread desolation far and wide, stifling the germs of nascent civilisation. Morally, both nations were in the '^^"^ SCOTT/SI^ INDEPENDENCE 227 end the gainers. The hardihood and self-rehance of the Scottish character IS distinctly to be traced to those years of struggle against 4- Lincoln Cathedral — the central tower : built about 1310. a powerful neighbour. England, too, was the better for being balked of its prey. No nation can suppress the liberty of another without endangering its own. g 2 228 EDWARD II. 1 3 14- 1 323 23. Lancaster's Government. 1314— 1322.— Edward was thrown by his defeat entirely under the power of Lancaster, who took the whole authority into his handj and placed and displaced ministers at his pleasure. Lancaster, however, was a selfish and incompetent ruler. He allowed the Scots to ravage the north of England with- out venturing to oppose them, and as he could not even keep order at home, private wars broke out amongst the barons. In 1318 Bruce took Berwick, the great border fortress against Scotland. It was rather by good luck than by good management that Edward was at last able to resist Lancaster. Edward could not exist without a per- sonal favourite, and he found one in Hugh le Despenser. Despenser was at least an Englishman, which Gaveston had not been, and his father, Hugh le Despenser the elder, did his best to raise up a party to support the king. In 1321, however, Parliament, under Lancaster's influence, declared against them and sentenced them to exile. Edward took arms for his favourites, and in 1322 defeated Lancaster at Boroughbridge, and then had him tried and beheaded at Pontefract. 24. A Constitutional Settlement. 1322. — Favourites as they were, the Despensers had at least the merit of seeing that the king could not overpower the barons by the mere assertion of his personal authority. At a Parliament held at York in 1322, the king obtained the revocation of the ordinances, and a declaration that * matters to be established for the estate of our lord the king and of his heirs, and for the estate of the realm and of the people, shall be treated, accorded, and established in Parliaments by our lord' the king, and by the consent of the prelates, earls and barons, and commonalty of the realm, according as hath been hitherto accustomed.' Edward I. had in 1295 gathered a full Parliament, in- cluding the commons. But there was no law to prevent him or his successors excluding the commons on some future occasion. Edward II. by this declaration, issued with consent of Parliament, confirmed his father's practice by a legislative act. Unless the law were broken or repealed, no future statute could come into exist- ence without the consent of the commons. 25. The Rule of the Despensers. 1322 — 1326. — For some years after the execution of Lancaster, Edward, or rather the Despensers, retained power, but it was power which did not work for good. In 1323 Edward made a truce with Scotland, but the cessation of foreign war did not bring with it a cessation of troubles at home. Edward was entirely unable to control his favourites. The elder Despenser was covetous and the youno^er '325-1327 DEPOSITION OF EDWARD IL 229 Despenser haughty, and they both made enemies for themselves and the king. Queen Isabella was alienated from her husband, partly by his exclu- sive devotion to the Despensers and partly by the contempt which an active woman is apt to feel for a husband without a will of his own. In 1325 she went to France, and was soon followed by her eldest son, named Edward after his father. From that moment she conspired against her husband. In 1326 she landed, accompanied by her paramour, Robert Mortimer, and bringing with her foreign troops. The barons rose in her favour. London joined them, and all resistance was speedily beaten down. The elder Despenser was hanged by the queen at Bristol. The younger was hanged, after a form of trial, at Hereford. 26. The Deposition and Murder of Edward II. 1327. — Early in 1327 a Parliament met at Westminster. It was filled with the king's enemies, and under pressure from the queen and Mortimer Edward II. was com- pelled to sign a declaration of his own wrong-doing and incompetency, after which he formally resigned the crown. He was allowed to live for eight months, at the end of which he was brutally murdered in Berkeley Castle. The deposition of Edward II. — for his enforced resignation was practically nothing less than that — was the work of a faithless wife and of unscrupulous partisans, but at least they clothed UM[S their vengeance in the forms of Parlia- mentary action. It was by the action sir Jfn^de^Cr.k=^^from his brass of Parliament in loosing the feudal ties bridgeshire : showing amour J worn between 1300 and 1335 or by which vassals were bound to an 1340. Date, about 1325. t^'- 230 EDWARD 11. 13^7 unworthy king, that it rose to the full position of being the represen- tative of the nation, and at the same time virtually proclaimed that Howden Church, Yorkshire-the west front ; buih about 1310-1320. The tower was built between 1390 and 1407. the wants of the nation must be satisfied at the expense of the feudal claims of the king. The national headship of the king would 1327-1330 MORTIMER AND ISABELLA 231 from henceforward be the distinguishing feature of his office, whilst his feudal right to personal service would grow less and less important every year. CHAPTER XV FROM THE ACCESSION OF EDWARD III. TO THE TREATY OF BRETIGNI 1327— 1360 LEADING DATES Reign of Edward III., 1327— 1377 Accession of Edward III 1327 Beginning of the War with France 1337 Battle of Crecy 1346 The Black Death 1348 Battle of Poitiers 1356 Treaty of Bretigni i3do I. Mortimer's Government. 1327 — 1330. — Edward III. was only fourteen at his accession. For three years power was in the hands of his mothei-'s paramour, Mortimer. Robert Bruce, though old and smitten with leprosy, was still anxious to wring from Eng- land an acknowledgment of Scottish independence, and, in spite of the existing truce, sent an army to ravage the northern counties of England. Edward led in person against it an English force far superior in numbers and equipment ; but the English soldier needed many things, whilst the Scot contented himself with a little oat- meal carried on the back of his hardy pony. If he grew tired of thai he had but to seize an English sheep or cow and to boil the flesh in the hide. Such an army was difficult to come up with. Fighting there was none, except once when the Scots broke into the English camp at night and almost succeeded in carrying off the young king. Mortimer was at his wits' end, and in 1328 agreed to a treaty acknowledging the complete independence of Scotland. It was a wise thing to do, but no nation likes to acknowledge failure, and Mortimer became widely unpopular. He succeeded indeed in breaking up a conspiracy against himself, and in 1330 even executed Edmund, Earl of Kent, a brother of Edward 11. The discon- tented barons found another leader in the king, who, young as he was* had been married at fifteen to Philippa of Hainault. Though 232 EDWARD III. 1328-1332 he was already a father, he was still treated by Mortimer as a child, and was virtually kept a prisoner. At Nottingham he introduced a body of Mortimer's enemies into the castle through a secret passage in the rock on which it stood. His mother pleaded in vain for her favourite : " Fair son, have pity on the gentle Mortimer." Mor- timer was hanged, and Queen Isabella was never again allowed to take part in public affairs. 2. The French Succession. 1328— 1331.— Isabella's three brothers, Louis X., Philip V., and Charles IV., had successively reigned in France. Louis X. died in 1316, leaving behind him a daughter and a posthumous son, who died a week after his birth. Then Philip V. seized the crown, his lawyers asserting that, accord- ing to the Salic law, ' no part of the heritage of Salic land can fall to a woman,' and that therefore no woman could rule in France. As a matter of fact this was a mere quibble of the lawyers. The Salic law had been the law of the Salian Franks in the fifth century, and had to do with the inheritance of estates, not with the inheri- tance of the throne of France, which was not at that time in exist- ence. The quibble, however, was used on the right side. What Frenchmen wanted was that France should remain an independent nation, which it was not likely to do under a queen who might marry the king of another country. The rule thus laid down was permanently adopted in France. When Philip V. died in 1322 the throne passed, not to his daughter, but to his brother, Charles IV., and when Charles died in 1328, to his cousin, Philip of Valois, who reigned as Philip VI. At that time England was still under the control of Mortimer and Isabella, and though Isabella, being the sister of Charles IV., thought of claiming the crown, not for herself, but for her son, Mortimer did not press the claim. In 1329 he sent Edward to do homage to Philip VI. for his French possessions, but Edward only did it with certain reservations, and in 1330 prepara- tions for war were made in England. In 1331, after Mortimer's fall, when Edward was his own master, he again visited France, and a treaty was concluded between the two kings in which he abandoned the reservations on his homage. 3. Troubles in Scotland. 1329 — 1336. — On his return, Edward looked in another direction. In 1329 Robert Bruce died, leaving his crown to his son, David II., a child five years old. Certain English noblemen had in the late treaty (seep. 231) been promised restoration of the estates of their ancestors in Scotland, and in 1332 some of them, finding the promise unfulfilled, offered English forces to John Balliol's son, Edward, to help him to the Scottish crown. 1332 EDWARD IIL AND PHTLIPPA 233 Effigies of Edward III. and Queen Philippa ; from their tombs in Westminster Abbeyr 234 EDWARD II L 1 332-1337 Aided by his English allies, Edward Balliol landed in Scotland, defeated the Scottish army at Dupplin, and was crowned king. Before the end of the year he was surprised at Annan, and fled to England to appeal to Edward for help. Though Edward had all the love of enterprise of his grandfather, Edward I., yet there was a marked contrast between the deliberate calculation of Edward I. and the almost accidental way in which Edward III. involved himself in an attempt to regain the lordship of Scotland. In 1333 he laid siege to Berwick, then in the hands of the Scots. The Scots advanced into England, and their spearmen crossed a marsh to attack the Enghsh array of knights and archers posted on the slope of Halidon Hill. The arrows poured like rain on their struggling columns. The Scots were thrown into confusion, and their whole army was almost destroyed. Berwick was regained, and Bannockburn, it seemed, was avenged. Edward not only set up Balliol as his vassal, but compelled him to yield all Scotland south of the Forth to be annexed to England. Such a settlement could not last. Balliol was as weak as his father had been, and the Scots, recovering courage, drove him out in 1334. Edward invaded Scotland again and again. As long as he was in the country he was strong enough to keep his puppet on the throne, but whenever he returned to England David Bruce's supporters regained strength. The struggle promised to be lengthy unless help came to the Scots. " 4. Dispute with France. 1336— 1337. — Philip VI., like Philip IV. in the days of Edward I. (see p. 218), had his own reasons for not allowing the Scots to be crushed. He pursued the settled policy of his predecessors in attempting to bring the great fiefs into his power, and especially that part of Aquitame which was still held by the most powerful of his vassals, the king of England. Whilst Edward was doing his best to bring Scotland into subjec- tion by open war, Philip was doing his best to disturb Edward in his hold upon Aquitaine by secret intrigues and legal chicanery. Ill-feeling increased on both sides. Philip welcomed David Bruce and gave him protection in France, and in 1336 French sailors attacked English shipping and landed plunderers in the Isle of Wight. In 1337 Edward determined to resist, and the long war roughly known as the Hundred Years' War began. It was In reality waged to discover by an appeal to arms whether the whole of Aquitaine was to be incorporated with France and whether Scotland was to be incorporated with England. That which gave it its peculiar bitterness was, however not so much the claims 1337-1338 EDWARD'S DIPLOMACY 235 of the kings, as the passions of their subjects. The national antagonism aroused by the plunderings of French sea-rovers would be invigorated by the plunderings of Englishmen in the fields of France. 5. Edward's Allies. 1337— 1338. — To Edward it was merely a question of defending, first England, and then Aquitaine, against aggression. . He won over, with large offers of money, the alliance of the princes of the Empire whose lands lay round the French frontier to the north and east, and even gained the support of the Emperor Lewis the Bavarian. His relations with Flanders were even more important. In Flanders there had sprung up great manufacturing towns, such as Ghent, Bruges, and Ypres, which worked up into cloth the wool which was the produce of English sheep. These wealthy towns claimed political independence, and thus came into collision with their feudal lord, the Count of Flanders. Early in the reign of Philip VI., the Count, who held the greater part of his lands from the king of France, had appealed to Philip for support, and Philip, who, unlike his wiser predecessors, despised the strength which he might gain from the goodwill of citizens in a struggle against their lords, took the part of the Count, and for a time crushed the citizens at the battle of Cassel. After a while the cities recovered themselves, and formed an alliance under the leadership of Jacob van Arteveldt, a Flemish nobleman, who had ingratiated himself with them by enrolling himself amongst the brewers of Ghent, and who was now successful in urging his| countrymen to enter into friendship with Edward. 6. Chivalry and War. — In the long run Edward's cause would be found a losing one, but there were circumstances which made it prevail for a time. In France there was a broad distinction be- tween gentlemen on the one side and citizens and peasants on the other* The gentlemen despised all who were not of their own class. In earlier days there had sprung up a view of life known as chivalry, which taught that the knight was bound to observe the laws of honour, to fight fairly, to treat with courtesy a de- feated enemy, and to protect women and all who were unable to help themselves. Ennobling as the idea was, it had been narrowed by the refusal of the gentlemen to extend the rules of chivalry beyond their own order, and they were, therefore, ready to exercise cruelty upon those who were not gentlemen, whilst proffering the most high-flown compliments to those who were. In France, too, this broad distinction of ranks told upon the military strength of the crown. The fighting force of the French king was 236 EDWARD III. 1338 his feudal array of armour-protected cavalry, composed entirely of gentlemen, and aiming at deciding battles in the old fashion by the rush of horsemen. If foot soldiers were brought at all into the field they were, for the most part, ill armed and ill trained peasants, ex- posed to be helplessly slaughtered by the horsemen. 7. Commerce and War. — In England, on the other hand, the various orders of society had been welded together into a united people. The king and his vassals indeed still talked the language of chivalry, but they were wise enough to seek strength elsewhere. War had become in England the affair of the nation, and no longer A knight Sir Geoffrey Luttrell, who died 1345 -receiving his helm and pennon from his wife. Another lady holds his shield. the affair of a class. It must be waged with efficient archers as well as with efficient horsemen, the archers being drawn from the class of yeomen or free landed proprietors of small plots of land, which was entirely wanting in France. Such an army needed pay, and the large sums required for the purpose could only be extracted from a nation which, like the English, had grown comparatively rich because it was at peace within its own borders. Edward was compelled, if he wanted to fight, to encou- rage trade, though it is only fair to remember that he showed him- self ready to encourage trade without any such ulterior object. He brought Flemish weavers into England, and did his best to improve the feeble woollen manufacture of the Eastern counties. 1338 TRADE AND WAR 237 His great resource, however, for purposes of taxation, was the export of wool to the Flemish manufacturing towns. Some- times he persuaded Parliament to raise the duties upon exported wool ; sometimes he raised them, by an evasion of the law, after making a private compact with the merchants without consult- ing Parliament at all ; sometimes he turned merchant himself and bought wool cheaply in England to sell it dear in Flanders. It was said of a great minister of later times that he made trade flourish by means of war.^ It might be said with greater truth of Edward III. that he made war flourish by means of trade. 8. Attacks on the North of France. 1338— 1340. — Great as was Edward's advantage in having a united nation at his back, it hardly seemed in the first years of the war as though he knew how to use it. Though he had declared war against Philip in 1337, he did not begin hostilities till the following year. In 1338, after landing at Ant- werp, he obtained from the Emperor Lewis the title of Im- perial Vicar, which gave him a right to the military services of the vassals of the Empire. Crowds of German and Low Country lords pressed into his ranks, but they all wanted high J See the inscription on the monu- ment to the elder Pitt in the Guild- hall, in the City of London. William of Hatfield, second son of Edward III. ; from his tomb in York Minster : showing rich costume worn by the youth of the upper classes about 1340. The embroidery on the tunic has been partly worn off on the effigy. 238 EDIVAI^D in. 1338 Vork Minster :— The nave, looking west, built during the first half of the fourteertih century. The west window was completed and glazed in 1338. ^339-1340 THE FRENCH CROWN CLAIMED -39 pay, and his resources, great as they were, were soon exhausted, and he had to pawn his crowns to satisfy their needs. These lords proved as useless as they were expensive. In 1339 Edward crossed the French frontier, but he could not induce Philip to fight, and being deserted by his German allies, he was obliged to return to England. He then attempted to fall back on the support of the Flemings, but was told by them that u^iless he formally took the title of king of France, which he had only occasionally done before, they could not fight for him, as the king of France, whoever he might be, was their superior lord, and as such had a claim to their services. After some hesitation, in the be- ginning of 1340, Edward satisfied their scruples by reviving the claim which he had formerly abandoned, declaring himself to be, in right of his mother, the law- ful king of France ; and quarteringthe French arms with his own. A third territorial question was thus added to the other two. Practically Edward's answer to Philip's effort to absorb all Aquitaine in France was a counter- demand that all France should be absorbed in England. 9. Battle of Sluys. 1340.— Edward had not yet learnt to place confidence in those Enghsh archers who had served him so well at Hahdon Hill. In 1340, however, he found himself engaged in a conflict which should have taught him where his true strength lay. The French navy held the Channel, and had burnt South- ampton. The fleet of the Cinque Ports was no longer sufficient to cope with the enemy. Edward proudly announced that he, like his progenitors, was the lord of the Enghsh sea on every side, and called out every vessel upon which he could lay hands. The result was a naval victoiy at Sluys, in which well-nigh the whole French fleet was absolutely destroyed. It was by the English archers that Royal arms of Edward III., adopted in 13-^0 and used till about 1405. From the tomb of Edward III. 240 EDWARD III. 1341- 1346 the day was won. So complete was the victory that no one dared to tell the ill news to Philip, till his jester called out to him, " What cowards those EngHsh are ! " " Because," he explained, " they did not dare to leap into the sea as our brave Frenchmen did." 10. Attacks on the West of France. 1341— 1345.— If Edward was to obtain still greater success, he had but to fight with a national force behind him on land as he had fought at sea ; but he was slow to learn the lesson. Personally he was as chivalrous as Philip, and thought that far more could be done by the charge of knights on horseback than by the cloth-yard shafts of the English bowmen. For six more years he frittered away his strength. There was a disputed succession in Brittany, and one of the claimants, John of Montfort, ranged himself on the side of the English. There was fighting in Brittany and fighting on the borders of Edward's lands in Aquitaine, but up to the end of 1345 there was no decisive result on either side. In Scotland, too, things had been going so badly for Edward that in 1341 David Bruce had been able to return, and was now again ruling over his own people. 11. The Campaign of Cre9y. 1346. — Surprising as Edward's neglect to force on a battle in France appears to us, it must be remembered that in those days it was far more difficult to bring on an engagement than it is in the present day. Fortified towns and castles were then almost impregnable, except when they were starved out ; and it was therefore seldom necessary for a com- mander — on other grounds unwilling to fight — to risk a battle in order to save an important post from capture. Edward, however, does not appear to have thought that there was anything to be gained by fighting. In 1346 he led a large English army into Nor- mandy, taking with him his eldest son, afterwards known as the Black Prince, at that time a lad of sixteen. It had been from Normandy and Calais that the fleets had put out by which the coasts of England had been ravaged, and Edward now deliberately ravaged Nor- mandy. Pie then marched on, apparently intending to take refuge in Flanders. As the French had broken the bridges over the Seine, he was driven to ascend the bank of the river almost to Paris be- fore he could cross. His burnings and his ravages continued till PhiHp, stung to anger, pursued him with an army more than twice as numerous as his own. Edward had the Somme to cross on his way, and the bridges over that river had been broken by the French, as those over the Seme had b:en broken ; and but for the opportune discovery of a ford at Blanche Tache Edward would have been 1346 CREqy 241 obliged to fight with an impassable river at his back. When he was once over the Somme he refused — not from any considerations of generalship, but from a point of honour — to continue his retreat further. He halted on a gentle slope near the village of Cre9y facing eastwards, as Philip's force had swept round to avoid diffi- culties in the ground, and was approaching from that direction. 12. The Tactics of Crecy. 1346. — Great as was Edward's advantage in possessing an army so diverse in its composition as that which he commanded, it would have availed him little if he had not known how to order that army for battle. At once it appeared that his skill as a tactician was as great as his weak- ness as a strategist. His experience at Halidon Hill (see p. 234) had taught him that the archers could turn the tide of battle against any direct attack, however violent. He knew, too, from the tra- dition of Bannockburn (see p. 226), that archers could readily be © © © « o O 9 @ O C u (J c u 4-f u o .0 5 rt o > u O a a a o U R 2 244 EDWARD III. 134 1 * Houses of Parliament finally separated from one another, and when Edward picked a quarrel with Archbishop Stratford., the Lords suc- Gloucester Cathedral. The choir, looking east : built between 1340 and 1350. cessfuUy insisted that no member of their House could be tried ex- cepting by his peers. The Commons, on the other hand, were striving i3li THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 245 — not always successfully— to maintain their hold upon taxation. In 1341 they made Edward a large money grant on condition of his yielding to their demands, and Edward (whose constitutional inten- tions were seldom proof against his wish to retain the power of the purse) shamelessly broke his engagement after receiving the money. On other occasions the Commons were more successful ; yet, after all, the composition of their House was of more importance than The upper chamber or solar at Sutton Courtenay manor-house. Date, about 1350. any special victory they might gain. In it the county members — or knights of the shire — sat side by side with the burgesses of the towns. In no other country in Europe would this have been pos- sible. The knights of the shire were gentlemen, who on the Continent were reckoned amongst the nobility, and despised townsmen far too much to sit in the same House with them. In England there was the same amalgamation of classes in Parliament 246 EDWARD ITL I347 as on the battle-field. When once gentlemen and burgesses formed part of the same assembly, they would come to have common interests; and, in any struggle in which the merchants were engaged, it would be a great gain to them that a class of men trained to arms would be inclined to take their part. 1 6. Edward's Triumph. 1347.— Edward's return after the sur- render of Calais was followed by an outburst of luxury. As the sea-rovers of Normandy and Calais had formerly plundered Eng- Interior of the Hall at Penshurst, Kent : showing the screen with minstrels' gallery over it, and the brazier for fire in the middle : built about 1340. lishmen, English landsmen now plundered Normandy and Calais. " There was no woman who had not gotten garments, furs, feather- beds, and utensils from the spoils." Edward surrounded himself with feasting and jollity. About this time he instituted the Order of the Garter, and his tournaments were thronged with gay knights and gayer ladies in gorgeous attires. The very priests caught the example, and decked themselves in unclerical garments. Even architecture lent itself to the prevailing taste for magnificence. The beautiful Decorated style which had come into use towards the 1272-1360 DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR STYLES 247 end of the reign of Edward I. — and which may be seen ^ in the central tower of Lincoln Cathedral (see p. 227), in the west front of Howden Church (seep. 230), and in the nave of York Minster (see p. 238) — A small house or cottage at Meare, Somerset. Built about 1350- Norborough Hall, Northamptonshire. A manor-house built about 1350. The dormer windows and addition to the left are of much later date. was, in the reign of Edward III., superseded by the Perpendicular style, in which beauty of form was abandoned for the sake of breadth, as in the choir of Gloucester and the nave of Winchester (see pp. 244, 1 Lichfield Cathedral (p. 213) is transitional. 248 EDWARD riL 134? '349 276). Roofs become wide, as in the Hall of Penshurst (see p. 246), and consequently halls were larger and better adapted to crowded gatherings than those at Meare and Norborough (p. 247). 17. The Black Death. 1348. — In the midst of this luxurious society arrived, in 1348, a terrible plague which had been sweeping over Asia and Europe, and which in modern times has been styled the Black Death. No plague known to history was so destruc- tive of life. Half of the population certainly perished, and some think that the number of those who died must be reckoned at two-thirds. 18. The Statute of Labourers. 1349. — This enormous destruc- tion of life could not fail to have important results on the economic Ploughing. condition of the country. The process of substituting money rents for labour^ service, which had begun some generations before (see p. 168), had become very general at the accession of Edward III. so that the demesne land which the lord kept in his own Harrowing. A boy slinging stones at the birds hands Avas on most estates cultivated by hired labour. Now when at least half of the labourers had disappeared, those who remained havmg less competition to fear, demanded higher wages, whilst at he same time the pnce of the produce of the soil was the same or less than ,t had been before. The question affected not merely '349 LABOUR AND WAGES 249 the great lords but the smaller gentry as well. The House of Common*, which was filled with the smaller gentry and the well- to-do townsmen — who were also employers of labour — was there- fore as eager as the House of Lords to keep down wages. In 1349 Breaking the clods with mallets Cutting weeds. Reaping. the Statute of Labourers was passed, fixing a scale ot wages at the rates which had been paid before the Black Death, and ordering punishments to be inflicted on those who demanded more. It is not necessary to suppose that the legislators had any 250 EDWARD in. 1349-^352 tyrannical intentions. For ages all matters relating to agricul- ture had been fixed by custom ; and the labourers were outrage- ously violating custom. Custom, however, here found itself in '*tii llil//lflH l Slacking corn. opposition to the forces of nature, and though the statute was often renewed, with increasing penalties, it was difficult to secure obe- dience to it in the teeth of the opposition of the labourers. The Threshing corn with the flail. chief result of the statute was that it introduced an element of discord between two classes of society. >^-:=.-<:;^ 19. The Statute of Treasons. 1352.— In 1352 was passed the Statute of Treasons, by which the offences amounting to treason were defined, the chief of them being levying war against the 1350-1356 POITIERS 251 king. As no one but a great nobleman was strong enough even to think of levying war against the king, this statute may be regarded as a concession to the wealthier landowners rather than to the people at large. 20. The Black Prince in the South of France. 1355. — In 1350 Philip VI. of France died, and was succeeded by his son John. The truce (see p. 243) was prolonged, and it was not till 1355 that war was renewed. Edward himself was recalled to England by fresh troubles in Scotland, but the Black Prince landed at Bordeaux and marched through the south of France, plundering as he went. Neither father nor son seems to have had any idea of gaining their ends except by driving the French by ill-treatment into submission. " You must know," wrote a contemporary in describing the con- dition of southern Languedoc, " that this was, before, one of the fat countries of the world, the people good and simple, who did not know what war was, and no war had ever been waged against them before the Prince of Wales came. The English and Gascons found the country full and gay, the rooms furnished with carpets and draperies, the caskets and chests full of beautiful jewels ; but no- thing was safe from these robbers." The Prince returned to Bor- deaux laden with spoils. 21. The Battle of Poitiers. 1356. — In 1356 the Black Prince swept over central France in another similar plundering expedition. He was on his way back with his plunder to Bordeaux with no more than 8,000 men to guard it when he learnt as he passed near Poitiers that King John was close to him with 50,000. He drew up his little force on a rising ground amidst thick vineyards, with a hedge in front of him behind which he could shelter his archers. As at Cregy, the greater part of the English horsemen were dismounted, and John, thinking that therein lay their secret of success, ordered most of his horsemen to dismount as well, not having discovered that though spearmen on foot could present a formidable resistance to a cavalry charge, they were entirely useless in attacking a strong position held by archers. Then he sent forward 300 knights who retained their horses, bidding a strong body of dismounted horsemen to support them. The horsemen, followed by the footmen, charged at a gap in the hedge, but the hedge on either side was lined with English bowmen, and men and horses were struck down. Those who survived fled and scattered their countrymen behind. Seeing the disorder, the Black Prince ordered the few knights whom he had kept on horseback to sweep round and to fall upon the confused crowd in the flank. The 252 EDWARD TIL 1356-1359 archers advanced to second them, and, gallantly as the French fought, their unhorsed knights could accomplish nothing against the combined efforts of horse and foot. King John was taken prisoner and the battle was at an end. 22. The Courtesy of the Black Prince.— The Black Prince had been cruel to townsmen and peasants, but he was a model of chivalry, and knew how to deal with a captive king. At supper he stood behind John's chair and waited on him, praising his bravery. " All on our side," he said, " who have seen you and your knights, are agreed about this, and give you the prize and the chapletif you will wear it." After the astounding victory of Poitiers, the Black Prince, instead of marching upon Paris, went back to Bordeaux. In 1357 he made a truce for two years and returned to England with his royal captive. 23. Misery of France. 1356— 1359.— In 1356, the year in which the Black Prince fought at Poitiers, his father ravaged Scotland. Edward, however, gained nothing by this fresh attempt at conquest. In his retreat he suffered heavy loss, and in 1357, changing his plan, he replaced David Bruce (see p. 242) on the throne, and strove to win the support of the Scots instead of exasperating them by violence. In the meanwhile the two years' truce brought no good to France. The nobles wrung from, the peasants the sums needed to redeem their relatives, who were prisoners in England, and the disbanded soldiers, French and English, formed themselves into free companies and plundered as mercilessly as the Black Prince had done in time of war. Worn down with oppression, the French peasants broke into a rebellion known as the Jacquerie, from the nickname of Jacques-Bonhomme, which the gentiy gave to them. After committing unheard-of cruelties the peasants were repressed and slaughtered. An attempt of the States-General — a sort of French Parliament which occasionally met — to improve the govern- ment failed. Peace with England was talked of, but Edward's terms were too hard to be accepted, and in 1359 war began again. 24. Edward's Last Invasion. 1359— 1360.— So miserably de- vastated was France that Edward, when he invaded the country in 1359, had to take with him not only men and munitions of war, but large stores of provisions. He met no enemy in the field, but the land had been so wasted that his men suffered much from want of food, in spite of the supplies which they had taken \ with them. " I could not believe," wrote an Italian who revisited \ France after an absence of some years, " that this was the same 1360 DESOLATION OF FRANCE 253 kingdom which I had once seen so rich and flourishing. Nothing presented itself to my eyes but a fearful sohtude, an extreme poverty, land uncultivated, houses in ruins. Even the neighbour- hood of Paris manifested everywhere marks of destruction and conflagration. The streets were deserted ; the roads overgrown with weeds ; the whole a vast solitude." In the spring of 1360 Edward moved on towards the banks of the Loire, hoping to find sustenance there. Near Chartres he was overtaken by a terrible storm of hail and thunder, and in the roar of the thunder he thought West front of Edington Church, Wilts : built about 1360. An example of the transition from the Decorated style to the Perpendicular. that he heard the voice of God reproving him for the misery which he had caused. He abated his demands and signed the treaty of Bretigni. 25. The Treaty of Bretigni. 1360.— By the treaty of Bretigni John was to be ransomed for an enormous sum ; Edward was to surrender his claim to the crown of France and to the provinces north of Aquitaine, receiving in return the whole of the duchy cf Aquitaine together with the districts round Calais and Ponthieu, all of them to be held in full sovereignty, without any feudal obliga- 254 EDWARD IIL 1360-1364 tion to the king of France. Probably it cost Edward little to abandon his claim to the French crown, which had only been an after-thought ; and it was a clear gain to get rid of those feudal entanglements which had so frequently been used as a pretext of aggression against the English kings. It was hardly hkely, how- ever, that England would long be able to keep a country hke Aquitaine, which was geographically part of France and m which French sympathies were constantly on the increase. " We will obey the English with our lips," said the men of Rochelle, when their town was surrendered, " but our hearts shall never be moved towards them." CHAPTER XVI REIGN OF EDWARD III. AFTER THE TREATY OF BRETIGNI 1360— 1377 LEADING DATES Reign of Edward III., 1327-1377- Battle of Navarrete 1367 Renewal of war with France 1369 Truce with France I375 The Good Parliament 137^ Death of Edward III 1377 1. The First Years of Peace. 1360— 1364.— To hold his new provinces the better, Edward sent the Black Prince to govern them in 1363 with the title of Duke of Aquitaine. King John had been liberated soon after the making of the peace, and had been allowed to return to France on payment of part of his ransom, and on giving hostages for the payment of the remainder. In 1363 one of the hostages, his son, the Duke of Anjou, broke his parole and fled, on which John, shocked at such perfidy, returned to England to make excuses for him, and died there in 1364. If honour, he said, were not to be found elsewhere, it ought to be found in the breasts of kings. 2. The Spanish Troubles. 1364 — 1368. — John's eldest son and successor, Charles V., known as the Wise, or the Prudent, was less chivalrous, but more cautious than his father, and soon found an opportunity of stirring up trouble for the Black Prince without ex- posing his own lands to danger. Pedro the Cruel, king of Castile, who had for some time been the ally of England, had murdered 1364-1368 THE BLACK PRINCE IN SPAIN 255 his wife, tyrannised over his nobles, and contracted an aUiance with the Mohammedans of Granada. The Pope having excom- municated him, hie own illegitimate brother, Henry of Trastamara, claimed the crown, and sought aid of the king of France. Charles V. sent Bertrand du Guesclin, a rising young commander, to his help. Du Guesclin's army was made up of men of the Free Com- panies (seep. 252), which still continued to plunder France on their own account after the Peace of Bretigni. In this way Charles got rid of a scourge of his own country at the same time that he at- tacked an ally of the English. In 1366 Du Guesclin entered Spain. The tyrannical Pedro took refuge at Bayonne, where he begged the Black Prince to help him. The Gascon nobles pleaded with the Prince to reject the monster, but the Prince was not to be held back. " It is not a right thing or reasonable," he said, when they A gold noble of Edward III., struck between A.D. 1360 and 1369. urged him to keep aloof from the unjust undertaking to which he in- vited them, " that a bastard should hold a kingdom, and thrust out of it, and of his heritage, a brother and heir of the land by legal marriage. All kings and sons of kings should never agree nor consent to it, for it is a great blow at the royal state." In 1367 the Black Prince entered Spain, and with the help of his English archers thoroughly defeated Henry at Navarrete. Then vengeance overtook him on the side on which he had sinned. Pedro was as false as he was cruel, and refused to pay the sums which he had engaged to furnish to the Prince's troops. Sickness broke out in the English ranks, and the Black Prince returned to Bordeaux with only a fifth part of his army, and with his own health irretrievably shattered. In 1368 Henry made his way back to Spain, defeated and slew Pedro, and undid the whole work of the Black Prince to the south of the Pyrenees. 2S6 EDWARD III. I 368- I 369 3. The Taxation of Aqui- taine. 1368— 1369. — Worse than this was in store for the Black Prince. As his soldiers clamoured for their wages, he levied a hearth tax to supply their needs. The Aquitanian Parliament de- clared against the tax, and appealed to the king of France to do them right. In 1369 Charles, who knew that the men of Aquitaine would be on his side, summoned the Black Prince to Paris to de- fend his conduct, on the pre- text that, as there had been some informality in the treaty of Bretigni, he was himself still the feudal superior of the Duke of Aquitaine. " Wil- lingly," replied the Black Prince when he received the summons, " we will go to the court of Paris, as the king of France orders it ; but it shall be with helmet on head and sixty thousand men with us." 4. The Renewed War. 1369— 1375.— Edward, by the advice of Parliament, re- sumed the title of King of France, and war broke out afresh in 1369. The result of the first war had been owing to the blunders of the French in attacking the English archers with the feudal cavalry. Charles V. and his Tr«; , ^A ^ .k CI 1 r> • c .- commandcr, Du Guesclin, Effigy of Edward the Black Prince, from his i j n v,i»**, tomb at Canterbury : showing the type of resolved tO fight nO battles, armour worn from 1335 to 1400. t"!,^' * i_ t 1 •^■^^ ^ 1 heir troops hung about the I370-I37S MILITARY FAILURES 257 English march, cut off stragglers, and captured exposed towns. The English marched hither and thither, plundering and burning, but their armies, powerful as they were when attacked in a defensive position, could not succeed in forcing a battle, and were worn out without accomplishing anything worthy of their fame. The Black Prince, soured by failure and ill-health, having succeeded in 1370 in recapturing Limoges, ordered his men to spare no one in the town, " It was great pity," wrote the chronicler Froissart, " for men, women, and children threw themselves on their knees before the Prince, crying * Mercy ! mercy ! gentle Sire ! ' " The Prince, who had waited at table behind a captive king, hardened his heart. More than three thousand — men, women and children— were butchered on that day. Yet the spirit of chivalry was strong within him, and he spared three gentlemen who fought bravely merely in order to sell their lives dearly. In 1371 the Black Prince was back in England. His eldest surviving brother, John of Gaunt — or Ghent — Duke of Lancaster, continued the war in France. In 1372 the English lost town after town. In 1373 John of Gaunt set out from Calais. He could plunder, but he could not make the enemy fight. " Let them go," wrote Charles V. to his com- manders ; " by burning they will not become masters of your heritage. Though storms rage over a land, they disperse of them- selves. So will it be with these English." When the English reached the hilly centre of France food failed them. The winter came, and horses and men died of cold and want. A rabble of half-starved fugitives was all that reached Bordeaux after a march of six hundred miles. Aquitaine, where the inhabitants were for the most part hostile to the English, and did everything in their power to assist the French, was before long all but wholly lost, and in 1375 a truce was made which put an end to hostilities for a time, leaving only Calais, Cherbourg, Brest, Bayonne, and Bordeaux in the hands of the English. 5. Anti-Papal Legislation. 1351 — 1366. — The antagonism be- tween England and France necessarily led to an antagonism between England and the Papacy. Since 1305 the Popes had fixed their abode at Avignon, and though Avignon was not yet incorporated with France, it was near enough to be under the control of the king of France. During the time of this exile from Rome, known to ardent churchmen as the Babylonian captivity of the Church, the Popes were regarded in England as th^ tools of the French enemy. The Papal court, too, became distinguished for luxury and vice, and its vast expenditure called for supplies which England was increasingly S 258 EDWARD III. 1 353-1 3^2 loth to furnish. By a system of provisions, as they were called, the Pope provided— or appointed beforehand— his nominees to English benefices, and expected that his nominees would be allowed to hold the benefices to the exclusion of those of the patrons. In 1351 the Statute of Provisors ^ attempted to put an end to the system, but it was not immediately successful, and had to be re-enacted in later years. In 1353 a Statute of PrcEfnunire'^ was passed, in which, though the Pope's name was not mentioned, an attempt was made to stop suits being carried before foreign courts— in other words^ before the Papal court at Avignon. Another claim of the Popes was to the 1,000 marks payable annually as a symbol of John's vassal- age, a claim most distasteful to Englishmen as a sign of national humiliation. Since 1333, the year in which Edward took the government into his own hands, the payment had not been made, and in 1366 Parliament utterly rejected a claim made by the Pope for its revival. 6. Predominance of the English Language. — The national spirit which revealed itself in an armed struggle with the French and in a legal struggle with the Papacy showed itself in the increasing predominance of the English language. In 1362 it supplanted French in the law courts, and in the same year Parliament was opened with an English speech. P^rench was still the language of the court, but it was becoming a foreign speech, pronounced very differently from the ' French of Paris.' 7. Piers the Plowman. 1362. —Cruel as had been the direct results of the English victories in France, they had indirectly con- tributed to the overthrow of that feudalism which weighed heavily upon France and upon all Continental Europe. The success of the English had been the success of a nation strong in the union of classes. The cessation of the war drove the thoughts of English- men back upon themselves. The old spiritual channels had been, to a great extent, choked up. Bishops were busy with the king's affairs ; monks had long ceased to be specially an example to the world ; and even the friars had fallen from their first estate, and had found out that, though they might personally possess nothing, their order might be wealthy. The men who won victories in France came home to spend their booty in show and luxury. Yet, for all the splendour around, there was a general feeling that the times were out of joint, and this feeling was strengthened by a fresh in- 1 Provisors are the persons provided or appointed to a benefice. 2 So called from the first words of the writs appointed to be"lssued under it, Prmmunire facias ; the first of these two \\ ords being a corruption ol P rcsmoneri. 1362-1377 PIERS THE PLOWMAN 259 road of the Black Death in 1361. To the prevalent yearning for a better life, a voice was given by William Langland, whose Vision of Piers the Plowman appeared in its first shape in 1362. In the opening of his poem he shows to his readers the supremacy of the Maiden Meed — bribery — over all sorts and conditions of men, lay and clerical. Then he turns to the purification of this wicked world. They who wish to eschew evil and to do good inquire their way to Truth— the eternal God — and find their only guide in ' Piers the Plowman.' The simple men of the plough, who do honest work and live upright lives, know how to find the way to Truth. That way lies not through the inventions of the official Church, the pardons and indulgences set up for sale. " They who have done good shall go into eternal life, but they who have done evil into eternal fire." Langland's teaching, in short, is the same as that of the great Italian poet, Dante, who, earlier in the century, had cried aloud for the return of justice and true rehgion. He stands apart from Dante and from all others of his time in looking for help to the despised peasant. No doubt his peasant was ideal- ised, as no one knew better than himself; but it was honesty of work in the place of dishonest idleness which he venerated. It was the glory of England to have produced such a thought far more than to have produced the men who, heavy with the plunder of un- happy peasants, stood boldly to their arms at Cre9y and Poitiers. He is as yet hardly prepared to say what is the righteousness which leads to eternal life. It is not till he issues a second edition in 1377 that he can answer. To do well, he now tells us, is to act right- eously to all in the fear of God. To do better is to walk in the way of love : " Behold how good a thing it is for brethren to dwell in unity." To do best is to live in fellowship with Christ and the Church, and in all humility to bring forth the fruits of the Divine communion. 8. The Anti-Clerical Party. 1371.— Langland wished to improve, not to overthrow, existing institutions, but for all that his work was profoundly revolutionary. They who call on those who have left their first love to return to it are seldom obeyed, but their voice is often welcomed by the corrupt and self-seeking crowd which is eager, after the fashion of birds of prey, to tear the carcase from which life has departed. A large party was formed in England, especially amongst the greater barons, which was anxious to strip the clergy of their wealth and power, without any thought for the better fulfil- ment of their spiritual functions. In the Parliament of 137JI bishops were declared unfit to hold offices of state. Amongst others who 52 26o EDWARD III. 1371-1374 were dismissed was William of Wykeham, the Bishop of Win- chester. He was a great architect and administrator, and having been deprived of the Chancellorship used his wealth to found at Winchester the first great public school in England. By this time a Chancellor was no longer what he had been in earlier days (see p. 127), a secretary to the king. He was now beginning to exercise equitable jurisdiction — that is to say, the right of deciding suits ac- cording to equity, in cases in which the strict artificial rules of the ordinary courts stood in the way of justice. 9. The Duke of Lancaster. 1374 — 1376. — In 1374, as soon as the Duke of Lancaster returned from his dis- astrous campaign (see p. 257), he put himself at the head of the baronial and anti-clerical party. He was selfish and unprincipled, but he had enormous wealth, having secured the vast estates of the Lancaster family by his marriage with Blanche, the granddaughter of the brother of Thomas of Lancaster, the opponent of Edward W. Rich as he was he wished to be richer, and he saw his opportunity in an attack upon the higher clergy, which might end in depriving them not only of political power, but of much of their ecclesias- tical property as well. His accession to the baronial party was of the greater importance because he was now prac- tically the first man in the state. The king was suffering from softening of the brain, and had fallen under the influence of a greedy and unscrupu- lous mistress, Alice Ferrers, whilst the Black Prince was disqualified by illness from taking part in the management of affairs. A bargain was struck between the Duke and Alice Ferrers, who was able to obtain the consent of the help- less king to anything she pleased. She even sat on the bench with the judges, intimidating them into deciding in favour of the suitors who had bribed her most highly. It seemed as if Langland's William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, 1367-1404 ; from his tomb at Winchester. 1366-1376 WVCLlFFk AMD LANCASTER 261 Meed (see p. 259) had appeared in person. The king's patronage was shared between her and Lancaster. 10. John Wycliffe. 1366— 1376. — If Lancaster's character had been higher, he might have secured a widespread popularity, as the feehng of the age was adverse to the continuance of a wealthy clergy. Even as things were, he had on his side John Wycliffe, the most able reasoner and devoted reformer of his age, who, like others before and after him, imagined that a high spiritual enterprise could be achieved with the help of low and worldly politicians. Wycliffe had distinguished himself at Oxford, and had attracted Lancaster's notice by the ability of his argument against the Pope's claim to levy John's tribute (see p. 258). In 1374 he had been sent to Bruges to argue with the representatives of the Pope on the question of the provisions, and by 1376 had either issued, or was preparing to issue, his work On Civil Lordships in which, by a curious adaptation of feudal ideas, he declared that all men held their possessions direct from God, as a vassal held his estate from his lord ; and that as a vassal was bound to pay certain military services, faiHng which he lost his estate, so everyone who fell into mortal sin failed to pay his service to God, and forfeited his right to his worldly possessions. In this way dominion, as he said, was founded on grace — that is to say, the continuance of man's right to his possessions depended on his remaining in a rtate of grace. It is true that Wycliffe qualified his argument by alleging that he was only announcing theoretical truth, and that no man had a right to rob another of his holding because he believed him to be living in sin. It is evident, however, that men like Lancaster would take no heed of this distinction, and would welcome Wycliffe as an ally in the work of despoiling the clergy for their own purposes. 11. Lancaster and the Black Prince. 1376. — Ordinary citizens, who cared nothing for theories which they did not understand, were roused against Lancaster by the unblushing baseness of his rule. Nor was this all. The anti-clerical party was also a baronial party, and ever since the Knights Bachelors of England had turned to the future Edward L to defend them against the barons who made the Provisions of Oxford (see p. 199), the country gentry and townsmen had learnt the lesson that they would be the first to suffer from the unchecked rule of the baronage. They now had the House of Commons to represent their wishes, but as yet the House of Commons was too weak to stand alone. At last it was rumoured that when the Black Prince died his young son Richard was to be set aside, and that Lancaster was to claim the inheritance of the 262 EDWARD III. 1376-1377 crown, as an earlier John had claimed it in the place of the youthful Arthur. The Black Prince awoke from his lethargy, and stood forward as the leader of the Commons. 12. The Good Parliament. 1376.— A Parliament, known as the Good Parliament, met in 1376, and, strong through the Black Prince's support, the Commons refused to grant supply till an account of the receipts and expenditure had been laid before them. "What," cried Lancaster, " do these base and ignoble knights attempt ? Do they think they be the kings and princes of the land ? I think they know not what power I am of I will therefore, early in the morning, appear unto them so glorious, and will show such power among them, and with such vigour I will terrify them that neither they nor theirs shall dare henceforth to provoke me to wrath." Lan- caster soon found that his brother was stronger than he. The Commons obtained a new Council, in which Wykeham was included and from which Lancaster was shut out. They then proceeded to accuse before the House of Lords Richard Lyons and Lord Latimer of embezzling the king's revenue. Lyons, ac- customed to the past ways of the court, packed 1,000/. in a barrel and sent it to the Black Prince. The Black Prince returned the barrel and the money, and the Lords condemned Lyons to im- prisonment. Latimer was also sentenced to imprisonment, but he was allowed to give bail and regained his liberty. These two cases are the first instances of the exercise of the right of impeach- ment— that is to say, of the accusation of political offenders by the Commons before the Lords. Alice Perrers was next driven from court. 13. The Last Year of Edward IIL 1376 — 1377. — Whilst Par- liament was still sitting the Black Prince, worn out by his exertions, died. His son, young Richard, was at once recognised as heir to the throne. Lancaster, however, regained his influence over his doting father. Alice Perrers and Lord Latimer found their way back to court. The Speaker of the House of Commons was thrown into prison. Frivolous charges were brought against Wykeham, who was deprived of his temporalities and banished from the court. In 1377 a new Parliament, elected under Lancaster's influence, reversed all the proceedings of the Good Parliament, and showed how little sympathy the baronial party had with the people by imposing a poll tax of 4,,^T^ t?j- , , built the great window) between 136^ and ici66? carH.H o ? Edington (who of Wykeham from 1394 ti 1416, and fin;aircom^let;d after his dea^^^^ 1381-1399 CRIME AND PUNISHMENT 277 confined, reeked with disease, and those who were, as wanderers or drunkards, put in the stocks, had, if an unpleasant, at least a less dangerous experience than the prisoner. One means of escape, indeed, was available to some, at least, of these un- fortunates. They could take refuge in the sanctuaries to be found in churches, from which no officer of the law could take them, and, though the Church preserved some guilty ones from just punish- ment, she also saved many who were either innocent or who were exposed to punishments far too severe for their slight offences. 17. Justices of the Peace. — Even harshness is less dangerous than anarchy, and from time to time measures were taken to pro- vide against anarchy. Before the Conquest order had been kept by making either the kindred or the township liable to produce offenders, and this system was maintained by the Norman kings. In the time of Richard I. all men were required to swear to keep the peace, to avoid crime, and to join in the hue and cry in pursuit of criminals. In the time of Henry III. persons called guardians of the peace were occasionally appointed to see that order was kept, and at the accession of Edward III. these officials were established for a time by Act of Parliament as conservators of the peace. In 1360, the year of the Treaty of Bretigni, they were permanently continued, and the name of Justices of the Peace was given to them. They were to keep the peace in each county, and their number was to be made up of a lord, three or four gentlemen, and a lawyer, who was in those days always a cleric.^ They were to seize and imprison, and even to try persons accused of crime. The king named these justices, but he had to name all of them except the lawyer from amongst the local landowners. In every way, in the fourteenth century, the chief local landowners were becoming pro- minent. The kings attempted to govern with their help, both in Parliament and in the counties. 1 Many clerics took one of the minor orders so as to secure the immunities of the clergy, without any intention of being ordained a deacon or a priest. 278 /*■■ CHAPTER XVIII RICHARD II. AND THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION 1382— 1399 LEADING DATES Reign of Richard II., 1377— ^399 The impeachment of Suffolk 1386 The Merciless Parliament 1388 Richard begins his constitutional government . . 1389 Richard's coup-d'^at i397 Deposition of Richard 1399 I. Progress of the War with France. 1382— 1386.— In 1382 Richard at the early age of fifteen was married to Anne of Bohemia. Though he was a young husband he was at all events old enough to be accused of disasters which he could not avoid. Not only was the war with France not prospering, but English influence was declining in Flanders. In 1382 Philip van Arteveldt, who like his father Jacob (see p. 235) headed the resistance of Ghent against the Count of Flanders, was defeated and slain at Roosebeke by Charles VI., the young king of France. In 1383 an Enghsh expedition led by Henry Spencer, Bishop of Norwich, under the pretext of a crusade against the French as the followers of the Pope of Avignon, ended in complete failure, and Flanders, the great purchaser of English wool, fell under the control of France. In 1385 Richard, indeed, invaded Scotland, ravaged the country and burnt Edinburgh, though without producing any permanent result. In 1386 a French fleet and army was gathered at Sluys, and an invasion of England was threatened. 2. Richard's growing Unpopularity. 1385— 1386.— When the king returned from Scotland in 1385 he made a large creation of peers. He raised his two younger uncles to the Dukedoms of York and Gloucester ; his Chancellor, Michael dela Pole, to the earldom of Suffolk, and his favourite, Robert de Vere, Earl of Oxford, to the marquisate of Dublin, making him not long afterwards Duke of Ireland. Suffolk was an able and apparently an honest adminis- trator, who upheld the king's prerogative against the encroachments of Parliament. Oxford was a gay and heedless companion of 1386-1388 A BARONIAL GOVERNMENT 279 Richard's pleasures, who encouraged him in unnecessary expense, and thereby provoked to resistance those who might have put up with an extension of the royal authority. That resistance, however, was to a great extent due to causes not of Richard's own making. Though the French in 1386 abandoned their attempt at invasion, the preparations to resist them had been costly, and Englishmen were in an unreasonable mood. Things, they said, had not gone so in the days of Edward III. A cry for reform and retrenchment, for more victories and less expense, was loudly raised. 3. The Impeachment of Suffolk and the Commission of Regency. 1386. — The discontented found a leader in Gloucester, the youngest of the king's uncles. Wealthy, turbulent, and am- bitious, he put himself at the head of all who had a grievance against the king. Lancaster had just sailed for Spain to prosecute a claim in right of his second wife to the throne of Castile, and as York was without ambition, Gloucester had it all his own way. Under his guidance a Parliament demanded the dismissal of Richard's ministers, and, on his refusal, impeached Suffolk. Suffolk, though probably innocent of the charges brought against him, was condemned and driven from power, and Commissioners of regency were appointed for a year to regulate the realm and the king's household, as the Lords Ordainers had done in the days of Edward IL (see p. 226). 4. The Lords Appellant and the Merciless Parliament. 1387 — 1388. — In one way the Commissioners of regency satisfied the desire of Englishmen. In 1387 they sent the Earl of Arundel to sea, and Arundel won a splendid victory over a combined fleet of French, Flemings, and Spaniards. Richard, on the other hand, fearing that they would prolong their power when their year of office was ended, consulted upon the legality of the commission with the judges in the presence of Suffolk and others of his principal supporters, amongst whom was the Duke of Ireland. With one voice the judges declared that Parliament might not put the king in tutelage. Richard then made preparations to prevent by force the renewal of the commission, and to punish as traitors those who had originated it. His intention got abroad, and five lords, the Duke of Gloucester, the Earls of Arundel, Nottingham, Warwick, and Derby, the latter being the son of the absent Lancaster, appeared at the head of an overwhelming force against him. The five lords appellant, as they were called, appealed, or accused of treason five of Richard's councillors before a Parliament which met at Westminster in 1388, by flinging down 28o RICHARD II. 1388- 1390 their gloves as a token that they were ready to prove the truth of their charge in single combat. The Duke of Ireland, attempting resistance, was defeated by Derby at Radcot Bridge, and finally escaped to Ireland. The Parliament, called by its admirers the Wonderful, and by its opponents the Merciless Parliament, was entirely subservient to the lords appellant, who, instead of meeting their antagonists in single combat, accused them befoie the House of Lords. The Duke of Ireland, Suffolk, Chief Justice Tresilian, and Brember, who had been Mayor of London, were condemned to be hanged. The two first-named had escaped to the Continent, but the others were put to death. The fifth councillor, the Archbishop of York, escaped with virtual de- privation by the Pope. Four other knights, amongst them Sir Simon Burley, a veteran soldier and trusted companion of the Black Prince, were also put to death. Richard was allowed nominally to retain the crown, but in reality he was subjected to a council in which Gloucester and his adherents were supreme. 5. Richard's Restoration to Power. 1389. — Richard's entire submission turned the scale in his favour. England had been dis- satisfied with him, but it had never loved the rule of the great feudal lords. Gloucester's council was no more popular than had been the Committees named in the Provisions of Oxford in the reign of Henry III., or the Lords Ordainers in the reign of Edward IL,and it fell more easily than any government, before or afterwards. Sud- denly, on May 3, 1389, Richard asked his uncle in full council how old he was. " Your highness," replied Gloucester, " is in your twenty-second year." " Then," said Richard, " I must be old enough to manage my own affairs, as every heir is at liberty to do when he is twenty-one." No attempt having been made to confute this argu- ment, Richard dismissed the council, and ruled once more in person. 6. Richard's Constitutional Government. 1389 — 1396. — This sudden blow was followed by seven years of constitutional govern- ment. It seemed as if Richard had solved the problem of the relations between Crown and Parliament, which had perplexed so many generations of Englishmen. In 1389 he appointed ministers at his own pleasure, but when Parliament met in 1390 he com- manded them to lay down their offices in order that no one should be deterred from bringing charges against them ; and it was only upon finding that no one had any complaint to bring against them that he restored them to their posts. Nor did he show any signs of irritation against those by whom he had been outraged. Not only did he forbear to recall Suffolk and his other exiled I390 GOVERNMENT BY THE KING 281 favourites, but after a little time he admitted Gloucester and his supporters to sit in council alongside of his own adherents. 7. Livery and Maintenance. 1390. — During the fourteenth cen- tury the importance of the House of Commons had been steadily growing, and the king on the one hand and the great nobles on the other had been sorely tempted to influence the elections un- duly. The means of doing so had come with a change in civil relationships, the natural result of that change in military relation- ships which had given a new character to the wars of Edward III. (see p. 236). Just as the king now fought with paid soldiers of every rank instead of fighting with vassals bound by feudal tenure, so the great nobles surrounded themselves with retainers instead of vassals. The vassal had been on terms of social equality with his lord, and was bound to follow him on fixed terms. The retainer was an inferior, who was taken into service and pro- fessed himself ready to fight for his lord at all times and in all causes. In return his lord kept open house for his retainers, supplied them with coats, known as liveries, marked with his badge, and undertook to maintain them against all men, either by open force or by supporting them in their quarrels in the law courts ; and this maintenance, as it was called, was seldom limited to the mere payment of expenses. The lord, by the help of his retainers, could bully witnesses and jurors, and wrest justice to the profit of the wrongdoer. As yet, indeed, the practice had not attained the pro- portions which it afterwards assumed, but it was sufficiently deve- loped to draw down upon it in 1390 a statute prohibiting mainte- nance and the granting of liveries. Such a statute was not merely issued in defence of private persons against intimidation ; it also helped to protect the Crown against the violence of the great lords. The growth of the power of the House of Commons was a good thing as long as the House of Commons represented the wishes of the community. It would be a bad thing if it merely represented knots of armed retainers who either voted in their own names according to the orders of their lords, or who frightened away those who came to vote for candidates whom their lords opposed. 8. Richard's Domestic Policy. 1390— 1391.— It was therefore well for the community that there should be a strong and wise king capable of making head against the ambition of the lords. For some years Richard showed himself wise. Not only did he seek, by opening the council to his opponents, to win over the lords to take part in the peaceable government of the country instead of dis- turbing it, but he forwarded legislation which carried out the general 282 RICHARD II. 1 390-1 397 « wishes of the country. The Statute of Provisors (see p. 258) was re-enacted and strengthened in 1390, the Statute of Mortmain (see p. 212) in 1391, and the Statute of Prasmunire (see p. 258) in 1393. 9. Richard's Foreign Policy. 1389— 1396.— Richard's foreign pohcy was based upon a French alliance. In 1389 he made a truce with France for three years. Negotiations for a permanent peace were frustrated because the French would make no peace unless Calais were surrendered to them, and English feeling was against the surrender of the claims sanctioned by the Treaty of Bretigni. The truce was, however, prolonged from time to time, and in 1396, when Richard, who was by that time a widower, married Isabella, the daughter of Charles VI., a child of eight, it was prolonged for twenty-eight years. Wise as this policy was, it was distasteful to Englishmen, and their dissatisfaction rose when they learnt that Richard had surrendered Brest and Cherbourg to the French. It was true that these places had been pledged to him for money, and that he had only given them up as he was bound to do when the money was paid, but his subjects drew no fine distinctions, and fancied that he was equally ready to surrender Calais and Bordeaux. 10. Richard's Coup d'Etat. 1397. — Richard knew that Glou- cester was ready to avail himself of any widespread dissatisfaction, and that he had recently been allying himself with Lancaster against him. To please Lancaster, who had married his mistress, Catherine Swynford, as his third wife, Richard had legitimatised the Beauforts, his children by her, for all purposes except the succession of the crown, thus giving personal offence to Gloucester. Lancaster's son Derby, and Nottingham, another of the lords appellant (see p. 279), were now favourable to the king, and when rumours reached Richard that Gloucester was plotting against him, he resolved to anticipate the blow. He arrested the three of the lords appellant whom he still distrusted, Gloucester, Wai-wick, and Arundel, and charged them before Parliament, not with recent malpractices, of which he had probably no sufficient proof, but with the slaughter of his ministers in the days of the Merciless Parliament. Warwick was banished to the Isle of Man, Arundel was executed, and Gloucester imprisoned at Calais, where he was secretly murdered, as was generally believed by the order of the king. Archbishop Arundel, brother of the Earl of Arundel, was also banished. In such contradiction was this sudden outburst of violence to the prudence of Richard's recent conduct, that it has sometimes been supposed that, he had been dissimulating all the time. It is more probable that, without being actually insane, his mind had to some extent given way. He was I397-I399 RICHARnS ABSOLUTISM 283 always excitable, and in his better days his alertness of mind carried him forward to swift decisions, as when he met the mob at Smith- field, and when he vindicated his authority from the restraint of his uncle. Signs had not been wanting that his native energy was no longer balanced by the restraints of prudence. In 1394 he had actually struck Arundel in Westminster Abbey. In 1397 there was much to goad him to hasty and ill-considered action. The year before complaints had been raised against the extravagance of his household. The peace which he had given to his country was made the subject of bitter reproach against him, and he seems to have believed that Gloucester was plotting to bring him back into the servitude to which he had been subjected by the Com- missioners of regency. 11. The Parliament of Shrewsbury. 1398.— Whether Richard was mad or not, he at all events acted like a madman. In 1398 he summoned a packed Parliament to Shrewsbury, which declared all the acts of the Merciless Parliament to be null and void, and announced that no restraint could legally be put on the king. It then delegated all parliamentary power to a committee of twelve lords and six commoners chosen from the king's friends. Richard was thus made an absolute ruler unbound by the necessity of gathering a Parliament again. He had freed himself not merely from turbulent lords but also from all constitutional restraints. 12. The Banishment of Hereford and Norfolk. 1398. — Richard had shown favour to the two lords appellant who had taken his side. Derby became Duke of Hereford, and Nottingham Duke of Norfolk. Before long Hereford came to the king with a strange tale. Norfolk, he said, had complained to him that the king still distrusted them, and had suggested that they should guard them- selves against him. Norfolk denied the truth of the story, and Richard ordered the two to prove their truthfulness by a single com- bat at Coventry. When the pair met in the lists in full armour Richard stopped the fight, and to preserve peace, as he said, banished Norfolk for life and Hereford for ten years, a term which was soon reduced to six. There was something of the unwise cunning of a madman in the proceeding. 13. Richard's Despotism. 1398 — 1399. — Richard, freed from all control, was now, in every sense of the word, despotic. He extorted money without a semblance of right, and even compelled men to put their seals to blank promises to pay, which he could fill up with any sum he pleased. He too, like the lords, gathered round him a vast horde of retainers, who wore his badge and ill- 284 RICHARD IL 1399 treated his subjects at their pleasure. He threatened the Percies, the Earl of Northumberland and his son, Harry Hotspur, with exile, and sent them off discontented to their vast possessions in the North. Early in 1399 the Duke of Lancaster died. His son, the banished Hereford, was now Duke of Lancaster. Richard, however, seized the lands which ought to have descended to him from his father. Every man who had property to lose felt that Lancaster's cause was his own. Richard at this inopportune moment took occasion to sail to Ireland. He had been there once Meeting of Henry of Lancaster and Richard II. at Flint : from Harl. MS. 1319. before in 1394 in the vain hope of protecting the English colonists (see p. 265). His first expedition had been a miserable failure : his second expedition was cut short by bad news from England. 14. Henry of Lancaster in England. 1399.— Lancaster, with a small force, landed at Ravenspur, in Yorkshire, a harbour which has now disappeared in the sea. At first he gave out that he had come merely to demand his own inheritance. Then he alleged that he had come to redress the wrongs of the realm. Northumberland brought the Percies to his help. Armed men flocked to his support 1399 RICHARD'S ABDICATION 285 in crowds. The Duke of York, who had been left behind by Richard as regent, accepted this statement and joined him with all his forces. When Richard heard what had happened, he sent the Earl of Salisbury from Ireland to Wales to summon the Welshmen to his aid. The Welshmen rallied to Salisbury, but the king was long in following, and when Richard landed they had all dispersed. Richard found himself almost alone in Conway Castle, whilst Lancaster had a whole kingdom at his back. 15. The Deposition of Richard and the Enthronement of Henry IV. 1399. —By lying promises Lancaster induced Richard Henry of Lancaster claiming the throne : from Harl. MS. 1319. to place himself in his power at Flint. " My lord," said Lancaster to him, " I have now come before you have sent for me. The reason is that your people commonly say you have ruled them very rigorously for twenty or two and twenty years ; but, if it please God, I will help you to govern better." The pretence of helping the king to govern was soon abandoned. Richard was carried to London and thrown into the Tower. He consented, probably not till after he had been threatened with the fate of Edward IL, to sign his abdication. On the following morning the act of abdication was read in Parhartient. The throne was empty. 286 RICHARD //. 1399 Then Lancaster stepped forward. " In the name," he said, " of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I, Henry of Lancaster, challenge this realm of England, and the crown with all its members and appurtenances, as I am descended by right line of the blood coming from the good lord King Henry the Third, ^ and through that right God of his grace hath sent me, with help of my kin and of my friends, to recover it, the which realm was in point to be undone for default of governance and undoing of the good laws." The assent of Parliament was given, and Lancaster took his seat in Richard's throne as King Henry IV. 16. Nature of the Claim of Henry IV. — The claim which Henry put forward would certainly not bear investigation. It laid stress on right of descent, and it has since been thought that Henry intended to refer to a popular belief that his ancestor Edmund, the second son of Henry III., was in reality the eldest son, but had been set aside in favour of his younger brother, Edward I., on account of a supposed physical deformity from which he was known as Edmund Crouchback. As a matter of fact the whole story was a fable, and the name Crouchback had been given to Edmund not because his back was crooked, but because he had worn a cross on his back as a crusader (see p. 197). That Henry 1 Genealogy of the claimants of the throne in 1399 : — Henry IH. 1216-1272 Edward I. I 272-1 307 Edmund Edward II. I 307-1 327 I Edward III 1327-1377 I Edward, the Black Prince I Richard II. 1377-1399 Thomas, Earl of Lancaster Henry, Earl of Lancaster ^ . Henry, Duke of Lancaster Lionel, I Duke of Clarence Blanche = John of Gaunt. ni-i' T^ , Duke of t^hihppa = Edmund Mortimer, Lancaster Earl of March Roger Mortimer, Earl of March Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March Henry IV. 1399-1413 1399 A PARLIAMENTARY REVOLUTION 287 should have thought it neces- sary to allude to this story, if such was really his meaning, shows the hold which the idea of hereditary succession had taken on the minds of English- men. In no other way could h^ claim hereditary right as a descendant of Henry III. Richard had selected as his heir Roger Mortimer, the son of the daughter of Lionel, Duke of Clarence, the next son of Edward III., after the Black Prince, who lived to be old enough to have children. Roger Mortimer, indeed, had recently been killed in Ireland, but he had left a boy, Edmund Mortimer, who, on hereditary principles, was heir to the king- dom, unless the doctrine an- nounced by Edward III. that a claim to the crown descended through females was to be set aside. In fact the real import- ance of the change of kings lay not in what Henry said, but in what he avoided saying. It was a reversion to the old right of election, and to the prece- dent set in the deposition of Edward II. Henry tacitly an- nounced that in critical times, when the wearer of the crown was hopelessly incompetent, the nation, represented by Par- liament, might step in and change the order of succession. The question at issue was not merely a personal one between Richard and Henry. It was Effigy of a knight at Clehonger, showing development of plate armour. Date, about 1400. 288 RICHARD IT. a question between hereditary succession leading to despotism on the one side, and to parliamentary choice, perhaps to anarchy, on the other. That there were dangers attending the latter solu- tion of the constitutional problem would not be long in appearing. Books recommended for further study of Part II L Green, J. R. History of the English People. Vol. i. pp. 189-520. Stubbs, W. (Bishop of Oxford). Constitutional History of England. Vol. i. chap. xii. sections 1 51-155 ; vol. ii. chaps, ix. and x. The Early Plantagenets, 129-276. NoRGATE, Miss K. England under the Angevin Kings. Vol. ii. p. 390. MiCHELET, J. History of France (Middle Ages). Translated by G. H. Smith. Longman, W. The History of the Life and Times of Edward HI. Gairdner, James. The Houses of Lancaster and York, pp. 1-64. Rogers, James E. Thorold. A History of Agriculture and Prices in England. Vols. i. and ii. Cunningham, W. Growth of English Industry and Commerce in the Early and Middle Ages, pp. 172-365. Wakeman, H. O. and Hassall, A. (Editors). Essays Introductory to the Study of English Constitutional History. Ashley, W. J. An Introduction to English Economic History and Theory. Vol. i. Jusserand. J. J. English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages. Translated by Lucy Toulmin Smith (Miss). Browne, M. Chaucer's England. Jessopp, a.. Dr. The Coming of the Friars, and other Historic Essays. Oman, C. W. C. The Art of War in the Middle Ages. /\ 8. PART IV LANCASTER, YORK, AND TUDOR. 1399-1509 CHAPTER XIX HENRY IV. AND HENRY V. HENRY IV., 1399 — 1413. HENRY V., I413 — 1422 LEADING DATES Accession of Henry IV 1393 Statute for the burning of heretics 1401 Battle of Shrewsbury 1403 Fight at Bramham Moor 1408 Succession of Henry V 1413 Battle of Agincourt 1415 Treaty of Troyes 1420 Death of Henry V 1422 I. Henry's First Difficulties. 1399— 1400. — Henry IV. fully understood that his only chance of maintaining himself on the throne was to "rule with due consideration for the wishes of Parliament. His main difficulty, like that of his predecessor, was that the great lords preferred to hold their own against him individually with the- help of their armies of retainers, instead of exercising political power in Parliament. In his first Parliament an angry brawl arose. The lords who in the last reign had taken the side of Gloucester flung their gloves on the floor of the House as a challenge to those who had supported Richard when he compassed Gloucester's death ; and though Henry succeeded in keeping the peace for the time, a rebellion broke out early in 1400 in the name of Richard. Henry, like the kings before him, found his support against the turbulent nobles in the townsmen and the yeomen, and he was thus able to suppress the rebellion. Some of the noblemen who were caught by the excited de- fenders of the throne were butchered without mercy and without law. U 290 HENRY IV. 1399-140C Henry IV. and his queen, Joan of Navarre ; from their tomb in Canterbury Cathedral. 1400 A CONSERVATIVE ALLIANCE 291 2. Death of Richard II. 1400. — A few weeks after the sup- pression of this conspiracy it was rumoured that Richard had died in prison at Pontefract. According to Henry's account of the matter he had vohmtarily starved himself to death. Few, however, doubted that he had been put to death by Henry's orders. To prove the untruth of this story, Henry had the body brought to St. Paul's, where he showed to the people only the face of the corpse, as if this could be any evidence whatever. After Richard's death, if hereditary succession had been regarded, the person having a claim to the crown in prefer- ence to Henry was the young Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, the descen- dant of Lionel, Duke of Clarence (see p. 287). Henry there- fore took care to keep the boy under custody during the whole of his reign. 3. Henry IV. and the Church.— Be- sides seeking the support of the com- monalty, Henry sought the support of the Church. Since the rise of the friars at the beginning of the thirteenth cen- tury (see p. 191) the Church had produced no new orders of monks or friars. In the thirteenth and fourteenth she produced the schoolmen, a succession of great thinkers who systematised her moral and religious teaching. Imaginmg that she had no more to learn, she now attempted to strengthen herself by persecutmg those who disbelieved her teaching, and after the suppression of the revolt of the peasants, made common cause with the landlords, who feared pecuniary loss from the emancipation of the villeins. This conservative alliance against social and religious change was the more easily made because many of the bishops were now members of u 2 Royal arms as borne by Henry IV. after about 1408, and ijy successive sovereigns down to 1603. 292 HENRY IV, 1400- I 401 noble families, instead of springing, as had usually been the case in the better days of the mediaeval Church, from poor or middle- class parentage. In the reign of Richard II. a Courtenay, a kinsman of the Earl of Devonshire, had become first Bishop of London (see p. 263), and then Archbishop of Canterbury. He was succeeded in his arch- bishopric by an Arundel, brother of the Earl of Arundel who had been executed by Richard, and Archbishop Arundel was in the days of Henry IV. the spokesman of the clergy. 4. The Statute for the Burning of Heretics. 1401. — In 1401 the clergy cried aloud for new powers. The ecclesiastical courts could condemn men as heretics, but had no power to burn them. Bishops and abbots formed the majority of the House of Lords, and though the Commons had not lost that craving for the wealth of the Church which had distin- guished John of Gaunt's party, they had no sympathy with heresy. Ac- cordingly the statute for the burning of heretics {De hccretico combtirendo\ the first English law for the suppres- sion of religious opinion, was passed with the ready consent of the king and both Houses. The first victim was William Sawtre, a priest who held, amongst other things, "that after the words of consecration in the Eu- charist the bread remains bread, and 'Thomas Craniey, Archbishop of nothing more." He was burnt by a ?rass' a"; Nlt'iXge/oxfo?i' Special Order from the king and and pall. Date, about 1400. been enacted. 5- Henry IV. and Owen Glen- dower. I400-I402.-If Henry found it difficult to maintain order in England, he found it still more difficult to keep the peace on the 1400-T403 TROUBLES IN WALES AND THE NORTH 29-? borders of Wales. In 1400 an English nobleman, Lord Grey of Ruthyn, seized on an estate belonging to Owen Glendower, a power- ful Welsh gentleman. Owen Glendower called the Welsh to arms, ravaged Lord Grey's lands, and proclaimed himself Prince of Wales. For some years Wales was practically independent. English towns- men and yeomen were ready to support Henry against any sudden attempt of the nobility to crush him with their retainers, but they were 'unwilling to bear the burden of taxation needed for the steady perfonnance of a national task. In the meanwhile Henry was con- stantly exposed to secret plots. In 1401 he found an iron with four spikes in his bed. In the autumn of 1402 he led an expedition into Wales, but storms of rain and snow forced him back. His English followers attributed the disaster to the evil spirits which, as they fully believed, were at the command of the wizard Glendower. 6. The Rebellion of the Percies. 1402— 1404. — The Scots were not forgetful of the advantages to be derived from the divisions of England. They had amongst them some one — whoever he may have been — whom they gave out to be King Richard, and when Henry marched against Wales in 1402 they invaded England. They were met by the Percies and defeated at Homildon Hill. The Percies had still something of the enormous power of the feudal barons of the eleventh century. Their family estates stretched over a great part of Northumberland, and as they were expected to shield England against Scottish invasions they were obliged to keep up a military retinue which might be employed against the king as well as in his service. It was mainly through their aid that Henry had seated himself on the throne. Their chief, the Earl of Nor- thumberland, and his brother, the Earl of Worcester, were aged men, but Northumberland's son, Henry Percy — Harry Hotspur as he was usually called — was of a fiery temper, and disinclined to submit to insult. Hotspur's wife was a Mortimer, and her brother, Sir Edmund Mortimer, the uncle of the young Earl of March, had been taken prisoner by Glendower. It was noticed that Henry, who had ransomed other prisoners, took no steps to ransom Mor- timer, and it was believed that he was in no hurry to set free one whose hereditary claim to the crown, like that of the Earl of March, came before his own. Other causes contributed to irritate the Percies, and in 1403, bringing with them as alHes the Scottish prisoners whom they had taken at Homildon Hill, they marched southwards against Henry. Southern England might not be ready adequately to support Henry in an invasion of Wales, but it was in no mood to allow him to be dethroned by the Percies. It rallied to 294 HENRY IV. 1404 his side, and enabled him signally to defeat the Percies at Shrews- bury. Hotspur was killed in the fight, and his uncle, the Earl of Worcester, being captured, was beheaded without delay. Northum- The battle of Shrewsbury : from the " Life of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of \Varwick ; " drawn by John Rous about 1485. berland, who was not present at the battle, was committed to prison in 1404, but was pardoned on promise of submission. 7. The Commons and the Church. 1404. — After such a deliverance the Commons could not but grant some supplies. In the autumn of 1404, however, they pleaded for the confiscation of the revenues of the higher clergy, which were sufficient, as they alleged, to support 15 earls, 1,500 knights, 6,200 esquires, and 100 hospitals as well. The king refused to listen to the proposal, and money was voted in the ordinary way. It was the first deliberate attempt to meet the growing expenditure of the Crown by the con- fiscation of ecclesiastical revenue. I40S FRANCE AND SCOTLAND 295 8. The Capture of the Scottish Prince. 1405. — Early in 1405 Heniy \yas threatened with a fresh attack. Charles VI. of France was now a confirmed lunatic, and his authority had mainly fallen into the hands of his brother Louis, Duke of Orleans, a profligate and unscrupulous man who was regarded by the feudal nobility of France as their leader. The Duke of Orleans refused to consider himself bound to Henry by the truce which had been made with Richard, and, forming an alliance with Owen Glendower, prepared to send a fleet to his aid. When there was war between England and France the Scots seldom remained quiet, but this time Henry was freed from that danger by an unexpected occurrence. The reigning King of Scotland was Robert HI., whose father, Robert H., had been the first king of the House of Stuart, and had as- cended the throne after the death of David Bruce, as being the son of his sister Margaret' Robert HI., weakly in mind and body, had committed to the custody of his brother, the Duke of Albany, his eldest son, the Duke of Rothesay, who had gained an evil name by his scandalous debauchery. Rothesay died in the prison in which his uncle had confined him, and popular rumour alleged that Albany had murdered him to clear the way to the throne. Robert now sent young James, his only surviving son, to be educated in France in order to save him from Albany's machinations. On his way the prince was captured by an English ship, and delivered to Henry, who kept him under guard as a hostage for the peaceful behaviour of his countrymen. The prince, he said, should have been sent to him to be educated, as he could talk French as well as the king of France. When Robert died soon afterwards the ^ Genealogy of the kings of Scotland from Robert Bruce to James I. : — Robert L , Bruce (1306-1329) I I David II. Margaret = Walter Stewart (1329-1370) Robert II., Stewart or Stuart (1370-1390) I I Robert III. Robert, Duke (1390-1406) of Albany David, James I. Duke of Rothesay (1406-1437) 296 HENRY IV. 1 405 -1 408 captive became King: James I. ; but he was not allowed to return home, and Albany ruled Scotland as regent in his name. 9. The Execution of Archbishop Scrope. 1405.- The capture of such a hostage as James was the more valuable to Henry as at that very moment there was a fresh rising in the North, in which Scrope, the Archbishop of York, took a leading part. The in- surgents were soon dispersed, and both Archbishop Scrope and Mowbray, the Earl Marshal, were captured. Henry had them both beheaded, though neither were tried by their peers, and ecclesiastics were not punishable by a secular court. Knowing that the insur- rection had been contrived by Northumberland, Henry gave him- self no rest till he had demolished the fortifications of his castles of Alnwick, Warkworth, and Prudhoe. Northumberland himself escaped to Scotland. 10. France, Wales, and the North. 1405 — 1408.— In 1405, whilst Henry was in the North, a French fleet landed a force in Wales and seized Carmarthen. In 1406 the Duke of Orleans at- tacked the possessions still held by the English in Guienne, but though he plundered the country he could do no more. Once again fortune relieved Henry of a dangerous enemy. The Duke of Orleans had a rival in his cousin John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, who, in addition to his own duchy and county of Burgundy, was ruler of Flanders through his mother. His wise and firm government attached the manufacturing towns of Flanders to him, and the example of his government in Flanders won him favour in Paris and other French towns, especially in the north of France. He was, however, personally brutal and unscrupulous, and having entered into a competition for power with the Duke of Orleans, he had him murdered in 1407 in the streets of Paris. At once a civil war broke out between the Burgundian party, supported by the towns, and the Orleans party, which rested on the feudal nobility, and was now termed the party of the Annagnacs, from the Count of Armagnac, its chief leader after the murder of the Duke of Orleans. Henry had no longer to fear invasion from France. In 1408 he was freed from yet another enemy. The old Earl of North- umberland, who had wandered from Scotland to Wales, now wandered north again to try his fortunes in his own country. As he passed through Yorkshire he was met by the sheriff of the county, and defeated and slain on Bramham Moor. At the same time South Wales fell again under the power of the king, and though Owen Glendower still continued to hold out in the moun- tainous region round Snowdon, his power rapidly declined. I409 YOUTH OF HENRY V. 297 II. Henry, Prince of Wales. 1409— 1410.— No one had been more helpful to the king in these wars than his son, Henry, Prince of Wales. He had fought at Shrewsbury and in Wales, and had learnt to command as well as to fight. Young as he was— in 1409 oooooooooTJoo 00 00000000 o 0000 OQO coooooc5( llUllii^({Miiiui<(,./u f/fif/ A ajj_UWJ iil f f fl i fy't fri'"'" < II ■■"'"■■""■" "'t""'"i'""i""""""t'iit in .n O Q 6 o .)-■ > c o B o I a who had been sent to England as the Pope's legate, was allowed to receive the submission of England. The queen, the king, and both Houses knelt before him, confessed their sin of breaking away from the Roman see, and received absolution from his mouth. To Mary the moment was one of inexpressible joy. She had grieved over the separation from Rome as a sin burdening her own conscience, arid she believed with all her heart that the one path to happiness, temporal and eternal, for herself and her realm, was to root out heresy, in the only way in which it seemed possible, by rooting out the heretics. 21. The Beginning of the Persecution. 1555.— It was not only Mary who thought it meet that heretics should be burnt. John Rogers, who was the first to suffer, had in the days of Edward pleaded for the death of Joan Bocher (see p. 419). He was followed to the stake by Bishop Hooper, who was carried to Gloucester, that he might die at the one of his two sees which he had stripped of its property to enrich the Crown (see p. 418). He and many another died bravely for their faith, as More and Forest had died for theirs (see pp. 394, 398). Rowland Taylor, for instance (a Suffolk clergyman), was condemned in London to be burnt, and sent to his own county to die. As he left his prison in the dark of the early morning he found his wife and children waiting for him in the street. He was allowed to stop for a moment, and knelt down on the stones, repeating the Lord's Prayer with his family. " Farewell, my dear wife," he said, as soon as he had risen from his knees ; "be of good comfort, for I am quiet iti my conscience. God shall stir up a father for my children." '* Thanked be God,'* he exclaimed when he at last reached the village where his voice had once been heard in the pulpit, and where now the stake rose up amidst the faggots which were to consume him, " I am even at home ! " After he had been tied to the stake a wretch threw a faggot at his face. " O friend," he said gently, *' I have harm enough : what needed that ?" The flames blazed up around his suffering body, and Rowland Taylor entered into his rest 1556 DEA THS OF RIDLE Y AND LA TIMER 425 Ridley and Latimer were burnt at Oxford, in the town ditch, in front of Balliol College. « Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man," cried Latimer, when the fire was lighted at his feet. " We shall this day light such a candle, by God's grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out." 22. Death of Cranmer. 1556.— Cranmer would have accom- panied Ridley and Latimer to the stake, but as he alone of the Hugh Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, 1535-39, burnt 1555 : from the National Portrait Gallery. three had been consecrated a bishop in the days when the Pope's authority was accepted in England, it was thought right to await the Pope's authority for the execution of his sentence. In 1556 that autho- rity arrived. Cranmer's heart was as weak as his head was strong, and he six times recanted, hoping to save his life. Mary specially detested him, as having sat in judgment on her mother (see p. 389), and she was resolved that he should die. Finding his recantation useless, he recovered his better mind, and renounced his recantation. IL F F 426 MA/^Y 1556-155S " I have written," he said, " many things untrue ; and forasmuch as my hand offended in writing contrary to my heart, my hand therefore shall be the first burnt." He was hurried to the stake, and when the flames leapt up around him held his right hand steadily in the midst of them, that it might be ' the first burnt.' 23. Continuance of the Persecution. 1556— 1558.— Immediately after Cranmer's death Pole became Archbishop of Canterbur>-. The persecution lasted for two years more. The number of those who suffered has been reckoned at 277. Almost all of these were burnt in the eastern and south-eastern parts of England. It was there that the Protestants were the thickest. New opinions always flourish more in towns than in the country, and on this side of England were those trading towns, from which communication with the Protestants of the Continent was most easy. Sympathy with the sufferers made these parts of the kingdom more strongly Protestant than they had been before. 24. The Queen's Disappointment. 1555 — 1556. — Mary was a sorrowful woman. Not only did Protestantism flourish all the more for the means which she took to suppress it, but her own domestic life was clouded. She had longed for an heir to carry on the work which she believed to be the work of God, and she had even imagined herself to be with child. It was long before she abandoned hope, and she then learnt also that her husband — to whom she was passionately attached — did not love her, and had never loved anything in England but her crown. In 1555 Philip left her. He had indeed cause to go abroad. His father, Charles V., was broken in health, and, his schemes for making himself master of Germany having ended in failure, he had resolved to abdicate. Charles was obliged to leave his Austrian possessions to his brother Ferdinand ; and the German electors, who detested Philip and his Spanish ways, insisted on having Ferdinand as Emperor. Charles could, however, leave his western possessions to his son, and in 1556 he completed the surrender of them. Mary's husband then became Philip II. of Spam, ruling also over large territories in Italy, over Franche Comte, and the whole of the Netherlands, as well as over vast tracts in America, rich in mines of silver and gold which had been appropriated by the hardihood, the cruelty, and the greed of Spanish adventurers. No prince in Europe had at his command so warlike an army, so powerful a fleet, and such an abounding revenue as Philip had at his disposal. Philip's in- crease of power produced a strong increase of the anti-Spanish feeling in England, and conspiracies were formed against Mary I557-T558 DEATH OF MARY 427 who was believed to be ready to welcome a Spanish invading army. 25. War with France and the Loss of Calais. 1557 — 1558. — In 1557 Philip was at war with France, and, to please a husband who loved her not, Mary declared war against Philip's enemy- She sent an English army to her husband's support, but though Philip gained a crushing victory over the French at St. Quentin, the English troops gained no credit, as they did not arrive in time to take part in the battle. In the winter, Francis, Duke of Guise, an able French warrior, threatened Calais. Mary, who, after wringing a forced loan from her subjects in the summer, had spent it all, had little power to help the governor, Lord Wentworth, and persuaded herself that the place was in no danger. Guise, however, laid siege to the town. The walls were in disrepair and the garrison too small for defence. On January 6, 1558, Guise stormed Calais, and when, a few days afterwards, he also stormed the outlying post of Guisnes, the last port held by the English in France fell back into the hands of the French. Calais was now again a French town, after having been in the hands of strangers for 211 years. 26. Death of Mary. 1558. — The loss of Calais was no real misfortune to England, but it was felt as a deep mortification both by the queen and by her people. The people distrusted Mary too much to support her in the prosecution of the war. They were afraid of making Philip more powerful. Mary, hoping that Heaven might yet be gracious to her, pushed on the persecution, and sent Protestants in large numbers to the stake. Philip had visited her the year before, in order to persuade her to join him against France, and she again fancied herself to be with child. Her husband had once more deserted her, and she now knew that she was suffering— without hope — from dropsy. On November 17 she died, sad and lonely, wondering why all that she had done, as she believed on God's behalf, had been followed by failure on every side— by the desertion of her husband and the hatred of her subjects. Happily for himself, Pole too died two days afterwards.^ 1 The 19th is the date of Macbyn's contemporary diary ; but other authori- ties make it the 17th or i8th. F P2 428 CHAPTER XXVIII THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT IN CHURCH AND STATE 1558— 1570 LEADING DATES Reign of Elizabeth, 1558— 1603 Accession of Elizabeth 1558 The Acts of Suprennacy and Uniformity .... i559 The Treaty of Edinburgh . . * 1560 Mary Stuart lands in Scotland 1561 End of the Council of Trent 1563 Marriage of Mary and Darnley 1565 Murder of Darnley 1567 Escape of Mary into England 1568 The rising in the North . 1569 Papal excommunication of Elizabeth 1570 I. Elizabeth's Difficulties. 1558. — Elizabeth, when she received the news of her sister's death, was sitting under an oak in Hatfield Park (see p. 423). " This," she exclaimed, " is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes." Her life's work was to throw down all that Mary had attempted to build up, and to build up all that Mary had thrown down. It was no easy task that she had undertaken. The great majority of her subjects would have been well pleased with a return to the system of Henry VIII. — that is to say, with the retention of the mass, together with its accompanying system of doctrine, under the protection of the royal supremacy, in complete disregard of the threats or warnings of the Pope. Eliza- beth was shrewd enough to see that this could not be. On the one hand, the Protestants, few as they were, were too active and intelligent to be suppressed, and, if Mary's burnings had been unavailing, it was not likely that milder measures would succeed. On the other hand, the experience of the reign of Edward VI. had shown that immutability in doctrine and practice could only be secured by dependence upon the immutable Papacy, and Elizabeth had made up her mind that she would depend on no one but herself. She would no more place herself under the Pope than she would place herself under a husband. She cared nothing for theo- logy, though her inclinations drew her to a more elaborate ritual than that which the Protestants had to offer. She was, however, '558-1559 ECCLESIASTICAL UNITY 429 intensely national, and was resolved to govern so that England might be great and flourishing, especially as her own greatness would depend upon her success. For this end she must establish national unity in the Church, a unity which, as she was well aware, could only be attained if large advances were made in the direction of Protestantism. There must be as little persecution as possible, but extreme opinions must be silenced, because there was a danger lest those who came under their influence would sur up civil war in order to make their own beliefs predominant. The iirst object of Elizabeth's government was internal peace. 2. The Act of Uniformity and Supremacy. 1559. — Elizabeth marked her intentions by choosing for her secretary Sir William Cecil, a cautious supporter of Protestantism, the best and most faithful of her advisers. As Convocation refused to hear of any change in the Church services, she appointed a commission com- posed of divines of Protestant tendencies, who recommended the adoption, with certain alterations,^ of the second Prayer Book of Edward VI. Elizabeth's first Parliament, which met in 1559, passed an Act of Uniformity forbidding the use of any form of public prayer other than that of the new Prayer Book. The same Parliament also passed a new Act of Supremacy, in which the title of Supreme Head of the Church was abandoned, but all the ancient jurisdiction of the Crown over ecclesiastical persons was claimed. This Act imposed an oath in which the queen was acknowledged to be the Supreme Governor of the Realm ' as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things as temporal' ; but this oath, unlike that imposed by Henry VHI., was only to be taken by persons holding office or taking a university degree, whilst a refusal to swear was only followed by loss of office or degree. The maintenance of the authority of any foreign prince or prelate was to be followed by penalties increased upon a repetition of the offence, and reaching to a traitor's death on the third occasion. 3. The new Bishops and the Ceremonies. 1559 — 1564. — All the bishops except one refusing to accept the new order of things, new ones were substituted for them, the old system of election by the chapters on a royal congd d^dlire being restored (see pp. 391, 415). Matthew Parker, a moderate man after Elizabeth's own heart, became Archbishop of Canterbury. Very few of the old clergy who had said mass in Mary's reign refused to use the new Prayer 1 The most noteworthy of these alterations was the amalgamation of the forms used respectively in the two Prayer Books of Edward VI. at the ad- ministration of the Communion (see p. 418). 430 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 1559-1564 Book, and as Elizabeth prudently winked at cases in which persons of importance had mass said before them in private, she was able to hope that, by leaving things to take their course, a new genera- tion would grow up which would be too strong for the lovers of the old ways. The main difficulty of the bishops was with the Protestants. Many of those who had been in exile had returned with a strengthened belief that it was absolutely unchristian to adopt any vestments or other ceremonies which had been used in the Papal Church, and which they, therefore, contumeliously described as rags of Antichrist. A large number even of the bishops sympathised with them, and opposed them only on the ground that, though it would have been better if surplices and square caps had been prohibited, still, as such matters were in- different, the queen ought to be obeyed in all things indifferent. To Elizabeth refusal to wear the surplice was not only an act of insubordination, but likely to give offence to lukewarm supporters of the Church system which she had established, and had, therefore, a tendency to set the nation by the ears. In Parker she found a tower of strength. He was in every sense the successor of Cranmer, with all Cranmer's strength but with none of Cranmer's weakness. He fully grasped the principle that the Church of England was to test its doctrines and practices by those of the Church of the first six hundred years of Christianity, and he, therefore, claimed for it catholicity, which he denied to the Church of Rome ; whilst he had all Cranmer's feeling for the maintenance of external rites which did not directly imply the existence of beliefs repudiated by the Church of England. 4. Calvinism. — The returning exiles had brought home ideas even more distasteful to Elizabeth than the rejection of ceremonies. The weak point of the Lutherans in Germany, and of the reformers in England, had been their dependence upon the State. This de- pendence made them share the blame which fell upon rulers who, like Henry VI 11., were bent on satisfying their passions, or, like Northumberland, on appropriating the goods of others. Even Elizabeth thought first of what was convenient for her government, and secondly, if she thought at all, of the quest after truth and purity. In Geneva the exiles had found a system in full working order which appeared to satisfy the cravings of their minds. It had been founded by a Frenchman, John Calvin, who in 1536 had published The Institution of the Christian Religion^ in which he treated his subject with a logical coherence which impressed itself on all Protestants who were in need of a definite creed. He had soon after- 1559 CALVINISM 43* wards been summoned to Geneva, to take charge of the congrega- tion there, and had made it what was extensively beheved to be, a model Church. With Calvin everything was rigid and defined, and he organised as severely as he taught. He established a discipline which was even more efficacious than his doctrine. His Church proclaimed itself, as the Popes had proclaimed themselves, to be independent of the State, and proposed to uphold truth and right irre- spective of the fancies and prejudices of kings. Bishops there were to be none, and the ministers were to be elected by the congregation. The congregation was also to elect lay-elders, whose duty it was to enforce morality of the strictest kind ; card-playing, singing profane songs, and following after amusements on the Sunday — or Sabbath as it was called in Geneva— being visited with excommunication. The magistrates were expected to inflict temporal penalties upon the offender. This Presbyterian system, as it was called, spread to other countries, especially to countries like France, where the Protestant congregations were persecuted by the Government. In France a final step was taken in the Presbyterian organisation. The scattered congregations elected representatives to meet in synods or assemblies, and the French Government, in this way, found itself confronted by an ecclesiastical representative republic. 5. Peace with France. 1559. — It was this Calvinistic system which was admired by many of the exiles returning to England, but which Elizabeth detested as challenging her own authority. Her only chance of resisting with success lay in her power of appealing to the national instinct, and of drawing men to think more of unity and peace at home than of that search after truth which inevitably divides, because all human conceptions of truth are necessarily imperfect, and are differently held by different minds. To do this she must be able to show that she could main- tain her independence of foreign powers. Though her heart was set on the recovery of Calais, she was obliged in 1559 to make peace with France, obtaining only a vague promise that it might be restored at a future time. Shortly afterwards peace was made between France and Spain at Cateau Cambresis. Elizabeth was aware that, though neither Philip II. of Spain nor Henry II. loved her, neither of them would allow the other to interfere to her detri- ment. She was therefore able to play them off one against the other. Her diplomacy was the diplomacy of her time. Elizabeth like her contemporaries, lied whenever it suited her to lie, and made promises which she never intended to perform. In this spirit she treated the subject of her marriage. She at once rejected Philip, 432 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT I559 who, though he was her brother-in-law, proposed to marry her immediately after her accession, but when he suggested other candidates for her hand, she listened without giving a decided answer. It was convenient not to quarrel with Philip, but it would be ruinous to accept a husband at his choice. 6. The Reformation in Scotland. 1559.— Philip was formidable to Elizabeth because he might place himself at the head of the English Catholics. Henry was formidable because the old alliance between France and Scotland, confirmed by the recent marriage of the Dau- phin with Mary Stuart, made it easy for him to send French troops by way of Scotland into England. Early in Elizabeth's reign, however, events occurred in Scotland which threatened to sever the links between that country and France. The Regent, Mary of Guise — mother of the absent queen and sister of the Duke of Guise, the French conqueror of Calais, and leader of the French Catholics — was hostile to the Protestants not only by conviction, but because there had long been a close alliance between the bishops and the Scottish kings in their struggle with the tur- bulent nobles. The wealth of the bishops, however, great according to the standard of so poor a country, tempted the avarice of the nobles, and their profligacy, openly displayed, offended all who cared for morality. In 1559 a combination was formed amongst a large number of the nobles, known as the Lords of the Congrega- tion, to assail the bishops. John Knox, the bravest and sternest of Calvinists, urged them on. The Regent was powerless before them. The mass was suppressed, images destroyed, and monas- teries pulled down. Before long, however, the flood seemed about to subside as rapidly as it rose. The forces of the lords consisted of untrained peasants, who could not keep the field when the labours of agriculture called them home, and rapidly melted away. Then the Lords of the Congregation, fearing disaster, called on Elizabeth for help. 7. The Claims of Mary Stuart. 1559. — Elizabeth was decided enough when she could see her way clearly. When she did not she was timid and hesitating, giving contradictory orders and making contradictory promises. She detested Calvinism, and regarded rebellion as of evil example. She especially abhorred Knox, because in her sister's reign he had written a book against The Monstrous Regimen of Woinen^ disbelieving his assertion that she was herself an exception to the rule that no woman was fit to govern. It is therefore almost certain that she would have done nothing for the Lords of the Congregation if France had done 1559-1560 MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS 433 nothing for the Regent. Henry IL, however, was killed by an accidental lance-thrust which pierced his eye in a tournament, and on the accession of his son as Francis 1 1., Mary Stuart, now queen of France, assumed the arms and style of queen of England.^ The \ife-long quarrel between Elizabeth and Mary could hardly be staved off. Not only did they differ in religion, but there was also between them an irreconcilable political antagonism closely con- nected with their difference in religion. If the Papal authority was all that Mary believed it to be, Elizabeth was a bastard and a usurper. If the national Church of England had a right to in- dependent existence, and the national Parliament of England to independent authority, Mary's challenge of Elizabeth's title was an unjustifiable attack on a sovereignty acknowledged by the con- stitutional authorities of the English nation. 8. The Treaty of Edinburgh. 1560. — In spite of Cecil's urgency Elizabeth was slow to assist the Scottish rebels. For some months Mary of Guise had been gathering French troops to her support, and she at last had a foreign army at her command powerful enough to make her mistress of Scotland, and to form the nucleus of a larger force which might afterwards be sufficiently powerful to make her mistress of England. This was more than Elizabeth could bear, and in January 1560 she sent her fleet with troops to the help of the Lords of the Congregation. The French retreated into Leith, where they were besieged by the allied forces. In June the Regent died, and in July Leith surrendered. By a treaty signed at Edinburgh the French agreed to leave Scotland, and to acknowledge Elizabeth's title to the English crown. In December Francis II. died, and as his brother, who succeeded him as Charles IX,, was too young to govern, his mother, Catherine de Medicis, acted as regent. Catherine was jealous of the Duke 01 Guise, and also of his niece, Mary Stuart, the widow of her eldest 1 Genealogy of the last Valois kings of France : — Francis I, 1515-1547 Henry II. = Catherine de Medicis 1547-1559 I I I I I T. 1 Francis II. Charles IX. Henry III. Francis, Duke 1559-1560 1560-1574 Duke of of Alen9on, Anjou, king afterwards of France, Duke of Anjou 1574-1589 434 THE ELIZABETBAN SETTLEMENT 1561 son.^ Mary, finding no longer a home in France, was driven for refuge to her own unruly realm of Scotland. 9. Scottish Presbyterianism. 1561.— The Scots had not failed to profit by the cessation of authority following on the death of Mary of Guise. They disclaimed the authority of the Pope and made it punishable to attend mass, the penalty for the third offence being death. The English Reformation had been the work of the king and of the clergy of the Renascence, and had, therefore, been carried on under the form of law. The Scottish Reformation had been the revolutionary work of the nobility and of the Calvinistic clergy. In England the power of the State had been strengthened. In Scotland it was weakened. Almost from the beginning the nobles who had taken part in the revolution showed signs of dis- agreement. A few of them were earnest Protestants, but there were more who cared only for political or personal ends. " I have lived many years," said the aged Lord Lindsay; "now that it hath pleased God to let me see this day ... I will say with Simeon, * Now lettest Thou thy servant depart in peace.' " Hey then ! " said Maitland of Lethington sarcastically, when he heard that the clergy claimed to govern the Church and own its property in the place of the bishops, " we may all bear the barrow now to build the house of the Lord." Knox organised the Church on a democratic and Presbyterian basis with Church Courts com- posed of the minister and lay elders in every parish, with repre- sentative Presbyteries in every group of parishes, and with a repre- sentative General Assembly for all Scotland. Like a prophet of old, Knox bitterly denounced those who laid a finger on the Church's discipline. The nobles let him do as he would as far as religion was concerned, but they insisted on retaining nominal bishops, not ^ Genealogy of the Guises : — Claude, Duke of Guise Francis, Duke Mary = James V. of Guise, of Guise, killed at died in Dreux, 1563 1560 I king of Scotland 1 I I Henry Charles, Louis, Cardinal Mary Stuart, Duke of Guise, Duke of of Guise, Queen of Scots murdered in 1588 Mayenne murdered in 1588 I56i MARY AND ELIZABETH 435 to rule the Chuorch, but to hold the Church lands and pass the rents over to themselves. 10. Mary and Elizabeth. 1561. — In August 1561 Mary landed in Scotland, having come by sea because Elizabeth refused to allow her to pass through England unless she would renounce her claim to the English crown. Mary would perhaps have yielded if Elizabeth would have named her as her successor. Elizabeth would do nothing of the kind. She had a special dislike to fixing on anyone as her successor. About this time she threw into prison Lady Catherine Grey for committing the offence of marrying with- out her leave. Lady Catherine was the next sister of Lady Jane Grey, and therefore Elizabeth's heir if the will of Henry VII L in favour of the Suffolk line (see p. 410) was to be held binding, Elizabeth no doubt had a political object in showing no favour to either of her expectant heirs. By encouraging Catherine's hopes A ' milled ' half-sovereign of Elizabeth, 1562-1568. she would drive her Catholic subjects to desperation. By en- couraging Mary's she would drive her Protestant subjects to des- peration. Yet there was also strong personal feeling to account for her conduct. She was resolved never to marry, however much her resolution might cost her. Yet she too was a very woman, hungry for manly companionship and care, and, though a politician to the core, was saddened and soured by the suppression of her womanly nature. To give herself a husband was to give herself a master, yet she dallied with the offers made to her, surely not from political craft alone. The thought of marriage, abhorrent to her brain, was pleasant to her heart, and she could not lightly speak the positive word of rejection. Even now, in the vain thought that she might rule a subject, even if she became his wife, she was toying with Lord Robert Dudley, the handsome and worthless son of the base Northumberland. So far did she carry 436 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 1562- 1564 her flirtations that tales against her fair fame were spread abroad, but marry him she never did. Her treatment of the Lady Catherine was doubtless caused far less by her fear of the claims of the Suffolk line than by her reluctance to think of one so near to her as a happy wife, and as years grew upon her she bore hardly on those around her who refused to live in that state of maidenhood which she had inflicted on herself. _^:i ^ 11. The French War. 1562— 1564.— Elizabeth and Mary were not merely personal rivals. The deadly struggle on which they had entered was a European one, and the success or failure of the Catholic or the Protestant cause in some Continental country might determine the future history of Britain. In 1562 a civil war broke out between the French Protestants— or Huguenots,^ as they were usually called in France-and their Catholic fellow-subjects. The leaders of the Huguenots obtained Elizabeth's aid by offering her Havre, which she hoped to exchange for Calais. The Huguenots were, however, defeated at the battle of Dreux, though Guise, who commanded the Catholics, was in the moment of victory shot dead by an assassin. In 1563 peace was patched up for a time between the French parties, but EHzabeth refused to surrender Havre, till a plague broke out amongst the English garrison, and drove the scanty remnants of it back to England. In 1564 Elizabeth was forced to make peace without recovering Calais. The war thus ended was the only one in which she ever took part except when absolutely no alternative was left to her. 12. End of the Council of Trent. 1563. — If Rome was to be victorious she must use other than carnal weapons. The main cause of the growth of Protestantism had been the revolt of honest minds against the profligacy of the Popes and the clergy. The Popes had after a long time learnt the lesson, and were now as austerely moral as Calvin himself They had of late busied them- selves with bringing the doctrines of the Church into a coherent whole, in order that they might be referred to with as much cer- tainty as the Institution of Calvin was referred to by the Calvinist. This work was accomplished by an ecclesiastical council sitting at Trent, and composed mainly of Spanish and Italian prelates. The Council, having completed its task, broke up in 1563. 13. The Jesuits. — The main instruments of the Popes to win back those who had broken loose from their authority were the 1 Probably from Eidgenosscn, the name of the Swiss Confederates, because the first Protestants who appeared at Geneva came from Switzerland, and no French-speaking mouth could pronounce such a word as ' Eidgenossen. ' 1540-1565 THE JESUITS 437 members of the Society of Jesus, usually known as Jesuits. The society was founded in 1540 by Ignatius Loyola, a Spanish knight who, having been incapacitated by a wound for a military career, had devoted himself to the chivalry of religion. The members of the society which he instituted were not, like the monks, to devote themselves to setting an example of ascetic self-denial, nor, like the friars, to combine asceticism with preaching or well-doing. Each Jesuit was to give himself up to winning souls to the Church, whether from heathenism or from heresy. With this end, the old soldier who established the society placed it under more than military discipline. The first virtue of the Jesuit was obedience. He was to be in the hands of his superior as a stick in the hand of a man. He was to do as he was bidden, unless he was convinced that he was bidden to commit sin. What was hardest, perhaps, of all was that he was not allowed to judge his own character in choosing his work. He might think that he was admirably qualified to be a missionary in China, but if his superior ordered him to teach boys in a school, a schoolmaster he must become. He might believe himself to be a great scholar and fitted by nature to impart his knowledge to the young, but if his superior ordered him to go as a missionary to China, to China he must go. Discipline volun- tarily accepted is a great power in the world, and this power the Jesuits possessed. 14. The Danger from Scotland. 1561 — 1565. — Whilst the opposing forces of Calvinism and the reformed Papacy were laying the foundations of a struggle which would split western Europe in twain, Elizabeth was hampered in her efforts to avert a dis- ruption of her own realm by the necessity of watching the proceedings of the Queen of Scots. If in Elizabeth the politician predominated over the woman, in Mary the woman predominated over the politician. She was keen of sight, strong in feeling, and capable of forming far-reaching schemes, till the gust of passion swept over her and ruined her plans and herself together. After her arrival in Scotland she not only acknowledged the new Calvin- istic establishment, but put down with a strong hand the Earl of Huntly, who attempted to resist it, whilst on the other hand she insisted, in defiance of Knox, on the retention of the mass in her own chapel. It is possible that there was in all this a settled design to await some favourable opportunity, as she knew that there were many in Scotland who cherished the old faith. It is possible, on the other hand, that she thought for a time of making the best of her uneasy position, and preferred to be met 438 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 1565-1566 with smiles rather than with frowns. Knox, however, took care that there should be frowns enough. There was no tolerant thought in that stern heart of his, and he knew well that Mary would in the end be found to be fighting for her creed and her party. Her dancing and light gaiety he held to be profane. The mass, he said, was idolatry, and according to Scripture the idolater must die. There was in Scotland as yet no broad middle class on which Mary could rely, and, feeling herself insulted both as a queen and as a woman, she took up Knox's challenge. She had but the weapons of craft with which to fight, but she used them admirably, and before long, with her winning grace, she had the greater number of the nobility at her feet. 15. The Darnley Marriage. 1565. — The sense of mental superiority could not satisfy a woman such as Mary. Her life was a lonely one, and it was soon known that she was on the look-out for a husband. The choice of a husband by the ruler of Scotland could not be indifferent to Elizabeth, and in 1564 Elizabeth offered to Mary her own favourite Dudley, whom she created Earl of Leicester. Very likely Elizabeth imagined that Leicester would be as pleasing to Mary as he was to herself Mary could only regard the proposal as an insult. In 1565 she married her second cousin, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley.^ Elizabeth was alarmed, taking the marriage as a sign that Mary intended to defy her in everything, and urged the Scottish malcontents, at whose head was Mary's illegitimate brother, the Earl of Murray, to rebel. Mary chased them into England, where Elizabeth protested loudly and falsely that she knew nothing of their conspiracy. 16. The Murder of Rizzio. 1566. — Mary had taken a coarse- minded fool for her husband, and had to suffer from him all the tyranny which a heartless man has it in his power to inflict on a woman. Her heart craved for affection, and Darnley, who plunged ^ Genealogy of Maiy and Darnley : — (i) James IV. = Margaret Tudor =(2) Archibald Douglas, 1488-1513 Earl of Angus Mary of Guise = James V. Matthew Stuart, = Margaret Douglas 1513-1542 Earl of Lennox Francis II. = Mary = Henry Stuart, King of 1542- France 1567 Lord Darnley James VI . 1567-1625 1566-.1567 THE MURDER OF DARN LEY 439 without scruple into the most degrading vice, believed, or affected to believe, that his wife had sacrificed her honour to David Rizzio, a cultivated Italian who acted as her secretary, and carried on her correspondence with the Continental powers. A league for the mur- der of Rizzio — such things were common in Scotland — was formed between Darnley and the Protestant lords. On March 9, 1566, they burst into Mary's supper-room at Holyrood. Rizzio clung to his patroness's robe, but was dragged off and slain. Murray with his fellow-conspirators came back to Scotland. Mary, however, with loving looks and words, won over the husband whom she despised, broke up the confederacy, and drove most of the con- federates out of the country. 17. The Murder of Darnley. 1567. — On June 19, 1566, Mary gave birth to a son, afterwards James VI. of Scotland, and James I. of England. His birth gave strength to the party in England which was anxious to have Mary named heiress of the crown. Whatever little chance there was of Elizabeth's consent being won was wrecked through a catastrophe in which Mary became involved. Mary despised her miserable husband as thoroughly as he deserved. He at least, weak as water, could give her no help in her struggle with the nobles. Her passionate heart found in the Earl of Both- well one who seemed likely to give her all that she needed — a strong will in a strong body, and a brutal directness which might form a complement to her own intellectual keenness. Mary and Bothwell were both married, but Bothwell at least was not to be deterred by such an obstacle as this. The evidence on Mary's conduct is conflicting, and modern enquirers have not succeeded in coming to an agreement about it. It is possible that she did not actually give her assent to the evil deed which set her free ; but it can hardly be doubted that she at least willingly closed her eyes to the preparations made for her husband's murder. Whatever the truth as to her own complicity may be, it is certain that on February 10, 1567, Darnley was blown up by gunpowder at Kirk o' Field, a lonely house near Edinburgh, and slain by Bothwell, or by Bothwell's orders, as he was attempting to escape. Bothwell then obtained a divorce from his own wife, carried Mary off — not, as was firmly believed at the time, against her will— and married her. 18. The Deposition and Flight of Mary. 1567— 1568.— Mary, in gaining a husband, had lost Scotland. Her subjects rose against her as an adulteress and a murderess. At Carberry Hill, on June 15? 1567? her own followers refused to defend her, and she was forced to surrender, whilst Bothwell fled to Denmark, remaining 440 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 1567- 15^9 in exile for the rest of his life. Mary was imprisoned in a castle on an island in Loch Leven, and on July 24 she was forced to abdicate in favour of her son. Murray acted as regent in the infant's name. On May 2, 1568, Mary effected her escape, and rallied to her side the family of the Hamiltons, which was all- powerful in Clydesdale. On May 13 she was defeated by Murray at Langside, near Glasgow. Rid- ing hard for the Solway Firth, she threw herself into a boat, and found herself safe in Cum- berland. She at once appealed to Elizabeth, asking not for pro- tection only, but for an English army to replace her on the throne of Scotland. 19. Mary's Case before Eng- lish Commissioners. 1568 — 1569. Elizabeth could hardly replace her rival in power, and was still less incHned to set her at liberty, lest she should go to France, and bring with her to Scotland another French army. After innumerable changes of mind Elizabeth appointed a body of commissioners to consider the case against Mary. Before them Murray produced certain letters contained in a casket, and taken after Bothwell's flight. The cas- ket letters, as they are called, were alleged to be in Mary's handwriting, and, if genuine, Silver-gilt standing cup made in London in P^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ <^^^t>t her guilty 1569-70, and given to Corpus Christi passion for Bothwell, and her College, Cambridge, by Archbishop . . , ' Parker. connivance m her husband's 1 568-1570 THE RISING IN THE NORTH 441 murder. They were acknowledged by the commissioners, with the concurrence of certain English lords who were politically partisans of Mary, to be in her hand. Mary —either, as her adversaries allege, because she knew that she was guilty, or as her supporters allege, because she. was afraid that ghe could not obtain justice — withdrew her advocates, and pleaded with Elizabeth for a personal interview. This Elizabeth refused to grant, but on the other hand she denied the right of the Scots to depose their queen. Mary remained virtually a prisoner in England. She was an interesting prisoner, and in spite of all her faults there were many who saw in her claim to the English crown the easiest means of re-establishing the old Church and the old nobility. 20. The Rising in the North. 1569. — The old Church and the old nobility were strongest in the North, where the Pilgrimage of Grace had broken out in 1536 (see p. 397). The northern lords, the Earls of Northumberland and Westmorland, longed to free Mary, to proclaim her queen of England, and to depose Elizabeth. They were, however, prepared to content themselves with driving Cecil from power, with forcing Elizabeth to acknowledge Mary as her heir, and to withdraw her support from Protestantism. Mary, according to this latter plan, was to marry the Duke of Norfolk, the son of that Earl of Surrey who had been executed in the last days of Henry VIII. (see p. 411). On October 18 Elizabeth, suspecting that Norfolk was entangling himself with the Queen of Scots, sent him to the Tower. Northumberland and Westmorland hesitated what course to pursue, but a message from the Queen requiring their presence at Court decided them, and they rose in insurrec- tion. On November 14, with the northern gentry and yeomanry at their heels, they entered Durham Cathedral, tore in pieces the English Bible and Prayer Book, and knelt in fervour of devotion whilst mass was said for the last time in any one of the old cathedrals of England. Elizabeth sent an army against the earls. Both of them were timorous and unwarlike, and they fled to Scotland before the year was ended, leaving their followers to the vengeance of Elizabeth. Little mercy was shown to the insurgents, and cruel executions fol- lowed this unwise attempt to check the progress of the Reformation. 21. The Papal Excommunication. 1570.— Elizabeth, it seemed for all her triumph over the earls, had a hard struggle still before her. In January 1570 the regent Murray was assassinated by Hamilton of Bothwellhaugh, and Mary's friends began again to raise their heads in Scotland. In April Pope Pius V. excommuni- cated Elizabeth and absolved her subjects from their allegiance. II. GG 442 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 1570 In May, a fanatic named Felton affixed the Pope's bull of excom- munication to the door of the Bishop of London's house. Felton was eventually seized and executed, but his deed was a challenge which Elizabeth would be compelled to take up. Hitherto she had trusted to time to bring her subjects into one way.of thinking, knowing that the younger generation was likely to be on her side. She had taken care to deal as lightly as possible v/ith those who shrank from abandoning the religion of their childhood, and she had recently announced that they were free to believe what they would if only they would accept her supremacy. The Pope had now made it clear that he would not sanction this compromise. English- men must choose between him and their queen. On the side of the Pope it might be argued with truth that with Elizabeth on the throne it would be impossible to maintain the Roman Catholic faith and organisation. On the side of the queen it might be argued that if the Papal claims were admitted it would be impossible to maintain the authority of the national government. A deadly conflict was imminent, in which the liberty of individuals would suffer whichever side gained the upper hand. Nations, like per- sons, cannot attend to more than one important matter at a time, and the great question at issue in Elizabeth's reign was whether the nation was to be independent of all foreign powers in ecclesi- astical as well as in civil affairs. CHAPTER XXIX ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT. IS70— 1587 LEADING DATES Reign of Elizabeth, 1558—1603 The Execution of the Duke of Norfolk . The foundation of the Dutch Republic . The arrival of the Jesuits The Association Babington's Plot Execution of Mary Stuart 1572 1572 1580 1584 1586 1587 I. The Co^tinental Powers. 1566— 1570. — If the Catholic powers of the Continent had been able to assist the Eno-ljsh Catholics Elizabeth would hardly have suppressed the risino- j^ the North. It happened, however, that neither in the Spanish Nether I566-IS70 FRANCE, SPAIN, AND SCOTLAND 443 lands nor in France were the governments in a position to quarrel with her. In the Netherlands Philip, who burnt and slaughtered Protestants without mercy, was in 1566 opposed by the nobility, and in 1568 he sent the Duke of Alva, a relentless soldier, to Brussels with a Spanish army to establish the absolute authority of the king and the absolute authority of the Papacy. In 1569 Alva believed himself to have accomplished his task by wholesale executions, and by the destruction of the constitutional privileges of the Netherlanders. His rule was a grinding tyranny, rousing both Catholics and Protestants to cry out for the preservation of their customs and liberties from the intruding Spanish army. Alva had therefore no men to spare to send to aid the English Catholics. In France the civil war had broken out afresh in 1568, and in 1569 the Catholics headed by Henry, Duke of Guise, the son of the murdered Duke Francis (see p. 436), and by Henry, Duke of Anjou, the brother of the young king, Charles IX., won victories at Jamac and Moncontour. Charles and his mother took alarm lest the Catholics should become too powerful for the royal authority, and in 1570 a peace was signed once more, the French king refusing to be the instrument of persecution and being very much afraid of the establishment of a Catholic government in England which might give support to the Catholics of France. Accordingly in 1570, France would not interfere in England if she could, whilst Spain could not interfere if she would. 2. The Anjou Marriage Treaty and the Ridolfi Plot. 1570 — 1571. — For all that, Elizabeth's danger was great. In 1570 she had done her best to embroil parties in Scotland lest they should join against herself The bulk of the nobility in that country had thrown themselves on the side of Mary, and were fighting against the new regent, Lennox, having taken alarm at the growth of the popular Church organisation of Knox and the Presbyterians, who sheltered themselves under the title of the little James VI. At home Elizabeth expected a fresh outbreak, and could not be certain that Alva would be unable- to support it when it occurred. Cecil accordingly pleaded hard with her to marry the frivolous Duke of Anjou. He thought that unless she married and had children, her subjects would turn from her to Mary, who, having already a son, would give them an assured succession. If she was to many, an alliance with the tolerant Government of France was better than any other. Elizabeth indeed consented to open negotiations for the marriage, though it was most unlikely that she would ever really make up her mind to it. The English Catholics, in conse- GG 2 444 ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT 1566-1571 quence, flung themselves into the arms of the king of Spain, and in March 1571, Ridolfi, a Florentine banker residing in England, who carried on their correspondence with Alva, crossed to the Nether- lands to inform him that the great majority of the lay peers had invited him to send 6,000 Spanish soldiers to dethrone Elizabeth and to put Mary in her place. Norfolk, who had been released from the Tower (see p. 441), was then to become the husband of Mary, and it was hoped that there would spring from the marriage a long line of Catholic sovereigns ready to support the Papal Church. 3. Elizabeth and the Puritans.— EHzabeth's temporising policy had naturally strengthened the Calvinism of the Calvinistic clergy. In every generation there are some who ask not what is expedient but what is true, and the very fact that they aim at truths in defiance of all earthly considerations, not merely assures them influence, but diffuses around them a life and vigour which would be entirely wanting if all men were content to support that which is politically or socially convenient. Such were the best of the EngUsh Puritans, so called because, though they did not insist upon the abolition of Episcopacy or the establishment of the Calvinistic discipline (see p. 431), they contended for what they called purity of worship, which meant the rejection of such rites and vestments as reminded them of what they termed the idolatry of the Roman Church. Elizabeth and Parker had from time to time interfered, and some of the Puritan leaders had been deprived of their bene- fices for refusing to wear the cap and surplice. 4. Elizabeth and Parliament. 1566. — From 1566 to 1571 Elizabeth abstained from summoning a Parliament, having been far more economical than any one of the last three sovereigns. Early in her reign she had restored the currency, and after the session of 1566 had actually returned to her subjects a subsidy which had been voted to her and which had been already collected. Her reason for avoiding Parliaments was political. Neither of the Houses was likely to favour her ecclesiastical policy. The House of Lords v/antedher to go backwards— to declare Mary her successor and to restore the mass. The House of Commons wanted her to go forwards — to marry, and .have children of her own, and to alter the Prayer Book in a Puritan direction. In 1566, if the House of Commons had really represented the average opinion of the nation, she would have been obliged to yield. That i A subsidy was a tax on lands and goods voted by Parliament to the Crown, resembling in many respects the modern income-tax. 1566-1571 ELIZABETH AND PURITANISM 445 it did not was partly owing to the imposition in 1562 of the oath of supremacy upon its members, by which all who favoured the Pope's authority were excluded from its benches, but still more on account of the difficulty of packing a Parliament so as to suit the queen's moderate ideas. Those who admired the existing Church system were but few. The majority of the nation, even if those who refused to accept the Royal supremacy were left out of account, was undoubtedly sufficiently attached to the old state of things to be favourable at least to Mary's claim to be acknowledged as heir to the throne. To Elizabeth it was of the first importance that the influence of the Crown should be used to reduce the numbers of such men in the House of Commons. If, however, they were kept out, there was nothing to be done but to favour the election of Puritans, or at least of those who had a leaning towards Puritanism. The queen, therefore, having to make her choice between those who objected to her proceedings as too Protestant and those who objected to them as not Protestant enough, not unnaturally pre- ferred the latter. 5, A Puritan Parliament. 1571. — In 1571 Elizabeth had to deal with a Puritan House of Commons. The House granted supplies, and wanted to impose new penalties on the Roman Catholics and to suppress ecclesiastical abuses. One of the members named Strickland, having proposed to ask leave to amend the Prayer Book, the Queen ordered him to absent himself from the House. The House was proceeding to remonstrate when Elizabeth, too prudent to allow a quarrel to spring up, gave him permission to return. She had her way, however, and the Prayer Book remained untouched. She was herself a better representative of the nation than the House of Commons, but as yet she represented it only as standing between two hostile parties ; though she hoped that the time would come when she would have a strong middle party of her own. 6. The Duke of Norfolk's Plot and Execution. 1571 — 1572. For the present Elizabeth's chief enemies were the conspirators who were aiming at placing Mary on her throne. In April 1571 Ridolfi reached the Netherlands, and urged Alva to send a Spanish army to England. Alva was cautious, and thought the attempt dangerous unless Elizabeth had first been killed or captured. Philip was consulted, gave his approval to the murder, but after- wards drew back, though he ordered Alva to proceed with the invasion. In the meanwhile Cecil, who had just been made Lord Burghley, came upon traces of the plot. Norfolk was arrested, and 446 ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT 1571-1572 before the end of the year everything was known. Though the proposal of a marriage between EHzabeth and the Duke of Anjou had lately broken down, she now, in her anxiety to find support in France against Spain, entered into a negotiation to marry Anjou's brother, the Duke of Alen^on, a vicious lad twenty-one years younger than herself Then she was free to act. She drove the Spanish ambassador out of England, and Norfolk was tried and convicted of treason. A fresh Parliament meeting in 1572 urged the queen to consent to the execution of Mary. Elizabeth refused, but she sent Norfolk to the block. 7. The Admonition to Parliament. 1572. — The rising in the North and the invitation to bring a Spanish army into England could not but fan the zeal of the Puritans. At the beginning of the reign they had contented themselves with calling for the abolition of certain ceremonies. A more decided party now added a demand for the abolition of episcopacy and the establishment of Presby- terianism and of the complete Calvinistic discipline. The leader of this party was Thomas Cartwright, a theological professor at Cambridge, the university which had produced the greater number of the reformers, as it now produced the greater number of Puritans. In 1570, Cartwright was expelled from his Professorship. He sym- pathised with An Admomtio7t to Parliament written in 1572 by two of his disciples, and himself wrote A Second Ad?nomtion to Parliament^ to second their views. Cartwright was far from claiming for the Puritans the position of a sect to be tolerated. He had no thought of establishing religious liberty in his mind. He declared the Presbyterian Church to be the only divinely appointed one, and asked that all Englishmen should be forced to submit to its ordinances. The civil magistrate was to have no control over its ministers. All active religious feeling being enlisted either on the Papal or the Puritanical side, Elizabeth's reformed, but not Puritan, Church seemed likely to be crushed between two forces. It was saved by the existence of a large body of men who cared for other things more than for religious disputes, and who were ready to defend the Queen as ruler of the nation without any special regard for the ecclesiastical system which she maintained. 8. Mariners and Pirates.— Of all Elizabeth's subjects there were none who stood their country in such good stead in the impending conflict with Spain and the Papacy as the mariners. Hardy and reckless, they cared little for theological distinctions or for forms of Church government, their first instinct being to fill their own purses either by honest trade if it might be, or by piracy if that seemed 1572 WESTWARD HO! 447 likely to be more profitable. Even before Elizabeth's accession, the Channel and the seas beyond it swarmed with English pirates. Though the pirates cared nothing for the nationality of the vessels which they plundered, it was inevitable that the greatest loss should fall on Spain. Spain was the first maritime power" in the world, and her galleons as they passed up to Antwerp to exchange the silks and spices of the East for the commodities of Europe, fell an easy prey to the swift and well-armed cruisers which put out from English harbours. The Spaniards retaliated by seizing English sailors wherever they could lay their hands upon them, somethnes hanging them out of hand, sometimes destroying them with starvation and misery in fetid dungeons, sometimes handing them over to the Inquisition — a court the function of which was the suppression of heresy — in other words, to the torture-room or the stake. 9. Westward Ho ! — Every year the hatred between the mariners of Spain and England grew more bitter, and it was not long before English sailors angered the king of Spain by crossing the Atlantic to trade or plunder in the West Indies, where both the islands and the mainland of Mexico and South America were full of Spanish settle- ments. In those days a country which sent out colonies claimed the sole right of trading with them ; besides which the king of Spain claimed a right of refusing to foreigners an entrance into his American dominions because, towards the end of the fifteenth cen- tury, Pope Alexander VI. being called on to mediate between Spain and Portugal, had drawn a line on the map to the east of which was to be the Portuguese colony of Brazil, whilst all the rest of America to the west of it was to be Spanish. From this the Spaniards reasoned that all America except Brazil was theirs by the gift of the Pope— which in their eyes was equivalent to the gift of God. English sailors refusing to recognise this pretension, sailed to the Spanish settlements to trade, and attacked the Spanish officials who tried to preven-t them. The Spanish settlers were eager to get negro slaves to cultivate their plantations, and Englishmen were equally eager to kidnap negroes in Africa and to sell them in the West Indies. A curious combination of the love of gain and of Protestantism sprang up amongst the sailors, who had no idea that to sell black men was in any way wrong. One engaged in this villanous work explained how he had been saved from the perils of the sea by 'Almighty God, who never suffers his elect to perish ! ' There was money enough to be got, and sometimes there would be hard fighting and the gain or loss of all. 448 ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT 1572 10. Francis Drake's Voyage to Panama. 1572. — The noblest of these mariners was Francis Drake. Sickened by one experience Sir Francis Drake, in his 43rd year : from the engraving by Elstracke. of the slave trade, and refusing to take any further part in it he flew at the wealth of the Spanish Government. In 1572 he sailed fer Nombre de Dios, on the Atlantic sicje of the isthmus of \572-1576 THE DUTCH STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM 449 Panama. Thither were brought once a year gold and silver from the mines of Peru. In the governor's house Drake found a pile of silver bars. " I have now," he said to his men, " brought you to the mouth of the treasury of the world." He himself was wounded, and his followers, having little spirit to fight without their leader, were beaten off. " I am resolved," he said somewhat later to a Spaniard, " by the help of God, to reap some of the golden harvest which you have got out of the earth and sent to Spain to trouble the earth." It was his firm conviction that he was serving God in robbing the king of Spain. Before he returned some Indians showed him from a tree on the isthmus the waters of the Pacific, which no civilised people except the Spaniards had ever navigated. Drake threw himself on his knees, praying to God to give him life and to allow him to sail an English vessel on those seas. 1 1 . The Seizure of Brill, and the Massacre of St. Bartholomew. 1572. — Exiles from the Netherlands took refuge on the sea from Alva's tyranny, and plundered Spanish vessels as Englishmen had done before. In 1572 a party of these seized Brill and laid the foundations of the Dutch Republic. They called on Charles IX. of France to help them, and he (being under the influence of Coligny, the leader of the Huguenots) was eager to make war on Spain on their behalf Charles's mother, Catherine de Medicis, was, how- ever, alarmed lest the Huguenots should grow too powerful, and frightened her son with a tale that they were conspiring against him. He was an excitable youth, and turned savagely on the Huguenots, encouraging a fearful butchery of them, which is known as the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, because it took place on August 24, which was St. Bartholomew's day. Coligny himself was among the victims. 12. The Growth of the Dutch Republic. 1572— 1578.— By this time the provinces of Holland and Zeeland had risen against Spain. They placed at their head the Prince of Orange with the title of Stadtholder or Lieutenant, as if he had been still the lieu- tenant of the king of Spain whom he resisted. The rebels had but a scanty force wherewith to defend themselves against the vast armies of Spain. Alva took town after town, sacked them, and butchered man, woman and child within. In 1574 Leyden was saved from his attack. Holland is below the sea-level, and the Dutch cut the dykes which kept off the sea, and when the tide rushed in, sent flat-bottomed vessels over what had once been land, and rescued the town from the besiegers. Alva, disgusted at his failure, returned to Spain. In 1576 his successor Requesens died. Spain, with all the wealth 450 ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT 1576-1578 of the Indies pouring into it, was impoverished by the vastness of the work which Philip had undertaken in trying to maintain the power of the Roman CathoHc Church in all western Europe. The expenses of the war in the Netherlands exhausted his treasury, and on the death of Requesens, the Spanish army mutinied, plundered even that part of the country which was friendly to Spain, and sacked Antwerp with barbarous cruelty. Then the whole of the seventeen provinces of the Netherlands drove out the Spaniards, and bound themselves by the Pacification of Ghent into a con- federate Republic. In 1578 Alexander, duke of Parma, arrived a? the Spanish governor. He was a great warrior and statesman, and he won over the Catholic provinces of the southern Netherlands to his side. By the Union of Utrecht the Prince of Orange formed a new confederate republic of the seven northern provinces, which were mainly Protestant. "^^-^"^^ 13. Quiet Times in England. 1572 — 1577. — The Spaniards were no longer able to interfere in England. Elizabeth was equally safe from the side of France. In 1574 Charles IX. died, and was succeeded by Ehzabeth's old suitor Anjou as Henry III. There were fresh civil wars which gave him enough to do at home. In 1573 Elizabeth sent aid to the party of the young king in Scotland, and suppressed the last remnants of Mar/s party there. In England she pursued her old policy. Men might think what they would, but they must not discuss their opinions openly. There must be as little preaching as possible, and when the clergy began to hold meetings called prophesyings for discussion on the Scriptures, she ordered Grindal, who had succeeded Parker as Archbishop of Canterbury, to suppress them, and on his refusal in 1577 suspended him from his office, and put down the prophesyings herself. 14. Drake's Voyage. 1577 — 1580.— Elizabeth had no sympathy with the heroic Netherlanders, who fought for liberty and conscience, but she had sympathy with the mariners who by fair means or foul brought treasure into the realm. In 1577 Drake sailed for that Pacific which he had long been eager to enter. Passing through the Straits of Magellan, he found himself alone on the unknown ocean with the ' Pelican,' a little ship of 100 tons. He ranged up the coast of South America, seizing treasure where he landed, but never doing any cruel deed. The Spaniards, not thinking it pos- sible that an English ship could be there, took the ' Pelican ' for one of their own vessels, and were easily caught. At Tarapaca, for instance, Drake found a Spaniard asleep with bars of silver by his side. At another landing place be found eight llamas laden with 1547-1580 IRELAND AND THE REFORMATION 451 silver. So he went on, till he took a great vessel with jewels in plenty, thirteen chests of silver coin, eighty pounds' weight of gold, and twenty-six tons of silver. With all this he sailed home by way of the Cape of Good Hope, arriving in England in 1580, being the first commander who had circumnavigated the globe. ^ The king of Spain was furious, and demanded back the wealth of which his subjects had been robbed. Elizabeth gave him good words, but not a penny of money or money's worth. 15. Ireland and the Reformation. 1547. — Since the death of Henry VHI. the manage- ment of Ireland had been increasingly diffi- cult An attempt had been made in the reign of Edward VI. to establish the reformed religion. All that was then done had been over- thrown by Mary, and what Mary did was in turn overthrown by Elizabeth. As yet, however, the orders of the English Government to make re- ligious changes in Ireland were of compara- tively little importance. The power of the Government did not reach far, and even in the districts to which it extended there was none of that mental preparation for the reception of the new doctrines which was to be found in England. The Reformation was accepted by very few, except by English officials, who were ready to accept anything to please the Govern- ment Those who clung to the old ways, how- ever, were not at all zealous for their faith, and there was as yet no likelihood that any reli- gious insurrection like the Pilgrimage of Grace or the rising in the North would be heard of in Ireland. The lives of the Celtic chiefs and the Anglo-Norman lords were passed in blood- shedding and looseness of life, which made them very unfit to be champions of any religion whatever. 16. Ireland under Edward VI. and Mary. i547— iSS^.— The real difficulty of the English Government in Ireland lay in its rela- tions with the Irish tribes, whether under Celtic chiefs or Anglo- Norman lords. At the end of the reign of Edward VI. an attempt had been made to revert to the better part of the policy of Henry » Magellan died on the way, though his ship completed the voyage round the world. Armour as worn during the reign of Eliza- beth : from the brass of Francis Cldpton, 1577, at Long Mel- ford, Suffolk, 452 ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT i547-i579 VI II., and the heads of the tribes were entrusted by the government with powers to keep order in the hope that they would gradually settle down into civilisation and obedience. Such a policy required almost infinite patience on the part of the Government, and the Earl of Sussex, who was Lord Deputy under Mary, began again the old mischief of making warhke attacks upon the Irish which he had not force or money enough to render effectual. It was Mary and not a Protestant sovereign who first sent English colonists to occupy the lands of the turbulent Irish in King's County and Queen's County — then much smaller than at present. A war of extermination at once began. The natives massacred the intruders and the intruders massacred the natives, till — far on in Elizabeth's reign — the natives had been all slaughtered or expelled. There was thus introduced into the heart of Ireland a body of Englishmen who, no doubt, were far more advanced in the arts of life than the Irish around them, but who treated the Irish with utter contempt, and put them to death without mercy. 17. Elizabeth and Ireland. 1558— 1578. — From the time of the settlement of King's and Queen's Counties all chance of a peaceable arrangement was at an end. Elizabeth had not money enough to pay an army capable of subduing Ireland, nor had the Irish tribes sufficient trust in one another to unite in national resistance. There was, in fact, no Irish nation. Even Shan O'Neill, the most formidable Irish opponent of the English Government, who was predominant in the North during the early part of Elizabeth's reign, failed because he tried to reduce the other Uls4:er chiefs to subjection to himself, and in 1567 was overthrown by the O'Don- nells, and not by an English army. When the English officials gained power, they were apt to treat the Irish as if they were vermin to be destroyed. New attempts at colonisation were made, but the Irish drove out the colonists, and Ireland was in a more chaotic state than if it had been left to its own disorder. 18. The Landing at Smerwick, and the Desmond Rising. 1579 — 1583. — Elizabeth's servants were the more anxious to subdue Ireland by the process of exterminating Irishmen, because they believed that the Irish would welcome Spaniards if they came to establish a government in Ireland hostile to Elizabeth. On the other hand, the English Catholics, and especially the English Catholic clergy in exile on the Continent, fancied, wrongly, that the Irish were fighting for the papacy, and not for tribal independence, or, rather, for bare life, which tribal independence alone secured. In 1579 Sir James Fitzmaurice landed with a few men at Dingle, 1579-1580 THE JESUITS m ENGLAND 453 under the authority of the Pope, but was soon defeated and slain. In 1580 a large number of Spaniards and Italians landed at Smer- wickj but was overpowered and slaughtered by Lord Grey, the Lord Deputy. Then the Earl of Desmond, the head of a branch of the family of Fitzgerald, all-powerful in Munster, rose. The insurrection was put down, and Desmond himself slain, in 1583. It is said that in 1582 no less than 30,000 perished — mostly of starvation — in a single year. It is an English witness who tells us of the poor wretches who survived, that ^ out of every corner of the woods and glens they came creeping forth upon their hands, for their legs could not bear them ; they spoke like ghosts crying out of their graves ; they did eat the dead carrions, happy where they could find them.' 19. The Jesuits in England. 1580. — In England the landing of a papal force at Smerwick produced the greater alarm because Parma (see p. 450) had been gaining ground in the Netherlands, and the time might soon come when a Spanish army would be available for the invasion of England. For the present what the Government feared was any interruption to the process by which the new religion was replacing the old. In 1571 there had been an act of Parliament in answer to the Papal Bull of Deposition (see p. 442), declaring all who brought Bulls into the country, and all who "were themselves reconciled to the see of Rome, or who recon- ciled others to be traitors, but for a long time no use was made by Elizabeth of these powers. The Catholic exiles, however, had wit- nessed with sorrow the gradual decay of their religion in England, and in 1568 William Allen, one of their number, had founded a college at Douai (removed in 1578 to Reims) as a seminary for missionaries to England. It was not long before seminary priests, as the missionaries were called, began to land in England to revive the zeal of their countrymen, but it was not till 1577 that one of them, Cuthbert Mayne, was executed, technically for bringing in a copy of a Bull of a trivial character, but really for maintaining that Catholics would be justified in rising to assist a foreign force sent to reduce England to obedience to the Papacy. There were, in fact, two rival powers inconsistent with one another. If the Papal power was to prevail, the Queen's authority must be got rid of. If the Queen's power was to prevail, the Pope's authority must be got rid of. In 1580 two Jesuits, Campion and Parsons, landed. They brought with them an explanation of the Bull of Deposition, which practically meant that no one need act on it till it was convenient to do so. They went about making converts and strengthening the lukev/arm in the resolution to stand by their faith. ^t^/^ ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT 1580-1581 20. The Recusancy Laws. 1581. — Elizabeth in her dread of religious strife had done her best to silence religious discussion and even religious teaching. Men in an age of religious contro- versy are eager to believe something. All the more vigorous of the Protestants were at this time Puritans, and now the more vigorous of those who could not be Puritans welcomed the Jesuits with joy. There were never many Jesuits in England, but for a time they gave life and vigour to the seminary priests who were not Jesuits. In 1581 Parliament, seeing nothing in what had hap- pened but a conspiracy against the Crown, passed the first of the acts which became known as the Recusancy laws. In addition to the penalties on reconciliation to Rome and the introduction of Bulls, fines and imprisonment were to be inflicted for hearing or saying mass, and fines upon lay recusants -that is to say, persons who refused to go to church. Catholics were from this time fre- quently subjected to torture to drive them to give information which would lead to the apprehension of the priests. Campion was arrested and executed after cruel torture \ Parsons escaped. If the Government and the Parliament did not see the whole of the causes of the Jesuit revival, they were not wrong in seeing that there was political danger. Campion was an enthusiast. Parsons was a cool-headed intriguer, and he continued from the Continent to direct the threads of a conspiracy which aimed at Elizabeth's life. 21. Growing Danger of Elizabeth. 1580— 1584.— Elizabeth was seldom startled, but her ministers were the more frightened because the power of Spain was growing. In 1580 Philip took possession of Portugal and the Portuguese colonies, whilst in the Netherlands Parma was steadily gaining ground. Elizabeth had long been nursing the idea of the Alengon marriage (see p. 446), and in 1581 it seemed as if she was in earnest about it. She enter- tained the Duke at Greenwich, gave him a kiss and a ring, then changing her mind sent him off to the Netherlands, where he hoped to be appointed by the Dutch to the sovereignty of the independent states. In the spring of 1582 a fanatic, Jaureguy, tried to murder the Prince of Orange at Philip's instigation. Through the summer of that year Parsons and Allen were plotting with Philip and the Dujce of Guise, for the assassination of Elizabeth, on the under- standing that as soon as Elizabeth had been killed. Guise was to send or lead an army to invade England. They hoped that such an army would receive assistance from Scotland, where the young James had become the tool of a Catholic intriguer whom he made 1583 SCOTLAND AND THE NETHERLANDS 455 Duke of Lennox. Philip, however, was too dilatory to succeed. In August James was seized by some Protestant Lords, and Lennox Hall of Burghlcy House, Northamptonshire, built about 1580 ; from Drummond's Histories of Noble British Families, vol. i. was soon driven from the country. In 1583 there was a renewal of the danger. The foolish Alengon, wishing to carve out a princi- pality for himself, made a violent attack on Antwerp and other 456 ELIZABETH Al^b THE eVROPEAM CONELICT 1583-158^ Flemish towns which had aUied themselves with him, and was consequently driven from the country ; whilst Parma, taking advantage of this split amongst his enemies, conquered most of the towns— Antwerp, however, being still able to resist. He now held part of the coast line, and a Spanish invasion of England from the Netherlands once more became feasible. In November 1583 a certain Francis Throgmorton, having been arrested and racked, made known to Elizabeth the whole story of the intended invasion of the army of Guise. In January 1584 she sent the Spanish ambassador, Mendoza, out of England. On June 29 Balthazar Gerard assassinated the Prince of Orange. 22. The Association. 1584— 1585.— Those who had planned the murder of the Prince of Orange were planning the murder of Elizabeth. In their eyes she was a usurper, who by main force held her subjects from all hope *of salvation by keeping them in ignorance of the teaching of the true Church, and they accordingly drew the inference that it was lawful to murder her and to place Mary on her throne. They did not see that they had to do with a nation and not with a queen alone, and that, whether the nation was as yet Protestant or not, it was heart and soul with Elizabeth against assassins and invaders. In November 1584, at the instigation ot the Council, the mass of Englishmen — irrespective of creed — bound themselves in an association not only to defend the Queen, but, in case of her murder, to put to death the person for whose sake the crime had been committed — or, in other words, to send Mary to the grave instead of to the throne. In 1585 this association, with con- siderable modifications, was confirmed by Parliament. At the same time an act was passed banishing all Jesuits and seminary priests, and directing that they should be put to death if they returned. 23. Growth of Philip's Power. 1584—1585. — In the meantime Philip's power was still growing. The wretched AlenQon died in 1584, and a far distant cousin of the childless Henry III., Henry king of Navarre, who was a Huguenot, became heir to the French throne. Guise and the ardent Cathohcs formed themselves into a league to exclude Huguenots from the succession, and placed themselves under the direction of the king of Spain. A civil war broke out once more in 1585, and if the league should win (as at first seemed likely) Philip would be able to dispose of the resources of France in addition to his own. As Guise had now enough to do at home, Phihp took the invasion of England into his own hands. He had first to extend his power in the Netherlands. In August the great port of Antwerp surrendered to Parma. The Dutch had 1586 SIR PHILIP SIDNEY 457 offered to make Elizabeth their sovereign, and, though she had prudently refused, she sent an army to their aid, but neutralised the gift by placing the wretched Leicester at its head, and by giving him not a penny wherewith to pay his men. In 1586, after an attempt (after Alen^on's fashion) to seize the government for himself, Leicester returned to England, having accomplished nothing. What Elizabeth did not do was done by a crowd of young Englishmen who pressed over to the Netherlands to fight as volun- teers for Dutch freedom. The best known of these was Sir Philip Sidney, whose head and heart alike seemed to qualify him for a foremost place amongst the new generation of Englishmen. Unhappily he was slain in battle near Zutphen. As he lay dying he handed a cup of water untasted to another wounded man. * Thy necessity,' he said to him, ' is greater than mine.' Parma took Zutphen, and the territory of the Dutch RepubHc — the bulwark of England — was the smaller by its loss. By sea England more than held her own, and in 1586 Drake returned from a voyage to the West Indies laden with spoils. 24. Babington's Plot, and the Trial of Mary Stuart. 1586*— The Spanish invasion being still delayed, a new plot for murdering Elizabeth was formed. A number of young Catholics (of whom Anthony Babington was the most prominent) had been allowed to remain at Court by Elizabeth, who was perfectly fearless. Acting under the instructions of a priest named Ballard, they now sought basely to take advantage of their easy access to her person to assas- sinate her. They were detected and executed, and Walsingham, the Secretary of State who conducted the detective department of the government, discovered, or said that he had discovered, evidence of Mary Stuart's approving knowledge of the conspiracy. Elizabeth's servants felt that there was but one way of saving the life of the queen, and that was by taking the life of her whose existence made it worth while to assassinate Elizabeth. Mary was brought to trial and condemned to death on a charge of complicity in Babington's plot. When Parliament met it petitioned Elizabeth to execute the sentence. Elizabeth could not make up her mind. She knew that Mary's execution would save herself and the country from enormous danger, but she shrank from ordering the deed to be done. She signed the warrant for Mary's death, and then asked Mary's gaoler Paulet to save her from responsibility by murdering his prisoner. On Paulet's refusal she continued her vacillations, till the Council authorised Davison, Walsingham's colleague in the Secretaryship, to send off the wan ant without further orders. II. H H 45B ELIZABETH AND THE EUROPEAN CONFLICT 1587-1588 25. Execution of Mary Stuart. 1587.— On February 8, 1587, Mary Stuart was beheaded at Fotheringhay. Elizabeth carried out to the last the part which she had assumed, threw the blame on Davison, dismissed him from her service, and fined him heavily. After Mary's death the attack on England would have to be con- ducted in open day. It would be no advantage to Philip and the Pope that Elizabeth should be murdered if her place was to be taken, not by Mary, but by Mary's Protestant son, James of Scotland. ^ CHAPTER XXX ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH. 1587— 1603 LEADING DATES Reign of Elizabeth, 1558-1603 Drake singes the King of Spain's beard .... 1587 The defeat of the Armada . . , . The rising of O'NeiU The taking of Cadiz . . , Essex arrives in Ireland ..... Mountjoy arrives in Ireland .... The Monopolies withdrawn .... Conquest of Ireland, and death of Elizabeth 1588 1594 1596 1599 1600 1 601 1603 1. The Singeing of the King of Spain's Beard. 1587.— After Mary's execution Philip claimed the crown of England for himself or his daughter the Infanta Isabella, on the plea that he was descended from a daughter of John of Gaunt, and prepared a great fleet in the Spanish and Portuguese harbours for the invasion of England. In attempting to overthrow Elizabeth he was eager not merely to suppress English Protestantism, but to put an end to Eng- lish smuggling and piracy in Spanish America, and to stop the assis- tance given by Englishmen to the Netherlanders who had rebelled against him. Before his fleet was ready to sail Drake appeared off his coast, running into his ports, burning his store-ships, and thus making an invasion impossible for that year (1587). Drake, as he said on his return, had singed the king of Spain's beard. 2. The Approach of the Armada. 1588. — The Invincible Armada,^ as some foolish Spaniards called PhiHp's great fleet, set 1 ' Armada ' was the Spanish name for any armed fleet 1588 THE SPANISH ARMADA 459 out at last in 1588. It was to sail up the Channel to Flanders, and to transport Parma and his army to England. Parma's soldiers were the best disciplined veterans in Europe, while Ehzabeth's were raw militia, who had never seen a shot fired in actual war. If, therefore, Parma succeeded in landing, it would probably go Sir Martin Frobisher, died 1594 : from a picture belonging to the Earl of Carlisle. hard with England. It was, therefore, in England's interest to fight the Armada at sea rather than on land. 3. The Equipment of the Armada. 1588.— Even at sea the odds were in appearance against the English. The Spanish ships were not indeed so much larger than the largest English vessels as has often been said, but they were somewhat larger, and they were H H 2 46o ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1588 built so as to rise much higher out of the water, and to carry a greater number of men. In fact, the superiority was all on the Enghsh side. In great military or naval struggles the superiority of the victor is usually a superiority of intelligence, which shows itself in the preparation of weapons as much as in conduct in action. The Spanish ships were prepared for a mode of warfare which had hitherto been customary. In such ships the soldiers were more numerous than the sailors, and the decks were raised high above the water, in order that the soldiers might command with their muskets the decks of smaller vessels at close quarters. The Spaniards, trusting to this method of fighting, had not troubled themselves to improve their marine artillery. The cannon of their largest ships were few, and the shot which they were capable of firing was light. Philip's system of requiring absolute submission in Church and State had resulted in an uninventive frame of mind in those who carried out his orders. He had himself shown how little he cared for ability in his selection of an admiral for his fleet. That post having becorrie vacant by the death of the best seanian in Spain, Philip ordered the Duke of Medina Sidonia to take his place. The Duke answered — with perfect truth — that he knew nothing about the sea and nothing about war ; but Philip, in spite of his candour, bade him- go, and go he did. 4. The Equipment of the English Fleet. 1588. — Very different was the equipment of the English fleet. Composed partly of the queen's ships, but mainly of volunteers from every port, it was commanded by Lord Howard of Effingham, a Catholic by convic- tion. The very presence of such a man was a token of a patriotic fervour of which Philip and the Jesuits had taken no account, but which made the great majority of Catholics draw their swords for their queen and country. With him were old sailors like Frobisher, who had made his way through the ice of Arctic seas, or like Drake, who had beaten Spaniards till they knew their own superi- ority. That superiority was based not merely on greater skill as sailors, but on the possession of better ships. English ship- builders had adopted an improved style of naval architecture, hav- ing constructed vessels which would sail faster and be more easily handled than those of the older fashion, and —what was of still greater importance — had built them so as to carry more and heavier cannon. Hence, the English fleet, on board of which the number of sailors exceeded that of the soldiers, was in reality — if only it could avoid fighting at close quarters — far superior to that of the enemy. 1588 THE ARMADA IN THE CHANNEL 461 oc 00 in sx bO O _u V o^ (/) "^ ^^ , R o ^6 a> *5 •4-t bD -o J2 C a 462 ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1588 5. The Defeat of the Armada. 1588. — When the Armada was sighted at the mouth of the Channel, the EngHsh commander was playing bowls with his captains on Plymouth Hoe. Drake refused to break off his amusement, saying that there was time to finish the game and to beat the Spaniards too. The wind was blowing strongly from the south-west, and he recommended Lord Howard to let the Spaniards pass, that the English fleet might follow them up with the wind behind it. When once they had gone by they were at the mercy of their English pursuers, who kept out of their way whenever the Spaniards turned in pursuit. The superiority of the English gunnery soon told, and, after losing ships in the voyage up the Channel, the Armada put into Calais. The English captains sent in fire-ships and drove the Spaniards out. Then came a fight off Gravelines— -if fight it could be called — in which the helpless mass of the Armada was riddled with English shot. The wind rose into a storm, and pursuers and pursued were driven on past the coast of Flanders, where Parma's soldiers were blockaded by a Dutch fleet. Parma had hoped that the Armada when it came would set him free, and convoy him across to England. As he saw the tall ships of Spain hurrying past before the enemy and the storm, he learnt that the enterprise on which he had set his heart could never be carried out. 6. The Destruction of the Armada. 1588. — The Spanish fleet was driven northwards without hope of return, and narrowly escaped wreck on the flats of Holland. *' There was never anything pleased me better," wrote Drake, as he followed hard, " than seeing the enemy flying with a southerly wind to the northwards. . . . With the grace of God, if we live, I doubt not, ere it be long, so to handle the matter with the Duke of Sidonia as he shall wish himself at St. Mary Port ^ amongst his orange trees." Before long even Drake had had enough. Elizabeth, having with her usual economy kept the ships short of powder, they were forced to come back. The Spaniards had been too roughly handled to return home by the way they came. Round the north of Scotland and the west of Ireland they went, strewing the coast with wrecks. About 120 of their ships had entered the Channel, but only 54 returned. " I sent you," said Philip to his admiral, " to fight against men, and not with the winds." Elizabeth, too, credited the storms with her success. She struck a medal with the inscription, " God blew with his wind and they were scattered." The winds had done their ^ A place near Cadiz where the Duke's residence was. 1588 SIR WALTER RALEIGH 463 S. wane. Ra...M.SS=;;...S) .^^^^^^^^ ■ ^ ' picture. 464 ELIZABETirS YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1588-1596 part, but the victory was mainly due to the seamanship of English mariners and the skill of English shipwrights. 7. Philip II. and France. 1588— 1593.— Philip's hopes of con- trolling France were before long baffled as completely as his hopes of controlling England. In 1588 Guise, the partisan of Spain, was murdered at Blois by the order of the king in his very presence. In 1589 Henry III. was murdered in revenge by a fanatic, and the Huguenot king of Navarre claimed the crown as Henry IV. The League declared that no Huguenot should reign in France. A struggle ensued; and twice when Henry seemed to be gaining the upper hand Philip sent Parma to aid the League. The feeUng of the French people was against a Huguenot king, but it was also against Spanish interference. When in 1593 Henry IV. declared himself a Catholic, Paris cheerfully submitted to him, and its example was speedily followed by the rest of France. Elizabeth saw in Henry IV. a king whose position as a national sovereign re- sisting Spanish interference much resembled her own, and in 1589 and again in 1591 she sent him men and money. A close alliance against Spain sprang up between France and England. 8. Maritime Enterprises. 1589 — 1596.— It was chiefly at sea, however, that Englishmen revenged themselves for the attack of the Armada. In 1592 Drake and Sir John Norris sacked Corunna but failed to take Lisbon. Other less notable sailors plundered and destroyed in the West Indies. In 1595 Drake died at sea. In the same year Sir Walter Raleigh, who was alike distinguished as a courtier, a soldier, and a sailor, sailed up the Orinoco in search of wealth. In 1596 Raleigh, together with Lord Howard of Effingham and the young Earl of Essex, who was in high favour with the Queen, took and sacked Cadiz. Essex was generous and impetuous, but intensely vain, and the victory was followed by a squabble between the commanders as to their respective merits. 9. Increasing Prosperity. — It was not so much the victories as the energy which made the victories possible that diffused wealth and prosperity over England. Trade grew together with piracy and war. Manufactures increased, and the manufacturers growing in numbers needed to be fed. Landed proprietors, in consequence, found it profitable to grow corn instead of turning their arable lands into pasture, as they had done at the beginning of the century. The complaints about inclosures (see pp. 368, 415) died away. The results of wealth appeared in the show and splendour of the court, where men decked themselves in gorgeous attire, but still more in the gradual rise of the general standard of comfort. 1588-1596 INCREASE OF COMFORT 465 10. Buildings. —Even in Mary's days the good food of English- men had been the wonder of foreigners. " These EngHsh," said a Spaniard, " have their houses of sticks and dirt, but they fare com- monly as well as the king." In Elizabeth's time the houses were improved. Many windows, which had, except in the houses of the great, been guarded with horn or lattice, were now glazed, and even in the man- sions of the nobility large windows stood in striking contrast with the narrow open- ings of the build- ings of the middle ages. Glass was wel- come, because men no longer lived — as they had lived in the days when internal wars were frequent — in fortified castles, where, for the sake of defence, the open- ings were narrow and infrequent. Elizabe- than manor-houses, as they are now termed, sometimes built in the shape of the letter E, in honour, as is some- times supposed, of the Queen's name, rose all over the country to take the place of the old castles. They had chimneys to carry off the smoke, which, in former days, had, in all but the largest houses, been allowed to escape through a hole in the roof. See pp. 466,467,469-471. 11. Furniture. — The furniture within the houses underwent a change as great as the houses themselves. When Elizabeth came to the throne people of the middle class were content to lie on a straw pallet, with a log of wood, or at the best a bag of chaff, under their heads. It was a common saying that pillows were fit only A mounted soldier at the end of the sixteenth century • from a broadside printed in 1596. 466 ELIZABETirS YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1580-1588 00 00 10 M I O 00 in 3 o >^ Xi 3 O o c vi CO (L) o H 3 V u s d C *^ 4-1 o 12; c o o 1597 ELIZABETHAN ARCHITECTURE 467 10 3 O 3 in CO (/) VI V c 3 o U (U .a 3 V ^JS^ ELIZABETH'S YE^ARS OF TRIUMPH 1580-1583 for sick women. Before many years had passed comfortable bedding had been introduced. Pewter platters and tin spoons re- placed wooden ones. Along with these improvements was noticed a universal chase after wealth, and farmers complained that landlords not only exacted higher rents, but themselves engaged in the sale of the produce of their lands. 12. Growing Strength of the House of Commons. — This in- crease of general prosperity could not but strengthen the House of Commons. It was mainly composed of country gentlemen, and it had been the policy of the Tudors to rely upon that class as a counterpoise to the old nobility. Many of the country gentlemen were employed as Justices of the Peace, and Elizabeth had gladly increased their powers. When, therefore, they came to fulfil their duties as members of ParHament, they were not mere talkers unac • quainted with business, but practical men, who had been used to deal with their own local iffairs before being called on to discuss the affairs of the country. Various causes made their opinions more important as the reign went on. In the first place, the national uprising against Spain drew with it a rapid increase of Protestantism in the younger generation, and, for this reason, the House of Commons, which, at the beginning of the reign, represented only a Protestant minority in the nation itself (see p. 428), at the end of the reign represented a Protestant majority, and gained strength in consequence. In the second place, Puritanism tended to de- velope independence of character, whilst the queen was not only unable to overawe the Puritan members of the House, but, unlike her father, had no means of keeping the more worldly-minded in submission by the distribution of abbey lands. -x<^ 13. Archbishop Whitgift and the Court of High Commission. 1583.— The Jesuit attack in 1580 and 1581 strengthened the queen's resolution to put an end to the divisions which weakened the English Church, as she was still afraid lest Puritanism, if un- checked, might give offence to her more moderately-minded subjects and drive them into the arms of the Papacy, In 1583, on Grindal's death, she appointed to the Archbishopric of Canterbury Whitgift, who had taken a leading part in opposing Cartwright (see p. 446). Whitgift held that as questions about vestments and ceremonies were unimportant, the queen's pleasure in such matters ought to be the rule of the Church. He was, however, a strict disciplinarian, and he was as anxious as the queen to force into conformity those clergy who broke the unity of the Church for the sake of what he regarded as mere crotchets of their own, especially i6oi ELIZABETHAN ARCHITECTURE 469 ^ 3 o si Ph o o X H 9 u -a u C/3 u D tn 3 4.' PQ V ti. 3 O u: w Q< n 47o ELIZABETirS YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1584-1588 as some of them were violent assailants of the established order. In virtue of a clause in the Act of Supremacy the queen erected a Court of High Commission. Though many laymen were mem- bers of the new Court, they seldom attended its sittings, and it was therefore practically managed by bishops and ecclesiastical lawyers. Its business was to enforce conformity on the clergy, and under Whitgift it acted most energetically, driving from their livings and committing to prison clergymen who refused to conform. 14. The House of Commons and Puritanism. 1584.— The severity of the High Commission roused some of the Puritan clergy to attempt— in private meetings— to bring into existence something of the system of Presbyterianism, but the attempt was soon aban- doned. Few amongst the Protestant laity had any liking for Presbyterianism, which they regarded as oppressive and intolerant, and it had no deep roots even amongst the Puritan clergy. If many members of the House of Commons were attracted to Puritanism, as opposed to Presbyterianism, it was partly because at the time of a national struggle against Rome, they preferred those amongst the clergy whose views were most antagonistic to those of Rome ; but still more because they admired the Puritans as defenders of morality. Not only were the Church courts op- pressive and meddlesome, but plain men were disgusted at a system in which ignorant and lazy ministers who conformed to the Prayer Book were left untouched, whilst able and energetic preachers who refused to adopt its ceremonies were silenced. 15. The Separatists. — The desire for a higher standard of morality, which made so many support the Puritan demand for a further reformation of the Church, drove others to denounce the Church as apostate. Robert Browne, a clergyman, was the first to declare in favour of a system which was neither Episcopal nor Presbyterian. He held it to be the duty of all true Christians to separate themselves from the Church, and to form congregations apart, to which only those whose religion and morality were beyond question should be admitted. These separatists, as they called themselves, were known as Brownists in common speech. Un- fortunately their zeal made them uncharitably contemptuous of those who were less zealous than themselves, and it was from amongst them that there came forth — beginning in 1588 — a series of virulent and libellous attacks on the bishops, known as the Mar- prelate Tracts, printed anonymously at a secret press. Browne and his followers advocated complete religious liberty — denying the right of the State to interfere with the conscience. The doctrine i6oi ELIZA BE THA N ARCH I TECTURE 471 S> 3 o C4 3 2 u CO bx) B 472 ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1588-1593 was too advanced for general acceptance, and the violence of the Marprelate Tracts gave offence even to the Puritans. Englishmen might differ as to what sort of church the national church should be, but almost all were as yet agreed that there ought to be one national church and not a number of disconnected sects. In 1593 an act of Parliament was passed imposing punishment on those who attended conventicles or private religious assemblies, and in the course of the year three of the leading separatists — Barrow, Greenwood, and Penry — were hanged, on charges of sedition. 16. Whitgift and Hooker.— The Church of England would certainly not have sustained itself against the Puritans unless it had found a champion of a higher order than Whitgift. Whitgift maintained its organisation, but he did no more. Cranmer, at the beginning of the Reformation, had declared the Bible as interpreted by the writers of the first six centuries to be the test of doctrine, but this assertion had been met during the greater part of Ehza- beth's reign, on the one hand by the Catholics, who asserted that the Church of the first six centuries differed much from the Church of England of their day, and on the other hand by the Puritans, who asserted that the testimony of the first six centuries was irrelevant, and that the Bible alone was to be con- sulted. Whitgift had called both parties to obedience, on the ground that they ought to submit to the queen in indifferent matters. Hooker in the opening of his Ecclesiastical Polity called the Puritans to peace. " This unhappy controversy," he declared, " about the received ceremonies and discipHne of the Church of England, which hath so long time withdrawn so many of her ministers from their principal work and employed their studies in contentious opposi- tions, hath, by the unnatural growth and dangerous fruits thereof, made known to the world that it never received blessing from the Father of peace." Hooker's teaching was distinguished by the importance which he assigned to 'law,' as against the blind acceptance of Papal decisions on the one side and against the Puritan reverence for the letter of the scriptures on the other. The Puritans were wrong, as he taught, not because they disobeyed the queen, but because they did not recognise that God revealed Himself in the natural laws of the world as well as in the letter of Scripture. " Of law," he wrote, " there can be no less acknowledged than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world : all things in heaven and earth do her homage — the very least as feeling her care, and the greatest as not exempted from her power: both angels and men and creatures of what condition 1588-1603 ELIZABETHAN LITERATURE 473 soever — though each in dififerent sort and manner, yet all with universal consent — admiring her as the mother of their peace and joy," It was therefore unnecessaiy, according to Hooker's teaching, to defend certain usages on the ground of their sanction by tradi- tion or by Papal authority, as it was unreasonable to attack them on the ground that they were not mentioned in Scripture. It was sufficient that they were fitting expressions of the feelings of reverence which had been implanted by God in human nature itself Coaches In the reign of Elizabeth : from Archceologia 17. Spenser, Shakspere, and Bacon. — With the stately periods of Hooker English prose entered on a new stage. For the first time it sought to charm and to invigorate, as well as to inform the world. In Spenser and Shakspere are to be discerned the same influences as those which made Hooker great. They, too, are filled with reverence for the reign of law. Spenser, in his Faerie Queen set forth the greatness of man in following the laws which IL 1 1 474 ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1588-1603 rule the moral world — the laws of purity and temperance and justice ; whilst Shakspere, in the plays which he now began to pour forth, taught them to recognise the penalties which follow hard on him who disregards not only the moral but also the physical laws of the world in which he lives, and to appraise the worth of William Shakspere : from the bust on his tomb at Stratford-on-Avon. man by what he is and not by the dogmas which he accepts. That nothing might be wanting to point out the ways in which future generations were to walk, young Francis Bacon began to dream of a larger science than had hitherto been possible — a science based on a reverent inquiry into the laws of nature. I595-IS99 ONEILUS RISING 475 18. Condition of the Catholics. 1588—1603. — Bacon cared for many matters, and one of his earliest recommendations to Eliza- beth had been to make a distinction between the Catholics who would take an oath to defend her against all enemies and those who would not. The patriotism with which many Catholics had taken her side when the Armada appeared ought to have procured the acceptance of this proposal. It is seldom, however, that either men or nations change their ways till long after the time when they ought to change them. Spain and the Pope still threatened, and all Catholics were still treated as allies of Spain and the Pope, and the laws against them were made even more severe during the remainder of the reign. 19. Irish Difficulties. 1583 — 1594. — The dread of a renewal of a Spanish invasion was productive of even greater mischief in Ireland than in England. After the suppression of the Desmond insurrection, an attempt was made to colonise the desolate lands of Munster (see p. 453) with English. The attempt failed, chiefly because — though courtiers willingly accepted large grants of lands — English farmers refused to go to Ireland in sufficient numbers to till the soil. On the other hand. Irishmen enough reappeared to claim their old lands, to rob, and sometimes murder, the few settlers who came from England. The settlers retaliated by acts of violence. All over Ireland the soldiers, left without pay, spoiled and maltreated the unfortunate inhabitants. The Irish, exasperated by theii cruelty, longed for someone to take up their cause, and in 1594 n rising in Ulster was headed by Hugh O'Neill, known in England as the Earl of Tyrone. How bitter the Irish feeling was against England is shown by the fact that the other Ulster chiefs, who usually quarrelled with one another, now placed themselves under O'Neill. 20. O'Neill and the Earl of Essex. 1595 — 1600.— In 1595 O'Neill applied to the king of Spain for help ; but Spain was weaker now than in former years, and though Philip promised help, he died in 1598 without fulfilling his engagement, being succeeded by his son, Philip III. In the same year O'Neill utterly defeated an Enghsh army under Bagenal on the Blackwater. All Celtic Ireland rose in his support, and in 1599 Elizabeth sent her favourite, Essex, to conquer Ireland in good earnest, lest it should fall into the hands of the king of Spain. Essex, through mismanagement, failed entirely, and after a great part of his army had melted away he came back to England without leave. On his arrival, knowing Elizabeth's fondness for him, he hoped to surprise her intoforgive- 1 12 476 ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1599-1600 ness of his disobedience, and rushed into Elizabeth's presence in his muddy and travel-stained clothes. 21. Essex's Imprisonment and Execution. 1599— 1601. — The queen, who was not accustomed to allow even her favourites to run away from their posts without permission, ordered him into confinement. In 1600, indeed, she restored him to liberty, but forbade him to come to court. Essex could not brook the dis- Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex, K.G., 1567-1601 : from a painting by Van Somer, dated 1599, belonging to the Earl of Essex. grace, especially as the queen made him suffer in his pocket for his misconduct. As she had little money to give away, Elizabeth was in the habit of rewarding her courtiers by grants of monopoly — that is to say, of the sole right of selling certain articles, thus enabling them to make a profit by asking a higher price than they could have got if they had been subjected to competition To Essex she had given a monopoly of sweet wines for a term of i6cx>-i6o3 THE MONOPOLIES 477 years, and now that the term was at an end she refused to renew the grant. Early in 1601 Essex— professing not to want to injure the queen, but merely to force her to change her ministers— rode Queen Elizabeth, 1558-1603 : from a painting belonging to the University of Cambridge. at the head of a few followers into the City, calling on the citizens to rise in his favour. He was promptly arrested, and in the course of the enquiries made into his conduct it was discovered that when 478 ELIZABETH'S YEARS OF TRIUMPH 1601 he was in Ireland he had entered into treasonable negotiations with James VI. At his trial, Bacon, who had been most kindly treated by Essex, shocked at the disclosure of these traitorous proceedings, turned against him, and, as a lawyer, argued strongly that he had been guilty The EaA was convicted and executed. 22. Mountjoy's Conquest of Ireland. 1600— 1603.— In 1600, after Essex had deserted Ireland, Lord Mountjoy was sent to take his place. He completed the conquest systematically, building forts as places of retreat for his soldiers whenever they were attacked by overwhelming numbers, and from which he could send out flying columns to devastate the country after the enemy had retreated. In 1601 a Spanish fleet and a small Spanish army at last arrived to the help of the Irish, and seized Kinsale. The English forces hemmed them in. defeated the Irish army which came to their support, and compelled the Spaniards to withdraw. The horrid work of conquering Ireland by starvation was carried to the end. *' No spectacle," wrote Mountjoy's English secretary, " was more frequent in the ditches of the towns, and especially in wasted countries, than to see multitudes of these poor people dead, with their mouths all coloured green by eating nettles, docks, and all things they could rend up above ground." In one place a band of women enticed little children to come among them, and murdered them for food. At last, in 1603, O'Neill submitted. Ireland had been conquered by England as it had never been conquered before. 23, Parliament and the Monopolies. 1601. — The conquest of Ireland was expensive and in i6oi Elizabe^th summoned Parliament to ask for supplies. The House of Commons voted the money cheerfully, but raised an outcry against the monopolies. Elizabeth knew when to give way, and she announced her intention of can- celling all monopolies which could be shown to be burdensome. " I have more cause to thank you all than you me," she said to the Commons when they waited on her to express their gratitude ; "for had I not received a knowledge from you, I might have fallen into the lap of an error, only for lack of true information. I have ever used to set the last judgment-day before mine eyes, and so to rule as I shall be judged to answer before a higher Judge — to whose judgment-seat I do appeal, that never thought was cherished in my heart that tended not to my people's good. Though you have had, and may have, many princes, more mighty and wise, sitting in this seat, yet you never had, or ever shall have, any that will be more careful and loving." i6oi-i6o3 THE WORK OF ELIZABETH 479 24. The Last Days of Elizabeth. 1601 — 1603. — These were the last words spoken by Elizabeth to her people. She had many faults, but she cared for England, and, more than any one else, she had made England united and prosperous. She had found it distracted, but by her moderation she had staved off civil war, till the country had rallied round the throne. No doubt those who worked most hard towards this great end were men like Burghley William Cecil, Lord Burghley, K.G., 1520-1593 : from a painting in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. and Walsingham in the State, and men like Drake and Raleigh at sea ; but it was Elizabeth who, being what she was, had given to each his opportunity. If either Edward VI. or Mary had been in her place, such men would have found no sphere in which their work could have been done, and, instead of telling of * the spacious times of great Elizabeth,' the historian would have had to narrate the progress of civil strife and of the mutual conflict of ever-narrowing creeds. The last days of the great queen were gloomy, as far as 48o DEATH OF ELIZABETH 1598-1603 she was personally concerned, Burghley, the wisest of her ministers, died in 1598. In his last days he had urged the queen to bring to an end the war with Spain, which no longer served any useful purpose ; and when Essex pleaded for its continuance, the aged statesman opened the Bible at the text, " Bloody and deceit- ful men shall not live out half their days " In 1603 Elizabeth her- self died at the age of sixty-nine. According to law, the heir to the crown was William Seymour, who, being the son of the Earl of Hertford and Lady Catherine Grey, inherited the claims of the Suffolk line (see pp. 411, 435). There were, however, doubts about his legitimacy, as, though his parents had been married in due form, the ceremony had taken place in private, and it was believed by many that it had never taken place at all. Elizabeth had always refused to allow her heir to be designated ; but as death approached she indicated her preference for James, as having claim to the inheritance by descent from her own eldest aunt, Margaret (see p. 411). " My seat," she said, " hath been the seat of kings, and I will have no rascal to succeed me." "And who," she added, " should that be but our cousin of Scotland 1 " Books reco}nme?tded for fu7'ther study of Part IV, Brewer, J. S. The Reign of Henry VIII. from his Accession to the Death of Wolsey. DixoN, Canon R. W. History of the Church of England from the Abolition of the Roman Jurisdiction. Froude, J. A. History of England from the Fall of Wolsey to the Death of Elizabeth. Vols, v.-xii. Motley, J. L. The Rise of the Dutch Republic. The History of the United Netherlands. Mullinger, J. B. History of the University of Cambridge. Vol. ii. Strype, J. Annals of the Reformation. Life and Acts of Aylmer. I, ,, Grindal. .. M Whitgift. Nicolas, Sir W. H. Life of Sir C. Hatton. ,. V/. Davison, Spedding, J, Letters and Life of Francis Bacon. Vol. i.-iii. p. 58. Edwards. E. The Life of Sir W. Raleigh. 48i PART VI THE PURITAN REVOLUTION, 1603—1660 CHAPTER XXXI JAMES I. 1603— 1625 LEADING DATES Accession of James I. , , 1603 The Hampton Court Conference 1604 Gunpowder Plot , . . . 1605 Foundation of Virginia 1607 The Great Contract 1610 Beginning of the Thirty Years' War 1618 Foundation of New England 1620 Condemnation of the Monopolies and fall of Bacon , 1621 Prince Charles's visit to Madrid ,...., 1623 Breach with Spain ......... 1624 Death of James I . 1625 1. The Peace with Spain, 1603— 1604.— At the end of Elizabeth's reign there had been much talk of various claimants to the throne, but when she died no one thought seriously of any one but James. The new king at once put an end to the war with Spain, though no actual treaty of peace was signed till 1604. James gave his confidence to Sir Robert Cecil, Lord Burghle/s second son, whom he continued in the office of Secretary of State, which had been conferred on him by Elizabeth. The leader of the war-party was Raleigh, who was first dismissed from his offices and afterwards accused of treason, on the charge of having invited the Spaniards to invade England. It is most unlikely that the charge was true, but as Raleigh was angry at his dismissal, he may have spoken rashly. He was condemned to death, but James commuted the sentence to imprisonment. 2. The Hampton Court Conference. 1604. — The most im- portant question which James had to decide on his accession was 482 JAMES I. 1603-1604 that of religious toleration. Many of the Puritan clergy signed a petition to him known as the Millenary Petition, because it was intended to be signed by a thousand ministers. A conference was held on January 14, 1604, in the king's presence at Hampton Court, in which some of the bishops took part, as well as a deputation of Puritan ministers who were permitted to argue in favour of the demands put forward in the petition. The Puritan Clergy had by this time abandoned Cartwright's Presbyterian ideas (see p. 446) and merely asked that those who thought it wrong to wear surplices and to use certain other ceremonies might be excused from doing so, without breaking away from the national church. James listened quietly to them, till one of them used the word Presbytery. He at once flew into a passion. *' A Scottish Presbytery," he said, "agreeth as well with a monarchy as God with the devil. Then Jack and Tom and Will and Dick shall meet, and at their pleasures cen- sure me and my council. . . . Until you find that I grow lazy — let that alone." James ordered them to conform or to leave the ministry. He adopted the motto, " No bishop, no king ! " Like Elizabeth, he used the bishops to keep the clergy from gaining power independent of the Crown. The bishops were delighted, and one of them said that 'his Majesty spoke by the inspiration of God.' 3. James and the House of Commons. — In 1604 Parliament met. The members of the House of Commons had no more wish than James to overthrow the bishops, but they thought that able and pious ministers should be allowed to preach even if they would not wear surplices, and they were dis- satisfied with the king's decision at Hampton Court. On the other hand, James was anxious to obtain their consent to a union with Scotland, which the Commons disliked, partly because the king had brought many Scotsmen with him, and had supplied them with English lands and money. Financial difficulties also arose, and the session ended in a quarrel between the king and the House of Commons. Before the year was over he had deprived of their livings many of the clergy who refused to conform. Royal Arms borne by James I. and succeeding Stuart sovereigns. 1605-1607 GUNPOWDER PLOT 483 4. Gunpowder Plot. 1604 — 1605. — Not only the Puritans, but the Catholics as well, had appealed to James for toleration. In the first year of his reign he remitted the recusancy fines (see p. 454). As might be expected, the number of recusants increased, pro- bably because many who had attended church to avoid paying fines stayed away as soon as the fines ceased to be required. James took alarm, and in February 1604 banished the priests from London. On this, a Catholic named Robert Catesby proposed to a few of his friends a plot to blow up king. Lords, and Commons with gunpowder at the opening of Parliament. The king had two sons, Henry and Charles, and a little daughter, Elizabeth. Catesby, expecting that the two princes would be destroyed with theii father, intended to make Elizabeth queen, and to take care that she was brought up as a Roman Catholic. Guy Fawkes, a cool soldier, was sent for from Flanders to manage the scheme. The plotters took a house next to the House of Lords, and began to dig through the wall to enable them to carry the powder into the base- ment. The wall, however, was nine feet thick, and they, being little used to mason's work, made but little way. In the spring of 1605 James increased the exasperation of the plotters by re-imposing the recusancy fines on the Catholic laity. Soon afterwards their task was made more easy by the discovery that a coal-cellar reaching under the floor of the House of Lords was to be let. One of their number hired the cellar, and introduced into it barrels of powder, covering them with coals and billets of wood. Parliament was to be opened for its second session on November 5, and in the pre- ceding evening Fawkes went to the cellar with a lantern, ready to fire the train in the morning. One of the plotters, however, had betrayed the secret. Fawkes was seized, and his companions were pursued. All the conspirators who were taken alive were executed, and the persecution of the Catholics grew hotter than before. 5. The Post-nati. 1606 — 1607. — When another session opened in 1606 James repeated his efforts to induce the Commons to do something for the union with Scotland. He wanted them to esta- blish free trade between the countries, and to naturalise his Scottish subjects in England. Finding that he could obtain neither of his wishes from Parliament, he obtained from the judges a decision that all his Scottish subjects born after his accession in England— the Post-nati^ as they were called— were legally natu- ralised, and were thus capable of holding land in England. He had to give up all hope of obtaining freedom of trade. 6. Irish Difficulties. 1603— 1610.— James was the first English 484 JAMES I, 1603-1610 sovereign who was the master of the whole of Ireland. He tried to win the affection of the tribes by giving them the protection of English law against the exactions of their chiefs. Naturally, the chiefs resented the change, while the tribesmen distrusted the interference of Englishmen from whom they had suffered so much. In 1607 the chiefs of the Ulster tribes of O'Neill and O'Donnell— known in England as the Earls of Tyrone and Tyrconnell— seeing resistance hopeless, fled to Spain. James ignored the Irish doctrine that the land belonged to the tribe, and confiscated six counties as if they had been the property of the chiefs, according to the feudal principles of English law. He then poured in English and Scottish colonists, leaving to the natives only the leavings to live on. 7. Bate's Case and the New Impositions. 1606 — 1608. — The state of James's finances was almost hopeless. Efizabeth, stingy as she was, had scarcely succeeded in making both ends meet, and James, who had the expense of providing for a family, from which Elizabeth had been free, would hardly have been able to meet his expenditure even if he had been economical. He was, however, far from economical, and had given away lands and money to his Scottish favourites. There was, therefore, a large deficit, and James wanted all the money he could get. In 1606 a merchant named Bate challenged his right to levy an imposition on currants, which had already been levied by Elizabeth. The Court of Exchequer, however, decided that the king had the right of levying impositions— that is to say, duties raised by the sole authority of the king — without a grant from Parliament — holding that the Confirmatio Cartarum (see p. 221), to which Bate's counsel appealed, only restricted that right in a very few cases. Whether the argument of the judges was right or wrong, they were the constitutional exponents of the law, and when Cecil (who had been James's chief minister from the beginning of the reign, and was created Earl of Salisbury in 1605) was made Lord Treasurer as well as Secretary in 1608, he at once levied new impositions to the amount of about 70,000/. a year, on the plea that more money was needed in consequence of the troubles in Ireland. 8. The Great Contract. 1610 — 1611. — Even the new imposi- tions did not fill up the deficit, and Parliament was summoned in 1610 to meet the difiiculty. It entered into a bargain — the Great Contract, as it was called — by which, on receiving 200,000/. a year, James was to abandon certain antiquated feudal dues, such as those of wardship and marriage (see p. 116). An agreement was also come to on the impositions. James voluntarily remitted the i6o5-i6ii HATFIELD HOUSE 485 486 JAMES /. 1601-1614 most burdensome to the amount of 20ftooL a year, and the House of Commons agreed to grant him the remainder on his passing an Act declaring illegal all further levy of impositions without a Parliamentary grant. Unfortunately, before the details of the Great Contract were finally settled, fresh disputes arose, and early in 1611, James dissolved his first Parliament in anger without settling anything either about the feudal dues or about the im- positions. 9. Bacon and Somerset 1612— 1613.— In 1612 Salisbury died, and Bacon, always ready with good advice, recommended James to abandon Salisbury's policy of bargaining with the Commons. Bacon was a warm supporter of monarchy, because he was anxious for reforms, and he believed that reforms were more likely to come from the king and his Council than from a House of' Commons — which was mainly composed of country gentlemen, with little knowledge of affairs of State. Bacon, however, knew what were the conditions under which alone a monarchical system could be maintained, and reminded James that king and Parliament were members of one body, with common interests, and that he could only expect the Commons to grant supplies if he stepped forward as their leader by setting forth a policy which would commend itself to them. James had no idea of leading, and, instead of taking Bacon's advice, resolved to do as long as he could with- out a Parliament. A few years before he had taken a fancy to a handsome young Scot named Robert Carr, thinking that Carr would be not only a boon companion, but also an instrument to carry out his orders, and relieve him from the trouble of dispensing patronage. He enriched Carr in various ways, especially by giving him the estate of Sherborne, which he took from Raleigh on the ground of a flaw in the title — though he made Raleigh some compensation for his loss. In 1613 he married Carr to Lady Essex, who had been divorced from her husband under very disgraceful circumstances, and created him Earl of Somerset. Somerset' was brought by this marriage into connection with the family of the Howards — his wife's father, the Earl of Suffolk, being a Howard. As the Howards were for the most part Roman Catholics at heart if not openly, Somerset's influence was henceforth used in opposi- tion to the Protestant aims which had found favour in the House of Commons. 10. The Addled Parliament. 1614. — In spite of Somerset and the Howards, James's want of money drove him, in 1614, to call another Parliament. Instead of following Bacon's advice that he i6i4 THE UNDERTAKERS 487 should win popularity by useful legislative projects, he tried first to secure its submission by encouraging persons who were known as the Undertakers because they undertook that candidates who supported the king's interests should be returned. When this failed, he again tried, as he had tried under Salisbury's influence An unknown gentleman : from a painting belonging to T. A. Hope, Esq. in 1610, to enter into a bargain with the Commons. The Commons, however, replied by asking him to abandon the impositions and to restore the nonconforming clergy ejected in 1604 (see p. 482). On this James dissolved Parliament. As it granted no supplies, and passed no act, it became known as the Addled Parliament. 488 JAMES L 1614-1618 ir. The Spanish Alliance. 1614—1617.— James was always anxious to be the peacemaker of Europe, being wise enough to see that the reHgious wars which had long been devastating the Conti- nent might be brought to an end if only the contending parties would be more tolerant. It was partly in the hope of gaining influence to enable him to carry out his pacificatory policy that he aimed, early in his reign, at marrying his children into influential families on the Continent. In 1613 he gave his daughter Eliza- beth to Frederick V., Elector Palatine, who was the leader of the German Calvinists, and he had long before projected a marriage between his eldest son, Prince Henry, and a Spanish Infanta. Prince Henry, however, died in 1612, and, though James's only surviving son, Charles, was still young, there had been a talk of marrying him to a French princess. The breaking-up of the Par- liament of 1614 left James in great want of money ; and, as he had reason to believe that Spain would give a much larger portion than would be given with a French princess, he became keenly eager to marry his sen to the Infanta Maria, the daughter of Philip III. of Spain. Negotiations with this object were not formally opened till 1617, and in i6i8 James learnt that the marriage could not take place unless he engaged to give religious liberty to the English Roman Catholics. He then offered to write a letter to the king of Spain, promising to relieve the Roman Catholics as long as they gave no offence, but Philip insisted on a more binding and permanent engagement, and, on James's refusal to do more than he had offered to do, Gondomar, the very able Spanish ambassador who had hitherto kept James in good humour, was withdrawn from England, and the negotiation was, for the time, allowed to drop. 12. The rise of Buckingham. 1615— 1618.— In 1615 Somerset and his wife were accused of poisoning Sir Thomas Overbury. There can be no doubt that the Countess was guilty, but it is less certain what Somerset's own part in the matter was. In 1616 they were both found guilty, and, though James spared their lives, he never saw either of them again. He had already found a new favourite in George Villiers, a handsome youth who could dance and ride gracefully, and could entertain the king with lively con- versation. The opponents of the Spanish alliance had supported Villiers against Somerset, but they soon found that Villiers was ready to throw himself on the side of Spain as soon as he found that it would please the king. James gave him large estates, and rapidly advanced him in the peerage, till, in 1618, he created him Marquis of Buckingham. He also made him Lord Admiral in the I6i7-i6i8 RALElGirS VOYAGE TO GUIANA 489 hope that he would improve the navy, and allowed all the patronage of England to pass through his hands. Statesmen and lawyers had to bow down to Buckingham if they wished to rise. No wonder the young man felt as if the nation was at his feet, and gave him- self airs which disgusted all who wished to preserve independence of character. 13. The Voyage and Execution of Raleigh. 1617— 1618. — In 1617 Raleigh, having been liberated through Buckingham's influ- ence, sailed for the Orinoco in search of a gold-mine, of which he had heard in an earlier voyage in Elizabeth's reign (see p. 464). He engaged, before he sailed, not to touch the land of the king of Spain, and James let him know that, if he broke his promise, he would lose his head. It was, indeed, difficult to say where the lands of the king of Spain began or ended, but James left the burden of proving this on Raleigh ; whilst Raleigh, imagining that if only he could find gold he would not be held to his promise, sent his men up the river, without distinct orders to avoid fighting. They attacked and burnt a Spanish village, but never reached the mine. Heart-broken at their failure, Raleigh proposed to lie m wait for the Spanish treasure-ships, and, on the refusal of his captains to follow him in piracy, returned to England with nothing in his hands. James sent him to the scaffold for a fault which he should never have been given the chance of committing. Raleigh was the last of the Elizabethan heroes— a many-sided man : soldier, sailor, statesman, historian, and poet. He was as firmly convinced as Drake had been that there was no peace in American waters, and that to rob and plunder Spaniards in time of peace was in itself a virtue. James's unwise attempt to form a close alliance with Spain made Raleigh a popular hero. 14. Colonisation of Virginia and New England. 1607— 1620. — Gradually Englishmen learned to prefer peaceable commerce and colonisation to piratical enterprises. In 1585 Raleigh had sent out colonists to a region in North America to which he gave the name of Virginia, in honour of Elizabeth, but the colonists either returned to England or were destroyed by the Indians. In 1607 ^ fresh attempt was made, and, after passing through terrible hardships, the Colony of Virginia grew into a tobacco-planting, well-to-do community. In 1608 a congregation of Separatists emigrated from England to Holland, and, after a while, settled at Leyden, where, anxious to escape from the temptations of the world, many of them resolved to emigrate to America, where they might lead an ideally religious life. In 1620 the emigrants, a hundred in all, * lifting up II. K K 490 JAMES I. 1618-1621 their eyes to heaven, their dearest country,' crossed the Atlantic in the ' Mayflower,' and found a new home which they named Plymouth. These first emigrants, the Pilgrim Fathers, as their descendants fondly called them, lost half their number by cold and disease in the first winter, but the remainder held on to form a nucleus for the Puritan New England of the future. 15. The Beginning of the Thirty Years' War. 1618— 1620.— As yet, however, these small beginnings of a colonial empire attracted little attention in England. Men's thoughts ran far more on a great war— the Thirty Years' War— which, in 1618, began to desolate Germany. In that year a revolution took place in Bohemia, where the Protestant nobility rose against their king, Matthias, a Catholic, who was at the same time Emperor, and, in 1619, after the death of Matthias, they deposed his successor, Ferdinand, and chose Frederick, the Elector Palatine, James's Calvinist son-in-law, as king in his place. Almost at the same time Ferdinand became by election the Emperor Ferdinand II. James was urged to interfere on behalf of Frederick, but he could not make up his mind that the cause of his son-in-law was righteous, and he therefore left him to his fate. Frederick's cause was, however, popular in England, and in 1620, when there were rumours that a Spanish force was about to occupy the Palatinate in order to compel Frederick to abandon Bohemia, James — drawing a distinction between helping his son- in-law to keep his own and supporting him in taking the land of another— went so far as to allow English volunteers, under Sir Horace Vere, to garrison the fortresses of the Palatinate. In the summer of that year, a Spanish army, under Spinola, actually occu- pied the Western Palatinate, and James, angry at the news, sum- moned Parliament in order -o obtain a vote of supplies for war. Before Parliament could meet, Frederick had been crushingly defeated on the White Hill, near Prague, and driven out of Bohemia. 16. The Meeting of James's Third Parliament. 1621. — ParHa- ment, when it met in 1621, was the more distrustful of James, as Gondomar had returned to England in 1620 and had revived the Spanish marriage treaty. When the Houses met, they were disappointed to find that James did not propose to go to war at once. James fancied that, because he himself wished to act justly and fairly, every one of the other Princes would be regardless of his own interests, and, although he had already sent several ambas- sadors to settle matters without producing any results, he now proposed to send more ambassadors, and only to fight if negotia- {621 THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR 491 tion failed. On learning this, the House of Commons only voted him a small supply, not being willing to grant war-taxes unless it King James I. : from a painting by P, van Somer, <}ated 1621, in the National Portrait Gallery K K 2 492 JAMES I. 1616-1621 was sure that there was to be a war. Probably Jarnes was right in not engaging England in hostilities, as ambition had as much to do with Frederick's proceedings as religion, and as, if James had helped his German allies, he could have exercised no control over them ; but he had too little decision or real knowledge of the situation to inspire confidence either at home or abroad ; and the Commons, as soon as they had granted a supply, began to criticise his govern- ment in domestic matters. 17. The Royal Prerogative. 1616 — 1621. — Elizabeth had been high-handed enough, but she had talked little of the rights which she claimed, and had set herself to gain the affection of her subjects. James, on the other hand, liked to talk of his rights, whilst he took no trouble to make himself popular. It was his business, he held, to see that the judges did not break the law under pretence of ad- ministering it. " This," he said in 1616, " is a thing regal and proper to a king, to keep every court within its true bounds." More startling was the language which followed. "As for the absolute prerogative of the Crown," he declared, " that is no subject for the tongue of a lawyer, nor is it lawful to be disputed. It is atheism and blasphemy to dispute what God can do : good Christians content themselves with His will revealed in His word; so it is presumption and high contempt in a subject to dispute what a king can do, or say that a king cannot do this or that ; but rest in that which is the king's will revealed in his law." What James meant was that there must be in every state a power above the law to provide for emergencies as they arise, and to keep the authorities- judicial and administrative— from jostling with one another. At present this power belongs to Parliament. When Elizabeth handed on the government to James, it belonged to the Crown. What James did not understand was ihat, in the long run, no one—either king or Parliament— will be allowed to exercise powers which are unwisely used. Such an idea probably never entered into James's mind, because he was convinced that he was himself not only the best but the wisest of men, whereas he was in reality —as Henry IV of France had said of him— « the wisest fool in Christendom.' 18. Financial Reform. 1619.— James not only thought too Civil costume about 1620: from a contemporary broadride. I6I9-I62I THE BANQUETING HALL 493 494 JAMES L 1621 highly of his own powers of government, but was also too careless to check the misdeeds of his favourites. For some time his want of money led him to have recourse to strange expedients. In 1611 he founded the order of baronets, making each of those created pay him 1,080/. a year for three years to enable him to support soldiers for the defence of Ulster. After the first few years, however, the money, though regularly required of new baronets, was invariably repaid to them. More disgraceful was the sale of peerages, of which there were examples in i6j8. In 1619, however, through the exer- tions of Lionel Cranfield, a city merchant recommended to James by Buckingham, financial order was comparatively restored, and in quiet times the expenditure no longer much exceeded the revenue. 19. Favouritism and Corruption. — Though James did not ob- tain much money in irregular ways, he did not keep a watchful eye on his favourites and ministers. The salaries of Ministers were low, and were in part themselves made up by the presents of suitors. Candidates for office, who looked forward to being enriched by the gifts of others, knew that they must pay dearly for the goodwill of the favourites through whom they gained promo- tion. In 1620 Chief Justice Montague was appointed Lord Treasurer. " Take care, my lord," said Bacon to him, when he started for Newmarket to receive from the king the staff which was the symbol of his office, " wood is dearer at Newmarket than in any other place in England." Montague, in fact, had to pay 20,000/. for his place. Others, who were bachelors or widowers, received promotion on condition of marrying one of the many penniless young ladies of Buckingham's kindred. 20. The Monopolies Condemned. 1621, — The Commons, therefore, in looking for abuses, had no lack of subjects on which to complain. They lighted upon monopolies. James, soon after his accession, had abolished most of those left by Elizabeth, but the number had been increased partly through a wish to encourage home manufactures, and partly from a desire to regulate commerce. One set of persons, for example, had the sole right of making glass, because they bound themselves to heat their furnaces with coal instead of wood, and thus spared the trees needed for ship- building. Others had the sole right of making gold and silver thread, because they engaged to import all the precious metals they wanted, it being thought, in those days, that the precious metals alone constituted wealth, and that England would therefore be impoverished if English gold and silver were wasted on personal adornment. There is no doubt that courtiers received payments l62I BACON AND THE MONOPOLIES; 495 from persons interested in these grants, but the amount of such payments was grossly exaggerated, and the Commons imagined that these and similar grievances owed their existence merely to the desire to fill the pockets of Buckingham and his favourites. There was, therefore, a loud outcry in Parliament. One of the main promoters of these schemes, Sir Giles Mompesson, fled the kingdom. Others were punished, and the monopolies recalled by Francis Bacon, Viscount St. Alban, Lord Chancellor : from the National Portrait Gallery. the king, though as yet no act was passed declaring them to be illegal. 21. The Fall of Bacon. 1621. — After this the Commons turned upon Bacon. He was now Lord Chancellor, and had lived to find that his good advice was never followed. He had, neverthe- less, been an active and upright judge. The Commons, however, distrusted him as having supported grants of monopolies^ and, 496 JAMES I. 1 62 1 when charges of bribery were brought against him, sent them up to the Lords for enquiry. At first Bacon thought a pohtical trick was being played against him. He soon discovered that he had thoughtlessly taken gifts even before judgment had been given, though if they had been taken after judgment, he would— according to the custom of the time— have been considered innocent. His own opinion of the case was probably the true one. His sentence, he said, was ^ just, and for reformation's sake fit.' "Yet he was ' the justest Chancellor' that had been since his father's time, his father, Sir Nicholas Bacon, having creditably occupied under Elizabeth the post which he himself filled under James. He was stripped of office, fined, and imprisoned. His imprisonment, how- ever, was extremely brief, and his fine was ultimately remitted. Though his trial was not exactly like that of the old impeachments, it was practically the revival of the system of impeachments which had been disused since the days of Henry VI. It was a sign that the power of Parliament was increasing and that of the king growing less. 22. Digby's Mission, and the Dissolution of Parliament. 1621. — The king announced to Parliament that he was about to send an ambassador to Vienna to induce the Emperor Ferdinand to be content with the re-conquest of Bohemia, and to leave Frederick undisturbed in the Palatinate. Parliament was therefore adjourned, in order to give time for the result of this embassy to be known ; and the Commons, at their last sitting, declared — with wild enthusiasm — that, if the embassy failed, they would support Frederick with their lives and fortunes. When Lord Digby, who was the chosen ambassador, returned, he had done no good. Ferdinand was too anxious to push his success further, and Frederick was too anxious to make good his losses for any negotiation to be successful. The Imperialists invaded the Palatinate, and in the winter James called on Parliament — which had by that time re-assembled after the adjournment — for money sufficient to defend the Palatinate till he had made one more diplomatic effort. The Commons, believing that the king's alliance with Spain was the root of all evil, petitioned him to marry his son to a Protestant lady, and plainly showed their wish to see him at war with Spain. James replied that the Commons had no right to discuss matters on which he had not consulted them. They drew up a protestation asserting their right to discuss all matters of pubHc concernment. James tore it out of their journal-book, and dissolved Parliament, though it had not yet granted him a penny. 1622-1623 '. PRINCE CHARLES IN SPAIN 497 23. The Loss of the Palatinate. 1622. — In 1614, James, being in want of money, had had recourse to a benevolence — the lawyers having advised him that, though the Act of Richard III. (see p. 342) made it illegal for him to compel its payment, there was no law against his asking his subjects to pay it voluntarily. He took the same course in 1622, and got enough to support the garrisons in the Palatinate for a few months, as many who did not like to give the money feared to provoke the king's displeasure by a refusal. Before the end of the year, however, the whole Palatinate, with the exception of one fortress, had been lost. 24. Charles's Journey to Madrid. 1623.— It was now time to try if the Spanish alliance was worth anything. Early in 1623, Prince Charles, accompanied by Bucking- ham, started for Madrid to woo the Infanta in person. The young men imagined that the king of Spain would be so pleased with this un- usual compliment, that he would use his influence — and, if necessary, his troops — to obtain the restitution of the Palatinate to Charles's brother-in-law, the Elector Frede- rick. The Infanta's brother, Philip IV., was now king of Spain, and he had lately been informed by his sister that she was resolved not to marry a heretic. Her confessor had urged her to refuse. "What a com- fortable bedfellow you will have ! " he said to her : " he who lies by your side, and will be the father of your children, is certain to go to hell." Philip and his prime minister Olivares feared lest, if they announced this refusal, it would lead to a war with England. They first tried to convert the prince to their religion, and when that failed, secretly invited the Pope to refuse to grant a dispensation for the marriage. The Pope, however, fearing that, if he caused a breach, James and Charles would punish him by increasing the persecution of the English Catholics, informed Philip that he should have the dispen- sation for his sister, on condition not only that James and Charles should swear to grant religious liberty to the Catholics in England, Costume of a lawyer: from a broadside, dated 1623. 498 JAMES I. 1623 but that he should himself swear that James and Charles would keep their word. 25. The Prince's Return. 1623. -Philip referred the pomt whether he could conscientiously take the oath to a committee of theologians. In the meantime, Charles attempted to pay court to the Infanta. Spanish etiquette was, however, strict, and he was not allowed to speak to her, except in public and on rare occasions. 1623 CONVOCA TION 499 500 /AMES I. 1623-1624 Once he jumped over a wall into a garden in which she was. The poor girl shrieked and fled. At last Charles was informed that the theologians had come to a decision. He might marry if he pleased, but, the moment that the ceremony was over, he was to leave for England. If, at the end of six months, he had not only promised religious liberty to the Catholics, but had actually put them in the enjoyment of it, then, and only then, his wife should be sent after him. Charles was indignant— the more so because he learnt that there was little chance that the king of Spain would interfere to restore the Protestant Frederick by force — and ret-urned to England eager for war with Spain. Never before or after was he so popular as when he landed at Portsmouth— not so much because he had come back, as because he had not brought the Infanta with him. 26. The Last Parliament of James I. 1624. — James's foreign policy had now hopelessly broken down. He had expected that simply because it seemed to him to be just, Philip would quarrel with the Emperor for the sake of restoring the Palatinate to a Protestant. When he found that this could not be, he had nothing more to propose. His son and his favourite, who had been created Duke of Buckingham whilst he was in Spain, urged him to go to war, and eaily in 1624 James summoned a new Parliament, which was entirely out of his control. For the time Buckingham, who urged on the war, was the most popular man in England. A large grant of supply was given, but the Commons distrusting James, ordered the money to be paid to treasurers appointed by themselves, and to be spent only upon four objects — the repairing of forts in England, the increase of the army in Ireland, the fitting-out of a fleet, and the support of the Dutch Republic, which was still at war with Spain, and of other allies of the king. The king, on his part, engaged to invite friendly states to join him in war for the recovery of the Palatinate, and to summon Parliament in the autumn to announce the result. The Commons were the less anxious to trust James with money as they were in favour of a maritime war against Spain, whilst they believed him to be in favour of a military war in Germany. They had reason to think that Cranfield, who was now Earl of Middlesex and Lord Treasurer, had used his influence with the king to keep him from a breach with Spain ; and, with Charles and Buckingham hounding them on, they now impeached Middle- sex on charges of malversation, and drove him from office. It was generally believed that the Lord Treasurer owed his fall to his dislike of a war which would be ruinous to the finances 1622-1625 THE FRENCH MARRIAGE TREATY 501 which it was his business to guard. The old king could not resist, but he told his son that, in supporting an impeachment, he was preparing a rod for himself. Before the end of the session the king agreed to an act abolishing monopolies, except in the case of new inventions. 27. The French Alliance. — Even before Parliament was pro- rogued, a negotiation was opened for a marriage between Charles and Henrietta Maria, the sister of Louis XIII., king of France. Both James and Charles had promised Parhament that, if the future queen were a Roman Catholic, no religious liberty should be granted to the English Catholics by the marriage treaty. Both James and Charles gave way when they found that Louis insisted on this concession, and promised religious liberty to the Catholics. Con- sequently, they did not venture to summon Parliament till the marriage was over and it was too late to complain. Yet Bucking- ham, who was more firmly rooted in Charles's favour than he had ever been in that of his father, had promised money in all directions. Before the end of the year he had engaged to find large sums for the Dutch Republic to fight Spain, 30,000/. a month for Christian IV., king of Denmark, to make war in Germany against the Emperor, 20,000/. a month for Count Mansfeld, a German adventurer, to advance to the Palatinate, and anything that might be needed for a fleet to attack the Spanish ports. James, in short, was for a war by land, the Commons for a war by sea, and Buckingham for both. 28. Mansfeld's Expedition, and the Death of James I. 1624 — 1625. — Before the end of 1624, twelve thousand Englishmen were gathered at Dover to go with Mansfeld to the Palatinate. The king of France, who had promised to help them, refused to allow them to land in his dominions. It was accordingly resolved that they should pass through Holland. James, however, had nothing to give them, and they were consequently sent across the sea without money and without provisions. On their arrival in Holland they were put on board open boats to make their way up the Rhine. Frost set in, and the boats were unable to stir. In a few weeks three-fourths of the men were dead or dying. It was Buckingham's first experience of making war without money and without Parlia- mentary support. Before anything further could be done, James was attacked by a fever, and, on March 27, 1625, he died. Though his reign did not witness a revolution, it witnessed that loosening of the bonds of sympathy between the ruler and the ruled which is often the precursor of revolution. 502 CHAPTER XXXII THE GROWTH OF THE PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1625— 1634 LEADING DATES The Reign of Charles I., 1625-1649 Charles's first Parliament and the expedition to Cadiz . 1625 Charles's second Parliament and the impeachment of Buckingham 1626 The expedition to R6 1627 Charles's third Parliament and the Petition of Right . 1628 Dissolution of Charles's third Parliament .... 1629 Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury 1633 Prynne's sentence executed ^634 1. Charles I. and Buckingham. 1625.— The new king, Charles I., was more dignified than his father, and was conscientiously desirous of governing well. He was, unfortunately, extremely unwise, being both obstinate in persisting in any line of conduct which he had himself chosen, and ready to give way to the advice of others in matters of detail. Buckingham, who sympathised with him in his plans, and who was never at a loss when called on to express an opinion on any subject whatever, had now made himself com- pletely master of the young king, and was, in reality, the governor of England far more than Charles himself On May i Charles was married by proxy to Henrietta Maria, and Buckingham fetched home the bride. 2. Charles's First Parliament. 1625. — Charles was eager to meet his first Parliament, because he thought that it would grant him enormous sums of money to carry on the war with Spain, on which he had set his heart. He forgot that its members would be disgusted at the mismanagement of Mansfeld's expedition, and at the favour shown by himself to the Catholics in consequence of his marriage. When Parliament met on June 18, the House of Commons voted a small sum of 140,000/., and asked him to put in execution the recusancy laws. Charles adjourned Parliament to Oxford, as the plague was raging in London, in order that he might urge it to vote him a larger sum. It met at Oxford on August I but the Commons refused to vote more money, unless counsellors in whom they could confide — in other words, counsellors other than i62S CHARLES I, AND THE COMMONS 503 Buckingham — had the spending of it. Charles seeing that, if the Commons could force him to accept ministers against his wish, they would soon control himself, dissolved the Parliament. On everything else he was ready to give way — making no objection to the renewal of the persecution of the Catholics, whom a few months ago he had solemnly promised in his marriage treaty to protect. Though the question now raised was whether England was to be ruled by the king or by the House of Commons, it would be a mistake to think that the Commons were consciously aiming at sovereignty. They saw that there was mismanagement, and all that they wanted was to stop it. 3. The Expedition to Cadiz. 1625. — Charles thought that, if he could gain a great victory, there would be no further talk about mismanagement. Scraping together what money he could, he sent a great fleet and army, under the command of Sir Edward Cecil, to take Cadiz, the harbour of which was the port at which the Spanish treasure ships arrived from America once a year, laden with silver and gold from the mines of America. The greater part of Cecil's fleet was made up of merchant-vessels pressed by force into the king's service. Neither soldiers nor sailors had any heart in the matter. The masters of the merchant vessels did all they could to keep themselves out of danger. The soldiers after landing outside the town got drunk in a body, and would have been slaughtered if any Spaniards had been near. Cecil failed to take Cadiz, and after he left it, the Spanish treasure-ships from America, which he hoped to capture, got safely into Cadiz harbour, whilst he was looking for. them in another part of the sea. The great expedition sent by Buckingham to Cadiz was as complete a failure as that which he had sent out the year before under Mansfeld. Whilst Cecil was employed in Spain Buckingham himself went to the Hague to form a conti- nental alliance for the recovery of the Palatinate, hoping especially to secure the services of Christian IV., king of Denmark. Finding Christian quite ready to fight, Buckingham tried to pawn the king's jewels at Amsterdam in order to supply him with 30,000/. a month, which he had promised to him. No one would lend money on the jewels, and Buckingham came back, hoping that a second Parliament would be more compliant than the first. 4. Charles's Second Parliament. 1626.— The new Parliament met on February 6, 1626. Charles, in order to secure himself against what he believed to be the attacks of interested and ambitious men, had hit on the clever expedient of making sheriffs 504 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1626 of the leaders of the Opposition, so as to secure their detention in their own counties. The Opposition, however, found a leader in Sir John Eliot, who, though he had formerly been a friend of Buckingham, was now shocked at the misconduct of the favourite and regarded him as a selfish and unprincipled adventurer. Eliot was not only a natural orator, but one of the most pure-minded of . .••:;C?i^5^'' ••••^>^aV ■ ■* >^' King Charles I. : from a painting by Van Dyck. patriots, though the vehemence of his temperament often carried him to impute more evil to men of whom he thought badly than they were really guilty of. At present, he was roused to indignation against Buckingham, not only on account of the recent failures, but because, in the preceding summer, he had lent some English ships to the French, who wanted to use them for suppressing the Huguenots of Rochelle, then in rebellion against their king, Louis XIII. Before long the Commons^ under Ehot's guidance, 1626 BUClClNGtiAM IMPEACHED 505 impeached Buckingham of all kinds of crime, making against him charges of some of which he was quite innocent, whilst others were much exaggerated. The fact that the only way to get rid of an unpopular minister was to accuse him of crime, made those who would otherwise have been content with his dismissal ready to believe in his guilt. Charles's vexation reached its heig^ht when he heard that Eliot had branded Buckingham as Sejanus. "If he is -•.-P*"-.-:, Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles I. : from a painting by Van Dyck. Sejanus," he said, " I must be Tiberius." Rather than abandon his minister, he dissolved Parliament, before it had voted him a sixpence. -5- The Forced Loan. 1626. — If the war was to go on, money must in some way or other be had. Charles asked his subjects to bestow on him a free gift for the purpose. Scarcely any one gave him anything. Then came news that the king of Denmark, to whom the promised 30,000/. a month had not been paid (see II. - L L 5o6 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES I. 1626-1627 p. 501, 503 ), had been signally defeated at L-utter, so that the recovery of the Palatinate was further off than ever. Some clever person suggested to Charles that, though the Statute of Benevolences (see p. 342) prohibited him from making his subjects give him money, no law forbade him to make them lend, even though there was no chance that he would ever be able to repay what he borrowed. He at once gave orders for the collection of a forced loan. Before this was gathered in, troubles arose with France. Louis XIII. was preparing to besiege Rochelle, and Charles believed himself to be in honour bound to defend it because Louis had at one time promised him that he would admit his Huguenot subjects to terms. Besides, he had offended Louis by sending out of the country the queen's French attendants, thinking, probably with truth, that they encouraged her to resent his breach of promise about the English Catholics (see p. 501). 6. The Expedition to Re. 1627. — In 1627 war broke out be- tween France and England. Payment of the forced loan was urged in order to supply the means. Chief Justice Crewe, refusing to acknowledge its legality, was dismissed. Poor men were forced to serve as soldiers ; rich men were sent to prison. By such means a considerable sum was got together. A small force was sent to help the king of Denmark, and a fleet of a hundred sail, carrying soldiers on board, was sent to relieve Rochelle, under the command of Buckingham himself. On July 12 Buckingham landed on the Isle of Re, which would form a good base of operations for the relief of Rochelle. He laid siege to the fort of St. Martin's on the island, and had almost starved it into surrender, when, on September 27, a relieving force of French boats dashed through the English blockading fleet, and re-victualled the place. Buckingham, whose own numbers had dwindled away, called for reinforcements from England. Charles did what he could, but Englishmen would lend no money to succour the hated Bucking- ham ; and, before reinforcements could arrive, a French army landed on the Isle of Re, and drove Buckingham back to his ships. Out of 6,800 soldiers, less than 3,000— worn by hunger and sickness — returned to England. 7. The Five Knights' Case. 1627. — Buckingham was more unpopular than ever. " Since England was England," we find in a letter of the time, " it received not so dishonourable a blow." Attention was, however, chiefly turned to domestic grievances. Soldiers had been billeted on householders without their consent and martial law had been exercised over civilians as well as 1 627 THE EXPEDITION TO RE 507 soldiers. Moreover, the forced loan had been exacted, and some of those who refused to pay had been imprisoned by the mere order of the king and the Privy Council. Against this last injury, five knights, who had been imprisoned, appealed to the Court of King's Bench. A writ oi habeas corpus was issued— that is to say, an order was given to the gaoler to produce the prisoners before the Court, together with a return showing the cause of committal. All that the gaoler could show was that the prisoners had been com- mitted by order of the king, signified by the Privy Council. The lawyers employed by the five knights argued that every prisoner Tents and military equipment in the early part of the reign of Charles I. : from the monument of Sir Charles Montague (died in 1625) in the church of Barking, Essex. had a right to be tried or liberated on bail ; that, unless cause was shown— that is to say, unless a charge was brought against him — there was nothing on which he could be tried ; and that, therefore, these prisoners ought to be bailed. The lawyers for the Crown argued that when the safety of the state was concerned, the king had always been allowed to imprison without showing cause, and that his discretion must be trusted not to imprison any one ex- cepting in cases of necessity. The judges did not decide this point, but sent the five knights back to prison. In a few days, all the prisoners were set free, and Charles summoned a third Parha- L L 3 5o8 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES I. 1627-1628 ment, hoping that it would vote money for a fresh expedition to reheve Rochelle. 8. Wentworth and Eliot in the Third Parliament of Charles I. 1628.— Charles's third Parlia.ment met on March 17, 1628. The leadership was at once taken by Sir Thomas Wentworth, who, as well as Eliot, had been imprisoned for refusing to pay the loan. Though the two men now worked together, they were, in most points, opposed to one another. Eliot had been a warm advocate of the war with Spain, till he found it useless to carry on the war under Buckingham's guidance. Wentworth disliked all wars, and especially a war with Spain. Eliot believed in the wisdom of the House of Commons, and thought that, if the king always took its advice, he was sure to be in the right. Wentworth thought that the House of Commons often blundered, and that the king was more likely to be in the right if he took advice from wise counsellors, Wentworth, however, believed that in this case Charles had unfor- tunately preferred to take the advice of foolish counsellors, and though not sharing the opinions of Eliot and his friends, threw himself into the struggle in which the House of Commons was trying to stop Buckingham in his rash course. From time to time Wentworth contrived to show that he was no enemy of the king, or of a strong government such as that which had existed in the reign of Elizabeth. He was, however, an ardent and impetuous speaker, and threw himself into any cause which he defended with more violence than he could, in calmer moments, have justified to himself He saw clearly that the late aggressions on the liberty of the subject weakened, instead of strengthening, the Crown ; and he now proposed a bill which should declare them illegal in the future. Charles refused to accept the bill, and Wentworth, unwilling to take a prominent part in a struggle with the king himself, retired into the background for the remainder of the session. 9. The Petition of Right. 1628. — Instead of Wentworth's bill, Eliot and the lawyers — Coke and Selden being prominent amongst them — brought forward a Petition of Right, not merely providing for the future, but also declaring that right had actually been vio- lated in the past. Charles was willing to promise everything else asked of him, but he resisted the attempt to force him to promise never to imprison without showing cause, and thus to strip himself of the power of punishing offences directed against the safety of the State. The Commons, who held that he had directed his powers against men who were patriots, proved inexorable. Charles 1628 THE PETITION OF RIGHT 509 needed money for another fleet which he was preparing for the relief of Rochelle, which was straitly besieged by the French king. He tried hard to get over the difficulty by an evasive answer, but at last, on June 7, he gave way, and the Petition of Right became the law of the land- After that, so far as the George Villiers, first Duke of Buckingham, 1592-1628 : from the National Portrait Gallery. law went, there was to be no more martial law or enforced billeting, no forced loans or taxes imposed without a Parliamentary grant, or imprisonment without cause shown. 10. Tonnage and Poundage. 1628. — Before the end of the session a fr^sh question was raised. For many reigns Parliament bad voted to each king for life, at the beginningof his reign, certain 510 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES I. 1628 customs duties known as Tonnage and Poundage. In addition to these James had added the impositions (see p. 484) without a ParHamentary grant. In the first Parliament of Charles, the Commons, probably wishing to settle the question of impositions before permanently granting Tonnage and Poundage, had passed a bill granting the latter for a single year ; but that Parliament had been dissolved before the bill had passed the Lords. The second Parliament was dissolved before the Commons had even discussed the subject, and the third Parliament now sitting had found no time to attend to it till after the Petition of Right had been granted. Now that the session was drawing to a close the Commons again proposed to grant Tonnage and Poundage for a year only. Charles, who had been levying the duties ever since his accession, refused to accept a grant on these terms, and the Commons then asserted that the clajase of the Petition of Right forbidding him to levy taxes without a vote of Parliament made his raising of Tonnage and Poundage illegal. It was a nice legal point whether customs were properly called taxes, and Charles answered that he did not think that in demanding the petition they had meant to ask him to yield his right to Tonnage and Poundage, and that he was sure he had not meant to do so. The Commons then attacked Buckingham, and on June 26 Charles prorogued Parliament. 11. Buckingham's Murder. 1628. — In return for the Petition of Right Charles had received a grant of money large enough to enable him to send out his fleet. In August Buckingham went to Portsmouth to take the command. He was followed by John Felton, an officer to whom he had refused employment, and who had not been paid for his former services. Language used by the House of Commons in their recent attack on Buckingham persuaded Felton that he would render service to God and man by slaying the enemy of both. On August 23 he stabbed the Duke as he came out from breakfast, crying, * God have mercy on thy soul ! ' Buckingham fell dead on the spot. The fleet went out under the command of the Earl of Lindsey to relieve Rochelle, but it failed utterly. There was no heart in the sailors or resolution in the commanders. Rochelle surrendered to the King of France, and Charles was left to bear the weight of the unpopularity of his late favourite. 12. The Question of Sovereignty. 1628. — Charles was anxious to come to terms with his Parliament on the question of Tonnage and Poundage, and would probably have consented to accept the compromise proposed in 1610 (see p. 486). Neither party, indeed, could afford to surrender completely to the other. The customs 1625-1628 RELIGIOUS DIFFICULTIES 511 duties were already more than a third of the revenue, and, if Charles could levy what he pleased, he might so increase his income as to have no further need of parliaments ; whereas, if the Commons refused to make the grant, the king would soon be in a state of bankruptcy. The financial question, in short, involved the further question whether Charles or the Parliament was to have the sovereignty. Dangerous as it would be for both parties to enter upon a quarrel which led up to such issues, it was the more difficult to avoid it because the king and the Commons were already at variance on another subject of pre-eminent importance. 13. Protestantism of the House of Commons. 1625 — 1628. — That subject was the subject of religion. The country gentlemen, who almost entirely filled the benches of the House of Commons, were not Puritan in the sense in which Cartwright had been Puritan in Elizabeth's reign (see p. 446). They did not wish to abolish epis- copacy or the Prayer Book ; but they were strongly Protestant, and their Protestantism had been strengthened by a sense of danger from the engagements in favour of the English Catholics into which James and Charles had entered. Lately, too, the power of the Catholic States on the Continent had been growing. In 1626 the King of Denmark had been defeated at Lutter. In 1628 the French Huguenots had been defeated at Rochelle. It was probably in consequence of these events that there was in England a revival of that attachment to Calvinistic doctrines which had accompanied the Elizabethan struggle against Spain and the Pope. 14. Religious Differences. 11625 — 1628. — On the other hand, a small but growing number amongst the clergy were breaking away from rfie dogmas of Calvinism, and especially from its stern doctrine on the subject of predestination. The House of Commons claimed to represent the nation, and it upheld the unity of the national beHef as strongly as it had been upheld by Henry VIII. In 1625 the House summoned to its bar Richard Montague, who had challenged the received Calvinist opinions on the ground that they were not the doctrines of the Church of England. In 1626 it impeached him. Naturally, Montague and those who agreed with him warmly supported the royal power, and in 1627 urged the duty of paying the forced loan. Another clergyman, Roger Manwaring, preached sermons in which Parliaments were treated with con- tempt, and the Commons retaliated by impeaching the preacher. Charles would have acted in a spirit, in advance of his times, and certainly in advance of his opponents, if he had merely upheld the right of the minority to liberty of speech. Instead of contenting 512 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1628- 1629 himself with this he made Montague Bishop of Chichester and gave Man waring a good Hving. 15. The King's Declaration. 1628.— With the intention ot smoothing matters down, Charles issued a declaration prefixed to the Articles, which would, as he hoped, make for peace. No one was in future to speak in public on the controverted points. Charles probably believed himself to be acting fairly, whilst, in reality, his compromise was most unfair. The Calvinists, who believed their views about predestination to be of the utmost importance to the souls of Christians, were hardly treated by the order to hold their tongues on the subject. Their opponents did not care about the doctrine at all, and would be only too glad if nothing more was heard of it. Charles, however, was but following in Elizabeth's steps in imposing silence and caUing it peace. But the times were different. There was no longer a Catholic claimant of the throne or a foreign enemy at the gates to cause moderate men to support the government, even in its errors. 16. The Second Session of the Third Parliament of Charles I. 1629. — The Houses met for a second session on January 20, 1629. The Commons attacked the clergy on a side on which they were especially vulnerable. Some of those who had challenged the Calvinistic doctrines had revived certain ceremonial forms which had generally fallen into disuse. In Durham Cathedral espe- cially, parts of the service had been sung which had not been sung before, and the Communion table, which had hitherto stood at the north door and had been moved to the middle of the choir when needed, had been permanently fixed at the east end of the chancel. The Commons were indignant at what they styled Popish practices, and summoned the offenders before them. Then they turned to Tonnage and Poundage. Eliot, instead of con- fronting the difficulty directly, attempted to make it a question of privilege. The goods of a member of the House, named RoUe, had been seized for non-payment of Tonnage and Poundage, and Eliot wished to summon the Custom House officers to the bar, not for seizing the goods of an Englishman, but for a breach of privi- lege in seizing the goods of a member of Parliament. Pym, who occupied a prominent position amongst the popular party, urged the House to take broader ground : " The liberties of this House," he said, " are inferior to the liberties of this kingdom. To determine the privileges of this House is but a mean matter, and the main end is to establish possession of the subjects."* Eliot carried the 1 ue. to establish the right of the subjects to possess their property. i629 THE STRUGGLE FOR SOVEREIGNTY 513 House with him, but Charles supported his officers, and refused to allow them to appear at the bar of the House. Once more the ques- tion of sovereignty was raised. The House was adjourned by the king^s order in the hope that a compromise might be discovered. 17. Breach between the King and the Commons. 1629. — No compromise could be found, and on March 2 a fresh order for adjournment was given. When Finch, the Speaker, rose to announce it, two strong young members, Holies and Valentine, pushed him back into his chair whilst Eliot read three resolutions to the effect that whoever brought in innovations in religion, or introduced opinions differing from those of the true and orthodox church ; whoever advised the levy of Tonnage and Poundage without a grant by Pariiament ; and whoever voluntarily paid those duties, was an enemy to the kingdom and a betrayer of its liberties. A wild tumult arose. A rush was made to free the Speaker, and another rush to hold him down. One member, at least, laid his hand on his sword. The doors were locked, and, amidst the hubbub. Holies repeated the resolutions, which were accepted with shouts of * Aye, aye.' Then the doors were opened, and the mem- bers poured out. The king at once dissolved Parliament, and for eleven years no Parliament met again in England. 18. The Constitutional Dispute. 1629. — The constitutional system of the Tudor monarchy had practically broken down. The nation had, in the sixteenth century, entered upon a struggle for national independence. Henry VI H. and Elizabeth had headed it in that struggle, and the House of Commons had but represented the nation in accepting Heniy VIII. and Elizabeth as supreme rulers. The House of Commons now refused to admit that Charles was its supreme ruler, because he could neither head the nation, nor understand either its wants or its true needs. Yet the House had not as yet shown its capacity for taking his place. It had criticised his methods of government effectively, but had displayed its own intolerance and disregard for individual "liberty. Yet, till it could learn to respect individual liberty, it would not be likely to gain the sovereignty at which it aimed. A king becomes powerful when men want a strong government to put down enemies abroad or petty tyrants at home. A Parliament becomes powerful when men want to discuss political questions, and political discussion cannot thrive when voices disagreeable to the majority are silenced. The House of Commons had thought more of opposing the king than of laying a wide basis for its own power, and now it wa^, for a time at least, silenced. 514 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES I. 1629-1632 19. The Victory of Personal Government. 1629 — 1632. — Charles was now to show whether he could do better than the Commons. He had gained one great convert soon after the end of the first session of the last Parliament. Wentworth, satisfied, it is to be supposed, with the Petition of Right, and dissatisfied with the claim to sovereignty put forward by the Commons, came over to his side and was made first a baron and then a viscount, after which before the end of 1628 he was made President of the Council of the North (see p. 397). Wentworth was no Puritan, and the claim of the Commons, in the second session, to meddle with religion no doubt strengthened him in his conviction that he had chosen the right side. Before the end of 1629 he became a Privy Councillor. The most influential member of Charles's Council, however, was Weston, the Lord Treasurer. Peace was made with France in 1629, and with Spain in 1630. To bring the finances into order, the king insisted on collecting the customs without a Parliamentary grant, and Chambers, a merchant who refused to pay, was summoned before the Council, and then fined 2,000/. and imprisoned for saying that mer- chants were more wrung in England than they were in Turkey. The leading members who had been concerned in the disturbance at the last meeting of Parliament were imprisoned, and three of them, Eliot, Holies, and Valentine, were charged before the King's Bench with riot and sedition. They declined to plead, on the ground that the judges had no jurisdiction over things done in Parliament. The judges held that riot and sedition must be punished somewhere, and that as Parliament was not always sitting it must be punished by themselves. As the accused still refused to plead they were fined and imprisoned. Eliot died of consumption in the Tower in 1632. Charles had refused to allow him to go into the country to recover his health, and after his death he refused to allow his children to dispose of his body. Eliot was the martyr, not of individual liberty, but of Parliamentary supremacy. Charles hated him because he regarded him as the factious accuser of Bucking- ham. 20. Star Chamber Sentences. 1630— 1633. — The first years of unparliamentary government were, on the whole, years of peace and quiet. The Star Chamber, which under Henry VII. had put down the old nobility, was now ready to put down the opponents of the king. Its numbers had grown with its work, and all of the Privy Councillors were now members of it, the only other members being two judges. It was therefore a mere instrument in the king's hands. In 1630 Alexander Leighton was flogged and i<533 STAR CHAMBER PUNISHMENTS 515 mutilated by order of the Star Chamber for having written a virulent libel against the bishops ; in which he blamed them for all existing mischiefs, including the extravagance of the dress of the ladies, and ended by advising that they should be smitten under the fifth rib. In 1633 the same court fined Henry Sherfieldfor breaking a church window which he held to be superstitious. The bulk of Englishmen were not touched by these sentences, and there was more indigna- Sir Edward and Lady Filmer : from their brass at East Sutton, Kent, showing armour and dress worn about 1630. tion when, in order to pay off debts contracted in time of war, Charles ordered the enforcement of fines upon all men holding by military tenure lands worth 40/. a year who had neglected to be knighted. The Court of Exchequer held that the fines were legal ; but the whole system of military tenure was obsolete, and those who suffered regarded themselves as wronged through a mere technicality. 5i6 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES I. 1633 21. Laud's Intellectual Position. 1629— 1633.— For all matters relating to the Church Charles's principal adviser was Williani Laud, now Bishop of London. As far as doctrine was concerned Laud carried on the teaching of Cranmer and Hooker. He held that the basis of belief was the Bible, but that the Bible was to be interpreted by the tradition of the early church, and that all doubtful points were to be subjected, not to heated arguments in the pulpits, but to sober discussion by learned men. His mind, in short, like those of the earlier English reformers, combined the Protestant reliance on the Scriptures with reverence for ancient tradition and with the critical spirit of the Renascence. Laud's diffi- culty lay, as theirs had lain, in the impossibility of gaining over any large number of his fellow-countrymen. Intelligent criticism and intelligent study were only for the few. Laud, as he himself plain- tively declared, was in danger of being crushed between the upper and lower mill-stones of Puritanism and the Papacy. 22. Laud as the Upholder of Uniformity.— In all this there was nothing peculiar to Laud. What was peculiar to him was his perception that intellectual religion could not maintain itself by mtellect alone. Hooker's appeals to Church history and to the supremacy of reason had rolled over the heads of men who knew nothing about Church history, and who did not reason. Laud fell back upon the influence of ceremonial. " I laboured nothing mOre," he afterwards said, " than that the external public worship of God — too much slighted in most parts of the kingdom — might be pre- served, and that with as much decency and uniformity as might be ; being still of opinion that unity cannot long continue in the Church when uniformity is shut out of the Church door." He, like Eliot and the Parliamentarians, was convinced that there could be but one Church in the nation. As they sought to retain their hold on it by the enforcement of uniformity of doctrine, Laud sought to retain his hold on it by enforcing uniformity of worship. To do this he attempted to put in force the existing law of the Church as opposed to the existing practice. What he urged men to do he believed to be wholly right. He himself clung with all his heart to the doctrine of the divine right of episcopacy, of the efficacy of the Sacraments, and to the sobering influence of appointed prayers and appointed ceremonies. What he lacked was broad human sympathy and respect for the endeavour of each earnest man to grow towards perfection in the way which seems to him to be best. Men were to obey for their own good, and to hold their tongues. The king was the supreme governor, and with his authority, as lexercised 1^33 ARCHBISHOP LAUD 517 in the Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission, Laud hoped to rescue England from Pope and Puritan. 23. The Beginning of Laud's Archbishopric. 1633 -1634. — In 1633 Laud became Archbishop of Canterbury. He at once made his hand felt in every direction. By his advice, in consequence of an attempt of the judges to put an end to Sunday amusements, Charles republished the Declaration of Sports which had been Archbishop Laud : from a copy in the National Portrait Gallery by Henry Stone, from the Van Dyck at Lambeth. issued by his father, authorising such amusements under certain restrictions. Where, however, James had contented himself with giving orders, Charles insisted on having the Declaration read in church by all the clergy, and roused the resistance of those who regarded Sunday amusements as a breach of the Sabbath. Laud was also anxious to see the Communion table standing everywhere at the east end of the church. No doubt his anxiety came in part 5i8 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1633-1634 from his reverence of the holy sacrament for which it was set apart, but it also arose from his dislike to the base purposes for which it ^ij^mi(:mmMmmmmMmmmm::^} y Silver-gilt tankard made at London in 16^4-35, now belonging to the Corporation of Bristol. was often made to serve. Men often put their hats on it, or used it as a writing table. The canons, or laws of the Church, indeed directed that the position of the table should, when not in use, be at 1633-1634 HISTRIOMASTIX 519 the east end, though at the time of Communion it was to be placed in that part of the church or chancel from which the minister could best be heard. A case was brought before the king and the Privy Council in 1633, ^^^ it was then decided that the bishop or other proper authority should settle what was the position from which the minister could best be heard. Of course the bishops settled that that place was the east end of the chancel. 24. Laud and Prynne. 1633 — 1634. — Amongst the most virulent opponents of Laud was William Prynne, a lawyer whose extensive study of theology had not tended to smooth away the asperities of his temper. He was, moreover, a voluminous writer, and had written books against drinking healths and against the wearing of long hair by men, in which these follies had been treated as equally blameworthy with the grossest sins. Struck by the immorality of the existing drama, he attacked it in a heavy work called Histrio- inastix^ or The scourge of stage players, in which he held the frequenting of theatres to be the cause of every crime under the sun. He pointed out that all the Roman emperors who had patronised the drama had come to a bad end, and this was held by the courtiers to be a reflection on Chailes, who patronised the drama. He inserted in the index a vile charge against all actresses, and this was held to be an insult to the queen, who was at the time taking part in the rehearsal of a theatrical representation. Ac- cordingly in 1633 Prynne was sentenced by the Star Chamber to lose his ears in the pillory, to a heavy fine, and to imprisonment during the king's pleasure. In 1634 the sentence was carried out. Prynne's case, however, awakened no general sympathy, and the king does not appear to have as yet become widely unpopular. The young lawyers came to Whitehall to give a masque or drama- tic representation in presence of the king and queen, in order to show their detestation of Prynne's conduct, whilst John Milton, the strictest and most pure-minded of poets, wrote a masque, Comus, to show how little sympathy he had with Prynne's sweeping denunciations. Yet, though Milton opposed Prynne's exaggeration, his own poetry was a protest against Laud's attempt to reach the mind through the senses. Milton held to the higher part of the Puritan teaching, that the soul is to lead the body, and not the body the soul. " So dear," he wrote in Comus, to Heaven is saintly chastity, That, when a soul is found sincerely so, A thousand liveried angels lackey her, Driving far off each thing of sin and guilt- 520 PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1634 And, in clear dream and solemn vision, Tell her of things that no gross ear can hear, Till oft converse vdth heavenly habitants Begin to cast a beam on the outward shape. The unpolluted temple of the mind. And turns it by degrees to the soul's essence, Till all be made immortal. CHAPTER XXXIII THE OVERTHROW OF THE PERSONAL GOVERNMENT OF CHARLES L 1634— 1641 LEADING DATES The Reign of Charles L, 1625— 1649 The Metropolitical Visitation 1634 First Ship-money Writ (to the port-towns) . . 1634 Second Ship-money Writ (to all the counties) . . 1635 Prynne, Burton, and Bastwick in the pillory . . . 1637 Riot in Edinburgh 1637 Scottish National Covenant 1638 Judgment in Hampden's Case 1637-1638 First Bishops' War 1639 Short Parliament 1640 Second Bishops' War . - 1640 Meeting of the Long Parliament 1640 Execution of Strafford, and Constitutional Reforms . 1641 I. The Metropolitical Visitation. 1634 — 1637. — The antagonism which Laud had begun to rouse in the first months of his arch- bishopric became far more widely spread in the three years beginning in 1634 and ending in 1637, in consequence of a Metropolitical Visitation — that is to say, a visitation which he conducted by the Metropolitan or Archbishop — either in person or by deputy — to enquire into the condition of the clergy and churches of the Province of Canterbury ; a similar visitation being held in the Province of York by the authority of the Archbishop of York. Every clergyman who refused to conform to the Prayer Book, who resisted the removal of the Communion table to the east end of the chancel, or who objected to bow when the sacred name of Jesus was pro- nounced, was called in question, and if obstinate, was brought before the High Commission and suspended from the exercise of his functions or deprived of his living. Laud wanted to reach 1634-1637 THE LAUDIAN SYSTEM ENFORCED 521 unity through uniformity, and made the canons of the Church his standard of uniformity. Even moderate men suspected that he sought to subject England again to the Pope. The queen, too, entertained a Papal agent at her Court, and a few successful con- versions, brought about by Con, who at one time resided with her in that capacity, frightened the country into the belief that a plot existed to overthrow Protestantism. Some of Laud's clerical sup- porters favoured this idea, by talking about such topics as altars and the invocation of the saints, which had hitherto been held to have no place m Protestant teaching. The result was that moderate Protestants now joined the Puritans in opposing Laud. 2. Prynne, Bastwick, and Burton. 1637. — Laud had little hope of being able to abate the storm. One of his best qualities was that he was no respecter of persons, and he had roused animosity in the upper classes by punishing gentlemen guilty of immorality or of breaches of church discipline as freely as he punished more lowly offenders. In 1637 ^^ characteristically at- tempted to defend himself from the charge of being a Papist and an innovator in religion by bringing three of his most virulent assailants — Prynne, Bastwick, and Burton — before the Star Cham- ber. The trial afforded him the opportunity of making a speech in his own defence, to which nobody paid the least attention. As a matter of course the accused were heavily punished, being sentenced to lose their ears in the pillory, to pay a fine of 5,000/., and to imprisonment for life. It was not now as it had been in 1634, when Prynne stood alone in the pillory, no man regarding him. The three victims had a triumphal reception on their way to the pillory. Flowers and sweet herbs were strewed in their path. The crowd applauded them whilst they suffered. On their way to their several prisons in distant parts of the country men flocked to greet them as martyrs. 3. Financial Pressure. 1635 — 1637. — Revolutions are never successful without the guidance of men devoted to ideas ; but on the other hand they are not caused only by grievances felt by religious or high-minded people. To stir large masses of men to resistance, their pockets must be touched as well as their souls. In 1635 Weston, who had been created Earl of Portland, died, and a body of Commissioners of the Treasury, who succeeded him, laid additional impositions on commerce and established corporations for exercising various manufac- tures under the protection of monopolies. This proceeding was according to the letter of the law, as corporations had been n. M M 1634-1637 SHIP-MONEY 523 exempted from the act in restraint of monopolies which had been passed in 1624 (see p. 501). So, too, was a claim put forward by Charles in 1637 to levy fines from those who had encroached on the old boundaries of the forests. It is true that, in the teeth of the opposition roused, Charles exacted but a small part of the fines imposed, but he incurred almost as much obloquy as if he had taken the whole of the money. 4. Ship-money. 1634 — ^^37- — More important was Charles's effort to provide himself with a fleet. As the Dutch navy was powerful, and the French navy was rapidly growing in strength, Charles, not unnaturally, thought that England ought to be able to meet their combined forces at sea. In 1634, ^Y the advice of Attorney-General Noy, he issued writs to the port towns, to furnish him with ships. He took care to ask for ships larger than any port — except London — had got, and then offered to supply ships of his own, on condition that the port towns should equip and man them. In 1635 — Noy having died in the meantime — Charles asked for ships not merely from the ports, but from the inland as well as from the maritime counties. Again London alone provided ships ; in all the rest of England money had to be found to pay for the equipment and manning of ships belonging to the king. In this way Charles got a strong navy which he manned with sailors in the habit of managing ships of war, and entirely at his own orders. The experience of the Cadiz voyage had shown him that merchant-sailors, such as those who had done good service against the Armada, were not to be trusted to fight in enterprises in which they took no interest, and it is from the ship-money fleet that the separation of the naval and mercantile marine dates. Necessarily, however. Englishmen began to com- plain, not that they had a navy, but that the money needed for the navy was taken from them without a Parliamentary grant. Year after year ship-money was levied, and the murmurs against it increased. In February, 1637, Charles consulted the judges, and ten out of the twelve judges declared that the king had a right to do what was necessary for the defence of the realm in time of danger, and that the king was the sole judge of the existence of danger. 5. Hampden's Case. 1637 — 1638. — It was admitted that, in accordance with the Petition of Right, Charles could not levy a tax without a Parliamentary grant. Charles, however, held that ship-money was not a tax, but money paid in commutation of the duty of all Englishmen to defend their country. Common sense held that, whether ship-money was a tax or not, it had been MM 2 524 OVERTHROW OF PERSONAL GOVERNMENT 1638 levied without consulting Parliament, simply because the king shrank from consulting Parliament ; or, in other words, because he was afraid that Parliament would ask him to put an end to Laud's system of managing the Church. Charles was ready, as he said, to allow to Parliament liberty of counsel, but not of control. The sense of irritation was now so great that the nation wanted to control the Government, and knew that it would never be able to do so if Charles could, by a subterfuge, take what money he needed without summoning Parliament. Of this feeling John Hampden, a Buckinghamshire squire, became the mouthpiece. He refused to pay los. levied on his estate for ship-money. His case was argued before the twelve judges sitting in the Exchequer Chamber. In 1638 two pronounced distinctly in his favour, three supported him on technical grounds, and seven pronounced for the king. Charles continued to levy ship-money, but the arguments of Hampden's lawyers were circulated in the country, and the judg- ment of the majority on the Bench was ascribed to cowardice or obsequiousness. Their decision ranged against the king all who cared about preserving their property, as the Metropolitical visi- tation had ranged against him all who cared for religion in a distinctly Protestant form. Yet, even now, the Tudor monarchy had done its work too thoroughly, and had filled the minds of men too completely with the belief that armed resistance to a king was unjustifiable, to make Englishmen ripe for rebellion. They pre- ferred to wait till some opportunity should arrive which would enable them to express their disgust in a constitutional way. 6. Scottish Episcopacy. 1572 — 1612. — The social condition of Scotland was very different from that of England. The nobles there had never been crushed as they had been in England, and they had tried to make the reformation conduce to their own profit. In 1572 they obtained the appointment of what were known as Tulchan bishops, who, performing no episcopal function, received the revenues of their sees and then handed them over to certain nobles. ^ The Presbyterian clergy, however, represented the popular element in the nation— and that element, though it had hitherto been weak, was growing strong through the discipline which it received in consequence of the leading share assigned to the middle and lower classes in the Church Courts (see p. 434). The disagreement between these classes and the nobles gave to James the part of arbitrator, and thus conferred on him a power which no Scottish * A Tulchan was a stuffed calf's skin set by a cow to induce her to give her milk freely. 1592-1638 THE SCOTTISH CHURCH 525 king had had before. After much vacillation, he consented, in 1592, to an act fully re-establishing the Presbyterian system. It was not long before he repented. The Presbyterian clergy attacked his actions from the pulpit, and one of them, Andrew Melville, plucking him by the sleeve, called him ' God's silly vassal.' The nobles, too, were angry because the clergy assailed their vices, and tried to subject them to the discipline of the Church. Though their ancestors had, at almost all times, been the adver- saries of the kings, they now made common cause with James. Gradually episcopacy was restored. Bishops were re-appointed in 1599. Step by step episcopal authority was regained for them. In 1610 three of their number were consecrated in England, and in 1612 the Scottish Parliament ratified all that had been done. 7. The Scottish Bishops and Clergy. 1612 -1637. — I^^ Eng- land bishops had a party (lay and clerical) behind them. In Scot- land they were mere instruments of the king and the nobles to keep the clergy quiet. In 1618, James, supported by the bishops and the nobles, forced upon a general assembly the acceptance of the Five Articles of Perth, the most important of which was a direction that the Communion should be received in a kneeling posture. Yet, in spite of all that James had done, the local popular Church courts still existed, and the worship of the Church remained still distinctly Calvinistic and Puritan. Charles was more eager than his father to alter the worship of the Scottish Church, and, in 1637, ^^ his command, certain Scottish bishops— often referring for advice to Laud — completed a new Prayer Book, not unlike that in use in England, but differing from it, for the most part, in a sense adverse to Puritanism. The clergy declared against it, and this time the clergy had on their side the nobles, who not only feared lest Charles should take from them the Church lands appropriated by their fathers, but were also irritated at the promotion of some bishops to high offices which they claimed for themselves. 8. The Riot at Edinburgh and the Covenant. 1637— 1638. — On July 23, 1637, an attempt was made to read the new service in St. Giles's, at Edinburgh. The women present burst into a riot, and one of them threw her stool at the head of the officiating minister, fortunately missing him. All Scotland took part with the rioters. The new Prayer Book was hated, not only because it was said to be Popish, but also because it was English. In November four committees, known as the Tables, practically assumed the government of Scotland. In February, 1638, all good Scots were signing a National Covenant. Nothing was said in it 526 OVERTHROW OF PERSONAL GOVERNMENT 1638-1649 about episcopacy, but those who signed it bound themselves to labour, by all means lawful, to recover the purity and liberty of the Gospel, as it was established and professed before the recent innovations. 9. The Assembly of Glasgow, and the Abolition of Episco- pacy. 1638.— The greater part of 1638 was passed by Charles in an endeavour to come to an understanding with the Scots. On September 2 he revoked the Prayer Book, and offered to limit the powers of the bishops. On November 21 a general assembly met at Glasgow, in which ninety-six lay members— for the most part noblemen — sat with 144 clergymen, and which may therefore be regarded as a sort of Ecclesiastical Parliament in which the clergy predominated as the nobles predominated in the single house which made up the real Parliament. The Assembly claimed to judge the bishops, on which the king's commissioner, the Marquis of Hamilton, dissolved the Assembly rather than admit its claim. The Assembly, however, on the ground that it possessed a Divine right to settle all affairs relating to the Church independently of che King, sat on, as if nothing had happened, deposed the bishops, and re-established the Presbyterian system. 10. The First Bishops* War. 1639.— In refusing to obey the order for dissolution, the Scottish General Assembly had practically made itself independent of the king, and Charles was driven — unless he cared to allow the establishment of a precedent, which might some day be quoted against him in England — to make war upon the Scots. Yet he dared not summon the English Parliament, lest it should follow their example, and he had to set forth on what came to be known as the First Bishops' War — because it was waged in the cause of the bishops — with no more money than he could get from a voluntary contribution, not much exceeding 50,000/. Soon after he reached Berwick with his army, he found that the Scots had, on Dunse Law,^ an army almost equal to his own in numbers, commanded by Alexander Leslie, an old soldier who had fought in the German wars, and mainly composed of veterans, who had seen much service on the Continent, whilst his own men were raw recruits. His money soon came to an end, and it was then found impossible to keep the army together. The war was one in which there was no fighting, and in which only one man was killed, and he by an accident. On June 24 Charles signed the Treaty of Berwick. Both sides passed over in silence the deeds of the Glasgow Assembly, but a promise was given that all affairs civil 1 • Law,' in the Lowlands of Scotland, means a solitary hilL I632-I639 WENTWORTH IN IRELAND 52:7 and ecclesiastical should be settled in an assembly and Parliament. Assembly and Parliament met at Edinburgh, and declared in favour of the abolition of episcopacy ; but Charles, who could not, even now, make up his mind to submit, ordered the adjourn- ment of the Parliament, and prepared for a new attack on Scotland. 1 1. Wentworth in Ireland. 1633 — 1639. — li^ preparing for a new war, Charles had Went- worth by his side. Went- worth, who was by far the ablest of his advisers, after ruling the north of England (see p. 514) in a high-handed fashion, had, in 1632, been appointed Lord Deputy of Ireland. In 1634 ^^ sum- moned an Irish Parliament, taking care that the English Protestant settlers and the Irish Catholics should be so evenly balanced that he could do what he would with it. He carried through it admir- able laws and a vote of money which enabled him to be in- dependent of Parliament for some time to come. As far as its material interests were concerned, Ireland had never been so prosperous. Trade grew, and the flax industry of the North sprang into exist- ence under Wentworth's pro- tection. Churches which had lain in ruins since the deso- Soldier armed with a pike : from a broadside, printed circa 1630. Soldier with muslcet and crutch : from abroad- side printed about 1630. 528 OVERTHROW OF PERSONAL GOVERNMENT 1633-1639 lating wars of Elizabeth's reign were rebuilt, and able and active ministers were invited from England. The Earl of Cork, who had illegally seized Church property to his own use, was heavily fined, and Lord Mountnorris, a self-seeking official, who refused to resign his office, was brought before a court-martial and condemned to death ; though Wentworth let him know that his life was in no danger, and that all that was wanted of him was the resignation of an office which he was unfitted to fill. Wentworth required all the officers of the Crown to live up to the motto of * Thorough,' which he had adopted for himself, by which he meant a ' thorough' de- votion to the service of the king and the State, without regard for private interests. 12. The Proposed Plantation of Connaught. — Wentworth gave great offence to the English officials and settlers by the harsh and overbearing way in which he kept them in order. His conduct to the Celtic population was less violent than that of some other lord deputies, but he had no more idea than his predecessors of leaving the Irish permanently to their own customs and religion. He believed that, both for their own good and for the safety of the English Crown, they must be made as like Englishmen as possible, and that, to effect this, it would be necessary to settle more Englishmen in Ireland to overawe them. Accordingly, in 1635, ^^ visited Connaught, where he raked up an old claim of the king's to the whole land of the province, though Charles had promised not to put forward any such claim at all. In every county of Connaught except Galway, a jury was found to give a verdict in favour of the king's claim. The jury in County Galway re- fused to do his bidding, and Wentworth had the jurymen fined, and the land of the county seized by the order of the Irish Court of Exchequer, which pronounced judgment without a jury. He then invited English settlers to Connaught ; but he found that few English settlers would go to such a distance from their homes. Perhaps many refused to come because they distrusted Wentworth. Yet, for the moment, his government appeared successful. In 1639 he visited England, and Charles, who needed an able counsellor, made him Earl of Strafford, and from that time took him for his chief adviser. 13. The Short Parliament. 1640.— Strafford's advice was that Charles should summon an Enghsh Parliament, whilst he himself held a Parliament in Dublin, which might show an example of loyalty. The Irish Parliament did all that was expected of it, the Catholic members being especially forward in voting supplies in 1640 THE SHORT PARLIAMENT 529 the hope that, if they helped Charles to conquer the Scots, he would allow freedom of religion in Ireland. In England, Parliament met on April 13. Pym at once laid before the Commons a statement of the grievances of the nation, after which the House resolved to ask for redress of these grievances before granting supply. Charles offered to abandon ship-money if the Commons would give him twelve subsidies equal to about 960,000/. The Commons hesitated about granting so much, and wished the king to yield on other points as well as upon ship-money. In the end they prepared to advise Charles to abandon the war with Scotland altogether, and, to avoid this, he dissolved Parliament on May 5. As it had sat for scarcely more than three weeks, it is known as the Short Parliament. 14. The Second Bishops' War. 1640. — In spite of the failure of the Parliament, Charles gathered an army by pressing men from all parts of England, and found money to pay them for a time by buying a large quantity of pepper on credit and selling it at once for less than it was worth. The soldiers, as they marched north- wards, broke into the churches, burnt the Communion rails, and removed the Communion tables to the middle of the building. There was no wish amongst Englishmen to see the Scots beaten. The Scots, knowing this, crossed the Tweed, and, on August 28, routed a part of the English army at Newburn on the Tyne. Even Strafford did not venture to advise a prolongation of the war. Negotiations were opened at Ripon, and Northumberland and Durham were left in the hands of the Scots as a pledge for the payment of 850/. a day for the maintenance of their army, till a permanent treaty could be arranged. Charles, whose money was already exhausted, summoned a Great Council, consisting of Peers alone, to meet at York. All that the Great Council could do was to advise him to summon another Parliament, and that advice he was obliged to take. 15. The Meeting of the Long Parliament. 1640. — On No- vember 3, 1640, the new Parliament, which was to be known as the Long Parliament, met. Pym once more took the lead, and proposed the impeachment of Strafford, as the king's chief adviser in the attempt to carry on war in defiance of Parliament. Strafford had also collected an Irish army for an attack on Scotland, and it was strongly believed that he had advised the king to use that army to reduce England as well as Scotland under arbitrary government. The mere suspicion that he had threatened to bring an Irish army into England roused more than ordinary indignation, as, in those days, Irishmen were both detested and despised in England. 530 OVERTHROW OF PERSONAL GOVERNMENT 1640-1641 Strafford was therefore impeached, and sent to the Tower. Laud was also imprisoned in the Tower, whilst other officials escaped to the Continent to avoid a similar fate. The Houses then pro- ceeded to pass a Triennial Bill, directing that Parliament should meet every three years, even if the king did not summon it, and to this, with some hesitation, Charles assented. He could not, in fact, refuse anything which Parliament asked, because, if he had done so. Parliament would give him no money to satisfy the Scots, and if the Scots were not satisfied, they would recom- mence the war. 16. The Impeachment of Strafford. 1641. — On March 22, 1641, Strafford's trial was opened in Westminster Hall. All his overbearing actions were set forth at length, but, after all had been said, a doubt remained whether they constituted high treason, that crime having been strictly defined by a statute of Edward HI. (see p. 250). Young Sir Henry Vane, son of one of the Secretaries of State, found amongst his father's papers a note of a speech delivered by Strafford in a Committee of the Privy Council just after the breaking up of the Short Parliament, in which he had spoken of the king as loose and absolved from all rules of govern- ment. " You have an army in Ireland," Strafford was reported to have said, " you may employ here to reduce this kingdom, for I am confident as anything under heaven, Scotland shall not hold out five months." The Commons were convinced that ' this kingdom ' meant England and not Scotland ; but there were signs that the lords would be likely to differ from them, and the Commons accordingly abandoned the impeachment in which the lords sat as judges, and introduced a Bill of Attainder (see p. 401, note), to which, after the Commons had accepted it, the lords would have to give their consent if it was to become law, as in the case of any ordinary Bill. 17. Strafford's Attainder and Execution. — Pym would have preferred to go on with the impeachment, because he beheved that Strafford was really guilty of high treason. He held that treason was not an offence against the king^s private person, but against the king as a constitutional ruler, and that Strafford had actually diminished the king's authority by attempting to make him an absolute ruler, and thereby to weaken Charles's hold upon the good- will of the people. This argument, however, did not break down the scruples of the Peers, and if Charles had kept quiet, he would have had them at least on his side. Neither he nor the queen could keep quiet. Before the end of 1640 she had urged the 1641 THE LONG PARLIAMENT 531 Pope to send her money and soldiers, and now she had a plan for bringing the defeated English army from Yorkshire to West- minster to overpower Parliament. Then came an attempt of Charles to get possession of the Tower, that he might liberate Strafford by force. Pym, who had learnt the secret of the queen's army-plot, disclosed it, and the peers, frightened at their danger, passed the Bill of Attainder. A mob gathered round Whitehall and howled for the execution of the sentence. Charles, fearing lest the mob should take vengeance on his wife, weakly signed a commission appointing commissioners to give the royal assent to the Bill, though he had promised Strafford that not a hair of his head should be touched. With the words, " Put not your trust in princes " on his lips, the great royalist statesman prepared for the scaffold. On May 12 he was beheaded, rather because men feared his ability than because his offences were legally punishable with death. 18. Constitutional Reforms. 1641. — Englishmen would not have feared Strafford if they could have been sure that the king could be trusted to govern according to law, without employing force to settle matters in his own way. Yet, though the army-plot had made it difficult to feel confidence in Charles, Parliament was at first content to rely on constitutional reforms. On the day on which Charles assented to the bill for Strafford's execution he assented to another bill declaring that the existing Parliament should not be dissolved without its own consent, a stipulation which made the House of Commons legally irresponsible either to the king or to its constituents, and which could only be justified by the danger of an attack by an armed force at the bidding of the king. Acts were passed abolishing the Courts of Star Chamber and the High Commission, declaring ship-money to be illegal, limiting the king's claims on forests, prohibiting fines for not taking up knighthood, and preventing the king from levying Tonnage and Poundage or impositions without a Parliamentary grant. Taking these acts as a whole, they stripped the Crown of the extraordinary powers which it had acquired in Tudor times, and made it impossi- ble for Charles, legally, to obtain money to carry on the govern- ment without the goodwill of Parliament, or to punish offenders without the goodwill of juries. All that was needed in the way of constitutional reform was thus accomplished. As far as law could do it, the system of personal government which Charles had in part inherited from his predecessors and in part had built up for himself, was brought to an end. 532 CHAPTER XXXIV THE FORMATION OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES AND THE FIRST YEARS OF THE CIVIL WAR. 164I — 1644 LEADING DATES Reign of Charles I., 1625— 1649 The Debate on the Grand Remonstrance , The Attempt on the Five Members The Battle of Edgehill The Fairfaxes defeated at Adwalton Moor Waller's Defeat at Roundway Down The Raising of the Siege of Gloucester The First Battle of Newbury The Solemn League and Covenant taken by the Houses The Scottish Army crosses the Tweed The Battle of Marston Moor, Capitulation of Essex's Infantry at Lostwithiel Sept. 2, 1644 The Second Battle of Newbury .... Oct. 27, 1644 Nov. 23, 1641 Jan. 4, 1642 Oct. 23, 1642 June 30, 1643 July 13, 1643 Sept. 5, 1643 Sept. 20, 1643 Sept. 25, 1643 Jan. ig, 1644 July 2, 1644 1. The King's Visit to Scotland. 1641. — If Charles could have inspired his subjects with the belief that he had no intention of overthrowing the new arrangements by force, there would have been little more trouble. Unfortunately, this was not the case. In August, indeed, the Houses succeeded in disbanding the English army in Yorkshire, and in dismissing the Scottish army across the Tweed ; but, in the same month, Charles set out for Scotland, ostensibly to give his assent in person to the Acts abolishing epis- copacy in that country, but in reality to persuade the Scots to lend him an army to coerce the English Parliament. Pym and Hamp- den suspecting this, though they could not prove it, felt it necessary to be on their guard. 2. Parties formed on Church Questions. 1641. — There would, however, have been little danger from Charles if political questions alone had been at stake. Parliament had been unanimous in abolishing his personal government, and no one was likely to help him to restore it by force. In ecclesiastical questions, however, differences arose early. All, indeed, wished to do away with the practices introduced by Laud, but there was a party, which though willing to introduce reforms into the Church, and to subject it to Parliament, objected to the introduction of the Presbyterian system, 1641 CHURCH QUESTIONS 533 lest presbyters should prove as tyrannical as bishops. Of this party, the leading members were Hyde, a politician who surveyed State affairs with the eyes of a lawyer, and the amiable Lord Falkland, a scholar and an enthusiast for religious toleration. On the other hand, there was a party which believed that the abolition of episcopacy was the only possible remedy for ecclesiastical tyranny. If Charles had openly supported the first party, it might, perhaps, have been in a majority ; but as he did nothing of the sort, an impression gained ground that if bishops were not entirely abolished, they would sooner or later be restored by the king to their full authority, in spite of any limitations which Parliament might put upon them. Moreover, the lords, by throwing out a bill for removing the bishops from their House, exasperated even those members who were still hesitating. A majority in the Commons supported a bill, known as the Root and Branch Bill, for the abolition of episcopacy and for the transference of their jurisdiction to committees of laymen in each diocese. Though this bill was not passed, its existence was sure to intensify the dislike of the king to those who had brought it in. 3. Irish Parties. 1641.— Before the king returned from Scot- land, news arrived from Ireland which increased the difficulty of maintaining a good understanding with Charles. Besides the Eng- lish officials, there were two parties in Ireland discontented with Straffijrd's rule. Of these one was that of the Catholic lords, mostly of English extraction, who wanted toleration for their religion and a large part in the management of the country. The other was that of the native Celts, who were anxious to regain the lands of which they had been robbed and to live agam under their old customs. Both parties were terrified at the danger of increased persecution by the Puritan Parliament at Westminster, especially as the government at Dublin was in the hands of two lords justices, of whom the more active. Sir William Parsons, advocated repressive measures against the Catholics, and the in- troduction of fresh colonists from England to oust the Irish more completely from the land. In the spring of 1641 the Catholic lords had emissaries at Charles's court offering to send an army to his help in England, if he would allow them to seize Dublin and to overthrow the Government carried on there in his name. 4. The Irish Insurrection. 1641. — Nothing was settled when Charles left England, and in October the native Irish, impatient of delay, attempted to seize Dublm for themselves. The plot was, however, detected, and they turned savagely on the English and 534 THE FORMATION OF PARTIES 1641 Scottish colony in Ulster. Murders, and atrocities worse than ordinary murder, were committed in the North of Ireland. At Porta- down the victims were driven into a river and drowned. Women were stripped naked and turned into the wintry air to die of cold and starvation, and children were slaughtered as ruthlessly as full- grown men. The lowest estimate of the destruction which reached England raised the number of victims to 30,000, and, though this was doubtless an immensely exaggerated reckoning, the actual number of victims must have reached to some thousands. In England a bitter cry for vengeance went up, and with that cry was mingled distrust of the king. It was felt to be necessary to send an army into Ireland, and, if the army was to go under the king's orders, there was nothing to prevent him using it — after Ireland had been subdued — against the English ParHament. 5. The Grand Remonstrance. 1641.— The perception of this danger led the Commons to draw up a statement of their case, known as the Grand Remonstrance. They began with a long indictment of all Charles's errors from the beginning of his reign, and, though the statements were undoubtedly exaggerated, they were adopted by the whole House. When, however, it came to the proposal of remedies, there was a great division amongst the members. The party led by Pym and Hampden, by which the Remonstrance had been drawn up, asked for the appointment of ministers responsible to Parliament, and for the reference of Church matters to an Assembly of divines nominated by Parliament. The party led by Hyde and Falkland saw that the granting of these demands would be tantamount to the erection of the sovereignty of Parliament in Church and State ; and, as they feared that this in turn would lead to the establishment of Presby- terian despotism, they preferred to imagine that it was still possible to make Charles a constitutional sovereign. On November 23 there was a stormy debate, and the division was not taken till after midnight. A small majority of eleven declared against the king. The majority then proposed to print the Remonstrance for the purpose of circulating it among the people. The minority pro- tested, and, as a protest was unprecedented in the House of Commons, a wild uproar ensued. Members snatched at their swords, and it needed all Hampden's persuasive pleadings to quiet the tumult. 6. The King*s Return. 1641. — Charles had at last got a party on his side. When, on November 25, he returned to London, he announced that he intended to govern according to the laws, and 1641-1642 THE FIVE MEMBERS 535 would maintain the * Protestant religion as it had been established in the times of Elizabeth and his father.' He was at once greeted with enthusiasm in the streets, and felt himself strong enough to refuse to comply with the request of the Remonstrance. If only he could have kept quiet, he would probably, before long, have had a majority, even in the House of Commons, on his side. It was, however, difficult for Charles to be patient. He was kept short of money by the Commons, and he had not the art of conciliating opponents. On December 23 he appointed Lunsford, a debauched ruffian, Lieutenant of the Tower, and the opponents of the Court naturally saw in this unwarrantable proceeding a determination to use force against themselves. On December 26 they obtained Lunsford's dismissal, but on the following day they heard that the rebellion in Ireland was spreading, and the increased necessity of providing an army for Ireland impressed on them once more the danger of placing under the orders of the king forces which he might use against themselves. 7. The Impeachment of the Bishops. 1641. — In order to make sure that the House of Lords would be on their side in the time of danger which was approaching, the Commons and their supporters called out for the exclusion of the bishops and the Roman Catholic peers from their seats in Parliament. A mob gathered at West- minster, shouting, No bishops ! No Popish lords ! The king gathered a number of disbanded officers at Whitehall for his protection, and these officers sallied forth beating and chasing the mob Another day Williams, Archbishop of York, having been hustled by the crowd, he and eleven other bishops sent to the Lords a protest that anything done by the House of Lords in their . absence would be null and void. The Peers, who had hitherto supported the king, were offended, and, for a time, made common cause with the other House against him ; whilst the Commons impeached as traitors the twelve bishops who had signed the protest, wanting, not to punish them, but merely to get rid of their votes. 8. The Impeachment of the Five Members. 1642. — Charles, on his part, was exasperated, and fancied that he could strike a blow which his opponents would be unable to parry. He knew that the most active of the leaders of the opposition. Lord Kim- bolton in the House of Lords, and Pym, Hampden, Hazlerigg, Holies, and Strode in the Commons, had negotiated with the Scots before they invaded England in 1640, and he believed that they had actually mvited them to enter the kingdom in arms. If this was true, they had legally been guilty of treason, and on January 3, 53^ THE FORMATION OF PARTIES 1642 1642, Charles ordered the Attorney- General to impeach them as traitors. Doubts were afterwards raised whether the king had a right to impeach, but Charles does not seem to have doubted at the time that he was acting according to law. 9. The Attempt on the Five Members. 1642.— As the Com- mons showed signs of an intention to shelter these five members from arrest, Charles resolved to seize them himself. On the 4th of January, followed by about 500 armed men, he betook himself to the House of Commons. Leaving his followers outside, he told the House that he had come to arrest five traitors. As they had already left the House and were on their way to the city, he looked round for them in vain, and asked Lenthall, the Speaker, where they were. " May it please your Majesty," answered Lenthall, kneeling before him, " I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place, but as this House is pleased to direct me." Charles eagerly looked round for his enemies. " The birds are flown," he exclaimed, when he failed to descry them. He had missed his prey, and, as he moved away, shouts of " Privilege ! privilege ! " were raised from the benches on either side. 10. The Commons in the City. 1642. — The Commons, be- lieving that the king wanted, not to try a legal question, but to intimidate the House by the removal of its leaders, took refuge in the City. The City, which had welcomed Charles in November, when it was thought that he was come to maintain order according to law, now declared for the Commons. On Januaiy 10 Lord Kimbolton and the five members were brought back in triumph to Westminster by the citizens. Charles had already left White- hall, never to return till the day on which he was brought back to be tried for his life. 11. The Struggle for the Militia. 1642. — There was little doubt that if Charles could find enough support, the questions at issue would have to be decided by arms. To gain time, he con- sented to a Bill excluding the bishops from their seats in the House of Lords, and he then sent the queen abroad to pawn or sell the Crown jewels and to buy arms and gunpowder with the money. He turned his own course to the north. A struggle arose be- tween him and the Houses as to the command of the militia. There was no standing army in England, but the men of military ao-e were mustered every year in each county, the fittest of them being selected to be drilled for a short time, at the expiration of which they were sent home to pursue their ordinary avocations. These drilled men were liable to be called out to defend theit 1642-1643 EDGEHILL 537 county against riots or invasion, and when they were together were formed into regiments called trained bands. All the trained bands in the country were spoken of as the militia. The Houses asked Charles to place the militia under officers of their choosing. " Not for an hour," replied Charles ; " it is a thing with which I would not trust my wife and children." The feeling on both sides grew more bitter ; Charles, after taking up his quarters at York, rode to Hull, where there was a magazine of arms of which he wished to possess himself Sir John Hotham, the Parliamentary commander, shut the gates in his face. Both Charles and the Parliament began to gather troops. The Parliament appointed the Earl of Essex, the son of Elizabeth's favourite, a steady, honourable man, without a spark of genius, as their general. On August 22, 1642, Charles set up his standard at Nottingham as a sign of war. 12. Edgehill and Turnham Green, 1642. — The richest part of England — the south-east — took, on the whole, the side of the Parliament ; the poorer and more rugged north-west took, on the whole, the side of the king. The greater part of the gentry were cavaliers or partisans of the king ; the greater part of the middle class in the towns were partisans of the Parliament, often called Roundheads in derision, because some of the Puritans cropped their hair short. After a successful skirmish at Powick Bridge Charles pushed on towards London, hoping to end the war at a blow. On October 23 the first battle was fought at EdgehiU. The king's nephew. Prince Rupert, son of Elizabeth and the Elec- tor Palatine, commanded his cavalry. With a vigorous charge he drove before him the Parliamentary horse in headlong flight ; but he did not pull up in time, and when he returned from the pursuit he found that the royalist infantry had beeri severely handled, and that it was too late to complete the victory which he had hoped to win. The fruits of victory, however, fell to the king. The cautious Essex drew back and Charles pushed on for London, reaching Brentford on November 12. That he did not enter London as a conqueror was owing to the resistance of the London trained bands, the citizen-soldiery of the capital. On the 13th they barred Charles's way at Turnham Green. The king hesitated to attack, and drew back to Oxford. He was never to have such another chance again. 13. The King's Plan of Campaign. 1643.— Charles's hopes of succeeding better in 1643 were based on a plan for overwhelming London with superior force. He made Oxford the headquarters of his own army, and he had a second army under Sir Ralph II. N N 53^ THE FIRST YEARS OF THE CIVIL WAR 1643 Hopton in Cornwall, and a third army under the Earl of Newcastle in Yorkshire. His scheme was, that whilst he himself attacked London in front, Hopton should advance through the southern counties into Kent, and Newcastle through the eastern counties into Essex. Hopton and Newcastle would then be able to seize the banks on either side of the Thames below London, and thus to interrupt the commerce of the city, without which it would be im- possible for it to hold out long. 14. Royalist Successes. 1643.— The weak point in Charles's plan was that his three armies were far apart, and that the Earl of Essex, now stationed in London, might fall upon his main army before Newcastle and Hopton could come to its aid. Towards the end of April, Essex besieged and took Reading, but his troops melted away from disease, and he did not advance against Oxford till June, when his cautious leadership was not likely to effect any- thing decisive. In the meanwhile the king's party was gaining the upper hand elsewhere. On May 16 Hopton completely defeated the Parliamentarians at Stratton in Cornwall, and was then ready to march eastwards. On June 18 Hampden received a mortal wound in a skirmish at Chalgrove Field. On July 5 Hopton got the better of one of the most energetic of the Parliamentary generals, Sir William Waller, on Lansdown, near Bath, and on July 13 his army thoroughly overthrew the same commander at Round- way Down, near Devizes. On July 26 Bristol was stormed by Rupert, Hopton now hoped to be able to push on towards Kent without difficulty. In the north, too, the king's cause was prospering On June 30, Newcastle defeated the Parliamentarians, Lord Fairfax and his son, Sir Thomas Fairfax, at Adwalton Moor, close to Brad- ford. He, too, hoped to be able to push on southwards. It seemed as if the king's plan would be carried out before the end of the summer, and that London would be starved into surrender. 15. The Siege of Gloucester. 1643. — Charles, however, failed to accomplish his design, mainly because the armies of Hopton and Newcastle were formed for the most part of recruits levied respectively in the west and in the north of England, who cared more for the safety of their own property and families than for the king's cause. In the west, Plymouth, and in the north, Hull were still garrisoned by the Parliament. Hopton's men were there- fore, unwilling to go far from their homes in Cornwall as loner as their fields were liable to be ravaged by the garrison of Plymouth and in the same way, Newcastle's men would not go far from Yorkshire as long as their fields were liable to be ravaged by the l643 CHARLES'S ATTACK BAFFLED 539 garrison of Hull. The Welshmen, also, who served in the king's own army found their homes endangered by a Parliamentary garrison at Gloucester, and were equally unwilling to push forward. Charles had, therefore, to take Plymouth, Hull, and Gloucester, if he could, before he could attack London. In August he laid siege in person to Gloucester. The London citizens at once perceived that, if Gloucester fell, their own safety would be in peril, and amidst the greatest enthusiasm the London trained bands marched out to its relief. On September 5 the king raised the siege on their approach. 16. The First Battle of Newbury. 1643.— Charles did not, however, give up the game. Hurrying to Newbury, and reaching it before Essex could arrive there on his way back to London, he blocked the way of the Parliamentary army. Essex, whose provisions were running short, must force a passage or surrender. On September 20 a furious battle was fought outside Newbury, but when the evening came, though Essex had gained ground, the royal army still lay across the London road. It had, however, suffered heavy losses, and its ammunition being almost exhausted, Charles marched away in the night, leaving the way open for Essex to continue his retreat to London. In this battle Falkland was slain. He had sided with the king, not because he shared the passions of the more violent Royalists, but because he feared the intolerance of the Puritans. Charles's determination to conquer or perish rather than to admit of a compromise had saddened his mind, and he went about murmuring, * Peace ! peace ! ' He was weary of the times, he said, on the morning of the battle, but he would ' be out of it ere night.' He threw himself into the thick of the fight and soon found the death which he sought. 17. The Eastern Association. 1643. — Whilst in the south the resistance of Gloucester had weakened the king's power of attack, a formidable barrier was being raised against Newcastle's advance in the east. Early in the war, certain counties in different parts of the country had associated themselves together for mutual defence, and of these combinations the strongest was the Eastern Associa- tion, comprising the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Cambridge and Hertford. These five counties raised forces in common and paid them out of a common purse. 18. Oliver Cromwell. 1642— 1643. — The strength which the Eastern Association soon developed was owing to its placing. it- self under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell, a member of Parlia- ment, who had taken arms when the civil war began, and who soon distinguished himself by his practical sagacity. "Your N N2 540 THE FIRST YEARS OF THE CIVIL WAR 1643 troops," he said to Hampden after the flight of the Parliamentary cavalry at Edgehill, " are, most of them, old decayed serving men and tapsters, and such kind of fellows, and their troops are gentle- men's sons, younger sons, and persons of quality ; do you thmk that the spirits of such base and mean fellows will ever be able to encounter gentlemen that have honour and courage and resolution in them ? You must get men of a spirit, and take it not ill what I say— I know you will not— of a spirit that is likely to go on as far as gentlemen will go ; or else you will be beaten still." It was this idea which Cromwell, having been appointed a colonel, put in execution in the Eastern Association. He took for his sol- diers sternly Puritan men, who had their hearts in the cause ; but he was not content with religious zeal alone. Every one who served under him must undergo the severest discipline. After a few months he had a cavalry regiment under his orders so fiery and at the same time so well under restraint that no body of horse on either side could compare with it. 19. The Assembly of Divines. 1643.— Whilst the armies were fighting with varying success, Pym, with undaunted courage, was holding the House of Commons to its task of resistance. After the Royalist successes in June and July, the great peril of the Parliamentary cause made him resolve to ask the Scots for help. The Scots, thinking that if Charles overthrew the English Parlia- ment he would next fall upon them, were ready to send an army to fight against the king, but only on the condition that the Church of England should become Presbyterian like their own. Already some steps had been taken in this direction, and on July I a Puritan As- sembly of divines met at Westminster to propose ecclesiastical alter- ations, which were to be submitted to Parliament for its approval. 20. The Solemn League and Covenant. 1643. — In August, com- missioners from the English Parliament, of whom the principal was Sir Henry Vane, arrived in Edinburgh to negotiate for an alliance. The result was a treaty between the two nations, styled the Solemn League and Covenant — usually known in England simply as the Covenant, but altogether different from the National Covenant, signed by the Scots only in 1638 (see p. 525). The Scots wished the English to bind themselves to ' the reformation of religion in the Church of England according to the example of the best reformed churches ' ; in other words, according to the Presbyterian system. Vane, however, who was eager for religious liberty, insisted on slipping in the words, ' and according to the Word of God.' The Scots could not possibly refuse to accept 1641-1643 THE CONFEDERATE CATHOLICS 541 the addition, though, by so doing, they left it free to every EngUshman to assert that any part of the Presbyterian system which he disHked was not ' according to the Word of God.' The Covenant, thus amended, was carried to England, and on Sep- tember 25, five days after the battle of Newbury, was sworn to by the members of the two Houses, and was soon afterwards ordered to be sworn to by every Englishman. Money was then sent to Scotland, and a Scottish army prepared to enter England before the opening of the next campaign. 21. The Irish War. 1641 — 1643. — Whilst Parliament looked for help to Scotland, Charles looked to Ireland. The insurrection in the north of Ireland in October, 1641 (see p. 533) had been the affair of the Celtic natives ; but in December they were joined by the Catholic lords and gentry of Norman or English descent. For the first time in Ireland there was a contest between Catholic and Protestant, instead of a contest between Celts on one side, and those who were not Celts on the other. The allies were not likely to be very harmonious, as the Celts wished to return to their old tribal institutions, and the Catholic lords wished to be pre- dominant in Parliament in agreement with the king. For the present, however, they were united by the fear that the Puritan Parliament in England and the Puritan Government in Dublin (see p. 533) would attempt to destroy them and their religion together. The outbreak of the Civil War in England, in 1642, made, it impossible for either king or Parliament to send sufficient troops to overpower them. In May they had chosen a Supreme Council to govern revolted Ireland, and in October a General Assembly of the Confederate Catholics, as they styled themselves, was held at Kilkenny. The Assembly petitioned Charles for the redress of grievances, and in January, 1643, Charles opened nego- tiations with them, hoping to obtain an Irish army with which he might carry on war in England. In March they offered him 10,000 men if he would consent to allow a Parliament mainly composed of Catholics to meet at Dublin and to propose bills for his approval. Charles, who liked neither to make this concession nor to relinquish the hope of Irish aid, directed a cessation of arms in Ireland, in the hope that an agreement of some kind might ultimately be come to. In accordance with this cessation, which was signed on September 15, the coast-line from Belfast to Dublin, and a patch of land round Cork, was in the possession of the English forces, whilst a body of Scots, under Monro, held Carrickfergus, but all the rest of Ireland was in the hands of the Confederates. 542 THE FIRST YEARS OF THE CIVIL WAR 1643-1644 22. Winceby and Arundel. 1643 -1644. —As yet Charles had to depend on his English forces alone. In the beginning of September, Newcastle, lately created a Marquis, laid siege to Hull. If Hull fell, he would be able to sweep down on the Eastern Association. The Earl of Manchester- -known as Lord Kimbolton at the time of the attempt on the five members— had been appointed general of the army of that Association, with Cromwell as his lieu- tenant-general. On October 1 1 Cromwell defeated a body of Royahst horse at Winceby. On the 12th, Newcastle raised the siege of Hull. All danger of Newcastle's marching southwards was thus brought to an end. In the South, Hopton succeeded in reaching Sussex, and, in December, took Arundel Castle ; but the place w;^s retaken by Sir William Waller on January 6, 1644. Here, too, the Royahst attack received a check, and there was no longer any likelihood that the king's forces would be able to starve out London by establishing themselves on the banks of the Thames. 23. The Committee of Both Kingdoms. 1644. — Pym, whose statesmanship had brought about the alliance with the Scots, died on December 8, 1643. On January 19 the Scots crossed the Tweed again under the command of Alexander Leslie (see p. 526), who had been created Earl of Leven when Charles visited Edinburgh in 1641. On the 25th, Sir Thomas Fairfax defeated, at Nantwich, a force of English soldiers who had been freed from service in Ireland by the cessation of arms, and had been sent by Ormond, who had recently been named by Charles Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, to support the royahst cause in England. Pym's death, and the necessity of carrying on joint operations with the Scots, called for the appointment of some definite authority at Westminster, and, on February 16, a Committee of Both Kingdoms, composed of members of one or other of the two Houses, and also of Scottish Commissioners sent to England by the Parliament of Scotland, was named to control the operations of the armies of the two nations. 24. The Campaign of Marston Moor. 1644. — The spring campaign opened successfully for Parliament. In March, indeed, Rupert relieved Newark, which was hardly pressed by a Parlia- mentary force ; but in April Waller defeated Hopton at Cheriton, near Alresford, whilst in the North, Sir Thomas Fairfax, together with his father. Lord Fairfax, seized upon Selby, and joined the Scots in besieging York, into which Newcastle had been driven. In May, Manchester stormed Lincoln, and he too joined the forces before York. At the king's headquarters there was deep alarm. i644 MARSTON MOOR 543 Essex and Waller were approaching to attack Oxford, but Charles slipping out of the city before it was surrounded despatched Rupert to the relief of York. At Rupert's approach the besiegers retreated. On July 2 Rupert and Newcastle fought a desperate battle on Marston Moor, though they were decidedly outnumbered by their opponents. The whole of the right wing of the Parliamentarians, and part of the centre, fled before the Royalist attack ; but on their left, Cromwell restored the fight, and drove Rupert in flight before him. Cromwell did not, however, as Rupert had done at Edgehill, waste his energies in the pursuit of the fugitives. Promptly drawing up, he faced round, and hurled his squadrons upon the hitherto victprious Royalists in the other parts of the field. The result was decisive. " It had all the evidence," wrote Cromwell, "of an absolute victory, obtained by the Lord's blessing upon the godly party principally. We never charged but we routed the enemy. God made them as stubble to our swords." All the north of England, except a few fortresses, fell into the hands of Parliament and the Scots. 25. Presbyterians and Independents. 1644. — Cromwell spoke of Marston Moor as a victory of the ' godly party.' The West- minster Assembly of Divines had declared strongly in favour of Presbyterianism, but there were a few of its members — only five at first, known as the five Dissenting Brethren — who stood up for the principles of the Separatists (see p. 470) wishing to see each congregation independent of any general ecclesiastical organisa- tion. From holding these opinions they were beginning to be known as Independents. These men now attracted to themselves a con- siderable number of the„.stronger-minded Puritans, such as Crom- well and Vane, of whom many, though they had no special attach- ment to the teaching of the Independent divines, upheld the idea of toleration, whilst others gave their adherence to one or other of the numerous sects which had recently sprung into existence. Cromwell, especially, was drawn in the direction of toleration by his practical experience as a soldier. It was intolerable to him to be forbidden to promote a good officer on the ground that he was not a Presbyterian. On one occasion he was asked to discard a certain officer because he was an Anabaptist '' Admit he be," he had replied ; " shall that render him incapable to serve the public ? Take heed of being too sharp, or too easily sharpened by others, against those to whom you can object little but that they square not with you in every opinion concerning matters of religion." He had ac- cordingly filled his own regnnents with men of every variety of Puritan opinion, choosing for promotion the best soldier, and not 544 THE FIRST YEARS OF THE CIVIL WAR 1644 the adherent of any special Church system. These he styled * the godly party/ and it was by the soldiers of 'the godly party,' so understood, that Marston Moor had been won. 26. Essex's Surrender at Lostwithiel. 1644.— Essex was the hope of the Presbyterians who despised the sects and hated toleration. Being jealous of Waller, he left him to take Oxford alone, if he could, and marched off to the West, to accomplish what he imagined to be the easier task of wresting the western counties from the king. Charles turned upon Waller, and fought an indecisive action with him at Cropredy Bridge, after which Waller's army, being composed of local levies with no heart for permanent soldiering, melted away. Charles then marched in pursuit of Essex, and surrounded him at Lostwithiel, in Cornwall. Essex's provisions fell short ; and on September 2, though his horse cut their way out, and he himself escaped in a boat, the whole of his infantry capitulated. 27. The Second Battle of Newbury. 1644. — London was thus laid bare, and Parliament hastily summoned Manchester and the army of the Eastern Association to its aid. Manchester, being good-natured and constitutionally indolent, longed for some com- promise with Charles which might bring about peace. Cromwell, on the other hand, perceived that no compromise was possible with Charles as long as he was at the head of an army in the field. A second battle of Newbury was fought, on October 27, with doubtful results : Manchester showed little energy, and the king was allowed to escape in the night. Cromwell, to whom his sluggishness seemed nothing less than treason to the cause, attacked Manchester in Parliament, not from personal ill-will, burfrom a desire to remove an inefficient general from his command in the army. Two parties were thus arrayed against one another : on the one side the Presbyterians, who wanted to suppress the sects and, if possible, to make peace ; and on the other side the Independents, who wanted toleration, and to carry on the war efficiently till a decisive victory had been gained. 545 CHAPTER XXXV THE NEW MODEL ARMY. 1644—1649 LEADING DATES Reign of Charles I., 1625— 1649 Battle of Naseby Glamorgan's Treaty . Charles in the hands of the SCcTts Charles surrendered by the Scots Charles carried off from Holmby The Army in Military Possession of London Charles's Flight from Hampton Court The Second Civil War Pride's Purge Execution of Charles .... April June 14, 1645 Aug. 25, 1645 May 5, 1646 Jan. 30, 1647 June 5, 1647 Aug. 7, 1647 Nov. II, 1647 to Aug., 1648 Dec. 6, 1648 Jan. 30, 1649 I. The Self-denying Ordinance and the New Model. 1645. — Cromwell dropped his attack on Manchester as soon as he found that he could attain his end in another way. A proposal was made for the passing of a Self-denying Ordinance,' which was to exclude all members of either House from commands in the army. The Lords, knowing that members of their House would be chiefly affected by it, threw it out, and the Commons then proceeded to form a New Model Army — that is to say, an army newly organised, its officers and soldiers being chosen solely with a view to military efficiency. Its general was to be Sir Thomas Fairfax, whilst the lieutenant-general was not named ; but there can be little doubt that the post was intended for Cromwell. After the Lords had agreed to the New Model, they accepted the Self-denying Ordinance in an altered form, as, though all the existing officers were directed to resign their posts, nothing was said against their re-appointment. Essex, Manchester, and Waller resigned, but when the time came for Cromwell to follow their example, he and two or three others were appointed to commands in the new army. Cromwell became Lieutenant- General, with the command of the cavalry. The New Model was composed partly of pressed men, and was by no means, 1 An ordinance was at this time in all respects similar to an Act of Parlia- ment, except that it did not receive the Royal assent. In the middle ages an ordinance was exactly the reverse, being issued by the King without Parlia- mentary approval. 546 THE NEW MODEL ARMY 1644- 1645 as has been often said, of a sternly religious character throughout ; but a large number of decided Puritans had been drafted into it, especially from the army of the Eastern Association ; and the majority of the officers were Independents, some of them of a strongly Sectarian type. The New Model Army had the ad- vantage of receiving regular pay, which had not been the case before ; so that the soldiers, whether Puritans or not, were now likely to stick to their colours. 2. Milton's * Areopagitica.' 1644.— By Cromwell, who in con- sequence of his tolerance was the idol of the Sectarians in the army, religious liberty had first been valued because it gave him the service of men of all kinds of opinions. On November 24, 1644, Milton, some of whose books had been condemned by the hcensers of the press appointed by Parliament, issued Areopagitica^ in which he advocated the liberty of the press on the ground that excel- lence can only be reached by those who have free choice between good and evil. " He that can apprehend," he wrote, " and consider vice with all her baits and seeming pleasures, and yet abstain — he is the true warfaring Christian. I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and seeks her adversary, but slinks out of the race, when that immortal garland is to be run for, not without dust and heat." Liberty was good for religion as much as it was for literature. " These are the men," he continued, " cried out against for schismatics and sectaries, as if, while the temple of the Lord was buiJding, there should be a sort of irrational men who could not consider there must be many schisms and many dissections made in the quarry and in the timber ere the house of God can be built." The perfection of the building consisted " in this — that out of many moderate varieties and brotherly dissimilitudes that are not vastly disproportional, arises the goodly and the graceful symmetry that commends the whole pile and structure." 3. The Execution of Laud. 1645. — In Parliament, at least, there was one direction in which neither Presbyterian nor Inde- pendent was inclined to be tolerant. They had all suffered under Laud, and Laud's impeachment was allowed to go on. The House of Lords pronounced sentence against him, and on January 10, 1645, he was beheaded. The Presbyterians had the majority in the House of Commons, and they were busy in enforcing their system, as far as Parliamentary resolutions would go. The Independents had to wait for better times. 4. Montrose and Argyle. 1644. — For the present, however. 1644-1645 MONTROSE'S CAMPAIGN 547 the two parties could not afford to quarrel, as a powerful diversion in the king's favour was now threatening them from Scotland. The Marquis of Montrose, who, in the Bishops' Wars, had taken part with the Covenanters, had grown weary of the interference of the Scottish Presbyterian clergy with politics, and •Still more weary of the supremacy in Scotland of the Marquis of Argyle, who had all the organisation of the Presbyterian Church at his disposal. Montrose saw that, though Argyle was too strong for him in the Lowlands, it was possible to assail him with effect in the Highlands, where he had made many enemies. In the Low- lands Argyle was regarded as a Scottish nobleman. In the High- lands he was the chief of the clan of the Campbells, which had often unscrupulously extended its borders at the expense of its neighbours, especially at the expense of the various clans of the Macdonalds. Montrose therefore hoped that if he threw himself into the Highlands, he might make use of the enmity of these clans against the Campbells to crush Argyle and to exalt the king. 5. Montrose in the Highlands. 1644 — 1645. — In 1644, shortly after the battle of Marston Moor, Montrose made his way to the Highlands with only two followers. He was the first to discover the capacity of the Highlanders for war. With their help, and with the help of a trained Irish contingent, mostly composed of the descendants of Highlanders who had emigrated to Ireland, he beat the Scottish forces at Tippermuir and Aberdeen, and then, crossing the mountains, amidst the snows of winter, harried the lands of the Campbells. On February 2, 1645, he defeated Argyle's clans- men at Inverlochy, whilst Argyle himself — who was no warrior — watched their destruction from a boat. Wherever Montrose went the heavy Lowland troops toiled after him in vain. On May 9 he overthrew another army under Baillie at Auldearn. Leven's Scottish army in Yorkshire had enough to do to bar the way against Mont- rose in case of his issuing from the mountains and attempting to join forces with Charles in England With any other troops Montrose would probably have made the attempt already ; but his Highlanders were accustomed to return home to deposit their booty in their own glens as soon as a battle had been won, and, there- fore, victorious as he had been, he was unable to leave the High- lands. 6. The New Model Army in the Field. 1645.— The New Model army started on its career in April. Cromwell, with his highly-trained horse, swept round Oxford, cutting off Charles's supplies ; whilst Fairfax was sent by the Committee of Both Kingdoms (see p. 542) 548 THE NEW MODEL ARMY 1645 to the relief of Taunton, which had been gallantly holding out under Robert Blake. A detachnaent of Fairfax's force sufficed to set Taunton free. His main force was stupidly sent by the Committee to besiege Oxford, though the king was marching northwards, and might fall upon Leven's Scots as soon as he reached them. On May 31, however, Charles turned sharply round, and stormed Leicester. The popular outcry in London compelled the Com-, mittee to allow their commander-in-chief to act on his own dis- cretion ; and Fairfax, abandoning the siege of Oxford, marched straight in pursuit of the Royal army. 7. The Battle of Naseby. 1645. — On June 14 Fairfax overtook the king at Naseby. In the battle which followed, the Parlia- mentary army was much superior in numbers, but it was largely composed of raw recruits (see p. 545), and its left wing of cavalry — under Cromwell's son-in-law, Ireton — was routed by the king's right, under Rupert. As he had done at Edgehill, Rupert galloped hard in pursuit, without looking back. The Parliamentary infantry in the centre was by this time pressed hard, but Cromwell, on the right, at the head of a large body of cavalry, scattered the enemy's horse before him. Then, as at Marston Moor, he halted to see how the battle went elsewhere. Sending a detachment to pursue the defeated Royalists, he hurled the rest of his horse on the king's foot, who were slowly gaining ground in the centre. In those days^ when half of eveiy body of infantry fought with pikes, and the other half with inefficient muskets, it was seldom that foot-soldiers could withstand a cavalry charge in the open, and the whole of Charles's infantry, after a short resistance, surrendered on the spot. Rupert returned only in time to see that defeat was certain. The king, with what horse he could gather round him, made off as fast as he could. The stake played for at Naseby was the crown of England, and Charles had lost it. 8. The Results of Naseby. 1645.— Disastrous as Charles's defeat had been, he contrived to struggle on for some months. The worst thing that befel him after the battle was the seizure of his cabinet containing his correspondence, which revealed his con- stant intrigues to bring alien armies— French, Lorrainers, and Irish —into England. It was, therefore, in a more determined spirit than ever that Parliament carried on the war. After retaking Leicester on June 18, Fairfax marched on to the West, where the king's eldest son, Charles, Prince of Wales, had been since the summer of 1644, and where debauched and reckless Goring was at the head of a Royalist army. On July 10 Fairfax routed him at Langport, and on i645 THE GLAMORGAN TREATY 549 July 23 took Bridgwater. Then, leaving forces to coop up Goring's remaining troops, Fairfax turned eastward, took Sherborne on August 2, whilst the Scots, who after Naseby had marched south- wards, were besieging Hereford. On September i, however, the king relieved Hereford, and fancied he might still retrieve his fortunes. On September 10, he received a severe blow. Fairfax stormed the outer defences of Bristol, and Rupert, who commanded the garrison, at once capitulated. There can be little doubt that he had no other choice ; but Charles would hear no excuse, and dismissed him from his service. 9. Charles's Wanderings. 1645. — Charles's hopes were always springing up anew, and now that Rupert had failed him, he looked to Montrose for deliverance. Montrose, on July 4, had won another victory at Alford, and, on August 14, a still more crushing victory at Kilsyth, after which he had entered Glasgow, and received the submission of the Lowlands. Charles marched northward to meet him, but on the way was met and defeated by the Parlia- mentary general, Poyntz, on Rowton Heath. Almost immediately afterwards he heard the disastrous news that David Leslie, an able officer who had won renown in the German wars, and had fought well at Marston Moor, had been despatched from the Scottish army in England, had fallen upon Montrose at Philiphaugh, at a time when he had but a scanty following with him, and had utterly defeated him. After this Cromwell reduced the South, capturing Winchester and Basing House, whilst Fairfax betook himself to the siege of Exeter. In October, Charles, misled by a rumour that Montrose had recovered himself, made one more attempt to join him ; but he was headed by the enemy, and compelled to retreat to Oxford, where, with all his followers ardently pleading for peace, he still maintained that his conscience would not allow him to accept any terms from rebels, or to surrender the Church of England into their hands. 10. Glamorgan in Ireland. 1645— 1646. — Not one of Charles's intrigues with foreign powers did him so much harm as his con- tinued efforts to bring over an Irish army to fight his battles in England. In 1645 he despatched the Roman Catholic Earl of Glamorgan to Ireland, giving him almost unlimited powers to raise money and men, and to make treaties with this object, but in- structing him to follow the advice of Ormond. When Glamorgan arrived in Ireland, in August, he found that the Confederate Catholics were resolved to demand that all the churches in Ire- land, except the few still in the hands of the English, should be 550 THE NEW MODEL ARMY I 645- I 646 given permanently to the Catholics, and that permission should be granted to their clergy to exercise jurisdiction in matters spiritual and ecclesiastical. Though Glamorgan knew that Charles had never approved of these concessions, he signed a treaty, on August 25, 1645, in which he granted all that was asked, in consideration of an engagement by the Confederates to place him at the head of 10,000 Irishmen destined for England. Before anything had been done, a Papal Nuncio, Rinuccini, landed in Ireland and required fresh concessions, to which Glamorgan readily assented. On January 16, 1646, however, before Glamorgan's army was ready to start, the treaty which he had made in August became known A gentleman. A gfentlewoman. Ordinary civil costume temp. Charles I. : from Speed's map of 'The Kingdom of England,' 1646. at Westminster ; and, though Chatles promptly disavowed having authorised its signature, there remained a grave suspicion that he was not as innocent as he pretended to be. IT. The King's Flight to the Scots. 1646. — In the beginning of 1646 the Civil War virtually came to an end. On March 14, Charles's army in the West surrendered to Fairfax in Cornwall, and in the same month the last force which held the field for him was overthrown at Stow-on the-Wold. Many fortresses still held out, but, as there was no chance of relief, their capture was only a question of time ; and though the last of them — Harlech Castle — did not surrender till 1647, there was absolutely no doubt what the result would be. Charles, now again at Oxford, had but to choose 1646 CHARLES AND THE SCOTS 551 to whom he would surrender. He chose to give himself up to the Scots, whose army was at the time besieging Newark. He seems to have calculated that they would replace him on the throne without insisting on very rigorous conditions, thinking that they would rather restore him to power than allow the English army^ formidable as it was, to have undisputed authority in England, and possibly to crush the independence of Scotland. The Scots, on the other hand, seem to have thought that, when Charles was once in their power, he must, for his safety's sake, agree to estabhsh Presbyterianism in England, by which means the party which would of necessity lean for support on themselves would have A citizen. A citizen's wife. Ordinary civil costume tem_p. Charles I. : from Speed's map of * The Kingdom of England, 1646. the mastery in England. On May 5, 1646, Charles rode in to the quarters of the Scottish army at Southwell, a few miles from Newark. 12. Charles at Newcastle. 1646. — Newark at once surrendered, and Charles was conveyed to Newcastle, where, as he refused to consent to the establishment of Presbyterianism in England, he was practically treated as a prisoner. At the end of 1645 and the beginning of 1646 there had been fresh elections to fill up seats in the House of Commons left vacant by Royalists expelled for taking the king's part ; but, though many Independent officers were chosen, there was still a decidedly Presbyterian majority. On July 14 propositions for peace were delivered to Charles on 552 THE NEW MODEL ARMY I 646- I 647 behalf of Parliament and the Scots. He was to surrender his power over the militia for twenty years, to take the Covenant, and to support Presbyterianism in the Church. Charles, in his corre- spondence with his wife, showed himself more ready to abandon the militia than to abandon episcopacy ; whilst she, being a Roman Catholic, and not carmg for bishops whom she counted as heretics, advised him at all hazards to cling to the command of the militia. Charles hoped everythmg from mere procrastination. "All my endeavours," he wrote to the queen, " must be the delaying of my answer till there be considerable parties visibly formed "—in other words, till Presbyterians and Independents were ready to A countryman. A countrywoman. Ordinary civil costume temp. Charles I. : from Speed's map of ' The Kingdom of England,' 1646. come to blows, and, therefore, to take him at his own price. In order to hasten that day, he made in October a proposal of his own, in which he promised, in case of his being restored to power, to estabhsh Presbyterianism for three years, during which time the future settlement of the Church might be publicly discussed. He, however, took care to make no provision for the very probable event of the discussion leavmg parties as opposed to one another as they had been before the discussion was opened, and it was obvious that, as he had never given the royal assent to any Act for the abolition of episcopacy, the whole episcopal system would legally occupy the field when the three years came to an end. The Presbyterians would thus find themselves checkmated by an unworthy trick! 1047 THE KING AT HOLMBY HOUSE 553 13. The Removal of the King to Holmby. 1647.— The Scots, discontented with the king's refusal to accept their terms, began to open their ears to an offer by the English Parliament to pay them the money owing to them for their assistance, on the open understanding that they would leave England, and the tacit under- standing that they would leave the king behind them. Once more they implored Charles to support Presbyterianism, assuring him that, if he would, they would fight for him to a man. On his refusal, they accepted the English offer, took their money, and on January 30, 1647, marched away to their own country, leaving Charles in the hands of Commissioners of the English Parliament, who conveyed him to Holmby House, in Northamptonshire. • 14. Dispute between the Presbyterians and the Army, 1647. — The leading Presbyterians, of whom the most prominent was Holies (see p. 535), were so anxious to come to terms with the king, that before the end of January they accepted Charles's illusory proposal of a three years' Presbyterianism (see p. 552), offering to- allowhim to come to London or its neighbourhood in order to carry on negotiations. The fact was, that they were now more afraid of the army than of the king, believing it to be ready to declare not merely for toleration of the sects, but also for a more demo- cratic form of government than suited many of the noblemen and gentlemen who sat on the benches of the Lords and Commons. In March the Commons voted that only a small body of cavalry should be kept up in England, and no infantry at all, except a small force needed to garrison the fortresses, and also that when the infantry regiments were broken up the disbanded soldiers should be asked to volunteer for service in Ireland. Of the cavalry in England Fairfax was to be general, but no ofificer under him was to hold a higher rank than that of colonel, a rule which would enable Crom- well's opponents in Parliament to oust him from his position in the army. So strong was the feeling in the nation for peace, and for the diminution of the heavy burden of taxation which the main- tenance of the army required, that the Presbyterians would pro- bably have gained their object had they acted with reasonable prudence, as a large number of soldiers had no sympathy \vith the religious enthusiasts in the ranks. There were, however, con- siderable arrears of pay owing to the men, and had they been paid in ready money, and an ordinance passed Indemnifying them for acts done in war-time, most, if not all, would, in all probability^ either have gone home or have enlisted for Ireland, instead of doing this, Parliament only voted a small part of the arrears, and II. 00 554 THE NEW MODEL ARMY 1647 fiercely denounced the army for daring to prepare a petition to Fairfax asking for his support in demanding full pay and indemnity. In a it^N weeks Parliament and army were angrily distrustful of one another, and the soldiers, organising themselves, chose representatives, who were called Agitators ^ or agents, to consult on things relating to their present position. 15. Cromwell and the Army. 1647. — Cromwell's position durmg these weeks was a delicate one. He sympathised not only with the demands of the soldiers for full pay, but also with the demand of the religious enthusiasts for toleration. Yet he had a strong sense of the evil certain to ensue from allowing an army to overthrow the civil institutions of the country,^ and both as a member of the House of Commons and as an officer he did his best to avert so dire a catastrophe. In March he had even pro- posed to leave England and take service in Germany under the Elector Palatine, the son of Frederick and Elizabeth (see p. 488). As this plan fell through, he was sent down, in May, with other commissioners, to attempt to effect a reconciliation between the army and the Parliament. In this he nearly succeeded ; but a few days after his return to Westminster Parliament decided to disband the army at once, without those concessions which, in consequence of Cromwell's report, it at first seemed prepared to make. The soldiers, finding that only a small portion of their arrears was to be paid, refused to disband, and before the end of May everything was in confusion. t6. The Abduction of the King". 1647. — The fact was that the Presbyterian leaders fancied themselves masters of the situ- ation. Receiving a favourable answer from the king to the pro- posals made by them in January (see p. 553), they entered into a negotiation with the French ambassador and the Scottish com- missioners to bring about a Scottish invasion of England on the king's behalf, and this invasion was to be supported by a Presby- terian and Royahst rising in England. In the meanwhile Charles was to be conveyed away from Holmby to preserve him from the ' The name ' Adjutator,' often given to these men, is undoubtedly a mere blunder. The use of the verb ' to agitate ' in the sense of ' to act,' and of the noun ' agitator,' in the sense of an agent, is now obsolete. 2 Cromwell did not hold that, in fighting against the king, he had himself been assailmg the civil institutions of the country. In his eyes, as in the eyes of all others on his side, the king was the aggressor, attacking those institutions, and war against him was therefore defensive, being waged to save the most important part of them from destruction. i647 THE KING WITH THE ARMY 555 army. This design was betrayed to Cromwell, and, in consequence, he secretly gave instructions to a certain Cornet Joyce to take a body of cavalry to hinder the Scots and Presbyterians from carry- ing off the king, but only, as it seems, to remove him from Holmby if force was likely to be used on the other side. On June 3, Joyce, with a picked body of horse, appeared at Holmby. On the 4th he received news which led him to think that a Presbyterian body of troops was approaching with the intention of taking pos- session of the king's person. Late in the evening, therefore, imagin- ing that the danger foreseen as possible in Cromwell's instructions had really arrived, he invited the king to leave Holmby the next mornmg. When the morning came Charles, stepping out on the lawn, asked Joyce for a sight of the commission which authorised him to give such unexpected orders. " There is my commission,' answered Joyce, pointing to his soldiers. There was no resisting such an argument, and Charles was safely conducted to Newmarket. 17. The Exclusion of the Eleven Members. 1647. —Parlia- ment, dissatisfied with this daring act, began to levy troops in London, and reorganised the London trained bands, excluding all Independents from their ranks. The army declared that eleven members of the House of Commons — the leaders of the Presbyterian party — were making arrangements for a new war, and sent in charges against them. The eleven members, finding themselves helpless, asked leave of absence. The City of London was as Pres- byterian as Parliament. A mob burst into the House, and, under stress of violence, the Independent members, together with the Speakers of the two Houses, left Westminster and sought protec- tion with the army. The Presbyterians kept their seats, and voted to resist the army by force. The army took advantage of the tumult to appear on the scene as the vindicators of the liberties of Parlia- ment and, marching upon London, passed through the City on August 7; leaving sufficient forces behind to occupy Westminster and the Tower. The eleven Presbyterian members sought refuge on the Continent. 18. The Heads of the Proposals. 1647.— In the meanwhile Cromwell was doing his best to come to an understanding with Charles. A constitutional scheme, to which was given the name of The Heads of the Proposals^ was drawn up by Ireton and pre- sented in the name of the army to the king. It proyided for a constant succession of biennial Parliaments with special powers over the appointment of officials, and it proposed to settle the religious difficulty by giving complete religious liberty to all except 002 556 THE NEW MODEL ARMY 1647-1648 Roman Catholics. Those who chose to do so might submit to the jurisdiction of bishops, and those who chose to do so might submit to the jurisdiction of a presbytery, but no civil penalties were to be inflicted on those who objected either to Episcopacy or to Presbyterianism or to both. 19. The King's Flight to the Isle of Wight. 1647.— No proposals so wise and comprehensive had yet been made, but neither Charles nor the Parliament was inclined to accept them. Many of the Agitators, finding that there was still a Presbyterian majority in Parliament, talked of using force once more and of purging the Houses of all the members who had sat in them whilst the legitimate Speakers were absent. In the meanwhile the king grew more hostile to Cromwell every day, and entered secretly into afresh negotiation with the Scottish commissioners who formed part of the Committee of both Kingdoms, asking them for the help of a Scottish army. The more advanced Agitators proposed a still more democratic constitution than The Heads of the Proposals^ under the name of The Agreement of the People^ and attempted to force it upon their officers by threats of a mutiny, At the same time, they and some of the officers talked of bringing the king to justice for the bloodshed which he had caused. Charles, becoming aware of his danger, fled on November 11 to the Isle of Wight, thinking that it would be easy to escape whenever he wished. He was, however, detained in Carisbrooke Castle, where he was treated very much as a prisoner. 20. The Scottish Engagement, and the Vote of No Addresses. 1647-1648.— Cromwell put down the mutiny in the army, but he learnt that the king was intriguing with the Scots, and at last abandoned all hope of settling the kingdom with Charles's help. On December 26, 1647, Charles entered into an Engagement with the Scottish commissioners. On the condition of having toleration for his own worship, according to the Prayer Book, he agreed to establish Presbyterianism in England for three years, and to sup- press all heresy. The Scottish army was then to advance into England to secure the king's restoration to power in accordance with the wishes of a free Parliament, to be chosen after the existing one had been dissolved. The English Parliament, indeed, had no knowledge of this engagement, but finding that Charles refused to accept their terms, they replied, on January 17, 1648, by a Vote of No Addresses, declaring that they would make no more pro- posals to the king. 21. The Second Civil War. 1648.— The majority of English- 1648- 1649 THE ASCENDENCY OF THE ARMY 557 men were, on the contrary, ready to take Charles at his word. Men were weary of being controlled by the army, and still more of paying the taxes needed for the support of the army. There were risings in Wales and Kent, and a Scottish army prepared to cross the borders under the Duke of Hamilton. The English army had, however, made up its mind that Charles should not be restored. Fairfax put down the rising in Kent after a sharp fight ^at Maidstone, and drove some of the fugitives across the Thames into Essex, where being outnumbered they took refuge in Colchester. 'Fairfax, following ihem up, laid siege to Colchester, though the Londoners threatened to rise in his rear, and a great part of the fleet deserted to the Prince of Wales, who came from France to take the command. In the meanwhile Cromwell suppressed the insurrection in Wales, and then marched northwards. On August 17, with less than 9,000 men, he fell upon the 24,000 who followed Hamilton, and, after three days' fighting, routed them utterly. On August 28 Colchester surrendered to Fairfax. 22. Pride's Purge. 1648. —The army had lost all patience with the king, and it had also lost all patience with Parliament. Whilst Fairfax and Cromwell were fighting, the Houses passed an ordinance for the suppression of heresy, and opened the negotia- tions with the king which bear the name of the Treaty ' of Newport. The king only played with the negotiations, trying to spin out the time till he could make his escape, in order that he might, with safety to his own person, obtain help from Ireland or the Continent. The army was tired of such delusions, seeing clearly that there could be no settled government in England as long as Charles could play fast-and-loose with all parties, and it demanded that he should be brought to justice. By military authority he was removed on - December i from Carisbrooke to the desolate Hurst Castle, where no help could reach him. On December 5 the House of Commons declared for a reconciliation with the king. On the 6th a body of soldiers, under the command of Colonel Pride, forced it to serve the purposes of the army by forcibly expelling all members who took the side of the king. This act of violence is commonly known as Pride's Purge. 23. The High Court of Justice. 1649. — On January i, 1649, the purged House proposed to appoint a High Court of Justice to try Charles^ but the Lords refused to take part in the act. On the 4th the Commons declared that the people were, under God, the source 1 A treaty then meant a negotiation, not, as now, the document which results from a successful negotiation. 558 THE NEW MODEL ARMY 1649 1649 THk High coOrt of justice 55^ of all just power, and that the House of Commons, being chosen l)y the people, formed the supreme power in England, having no need of either king or House of Lords. Never was constitutional pedantry carried further than when this declaration was issued by a mere fragment of a House which, even if all its members had been present, could only claim to have represented the people some years before. On January 9 a special High Court of Justice was constituted by the mutilated House of Commons alone, for the trial of the king. On January 19 Charles was brought up to Westminster. Only the sternest opponents of Charles would consent to sit on the Court which tried him. Of 135 members named, only 67 Execution ot King Charles I., January 30, 1649 : from a contemporary broadside. were present when the trial began. Fairfax was amongst those appointed, but he absented himself, and when his name was called, his wife cried out, " He is not here, and will never be ; you do wrong to name him." 24. The King's Trial and Execution. 1649.— Charles's ac- cusers had on their side the discredit which always comes to those who, using force, try to give it the appearance of legality. Charles had all the credit of standing up for the law, which, in his earlier life, he had employed to establish absolutism. He refused to plead before the Court, on the ground that it had no jurisdiction over a king. His assailants fell back on the merest technicalities. 56o THE NEW MODEL ARMY 1649 Instead of charging him with the intrigues to bring foreign armies into England, of which he had been really guilty, they accused him of high treason against the nation, because, forsooth, he had appeared in arms against his subjects in the first Civil War. The Court, as might have been expected, passed sentence against him, and, on January 30, he was beheaded on a scaffold in front of his own palace at Whitehall. 25. Results of Charles's Execution. 1649. — With the king's execution all that could be permanently effected by his oppo- nents had been accomplished. When the Long Parliament met, in November 1640, all Englishmen had combined to bring Charles to submit to Parliamentary control. After the summer of 1641 a considerable part of the nation, coming to the conclusion that Charles was ready to use force rather than to submit, took arms against him to compel him to give way. Towards the end of 1647 a minority of Englishmen, including the army, came to the con- clusion that it was necessary to deprive Charles of all real power, if the country was not to be exposed to constantly recurring danger whenever he saw fit to re-assert his claims to the authority which he had lost. In 1648 a yet smaller minority came to the conclusion that security could only be obtained if he were deprived of life. In depriving the king of life all had been done which force could do. The army could guard a scaffold, but it could not reconstruct society. The vast majority of that part of the nation which cared about pohtics at all disliked being ruled by an army even more than it had formerly disliked being ruled by Charles, and refused its support to the new institutions which, under the patronage of the army, were being erected in the name of the people. 561 CHAPTER XXXVI THE COMMONWEALTH AND PROTECTORATE. 1649— 1660 LEADING DATES The Establishment of the Commonwealth 1640 Cromwell in Ireland . . * ^g.^ rIIJ'Iw"''". • ■ .':;:; s;pt.3.i65o Battle of Worcester Sept. 3, 1651 The Long Parliament dissolved by Cromwell . April 20, 1653 The so-called Barebones Parliament . July 4 to Dec. 11, 1653 Establishment of the Protectorate Dec. 16, 1653 The First Protectorate Parliament . Sept. 3, 1654, to Jan. 22,' 1655 Treaty of Alliance with France Oct. 24, 1655 The Second Protectorate Parliament . Sept. 17, 1656, to Feb. 4, 1658 Death of Oliver Cromwell Sept. 3, 1658 Richard Cromwell's Protectorate . Sept. 3, 1658, to April 22, 1659 The Long Parliament Restored .... May 7 to Oct. 13, 1659 Military Government ..... Oct. 13 to Dec. 26. 1659 The Long Parliament a Second Time ) t^ , ^ » I May I, 1660 and Commons ) "^ I. Establishment of the Commonwealth. 1649. — It was not to be expected that the men in Parliament or in the army by whom great hopes of improvement were entertained should discover that they had done all that it was possible for them to do. They believed it to be still in their power to regenerate Eng- land. The House of Commons declared England to be a Common- wealth, * without a king or House of Lords,' and, taking the name of Parliament for itself, appointed forty-one persons to be a Council of State, charged with the executive government, and renewed annually. Most members of the Council of State were also mem- bers of Parliament ; and, as the attendance in Parliament seldom exceeded fifty, the Councillors of State (if they agreed together) were able to command a majority in Parliament, and thus to con- trol its decisions. Such an arrangement was a mere burlesque on Parliamentary institutions, and could hardly have existed for a week if it had not been supported by the ever-victorious army. In the army, indeed, it had its opponents, who, under the name of Levellers, called out for a more truly democratic government ; S62 THE COMMONWEALTH a^ PROTECTORATE 1649-1650 but they had no man of influence to lead them. Cromwell had too much common sense not to perceive the difficulty of establishing a democracy in a country in which that form of government had but few admirers, and he suppressed the Levellers with a strong hand. In quiet times, Cromwell would doubtless have made some attempt to place the constitution of the Commonwealth on a more satisfactory basis, but for the present it needed to be defended rather than improved. 2. Parties in Ireland. 1647— 1649.— In Ireland the conjunction formed at the end of 1641 between the Catholic lords and the native Irish broke down in 1647. Rinuccini, the Papal Nuncio (see p. 550), discovered that Ireland could only be organised to resist English Puritanism under the authority of the Papal clergy, as there was not sufficient union amongst the Irish themselves to admit the existence of lay national institutions. He was unable to carry his idea into effect. Ormond, the king^s Lord-lieutenant, who was himself a Protestant, left Ireland, and handed over Dublin to the Parliamentary troops under Michael Jones, rather than see it in the hands of Rinuccini and the Celts. Even the Catholic lords objected to become the servants of a clerical State, and Rinuccini, baffled on every side, was obliged to return to Italy. In September, 1648, Ormond returned to Ireland, where he soon afterwards entered into a close alliance with the Catholic lords, who were to receive religious toleration, and in return to defend the king. After the king's execution, Charles II. was proclaimed in Ireland. Ormond, having now an army in which Irish Catholics and English Royalist Protestants were combined, hoped to be able to overthrow the Commonwealth both m Ireland and in England. 3. Cromwell in Ireland. 1649 — 1650. — To Cromwell such a situation was intolerable. His Puritan zeal led him to regard with loathing Ormond's league with the Catholics, and he was too thorough an Englishman not to resolve that, if there was to be a struggle, England must conquer Ireland, and not Ireland England. On August 15 he landed at Dublin. On September 11 he stormed Drogheda, where he put 2,cx)omen to the sword, a slaughter which was in strict accordance with the laws of war of that day, which left garrisons refusing, as that of Drogheda had done, to surrender an indefensible post, when summoned to do so, to the mercy or cruelty of the enemy. Cromwell had a half-suspicion that some farther excuse was needed. " I am persuaded," he wrote, " that this is a righteous judgment of God upon those barbarous wretches who have imbrued their hands in so much innocent blood ; and that it i6so DROGHEDA AND DUNBAR 563 will tend to prevent the effusion of blood for the future — which are the satisfactory grounds to such actions, which otherwise cannot but work remorse and regret." At Wexford, where the garrison continued to defend itself after the walls had been scaled, there was another slaughter. Town after town surrendered. In the spring of 1650 Cromwell left Ireland. The conquest was prosecuted by his successors, Ireton and Ludlow, with savage effectiveness ; and when at last, in 1652, the war came to an end, a great part of three out of the four provinces of Ireland was confiscated for the benefit of the conquering race. The Catholic landowners of Ireland who had borne arms against the Parliament were driven into the wilds of Connaught, to find there what sustenance they could. 4. Montrose and Charles II. in Scotland. 1650. — In 1650 Cromwell's services were needed in Scotland. In the spring, Montrose reappeared in the Highlands, but was betrayed, carried to Edinburgh, and executed as a traitor. On June 24 Charles II. landed in Scotland, and, on his engaging to be a Presbyterian king, found the whole nation ready to support him. Fairfax de- clined to lead the English army against Charles, on the plea that the Sijcots had a right to choose their own form of government. Cromwell had no such scruples, knowing that, if Charles were once established in Scotland, the next thing would be that the Scots would try to impose their form of government on England. Cromwell, being appointed General in the room of Fairfax, marched into Scotland, and attempted to take Edinburgh ; but he was out- manoeuvred by David Leslie (see p. 549), who was now the Scottish commander, and, to save his men from starvation, had to retreat to Dunbar. 5. Dunbar and Worcester. 1650 — 1651. — Cromwell's position at Dunbar was forlorn enough. The Scots seized the passage by which alone he could retreat to England by land, whilst the mass of their host was posted inaccessibly on the top of a long hill in front of him. If he sailed home, his flight would probably be the signal for a rising of all the Cavaliers and Presbyterians in England. The Scots, however, relieved him of his difficulties. They were weary of waiting, and, on the evening of September 2, they de- scended the hill. Early on the morning of the 3rd, Cromwell, crying " Let God arise ; let His enemies be scattered," charged into their right wing before the whole army had time to draw up in line of battle, and dashed them into utter ruin. Edinburgh surrendered to him, but there was still a large Scottish army on foot, and, in August 1651, its leaders, taking Charles with them, 564 THE COMMONWEALTH &^ PROTECTORATE 1651 pushed on into England, where they hoped to raise an insurrection before Cromwell could overtake them. On they marched, with Cromwell following hard upon their heels. Fear kept those who sympathised with Charles from rising, and, at Worcester, on September 3-the anniversary of the battle of Dunbar— Cromwell absolutely destroyed the Scottish army. Those who were not slam were taken prisoners, and many of the prisoners sent as slaves to Barbadoes. "The dimensions of this mercy," wrote Cromwell, "are above my thoughts. It is, for aught I know, a crownmg mercy." He spoke truly. Never again was he called on to draw A coach of the middle of the seventeenth century : from an engraving by John Dunstall. sword in England. Charles succeeded in making his escape to France, on one occasion concealing himself amidst the thick leafage of an oak, whilst his pursuers rode unwittingly below. 6. The Navigation Act. 1651. — Ever since the days of James I. there had existed a commercial rivalry between England and the Dutch Republic, and disputes relating to trade constantly arose. Latterly these disputes had been growing more acute. Early in 1648 Spain came to terms with the Dutch by acknowledging their independence, and, later in the same year, the Thirty Years' War in Germany was brought to an end by the Peace of Westphalia, 1648- 1653 THE NAVIGATION ACT 565 though war between France and Spain still continued. Hence- forth religion was no longer made the pretext for war on the Continent ; and States contended with one another because they wished either to annex territory, or to settle some trade dispute in their own favour. In 1650 the Stadholder, William II.— the son-in-law of Charles I. — died, and the office which he held was aboUshed, the government of the Dutch Republic faUing completely under the control of the merchants of the Province of Holland, in which were situated the great commercial ports of Amsterdam and Rotterdam. The Dutch had got into their hands the carrying trade of Europe. In 1651 the English Parliament passed the Navigation Act, to put an end to this state of things. EngHsh vessels alone were to be allowed to import goods into England, except in the case of vessels belonging to the country in which the goods which they carried were produced. 7. The Dutch War. 1652 — 1653. — War with the Dutch soon followed. Vane, the leading man in the Committee of the Council of State which managed the navy, had put the fleet into excellent condition. Its command was given to Blake, who had been noted as a soldier by the defence of Taunton (see p. 547) in the Civil War, but who never went to sea till 1649, when he was over fifty. Yet Blake soon found himself at home on board ship, and won the confidence of officers and men. Battle after battle was fought between the English and Dutch fleets. The sturdy antagonists were well matched, though the English ships were larger and more powerfully armed. In November 1652, Tromp (the Dutch Admiral) got the better of Blake, but in February 1653 there was another battle, in which Blake got the upper hand ; but it was no crushing victory, like Dunbar and Worcester. In the summer of 1653 the English gained two more victories, but though they attempted to blockade the Dutch ports, they were obliged to give up the attempt. 8. Unpopularity of the Parliament. 1652— 1653.— At home, the truncated ParHament was becoming increasingly unpopular. Ever since the end of the first Civil War, Parliament had sup- plied itself with money by forcing Royalists to compound— that is to say, to pay down a sum of money, without which they were not allowed to enjoy their estates ; and these compositions, as they were called, were still exacted from men who had joined in the second Civil War, or had favoured the invasion by Charles 1 1. The system, harsh in itself, was not fairly carried out. Members of Parliament took bribes, and let the briber ofl" more easily than they 566 THE COMMONWEALTH ^ PROTECTORATE 1653 did others who neglected to give them money. Those who were not Royalists had grievances of their own. Many of the members used their power in their own interest, disregarding justice, and pro- moting their sons and nephews in the public service. 9. Vane's Reform Bill. 1653.— For a long time Cromwell and the officers had been urging ParHament to dissolve itself and to provide for the election of a new Parliament, which would be more truly representative. Vane had, indeed, brought in a Reform Bill, providing for a redistribution of seats, depriving small hamlets of the franchise, and conferring it upon populous towns and counties ; but the discussion dragged on, and the army was growing im- patient. Yet, impatient as the army was, officers and politicians alike recognised that a freely-elected Parliament would probably overthrow the Commonwealth and recall the king. Cromwell suggested that a committee of officers and politicians should be formed to consult on securities to be taken against such a catastrophe. The securities which pleased the members of Parlia- ment were, that all members then sitting should continue to sit in the next Parliament, without fresh election, and should be formed into a committee having power to reject any new member whom they considered it desirable to exclude. 10. Dissolution of the Long Parliament by Cromwell, 1653. — Cromwell, who disliked this plan, was assured, on April 19, by one of the leading members of Parliament that nothing would be done in a hurry. On the next day, April 20, he heard that the House was passing its bill in the form which he disliked. Going to the House, when the last vote on the bill was about to be taken he rose to speak. Parliament, he said, had done well in its care for the public good, but it had been stained with ' injustice, delays of justice, self-interest.' Being interrupted by a member, he blazed up into anger. " Come, come ! " he cried ; " we have had enough of this. I will put an end to this. It is not fit you should sit here any longer." He called in his soldiers, and bade them clear the House, following the members with words of obloquy as they passed out. "What shall we do with this bauble?" he asked, taking up the mace. " Take it away." " It is you," he said to such of the members as still lingered, " that have forced me to do this. I have sought the Lord night and day, that He would rather slay me than put me upon the doing of this work." 11. The so-called Barebone's Parliament. 1653. — Cromwell and the officers shrank from summoning an elected Parliament. They gathered an assembly of their own nominees, to which men 1653 THE BARE BONE'S PARLIAMENT 567 gave, in derision, the title of the Barebone's Parliament, because a certain Praise-God Barebone sat in it. In a speech at its opening, on July 4, Cromwell told them that England ought to be governed by godly men, and that they had been selected to govern it because they were godly. Unfortunately, many of these godly men were crotchety and impracticable. A large number of them wanted to abolish the Court of Chancery without providing a substitute, Oliver Cromwell : from the painting by Samuel Cooper at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. and a majority resolved to abolish tithes without providing any other means for the support of the clergy. At the same time, enthusiasts outside Parliament — the Fifth Monarchy men, as they were called— declared that the time had arrived for the reign of the saints, and that they were themselves the saints. All who had anything to lose were terrified, and turned to Cromwell for 568 THE COMMONWEALTH