Consider: Why
would Stephen chose to fight at Lincoln without gathering a larger
army?
Why would Robert rely on the Disenheirted, yet place the Earl of Chester at the front?
Why didn't Matilda wait for a Coronation before issuing royal proclamations as Lady and Queen of England?
Why did she agree that Henry of Winchester would chose Bishops and Abbots?
Why did Henry of Winchester call the Council of April 7th, 1141?
Why did Matilda spend the first part of the year at Oxford instead of London?
How do Matlida cost herself the Coronation and a Kingdom at peace?
Why would Henery of Winchester be concerned for Eustace's Titles and Lands?
Why would Matilda and Robert attack Winchester after the 'flight from London'?
Why were Stephen's men bold enough to beseige the beseigers?
Why would the exchange of King Stephen for the Duke of Gloucester be called 'even'?
Why was Stephen unable to recover the whole of England?
Why would the Archbishop re-crown Stephen?
What is the signficance of the Council of Westminster of 7 December 1141?
How was Stephen able to recover the loyalty of the Earls of Chester & Lincoln in 1142?
Know: In the Battle of Lincoln, Stephen was on foot at the rear behind two lines of Earls.
The Earl of Chester lead the charge of the opposing forces, made up primarily of the 'Disenherited' – those raised up by Henry, and brought low by Stephen.
Stephen was captured after his lines of earls fled, but only after several attacks on him.
Stephen surrendered to Robert of Gloucester, and was sent to Gloucester, then Bristol.
Stephen's Earls escaped, Matilda's forces (Robert's Army) looted Lincoln.
March 3, 1141 - Matilda was ceremonially proclaimed Lady of the English ("domina anglorum" or "Anglorum Domina") at Winchester Cathedral .
Matilda was declared Lady and Queen of the English on 8 April 1141 in Winchester by Bishop and Papal Legate Henry of Winchester following the Council of 7 April.
Matlida began to act as Queen immediately - appointing Bishops and Earls, and referening in documents to her Kingdom and her Crown.
Matilda's demands on the City of London so insulted the populace that they threw her out before her formal coronation could happen, even though the King of Scots had come down for it.
Henry changed sides again and joined with Stephen, when Matilda wouldn't promise to recognize Eustace's lands and titles in Europe (.
Robert and Matlida took Winchester, evicted Bishop Henry and besieged the bishop 's castle there.
The besiegers became the besieged, Robert became rear-guard for Matilda.
Stephen's forces took Robert of Gloucestor prisoner, and on November 1, Matilda exchanged Stephen for Robert.
Siege and skirmish, treason and counter-treason, fill up the passing months for the next 10 years.
December 7, a new council, assembling in Westminster, reversed the decisions of the council of Winchester.
Shortly after Stephen created William of Albini as Earl of Sussex or Arundel, and Gilbert of Clare as Earl of Hertford
In the early months of 1142 Stephen recovered the allegiance of the Earl of Chester and of his brother, the Earl of Lincoln.
Consider: Why would Robert have thought Matilda safe in Oxford?
Why would Robert have gone to Normandy to request Geoffrey's presence in England?
Why is Matlida's escape from Oxford so much a favourite tale of English History?
Why would Robert keep Henry four years (ages 10 to 13) at Bristol?
Why didn't Stpehen go 'full measure' during the St Albans' Court of 1143?
Why was Geoffrey able to secure Normandy by 1144 while Stephen still held England?
Why were the Earls positioned so as to have great bargaining power?
Why were the treasons of the Earls left unchecked by both sides?
Why did the Chroniclor say of these times that 'Christ and the Apostles slept'?
Why was Geoffrey de Mandeville's body left unburied for so long?
Why would the Earl of Chester join the side of King Stephen?
Why were all these rebellious Earls unable to secure a 'fedual or divided England'?
Know: Stephen sacked Oxford, and laid seige to its castle while Robert was in Normandy.
Stephen (unusually) maintained the siege even after Robert returned from Normandy.
As Christmas approached the neccessity of surrender became apparent to Matilda.
Matilda (dressed all in white) made a bold night time escape with only a few attendents.
The first 6 miles of her escape where made on foot in deep snow.
Robert, and Matilda's son (Henry II) meet her at Wallingford.
Henry was now in his tenth year, and for four years and more he remained in England in the inaccessible stronghold of Bristol.
Over the next two years Matlida's husband Geoffrey had great success in Normandy.
On January 20,1144, the city of Rouen surrendered to the Geoffrey Count of Anjou.
The Earl of Essex, Geoffrey de Mandeville, soon after Easter, 1142, he had found an opportunity for another prudent and profitable change of sides, - the reported death of Stephen.
Geoffrey, with his change of sides could threaten to cut the kingdom of Stephen into two detached fragments.
Neither Geoffrey nor the Empress gained anything from this bargaining. Stephen was not dead, his campaign of the summer of 1142 made it prudent to Geoffrey to hold his treason.
Stephen took his opportunity in the autumn of 1143, at a court held at St. Albans.
Geoffrey was not the man to submit to such a sudden overthrow, and rebelled.
Towards the end of the summer of 1144, he was wounded in the head by an arrow, in an attack on a fortified post which the king had established and soon after he died.
For twenty years his body could not be received into consecrated ground, for he had died with his crimes unpardoned and under the ban of the Church.
To the great power for which Geoffrey was playing, to his independent principality, or to his even higher ambition of controlling the destinies of the Crown, there was no successor.
The years 1144 and 1145 were on the whole prosperous for Stephen.
Even the Earl of Gloucester's son Philip, turned against his father; but the most important desertion to the king was that of the Earl of Chester, who joined him in 1146
His design was hardly less than the carving out of a state for himself from western and northern England, and he seems to have carried himself with no regard to either side.
On Henry's final visit, in 1153, when the tide was fairly turning in his favour, another well-timed treason secured the Earl his winnings; but in this same year he died.
Out of the breaking up of England and the helplessness of her rulers arose no independent feudalism. Higher titles and wider lands many barons did gain, but the power of the king emerged in the end still supreme, & the worst of the evils of the feudal system, a divided state, averted.
Consider: Why did the instability of the Papal Government factor into the English Succession?
Why would Henry still find his Enemies to strong for him in 1149?
Why was the 1152 attempt so much more successful?
Why did the Church refuse Eustace the Crown in 1151, and why did this matter?
Why was Geoffrey of Anjou's success so important to Henry II?
Why would Eleanor consider Louis a 'Monk and not a King'?
Why was the marriage of Henry II to Eleanor so important to them both?
What should be made of the timing of Eleanor's Divorce, Marriage and William's Birth?
How were the factors that delayed Henry's move on England interrelated?
What is the significance of the Arch-bishops refusal to consecrate Eustace?
Know: Stephen's supporter Innocent II died in September 1143.
Celestine II followed as was pro Henry II (his reign was short).
Lucius II (March 1144) was more 'neutral'.
Eugenius III (1145) was hostile to Stephen as King.
Thomas Becket received training in Church State Politics at this time as well.
Robert of Gloucester died at Bristol in 1148.
In 1149 Henry was sixteen years old and came to England to put forth his own Claim.
Henry passed rapidly through western England to Carlisle, and was knighted by David, King of Scots.
Their army, which advanced to attack Lancaster, accomplished nothing and Henry, again disappointed, was obliged to return to Normandy.
1150 Henry's father had handed over to him the only portion of his mother's inheritance which had yet been recovered, the duchy of Normandy
Stephen seems to have decided upon a plan of securing a formal recognition of his son Eustace as his successor in the throne, or even as king with him.
It was this that Stephen was not able to secure. The pope--this was about Easter time of 1151--rejected almost with indignation the suggestion.
Twice during the summer of 1151 French armies invaded Normandy (unsuccessfully).
Henry ordered an assembly of the Norman barons, on September 14, to consider the invasion of England; but his plans were interrupted by the sudden death of his father a week before.
Late 1151, the death of his father added the county of Anjou to his duchy of Normandy.
Third week of May 1152, Henry Married Eleanor of Aquitaine.
If he could gain England, he would bear sway, as king in reality if not in name, from Scotland to the Pyrenees
Louis VII in particular had reasons for interfering, and A summons, it is said, was at once served on Henry to appear before the king's court and answer for his conduct (marrying Eleanor).
A new coalition opposed Henry: Louis VII and Eustace, joined by Henry's own brother Geoffrey, Robert of Dreux, Count of Perche, and Eustace's cousin Henry, Count of Champagne.
In January, 1153, Henry started his long-deferred expedition to recover his kingdom.
A meeting of the great council of the kingdom, or of that part which obeyed Stephen, was called at London early in April, 1152.
This body was asked to sanction the immediate consecration of Eustace as king.
The barons who were present were ready to agree, they swore allegiance did homage.
The Archbishop of Canterbury,--Henry of Winchester is not mentioned in this case,--flatly refused to perform the consecration.
Then followed the vigorous siege of Wallingford, which called Henry into England.
Consider: Why would Henry's force appear to be disappointingly small to the English Barons?
Why would Henry win by his management skills and events which worked for him?
Why would the Barons have desired nothing less than the victory of one of the rivals?
Why would Eustace's death be desribed as 'Punishment' and from 'Madness'?
Why did Eustace's death change the whole outlook of the future?
Which parties had to agree to the 'Peace of Novermber 6th' ?
Where all the treaty provisions necessary? Where they upheld?
Why would Henry return to Normandy (and not address the issue in England?)
What institution gained strength during the anarchy? Why did it do so?
Why would monastaries florish during (and after) the Anarchy?
Know: Henry crossed the Channel in 36 ships with 140 men-at-arms and 3,000 footmen.
Henry's supporters, knowing of his extensive holdings expected a larger army.
Ralph of Chester changed sides again (to Henry's) after his landing.
Henry's first attempt was against the important castle of Malmesbury.
Then the garrison of Wallingford was relieved, and the intrenched position of Stephen's forces over against the castle was invested.
King Stephen came up with an army to protect his men, and would gladly have joined battle and settled the question on the spot, but once more his barons refused to fight.
The leaders agreed to a brief truce, the advantage of which fell wholly to Henry.
From Wallingford Henry marched north through central England, where towns
and castles one after another fell into his hands.
From Wallingford also, Eustace withdrew from his father - and went off to the east on an expedition of his own which looks much like a plundering raid.
Within a week Eustace was smitten with madness and died on August 17.
His death changed the whole outlook for the future. Stephen had no more interest in continuing the war than to protect himself.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, who had by some means returned to England, proposed peace, and undertook negotiations between the king and the duke.
On November 6 the rivals met at Winchester to make peace, and the terms of their agreement were recited in a great council of the kingdom (1st real all kingdom council in 15 years).
The king formally recognized before the assembly the hereditary right of Henry to the kingdom of England. The duke formally agreed that Stephen should hold the throne so long as he lived.
It was also agreed that all possessions which had been seized by force should be restored, and that all castles which had been erected since the death of Henry I should be destroyed.
Henry promised that William should enjoy undisturbed all the possessions which he had obtained with his wife or father, and all his father's private inheritance in England and Normandy.
Allegiance and homage were paid by Henry to Stephen as king and by William to Henry, and Henry's barons did homage to Stephen and Stephen's to Henry, with the usual reservation.
The King's Flemish mercenaries were to be sent home, and order was to be established
throughout the land.
The new day of peace and strong government was not for Stephen. On October 25, 1154, he died at Dover.
One of the parties to the strife, and one only, emerged from it with great permanent gains of power and independence, the Church.
In these events Thomas Becket, who was to lead the defence of the Church, had been trained for his future work.
Consider: Why is the physical appearance of Henry II so important?
Why would Henry II be considered as 'possibly the greatest English Monarch'?
Why would the pacification of England be Henry II's only signal success?
Why was the restoration of peace in England such a major achievement?
Why should Henry II be considered a Restorationist instead of a Founder?
How did Henry II's Passions affect his reign and his diplomacy?
Why would Henry II have a 'Narrow Range of Ethical Ideas'?
What were these 'Ethical Ideas' that provided the scruples of Henry II?
Why would Elanore have had cause for the bitterness she felt toward Henry II?
What special insights might Henry's mother have about Governance?
Was it wise of Henry to consult her often (as he did) on Matters of State?
Why would everyone either love of fear the new King Henry II?
Why would this Henry make 'King Henry my Grandfather' the keynote of his reign?
Why would henry II appoint Robert de Beaumont, Earl of Leicester, as Justiciar?
Why was Thomas Becket the choice for Chancellor?
Why would Henry II find it easier to remove the mercenaries than the unlawful castles?
Know: Henry II was 22 years old when the Throne of England became unquestionably his.
Henry II restored both peace and strong central government to England.
He was determined to be a strong king, to be obeyed, and to allow no infringement of his own rights.
He held under a strong government compeled into good order, almost unbroken, a generation which had been trained in the anarchy of Stephen's Reign.
He continued the steady and systematic development of the machinery of central government in this was his greatest service to England.
Henry II was a very active King, in mind and body.
But Henry is not to be reckoned among the kings whose policy or public conduct were affected by his vices.
Henry II was able to re-establish control of a fuedal baronage – even maintainng one was no easy task.
Henry II knew what he wanted and how to get it, and that he would be satisfied with nothing less.
Henry did not cross back to England immediately upon the death of King Stephen.
The King's Peace was undisturbed during the absence of the King.
Henry came to England in December, took the homage of the Barons at Winchester, and was crowned by the Archbishop of Canterbury on the Sunday before Christmas - 1154.
The key to Henry II's Coronation Charter and reign was 'King Henry my Grandfather'.
Richard de Lucy (in charge of the Tower and Windsor Castle) was the only signatory to Henry II's Coronation Charter, and appears to have been his Justiciar.
Robert de Beaumont, Earl of Leicester, was apparently given office with the same title within a few days, continuing the family tradition of service to the Norman Kings.
Young Thomas Becket, who had done so much to prevent the coronation of
Eustace, was made Chancellor.
Immediately after his coronation, at Christmas time, Henry held at Bermondsey the first of the great councils of his reign.
The king himself set out early in 1155 to complete the destruction of unlawful castles.
Consider: Why would Henry II hold Councils so frequently at the start of his reign?
Why would Hugh Mortimer think to openly rebel against Henry II?
Why would Henry II have the Barons swear allegiance to both William and Henry?
Why are the events leading to the conquest of Ireland so 'disputed' to this day?
Why is Nicholas Breakspear so important to the History of England and the United Kingdom?
Why must we rely on John of Salisbury for the description of Pope Hadrian IV's letter?
Why should we consider John of Salisbury to be a reliable source for this description?
Would the letter as he describes it correspond fully with papal ideas current at the time?
Why would Matilda have objected to the invasion of Ireland?
Does the quotation “The history of the year furnishes, abundant illustration of the energy and capacity of a king of two-and-twenty." reflect reality, or propaganda?
Why would Geoffrey think he could obtain Anjou and Maine?
Why would Henry II support Geoffrey of Anjou as 'Count of Nantes'?
Why would Louis VII accept his homage both for his father's and his wife's inheritance?
Why is Henry II given credit for the practice of Scutage?
Know: Henry II held for Councils in the first 9 months of his reign in England.
Only Hugh Mortimer attempted to hold Castles against him during the restoration.
At the 3rd of the great councils of held at Wallingford early in April, the barons had sworn allegiance to Henry's eldest son William, and in case of his death to his younger brother Henry.
The 4th great council met at Winchester in the last days of September, and there a new question of policy was discussed regarding Ireland.
Nicholas Breakspear, was the only Englishman who ever became pope, as Hadrian IV.
It is impossible to say what was the form of Henry's request regarding Ireland, or the character of the pope's reply.
John of Salisbury was an intimate friend of Pope Hadrian IV's and spent some months with him in very familiar intercourse in the winter of 1155-1156.
John declares that the this grant was the ownership of the islands, and he adds that
Hadrian sent Henry a ring by which he was to be invested with the right of ruling in Ireland. Letter and ring, he says, are preserved in England at the time of his writing.
Henry did NOT mount the invasion of Ireland during his first year as King.
Henry seized the Castles of Henry of Winchester when he left England without permission of the King.
“The history of the year furnishes, abundant illustration of the energy and capacity of a king of two-and-twenty."
Early in January, 1156, Henry crossed to Normandy. His brother Geoffrey was making trouble demanding that Anjou and Maine should be assigned to him.
Until April of the next, 1157, Henry remained abroad, and before his return to England he was able to offer his brother the position of Count of Nantes in Brittany.
Henry II had spent most of the year on an 'Introductory Tour' of his and Elanor's lands.
The term "scutage" may be roughly translated "shield money," and, as the word implies, it was a tax assessed on the knight's fee, and was in theory a money payment accepted by the king in place of the military service
Consider: Why was Henry II now able to 'fly after higher game'?
Would Henry have been as aggressive if Geoffrey were still 'on the scene'?
Why might 'crown wearing and ceremony' have been distasteful to Henry II?
Why was Thomas Becket so successful as an emissary for Henry II?
Why would Henry and Louis agree to the marriage of their infant children?
Why would Henry push the claims of Elanor in Toulouse?
Why would Henry II 'Consult with his Barons' before beginning military action?
Why would Henry not maintain the Siege when Louis entered on Raymond V's side?
Why would the Count of Barcelona pledge his daughter to Henry's son Richard?
What was the greatest lasting result of the Toulouse Campaign?
Why was Henry II able to 'push through' the Scutage Plan on the lay Barons?
How was the scutage better for the King than 'knightly service'? For the Baron?
Why did government still rely heavily on the 'Dona' or 'Gifts'?
Why was Henry II able to 'compel' these 'voluntary gifts'?
Why would Henry II work to see Mary, Abbess of Romsey married to a son of the Count of Flanders?
Know: April, 1157, Henry returned to England & took up again the work which had been interrupted by the demands of his brother Geoffrey.
Stephen's son William, Hugh Bigod, Malcolm IV of Scotland, Owen, the prince of North Wales, all surrendered their castles in England to Henry II.
Half of the year 1158 Henry spent in England, but the work which lay before him at his accession was now done.
Henry to crossed to Normandy in August. He met the king of France near Gisors where the marriage of Henry's infant son Henry and Louis's infant daughter Margarette was arraigned.
Henry's chancellor, Thomas Becket, was instrumental in Henry's diplomatic success, having used a display of wealth and subtly of speech.
Henry launched military campaign in the summer of 1159, after consulting with his barons to secure Elanor's claims to Toulouse.
Henry would not directly attack his suzerain, King Louis of France, but would besiege his castles were he was not present.
Thomas Becket thought this refusal folly and argued loudly to continue the campaign against Raymond and his Ally the King of France.
Scutage was extended from Ecclesiastical Baronies to all lay Baronies to fund the Toulouse Campaign.
Henry made it seem his 'scutage plan' was to avoid hardships for England and its Barons, taking their money but leaving them behind to 'maintain the state'.
Henry had effectively discovered a new form of 'feudal land tax' that worked – a land-tax payable in hard currency instead of unreliable services.
Henry also made extensive use of the 'Dona' or 'voluntary' gifts.
In theory Dona was voluntary – under Henry II reality didn't agree with theory.
Henry II's “Dona” established a precedent for the King's Arbitrary Taxing of the People.
When Stephen's son William died and ended of the male line of Stephen's succession, his Norman county of Mortain was at once taken in hand by Henry as an escheated fief.
The wide personal possessions of William in England were apparently added to the royal
domain
Consider: Why would Louis be so quick to remarry?
Why would Henry move so quickly to 'formalize' the Marriage of Young Henry to Margaret?
How was war avoided while the Castles were fortified?
Why were the Barons asked to swear fealty to the young Henry in his 8th year?
Why would Archbishop Theobald have hoped & prayed that Thomas succeed him?
Why would Thomas have thought his Archbishopric would bring back the days of Anselm and Henry I?
What abilities and traits did Thomas display that made Henry II think him the right man for the job of Primate of England?
Why would Thomas Becket throw himself into the elegant and luxurious life of the court with an abandon and delight?
Why would his home have been a better training than that of the King?
How was Thomas able to avoid the Envy of the King while maintaining such a household?
Why were some of the monks opposed to Thomas Becket's selection as Archbishop?
Why did they yield to the King's Desire on the matter?
Why did the Young Henry approve the election of Thomas 'immediately'?
Why were the demands of Henry, Bishop of Winchester regarding accountablitiy for the past actions of the Chancellor meet so readily?
What does Thomas' first act as prelate say about his style and indicate for the future?
Know: At the beginning of October, 1160, Louis's second wife died leaving no male heir.
Louis married the sister of the Counts of Blois and Champagne within two weeks.
The counts were betrothed (to his daughters from Elanor) sons-in-law to Louis.
Henry saw the danger of the power of the House of Blois, and fortified his holdings.
The marriage of the young Henry and Margaret of France was immediately celebrated.
It is said that the suggestion of these defensive moves came from Thomas Becket.
Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury died on April 18, 1161.
The swearing of fealty to the heir (young Henry in 1161), to which the barons were now accustomed, was performed without objection, Thomas setting the example by first taking the oath.
This swearing of fealty was Thomas' last major assignment as Chancellor.
Bishop of Hereford, Gilbert Foliot, records his own opposition to the appointment of Thomas as Archbishop of Canterbury – one of the few to raise objections.
Thomas had come to the chancellorship at the age of thirty-seven.
In the order and elegance of his household as it is described, the chancellor (Thomas) surpassed the king (Henry II).
In the king's service he spent his money with as lavish a hand as for himself, in his embassy to the French court or in the war against Toulouse.
He had the skill to avoid the envy of either king or courtier, and no scandal or hint of vice was breathed against him.
The election of Becket to the see of Canterbury seems to have followed closely the forms described in the Constitutions of Clarendon.
June 3, 1162, Thomas was consecrated Archbishop at Canterbury by the Bishop of Winchester, as the see of London was vacant.
As his first official act the new prelate ordained that the feast in honour of the Trinity should be henceforth kept on the anniversary of his consecration.
Consider: What events in Thomas Becket's past were especially important training for his role as Archbishop of Canterbury?
What things had Becket done for Henry II to lead him to trust in Becket's abilities?
Why was Becket's Church more independent than that of Lanfranc or Anslem?
Why did Henry II think he would have Becket's assistance in the restoring Royal Power?
What was the true and natural character of Thomas Becket?
Why did Becket refuse to be both Primate of the Church and Chancellor of England?
Why did Henry II propose a change in tax policy at the Council of Woodstock?
Why was Becket opposed to the change?
Why is this public disagreement between Archbishop and King a foreshadowing?
How does the reign of Henry II show that he had a high ideal of Kingly duty to ensure Justice and repress crime and disorder throughout the Realm?
Why was Church Law more systematically developed than that of the State?
How did the Cluniac reformation impact the growth of Church Law and Courts?
Why were the lines between State Jurisdiction and Church Jurisdiction so hazy?
Why might William and Stephen have granted the Church Courts the powers they did?
How might the history of the 'squabble' have been different if Henry II had pursued the issues with Archbishop Theobald earlier, rather than crossing over to France and facing Becket now?
What does the case of Philip of Broi show about the 'Power of the King, and of the Church' at the beginning of Henry II's reign?
Should such a separation of Church and State be acceptable to Subject of the Crown?
Would it be fair to say that squabble between Henry II and Becket was about the question: “What law and what sovereign should rule in England”?
Was the demand of Henry II that clerics found guilty by church courts be degraded and handed over to the King's Justice for punishment reasonable and in accord with English Tradition?
Know: Thomas Becket had was born to middle class parents, studied abroad and in the household of Archbishop Theobald, served as diplomat and Chancellor before becoming Archbishop.
From the death of Henry I to the ascension of Henry II the Church had operated with a nearly free hand, independent of the State.
Becket threw himself with all the ardour of a great nature into whatever work he was called upon to do.
King Henry II crossed from Normandy back to England, at the end of January, 1163.
Becket firmly declined to continue in the old office of Chancellor.
Henry's campaign in South Wales brought the prince of that country to terms, and was followed by homages rendered at a great council held at Woodstock during the first week of July, 1163.
At Woodstock Henry made a proposition to change the collection of the Sheriff's Aid which Becket successfully opposed.
Administration and jurisdiction, revenue and justice, were so closely connected in the medieval state that changes in the one necessitated changes in the other.
Henry had a high conception of the duty of the king to make justice prevail and to repress disorder and crime.
The Church Law rivalled that of the State in its own field and surpassed it in scientific form and content.
Even the king could not obtain justice for a personal injury in his own courts against a cleric.
Consider: Why did Henry II see adopting the position of Henry I as his only option?
Why would the Bishops and the Pope urge Becket to compromise?
Why would Becket agree to a public display of his pledge to accept the ancient customs at Clarendon?
Why was the formal declaration of these customs less acceptable to Becket?
What was the purpose and effect of the Council of Clarendon of January 1164?
Why would the Bishops and Becket 'delay' signing the Constitutions of Clarendon?
What were the main issues 'settled' by the Constitutions of Clarendon? In whose favour?
Why was the Henry II – Becket conflict likely to be a war of giants?
What is the significance of the curia regis at Northampton on October 6 1164?
Why might Becket have been summoned by the Sheriff and not the King to this court?
Why was the issue of who would announce the Judgment of the Court so important?
What did Henry II achieve by his victory before the court on 6 October 1164?
Why did Henry II not rest content with the 'victory' of 6 October 1164?
What caused Becket to determine for himself and the Church the 'hard line' course?
What would have happened had Henry II been content with the original October verdict?
Know: Henry's response to the archbishop was to adopt exactly the position of his grandfather.
The pope, Alexander III, counselled moderation, and sent letters to Becket stating this.
Becket was persuaded to concede the form of words to save the honour of the king.
At Oxford Becket engaged that he would faithfully observe the customs of the realm.
A great council met at Clarendon, near Salisbury, towards the end of January, 1164.
The Clarendon Council had two purposes, to witness the archbishop's declaration and to
make the recognition of the 'customs of the realm'.
Becket gave the required promise with no qualifying phrase, and was followed by each of the bishops in the same form.
After the customs were reduced to definite statement, no formal promise was made.
To all who accepted the ideas which now ruled the Church there was much to complain of, much that was impossible in the Constitutions of Clarendon.
It provided that an accused cleric should be first brought before a secular court, then be tried in Church Court, and if guilty be degraded from the church and punished by secular authorities.
Becket and his party regarded this as double trial and punishment for a single offence.
The Constitutions went beyond the original controversy:
Right of presentation must be tried in the king's court even if between two clerics.
. None of the higher clergy were to leave the kingdom without the king's permission,
Nor without his consent were appeals to be taken from church courts to the pope.
Charged with disregard of the king's processes Becket was summoned to answer before the curia regis at Northampton on October 6.
He was tried strictly on the grounds of the archbishop's feudal obligations, and there he had no defence. Judgment was against him, and all his movables were declared in the king's mercy.
The sentence was pronounced by the aged Henry, Bishop of Winchester.
The king immediately demanded that his former chancellor should account for £300 spent by Becket as Chancellor.
On the next day the king demanded the return of 500 marks which he had lent Becket for the Toulouse campaign.
Becket now saw clearly that all concessions had been and would be in vain, and determined to fight with all the resources at his disposal.
Read: Pages 168-170 of the text
(Chapter XIII the third part)
Consider: Why
would Becket chose to 'Up the Ante' by his selection of Sermon
Material?
Was his Personal Carrying of the Cross a 'wise move' in the Court?
Why would the King approve the Bishop's Appeal to Rome? Was that wise?
Was Beckett a 'Perjurer and a Traitor' ?
What does Beckett's speech on leaving the Court say about his personal character?
Was Henry within his rights to style Becket 'Formerly Archbishop of Canterbury'?
Does the 'guilt of forcing the issue' lie with Henry II or Thomas a' Beckett?
Did Beckett have any other course of action open to him at this time?
Was Henry acting according to law, and wisely, when he seized the revenues of the Archbishopric?
Why did Pope Alexander delay in rendering a verdict?
Why did Henry marry his daughter off to the house of Guelph?
Why might Henry's Embassy to Germany think he would support the Emperor against the Pope?
Why would Beckett proceed to excommunicate Richard of Lucy while his case was still pending before the Pope?
Why is the conquest of Brittany and the War with France (in this time) worthy of so much less notice and discussion than the battle of Words before the Pope between Henry and Beckett?
Why were the Papal Legates unable to effectively deal with the situation?
Know: Beckett quoted from Psalm 119:23 for his Feast of Stephen Sermon before attending Court – a statement noted by those around him.
The Bishops argued for Beckett's capitulation and were attacked by him for it..
Beckett carried the Archbishop's Cross himself when entering into the Court Chambers.
Beckett ordered the Bishops not to sit in the Kings Court against him again.
When the King required that the Bishops seat in judgment against this violation of the Constitutions of Clarendon, the bishops demurred, and the King granted them appeal to the pope against the Archbishop's commandment.
Hilary, Bishop of Chichester was on who argued that the Archbishop should respect the Constitutions of Clarendon, and was made part of the King's Embassy to the Pope.
The Court, without the Bishops found Becket guilty of Perjury (and probably Treason).
Thomas fled England secretly and in disguise.
Henry sent letters to the King of France and to the Count of Flanders which said that Thomas, "formerly Archbishop of Canterbury," had fled the kingdom as a traitor.
The war now declared between Henry (state) and Beckett (church) dragged slowly on for six years with few events that seemed to bring a decision nearer till towards the end of that period.
When the King's Embassy returned with no judgment from the Pope he implemented the usual penalties for non service, and went beyond that to include the Archbishop's clerks and kin.
Political events continued – Henry crossed to Normandy in the spring of 1165, where an embassy the Emperor which resulted in the marriage of his daughter Matilda with Henry the Lion.
1166 is noteworthy for the beginning of extensive judicial and administrative reforms.
Beckett's excommunication of the Justicar led to a reaction of feeling against him from its unnecessary severity, and a synod of the clergy of the archbishopric entered an appeal against it.
Pope Alexander seems to have been displeased with Becket's actions and sent legates to Henry in October, 1167. Their mission proved a failure.
Becket refused to accept any compromise and the King was angry that they didn't deprive the archbishop.
Read: Pages 171-173 of the text
(Chapter XIII the last part, and Chapter XIV the first
part)
Consider: Why did
the Pope try to force a compromise instead of 'rendering judgment'?
Why Would Louis support both the rebellion in Brittany and Henry against Thomas?
Why would both Henry and Becket agree to the 'Truce of 1170'?
Why did Henry so strongly desire that his son Henry be crowned 'early'?
Why did Thomas suspend the Bishop of York, and re-excommunicate the Bishops of Salisbury and London?
Did the flight of the Bishops to the Court of the King indicate that the local English Church was being driven to the side of the King?
What are your thoughts on the actions of the four knights?
What do you think of Thomas' reaction and manner when faced by the knights?
Why did Thomas' martyrdom serve his cause better than his life could have?
Was Henry's reaction of horror and dread 'real'? What does his actions on hearing the news show about his true character?
Why would St. Thomas Becket be a favourite, not just in England but all Europe?
Why was the death of Becket also the end of the 'Church-State' struggle?
Why did Henry hurry off from Normandy?
Why did Henry now turn his attention to Ireland, so long neglected?
Why was the Earl of Pembroke summoned back to England in 1171?
Know: The year 1168 was a troubled one for Henry (revolts in Poitou and Britanny).
Early in 1169 the pope sent new envoys to try to reconcile king and primate.
A third embassy later in the year seemed for a moment about to find a possible compromise, but ended in another failure (Becket continued to excommunicate during the interim).
The Bishops of London and Salisbury were among those excommunicated in 1169.
The danger that England would be placed under an interdict Henry met by most stringent regulations against the admission of any communications from the pope or archbishop.
The king had long wished to have his son Henry crowned, and on June 14, 1170, that ceremony was actually performed at Westminster by the Archbishop of York.
Finally, towards the end of July, an agreement was reached which was no compromise- it simply ignored the points in dispute and omitted all the qualifying phrases.
It was December 1 before Thomas actually landed in England. He came bringing war, not peace, suspending all the bishops who had taken part in the coronation of Henry's son and reviving the excommunications of the Bishops of London and Salisbury.
The three prelates most affected--York, London, and Salisbury--went over to Normandy to the king.
It was on the news of Becket's Christmas proclamation, or perhaps on the report of the bishops from England, that Henry gave way to his violent temper, and in an outburst denounced those whom he had cherished and favoured, because they could not avenge him of this one priest.
On these words four knights of his household resolved to punish the archbishop.
December 29 The archbishop was struck down by their swords and murdered in church.
The martyrdom of Thomas Becket served his cause better than his life could have done.
Henry himself was under no delusion as to its effect. He was thunderstruck at the news, and, in a frenzy of horror fasted and shut himself from communication with the court for days.
An embassy to the Pope left Normandy almost immediately to promise on the part of the king his complete submission to whatever the pope should decree after examination of the facts.
The refuge which the repentant Henry may have sought from the necessity of giving an answer to the pope at once, or a kind of preliminary penance for his sin, he found in Ireland.
Read: Pages 174-176 of the text
(Chapter XIV the second part)
Consider: Why
might Henry fear that Ireland could slip from his hands, to those of
his Vassals?
What Splendor of Court would Henry have presented that would impress the Irish?
Why did the Church of Rome favour the English conquest of Ireland?
What is the significance of the Papal Letters of September 20, 1172?
What factors doomed the English Conquests in Ireland to 'speedy troubles'?
Why was Norman Controlled Ireland treated as a transported part of England?
Was the reconciliation of Henry and the Pope (State and Church) on fair grounds?
Why did the Church hold that appeals to the Pope were essential?
Why would Henry feel that he had given up a lot in reaching the 'compromise'?
What was Henry's most significant gain from the 'agreement'?
What caused the troubles between Henry and his sons?
How do the young king Henry and Philip Augustus (Philip II of France) demonstrate the ideals of Chivalry as expressed in the poems and ballads of the time?
Why would Henry feel it his duty to provide courts of their own for his sons?
How did this conflict with his duties as King of England of the Angevin domains?
Why did Henry II have the young Henry crowned?
Why was Henry unable to control the results of this action?
Why would Henry give Elanor's inheritance to Richard, instead of the young Henry?
What does John's title of 'Lackland' express of Henry's idea about his position?
Know: Henry had crossed from Normandy early in September, 1171, & visited Henry of Blois.
Henry advanced with his army through southern Wales into Pembrokeshire whence he crossed to Ireland in the middle of October, 1171.
In Early 1172, a council of the Irish Church was held at Cashel, and all the prelates of the island except the Archbishop of Armagh whose age prevented him, swore allegiance to Henry.
A report of Henry's acceptance by the Irish kings and of the acts of the council was sent at once to the pope, who replied in three letters under date of September 20, 1172.
No attempt seems to have been made to rule those princes who were outside the territories occupied by the Norman adventurers.
The part of Ireland which was actually occupied was not treated in practice as a separate kingdom, but as a transplanted part of England, a purely feudal colony.
Henry returned to England at Easter time, and went on almost at once to meet the papal legates in Normandy.
By the end of May his reconciliation with the Church was completed.
He did not get all which he had set out to recover from the Church, but his gains were large and substantial.
Clerks accused of felonies, except high treason, were tried and punished by the Church courts, but in all minor offences no distinction was made between clerk and layman.
The interval of peace for Henry was not a long one.
The age that formed and applauded the young Henry also gave birth to Philip Augustus.
Henry II really believed it to be his duly to give his sons the position that belonged to them as princes, where they could form courts of their own.
He also thought that the real control of the whole kingdom must remain in his hands. This conflict of ideas in his mind, led inevitably to conflicts of physical force.
Not long after his brother's coronation Richard received his mother's inheritance, Aquitaine and Poitou; Geoffrey was to be Count of Britanny by his marriage with the heiress, John had nothing.
Create a free website at Webs.com