Chapter VII: Richard and England (1)

1189–1194.

All doubts as to the destination of Henry’s realms after his death were settled at once by the discovery of John’s treason. Throughout the Angevin dominions not a voice was raised to challenge the succession of Richard. The English marshal and the Angevin barons gathered at Fontevraud received him unquestioningly as their lord, and were at once accepted as loyal subjects. One of them indeed, the seneschal of Anjou, Stephen of Turnham or of Marçay, was flung into prison for failing to surrender the royal treasure;[1334] but the reason of his failure seems to have been simply that the treasury was empty.[1335] According to one contemporary historian, Richard sealed his forgiveness of William the Marshal by at once despatching him to England with a commission to hold the country for him--in effect, to act as justiciar--till he could proceed thither himself.[1336] In all probability, however, William was authorized to do nothing more than set Eleanor at liberty; it was she who, by her son’s desire, undertook the office of regent in England,[1337] which she fulfilled without difficulty for the next six weeks. Geoffrey the chancellor resigned his seal into his half-brother’s hands as soon as the funeral was over.[1338] The promise of the Norman castellans to Henry that they would surrender to no one but John was of course annulled by later events. John himself hastened to join his brother; Richard gave him a gracious welcome, and they returned to Normandy together.[1339] At Séez the archbishops of Canterbury and Rouen came to meet them, and absolved Richard from the excommunication[1340] laid on him by the legate John of Anagni. Thence they all proceeded to Rouen. On July 20 Richard went in state to the metropolitan church, where Archbishop Walter girded him with the ducal sword and invested him with the standard of the duchy.[1341] On the same day he received the fealty of the Norman barons,[1342] and held his first court as duke of Normandy, and also, it seems, as king-elect of England, although there had been no formal election. He at once made it clear that the abettors of his revolt had nothing to hope from him--three of the most conspicuous had been deprived of their lands already[1343]--and that his father’s loyal servants had nothing to fear, if they would transfer their loyalty to him. He shewed indeed every disposition to carry out his father’s last wishes; he at once nominated Geoffrey for the see of York, and confirmed Henry’s last grant to John, consisting of the Norman county of Mortain and four thousand pounds’ worth of land in England;[1344] at the same time he bestowed upon William the Marshal the hand of Isabel de Clare, daughter and heiress of Earl Richard of Striguil, and upon the son of the count of Perche a bride who had already been sought by two kings--his niece, Matilda of Saxony.[1345]

[1334] _Gesta Ric._ (“Benedict of Peterborough,” Stubbs, vol.
ii.), p. 71. Cf. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 6.

[1335] See _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9198, 9199
(_Romania_, vol. xi. p. 67).

[1336] _Ib._ vv. 9347–9354 (p. 69).

[1337] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 67.

[1338] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 5 (Brewer, vol. iv.
p. 372).

[1339] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 72.

[1340] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 67. How had the
archbishops power to cancel a legatine sentence?

[1341] _Ibid._ _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 73. (The date is from
this last).

[1342] _Gesta Ric._ as above.

[1343] _Ib._ p. 72.

[1344] _Ib._ p. 73. Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 3 (Howlett, vol. i.
p. 301). On John and Mortain see Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii.
p. 6 and note 2, and preface to vol. iii. p. xxiv, note 1.

[1345] _Gesta Ric._ as above.

This last match was evidently intended to secure the attachment of the important little border-county of Perche in case of a rupture with France, which seemed by no means unlikely. The alliance of Philip and Richard had expired with King Henry; now that Richard stood in his father’s place, Philip saw in him nothing but his father’s successor--the head of the Angevin house, whose policy was to be thwarted and his power undermined on every possible occasion and by every possible means. This was made evident at a colloquy held on S. Mary Magdalene’s day to settle the new relations between the two princes; Philip greeted his former ally with a peremptory demand for the restitution of the Vexin.[1346] Richard put him off with a bribe of four thousand marks, over and above the twenty thousand promised by Henry at Colombières; and on this condition, accompanied, it seems, by a vague understanding that Richard and Adela were to marry after all,[1347] Philip agreed to leave Richard in undisturbed possession of all his father’s dominions, including the castles and towns which had been taken from Henry in the last war,[1348] except those of Berry and Auvergne.[1349] Thus secured, for the moment at least, in Normandy, Richard prepared to take possession of his island realm. He had paved the way for his coming there by empowering Eleanor to make a progress throughout England, taking from all the freemen of the land oaths of fealty in his name, releasing captives, pardoning criminals, mitigating, so far as was possible without upsetting the ordinary course of justice, the severe administration of the late king. Richard himself now restored the earl of Leicester and the other barons whom Henry had disseized six years before.[1350] The next step was to send home the archbishop of Canterbury and three other English prelates who were with him in Normandy.[1351] On August 12 they were followed by Richard himself.[1352]

[1346] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 73, 74. Rog. Howden (Stubbs),
vol. iii. pp. 3, 4.

[1347] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 74.

[1348] Rog. Howden as above, p. 4.

[1349] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
29. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ib._), p. 75. Gerv. Cant.
(Stubbs), vol. i. p. 450.

[1350] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 74, 75.

[1351] _Ib._ p. 75.

[1352] Gerv. Cant. as above, p. 457. The _Gesta Ric._, as
above, give a confused date--“Idus Augusti, die dominicâ post
Assumptionem B. Mariæ.”

His politic measures of conciliation, executed by his mother with characteristic intelligence and tact, had secured him a ready welcome. It was only by slow degrees, and with the growing experience of years, that the English people learned how much they owed to the stern old king who was gone. At the moment they thought of him chiefly as the author of grievances which his son seemed bent upon removing.[1353] Richard’s mother, with a great train of bishops and barons, was waiting to receive him at Winchester;[1354] there, on the vigil of the Assumption, he was welcomed in solemn procession;[1355] and there, too, he came into possession of the royal treasury, whose contents might make up for the deficiencies in that of Anjou.[1356] So complete was his security that instead of hastening, as his predecessors had done, to be crowned as soon as possible, he left Eleanor nearly three weeks in which to make the arrangements for that ceremony,[1357] while he went on a progress throughout southern England,[1358] coming back at last to be crowned by Archbishop Baldwin at Westminster on September 3.[1359] No charter was issued on the occasion. The circumstances of the new king’s accession were not such as to make any special call for one; they were sufficiently met by a threefold oath embodied in the coronation-service, pledging the sovereign to maintain the peace of the Church, to put down all injustice, and to enforce the observance of righteousness and mercy.[1360] In the formal election by clergy and people which preceded the religious rite,[1361] and in the essentials of the rite itself, ancient prescription was strictly followed. The order of the procession and the details of the ceremonial were, however, arranged with unusual care and minuteness; it was the most splendid and elaborate coronation-ceremony that had ever been seen in England, and it served as a precedent for all after-time.[1362] Richard had none of his father’s shrinking from the pageantries and pomps of kingship; he delighted in its outward splendours almost as much as in its substantial powers.[1363] He himself, with his tall figure, massive yet finely-chiselled features, and soldierly bearing, must have been by far the most regal-looking sovereign who had been crowned since the Norman Conqueror; and when Archbishop Baldwin set the crown upon his golden hair, Englishmen might for a moment dream that, stranger though he had been for nearly thirty years to the land of his birth, Richard was yet to be in reality what he was in outward aspect, a true English king.

[1353] Cf. _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 75, 76; and Will. Newb.,
l. iv. c. 1 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 293).

[1354] Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 453, 454.

[1355] _Ib._ p. 457. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 67. _Gesta
Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 74.

[1356] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 76, 77.

[1357] “Mater comitis Alienor regina de vocatione comitum,
baronum, vicecomitum, uit sollicita.” R. Diceto as above, p. 68.

[1358] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 77. Gerv. Cant. as above, p.
457, says he went to check the depredations of the Welsh.

[1359] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 78, 79. Gerv. Cant. and R.
Diceto as above. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 5. R. Coggeshall
(Stevenson), pp. 26, 27. Will. Newb. as above (p. 294).

[1360] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 81, 82. R. Diceto as above.
This last was an eye-witness, for, the see of London being
vacant, the dean had to fulfil in his bishop’s stead the duty
of handing the unction and chrism to the officiating primate.
_Ib._ p. 69.

[1361] R. Diceto as above, p. 68.

[1362] See details in _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 80–83; and
Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii. pp. 9–12.

[1363] We see this in the descriptions of his magnificent
dress, brilliant armour, etc. in the _Itinerarium Regis
Ricardi_.

Such dreams however were soon to be dispelled. On the second day after his crowning Richard received the homage of the bishops and barons of his realm;[1364] he then proceeded into Northamptonshire, and on September 15 held a great council at Pipewell.[1365] His first act was to fill up the vacant sees, of which there were now four besides that of York. The appointments were made with considerable judgement. London, whose aged bishop Gilbert Foliot had died in 1187,[1366] was bestowed upon Richard Fitz-Nigel,[1367] son of Bishop Nigel of Ely, and for the last twenty years his successor in the office of treasurer; while Ely, again vacated scarcely three weeks ago by the death of Geoffrey Ridel,[1368] rewarded the past services and helped to secure the future loyalty of Richard’s chancellor, William of Longchamp.[1369] Winchester, vacated nearly a year ago by the death of Richard of Ilchester,[1370] was given to Godfrey de Lucy, a son of Henry’s early friend and servant Richard de Lucy “the loyal”;[1371] Salisbury, which had been without a bishop ever since November 1184,[1372] was given to Hubert Walter,[1373] a near connexion of the no less faithful minister of Henry’s later years, Ralf de Glanville. This last appointment had also another motive. Hubert Walter was dean of York; he stood at the head of a party in the York chapter which had strongly disputed the validity of Geoffrey’s election in the preceding August, and some of whom had even proposed the dean himself as an opposition candidate for the primacy.[1374] Hubert’s nomination to Salisbury cleared this obstacle out of Geoffrey’s way, and no further protest was raised when Richard confirmed his half-brother’s election in the same council of Pipewell.[1375]

[1364] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 84.

[1365] _Ib._ p. 85. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 69. Gerv.
Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 458.

[1366] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 5. R. Diceto as
above, p. 47.

[1367] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 85. R. Diceto as above, p. 69.
Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 9.

[1368] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 78. R. Diceto as above, p. 68.

[1369] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 85. R. Diceto as above, p. 69.
Ric. Devizes as above.

[1370] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 58. R. Diceto as above, p. 58.

[1371] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 84. R. Diceto as above, p. 69.
Ric. Devizes as above.

[1372] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 32. _Gesta Hen._
(Stubbs), vol. i. p. 320.

[1373] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 84. R. Diceto as above, p. 69.
Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 9.

[1374] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 77, 78. Cf. Gir. Cambr. _Vita
Galfr._, l. i. c. 6 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 373). Hubert had
indeed been proposed for the see as far back as 1186; _Gesta
Hen._ as above, p. 352. See also Bishop Stubbs’s preface to
Rog. Howden, vol. iv. pp. xxxix–xlvi.

[1375] Gir. Cambr. as above (p. 374).

When, however, the king turned from the settlement of the Church to that of the state, it became gradually apparent that his policy in England had only two objects:--to raise money for the crusade, and to secure the obedience of his realm during his own absence in the East. These objects he endeavoured to effect both at once by a wholesale change of ministers, sheriffs and royal officers in general, at the council of Pipewell or during the ten days which elapsed between its dissolution and the Michaelmas Exchequer-meeting. The practice of making a man pay for the privilege either of entering upon a public office or of being released from its burthen was, as we have seen, counted in no way disgraceful in the days of Henry I., and by no means generally reprobated under Henry II. Richard however carried it to a length which clearly shocked the feelings of some statesmen of the old school,[1376] if not those of the people in general. The first to whom he applied it was no less a person than the late justiciar, Ralf de Glanville. Ralf was, like Richard himself, under a vow of crusade, which would in any case have rendered it impossible for him to retain the justiciarship after the departure of the English host for Palestine.[1377] The king, however, insisted that his resignation should take effect at once,[1378] and also that it should be paid for by a heavy fine--a condition which was also required of the Angevin seneschal, Stephen of Turnham, as the price of his release from prison.[1379] Worn out though he was with years and labours,[1380] Ralf faithfully kept his vow.[1381] If all the intending crusaders had done the same, it would have been no easy matter to fill his place or to make adequate provision for the government and administration of the realm. Both king and Pope, however, had learned that for eastern as well as western warfare money was even more necessary than men; Richard had therefore sought and obtained leave from Clement III. to commute crusading vows among his subjects for pecuniary contributions towards the expenses of the war.[1382] By this means he at once raised a large sum of money, and avoided the risk of leaving England deprived of all her best warriors and statesmen during his own absence. Instead of Ralf de Glanville he appointed two chief justiciars, Earl William de Mandeville and Bishop Hugh of Durham;[1383] under these he placed five subordinate justiciars, one of whom was William the Marshal.[1384] The bishop-elect of London, Richard Fitz-Nigel, was left undisturbed in his post of treasurer, where his services were too valuable for the king to venture upon the risk of forfeiting them; but the bishop-elect of Ely, although a favourite servant and almost a personal friend of Richard, had to pay three thousand pounds for his chancellorship. On the other hand, Richard proved that in this instance he was not actuated solely by mercenary motives, by refusing a still higher bid from another candidate.[1385] All the sheriffs were removed from office; some seven or eight were restored to their old places, five more were appointed to shires other than those which they had formerly administered;[1386] the sheriffdom of Hampshire was sold to the bishop-elect of Winchester,[1387] that of Lincolnshire to Gerard de Camville, those of Leicestershire, Staffordshire and Warwickshire to Bishop Hugh of Chester;[1388] and the earldom of Northumberland was granted on similar terms to the justiciar-bishop of Durham.[1389]

[1376] This appears from the tone in which his sales of office,
etc., are described by Richard Fitz-Nigel in the _Gesta Ric._
(Stubbs), pp. 90, 91, and by Roger of Howden (Stubbs), vol.
iii. p. 13.

[1377] He had taken the cross in 1185; Rog. Howden (Stubbs),
vol. ii. p. 302. The _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 87, and Will.
Newb. l. iv. c. 4 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 302) say distinctly that
Ralf himself wished to resign in order to fulfil his vow.

[1378] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 90. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson),
p. 7, says he even put him in ward.

[1379] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), pp. 6, 7.

[1380] _Ib._ p. 9.

[1381] He died at the siege of Acre before October 21, 1190.
_Epp. Cant._ ccclvi. (Stubbs, p. 329).

[1382] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii. p. 17.

[1383] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 87. Hugh paid a thousand
marks for the remission of his crusading vow, to enable him to
undertake the office. _Ib._ p. 90.

[1384] Rog. Howden as above, p. 16.

[1385] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 9.

[1386] Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. p. xxix.

[1387] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 10.

[1388] Stubbs as above, pp. xxviii, xxix, and Madox, _Hist.
Exch._, vol. i. p. 458, from Pipe Roll 2 Ric. I.

[1389] Pipe Roll 2 Ric. I. (Stubbs, as above, p. xxviii, note
3). _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 90. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p.
8. Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 5 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 304). Geoff.
Coldingham, c. 9 (_Script. Dunelm. III._, Raine, p. 14). The
grant itself, dated November 25, is in _Scriptt. Dunelm. III._,
App. p. lxii.

Two other matters had to be dealt with before Richard’s preparations for departure were completed. To guard his realm from external disturbance, he must secure the fealty of the vassal-rulers of Scotland and Wales. To guard it against internal treason, he must, if such a thing were possible, secure the loyalty of the brother whom he was leaving behind him. The first was at once the less important and the easier matter of the two. Rees of South Wales had indeed profited by the change of rulers in England to break the peace which he had been compelled to maintain with King Henry, and after the council of Pipewell Richard sent John against him at the head of an armed force. The other Welsh princes came to meet John at Worcester and made submission to him as his brother’s representative;[1390] Rees apparently refused to treat with any one but the king in person, and accordingly he came back with John as far as Oxford, but Richard would not take the trouble to arrange a meeting, and was so unconcerned about the matter that he let him go home again without an audience, and, of course, in a state of extreme indignation.[1391] His threatening attitude served as an excuse for raising a scutage, nominally for a Welsh war;[1392] but the expedition was never made. The king of Scots was otherwise dealt with. Early in December, while Richard was at Canterbury on his way to the sea, William the Lion came to visit him, and a bargain was struck to the satisfaction of both parties. Richard received from William a sum of ten thousand marks, and his homage for his English estates, as they had been held by his brother Malcolm; in return, he restored to him the castles of Roxburgh and Berwick, and released him and his heirs for ever from the homage for Scotland itself, enforced by Henry in 1175.[1393]

[1390] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 87, 88.

[1391] _Ib._ p. 97.

[1392] Madox, _Hist. Exch._, vol. i. p. 664, from Pipe Roll 2
Ric. I.

[1393] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 98. Richard’s charter of
release to William is in Rymer, _Fœdera_, vol. i. p. 30; _Gesta
Ric._ as above, pp. 102, 103; Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii.
pp. 25, 26. It is dated (in Rymer’s copy) December 5. On this
transaction see also R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 72, and
Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 5 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 304).

Richard’s worst difficulty however was still unsolved: how to prevent John from trying to supplant him in his absence. Richard knew that this lad, ten years younger than himself, had been his rival ever since he was of an age to be a rival to any one; and he knew his brother’s character as, perhaps, no one else did know it as yet--for their mother had scarcely seen her youngest child since he was six years old. In the light of later history, it is impossible not to feel that Richard’s wisest course, alike for his own sake and for England’s, would have been to follow the instinct which had once prompted him to insist that John should go with him to the crusade. In this case however he was now led astray by the noblest feature in his character, his unsuspecting confidence and generosity. From the hour of their reconciliation after their father’s death, Richard’s sole endeavour respecting John was to gain his affection and gratitude by showering upon him every honour, dignity and benefit of which it was possible to dispose in his favour. The grant of the county of Mortain made him the first baron of Normandy, and it was accompanied by a liberal provision in English lands. To these were added, as soon as the brothers reached England, a string of “honours”--Marlborough, Luggershall, Lancaster, each with its castle; the Peak, Bolsover, and the whole honour of Peverel; those of Wallingford and Tickhill, and that of Nottingham, including the town; and the whole shire of Derby;[1394] besides the honour of Gloucester, which belonged to John’s betrothed bride Avice, and which Richard secured to him by causing him to be married to her at Marlborough on August 29,[1395] in spite of Archbishop Baldwin’s protests against a marriage between third cousins without dispensation from the Pope. Baldwin at once laid all the lands of the young couple under interdict; but John appealed against him, and a papal legate who came over in November to settle Baldwin’s quarrel with his own monks confirmed the appeal and annulled the sentence of the primate.[1396] At the same time Richard bestowed upon his brother four whole shires in south-western England--Cornwall, Devon, Somerset and Dorset--with the ferms and the entire profits of jurisdiction and administration.[1397] More than this even Richard could not give; if more was needed to hold John’s ambition in check, he could only trust to the skilful management of Eleanor. She was left, seemingly without any formal commission, but with the practical authority of queen-regent, and with the dowries of two former queens in addition to her own.[1398]

[1394] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 78. See also Stubbs, _Rog.
Howden_, vol. iii., pref. p. xx.

[1395] _Gesta Ric._ as above, p. 78.

[1396] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 72, 73.

[1397] _Gesta Ric._ as above, p. 99. Stubbs as above, p. xxv.
Cf. Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 3 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 301), and his
comments on the subject (_ib._ p. 302).

[1398] _Gesta Ric._ as above.

One important part of Richard’s administrative arrangements was however already upset: William de Mandeville, having gone to Normandy on business for the king, died there on November 14.[1399] Earl of Essex by grant of Henry II., count of Aumale by marriage with its heiress, William had been through life one of Henry’s most faithful friends; he was honoured and esteemed by all parties on both sides of the sea; there was no one left among the barons who could command anything like the same degree of general respect; and Richard for the moment saw no means of filling his place. He therefore left Bishop Hugh of Durham as sole chief justiciar; but he made a change in the body of subordinate justiciars appointed at Pipewell. Two of them were superseded; one was replaced by Hugh Bardulf, and the other, it seems, by the chancellor William of Longchamp, who, in addition to the office which he already held, was put in charge of the Tower of London, and intrusted with powers which virtually made him equal in authority to the chief justiciar.[1400]

[1399] R. Diceto as above, p. 73. _Gesta Ric._ as above, p.
92. The day comes from Ralf. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 26,
makes it December 12.

[1400] On these appointments cf. _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p.
101; Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii. p. 28; Ric. Devizes
(Stevenson), pp. 8, 11; Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 5 (Howlett, vol.
i. p. 306); and Bishop Stubbs’s note, pref. to Rog. Howden as
above, p. xxx.

None of these appointments was in itself unwise; but two worse-matched yokefellows than the justiciar and the chancellor it would have been difficult to find. Hugh of Puiset--or “Pudsey,” as his English flock called him--had stood high in both Church and state ever since the days of the civil war. Through his mother he was a great-grandson of the Conqueror, and thus cousin in no remote degree to Henry Fitz-Empress and Richard Cœur-de-Lion, as well as to Philip of France. We saw him more than forty years ago, as archdeacon and treasurer of York, meeting the ecclesiastical censures of his metropolitan with a retort on equal terms, and wielding not unsuccessfully the weapons both of spiritual and temporal warfare in the cause of his cousin William of York and his uncle Henry of Winchester. Since 1153 he had been bishop of Durham; certainly not an ideal successor of S. Cuthbert; yet his appointment had been sanctioned by the saintly archbishop Theobald; and throughout his long episcopate he shewed himself by no means ill-fitted, on the whole, for his peculiar position. That position, it must be remembered, had more than that of any other English bishop an important political side. The bishop of Durham was earl palatine of his shire; its whole administration, secular as well as ecclesiastical, was in his hands. His diocesan jurisdiction, again, extended over the whole of Northumberland, and thus brought him into immediate contact with the Scots across the border. His diocese was in fact a great marchland between England and Scotland; he was the natural medium of communication or negotiation between the two realms; and on him depended in no small degree the security of their relations with each other. For such a post it was well to have a strong man, in every sense of the words; and such a man was Hugh of Puiset. His strength was not based solely upon an unscrupulous use of great material and political resources. He was a popular man with all classes; notwithstanding his unclerical ways, he never fell into any ecclesiastical disgrace except with his own metropolitan, for whom he was generally more than a match; and he was one of the very few prelates who managed to steer their way through the Becket quarrel without either damaging their reputation as sound churchmen or forfeiting the confidence of Henry II. His intrigues with the Scot king and the rebel barons in 1174 failed so completely and so speedily that Henry found it scarcely worth while to punish them in any way; and on the other hand, Hugh’s position was already so independent and secure that he himself never found it worth while to renew them. In his own diocese, whatever he might be as a pastor of souls, he was a vigorous and on the whole a beneficent as well as magnificent ruler; the men of the county palatine grumbled indeed at his extravagance and at the occasional hardships brought upon them by his inordinate love of the chase, but they were none the less proud of his splendid buildings, his regal state, and his equally regal personality. His appearance and manners corresponded with his character and his rank; he was tall in stature, dignified in bearing, remarkably attractive in look, eloquent and winning in address.[1401] Moreover, he had lived so long in England, and all his interests had so long been centred there, that for all practical purposes, social as well as political, he was a thorough Englishman--certainly far more of an Englishman than his young English-born cousin, King Richard. For the last eight years, indeed, he had held in the north much the same position as had belonged in earlier times to the archbishops of York; for the northern province had been without a metropolitan ever since the death of Roger of Pont-l’Evêque in November 1181,[1402] and the supreme authority, ecclesiastical as well as secular, had thus devolved upon the bishop of Durham. He was now threatened with the loss of this pre-eminence; but he had no intention of giving it up without a struggle, in which his chances of success were at least as good as those of his rival the archbishop-elect; and whatever the result might be with respect to his ecclesiastical independence, he had secured a formidable counterpoise to the primate’s territorial influence by his purchase of Northumberland, which made him sole head, under the Crown, of the civil administration of the whole country between the Tweed and the Tees.

[1401] On Hugh of Durham see Will. Newb., l. v. c. 10 (Howlett,
vol. ii. pp. 436–438), Geoff. Coldingham, cc. 1, 4, 11, 14
(_Script. Dunelm. III._, Raine, pp. 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14), and
Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. pp. xxxiii.–xxxvii.

[1402] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 283. R. Diceto
(Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 10. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 5 (Howlett,
vol. i. p. 225).

Alike in himself and in his antecedents Hugh of Puiset was the very antithesis to William of Longchamp. William had nothing of the stately presence and winning aspect which distinguished the bishop of Durham; on the contrary, he laboured under personal disadvantages which should have entitled him to sympathy, but which one of his political opponents was heartless enough to caricature, after his fall, in order to make him an object of vulgar contempt and disgust. His stature was diminutive, his countenance swarthy and ill-favoured, his figure mis-shapen, and he was moreover very lame.[1403] His origin was as lowly as his person. His father was a certain Hugh of Longchamp who in 1156 received from the king a grant of lands in Herefordshire,[1404] and about the time of the barons’ revolt was fermor of the honour of Conches in Normandy.[1405] His grandfather was said to have been a French serf who had fled from the justice of his lord and found a refuge in the Norman village whence his descendants took their name.[1406] In Henry’s latter years Hugh of Longchamp was deep in debt and disgrace,[1407] and his six sons had to make their way in the world as best they could under the shadow of the king’s displeasure.[1408] William, whose physical infirmities must have shut him out from every career save that of a clerk, first appears under the patronage of Geoffrey the chancellor, as his official in one of his many pieces of Church preferment, the archdeaconry of Rouen.[1409] The king, however, remonstrated strongly with his son on the danger of associating with a man whom he declared to be “a traitor, like his father and mother before him.”[1410] The end of his remonstrances was that, shortly before the last outbreak, William fled from Geoffrey to Richard, and, according to one account, became the chief instigator of Richard’s rebellion.[1411] However this may be, it is certain that Richard, while still merely duke of Aquitaine, employed William as his chancellor,[1412] and that he was not only so well satisfied with his services as to retain him in the same capacity after his accession to the crown, but had formed such a high opinion of his statesmanship and his fidelity as to make him his chief political adviser and confidant. Richard, like his father, was constant in his friendships, and very unwilling to discard those to whom he had once become really attached; his trust in William remained unshaken to the end of his life, and in some respects it was not misplaced. William seems to have been thoroughly loyal to his master, and his energy and industry were as unquestionable as his loyalty. As Richard’s most intimate companion, confidential secretary, and political adviser in foreign affairs, William was in his right place; but he was by no means equally well fitted to be Richard’s representative in the supreme government and administration of England. He had the primary disqualification of being a total stranger to the land, its people and its ways. Most likely he had never set foot in England till he came thither with Richard in 1189; he was ignorant of the English tongue;[1413] his new surroundings were thoroughly distasteful to him; and as he was by no means of a cautious or conciliatory temper, he expressed his contempt and dislike of them in a way which was resented not only by the people, but even by men whose origin and natural speech were scarcely more English than his own.[1414] He had in short every qualification for becoming an extremely unpopular man, and he behaved as if he desired no other destiny. The nation at large soon learned to return his aversion and to detest him as a disagreeable stranger; his colleagues in the administration despised him as an upstart interloper; the justiciar, in particular, keenly resented his own virtual subordination to one whom he naturally regarded as his inferior in every way.[1415] It was sound policy on Richard’s part to place a check upon Hugh of Durham; and it was not unnatural that he should select his chancellor for that purpose. The seven happiest years of Henry Fitz-Empress had been the years during which another chancellor had wielded a power almost as great as that which Richard intrusted to William of Longchamp. But, on the other hand, any one except Richard might have seen at a glance that of all statesmen living, William of Longchamp was well-nigh the least fitted to reproduce the career of Thomas of London.

[1403] Cf. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 11, with the horrible
caricature in Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. ii. c. 19 (Brewer,
vol. iv. p. 420).

[1404] Pipe Roll 2 Hen. II. (Hunter), p. 51.

[1405] _Mag. Rot. Scacc. Norm._ (Stapleton), vol. i. p. 74. Cf.
Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. p. xxxviii.

[1406] Letter of Hugh of Nonant, in _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs),
p. 216 (also in Rog. Howden, Stubbs, vol. iii. p. 142). Gir.
Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. ii. c. 18 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 418).

[1407] _Mag. Rot. Scacc. Norm._ (Stapleton), vol. i. p. 74.
Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. pp. xxxviii, xxxix and
notes.

[1408] Stubbs, as above, pp. xxxix, xl.

[1409] Gir. Cambr. as above, c. 1 (p. 388).

[1410] _Ibid._ Cf. c. 19 (pp. 420, 421). It does not seem to be
known exactly who William’s mother was; but she brought to her
husband in dower a knight’s fee in Herefordshire under Hugh de
Lacy. See _Lib. Nig. Scacc._ (Hearne), p. 155, and Stubbs, as
above, p. xxxviii, note 4.

[1411] Gir. Cambr. as above, c. 19 (p. 421).

[1412] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 6.

[1413] Letter of Hugh of Nonant in _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), vol.
ii. p. 219.

[1414] See Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. ii. c. 19 (Brewer,
vol. iv. p. 424).

[1415] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 101. Rog. Howden (Stubbs),
vol. iii. p. 29.

The king left England on December 11.[1416] William was consecrated, together with Richard Fitz-Nigel, on December 31,[1417] and on the feast of the Epiphany he was enthroned at Ely.[1418] Immediately afterwards he began to assert his temporal authority. At a meeting of the Court of Exchequer the bishop of Durham was turned out by the chancellor’s orders; presently after he was deprived of his jurisdiction over Northumberland. Soon after this, Bishop Godfrey of Winchester was dispossessed not merely of his sheriffdom and castles, but even of his own patrimony.[1419] For this last spoliation there is no apparent excuse; that a man should hold a sheriffdom together with a bishopric was, however, contrary alike to Church discipline and to sound temporal policy; and the non-recognition of Hugh’s purchase of Northumberland might be yet further justified by the fact that the purchase-money was not yet paid.[1420] In February 1190 Richard summoned his mother, his brothers and his chief ministers to a final meeting in Normandy;[1421] the chancellor, knowing that complaints against him would be brought before the king, hurried over in advance of his colleagues, to justify himself before he was accused,[1422] and he succeeded so well that Richard not only sent him back to England after the council with full authority to act as chief justiciar as well as chancellor,[1423] but at the same time opened negotiations with Rome to obtain for him a commission as legate[1424]--an arrangement which, the archbishop of Canterbury being bound on crusade like the king, would leave William supreme both in Church and state.

[1416] _Gesta Ric._ as above. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p.
73, makes it December 14.

[1417] R. Diceto as above, p. 75. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p.
11.

[1418] R. Diceto as above.

[1419] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 11.

[1420] See Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. p. xxxi. and
note 3.

[1421] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 105, 106.

[1422] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 12.

[1423] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 106. Cf. Ric. Devizes as
above, and Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 14 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 331).

[1424] _Gesta Ric._ as above.

The new justiciar’s first act on his return was to fortify the Tower of London;[1425] his next was to punish a disturbance which had lately occurred at York. During the last six months the long-suppressed hatred which the Jews inspired had broken forth into open violence. The first pretext had been furnished by a misunderstanding on the coronation-day. Richard, who had some very strict ideas about the ceremonials of religion, had given orders that no Jew should approach him on that solemn occasion; in defiance or ignorance of the prohibition, some rich Jews came to offer gifts to the new sovereign; the courtiers and the people seized the excuse to satisfy at once their greed and their hatred; the unwelcome visitors were driven away, robbed, beaten, some even slain;[1426] and the rage of their enemies, once let loose, spent itself throughout the night in a general sack of the Jewish quarter. Richard, engaged at the coronation-banquet, knew nothing of what had happened till the next day,[1427] when he did his best to secure the ringleaders, and punished them severely.[1428] When he was gone, however, the spark thus kindled burst forth into a blaze in all the chief English cities in succession, Winchester being almost the sole exception.[1429] Massacres of Jews took place at Norwich on February 6, at Stamford on March 7, at S. Edmund’s on March 18, Palm Sunday.[1430] A day before this last, a yet worse tragedy had occurred at York. The principal Jews of that city, in dread of a popular attack, had sought and obtained shelter in one of the towers of the castle, under the protection of its constable and the sheriff of Yorkshire.[1431] Once there, they refused to give it up again; whereupon the constable and the sheriff called out all the forces of city and shire to dislodge them. After twenty-four hours’ siege the Jews offered to ransom themselves by a heavy fine; but the blood of the citizens was up, and they rejected the offer. The Jews, in desperation, resolved to die by their own hands rather than by those of their Gentile enemies; the women and children were slaughtered by their husbands and fathers, who flung the corpses over the battlements or piled them up in the tower, which they fired.[1432] Nearly five hundred Jews perished in the massacre or the flames;[1433] and the citizens and soldiers, baulked of their expected prey, satiated their greed by sacking and burning all the Jewish houses and destroying the bonds of all the Jewish usurers in the city.[1434] At the end of April or the beginning of May[1435] the new justiciar came with an armed force to York to investigate this affair. The citizens threw the whole blame upon the castellan and the sheriff; William accordingly deposed them both.[1436] As the castle was destroyed, he probably thought it needless to appoint a new constable until it should be rebuilt; for the sheriff--John, elder brother of William the Marshal--he at once substituted his own brother Osbert.[1437] Most of the knights who had been concerned in the tumult had taken care to put themselves out of his reach; their estates were, however, mulcted and their chattels seized;[1438] and the citizens only escaped by paying a fine[1439] and giving hostages who were not redeemed till three years later, when all thought of further proceedings in the matter had been given up.[1440] Even the clergy of the minster had their share of punishment, although for a different offence: William, though his legatine commission had not yet arrived, claimed already to be received as legate, and put the church under interdict until his claim was admitted.[1441]

[1425] _Ibid._

[1426] The _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 83, lay the blame
on “curiales”; with Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii. p.
12, the source of the mischief is “plebs superbo oculo et
insatiabili corde”; R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 69, is
so ashamed of the whole business that he tries to shift
the responsibility off all English shoulders alike--“Pax
Judæorum, quam ab antiquis temporibus semper obtinuerant, ab
alienigenis interrumpitur.” Cf. the very opposite tone of R.
Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 28, and the judicial middle course
characteristically steered by Will. Newb., l. iv. cc. 1 and 9
(Howlett, vol. i. pp. 297, 298, 316, 317).

[1427] R. Diceto as above.

[1428] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 84. Rog. Howden as above.
Both take care to assure us that Richard’s severity was owing
not to any sympathy for the Jews, but to the fact that in
the confusion a few Christians had suffered with them. Cf. a
slightly different version in Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 1 (as
above, pp. 297–299).

[1429] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 5.

[1430] R. Diceto as above, p. 75. Cf. Will. Newb., l. iv. cc.
7, 8 (as above, pp. 308–312), who adds Lynn to the series.

[1431] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 107, and a more detailed
account in Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 9 (as above, pp. 312–314).
From him we learn that the Jews of Lincoln did the same, and
with a more satisfactory result.

[1432] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 107. For date--March 16--see
R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 75.

[1433] R. Diceto as above.

[1434] _Gesta Ric._ as above. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii.
p. 34. Cf. the somewhat different version of Will. Newb., l.
iv. cc. 9, 10 (Howlett, vol. i. pp. 314–322), and also R.
Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 27, 28.

[1435] The _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 108, say merely “post
Pascha”; Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 11 (as above, p. 323), says
“circa Dominicæ Ascensionis solemnia,” which fell on May 4.

[1436] _Gesta Ric._ as above.

[1437] Rog. Howden as above.

[1438] Will. Newb. as above (p. 323). Cf. Pipe Roll 2 Ric. I.,
quoted in Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. pp. xliv.,
notes 4, 5, xlv., note 1.

[1439] Will. Newb. as above.

[1440] Pipe Roll 5 Ric. I. in Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii.
pref. p. xliv., note 7. Will. Newb., as above (p. 324), says
that nothing further was ever done in the matter.

[1441] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 108, 109.

For the moment William’s power was undisputed even in the north; for Hugh of Durham was still in Gaul. Now, however, there came a notice from the king that he was about to send Hugh back to England as justiciar over the whole country north of the Humber.[1442] Hugh himself soon afterwards arrived, and hurried northward, in the hope, it seems, of catching the chancellor on the further side of the Humber and thus compelling him to acknowledge his inferiority.[1443] In this hope he was disappointed; they met at Blyth in Nottinghamshire.[1444] Hugh, impetuous in old age as in youth, talked somewhat too much as the chancellor had acted--“as if all the affairs of the realm were dependent on his nod.”[1445] At last, however, he produced the commission from Richard upon which his pretensions were founded;[1446] and William, who could read between the lines of his royal friend’s letters, saw at once that he had little to fear.[1447] He replied simply by expressing his readiness to obey the king’s orders,[1448] and proposing that all further discussion should be adjourned to a second meeting a week later at Tickhill. There Hugh found the tables turned. The chancellor had reached the place before him; the bishop’s followers were shut out from the castle; he was admitted alone into the presence of his rival, who, without giving him time to speak, put into his hands another letter from Richard, bidding all his English subjects render service and obedience to “our trusty and well-beloved chancellor, the bishop of Ely,” as they would to the king himself. The letter was dated June 6--some days, if not weeks, later than Hugh’s credentials;[1449] and it seems to have just reached William together with his legatine commission, which was issued on the previous day.[1450] He gave his rival no time even to think. “You had your say at our last meeting; now I will have mine. As my lord the king liveth, you shall not quit this place till you have given me hostages for the surrender of all your castles. No protests! I am not a bishop arresting another bishop; I am the chancellor, arresting his supplanter.”[1451] Hugh was powerless; yet he let himself be dragged all the way to London before he would yield. Then he gave up the required hostages,[1452] and submitted to the loss of all his lately-purchased honours--Windsor, Newcastle, Northumberland, even the manor of Sadberge which he had bought of the king for his see[1453]--everything, in short, except his bishopric. For that he set out as soon as he was liberated; but at his manor of Howden he was stopped by the chancellor’s orders, forbidden to proceed further, and again threatened with forcible detention. He promised to remain where he was, gave security for the fulfilment of his promise, and then wrote to the king his complaints of the treatment which he had received.[1454] All the redress that he could get, however, was a writ commanding that Sadberge should be restored to him at once and that he should suffer no further molestation.[1455]

[1442] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 109. This appointment is
mentioned (_ib._ p. 106) among those made at the council of
Rouen, where William himself was appointed; but it seems plain
that it was not ratified till some time later.

[1443] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 12.

[1444] _Gesta Ric._ as above, p. 109.

[1445] Ric. Devizes as above.

[1446] _Ib._ p. 13. _Gesta Ric._ as above.

[1447] Ric. Devizes as above.

[1448] _Gesta Ric._ as above.

[1449] Cf. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 83, with Ric.
Devizes as above.

[1450] R. Diceto as above.

[1451] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 13.

[1452] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 109. Rog. Howden (Stubbs),
vol. iii. p. 35, places the submission at Southwell.

[1453] _Gesta Ric._ as above. On Sadberge see Rog. Howden as
above, p. 13.

[1454] _Gesta Ric._, pp. 109, 110.

[1455] The _Gesta Ric._, p. 110, say Richard ordered the
restitution of Newcastle and Sadberge; for Newcastle Rog.
Howden, as above, p. 38, substitutes “comitatum Northumbriæ”;
but the king’s letter, given by Roger himself (_ib._ pp. 38,
39), mentions nothing except Sadberge. For its date see _ib._
pp. 37 note 1, 39 note 3, and _Gesta Ric._ as above, p. 112,
note 1.

The chancellor’s first rival was thus suppressed; but already he could see other stumbling-blocks arising in his path, not a few of them placed there by the shortsighted policy of his royal master. Richard’s reckless bestowal of lands and jurisdictions would, if left undisturbed, have put the administration of at least ten whole shires practically beyond the control of the central government. The bishops of Durham, Winchester and Coventry or Chester would have had everything their own way, in temporal matters no less than in spiritual, throughout their respective dioceses. To this state of things William had summarily put an end in the cases of Northumberland and Hampshire; in those of Leicestershire, Staffordshire and Warwickshire the primate had been induced to remonstrate with Hugh of Coventry upon the impropriety of a bishop holding three sheriffdoms, and Hugh had accordingly given up two of them, though he managed to get them back after Baldwin’s death at the close of 1190.[1456] There were however still four shires in the south-west and one in Mid-England over which the king’s justiciar was not only without practical, but even without legal jurisdiction. In these, and in a number of “honours” scattered over the midland shires from Gloucester to Nottingham, the whole rights and profits of government, administration and finance belonged solely to John; for his exercise of them he was responsible to no one but the king; and thus, as soon as Richard was out of reach, John was to all intents and purposes himself king of his own territories. For the present indeed he was unable to set foot in his little realm: Richard in the spring had made both his brothers take an oath to keep away from England for three years.[1457] It was however easy enough for John to govern his part of England, as the whole of it had often been governed for years together, from the other side of the Channel. He had his staff of ministers just like his brother--his justiciar Roger de Planes,[1458] his chancellor Stephen Ridel,[1459] his seneschal William de Kahaines, and his butler Theobald Walter;[1460] the sheriffs of his five counties and the stewards or bailiffs of his honours were appointed by him alone, and exercised their functions solely for his advantage, without reference to the king’s court or the king’s exchequer.[1461] It is evident that, even though as yet the sea lay between them, John had already the power to make himself, if he were so minded, a serious obstacle to the chancellor’s plans of governing England for Richard. Moreover, before Richard finally quitted Gaul, his mother persuaded him to release John from his oath of absence;[1462] and William of Longchamp himself, in his new character of legate, was obliged to confirm the release with his absolution.[1463] In view of the struggle which he now saw could not be far distant, William began to marshal his political forces and concert his measures of defence. On August 1 he held a Church council at Gloucester, in the heart of John’s territories;[1464] on October 13 he held another at Westminster;[1465] and he seems to have spent the winter in a sort of half legatine, half vice-regal progress throughout the country, for purposes of justice and finance and for the assertion of his own authority. This proceeding stirred up a good deal of discontent. Cripple though he was, William of Longchamp seems to have been almost as rapid and restless a traveller as Henry II.; one contemporary says he “went up and down the country like a flash of lightning.”[1466] It may be however that these words allude to the disastrous effects of the chancellor’s passage rather than to its swiftness and suddenness; for he went about in such state as no minister except Henry’s first chancellor had ever ventured to assume. His train of a thousand armed knights, besides a crowd of clerks and other attendants, was a ruinous burthen to the religious houses where he claimed entertainment; and the burthen was made almost unbearable by the heavy exactions, from clerk and layman alike, which he made in his master’s name.[1467]

[1456] See R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 77, 78, and Stubbs,
_Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. p. xxxi. and note 5.

[1457] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 106. Ric. Devizes (Stevenson),
p. 15.

[1458] R. Diceto as above, p. 99.

[1459] _Gesta Ric._ as above, p. 224.

[1460] Rymer, _Fœdera_, vol. i. p. 55.

[1461] See Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iii. pref. pp. xxxiii
and lii.

[1462] _Gesta Ric._ and Ric. Devizes as above.

[1463] Gir. Cambr. _De rebus a se gestis_, l. ii. c. 23
(Brewer, vol. i. p. 86). Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 15, says
the arrangement was that John “in Angliam per cancellarium
transiens staret ejus judicio, et ad placitum illius vel
moraretur in regno vel exularet.” But with Eleanor in England
to back her son, William could really have no choice in the
matter.

[1464] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 83. On the version of
this in Ric. Devizes (as above, pp. 13, 14), see Stubbs, _Rog.
Howden_, vol. iii. pref. p. xlix.

[1465] R. Diceto as above, p. 85. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i.
p. 488, makes it October 16.

[1466] Ric. Devizes (Stevenson), p. 14.

[1467] _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 214. Rog. Howden (Stubbs),
vol. iii. p. 72. Will. Newb., l. iv. c. 14 (Howlett, vol. i.
pp. 333, 334).