Chapter IX: The Fall of the Angevins (1)

1199–1206.

“In the year 1199,” says a contemporary French writer, “God visited the realm of France; for King Richard was slain.”[1941] Richard’s death was in truth the signal for the break-up of the Angevin dominions to the profit of the French Crown. John, who was at the moment in Britanny, hurried southward as soon as he heard the news. Three days after the funeral--on April 14, the Wednesday before Easter--he arrived at Chinon, the seat of the Angevin treasury; the wardens of the castle[1942] welcomed him as their lord in his brother’s stead; the household of the late king came to meet him and acknowledged him in like manner, after receiving from him a solemn oath that he would carry out Richard’s testamentary directions and maintain the customs of the lands over which he was called to rule.[1943] On this understanding the treasury was given up to him by the Angevin seneschal, Robert of Turnham.[1944] After keeping Easter at Beaufort,[1945] he proceeded into Normandy; here he was received without opposition, and on the Sunday after Easter was invested with the sword, lance and coronet of the duchy by Archbishop Walter at Rouen.[1946] As the lance was put into his hands he turned with characteristic levity to join in the laughing comments of the young courtiers behind him, and in so doing let the symbol of his ducal authority fall to the ground. His irreverent behaviour and refusal to communicate on Easter-day had already drawn upon him a solemn warning from S. Hugh; and this fresh example of his profane recklessness, and its consequence, were noted as omens which later events made but too easy of interpretation.[1947] For the moment, however, the Normans were willing to transfer to Richard’s chosen successor the loyalty which they had shewn towards Richard himself; and so, too, were the representatives of the English Church and baronage who happened to be on the spot, Archbishop Hubert and William the Marshal.[1948] But in the Angevin lands Philip’s alliance with the Bretons, fruitless so long as Richard lived, bore fruit as soon as the lion-heart had ceased to beat. While Philip himself invaded the county of Evreux and took its capital,[1949] Arthur was at once sent into Anjou with a body of troops;[1950] his mother, released or escaped from her prison, joined him at the head of the Breton forces;[1951] they marched upon Le Mans, whence John himself only escaped the night before it fell into their hands;[1952] Angers was given up to them by its governor, a nephew of the seneschal Robert of Turnham;[1953] and on Easter-day,[1954] while John was actually holding court within fifteen miles of them at Beaufort, the barons of Anjou, Touraine and Maine held a council at which Arthur was unanimously acknowledged as lawful heir to his uncle Richard according to the customs of the three counties, and their capital cities were surrendered to him at once.[1955] At Le Mans he met the French king and did homage to him for his new dominions, Constance swearing fealty with him.[1956] Shortly afterwards, at Tours, Constance formally placed her boy, who was now twelve years old, under the guardianship of Philip; and Philip at once took upon himself the custody and the administration of all the territories of his ward.[1957]

[1941] Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc.
Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 80.

[1942] “A proceribus quibusdam _Anglorum_ castrum ipsum
servantibus.” _Mag. Vita S. Hug._ (Dimock), p. 287.

[1943] _Ibid._

[1944] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 86. R. Coggeshall
(Stevenson), p. 99.

[1945] Rog. Howden as above, p. 87.

[1946] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 166. Rog. Howden
(Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 87, 88. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p.
99. _Mag. Vita S. Hug._ (Dimock), p. 293.

[1947] _Mag. Vita S. Hug._ (Dimock), pp. 291–294.

[1948] Rog. Howden as above, p. 86.

[1949] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
43. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 80. Cf. R.
Coggeshall as above.

[1950] Rigord as above.

[1951] Cf. R. Coggeshall as above, and _Mag. Vita S. Hug._
(Dimock), p. 296, with Rog. Howden as above, p. 87.

[1952] _Mag. Vita S. Hug._ as above.

[1953] Rog. Howden as above, p. 86.

[1954] Chron. S. Albin. a. 1199 (Marchegay, _Eglises_, p. 50).

[1955] Rog. Howden as above, pp. 86, 87. Cf. R. Coggeshall as
above.

[1956] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
43.

[1957] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 87. The Chron. S.
Albin. a. 1200 (Marchegay, _Eglises_, p. 51) places this a year
later.

Neither in personal influence nor in political skill, however, was Constance a match for her mother-in-law. Eleanor was, as has been seen, at Fontevraud when Richard died. Feeling and policy alike inclined her to favour the cause of his chosen successor, her own only surviving son, rather than that of a grandson whom most likely she had never even seen. She therefore effected a junction with Mercadier and his Brabantines as soon as they had had time to march up from Châlus, and the whole band of mercenaries, headed by the aged queen and the ruthless but faithful Provençal captain, overran Anjou with fire and sword to punish its inhabitants for their abandonment of John.[1958] Having given this proof of her undiminished energy, Eleanor, to take away all pretext for French intermeddling in the south, went to meet Philip at Tours and herself did homage to him for Poitou.[1959] By this means Aquitaine was secured for John. John himself had made a dash into Maine and burned Le Mans in vengeance for the defection of its citizens.[1960] He could, however, venture upon no serious attempt at the reconquest of the Angevin lands till he had secured his hold upon Normandy and England; and for this his presence was now urgently needed on the English side of the Channel.

[1958] Rog. Howden as above, p. 88.

[1959] Rigord as above.

[1960] Rog. Howden as above, p. 87. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson),
p. 99.

Archbishop Hubert and William the Marshal had already returned to England charged with a commission from John to assist the justiciar Geoffrey Fitz-Peter in maintaining order there until the new king should arrive.[1961] The precaution was far from being a needless one. The news of Richard’s death reached England on Easter Eve; and its consequences appeared the very next morning, when some of the nobles and knights went straight from their Easter feast to begin a course of rapine and depredation which recalls the disorders after the death of Henry I., and which was only checked by the return of the primate. Hubert at once excommunicated the evil-doers,[1962] and, in concert with the Marshal, summoned all the men of the realm to swear fealty and peaceable submission to John, as heir of Henry Fitz-Empress. The peace, however, was not so easy to keep now as it had been during the interval between Henry’s death and Richard’s coronation. Since then John himself had set an example which those whom he now claimed as his subjects were not slow to follow. All who had castles, whether bishops, earls or barons, furnished them with men, victuals and arms, and assumed an attitude of defence, if not of defiance; and this attitude they quitted only when the archbishop, the marshal and the justiciar had called all the malcontents to a conference at Northampton, and there solemnly promised that John should render to all men their rights, if they would keep faith and peace towards him. On this the barons took the oath of fealty and liege homage to John. The king of Scots refused to do the like unless his lost counties of Northumberland and Cumberland were restored to him, and despatched messengers charged with these demands to John himself; the envoys were, however, intercepted by the archbishop and his colleagues, and the Scot king was for a while appeased by a promise of satisfaction when the new sovereign should arrive in his island-realm.[1963]

[1961] Rog. Howden as above, p. 86.

[1962] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 98.

[1963] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 88, 89.

On May 25 John landed at Shoreham; next day he reached London;[1964] on the 27th--Ascension-day--the bishops and barons assembled for the crowning in Westminster abbey.[1965] John’s coronation is one of the most memorable in English history. It was the last occasion on which the old English doctrine of succession to the crown was formally asserted and publicly vindicated, and that more distinctly than it had ever been since the Norman conquest. In the midst of the crowded church the archbishop stood forth and spoke: “Hearken, all ye that are here present! Be it known unto you that no man hath any antecedent right to succeed another in the kingdom, except he be unanimously chosen by the whole realm, after invocation of the Holy Spirit’s grace, and unless he be also manifestly thereunto called by the pre-eminence of his character and conversation, after the pattern of Saul the first anointed king, whom God set over his people, although he was not of royal race, and likewise after him David, the one being chosen for his energy and fitness for the regal dignity, the other for his humility and holiness; that so he who surpassed all other men of the realm in vigour should also be preferred before them in authority and power. But indeed if there be one of the dead king’s race who excelleth, that one should be the more promptly and willingly chosen. And these things have I spoken in behalf of the noble Count John here present, the brother of our late illustrious King Richard, now deceased without direct heir; and forasmuch as we see him to be prudent and vigorous, we all, after invoking the Holy Spirit’s grace, for his merits no less than his royal blood, have with one consent chosen him for our king.” The archbishop’s hearers wondered at his speech, because they could not see any occasion for it; but none of them disputed his doctrine; still less did they dispute its immediate practical application. “Long live King John!” was the unanimous response;[1966] and, disregarding a protest from Bishop Philip of Durham against the accomplishment of such an important rite in the absence of his metropolitan Geoffrey of York,[1967] Archbishop Hubert proceeded to anoint and crown the king. A foreboding which he could not put aside, however, moved him to make yet another significant interpolation in the ritual. When he tendered to the king-elect the usual oath for the defence of the Church, the redressing of wrongs and the maintenance of justice, he added a solemn personal adjuration to John, in Heaven’s name, warning him not to venture upon accepting the regal office unless he truly purposed in his own mind to perform his oath. John answered that by God’s help he intended to do so.[1968] But he contrived to omit the act which should have sealed his vow. For the first and last time probably in the history of Latin Christendom, the king did not communicate upon his coronation-day.[1969]

[1964] _Ib._ p. 89.

[1965] _Ib._ pp. 89, 90. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 166.
R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 99, 100.

[1966] Mat. Paris, _Chron. Maj._ (Luard), vol. ii. pp. 454, 455.

[1967] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 90.

[1968] Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol. iii. p. 140.

[1969] _Mag. Vita S. Hug._ (Dimock), p. 293.

On that very day he made his arrangements for the government of the realm which he was already anxious to leave as soon as he could do so with safety. Geoffrey Fitz-Peter was confirmed in his office of justiciar, William in that of marshal, and both were formally invested with the earldoms whose lands and revenues they had already enjoyed for some years--Geoffrey with the earldom of Essex, William with that of Striguil. At the same time, in defiance alike of precedent, of ecclesiastical propriety, and of the warnings of an old colleague in the administration, Hugh Bardulf, Archbishop Hubert undertook the office of chancellor.[1970] Next day John received the homage of the barons, and went on pilgrimage to S. Alban’s abbey;[1971] he afterwards visited Canterbury and S. Edmund’s,[1972] and thence proceeded to keep the Whitsun feast at Northampton.[1973] An interchange of embassies with the king of Scots failed to win either the restitution of the two shires on the one hand, or the required homage on the other; William threatened to invade the disputed territories if they were not made over to him within forty days; John retorted by giving them in charge to a new sheriff, the brave and loyal William de Stuteville, and by appointing new guardians to the temporalities of York, as security for the defence of the north against the Scots,[1974] while he himself hurried back to the sea, and on June 20 sailed again for Normandy.[1975]

[1970] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 90, 91.

[1971] Rog. Wend. as above.

[1972] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 166.

[1973] _Ibid._ Rog. Howden as above, p. 91, says _Nottingham_;
but John was at Northampton on Whit-Monday according to Sir T.
D. Hardy’s _Itin. K. John_, a. 1 (_Introd. Pat. Rolls_).

[1974] Rog. Howden as above, pp. 91, 92.

[1975] _Ib._ p. 92. R. Diceto (as above) says June 19, but
Sir T. D. Hardy’s _Itinerary_, a. 1 (as above), shews John at
Shoreham on the 20th.

On Midsummer-day he made a truce with Philip for three weeks.[1976] At its expiration the two kings held a personal meeting; John’s occupation of his brother’s territories without previous investiture from and homage to Philip was complained of by the latter as an unpardonable wrong; and John was required to expiate it by the cession of the whole Vexin to Philip in absolute ownership, and of Poitou and the three Angevin counties for the benefit of Arthur. This John refused.[1977] His fortunes were not yet so desperate as to compel him to such humiliation. He had already secured the alliance of Flanders;[1978] his nephew Otto, now fully acknowledged by the Pope as Emperor-elect, was urging him to war with France and promising him the aid of the imperial forces;[1979] and his refusal of submission to Philip was at once followed by offers of homage and mutual alliance from all those French feudataries who had been in league with Richard against their own sovereign.[1980] The war began in September, with the taking of Conches by the French king; this was followed by the capture of Ballon. Philip, however, chose to celebrate these first successes by levelling Ballon to the ground. As the castle stood upon Cenomannian soil, it ought, according to the theory proclaimed by Philip himself, to have been handed over by him to Arthur; Arthur’s seneschal William des Roches therefore remonstrated against its demolition as an injury done to his young lord. Philip retorted that “he would not for Arthur’s sake stay from dealing as he pleased with his own acquisitions.” The consequence was a momentary desertion of all his Breton allies. William des Roches not only surrendered to John the city of Le Mans, which Philip and Arthur had intrusted to him as governor, but contrived to get the boy-duke of Britanny out of Philip’s custody and bring him to his uncle, who received him into seeming favour and peace.[1981] That very day, however, a warning reached Arthur of the fate to which he was already doomed by John; and on the following night he fled away to Angers with his mother and a number of their friends. Among the latter was the viscount Almeric of Thouars, who had just been compelled to resign into John’s hands the office of seneschal of Anjou and the custody of the fortress of Chinon, which he held in Arthur’s name; and it seems to have been shortly afterwards that Constance, apparently casting off Ralf of Chester without even an attempt at divorce, went through a ceremony of marriage with Almeric’s brother Guy.[1982]

[1976] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 93.

[1977] _Ib._ pp. 94, 95.

[1978] The count of Flanders did homage to John at Rouen on
August 13 [1199]. _Ib._ p. 93.

[1979] _Ib._ pp. 95, 96.

[1980] _Ib._ p. 95.

[1981] _Ib._ p. 96. This must have been on September 22; see
Hardy, _Itin. K. John_, a. 1 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

[1982] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 96, 97. The marriage
of Guy and Constance must however have been legalized somehow,
for their child was ultimately acknowledged as heiress of
Britanny.

The year’s warfare again ended in a truce, made in October to last till S. Hilary’s day.[1983] Its author was that Cardinal Peter of Capua[1984] who had negotiated the last truce between Philip and Richard, and who now found another occupation in punishing the matrimonial sins of the French king:--Philip having sent away his queen Ingebiorg of Denmark immediately after his marriage with her in 1193, and three years later taken as his wife another princess, Agnes of Merania.[1985] At a Church council at Dijon on December 6, 1199, the legate passed a sentence of interdict upon the whole royal domain, to be publicly proclaimed on the twentieth day after Christmas[1986]--the very day on which Philip’s truce with John would expire. It was no doubt the prospect of this new trouble which moved Philip, when he met John in conference between Gaillon and Les Andelys,[1987] to accept terms far more favourable to the English king than those which he had offered six months before. As a pledge of future peace and amity between the two kings, Philip’s son Louis was to marry John’s niece Blanche, a daughter of his sister Eleanor and her husband King Alfonso of Castille; John was to bestow upon the bride, by way of dowry, the city and county of Evreux and all those Norman castles which had been in Philip’s possession on the day of Richard’s death; he was also to give Philip thirty thousand marks of silver, and to swear that he would give no help to Otto for the vindication of his claim to the Empire. The formal execution of the treaty was deferred till the octave of midsummer; and while the aged queen-mother Eleanor went to fetch her granddaughter from Spain, John at the end of February took advantage of the respite to make a hurried visit to England,[1988] for the purpose of raising the thirty thousand marks which he had promised to Philip. This was done by means of a carucage or aid of three shillings on every ploughland.[1989] As a scutage of a most unusual amount--two marks on the knight’s fee--had already been levied since John’s accession, this new impost was a sore burthen upon the country. The abbots of some of the great Cistercian houses in Yorkshire withstood it as an unheard-of infringement of their rights, to which they could not assent without the permission of a general chapter of their order. John in a fury bade the sheriffs put all the White Monks outside the protection of the law. The remonstrances of the primate compelled him to revoke this command; but he rejected all offers of compromise on the part of the monks, and “breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord” went over sea again at the end of April.[1990] As France had been suffering the miseries of an interdict ever since January,[1991] Philip was now growing eager for peace. He therefore met John at Gouleton, between Vernon and Les Andelys, on May 22, and there a treaty was signed. Its solid advantages were wholly on the side of John. In addition to the concessions made in January, he did indeed resign in favour of Blanche and her bridegroom his claims upon the fiefs of Berry; but the thirty thousand marks due to Philip were reduced to twenty thousand; Arthur was acknowledged as owing homage to his uncle for Britanny; and John was formally recognized by the French king as rightful heir to all the dominions of his father and his elder brother.[1992] On the morrow Louis and Blanche were married, by the archbishop of Bordeaux, and on Norman soil, in consequence of the interdict in France;[1993] and on the same day, at Vernon, John received in Philip’s presence Arthur’s homage for Britanny,[1994] Philip having already accepted that of John for the whole continental dominions of the house of Anjou.[1995]

[1983] _Ib._ p. 97. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._,
vol. v.) p. 43, says S. John’s day.

[1984] Rog. Howden as above.

[1985] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iii. pp. 224, 306, 307. R.
Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 111. Rigord (as above), pp. 36,
37, 40, 42. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), pp. 77,
78. “Merania” is Moravia. Rigord and William both call the lady
Mary, but all scholars seem agreed that Agnes was her real name.

[1986] Rigord (as above), p. 43. Will. Armor. (as above), p.
80. Cf. R. Diceto (as above), pp. 167, 168.

[1987] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 106.

[1988] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 106, 107. John
crossed on February 24; Ann. Winton, a. 1200 (Luard, _Ann.
Monast._, vol. ii. p. 73).

[1989] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 101. Rog. Howden as above,
p. 107.

[1990] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 102, 103. The date of
John’s crossing lies between April 28 and May 2. Hardy, _Itin.
K. John_, a. 1 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

[1991] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
43; Rog. Howden as above, p. 112. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii.
p. 168, says only since Mid-Lent.

[1992] Treaty in Rymer, _Fœdera_, vol. i. p. 79, and Rog.
Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 148–151. Its date is not quite
clear; the document itself bears only “mense Maii”; Rigord
(Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v. p. 43) says it
was made on Ascension-day (May 18); Rog. Howden (as above,
p. 114) begins by placing it at the date for which it had
been originally fixed--the octave of S. John Baptist--but in
the next page corrects this into “xi kalendas Junii, feria
secunda,” _i.e._ Monday, May 22. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p.
103, believed the thirty thousand marks to have been paid in
full. The remission of ten thousand of them clearly made no
difference to England; they were pocketed by John.

[1993] Rog. Howden as above, p. 115. He says it was at
Portmort, on the morrow of the treaty--_i.e._ according to
his reckoning, on Tuesday, May 23. Rigord however (as above),
p. 44, dates it “at the same place, on the Monday after
[Ascension],” _i.e._ Gouleton, May 22. Hardy’s _Itinerary_, a.
2, shews John at La Roche-Andelys (Château-Gaillard) daily from
May 17 to May 25. The places however are all close together.

[1994] Rog. Howden as above.

[1995] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 101.

The next six weeks were spent by John in a triumphant progress southward, through Le Mans, Angers, Chinon, Tours and Loches, into Aquitaine, where he remained until the end of August.[1996] While there, he received the homage of his brother-in-law Count Raymond of Toulouse for the dower-lands of Jane,[1997] who had died in the preceding autumn.[1998] Of all these successes, however, John went far to cast away the fruit by a desecration of the marriage-bond almost as shameless and quite as impolitic as that which had brought upon Philip the wrath of Rome. He persuaded the Aquitanian and Norman bishops to annul his marriage with his cousin Avice of Gloucester, apparently by making them believe that the dispensation granted by Clement III. had been revoked by Innocent.[1999] Instead however of restoring to Avice the vast heritage which had been settled upon her at her betrothal, he gave her county of Gloucester to her sister’s husband Count Almeric of Evreux as compensation for the loss of his Norman honour,[2000] and apparently kept the remainder of her estates in his own hands. These proceedings were enough to excite the ill-will of a powerful section of the English baronage. John’s next step was a direct challenge to the most active, turbulent and troublesome house in all Aquitaine. He gave out that he desired to wed a daughter of the king of Portugal, and despatched an honourable company of ambassadors, headed by the bishop of Lisieux, to sue for her hand; after these envoys had started, however, and without a word of notice to them, he suddenly married the daughter of Count Ademar of Angoulême.[2001] Twenty-nine years before, Richard, as duke of Aquitaine, had vainly striven to wrest Angoulême from Ademar in behalf of Matilda, the only child of Ademar’s brother Count Vulgrin III. Matilda was now the wife of Hugh “the Brown” of Lusignan, who in 1179 or 1180 had in spite of King Henry made himself master of La Marche,[2002] and whose personal importance in southern Gaul was increased by the rank and fame which his brothers Geoffrey, Guy and Almeric had won in the kingdoms of Palestine and Cyprus. His son by Matilda--another Hugh the Brown--had through Richard’s good offices been betrothed in boyhood to his infant cousin Isabel, Ademar’s only child; the little girl was educated with her future husband, and it was hoped that in due time their marriage would heal the family feud and unite the lands of Angoulême and La Marche without possibility of further dissension. No sooner however did Count Ademar discover that a king wished to marry his daughter than he took her away from her bridegroom; and at the end of August she was married to John at Angoulême by the archbishop of Bordeaux.[2003]

[1996] See Hardy, _Itin. K. John_, a. 2 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

[1997] Rog. Howden as above, p. 124.

[1998] _Ib._ p. 96.

[1999] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 103, says the divorce was
made “per mandatum domini Papæ ... propter consanguinitatis
lineam.” But R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 167, says it
was made because John was “sublimioris thori spe raptatus,”
and adds: “unde magnam summi pontificis, scilicet Innocentii
tertii, et totius curiæ Romanæ indignationem incurrit.” He
dates it 1199, and attributes it to the Norman bishops; Rog.
Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 119, places it in 1200, and names
only the archbishop of Bordeaux and the bishops of Poitiers and
Saintes.

[2000] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 101.

[2001] R. Diceto as above, p. 170.

[2002] See above, p. 220.

[2003] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. pp. 119, 120. Cf. R.
Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 103. No one gives a date; but John
was at Angoulême on August 26 (Hardy, _Itin. K. John_, a. 2,
_Intr. Pat. Rolls_); and “his settlement on Isabella is dated
Aug. 30. _Rot. Chart._, p. 75” (Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. iv.
p. 168, note 1). Rog. Howden and R. Coggeshall both say this
marriage was advised by Philip.

Heedless of the storm which this marriage was sure to raise in Aquitaine, John in the first days of October carried his child-queen with him to England, and on the 8th was crowned with her at Westminster.[2004] His first business in England was to renew his persecution of the Cistercians;[2005] the next was to arrange a meeting with the king of Scots. This took place in November at Lincoln, where John, defying the tradition which his father had carefully observed, ventured to present himself in regal state within the cathedral church.[2006] The two kings held their colloquy on a hill outside the city; William performed his long-deferred homage,[2007] although his renewed demand for the restitution of the northern shires was again put off till Whitsuntide.[2008] Next day the king of England helped with his own hands to carry the body of the holy bishop Hugh to its last resting-place in the minster which he had himself rebuilt.[2009] Some haunting remembrance of Hugh’s saintlike face, as he had seen it in London only a few weeks before the good bishop’s death,[2010] may have combined with a sense that the White Monks were still too great a power in the land to be defied with impunity, and moved John on the following Sunday to make full amends to the Cistercian abbots, promising to seal his repentance by founding a house of their order[2011]--a promise which he redeemed by the foundation of Beaulieu abbey, in the New Forest.[2012] After keeping Christmas at Guildford[2013] he came back again to Lincoln, and quarrelled with the canons about the election of a new bishop.[2014] He thence went northward, accompanied by his queen, through Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, Northumberland and Cumberland, taking fines everywhere for offences against the forest-law. At Mid-Lent he was at York,[2015] and on Easter-day he and Isabel wore their crowns at Canterbury.[2016] A few days later, rumours of disturbances in Normandy and in Poitou paused him to issue orders for the earls and barons of England to meet him at Portsmouth at Whitsuntide, ready with horses and ships to accompany him over sea. The earls however held a meeting at Leicester, and thence by common consent made answer to the king that they would not go with him “unless he gave them back their rights.” It is clear that they already looked upon personal service beyond sea as no longer binding upon them without their own consent, specially given for a special occasion. John retorted by demanding the surrender of their castles, beginning with William of Aubigny’s castle of Beauvoir, which William was only suffered to retain on giving his son as a hostage.[2017] This threat brought the barons to Portsmouth on the appointed day; but the quarrel ended in a compromise. After despatching his chamberlain Hubert de Burgh, with a hundred knights, to act as keeper of the Welsh marches, and sending William the Marshal and Roger de Lacy, each with a hundred mercenaries, to resist the enemies in Normandy, John took from the remainder of the host a scutage in commutation of their services, and bade them return to their own homes.[2018] On Whit-Monday the queen crossed to Normandy, and shortly afterwards her husband followed.[2019]

[2004] Rog. Howden as above, p. 139. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol.
ii. p. 170. R. Coggeshall as above, with a wrong date.

[2005] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 103, 104.

[2006] Rog. Howden as above, pp. 140, 141.

[2007] _Ib._ p. 141.

[2008] _Ib._ p. 142.

[2009] _Ibid._ R. Diceto as above, p. 171. _Mag. Vita S. Hug._
(Dimock), pp. 370, 371.

[2010] Rog. Howden as above, pp. 140, 141.

[2011] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 107–110. _Mag. Vita S.
Hug._ (Dimock), pp. 377, 378.

[2012] On Beaulieu see R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 147; Ann.
Waverl. a. 1204 (Luard, _Ann. Monast._, vol. ii. p. 256); and
Dugdale, _Monast. Angl._, vol. v. pp. 682, 683.

[2013] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 172. Rog. Howden
(Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 156.

[2014] Rog. Howden as above.

[2015] _Ib._ p. 157. See details of his movements in Hardy,
_Itin. K. John_, a. 2 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

[2016] Rog. Howden as above, p. 160. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol.
ii. p. 172.

[2017] Rog. Howden as above, pp. 160, 161.

[2018] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 163.

[2019] _Ib._ p. 164.

After a friendly meeting near the Isle of Andelys,[2020] Philip invited John to Paris, where he entertained him with the highest honours, vacating his own palace for the reception of his guest, and loading him with costly gifts.[2021] From Paris John went to meet his sister-in-law, Richard’s queen Berengaria, at Chinon,[2022] where he seems to have chiefly spent the rest of the summer. He came back to Normandy in the autumn,[2023] and the Christmas feast at Argentan[2024] passed over in peace; but trouble was fast gathering on all sides. Philip was at last free of his ecclesiastical difficulties, for Agnes of Merania was dead, and he had taken back his wife.[2025] John was now in his turn to pay the penalty for his unwarrantable divorce and his lawless second marriage. As if he had not already done enough to alienate the powerful house of Lusignan by stealing the plighted bride of its head,[2026] he had now seized the castle of Driencourt, which belonged to a brother of Hugh the Brown, while its owner was absent in England on business for the king himself;[2027] and he had further insulted the barons of Poitou by summoning them to clear themselves in his court from a general charge of treason against his late brother and himself, by ordeal of battle with picked champions from England and Normandy. They scorned the summons,[2028] and appealed to the king of France, John’s overlord as well as theirs, to bring John to justice for their wrongs.[2029] On March 25 Philip met John at Gouleton,[2030] and peremptorily bade him give up to Arthur all his French fiefs, besides sundry other things, all of which John refused.[2031] Hereupon Philip sent, through some of the great French nobles,[2032] a citation to John, as duke of Aquitaine, to appear in Paris fifteen days after Easter at the court of his lord the king of France, to stand to its judgement, to answer to his lord for his misdoings, and to undergo the sentence of his peers.[2033] John made no attempt to deny Philip’s jurisdiction; but he declared that, as duke of Normandy, he was not bound to obey the French king’s citation to any spot other than the traditional trysting-place on the border. Philip replied that his summons was addressed to the duke of Aquitaine, not to the duke of Normandy, and that his rights over the former were not to be annulled by the accidental union of the two dignities in one person.[2034] John at length yielded so far as to promise that on the appointed day he would present himself before the court in Paris, and would give up to Philip the two castles of Tillières and Boutavant as security for his abiding by the settlement then to be made. The day however came and went without either the surrender of the forts or the appearance of John.[2035] The court of the French peers condemned him by default, and sentenced him to be deprived of all his lands.[2036]

[2020] _Ibid._ John was at the Isle June 9–11, and again June
25–27 [1201]. Hardy, _Itin. K. John_, a. 3 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

[2021] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
44. Rog. Howden as above; on the date see Bishop Stubbs’s note
1, _ibid._

[2022] Rog. Howden as above. The purpose was to settle with her
about her dowry; _ibid._, and p. 172 and note 2.

[2023] See Hardy as above.

[2024] Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol. iii. p. 167.

[2025] Rigord as above. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._
(_ibid._), p. 81. Rog. Howden as above, pp. 146–148.

[2026] Strictly speaking, its future head. The elder Hugh,
father of Isabel’s bridegroom, lived till 1206.

[2027] Will. Armor. _Philipp._, l. vi. (Duchesne, as above), p.
159. This was Ralf of Issoudun, a brother of the elder Hugh,
and count of Eu in right of his wife.

[2028] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 176.

[2029] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 135. Will. Armor. _Gesta
Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
81; _Philipp._, l. vi. (_ibid._) p. 159.

[2030] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 174.

[2031] Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol. iii. p. 167.

[2032] “Per proceres regni Francorum.” R. Coggeshall as above.

[2033] _Ib._ pp. 135, 136. The date fixed for the trial--April
29 [1202]--is from Rigord (Duchesne as above), p. 44. This
writer and Will. Armor. (_Gesta Phil. Aug._ as above) give a
version somewhat different from Ralf’s, saying that Philip
summoned John to do right to Philip himself for the counties of
Anjou, Touraine and Poitou. William however in the _Philipp._
(as above) substantially agrees with the English writer as to
the ground of Philip’s complaint.

[2034] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 136.

[2035] Will. Armor. as above, pp. 81, 161.

[2036] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 136.

Philip at once marched upon Normandy to execute the sentence by force of arms. He began by taking Boutavant[2037] and Tillières;[2038] thence he marched straight up northward by Lions,[2039] Longchamp, La Ferté-en-Bray,[2040] Orgueil and Mortemer,[2041] to Eu;[2042] all these places fell into his hands. Thus master of almost the whole Norman border from the Seine to the sea, he turned back to lay siege on July 8 to Radepont on the Andelle, scarcely more than ten miles from Rouen. Dislodged at the end of a week by John,[2043] he again withdrew to the border. The castle of Aumale and the rest of its county were soon in his hands.[2044] Hugh of Gournay alone, the worthy bearer of a name which for generations had been almost a synonym for loyalty to the Norman ducal house, still held out in his impregnable castle; Philip however, by breaking down the embankment which kept in the waters of a reservoir communicating with the river and the moat, let loose upon the castle a flood which undermined its walls and almost swept it away, thus compelling its defenders to make their escape and take shelter as best they could in the neighbouring forest.[2045] At Gournay Philip bestowed upon Arthur the hand of his infant daughter Mary,[2046] the honour of knighthood,[2047] and the investiture of all the Angevin dominions except the duchy of Normandy,[2048] which he evidently intended to conquer for himself and keep by right of conquest.

[2037] _Ibid._ Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol. iii. p. 168. Rigord
(Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 45. Will.
Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 81; _Philipp._,
l. vi. (_ibid._), p. 161. Boutavant was a small fortress
built by Richard in 1198, on the Seine, four miles above
Château-Gaillard, on the border-line between Normandy and
France (Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ as above. Rog. Howden,
Stubbs, vol. iv. p. 78). Philip had retorted by building hard
by it a rival fortress which he called Gouleton (Rog. Howden
as above)--the scene of his treaty with John in May 1202; see
above, p. 396.

[2038] Will. Armor. as above.

[2039] Rog. Wend. and Will. Armor. _Philipp._ as above.

[2040] Will. Armor. as above.

[2041] _Ibid._ _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 81. Rigord
(_ibid._), p. 45.

[2042] Rog. Wend. as above.

[2043] _Ibid._ p. 167; he says Philip besieged Radepont for
eight days. John got there on July 15; Hardy, _Itin. K. John_,
a. 4 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

[2044] R. Coggeshall as above.

[2045] Rog. Wend. as above, pp. 167, 168. Will. Armor. _Gesta
Phil. Aug._ as above; _Philipp._ (_ibid._), pp. 161, 162.

[2046] Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ as above, p. 82;
_Philipp._ (_ibid._), p. 162. Cf. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson),
p. 137. Mary (or Jane, as Rigord calls her) was one of the two
children of Agnes of Merania, legitimatized by Innocent III.;
cf. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc.
Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 81, and Rigord (_ibid._), p. 44.

[2047] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 137. Rigord as above,
p. 45; Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 82;
_Philipp._ (_ibid._), p. 162. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p.
94, says that Arthur was knighted by Philip when he first did
him homage in 1199.

[2048] Rigord as above. The order of the campaign above
described is not easy to make out, for no two contemporary
writers name the castles in the same order. Taking geography
for a guide, it would at first glance seem more natural that
Philip should have gone to Radepont from Tillières, and that
the whole northward expedition should come afterwards. But
it is certain that the siege of Radepont happened July 8–15
(see above, p. 403, note 8{2043}); and on the one hand, the
northern campaign, or at any rate part of it, seems needed to
fill up the interval between the breaking-out of the war at the
beginning of May and July 8; while on the other, it seems
impossible to crowd in the whole campaign between July 15 and
the knighting of Arthur, which clearly took place before that
month had expired. Lions, however, was not taken till after May
29, for on that day John was there; Hardy, _Itin. K. John_, a.
4 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_).

What John had been doing all this time it is difficult to understand. Between the middle of May and the end of June he had shifted his quarters incessantly, moving through the whole length of eastern Normandy, from Arques to Le Mans; throughout July he was chiefly in the neighbourhood of Rouen;[2049] but, except in the one expedition to Radepont, he seems to have made no attempt to check the progress of his enemies. After the knighting of Arthur at Gournay, however, he tried to make a diversion by sending a body of troops into Britanny. With their duchess dead[2050] and their young duke absent, the Bretons were in no condition for defence; Dol and Fougères were taken by John’s soldiers, and the whole country ravaged as far as Rennes.[2051] This attack stung Arthur into an attempt at independent action which led to his ruin. He and Philip divided their forces; while the French king led the bulk of his army northward to the siege of Arques,[2052] Arthur with two hundred knights[2053] moved southward to Tours,[2054] sending forward a summons to the men of his own duchy and those of Berry to meet him there for an expedition into Poitou.[2055] At Tours he was met by the disaffected Aquitanian chiefs:--the injured bridegroom young Hugh of La Marche, and two of his uncles, Ralf of Issoudun the dispossessed count of Eu, and Geoffrey of Lusignan, the inveterate fighter who had taken a leading part in every Aquitanian rising throughout the last twenty-two years of Henry’s reign, who after being Richard’s bitterest foe at home had been one of his best supporters in Palestine, and who had come back, it seems, to join in one more fight against his successor. The three kinsmen, however, brought together a force of only seventy-five knights; to which a Gascon baron, Savaric of Mauléon, added thirty more, and seventy men-at-arms.[2056] Arthur, mere boy of fifteen though he was, had enough of the hereditary Angevin wariness to shrink from attempting to act with such a small force, and in accordance with Philip’s instructions proposed to wait for his expected allies.[2057] But the Poitevins would brook no delay; and a temptation now offered itself which was irresistible alike to them and to their young leader. On her return from Castille with her granddaughter Blanche in the spring of 1200, Queen Eleanor, worn out with age and fatigue, had withdrawn to the abbey of Fontevraud,[2058] where she apparently remained throughout the next two years. The rising troubles of her duchy, however, seem to have brought her forth from her retirement once more, and she was now in the castle of Mirebeau, on the border of Anjou and Poitou. All John’s enemies knew that his mother was, in every sense, his best friend. She was at once his most devoted ally and his most sagacious counsellor, at least in all continental affairs; moreover, in strict feudal law, she was still duchess of Aquitaine in her own right, a right untouched by the forfeiture of John; and she therefore had it in her power to make that forfeiture null and void south of the Loire, so long as she lived to assert her claims for John’s benefit.[2059] To capture Eleanor would be to bring John to his knees; and with this hope Arthur and his little band laid siege to Mirebeau.[2060]

[2049] See Hardy, as above, a. 3, 4 (_ibid._)

[2050] Constance died September 3 or 4, 1201. Chronn. Britt.
_ad ann._ (Morice, _Hist. Bret., preuves_, vol. i. cols. 6,
106).

[2051] Will. Armor. _Philipp._ as above, p. 163. In the _Gesta
Phil. Aug._ (as above) he places this after Arthur’s capture.
In both works he says that _John_ did all this in Britanny;
but Hardy’s _Itinerary_ (as above) shews that John did it
vicariously.

[2052] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p.
45. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 138. Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol.
iii. p. 169.

[2053] Rog. Wend., as above, p. 168.

[2054] Will. Armor. _Philipp._, l. vi. (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc.
Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 162. Rigord as above.

[2055] Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne as above), p.
82. To the Bretons and the men of Berry he adds “Allobroges.”
What can they have had to do in the case, or what can he mean
by the name?

[2056] Will. Armor. _Philipp._ as above. He says Geoffrey
brought twenty picked knights, Ralf forty, and Hugh fifteen. R.
Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 137, makes the total force of Arthur
and the Poitevins together two hundred and fifty knights.

[2057] Will. Armor, as above, p. 163.

[2058] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 114.

[2059] On the relations of Eleanor, John, and Aquitaine see
Bishop Stubbs’s note to W. Coventry, vol. ii., pref. p.
xxxiv, note 1. His conclusion is that “certainly the legal
difficulties were much greater than Philip’s hasty sentences of
forfeiture could solve.”

[2060] Will. Armor. _Philipp._, l. vi. (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc.
Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 164; _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p.
82. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 137. Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol.
iii. p. 168.

John, however, when once roused, could act with all the vigour and promptitude of his race. On July 30, as he was approaching Le Mans, he received tidings of his mother’s danger; on August 1 he suddenly appeared before Mirebeau.[2061] The town was already lost, all the gates of the castle save one were broken down, and Eleanor had been driven to take refuge in the keep; the besiegers, thinking their triumph assured, were surprised and overpowered by John’s troops, and were slain or captured to a man, the Lusignans and Arthur himself being among the prisoners.[2062] Philip, who was busy with the siege of Arques, left it and hurried southward on hearing of this disaster;[2063] John however at once put an end to his hopes of rescuing Arthur by sending the boy to prison at Falaise;[2064] and Philip, after taking and burning Tours,[2065] withdrew into his own domains.[2066] John in his turn then marched upon Tours, and vented his wrath at its capture by completing its destruction.[2067] Shortly afterwards he had the good luck to make prisoner another disaffected Aquitanian noble, the viscount of Limoges.[2068] It was however growing evident that he would soon have nothing but his own resources to depend upon. His allies were falling away; the counts of Flanders, Blois and Perche and several of the other malcontent French barons had taken the cross and abandoned the field of western politics to seek their fortunes in the East;[2069] he had quarrelled with Otto of Germany;[2070] William des Roches, after pleading in vain for Arthur’s release, was organizing a league of the Breton nobles which some of the Norman border-chiefs were quite ready to join, and by the end of October the party thus formed was strong enough to seize Angers and establish its head-quarters there.[2071] It was probably the knowledge of all this which in the beginning of 1203 made John transfer his captive nephew from the castle of Falaise to that of Rouen.[2072] Sinister rumours of Arthur’s fate were already in circulation, telling how John had sent a ruffian to blind him at Falaise, how the soldiers who kept him had frustrated the design, and how their commandant, John’s chamberlain Hubert de Burgh, had endeavoured to satisfy the king by giving out that Arthur had died of wounds and grief and ordering funeral services in his memory, till the threats of the infuriated Bretons drove him to confess the fraud for the sake of John’s own safety.[2073] How or when Arthur really died has never yet been clearly proved. We only know that at Easter 1203 all France was ringing with the tidings of his death, and that after that date he was never seen alive. In his uncle’s interest an attempt was made to suggest that he had either pined to death in his prison, or been drowned in endeavouring to escape across the Seine;[2074] but the general belief, which John’s after-conduct tends strongly to confirm, was that he had been stabbed and then flung into the river by the orders, if not actually by the hands, of John himself.[2075]

[2061] These dates are given by John himself in a letter to the
barons of England, inserted by R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp.
137, 138. Hardy’s _Itin. K. John_, a. 4 (_Intr. Pat. Rolls_),
shews John at Bonport on July 30, and then gives no further
indication of his whereabouts till August 4, when he appears at
Chinon.

[2062] R. Coggeshall as above. Rog. Wend., as above, p. 169.
Cf. Rigord (Duchesne as above), p. 45; Will. Armor. _Gesta
Phil. Aug._ as above; and _Philipp_, (_ibid._), pp. 164, 165.
According to this last, John got into Mirebeau by night, by a
fraudulent negotiation with William des Roches.

[2063] Rog. Wend., Rigord, and Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._,
as above.

[2064] Rog. Wend. (Coxe), vol. iii. pp. 169, 170. Will. Armor.
_Philipp._, l. vi. (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol.
v.), p. 165.

[2065] Rigord (Duchesne, as above), p. 45. Will. Armor. _Gesta
Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 82.

[2066] Rog. Wend. (as above), p. 170. He adds “residuum anni
illius imbellis peregit.”

[2067] Rigord as above. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ as
above. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 138.

[2068] Rigord as above. This was Guy, son and successor to
Ademar, who had been slain in 1199 by Richard’s son Philip in
vengeance for the quarrel which had led to Richard’s death.
Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. iv. p. 97.

[2069] Rigord and Will. Armor, as above.

[2070] In 1200 Otto had demanded the lands and the jewels
bequeathed to him by Richard; John had refused to give them up.
Rog. Howden as above, p. 116.

[2071] Chron. S. Albin. a. 1202 (Marchegay, _Eglises_, p. 51).
R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 139. The former gives the date,
Wednesday before All Saints’ day.

[2072] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 143. Rog. Wend., as above.
Will. Armor. _Philipp._ as above, p. 166.

[2073] R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 139–141.

[2074] Mat. Paris, _Hist. Angl._ (Madden), vol. ii. p. 95.

[2075] On Arthur’s death see note at end of chapter.

The fire which had been smouldering throughout the winter in Britanny now burst into a blaze. The barons and prelates of the duchy, it is said, held a meeting at Vannes, and thence sent to the king of France, as overlord alike of Arthur and of John, their demand for a judicial inquisition before the peers of the realm--that is, before the supreme feudal court of France--into John’s dealings with their captive duke.[2076] A citation was accordingly sent to John, as duke of Normandy, either to present Arthur alive,[2077] or to come and stand his trial before the French king’s court on a charge of murder. John neither appeared nor sent any defence; the court pronounced him worthy of death, and sentenced him and his heirs to forfeiture of all the lands and honours which he held of the Crown of France.[2078] The trial seems to have been held shortly after Easter. The legal force of the sentence need not be discussed here.[2079] Its moral justice can hardly be disputed, so far as John himself is concerned; and Philip’s action did little more than precipitate the consequences which must sooner or later have naturally resulted from John’s own deed. John in committing a great crime had committed an almost greater blunder. Arthur’s death left him indeed without a rival in his own house. It left him sole survivor, in the male line, alike of the Angevin and Cenomannian counts and of the ducal house of Normandy. Even in the female line there was no one who could be set up against him as representative of either race. Eleanor of Britanny, the only remaining child of his brother Geoffrey, was a prisoner in her uncle’s keeping. The sons of his sister Matilda had cast in their lot with their father’s country and severed all ties with their mother’s people; the children of his sister Eleanor were still more complete strangers to the political interests of northern Gaul, and the only one of them who was known there at all was known only as the wife of the heir to the French crown. But these very facts set John face to face with a more dangerous rival than any of the ambitious kinsmen with whom the two Williams or the two Henrys had had to contend. They drove his disaffected subjects to choose between submission to him and submission to Philip Augustus. The barons of Anjou, of Maine, of Britanny or of Normandy had no longer any chance of freeing themselves from the yoke of the king from over-sea who had become a stranger to them all alike, save by accepting in its stead the yoke of the king with whom they had grown familiar through years of political and personal intercourse, and whom, in theory at least, even their own rulers had always acknowledged as their superior. Anjou, Maine and Britanny had all resolved upon Richard’s death that they would not have John to rule over them; Normandy was now fast coming to the same determination. Under the existing circumstances it would cost them little or no sacrifice to accept their titular overlord as their real and immediate sovereign. So long as Arthur lived, Philip had been compelled to veil his ambition under a shew of zeal for Arthur’s rights; now he could fling aside the veil, and present himself almost in the character of a deliverer. If the barons did not actually hail him as such, they were at any rate for the most part not unwilling to leave to him the responsibility of accomplishing their deliverance, and to accept it quietly from his hands.