foreseen, such as the empress readily accepted, but which the king could not but totally reject 1.

Stephen was now no longer blind to the difficulties of his position, and spared no means of confirming the attachment of those barons who remained faithful to him. With great consideration he treated the earl Ranulf of Chester, who had married a daughter of Robert of Gloucester, as well as his brother, William of Roumare 2. Ranulf had shown an inclination to take advantage of the king's difficulties by endeavouring to establish claims on Carlisle and the south of Cumberland, and thereby excited the indignation of the generally kindly disposed prince, to a degree that it was through the queen's mediation alone that he escaped with life 3. Stephen readily forgave, and, at Christmas, had left his deeply indebted and, as he imagined, well-disposed vassal quiet at Lincoln1. After a few days, however, while the garrison of the castle were diverting themselves without the walls, the wives of the two earls went to pay a visit to a lady who dwelt within it. In a short time the earl of Chester appeared, but without weapons or armour, under the pretext of escorting them home. Three of his soldiers likewise stole after him into the castle. They then speedily possessed themselves of some weapons, drove out the few of the garrison that were left, and gave admission to William of Roumare and the rest of their associates, and from the fortress easily rendered themselves masters of the city. The bishop and citizens, dreading the new lord of the castle, instantly communicated intelligence of what had taken place to the king 5. who with his usual, though by the earl little looked-for, celerity appeared and captured seventeen of his adversary's

1 Ibid.

2 Ord. Vital. p. 922.

3 Joh. Hagust. a. 1140. col. 268.

4 W. Malm. p. 739.

5 Ord. Vital. p. 921. Malmesbury (p. 739) is so disingenuous that he omits all mention of the treachery of the two earls, and accuses the citizens of having betrayed them.

knights; but the castle was too strong to be speedily taken, however considerable the number of men brought against it. Under cover of the darkness, earl Ranulf, with some companions, escaped from the castle, for the purpose of seeking aid from Chester, and of having an interview with earl Robert. The latter not only lent a willing ear to earl Ranulf, who swore fealty to the empress, but resolved, on this occasion, to effect a decision of the contest, and put an end to the lamentable state of the country1. Without disclosing his intention, he caused the Welsh, the outlaws, and malcontents from all sides to march to the Trent, which, in consequence of the heavy rains, they crossed with difficulty, and, in the beginning of February, appeared unexpectedly with a considerable army before Lincoln, in front of the king. By his barons Stephen was advised to withdraw into the interior of the country; for the purpose of reinforcing his army, but heedless even of the feast of the Purification (Feb. 2. 1141), he rashly resolved on a battle. He divided his army in three bodies, the first of which consisted of the Flemings, under William of Ypres, and the Bretons, under count Alan of Dinan. Opposed to these stood the Welsh, under two princely brothers, Meredith and Cadwalader, with the first division under earl Ranulf. Speeches are preserved which, as we are told, were made before the battle, by the leaders of the two armies. Those of the earls Ranulf and Robert abound in vaunt, and vehement, if not coarse, outbreaks against the most distinguished of their adversaries, which with equal justice might have been applied to themselves. That of Baldwin fitz Gilbert, who

i W. Malm. p. 740.

2 Of all of them John of Salisbury (Polycrat. viii. 21.) says: "Gaufridus (de Magnavilla), Milo, Ranulphus, Alanus, Simon (de Senlis), Gillebertus (de Clara), non tam comitis regni quam hostes publici." [It appears that Stephen had many traitors in his army, from the words of Orderic (p. 922), “In illo conflictu perfidia nequiter debacchata est. Nam quidam magnatorum cum paucis suorum regi comitati sunt, suorumque satellitum turmam adversariis ut prævalerent præmiserunt."—T.]

had undertaken to harangue the royal army, instead of the king, who was suffering from hoarseness1, enlarged judiciously and with dignity,on the justice of Stephen's cause, the sufficiency of their force, and the valour of his fellow warriors 2.

The first onset was given by the royal forces with their missiles; but the body of outlaws pressed so irresistibly on the foremost ranks with their swords, that the former quickly dismounted and had recourse also to their swords. But almost instantaneously their first line was broken through in many places, and the most distinguished warriors, who were too closely crowded together, were compelled to flee. Among them, after a short resistance, were count Alan and William of Ypres; but with disgraceful precipitation and cowardice, Waleram of Meulan and his brother, William of Warenne, William earl of York and Gilbert of Clare. Earl Alan of Richmond, who in latter times had, by his depredations on the possessions of the bishop of Durham and the recently deceased archbishop Thurstan of York, proved himself one of the greatest and most licentious enemies of law and order, renounced, together with his followers, before the beginning of the battle, both the king and the contest3. Only a few valiant knights, Baldwin of Clare, Richard fitz Urse, Engelram of Sai, and Ilbert of Lacy, flinched not from the side of the king. Stephen himself fought with a lion's courage; with a Norwegian battle-axe, with which a young man of Lincoln had supplied him, he prostrated every foe that approached him1; he smashed the helmet of earl Ranulf, but without slaying him; at length he was struck by a stone which brought him to the ground. With only three com

1 "Quia rex festiva voce carebat." H. Hunt. Gervas. col. 1352.-T. 2 H. Hunt. a. 1141.

3 Joh. Hagust. a. 1142 (1141). [Alan earl of Richmond is, it would seem, a distinct person from the count Alan who, with William of Ypres, commanded the first body.-T.]

4 Ord. Vital. p. 922.

5 W. Malm. p. 742.

panions by his side, he found himself compelled to retire before the pressing enemy. A valiant knight, William of Cahaines, seized him by the helmet, and with a loud voice announced the prize he had taken. Stephen had now no alternative but to yield himself a prisoner to the earl of Gloucester. With the king were likewise taken Baldwin fitz Gilbert and Richard fitz Urse. The earl conducted his royal captive to the empress, whereupon he was consigned to durance in Bristol castle, lenient at first, but afterwards more rigorous, and was even loaded with chains, in consequence, it is said, of his repeated attempts to escape1. In the speedily decided conflict few were the fallen, the number of corpses found not exceeding a hundred. A greater booty did the angel of death find among the unfortunate citizens of Lincoln. On the calamitous issue of the battle, they had to expect that the vengeance of the earl of Chester and the rapacity of his followers would be glutted to the utmost. Many consequently fled by means of the small vessels on the river, escaping from murder by voluntary exile. Owing to the pressure of the crowd, the boats, being too heavily laden, sank with their freight, and about five hundred of the citizens thus found a watery grave. Those who remained in the city and were taken fell a sacrifice to the barbarity of earl Ranulf and his well-practised myrmidons in the hangman's art2.

The consequences of the king's captivity were, however, not so important as they would have shown themselves, had a universally favourable disposition towards the empress prevailed in the nation. The earls, Waleram of Meulan, William of Warenne, and Simon of Northampton, with William of Ypres, hastened to the queen who had found a safe asylum among the faithful men of Kent. Earl Ranulf gained possession of some castles and treasures not belonging to him, partly

1 Ibid. Sax. Chron. a. 1141.

2 Ord. Vital. p. 922. W. Malm. p. 742. H. Hunt. a. 1141. Gervas. coll. 1350 sqq.

by treachery, through which he got count Alan into his power, whom, by hunger and other acts of violence, he compelled to become his vassal, and to deliver up his castles. The county of Cornwall Stephen also lost, now that Reginald's party was in the ascendant. Count Hervé also, his son-in-law, after being long besieged in the castle of Devizes by a multitude of the peasantry, who had risen in a body against him, was at length compelled to surrender that fortress to the empress, and, with a few followers, to flee precipitately from England. And Hugh, surnamed the Poor, whom, on the expulsion of Milo of Beauchamp, the king had created earl of Bedford, a negligent and effeminate man, was now forced to restore that castle to Milo'. Among the foremost who joined the party of Matilda were Robert of Oilli and the earl of Warwick 2. The town of Nottingham was by the empress taken from William Peverel and given to William Paganel. From the knights captured vast ransoms were extorted, and in general nothing was done by the victors to conciliate esteem and good will 3.

To Matilda it now appeared desirable to gain the legate bishop of Winchester to her interests, who, in foresight and sagacity, was thought to excel all the nobles of the kingdom, while his courage and riches rendered him the most powerful. If he, she declared, would attach himself to her party, honours should await him; if, on the other hand, he proved adverse and rebellious, the whole armed force of England should be directed against him. The legate's position was a difficult one; on the one hand, to defend the cause of the king seemed an almost hopeless task, while on the other, it was painful to himself, and must appear indecent and unnatural to others, to declare in favour of Matilda, while his brother

Gesta Steph. p. 73. See p. 377.

2 Gesta Steph. p. 74. [where they are described as liciis magis quam animi fortitudine affluentes."-T.]

Joh. Hagust. col. 269.