Page images
PDF
EPUB

turned from this enterprise through the lands of their adversaries, whence they also bore off much booty. In the following year (1151) the king resumed the siege of the castle of Worcester, and erected two forts against it, then left it to be conducted by his nobles. The place was defended by the brother of the count, Robert earl of Leicester, who succeeded in demolishing the two forts and causing the siege to be raised 1.

More important for England was that which at this time took place in France. No sooner had king Lewis VII. returned from the crusade than count Geoffrey hastened to him, for the purpose of preferring his complaints against Stephen. He renounced for himself the further government of Normandy, and the king of France conferred it on his son Henry, as the rightful heir, reserving, however, the Norman Vexin, between the Epte and the Andelle, for the crown of France, an act which soon led to hostilities between the king and the young duke, whereby prince Eustace found an opportunity of attaching himself more closely to his brother-in-law, the king of France, and even of rendering him effectual aid at the siege of Pont-de-l'Arche2. Hardly was peace restored at a meeting of the princes there, in which Bernard of Clairvaux acted as a mediator, to the no small advantage of the apparently compliant but politic Henry, when disease carried off his father, the stout and practised warrior; by which event the county of Anjou and his pretensions to the English crown devolved on his eldest son. Shortly after, fortune's favour brought to duke Henry a new and great accession to his power. Eleanor, a daughter of William X., count of Poitiers and duke of Guienne, had since the year 1137 been married to king Lewis VII. and had borne him two daughters. She had accompanied him on the crusade, her levities during

1 H. Hunt. aa. 1150, 1151.

2 Historia Regis Ludovici VII. ap. Bouquet, xiii. p. 127. Rob. de Monte, aa. 1150, 1151.

which gave rise to dissensions between her and her consort, which, after a union of fifteen years, led to a sentence of divorce pronounced at the council of Baugency (1152, March 18th), on the plea of too near consanguinity. Hardly was Eleanor-who retained Poitou and Guienne-separated from the king, when her hand was sought by the highest princes of France. From the importunate suit of the young count Theobald V. of Blois she was obliged to escape by night, and in a similar manner from an attempt at abduction by Geoffrey Plantagenet, second son of the recently deceased count of Anjou1. More fortunate was his elder brother Henry, on whom Eleanor, only six weeks after her divorce, bestowed her hand with her rich possessions (May 18th), thereby making him master of a half of France. Great were the surprise and indignation of the French monarch on this occasion, who was now sensible of the impolicy of his divorce. Nor was the consternation less which pervaded the court of Stephen, when it became known how Henry, only a short time before, the youngest and poorest knight, whose greatest pride was a successful chase, or an insignificant border war, had at once become one of the most considerable and powerful princes of Europe. King Lewis and Eustace now invaded Normandy at the head of a numerous French army, to whom Henry offered a stout resistance, yet lost the castle of Neufmarché, till then regarded as impregnable, which king Lewis gave over to Eustace 2.

While these youthful forms were entering upon the world's stage, and the eyes of all were directed towards them, more and more of those who constituted the historic matter, as it were, of Stephen's reign were retiring from it. His brother, the excellent count Theobald of Blois, had died in the beginning of this year; and a few weeks later (March 3rd) the

1 Chron. Turon. a. 1152.

2 H. Hunt. a. 1151 (1152). Robert de Monte, a. 1152, gives details of this war.

no less excellent queen Matilda. Of Stephen's adversaries there died about the same time prince Henry, son of king David, a valiant, and in the milder virtues, well-approved prince, who, in the next year, was followed by his royal father and, shortly after, by many of the rebellious barons1.

It was a great error on the part of Stephen to alienate the good will of the Church, and this may be ascribed in a great degree, if not solely, to his brother Henry, who had exercised his legatine authority in a very questionable, if not arbitrary, manner. But his patron Innocent II. dying (1144) was, in the short space of two years, succeeded by two popes, one of whom, Celestine II., at the instance of archbishop Theobald, deprived Henry of his legatine office. Mortified at his disgrace, the bishop prevailed on his brother to forbid the archbishop to assist at the council of Rheims (1148); but Theobald slighted the prohibition, and at his return was driven into exile. He landed in France, passed over from thence to Framlingham, where, under the protection of Bigot, earl of Norfolk, he published a sentence of interdict on all the royal demesnes, which was forthwith put in execution, when Stephen's friends, alarmed at the cessation of divine service, compelled him to seek a reconciliation with the primate3.

There was, in fact, an internal warfare, which never ceased, between the secular and the ecclesiastical powers. The introduction of appeals to the pope, which had until then been unknown in England, but which, as papal legate, the bishop of Winchester had introduced among the clergy, gave rise to many dissensions. After the death of Innocent II., and of his two short-lived successors (Celestine II. and Lucius II.), Eugenius III. had followed a hostile policy towards Stephen

1 Joh. Hagust. a. 1153 (1152). Rob. de Monte, h. a.

2 On the death of abp. William, the predecessor of Theobald, Henry had endeavoured to obtain the primacy, but was thwarted by both the king and queen. Gervas. col. 1348.—T.

3 Gervas. coll. 1348, 1363 sq. 1665.

4 H. Hunt. a. 1151. W. Malm. p. 723.

and bishop Henry. A new legate, the presbyter cardinal John, was sent to Ireland (1150), but was by Stephen forbidden a free passage into England, unless he engaged that his mission had for its object nothing prejudicial to the realm. Some years after, on the return of the legate, the king strove to make good his former ill-advised step1. He had, in the meantime, become reconciled with the archbishop of York, Henry Murdac, who, contrary to his will, had been elected by the clergy, and consecrated by the pope, and with whom Eustace had had many quarrels, but which had also been settled amicably 2.

At Midlent, in the following year (1154), a council was convoked at London, at which the king and his son Eustace were present. When an overwhelming number of appeals had been heard, Stephen demanded of the prelates that they should crown his son. From archbishop Theobald he met with a refusal, the pope, he asserted, having by his letter prohibited him from raising the king's son to the throne, because Stephen himself, in violation of his oath, had seized on the kingdom by force. This letter, it is said, was obtained of the pope, and brought to England by Thomas, son of Gilbert Becket, a priest of London, the future archbishop of Canterbury, celebrated for his disputes with Henry II. and his tragic end. When the king attempted to extort compliance from the prelates by shutting them up in a house, the archbishop found means to escape, and crossed over to Normandy. Stephen confiscated their temporalities, but Henry gained the primate of all England for a declared adherent".

In this year Stephen succeeded in capturing the castle of Newbury, and thence proceeded to renew the siege of Wallingford, where, at the end of the bridge at Crowmarsh, he caused a fort to be erected, to cut off all supplies from the

1 Joh. Hagust. aa. 1152 (1151), 1153 (1152).

2 Ibid. aa. 1147, 1150, 1151.

H. Hunt. a. 1152. Gervas, coll, 1369, 1372, 1668.

garrison. Thus reduced to an extremity, they besought the duke of Normandy either to send them succour, or consent to the surrender of the castle to the king1.

After a long contest, a truce was this year (1153) concluded between king Lewis and Henry, but which the former seemed disposed to violate. Nevertheless, early in January, Henry sailed with thirty-six ships and an army, consisting of a hundred and forty horse and three thousand foot, to England. Shortly after his arrival, his army being greatly increased, he laid siege to and captured the town of Malmesbury (Jan. 13th), with the exception of one tower, which could only be reduced by famine. The defence of this tower had been intrusted by the king to one Jordan, who hastened to him and announced the state of things. Stephen hereupon marched to attack the duke, and the armies met near Malmesbury, where the unfavourable position of the royal troops, who had the snow, rain, and wind storming in their faces, while those of the duke were naturally free from those annoyances, decided the fate of the day in favour of Henry2. Depressed in spirit Stephen hurried back to London, and many of the English nobility began to declare for Henry. Gundred countess of Warwick expelled the garrison placed by the king in her castle, which she delivered to the duke3. Robert earl of Leicester supplied him with everything he needed, and, by his representations, induced nearly thirty holders of castles to join him1. The tower of Malmesbury having surrendered, Henry hastened to the relief of Wallingford, but which he only partially effected. To prevent the garrison at Crowmarsh from acting on the offensive, Henry caused a deep trench to be dug round the fort, whereby those in Wallingford were enabled to open their gates. On hearing what was taking place, Stephen marched to the relief of his fort, and both armies again stood in front of each other; but many of the most distinguished men,

H. Hunt. a, 1152. Gervas. h. a.

2 H. Hunt. a. 1153.

3 Rob. de Monte, h. a. R. Wendov. ii. p. 254. 4 Gervasius, h. a.

« PreviousContinue »