Page images
PDF
EPUB

had opposed him at Hastings, but even of those who had intended to be there; and, indeed, many of the Normans had done homage to him before the expedition, for lands about to be conquered'. To his fellow-soldiers, accordingly, many of them poor and lowly at home, were vast tracts of English land granted.

It is due to King William's discretion, to observe that in Domesday there occurs only once, perhaps by an oversight, a phrase indicating conquest', the more usual term referring to so great a change being the courteous one "after the King came to England";" and it is also remarkable, that there was no grant of a single acre to any of his own sons.

When Domesday reports but two or three ploughs in a large parish, it is obvious that land of so little value was indeed the cheapest reward in the King's power, and of this he made an unsparing use, giving, for example, to his sonin-law, William, Earl de Warenne, 298 manors. The wholesale nature of the confiscation may be made more palpable, perhaps, by stating that all the three adjoining counties of Kent, Surrey, and Sussex, were thus in the hands of 56 proprietors, very few indeed of whom were Saxons.

Kent was the property of 12 owners, all Normans, except the clergy.
Surrey

Sussex

41 including 6 Saxons, who held only 8 manors.

-15

68

of the 3489 hides, 2649 belonged to the King

and Normans, 833 to the Church, and 10 only Saxons.

to

The King, however, being reckoned in each county, and 10 of the 15 Sussex proprietors holding lands also in Surrey,

1 Chr. de Norm. Thierry, Conq. d'Angl.

26 Postquam Wilhelmus Rex conquisivit Angliam."

366 Postquam Rex venit in Angliam."

Kent, Sussex, and Surrey being the first counties occupied, and com

prising many estates that belonged to Harold, his family and his adherents, suffered in proportion more than the rest of England. P.

5 The numbers given amount to 3492. My own calculation of the hidage of Sussex makes it under 3200. P.

a deduction of 12 would reduce the number to 56. In all Domesday, which does not include four Northern counties, there are only 600 named proprietors1.

The few Normans thus enriched, and scattered over the face of the country, became by the very condition of their scanty numbers, and their masses of property, too proud and powerful for easy control, and gradually imbibed from the soil of their new country the inherent maxims of Saxon freedom. They who had conquered the land with the Conqueror, were little ready to give up the privileges which they had so earned, and as, fortunately, no difference of religious creed separated them from the humbled Saxons, though of another race and language, common interests and intercourse gradually led to mutual respect. The Norman landholders were, indeed, but little of patriots, and set slight value on the good of the people, but being jealous of the royal authority, they readily combined with them in the coercion of their King. They had grievances too of their own, heavy burthens repugnant to their feelings, arising from their feudal tenures, which, on every fresh occasion, revived heart-burnings and rebellions among them. Some of these hardships-the unfixed alienation fines, the inability to devise fiefs by will, and the control of the crown over the marriage of wards—had been unknown to them in Normandy'.

The more refined arts and manners of their foreign dominions naturally attracted the early Norman kings to frequent residence in the country of their birth. During the 36 years of his reign, Henry I. passed but 5 summers in England. Henry II. visited Normandy annually for 26 years, and died there. Richard I. was abroad for 9 years,

1 Mr Blaauw here refers to a passage in Brady's Introduction (pp. 170, 171), there were not in William the Conqueror's reign (as appears by an alphabetical catalogue made out of Domesday Book) 700 tenants in capite besides Bishops, Abbots, Priors, and great Churchmen," &c. Kel

ham, however, only enumerates 435, besides Bishops and Churches. Sir H. Ellis, reckoning in Ecclesiastical Corporations and King's Thanes, says "The Tenants in capite amounted scarcely to 1400." Introduction to Domesday, Vol. I. p. 511. P.

Hallam, Middle Ages.

except a few months in England. The long absences of their kings afforded greater opportunity to the barons to establish themselves on an independent footing. After the lapse of four or five generations, they began to consider themselves as Englishmen, and resented as such the tyrannous caprice and corruption of the court. It must be remembered that at this period there was no permanent tax, and no standing army; the physical strength of the crown was but occasional, and the revenue casual. When the Sovereign, therefore, in his need grasped at forbidden profits, his rapacity was resisted at once by the feudal Barons as an unlawful interference, not so much with their rights as subjects, as with their individual privileges and property. These were much more intelligible to them and more dearly cherished, for "what we now call public rights were then private ones," as has been remarked by a sagacious historian';" and it was under these impulses that their combined efforts of resistance won the Great Charter.

1 Guizot, Civilisation en Europe.

CHAPTER II.

HENRY III. AND HIS COURTIERS.

"Our coffers with too great a court

And liberal largess are grown somewhat light."

RICH. II.

MAGNA CHARTA, to which it is remarkable that Shakspeare makes no allusion whatever in his King John, required about thirty confirmations from subsequent kings to enforce its provisions, although its renewal in the ninth year of Henry III. is now referred to as an existing statute, and was of so little avail to check discord, that it was while a foreign Prince was occupying the country and claiming the Crown (in behalf of his wife, John's niece), that Henry III., a boy of nine years old, first inherited the throne.

Nothing but the wisdom and courage of the Regent William, Earl of Pembroke, which won over the chiefs of the opposite party, preserved England from then becoming a tributary province to France, and until his death (in March, 1219) the councils of the young Prince were swayed by his prudence; nor did the defects of the King's character become apparent, until deprived of this statesman.

This Earl, by his marriage with the heiress of Strongbow, the conqueror of Ireland, had acquired immense estates in that country, which extended over 124 miles in length and 74 in breadth. Leaving ten children, his earldom was successively held by each of his five sons, after whom his five

daughters became, in 1245, the co-heirs of the property'. This failure of male heirs was looked upon as fulfilling the curse of a priest, from whom he had seized some lands. The zealous churchman, when urged by the King to remove the excommunication after his death, stuck steadily to his text, while professing compliance; and though he ceremoniously absolved the soul of the Earl, it was on the express condition of previous restitution by his heirs of the lands in question.

An ambitious native of Poictou, Peter de Roches, Bishop of Winchester, succeeded as Regent. Having been an active knight in earlier life, he was employed, in 1234, by the Pope, long after his episcopacy, to command his troops3; and this soldier-prelate made the weak King for many years the passive instrument of his own power, inspiring him with those arbitrary principles of government, which so often en

1 William, the Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, married Isabella, only child of Richard de Clare, Earl of Pembroke, surnamed Strongbow. He died March, 1219, and lies buried in the Temple Church. His arms were "Party per pale, or and vert, a lion rampant, gules.'

1. William, 2nd Earl, his eldest son, a gallant soldier, one of the 25 guardians of Magna Charta, died April, 1231, and is buried in the Temple. He married Princess Eleanor, daughter of King John, in 1224, but they had no children, and she remarried, January, 1238, Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester.

2. Richard, 3rd Earl, rebelled, and was killed in Ireland, 1234.

3. John, defeated Prince Louis at sea, 1217, and died unmarried.

4. Gilbert, 4th Earl, implicated in the rebellion of Earl Richard (Archæol. Journal, 1863, p. 165), a Crusader, in 1236, suddenly dismissed by Henry III., 1239, died at a tournament, May, 1241, and is buried in the Temple; he married Margaret, a princess of Scotland.

5. Walter, 5th Earl, died Decem

ber 4, 1245.

6. Anselm, 6th Earl, Dean of Salisbury, died December 22, 1245.

7. Matilda, the eldest daughter, carried the hereditary title of Earl Marshal into her husband's family, with whose descendants it still remains. She died 1248, having married, first, Hugh le Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, and, secondly, John de Warenne, Earl of Surrey.

8. Joan, married Warin de Monchensi. Their daughter carried the earldom of Pembroke to her husband, William de Valence, half brother of Henry III.

9. Isabella married, first, Gilbert de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, who died October, 1230; and, secondly, Prince Richard, Earl of Cornwall, April, 1231. Her incised memorial was lately found at Beaulieu Abbey. Archæol. Journal, 1863, p. 107.

10. Sybilla, married William de Ferrers, Earl of Derby.

11. Eve, married William de Braose (see Calend. Geneal. 1. p. 227. P.), who died 1254.

2 M. Par.

3 Ibid.

« PreviousContinue »