and the legislator. The revived study of Roman law had been
one of the greatest results of the intellectual renaissance of
the twelfth century. The enormous growth of the universities
in the early part of the thirteenth century was in no small
measure due to the zeal, ardour and success of their legal
faculties. From Bologna there flowed all over Europe a great
impulse towards the systematic and scientific study of the
Civil Law of Rome. ... The northern lawyers were inspired by
their emulation of the civilians and canonists to look at the
rude chaos of feudal custom with more critical eyes. They
sought to give it more system and method, to elicit its
leading principles, and to coordinate its clashing rules into
a harmonious body of doctrine worthy to be put side by side
with the more pretentious edifices of the Civil and Canon Law.
In this spirit Henry de Bracton wrote the first systematic
exposition of English law in the reign of Henry III. The
judges and lawyers of the reign of Edward sought to put the
principles of Bracton into practice. Edward himself strove
with no small success to carry on the same great work by new
legislation. ... His well-known title of the 'English
Justinian' is not so absurd as it appears at first sight. He
did not merely resemble Justinian in being a great legislator.
Like the famous codifier of the Roman law, Edward stood at the
end of a long period of legal development, and sought to arrange
and systematise what had gone before him. Some of his great
laws are almost in form attempts at the systematic
codification of various branches of feudal custom. ... Edward
was greedy for power, and a constant object of his legislation
was the exaltation of the royal prerogative. But he nearly
always took a broad and comprehensive view of his authority,
and thoroughly grasped the truth that the best interests of
king and kingdom were identical. He wished to rule the state,
but was willing to take his subjects into partnership with
him, if they in return recognised his royal rights. ... The
same principles which influenced Edward as a lawgiver stand
out clearly in his relations to every class of his subjects.
... It was the greatest work of Edward's life to make a
permanent and ordinary part of the machinery of English
government, what in his father's time had been but the
temporary expedient of a needy taxgatherer or the last
despairing effort of a revolutionary partisan. Edward I.
is--so much as one man can be--the creator of the historical
English constitution. It is true that the materials were ready
to his hand. But before he came to the throne the parts of the
constitution, though already roughly worked out, were
ill-defined and ill-understood. Before his death the national
council was no longer regarded as complete unless it contained
a systematic representation of the three estates. All over
Europe the thirteenth century saw the establishment of a
system of estates. The various classes of the community, which
had a separate social status and a common political interest,
became organised communities, and sent their representatives
to swell the council of the nation. By Edward's time there had
already grown up in England some rough anticipation of the
three estates of later history. ... It was with no intention
of diminishing his power, but rather with the object of
enlarging it, that Edward called the nation into some sort of
partnership with him. The special clue to this aspect of his
policy is his constant financial embarrassment. He found that
he could get larger and more cheerful subsidies if he laid his
financial condition before the representatives of his people.
... The really important thing was that Edward, like Montfort,
brought shire and borough representatives together in a single
estate, and so taught the country gentry, the lesser
landowners, who, in a time when direct participation in
politics was impossible for a lower class, were the real
constituencies of the shire members, to look upon their
interests as more in common with the traders of lower social
status than with the greater landlords with whom in most
continental countries the lesser gentry were forced to
associate their lot. The result strengthened the union of
classes, prevented the growth of the abnormally numerous
privileged nobility of most foreign countries, and broadened
and deepened the main current of the national life."
_T. F. Tout,
Edward the First,
chapter 7-8._
{811}
"There was nothing in England which answered to the 'third
estate' in France--a class, that is to say, both isolated and
close, composed exclusively of townspeople, enjoying no
commerce with the rural population (except such as consisted
in the reception of fugitives), and at once detesting and
dreading the nobility by whom it was surrounded. In England
the contrary was the case. The townsfolk and the other classes
in each county were thrown together upon numberless occasions;
a long period of common activity created a cordial
understanding between the burghers on the one hand and their
neighbours the knights and landowners on the other, and
finally prepared the way for the fusion of the two classes."
_E. Boutmy,
The English Constitution,
chapter 3._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1279.
The Statute of Mortmain.
"For many years past, the great danger to the balance of power
appeared to come from the regular clergy, who, favoured by the
success of the mendicant orders, were adding house to house
and field to field. Never dying out like families, and rarely
losing by forfeitures, the monasteries might well nigh
calculate the time, when all the soil of England should be
their own. ... Accordingly, one of the first acts of the
barons under Henry III. had been to enact, that no fees should
be aliened to religious persons or corporations. Edward
re-enacted and strengthened this by various provisions in the
famous Statute of Mortmain. The fee illegally aliened was now
to be forfeited to the chief lord under the King; and if, by
collusion or neglect, the lord omitted to claim his right, the
crown might enter upon it. Never was statute more unpopular
with the class at whom it was aimed, more ceaselessly eluded,
or more effectual. ... Once the clergy seem to have meditated
open resistance, for, in 1281, we find the king warning the
bishops, who were then in convocation at Lambeth, as they
loved their baronies, to discuss nothing that appertained to
the crown, or the king's person, or his council. The warning
appears to have proved effectual, and the clergy found less
dangerous employment in elaborating subtle evasions of the
obnoxious law. At first fictitious recoveries were practised;
an abbey bringing a suit against a would-be donor, who
permitted judgment against him to go by default. When this was
prohibited, special charters of exemption were procured. Once
an attempt was made to smuggle a dispensing bill through
parliament. One politic abbot in the 15th century encouraged
his friends to make bequests of land, suffered them to
escheat, and then begged them back of the crown, playing on
the religious feelings of Henry VI. Yet it is strong proof of
the salutary terror which the Statute of Mortmain inspired
that even then the abbot was not quieted, and procured an Act
of Parliament to purge him from any consequences of his
illegal practices. In fact, the fear, lest astute crown
lawyers should involve a rich foundation in wholesale
forfeitures, seems sometimes to have hampered its members in
the exercise of their undoubted rights as citizens."
_C. H. Pearson,
History of England during the Early and Middle Ages,
volume 2, chapter 9._
ALSO IN:
_E. F. Henderson,
Select Historical Documents._
_K. E. Digby,
Law of Real Property (4th edition)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1282-1284.
Subjugation of Wales.
See WALES: A. D. 1282-1284.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1290-1305.
Conquest of Scotland by Edward I.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1290-1305.
ENGLAND: 14th Century.
Immigration of Flemish artisans.
The founding of English manufactures.
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1335-1337.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1306-1393.
Resistance to the Pope.
"For one hundred and fifty years succeeding the Conquest, the
right of nominating the archbishops, bishops, and mitred
abbots had been claimed and exercised by the king. This right
had been specially confirmed by the Constitutions of
Clarendon, which also provided that the revenues of vacant
sees should belong to the Crown. But John admitted all the
Papal claims, surrendering even his kingdom to the Pope, and
receiving it back as a fief of the Holy See. By the Great
Charter the Church recovered its liberties; the right of free
election being specially conceded to the cathedral chapters
and the religious houses. Every election was, however, subject
to the approval of the Pope, who also claimed a right of veto
on institutions to the smaller church benefices. ... Under
Henry III. the power thus vested in the Pope and foreign
superiors of the monastic orders was greatly abused, and soon
degenerated into a mere channel for draining money into the
Roman exchequer. Edward I. firmly withstood the exactions of
the Pope, and reasserted the independence of both Church and
Crown. ... In the reign of the great Edward began a series of
statutes passed to check the aggressions of the Pope and
restore the independence of the national church. The first of
the series was passed in 1306-7. ... This statute was
confirmed under Edward III. in the 4th, and again in the 5th
year of his reign; and in the 25th of his reign [A. D. 1351],
roused 'by the grievous complaints of all the commons of his
realm,' the King and Parliament passed the famous Statute of
Provisors, aimed directly at the Pope, and emphatically
forbidding his nominations to English benefices. ... Three
years afterwards it was found necessary to pass a statute
forbidding citations to the court of Rome--[the prelude to the
Statute of Præmunire, described below]. ... In 1389, there was an
expectation that the Pope was about to attempt to enforce his
claims, by excommunicating those who rejected them. ... The
Parliament at once passed a highly penal statute. ... Matters
were shortly afterwards brought to a crisis by Boniface IX.,
who after declaring the statutes enacted by the English
Parliament null and void, granted to an Italian cardinal a
prebendal stall at Wells, to which the king had already
presented. Cross suits were at once instituted by the two
claimants in the Papal and English courts. A decision was
given by the latter, in favour of the king's nominee, and the
bishops, having agreed to support the Crown, were forthwith
excommunicated by the Pope. The Commons were now roused to the
highest pitch of indignation,"--and the final great Statute of
Præmunire was passed, A. D. 1393. "The firm and resolute
attitude assumed by the country caused Boniface to yield; 'and
for the moment,' observes Mr. Froude, 'and indeed for ever
under this especial form, the wave of papal encroachment was
rolled back.'"
_T. P. Taswell-Langmead,
English Constitutional History,
chapter 11._
"The great Statute of Provisors, passed in 1351, was a very
solemn expression of the National determination not to give
way to the pope's usurpation of patronage. ... All persons
procuring or accepting papal promotions were to be arrested.
... In 1352 the purchasers of Provisions were declared
outlaws; in 1365 another act repeated the prohibitions and
penalties; and in 1390 the parliament of Richard II. rehearsed
and confirmed the statute. By this act, forfeiture and
banishment were decreed against future transgressors."
{812}
The Statute of Præmunire as enacted finally in 1393, provided
that "all persons procuring in the court of Rome or elsewhere
such translations, processes, sentences of excommunication,
bulls, instruments or other things which touch the king, his
crown, regality or realm, should suffer the penalties of
præmunire"--which included imprisonment and forfeiture of
goods. "The name præmunire which marks this form of
legislation is taken from the opening word of the writ by
which the sheriff is charged to summon the delinquent."
_W. Stubbs,
Constitutional History of England,
chapter 19, section 715-716._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1307.
Accession of King Edward II.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1310-1311.
The Ordainers.
"At the parliament which met in March 1310 [reign of Edward
II.] a new scheme of reform was promulgated, which was framed
on the model of that of 1258 and the Provisions of Oxford. It
was determined that the task of regulating the affairs of the
realm and of the king's household should be committed to an
elected body of twenty-one members, or Ordainers, the chief of
whom was Archbishop Winchelsey. ... The Ordainers were
empowered to remain in office until Michaelmas 1311, and to
make ordinances for the good of the realm, agreeable to the
tenour of the king's coronation oath. The whole administration
of the kingdom thus passed into their hands. ... The Ordainers
immediately on their appointment issued six articles directing
the observance of the charters, the careful collection of the
customs, and the arrest of the foreign merchants; but the
great body of the ordinances was reserved for the parliament
which met in August 1311. The famous document or statute known
as the Ordinances of 1311 contained forty-one clauses, all
aimed at existing abuses."
_W. Stubbs,
The Early Plantagenets,
chapter 12._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1314-1328.
Bannockburn and the recovery of Scottish independence.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1314; 1314-1328.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1327.
Accession of King Edward III.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1328.
The Peace of Northampton with Scotland.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1328.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1328-1360.
The pretensions and wars of Edward III. in France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1328-1339; and 1337-1360.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1332-1370.
The wars of Edward III. with Scotland.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1332-1333, and 1333-1370.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1333-1380.
The effects of the war in France.
"A period of great wars is generally favourable to the growth
of a nobility. Men who equipped large bodies of troops for the
Scotch or French wars, or who had served with distinction in
them, naturally had a claim for reward at the hands of their
sovereign. ... The 13th century had broken up estates all over
England and multiplied families of the upper class; the 14th
century was consolidating properties again, and establishing a
broad division between a few powerful nobles and the mass of
the community. But if the gentry, as an order, lost a little
in relative importance by the formation of a class of great
nobles, more distinct than had existed before, the middle
classes of England, its merchants and yeomen, gained very much
in importance by the war. Under the firm rule of the 'King of
the Sea,' as his subjects lovingly called Edward III., our
commerce expanded. Englishmen rose to an equality with the
merchants of the Hanse Towns, the Genoese, or the Lombards,
and England for a time overflowed with treasure. The first
period of war, ending with the capture of Calais, secured our
coasts; the second, terminated by the peace of Brétigny,
brought the plunder of half [of] France into the English
markets; and even when Edward's reign had closed on defeat and
bankruptcy, and our own shores were ravaged by hostile fleets,
it was still possible for private adventurers to retaliate
invasion upon the enemy. ... The romance of foreign conquest,
of fortunes lightly gained and lightly lost, influenced
English enterprise for many years to come. ... The change to
the lower orders during the reign arose rather from the
frequent pestilences, which reduced the number of working men
and made labour valuable, than from any immediate
participation in the war. In fact, English serfs, as a rule,
did not serve in Edward's armies. They could not be
men-at-arms or archers for want of training and equipment; and
for the work of light-armed troops and foragers, the Irish and
Welsh seem to have been preferred. The opportunity of the
serfs came with the Black Death, while districts were
depopulated, and everywhere there was a want of hands to till
the fields and get in the crops. The immediate effect was
unfortunate. ... The indifference of late years, when men were
careless if their villans stayed on the property or emigrated,
was succeeded by a sharp inquisition after fugitive serfs, and
constant legislation to bring them back to their masters. ...
The leading idea of the legislator was that the labourer,
whose work had doubled or trebled in value, was to receive the
same wages as in years past; and it was enacted that he might
be paid in kind, and, at last, that in all cases of contumacy
he should be imprisoned without the option of a fine. ... The
French war contributed in many ways to heighten the feeling of
English nationality. Our trade, our language and our Church
received a new and powerful influence. In the early years of
Edward III.'s reign, Italian merchants were the great
financiers of England, farming the taxes and advancing loans
to the Crown. Gradually the instinct of race, the influence of
the Pope, and geographical position, contributed, with the
mistakes of Edward's policy, to make France the head, as it
were, of a confederation of Latin nations. Genoese ships
served in the French fleet, Genoese bowmen fought at Crécy,
and English privateers retorted on Genoese commerce throughout
the course of the reign. In 1376 the Commons petitioned that
all Lombards might be expelled [from] the kingdom, bringing
amongst other charges against them that they were French
spies. The Florentines do not seem to have been equally
odious, but the failure of the great firm of the Bardi in
1345, chiefly through its English engagements, obliged Edward
to seek assistance elsewhere; and he transferred the privilege
of lending to the crown to the merchants of the rising Hanse
Towns."
_C. H. Pearson,
English History in the Fourteenth Century,
chapter 9._
"We may trace the destructive nature of the war with France in
the notices of adjoining parishes thrown into one for want of
sufficient inhabitants, 'of people impoverished by frequent
taxation of our lord the king,' until they had fled, of
churches allowed to fall into ruin because there were none to
worship within their walls, and of religious houses
extinguished because the monks and nuns had died, and none bad
been found to supply their places. ...
{813}
To the poverty of the country and the consequent inability of
the nation to maintain the costly wars of Edward III., are
attributed the enactments of sumptuary laws, which were passed
because men who spent much on their table and dress were
unable 'to help their liege lord' in the battle field."
_W. Denton,
England in the 15th Century,
introduction, part 2._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1318-1349.
The Black Death and its effects.
"The plague of 1349 ... produced in every country some marked
social changes. ... In England the effects of the plague are
historically prominent chiefly among the lower classes of
society. The population was diminished to an extent to which
it is impossible now even to approximate, but which bewildered
and appalled the writers of the time; whole districts were
thrown out of cultivation, whole parishes depopulated, the
number of labourers was so much diminished that on the one
hand the survivors demanded an extravagant rate of wages, and
even combined to enforce it, whilst on the other hand the
landowners had to resort to every antiquated claim of service
to get their estates cultivated at all; the whole system of
farming was changed in consequence, the great landlords and
the monastic corporations ceased to manage their estates by
farming stewards, and after a short interval, during which the
lands with the stock on them were let to the cultivator on
short leases, the modern system of letting was introduced, and
the permanent distinction between the farmer and the labourer
established."
_W. Stubbs,
Constitutional History of England,
chapter 16, section 259._
"On the first of August 1348 the disease appeared in the
seaport towns of Dorsetshire, and travelled slowly westwards
and northwards, through Devonshire and Somersetshire to
Bristol. In order, if possible, to arrest its progress, all
intercourse with the citizens of Bristol was prohibited by the
authorities of the county of Gloucester. These precautions
were however taken in vain; the Plague continued to Oxford,
and, travelling slowly in the same measured way, reached
London by the first of November. It appeared in Norwich on the
first of January, and thence spread northwards. ... The
mortality was enormous. Perhaps from one-third to one-half the
population fell victims to the disease. Adam of Monmouth says
that only a tenth of the population survived. Similar
amplifications are found in all the chroniclers. We are told
that 60,000 persons perished in Norwich between January and
July 1349. No doubt Norwich was at that time the second city
in the kingdom, but the number is impossible. ... It is stated
that in England the weight of the calamity fell on the poor,
and that the higher classes were less severely affected. But
Edward's daughter Joan fell a victim to it and three
archbishops of Canterbury perished in the same year. ... All
contemporary writers inform us that the immediate consequence
of the Plague was a dearth of labour, and excessive
enhancement of wages, and thereupon a serious loss to the
landowners. To meet this scarcity the king issued a
proclamation directed to the sheriffs of the several counties,
which forbad the payment of higher than the customary wages,
under the penalties of amercement. But the king's mandate was
every where disobeyed. ... Many of the labourers were thrown
into prison; many to avoid punishment fled to the forests, but
were occasionally captured and fined; and all were constrained
to disavow under oath that they would take higher than
customary wages for the future."
_J. E. T. Rogers,
History of Agriculture and Prices in England,
volume 1, chapter 15._
ALSO IN:
_F. A. Gasquet,
The Great Pestilence._
_W. Longman,
Edward III.,
volume 1; chapter 10._
_A. Jessop,
The Coming of the Friars, &c.,
chapter 4-5._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1350-1400.
Chaucer and his relations to English language and literature.