As they marched out in the early morning on the 4th of August,

they saw a well-ordered army approaching, and Leicester’s barber,

who happened to be the longest-sighted man amongst then, at first

recognized all the standards as belonging to young De Montfort;

only after he had ascended a church-tower did he perceive the

emblems of De Clare and Edward mingled with them. De Montfort was

thus greatly outnumbered and surprised. As the enemy approached in

three well-arrayed divisions, “Ah,” said he, “that arrangement is

not your own, I have taught you how to fight.” Then, as it became

evident that he had neither time nor men to secure the victory,

he added, “God have mercy on our souls, for our bodies are the

Prince’s.” The stories of the fidelity of his party are touching.

He begged his partisans to fly while there was time. They refused

to leave him, while his son Henry begged him to make good his

retreat, and leave him alone to fight the battle. He was not a

man to listen to such advice. At length the assault came. He saw

the best of his followers and his son killed or disabled around

him. But still, though his horse was killed under him, “like a

giant,” says one, “like an impregnable tower for the liberties of

England,” says another of the Chroniclers, he fought on, wielding

his sword with both hands, till he fell overpowered by the assault

of numbers. Three hours completed the battle, which was little

else than a massacre. “Thus lamentably fell the flower of all

knighthood, leaving an example of steadfastness to others. But

since there is no curse more baleful than a domestic enemy, who

can wonder at his fall? those who had eaten his bread lifted their

heels against him, they who loved him by word of mouth lied in

their throat.”[42]

[Sidenote: Kenilworth and the Fens hold out. 1266.]

[Sidenote: Dictum of Kenilworth.]

The victory produced a complete reaction in England. Castle

after castle opened its gates to the royalists. At Kenilworth

alone, which Simon had defended with extraordinary machines which

his skill as an engineer had invented, and in the inaccessible

marshes in the East of England, the baronial party still held out.

The conqueror proceeded at once to act with reckless severity.

The whole of Leicester’s property was confiscated and given to

Prince Edward, all his followers were deprived of civil rights

and property, and all acts of the government since the battle

of Lewes were declared null. This was the work of a Parliament

summoned at Winchester, where of course there is no sign either

of county or of borough representation. After London, which made

some opposition, was conquered, and for the time disfranchised,

all efforts were directed against Kenilworth. This stronghold had

become a centre from which, as from the Eastern Fens, disorderly

bodies pushed out to wreak their vengeance on the King’s followers.

The defence was heroic. It seemed plain that the reaction had been

carried much too far. One party at all events of the royalists,

with Prince Henry d’Almeyne and perhaps Prince Edward at its head,

desired a more conciliatory policy, and at length, at the end of

the year, a Commission of twelve was established to attempt to

produce peace. Under their management, a Parliament and Convocation

was held, the Magna Charta again acknowledged, even by the Papal

Legate, and those who had been disinherited were allowed to regain

their lands by paying a certain number of years’ income to the

new possessors. The sons of Lord Derby and Leicester were alone

excepted. In accordance with this arrangement, called the Dictum of

Kenilworth, the castle was surrendered.

[Sidenote: De Clare compels more moderate government.]

[Sidenote: Constitutional end of the reign.]

The insurgents in the Fens afterwards submitted on the same terms,

but not before Gilbert de Clare had again changed sides, making it

plain to the government that however much jealousy of De Montfort

might have broken the baronial moderate party, the feelings which

had dictated the Provisions of Oxford were still unconquered. Under

these circumstances it was found necessary to take further measures

to insure moderation of government. In May 1267, Magna Charta

was again enacted, and from this time forward kept. The offices

were given into the hands of Englishmen, and Englishmen only. The

Sicilian project had become impossible, indeed the crown had been

given to Charles of Anjou; and, finally, Prince Edward, whose

influence might have been dangerous, had withdrawn from England on

a crusade, and taken many English nobles with him. The Barons’ war

had thus, although in its outward form a failure, secured its main

object--tolerable constitutional government, and the establishment

of a national rule. In 1272 the King died.

[Sidenote: Views of the people on the revolution.]

It is always difficult to know how far the popular feeling is

engaged in political revolutions. The great bulk of the nation is

never the originator of such changes. The fate of a country is

settled by the conduct and thought of its educated men, though the

mass of the people plays a very prominent part as an instrument

in the hands of its leaders. There is much to make us believe,

however, that the movement of the Barons was in reality a national

one. More particularly is this true in the case of Simon de

Montfort. He is constantly spoken of by contemporary writers with

admiration. “Il eime dreit, et att le tort,” (He loves right and

hates the wrong), says one poet. “It should, however, be declared,”

says the Chronicler of Melrose, “that no one in his senses would

call Simon a traitor, for he was no traitor, but the most devout

and faithful worshipper of the Church in England, the shield and

defender of the kingdom, the enemy and expeller of aliens, although

by birth he was one of them.” The Londoners were his devoted

adherents, while the character of the Parliament which he summoned

after the battle of Lewes was certainly popular. It seems fair to

believe that he was the unselfish supporter of the national policy.

Again, all the writers of the time, with very few exceptions,[43]

whether chroniclers or poets, were in favour of the baronial party.

When some of the leaders seem flagging in their energy, they were

cheered by such words as these,--

“O Comes Gloverniæ, comple quod cæpisti,

Nisi claudas congruè, multos decepisti.”

“O tu Comes le Bygot, pactum serva sanum

Cum sis miles strenuus, nunc exerce manum.

O vos magni proceres, qui vos obligatis,

Observate firmiter illud quod juratis.”

Again, in one political poem of the day we have the question at

issue argued out in a manner which shows the advance of political

knowledge, and in a constitutional tone which would become a modern

Whig. “All restraint does not deprive of liberty. He who is kept

from falling so that he lives free from danger, reaps advantage

from such keeping, nor is such a support slavery, but the safeguard

of virtue. Therefore that it is permitted to a king all that is

good, but that he dare not do evil--this is God’s gift.... If a

prince love his subjects, he will be repaid with love; if he reign

justly, he will be honoured; if he err, he ought to be recalled by

them whom his unjust denial may have grieved, unless he be willing

to be corrected; if he is willing to make amends, he ought to be

raised up and aided by those same persons.... If a king be less

wise than he ought to be, what advantage will the kingdom gain

by his reign? Is he to seek by his own opinion on whom he should

depend to have his failing supplied? If he alone choose, he will

be easily deceived. Therefore let the community of the kingdom

advise, and let it be known what the generality thinks, to whom

their own laws are best known. Since it is their own affairs that

are at stake, they will take more care and will act with an eye to

their own peace.... We give the first place to the community; we

say also that the law rules over the king’s dignity, for the law

is the light without which he who rules will wander from the right

path.”

That proclamations should be published in English is also a

significant fact, and it may on the whole be considered that

this war was practically the conclusion of foreign domination in

England. It is the great honour of Edward I. to have perceived this

so clearly, that he willingly accepted the new national line of

policy which the Barons had marked out, and he may be regarded as

our first purely national monarch.

EDWARD I.

1272-1307.

Born, 1239 = 1. Eleanor of Castile.

|

+---------+---------+---------+---+------+-----------------+

| | | | | |

John. Henry. Alfonso. Edward II. Eleanor = Henry |

d. 1271. d. 1274. d. 1284. of Bar. |

|

+------------------------------------------------------+

|

+----+----------------+-------------------+

| | |

Joan = Gilbert, Margaret = John of Elizabeth = 1. John of

Earl of Brabant. Holland.

Gloucester. 2. Humphrey

de Bohun.

= 2. Margaret of France.

|

+--------------+---------------+

| |

Thomas, Earl of Norfolk. Edmund, Earl of Kent.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

_Scotland._ | _France._ | _Germany._ | _Spain._

| | |

Alexander III., | Philip III., | Rodolph, 1272. | Alphonso X.,

1249. | 1270. | Adolphus, 1291. | 1252.

Margaret, 1286. | Philip IV., | Albert, 1298. | Sancho IV.,

Interregnum, 1290. | 1285. | | 1284.

Baliol, 1292. | | | Ferdinand IV.,

Interregnum, 1296. | | | 1295.

Robert I., 1306. | | |

POPES.--Gregory X., 1271. Innocent V., 1276. Adrian V., 1276.

John XX., 1276. Nicholas III., 1277. Martin IV., 1281. Honorius IV.,

1285. Nicholas IV., 1288. Vacancy, two years. Celestine V., 1292.

Boniface VIII., 1294. Benedict X., 1303. Vacancy, one year.

Clement V., 1305.

_Archbishops._ | _Chancellors._ | _Chief-justices._

| |

Robert Kilwardby, | Walter de Merton, 1272. | Ralph de Hengham,

1273-1278. | Robert Burnell, 1273-1292. | 1273-1289.

John Peckham, | John Langton, 1292. | Gilbert de Thornton,

1279-1292. | William Greenfield, 1302. | 1289-1295.

Robert Winchelsey, | William de Hamilton, 1304. | Roger Brabazon, 1295.

1294-1313. | Ralph de Baldock, 1307. |

[Sidenote: Edward’s peaceful accession. 1272.]

[Sidenote: His journey home, 1274.]

Edward was still abroad when the news of his father’s death was

brought to him. His accession had been so long looked forward to

as a happy termination to the difficulties of the last reign, that

what might have been a dangerous crisis passed over peacefully.

An assembly was summoned at Westminster, not only of the nobles,

but also of the representatives of the lower estates, and there an

oath of fidelity was taken to the absent King. Three prominent

nobles seem to have assumed the position of governors; the

Archbishop of York, as head of the clergy, Edmund of Cornwall, the

King’s brother, as representative of the royalty, and Gilbert of

Gloucester, as chief of the baronage. Under them the government

pursued its old course. Hearing that things were going well in

England, Edward did not hurry home. He returned by Sicily and Rome,

where he induced the Pope to visit upon the young De Montforts

the murder of Henry D’Almeyne, whom they had killed at Viterbo.

Thence he passed into France, joined in a great tournament at

Châlons, where jest was changed to earnest, and a rough skirmish

ensued, known as the little battle of Châlons. True to his legal

obligations, he did homage at Paris for his French dominions,

demanding what as yet had not been fulfilled, the completion of

the late definitive treaty in France: and after settling, not

without application to the French King as feudal superior, his

quarrels with Gaston de Bearn in Gascony, and establishing friendly

relations with Flanders, he returned in 1274 to England, and there,

on the 18th of August, was crowned and received the homage of his

Barons, and that, among others, of Alexander III. of Scotland.

Shortly after, he appointed as his chancellor Robert Burnell, who

served him throughout his life as chief minister, while Anthony

Beck, Bishop of Durham, was his chief agent in all diplomatic

matters.

[Sidenote: The importance of the reign.]

From the reign of Edward began what may be properly spoken of as

the _English_ monarchy. The last reign had brought prominently

forward the two great points which constituted the nationality

of the country. Primarily the object of the baronial party had

been to separate England from the overwhelming importance of its

foreign connections, and to prevent it from becoming a mere source

of wealth to foreign adventurers. In this the baronial party had

succeeded. While declaring themselves national, they had been

obliged to have recourse for support to other elements of the

nation than those from which the ruling class had hitherto been

formed. The advance of these new classes had, as has been seen,

been gradual. Already, in earlier reigns, the principle both of

election and representation had been, on more than one occasion,

accepted. But it was the formal admission both of knights of the

shire and of burghers to parliamentary privileges, even though the

practice had not been continued, which rendered it impossible long

to ignore the growing feeling that all classes should in some way

be consulted about what interested all.

[Sidenote: Edward the first English king.]

[Sidenote: His political views.]

[Sidenote: His legal mind.]

[Sidenote: His success.]

[Sidenote: His enforced concessions.]

Edward was well fitted, both by position and character, to play the

part of the first English king. He had given distinct proofs in the

earlier part of the late baronial quarrels that a good and national

government was what he desired. But it would be wrong to suppose

that he was at all inclined to what we should now call liberal

policy. In the latter part of his father’s reign he had made it

clear that to his mind a strong monarchy was a necessary condition

of good government. It was only gradually, and in accordance with

a love of symmetrical government which strongly characterized him,

that he recognized the advantage of the complete admission of the

hitherto unprivileged classes to the rights of representation.

He set before him as his object the establishment of a good and

orderly government in the national interests, but carried out by a

strong, nay despotic monarch, subjected only to the restrictions

of the law. This is indeed another prominent characteristic of the

King, in which he went along with the tendencies of the age. His

mind was essentially legal, and just at this time the Roman and

civil law were forcing their way into prominence throughout Europe.

In Edward and his great rival Philip IV. of France, we have,

allowing for their differences in personal character, instances

of the same course of action. They both intended to make use of

feudal law, interpreted more or less by the Roman law, and pressed

to its legal and logical conclusions, to strengthen the monarchy.

It is thus that we find Edward constantly enacting statutes and

constitutions, making use of feudal claims to compel the submission

of his neighbours, and exerting to the full, sometimes even beyond

the limits of honesty, the rights the constitution gave him, but

never wilfully transgressing what he regarded as the law. He was

successful in carrying out the two first branches of his threefold

policy; in the third he failed. Good government he established by

a series of admirable administrative enactments, and by that power

of definition which a living historian[44] has attributed to him,

in spite of the difficulties presented by the independent position

of the Church, and by the disorders still remaining from the late

troubled times. Nationality he was able to foster both by foreign

wars and by his great plan of connecting all the kingdoms of Great

Britain. But in his efforts to establish an absolute monarchy, he

was met by the financial difficulties into which the late reign had

plunged the Crown, and by that entanglement in foreign politics

which the English possessions in France, of which he was not yet

quite free, continually caused. Urged by his wide schemes to have

recourse to arbitrary means for replenishing his treasury, he

excited again an opposition similar to that of his father’s reign,

and found himself obliged to make concessions which effectually

prevented any of his successors from attempting to render the Crown

independent.

[Sidenote: First Parliament. Statute of Westminster. 1275.]

[Sidenote: Establishment of customs.]

[Sidenote: His restorative measures. 1278.]

The first years of the King’s reign were employed in restoring

order to the government and the finances. His first Parliament

met at Westminster in 1275, where was passed a great restorative

measure known by the name of the First Statute of Westminster.

It was so wide and far-reaching that it might be called a code

rather than an Act. Its object is said by a contemporary writer to

have been to “awake those languid laws which had long been lulled

asleep” by the abuses of the time. It secured the rights of the

Church, improved the tardy processes of law, and re-established

the charters, further limiting the sums which could be demanded

for the three legal aids. At the same Parliament, an export duty

on wool and leather, the origin of the customs, was granted to

the King, the more readily, perhaps, as his firmness had lately

re-established the wool-trade with Flanders. During the next three

or four years other less popular measures were taken with a view to

replenish the King’s treasury. Commissions were issued to inquire

into the exact limits of the grants of the late King to the clergy,

and to inquire into the tenure of property throughout England, with

the twofold view of establishing the rights of property disturbed

by the late war, and of clearly defining the revenue due to the

Crown.

[Sidenote: New coinage.]

[Sidenote: Statute of Mortmain. 1279.]

It was not till the year 1278 that the effect of this commission

was seen. Orders were then issued to the itinerant justices to make

use of the evidence which had been obtained, and to issue writs

of “quo warranto,” to oblige owners to make good their titles.

This was the occasion of the well-known answer of Warrenne, Earl

of Surrey, who presented his sword to the judge, saying, “This

is my title-deed, with this my ancestors won my land, with this

will I keep it.” The temper thus shown by one of his most faithful

followers prevented Edward from pushing matters to extremity.

During these years was set on foot also the practice of demanding

that those who were wealthy enough should receive knighthood. The

practice was kept up during the reign, but the property counted

sufficient for the holder of that dignity varied from £20 to £100

a year. The King’s activity reached in all directions. Another

commission was issued to inquire into the conduct of sheriffs. The

coinage, much clipped and debased, was renewed; it was ordered

that its shape should always be round, as the prevalent method of

clipping had been to cut the pieces into four, so that the exact

edge could not be known. At length, in 1279, Edward proceeded to

regulate one of the great abuses of the Church. Not only had that

body become exorbitantly rich, but the privileges which it claimed

had begun to be detrimental to the Crown; and when, in the earlier

part of the year, Peckham, Archbishop of Canterbury, produced and

authorized, at a meeting at Reading, some canons tending to the

independence of the Church, the King was determined to strike a

blow in return. As corporations could not die, land which had

passed into their possession was free from the fines and payments

due from an incoming heir, which were thus lost to the feudal

superior. Moreover, and this touched the Crown more nearly, it had

become a habit to give property to the Church, and fraudulently to

receive it back again as a Church fief, and thus free from feudal

services. By the Statute of Mortmain, which was now passed, it was

forbidden, without the King’s consent, to transfer property to the

Church.

[Sidenote: Wales. 1275.]

[Sidenote: Llewellyn’s suspicious conduct.]

[Sidenote: War breaks out. 1277.]

[Sidenote: Llewellyn submits.]

[Sidenote: His merciful treatment.]

Meanwhile, while Edward had been thus busied at home, affairs in

Wales had begun to attract his attention. Llewellyn had always

been in close alliance with the Leicester party, and had shown his

dissatisfaction at the accession of Edward by refusing to come

to the assembly which swore fealty to the new King. Edward, who

wished honestly to heal the late differences, had summoned him to

his coronation, and had again been refused. Had he not desired a

peaceful solution of the difficulty, he would certainly now have

proceeded to extremities. But no less than six opportunities were

given to the Prince of appearing in England, to set himself right;

on every occasion he had refused to do so. The suspicions which

his conduct excited received a strong confirmation when it was

known that he was contemplating a marriage with the daughter of

De Montfort. It is probable that this marriage was to be carried

out in pursuance of some scheme for continuing the disturbances

of the last reign. Fortunately the lady was captured, with her

brother Almeric who was escorting her, on her way to Wales.

This brought matters to a crisis. In 1276, Llewellyn, who had

refused all approaches to friendship, demanded, in the language

of an independent prince, a treaty, and the restoration of his

wife. In November of that year Edward, acting in concert with

his Parliament, ordered his army to meet him at Worcester, and

the war began. Even the strength of his country did not enable

Llewellyn to hold out against the superior power and ability of the

English King. A fleet of ships from the Cinque Ports cut him off

from Anglesea, and mastered that island, while the English army

forced him back towards the mountains of Snowdon. He was induced

to treat. The terms given him were stringent. The Cantreds or

Hundreds between Chester and Conway were given up to the English.

Anglesea alone he was allowed to keep in full, on the payment of

1000 marks, while a few baronies around Snowdon were left in his

hands, to prevent his title of Prince of Wales being a mere empty

honour. Besides this, he had to pay 50,000 marks for the expenses

of the war, and a tribute of 1000 marks. Once conquered, however,

and brought to complete submission, his treatment was generous. The

money payments were at once remitted. His brother David, his enemy,

and a probable source of discomfort to him, was kept in England and

pensioned; and finally, he came to England, and received his wife,

their marriage being nobly celebrated by the King.

[Sidenote: Second rising in Wales. 1282.]

[Sidenote: Death of Llewellyn.]

[Sidenote: Execution of David. 1283.]

[Sidenote: Statute of Wales. Annexation of Wales. 1284.]

[Sidenote: Statute of Winchester. 1285.]

A History of England, Period I. Mediæval Monarchy · 第 21 / 44 段