CHAPTER VIII.

REIGN OF JOHN.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1199]

We are now arrived at one of the most memorable periods in the English

story, whether we consider the astonishing revolutions which were then

wrought, the calamities in which both the prince and people were

involved, or the happy consequences which, arising from the midst of

those calamities, have constituted the glory and prosperity of England

for so many years. We shall see a throne founded in arms, and augmented

by the successive policy of five able princes, at once shaken to its

foundations: first made tributary by the arts of a foreign power; then

limited, and almost overturned, by the violence of its subjects. We

shall see a king, to reduce his people to obedience, draw into his

territories a tumultuary foreign army, and destroy his country instead

of establishing his government. We shall behold the people, grown

desperate, call in another foreign army, with a foreign prince at its

head, and throw away that liberty which they had sacrificed everything

to preserve. We shall see the arms of this prince successful against an

established king in the vigor of his years, ebbing in the full tide of

their prosperity, and yielding to an infant: after this, peace and order

and liberty restored, the foreign force and foreign title purged off,

and all things settled as happily as beyond all hope.

Richard dying without lawful issue, the succession to his dominions

again became dubious. They consisted of various territories, governed by

various rules of descent, and all of them uncertain. There were two

competitors: the first was Prince John, youngest son of Henry the

Second; the other was Arthur, son of Constance of Bretagne, by Geoffrey,

the third son of that monarch. If the right of consanguinity were only

considered, the title of John to the whole succession had been

indubitable. If the right of representation had then prevailed, which

now universally prevails, Arthur, as standing in the place of his

father, Geoffrey, had a solid claim. About Brittany there was no

dispute. Anjou, Poitou, Touraine, and Guienne declared in favor of

Arthur, on the principle of representation. Normandy was entirely for

John. In England the point of law had never been entirely settled, but

it seemed rather inclined to the side of consanguinity. Therefore in

England, where this point was dubious at best, the claim of Arthur, an

infant and a stranger, had little force against the pretensions of John,

declared heir by the will of the late king, supported by his armies,

possessed of his treasures, and at the head of a powerful party. He

secured in his interests Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, and

Glanville, the chief justiciary, and by them the body of the

ecclesiastics and the law. It is remarkable, also, that he paid court to

the cities and boroughs, which is the first instance of that policy: but

several of these communities now happily began to emerge from their

slavery, and, taking advantage of the necessities and confusion of the

late reign, increased in wealth and consequence, and had then first

attained a free and regular form of administration. The towns new to

power declared heartily in favor of a prince who was willing to allow

that their declaration could confer a right. The nobility, who saw

themselves beset by the Church, the law, and the burghers, had taken no

measures, nor even a resolution, and therefore had nothing left but to

concur in acknowledging the title of John, whom they knew and hated. But

though they were not able to exclude him from the succession, they had

strength enough to oblige him to a solemn promise of restoring those

liberties and franchises which they had always claimed without having

ever enjoyed or even perfectly understood. The clergy also took

advantage of the badness of his title to establish one altogether as ill

founded. Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, in the speech which he

delivered at the king's coronation, publicly affirmed that the crown of

England was of right elective. He drew his examples in support of this

doctrine, not from the histories of the ancient Saxon kings, although a

species of election within a certain family had then frequently

prevailed, but from the history of the first kings of the Jews: without

doubt in order to revive those pretensions which the clergy first set up

in the election of Stephen, and which they had since been obliged to

conceal, but had not entirely forgotten.

John accepted a sovereignty weakened in the very act by which he

acquired it; but he submitted to the times. He came to the throne at the

age of thirty-two. He had entered early into business, and had been

often involved in difficult and arduous enterprises, in which he

experienced a variety of men and fortunes. His father, whilst he was

very young, had sent him into Ireland, which kingdom was destined for

his portion, in order to habituate that people to their future

sovereign, and to give the young prince an opportunity of conciliating

the favor of his new subjects. But he gave on this occasion no good

omens of capacity for government. Full of the insolent levity of a young

man of high rank without education, and surrounded with others equally

unpractised, he insulted the Irish chiefs, and, ridiculing their uncouth

garb and manners, he raised such a disaffection to the English

government, and so much opposition to it, as all the wisdom of his

father's best officers and counsellors was hardly able to overcome. In

the decline of his father's life he joined in the rebellion of his

brothers, with so much more guilt as with more ingratitude and

hypocrisy. During the reign of Richard he was the perpetual author of

seditions and tumults; and yet was pardoned, and even favored by that

prince to his death, when he very unaccountably appointed him heir to

all his dominions.

It was of the utmost moment to John, who had no solid title, to

conciliate the favor of all the world. Yet one of his first steps,

whilst his power still remained dubious and unsettled, was, on pretence

of consanguinity, to divorce his wife Avisa, with whom he had lived many

years, and to marry Isabella of Angoulême, a woman of extraordinary

beauty, but who had been betrothed to Hugh, Count of Marche: thus

disgusting at once the powerful friends of his divorced wife, and those

of the Earl of Marche, whom he had so sensibly wronged.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1200.]

The King of France, Philip Augustus, saw with pleasure these proceedings

of John, as he had before rejoiced at the dispute about the succession.

He had been always employed, and sometimes with success, to reduce the

English power through the reigns of one very able and one very warlike

prince. He had greater advantages in this conjuncture, and a prince of

quite another character now to contend with. He was therefore not long

without choosing his part; and whilst he secretly encouraged the Count

of Marche, already stimulated by his private wrongs, he openly supported

the claim of Arthur to the Duchies of Anjou and Touraine. It was the

character of this prince readily to lay aside and as readily to reassume

his enterprises, as his affairs demanded. He saw that he had declared

himself too rashly, and that he was in danger of being assaulted upon

every side. He saw it was necessary to break an alliance, which the nice

circumstances and timid character of John would enable him to do. In

fact, John was at this time united in a close alliance with the Emperor

and the Earl of Flanders; and these princes were engaged in a war with

France. He had then a most favorable opportunity to establish all his

claims, and at the same time to put the King of France out of a

condition to question them ever after. But he suffered himself to be

overreached by the artifices of Philip: he consented to a treaty of

peace, by which he received an empty acknowledgment of his right to the

disputed territories, and in return for which acknowledgment he

renounced his alliance with the Emperor. By this act he at once

strengthened his enemy, gave up his ally, and lowered his character with

his subjects and with all the world.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1201.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1202.]

This treaty was hardly signed, when the ill consequences of his conduct

became evident. The Earl of Marche and Arthur immediately renewed their

claims and hostilities under the protection of the King of France, who

made a strong diversion by invading Normandy. At the commencement of

these motions, John, by virtue of a prerogative hitherto undisputed,

summoned his English barons to attend him into France; but instead of a

compliance with his orders, he was surprised with a solemn demand of

their ancient liberties. It is astonishing that the barons should at

that time have ventured on a resolution of such dangerous importance, as

they had provided no sort of means to support them. But the history of

those times furnishes many instances of the like want of design in the

most momentous affairs, and shows that it is in vain to look for

political causes for the actions of men, who were most commonly directed

by a brute caprice, and were for the greater part destitute of any fixed

principles of obedience or resistance. The king, sensible of the

weakness of his barons, fell upon some of their castles with such timely

vigor, and treated those whom he had reduced with so much severity, that

the rest immediately and abjectly submitted. He levied a severe tax upon

their fiefs; and thinking himself more strengthened by this treasure

than the forced service of his barons, he excused the personal

attendance of most of them, and, passing into Normandy, he raised an

army there. He found that his enemies had united their forces, and

invested the castle of Mirebeau, a place of importance, in which his

mother, from whom he derived his right to Guienne, was besieged. He flew

to the relief of this place with the spirit of a greater character, and

the success was answerable. The Breton and Poitevin army was defeated,

his mother was freed, and the young Duke of Brittany and his sister were

made prisoners. The latter he sent into England, to be confined in the

castle of Bristol; the former he carried with him to Rouen. The good

fortune of John now seemed to be at its highest point; but it was

exalted on a precipice; and this great victory proved the occasion of

all the evils which afflicted his life.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1203.]

John was not of a character to resist the temptation of having the life

of his rival in his hands. All historians are as fully agreed that he

murdered his nephew as they differ in the means by which he accomplished

that crime. But the report was soon spread abroad, variously heightened

in the circumstances by the obscurity of the fact, which left all men at

liberty to imagine and invent, and excited all those sentiments of pity

and indignation which a very young prince of great hopes, cruelly

murdered by his uncle, naturally inspire. Philip had never missed an

occasion of endeavoring to ruin the King of England: and having now

acquired an opportunity of accomplishing that by justice which he had in

vain sought by ambition, he filled every place with complaints of the

cruelty of John, whom, as a vassal to the crown of France, the king

accused of the murder of another vassal, and summoned him to Paris to

be tried by his peers. It was by no means consistent either with the

dignity or safety of John to appear to this summons. He had the argument

of kings to justify what he had done. But as in all great crimes there

is something of a latent weakness, and in a vicious caution something

material is ever neglected, John, satisfied with removing his rival,

took no thought about his enemy; but whilst he saw himself sentenced for

non-appearance in the Court of Peers, whilst he saw the King of France

entering Normandy with a vast army in consequence of this sentence, and

place after place, castle after castle, falling before him, he passed

his time at Rouen in the profoundest tranquillity, indulging himself in

indolent amusements, and satisfied with vain threatenings and boasts,

which only added greater shame to his inactivity. The English barons who

had attended him in this expedition, disaffected from the beginning, and

now wearied with being so long witnesses to the ignominy of their

sovereign, retired to their own country, and there spread the report of

his unaccountable sloth and cowardice. John quickly followed them; and

returning into his kingdom, polluted with the charge of so heavy a

crime, and disgraced by so many follies, instead of aiming by popular

acts to reestablish his character, he exacted a seventh of their

movables from the barons, on pretence that they had deserted his

service. He laid the same imposition on the clergy, without giving

himself the trouble of seeking for a pretext. He made no proper use of

these great supplies, but saw the great city of Rouen, always faithful

to its sovereigns, and now exerting the most strenuous efforts in his

favor, obliged at length to surrender, without the least attempt to

relieve it Thus the whole Duchy of Normandy, originally acquired by the

valor of his ancestors, and the source from which the greatness of his

family had been derived, after being supported against all shocks for

three hundred years, was torn forever from the stock of Rollo, and

reunited to the crown of France. Immediately all the rest of the

provinces which he held on the continent, except a part of Guienne,

despairing of his protection, and abhorring his government, threw

themselves into the hands of Philip.

Meanwhile the king by his personal vices completed the odium which he

had acquired by the impotent violence of his government. Uxorious and

yet dissolute in his manners, he made no scruple frequently to violate

the wives and daughters of his nobility, that rock on which tyranny has

so often split. Other acts of irregular power, in their greatest

excesses, still retain the characters of sovereign authority; but here

the vices of the prince intrude into the families of the subject, and,

whilst they aggravate the oppression, lower the character of the

oppressor.

In the disposition which all these causes had concurred universally to

diffuse, the slightest motion in his kingdom threatened the most

dangerous consequences. Those things which in quiet times would have

only raised a slight controversy, now, when the minds of men were

exasperated and inflamed, were capable of affording matter to the

greatest revolutions. The affairs of the Church, the winds which mostly

governed the fluctuating people, were to be regarded with the utmost

attention. Above all, the person who filled the see of Canterbury, which

stood on a level with the throne itself, was a matter of the last

importance. Just at this critical time died Hubert, archbishop of that

see, a man who had a large share in procuring the crown for John, and in

weakening its authority by his acts at the ceremony of the coronation,

as well as by his subsequent conduct. Immediately on the death of this

prelate, a cabal of obscure monks, of the Abbey of St. Augustin,

assemble by night, and first binding themselves by a solemn oath not to

divulge their proceedings, until they should be confirmed by the Pope,

they elect one Reginald, their sub-prior, Archbishop of Canterbury. The

person elected immediately crossed the seas; but his vanity soon

discovered the secret of his greatness. The king received the news of

this transaction with surprise and indignation. Provoked at such a

contempt of his authority, he fell severely on the monastery, no less

surprised than himself at the clandestine proceeding of some of its

members. But the sounder part pacified him in some measure by their

submission. They elected a person recommended by the king, and sent

fourteen of the most respectable of their body to Rome, to pray that the

former proceedings should be annulled, and the later and more regular

confirmed. To this matter of contention another was added. A dispute had

long subsisted between the suffragan bishops of the province of

Canterbury and the monks of the Abbey of St. Austin, each claiming a

right to elect the metropolitan. This dispute was now revived, and

pursued with much vigor. The pretensions of the three contending parties

were laid before the Pope, to whom such disputes were highly pleasing,

as he knew that all claimants willingly conspire to flatter and

aggrandize that authority from which they expect a confirmation of

their own. The first election, he nulled, because its irregularity was

glaring. The right of the bishops was entirely rejected: the Pope looked

with an evil eye upon those whose authority he was every day usurping.

The second election was set aside, as made at the king's instance: this

was enough to make it very irregular. The canon law had now grown up to

its full strength. The enlargement of the prerogative of the Pope was

the great object of this jurisprudence,--a prerogative which, founded on

fictitious monuments, that are forged in an ignorant age, easily

admitted by a credulous people, and afterwards confirmed and enlarged by

these admissions, not satisfied with the supremacy, encroached on every

minute part of Church government, and had almost annihilated the

episcopal jurisdiction throughout Europe. Some canons had given the

metropolitan a power of nominating a bishop, when the circumstances of

the election were palpably irregular; and as it does not appear that

there was any other judge of the irregularity than the metropolitan

himself, the election below in effect became nugatory. The Pope, taking

the irregularity in this case for granted, in virtue of this canon, and

by his plenitude of power, ordered the deputies of Canterbury to proceed

to a new election. At the same time he recommended to their choice

Stephen Langton, their countryman,--a person already distinguished for

his learning, of irreproachable morals, and free from every canonical

impediment. This authoritative request the monks had not the courage to

oppose in the Pope's presence and in his own city. They murmured, and

submitted.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1208.]

In England this proceeding was not so easily ratified. John drove the

monks of Canterbury from their monastery, and, having seized upon their

revenues, threatened the effects of the same indignation against all

those who seemed inclined to acquiesce in the proceedings of Rome. But

Rome had not made so bold a step with intention to recede. On the king's

positive refusal to admit Langton, and the expulsion of the monks of

Canterbury, England was laid under an interdict. Then divine service at

once ceased throughout the kingdom; the churches were shut; the

sacraments were suspended; the dead were buried without honor, in

highways and ditches, and the living deprived of all spiritual comfort.

On the other hand, the king let loose his indignation against the

ecclesiastics,--seizing their goods, throwing many into prison, and

permitting or encouraging all sorts of violence against them. The

kingdom was thrown into the most terrible confusion; whilst the people,

uncertain of the object or measure of their allegiance, and distracted

with opposite principles of duty, saw themselves deprived of their

religious rites by the ministers of religion, and their king, furious

with wrongs not caused by them, falling indiscriminately on the innocent

and the guilty: for John, instead of soothing his people in this their

common calamity, sought to terrify them into obedience. In a progress

which he made into the North, he threw down the inclosures of his

forests, to let loose the wild beasts upon their lands; and as he saw

the Papal proceedings increase with his opposition, he thought it

necessary to strengthen himself by new devices. He extorted hostages and

a new oath of fidelity from his barons. He raised a great army, to

divert the thoughts of his subjects from brooding too much on their

distracted condition. This army he transported into Ireland; and as it

happened to his father in a similar dispute with the Pope, whilst he was

dubious of his hereditary kingdom, he subdued Ireland. At this time he

is said to have established the English laws in that kingdom, and to

have appointed itinerant justices.

At length the sentence of excommunication was fulminated against the

king. In the same year the same sentence was pronounced upon the Emperor

Otho; and this daring Pope was not afraid at once to drive to

extremities the two greatest princes in Europe. And truly, nothing is

more remarkable than the uniform steadiness of the court of Rome in the

pursuits of her ambitious projects. For, knowing that pretensions which

stand merely in opinion cannot bear to be questioned in any part, though

she had hitherto seen the interdict produce but little effect, and

perceived that the excommunication itself could draw scarce one poor

bigot from the king's service, yet she receded not the least point from

the utmost of her demand. She broke off an accommodation just on the

point of being concluded, because the king refused to repair the losses

which the clergy had suffered, though he agreed to everything else, and

even submitted to receive the archbishop, who, being obtruded on him,

had in reality been set over him. But the Pope, bold as politic,

determined to render him perfectly submissive, and to this purpose

brought out the last arms of the ecclesiastic stores, which were

reserved for the most extreme occasions. Having first released the

English subjects from their oath of allegiance, by an unheard-of

presumption, he formally deposed John from his throne and dignity; he

invited the King of France to take possession of the forfeited crown;

he called forth all persons from all parts of Europe to assist in this

expedition, by the pardons and privileges of those who fought for the

Holy Land.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1218.]

This proceeding did not astonish the world. The King of France, having

driven John from all he held on the continent, gladly saw religion

itself invite him to farther conquests. He summoned all his vassals,

under the penalty of felony, and the opprobrious name of

_culvertage_,[82] (a name of all things dreaded by both nations,) to

attend in this expedition; and such force had this threat, and the hope

of plunder in England, that a very great army was in a short time

assembled. A fleet also rendezvoused in the mouth of the Seine, by the

writers of these times said to consist of seventeen hundred sail. On

this occasion John roused all his powers. He called upon all his people

who by the duty of their tenure or allegiance were obliged to defend

their lord and king, and in his writs stimulated them by the same

threats of _culvertage_ which had been employed against him. They

operated powerfully in his favor. His fleet in number exceeded the vast

navy of France; his army was in everything but heartiness to the cause

equal, and, extending along the coast of Kent, expected the descent of

the French forces.

Whilst these two mighty armies overspread the opposite coasts, and the

sea was covered with their fleets, and the decision of so vast an event

was hourly expected, various thoughts arose in the minds of those who

moved the springs of these affairs. John, at the head of one of the

finest armies in the world, trembled inwardly, when he reflected how

little he possessed or merited their confidence. Wounded by the

consciousness of his crimes, excommunicated by the Pope, hated by his

subjects, in danger of being at once abandoned by heaven and earth, he

was filled with the most fearful anxiety. The legates of the Pope had

hitherto seen everything succeed to their wish. But having made use of

an instrument too great for them to wield, they apprehended, that, when

it had overthrown their adversary, it might recoil upon the court of

Rome itself; that to add England to the rest of Philip's great

possessions was not the way to make him humble; and that in ruining John

to aggrandize that monarch, they should set up a powerful enemy in the

place of a submissive vassal.

They had done enough to give them a superiority in any negotiation, and

they privately sent an embassy to the King of England. Finding him very

tractable, they hasted to complete the treaty. The Pope's legate,

Pandulph, was intrusted with this affair. He knew the nature of men to

be such that they seldom engage willingly, if the whole of an hardship

be shown them at first, but that, having advanced a certain length,

their former concessions are an argument with them to advance further,

and to give all because they have already given a great deal. Therefore

he began with exacting an oath from the king, by which, without showing

the extent of his design, he engaged him to everything he could ask.

John swore to submit to the legate in all things relating to his

excommunication. And first he was obliged to accept Langton as

archbishop; then to restore the monks of Canterbury, and other deprived

ecclesiastics, and to make them a full indemnification for all their

losses. And now, by these concessions, all things seemed to be perfectly

settled. The cause of the quarrel was entirely removed. But when the

king expected for so perfect a submission a full absolution, the legate

began a labored harangue on his rebellion, his tyranny, and the

innumerable sins he had committed, and in conclusion declared that there

was no way left to appease God and the Church but to resign his crown to

the Holy See, from whose hands he should receive it purified from all

pollutions, and hold it for the future by homage and an annual tribute.

John was struck motionless at a demand so extravagant and unexpected. He

knew not on which side to turn. If he cast his eyes toward the coast of

France, he there saw his enemy Philip, who considered him as a criminal

as well as an enemy, and who aimed not only at his crown, but his life,

at the head of an innumerable multitude of fierce people, ready to rush

in upon him. If he looked at his own army, he saw nothing there but

coldness, disaffection, uncertainty, distrust, and a strength in which

he knew not whether he ought most to confide or fear. On the other hand,

the Papal thunders, from the wounds of which he was still sore, were

levelled full at his head. He could not look steadily at these

complicated difficulties: and truly it is hard to say what choice he

had, if any choice were left to kings in what concerns the independence

of their crown. Surrounded, therefore, with these difficulties, and that

all his late humiliations might not be rendered as ineffectual as they

were ignominious, he took the last step, and in the presence of a

numerous assembly of his peers and prelates, who turned their eyes from

this mortifying sight, formally resigned his crown to the Pope's

legate, to whom at the same time he did homage and paid the first fruits

of his tribute. Nothing could be added to the humiliation of the king

upon this occasion, but the insolence of the legate, who spurned the

treasure with his foot, and let the crown remain a long time on the

ground, before he restored it to the degraded owner.

In this proceeding the motives of the king may be easily discovered; but

how the barons of the kingdom, who were deeply concerned, suffered

without any protestation the independency of the crown to be thus

forfeited is mentioned by no historian of that time. In civil tumults it

is astonishing how little regard is paid by all parties to the honor or

safety of their country. The king's friends were probably induced to

acquiesce by the same motives that had influenced the king. His enemies,

who were the most numerous, perhaps saw his abasement with pleasure, as

they knew this action might be one day employed against him with effect.

To the bigots it was enough that it aggrandized the Pope. It is perhaps

worthy of observation that the conduct of Pandulph towards King John

bore a very great affinity to that of the Roman consuls to the people of

Carthage in the last Punic War,--drawing them from concession to

concession, and carefully concealing their design, until they made it

impossible for the Carthaginians to resist. Such a strong resemblance

did the same ambition produce in such distant times; and it is far from

the sole instance in which we may trace a similarity between the spirit

and conduct of the former and latter Rome in their common design on the

liberties of mankind.

The legates, having thus triumphed over the king, passed back into

France, but without relaxing the interdict or excommunication, which

they still left hanging over him, lest he should be tempted to throw off

the chains of his new subjection. Arriving in France, they delivered

their orders to Philip with as much haughtiness as they had done to

John. They told him that the end of the war was answered in the

humiliation of the King of England, who had been rendered a dutiful son

of the Church,--and that, if the King of France should, after this

notice, proceed to further hostilities, he had to apprehend the same

sentence which had humbled his adversary. Philip, who had not raised so

great an army with a view of reforming the manners of King John, would

have slighted these threats, had he not found that they were seconded by

the ill dispositions of a part of his own army. The Earl of Flanders,

always disaffected to his cause, was glad of this opportunity to oppose

him, and, only following him through fear, withdrew his forces, and now

openly opposed him. Philip turned his arms against his revolted vassal.

The cause of John was revived by this dissension, and his courage seemed

rekindled. Making one effort of a vigorous mind, he brought his fleet to

an action with the French navy, which he entirely destroyed on the coast

of Flanders, and thus freed himself from the terror of an invasion. But

when he intended to embark and improve his success, the barons refused

to follow him. They alleged that he was still excommunicated, and that

they would not follow a lord under the censures of the Church. This

demonstrated to the king the necessity of a speedy absolution; and he

received it this year from the hands of Cardinal Langton.

That archbishop no sooner came into the kingdom than he discovered

designs very different from those which the Pope had raised him to

promote. He formed schemes of a very deep and extensive nature, and

became the first mover in all the affairs which distinguish the

remainder of this reign. In the oath which he administered to John on

his absolution, he did not confine himself solely to the ecclesiastical

grievances, but made him swear to amend his civil government, to raise

no tax without the consent of the Great Council, and to punish no man

but by the judgment of his court. In these terms we may Bee the Great

Charter traced in miniature. A new scene of contention was opened; new

pretensions were started; a new scheme was displayed. One dispute was

hardly closed, when he was involved in another; and this unfortunate

king soon discovered that to renounce his dignity was not the way to

secure his repose. For, being cleared of the excommunication, he

resolved to pursue the war in France, in which he was not without a

prospect of success; but the barons refused upon new pretences, and not

a man would serve. The king, incensed to find himself equally opposed in

his lawful and unlawful commands, prepared to avenge himself in his

accustomed manner, and to reduce the barons to obedience by carrying war

into their estates. But he found by this experiment that his power was

at an end. The Archbishop followed him, confronted him with the

liberties of his people, reminded him of his late oath, and threatened

to excommunicate every person who should obey him in his illegal

proceedings. The king, first provoked, afterwards terrified at this

resolution, forbore to prosecute the recusants.

The English barons had privileges, which they knew to have been

violated; they had always kept up the memory of the ancient Saxon

liberty; and if they were the conquerors of Britain, they did not think

that their own servitude was the just fruit of their victory. They had,

however, but an indistinct view of the object at which they aimed; they

rather felt their wrongs than understood the cause of them; and having

no head nor council, they were more in a condition of distressing their

king and disgracing their country by their disobedience than of applying

any effectual remedy to their grievances. Langton saw these

dispositions, and these wants. He had conceived a settled plan for

reducing the king, and all his actions tended to carry it into

execution. This prelate, under pretence of holding an ecclesiastical

synod, drew together privately some of the principal barons to the

Church of St. Paul in London. There, having expatiated on the miseries

which the kingdom suffered, and having explained at the same time the

liberties to which it was entitled, he produced the famous charter of

Henry the First, long concealed, and of which, with infinite difficulty,

he had procured an authentic copy. This he held up to the barons as the

standard about which they were to unite. These were the liberties which

their ancestors had received by the free concession of a former king,

and these the rights which their virtue was to force from the present,

if (which God forbid!) they should find it necessary to have recourse to

such extremities. The barons, transported to find an authentic

instrument to justify their discontent and to explain and sanction their

pretensions, covered the Archbishop with praises, readily confederated

to support their demands, and, binding themselves by every obligation of

human and religious faith, to vigor, unanimity, and secrecy, they depart

to confederate others in their design.

This plot was in the hands of too many to be perfectly concealed; and

John saw, without knowing how to ward it off, a more dangerous blow

levelled at his authority than any of the former. He had no resources

within his kingdom, where all ranks and orders were united against him

by one common hatred. Foreign alliance he had none, among temporal

powers. He endeavored, therefore, if possible, to draw some benefit from

the misfortune of his new circumstances: he threw himself upon the

protection of the Papal power, which he had so long and with such reason

opposed. The Pope readily received him into his protection, but took

this occasion to make him purchase it by another and more formal

resignation of his crown. His present necessities and his habits of

humiliation made this second degradation easy to the king. But Langton,

who no longer acted in subservience to the Pope, from whom he had now

nothing further to expect, and who had put himself at the head of the

patrons of civil liberty, loudly exclaimed at this indignity, protested

against the resignation, and laid his protestation on the altar.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1214.]

This was more disagreeable to the barons than the first resignation, as

they were sensible that he now degraded himself only to humble his

subjects. They were, however, once more patient witnesses to that

ignominious act,--and were so much overawed by the Pope, or had brought

their design to so little maturity, that the king, in spite of it, still

found means and authority to raise an army, with which he made a final

effort to recover some part of his dominions in France. The juncture was

altogether favorable to his design. Philip had all his attention

abundantly employed in another quarter, against the terrible attacks of

the Emperor Otho in a confederacy with the Earl of Flanders. John,

strengthened by this diversion, carried on the war in Poitou for some

time with good appearances. The Battle of Bouvines, which was fought

this year, put an end to all these hopes. In this battle, the Imperial

army, consisting of one hundred and fifty thousand men, were defeated by

a third of their number of French forces. The Emperor himself, with

difficulty escaping from the field, survived but a short time a battle

which entirely broke his strength. So signal a success established the

grandeur of France upon immovable foundations. Philip rose continually

in reputation and power, whilst John continually declined in both; and

as the King of France was now ready to employ against him all his

forces, so lately victorious, he sued, by the mediation of the Pope's

legate, for a truce, which was granted to him for five years. Such

truces stood in the place of regular treaties of peace, which were not

often made at that time.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1215.]

The barons of England had made use of the king's absence to bring their

confederacy to form; and now, seeing him return with so little credit,

his allies discomfited, and no hope of a party among his subjects, they

appeared in a body before him at London. All in complete armor, and in

the guise of defiance, they presented a petition, very humble in the

language, but excessive in the substance, in which they declared their

liberties, and prayed that they might be formally allowed and

established by the royal authority. The king resolved not to submit to

their demands; but being at present in no condition to resist, he

required time to consider of so important an affair. The time which was

granted to the king to deliberate he employed in finding means to avoid

a compliance. He took the cross, by which he hoped to render his person

sacred; he obliged the people to renew their oath of fealty; and,

lastly, he had recourse to the Pope, fortified by all the devices which

could be used to supply the place of a real strength, he ventured, when

the barons renewed their demands, to give them a positive refusal; he

swore by the feet of God (his usual oath) that he would never grant them

such liberties as must make a slave of himself.

The barons, on this answer, immediately fly to arms: they rise in every

part; they form an army, and appoint a leader; and as they knew that no

design can involve all sorts of people or inspire them with

extraordinary resolution, unless it be animated with religion, they call

their leader the Marshal of the Army of God and Holy Church. The king

was wholly unprovided against so general a defection. The city of

London, the possession of which has generally proved a decisive

advantage in the English civil wars, was betrayed to the barons. He

might rather be said, to be imprisoned than defended in the Tower of

London, to which close siege was laid; whilst the marshal of the barons'

army, exercising the prerogatives of royalty, issued writs to summon all

the lords to join the army of liberty, threatening equally all those who

should adhere to the king and those who betrayed an indifference to the

cause by their neutrality. John, deserted by all, had no resource but in

temporizing and submission. Without questioning in any part the terms of

a treaty which he intended to observe in none, he agreed to everything

the barons thought fit to ask, hoping that the exorbitancy of their

demands would justify in the eyes of the world the breach of his

promises. The instruments by which the barons secured their liberties

were drawn up in form of charters, and in the manner by which grants had

been usually made to monasteries, with a preamble signifying that it was

done for the benefit of the king's soul and those of his ancestors. For

the place of solemnizing this remarkable act they chose a large field,

overlooked by Windsor, called Running-mede, which, in our present

tongue, signifies the Meadow of Council,--a place long consecrated by

public opinion, as that wherein the quarrels and wars which arose in the

English nation, when divided into kingdoms or factions, had been

terminated from the remotest times. Here it was that King John, on the

15th day of June, in the year of our Lord 1215, signed those two

memorable instruments which first disarmed the crown of its unlimited

prerogatives, and laid the foundation of English liberty. One was called

the Great Charter; the other, the Charter of the Forest. If we look back

to the state of the nation at that time, we shall the better comprehend

the spirit and necessity of these grants.

Besides the ecclesiastical jurisprudence, at that time, two systems of

laws, very different from each other in their object, their reason, and

their authority, regulated the interior of the kingdom: the Forest Law,

and the Common Law. After the Northern nations had settled here, and in

other parts of Europe, hunting, which had formerly been the chief means

of their subsistence, still continued their favorite diversion. Great

tracts of each country, wasted by the wars in which it was conquered,

were set apart for this kind of sport, and guarded in a state of

desolation by strict laws and severe penalties. When, such waste lands

were in the hands of subjects, they were called Chases; when in the

power of the sovereign, they were denominated Forests. These forests lay

properly within the jurisdiction of no hundred, county, or bishopric;

and therefore, being out both of the Common and the Spiritual Law, they

were governed by a law of their own, which was such as the king by his

private will thought proper to impose. There were reckoned in England no

less than sixty-eight royal forests, some of them of vast extent. In

these great tracts were many scattered inhabitants; and several persons

had property of woodland, and other soil, inclosed within their bounds.

Here the king had separate courts and particular justiciaries; a

complete jurisprudence, with all its ceremonies and terms of art, was

formed; and it appears that these laws were better digested and more

carefully enforced than those which belonged to civil government. They

had, indeed, all the qualities of the worst of laws. Their professed

object was to keep a great part of the nation desolate. They hindered

communication and destroyed industry. They had a trivial object, and

most severe sanctions; for, as they belonged immediately to the king's

personal pleasures, by the lax interpretation of treason in those days,

all considerable offences against the Forest Law, such as killing the

beasts of game, were considered as high treason, and punished, as high

treason then was, by truncation of limbs and loss of eyes and testicles.

Hence arose a thousand abuses, vexatious suits, and pretences for

imposition upon all those who lived in or near these places. The deer

were suffered to run loose upon their lands; and many oppressions were

used with relation to the claim of commonage which the people had in

most of the forests. The Norman kings were not the first makers of the

Forest Law; it subsisted under the Saxon and Danish kings. Canute the

Great composed a body of those laws, which still remains. But under the

Norman kings they were enforced with greater rigor, as the whole tenor

of the Norman government was more rigorous. Besides, new forests were

frequently made, by which private property was outraged in a grievous

manner. Nothing, perhaps, shows more clearly how little men are able to

depart from the common course of affairs than that the Norman kings,

princes of great capacity, and extremely desirous of absolute power, did

not think of peopling these forests, places under their own uncontrolled

dominion, and which might have served as so many garrisons dispersed

throughout the country. The Charter of the Forests had for its object

the disafforesting several of those tracts, the prevention of future

afforestings, the mitigation and ascertainment of the punishments for

breaches of the Forest Law.

The Common Law, as it then prevailed in England, was in a great measure

composed of some remnants of the old Saxon customs, joined to the feudal

institutions brought in at the Norman Conquest. And it is here to be

observed, that the constitutions of Magna Charta are by no means a

renewal of the Laws of St. Edward, or the ancient Saxon laws, as our

historians and law-writers generally, though very groundlessly, assert.

They bear no resemblance in any particular to the Laws of St. Edward, or

to any other collection of these ancient institutions. Indeed, how

should they? The object of Magna Charta is the correction of the feudal

policy, which was first introduced, at least in any regular form, at the

Conquest, and did not subsist before it. It may be further observed,

that in the preamble to the Great Charter it is stipulated that the

barons shall _hold_ the liberties there granted _to them and their

heirs, from the king and his heirs_; which shows that the doctrine of an

unalienable tenure was always uppermost in their minds. Their idea even

of liberty was not (if I may use the expression) perfectly free; and

they did not claim to possess their privileges upon any natural

principle or independent bottom, but just as they held their lands from

the king. This is worthy of observation.

By the Feudal Law, all landed property is, by a feigned conclusion,

supposed to be derived, and therefore to be mediately or immediately

held, from the crown. If some estates were so derived, others were

certainly procured by the same original title of conquest by which the

crown itself was acquired, and the derivation from the king could in

reason only be considered as a fiction of law. But its consequent rights

being once supposed, many real charges and burdens grew from a fiction

made only for the preservation of subordination; and in consequence of

this, a great power was exercised over the persons and estates of the

tenants. The fines on the succession to an estate, called in the feudal

language _reliefs_, were not fixed to any certainty, and were therefore

frequently made so excessive that they might rather be considered as

redemptions or new purchases than acknowledgments of superiority and

tenure. With respect to that most important article of marriage, there

was, in the very nature of the feudal holding, a great restraint laid

upon it. It was of importance to the lord that the person who received

the feud should be submissive to him; he had, therefore, a right to

interfere in the marriage of the heiress who inherited the feud. This

right was carried further than the necessity required: the male heir

himself was obliged to marry according to the choice of his lord; and

even widows, who had made one sacrifice to the feudal tyranny, were

neither suffered to continue in the widowed state nor to choose for

themselves the partners of their second bed. In fact, marriage was

publicly set up to sale. The ancient records of the Exchequer afford

many instances where some women purchased by heavy fines the privilege

of a single life, some the free choice of an husband, others the liberty

of rejecting some person particularly disagreeable. And what may appear

extraordinary, there are not wanting examples where a woman has fined in

a considerable sum, that she might not be compelled to marry a certain

man; the suitor, on the other hand, has outbid her, and solely by

offering more for the marriage than the heiress could to prevent it, he

carried his point directly and avowedly against her inclinations. Now,

as the king claimed no right over his immediate tenants that they did

not exercise in the same or in a more oppressive manner over their

vassals, it is hard to conceive a more general and cruel grievance than

this shameful market, which so universally outraged the most sacred

relations among mankind. But the tyranny over women was not over with

the marriage. As the king seized into his hands the estate of every

deceased tenant in order to secure his relief, the widow was driven

often by an heavy composition to purchase the admission to her dower,

into which it should seem she could not enter without the king's

consent.

All these were marks of a real and grievous servitude. The Great Charter

was made, not to destroy the root, but to cut short the overgrown

branches of the feudal service: first, in moderating and in reducing to

a certainty the reliefs which the king's tenants paid on succeeding to

their estate according to their rank; and, secondly, in taking off some

of the burdens which had been laid on marriage, whether compulsory or

restrictive, and thereby preventing that shameful market which had been

made in the persons of heirs, and the most sacred things amongst

mankind.

There were other provisions made in the Great Charter that went deeper

than the feudal tenure, and affected the whole body of the civil

government. A great part of the king's revenue then consisted in the

fines and amercements which were imposed in his courts. A fine was paid

there for liberty to commence or to conclude a suit. The punishment of

offences by fine was discretionary; and this discretionary power had

been very much abused. But by Magna Charta, things were so ordered, that

a delinquent might be punished, but not ruined, by a fine or amercement;

because the degree of his offence, and the rank he held, were to be

taken into consideration. His freehold, his merchandise, and those

instruments by which he obtained his livelihood were made sacred from

such impositions.

A more grand reform was made with regard to the administration of

justice. The kings in those days seldom resided long in one place, and

their courts followed their persons. This erratic justice must have been

productive of infinite inconvenience to the litigants. It was now

provided that civil suits, called _Common Pleas_, should be fixed to

some certain place. Thus one branch of jurisdiction was separated from

the king's court, and detached from his person. They had not yet come to

that maturity of jurisprudence as to think this might be made to extend

to criminal law also, and that the latter was an object of still greater

importance. But even the former may be considered as a great revolution.

A tribunal, a creature of mere law, independent of personal power, was

established; and this separation of a king's authority from his person

was a matter of vast consequence towards introducing ideas of freedom,

and confirming the sacredness and majesty of laws.

But the grand article, and that which cemented all the parts of the

fabric of liberty, was this,--that "no freeman shall be taken, or

imprisoned, or disseized, or outlawed, or banished, or in any wise

destroyed, but by judgment of his peers."

There is another article of nearly as much consequence as the former,

considering the state of the nation at that time, by which it is

provided that the barons shall grant to their tenants the same liberties

which they had stipulated for themselves. This prevented the kingdom

from degenerating into the worst imaginable government, a feudal

aristocracy. The English barons were not in the condition of those

great princes who had made the French monarchy so low in the preceding

century, or like those who reduced the Imperial power to a name. They

had been brought to moderate bounds, by the policy of the first and

second Henrys, and were not in a condition to set up for petty

sovereigns by an usurpation equally detrimental to the crown and the

people. They were able to act only in confederacy; and this common cause

made it necessary to consult the common good, and to study popularity by

the equity of their proceedings. This was a very happy circumstance to

the growing liberty.

These concessions were so just and reasonable, that, if we except the

force, no prince could think himself wronged in making them. But to

secure the observance of these articles, regulations were made, which,

whilst they were regarded, scarcely left a shadow of regal power. And

the barons could think of no measures for securing their freedom, but

such as were inconsistent with monarchy. A council of twenty-five barons

was to be chosen by their own body, without any concurrence of the king,

in order to hear and determine upon all complaints concerning the breach

of the charter; and as these charters extended to almost every part of

government, a tribunal of his enemies was set up who might pass judgment

on all his actions. And that force might not be wanting to execute the

judgments of this new tribunal, the king agreed to issue his own writs

to all persons, to oblige them to take an oath of obedience to the

twenty-five barons, who were empowered to distress him by seizure of his

lands and castles, and by every possible method, until the grievance

complained of was redressed according to their pleasure: his own person

and his family were alone exempted from violence.

By these last concessions, it must be confessed, he was effectually

dethroned, and with all the circumstances of indignity which could be

imagined. He had refused to govern as a lawful prince, and he saw

himself deprived of even his legal authority. He became of no sort of

consequence in his kingdom; he was held in universal contempt and

derision; he fell into a profound melancholy. It was in vain that he had

recourse to the Pope, whose power he had found sufficient to reduce, but

not to support him. The censures of the Holy See, which had been

fulminated at his desire, were little regarded by the barons, or even by

the clergy, supported in this resistance by the firmness of their

archbishop, who acted with great vigor in the cause of the barons, and

even delivered into their hands the fortress of Rochester, one of the

most important places in the kingdom. After much meditation the king at

last resolved upon a measure of the most extreme kind, extorted by

shame, revenge, and despair, but, considering the disposition of the

time, much the most effectual that could be chosen. He dispatched

emissaries into France, into the Low Countries and Germany, to raise men

for his service. He had recourse to the same measures to bring his

kingdom to obedience which his predecessor, William, had used to conquer

it. He promised to the adventurers in his quarrel the lands of the

rebellious barons, and it is said even empowered his agents to make

charters of the estates of several particulars. The utmost success

attended these negotiations in an age when Europe abounded with a

warlike and poor nobility, with younger brothers, for whom there was no

provision in regular armies, who seldom entered into the Church, and

never applied themselves to commerce, and when every considerable family

was surrounded by an innumerable multitude of retainers and dependants,

idle, and greedy of war and pillage. The Crusade had universally

diffused a spirit of adventure; and if any adventure had the Pope's

approbation, it was sure to have a number of followers.

John waited the effect of his measures. He kept up no longer the solemn

mockery of a court, in which a degraded long must always have been the

lowest object. He retired to the Isle of Wight: his only companions were

sailors and fishermen, among whom he became extremely popular. Never was

he more to be dreaded than in this sullen retreat, whilst the barons

amused themselves by idle jests and vain conjectures on his conduct.

Such was the strange want of foresight in that barbarous age, and such

the total neglect of design in their affairs, that the barons, when,

they had got the charter, which was weakened even by the force by which

it was obtained and the great power which it granted, set no watch upon

the king, seemed to have no intelligence of the great and open

machinations which were carrying on against them, and had made no sort

of dispositions for their defence. They spent their time in tournaments

and bear-baitings, and other diversions suited to the fierce rusticity

of their manners. At length the storm broke forth, and found them

utterly unprovided. The Papal excommunication, the indignation of their

prince, and a vast army of lawless and bold adventurers were poured

down at once upon their heads. Such numbers were engaged in this

enterprise that forty thousand are said to have perished at sea. Yet a

number still remained sufficient to compose two great armies, one of

which, with the enraged king at its head, ravaged without mercy the

North of England, whilst the other turned all the West to a like scene

of blood and desolation. The memory of Stephen's wars was renewed, with

every image of horror, misery, and crime. The barons, dispersed and

trembling in their castles, waited who should fall the next victim. They

had no army able to keep the field. The Archbishop, on whom they had

great reliance, was suspended from his functions. There was no hope even

from submission: the king could not fulfil his engagements to his

foreign troops at a cheaper rate than the utter ruin of his barons.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1216]

In these circumstances of despair they resolved to have recourse to

Philip, the ancient enemy of their country. Throwing off all allegiance

to John, they agreed to accept Louis, the son of that monarch, as their

king. Philip had once more an opportunity of bringing the crown of

England into his family, and he readily embraced it. He immediately sent

his son into England with seven hundred ships, and slighted the menaces

and excommunications of the Pope, to attain the same object for which he

had formerly armed to support and execute them. The affairs of the

barons assumed quite a new face by this reinforcement, and their rise

was as sudden and striking as their fall. The foreign army of King John,

without discipline, pay, or order, ruined and wasted in the midst of its

successes, was little able to oppose the natural force of the country,

called forth and recruited by so considerable a succor. Besides, the

French troops who served under John, and made a great part of his army,

immediately went over to the enemy, unwilling to serve against their

sovereign in a cause which now began to look desperate. The son of the

King of France was acknowledged in London, and received the homage of

all ranks of men. John, thus deserted, had no other ally than the Pope,

who indeed served him to the utmost of his power, but with arms to which

the circumstances of the time alone can give any force. He

excommunicated Louis and his adherents; he laid England under an

interdict; he threatened the King of France himself with the same

sentence: but Philip continued firm, and the interdict had little effect

in England. Cardinal Langton, by his remarkable address, by his interest

in the Sacred College, and his prudent submissions, had been restored to

the exercise of his office; but, steady to the cause he had first

espoused, he made use of the recovery of his authority to carry on his

old designs against the king and the Pope. He celebrated divine service

in spite of the interdict, and by his influence and example taught

others to despise it. The king, thus deserted, and now only solicitous

for his personal safety, rambled, or rather fled, from place to place,

at the head of a small party. He was in great danger in passing a marsh

in Norfolk, in which he lost the greatest part of his baggage, and his

most valuable effects. With difficulty he escaped to the monastery of

Swineshead, where, violently agitated by grief and disappointments, his

late fatigue and the use of an improper diet threw him into a fever, of

which he died in a few days at Newark, not without suspicion of poison,

after a reign, or rather a struggle to reign, for eighteen years, the

most turbulent and calamitous both to king and people of any that are

recorded in the English history.

It may not be improper to pause here for a few moments, and to consider

a little more minutely the causes which had produced the grand

revolution in favor of liberty by which this reign was distinguished,

and to draw all the circumstances which led to this remarkable event

into a single point of view. Since the death of Edward the Confessor

only two princes succeeded to the crown upon undisputed titles. William

the Conqueror established his by force of arms. His successors were

obliged to court the people by yielding many of the possessions and many

of the prerogatives of the crown; but they supported a dubious title by

a vigorous administration, and recovered by their policy, in the course

of their reign, what the necessity of their affairs obliged them to

relinquish for the establishment of their power. Thus was the nation

kept continually fluctuating between freedom and servitude. But the

principles of freedom were predominant, though the thing itself was not

yet fully formed. The continual struggle of the clergy for the

ecclesiastical liberties laid open at the same time the natural claims

of the people; and the clergy were obliged to show some respect for

those claims, in order to add strength to their own party. The

concessions which Henry the Second made to the ecclesiastics on the

death of Becket, which were afterwards confirmed by Richard the First,

gave a grievous blow to the authority of the crown; as thereby an order

of so much power and influence triumphed over it in many essential

points. The latter of these princes brought it very low by the whole

tenor of his conduct. Always abroad, the royal authority was felt in its

full vigor, without being supported by the dignity or softened by the

graciousness of the royal presence. Always in war, he considered his

dominions only as a resource for his armies. The demesnes of the crown

were squandered. Every office in the state was made vile by being sold.

Excessive grants, followed by violent and arbitrary resumptions, tore to

pieces the whole contexture of the government. The civil tumults which

arose in that king's absence showed that the king's lieutenants at least

might be disobeyed with impunity. Then came John to the crown. The

arbitrary taxes which he imposed very early in his reign, which,

offended even more by the improper use made of them than their

irregularity, irritated the people extremely, and joined with all the

preceding causes to make his government contemptible. Henry the Second,

during his contests with the Church, had the address to preserve the

barons in his interests. Afterwards, when the barons had joined in the

rebellion of his children, this wise prince found means to secure the

bishops and ecclesiastics. But John drew upon himself at once the hatred

of all orders of his subjects. His struggle with the Pope weakened him;

his submission to the Pope weakened him yet more. The loss of his

foreign territories, besides what he lost along with them in reputation,

made him entirely dependent upon England: whereas his predecessors made

one part of their territories subservient to the preservation of their

authority in another, where it was endangered. Add to all these causes

the personal character of the king, in which there was nothing uniform

or sincere, and which introduced the like unsteadiness into all his

government. He was indolent, yet restless, in his disposition; fond of

working by violent methods, without any vigor; boastful, but continually

betraying his fears; showing on all occasions such a desire of peace as

hindered him from ever enjoying it. Having no spirit of order, he never

looked forward,--content by any temporary expedient to extricate himself

from a present difficulty. Rash, arrogant, perfidious, irreligious,

unquiet, he made a tolerable head of a party, but a bad king, and had

talents fit to disturb another's government, not to support his own.

A most striking contrast presents itself between the conduct and fortune

of John and his adversary Philip. Philip came to the crown when many of

the provinces of Prance, by being in the hands of too powerful vassals,

were in a manner dismembered from the kingdom; the royal authority was

very low in what remained. He reunited to the crown a country as

valuable as what belonged to it before; he reduced his subjects of all

orders to a stricter obedience than they had given to his predecessors;

he withstood the Papal usurpation, and yet used it as an instrument in

his designs: whilst John, who inherited a great territory and an entire

prerogative, by his vices and weakness gave up his independency to the

Pope, his prerogative to his subjects, and a large part of his dominions

to the King of France.

FOOTNOTES:

[82] A word of uncertain derivation, but which signifies some scandalous

species of cowardice.

The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, Vol. 07 (of 12) · 第 8 / 9 章