CHAPTER VI.

THE LAST YEARS OF HENRY II.

1183–1189.

The unexpected death of the young king was a catastrophe almost equally overwhelming to both parties in the war. Henry himself, when the news was brought to him by the prior of Grandmont, whither the body had been taken to be prepared for burial,[1087] went almost out of his mind with grief.[1088] For a moment indeed friends and foes alike seemed incapable of anything but mourning. Hero or saint could scarcely have won a more universal tribute of affection and regret than was showered upon this young king who, so far as we can see, had done so little to deserve it. Stern voices like that of Bertrand de Born, accustomed only to the bitterest tones of sarcasm, insult and angry strife, melted suddenly into accents of the deepest tenderness and lamentation.[1089] Sober-minded churchmen and worldly-wise courtiers, though they could not deny or excuse the dead man’s sins, yet betrayed with equal frankness their unreasoning attachment to his memory.[1090] As his body, arrayed in the linen robe which he had worn at his coronation--its white folds, hallowed by the consecrating oil, made to serve for a winding-sheet--was borne on an open bier upon the shoulders of his comrades-in-arms from Grandmont northward through Anjou, the people streamed forth from every castle and town and village along the road to meet it with demonstrations of mourning and tears;[1091] and at Le Mans, where it was deposited for a night in the cathedral church, the bishops and citizens forcibly took possession of it, refused to give it up, and buried their beloved young king then and there by the side of his grandfather Geoffrey Plantagenet.[1092].

[1087] Geoff. Vigeois, l. ii. c. 20 (Labbe, _Nova Biblioth._, vol. ii. p. 338).

[1088] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 301. Cf. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 279, and Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. ii. c. 8 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 30).

[1089] See Bertrand de Born’s two elegies on the young king, Clédat, _Bert. de Born_, pp. 53, 54.

[1090] See Pet. Blois, Ep. ii. (Giles, vol. i. pp. 3–5); Gir. Cambr. as above, c. 9 (pp. 31, 32); W. Map, _De Nug. Cur._, dist. iv. c. i. (Wright, pp. 139, 140); and Th. Agnellus (Stevenson, _R. Coggeshall_), pp. 265–273. The tone of the real historians of the time is however somewhat different. The _Gesta Hen._ is perfectly colourless, and even on the young king’s death the writer adds not a word of comment, good or bad. Rog. Howden, on the other hand (Stubbs, vol. ii. p. 279), openly gives vent to a feeling which may be expressed by “So perish all the enemies of King Henry,” and grows almost impatient with Henry’s grief. R. Diceto (Stubbs, vol. ii. pp. 19, 20) is as usual very cautious in the expression of his personal opinions, but they also appear to be somewhat opposed to the popular sentiment. The point of view taken by Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs, vol. i. p. 305) is probably unique. The one really judicial commentator on the whole affair is William of Newburgh (l. iii. c. 7--Howlett, vol. i. pp. 233, 234).

[1091] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 20. Cf. Th. Agnellus (Stevenson, _R. Coggeshall_), p. 268.

[1092] R. Diceto as above. Th. Agnellus (as above), p. 269. _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 303.

The political tide, however, turned as soon as he was gone. The Aquitanian league suddenly found itself without a head; for Geoffrey of Britanny, although the wiliest and most plausible of all the king’s sons, was also the most generally distrusted and disliked.[1093] The league broke up at once; on Midsummer-day Ademar of Limoges surrendered his citadel and made his peace;[1094] and most of the other rebels soon followed his example. By the end of the month Henry, having razed the walls of Limoges and garrisoned with his own troops the castles which had submitted to him, could venture to set out for Normandy;[1095] while King Alfonso of Aragon, who had come to the help of his father’s old ally, found nothing left for him to do but to join Richard in an expedition against the one baron who still persisted in his rebellion--Bertrand de Born.[1096] If Bertrand’s story may be believed, it was Alfonso’s treachery which, after a week’s siege, compelled him to surrender Hautefort.[1097] What followed shewed plainly that the Aquitanian revolt was at an end. Richard made over Hautefort to Constantine de Born, the troubadour’s brother and lifelong rival;[1098] Bertrand, instead of calling his fellow-barons to avenge him as of old, threw himself upon the generosity of his conqueror, and addressed Richard in a _sirvente_ entreating that his castle might be restored to him. Richard referred him to his father; Bertrand then hastened to the king, who greeted him sarcastically with an allusion to one of his own earlier _sirventes_: “You were wont to boast of possessing more wits than you ever needed to use--what has become of them now?” “Sire, I lost them on the day that you lost your son.” Henry burst into tears; Bertrand was forgiven, indemnified for the losses which he had sustained during the siege, and dismissed with a charter securing to him from that time forth the sole possession of Hautefort.[1099] As a natural consequence, his lyre and his sword were thenceforth both alike at the service of the ducal house to whom he had hitherto been such a troublesome and dangerous foe.

[1093] See Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. ii. c. 11 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 35). The author of the _Gesta Hen._ seems to look upon Geoffrey as the instigator of all his brothers’ misdoings, and scarcely ever mentions his name without an epithet of abuse.

[1094] Geoff. Vigeois, l. ii. c. 18 (Labbe, _Nova Biblioth._, vol. ii. p. 337). _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 302. The date comes from Geoffrey.

[1095] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 303.

[1096] Geoff. Vigeois, l. ii. c. 18 (Labbe, _Nova Biblioth._, vol. ii. p. 337).

[1097] On the story of this siege see Clédat, _Bert. de Born_, pp. 55–57, and Geoff. Vigeois as above.

[1098] Geoff. Vigeois as above.

[1099] Clédat, _Bert. de Born_, pp. 57, 58.

On his northward march Henry met with no opposition. The young king had drawn to himself followers from all parts of the Angevin dominions, as well as from those of the French Crown;[1100] but they had all been drawn by a purely personal attraction, or by the hope of gain; their action had no political significance; and the greater barons, warned by their experience of ten years before, had remained entirely aloof from the whole movement. On reaching Le Mans, indeed, Henry found the old jealousy between Normandy and Maine on the point of breaking out over his son’s dead body; the clergy and people of Rouen, indignant at being defrauded of their young king’s dying bequest, were threatening to come and destroy the city of Le Mans and carry off his body by force. Henry was obliged to cause it to be disinterred and conveyed to Rouen for re-burial,[1101] while he himself returned to Angers to meet Richard and to receive Geoffrey’s submission.[1102] The quarrel between the Cenomannians and the citizens of Rouen was however only the smallest part of the troubles which arose from the young king’s death. As Margaret’s only child had died in infancy, her brother Philip of France at once demanded the restoration of her dowry, and especially the fortress of Gisors. Henry refused to give it up; conference after conference was held without result;[1103] at last, in December, a compromise was made, Henry consenting to do homage to Philip for all his transmarine dominions and to pay a money-compensation for Gisors, which was to be left in his hands henceforth as the dowry not of Margaret, but of her sister Adela, Richard’s affianced bride.[1104]

[1100] W. Map, _De Nug. Cur._, dist. iv. c. i. (Wright, p. 139).

[1101] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 303, 304. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 280. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 20. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 305. Th. Agnellus (Stevenson, _R. Coggeshall_), pp. 269–272.

[1102] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 304.

[1103] _Ib._ pp. 304, 305. Cf. Rog. Howden as above, pp. 280, 281. According to the _Gesta_, one of Henry’s contrivances for avoiding the restitution of the dower-lands was to declare that he had bestowed them upon his own wife; and he set her at liberty and made her go through the said lands to demonstrate the fact. If so, however, she was soon put in prison again.

[1104] _Ib._ p. 306. Cf. Rog. Howden, as above, pp. 281, 284.

But a far worse difficulty remained. All Henry’s schemes for the distribution of his territories were upset by the death of his heir, and it was necessary to devise some new arrangement. It really seems as if Henry’s first thought about the matter was that now at last he could provide as he chose for his darling “Lackland”; for he at once bade the English justiciar Ralf de Glanville bring John over to meet him in Normandy. As soon as they arrived he sent for Richard and unfolded his plan. Richard was now the eldest son; if he lived, he must in due time succeed his father as head of the Angevin house. Henry had clearly no mind to venture a second time upon the dangerous experiment of crowning his heir during his own life. But, although we have no actual statement of his intentions, it seems plain that he did intend to place Richard, in every respect short of the coronation, in the same position which had been held by the young king. Under these circumstances, if the continental dominions of the Angevin house were to be redistributed among the three surviving brothers, there was only one possible mode of redistribution. Geoffrey could not give up Britanny, for he was now actually married to its duchess;[1105] but Richard, in consideration of his prospects as future king of England, duke of Normandy and count of Anjou, might fairly be asked to surrender to his youngest brother the duchy of Aquitaine. So at least it seemed from Henry’s point of view. Richard however saw the matter in another light. Not because he loved Aquitaine, but because he hated it--because for eight years he had fought unceasingly to crush it beneath his feet--now that it lay there prostrate, he could not let it escape him. Richard was generous; but to give up to other hands the reaping of a harvest which he had sown with such unsparing labour and watered with such streams of blood, was a sacrifice too great for his generosity in his six-and-twentieth year. He met his father’s demand with a request for time to think it over; that evening he mounted his horse and rode straight for Poitou; and thence he sent back a message that so long as he lived, no one but himself should ever hold the duchy of Aquitaine.[1106]

[1105] Geoffrey and Constance were married in 1181; see a document in Morice, _Hist. Bret., preuves_, vol. i. col. 687. Rob. Torigni dates the marriage a year too late (Delisle, vol. ii. p. 104 and note 4).

[1106] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 308.

After threatening and beseeching him by turns all through the winter, Henry so far lost patience that he gave permission to John--now fifteen years old--to lead an army into his brother’s territories and win an heritage for himself if he could.[1107] It does not appear, however, that any such attempt was actually made till after Henry himself had gone back to England in June 1184.[1108] As soon as his back was turned, his two younger sons joined to harry the lands of the eldest; Richard retaliated by pushing across the Angevin border and making a raid upon Britanny; and in November Henry found it necessary to check the lawless doings of all three by summoning them to rejoin him in England.[1109] On S. Andrew’s day a sort of public reconciliation of the whole family took place in a great council at Westminster; Eleanor was suffered to resume her place as queen, and the three sons were compelled formally at least to make peace among themselves.[1110] Geoffrey was at once sent back to Normandy;[1111] Richard and John stayed to keep the Christmas feast with their father and mother amid a brilliant gathering of the court at Windsor.[1112] Soon afterwards Richard also returned to his troublesome duchy;[1113] for Henry had now abandoned all idea of transferring it to John. Falling back upon his earlier plans for his youngest child, on Mid-Lent Sunday 1185 he knighted John at Windsor, and thence despatched him as governor to Ireland.[1114]

[1107] _Ib._ p. 311.

[1108] _Ib._ p. 312. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 21.

[1109] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 319.

[1110] _Ib._ pp. 319, 320. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 288. Eleanor had been released in June in order that she might welcome her daughter, the duchess of Saxony; _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 313.

[1111] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 320.

[1112] _Ib._ p. 333.

[1113] _Ib._ p. 334.

[1114] _Ib._ p. 336. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 34. John sailed from Milford on April 24 and landed next day at Waterford. Gir. Cambr. _Expugn. Hibern._, l. ii. c. 32 (Dimock, vol. v. p. 380).

Meanwhile the king himself was again called over sea by fresh troubles in Gaul. The king of France and the count of Flanders had been quarrelling for the last two years over the territories of the latter’s deceased wife, the counties of Amiens and Vermandois;[1115] Henry’s last act before he left Normandy had been to arrange a truce between them.[1116] Two months later--in August 1184--while Philip of Flanders was away in England on a pilgrimage to the martyr’s tomb at Canterbury, Philip of France broke the truce by stirring up his father-in-law the count of Hainaut to attack Flanders in his behalf: Philip of Flanders appealed for help to his other overlord the Emperor Frederic; the archbishop of Cöln, who had been his fellow-pilgrim, at once joined him in a counter-invasion of Hainaut;[1117] and the incalculable dangers of a war between France and Germany were only averted by Frederic’s wise reluctance to interfere, strengthened, we may perhaps suspect, by the influence of the English king. It seemed indeed as if nothing but Henry’s presence could avail to keep order in Gaul. When he returned thither, in April 1185,[1118] his first task was to pacify another quarrel between his own sons. This time the elder one seems to have been the aggressor; and Henry grew so angry that he once more summoned Richard to give up Aquitaine altogether, not, however, to either of his brothers, but to its own lawful lady, his mother, Queen Eleanor. Despite all her faults, Eleanor was reverenced by her sons; Richard especially treated her throughout his life with the utmost respect and affection; and the demand thus made in her behalf met with immediate submission.[1119] For nine months Henry’s dominions were quiet, and his hands were free to deal with the quarrels of France and Flanders. But before he had succeeded in pacifying them, a further complication was added. King Bela of Hungary made suit to Philip of France for the hand of his sister the widowed Queen Margaret,[1120] and this at once re-opened the question about her dower; for the agreement made two years before had been conditional upon Richard’s marriage with Adela, and as this event seemed as far off as ever, Philip again laid claim to the whole dowry, including Gisors. He was however too much in need of Henry’s assistance in his dispute with Flanders over the dower-lands of Isabel of Vermandois to risk a quarrel with him about those of the young queen; and by Henry’s tact and diplomacy both questions were settled in a conference at Gisors itself early in 1186.[1121] The count of Flanders gave up Vermandois to Philip Augustus,[1122] while Philip and Margaret again consented, in return for a money-compensation from Henry, to make Gisors over to him on the old condition--that Richard should marry Adela without further delay.[1123] The condition however remained unfulfilled. Richard was again despatched into Aquitaine, not indeed as its duke--for Henry had placed all its fortresses under officers of his own appointment[1124]--but still as his father’s representative, charged in his name with the maintenance of obedience and order.[1125] As for Eleanor, Henry had clearly never intended again to intrust her with any real authority; and in April he carried her back with him to England.[1126]

[1115] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 311, 312. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 309. On this quarrel cf. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), pp. 12, 13, and Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 2 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 88–90). This last version is extremely confused in its chronology. The main facts of the case are these: Philip of Flanders and Isabel his wife had no children, and they had quarrelled (_Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 99, 100). Philip’s heir-presumptive was his sister Margaret, wife of Count Baldwin of Hainaut, and after her, her son, another Baldwin. In 1180, however, Philip proposed, instead of leaving all his dominions to his sister and her son, to settle the southern half of them, comprising Vermandois and Flanders south of the river Lys, upon her daughter Elizabeth, whom he had just given in marriage to Philip of France. (_Ib._ p. 245.) He meant to leave them to her on his own death; but when his wife died, in 1182 (_ib._ p. 285), Philip Augustus laid claim to her two counties as lapsed fiefs. King and count went on quarrelling till 1186, when, as we shall see, the matter was settled by the immediate cession of Vermandois to Philip Augustus, who thereupon agreed to wait for the rest till the Flemish count’s death.

[1116] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 312. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 309.

[1117] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 321, 322. Cf. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 288, and R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 32.

[1118] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 337. R. Diceto as above, p. 34.

[1119] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 337, 338. Cf. Rog. Howden as above, p. 304.

[1120] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 20. Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 73. According to the _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 346, Bela’s first suit was to Henry, for the hand of his granddaughter Matilda of Saxony; but Henry, “ut mos suus erat,” was so slow in answering that Bela, tired of waiting, transferred his proposals to Margaret. On the other hand, Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 336, 337, charges Henry with having contrived Margaret’s marriage with Bela on purpose to get her to a safe distance, whence neither she nor her husband could reclaim the dowry.

[1121] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 343. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 40. The last gives the date as March 10; the _Gesta_ make it just before Mid-Lent, which was February 26.

[1122] Cf. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 13, with R. Diceto as above.

[1123] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 344. Cf. R. Diceto as above.

[1124] R. Diceto as above.

[1125] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 345.

[1126] _Ibid._ R. Diceto as above.

England was now his only refuge. In these closing years of his reign, when the whole interest of the story centres round the person of the king, the character of those few incidents which take place on English ground is in striking contrast with the state of affairs which occupied him in Gaul. While the Angevin dominions on the continent were threatening disruption under their owner’s very eyes, each of his visits to England was marked by some fresh indication of the firm hold which he had gained upon his island realm and its dependencies, or of the lofty position which England under him had acquired among the powers of the world. Of the internal affairs of England itself, indeed, we hear absolutely nothing save a few ecclesiastical details, and of Wales and Scotland scarcely more. Henry’s first business after his landing in 1184 had been to lead an army against South Wales;[1127] but at the mere tidings of his approach Rees hurried to make submission at Worcester.[1128] William of Scotland was in still greater haste to meet the English king with a suit for the hand of his granddaughter Matilda of Saxony,[1129] who was now in England with her parents. The project was foiled by the Pope’s refusal to grant a dispensation,[1130] without which such a marriage was impossible, owing to the descent of both parties from Malcolm III. and Margaret. Henry, however, on his next visit to England in 1186, proposed that William should wed in Matilda’s place her kinswoman Hermengard of Beaumont.[1131] Hermengard stood even nearer than Matilda in descent from Henry I., but there was no obstacle to her marriage with the king of Scots; he therefore willingly embraced the offer; and before the year closed the alliance between the two kings was doubly cemented, first at Carlisle by the final submission of Galloway to Henry, William himself standing surety for its obedience;[1132] and afterwards, at Woodstock on September 5, by the marriage of Hermengard and William, to whom Henry restored Edinburgh castle as his contribution to the dowry of the bride.[1133]

[1127] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 314. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 309.

[1128] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1129] _Ib._ p. 313.

[1130] _Ib._ p. 322.

[1131] _Ib._ p. 347.

[1132] _Ib._ pp. 348, 349.

[1133] _Ib._ p. 351.

Henry is said to have received in the course of the same year another proposal, from a more distant quarter, for his granddaughter’s hand. According to one writer, Bela of Hungary had at first desired the young Saxon princess for his queen, and it was only Henry’s long delay in answering his suit which provoked him to transfer it to Margaret.[1134] Both Matilda’s suitors must have been attracted solely by the ambition of forming a family connexion with her grandfather King Henry; and that attraction must have been a very strong one, for at the time of William’s suit, if not at the time of Bela’s, it had to counterbalance the fact that Matilda herself, her parents, and all their other children, were landless and penniless exiles. To Henry’s load of family cares there had been added since 1180 that of the troubles of his eldest daughter and her husband, Duke Henry the Lion of Saxony. During the retreat of the Imperial forces from Italy in 1179 the duke fell under the displeasure of his cousin the Emperor; next year he was deprived of all his estates and placed under the ban of the Empire. In the summer of 1182 he and his family made their way to the sole refuge left them, the court of his father-in-law; and there for the most part they remained during the next two years. Towards the close of 1184 the English king’s influence in Germany prevailed to obtain the duke’s restoration to his patrimonial duchy of Brunswick;[1135] and another token of the eagerness with which Henry’s alliance was sought may be seen in the fact that among the conditions demanded by Frederic was the betrothal of one of his own daughters to Richard of Poitou.[1136] This condition, which might have added considerably to Henry’s difficulties in France, was annulled by the speedy death of the intended bride.[1137] On the other hand, the restoration of the exiled duke was far from complete; Brunswick was only a small part of the vast territories which he had formerly possessed; although he returned to Germany in 1185,[1138] it was as a suspected and ruined man; and before Henry’s reign closed another sentence of banishment drove him and his wife again to seek the shelter of her father’s court.

[1134] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 346. See above, p. 235, note 5{1120}.

[1135] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 249, 287, 288, 318, 319, 322, 323; cf. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 199–201, 269, 288, 289.

[1136] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 319.

[1137] _Ib._ p. 322.

[1138] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 38.

Early in 1185 came a crowning proof of the estimation in which the English king was held both at home and abroad. King Baldwin III. of Jerusalem, the eldest son and successor of Queen Melisenda and Fulk of Anjou, had died in 1162, the year of Thomas Becket’s appointment to the see of Canterbury. He was succeeded by his brother Almeric, who died while Henry was struggling with his rebellious barons in 1173. During the twelve years which had passed since then, Almeric’s son, another Baldwin, had fought on bravely against overwhelming odds to keep out the Infidel foe. But the struggle grew more hopeless year by year and day by day. The young king himself was in natural temper as gallant a knight as ever sprang from the blood of Anjou; but he was crippled physically, socially and politically by a disease which made his life a burthen--he was a leper; his kingdom was torn by the mutual jealousies of the kinsmen on whom he was compelled to rely for its government and defence; while the political and military power of the Turks was growing to a height such as it had never before attained, under their famous leader Saladin.[1139] If the necessities of Palestine had been grievous when King Baldwin II. had called upon Fulk to protect Melisenda on her perilous throne--if they had been grievous when Melisenda sought the aid of the western princes for her infant son Baldwin III.--they were far more grievous now. But times were changed in the west since Melisenda had been obliged to rest content with a general appeal addressed to Latin Christendom through the abbot of Clairvaux. Independent of the claim of the king of Jerusalem to the sympathy and the succour of all Christian princes, Baldwin had a direct personal claim upon one prince, and that one well-nigh the mightiest of all. He himself represented one branch of the race whose power had spread from the black rock of Angers to the ends of the earth; the other, the elder branch, was represented by Henry Fitz-Empress. As Baldwin’s nearest kinsman, as the foremost descendant alike of Fulk the King and of Fulk the Canon, as head of the whole Angevin race on both sides of the sea, it was to the Angevin king of England that the Angevin king of Jerusalem appealed, as a matter of right and almost of duty, for succour in his extremity.[1140] And he threw his appeal into a shape which made it indeed irresistible. Henry was at Nottingham, on his way northward to York, in the last days of January 1185, when he was stopped by tidings that two of the highest dignitaries of the Latin Church in the east, Heraclius the Patriarch of Jerusalem and the Grand Master of the Hospital, had arrived at Canterbury on a mission from Holy Land.[1141] He at once changed his course and hurried southward again to meet them at Reading.[1142] With a burst of tears Heraclius laid at the feet of the English king the royal standard of Jerusalem, the keys of the city, those of the Tower of David and of the Holy Sepulchre itself, beseeching him in Baldwin’s name to carry them back at the head of his crusading host.

[1139] Will. Tyr., ll. xix.–xxii. l. xxi.; containing a most moving account of Baldwin. See also Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 10 (Howlett, vol. i. pp. 240–247), and Bishop Stubbs’s elucidation of the whole story and its significance in his introduction to _Itin. Reg. Ric._, pp. lxxxi. _et seq._

[1140] “Sicut ab eo ad cujus nutum regnum Jerosolymitanum de jure hæreditario prædecessorum suorum spectabat.” _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 328.

[1141] _Ib._ p. 335. They had come through France, and had been received in Paris by Philip on January 16; Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 14. They were at Canterbury on January 29, and it seems that even the Patriarch of Jerusalem, with the very keys of the Sepulchre itself in his hands, thought it well to stop and pay his devotions at the martyr’s tomb; Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 325. A third envoy, the Grand Master of the Temple, had died on the way at Verona; _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 331; R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 32.

[1142] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 335; cf. R. Diceto as above. Gir. Cambr., _De Instr. Princ._, dist. ii. c. 24 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 59) places the meeting at Winchester.

The whole assembly wept with the Patriarch; and the king himself was deeply moved.[1143] How many of his earlier projects of going on crusade--now to Spain, now to Holy Land, now alone, now with the king of France--had been mere political expedients, we cannot tell; there may have been more sincerity in them than one is at first disposed to imagine. Little as Henry cared for either war or adventure merely for its own sake, still there flowed in his veins, no less than in those of his young cousin Baldwin, the blood of Angevin pilgrims and crusaders. The lifelong dream of Fulk Nerra and Fulk V. may have been also the dream of Henry, although none of the three was a man to let his dreams influence his conduct until he saw a clear possibility of realizing them. Whether there was such a possibility now, however, was a question whose decision did not rest with Henry alone. If he was to head a crusade, he must head it not merely as count of Anjou but as king of England, with all England’s powers and resources, material and moral, at his back; and this could only be if England sanctioned his undertaking. The “faithful men of the land”--the bishops and barons, the constitutional representatives of the nation--were therefore gathered together in council at Clerkenwell on March 18; Henry bade them advise him as they thought best for his soul’s health, and promised to abide by their decision. After deliberation, they gave it as their unanimous judgement that he must remain at home and not venture to abandon, for the sake of giving his personal assistance in the east, the work to which he was pledged by his coronation-oath, of keeping his own realms in peace and order and securing them from external foes.[1144] Whether or not the decision thus arrived at was wise for the interests of Christendom at large--whether or not it redounds altogether to the honour of England--it was surely the highest tribute she could pay to her Angevin king. A ruler from whom his people were so unwilling to part had clearly some better hold over them than that of mere force. That they shrank with such dread from any interruption of his kingly labours is the best proof how greatly they had benefited by those labours during the past thirty years.

[1143] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 335, 336. R. Diceto as above, pp. 32, 33. Cf. Gir. Cambr. as above (pp. 59, 60).

[1144] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 33, 34. The author of _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 336, dates the council eight days earlier than Ralf, and finds nothing more to say about it than “cum diu tractâssent de itinere Jerosolimitanæ profectionis, tandem placuit regi et consiliariis consulere inde Philippum regem Franciæ.” But the totally independent versions of Henry’s answer to the Patriarch given by Gir. Cambr., _De Instr. Princ._, dist. ii. c. 27 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 64, 65), and Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 32, both distinctly support Ralf thus far, that they represent the king’s refusal as grounded on the difficulty of reconciling the proposed expedition with the fulfilment of his duty to his own realms.

The Patriarch was bitterly disappointed, and vented his disappointment upon Henry in unmeasured terms. In vain did he intreat that at least John, the only one of the king’s sons then in England, might be sent to infuse some new life into the rapidly-dying stock of the Angevin house in Palestine. John himself, it is said, was eager to go,[1145] but the king refused his consent, and six weeks later, as we have seen, despatched him as governor to Ireland. This mission failed completely, through John’s own fault. He was received with every demonstration of loyalty both by the native princes and by the English settlers; but in a very few months he contrived to set them all against him. He treated the English leaders with the most overbearing insolence; he insulted the Irish chieftains who came to bring him their loyal greetings at Waterford more brutally still, mocking at their dress and manners, and even pulling their beards;[1146] he sent the mercenaries who had accompanied him from England to make a raid upon North Munster, in which they were repulsed with great loss,[1147] and then exasperated them to mutiny by keeping them penniless while he spent their wages upon his own pleasure.[1148] By September he had brought matters to such a pass that his father was obliged to recall him and bid John de Courcy undertake the government of Ireland in his place.[1149] Henry however was far from abandoning his cherished scheme. Blinded by his fatal partiality for his youngest child, he was willing to attribute John’s failure to any cause except the true one; he determined that the lad should return to his post, but clothed with fuller powers and loftier dignity. Taking advantage of a change in the Papacy, he at once applied to the new Pope, Urban III., for leave to have his son anointed and crowned as king of Ireland. Urban not only gave his consent, but accompanied it with a gift of a crown made of peacock’s feathers set in gold.[1150] Next summer there came to England news that “a certain Irishman had cut off the head of Hugh de Lacy”;[1151] Henry, seeing in this event an opportunity of recovering for the Crown Hugh’s vast estates in Ireland, hurried John off thither at once[1152] without waiting to have him crowned, or possibly intending that the coronation should take place in Dublin. But before John had sailed, he was recalled by tidings of another death which touched his father more nearly.

[1145] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. ii. c. 27 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 65).

[1146] Gir. Cambr. _Expugn. Hibern._, l. ii. c. 36 (Dimock, vol. v. p. 389).

[1147] Four Masters, a. 1185 (O’Donovan, vol. iii. p. 67).

[1148] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 339.

[1149] Gir. Cambr. _Expugn. Hibern._ as above (p. 392).

[1150] _Gesta Hen._ as above. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 306, 307.

[1151] _Gesta Hen._ (as above), p. 350. Cf. _ib._ p. 361; Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 309; Four Masters, a. 1186 (O’Donovan, vol. iii. pp. 71–75); Gir. Cambr. _Expugn. Hibern._, l. ii. c. 35 (Dimock, vol. v. p. 387); and R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 34. This last gives the day, July 25, but places the event a year too early.

[1152] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 350.

Geoffrey of Britanny had gone to visit the French king in Paris; there, on August 19, he died.[1153] No one regretted him, unless it was his father, and Philip of France, who caused him to be buried with regal honours in the cathedral church of our Lady in Paris, and followed him to the grave with every demonstration of mourning.[1154] If report spoke true, Philip’s grief was as sincere as it was selfish; for Geoffrey had been cut off in the midst of a plot whereby he proposed, out of spite against his father and elder brother, to withdraw from them his homage for Britanny and become Philip’s liegeman, receiving in return the title of grand seneschal which in the year of his own birth had been conferred upon his father as a warrant for intervention in the affairs of the Breton duchy.[1155] Faithful servants of the English king were inclined to see in Geoffrey’s sudden end a divine judgement upon this undutiful scheme.[1156] Philip however saw a means of making his own profit out of Geoffrey’s death, quite as readily as out of his life. He at once claimed, as overlord, the wardship of the infant heiress-presumptive of Britanny--Eleanor, the only child of Geoffrey and Constance[1157]--and with it the administration of her duchy till she should be old enough to be married. Henry tried to temporize,[1158] but the longer the negotiations lasted the more complicated they became, as Philip kept increasing his demands. First Aquitaine was dragged into the dispute. Its northern portion was just now in a state of unwonted tranquillity, for at the close of the year we find Bertrand de Born complaining that he had witnessed neither siege nor battle for more than twelve months.[1159] Richard was in fact busy in the south, at war with the count of Toulouse.[1160] Against this Philip remonstrated, as an unjust aggression upon a loyal vassal of the French Crown;[1161] he added to his remonstrance a demand for Richard’s homage to himself for Aquitaine, and also--all prospect of Adela’s marriage being now apparently at an end--for the definite restitution of Gisors.[1162] While the two kings were negotiating, actual hostilities broke out between some of their constables on the border; the warlike zeal of both parties, however, died down at the approach of Christmas;[1163] Henry lingered in England to receive two papal legates who were coming to crown John as king of Ireland,[1164] but the crowning never took place; and at last, on February 17, 1187, king and legates sailed together for Normandy.[1165]

[1153] R. Diceto as above, p. 41. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 20. Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 73. The accounts of the cause of death are very conflicting. Rigord, Will. Armor. and Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs, vol. i. 336) say he died of some malady not specified. Gir. Cambr., _De Instr. Princ._, dist. ii. c. 10 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 34), makes him die “eodem quo et frater antea morbo acutissimo, sc. febrili calore.” The _Gesta Hen._ as above, and Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 309, attribute his death to injuries received in a tournament; but the _Gesta_, as we shall see, have an alternative version.

[1154] Gir. Cambr., Rigord and Will. Armor. as above.

[1155] Cf. Gir. Cambr. as above (pp. 33, 34), with _Gesta Hen._ as above, and Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 7 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 235).

[1156] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1157] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 41, says they had two daughters; but I can find no trace of a second.

[1158] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 353, 354.

[1159] Clédat, _Bert. de Born_, pp. 68, 69.

[1160] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 345.

[1161] R. Diceto as above, pp. 43, 44.

[1162] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 23. Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), pp. 73, 74; _Philipp._, l. ii. (_ibid._), p. 118.

[1163] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 354, 355. R. Diceto as above, p. 44.

[1164] Cardinal Octavian and Hugh of Nonant, bishop-elect of Chester; _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 3, 4; R. Diceto (as above), p. 47. They landed at Sandwich on Christmas-eve and kept the feast at Canterbury. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 346.

[1165] The _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 4, and Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 317, say they crossed together; R. Diceto as above, p. 47, to whom we owe the date of Henry’s crossing, seems to think the legates had preceded him.

When the two kings met at the Gué-St.-Rémy on April 5,[1166] little Eleanor was no longer heiress of Britanny. On Easter-day Constance had become the mother of a son, whom the Bretons, in defiance of his grandfather’s wish to bestow upon him his own name, insisted upon calling after the legendary hero of their race, Arthur[1167]--thus at once claiming him as the representative of their national existence and rights. The child’s birth made little difference in the political situation; Philip claimed the wardship of the heir of Britanny just as he had claimed that of its heiress; the conference broke up, and both parties prepared for war. Henry distributed his forces in four divisions; one of these was commanded by his eldest son, Geoffrey the chancellor, who as bishop-elect of Lincoln had given good proof of his military capacities in the revolt of 1174;--another was intrusted to the king’s faithful friend Earl William de Mandeville; the other two were commanded respectively by Richard and John, and it seems that both of these were at once sent down into Berry, where Philip was expected to begin his attack. Soon after Whitsuntide Philip advanced upon Berry,[1168] took Issoudun and Graçay, and laid siege to Châteauroux.[1169] Henry now followed his sons; the three together marched to the relief of Châteauroux, and Richard apparently succeeded in making his way into the place, where John afterwards rejoined him.[1170] For nearly a fortnight the two kings remained encamped on opposite sides of the Indre, drawing up their forces every morning for battle;[1171] but each day the battle was averted by some means or other. Now it was the mediation of the French bishops in Philip’s camp, or of the Roman legates in that of Henry;[1172] now it was a miraculous judgement upon a sacrilegious Brabantine in the French host, which scared Philip into dismissing his mercenaries;[1173] now it was the count of Flanders who, as soon as his peace with France was made, turned against the peace-maker and sought to stir Richard up to play over again the part of the young king; now it was Henry himself who opened negotiations for a truce.[1174] Finally, on Midsummer-eve,[1175] a truce was made for two years.[1176] According to Bertrand de Born, it was wrung from Philip by the discovery that the troops of Champagne, which formed a considerable part of his army, had been bought over by the English king.[1177] Its actual negotiator was Richard;[1178] and when Richard, instead of returning to his father, rode away in the closest companionship with the king of France, Henry naturally grew suspicious of the terms on which it had been won. His suspicions were confirmed when Richard, under pretence of obeying his summons to return, made his way to Chinon and there seized the contents of the Angevin treasury, which he immediately applied to the fortification of his own castles in Poitou.[1179] A partizan of Richard tells us that Philip had communicated to him a letter in which Henry proposed to make peace by marrying Adela to John and constituting the latter heir to all his dominions except England and Normandy.[1180] If this scheme really existed, it was foiled by Philip’s own act; and when Henry and his elder son met soon afterwards at Angers, their differences were apparently settled for the moment by Richard’s reinstatement in the dukedom of Aquitaine; for we are told that he not only returned to his duty, but publicly renewed his homage to the king.[1181]

[1166] _Gesta Hen._ (as above), p. 5.

[1167] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 48. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 7 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 235). _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 358, 361. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 315. These two latter make the year 1186, which is nonsense, as they both expressly say that the child was posthumous.

[1168] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 6.

[1169] Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 23; Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 74; _Philipp._, l. ii. (_ibid._), p. 119.

[1170] _Gesta Hen._ (as above), p. 5. Cf. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 369.

[1171] See Clédat, _Bert. de Born_, p. 71.

[1172] _Ibid._ _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 6, 7.

[1173] Cf. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 369, 370; Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), pp. 23, 24; Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 14 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 248); and Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 2 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 92).

[1174] Gerv. Cant. as above, pp. 371–373.

[1175] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 49.

[1176] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 7; R. Diceto and Gir. Cambr. as above; Rigord (as above), p. 23. Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 75, and _Philipp._, l. ii. (_ibid._), p. 120, turns the truce into an abject submission of Henry and Richard. Gerald says that one of the conditions of the truce was that Auvergne, which Philip had conquered, should remain in his hands during the period. But none of the other authorities mention Auvergne at all at this time; and Gerald’s statement seems incompatible with the French accounts of Philip’s attack upon Auvergne, as if upon a hostile country, in 1188 (Rigord, as above, p. 27; Will. Armor., _ibid._, pp. 74, 122). Gerald and Rigord are however almost equally untrustworthy for details, and especially for chronology.

[1177] See Clédat, _Bert. de Born_, pp. 71, 72.

[1178] Gerv. Cant. as above, p. 373.

[1179] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 9.

[1180] Gir. Cambr. as above (pp. 91, 92).

[1181] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 9.

All these western quarrels again sank into the background before the tidings which came from Holy Land as the year drew to a close. Heraclius had gone home from his unsuccessful mission to find Baldwin IV. delivered out of all his troubles, and his throne occupied by his infant nephew, the child of his sister Sibyl. The little king soon followed his uncle to the grave; and Sibyl, on whom the representation of the royal house thus devolved, at once bestowed her crown upon the man who had already been for six years the bravest and most successful defender of the distracted realm--her husband, Guy of Lusignan.[1182] Guy sprang from a faithless race whom the Angevins had little cause to love or trust in their western home; but in Palestine he was hated simply because he had deservedly won the affection and the confidence of both Baldwin and Sibyl. Thwarted, baffled, deserted, betrayed by envious rivals, left almost alone to face the Infidel foes whose advance grew more threatening day by day, Guy fought on till in a great battle at Tiberias, in July 1187, he was made prisoner by the Turks; the Christians were totally defeated, and the relic of the Cross, which they had carried with them to the fight, fell with the king into the hands of the unbelievers.[1183] The tidings of this disaster, when they reached Europe in October, gave the death-blow to Pope Urban III.[1184] His successor, Gregory VIII., opened his pontificate with an impassioned appeal to all Western Christendom for the rescue of the Holy Land.[1185] The first response came from the young duke of Aquitaine; without waiting to consult his father, at the earliest tidings of the catastrophe Richard took the cross at the hands of the archbishop of Tours.[1186] Henry himself was so thunderstruck at the news that for four days he suspended all state business and refused to see any one.[1187] He was in Normandy, and with him was Archbishop Baldwin of Canterbury, who had taken the cross two years before with the archbishop of Rouen, the veteran warrior-bishop Hugh of Durham, the justiciar Ralf de Glanville, and a crowd of other dignitaries of both Church and state, none of whom, however, had as yet actually started on their crusade. It was not King Henry who hindered them; he had given every facility for the preaching of the crusade throughout his dominions;[1188] and even in Richard’s case, although reproving the hastiness of the vow, he made no attempt to thwart its fulfilment, but on the contrary promised his son every assistance in his power.[1189] Richard’s project, however, roused up the king of France to insist once more upon his immediate marriage with Adela, or, failing this, the restitution of Gisors; and Henry, on his way to England in January 1188, was recalled by tidings that Philip had gathered his host and was threatening to invade Normandy unless his demands were granted at once. The kings met at the old trysting-place between Gisors and Trie;[1190] but their conference had scarcely begun when it was interrupted by another messenger from Palestine, charged with news of a catastrophe more awful than even that of Tiberias. Three months after Guy’s capture, in October 1187, Jerusalem itself had fallen into the hands of the Infidels;[1191] and the archbishop of Tyre now came to tell with his own lips the sad and shameful story.

[1182] _Ib._ vol. i. pp. 358, 359.

[1183] According to the pathetic story in _Itin. Reg. Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 15, it was rather the king who fell with the Cross, in a desperate effort to save it. See also _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 13, 22, 37; R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), p. 21; _Expugn. Terræ Sanctæ_ (_ibid._), pp. 209–227.

[1184] Cf. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 21 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 267), and Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 24.

[1185] Will. Newb. as above. See also _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 15, and Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 322.

[1186] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 50. Cf. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 23 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 271). Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 5 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 98).

[1187] Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 389.

[1188] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 302.

[1189] Will. Newb. as above.

[1190] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 29. Rog. Howden as above, p. 334. R. Diceto as above, p. 51. Gerv. Cant. as above, p. 406. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 24. Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 74. The date is either S. Hilary’s day, January 13 (Rigord and Will. Armor.), or that of S. Agnes, January 21 (_Gesta Hen._, Rog. Howden and R. Diceto). Gerv. Cant. makes it “about S. Vincent’s day” (January 22).

[1191] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 24. R. Coggeshall (Stevenson), pp. 22, 23. _Expugn. Terræ Sanctæ_ (_ibid._), pp. 241–248. _Itin. Reg. Ric._ (Stubbs), pp. 20–22.

In his presence the selfish quarrel of the two kings was shamed into silence. The king of France took the cross at once, and the king of England followed his example, this time without waiting for his people’s consent; the archbishops of Reims and Rouen, the counts of Flanders, Burgundy, Blois and Champagne, and a crowd of French and Norman barons did the like.[1192] The two kings set up a wooden cross, afterwards replaced by a church, to mark the spot, which they called the “Holy Field”;[1193] then they separated to make their preparations. Henry at once sent to request a safe-conduct for himself and his troops through the dominions of the king of Hungary and those of the Western and Eastern Emperors.[1194] Before the end of the month he issued from Le Mans an ordinance known as that of the “Saladin tithe,” requiring every man in his dominions to give towards the expenses of the crusade a tithe of all his personal property, excepting only the necessary outfit of a knight or a priest.[1195] This was accompanied by eight other ordinances also relating to the crusade,[1196] and was imitated two months later in France by Philip Augustus.[1197] On January 30 Henry returned to England;[1198] on February 11 he met the bishops and barons in council at Geddington near Northampton, to obtain their assent to the Saladin tithe and make arrangements for its collection.[1199] It was chiefly to superintend this that the king remained in England, while the archbishop of Canterbury went to preach the crusade in Wales.[1200]

[1192] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 51. _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 30. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 23 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 272). Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 406. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 25.

[1193] Rigord, as above.

[1194] R. Diceto as above, pp. 51–54.

[1195] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 31. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 335, 336. Stubbs, _Select Charters_, p. 160.

[1196] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 31, 32. Rog. Howden as above, pp. 336, 337. These latter ordinances were issued in all Christian realms by the Pope’s desire; see Will. Newb. as above (pp. 273, 274).

[1197] Rigord (as above), pp. 25, 26.

[1198] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 33. Gerv. Cant. as above.

[1199] Gerv. Cant. as above, pp. 409, 410 (we are indebted to him for place and date). _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1200] Henry seems to have intended going to Wales himself, but to have given it up and sent the archbishop instead--an exchange which Baldwin gladly accepted, as he was at feud with his chapter, and greatly relieved to get away from it. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 419–421.

Meanwhile Richard was eager to start without delay; but his father refused his consent, insisting that their expedition should be made in common. The impatient “Lion-heart,” however, was not to be thus restrained, and in his father’s absence he made all his preparations and wrote to bespeak the aid of his brother-in-law William of Sicily for the voyage which he was determined to begin as soon as the summer should arrive.[1201] But his plans were checked by a fresh rising of the Poitevin barons, headed as usual by the count of Angoulême, Geoffrey of Rancogne and Geoffrey of Lusignan.[1202] This last was the worst offender, having treacherously slain a personal friend of Richard’s.[1203] But, like Richard himself, he had taken the cross; and it was doubtless owing to this protection that, before the summer was over, he was suffered to make his escape to the realm of his hapless brother in Palestine.[1204] The other rebels were scarcely put down when Raymond of Toulouse seized and cruelly maltreated some Poitevin merchants who were passing through his territory. Richard at once avenged this outrage by an armed raid upon the frontier-districts of Toulouse, and presently managed to catch and imprison the count’s chief adviser Peter Seilun, who was said to have instigated the seizure of the merchants. Raymond retaliated by capturing two knights attached to the household of the English king, Robert Poer and Ralf Fraser, on their way back from a pilgrimage to Compostella; and neither Richard’s protest against the sacrilege of keeping pilgrims in prison, nor even the express command of the king of France for their liberation out of reverence to S. James, could induce him to give them up on any condition save the release of Peter Seilun, which Richard firmly refused.[1205] A heavy ransom offered by the two English captives themselves shortly afterwards changed Raymond’s determination;[1206] but this was of course no satisfaction to Richard, and after Whitsuntide he again invaded Toulouse with fire and sword; castle after castle fell into his hands, till at last he began to threaten the capital itself.[1207]

[1201] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 7 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 102, 103).

[1202] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 34.

[1203] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 54.

[1204] _Itin. Reg. Ric._ (Stubbs), p. 26.

[1205] _Gesta Hen._ (as above), pp. 34, 35. Cf. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 339, 340. The date of this expedition of Richard’s against Toulouse seems to have been about April; see Will. Armor. _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 74.

[1206] Rog. Howden. (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 340.

[1207] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 36. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 55. This last writer says that Richard took seventeen castles, but he must be counting in those which had been taken in the spring. The date of this second expedition comes from Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 27, who places it between Pentecost and midsummer. The new editors of Vic and Vaissète, _Hist. du Languedoc_, vol. vii. p. 22, charge Rigord with false chronology here, and insist upon following (as they suppose) that of Will. Armor., who tells us that Richard began his campaign against Toulouse “modico elapso tempore” after the Mid-Lenten council at Paris (_Gesta Phil. Aug._, Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v. p. 74). If, however, they had read the English authorities more carefully, they would have seen that there were really two campaigns, and that while Will. Armor. speaks of the first, Rigord is speaking of the second.

In Aquitaine even more than elsewhere, the beginning of strife was like the letting-out of water. This time the strife of Richard and Raymond led to the outbursting of a flood which ended by overspreading the whole Angevin dominions and sweeping away Henry Fitz-Empress himself. If Richard’s story was true, neither he nor Raymond was the real originator of the mischief; it was Philip of France who had secretly urged him to the attack;[1208] while another rumour, which Richard was only too ready to believe, accused Henry himself of stirring up the count of Toulouse and the Aquitanian rebels against his son, in order to prevent him from starting on the Crusade.[1209] Little as we can credit such a tale, it is easy to imagine how dexterously Philip would use it to sow dissensions between father and son and entangle the impetuous Richard in a coil such as only the sword could cut. Openly, meanwhile, Philip was taking the part of Toulouse, and peremptorily insisting that Henry should put a stop to his son’s aggressions in that quarter.[1210] Without waiting for Henry’s reply, he marched upon Berry and laid siege to Châteauroux, which surrendered to him on June 16.[1211] It was now Henry’s turn to remonstrate against this breach of truce, all the more flagrant because committed against a brother-crusader. He knew however that nothing but his own presence could make his remonstrances of any avail; sending John over before him, on the night of July 10 he hurried across the sea to Barfleur, and thence went to muster his forces at Alençon.[1212] They consisted of the feudal levies of England and Normandy, and a multitude of Welsh under the command of Ralf de Glanville,[1213] together with some Bretons and Flemish mercenaries,[1214] and apparently some Angevins and Cenomannians.[1215] Henry was however very unwilling to resort to force; his old scruple about making war upon his overlord seems not to have been yet quite extinguished, and moreover he shrank alike from the bloodshed and the expense of war. During some weeks his forces were still kept idle, save for an occasional plundering-raid across the French border.[1216] Philip meanwhile was carrying all before him in Berry, and having conquered nearly the whole district, made a dash upon Auvergne.[1217] Richard seized the opportunity for an attempt to regain Châteauroux, in which however he failed, and was only saved from capture or death by the help of a friendly butcher.[1218] His advance however had been enough to make Philip retire into his own domains.[1219] Soon afterwards the approach of the vintage-season compelled the French king to disband a part of his forces; the remainder, under command of the bishop of Beauvais, went to ravage the Norman frontier-lands. Henry demanded reparation, and threatened to cast off his allegiance in default of it; Philip retorted that he would not cease from the warfare which he had begun till all Berry and the Vexin were in his hands.[1220] At last, in the middle of August, the two kings met in person once more between Gisors and Trie; but the meeting broke up in anger; and when they parted, Philip in his rage cut down the great elm tree under which the conferences between the rulers of France and Normandy had so long been held, vowing that no conference should ever be held there again.[1221]

[1208] Rog. Howden as above. Cf. _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 39.

[1209] R. Diceto as above. Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 7 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 103).

[1210] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 36.

[1211] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 55. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 432, seems to have confused this siege of Châteauroux with an earlier one. Cf. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 25 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 276), Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 27, and Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 74.

[1212] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 40. Cf. Gerv. Cant. as above, p. 433. R. Diceto (as above) dates the king’s crossing “circa festum S. Jacobi,” but this is clearly wrong.

[1213] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1214] R. Diceto as above.

[1215] Rog. Howden (Stubbs, vol. ii. p. 343) adds some troops “from his other lands.”

[1216] Gerv. Cant. as above, pp. 433, 434.

[1217] Rigord as above. Will. Armor. as above; _Philipp._, l. iii. (_ibid._), p. 122. Both these writers however throw some suspicion upon their account of Philip’s successes by saying that Henry was flying before him all the while, and was finally chased back by him into Normandy--which in reality it seems plain that he had never quitted.

[1218] Gerv. Cant. as above, p. 434.

[1219] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 45.

[1220] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 45, 46.

[1221] According to R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 55, the conference began on August 16 and lasted three days. The _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 47, place it after September 1, but this is impossible. Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 74, and _Philipp._, l. iii. (_ibid._) pp. 123, 124, tells the story of the tree in a very odd shape. He says the English were sitting comfortably under its shade, while the French were broiling in the sun, and the French grew so envious of the more agreeable situation of their foes that they made a dash at them, put them to flight, and then cut down the tree, which Henry had caused to be carefully enclosed, as a sort of symbol of his ownership in the soil. R. Diceto, however, says that the ground on which the tree stood was French.

Richard had now rejoined his father,[1222] and at his instigation an attack was made by their united forces upon Mantes, which was occupied by a small French force under William des Barres, lately the commandant of Châteauroux. Richard succeeded in avenging his recent mishap at Châteauroux by taking William prisoner, but he made his escape immediately, and nothing was gained by the expedition.[1223] Richard again went into Berry; Henry lingered on the Norman border, where soon afterwards he received from Philip a demand for another conference. It took place at Châtillon on October 7, but again without result. Philip now followed Richard, who thereupon opened negotiations on his own account, offering to submit his quarrel with Toulouse to the judgement of the French king’s court;[1224] but this also came to nothing. Still the negotiations went on, and Henry’s difficulties were increasing. Chief among them was the want of money to pay his soldiers. His realms had been almost drained for the Saladin tithe; his own treasury was exhausted; his troops, seeing no prospect of either wages or plunder, began to slip away; and at last he was obliged to disband his mercenaries and send his Welsh auxiliaries back to their own country.[1225] Philip meanwhile was secretly in communication with Richard;[1226] and Richard was growing eager to bring matters to a crisis. The insidious whispers of France and Flanders had done their work in his too credulous mind. To the end of his life Richard was but little of a statesman and less of a diplomatist; it is therefore no wonder that he failed on the one hand to fathom the subtle policy of his father, and on the other to see through the wiles of Philip. His fault lay in this--that while Henry’s servants were content to trust him where they could not understand him, his own son was ready to find a ground of suspicion in every word and action of his father’s for which his own intelligence was incapable of accounting, and to credit every calumny reported to him by his father’s enemies. More than a year ago they had contrived, as has been seen, to awaken in his mind an idea that he was in danger of being disinherited in favour of his youngest brother; and it was with a determination to ascertain once for all the extent of this danger that he brought the two kings to a meeting with each other and with himself near Bonmoulins on November 18.[1227]

[1222] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 10 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 111), makes them meet before Châteauroux. He has confused this campaign with that of the previous year.

[1223] Cf. _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 46, with Will. Armor. _Philipp._, l. iii. (as above), pp. 124–132.

[1224] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 46, 48, 49.

[1225] _Ib._ p. 50. Cf. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 434, 435.

[1226] Gerv. Cant. (as above), p. 435.

[1227] _Ibid._ R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 57. _Gesta Hen._ as above.

The conference lasted three days; and each day the prospect of peace grew fainter.[1228] Philip proposed that all parties should return to the position which they had occupied before taking the cross; Henry was ready to close with this proposition, but Richard rejected it, as it would have compelled him to give up his conquests won from Toulouse and worth a thousand marks or more as demesne lands, in exchange for Châteauroux and a few other castles over which he would have had only a precarious overlordship.[1229] As far as the two kings were concerned, the meeting ended in a simple truce between them, to last till S. Hilary’s day. No sooner however was this settled than Philip offered to restore all his conquests on condition that Henry should cause his subjects to do homage to Richard as his heir, and should allow his marriage with Adela to take place immediately. Henry refused.[1230] The two kings were standing, with Richard and the archbishop of Reims, in the midst of a crowded ring of spectators. Richard himself now suddenly turned to his father, and demanded to be distinctly acknowledged as heir to all his dominions. Henry tried to put him off; he repeated his demand with the same result. “Now,” he exclaimed, “I believe what hitherto seemed to me incredible.” Ungirding his sword, he stretched out his hands to the king of France and offered him his homage and fealty for the whole continental heritage of the Angevin house; an offer which Philip readily accepted, promising in return to give back to Richard his recent conquests in Berry.[1231] Henry drew back, speechless with amazement and consternation; the crowd, seeing the two kings thus separated, rushed in between them, and the duke of Aquitaine rode away in company with the French king, leaving Henry alone with his recollections of all the evils which had come of his eldest son’s alliance with Louis VII., and his forebodings of worse mischief to come from this new alliance with Philip, who, as he well knew, was far more dangerous than Louis had ever been; for he had more brains and even fewer scruples.[1232]

[1228] Gerv. Cant. as above.

[1229] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 58.

[1230] _Ibid._ Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 435. _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 50.

[1231] Gerv. Cant. as above, pp. 435, 436. R. Diceto and _Gesta Hen._ as above. Cf. Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 27, and Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 10 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 111).

[1232] Gerv. Cant. as above, p. 436.

What little could be done to ward off the impending danger Henry did without delay. He sent the only one of his sons on whom he could really depend, Geoffrey the chancellor, to secure the fortresses of Anjou; he himself went to do the like in Aquitaine,[1233] whence he returned to keep Christmas at Saumur. The feast must have been a dreary one, even if both Geoffrey and John were with him; yet, deserted as he was, he managed to collect, for the last time, some semblance of the old regal state.[1234] When the truce expired, however, he postponed his intended meeting with Philip, on the plea of illness, first to Candlemas-day, and then till after Easter. He hoped to make use of the delay for winning Richard back; but Richard turned a deaf ear to every message of conciliation.[1235] He had in fact joined Philip in an attack upon Henry’s territories as soon as the truce was expired; and the ever-discontented Bretons had been induced to lend their aid.[1236] After Easter Richard was at length brought to a meeting with his father, on the borders of Anjou and Maine; but nothing came of the interview.[1237] In vain did the Pope, fearing that these quarrels in Gaul would put a stop to the crusade, send two legates in succession to make peace. The first, Henry of Albano, who was sent early in 1188 to mediate between Henry and Louis, unintentionally became the indirect cause of a further addition to Henry’s troubles. Thinking it safer to postpone his mediation till the meeting of the two kings should take place, he in the meantime went to preach the crusade in Germany and there persuaded the Emperor himself to take the cross.[1238] By May 1189 Frederic was ready to start;[1239] but before doing so he took a stern and summary measure to secure the peace of the Empire during his absence. He ordered all those princes and nobles whose loyalty he suspected either to accompany him or to quit the country and take an oath not to set foot in it again till his return. Among those who thus incurred banishment was Henry the Lion. For the second time he and his wife sought shelter in England; not finding the king there, they crossed over to Normandy in search of him,[1240] but it does not appear that they ever reached him where he lay, sick and weary, at Le Mans.[1241] Meanwhile Henry of Albano, after anathematizing Richard for his disturbance of the peace, had withdrawn to Flanders and there died.[1242] His mission was taken up with a somewhat firmer hand by another legate, John of Anagni. Reaching Le Mans at Ascension-tide 1189,[1243] John at once excommunicated all troublers of the peace except the two kings themselves, who were made to promise that they would submit their quarrels to his arbitration and that of the archbishops of Reims, Bourges, Canterbury and Rouen, and were threatened with excommunication if they should fail to redeem their promise.[1244]

[1233] Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 436.

[1234] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 60, 61.

[1235] Gerv. Cant. as above, pp. 438, 439.

[1236] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 61.

[1237] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 13 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 116, 117).

[1238] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 355, 356.

[1239] He took the cross at Mainz on March 27, 1188, and started on May 10, 1189. Ansbert (Dobrowsky), pp. 18, 21.

[1240] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 62.

[1241] The duchess died in that very summer, seven days after her father according to R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 65, or nine days before him according to the Chron. Stederburg (Leibnitz, _Scriptt. Rer. Brunswic._, vol. i. p. 861).

[1242] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 51, 55, 56. Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 355.

[1243] _Epp. Cant._ cccvii. (Stubbs), p. 290.

[1244] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 61.

On the basis of this agreement a conference was held on Trinity Sunday, June 4, at La Ferté-Bernard. There were present, besides the two kings, Richard, and the legate, the four archbishops who were to assist him as arbitrators, most of the Norman bishops, those of Angers and Le Mans, four English and several French prelates, and a crowd of French, English and Norman barons.[1245] Philip began by again demanding that Adela and Richard should be married at once; that Richard should have security given him for his succession to his father’s dominions; and that John should be made to take the cross and accompany his brother to Palestine.[1246] Richard repeated these demands for himself.[1247] Henry refused, and made a counter-proposition to Philip--the same which he was said to have made at Châteauroux two years ago, for Adela’s marriage with John; but this Philip rejected in his turn.[1248] The legate now interposed with a threat to Philip that unless he would come to terms, his domains should be laid under interdict; Philip defied the threat, and charged the legate with having been bribed by English gold.[1249] This explosion of course broke up the meeting.[1250] Henry went back to Le Mans, whence neither bishop nor archbishop, servant nor friend, could persuade him to move,[1251] although Philip and Richard with their united forces were overrunning Maine at their will. In five days the principal castles of its eastern portion were in their hands; one of the most important, Ballon, only fifteen miles from Le Mans, fell on June 9. There the conquerors paused for three days;[1252] and there, probably, they received the submission of the chief nobles of the western border--Geoffrey of Mayenne, Guy of Laval, Ralf of Fougères.[1253] But while the barons were false, the citizens were true. Le Mans still clung with unswerving loyalty to the count whom she looked upon as her own child; and Henry clung with equal attachment to the city which held his father’s grave and had held his own cradle.[1254] He had little else to cling to now. Where John was it is impossible to say; he was clearly not at Le Mans; and it is certain that, wherever he may have been, his proceedings were wholly unknown to Henry.[1255] Geoffrey the chancellor was still at his father’s side, and so were some half-dozen faithful barons, as well as Archbishop Bartholomew of Tours.[1256] Beyond these the king had nothing but a small force of mercenaries wherewith to defend either himself or Le Mans. The citizens were however willing to stand a siege for his sake, and he in return had promised never to desert them.[1257]

[1245] _Ib._ p. 66. The English bishops were Lincoln, Ely, Rochester and Chester.

[1246] _Ibid._ Rog. Howden as above, p. 362.

[1247] Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 447.

[1248] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 363.

[1249] _Ibid._ _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 66.

[1250] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 62, says there were _two_ meetings at La Ferté “after Easter.” There seems to be no other notice of the second; but Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. pp. 446, 447, has an account of a conference at Le Mans on June 9, which agrees almost to the letter with the report given in the _Gesta Hen._ and Rog. Howden of the proceedings at La Ferté on June 4. It seems most unlikely that either Philip or Richard would go to a conference at Le Mans itself; and June 9 is an impossible date, for by that time, as we shall see, the war was in full career, and Philip and Richard were actually besieging Ballon. Gervase has probably mistaken both place and date.

[1251] R. Diceto as above, p. 63.

[1252] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 67.

[1253] R. Diceto as above.

[1254] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1255] Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 25 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 277), says, after the king’s retreat from Le Mans, “Tunc Johannes filius ejus minimus, quem tenerrime diligebat, recessit ab eo.” But it is almost impossible that all the contemporary historians should have failed to mention John’s presence with his father if he had really been there; and Henry’s horrified surprise at the final discovery of John’s treachery shews that there had been no open desertion such as William seems to imply.

[1256] Besides Bartholomew (whom most of the English writers of the time call William) there had been with him throughout the spring the archbishops of Canterbury and Rouen; Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 13 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 115, 116). It is clear that Bartholomew stayed with him to the end, for he buried him. But we hear nothing more of either Baldwin of Canterbury or Walter of Rouen, except that Baldwin was at Rouen two or three days before Henry’s death; _Epp. Cant._ cccxi. (Stubbs), p. 296. See Bishop Stubbs’s preface to Rog. Howden, vol. ii. p. lxi, note 1. Of the laymen more later.

[1257] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 67.

On S. Barnabas’s day--Sunday, June 11--Philip and Richard appeared with their host before Le Mans. They made a feint of passing on in the direction of Tours; but next morning Philip suddenly drew up his forces under the walls and prepared for an assault. The defenders, conscious of the overwhelming odds against them, adopted the desperate remedy of setting fire to the suburbs. Unhappily, the wind carried the flames not into the enemy’s lines but into the city itself.[1258] The French saw their opportunity and rushed at the bridge; a gallant, though unsuccessful, attempt to break it down was made by some of Henry’s troops, headed by a Cenomannian knight, Geoffrey of Brulon, who thus honourably wiped out the memory of his rebellion of sixteen years before; after a desperate fight, Geoffrey was wounded and made prisoner with a number of his comrades, and the rest were driven back into the city, the French rushing in after them.[1259] Then at last Henry felt that he could not keep his promise to the citizens of Le Mans, and with some seven hundred knights he took to flight.[1260] The French hurried in pursuit, but they did not carry it far. It may be that Geoffrey of Brulon’s effort to break down the bridge saved the king although it could not save the city; for the French are said to have been checked in their pursuit by the impossibility of fording the river,[1261] and one can scarcely help conjecturing that the fugitives had crossed by the half-undermined bridge, and that it fell as soon as they had passed over it.[1262]

[1258] _Ibid._ R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 63. Gir. Cambr. as above, c. 24 (p. 137). Cf. Will. Newb., l. iii. c. 25 (Howlett, vol. i. p. 277).

[1259] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1260] _Ibid._ Cf. Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 447; R. Diceto and Will. Newb. as above; Gir. Cambr. as above (p. 138); Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 28; and Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 75.

[1261] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 68.

[1262] This is suggested by Bishop Stubbs’s remark about “the breaking down of the bridge.” _Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxii.

Geoffrey however was not the only baron who after siding with Henry’s enemies in his prosperous days had learned to stand by him in his last hour of need. Besides his one faithful son, Geoffrey the chancellor, his old friend Earl William de Mandeville, and William Fitz-Ralf the seneschal of Normandy, Henry was accompanied in his flight by an English baron, William the Marshal. William’s father, John, who seems to have been marshal successively to Henry I. and to Stephen, had married a sister of Patrick of Salisbury and, like his brother-in-law, espoused the cause of the Empress in the civil war.[1263] William himself first appears in history at the age of about six years, in 1152, when he was placed as a hostage in the hands of Stephen. Twice his life was forfeited by his father’s defiance of the king, and twice it was saved by the unconscious fearlessness of the child, which so won Stephen’s heart that he ended by making himself the little fellow’s playmate instead of his slayer.[1264] John’s services to the Empress were rewarded on Henry’s accession by his reinstatement in the office of marshal; he afterwards became notorious through his quarrel with Thomas of Canterbury, which formed one of the pretexts for the archbishop’s condemnation at Northampton.[1265] After John’s death his title and office seem to have been shared by his two sons.[1266] The second, William, we find in 1173 among the partizans of the young king’s rebellion; ten years later he appears as the young king’s best-beloved knight, and as charged by him with the last office of friendship, the accomplishment in his stead of the crusading vow which he had not lived to fulfil.[1267] Six years afterwards, however, William was still in Europe, ready to stand to the last by another perishing king, and to take the post of honour as well as of danger among the little band of faithful servants who watched over the last days of Henry Fitz-Empress. It was William who brought up the rear of the little force which covered Henry’s retreat from Le Mans. Turning round as he heard the pursuers close behind him, he suddenly found himself face to face with Richard, and levelled his spear at him without hesitation. “God’s feet, marshal!” cried Richard with his wonted oath, “slay me not! I have no hauberk.” “Slay you! no; I leave that to the devil,” retorted William, plunging his spear into the horse’s body instead of the rider’s.[1268] Richard was of course compelled to abandon the chase, and at a distance of some two miles from Le Mans the king felt himself sufficiently out of danger to pause on the brow of a hill whence he could look back for the last time upon his native city. As he saw its blazing ruins words of madness burst from his lips: “O God, Thou hast shamefully taken from me this day the city which I loved most on earth, in which I was born and bred, where lies the body of my father and that of his patron saint--I will requite Thee as I can; I will withdraw from Thee that thing in me for which Thou carest the most.”[1269] Another eighteen miles’[1270] ride brought the fugitives at nightfall to La Frênaye,[1271] whose lord, the viscount of Beaumont, was a kinsman of Henry, and the father of Hermengard whose marriage with the king of Scots had been arranged three years ago by Henry’s influence. The king found shelter in the castle; his followers, already sadly diminished in number in consequence of the overpowering heat and fatigue of the day’s ride, quartered themselves in the little town as best they could; the chancellor would have remained with them to keep guard himself, but his father would not be parted from him, and made him come in to sup and spend the night. Geoffrey, whose baggage had been all left in Le Mans, was glad to exchange his travel-stained clothes for some which his father was able to lend him; Henry, with characteristic disregard of such details, persisted in lying down to rest just as he was, with his son’s cloak thrown over him for a coverlet.[1272]

[1263] See extracts from _Hist. de Guillaume le Maréchal_, vv. 23–398, in _Romania_, vol. xi. (1882), pp. 47–52.

[1264] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 399–654 (as above, pp. 52–55).

[1265] See above, pp. 32, 33.

[1266] They seem to have both officiated at the crowning of Richard. _Gesta Ric._ (Stubbs, “Benedict of Peterborough,” vol. ii.), p. 81.

[1267] See above, pp. 139 and 228.

[1268] P. Meyer, in _Romania_, vol. xi. pp. 62, 63, from _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 8833–8836. This is clearly the incident recorded briefly and without a name by Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 25 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 140).

[1269] Gir. Cambr. as above, c. 24 (p. 138). He makes the distance two miles from Le Mans; in the _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 67, the pursuit is said to have extended to three miles.

[1270] Will. Armor. _Philipp._, l. iii. (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 132, makes the day’s ride twenty miles altogether; but he carries it as far as Alençon. See, however, Bishop Stubbs’s pref. to Rog. Howden, vol. ii. pp. lxii, lxiii and notes.

[1271] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 25 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 140); _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 4 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 369). See Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxiii, note 5.

[1272] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._ as above.

From La Frênaye another day’s ride would have brought the king to the Norman border. His first intention on leaving Le Mans had evidently been to fall back upon Normandy and there rally his forces--doubtless also to summon help from England--to renew the struggle with Philip; and this was the course to which his followers still urged him on the Tuesday morning. He, however, had changed his plans in the night. He seems to have made up his mind that his end was near; and in consequence, he had also made up his mind to go back to the Angevin lands. Since he had been compelled to leave his own birthplace in the enemy’s power, he would at any rate stand to the last by the old home of his father’s house, and die at his hereditary post as count of Anjou. He made William Fitz-Ralf and William de Mandeville swear that they would surrender the castles of Normandy to no one save John; he bade Geoffrey take the command of the troops, escort the barons with them as far as Alençon, and then come back to rejoin him in Anjou. Geoffrey, whose dominant feeling clearly was anxiety for his father’s personal safety, only stayed in Alençon long enough to secure the place and collect a fresh force of a hundred picked knights, and with these set off southward again to overtake his father. Henry meanwhile had started for Anjou almost alone. His son rejoined him at Savigny[1273]--whether it was the village of that name near Chinon, or one of several others further north, there is no means of deciding; but it is certain that by the end of the month Henry and his son were both safe at Chinon.[1274] Whether the king had made his way alone, or whether he had been at once the leader and the guide of the little Norman force, through the Angevin woodlands which as a hunter he had learned to know so well, and where he was now in danger of being hunted down in his turn--in either case this sick and weary man had achieved an adventure equal in skill and daring to those of Fulk Nerra’s most romantic days, or of his own youth. Once safe out of the enemy’s reach, he made no further movement until Philip, having possessed himself of the citadel of Le Mans[1275] and the remnant of the Cenomannian strongholds, and made his way southward by Chaumont and Amboise as far as Roche-Corbon,[1276] sent him a proposal for a meeting to be held at Azay on the last day of June.[1277] Henry apparently advanced from Chinon to Azay; but on that very day an attack of fever was added to the malady from which he was already suffering, and he was unable to attend the conference.[1278] It seems probable that he sent representatives to whom Philip and Richard made their propositions, and who may possibly have accepted them in his name.[1279] Certainly, however, no truce was made; for that same day Philip marched up to the southern bank of the Loire and drew up his host opposite the gates of Tours.[1280] Next day he forded the river--an easy exploit when it was half dried up by the summer’s heat[1281]--established his headquarters in the “borough of S. Martin” or Châteauneuf,[1282] and began to invest the city.[1283] Henry, it seems, had now gone to Saumur;[1284] there on the Sunday--July 2--he was visited, according to one account at his own request, by the archbishop of Reims, the count of Flanders and the duke of Burgundy, endeavouring to arrange terms of peace.[1285] The visit was a failure; it could not be otherwise, for the peacemakers were acting without Philip’s sanction, and in spite of a distinct warning from him that, whatever tidings they might bring back, he would assault Tours next morning.[1286] The morning came; the assault was made; the walls which had kept out Fulk Nerra and Geoffrey Martel could not avail to keep out Philip Augustus, enabled as he was by his possession of Châteauneuf and by the lack of water in the Loire to bring up his machines against their weakest side; and in a few hours he was master of Tours.[1287]

[1273] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 4 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 369). See Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. pp. lxiv, lxv and notes.

[1274] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 68.

[1275] Some of Henry’s troops had thrown themselves into the citadel, and held out there for three days after his flight. _Gesta Hen._ as above. Another body of troops in a tower by the north gate (this must be the Conqueror’s Mont-Barbet--the “citadel” being the old palace or castle of the counts, near the cathedral) held out for a week longer still. R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 63.

[1276] _Gesta Hen._ as above, p. 69.

[1277] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 25 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 140). R. Diceto, as above, p. 64, makes the day June 28; Bishop Stubbs (_Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxv) follows Gerald.

[1278] Gir. Cambr. as above.

[1279] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 365, 366, gives, with the date “circa festum apostolorum Petri et Pauli, ad colloquium inter Turonim et Azai,” a treaty identical with that which the _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 69, 70, give without any date at all, but after Philip’s capture of Tours, and which we know to have been finally made at Colombières on July 4 (see below, p. 265). R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 63, also gives the substance of the treaty, adding (p. 64): “Facta sunt autem hæc in vigiliâ Apostolorum Petri et Pauli, scilicet inter Turonim et Azai.” It seems possible that the terms were arranged at Azay between Philip and Henry’s representatives, subject to ratification by Henry himself. See Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxv.

[1280] On the date see Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxvi and note.

[1281] This is the English account; _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 69, copied by Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 364. But the French writers turn it into something very like a miracle. See Rigord (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 28; Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (_ibid._), p. 75, and _Philipp._, l. iii. (_ibid._), p. 133.

[1282] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1283] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, l. iii. c. 25 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 140) says the investment began on the morrow of the Azay conference.

[1284] _Gesta Hen._ as above. See Stubbs, _Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxvi and note.

[1285] _Gesta Hen._ as above. Gir. Cambr. as above (p. 141). For the duke of Burgundy Gerald substitutes the count of Blois. Bishop Stubbs (_Rog. Howden_, as above) adopts the former version.

[1286] _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1287] _Ibid._ Cf. Rigord and Will. Armor. as above, and _Philipp._ l. iii. (_ibid._), pp. 133, 134.

The tidings were carried at once to Henry, with a final summons to meet the conqueror at Colombières, half-way between Tours and Azay.[1288] Henry, at his wits’ end, consulted William the Marshal as to whether or not he should respond to the summons; William recommended him to follow the counsel of his barons; they advised that he should go, and he went. Most of his followers went with him; Geoffrey, however, feeling that he could not endure to see his father’s humiliation, besought and obtained permission to remain where he was.[1289] Henry found a lodging in a small commandery of Knights Templars at Ballan,[1290] close to Colombières; but he had no sooner reached it than he was seized with racking pains in every limb and every nerve. He again called for William the Marshal, who did his best to soothe him, and persuaded him to go to bed. Philip and Richard had always refused to believe that his sickness was anything but a feint, and despite the pleadings of his friends they still insisted that the conference should take place[1291] on the following day.[1292] When they saw him, however, they were compelled to admit the truth of his excuse; his sternly-set and colourless face shewed but too plainly how acutely he was suffering. So evident was his weakness that they offered him a seat--on a cloak spread upon the ground--but he refused it; he had not come there, he said, to sit down with them; he had come simply to hear and see what the French king demanded of him, and why he had taken away his lands.[1293] Philip formulated his demands with brutal bluntness; he required that Henry should put himself, as a conquered enemy, entirely at his mercy before he would discuss any terms at all.[1294] Henry could not at once bring himself to submit. Suddenly, amid the breathless stillness of the sultry July morning, a clap of thunder was heard, and the excited bystanders thought they actually saw a stroke of lightning fall out of the cloudless blue sky, directly between the two kings. Both started back in terror; after a while they rode forward again, and immediately there was a second peal of thunder. Henry’s shattered nerves gave way completely; he nearly fell from his horse, and at once placed himself wholly at Philip’s mercy.[1295] Then the terms were dictated to him. He was made to do homage to Philip, and to promise that Adela should be placed under guardians chosen by Richard, who was to marry her on his return from Palestine;--that Richard should receive the fealty of all the barons of the Angevin dominions, on both sides of the sea, and that all who had attached themselves to Richard’s party in the late war should be suffered to remain in his service and released from their obligations to his father, at any rate until the latter should be ready to set forth on the crusade;--that he would be thus ready, and would meet Philip and Richard at Vézelay, thence to start with them at Mid-Lent;[1296]--that he would renounce all claims upon Auvergne,[1297] and pay Philip an indemnity of twenty thousand marks.[1298] As security for the fulfilment of the treaty, Philip and Richard were to hold in pledge either three castles on the Norman border or two in Anjou, with the cities of Tours and Le Mans; and all Henry’s barons were to swear that they would hold their allegiance to him contingent only upon his fulfilment of these conditions.[1299] Finally, he was compelled to acknowledge himself reconciled with Richard, and to give him the kiss of peace. The kiss was indeed given; but it was accompanied by a whisper which Richard did not scruple to repeat for the amusement of the French court when the conference was over--“May I only be suffered to live long enough to take vengeance upon thee as thou deservest!”[1300]

[1288] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 8935–8944 (_Romania_, vol. xi. p. 64). The name of Colombières is given only by Will. Armor., _Gesta Phil. Aug._ (Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v.), p. 75, and _Philipp._, l. iii. (_ibid._), p. 134.

[1289] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 5 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 370).

[1290] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 8947–8958 (as above). M. Meyer (_ib._ p. 69) supplies the name of the commandery.

[1291] _Ib._ vv. 8960–8997 (as above, p. 64).

[1292] Will. Armor. _Philipp._, l. iii. (as above), gives the date by saying Henry died “post triduum.”

[1293] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9013–9028 (as above, p. 65).

[1294] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 25 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 141).

[1295] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 366.

[1296] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 70.

[1297] R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 64.

[1298] _Ib._ p. 63. _Gesta Hen._ as above.

[1299] _Gesta Hen._ as above, pp. 70, 71.

[1300] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 26 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 149, 150).

One thing alone Henry asked and obtained in return for all this humiliation; a written list of those among his subjects whose services were transferred to Richard.[1301] The list was promised,[1302] and Henry was carried back, worn out with fatigue, suffering and shame, to the favourite home of his brighter days at Chinon.[1303] By the time he reached it he was too ill to do anything but lie down never to rise again. He sent back his vice-chancellor, Roger Malchat,[1304] to fetch the promised list of traitors; and on Roger’s return he bade him sit down beside his bed and read him out the names. With a sigh Roger answered: “Our Lord Jesus Christ help me, sire! the first written down here is Count John, your son.”[1305] The words gave Henry his death-blow. “Say no more,”[1306] he faltered, turning away his face.[1307] Yet the tale seemed too horrible to be true, and he started up again: “Can it be? John, my darling child, my very heart, for love of whom I have incurred all this misery--has he indeed forsaken me?” It could not be denied; he sank back again and turned his face to the wall, moaning: “Let things go now as they will; I care no more for myself or for the world.”[1308]

[1301] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 366. _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, v. 9035 (_Romania_, vol. xi. p. 65).

[1302] Rog. Howden says that it was given, and implies that it was read, then and there, but we shall see that he is wrong.

[1303] Rog. Howden as above. _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, v. 3639 (as above). Bishop Stubbs (_Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxviii) says “he returned to Azai,” and makes the reading of the fatal list take place there, before Henry went on to Chinon (_ib._ p. lxx). This seems to be the meaning of Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 25 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 148). But Gerald evidently thought Henry had been at Azay ever since the Friday, just as William of Armorica (_Philipp._, l. iii., Duchesne, _Hist. Franc. Scriptt._, vol. v. p. 134) thought he had been all the while at Chinon; whereas the _Gesta_ and Roger shew that both are wrong in this. On the other hand, the _Life of William the Marshal_ seems distinctly to shew that the place where Henry went to lodge before the meeting at Colombières was not Azay, but Ballan; and it also tells us that he went straight back from Colombières to Chinon, and _there_ read the list. In the absence of further elucidations, I venture to follow this version.

[1304] “... Mestre Roger Malchael, Qui lores portout son seel.”

_Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9051–9052 (as above, p. 65). See M. Meyer’s note, _ib._ p. 69.

[1305] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9040–9076 (as above, p. 65).

[1306] “Asez en avez dit.” _Ib._ v. 9083 (as above).

[1307] _Ib._ v. 9084 (p. 66).

[1308] Gir. Cambr. as above.

All through that day and the next he lay there, trembling from head to foot, sometimes appearing to see and hear nothing, and to be conscious of nothing but pain, murmuring broken words which no one could understand.[1309] At other times his delirium shewed itself in frenzied curses upon himself and his sons, which the attendant bishops vainly besought him to revoke.[1310] It was Geoffrey who at length managed to bring him to a somewhat calmer frame both of body and of mind. With his head on his son’s shoulder and his feet on the knees of a faithful knight, Henry at last seemed to have fallen asleep. When he opened his eyes again and saw Geoffrey patiently watching over him and fanning away the flies which buzzed around his head, he spoke in accents very different from any that he had used for some days past. “My dearest son! thou, indeed, hast always been a true son to me. So help me God, if I recover of this sickness, I will be to thee the best of fathers, and will set thee among the chiefest men of my realm. But if I may not live to reward thee, may God give thee thy reward for thy unchanging dutifulness to me!” “O father, I desire no reward but thy restoration to health and prosperity” was all that Geoffrey could utter, as the violence of his emotion so overcame his self-control that he was obliged to rush out of the room.[1311] The interval of calmness passed away, and the ravings of delirium were heard again; “Shame, shame upon a conquered king!” Henry kept muttering over and over again, till the third morning broke--the seventh day of the fever[1312]--and brought with it the lightning before death. Once more Geoffrey, stifling his own distress, came to his father’s side; once more he was rewarded by seeing Henry’s eyes open and gaze at him with evident recognition; once more the dying king recurred wistfully to his plans, not this time of vengeance upon his rebellious sons, but of advancement for the loyal one, faintly murmuring in Geoffrey’s ear how he had hoped to see him bishop of Winchester, or better still, archbishop of York;[1313] but he knew that for himself all was over. He took off a gold finger-ring, engraved with a leopard[1314]--the armorial device of the Angevin house--and handed it to Geoffrey, bidding him send it to the king of Castille, the husband of his daughter Eleanor; he also gave directions that another precious ring which lay among his treasures should be delivered to Geoffrey himself, and gave him his blessing.[1315] After this he was, by his own desire, carried into the chapel of the castle and laid before the altar; here he confessed his sins to the attendant bishops and priests, was absolved, and devoutly made his last Communion. Immediately afterwards he passed away.[1316]

[1309] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9085–9094 (_Romania_, vol. xi. p. 66).

[1310] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 366.

[1311] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 5 (Brewer, vol. iv. pp. 370, 371).

[1312] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, l. iii. c. 26 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 150).

[1313] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._ as above (p. 371).

[1314] “Pantera.” “The word is doubtful,” notes Mr. Brewer (_Gir. Cambr._, vol. iv. p. 371); Bishop Stubbs (_Rog. Howden_, vol. ii. pref. p. lxxi) renders it “panther.”

[1315] Gir. Cambr. _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 5 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 371).

[1316] Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 367. Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 28 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 156), says there were no bishops with him at his death; any way, there were two at his burial. The date of death--July 6--is given by many authorities: _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 71; Rog. Howden as above; R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 64; Gerv. Cant. (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 450, etc.

Then followed one of those strange scenes which so often occurred after the death of a medieval king. The servants who should have laid out the body for burial stripped it and left it naked on the ground; and as during the three days that he lay dying they had plundered him of everything on which they could lay their hands, the few friends who were shocked at the sight could not find a rag wherewith to cover the dead king, till one of his knights, William de Trihan, took off his own cloak for the purpose.[1317] All this, however, was speedily set right by William the Marshal. He at once took the command of the little party--a duty for which Geoffrey was evidently unfitted by the violence of his grief--sent to call as many barons as were within reach to attend the funeral, and gave directions for the proper robing of the corpse.[1318] It was no easy matter to arrange within four-and-twenty hours, and utterly without resources, anything like a regal burial for this fallen king.[1319] William, however, managed to do it; and next day Henry Fitz-Empress, robed as if for his coronation, with a crown of gold upon his head, a gold ring on his finger, sandals on his feet, and a sceptre in his gloved right hand,[1320] was borne upon the shoulders of his barons down from his castle on the rock of Chinon, across the viaduct which he himself had built over the swampy meadows beneath, and thence northward along the left bank of the silvery, winding Vienne to his burial-place at Fontevraud.[1321] He had wished to be buried at Grandmont;[1322] but this of course was impossible now. “He shall be shrouded among the shrouded women”--so ran the closing words of a prophecy which during the last few months had been whispered throughout Henry’s dominions as a token of his approaching end. It was fulfilled now to the letter, as he lay in state in the abbey-church of Fontevraud, while the veiled sisters knelt by night and day murmuring their prayers and psalms around the bier.[1323]

[1317] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9027–9161 (_Romania_, vol. xi. p. 66). Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, as above (pp. 156, 157), tells the same story, more highly coloured, but with less verisimilitude, as he has lost the name of William de Trihan and turned him into “puer quidam.”

[1318] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9165–9172, 9215–9220 (as above, pp. 66, 67).

[1319] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 28 (Angl. Christ. Soc., pp. 157, 158).

[1320] _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 71. How hard it was to manage all this we learn from Gerald: “Vix annulus digito, vix sceptrum manu, vix capiti corona sicut decuit, quia de aurifrigio quodam veteri inventa fuit, vix ulla prorsus insignia regalia nisi per emendicata demum suffragia, eaque minus congruentia suppetiere.” _De Instr. Princ._ as above (p. 158). The chronicle of Laon, a. 1187, quoted in note (_ibid._), adds that the gold fringe of which the crown was made came off a lady’s dress.

[1321] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9071–9223 (_Romania_, vol. xi. p. 67). See a curious incident at the setting out of the funeral train, in vv. 9173–9214.

[1322] He had given solemn directions to that effect, when he thought himself dying at La Motte-de-Ger, in 1170. _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 7.

[1323] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9229–9244 (as above). For the prophecy and its application see _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 55, and Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. pp. 356, 367.

None of the dead king’s friends had thought it necessary to wait for any instructions from his heir. The marshal, however, had sent to apprise Richard of his father’s death, and delayed the burial long enough to give him an opportunity of attending it if he chose to do so. The other barons were in great dread of meeting the future king against whom they had been in arms; and several of them were even more anxious for the marshal than for themselves, for they could not but imagine that Richard’s heaviest vengeance would fall upon the man who had unhorsed and all but killed him at Le Mans. More than one of them offered to place himself and all his possessions at the service of the comrade whom they all held in such reverence, if thereby anything could be done to save him from Richard’s wrath. But he only answered quietly: “Sirs, I do not repent me of what I did. I thank you for your proffers; but, so help me God, I will not accept what I cannot return. Thanks be to Him, He has helped me ever since I was made a knight; I doubt not He will help me to the end.”[1324] Before nightfall Richard overtook them.[1325] He came, it seems, alone. Vainly did the bystanders seek to read his feelings in his demeanour; he shewed no sign of either grief or joy, penitence or wrath; he “spoke not a word, good or bad,”[1326] but went straight to the church and into the choir, where the body lay.[1327] For awhile he stood motionless before the bier;[1328] then he stepped to the head, and looked down at the uncovered face.[1329] It seemed to meet his gaze with all its wonted sternness; but there were some who thought they saw a yet more fearful sight--a stream of blood which flowed from the nostrils, and ceased only on the departure of the son who was thus proclaimed as his father’s murderer.[1330] Richard sank upon his knees; thus he remained “about as long as one would take to say the Lord’s Prayer;”[1331] then he rose and, speaking for the first time, called for William the Marshal. William came, accompanied by a loyal Angevin baron, Maurice of Craon. Richard bade them follow him out of the church; outside, he turned at once to the marshal: “Fair Sir Marshal, you had like to have slain me; had I received your spear-thrust, it would have been a bad day for both of us!” “My lord,” answered William, “I had it in my power to slay you; I only slew your horse. And of that I do not repent me yet.” With kingly dignity Richard granted him his kingly pardon at once;[1332] and on the morrow they stood side by side while Henry Fitz-Empress was laid in his grave before the high altar by Archbishop Bartholomew of Tours.[1333]

[1324] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9245–9290 (_Romania_, vol. xi. pp. 67, 68).

[1325] The _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 71, make Richard meet the corpse on its way; and Rog. Howden (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 367, follows the _Gesta_. But the _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._ and Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 28 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 157) both distinctly say that he met it at Fontevraud. The other version is intrinsically most improbable, for Richard can hardly have been coming from anywhere else than Tours, and in that case he could not possibly meet the funeral train on its way from Chinon to Fontevraud. That he should reach Fontevraud some hours after it, on the other hand, is perfectly natural; and this is just what Gerald and the French _Life_ imply; for they both tell us that the funeral started from Chinon on the day after the death--_i.e._ Friday, July 7--and Gerald (as above, p. 158) implies that the actual burial took place the day after Richard’s arrival, while in the _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 5 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 372), he seems to place it on the Saturday, July 8. See Bishop Stubbs’s preface to Rog. Howden, vol. ii. p. lxix, note 1. One of the MSS. of Mat. Paris, _Chron. Maj._ (Luard, vol. ii. p. 344, note 8) has a curiously different version of Richard’s behaviour on the occasion.

[1326] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9294–9298, 9300 (p. 68).

[1327] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._ as above.

[1328] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9299, 9300 (as above).

[1329] _Ib._ v. 9301. Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._ and _Vita Galfr._ as above.

[1330] Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._, dist. iii. c. 28 (Angl. Christ. Soc., p. 157); _Vita Galfr._, l. i. c. 5 (Brewer, vol. iv. p. 372). _Gesta Hen._ (Stubbs), vol. i. p. 71.

[1331] Gir. Cambr. as above.

[1332] _Hist. de Guill. le Mar._, vv. 9304–9344 (_Romania_, vol. xi. pp. 68, 69).

[1333] The day is given by Gir. Cambr. _De Instr. Princ._ as above (p. 158), and _Vita Galfr._ as above; the name of the officiating prelate by R. Diceto (Stubbs), vol. ii. p. 65. Bartholomew was assisted by Archbishop Fulmar of Trier (_ibid._)