THE INVESTITURE STRIFE 69 few weeks later his brother Robert returned from the Holy Land with much prestige as a valorous crusader, The claims he laid claim to the kingdom and found some of Robert. support among the nobles in England. He was unable to make his claim good, however, but strained relations continued between the brothers and resulted in open warfare five years later. Henry was victorious and seized the Norman duchy, which remained a French fief in possession of the English king for almost exactly a century longer. Duke Robert spent most of the remaining years of his life as his brother's prisoner in Cardiff castle in South Wales. 60. Henry I and the Church: Anselm. The Norman difficulty was settled in 1106. The same year King Henry solved another problem that he had inherited from The investihis predecessor: the question of investiture had ture strife. become a serious difficulty. After the death of Lanfranc, William Rufus had kept the see of Canterbury vacant for several years, to the great injury of the national church, inasmuch as no new bishop could be consecrated in the province of Canterbury while this vacancy continued. When a successor was finally selected, the choice fell upon another Italian, the monk Anselm, a man of learning and saintly character, whose soul was on fire with enthusiasm for the church, and in whose eyes the needs and claims of the king and his government counted for very little. Ancient custom demanded that the king should be present at the installation of a bishop, and that he should hand him the symbols of the episcopal office, the staff and the ring. Anselm refused to let William Rufus participate in the investiture of the newly elected prelates, and the investiture strife was on in England.1 As the king was unyielding, Anselm left the country and spent several years in voluntary exile. Anselm. 61. The Investiture Strife: the Compromise of 1106. Henry I recalled him; but the king and the archbishop differed as before. The church had recently developed a new organ 1 Cheyney, No. 76. for the election of bishops, the cathedral chapter, which was The cathedral composed of the priests, or canons as they were chapters. called, who carried on the church services in the various cathedrals. Of these canons there might be only half a dozen, or there might be as many as two score; the number would depend on the size, needs, and wealth of the cathedral. They were organized into a corporation called the chapter, headed by a dean. When the cathedral was located in a monastery, as was the case at Canterbury, the monks composed the chapter and claimed the right to choose the archbishop, who was at the same time their abbot. The earlier custom had been for the king to designate the new bishop and, after the choice had been confirmed at Rome, to invest the candidate with the staff and the ring, and to The " tempohand over to him the "temporalities" of the see. ralities." By the temporalities was meant the property, chiefly in land, from the revenues of which the bishops derived their financial support. It was now the desire of the church to emphasize further the spiritual character of the church offices by denying to the king any share whatever in the investiture ceremonies. mise of 1106. When Anselm returned, King Henry called upon him to do homage for the Canterbury lands, to pay the customary dues to the king, and to pledge the services that his predecessors had The compro- pledged; but the archbishop refused. For several years the dispute continued, until it was ended by the compromise of 1106.1 Of the three questions in dispute, homage, investiture, and election, the king and the church each surrendered one: the king gave up the right to invest, while the church agreed to pay the customary homage. On the far more important subject of election it was agreed that the cathedral chapter should elect the bishop and the monks of the monastery should choose the abbot; but that the king might be present at the election either in person or by a representative. On the whole the compromise was a victory for 1 Cheyney, No. 77. THE PROBLEM OF THE SUCCESSION 71 the king: his nominees were from this time on usually accepted and formally elected by the proper authorities; and his feudal superiority over the monastic and cathedral lands was conceded. 62. Henry I as a Ruler. The reign of Henry I was, on the whole, quiet and uneventful. Like his brother he was eager to amass wealth; but he had more discretion and foresight. He understood that greater revenues could be extracted by legal and customary means from a contented and prosperous people than by violent measures from a nation in Charter of distress. A few days after his accession he issued Henry I. a charter in which he promised the barons that the illegal practices of his brother William Rufus should be discontinued. Henry also promised to give up various other evil practices, but as usual the performance was not equal to the promise. The English king had an ancient right to certain fines that were levied in the local courts, and Henry I found it expedient to watch these closely. Henry was a king who loved order and justice for their own sakes as well as for the revenues that came in the form of fines and forfeitures. In his Revival of Old day a great interest appeared in Old English law. English law. Lawyers began the study of Anglo-Saxon legislation, and summaries and translations were made of the old laws, especially of the laws of Cnut, which were the most recent as well as the most complete. 1 63. The Problem of the Succession; the Anarchy of Stephen's Reign. Henry I also endeared himself to the English people by marrying Edith, a Scotch princess of the house of Alfred, the niece of Edgar the Etheling, who had been his father's competitor for the English throne in 1066. But the king found himself growing old without a male heir to succeed 1 The Norman line of kings, 1066-1154. 1 Matilda him. His daughter Matilda, who had married as her second husband Geoffrey Plantagenet, the duke of Anjou, and his sister's son, Stephen of Blois, were his nearest living relatives. The king finally succeeded in getting reluctant oaths from the English barons that they would elect Matilda as queen after his own death. But oaths were frail things even in such a religious age as the twelfth century. When it was noised about that Henry was no more, Stephen hastened to England, and the barons were easily convinced that, since they had in a way been forced to swear allegiance to Matilda, their oaths were not binding (1135). Accession of Blois. Stephen ascended the throne and remained nominal king for nearly twenty years. As a ruler he had the best of intentions, but was utterly wanting in ability to carry them out. The anarchy of Stephen's reign. His reign was an age of unrelieved misery.2 The constant warfare that the persistent Matilda kept up against the usurper gave the nobles an opportunity to ignore and nullify all authority but their own. Each baron thus became a local tyrant and the sufferings of the native villeins were keen and continuous. The reign of Stephen illustrates the evils of feudalism when unchecked by higher authorities in the state. The barons also did their best to keep the civil strife aflame by aiding now the one, now the other of the two claimants. After Matilda's death her young Henry Plan- son Henry took up the fight. Stephen's spirit tagenet. was now broken. His only son and heir was dead and he gladly came to terms with his virile opponent. By the treaty of Wallingford it was agreed that Stephen should retain the crown till his death, but that Henry of Anjou should succeed him. A year later the young duke ascended the throne as Henry II (1154). During this period of misery there was one institution that gained steadily in strength and influence: the church suffered 1 Innes, I, 72-76; Bates and Coman, 48-60 (Rossetti, The White Ship). 2 Cheyney, No. 78; Innes, 79-83; Kendall, No. 18. |