BOOK IV.

CONTAINING
OTHER THREE HUNDRED YEARS, FROM WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR TO THE TIME OF JOHN WICKLIFFE.
•WHEREIN IS DESCRIBED THE PROUD AND MISORDERED REIGN OF ANTICHRIST, BEGINNING TO STIR IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST.^
William, duke of Normandy, surnamed Conqueror, base son of wnnam Duke Robert, the sixth duke of Normandy, and' nephew^ unto King quercr' Edward, after the aforesaid victory against Harold and the English- ^ j^ men obtained, was received king over the realm of England, not so losg]
much by assent, as for fear and necessity of time; for else the Lon-
doners had promised their assistance to Edgar Etheling to the utter- most of their power. But being weakened and wasted so greatly in battles before, and the duke coming so fast upon them, fearing not to make their party good, they submitted themselves. Whereupon the said William (of a duke made a king) was crowned upon Christmas- day, A.D. 1066, by the hands of Aldred, archbishop of York ; foras- A.c.iofis much as at that time Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury, was absent, or else durst not, or would not come in the presence of the king. A little before the coming in of this duke, a terrible blazing star was a Mazing seen for the space of seven days, which was the same year ; in record "'"^' whereof, as well of the conquest of the duke, as of the blazing star, these verses yet remain : —
" Sexagenus erat sextus millesimus annus, Cum pereunt Angli Stella monstrante cometa.^
Which king, thus being crowned, did reign over the realm of England the space of one and twenty years and ten"* months, with great severity and cruelness toward the Englishmen, burdening them with great tributes and exactions ; which was to pay of every hide of ground containing twenty acres, six shillings ; by means whereof cer- ^^^^^' tain parts of the land rebelled, and especially the city of Exeter, but Eari Mar- at last William overcame them, and won the city, and punished them Karrifd'.'* grievously. But for that and for other stern deeds of this prince, ^'^'\J^,gi. divers of the lords departed to Scotland : wherefore he kept the other ing, with
(1) Edition 1563, p. 14. Ed. 1583, p. 171. Ed. 1596, p. 154. Ed. 1684, vol. i. p. 192.— Ed.
(2) " Nephew " was formerly used very indefinitely : see Nares : it here means " first cousin one remove." — Ed.
(3) In the copy of these verses, p, 14, Ed. 1563, follows a third line : —
" Dux Normanorum transit mare, vicit Heraldum." — Ed. (■*) Foxc's text hai " one month :" but see pp. 3, 134. — Ed.
106 TYRANNICAL KNACTMENTS OF WILLIAM.
William lords that tarried tlie straitcr, and exalted the Normans, giving to them gueror. thc cliicf posscssions of the land ; and forsomuch as he obtained the J. j^ kingdom by force and dint of sword, he changed the whole state of 10G7. ^^'^ governance of this commonweal, and ordained new laws at his own
~ pleasure, profitable to himself, but grievous and hurtful to the people,
therand abolishing the laws of King Iildward, whcrcunto notwithstanding he t^rs.^Mar- "'IS swom bcforc, to obscrvc and maintain them. For the which great chhltrnlf coiiiiiiotions and rebellions remained long after among the people, as fled into histories record, to have the said laws of King Edward revived again. Newking, * Here,' by the way, speaking of laws, this is memorable, that newiawa. evcH in tliis king's time the authority of thc temporal magistrate was ^J"^. distinct from that of the church ; but vet in such sort, that if need
William 11 11111- "i • • 1 11
forsworn rcquiretl, Jic should deal in causes ecclesiastical, and be assistant to lishing the bishop, whoso jurisdiction, what it was, and how qualified by Edward's ^'"g ^Villiam now holding the stern of government in his hand, the lawg. words following do declare.*
William, by the grace of God king of England, to all earls and sheriffs, and
to all French-born and English, who in the bishopric of bishop Remigius have
lands, greeting. Know you all, and thc rest my faithful subjects, who abide
in England, that the episcopal laws which have been not well, nor according to
the precepts of the holy canons, even to my time, in the kingdom of England,
by the common council and counselor mine archbishops, bisiiops, and abbots,
and all the princes of my kingdom, I have judged to be amended. Wherefore
I command, and by my royal authority give in charge, tliat no bishop or arch-
The juris- deacon do hold any more pleas of law by the episcopal laws in the Hundred,
eccle°?as- "°'' b*"'"? any cause which pertaine'h to the cure of soids unto the judgment of
ticaiqiia- secular men : but whosoever shall be troubled about any suit or default under
lifiedand {jjg episcopal laws, shall come to the place which to this end thc bishop shall
scribed in choose and name, and there answer liis cause, and not according to the liun-
King dred, but according to the canons and the episcopal laws, shall do right
time. ""*° ^°'^ ^'^^ '" ''''^ bishop. And if any, puffed up with pride, being called
once, twice, and thrice to the bishop's coiu^t, refuseth to come, and will not so
be drawn to amendment, let him be excomnumicated. And to enforce this, if
need be, let the power and authority of the king or tlie sheriff' be used.
And he who, being called to the bishop's court, will not come, for every such
calling shall be ))Ut to his answer before the bishop, and make amends. And
tliis I defend, and by mine authority forbid, that anv sheriff or provost, or
officer of the king, or any layman, interfere with the episcopal laws; nor that
any layman bring or sue another out of the bishop's court of justice unto
judgment. And as for judgment, let it be given in no place but in the
bishop's see, or in that place which in this behalf the bishop shall appoint.
By this evidence of record it is manifest, as you see, that Duke AVilliam (now king) having assumed unto himself the absolute .authority royal, endeavoured to establish a form of government both in the church and commonwealth answerable to his own mind : how- beit this is to be noted, that he allowed unto the clergy a kind of jurisdiction of con venting persons before them, and likewise of exer- cising such ecclesiastical discipline as the quality of that age and time did use, whereon we will not stand to debate any thing at large, but proceed in thc course of our story, as the Spirit of God shall vouchsafe to direct us.*
(1) This passage in single asterisks is not in the Edition of 1583, but it appears in that of 1596.— Ed.
(2) " Willielmus Gratia Dei Rex Anglorum, comitibus, vicecomitibus, et omnibus Francigeniset Anglis, qui in Episropatu Rcmigii Episcopi terras habent, salutem. Sciatis," S:c. — Turris Londin. [Given in the New Edition of Rymer's Frrdera, whence some corrections are made above. — Ed.]
FIVE COXCiUESTS OV KRITAIX. ] 07
Over and besides this, t/ie aforesaid William., as he was a zcam'or, wunam so he delighting in forts and bidicarks,^ \i\\\\ two at York, one at Nottingham, and anotlier at Lincoln, whirh " garrisons he furnished with Normans.
About the third year of his reign, Harold and Canute, sons of Swanus, king of Denmark, entered into the north country. The Normans -within York, fearing that the Englishmen would aid the Danes, fired the suburbs of the town ; whereof the flame was so York, big, and the wind so strong, that it reached the city, and burnt a min'stcr! great part thereof, Avitli the minster of St. Peter, where no doubt ^"™'" many worthy Avorks and monimients of books were consumed, in the time whereof the Danes, by favour of some of the citizens, entered the city, and slew more than three thousand of the Normans. But not long after King William chased them out, and di-ove them to their xhenorth ships, and took such displeasure with the inhabitants of that country, was'te? that he destroyed the land from York to Durham, so that nine years and^a-^"^ after the province lay waste and unmanured, except only St. John^s ™i"e. land of Beverly ; and the people thereof were so strictly kept in penury by the war of the king, that, as our English story saith, they eat rats, cats, and dogs, and other vermin.
Also, in the fourth year of this king, Malcolm, king of Scots, a.d.io7o. entered into Northumberland, and destroyed the country, and slew iii','^kk?g there much of the people, both men, women, and children, after a subdued lamentable sort, and took some prisoners. But within two years after. King William made such war upon the Scots, that he forced Malcolm their king to do him homage.
And thus much concerning the outward calamities of this realm Five con- under this foreign conquenjr, which is now the fifth time that the ^vhleh said land with the inhabitants thereof hath been scourged by the ^avebcen hand of God. First, by the Romans in the time of Julius Caesar ; realm, then by the Scots and Picts, as hath been showed ; afterward by the Saxons. Again, the Saxons or Englishmen did not enjoy the posses- sion of Britain with long quiet, but were brought into as much subjection themselves under the Danes as they had brought the Britons before, and even much more, insomuch that through all England, if an Englishman had met a Dane upon a bridge, he might not stir one foot before the Lord Dane (otherwise Lurdane) were past. And then if the Englishman had not given low reverence to the Dane at his coming by, he was sure to be sharply punished, as above hath been declared. This subjection continued almost from the reign of King Ethelwolf till the reign of King Edward, for the space of two hundred and thirty years ; and yet the indignation of God then ceased not, but stiiTcd up the Normans against them, who conquered and altered the whole realm after their own purpose ; insomuch that besides the innovation of the laws, coins, and posses- sions, there was almost in no church in England any English bishop, but only Normans and foreigners placed through all their dioceses.' To such misery was this land then brought, that not only of all the English nobility not one house was standing, but also it was thought reproachful to be called an Englishman. This punishment of God
(11 This passage in italic is not in the Edition of 1583, but is found in that of 1596 —Ed. (,2) Ex Henr. Huntingdon, lib. vi.
108
COUNCIL AT WINCHESTKll.
William Uie Con- queror.
A.D.
1070.
Vision of Kitif; Kdward.
English- men
scourged for tiieix unjust oppres- sion of the Britons.
Cmelties against the Nor- mans.
Three things in this con- quest to be noted.
against tlit' Englisli nation, writers do assign diversely to divers causes, as })artl y before is touched ; of wliom some assign this to be the cause as ioUoweth in the words of the story : — " That wliereas kings anil queens, dukes and prelates, in the prianitive time of the Englisii church, were ready, for religion, to forsake either liberty or country, and give themselves to a solitary life, in process of time they grew to such dissoluteness, that they left no other realm like unto them in iniquity,"^ kc. Again some, writing of the \ision of King Edward, a little before the invasion of the Normans, testify how the king, reporting of his own vision, should hear that for the great enormity and misbehaviour of the head dukes, bishops, and abbots of tlie realm, the kingdom should be given to the hand of their enemies after the decease of him, for the space of one hundred years and one day ; which space was also seen by William the Conqueror, to be one hundred and fifty years, and that his progeny so long should continue. Again, some Avritcrs, treating of this so great wrath of God upon the English people, declare the cause thereof as followeth : — '■'■ Like as the Englishmen did subdue the Britons, Avhom God proposed for their descrvings to exterminate, and them unjustly did dispossess of their land, so they should lilvc- wise be subdued and scourged with a double persecution, first by the Danes, and after by the Normans,"^ &c. Moreover to these injuries and iniquities done and Avrought by the Englishmen, hitherto recited, let us add also the cruel villany of this nation, in murdering and tithing the innocent Normans before, who coming as strangers with Alfred, the lawful heir of the crown, were despitefully put to death ; which seemeth to me no little cause why the Lord, whose doings be always just and right, did suffer the Normans so to prevail. By the coming in of these Normans, and by their quarrel unto the realm, three things we may note and learn. First, to consider and leara the righteous retribution and wrath of God from heaven upon all iniquity and unrighteous dealing of men. Secondly, we may thereby note, wliat it is for princes to leave no issue or sure succession behind them. Thirdly, what dangers often do chance to realms public by foreign mamage with other princes.
A.n.ioTo,
Council at W'in- chester, Apl. nth.
Pivers
bishops,
abhots,
and
priors,
deposed.
Li the same fourth year of this king, between Easter and Whitsun- tide, was holden a solemn council at Winchester of the clergy of England, at the which were present Hermenfrcd, bishop of Sion, and two cardinals sent from Pope Alexander IL, Peter and John. In this council, the king being present, were deposed divers bishops, abbots, and priors, by the means of the king, without any evident, cause ; to the intent his Normans might be j)refcrred to the rule or the church, as he had preferred his knights before to the rule of the" temporalty, thereby to stand in more surety of the land ; amongst' whom also Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury, was put down for three causes against him pretended.
(1) "In primitiva Anglire eoclesia religio clarissime splenduit, ita ut reges et leginjc, duces ed episcopi, vei nionacliatuni, vcl exilium pro Dei amore appctercnt : processu vero temporis adec omnis virtus in eis emarcuit, ut geiitem nullam proditione et nequitia sibi parem esse permit terent," &c.— Ex Histor. Jornalens.
(2) " Nam sicut Angli, Uritones quos Dcus distcrminare proposucrat (peccatis suis exigcntibus)! humiliaverant, et a terra Aiiglia; minus juste ftigavcrant : sic ipsi duplici persecutione," &'c.
(3) See Iloveden and Wilkins's Concilia, and the Appendix.— Ed.
THE GIVING OF THE PALL, 109
The first was, for tluat he had unlawfully held the bishopric of minam Winchester together with the archbishopric. g'Lrur.
The second was, for that, while Robert the archbishop above ^ ^ mentioned was living, he sometimes used his pall which he had left joyo*. at Canterbury when he was unjustly banished from England.
The third cause was, for that he had received a pall of Benedict X., bishop of Rome, which Benedict for buying his popedom was de- posed, as is showed before.'
Then Stigand well proved the benevolence of King William, for A.D.ioro. whereas before, the king seemed in friendly countenance to make much of him, and did unto him great reverence, then he changed all his mildness into sternness, and excused himself by the bishop of Rome's authority, so that in the end Stigand was deprived of his dignity, and kept in Winchester as a prisoner during his life. This Stigand is noted for a man so covetous and sparing, that when he would take nothing of his own, and would swear that he had not a penny, yet by a key fastened about his neck was found great treasure of his under the ground.
At the same time was preferred to the arclibisliopric of York, Thomas, a Norman, and canon of Baieux. At the which time also Lanfranc, Lanfranc, abbot of St. Stephen's at Caen, a Lombard and Italian born, arch!''^"' was sent for, and made archbishop of Canterbury, between which two ^'^'^\°p.°^ archbishops, about their consecration, first began a contention for bury. giving and taking the oath of obedience ; but that contention was, at that time, appeased by the king, and Thomas was contented to sub- scribe to the archbishop of Canterbury's obedience.
After this, it followed within short space, that the said Lanfranc, The min- and Thomas, archbishop of York, who first builded the minster of York York, and gave possessions thereunto, came to Rome with Reniigius, "■'^^"'"• bishop of Dorchester, for their palls, as the manner was ; without which no archbishop nor bishop could be confirmed, although their election were never so lawful. This pall must be asked nowhere The ^ but of the pope or his assigns, and that within three months ; also it fhe'pfi° must be asked not faintly, but mightily (Dist. 100, cap. " prisca") ; Avhich, as it was a chargeable thing to other nations, especially such as were far from Rome, so it was no small gain to the Romish see, so as they did order it. For although at the beginning the pall was given without money, according to the decree Dist. 100,^ or for little, as was the case in this time of Lanfranc ; yet, in process of years it grew to such excess, that whereas the bishop of Mentz Avas wont to give to Rome but ten thousand florins, afterwards it arose so, that he who asked his confirmation, could not obtain it without twenty thousand ; and from thence it exceeded to five and twenty thousand, and at length to seven and twenty thousand florins, which sum Jacob, archbishop of Mentz, was pressed to pay ; insomuch a.d.isoi. that the said Jacob at his departing, which was within four years after, said, that his death did not so much grieve him as to remember his ^^'leas poor subjects, who should be constrained to pay so terrible a fine for writeth the pope's pall. Now by this, what did arise to the pope in the whole be^fi/,y^^* of Germany, containing in it above fifty bishoprics, besides the abbeys, |',^'(1°p''" may be easily conjectured.* Lanfranc thus coming to Rome, with the many.
(1) See pp. 97, 98 : also the Appendix. (2) Dist. 100, cap. " novit."
(3) Ex lib. Gravaminum Nationis GermanicEe. [See Appendix. — Ec.J
no CONTENTION' KETWKKN THE TWO METROPOLITANS.
miiiam otlier two bishops, he, for the estimation of his learning, obtained of
q'lerlr' Alexander two ])alls, one of honour, the other of love. Item, he ob-
~ . jy taincd for the otlier two bishops also their confirmation. At this time,
1070. ^^'^y Ij^^ii'ir there present before Alexander, the controversy began first
' — to be moved, or rather renewed, for the primacy betwixt the two
metropolitans, that is, betwixt the archbishop of Canterbury and the archbishop of York, whether of them should have pre-eminence above the other ; for Canterbury challenged to himself prerogative and the primacy over the whole of Britain and Ireland. The which con- tention continued a long season betwixt these two churches, and was often renewed in the davs of divers kings after this ; as in the reign of Henry L, betwixt 'J'hurstin of York and Kadulph of Canterbury ; and again, in the seven and twentieth year of the said king, at his second coronation, for Radulph would not suffer the first coronation to stand, because it was done by the bishop of York, without his assent.' Also, in the reign of Henry II., where Pope Alexander III. made a letter decretal betwixt these two metropolitans, for bearing the cross, a.d. 1159. Also, another time, in the reign of the said king, betwixt Richard of Canterbury and Roger of York.^ Again, about a.d. 1 170, Avhcn Thomas Becket, hearing the king to be crowned of Roger, bishop of York, complained thereof grievously to Pope Alexander III. Item, another time, A.D. 1176, betwixt Richard and the said Roger, whether of them should sit on the right hand of Cardinal Hugo in his council in London. Moreover, in the beginning of the reign of King Richard, A.D. 1190, betwixt Baldwin of Canterbury and Godfrid of York.
Now to proceed in the story hereof:' after this question was brought, as is said, to the pope''s presence, he, not disposed to decide the matter, sent them home to England, there to have their cause determined. Whereui)on they, speeding themselves from Rome to England, a.d. 1072, and in the sixth year (as it is said) of this ^Villiam, brought the matter before the king and the clergy at Windsor. Where Lanfranc, first alleging for himself brought in, how that from the time of Austin to the time of Bede (which was about one hundred and forty years) the bishop of Canterbury had ever the primacy over the whole land of Britain and Ireland ; how he kept his councils divers times within the precincts of York ; how he did call and cite the bishops of York thereto, whereof some he did constitute, some he did excommunicate, and some he did remove : besides also he alleged divers privileges granted by princes and prelates to the primacy of that see.
To this Thomas, archbishop of York, replieth again, and first
beginning with the first original of the Britons' church declareth, in
order of time, how the Britons, first possessioncrs of this kingdom of
Britain, which endured from Brutus and Cadwallader two thousand
and seventy-six years under a hundred and two kings, at length
tVeTr't received the christian faith a.d. 180, in the time of Lucius,^ their
i^JiRpf king; when Eleutherius, bishop of Rome, sent Faganus and Da-
christen- miauus prcaclicrs unto them ; at which time, after their conver-
Theonus, Sion, they assigned and ordained in the realm eight and twenty
bi^^ho^oV bishops, with two archbishops, Theonus, the archbishop of London,
London, and Thcodosius, archbishop of York. Under those bishops and
(I) See Appendix. (2) See infri, p. 257. ;
(3) This account is apparently taken from Bromptou, Script, x. p. 970. — Ed. (4) See vol. i. 303. ■
\
CONCERNING THK PRIMACY. Ill
archbishops the church of Britain was governed after tlieir conversion, wuuam abnost three hundred years, till at length the Saxons, being then /uerlr.' infidels, with Hengist their king, subdued the Britons by fraudulent ^ j) murder, and invaded their land, which was about a.u.440.' After this, io72. the Britons being driven into Cambria, which we now call Wales, the Saxons overrunning the land, divided themselves into seven kingdoms ; and so, being infidels and pagans, continued till the time that Gregory, bishop of Rome, sent Augustine to preach unto them ; who, coming first to Dover, being then the chief city of Kent (called in Latin Dorobernia), and there planting himself, converted first the king of Kent, called Ethelbert, who had then subdued certain other kings as far as the Humber. By reason of this Augustine was made xi,ig „as archbishop of Dover, by the appointment of Gregory I., about ^.'"'"' '^^ A.D. 600, who sent him certain palls with his letter from Rome, as after the before is expressed,^ which letter being recited, Thomas expounding ofThe" upon the same, beginneth to declare for himself, how the meaning of Faxons. Gregory in this letter was, to reduce the new church of Saxons or Englishmen to the order that was in the old time among the Britons ; that is, to be under two metropolitans, one of London, the other of York ; for so the church was ordered in the time of the Britons, as is before declared. Notwithstanding he giveth to Augustine this prerogative during his lifetime, to have authority and jurisdiction, not only over his twelve bishops, but upon all other bishops and priests in England ; and after his decease then these two metropolitans, London and York, to oversee the Avhole clergy, as in times past amongst the Britons, whom he joineth together after the death of Augustine, to constitute bishops, and to oversee the chui"ch. That he meaneth London to be equal in authority with York, it appeareth by four argvmients : Fii'st, in that he willeth London to be consecrated by no bishop, but of his own synod : Secondly, in that he willeth no distinction of honour to be betwixt London and York, but only according to that as each one of them is elder in time Thirdly, in that he matcheth these two together in common counsel and with one agreement to consent together in doing and disposing such things as they shall consult upon, in the zeal of Christ Jesus ; and that, in such sort, that one should not dissent nor discord from the other ; what meaneth this, but that they should govern together, whom he would not to dissent together ? Fourthly, in that he Avriteth, that the bishop of York should not be subject to the bishop of London ; what meaneth this, but that the bishop of London should be equiva- lent with the metropolitan of York, or rather superior unto him ?
And thus he expounded the meaning of Gregory to be in the aforesaid letter. To whom Lanfranc again answereth, that he was not the bishop of London, and that the question pertained not to London. Thomas replieth, having on his part many favourers, that this privilege was granted by Gregory to Augustine alone, to have all otjier bishops subject to him; but after his decease there should be j equality of honour betwixt London and York, Avithout any distinction of priority, save only that priority of time should make superiority l)ctween them. And althoucrh Aurmstine translated the see from London to Kent, yet Gregory, if his mind had been to give the same
(1) Ex Chron. Sigeberti [read 45G : see vol. i. p. 315.— Ed.] (2) See vol. i- p. 3.35.— Ed.
112 DICXITY OF CANTERBURY CONFIRMEJ).
}yiiiiam prerogative to tlic successors of Augustine, which he gave to him, qteror. would cxprcssly havc uttered it in the words of his epistle, writing J. yy thus to Augustine : " That which I give to thee, Augustine, I give also 1072! ^^'^ grant to all tliy successors after thee." But in that he maketh
here no mention of his successors, it appearcth thereby, that it was
not his mind so to do.
To this Lanfranc argucth again, "■ If this authority had been given to Augustine alone, and not to his successors, it had been but a small gift, proceeding from the apostolic see, to his special and familiar friend ; especially seeing also that Augustine in all his life did con- stitute no bishop of York, neither was there any such bishop to be Dignity subject to him. Again, we have privileges from the apostolic see, bury"co"- '^vhich confirm this dignity in the successors of Augustine, in the same firmed, g^j. ^f ]3over. Morcovcr, all Englishmen think it both right and reason to fetch the direction of well living from that place, where first they took the sparkle of right believing. Further, whereas you say that Gregory might have confii-med with plain words the same thing to the successors of Augustine, which he gave unto him ; all that I grant : yet notwithstanding, this is nothing prejudicial to the see of weu re- Canterbury. For, if you know your logic, that which is true in the itlafarf^" whole is also true in the part ; and what is true in the more, is also true in the less. Now the church of Rome is as the whole, to whom all other churches be as parts thereof; and as 'homo,' i. e. mankind, is 'genus,' /. e. the general in a certain respect to all his ' indi vidua,' i. e. to all particular persons, yet in every particular person lieth the property of the general ; so in like manner the see of Rome in a certain respect is the general, and the whole to other churches, and yet in every particular church is contained the whole fulness of the whole christian faith. As the church of Rome is greater than all churches, that which is wrought in it ought to work in the less churches also, so that the authority of every chief head of the church ought to stand also in them that do succeed, unless there be any If this precise exception made by name. Wherefore like as the Lord said sinj'i'- to all bishops of Rome the same thing which he said to Peter, so
tuQ6 were * O '
formed Grcgory in like manner said to all the successors of Augustine, that
syuo^ which he said to Augustine. So thus I conclude — Likewise as the
n'e^ther ^^^hop of Canterbury is subject to Rome, because he had his faith
were the from theucc, SO York ought to be in subjection to Canterbury, which
true ■• and scut the first preachers thither. Now, whereas you allege, that
iiTminlr Crcgory would Augustine to be resident in London, that is utterly
^eT "' uncertain, for how is it to be thought that such a disciple would do
fiUse. contrary to «4ie mind of such a master .^ But grant, as you say, that
Augustine removed to London, what is that to me, who am not I
bishop of London ? Notwithstanding all this controversy ceasing
betwixt us, if it shall please you to come to some peaceable compc
sition with me, all contention set apart, you shall find me not out
of the way, so far as reason and equity shall extend."
AVith these reasons of Lanfranc, Thomas gave over, condescend- ing that his province should begin at the Humber. AVliereupon it was then decreed that York from that time should be subject to Canterbury in all matters appertaining to the rites and regiment of the catholic church ; so that wheresoever Avithin England Canteiy
f
i
bishops'' seks translated. 113
bury should or would hold his council, the bishop of York should wunam resort thither with his bishops, and be obedient to his decrees qlcrlV. canonical. Provided moreover that ■when the bishop of Canter- . ,^ bury should decease, York should repair unto Dover, there to 1072!
consecrate with others the bishop that should be elect. And if ■
York should decease, his successor should resort to Canterbury, or else where the bishop of Canterbury should appoint, there to receive his consecration, making his profession there, with an oath of canonical obedience. Thomas being content withal, Lanfranc, the Italian, triumpheth with no small joy, and putteth the matter forthwith in writing, that the memory thereof might remain to the posterity of his successors. But yet that decree did not long stand ; for, shortly after, the same scar, so superficially cured, burst out again, insomuch that in the reign of King Henry I., A.D. 1121, Thurstin, aixhbishop of York, could not be compelled to swear to the archbishop of Canterbury ; and yet, notwithstanding, by the letters of Calixtus 11. , was consecrated without any profession made to the said bishop, with much more matter of contention, all wliich to recite it Avcre too long. But this I thought to commit to history, to the intent men might see the lamentable decay of true Christianity amongst the christian bishops, who, inflamed with glorious ambition, so contended for honour, that without mere forcement of law, no modesty could take place.
Of such like contentions among prelates of the clergy for superi- ority, we read of divers in old chronicles, as in the history entitled Chronicon Hirsfeldense, where is declared a bloody conflict, which twice happened in the church of Goslar, between Hecelon, bishop of Hildesheim, and Wederatus, bishop of Fulda, and all for the superior place, who should sit next to the emperor ; the emperor himself being there present, and looking on, and yet not able to stay them.
Thus I have described the troublous contention between Lan- franc and Thomas, metropolitan of York, in the days of Alexander, jf which controversy, and of the whole discom-se thereof, Lanfranc ivriteth to Pope Alexander.^
In the story before of King Egelred, was declared, about a.d. 1016, Bishope' ow the bishopric of Lindisfarne, otherwise named Holy-island, in the
sees trans-
flood of Tweed, was translated to Durham ; so likewise in the days of '^'«d in this Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbmy, a.d. 1076, divers bishops' "^*" sees were altered and removed from townships to greater cities ; as Jie bishopric of Selsey, to Chichester ; of Cornwall to Exeter ; of Wells to Bath ; of Sherborne to Salisbury ; of Dorchester to Lin- 'oln ; of Lichfield to Chester ; the bishopric of Chester, Robert Deing then bishop, being reduced from Chester to Coventry. Like- vise after that, in the reign of William Rufas, a.d. 1095, Herbert, )ishop of Thetford, from thence reduced the see to Norwich, &c. I As concerning Dover and Canterbury, whether the see was like- '«'ise translated from the town of Dover to the city of Canterbury in
(1) The letter of Lanfranc sent to Pope Alexander begins thus: — " Domino totius Christianae elij,'ionis sumino speculatori Alex, papse Lancfrancus, sanctas Dorobernensis ecclesiee antistes, ebitam cum omni servitute obedientiam. In concilio quod Anfxliae per vestram authoritatem oactum est, ul-i querelas Thoniae Archiepiscopi prolatae et ventilataj sunt, allata est Ecclesiastica entis Anglorum Historia, quam Eboracensis eeclesia? Presbyter, et Anslorum doctor licda lom- ' osuit;" and so forth, in a long process of words which foUow ; among which, in the middle of the ( pistle, speaking of Dover and Canterbury, he hath these words : " Urbs nanique, quae nunc Can- larberia nominatur, antiquis temporibus, ab ipsius terrae incolis Dorobernia vocabatur," i:c. '' ih many other words in the said epistle, which for brevity I here over-pass.
VOL. II. I
]14 DKCREKS OF A COUNCIL IIOI.DKN AT I.OXDOK.
William the time of Theodore, or whether Canterbury in old time Iiad the
•i'utrln name of Dorobcrnia, as tlic letter of Lanfranc to Pope Alexander
abovcmcntioned doth pretend, I find it not in histories expressly
J 072 defined ; save that I read in the words of William, being yet duke of
— Normandy, charging then Harold to make a well of water for the king's
use in the castle of Dorobcrnia, that the said Dorobcrnia then was taken for that which wc now call Dover ; but whether Dorobcrnia and the city of Canterbury be both one or divers, the matter is not great. Notwithstanding this I read in the epistle of Pope Honiface