John Lackland. Kate Norgate
tion>
Kate Norgate
John Lackland
Published by Good Press, 2019
EAN 4064066150488
Table of Contents
CHAPTER I JOHN LACKLAND 1167–1189
CHAPTER II JOHN COUNT OF MORTAIN 1189–1199
CHAPTER III JOHN “SOFTSWORD” 1199–1206
CHAPTER IV KING JOHN 1206–1210
CHAPTER V JOHN AND THE POPE 1210–1214
CHAPTER VI JOHN AND THE BARONS 1214–1215
CHAPTER VII JOHN LACKLAND 1215–1216
Note I John and the De Braoses
Note II EUSTACE DE VESCI AND ROBERT FITZ-WALTER
LIST OF MAPS
I. | Ireland according to the Treaty of 1175 | To face page | 12 |
II. | Ireland according to Henry’s distribution, 1177 | ” | 14 |
III. | Ireland, A.D. 1185 | ” | 17 |
IV. | England, A.D. 1190 | ” | 27 |
V. | Ireland, A.D. 1210 | ” | 151 |
“The closer study of John’s history clears away the charges of sloth and incapacity with which men tried to explain the greatness of his fall. The awful lesson of his life rests on the fact that the king who lost Normandy, became the vassal of the Pope, and perished in a struggle of despair against English freedom was no weak and indolent voluptuary but the ablest and most ruthless of the Angevins.”
John Richard Green.
CHAPTER I
JOHN LACKLAND
1167–1189
. … Johan sanz Terre,
Por qui il[1] ot tant noise e guere.
Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, vv. 101, 102.
1167
The fifth son, the eighth and last child, of Henry II. of England and Eleanor of Aquitaine was born at Oxford, in the “King’s manor”—that is, the palace of Beaumont—on Christmas Eve 1167.[2] Of their six other surviving children, the three younger were daughters; the last of these, Joanna, was then two years old. The eldest living son, Henry, was nearly thirteen; Richard was ten, and Geoffrey nine. The boy Henry had, when an infant, been acknowledged by the barons of England as heir to the crown,[3] and in 1160 had done homage to Louis of France for the duchy of Normandy.[4] In 1162 preparations had been made for his crowning in England, and he had again received the homage of the barons,[5] to which that of the Welsh princes and the Scot king was added in 1163.[6] Eleanor’s duchy of Aquitaine had been destined for her second surviving son, Richard, as early as 1159,[7] when he was not yet two years old. In the summer of 1166 the king had secured Britanny for Geoffrey by betrothing him to its heiress.[8] The whole Angevin dominions, with one exception, were thus, in design at least, partitioned among John’s brothers before John himself was born. The exception was, indeed, an important one; in the contemporary accounts of Henry’s plans during this period for the distribution of his territories, there is no mention of Anjou and its dependency Touraine. The reason, however, is obvious. Anjou was the cradle of his race, the very heart and centre of his dominion, the one portion of it which he had inherited from his forefathers in unbroken male descent, by a right which had been always undisputed and indisputable. The destiny of Anjou was therefore as yet unspecified, not because Henry was reserving it for a possible younger son, but because its devolution to his eldest son, as head of the Angevin house after him, was in his mind a matter of course. It was in fact Henry himself who gave to his new-born child the name which has clung to him ever since—“Johans Sanz Terre,” John Lackland.[9]
1169
Two years later the scheme of partition was fully developed, and now Anjou was explicitly included in it. At Epiphany 1169 Louis of France granted to the younger Henry the investiture of Anjou and Maine, on the understanding that the boy was to hold these fiefs, as well as Normandy, in his own person, directly of the French crown. Richard was invested, on the same terms, with the county of Poitou and the duchy of Aquitaine. Britanny was granted to young Henry, to be holden by his brother Geoffrey of him as mesne lord, under the king of France as overlord.[10] The one fragment of the continental dominions of the Angevin house which the king of England formally reserved to himself was Touraine; his homage for it was due to a prince of inferior rank, the count of Blois, and his paternal pride chose rather to perform that homage himself than to suffer it to be performed by any of his sons.[11]