late pope, and he trusted that the new pontiff would renew the condemnation of his predecessor.' This epistle was followed up by a general communication to the cardinals in Curia in defence of one of his envoys to Rome, John Mansel, treasurer of York, who had been accused in Rome of stirring up strife between the king, his barons and bishops.2 Many letters, at the beginning of the year 1262, again manifest the pope's anxiety as to money matters. The archbishop of York, and other bishops, are asked to assist the work of Leonard of Messina, the pope's collector in England. Master Leonard is reminded of his duties, and told that in the Council of Lyons, Pope Innocent ordered that one half the revenues of all benefices not actually occupied by any individual should be applied for six months to the defence of Constantinople. Leonard is to consider whether it would be prudent to insist on this. He is to collect without fail all money certainly due, such as a tenth and a twentieth on ecclesiastical goods, the fines for the remission of all crusading vows, the goods of clerks dying intestate, Peter's pence, etc., etc. At this time, too, there are several letters of the pope to the archbishops of Canterbury and York, and to other bishops, urging them to do their utmost to assist the Church in its great necessity. "The Roman Church, which is the head of all other Churches, and the mother of all the faithful of Christ," is in debt to Italian and other merchants, he says, and it is the duty of all sons to help her.* 3 In February, 1262, the new pope had determined to confirm what Alexander IV had done in regard to the "Provisions of Oxford." He instructed the archbishop of 3 Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 15,360, ff. 39-47. 1 Rymer, i. 414. 2 Ibid. Canterbury to declare the king, queen, and royal princes, freed from the oaths they had taken. Further, that the nobles and prelates were to be held to their oaths of fidelity, and were to be told that the promises which bound them to any statutes or ordinances against the dignity of the Crown, or in prejudice to its rights, were null and void.1 The matter, however, did not rest here. Simon de Montfort, the earl of Leicester, had now been abroad for some time, although he still remained the real leader of the baronial party. On 16th October of this year, 1262, he suddenly returned to this country and attended a parliament held in London on St. Edward's day, which was presided over by Philip Basset, then justiciar of England. He brought with him, and produced at the meeting, a letter from the pope, approving of all the " Provisions of Oxford." The pope, in this document, declared that he and the Curia had been deceived into granting the letters absolving the nobles from the oaths they had taken to keep these “Provisions," and he recalled those letters. This papal letter to the barons was published by the earl, though against the wishes of the justiciar, and Simon de Montfort forthwith left England again, but, as the chronicler says, "leaving behind him many accomplices and followers ready to carry out his design." " 1 Rymer, i. 416. 2 2 Gervase of Cant., ii. 217; cf. Rymer, i. 422. CHAPTER XXI THE WORK OF OTTOBONI THE LEGATE THE tension between the king and the barons became more acute with the close of the year 1262, and during the course of 1263. In this latter period, the state of unrest in the country caused great distress, and the general uncertainty of the times is illustrated by the cessation at this time of many of the monastic chronicles. In 1261, Henry had felt himself strong enough to break away from the control of the committee of management imposed upon him by the "Provisions of Oxford." He raised an army, and seized the Tower of London: but quickly recognising that he was too weak to come to actual blows, he again consented to place himself in the hands of the party of Simon de Montfort. Meanwhile, the pope supported the king's authority as far as was possible under the circumstances. In January, 1263, he refused to ratify some ecclesiastical statutes which had been passed in synod, because the bishops had not obtained the royal licence to publish them, and against which Henry had protested by his agents.' The following month, Urban IV wrote to Archbishop Boniface condemning the "Provisions of Oxford," and the general attitude of the nobles of England towards their king. He declared that the oath which the king took to abide by the statutes was void; and that he and all those who had sworn to 1 Rymer, i. 424; cf. Wilkins, i. 759. observe these statutes and provisions were absolved from their promises. He further directed the archbishop to use his authority against all who abided by these oaths in spite of this absolution, or who in any way pretended that their association had papal approval.1 In the June of this same year 1263, the pope recalled his agent, Leonard, the precentor of Messina, and in his place appointed an English Franciscan, John of Kent. At this time, mainly through the exertions of Richard of Cornwall,' Henry was enabled to treat with his barons for some modus vivendi, likely to put an end to the civil strife, which now seemed almost inevitable. The bishops of Winchester, London and Coventry, were sent to the king on behalf of the barons with draft terms of peace; and Henry so far accepted their solicitations as to assume that the whole matter was accomplished satisfactorily, and directed the return of certain castles into his hands." This the holders of these fortresses considered as at least premature, since the peace had only been suggested and not as yet ratified. In the midst of this uncertainty, and whilst the negotiations between the king and the barons were in a very critical state, the pope directed his new agent, the friar, John of Kent, to press for the payment of the tribute due to him." At the same time he wrote to warn the English king that the question of the crown of Sicily must be settled once for all, and that he was sending over a special envoy to arrange the business," urging the bishops of England to assist in bringing this interminable affair to a conclusion. In the following month, August, 1263, the king's brother, Richard of Cornwall, was nominated king of the Romans, 2 the other candidate being Alfonso of Castile.1 By the end of the month, the pope informed the earl of his election, and explaining to him the meaning of the title "King of the Romans," warned him of the duties implied by the position. In a letter addressed “to all faithful Christians," Pope Urban once more proclaimed that all oaths taken against the English king were unlawful. It was the devil, he says, who had stirred up these conspiracies "in a country which for long ages has been specially devoted to God and the Apostolic See." On 16th September, he ordered William, the archdeacon of Paris, to proceed at once to England to act as his nuncio, with power to dispense the king from any oaths to the barons which might hamper his action, and in any other needful way to protect his royal person. On the same day the pope wrote to urge Richard, the elect king of the Romans, as he is now called, to help the English king out of his difficulties with his barons, and blamed him for hitherto favouring the combination against his royal brother." At the same time, Urban IV shows that he is not wholly disinterested in preserving the peace, for in a letter to King Henry he reminds him that the current yearly tribute of a thousand marks remains unpaid, together with two years of arrears.R The refusal of the custodians of Dover Castle to admit the king and his officials and to surrender their charge to him, almost precipitated an open conflict between the adherents of Henry and those of the earl of Leicester. The latter gathered his forces in London and proposed to march to the relief of Dover; but a truce of eight days being agreed upon, during that time both parties joined in asking the 1 Reg. Urb. IV, ii. No. 358. 2 Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 15,360, f. 266. 3 Reg. Urb. IV, ii. No. 718. 5 Brit. Mus. Add. MS., 15,360, f. 280. Ibid., No. 724. 6 Ibid., f. 269. |