their hands after some weeks' confinement and after being despoiled of his money. At the same time the archdeacon of Norwich, John de Ferentino, only escaped with difficulty and had to conceal himself in London.

The threats against foreigners became more numerous with the new year, 1232, and serious attacks were made upon their property. At Wingham, in Kent, the barns of a certain Roman clerk were pillaged; and upon complaint being made to the sheriff he sent some of his officials to make inquiry. They found the place occupied by armed men, who had already disposed of all the corn in the barn, selling some on easy terms and giving the rest to the poor. On being questioned about their proceedings they produced forged letters of the king, prohibiting anyone from interfering with them. Upon this matter being brought to the notice of the bishop of London, he at once took vigorous action. Having called together ten bishops, he got them to pass a joint excommunication on all who had been engaged in this work; and included in the same sentence those who had laid hands upon Cincio, the Roman canon of St. Paul's, and the authors of the threatening letters which had been widely distributed.'

These spiritual threats appear, however, to have done little to put a stop to the outrages by which a small but determined band of men designed to drive the strangers out of the kingdom. At Easter time, 1232, a general campaign appears to have been organised throughout the country. The barns of the Roman ecclesiastics in various parts of England were pillaged, and their contents sold or given to the poor. The perpetrators of these outrages obeyed the orders of one man, a Yorkshire knight, called Robert Twenge, who took the name of William Wither.

1 Roger de Wendover, iii. 28.

He was the owner of property, which entitled him to present to certain benefices, and he was aggrieved at that right being superseded by the papal provisions which had been made to them. Although the number of those actually engaged in this work was small, it is almost certain that they had the sympathy of a great number, and that many influential persons among the clergy as well as among the laity knew of their proceedings and lent them

countenance.

The Romans were terrified, and everywhere they sought shelter in monasteries, leaving their property to the spoilers. They appear to have made no complaints, probably preferring to sacrifice their goods rather than endanger their lives. It was not long, however, before the outrages came to the ears of the pope, and he at once wrote angrily to the king to put a stop to the doings. He reminded him of his coronation oath, and ordered him under pain of excommunication to hold a full inquiry and to punish the guilty with exemplary sentences.'

Commissions were also issued by the pope to seek out the guilty; for the south of England, Peter, bishop of Winchester and the abbot of Bury St. Edmund; for the north, the archbishop of York, the bishop of Durham and John Romanus, a canon of York. They were ordered to excommunicate all transgressors and to send them to Rome for absolution without right of appeal.2

When these courts of inquiry got to work very many of all ranks were accused of being concerned, directly or indirectly, in these outrages. Bishops (including the bishop of London), royal clerks, deans and archdeacons are named

1 1 Rymer, i. 203.

2 Brit. Mus. Add. MS., 15,353, ff. 133-140. The pope complains of the outrage to the Holy See in the treading under foot the Bullae of SS. Peter and Paul.

as consenting parties. De Burgh himself was pointed at as being the real instigator of the movement, although to him the pope especially appeals as a faithful son of the Roman church, to which, he says, "in these days you have taken care to manifest signs of your devotion and most welcome obedience." He begs him to see justice done, and to temper the king's anger at the issue by the Holy See of letters of inquiry into the disturbances. He must remember that "at this time they have often been asked for " and could not without grave injustice be refused.1

The ringleader of the movement, the knight Twenge, surrendered to the king and confessed that he was actuated by the sense of injustice in being defrauded of the presentation of his church by the sentence of the pope. He declared that he preferred to be excommunicated temporally than to be despoiled. In accordance with the papal injunctions he was sent to Rome, but Henry himself gave him letters testifying to his right and begged the pope to hear him.2

3

The conclusion of Twenge's history is curious. In 1239 he was dispatched to Rome with a letter signed by many of the leading barons, who had grievances similar to his. Matthew Paris has preserved this letter in which they appeal to Gregory IX to safeguard their rights. They tell the pope that "the ship of liberties, won by the blood of their forefathers," seems to be threatened more than ever by the stress of storms. They "consequently feel constrained to wake the Lord, who is sleeping in the bark of Peter, loudly calling with one voice, 'Lord save us, we perish,'" and to invoke the authority of the Apostolic See to protect their right of patronage.

Royal Letters, 549.

2 Roger de Wendover, iii. 29. 3 Chron. Maj. iii. 610-612.

His mission was entirely successful. The pope not only restored Twenge's right of presentation, but in two letters addressed to Richard of Cornwall and the legate Otho, then in England, he confirmed the rights of the English lay patrons over their benefices. On which letters Matthew Paris moralised: "In this fashion the rights of laymen are protected, whilst those of ecclesiastics and poor helpless religious are left to the mercy of the spoiler. Truly the world threatens to rush onward to complete ruin."

To revert to the national movement; the return of de Rupibus to power caused widespread consternation; and a determined opposition was formed under the leadership of Richard, the earl marshal, son of the former regent. When summoned to a meeting of the council at Oxford on 24th June, 1233, they refused to attend and explained their motives in plain terms, whilst Robert Bacon, a Dominican, explained to the king that there could be no peace as long as the bishop of Winchester retained his paramount influence.' At a second meeting the barons insisted upon the removal of the foreigners and declared that, unless this was done at once, they would summon a great council and elect a new king. All the summer and autumn of this year, 1233, there was practically civil war in the country. The earl marshal was declared a traitor and the king fixed the date for his trial. The barons denied the legality of this step, as a peer had a right to be tried by his peers. The bishop of Winchester retaliated by boldly denying that there were any peers in England in the same sense that there were in France. Upon this the power of the Church was invoked, and the bishops threatened de Rupibus with excommunication as a disturber of the public

1 Matthew Paris, iii. 244-245.

peace, and in fact they actually promulgated a general sentence against all who had turned the mind of the king from his subjects.

For some time after the death of Archbishop le Graund the archiepiscopal chair of Canterbury remained vacant. The first choice of the monks of Christ Church was unfortunate, though it would appear that they made it with the best intention of avoiding difficulties. Having obtained the royal licence to elect, they chose Ralph Nevile, the bishop of Chichester, the royal confessor, and at that time the king's chancellor, whom Henry had wished them to have for archbishop at the previous vacancy. Matthew Paris speaks in high terms of Bishop Nevile's ability and qualities, saying that the monks regarded him as an approved defender of their Church, and likened him to Saint Thomas, who also had been made archbishop whilst chancellor of the kingdom. Their choice was of course at once ratified by the king, and the monks came to inform the bishop and to ask him to defray their journey to Rome to obtain the confirmation of the pope, and for money to meet the fees in the Curia. Nevile refused to give them anything whatever for this purpose, and they had to set out without his help, and having reached Rome asked the pope for the canonical confirmation of the elect. Gregory IX at this period had for his adviser in English matters Simon Langton, the brother of the late archbishop, and upon being applied to for information about the elect, Langton spoke of him as "a courtier and illiterate," and said that he was "rapid and hasty in speech." He hinted that if he were promoted he would aid the king and the whole kingdom to free England from its suzerainty to the pope, and would try and get rid of the tribute with which King John

1 Matthew Paris, iii. 207.