Curia where he was then represented by his brother, Simon Langton. Although Pandulph carried the day, and gained a diplomatic victory for the legate by preventing the archbishop's case being fully considered, the representation seems in the end to have led to the legate's recall upon the final reconciliation. The departure of the Roman cardinal, however, made it more imperative for Pandulph to remain in the country. This he did during the rest of King John's reign, but without the official position of legate. His name occurs in the preamble of Magna Charter as one of the few who remained faithful to the king, and by whose counsel it was issued, and he is associated with the archbishops and bishops as one of the sureties for the general pardon promised by the king.

About this time, 1215, Pandulph was chosen to the vacant see of Norwich, and upon John coming to the determination to repudiate the provisions of the Great Charter, he thought of sending Pandulph to Rome to ask the pope to declare its provisions null and void. Before he left England, however, any hesitation Innocent III may have felt on the matter had been overcome, and the Bull quashing the Charter had been issued. Pandulph remained in England, and was associated, as has been pointed out, with the bishop of Winchester, in excommunicating those that refused to be reconciled to the king. On the arrival of Gualo, during the troubles of King John's last days, Pandulph retired once more into the subordinate position he had previously occupied under the legate Nicholas, and on the accession of Henry III he seems to have returned to Rome.1

On the recall of Gualo, in 1218, no one was better acquainted with the state of affairs in England, or better qualified to take up the work left by the legate than Pan

1 Matthew Paris, ii. 171.

dulph. On September 1, 1218, Honorius III wrote to the English archbishops and bishops announcing his appointment to the position,' and he forthwith set out for England. He was at this time still only bishop-elect of Norwich, and according to a special provision of the pope, so long as he remained merely bishop-elect, which indeed was to be whilst he remained papal legate, he was to be exempt from the canonical oath of obedience to the metropolitan of Canterbury. This exemption was no doubt intended to give him more freedom in his high functions than he would have had as a suffragan of Cardinal Langton.

Pandulph, with full legislative powers, landed in England on 3rd December, 1218. He found many important matters in Church and State already awaiting his settlement, and he began his work by an act of grace. Gualo, his predecessor, had deprived of their benefices a great number of ecclesiastics who had sided with Louis in the late troubles, and had even imprisoned many. Pandulph set all these at liberty, and even, where he was able, restored to them their benefices which had been confiscated." "The first year of Pandulph's legislation," writes Mr. Shirley, "passed in almost unbroken success." Through the mediation of the pope, no doubt on the initiative of the legate, the truce between France and England, which was on the point of expiring, was renewed for another four years. Even before his arrival in England, Pandulph was charged to examine into the relations of Scotland with this country, to review the agreement already made, and to confirm or annul it as he should think best. In the event, a lasting alliance

1 Brit. Mus. Add. MS., 15,351, f. 217.

2 Royal Letters, i. 533.

Radulphus de Coggeshall (Chronicon Anglicanum) (Rolls ed.), 263.

3

4

Annals of Dunstable (Ann. Mon., iii.), 53.

5 Royal Letters, etc., i., Preface, xxii.

6 Ibid., 16.

was secured between the two countries by the betrothal of Alexander II to the young King Henry's sister.

In May, 1219, William Marshall, earl of Pembroke, the king's regent, died.' From this time the king's ministers governed in his name, Peter de Rupibus, the bishop of Winchester, acting as tutor, and Hubert de Burgh as justiciar. The relations of these chief officials to each other gave Pandulph, as legate, an exceptional position. Had they been in entire agreement on all matters of policy and government, the authority of the recognised representative of the "overlord" of a minor might not have become so paramount as it did during the next two years. From the death of the earl of Pembroke to Pandulph's recall in 1221, he really acted, as a modern writer has remarked, almost "as king of England."

A few instances will enable the reader to judge what the legate's position and authority at this time were, and

1 In the important poem L'Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, edited by M. Paul Mayer for the Société de l'Histoire de France, an interesting account is given of the death of the earl of which a summary has been made by the editor (iii. 282 to 286). When the earl was ill at Caversham a council was held at Reading which the king, the legate, the justiciar, and many barons attended. This must have been about April 12, and at this meeting the earl marshal informed the king that it was necessary for the barons to elect someone to protect him and the kingdom. Upon this Peter de Rupibus declared that though the kingdom had been committed to the earl, the king had been committed to him. The earl replied that it was he who had given the king into his charge. After consultation the dying earl marshal declared that he had decided to entrust the king to God and the pope, and especially to the legate in their place. On the arrival of the king accompanied by the legate and some other magnates, the earl, taking the king by the hand, declared that he delivered him, in the presence of all there, to God, the pope, and the legate who represented them. After this, by orders of the earl, his son went to present the king to the legate in the presence of the barons, which he did, taking the youthful monarch by the hand, to the great annoyance of the bishop of Winchester. "So," says a modern writer, "Pandulph succeeded the earl marshal as regent, not by virtue of his appointment as legate, but in pursuance of the wishes of the earl, which the magnates of England ratified."-(G. J. Turner, ut sup. Trans. of Royal Hist. Soc., xviii. 292-293.)

how fully they were acknowledged or acquiesced in. In May, 1219, almost immediately after Pembroke's death, Pandulph writes to the bishop of Winchester and de Burgh about the collection of the royal revenue-a mere matter of state. "Being solicitous," he says, "about the king's affairs, we direct that Walter Malclerc be joined to the sheriffs for the collections. On this matter we strictly warn and order that you direct the royal letters to the said (sheriffs)." 1

Again on 4th July, in the same year, Pandulph wrote to the same two officials directing, and "strictly commanding " them, to redress some injury to one of his servants, so that "it may appear that you desire to procure the peace of the king and kingdom." To this note he adds: "We send you a copy of the letter from the king of Scotland, which we have received. When you have read it, write to us your opinion" upon the matter.' In the same months the legate writes to the same on the question of the Jews. "We can hardly tolerate any longer," he says, "the constant complaints of Christians as to the usury practised by the Jews." He hears from the abbot of Westminster that lately Isaac, the Jew of Norwich, has been demanding payments of the Jews before the justices. Now "being desirous to further the king's honour, which is much lowered by all this, as well as to help the Christians, we warmly ask and counsel you," he says, "for your own honour to order the said justices not to judge the above cases until we come into those parts." We will then see what remedy can be devised. At the close of this lengthy epistle, Pandulph returns to the question of the assessments for the royal dues. He expresses his wonder that his previous direction has not been carried out, and he "orders" the two nominal 2 Ibid., 35.

1 Royal Letters, etc., i. 27.

heads of the kingdom to do what had been provided in the matter.

In like manner the legate writes to de Burgh that he has postponed the day appointed for the submission of Llewellyn; he advises, nay orders, a secret mission to France; he sends for the reception of his temporalities the bishopelect of Ely, who has been chosen by himself, to the archbishop and the bishop of Salisbury, as a commission appointed by the pope; he orders de Burgh to be at Worcester at a certain date, for the meeting with Llewellyn, which he had previously postponed; he warns him to stand firm against a threatened agitation of Londoners, and in a second letter on the same subject, he tells him that he is himself coming to London "to deal with urgent business of the king and kingdom." In another letter, dated 3rd April, 1220, he announces his intention of being at Windsor at Easter time, and requests de Burgh to be there to meet him and discuss affairs of State. To this communication he adds: "In regard to what you have told us, namely, that the castle of Marlborough is being fortified, we order you, without loss of time, to send royal letters to the marshal, couched in the most stringent terms you can devise, expressly prohibiting these fortifications." In the same month he forbids Ralph Nevile, the vice-chancellor, to leave the Exchequer on any pretence, and charges him to deposit the money he has in the Temple, and not to disburse any "without our order and special licence."3 In the following month, he asks for a form for granting the custody of royal castles, which had been drawn up by the legate Gualo, and reminds Nevile of his injunction in regard to the royal Exchequer, bidding him, should he leave London, to deposit the Great Seal in the Temple for Royal Letters, etc., 74-75, 100. 2 Ibid., 101. 3 Ibid., 112.

2