[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Hubert must have believed that the baronage in general weregoing to follow the example given them by the two bishopsand refuse the required service, or he would not have dis-solved the council and reported to the king that his plan hadfailed.But to refuse this service on the ground that it couldnot be required except in England was to go against theunbroken practice of more than a hundred years.Nor wasthere anything contrary to precedent in the demand for threehundred knights to serve a year.The union of the militarytenants to equip a smaller force than the whole service dueto the lord, but for a longer time than the period of requiredfeudal service, was not uncommon.The demand implied afeudal force due to the king from England of less than threethousand knights, and this was well within his actual rights,though if we accept the very doubtful statement of one ofour authorities that their expenses were to be reckoned at therate of three shillings per day, the total cost would exceedthat of any ordinary scutage.Richard clearly believed, as did his justiciar, that he wasmaking no illegal demand, for he ordered the confiscation ofthe baronies of the two bishops, and Herbert of Salisbury wasobliged to pay a fine.It was only a personal journey toNormandy and the great reputation for sanctity of the futureSt.Hugh of Lincoln that relieved him from the same punish-ment.The importance of the right of consent to taxation inthe growth of the constitution has led many writers to attacha significance to this incident which hardly belongs to it.Whatever were the grounds of his action, the Bishop of Lin-coln could have been acting on no general constitutionalprinciple.He must have been insisting on personal rightssecured to him by the feudal law.If his action contributedlargely, as it doubtless did, to that change of earlier condi-tions which led to the beginning of the constitution, it was WAR ANDCHAP.less because he tried to revive a principle of generaltion, which as a matter of fact had never existed, thanbecause he established a precedent of careful scrutiny of theking s rights and of successful resistance to a demand possiblyof doubtful propriety.It is as a sign of the times, as themark of an approaching revolution, that the incident has itsreal interest.About the time that Richard sent over to England hisdemand for three hundred knights news must have reachedhim of an event which would seem to open the way to a greatchange in continental affairs.The far-reaching plans of theemperor, Henry VI, had been brought to an end by his deathin Sicily on September 28, I 197, in the prime of his life.His son, the future brilliant Emperor Frederick II, was stillan infant, and there was a prospect that the hold of theHohenstaufen on the empire might be shaken off.AboutChristmas time an embassy reached Richard from the princesof Germany, summoning him on the fealty he owed theempire to attend a meeting at Cologne on February 22 toelect an emperor.This he could not do, but a formal embassyadded the weight of his influence to the strong party;and his favourite nephew, who had been brought up at hiscourt, was elected emperor as Otto IV.The Hohenstaufenparty naturally did not accept the election, and Philip ofSuabia, the brother of Henry VI, was put up as an oppositionemperor, but for the moment the were the stronger,and they enjoyed the support of the young and vigorous pope,Innocent III, who had just ascended the papal throne, sothat even Philip support of his namesake of Suabia wasof little avail.From the change Richard gained in reality nothing.Itwas still an age when the parties to international alliancessought only ends to be gained within their own territories,or what they believed should be rightfully their territories,and the objects of modern diplomacy were not yet regarded.The truce of the preceding September, which was to lastthrough the whole of the year I was as little respected asthe others had been.As soon as it was convenient, the war wasreopened, the baronial alliance against the king of Francestill standing, and Baldwin of Flanders joining in the attack. 3%At the end of September Richard totally defeated the French, CHAP.and drove their army in wild flight through the town ofprecipitating Philip himself into the river Epte by the break-ing down of the bridge under the weight of the fugitives, andcapturing a long list of prisoners of distinction, three of them,a Montmorency among them, overthrown by Richard s ownlance, as he boasted in a letter to the Bishop of Durham.Other minor successes followed, and Philip found himselfreduced to straits in which he felt obliged to ask the inter-vention of the pope in favour of peace.Innocent III, anxiousfor a new crusade and determined to make his influence feltin every question of the day, was ready to interfere on hisown account; and his legate, Cardinal Peter, brought aboutan interview between the two kings on January I 199,when a truce for five years was verbally agreed upon, thoughthe terms of a permanent treaty were not yet settled.In the meantime financial difficulties were pressing heavilyupon the king of England.Scutages for the war in Normandyhad been taken in 1196 and I In the next year a stillmore important measure of taxation was adopted, which wasevidently intended to bring in larger sums to the treasurythan an ordinary scutage.This is the tax known as theGreat Carucage of 1198.The actual revenue that theking derived from it is a matter of some doubt, but the ma-chinery of its assessment is described in detail by a con-temporary and is of special The unit of the newassessment was to be the carucate, or ploughland, insteadof the hide, and consequently a new survey of the land wasnecessary to take the place of the old Domesday record
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]