Copyright by Christopher P. Hill 2008
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright by Christopher P. Hill 2008 The Dissertation Committee for Christopher P. Hill Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Gilbert Foliot and the Two Swords: Law and Political Theory in Twelfth-Century England Committee: Janet Meisel, Supervisor Brian Levack Denise Spellberg Andrew Villalon Ernest Kaulbach Gilbert Foliot and the Two Swords: Law and Political Theory in Twelfth-Century England by Christopher P. Hill, BA.; MA. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May 2008 Acknowledgements My greatest thanks, of course, to Jan Meisel for her continual and long-term support, help, and friendship. Thanks also to Denise Spellberg and Andy Villalon for stepping up on such short notice and offering constructive advice and criticism. A very special thank you to Ernie Kaulbach, the finest Latinist at the University of Texas, whose unflagging help as I struggled with medieval language and canon law provided the foundation upon which I was able to construct the argument presented in this work. I’d also like to thank the staff at the Department of History, especially Judy Hogan and Marilyn Lehman, for helping to smooth over the inevitable rough spots in dealing with the administration. And finally, my deepest thanks to Brian Levack, whose friendship and determination always pushed me toward quality. I owe all of these people a very great deal. Whatever this study has achieved is largely due to their assistance. The faults are entirely my own. iv Gilbert Foliot and the Two Swords: Law and Political Theory in Twelfth-Century England Publication No._____________ Christopher P. Hill, PhD The University of Texas at Austin, 2008 Supervisor: Janet Meisel Over the last fifty years or so, historians have largely neglected Gilbert Foliot, the man who was Bishop of London during the 1160s and 1170s, as representative of any larger theoretical position, dismissing his famous polemic letter Multiplicem nobis as the product of envy and thwarted ambition. In this dissertation I argue that Gilbert Foliot was neither out of step with the attitudes of his contemporaries nor driven blindly by anger and envy. Rather, his position was the result of legal training combined with his experience as a cleric in the tumultuous years of twelfth century England. Foliot’s legal training inculcated in him a political theory stressing a bifurcated authority structure in which the clerical and lay “swords” would be drawn to complement one another, but were at the same time necessarily separate and independent. Thus he believed that the Church’s success in its goal of saving souls was reliant on the goodwill and protection of an effective and powerful king. During the Anarchy of King Stephen’s reign, Foliot urged his clerical brethren to unleash the sword of excommunication against barons who v committed crimes, and he was frustrated by the lack of coercive power he felt King Stephen ought to have exercised over the rebellious knights who terrorized the countryside. Later, during the reign of Henry II, Foliot feared that the archbishop’s new insistence on clerical superiority would limit the king’s lawful coercive power, while pushing the king to work against the Church rather than with it. Foliot, the jurist, found the archbishop’s argument not only ill-advised, but legally illegitimate and dangerous. Thus Foliot’s diatribe in Multiplicem should be understood not simply as a moment of anger, but as representative of a valid strain of thought in the English clergy, and that the attitude toward the crown on the part of churchmen was more dynamic than historians have recognized. vi Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE: PIETY AND POLITICS IN TWELFTH-CENTURY ENGLAND 1 1.1. Introduction ..............................................................................................1 CHAPTER TWO: FOLIOT IN SOURCE AND HISTORIOGRAPHY 9 2.1. Sources and Manuscript Tradition ...........................................................9 2.2. Foliot in Historiography .........................................................................13 2.3. The Two Swords Doctrine in Historiography ........................................28 CHAPTER THREE: MASTER OF SCHOOLS 40 3.1. Foliot’s Family and Schooling ...............................................................40 3.2. Foliot and Cluny ....................................................................................52 3.3. Foliot, Matilda, and the Second Lateran council ...................................59 CHAPTER FOUR: FOLIOT IN THE ANARCHY 68 4.1. Foliot at Gloucester ................................................................................68 4.2. The Case of Bishop Roger .....................................................................73 4.3. Foliot and War; The Spiritual Sword .....................................................80 4.4. Foliot’s Support for the Angevin Cause ................................................85 4.5. Strong, Legitimate Government; Foliot’s letter to Brian FitzCount ......92 4.6. Weakness in the Ecclesiastical Court Structure ...................................101 4.7. Piety and Friendship ............................................................................108 CHAPTER FIVE: TYING TOGETHER THE EARLY AND LATE - FOLIOT AS BISHOP 115 5.1. The Circumstances of Foliot’s Elevation .............................................115 5.2. The Aftermath of the Elevation, and the Relationship between Church and Monarchy ...........................................................................................126 5.3. The Working Relationship: Henry II and Theobald ............................133 vii 5.4. Becket and Humility ............................................................................138 5.5. Designs on The See of Canterbury ......................................................144 5.6. Foliot’s Translation to London ............................................................159 5.7. Tours, 1163, and the Primacy of London ............................................169 CHAPTER SIX : FOLIOT , THE TWO SWORDS AND THE CRISIS 174 6.1. The Deteriorating Relationship between Henry and the English Church174 6.2. The Lines of Authority become blurred...............................................176 6.3. Criminous Clerks and the Council at Westminster ..............................184 6.4. The Customs of the Realm: The Council of Clarendon .......................195 6.5. Becket as Criminous Clerk: The Council at Northampton ..................214 CHAPTER SEVEN : THE FINE LINE 233 7.1. Crafting the Relationship with Henry ..................................................233 7.2. “Many things to us” .............................................................................242 Bibliography ........................................................................................................275 Vita .....................................................................................................................286 viii CHAPTER ONE: PIETY AND POLITICS IN TWELFTH- CENTURY ENGLAND 1.1. INTRODUCTION Considering the importance of the Church as a driving force in twelfth- century political history, the complex relationship between piety and Church involvement in lay politics during this time period remains surprisingly under-explored. The natural assumption is that pious clerics, with a few notable exceptions, feared the encroachment of lay authority as economic and political structures began to grow in sophistication during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Lay control could easily lead to the diminution of ecclesiastical liberties that had been gradually increasing since the founding of Cluny in 910. The Church, therefore, had no reason to support the growth of secular authority, and worked, as a body, to undermine any increase in lay authority that threatened, even potentially, Church autonomy. For its part, the increasingly powerful lay leaders resented Church interference in secular matters, and continually attempted to exert authority over the Church in a variety of ways, from investing bishops to naming popes to trying clerics in royal courts. This was more or less Tellenbach’s analysis of the Investiture Conflict, and following him many historians have assumed that the fanatical piety of Gregory VII and his resentment of imperial intervention underlay the relationship between Church and state from the eleventh century through the course of the twelfth, culminating in several peaks: Boniface VIII’s Unam sanctam , Innocent III’s interdict of England, and the famous showdown between 1 Henry II and his archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Becket. 1 The line between Gregory and the later events in this narrative is a more or less straight one. This analysis, however, runs counter to a demonstrable concern among equally pious clerics that the growing power of the Church during the twelfth century might damage the Church through increasing worldliness, a trend that historians notice at other points in history. The movement toward religious poverty during the following century, for example, led by the mendicants, has drawn considerable interest. 2 As the Church continued to grow in secular power over the later Middle Ages, historians document increasing unrest among the pious right up to the Reformation, which was at least partially a reaction to the worldly behavior of the papacy