mies against the Count; it was with great difficulty. that the hostilities which ensued after his return from France could be brought to a conclusion ;* and from 1175 till the end of the year 1176 the war continued and occupied the whole forces of the Count of Flanders. At length, however, a treaty was entered into by which he was left free to pursue his march towards Jerusalem; and he proposed to

The

* The Flemish historians, in general, pass over the stain upon the Count's memory, in regard to the death of Walter des Fontaines, very lightly; many of them not mentioning it at all. Neither do they connect it with the war which at this period took place between the Count and James of Avesnes and other noblemen, but attributed it entirely to a different cause. historians of England, however, are diametrically opposed to such statements; and even in regard to the results of the war, D'Oudegherst says that the Count merely made war upon James of Avesnes, because that nobleman had rebelled against the Count of Hainault, his brother-in-law; and the learned editor Mon. Lesbroussart assigns another cause; namely, that James of Avesnes had murdered Robert, Bishop of Cambray and Chancellor of Flanders. Now, before proceeding farther, it is necessary to remark that this Chancellor of Flanders is supposed to have been the person who instigated the Count to break his faith with Henry King of England. However that may be, Hoveden distinctly says, (page 546, ed. Saville,) that the sons of Walter des Fontaines, "with James of Avesnes and others of his relations, having prepared his castles, rose against the Count and devastated his territories with fire and sword, and thus at length compelled him to make satisfaction for the death of Walter des Fontaines." The Flemish historians, on the contrary, declare that James of Avesnes was forced to submit; but it seems from their whole account, that there is something concealed by them either from fear or favour.

set out about Christmas of the year 1176, when the message from Henry to which I have alluded reached him, holding out the expectation, that if he would delay his departure till the Easter of the following year, the English monarch would either accompany him in person, or give him aid of some kind in his expedition.

That Henry ever entertained the slightest intention of really taking the cross, I do not believe; but it is perfectly certain that on many occasions he asserted his determination of so doing, and deceived others as well as the Count with promises of joining them in their enterprises for the delivery of the Holy Land. It is probable therefore that the coming of the Count of Flanders to England at this moment, was not the most agreeable event in the world to the English monarch, although he had manifold reasons to assign for not fulfilling his engagement. We shall have occasion very soon to show what those causes were; and in the meanwhile it is only necessary to say, that Henry received the Count most graciously, furnished him with pecuniary aid, sent, or suffered to go with him, the Earl of Essex, and several other noblemen, with their retainers, and made such excuses for not accompanying him himself as were deemed sufficient by the Count.

It is not improbable that Henry was very willing to see some of his barons engaged in such distant and perilous expeditions; for it would seem that

by this time he had once more strong cause for entertaining suspicion of many of the principal persons in his dominions; but the gift of money which he made to the Count of Flanders, showed much more real kindness than the mere act of suffering any of his nobles to follow to the crusade. Notwithstanding all the exactions which had been made in consequence of breaches of the forest laws, the treasury of the King of England was by no means so well filled as before his unfortunate warfare with his sons, and several events had lately occurred to render it difficult to procure supplies from his people. Various pestilential diseases had afflicted England; one of which was an epidemic cough, by which many were destroyed; and in the years 1175 and 1176 another pestilence followed by a famine took place. Little money was to be found in the land, and at the same time Henry was compelled to enter into great expenses by the appearance of fresh dangers, and rumours of general disaffection throughout his dominions. Whether this disaffection had been produced by the severity he had exercised regarding every breach of the forest laws, or by other causes less apparent, we are not told; but we find that in the year 1176, the King thought fit to take possession of almost all the strong places belonging to his vassals, not only in England, but in Normandy. This was done with the advice of the council; and, consequently, as almost all the barons of the

land were themselves present, it is scarcely possible to suppose that the authors who state this fact could mean to comprise under the name castle, those fortified houses in which the nobility of the land then dwelt.* The act, however, did not tend to render the King popular; and, whether it originated in fears already well grounded, or gave rise to the discontent that followed, he had soon cause to apprehend that his eldest son was once more caballing against his authority, if not upon the eve of breaking out into insurrection against him.

It may now, however, be necessary to turn our attention towards the events which had lately occurred in Henry's continental dominions, and to trace the conduct of Prince Richard, who was now fully launched in that brilliant military career during which he won and merited the name of Coeur-de-Lion.

* Hoveden does not say that this was done by the advice of the council. His words are, Eodem anno Henricus rex Angliæ pater saisivit in manu suâ omnia castella Angliæ et Normmaniæ, tam Episcoporum quam Comitum et Baronum, et custodes suos in iis posuit."

BOOK I V.

WHEN Henry the Second returned to England, accompanied by his eldest and favourite son, he had left the two younger brothers, Richard and Geoffrey, occupied in the painful and dangerous task of demolishing, in the provinces assigned to them for their inheritance, those castles which had been either raised or strengthened to support them in rebellion. The operations of Geoffrey were attended with much less difficulty than those of Richard; for his claim to the obedience of the people of Britanny, in consequence of his alliance with Constance, was much stronger than that of his brother to the submission of Anjou and Poitou. The Bretons also, though a brave, hardy, and even contentious people, were not so light, irritable, and rebellious as those of Aquitaine, who at all periods of history have shown a factious and turbulent disposition, carrying many of the vices as well as the high qualities of the French nation