asteries made them again centres of culture. He had reunited England and Normandy and had extended English influence in Wales. He had preserved peace with Scotland. But he was only an administrator. He left a system only, and instilled no abiding principles of the order and peace he had so sternly enforced. It remained to be seen how such a system would fare when the mainstay and pivot of it all was removed.

Henry I. had tried to ensure the succession of his daughter. Matilda, who had married Geoffrey Plantagenet of Anjou (p. 15). But the Angevins were the hereditary foes of the Normans and Matilda herself was personally unpopular. Henry had made the Barons swear to support the title of herself and her son Henry (II.), but Stephen of Blois had little difficulty in creating a party in support of his own claims.

He was the son of the Conqueror's daughter Adela. Direct hereditary succession was by no means a settled principle of the English Monarchy, and the rule of a woman was a novelty, and may well have seemed a dangerous experiment to try in those turbulent times. Moreover Stephen, being less of a foreigner than Geoffrey, Matilda's husband, was for that reason more acceptable to the English.

In character he was brave, and with considerable military experience. This commended him to the Barons, as also, though for different reasons, did his easy-going good nature. In the result he was found to be quite unfitted for the post which he obtained. Gifted neither with a strong will nor a

Stephen. a, his title and

character. (Stubbs i, 344. Green 101.)

b, his supporters. (Stephens 144.)

c, measures to

clear head, he never felt confidence in himself or inspired it in others. He was impulsive rather than tenacious, and tried to gain by ready promises and easy concessions what he should have secured by firmness and decision.

He was welcomed by London and the Merchants, and his brother, who was Bishop of Winchester, secured the general secure acceptance allegiance of the Clergy by promising them good government. Like Henry I., Stephen issued a Charter in which he made large and general promises.

1. Charter of

Liberties.

(Stubbs i, 347, Sel. Chart. 120).

2. Concessions to Barons.

d, sources of

weakness.

1. His own character and actions.

Baronage.

(Green 102.)

I. To the Clergy he promised freedom of election and action. 2. To the Barons he promised a withdrawal of Henry I.'s encroachments on their privileges and lands.

3. To the people he promised repression of the injustice and exactions of the Sheriffs.

Like Henry, too, he had a dangerous rival who found many supporters (p. 15). Stephen tried to strengthen himself not by weakening these, to the general advantage, but by actually strengthening them, to the general harm. Whereas Henry's reign had been marked by growing firmness of administration and steady improvement in order and rule, Stephen's rapidly sank into anarchy.

Matilda's title had been sworn to by all the nobles, Stephen included. Stephen was the first to break his oath, and the example of unfaithfulness which he thus set was only too readily copied both by his own adherents and by Matilda's. 2. Selfish aims of The Barons were divided between two motives, each equally selfish. On the one hand they hoped for independence under a Queen, and on the other they knew that Stephen would try to bribe them to his side by yielding them powers which they would use for their own advantage only, and to the harm of both king and nation. The Clergy soon found that Stephen's charter meant but little. They were offended by his violation of its promises; and his arrest of the Justiciar, Roger, 3. Clergy alienated. Bishop of Salisbury, at one blow alienated the clergy, the government officials, and the friends of settled rule; while it paralysed the administration of government. Stephen's utter incapacity was soon seen. He wasted the Treasury and squandered the revenues on favourites. His use of Flemish mercenaries offended the national feeling which had given him the crown. He tried to bribe the Barons by giving them undue privileges, allowing them to build castles, and actually helping some of them by grants from the (Stubbs i, 350) national exchequer.

(Stephens 146.)

4. Failure of Government.

5. Unpopularity.

II. Temporary

success.

a, "The Fiscal

Earldoms."

b, defeat of Matilda and Scots.

Northallerton 1138.

(Oman 386-91.)

For the moment he succeeded. Robert of Gloucester, Matilda's half-brother, rose in support of her claims. Bigod and other Barons rose also. The Scots invaded the north. All these enemies were defeated, the Scots by the efforts of the National Fyrd at Northallerton. It was called the Battle of

(Norgate i, 289)

Government.

the Standard because the Englishmen rallied round a car bearing the banners of the great English Abbeys of the north, S. Peter of York, S. Wilfrid of Ripon, and S. John of Beverley. But Stephen was unable to turn his good fortune to account. III. Breakdown of The Barons, his supporters and opponents alike, agreed in setting law and restraint at defiance. Stephen's folly in allowing them to build castles, and his ill-advised concessions, resulted in hopeless disorder. William of Newborough, the a, Feudal abuses. greatest historian of the 12th Century, wrote: "there were in England as many kings, or rather tyrants, as there were lords of castles. Each had the power of striking his own coin, and of exercising supreme rule over his dependents. As each was really for himself though nominally for Stephen or Matilda they fought among themselves with deadly hatred. They spoiled the fairest regions with fire and rapine, and in a country which had once been most fertile they destroyed almost all the provision of bread."

1. Capture of Stephen. (Oman 392.)

3.

Alienation of

Londoners.

Stephen's release

4. Siege of Oxford.

When Matilda came to England she only added to the b, Outbreak of War. disorder. At first she found many supporters, and Robert of Gloucester on her behalf won considerable success. He even captured Stephen at Lincoln in 1141, and secured the recognition of Matilda as "Lady of England" at Winchester. But her weakness proved as great as Stephen's and offended all 2. classes, especially the Londoners. Robert's capture gave Stephen his liberty, for the prisoners were exchanged, and the civil war continued with increased bitterness. In 1142 Matilda was besieged for some months in Oxford, and only escaped by the daring expedient of dressing in white when the ground was covered with snow and so avoiding detection. The state of the country was appalling. The memorable c, Feudal Anarchy. words of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are picturesque and vivid. "They filled the land full of castles, and they filled the castles with devils. They took those men that they thought had anything, both by night and by day, even peasant men and women, and put them in prison for their gold and silver and tortured them. They laid imposts on the towns, and when the wretched men had no more to give they robbed and burned the towns, so that thou mightest well go a day's journey and never find a man sitting in a town or the land tilled. If two or three men came riding to a town all fled before them, thinking them to be robbers. Mer said openly that Christ and His Saints were asleep."

(Stubbs i, 354.)

lingford, 1153.

The extremity of the evil brought its own remedy. All d, Treaty of Walbecame exhausted, and when, in 1153, Henry of Anjou, Matilda's son, landed in England from Normandy, which her husband Geoffrey had succeeded in taking and keeping, (Norgate i. 400.) Archbishop Theobald brought about a settlement. The death of Eustace, Stephen's son, about the same time helped

'Adulterine Castles'

IV. Significance of

the Reign.

a, Clergy.

(Green 103.)

b, Monarchy.

c, People.
(Green 92.)

the same cause. The terms of the Treaty of Wallingford were: 1. Stephen was to be King, but the succession was to pass to young Henry.

2. The independent strongholds which the Barons had built were to be destroyed.

3. There was to be a general reform of abuses and establishment of order.

Stephen died next year.

The reign is important in the history of England. (a) It showed how much the measures of William I. and the work of Anselm had strengthened the Clergy. (1) The Clergy had had a large share in setting Stephen on the throne (p. 20); (2) their falling away contributed much to ruin his power; (3) the Treaty of Wallingford was largely the result of their efforts. (4) In the confusion into which the Civil Courts were plunged. (p. 20) the ecclesiastical courts gained great extensions of power and authority, which were afterwards to prove sources of difficulty and trouble.

(b) The reign showed Feudalism in its true colours. The misery which all alike suffered from the unfettered tyranny of the Barons drew together clergy and people in a common bond of union, ready to support a strong ruler.

(c) In the general confusion the Towns prospered. Their own strong walls enabled them to defy the Barons, and in the desire of all parties to procure supporters they obtained many Charters of privileges, and shook off many restraints. While rival claimants were fighting for the crown municipal govern-ment within the towns made good progress.