Richard I. was Henry II.'s second son. His eldest brother. His character. Henry had died in 1183 (p. 32). Like his father he was a great continental sovereign, but unlike his father he neglected England almost entirely. In his reign, as in his father's, much progress was seen in the development of the administration, both central and local, but whereas under Henry II. it had proceeded from the direct guidance of the King, under Richard I. it proceeded in spite of him and actually in consequence of his neglect of English affairs.

The new king was no Englishman. He was a brilliant soldier, but his great exploits, his military skill, and his adventurous spirit were poor substitutes for the important requisite for a good King sympathy with, or at least consideration for, the people he was called upon to rule. Richard had neither. His ambition was merely that of a warrior; and even as a warrior the glory he sought was victory rather than conquest.

He looked upon England as merely a treasure-chest to provide money for his military expeditions. His sole object was

Crusade.

to win renown in the Third Crusade which had just begun. II. The Third The Turks, led by Saladin, had crowned a series of successes by capturing Jerusalem from the Christians in 1187, and Pope a, Cause. Gregory VIII. appealed to the kings of Christendom to drive them out of the Holy Land. Henry II. had been prevented, but his son at once determined to go.

b, Richard's Financial expedients.

(Norgate, 470.)

(Sel. Chart, 264.)

c, Richard's share.

(Oman 303-9.)

d, Its failure.

e, Richard's return and captivity.

f, John's treachery.

III. War with

He used all possible methods of raising money.

1. Wards were hurried into marriage or the feudal fees (p. 10) were taken in advance.

2. Charters of privileges were sold to towns (e.g. London,
Winchester, Lincoln, etc.)

3. Offices, such as Sheriffdoms, and titles, were sold.
4. The Jews were fleeced.

5. The feudal supremacy over Scotland, so lately asserted,
(p. 31) was bartered away.

In alliance with Philip Augustus of France (p. 32) Richard set out by sea. The two kings met and wintered in Sicily but quarrels broke out between them, and Philip was offended by Richard's marriage with Berengaria of Navarre. In the spring of 1191 they set out for Palestine and Richard captured Cyprus on the way. They besieged Acre and Philip withdrew. Richard, after sullying his cause by massacring 5000 Turkish hostages, advanced southwards. At Arsouf he defeated Saladin, but quarrelled with Leopold the Archduke of Austria, the leader of the Imperial troops who had come by land through Asia Minor. Jealousies and rivalries among the various commanders, added to mismanagement and selfishness, ruined their chances of success, and though Richard pushed on almost to within sight of the Holy City he never actually saw it. The utmost he could accomplish was an agreement with the brave and chivalrous Saladin, by which Christian pilgrimages to Jerusalem were to be permitted.

Richard left Acre in the autumn of 1192 but was wrecked on the coast of Italy. Fearing to fall into the hands of those he had offended in Palestine he attempted to make his way home in disguise. He was betrayed to Leopold and given up to the Emperor Henry VI. who held him to ransom.

His brother John took the opportunity to attempt to seize England. He won Philip's assistance by doing homage to him for Normandy. But the Justiciar in England, William of Coutances, and Eleanor, Richard's mother, collected, by enormous exactions, the huge ransom which Henry VI. demanded, and in March 1194 the King returned. John had seized and fortified several royal castles, in Nottinghamshire and elsewhere, but was no match for Richard. He fled incontinently.

Richard, having been less than three months in England, followed John to Normandy whence he never returned.

He overcame John as easily in France as in England. But France. Richard realised that the constant efforts of the Kings of France to extend their feudal supremacy over the Kings of England, who, in their capacity as Dukes of Normandy were in the position of vassals, could only be kept in check by force. Other princes had suffered encroachments also, and a league

and Flanders.

was made between Richard, his nephew the Emperor Otto IV. a, League with Emp (p. 31) and the Duke of Flanders. To defend the frontier of Normandy against Philip, and to secure the loyalty of the Normans, who had always hated the Angevins (p. 19) and therefore felt little affection for Richard, he built Chateau Gaillard. Rising high above the valley of the Seine it was b, Chateau Gaillard. indeed a saucy castle," a daring defiance both to his feudal superior and to his discontented subjects.

Richard's military skill had been increased by his crusading experiences and Chateau Gaillard was perhaps the finest piece of fortification which the age produced.

It was placed in a splendid strategical position and completely blocked the main avenue of invasion from France. It stood at the end of a long spur of steep ground, connected with the hills only by a narrow neck. In this, though it was of solid rock, a deep ditch was hewn to bar assault from the only exposed side. Elsewhere the slopes are so steep that assault was practically out of the question. In the planning of the castle consummate skill was shown. The lines of fortification were drawn in accordance with the latest ideas, and each of the concentric wards commanded the one outside it. The Donjon-keep, the place where the final stand was to be made if all the rest were taken, was not only of immense strength of wall but was furnished with clever devices to defeat the attempts of besiegers. A stone gallery ran round its summit, with holes in the floor through which missiles could be shot, stones dropped, or liquid combustibles poured, on the assailants beneath. Below it the walls splayed out, to increase their strength and to throw the missiles further outwards.

When Chateau Gaillard was captured by Philip Augustus in 1204 it was only because John's folly had allowed it to be neglected and failed to relieve it when it was besieged. Even so it held out, unsupported and famine-stricken, for six months. When the final assault came through the breach which the miners had made, only 20 knights and a hundred and twenty of the garrison were left.

(Oman 533;

Green 114; plan
Oman plate xxi.)

The castle was hardly finished when a revolt in Poitou called c, rising in Poitou. Richard thither. In the midst of threats to massacre the whole

inmates of the castle of Chalus unless they surrendered, an

arrow from the walls struck him with a mortal wound.

The

strange contradictions in his nature continued to the end. d, Richard's death. For seven years he had refused to forgive Philip, who had, as

he imagined, wronged him, yet he freely forgave the poor

archer who had killed him.

We have said but little of England during Richard's reign. iv. His Reign. The importance of the reign arises from the fact that the absence of the King, who had hitherto been the moving spirit of the government, increased the importance of the officials.

importance.

a, Its constitutional Henry II.'s work was allowed to consolidate and strengthen itself without interference, and Englishmen began to learn how to conduct their own affairs. This was the case in all departments. Just as the highest officials, even the Justiciar, had to govern by themselves, unaided by the King, so the power of the local officials in the towns increased as the Charters of privileges which they bought from the needy King gave them new powers of self-government.

b, The Justiciars.

1. Longchamp

1190-91.

With an absent King the office of Justiciar obtained increased importance.

1. William Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, first held the office. He was also Papal Legate. He showed himself to be arrogant (Stephens 199-201.) and oppressive both in civil and in ecclesiastical affairs. He soon aroused general indignation and was obliged to flee the country. It was a foretaste of the combination of all classes which, later, won Magna Carta. It was also an early foreshadowing of the doctrine of the responsibility of ministers, for the barons definitely asserted their right to control even the Justiciar.

2. Coutances

1191-94.

3. Hubert Walter 1194-98.

a, his work,

b, his fall.

2. William of Coutances, Archbishop of Rouen, took his place. He was energetic and able, and enjoyed the support of Queen Eleanor, but the heavy ransom for Richard which he was obliged to raise prevented him from being popular, and Richard needed his help in France.

3. Hubert Walter, Bishop of Salisbury, succeeded him. He had been trained under Henry II., and his object was to continue Henry's policy and to develop and strengthen the administration he had organised.

i. His Grand Iter in 1194 did much to improve local govern

ment :

(a) Coroners were to be elected in the County Courts for the judicial work ;

(b) Justices Itinerant were bound to take the evidence of elected "recognitors."

ii. He found much difficulty in raising the money which Richard required for his campaigns in France.

(a) Tallages and Scutages had to be frequently demanded;

(b) The old Danegeld was revived under the name of Carucage, which was a tax of five shillings on every hundred acres ;

(c) The clergy were frequently called upon to pay large

sums;

(d) The towns were frequently taxed.

These heavy exactions, coming after the severe drainage to which the country had recently been subjected to provide Richard's ransom, roused universal discontent, and a dangerous insurrection was headed in London by William Fitz

1195.

Osbert who was popularly called Longbeard." This shook c, Longbeard Hubert's authority severely, and when in 1198 he had to bring forward Richard's demand that Englishmen should serve abroad, the Bishop of Lincoln, "S. Hugh" as he was afterwards called, headed a steadfast refusal. The Justiciar resigned. Fitz-Peter carried on the government for the rest 4. Fitz Peter. of the reign, following in the lines laid down by his predecessor.

(Norgate 350.)

1198-1213.