Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

CHAP.
VIII.

the young Aragonese prince, for their king, and defied united Europe to subdue them. There was no alternative but to leave the Sicilians their independence and their constitution, for which they had so gallantly fought. Thus terminated the stirring and heroic episode of the Sicilian war.

The French king turned his attention to what was more profitable than conquest beyond the Pyrenees, and this was the extension of his monarchy to the entire range of these mountains by the reduction of Guienne. Edward the First had shown towards the young French monarch an obsequiousness and a kindness similar to that which Henry the Second had shown to Philip Augustus; and he met with a similar return. If Henry had desired to remain the nominal vassal of France, Edward was equally submissive with respect to Guienne. That province, almost limited to Bordeaux and Bayonne, and to the barren lands between them (for the French king's fiefs came to Armagnac, and close to Mont Marsan), was not worth a national war, or any strenuous and constant exertion, for which the spirit or the ideas of the English were not prepared. It was easy for the first Plantagenets to war with the King of France: they had but to call on their feudatories of Normandy, Anjou, and Touraine. But to defend Guienne now required armies of English lieges, and these would not embark on transmarine expeditions. England therefore wisely and of necessity turned the military force of the country in the sole direction in which it could be employed, to the reduction of Wales and of Scotland. Feudal armies were well fitted for reducing neighbours, ill fitted for distant war. Edward subdued Scotland and Wales, and tried to tranquillise the ambition of Philip the Fourth by obsequiousness and fairness. This was no easy matter. Philip was in character a reproduction of his ancestor, Philip Augustus. Although able to maintain his place with dignity and courage at the head of armies,

when circumstances necessitated it, war was not his element. A continuation of it placed his feudatories almost on a level with himself, and this he did not like. His predilections and pastime were indeed the exercise of his judicial rights as king, by means of parliament, and of the supremacy which he attributed to it; his favourites were the band of lawyers who animated that parliament, and inspired the councils of the crown. A similar taste and similar predilections were remarkable in the good St. Louis, who, of all characters, preferred that of the paternal judge, deciding quarrels and making awards. It was by this love and labour of jurisprudence that Philip Augustus had laid the foundation of monarchic despotism, and that St. Louis had reared the edifice. For it was St. Louis more than any other monarch who dispensed with the concurrence of any assembly of his subjects or of his barons in legislation. The legists, under Philip the Hardy, continued their work as actively as before, though with little use of the king's edicts or name. Philip the Fair did but make use of the powers which St. Louis had procured or bequeathed him.

At the period of his accession the anomaly was, that whilst the monarch had grasped and used an uncontrolled power of judging, administering, and legislating, this was paralysed, and in a great measure rendered futile, by an inadequate amount of military force. The domain of the first monarchs had sufficed for the maintenance of their household. War waged by military feudatories paid itself. By degrees, as kingly power increased, royal functionaries multiplied. Having no funds wherewith to pay these, they were first allowed to reimburse themselves out of the proceeds of judicial courts. The Provost of Paris was salaried by the sums or fines which artizans paid for the liberty of exercising their trades. This led to abuse, and St. Louis gave the provost a fixed salary out of the treasury. No doubt the

CHAP.

VIII.

CHAP.
VIII.

same principle was extended to other functionaries, and a large amount soon was consequently required for the salaries of civil officers. The produce of the domain, of the tailles from towns, of relief and aid from feudal tenants, was not sufficient to meet the increased expenditure, which monarchs had no means of explaining to their subjects. And thus Philip the Fair and Edward the First obtained the character of rapacious sovereigns, whereas, in reality, they were always in want, and always grasping money, for the necessities of the State.

M. Guizot, in his history of French civilisation, distinguishes between those who became despots with a great, disinterested, and progressive aim, and those who were despots from mere personal gratification. He presents St. Louis as a sample of the first, and Philip the Fair as an exemplification of the second. But this monarch does not appear to have been actuated by movements of caprice or vindictiveness, so much as by the marked disparity between his authority and his means. All the enterprises of Philip the Fair were conceived with the view of increasing his revenues, or procuring ready money. Hence he gave up the war of Aragon as impossible. He endeavoured to seize Guienne, and get rid of all English claims, north of the Garonne, which were chiefly pecuniary. For the same reason he attacked Flanders, in order to be able to mulct its rich cities. His destruction of the Templars, and his crusade against the Church, had their rise in the same feeling and the same necessity, the procuring for the crown of wealth in some proportion to its power.

Edward the First obeyed the same necessities, and made similar attempts. But he was met on every occasion by determined and yet temperate resistance, which enforced in England the indispensable conjunction of crown and people, and the control of one by the other. In France, chiefly owing to that prostration of feudal rights, and that undermining of the nobler class, of

which national writers are so proud, Philip the Fair encountered no resistance worth recording. The classes of society, jealous of each other, were exultant in each other's downfal; the citizens applauded the humbling of the noblesse; the noblesse aided in the lowering of the clergy; whilst the crown with impunity pillaged all of property and rights, and threatened to reduce the country to Oriental servitude. There in time ensued a reaction, which prevented this from being so soon or at once accomplished. The aristocracy again sprung up to influence and power. But the legal and constitutional path was lost, and with it the possibility of reconciling in a practical constitution the conflicting claims and rights of different orders. The result was a century of anarchy to be followed by centuries of resuscitated despotism.

With respect to Guienne, the encroachment of the parliament of Paris upon its judicial independence began in the reign of St. Louis, and was most actively pushed in that of Philip the Hardy. Whoever was aggrieved in Guienne, whether feudal chief or convent or prelate, appealed to Paris, for they found it too often useless to apply to London. It was one of these appeals which compelled Edward, on his first accession, to crush the Count of Bearn. In 1275, the clerics of Aquæ in Gascony complained that Edward had sequestered their property. In the following year, Edward acquainted Philip that he might do what he pleased in the disputed matter of Fronsac. The French parliament procecded further, and demanded a right of legislation over Guienne. A custom prevailed there of nobles, when accused of murder, being permitted to clear themselves by an oath of compurgation. Edward consented to reform this, whilst the Gascons protested against being delivered over to French jurisdiction. The Parisian legists poured in their summonses, wherever there were appeals. To these the English authorities or

[blocks in formation]

CHAP.

VIII.

CHAP.

VIII.

Gascons did not always pay attention, and the result was, sentences against them in the Paris Court, condemning them to fines, and even forfeiture. This abuse reached such a height, that in 1283, when Philip the Hardy was entering upon his war with Aragon, and felt the necessity of listening to Edward's complaints, he issued an edict or letter of discharge, ordering that in any case of appeals to the French courts from Guienne, no penalty or forfeiture should ensue to the seneschals or officers of England, as long as Edward lived. This evidently was done for the sake of establishing the right, and enforcing it in the ensuing reign. It is astonishing that a spirited prince like Edward should have suffered this. But in the same year Philip made some concessions respecting the lands or annuities which St. Louis had promised to restore. He, for instance, gave 3000 livres annual, in lieu of the claim on Cahors. Edward, on his side, continued to exert himself to bring about peace between France and the Spanish monarchs of Castille and Aragon. And as long as the war lasted, Philip did not disturb the accord between himself and the English monarch.

When the French king had extricated himself from the Aragonese war, and when the dispute with Sicily began to smoulder and die out, then indeed he seized the first opportunity of quarrelling with Edward, and robbing him of Guienne. The circumstances which enabled him to proceed in the enforcement of such claims, first arose in a quarrel which took place in 1293, between some English and French sailors at Bayonne. A French pilot was killed in the fray: his comrades avenged him by seizing an English pilot and hanging him, suspending a dog at the same time by his side in derision. These acts of violence were no sooner known in England, than all the sailors of the Cinque Ports resolved to avenge their countryman. They fitted out a fleet, and the Normans another.

A naval battle ensued betwixt them, in

« AnteriorContinuar »