in the folk-moot flowed into the coffers of the church. On the other hand, in inflicting ecclesiastical penances the clergy endeavoured to secure the payment by evil-doers of the compensation which the secular law prescribed. It is laid down to be the duty alike of the bishop and of the king and his officer, when clerk or stranger is injured, to fill the place of kinsmen and to call the offender to account. Again, the independence of the bishops was utilized on behalf of the state by entrusting to them the collection of fines incurred by secular officers for misdemeanour in their offices. This connexion of the prelates with lay officials had a natural result: the former kept constant watch on the conduct of the latter and served as a counterpoise to their influence.

The principal representatives of the independence of the church at this period came to be the monasteries. But their striving for independence was directed even against the bishops. Probably there were instances, though rare ones, as early as Anglo-Saxon times, in which larger monasteries were freed wholly from episcopal interference."

How bishops and abbots were appointed in the last centuries of the Anglo-Saxon era, is a difficult matter to ascertain.10 Two rights were in conflict with each other: the right, traced back to heathen days, of free election by the clergy, and the right, at least to co-operate, of those who had endowed the several bishoprics and abbeys. Particularly in the monasteries, the right of free choice of an abbot (subject to episcopal confirmation) seems to have been in great measure maintained. In numerous cases, however, we find

Cf. § 59, note 19.

Edward and Guthrum c 12, buton he elles ôðerne (kinsmen) haebbe. Be leôd-gepineðum and lage (Of people's ranks and law), Schmid, appendix V c 8. Instituta Cnuti (Schmid, appendix XX; a law-book, probably dating from shortly after 1110) III c 63.-The right of representing kinsmen in such a case is ascribed to the king-but not in such a way as to exclude the possibility of the bishop's right side by side with the king's-in Aethelred VIII c 33, Knut II c 40, leg. Henrici I (a law-book, probably dating from 1110-18. Schmid, appendix XXI) c 10 § 3, c 75 § 7.

8 Aethelstan (924 (925)-940) II c 26 § 1: And se biscop amanige på oferhŷrnesse aet pâm gerêfan, be hit on his folgode sŷ ('And let the bishop collect the penalty for disobedience [i.e. for the non-execution of a law promulgated at the same time] from the gerefa, who is in his diocese'). Eadgar (959–75) III c 3: And se déma þe ôdrum wôh dême, gesylle þam cynge hund-twelftig scill. tô bôte, and amanige bære scire bisceop þá bote tô þaes cynges handa ("Let him who judgeth unjustly pay the king 120 shillings as a penalty, and let the bishop of the shire gather it into the king's hands").

Further details in Stubbs, Introduction to Epistolae Cantuarienses (Rer. Brit. Scr. No. 38 Vol. II) pp xxvii ff.

10 Cf. Gneist, Vfgsgesch. § 2, note 5; also Stubbs, Const. Hist. I, 149 c 6 § 57. 11 Poenitentiale Theodori (probably dating from the end of the seventh century. Haddan and Stubbs, Counc. III, 173 ff.) lib. II c 6 § 3; Privilege granted by king Wihtred of Kent at a Witenagemot at Baccanceld, relating to the election of an abbot in eight monasteries of Kent (date-between 696 and 716; printed in Haddan and Stubbs III, 238; genuineness not beyond dispute); Dialogus Egberti (regarded as genuine; between 732 and 766; printed in Haddan and Stubbs III, 403) c 11; Synods of Pincahala and Celchyth, 787 (Haddan and Stubbs III, 447) c 5; Council of Celchyth, 816 (Haddan and Stubbs III, 579) c 4.

appointments to abbacies made by other persons, above all by the king. When in the course of the tenth and eleventh centuries, in perhaps a third of all the bishoprics, secular canons were ousted and monastic chapters substituted for them,12 the rights which existed in regard to the election of abbots of monasteries exerted in not a few dioceses a direct influence upon the mode of appointing bishops. Nor had the principle of appointment to bishoprics by free election ever been wholly lost.13 Yet perhaps in a preponderating number of cases their nomination was by the king, often in the national council.

The pretensions of the church to immunity from secular burdens and to independence as against secular magistrates, were still confined in all directions within moderate limits. In the department of legislation the co-operation of the laity was not only tolerated, but actually sought. În the judicial sphere there were as yet only the germs of an attempt to withdraw from laymen all jurisdiction over the clergy; 14 sole and exclusive competence to determine even matters connected with church administration was not claimed by the church; although, in practice, there were many such matters in which the state did not intervene.15 The clergy were not exempt from military service; they did not, indeed, as a rule take part in war personally, but they furnished men from their holdings. In isolated donations of land to churches and monasteries, or on other special occasions, varying degrees of freedom from services to the state.were granted; but in almost all cases there remained at least the trinoda necessitas, as it was called, the obligations of military service, the repair of bridges and the maintenance of fortifications.i When the Anglo-Saxon kings, to keep the Northmen away, saw themselves compelled to pay them tribute the well-known Danegeld— they raised the necessary sums by the imposition of a land-tax. But church lands did not contribute thereto, and they continued to have this immunity whenever afterwards, in Anglo-Saxon times, this tax was levied for other purposes.1

§ 3.

17

c. Development of the church constitution internally."

16

I. Archbishops. After some initial uncertainty the AngloSaxon church, from the beginning of the ninth century onward, was permanently divided into two archiepiscopal provinces, over

12 Compare § 37, note 6.

13 Letters of Alcuin upon occasion of a vacancy in the archbishopric of York, 796 (printed, Haddan and Stubbs, Counc. III, 499, 500). Compare also the examples adduced in Stubbs, Const. Hist. I, 149 f. c 6 § 57. 14 Compare § 59, notes 13, 14.

15 Compare $ 59, sub finem.

16 According to Aethelstan (924 [925]-940) I pr., tithes payable to the church are to be collected even from the bishops' own property.

17 For the taxing of church lands under William II see § 4, note 21.

* Gneist, Engl. Verfassungsgeschichte § 5 I, II.—Stubbs, Const. Hist. c 8.

which the archbishops of Canterbury and York presided. But the development of the northern province was not vigorous; there were always but few bishops there and, in consequence of this, provincial church councils were of rare occurrence.

II. Bishops. In the first decades of the conversion each of the petty kingdoms, with the exception of Kent, received only one bishop. Subsequently (from 673) archbishop Theodore succeeded in increasing the number of bishoprics by dividing them. The bishops, who had originally been themselves active in travelling and spreading the faith by preaching and baptism, confined themselves more and more, as the number of the clergy increased, to the work of superintendence. But even at a later time they had to journey over their dioceses once a year, and were enjoined to hold, apparently also once a year, a diocesan synod.3 In the business of superintendence the bishop was from the beginning of the ninth century aided, afterwards to a gradually increasing extent represented, by his one archdeacon. Whether as early as these AngloSaxon days rural deans were instituted as resident overseers in small districts of the bishopric, is a doubtful matter. The companions of the bishop, who remained behind at the episcopal seat, formed themselves into a corporation. Such a corporation was, in the oldest period, frequently monastic or at least composed of monks and secular priests. In the second half of the eighth century a sharper division was drawn between these two classes. At the same time a decline of monasticism began. In the following century the corporations at the episcopal seats were transformed, everywhere or almost everywhere, into chapters of secular clergy. When then in the tenth century monasticism was rejuvenated, a struggle broke

Compare § 33.

6

3 Compare § 57, notes 1 and 3. 5 Compare § 43, note 2.

Ut

1 Compare § 33. Compare § 42. • Council of Clovesho, 747 (Haddan and Stubbs, Counc. III, 362 ff.): c 4 Ut episcopi in suis parochiis abbates atque abbatissas moneant, quatenus seipsos primo ponant exemplum bene vivendi, deinde subjectos sibi ut regulariter conversantur, diligenti cura exerceant ; c 5. episcopi monasteria, si tamen ea fas est ita nominare, quae utique quamvis temporibus istis propter vim tyrannicae quandam avaritiae, ad religionis Christianae statum nullatenus immutari possint, id est, quae a saecularibus, non Divinae scilicet legis ordinatione, sed humanae adinventionis praesumptione, utcunque tenentur ; tamen pro salute animarum in eisdem commorantium, adire debeant, sit necesse: et ut inter caetera exhortamenta praevideant, ne sine sacerdotis ministerio aliquod illorum deinceps debilitatum periclitetur, juvantibus ad hoc eorum possessoribus; c 19 Ut monachi seu

nunnones

quietam ac regularem vitam agant,

; c 28 . . . et ut inter alias regularis vitae observantias, vestibus consuetis juxta formam videlicet priorum, sive clerici, sive monachi deinceps utantur

; c 29 quod post hanc synodum non liceat clericos, vel monachos vel sanctimoniales, ulterius apud laicos habitare in domibus saecularium, sed repetant monasteria ubi primitus habitum sanctae professionis sumpserant; Legatine synods of Pincahala and Celchyth 787 (Haddan and Stubbs, Counc. III, 447 ff.) c 4: . Ut Episcopi diligenti cura provideant, quo omnes canonici sui canonice vivant, et monachi seu monachae regulariter conversentur, tam in cibis quam in vestibus, ut discretio sit inter canonicum et monachum vel secularem ;

out between the monks and the regular clergy, the former seeking to oust the secular element from the chapters of the bishops. The monks became possessed of a number of cathedral churches; in some places, however, they had to surrender again the position they had won. These contentions were prolonged into Norman times. At the head of the secular chapters was a dean; this dates, at the latest, from towards the end of the Anglo-Saxon period.8

III. Parish priests. It was only by degrees that the episcopal dioceses resolved themselves into smaller districts, in which single clergymen remained to fulfil their office. Gradually the boundaries between these districts were determined. About the end of the eighth century we find the whole of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms already divided up into parishes. In each parish an independent body of church property was formed, in the first instance by donations from the lord of the soil and by irregular gifts upon occasion of divine service, afterwards by tithes and a whole series of other taxes,10 voluntary at the outset, but soon transmuted by ecclesiastical or civil ordinances into enforceable services.

B. FROM THE NORMAN CONQUEST TO THE

REFORMATION.
§ 4.

a. Relation of state and church to one another.a

The conquest of England by the Normans brought with it a tightening of the central state control. This strengthening of the civil power came at a time when the papacy, represented by Gregory VII (pope from 1073), began to express with greater boldness than before the ultimate conclusions to which its principles led, and to demand not merely the exemption of the church from secular interference, but even the subjection of all the various civil forces to the power of the papal see. The existence of these two opposite and progressive tendencies rendered a peaceful co-operation, based on mutual regard, such as had hitherto in general prevailed between church and state, for the future impossible. In its stead came first a sharper accentuation of the opposing principles and a more precise definition of the rights and duties of each power toward the other, then a struggle between the two for mastery in the state.

10 Church-scot, candle-scot, soul-scot, plough-alms.

Gneist, Eng. Verfassungsgeschichte § 14.-Stubbs, Const. Hist. c 9 § 101 (William I), c 10 § 106 (William II), § 112 (Henry 1), c 12 §§ 139, 140 (Henry II), § 153 (John), c 19 and elsewhere. For the time of Henry III: H. R. Luard, On the relation between England and Rome during the earlier portion of the reign of Henry III, Cambridge 1877 (deals with the years 1216-35).-Weber, Heinrich, Uber das Verhältnis Englands zu Rom während der Zeit der Legation des Kardinals Otho in den Jahren 1237-41, Berlin 1883. Cf. also appendix XIV, II, 3 a.

During the first stage of that struggle, from William I to the death of Henry III (1066-1272) we see a steady retreat of the civil power before the superior might of the church, a retreat simply retarded by the best kings, not permanently checked. In the ensuing period, from Edward I to the end of the reign of Richard II (1272-1399), the state turns to the resolute assertion of its rights, and endeavours by strict regulations to restrain the church within limits consistent with the welfare of the body politic. The proceedings of Edward III (1327-77) were partly determined by the circumstance that the popes then living at Avignon (1309-76) were under French influence and necessarily regarded by him, in his wars with France, as foreign foes of England. From Henry IV to the Reformation (1399-1529) follows a third stage, a time of comparative peace. Both parties maintained their irreconcilable views. But the attention of the kings was fully occupied by the continuance of the great struggle with France and by the civil wars of red and white rose; the clergy, on their side, needed the protection of the civil power against the newly arisen party of reform. Thus, in this period again, small skirmishes between church and state occurred; but neither of the two parties staked its whole forces on the issue, and both preferred, as each difficulty sprang up, to bridge the gulf between their principles by conventional dispensations and compro

mises.

The constitution of the English state under the first Norman kings was that of an absolute monarchy, the will of the sovereign being, however, influenced by frequent discussion with his nobles. It was only by degrees that, following isolated precedents, decisive resolutions of the magnates of the land, and consultations with representatives of the knights of the shire and the towns became customary, the former from the time of Henry III, the latter from that of Edward I. In spite of the fact that the influence of the parliament thus originated, gradually increased, the power of the kings remained for long so preponderating, that their personal character almost determined the whole administration of the government. Accordingly, the relation of state to church varied with each succeeding reign, especially during the acute period of the struggle.

William I based his claim to the crown of England mainly on an alleged hereditary right of succession. But he at the same time in invading England appealed to the sanction of pope Alexander II, who had sent him the banner of the church. When, however,

The first attacks of Wycliffe upon the doctrines of the church were circ. 1363. Shirley, Introduction pp. xv ff. to Fasciculi Zizaniorum (Rer. Brit. Scr. No. 5).

* Compare § 21, note 6.

3 Stubbs, Const. Hist. I, 280, note 1 c 9 § 95.—Cf. however the view of the jurists in the thirteenth century, Bracton (Rer. Brit. Scr. No. 70) VI, 74: Non enim tenetur (the king) warrantizare donationem et feoffamenta regum qui regnaverant ante conquestum, ipse enim rex non est eorum haeres

The pope approved the attack on England, partly because archbishop Stigand of Canterbury had obtained the pallium from an antipope.