Monarchs From England

"Finally realizing the seriousness of William's preparations, in late September James tried to back-pedal, abolishing the Ecclesiastical Commission, restoring the old city charters and their Anglican Tory oligarchies, and promising to call a free parliament. This did nothing to placate the Tory clergy or gentry or attack Whig townspeople; instead it demoralized Catholics and threw the local government of the nation into confusion. Soon after hearing that William had landed, James developed a massive nosebleed- probably a psychological reaction. At first glance, the king's panic makes no sense. He had at his immediate disposal 25,000 troops encamped on Salisbury Plain, squarely between William, at Exeter, and London. His coffers were full. He had "home-field" advantage. And there had not been a successful invasion of England since the Wars of the Roses. James should have been able to throw William into the sea in a matter of weeks, if not days. But he must have realized that his forces were largely untested and divided in religion and loyalty. Nor could he have been encouraged by his own obvious personal unpopularity. Perhaps his father's fate haunted him."

"The King, finding resistance impossible, assembled such peers and Privy Counsellors as were still in London, and on their advice entered into negotiations with the Prince of Orange. Meanwhile the invading army moved steadily forward towards London. James sent his wife and son out of the kingdom, and on the night of December 11 stole from the palace at Whitehall, crossed the river, and road to the coast. He endeavoured to plunge his realm into anarchy. He threw the Great Seal into the Thames, and sent orders to Feversham to disband the Army, and to Dartmouth to sail to Ireland with what ships he could. The London mob sacked the foreign embassies, and a panic and terror, known as the "Irish Night," swept the capital. Undoubtedly a complete collapse of order would have occurred but for the resolute action of the Council, which was still sitting in London. With some difficulty they suppressed the storm, and, acknowledging William's authority, besought him to hasten his marches to London. James in his flight had actually got on board a ship, but, missing the tide, was caught and dragged ashore by the fishermen and townsfolk. He was brought back to London, and after some days of painful suspense was allowed to escape again. This time he succeeded and left English soil for ever. But though the downfall and flight of this impolitic monarch were at the time ignominious, his dignity has been restored to him by history. His sacrifice for religion gained for him the lasting respect of the Catholic Church, and he carried with him into lifelong exile an air of royalty and honour."

"That King James the Second, having endeayour'd to subvert the Constitution of the Kingdom, by breaking the Original Contract between King and People; and by the Advice of Jesuits, and other wicked Persons, having violated the Fundamental Laws; and withdrawn himself out of the Kingdom, hath Abdicated the Government, and that the Throne is thereby become Vacant."

"In 1685 and 1686, James II struck several more blows to the Whig network in an attempt to silence the radical voice. Early in the first year of his reign, James moved to put the press under stricter supervision. His government was also quick to move against persons accused of distributing seditious papers or telling seditious tales. Bookstores were raided. Benjamin Harris's stocks were seized, wherein books were found with such titles as English Liberties (Henry Care's book) and A Scheme of Popish Cruelties. In December 1685, warrants to arrest anyone dispersing "seditious, scandalous, and unlicensed books, pamphlets, pictures, and papers" were issued. James's crackdown seems to have successfully hindered the production of radical books and pamphlets in England. The number of books printed in 1686 is the lowest of the entire decade. But the king could not eradicate the dissemination of oppositional propaganda completely or control his subjects' minds, many of which were already influenced by Whig revolution culture. Throughout his reign, persons were still arrested, charged with voicing seditious opinions or distributing seditious libels. Books promoting the Protestant cause were still smuggled in from Holland."

"That this view was extremely naive goes without saying. But James never believed that anyone could honestly and sincerely hold opinions different from his own. He explained opposition in terms of personalities, faction, self-interest, misrepresentation or conspiracy but never in terms of principle... He did not understand that after a century and a quarter of continuous Protestantism Englishmen could not be (and did not wish to be) disabused of their misconceptions about Catholicism by a missionary effort as puny as the one that he mounted. He failed to appreciate that Protestants could be sincerely attached to their beliefs. His schemes were doomed to eventual failure because the vast majority of Englishmen would not willingly turn Papist."

"James's Catholicising policy might seem insane; it can be explained only by his naive and grossly inflated expectations of conversions. Fortified by his sense of divine mission, he believed with a conviction born of faith that converts would appear, not because he had any rational grounds for thinking that they would but because he desperately wanted them to... He blundered on with the blind optimism of a man whose mind was determinedly closed to any thought of failure... [W]hen William invaded, few were prepared to resist him. In less than four years James had destroyed the strongest political position that any Stuart ever enjoyed. He had turned the Tories from vociferous loyalty to sullen apathy. And he had achieved this by concentrating single-mindedly on the line of action that the Tories could not stomach – the promotion of Popery."

"He loved and aimed at absolute power, and believed that nothing could introduce and support it but the catholic religion, as the Romanists call theirs; and this increased his zeal for it, and that zeal increased his disposition to arbitrary power: so that in truth, his religion and his politics were partly the cause of each other, and indeed they cannot easily be separated."

"As Charles defaulted to his father’s autocratic habits, his throne returned to the vulnerability of the 1640s. On his deathbed in 1685, he showed more concern for his mistresses than his monarchy, and predicted that his brother’s reign would be short. So it proved. Louis’s revocation the same year of the Edict of Nantes (which had guaranteed freedom of worship for Protestants) flooded England with Protestant refugees, and every pulpit resounded to tales of Catholic atrocities. James II's Catholicism was toxic. He had to suppress a rebellion by the Protestant Duke of Monmouth, and began appointing Catholics to senior positions in the army, the church and Oxford University. He used his patronage to pack Parliament with loyal Tories. Even so, with the succession securely Protestant, all might have survived but for a final crisis. In June 1688, James’s wife gave birth to a son, thus removing Mary and William from the succession and substituting a Catholic infant. The battered Restoration compromise was in tatters."

"James the Second, who was a very good King, but unhappily believed that it was necessary for the salvation of his subjects that they should be Roman Catholicks."

"In retrospect the Revolution justified the policy of Exclusion. The events of the reign of James II fulfilled Whig predictions, proving that Popery was incompatible with the liberties as well as the religion of the nation. His conduct demonstrated to all that the Crown could not be allowed to retain those prerogative powers which had brought about the defeat of the Whigs, but which James had then turned against the Tories and the Church of England. Later generations disowned Shaftesbury, but they did not repudiate the principles on which the case for Exclusion, as well as the Revolution, rested—that political power should reside with those who possessed the greatest weight in society, and that in the last resort sovereignty rests with the people, the interests of the nation taking precedence over those of the Crown."

"For James the free exercise of Catholicism was the essential thing which, he believed, would lead inevitably to its re-establishment in England without any need for coercion. He thought once Englishmen could see how Catholicism had been misrepresented they would willingly turn to the true faith, especially if that had the weight of royal approval behind it. So long as Catholic worship were freely allowed, other details of the toleration were of secondary importance, merely a matter of tactics. Whether James wanted toleration for Dissenters as well as for Catholics varied according to circumstances. He was not a tolerationist in the sense that he believed that honest differences of opinion could be or should be permitted within a state or that no one church had a monopoly of truth: in fact he believed the opposite. His advocacy of toleration was the product of the self-confidence of his bigotry: if Catholicism were tolerated, it would triumph completely and inevitably and then the question of toleration would lose all meaning."

"Right trusty, worshipful and honourable good friends, and our allies, I greet you well. Being given to understand your good devoir and entreaty to advance me to the furtherance of my rightful claim, due and lineal inheritance of that crown, and for the just depriving of that homicide and unnatural tyrant which now unjustly bears dominion over you, I give you to understand that no Christian heart can be more full of joy and gladness than the heart of me your poor exiled friend, who will, upon the instant of your sure advertising what power you will make ready and what captains and leaders you get to conduct, be prepared to pass over the sea with such force as my friends here are preparing for me. And if I have such good speed and success as I wish, according to your desire, I shall ever be most forward to remember and wholly requite this your great and moving loving kindness in my just quarrel. Given under our signet. H."

"Medieval English military institutions...had been deliberately demolished by Henry VIII's father in his determination to impose the authority of the crown on the great nobles. He forbade private armies of retainers, except under special royal licence in the case of a few trusted magnates. No new royal military organization had replaced this abolished medieval source of troops. Unlike European monarchs, Henry VII had not needed a royal army to suppress by force his overmighty subjects and reunite his kingdom. For the traditional powers and authority of the English monarchy were much stronger than those handed down by struggling medieval European kingships. Englishmen – even jealous nobles – stood more in awe of the Crown and the law than Europeans, whose great vassals exercised almost independent rule over their own lands."

"Prerogativa Regis, which if denied the status of a statute clearly had that of a declaration of the common law. Under their intensive scrutiny that document encompassed more than a medieval escheator would have found within it and thus Henry's feudal rights went well beyond those of his predecessors, but such results were achieved by the rigorous use of the law and logic rather than by their neglect. Admittedly the distinction was not one likely to be fully appreciated by landowners who now felt the full force of an expanded prerogative."

"His body was slender but well built and strong; his height above the average. His appearance was remarkably attractive and his face was cheerful, especially when speaking; his eyes were small and blue, his teeth few, poor and blackish; his hair was thin and white; his complexion sallow. His spirit was distinguished, wise and prudent; his mind was brave and resolute and never, even at moments of the greatest danger, deserted him. He had a most pertinacious memory. Withal he was not devoid of scholarship. In government he was shrewd and prudent, so that no one dared to get the better of him through deceit or guile. He was gracious and kind and was as attentive to his visitors as he was easy of access. His hospitality was splendidly generous; he was fond of having foreigners at his court and he freely conferred favours on them. But those of his subjects who were indebted to him and who did not pay him due honour or who were generous only with promises, he treated with harsh severity. He well knew how to maintain his royal majesty and all which appertains to kingship at every time and in every place. He was most fortunate in war, although he was constitutionally more inclined to peace than to war. He cherished justice above all things; as a result he vigorously punished violence, manslaughter and every other kind of wickedness whatsoever. Consequently he was greatly regretted on that account by all his subjects, who had been able to conduct their lives peaceably, far removed from the assaults and evil doing of scoundrels. He was the most ardent supporter of our faith, and daily participated with great piety in religious services. To those whom he considered to be worthy priests, he often secretly gave alms so that they should pray for his salvation. He was particularly fond of those Franciscan friars whom they call Observants, for whom he founded many convents, so that with his help their rule should continually flourish in his kingdom. But all these virtues were obscured latterly only by avarice, from which...he suffered. This avarice is surely a bad enough vice in a private individual, whom it forever torments; in a monarch indeed it may be considered the worst vice, since it is harmful to everyone, and distorts those qualities of trustfulness, justice and integrity by which the state must be governed."

"Legend sees him as a miser. Truth acquits him of this vice. Legend fostered the impression that at his death he bequeathed to his son vast sums of gold and silver. Even in his lifetime rumour said that it amounted to some £1,800,000. Truth denies that he left in chests such stores of silver and gold, but it adds that he left very considerable resources, largely in the form of papers. The qualification is important. Those papers were recognisances and obligations. They bore witness to transactions whereby subjects had been bound to the King to perform certain promises, default being followed by the forfeiture of heavy sums of money. Despite what has been said to the contrary, most of these pledges were not the result of extortionate practices on the part of the King or his agents. They were rather symbols of Henry’s devices for good government. They represent the means he adopted to gain a hold over lawless subjects who could not be adequately dealt with even by his re-shaped court of star chamber, which he was using to force the great nobles to keep the peace. They were a means of raking in money; but they were also a guarantee of security and peace."

"Perhaps we are now in a position to pronounce with some confidence on the nature of Henry VII's fiscal policy. Down to about 1495 the king and his ministers were mainly engaged in extending the operation of the royal prerogative and erecting a system which would bring in the maximum return from landed revenues and feudal rights... the main work consisted in the extension of the king's legal claims, and this was quite complete by 1495. In the years that followed it appears that Henry turned to the problem of penal statutes, and from 1500 we know that an organization for their enforcement existed. These two activities—which in any case overlapped—do not represent a contrast between justifiable right and unjustifiable extortion. Though two different targets were involved, it is clear that both were targets properly constructed for the king's arrows. The most that one can say is that very possibly some of the exactions which resulted from this consistent and determined policy were oppressive and some unjust. A policy designed to restore half-vanished rights and enforce neglected laws cannot escape being harsh at times. But nothing in the discoverable facts hints at excessive injustice, at a change of attitude, or at some deterioration in the king's character after nearly twenty years of rule."

"Henry VII's government was more effective than that of Henry VIII before 1530 simply because he employed such "conciliar" methods more consistently, more energetically, and perhaps more ruthlessly. But if they are to be judged they must not be measured against a false standard of morality or constitutionalism. For they were neither immoral nor unconstitutional, resting as they did on the king's just prerogative and the needs of the country. One might condemn them because they caused more unpopularity than they were worth: that seems to have been the opinion of those who advised Henry VIII on his accession. The whole history of Henry VII's reign seems to me to disprove this judgment. Hostile views of these methods have prevailed for so long that Henry VII's reputation looked like being permanently damaged by those very things he thought most conducive to strong and good government in England. Yet by an agreeable stroke of justice he has now recovered a high standing among English sovereigns precisely because he governed well and wisely by methods which those who evaded the law might well resent but which represented no rapacity and required no remorse."

"Before the end of his reign he had overhauled the whole of the machinery of financial administration, and he left it completely modernised, so much so that we may say that the main outline of our present-day system of finance was blocked out by him. He enjoyed the work, had a flair for it that was the nearest approach to genius Henry ever revealed. By close application he so equipped himself for this task that before the end of his reign he was virtually his own chief financial officer. Day by day he went carefully through his official accounts, annotating them, scrawling his big initial H in bold strokes across the pages, mastering their contents, and using that knowledge to institute reforms in financial administration. That is why experts see in his scientific reorganisation of the exchequer and the departments of the household and the chamber, the work which must stand out as the really constructive contribution Henry made to the transition from mediaeval to modern England."

"For hit seide þe king Alfred: "Selde erendeð wel þe loþe, an selde plaideð wel þe wroþe.""

"For Alfred seide a wis word, euch mon hit schulde legge on hord: "3ef thu isihst er he beo icume, his strencþe is him wel neh binume.""

"So mon mai welþe lengest helden, giu þu neuere leuen alle monnis spechen, ne alle the þinke þat þu herest sinken."

"Ða ic ða gemunde hu sio Lar Lædengeðiodes ær ðissum afeallen wæs giond Angelcynn, ond ðeah monige cuðon Englisc gewrit arædan, ða ongan ic on gemang oðrum mislicum ond manigfealdum bisgum ðisses kynerices ða boc on Englisc ðe is genemned on Læden Pastoralis, ond on Englisc "Hierdeboc", hwilum word be worde, hwilum andgit of andgite."

"His unique importance in the history of English letters comes from his conviction that a life without knowledge or reflection was unworthy of respect, and his determination to bring the thought of the past within the range of his subjects' understanding. The translations of ancient books by which he tried to reach this end form the beginning of English prose literature."

"He seems to me a very foolish man, and very wretched, who will not increase his understanding while he is in the world, and ever wish and long to reach that endless life where all shall be made clear."

"Me com swiðe oft on gemynd, hwelce wiotan iu wæron giond Angelcynn, ægðer ge godcundra hada ge woruldcundra; ond hu gesæliglica tida ða wæron giond Angelcynn; ond hu ða kyningas ðe ðone onwald hæfdon ðæs folces Gode ond his ærendwrecum hiersumedon; ond hie ægðer ge hiora sibbe ge hiora siodu ge hiora onweald innanbordes gehioldon, ond eac ut hiora eðel rymdon; ond hu him ða speow ægðer ge mid wige ge mid wisdome; ond eac ða godcundan hadas, hu giorne hie wæron ægðer ge ymb lare ge ymb liornunga, ge ymb ealle ða ðiowotdomas ðe hie Gode don scoldon; ond hu man utanbordes wisdom ond lare hieder on lond sohte; ond hu we hie nu sceoldon ute begietan, gif we hie habban sceoldon."

"He þat is ute biloken he is inne sone forgeten."

"I could see how "democracy" might do very well in a society of saints and sages led by an Alfred or an Antoninus Pius. Short of that, I was unable to see how it could come to anything but an ochlocracy of mass-men led by a sagacious knave."

"Geðenc hwelc witu us ða becomon for ðisse worulde, ða ða we hit nohwæðer ne selfe ne lufodon ne eac oðrum monnum ne lefdon!"

"It grounds secular law upon Scripture, especially upon the principle of mercy. Alfred thus located his law code in a biblical lineage. His historical anthology of legal texts explains that the nature of Christian law is a system of justice in which mercy subsists."

"Þæt is nū hraðost to seċġenne þæt iċ wilnode weorðfullīċe to libbenne þā hwīle þe iċ lifde, and æfter mīnum līfe þām mannum tō lǣfanne þe æfter mē wǣren mīn ġemynd on gōdum weorcum."

"We discern across the centuries a commanding and versatile intelligence, wielding with equal force the sword of war and of justice; using in defence arms and policy; cherishing religion, learning, and art in the midst of adversity and danger; welding together a nation, and seeking always across the feuds and hatreds of the age a peace which would smile upon the land."

"Ne ches þe neuere to fere littele mon ne long ne red... Þe luttele mon he his so rei, ne mai non him wonin nei... Þe lonke mon is leþe bei, selde comid is herte rei... Þe rede mon he is a quet, for he wole þe þin iwil red he is cocker, þef and horeling, scolde, of wrechedome he is king..."

"No other man on record has ever so thoroughly united all the virtues both of the ruler and of the private man. In no other man on record were so many virtues disfigured by so little alloy. A saint without superstition, a scholar without ostentation, a warrior all whose wars were fought in the defence of his country, a conqueror whose laurels were never stained by cruelty, a prince never cast down by adversity, never lifted up to insolence in the day of triumph – there is no other name in history to compare with his."

"For dire was Alfred in his hour The pale scribe witnesseth, More mighty in defeat was he Than all men else in victory, And behind, his men came murderously, Dry-throated, drinking death."

"Doom very evenly! Do not doom one doom to the rich; another to the poor! Nor doom one doom to your friend; another to your foe!"

"ALFRED The Light of a Benighted Age Was a Philosopher and a Christian The Father of his People The Founder of the English MONARCHY and LIBERTY."

""The high tide!" King Alfred cried. "The high tide and the turn! As a tide turns on the tall grey seas, See how they waver in the trees, How stray their spears, how knock their knees, How wild their watchfires burn!"

"Yet Alfred is no fairy tale; His days as our days ran, He also looked forth for an hour On peopled plains and skies that lower, From those few windows in the tower That is the head of a man."

"Lady, by one light only We look from Alfred's eyes, We know he saw athwart the wreck The sign that hangs about your neck, Where One more than Melchizedek Is dead and never dies."

"Englene derling."

"By the yawning tree in the twilight The King unbound his sword, Severed the harp of all his goods, And there in the cool and soundless woods Sounded a single chord. Then laughed; and watched the finches flash, The sullen flies in swarm, And went unarmed over the hills, With the harp upon his arm..."

"In the parts of Mercia acquired by Alfred, the shire system seems now to have been introduced for the first time. This is the one grain of truth in the legend that Alfred was the inventor of shires, hundreds and tithings. … The Celtic principality in Cornwall, which seems to have survived at least till 926, must long have been practically dependent on Wessex. … We come now to what is in many ways the most interesting of Alfred’s works, his translation of Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy, the most popular philosophical manual of the middle ages. Here again Alfred deals very freely with his original and though the late Dr G. Schepss showed that many of the additions to the text are to be traced not to Alfred himself, but to the glosses and commentaries which he used, still there is much in the work which is solely Alfred’s and highly characteristic of his genius. It is in the Boethius that the oft-quoted sentence occurs: “My will was to live worthily as long as I lived, and after my life to leave to them that should come after, my memory in good works.” … The last of Alfred’s works is one to which he gave the title Blostman, i.e. “Blooms” or Anthology. The first half is based mainly on the Soliloquies of St Augustine, the remainder is drawn from various sources, and contains much that is Alfred’s own and highly characteristic of him. The last words of it may be quoted; they form a fitting epitaph for the noblest of English kings. “Therefore he seems to me a very foolish man, and very wretched, who will not increase his understanding while he is in the world, and ever wish and long to reach that endless life where all shall be made clear.” … How Alfred passed to “the life where all things are made clear” we do not know. The very year is uncertain. The arguments on the whole are in favour of 900. The day was the 26th of October. Alike for what he did and for what he was, there is none to equal Alfred in the whole line of English sovereigns; and no monarch in history ever deserved more truly the epithet of Great."

"When Alfred's word was ended Stood firm that feeble line, Each in his place with club or spear, And fury deeper than deep fear, And smiles as sour as brine."

"Cui ab incunabulis ante omnia et cum omnibus praesentis vitae studiis, sapientiae desiderium cum nobilitate generis, nobilis mentis ingenium supplevit."

"For all of Richard’s successes and accomplishments, strengths and abilities, in the end he could be accused of having worked, first and foremost, not for the betterment of his realm, protection of his kin or defence of Christendom, but for himself. His eyes seem to have been fixed on the creation of a legend, rather than the foundation of a legacy. Arguably, the quest for this hollow prize placed the Angevin realm on the path to destruction, for in neglecting the issue of succession, Richard I paved the way for his younger brother’s rise to power. And it would be King John who brought England to its knees and squandered all the Lionheart’s hard-won gains."

"For the authors of chivalric literature, and even some of the more inventive historians writing in the thirteenth century, the Lionheart developed into an ideal protagonist—a heroic figure drawn from the near-past who could emulate the likes of Arthur and his knights."

"One startling fact looms over Richard I’s career: though among the most renowned of all England’s monarchs, the Lionheart spent barely six months on English soil."

"[T]his triumphal and bright shining Starre of Chevalrie."

"Richard conceived of himself not just as a king, but also as a knight: as a warrior-general who could not only lead men in battle, but also wield sword, lance and crossbow with his own hands to deadly effect. In this, he was the product (and perhaps the epitome) of his age, for Richard was born into a culture newly obsessed with the notion of chivalry—one in which prowess was esteemed and honour craved; where a man’s value might be gauged by his reputation and measured by the admiration of his peers."