http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/10574/pg10574-images.html
NOTE: The chapters in the text of Hume's History of England are not subdivided into Sections, as my posts will be. The Sections will broadly (not always exactly) correspond with the subdivisions of the LibraVox recording of the book to which I am listening.
"[MN 1154. State of Europe] The extensive confederacies by which the European potentates are now at once united and set in opposition to each other, and which, though they are apt to diffuse the least spark of dissension throughout the whole, are at least attended with this advantage, that they prevent any violent revolutions or conquests in particular states, were totally unknown in ancient ages;
and the theory of foreign politics, in each kingdom, formed a speculation much less complicated and involved than at present.
Commerce had not yet bound together the most distant nations in so close a chain:
wars, finished in one campaign, and often in one battle, were little affected by the movements of remote states:
the imperfect communication among the kingdoms, and their ignorance of each other's situation, made it impracticable for a great number of them to combine in one project or effort:
and above all, the turbulent spirit and independent situation of the barons or great vassals in each state gave so much occupation to the sovereign, that he was obliged to confine his attention chiefly to his own state and his own system of government, and was more indifferent about what passed among his neighbours.
Religion alone, not politics, carried abroad the views of princes; while it either fixed their thoughts on the Holy Land, whose conquest and defence was deemed a point of common honour and interest, or engaged them in intrigues with the Roman pontiff, to whom they had yielded the direction of ecclesiastical affairs, and who was every day assuming more authority than they were willing to allow him.
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics & formatting added)
FFL COMMENT: An insight into the nature of confederacies, speaking generally in Europe.
"[MN State of France.] On the decline of the Carlovingian race, the nobles in every province of France, taking advantage of the weakness of the sovereign, and obliged to provide, each for his own defence, against the ravages of the Norman freebooters, had assumed, both in civil and military affairs, an authority almost independent, and had reduced within very narrow limits the prerogative of their princes. The accession of Hugh Capet, by annexing a great fief to the crown, had brought some addition to the royal dignity; but this fief, though considerable for a subject, appeared a narrow basis of power for a prince who was placed at the head of so great a community. The royal demesnes consisted only of Paris, Orleans, Estampes, Compeigne, and a few places scattered over the northern provinces: in the rest of the kingdom, the prince's authority was rather nominal than real:
the vassals were accustomed, nay entitled, to make war, without his permission, on each other:
they were even entitled, if they conceived themselves injured, to turn their arms against their sovereign:
they exercised all civil jurisdiction, without appeal, over their tenants and inferior vassals:
their common jealousy of the crown easily united them against any attempt on their exorbitant privileges;
and as some of them had attained the power and authority of great princes, even the smallest baron was sure of immediate and effectual protection.
Besides six ecclesiastical peerages, which, with the other immunities of the church, cramped extremely the general execution of justice, there were six lay peerages, Burgundy, Normandy, Guienne, Flanders, Toulouse, and Champaigne, which formed very extensive and puissant sovereignties. And though the combination all those princes and barons could, on urgent occasions, muster a mighty power; yet it was very difficult to set that great machine in movement; it was almost impossible to preserve harmony in its parts; a sense of common interest alone could, for a time, unite them under their sovereign against a common enemy; but if the king attempted to turn the force of the community against any mutinous vassal, the same sense of common interest made the others oppose themselves to the success of his pretensions. Lewis the Gross, the last sovereign, marched at one time to his frontiers against the Germans at the head of an army of two hundred thousand men; but a petty lord of Corbeil, of Puiset, of Couci, was able, at another period, to set that prince at defiance, and to maintain open war against him."
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics & formatting added)
FFL COMMENT: An insight into the nature of confederacies, speaking more specific of France at that time.
"The authority of the English monarch was much more extensive within his kingdom, and the disproportion much greater between him and the most powerful of his vassals.
His demesnes and revenue were large, compared to the greatness of his state:
he was accustomed to levy arbitrary exactions on his subjects;
his courts of judicature extended their jurisdiction into every part of the kingdom:
he could crush by his power, or by a judicial sentence, well or ill founded, any obnoxious baron:
and though the feudal institutions which prevailed in his kingdom had the same tendency as in other states to exalt the aristocracy and depress the monarchy, it required, in England, according to its present constitution, a great combination of the vassals to oppose their sovereign lord, and there had not hitherto arisen any baron so powerful, as of himself to levy war against the prince, and to afford protection to the inferior barons."
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics & formatting added)
"While such were the different situations of France and England, and the latter enjoyed so many advantages above the former, the accession of Henry II., a prince of great abilities, possessed of so many rich provinces on the continent, might appear an event dangerous, if not fatal, to the French monarchy, and sufficient to break entirely the balance between the states.
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics added)
FFL COMMENT: An insight into the nature of confederacies, speaking more specific of France at that time.
"[...] These provinces [possessed by Henry II, also King of England] composed above a third of the whole French monarchy, and were much superior, in extent and opulence, to those territories which were subjected to the immediate jurisdiction and government of the king. The vassal [that is, Henry II] was here more [in France] powerful than his liege lord: the situation which had enabled Hugh Capet to depose the Carlovingian princes seemed to be renewed, and that with much greater advantages on the side of the vassal; and when England was added to so many provinces, the French king had reason to apprehend, from this conjuncture, some great disaster to himself and to his family: but in reality, it was this circumstance, which appeared so formidable, that saved the Capetian race, and, by its consequences, exalted them to that pitch of grandeur which they at present enjoy.
The limited authority of the prince in the feudal constitutions prevented the King of England from employing with advantage the force of so many states, which were subjected to his government; and these different members, disjoined in situation, and disagreeing in laws, language, and manners, were never thoroughly cemented into one monarchy. He soon became, both from his distant place of residence, and from the incompatibility of interests, a kind of foreigner to his French dominions; and his subjects on the continent considered their allegiance as more naturally due to their superior lord, who lived in their neighbourhood, and who was acknowledged to be the supreme head of their nation. He was always at hand to invade them; their immediate lord was often at too great a distance to protect them; and any disorder in any part of his dispersed dominions gave advantages against him. [...]"
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics & formatting added)
"[MN 1155. First acts of Henrys government.] The first acts of Henry's government corresponded to the high idea entertained of his abilities, and prognosticated the re-establishment of justice and tranquillity, of which the kingdom had so long been bereaved.
He immediately dismissed all those mercenary soldiers who had committed great disorders in the nation; and he sent them abroad, together with William of Ypres, their leader, the friend and confidant of Stephen.
He revoked all the grants made by his predecessor, even those which necessity had extorted from the Empress Matilda; and that princess, who had resigned her rights in favour of Henry, made no opposition to a measure so necessary for supporting the dignity of the crown. \
He repaired the coin, which had been extremely debased during the reign of his predecessor; and he took proper measures against the return of a like abuse.
He was vigorous in the execution of justice, and in the suppression of robbery and violence;
and that he might restore authority to the laws, he caused all the new erected castles to be demolished, which had proved so many sanctuaries to freebooters and rebels. The Earl of Albemarle, Hugh Mortimer, and Roger the son of Milo of Gloucester, were inclined to make some resistance to this salutary measure; but the approach of the king with his forces soon obliged them to submit."
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics & formatting added)
"[MN 1158.] The martial disposition of the princes in that age engaged them to head their own armies in every enterprise, even the most frivolous; and their feeble authority made it commonly impracticable for them to delegate, on occasion, the command to their generals. [...]"
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762
"[...] Henry found that it would be requisite to support his pretensions against potent antagonists; and that nothing but a formidable army could maintain a claim which he had in vain asserted by arguments and manifestoes."
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762
"An army, composed of feudal vassals, was commonly very intractable and undisciplined, both because of the independent spirit of the persons who served in it, and because the commands were not given, either by the choice of the sovereign, or from the military capacity and experience of the officers. Each baron conducted his own vassals:
his rank was greater or less, proportioned to the extent of his property:
even the supreme command under the prince was often attached to birth;
and as the military vassals were obliged to serve only forty days at their own charge; though if the expedition were distant, they were put to great expense; the prince reaped little benefit from their attendance.
Henry, sensible of these inconveniences, levied upon his vassals in Normandy, and other provinces which were remote from Toulouse, a sum of money in lieu of their service; and this commutation, by reason of the great distance, was still more advantageous to his English vassals. He imposed, therefore, a scutage of one hundred and eighty thousand pounds on the knights fees, a commutation to which, though it was unusual, and the first perhaps to be met with in history, the military tenants willingly submitted; and with this money he levied an army which was more under his command, and whose service was more durable and constant.
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics & formatting added)
"[MN Disputes between the civil and ecclesiastical powers.] The usurpations of the clergy, which had at first been gradual, were now become so rapid, and had mounted to such a height, that the contest between the regale and pontificale was really arrived at a crisis in England, and it became necessary to determine whether the king or the priests, particularly the Archbishop of Canterbury, should be sovereign of the kingdom. The aspiring spirit of Henry, which gave inquietude to all his neighbours, was not likely long to pay a tame submission to the encroachments of subjects; and as nothing opened the eyes of men so readily as their interests, he was in no danger of falling, in this respect, into that abject superstition which retained his people in subjection. From the commencement of his reign, in the government of his foreign dominions, as well as of England, he had shown a fixed purpose to repress clerical usurpations, and to maintain those prerogatives which had been transmitted to him by his predecessors. [...] In England, the mild character and advanced years of Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, together with his merits in refusing to put the crown on the head of Eustace, son of Stephen, prevented Henry, during the lifetime of that primate, from taking any measures against the multiplied encroachments of the clergy; but after his death, the king resolved to exert himself with more activity, and that he might be secure against any opposition, he advanced to that dignity Becket, his chancellor, on whose compliance he thought he could entirely depend."
David Hume, History of England, Vol.1, Ch.8, Section 1, 1762 (italics added)
No comments:
Post a Comment