have done so much, that the names of my monks, and of the clerks who are connected with them, are written in the book of life." a Soon after the murder, John of Salisbury is found writing to ask the Bishop of Poitiers whether, since God had so amply warranted for Thomas the character of a martyr by miracles, it were lawful to venerate him as such without waiting for the formal authorization of the Pope.b

Both among the friends and among the enemies of Henry the tidings of the murder excited the strongest sensation. The monks of Grammont, who were bound to him by especial favours, heard with dismay that the patron who had founded churches for them had violated the sanctity of the church of Canterbury; they strove to disbelieve the guilt which the highest members of the French hierarchy confidently imputed to him. The Abbot of Grammont suspended the building of the abbey-church, which was proceeding at Henry's expense, until the truth of the matter should be ascertained; and Bernard de la Coudre, the Grandimontan who had been employed in one of the papal commissions, addressed to the King a letter of sorrowful reproof and admonition. "You promised," he says, "to give the Archbishop the second place in your kingdom,

a Gervas., 1418.

b Ep. 304, fin. It was in the very year of Becket's death that Alexander III. had declared, "Although miracles be done by one, it is not lawful to reverence him as a saint without the sanction of

the Roman Church." (Alex. ap. Gregor. IX., Decretal. xlv. i.) John of Salisbury would seem not to have been aware of this decree, the first by which canonization was exclusively reserved to the Pope.

provided only that he would show you an appearance of humility before your people. He has done a hundred times what you required, and he lies in the heart of the earth!" Bernard tells the King, that if the murderers were sent by him, he too was a partaker in their crime, but expresses a belief that he was incapable of designing so foul a deed; and he concludes by exhorting Henry to repentance, and by assuring him that the Order of Grammont is awaiting the change with prayers and groaning, in sackcloth and ashes.a

On the other hand, Henry's enemies were eager to take advantage of the occasion by clamouring for vengeance against him. Alexander the Welshman and Gunther the Fleming, whom Becket had despatched to the Pope on St. John the Evangelist's Day, were overtaken at Sens by the report of their master's death, and they carried onwards a letter from Archbishop William, which is the earliest in date of all the extant narratives. In this, and in another letter which followed, the Archbishop, without hesitation, attributes the murder to the "tyrant" of England, whom he declares to be worse than Ahab, Nero, and Herod, than the apostate Julian, and the traitor Judas. He charges as accomplices the "arch-devil" Roger of York, with the "apostate and pretended" Bishops of London and Salisbury; he relates the story of the murder with the exaggerations on one side and the suppressions on the other which have been already mentioned; and he exhorts the Pope to rouse

a Brial, 470-5,

C

66

himself as a son of the shaken out;"a to deal like another Elias with the guiltier than Ahab. Theobald, Count of Blois and nephew of King Stephen, also caught eagerly at the opportunity of gratifying the enmity which he habitually concealed under a pretence of regard for Henry. "The innocent lamb," he wrote to the Pope, "has suffered martyrdom on the morrow of the Holy Innocents. His righteous blood has been shed where the viaticum of our salvation was wont to be offered. The dogs of the Court, the familiars and domestics of the King of England, have acted as his instruments. . . . . To you the blood of the righteous man and martyr of God cries, and demands revenge. May the Almighty and merciful God put into your heart the will, and suggest the means, of a vengeance adequate to the crime!" And to the same purpose King Louis addressed Alexander, desiring that the sword of Peter might be unsheathed in behalf of the martyr of Canterbury, whose blood required vengeance, not so much for himself as for the universal Church.

d

The famous saying, "It was worse than a crime-it was a blunder," conveys, under the form of bitter irony and sarcasm, the truth that a great public crime may be even more impolitic than wicked; and if ever the words were applicable in this sense, they might have been applied to the part which Henry was supposed to have taken in the death of Becket. Since the recon

a See Appendix XVI.

b Epp. 330-1.

Bened. Petrib., Vita Henr. II.,

ed. Hearne.

d Ep. 356.

e Fol., Ep. 503.

ciliation, each of the parties had beset the Pope with complaints against the other. While the Archbishop represented that his possessions had not been restored to him, and on the very day of the murder a letter was addressed by Alexander to Henry, urging the fulfilment of the treaty in this and other respects," the King alleged that the Papal commissioners had not carried out their promise as to the absolution of those who were before excommunicate, and that the Archbishop had violated the agreement by inflicting fresh censures on the Bishops of London and Salisbury. But the tidings of the murder overwhelmed all other subjects. Henry could not but feel the prodigious difficulties into which he was plunged by the rash and violent act of his courtiers. He knew that the guilt would be universally charged on him, and that his enemies were now armed with a fearful weapon against him. He foresaw the eagerness with which they would take advantage of it; that the highest censures of the Church, with their terrible secular consequences, were inevitable, that his long struggle with the hierarchy must end in utter defeat, unless he could purge himself of the crime and propitiate the Roman Court. On receiving the news at Argentan, he burst forth into lamentations over the Archbishop's death as the most grievous calamity which could have befallen him; for three days he shut himself up in his chamber without tasting food, and for forty

Ap. Thom., Ep. 308. The date is taken from Jaffé.
b Ap. Fol., Epp. 490-1.

days he remained in penitential seclusion, abstaining

from all public business.

Even as to the murderers he
To leave them unpunished

knew not what to do.
would countenance the rumours which charged him
with having instigated their crime; to punish his sup-
posed instruments would not dissipate the suspicions, but
would be regarded as a further and detestable wicked-
ness. In these circumstances, speedy action was neces-
sary in order to counteract the general obloquy. He
therefore sent some clerks to Canterbury for the pur-
pose of explaining that, although the murderers had
undertaken their expedition in consequence of words
which had escaped him in his excitement, he was inno-
cent of having authorised them, and had endeavoured to
prevent the execution of their suspected design; and
he despatched to Italy an embassy, consisting of the
Archbishop of Rouen (who, however, was obliged by
age and infirmity to turn back), with the Bishops of
Worcester and Evreux and other ecclesiastics. These
envoys were charged with a letter, in which the King
protested that he had fulfilled his part of the treaty;
that Becket had broken it by stirring up his subjects
against him and groundlessly excommunicating his
servants; that he deeply regretted the murder and the
share which his own angry words might have had in
suggesting it; but that he was less distressed as to his
conscience than as to his reputation.d

a Arnulf, Ep. 55; Herb., viii. 34; Quadril. II., in S. T. C., 201, 204.

b W. Neubrig. ii. 25, p. 157.

They were left to ecclesiastical penance. See above, p. 82.

S. T. C., ii. 202.

d Patrol., cc. 1388; Hoved., 301.