est licentiousness in his personal conduct-among other things, "quod in una duntaxat villa et adjacentiis ejus xvii. genuit spurios." (Joh. Sarisb., Ep. 310; cf. Diceto, 561. Is this the origin of the Claringboulds who are now found among the peasantry of the neighbourhood?) But Clarembald's character did not come into the question between him and Becket. The claim that the Abbot of St. Augustine should receive the benediction within his own monastery, and without any profession of obedience, had been advanced against Archbishop Lanfranc, who was compelled by William Rufus to comply with it. Archbishop Anselm, however, obliged the next abbot to wait on him and receive his benediction in the Bishop of Rochester's Chapel at Lambeth. (Eadmer, Hist. Novorum, 1. iv., in Patrol. clix. 468; Inett, ii. 124.) But the question was afterwards revived, and on this and other subjects the monks of St. Augustine's were continually at feud with the archbishops and with the monks of the cathedral. In 1124, as Archbishop William of Corboyl could not be prevailed on to bless Abbot Hugh, except in the cathedral, Henry I. authorised the Bishop of Chichester to give the benediction in the monastery. The latest precedent was in favour of Clarembald, Archbishop Theobald having been compelled by the Pope, after much contention, to comply with the Augustinian pretensions in giving the benediction to Abbot Silvester, A.D. 1152. (See Joh. Sarisb., Epp. 102, 105; Gervas. 1370.) The claims of St. Augustine's were grounded on documents which Pope Alexander, supposing them genuine, did not feel himself at liberty to overrule (S. T. C. iv. 255); but their genuineness was really suspicious in the extreme. There is a letter from Giles, bishop of Evreux, about this time, stating that a monk of St. Medard's, at Soissons, had confessed on his death-bed to having forged "apostolical privileges" for the monks of St. Augustine's, and suggesting that the genuineness of their parchments should be inquired into. (Wharton, Ang. Sac. ii., præf. p. v.) After

the deposition of Clarembald, his pretensions were renewed against Archbishop Richard by Roger, who had been elected to the abbacy. The Archbishop, although ordered by the Pope to give the benediction in the required terms, refused; and the matter remained unsettled until 1178, when the abbot, after the employment of such means as were usually necessary and successful at the Roman court, received the benediction from the Pope in person. (Gervas. 1444.) In 1181 the Bishop of Durham and others were appointed by the Pope to examine the charters of St. Augustine's, when strong grounds of presumption appeared against those which were most relied on (ib. 1458); but the Pope sanctioned the claims of the abbey. An uncordial system of compromise was then carried on for upwards of 200 years. The archbishops would not go to the abbey, nor the abbots to the archbishops, and the benediction was given by some other prelate, until, in 1406, Abbot Thomas Hunden was blessed by Archbishop Arundel, in St. Paul's, London. See the Chronicles of St. Augustine's, by Thorn (in Twysden); and Thomas of Elmham, edited in 1858, for the Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain,' by my friend Archdeacon Hardwick,-whose life, so full both of valuable performance and of yet higher promise, has been cut short by a premature and terrible end while these sheets were in the course of final revision for the press.

6

XIV.-PHILIP OF L'AUMÔNE (p. 95).

The papal envoy's title of "Abbas de Eleëmosyna” has evidently caused much perplexity, although no writer has avowed any difficulty as to the matter. Dr. Giles writes Eleemosyna with a small initial (S. T. C., i. 26; iv. 277); and Philip has been variously styled "The Abbot Almoner," "The Pope's Almoner," "Abbot of Charity," and

the like. But, in fact, Eleëmosyna (in Garnier l'Almodne, and in later French l'Aumône) was the name of a Cistercian abbey, otherwise called Little Citeaux, about four leagues to the south-east of Châteaudun. (Le Prevost, n. on Order. Vital., t. iii. 445, ed. Soc. de l'Hist. de France.) Orderic mentions the fondness of the Cistercians for giving their monasteries such names as "Domus Dei, Clara Vallis, Bonus Mons, et Eleemosyna, quibus auditores

solo nominis nectare invitantur festinanter experiri quanta sit ibi beatitudo, quæ tam speciali denotetur vocabulo." It was from l'Aumône that the abbey of Waverley, in Surrey, was founded (Joh. Petriburg., ap. Sparke, 66), and also (as I learn from Mr. Morris, who has in part anticipated this note, p. 413) that of Tintern.

XV. BECKET'S CROSS-BEARER (p. 103).

Alan of Tewkesbury relates that, after the Council of Clarendon, Becket's cross-bearer took it on himself to reprove his master's late compliance (i. 340); and such is probably the origin of a story introduced by Father Lacordaire into one of his eloquent "Conférences,”—that, as the Archbishop was going from the Council, a deacon, who was his cross-bearer, placed the cross against a wall and refused to serve him, since he had betrayed the liberties of the Church, whereupon "Thomas Becket se mit à verser des larmes, et, aussitôt qu'il fut rentré chez lui, il rétracta ce qu'il avait signé." (i. 94, ed. Brux., 1847.) M. Thierry's "fixed idea" comes out amusingly in connexion with the scene (which he unaccountably refers to the evening before the day on which the written Constitutions were produced). He tells us that, as the Archbishop was on his way to Winchester, "a Saxon, named Edward Grim, his cross-bearer, spoke loudly against his compliance," and adds, that "in this reproof national senti

ment had perhaps as great a share as religious conviction " (iii. 119). For this the historian refers to Fleury, who in reality does not pretend to name the cross-bearer, and says nothing as to his race (Bk. lxxi. 5). In truth, the crossbearer who spoke was not a Saxon, but of a race which had been dispossessed by the Saxons,-a Welshman named Alexander Llewellyn, whom Giraldus Cambrensis describes as "joculans et linguæ dicacis" (De Instruct. Principum, 187, ed. Brewer); nor was Grim ever Becket's crossbearer, although the mistake of styling him so had been made by others before M. Thierry. Grim appears to have had no acquaintance with the Archbishop until he visited him at Canterbury about a week before the murder (Herb. vii. 368). Llewellyn was sent abroad just before that event; but, as we shall see hereafter, Grim did not act even as deputy cross-bearer on the fatal day.

XVI. FILIUS EXCUSSORUM (p. 107).

This strange phrase, which often occurs in writings of that age (e. g. Bernard. de Considerat., iii. 1; Pet. Bles. in Patrol., ccvii. 79; Will. Senon. in S. T. C., iv. 162), is derived from Psalm cxxvii. 5 (cxxvi. 4 Lat.), where the Latin Vulgate, following the LXX., has "ita sunt filii excussorum " for "so are the young children” (P. B.), or "children of the youth" (Eng. Bible). Rosenmüller (Schol. in loc.) says that the Greek and Latin translators supposed the Hebrew word for youth (?) to be the participle of a verb meaning to shake out (), and that under the epithet excussi they understood "persons who are shaken by troubles” (υἱοὶ τῶν ἐκτετιναγμένων, οἱ σφόδρα ταXaropouμero, Suidas, ed. Gaisford, ii. 3736). But this view of the meaning did not occur to, or did not satisfy the patristic and medieval commentators. According to St. Augustine (who expresses his belief that the explanation

had been suggested to him by inspiration), the excussi are the Prophets, because their obscure language requires to be shaken out in order to get at its meaning; and the fili excussorum are the Apostles (In Psalm. cxxvi. c. 10). Walafrid Strabo, however, holds that the Apostles themselves are the excussi, because they were charged to shake off the dust from their feet (Gloss. in loc., Patrol., cxiii.). Bruno of Segni argues that they are the Apostles, but for a different reason-that the Apostles were persecuted from city to city-and he supposes the sons to be those who imitate them (in loc., ib. clxiv.). Gerhoh of Reichersperg raises the question whether excussorum be the genitive of excussi or of excussores, but finds himself able to turn it to edification in either case (in loc., ib. cxciv.). It would, of course, be easy to multiply such specimens of interpretation. Whether Herbert attached any definite meaning to the phrase does not appear.

XVII.—THE RELEASE FROM SECULAR OBLIGATIONS (p. 116).

The release seems to me a matter of greater difficulty than it has been considered by many writers. That a release was asked and granted is certain; but there remain the questions, (1) What was it supposed to imply? and (2) Was it rightly granted? It seems clear that the Chancellor's accounts might have been required, and, indeed, ought to have been rendered, before his promotion to the primacy; and, on the other hand, that, if things had gone smoothly, or if Henry had had other means of assailing him, no demand would have been made on this ground. But, as matters actually stood, was it to be considered that the release had barred all claims which the King might wish to raise? Diceto, who (as Fitzstephen informs us, 227) was present at the trial, says that many thought it right that an account should be given, notwith

Ꮓ