§ 82. THE ABCHBISHOP AND THE KING. 139
meant to exercise his spiritual authority over his evil coun sellors, and especially over the archbishop of York and the bishops of London and Salisbury. These prelates had re cently officiated at the coronation of Henry's son. And it was this coronation, even more than the original and more important dispute about the immunity of the clergy, that led to the catastrophe.
After prolonged negotiations with the papal court and the king, Becket returned to his long-neglected flock, Dec. 1, 1170. On landing at Sandwich (instead of Dover, where he was expected), he was surprised by enemies, who searched his baggage, and demanded that he should withdraw his excommunication of the bishops who were then at Dover. He refused. On his way to Canterbury the country clergy and people met him, cast down their garments, chanting, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." He rode to the cathedral with a vast procession, amid the ringing of the bells, and preached on the text, " Here we have no abiding city."
The excommunicated prelates of York, London, and Salis bury sought the protection of the king, who was then at a castle near Bayeux in Normandy. He said: "If all are to be excommunicated who officiated at my son's coronation, by the eyes of God, I am equally guilty." One of the prelates (perhaps Roger of York) remarked, " As long as Thomas lives, you will never be at peace." Henry broke out into one of his constitutional fits of passion, and dropped the fatal words : " A fellow that has eaten my bread, has lifted up his heel against me; a fellow that I loaded with benefits, dares insult the king; a fellow that came to court on a lame horse, with a cloak for a saddle, sits without hindrance on the throne itself. By the eyes of God, is there none of my thankless and cowardly courtiers who will deliver me from the insults of this low-born and turbulent priest ? " With these words he rushed out of the room.
140 THE MIDDLE AGES. A.D. 1123-1198.
§ 33. The Martyrdom of Thomas Beclcet. Dec. 29, 1170.
On the murder of Becket we have the reports of five eye-witnesses, — Edward Grim (a Saxon monk of Cambridge), William Fitz-Stephen (Becket's chaplain), John of Salisbury (his faithful friend), William of Canterbury, and the anonymous author of a Lambeth MS. Two other biographers, Her bert of Bosham and Roger of Pontigny, though absent from England at that time, were on intimate terms with Becket, and took great pains to ascertain the facts to the minutest details.
Four warlike knights of high birth and large estate, cham berlains to the king,1 — Sir Reginald Fitz-Urse ("Son of the Bear," whom Becket had originally introduced to the court), Sir William de Tracy (of royal blood), Hugh de Moreville (judiciary of Northumberland and Cumberland), and Sir Richard le Bret or Breton (commonly known as Biito2),— eagerly caught at the king's suggestion, and resolved to carry it out in the spirit of passionate loyalty, at their own risk, as best they could, by imprisonment, or exile, or, if necessary, by murder. They seem to have had no premeditated plan except that of signal vengeance. Without waiting for in structions, they at once departed on separate routes for Eng land, and met at the castle of Saltwood, which belonged to the see of Canterbury, but was then occupied by Randulf of Broc. They collected a band of about a dozen armed men, and reached St. Augustine's abbey outside of the walls of Canterbury, early on the 29th of December, which was a Tuesday.
On the morning of that fatal day, Becket had forebodings of his death, and advised the clergy to escape to Sandwich before daylight. He attended mass in the cathedral, con fessed to two monks, and received three scourgings, as was his custom. At the banquet he drank more freely than usual, and said to the cupbearer, " He who has much blood to shed, must drink much." After dinner he retired to his
1 Cubicularii, gentlemen of the bed-chamber.
2 The biographers say he was more lit to be called " the Brute."