3i2 ConsliivtionoJ.. History. [chap.
nephew, was after consecration deposed by Eugenius III, and
Henry Murdac, abbot of Fountains, appointed in his stead ɪ ;
Gilbert Foliot, bishop of Hereford, was consecrated by the
archbishop when in exile, on the nomination of the Angevin
party opposed to Stephen2; Bichard de Belmeis was confirmed
in the see of London by the pope, but, in order to obtain royal
recognition, hampered himself with debt which hurried him to
his grave3 ; Hugh de Puiset, whose election to Durham was
quashed by his metropolitan, sought and found consecration at
Case of the Rome4. Matters were different under Henry H, who failed
election of * v .
Becket. however in lɪis attempts to prevent appeals to Rome on this
point; the election of Thomas Becket to Canterbury was
effected without opposition, the papal confirmation and gift of
the pall being apparently a matter of course quite as much
Appeals as the consent of the monks and the bishops ; but after
Rome. Becket’s death and the confusion which his long struggle had
caused, Henry found himself obliged to seek at Rome a decision
of the critical questions which arose as to the episcopate. To
the consecration of the prelates chosen in 1173 objections were
raised in every quarter ; the canonical competency and the ■
formal completeness of the election were denied on the clerical
side ; the young king Henry opposed his father’s acts of licence
and assent5; and, although Alexander III confirmed the elec-
tions, neither king nor chapters gained strength by the deci-
■ Position of sion. At the end however of the twelfth century the relations
close of the of the three parties were sufficiently well ascertained. The
tun∖t'' °en^ royal licence and assent were indispensable ; the elective right
of the chapters and the archiépiscopal confirmation were
formally admitted ; and the power of the pope to determine
all causes which arose upon disputed questions was too strongly
founded in practice to be controverted by the crown. This
power was however, in the case of the suffragans, an appellate
jurisdiction only. It was the archbishops alone who required
1 John of Hexham (ed. Raine), p. 154. William was deposed because
he had been elected ' ex ore ι∙cgi∙, ’ and had been consecrated in defiance of
an appeal ; ib. p. 142.
2 Gervase, i. 135. 3 See R. Diceto, vol. i. pref pp. xxiv, xxv.
* Gervase, i. 157. ∙, R. Diceto, i. 368, 369 ; Gervase, i. 245.
∖ιχ.] Papal Appointment. 313
papal confirmation and recognition by the gift of the pall ;
nor, although Paschal II had claimed a right to take cognisance
of and to confirm all elections, was the metropolitan authority
of Canterbury and York as yet overruled. The claim of the
bishops to take part in the election of the archbishops, which
was occasionally enforced during the twelfth century, was
rejected by Innocent III, and was never raised afterwards1.
382. The history of the thirteenth century is a long record Proceedings
. . t , zn of Innocent
of disputes, beginning with the critical struggle for Canterbury ɪɪɪ.
after the death of Hubert Walter. But even before this Inno-
cent III had asserted, in the case of a suffragan see, a new
principle of justice 2. In 1204, when the see of Winchester was
vacant, the chapter was divided between the dean of Salisbury
and the precentor of Lincoln ; the pope at the king’s request con-
secrated Peter des Boches, and laid down the rule that where
the electors have knowingly elected an unworthy person they
lose the right of making the next election. The appointment of important
Langton to Canterbury was not brought under this rule, but case of
had its special importance in this : hitherto the pope had done
no more than reject unfit candidates or determine the validity of
elections ; now he himself proposed a candidate, pushed him
through the process of election, and confirmed the promotion
1 Of the early archbishops after the Conquest, Lanfranc and Ansehn
were nominated by the kings with some show of acceptance in the national
council; Balph was chosen by the prior and monks and accepted by the
king and bishops; William of CorbeuiI was chosen by the monks out of
four proposed by the bishops to the king against the wish of the monks ;
Theobald was chosen by the bishops and the monks in national council ;
Lecket by the bishops, monks, and clergy of the province, in the presence
of the Justiciar. After Becket's death, Roger abbot of Bec was chosen
by both parties, but declined the election; after some delay the monks
chose two candidates, Odo their prior and Richard prior of Dover; the
bishops selected the latter, and he was confirmed by the pope. Baldwin,
Ids successor, was chosen first by the bishops, Dec. 2, 1184, and then by
the moiɪks^ Dec. ι6, in separate elections, both under royal pressure.
Reginald Iitz Jocelin was chosen by the monks in opposition to the
bishops and to the king’s nomination; Hubert Walter by the monks on
Saturday, May 29, 1193, and by the bishops on the following Sunday,
each party claiming the right and shutting their eyes to the act of the
other. On Huberts death the bishops acting with, the king chose John
de Gray, the monks their subprior, At Langton’s appointment the strife
ended ; see vol. i. p. 559.
2 Deer. Gieg. IX. lib. i. tit. 6. c. 25.