Henry II and Thomas Becket

This quarrel has been at the centre of our perception of English 12^th century history since the events themselves. The relationship between the two men has been accorded a degree of romanticism, with a presumed friendship running across the medieval fault lines between church and state. The portrayal of these tensions in drama, and generally in popular culture, has the two men’s long and amicable relationship turning sour, then assuming the characteristics of a personal and public power struggle. It’s a picture geared to a more modern dramatic imperative, and is unfortunately rather misleading.

The popular understanding of the relationship is of Thomas Becket being first promoted and then brought down by King Henry II. Historians Frank Barlow and Simon Schama, among many others, have been inclined to characterise the quarrel in this way. Becket, whose career as a cleric developed under the protection of Archbishop Theobald, was made chancellor soon after Henry’s accession in 1154. His strength of purpose and administrative capacity turned this position into one of the great offices of state. It was a secular post, and Becket was employed as an ambassador, a civil servant, and chief fixer. On occasion he even led troops into battle. He also moved to re-balance the tax base so that the Church, having traditionally been given preferential treatment, took on more of the English tax burden.

Archbishop Theobald, who had first recommended Becket to Henry, was angered by this and cut off contact with Becket. But he died in 1161, and despite the claims of more experienced bishops, Henry appointed Thomas, over their heads, to Canterbury. Becket was expected to combine both jobs, but he resigned as chancellor precipitately and instead threw himself into extending the Church’s wealth and power.

Church v State

This change inevitably meant endless arguments over law and property. The themes were the ever widening reach of papal sovereignty, plus the increasing claims of canon law for Church immunity from secular authority, with the exemption of the clergy from the courts that were applicable to everyone else. Such special pleading was characterised by the demand for liberty against oppression. It did not go down well with Henry, nor probably would it have done with any secular ruler.

It’s important to remember the medieval Church was an international organisation and carried all the authority which this involved. It was invested at this time in what we might now see as a power grab across Europe. But Henry too, was head of an extensive international family business, the Angevin monarchy. He was stubborn and driven by the determination to restore the lands of his grandfather, Henry I. Rather a case of the irresistible force against the immovable object. During his reign Henry spent more time in what is now France than in England. He spoke Norman French and Latin, but never learned English.

Becket lobbied determinedly in Rome against English government plans to weaken the influence of the Church. After the so called Clarendon proposals were accepted in January 1164 by most of the bishops, but not Becket, a final meeting of the Council at Northampton took place in October. It was meant to force the issue with Becket but he escaped overseas to exile at the Cistercian Abbey of Pontigny, Burgundy, 120 miles from Paris. He built this base as an alternative propaganda and power centre, winning support from around Europe. Then, after threats from Henry against the order, he moved to Sens, 35 miles away.

In a stormy six years' exile Becket was a noisy adversary, threatening to excommunicate and interdict Henry plus several bishops. Attempts were made to bring the two together. Yet the pope, sympathetic to Becket, was reluctant to make an enemy of so powerful a figure as Henry. At last, under pressure from Rome, they seemed to come to terms in July 1170. 

Power and personality

It was at best an uneasy truce. Becket at last returned to Canterbury in December but then promptly excommunicated three bishops, loyal supporters of Henry. It wasn’t the most diplomatic of moves but Thomas often lacked the ability and probably the will to compromise. Indeed he seemed not to have had a political bone in his body.

When Henry heard of this he is said to have railed “What miserable drones and traitors have I nourished and promoted in my household, who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born clerk”. This reaction was recorded by Grim, a normally reliable contemporary source, who was present on 29^th December when four knights burst into Canterbury Cathedral and at the altar literally cut Thomas to pieces. The presumed quote that inspired this murderous initiative, “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” didn’t actually appear in print until the 19^th century.

What other myths are attached to this episode? First, Henry and Thomas had not been friends. It’s clear from recently reviewed source material that the relationship was, as the case with everything about Henry, wholly conditional on the facts of power. Henry’s son, later to be known as the Young King Henry, had earlier been sent to Becket’s household for educational grooming, and seems to have been fond of his mentor. But this was a fairly typical pattern in the period. It's quite hard to equate this with friendship. John Guy, Becket’s most recent biographer, says Henry was a foul tempered, bullying, venal perjured tyrant ‘with an innate assumption that his will was law’. Clearly hated by his many children and his wife, as well as magnates and bishops, it’s no surprise that Becket found him hard work. But Becket, too, was not popular either at home in England or in exile.

Henry and Thomas - an exchange of views

International cult

Also despite what has often been written, and believed, Henry was not mortified by the murder of Thomas. He regarded it as inconvenient. The dead archbishop was quickly made a saint and a ‘cult of Becket’ soon grew up around him. Idealised and canonised, his was soon the most famous shrine in Christendom. Local monks grew fat on the resulting tourist trade.

While no charmer in his lifetime, and one who never felt he belonged, the awkward, bristly Becket was venerated as a martyr. Seeing the strength of public feeling and the power of this new cult, Henry eventually did public penance at Becket’s tomb. But it can easily be seen as a PR stunt to try and go with the grain. And in any case it didn’t happen until July 1174, with Becket now a saint, and well over three years after the murder.   

Finally, the relationship and power struggle between Henry and Becket has often been viewed through too Anglocentric a lense. Strip out the personalities and there would still have been a tug of war between church and state, as there has been throughout history in Britain and other countries. Competition for power and influence is a permanent leitmotif, in this case drawn more starkly by the struggle between the European medieval church and the European Angevin patrimony for rights, resources and legitimacy. These days we can see the international dimension. But it is an important factor in British history that has often been ignored.