well as to explain obscure phenomena, I have thought it best to pass briefly over the less interesting parts, and to tell in some detail the events of greatest importance. My great hope is to induce my readers to study those larger works which are in reality far more interesting than any small book can be. As Sir Francis Palgrave says, no small book can ever really teach great things. All I hope to do is to prepare my readers for books in which the secret of history is more fully unfolded. Of these works I have availed myself freely in the following pages; and as it was undesirable in so small a book to give references on every page, I have given at the end of the volume a table of the authorities for each chapter. If I should have any readers who are acquainted with such works as Professor Stubbs' 'Constitutional History,' or Mr. Freeman's Norman Conquest,' they will see at once what are my obligations to such writers; and às for those who are not, I wish I could inspire them with sufficient interest to read and find out from whom I have borrowed. It is a misfortune for my work that Mr. Freeman's fifth volume did not come into my hands until these sheets were passing through the press. It may be thought by some that I have given too large a proportion of space to ecclesiastical affairs. My apology is, that no amount of space can be too great in proportion to the influence of the Church on mediaval history. The Church, in the early and middle ages, is not an institution which was working silently in the background while events were going on independently; she was the central figure in the drama-the power most active in moulding events. Being not only the medium through which we inherited the civilisation of the past, not only the great moral educator of the ages of which I am writing, but also a secular power of the highest social and political importance, her influence penetrated side of life. It therefore seemed to me worth while to spend some time in trying to understand her, at the cost of some repetition. The struggle of Anselm with William II., of Becket with Henry II., must be studied as a prelude to the national revolt against the Papacy in John's reign. I have not carried my work further than the end of the twelfth century, chiefly because by that time the reader will have made acquaintance with all those things in medieval history which most require explanation, and from that time forward he can advance without further commentary; if he has understood what went before, he will understand what comes after, and is developed out of it. The twelfth century is also an important crisis in many respects. It saw the influence of the Church reach its zenith; it saw England united under a firm central government; it saw the rise of the forces which were ultimately to overthrow feudalism. With the thirteenth century a new period of history begins; the struggles of the nation against the despotism of John are wholly different from the struggles of the feudal baronage against the government of Henry II. I have not followed the archaic spelling of OldEnglish names, simply because to call a man Eadwine or Alfred is to put him farther off from us than if we call him Edwin or Alfred, and makes it more difficult to realise that he is not a foreigner, but is of our own flesh and blood. Many of these names have been handed down to our time by common use, and have been worn into their present form as naturally as other Old-English words. In other instances the Latinised forms have become more familiar to an English ear; and it is only in cases where there is no familiarity to lose that I have thought it worth while to use the archaic forms. WATERHEAD, OLDHAM : October 20, 1876. |