The Treaty of 1213 is extremely significant when trying to decipher the winners and losers of the papal interdict. The treaty essentially made John, England’s tenant as oppose to its owner. He was forced to recognise the pope as the “Vicar of Christ”, which he had not done previously. This also made John, Pope Innocent’s loyal follower and for that reason he would have the Pope’s blessing and support. The Treaty of 1213 shows that John was surrendering his stance against the Church and consequently losing the battle for power that was the interdict. Although this is clear, John’s hands were not completely tied and it was in his interest to become Innocent’s liegeman. This is because he now had the backing of the Roman Catholic Church and was therefore no longer its enemy, which in the thirteenth Century was a dangerous position to be in. England had become a Papal state and would receive support from the Church when it was arguably at its most powerful.
By accepting the conditions set out in the Treaty of 1213, John lost support from his barons, this led to Magna Carta being signed. This loss for John was the worlds gain as the signing of this Charter is extremely significant in regards to the legal systems through out history. The document was forced onto the king by his Barons in order to bind him by the law. The reason the interdict can be considered accountable for the signing of Magna Carta is the reasoning that without the dispute the barons would not feel the need to stop John making decisions for himself. However due to the fact that the nation was struggling financially but John had recently agreed to pay large sums of money to the Church affected Johns popularity and the Barons called for change. Along with this John had also become unpopular with the English public. This was due to his treatment of the churchmen who had their property taken from them and were exiled, the treatment of the popular Stephen Langton and also that Johns actions had caused them to be lacking religion in England. Another issue that arises when considering the popularity of both King John and also Pope Innocent III is they both died in 1216 and therefore it only leaves a small period of time between their deaths and the resolution of the interdict to gauge their popularity or how much support they had gained. The church definitely grew stronger as they had gained a new papal state that they could control as well as increasing the papal coffers by receiving more money.
There is a essential issue that the resolution of the interdict dispute, that spanned from 1206 until 1213, resolved. The problem not only reflected favourably on the English King and his ability to make the most of a difficult situation, but also highlighted Pope Innocent’s political prowess. The issue being considered is the declaration by the French King Philip of the imminent invasion of England on the 8th of April 1213. The invasion was endorsed by Stephen Langton. It was not however directly approved by Pope Innocent, however Langton’s support suggests it would be if the invasion had been acted upon. This threat of attack forced John’s hand to wave the white flag and offer his kingdom to the papacy. This resulted in the reinstatement of Stephen Langton as the Archbishop of Canterbury, which can certainly be counted as a success for him personally and his representation of the Church in England. This must also be considered a success for John as his Kingdom was not ceased by the French and he had inherited Innocent as his “uncritical protector”. Not only is this event extremely important due to the reasons stated above it can also be considered to be a major catalyst in ending the papal interdict and John’s excommunication. Morris also states “Innocent III involved himself in political actions to a greater extent than previous popes.” this is evident by the dispute that surrounded John’s agreement to Magna Carta. By becoming a supporter of John and his unstable Kingdom, the pope had to annul Magna Carta through his letters and also suspend Langton due to his support of the great charter.
The alliance between England and the Roman Catholic Church continued through out the thirteenth Century and England as a “kingdom was a papal fief. Both John and his son Henry III took full advantage of this position. They could rely on the Pope’s support against their internal enemies and for a favourable hearing in foreign affairs” due to their allegiance to the church. Another example of how there was a reliance on papal intervention by the English is made clear in 1298 when the kings of England and also France requested that Pope Boniface VIII took the role of arbitrator in order to resolve their four year feud. This shows the importance of the outcome of the interdict almost a Century after its resolution.
Due to the issues with France, unrest within England and a fear of the Church among other reasons it is clear that it was not within King John’s interest to continue to stand against the Pope and had to accept him as his leader. This set a precedent that was continued until Henry VIII’s Reformation Parliament, this gives another prim example of a victory for the Church as it allows popes to exert their power over the monarchs of England for a substantial period of time. This kind of control was clear during the reign of John Lackland’s successor, his son Henry III. This is shown by the sheer amount of foreign bishops that had become part of the English episcopacy and also the control that bishops had in the courts of Henry III. This again backs up the theory that the Church was victorious as a result of the papal interdict, England was becoming a church run state.
Another example of how King John prospered from the interdict dispute was the election of Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury. The reason this can be considered such a positive point for the King is the competency of Langton as a leader for England, politically as well as spiritually. Langton is strongly believed to be the driving force behind the implementation of Magna Carta and although his actions led to him being suspended, from a historical point of view he was integral to one of the most important events of all time. Langton is considered to be “ a great man, with a clear, sensible, penetrating, but not original mind, at work in a time more important, more critical, more full of opportunity, than any other period in the history of the medieval church.” Langton has always been held in high esteem historically not just because of his influence on Magna Carta but also because of the stance he took during the interdict.
Its believed by Moore that up until the point where the John accepted Innocents terms, “the church had sustained more damage than it had inflicted: many leading churchmen were in exile on the continent and their revenues were in loyal hands” this suggests that until the point John was threatened by France’s invasion he was in control. Although he could not defeat the church he may have been able to survive without them.
An aspect that has yet to be considered in this essay, but is one of the most critical when contemplating any medieval pr modern day victory, is the financial gain that came out of the interdict dispute. One example of how Rome prospered financially out of its feud against England, is the fact that when John agreed to meet Innocents terms by meeting with one of the popes legates, Pandulf in May 1213, it was stated that a full restitution would be made to all the churches due to their financial loss. John also agreed to pay the church one thousand marks a year for their support. These payments caused an economic strain on England. It is widely believed that John only paid back two fifths equivalent of the possessions he had confiscated from Churchmen in England. This suggests that John and his Kingdom profited from the dispute.
To conclude it is evident that both sides of this power struggle had successes and failures as a result of the interdict dispute. By weighing up all the evidence obtained it is clear that the Church had many more successes than England did. The church managed to instate the Archbishop they had wanted in the first place, they had also gained power by making England a papal state as well as public support and finances. It can be compared with any battle the fact that John surrender to Pope Innocents demands ultimately suggest he lost the overall dispute. The main factor that exemplifies this is the signing of the treaty of 1213 which was integral in the battle for power as it offered Innocent a chance to expand his Roman catholic kingdom and also accept King John as his liegeman. But as in any defeat there must be a benefit for the loser in order for them to wave the white flag. On this occasion John gained an exemplary Archbishop of Canterbury, profited from the money he had taken from the exiled churchmen and most important gained an extremely valuable ally that would protect England from invasion, and its monarchy from power sapping reforms. It must also be noted that as the quotation from Moore stated above John was probably wining the battle until France became involved. Innocent however was clearly the more calculating tactician and managed to get every thing he had desired before the interdict had begun. The victory of the church is also evident by the longevity of the churches influence on England , which lasted until the reign of King Henry VIII. It took a reformation government in the 16th Century to remove the papal influence, which shows what Pope Innocent III started continued for a long period of time.
Bibliography
Barraclough, G., The Medieva1 Papacy (1968)
Binns L.E, Innocent III (London, 1931)
Cheney C.R, Semple W.H, Selected Letters of pope Innocent III concerning England, 1198-1216 (London 1953)
Cheney, C.R., ‘King John and the Papal Interdict’, BJRL, xxxi (1948), 295-317
Cheney, C.R, from Becket to Langton, (University of Manchester, 1956)
Constable G, Renewal and Reform in Religious Life: Concepts and Realities (Harvard, 1982)
Gibbs M. Lang J, Bishops and Reform, 1215-1272 (London, 1934)
Moore, J.C., Pope Innocent III (1160/61-1216): to root up and to plant (2003)
Moorman J.R.H, Church life in England in the Thirteenth Century (Cambridge, 1946)
Morris C., The Papal Monarchy: the Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (1989)
Powell J.M ed, Innocent III: Vicar of Christ or Lord of the World (Washington, D.C. The Catholic University of America Press, 1994)
Powicke, F.M., Stephen Langton (Oxford, 1928)Sayers, J., Papal Judges Delegate in the Province of Canterbury, 1198-1254: a study in ecclesiastical jurisdiction and administration (1971)
Southern, W.R, Western society and the church in the middle ages, (Middlesex, 1970)
Tierney, B., The Crisis of Church and State 10501300 (Prentice-Hall Inc, 1964)
Ullmann, W., The growth of Papal Government during the Middle Ages (1955, 3rd. ed. 1970)
Waley D, The Papal State in the thirteenth-century (London, 1961)
Tierney, B., The Crisis of Church and State 10501300 (Prentice-Hall Inc, 1964) pg 128-129
Moorman J.R.H, Church life in England in the Thirteenth Century (Cambridge, 1946) pg 1
Morris, C., The Papal Monarchy: the Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (Oxford, 1989) pg 428-230
Powell J.M ed, Innocent III: Vicar of Christ or Lord of the World (Washington, D.C. The Catholic University of America Press, 1994)
Tierney, B., The Crisis of Church and State 10501300 (Prentice-Hall Inc, 1964) pg 128-129
Morris, C., The Papal Monarchy: the Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (Oxford, 1989) pg 428-231
Southern, W.R, Western society and the church in the middle ages, (Middlesex, 1970) pg 148-149
Gibbs M. Lang J, Bishops and Reform, 1215-1272 (London, 1934) pg 12
Powicke, F.M., Stephen Langton (Oxford, 1928) pg 102-103
Morris, C., The Papal Monarchy: the Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (Oxford, 1989) pg 428-231
Morris, C., The Papal Monarchy: the Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (Oxford, 1989) pg 428-231