Introduction: The Quarrel Solidified in Text
The Constitutions of Clarendon, a set of sixteen articles promulgated in January 1164, represent a watershed moment in the history of English law and the perennial medieval struggle between secular and ecclesiastical power.1 Far more than a simple legislative act, the document was the textual embodiment of a profound conflict between two of the twelfth century's most formidable personalities: King Henry II of England and his former chancellor, Thomas Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury.3 To ask who was the "author" of this document is to pose a question that cannot be answered with a single name. The modern concept of authorship, implying a sole creator of a text, is anachronistic when applied to the complex political and legal processes of the Angevin court. The Constitutions were not written; they were forged in the crucible of a power struggle, a product of royal will, expert legal craftsmanship, coerced political legitimation, and principled opposition.
This report seeks to deconstruct the notion of authorship as it pertains to the Constitutions of Clarendon by examining the distinct roles played by the key figures involved. It will argue that the creation of this pivotal document is best understood through a four-part model:
The Political Author: The individual whose will, ambition, and political agenda were the driving force behind the document's conception and creation.
The Technical Authors: The legal and administrative experts who translated political will into the precise, and often provocative, language of the text.
The Formal Recognizers: The political assembly of the realm's great men whose formal assent was sought to provide the document with the veneer of legitimacy as established custom.
The Defining Opponent: The figure whose steadfast resistance to the document shaped its historical trajectory and cemented its notoriety for centuries to come.
By analyzing the genesis of the Constitutions through this framework, it becomes clear that while King Henry II was the document's undeniable political architect and prime mover, he was not its sole creator. The text was drafted by his trusted justiciars, legitimized by a council of magnates, and ultimately defined by the very man it was designed to control: Thomas Becket.
Section I: The Royal Will - King Henry II as Political Author
King Henry II was the unambiguous political author of the Constitutions of Clarendon. The document was a direct manifestation of his overarching political project: to restore and expand royal authority, to create a uniform system of justice throughout his realm, and to subordinate all competing powers, including the formidable institution of the Church, to the authority of the Crown.2 His personal will and political agenda were the sole reasons for the document's existence, and its content reflects his specific grievances and strategic objectives.
Henry's primary justification for this assertion of power was the restoration of "ancestral customs." The preamble to the Constitutions explicitly frames the text not as an innovation, but as a "remembrance or recognition of a certain part of the customs, liberties, and dignities of his predecessors, viz of King Henry his grandfather".5 This was a shrewd political strategy. The reign of his predecessor, Stephen (1135-1154), had been a period of civil war and weakened royal authority known as "the Anarchy," during which the Church had significantly extended its jurisdiction and privileges.1 By claiming to be merely restoring the state of affairs that existed under his powerful grandfather, Henry I, he cast his reforms in a conservative light, making them appear as a return to order rather than a radical power grab.1 This narrative of restoration was a powerful tool for legitimizing what were, in fact, significant encroachments on ecclesiastical independence.
The most pressing issue that served as the catalyst for the Constitutions was the problem of "criminous clerks"—members of the clergy, a group that included not just priests but anyone in even minor holy orders, who were accused of serious secular crimes like robbery or murder.1 Henry II was infuriated that these individuals were subject only to the jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts. Under the principle of "benefit of clergy," these courts could not impose punishments involving bloodshed, meaning a cleric convicted of murder might only be defrocked (dismissed from his office) and fined.1 In Henry's royal courts, such a crime would be punished by mutilation or death.1 The king saw this as a grave injustice and a threat to the peace of his kingdom.8 Clause 3 of the Constitutions was his direct and most controversial solution, proposing a complex procedure whereby a clerk would be accused in a royal court, tried in a church court in the presence of a royal justice, and, if convicted and defrocked, returned to the royal court for secular punishment.6
Several other clauses directly reflect Henry's personal determination to assert royal prerogative over a defiant Church. Clause 7, which forbade the excommunication of the king's tenants-in-chief or officials without prior royal consent, is widely believed to be a direct response to an incident in July 1163 when Archbishop Becket excommunicated a royal vassal, William of Eynsford, without consulting the king, an act that enraged Henry.5 Likewise, Clause 4, which required high-ranking clergy to obtain royal permission before leaving the kingdom, was a pointed reassertion of a Norman custom designed to prevent unauthorized appeals to the Pope in Rome, thereby keeping ecclesiastical disputes under royal control.2
Perhaps Henry's most critical and strategic act of authorship was not in conceiving the individual clauses, but in demanding that these unwritten "customs" be formally codified in writing at the council held at his hunting lodge in Clarendon.4 This was a political masterstroke. It transformed a fluid and debatable set of oral traditions and practices into a rigid, sixteen-point legal text. This act of codification forced the bishops into a binary choice: either formally accept the king's written definition of royal authority with their seals, or openly defy him. Henry's authorship, therefore, was not one of mere penmanship but of sophisticated political architecture. He skillfully weaponized the concept of "custom" and the technology of writing to construct a legal and political framework intended to permanently subordinate the English Church to his will. The document itself was an act of statecraft, designed to create an unassailable legal fact on the ground.
Section II: The Archbishop's Defiance - Why Thomas Becket Was Not the Author
The proposition that Thomas Becket authored the Constitutions of Clarendon, particularly in his former capacity as Lord Chancellor, is historically untenable. His role was not that of a creator but of the document's most determined and consequential opponent. His resistance was so profound that it defined the Constitutions' historical significance and ultimately led to his own martyrdom.1
A simple examination of the timeline refutes any possibility of Becket's authorship. Becket served as Henry's loyal and effective Chancellor from 1155 to 1162.11 During this period, he was the king's closest friend and a staunch defender of royal interests, often at the expense of the Church.4 The conflict that produced the Constitutions began only
after Henry engineered Becket's appointment as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1162. Upon his consecration, Becket underwent a profound transformation, resigning the chancellorship against the king's wishes—a move that signaled his dramatic shift in allegiance from the Crown to God and the Church.8 He adopted an ascetic lifestyle and began to champion ecclesiastical rights with the same vigor he had once shown for royal power.4 The Constitutions of 1164 were the direct result of this new conflict; they were Henry's response to the defiance of the man who was once his closest ally.
At the Council of Clarendon in January 1164, Becket did not draft the articles; he led the resistance against them. He was horrified by what he saw as an assault on the liberties of the Church. Under immense pressure from the king and his barons, Becket and the other bishops eventually gave a reluctant verbal promise to observe the "customs".2 However, when presented with the written document—the Constitutions themselves—Becket refused to affix his seal.4 This refusal to formally endorse the text was the ultimate act of defiance, a clear rejection of its legitimacy. Soon after the council, tormented by guilt over his moment of weakness, Becket repudiated his verbal oath entirely. Pope Alexander III, while counseling diplomacy, ultimately condemned the most offensive clauses, and Becket fled into exile in France, where he waged a six-year battle against the king and the Constitutions he was accused of betraying.1
Becket's opposition was grounded in a sophisticated legal and theological argument. His primary objection to Clause 3, concerning "criminous clerks," was based on the principle that no person should be punished twice for the same offense (nemo bis in idipsum). He argued that to have a cleric tried and degraded from his office by a church court, and then handed over to a lay court to be mutilated or executed, was to inflict a double punishment for a single crime.1 For Becket, who was educated in canon law, this was a violation of both divine and natural justice.15
This clash was more than a personal quarrel or a simple political dispute. It represented the collision of two expanding and increasingly sophisticated legal systems. On one hand, Henry II was forging the foundations of the English common law, a centralized, national system of justice dependent on the king's authority.16 On the other hand, the universal Church, heavily influenced by the twelfth-century renaissance of Roman law and the systematization of its own canon law (notably in Gratian's
Decretum), was asserting its own comprehensive legal code with jurisdiction over its personnel and property across all of Christendom.10 Becket, as the head of the Church in England, saw himself as the defender of this universal, divinely-ordained legal order against the encroachments of a local, secular monarch. His refusal to author, or even endorse, the Constitutions was therefore not mere stubbornness, but a principled defense of a competing and, in his view, superior legal and spiritual authority. The conflict was an inevitable consequence of the great legal and intellectual developments of the age.
Section III: The King's Men - Identifying the Technical Drafters
While King Henry II provided the political impetus, the task of translating his will into a formal legal document fell to his expert administrators. The historical record, though not containing a formal scribal attribution, provides compelling evidence that the technical authors of the sixteen articles were two of the king's most trusted officials: his Chief Justiciar, Richard de Lucy, and the royal justice, Jocelin de Balliol.
The notion that the Constitutions were drafted by legal specialists is supported by a contemporary commentary appended to some versions of the text, which notes that "Henry caused the constitutions of Clarendon to be drawn up by two of his justiciars".9 This general statement points away from the king himself and toward the professional legal minds at the heart of his government.
The most specific and credible evidence for the identity of these two justiciars comes, paradoxically, from their adversaries. In the charged atmosphere of the Becket dispute, the archbishop's supporters sought to identify the architects of the policies they so vehemently opposed. The Dictionary of National Biography, drawing on contemporary accounts, records that "Archbishop Thomas believed that he, jointly with Joscelin de Bailleul, drew up the constitutions of Clarendon".19 The
Encyclopædia Britannica corroborates this, stating that de Lucy "was singled out by Henry’s enemies as the main author".20 This attribution from a hostile source carries significant weight. In historical analysis, an accusation made by an opponent regarding a matter of fact, rather than opinion, is often considered strong evidence. Becket's circle was not assigning credit; they were assigning blame, and in doing so, they almost certainly identified the men widely known within the court to have been responsible for the document's formulation.
Richard de Lucy was the logical choice for this task. As Chief Justiciar, he was Henry's principal minister and the head of the kingdom's judicial and administrative machinery, a position roughly analogous to a modern prime minister.20 He was a seasoned administrator who had served under Henry I and Stephen before becoming Henry II's right-hand man.19 He was responsible for running England during the king's frequent and prolonged absences in his continental domains.20 His deep involvement in the conflict is further confirmed by the fact that Becket personally excommunicated him on two separate occasions, in 1166 and 1169.20
Jocelin de Balliol (or Bailleul) was another influential Anglo-Norman baron who served as a royal justice. His name appears prominently in the preamble to the Constitutions, not as a drafter, but as one of the lay barons present at the council who "conceded" and "promised" to uphold the recognized customs.9 His identification by Becket's party as a co-drafter alongside de Lucy indicates that he was recognized by his contemporaries as a key legal expert in the king's service.
The drafting of the Constitutions by professional justiciars is a hallmark of the increasing sophistication and professionalization of the Angevin government. Henry II's reign was transformative, moving English governance away from ad-hoc administration and toward a more bureaucratic and expert-driven system.16 The legalistic precision of the Constitutions, especially the carefully worded Clause 3, which modern scholars note was "skilfully designed to avoid the prescriptions of canon law" 18, is indicative of the work of trained legal minds, not simply a monarch's decree. This process demonstrates the nascent common law system in action, where royal policy was formulated and implemented through an emerging professional judiciary. The long list of magnates—both lay and clerical—named in the preamble were not a drafting committee; they were the "Formal Recognizers," an assembly convened to witness and give assent, thereby granting the document the crucial political legitimacy of being the acknowledged "customs of the realm".6
Section IV: The Scholarly Consensus - A Review of Modern Historiography
The question of the authorship and significance of the Constitutions of Clarendon has been a subject of intense scholarly research for well over a century. Far from being a neglected topic, it lies at the heart of the historiography of the Angevin period, English legal history, and the medieval relationship between Church and state. Modern understanding of the document's creation is built upon a rich foundation of primary source analysis and scholarly debate.
The indispensable starting point for any serious research is the monumental seven-volume collection, Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, published in the Rolls Series between 1875 and 1885.23 This comprehensive compilation of contemporary Latin lives of Becket (by authors such as William of Canterbury, Edward Grim, and Herbert of Bosham), letters, and other documents provides the raw material from which all subsequent historical narratives have been constructed.3
Foundational work in the modern era was conducted by the great legal historian F. W. Maitland. In his 1898 work, Roman Canon Law in the Church of England, Maitland corrected a long-standing and crucial misunderstanding of Clause 3. He demonstrated that Henry II did not intend for criminous clerks to be tried in royal courts from the outset. Instead, he proposed a more legally subtle and complex procedure involving both courts, an arrangement designed by his lawyers to punish the clerk under lay law without directly violating the Church's claim to jurisdiction over the trial itself.1 Maitland's meticulous analysis established a new standard for understanding the legal intricacies of the dispute.
The twentieth century saw the publication of major biographies that have become standard works on the period. W. L. Warren's magisterial Henry II (1973) provides a comprehensive appraisal of the reign, placing the Constitutions firmly within the broader context of Henry's ambitious administrative and legal reforms.29 Warren portrays the Constitutions not as an isolated act of anger, but as a logical, if aggressive, component of the king's larger state-building project.31 Conversely,
Frank Barlow's Thomas Becket (1986) stands as the definitive modern biography of the archbishop.33 Barlow masterfully reconstructs the conflict from Becket's perspective, analyzing his transformation and motivations with deep learning and sympathy, while remaining critical.4 Together, Warren and Barlow provide the essential political and biographical framework for understanding the two protagonists.
More recent scholarship has delved into even more specialized legal and canonical aspects. Anne Duggan, a leading authority on twelfth-century canon law, has shown that Becket's stance on clerical immunity was not an outlier but was, in fact, "in line with current thinking about clerical immunity" among canonists of the day.18 Her work reinforces the view that Clause 3 was a "skilfully designed" attempt by Henry's legal team to find a loophole in established Church law, further highlighting the role of expert drafters.18 Legal historian
John Hudson has examined Clause 3 in relation to Henry's other legal innovations, arguing that it was part of a consistent royal policy to centralize justice and bring all significant criminal cases under the purview of the king's court and his chief justiciars.18
The evolution of the scholarship on the Constitutions of Clarendon reflects the development of historical methodology itself. It has progressed from the narrative and often partisan accounts of contemporary chroniclers to the rigorous source criticism and grand political narratives of Maitland, Warren, and Barlow. The current generation of scholars, like Duggan and Hudson, now engages in highly specialized institutional and legal analysis, comparing the nascent common law with the sophisticated international system of canon law. This scholarly journey demonstrates that while the question of "who wrote it?" has been answered with a high degree of certainty, the more profound historical inquiries have shifted to how it was written, what legal theories it engaged, and what its intended administrative consequences were. The focus has moved from personality to process, from a clash of wills to a clash of legal systems.
Conclusion: A Multi-faceted Authorship
The authorship of the Constitutions of Clarendon cannot be attributed to a single individual. The document was the product of a complex political process in which several key figures played distinct and crucial roles. A nuanced understanding requires moving beyond a simplistic search for one "author" and appreciating the multifaceted nature of its creation.
King Henry II was the undisputed political author. The Constitutions were a direct expression of his royal will, conceived to achieve his strategic goals of restoring royal prerogatives, centralizing justice, and curbing the independence of the English Church. His decision to codify these "customs" in writing was a masterful act of political statecraft that precipitated the crisis.
Thomas Becket was in no way an author of the document. His role as Chancellor is chronologically irrelevant, as the conflict arose only after he became Archbishop. He was, instead, the defining opponent. His principled and unyielding resistance, culminating in his refusal to seal the document and his subsequent six-year exile, transformed the Constitutions from a piece of royal legislation into the centerpiece of one of the most famous conflicts in English history.
The technical authors—the expert administrators who translated the king's agenda into precise legal articles—were, according to the most credible contemporary evidence, Henry's Chief Justiciar, Richard de Lucy, and the royal justice Jocelin de Balliol. The legalistic skill evident in the drafting, particularly in clauses designed to circumvent canon law, points to the work of these professional servants of the Crown.
The great council of archbishops, bishops, earls, and barons assembled at Clarendon served as the formal recognizers. They were not a drafting committee but a political body whose function was to grant legitimacy to the king's project by publicly assenting that these articles were, indeed, the ancient and established "customs of the realm."
Ultimately, the story of the Constitutions of Clarendon is the story of the birth of a legal text at the intersection of power, law, and ideology. It was driven by the ambition of a king, drafted by his expert lawyers, legitimized by his magnates, and immortalized by the defiance of his archbishop. To understand its creation is to witness a pivotal moment in the development of the English state and the enduring tension between secular and spiritual authority.
Appendix: Curated List of Sources
1. Primary Sources
Full Text of the Constitutions:
The Avalon Project: Medieval Documents. Yale Law School. The text includes a brief, though dated, scholarly commentary. 9
Internet Medieval Sourcebook. Fordham University. Provides access to the text and other related medieval documents. 37
Contemporary Chronicles and Letters:
Robertson, James Craigie, and J.B. Sheppard, eds. Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. 7 vols. Rerum Britannicarum Medii Aevi Scriptores (Rolls Series) 67. London: Longman & Co., 1875–85. This is the foundational and indispensable collection of primary source material, including the contemporary biographies by William of Canterbury, John of Salisbury, Edward Grim, William Fitzstephen, and Herbert of Bosham, as well as collections of letters pertinent to the dispute. 3
2. Key Secondary Sources (Modern Scholarship)
Barlow, Frank. Thomas Becket. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. The definitive modern biography of the archbishop, providing a thorough analysis of his career and the conflict with Henry II. 4
Duggan, Anne. Thomas Becket. London: Arnold, 2004. An important modern study with a particular focus on the canon law context of the dispute. 18
Hudson, John. "Constitutions of Clarendon, Clause 3, and Henry II's Reforms of Law and Administration." In Laws, Lawyers and Texts: Studies in Medieval Legal History in Honour of Paul Brand, edited by Susanne Jenks, Jonathan Rose, and Christopher Whittick, 1–20. Leiden: Brill, 2012. A specialized scholarly article analyzing the legal and administrative purpose of the most controversial clause. 18
Maitland, F. W. Roman Canon Law in the Church of England: Six Essays. London: Methuen & Co., 1898. Contains the foundational essay that re-interpreted the legal meaning of Clause 3. 1
Warren, W. L. Henry II. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973. The classic and comprehensive biography of the king, placing the Constitutions within the broader context of his reign and administrative reforms. 11
Entries for "Richard de Lucy" in Encyclopædia Britannica and "Lucy, Richard de" in Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900. These reference works provide concise summaries of de Lucy's career and his role in the drafting of the Constitutions, based on primary sources. 19
Works cited
Constitutions of Clarendon - Wikipedia, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutions_of_Clarendon
Constitutions of Clarendon | Henry II, Church-State Relations, Royal Authority | Britannica, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/event/Constitutions-of-Clarendon
The Abbess, the Empress and the 'Constitutions of Clarendon' (Chapter 13) - English Legal History and its Sources - Cambridge University Press & Assessment, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/english-legal-history-and-its-sources/abbess-the-empress-and-the-constitutions-of-clarendon/7F8BDA438774C8EAA6C512A37677BE89
Becket controversy - Wikipedia, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becket_controversy
Constitutions of Clarendon | In Custodia Legis - Library of Congress Blogs, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2014/12/constitutions-of-clarendon/
The Constitutions of Clarendon - Britain Express, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.britainexpress.com/History/medieval/clarendon.htm
How Falling Out with Henry II Resulted in Thomas Becket's Slaughter | History Hit, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.historyhit.com/how-falling-out-with-henry-ii-resulted-in-thomas-beckets-slaughter/
The Murder of an Archbishop (Becket) - Teach Democracy, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://teachdemocracy.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-16-1-b-the-murder-of-an-archbishop
Constitutions of Clarendon. 1164. - The Avalon Project, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/constcla.asp
Constitutions Of Clarendon | Encyclopedia.com, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/modern-europe/british-and-irish-history/constitutions-clarendon
Thomas Becket - Wikipedia, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Becket
Thomas Becket: the murder that shook the Middle Ages | British Museum, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/thomas-becket-murder-shook-middle-ages
Archbishop Thomas Becket - Learning Resources - Canterbury Cathedral, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://learning.canterbury-cathedral.org/a-walk-through-time/becket/
Benefit of Clergy--A Legal Anomaly - UKnowledge, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4977&context=klj
Thomas Becket - New World Encyclopedia, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Thomas_Becket
Henry II and the English Common Law. Justice John Bryson. Plantagenet Society of Au - NSW Supreme Court, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Publications/Speeches/Pre-2015-Speeches/Bryson_20020720.pdf
Henry II: Father of the Common Law - TBA Law Blog - Tennessee Bar Association, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.tba.org/index.cfm?pg=LawBlog&blAction=showEntry&blogEntry=26853
Constitutions of Clarendon, Clause 3, and Henry ii's reforms of law and administration John Hudson the conflict between - Brill, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://brill.com/display/book/9789004232570/B9789004232570_002.pdf
Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Lucy, Richard de ..., accessed on June 29, 2025, https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Lucy,_Richard_de
Richard de Lucy | Norman Lord, Magna Carta, Sheriff | Britannica, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Richard-de-Lucy
Richard de Lucy : London Remembers, Aiming to capture all ..., accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.londonremembers.com/subjects/richard-de-lucy
Constitutions of Clarendon, Clause 3, and Henry ii's reforms of law and administration John Hudson the conflict between - Brill, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://brill.com/previewpdf/book/edcoll/9789004232570/B9789004232570_002.xml
MATERIALS FOR THE HISTORY OF THOMAS BECKET, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (CANONIZED... (Hardcover) - AbeBooks, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.abebooks.com/first-edition/MATERIALS-HISTORY-THOMAS-BECKET-ARCHBISHOP-CANTERBURY/31170131993/bd
Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury (Canonized by Pope Alexander III, AD 1173) - Cambridge University Press & Assessment, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/materials-for-the-history-of-thomas-becket-archbishop-of-canterbury-canonized-by-pope-alexander-iii-ad-1173/2776FB0D58B13C7622095D94C859CD27
Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury - Better World Books, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.betterworldbooks.com/product/detail/materials-for-the-history-of-thomas-becket-archbishop-of-canterbury-9781108049290/new
Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, (canonized by Pope Alexander III, A.D. 1173) - University of Edinburgh - DiscoverEd, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://discovered.ed.ac.uk/discovery/fulldisplay?vid=44UOE_INST%3A44UOE_VU2&search_scope=UoE&tab=Everything&docid=alma99480313502466&lang=en&context=L&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&query=sub%2Cexact%2CScotland%20--%20History%20--%20Sources
Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury (canonized by Pope Alexander III., AD 1173) - The Online Books Page, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupid?key=ha008883692
Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury (canonized by Pope Alexander III., A.D. 1173) - Internet Archive, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://archive.org/details/materialsforhist01robe
Henry II - Wilfred Lewis Warren - Google Books, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://books.google.com/books/about/Henry_II.html?id=C8KrkVOxaT0C
Henry II (English Monarchs) by Wilfred Lewis Warren | Goodreads, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/478634.Henry_II
The Golden Age of Historiography: Records and Writers in ... - Sci-Hub, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://dacemirror.sci-hub.se/journal-article/dd13341dbb533da3e55b1ef82a80612f/hosler2014.pdf
Henry II. -- : Warren, Wilfred, Lewis : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming - Internet Archive, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://archive.org/details/henryii00warr
Thomas Becket - Frank Barlow - Google Books, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://books.google.com/books/about/Thomas_Becket.html?id=8j5clEE5VwwC
Thomas Becket by Frank Barlow - Paper - University of California Press, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520071759/thomas-becket
Constitutions of Clarendon, Clause 3, and Henry II's Reforms of Law and Administration, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://michigan.law.umich.edu/faculty-scholarship/faculty-publications/constitutions-clarendon-clause-3-and-henry-iis-reforms-law
Medieval Documents : 400 - 1399 - Avalon Project, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/medieval.asp
Constitutions of Clarendon, 1164 - IALS Digital resources - School of Advanced Study, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://resources.ials.sas.ac.uk/eagle-i/constitutions-clarendon-1164
Selected Sources: England - Internet History Sourcebooks: Medieval Sourcebook, accessed on June 29, 2025, https://origin.web.fordham.edu/Halsall/sbook1n.asp
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.