Constitutions of Clarendon: Henry II's Motivation for his introducing the Constitutions of Clarendon

1. Introduction: The Crisis of Authority and the Appeal to the Past

The Constitutions of Clarendon, promulgated by Henry II in January 1164, stand as one of the most seminal documents in the legal history of the Latin West. Ostensibly a record of the avitae consuetudines (ancestral customs) of the realm—specifically those observed during the reign of Henry II's grandfather, Henry I (r. 1100–1135)—the document precipitated a catastrophic breakdown in relations between the English Crown and the Church. This rupture, crystallized in the feud between Henry II and Archbishop Thomas Becket, fundamentally altered the trajectory of English law and defined the boundaries of secular and ecclesiastical jurisdiction for centuries.

The central inquiry of this report is to determine the extent to which the Constitutions of Clarendon represented a radical innovation by Henry II or a genuine restoration of ancestral customs. To answer this, one must evaluate Henry’s claim regarding the laws of his grandfather, Henry I, against the backdrop of the mid-twelfth-century legal renaissance. The motivation for the Constitutions cannot be understood merely as a chapter in the biography of Thomas Becket, nor solely as a power struggle between two strong-willed individuals. Rather, it must be situated within the profound structural shifts occurring in European governance: the systematization of the English Common Law under the Angevin administration and the simultaneous consolidation of Canon Law following the publication of Gratian’s Decretum (c. 1140).

Henry II, a ruler of immense administrative energy and territorial ambition, sought to standardize justice across his disparate domains. His appeal to the customs of his grandfather was both a political strategy to legitimize his reforms and a legal argument to counter the "new laws" of the reformed Papacy.1 However, the "customs" Henry II sought to restore had been unwritten, flexible, and exercised in a world before the full reception of Gregorian reform in England. By attempting to freeze these fluid practices into a rigid, written legal code at precisely the moment when the European Church was least disposed to accept lay control, Henry II engaged in a paradoxical act: a radical innovation in method and procedure designed to achieve a conservative restoration of royal prerogative.

This report will argue that while the substantive content of the Constitutions largely reflected the practices of Henry I’s reign, the act of codifying them into written statute, coupled with the rigorous procedural machinery of the nascent Common Law, constituted a transformative innovation. Henry II transformed the vague "customs" of the past into the hard law of the Angevin state, thereby precipitating a conflict that the ambiguity of oral tradition had previously successfully suppressed.

2. The Angevin Inheritance: The Shadow of the Anarchy

To evaluate the veracity of Henry II's claims, it is essential to understand the political landscape he inherited in 1154. The legitimacy of the Angevin regime was predicated on the rejection of the immediate past—the reign of King Stephen (1135–1154)—and the conscious emulation of the reign of Henry I.

2.1 The "Gap" of Stephen's Reign (1135–1154)

The nineteen years of King Stephen's reign, often termed "The Anarchy," represented a traumatic collapse of royal authority. The civil war between Stephen and the Empress Matilda (Henry II's mother) fragmented the administration of justice. As the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle famously lamented, "Christ and his saints slept".3

In this vacuum of secular power, the Church expanded its jurisdiction by necessity and opportunity. Where the King’s writ no longer ran effectively, ecclesiastical courts stepped in to adjudicate disputes that touched upon spiritual matters, however tangentially. This included cases of debt (pledged on oath), land disputes involving church property (the actio spolii), and the trial of clerks accused of secular crimes.4

Crucially, the "Anarchy" coincided with the spread of the Gregorian Reform movement. The weakened monarchy was unable to maintain the barriers against papal influence that William the Conqueror and Henry I had erected.

Appeals to Rome: During Stephen's reign, appeals from English church courts to the Papal Curia in Rome became frequent and normalized.6 The English Church became functionally integrated into the hierarchy of the universal Church in a way it had not been under the Norman kings.
Legatine Authority: Papal legates exercised unprecedented authority within England, holding councils and legislating for the local church without royal impediment.
Canon Law: The study of formal Canon Law, bolstered by the new schools in Bologna and the teaching of Vacarius in Oxford, began to penetrate the English episcopate.7

By 1154, the English Church had become accustomed to a degree of autonomy and international integration that was fundamentally at odds with the Anglo-Norman tradition of theocratic kingship.

2.2 Henry II’s Project of Restoration

When Henry II ascended the throne, he viewed these ecclesiastical gains not as legitimate developments but as "usurpations" permitted by a usurper king.8 His coronation oath and subsequent charters explicitly promised to restore the "good laws" of his grandfather. For Henry II, "innovation" was a pejorative term; his reforms were always framed as a return to the status quo ante bellum.

However, the England of 1154 was not the England of 1135. The intellectual and legal horizons of the clergy had expanded. Henry II’s attempt to simply "reset" the relationship to the days of Henry I ignored the reality that the Church had moved on. The conflict, therefore, was structural: a clash between a monarchy attempting to reconstruct a past reality and a Church operating under a new, modernized legal framework.

3. The Benchmark of Legitimacy: The Reign of Henry I (1100–1135)

Henry II’s specific claim was that the Constitutions of Clarendon enshrined the avitae consuetudines of Henry I. To adjudicate this, one must reconstruct the actual governance of the Church under the "Lion of Justice."

3.1 The Henrician Settlement

Henry I was a formidable ruler who maintained a firm grip on the English Church, continuing the tradition established by his father, William the Conqueror. His reign saw the resolution of the Investiture Controversy in England through the Concordat of London (1107).9

The Concordat of London (1107):

Compromise: Henry I renounced the right to invest bishops with the ring and staff (symbols of spiritual authority) but retained the right to receive homage from them for their temporal lands before their consecration.
Reality of Power: While seemingly a concession, in practice, Henry I retained effective control over appointments. Elections often took place in the royal chapel, in the King's presence, ensuring that only royal candidates were chosen.10

3.2 Customs and Practices under Henry I

The "customs" of Henry I were unwritten but strictly enforced conventions that governed the interface between Church and State.

Table 1: Practices of Church-State Relations under Henry I

Area of Governance	Practice under Henry I	Goal of the Crown
Episcopal Elections	Elections held in the King's presence; homage paid before consecration.	Ensure loyalty of key tenants-in-chief; control vast church estates.
Papal Correspondence	Royal permission required for letters to/from Rome; legates rarely admitted.	Prevent external interference in domestic affairs; maintain sovereignty.
Travel of Prelates	Bishops forbidden to leave the kingdom without royal license.12	Prevent attendance at councils hostile to the King.
Judicial Appeals	Appeals to the Papal Curia effectively blocked or strictly controlled.	Keep justice within the King's realm; prevent "foreign" jurisdiction.
Criminous Clerks	No fixed system, but clerks often punished by secular arm; Leges Henrici Primi implies limits to immunity.13	Maintain public order; prevent clerical status from becoming a shield for crime.

3.3 The Evidence of the Leges Henrici Primi

The Leges Henrici Primi (c. 1115), a compilation of legal customs from Henry I's reign, provides crucial evidence. It states that "no accusation, be it for grave crime, be it for light offense, is to be brought against any ordained clerk save before his bishop".13 This seems to support Becket’s view of clerical immunity.

However, the Leges also implies that this immunity was conditional on the clerk proving his status and was not an absolute bar to secular intervention in all cases. Furthermore, practice often diverged from theory. There are recorded instances of Henry I subjecting clerks to heavy fines and even mutilation, ignoring the theoretical protections of the Church when the peace of the realm was at stake.14

Conclusion on the Benchmark: Henry II was largely correct in his historical memory. Under Henry I, the King was the effective master of the Church. The customs regarding elections, travel, and appeals were rigorously enforced, albeit through the exercise of raw royal power rather than written statute. The ambiguity lay in the judicial treatment of clerks, where practice was inconsistent and ad hoc.

4. The Intellectual Revolution: Canon Law and the Two Swords

Between the death of Henry I (1135) and the Council of Clarendon (1164), the intellectual landscape of Western Christendom was transformed. This transformation is the key variable that turned Henry II’s "restoration" into a collision.

4.1 Gratian and the Decretum (c. 1140)

The publication of Gratian’s Concordia discordantium canonum, commonly known as the Decretum, systematized the disparate canons of the Church into a coherent legal code. Gratian utilized the scholastic method to resolve contradictions, creating a jurisprudence that asserted the autonomy and superiority of the spiritual power.15

Key Concepts of the New Canon Law:

The Two Swords: The spiritual sword (Church) and the temporal sword (State) are distinct. The spiritual is superior because it deals with the soul.
Liberty of the Church: The freedom of the Church from secular control was not a concession from the King but a divine right.
Clerical Immunity: Gratian’s Causa 11, Questio 1 explicitly dealt with the trial of clerics, asserting that they must be judged by their own peers (the clergy) and not by laymen.15

4.2 The Reception of Canon Law in England

Under the patronage of Archbishop Theobald of Bec (Becket’s predecessor), the study of Roman and Canon Law flourished in England. The Italian jurist Vacarius taught at Oxford, introducing the new legal science to a generation of English clerks.7

Thomas Becket: As a member of Theobald’s household, Becket was immersed in this intellectual milieu. His arguments at Clarendon were not idiosyncratic; they were grounded in the latest scholarship from Bologna.
The Definition of Custom: Canon Law defined "custom" strictly. Gratian argued that consuetudo (custom) must yield to veritas (truth) and jus (law). A custom that contradicted Canon Law was not a law but a corruption (corruptela).17

This intellectual shift meant that when Henry II appealed to the "customs of Henry I," the bishops heard "the abuses of a tyrant." The shared language of governance had fractured.

5. The Flashpoint: Criminous Clerks and the Crisis of Order

The immediate catalyst for the Constitutions was the issue of "criminous clerks"—clergy accused of serious felonies like murder, rape, and theft.

5.1 The Sociology of the Crisis

In 12th-century England, the "clergy" was a broad demographic category. It included not just priests and monks, but a vast number of men in minor orders (doorkeepers, readers, acolytes) who lived in the world, often married, and engaged in secular business.18 These men were subject to Canon Law, which forbade the shedding of blood. Consequently, ecclesiastical courts could not impose the death penalty or mutilation. The maximum penalty was degradation (loss of orders).

The King’s Problem: To Henry II, this created a class of citizens immune from the ultimate sanctions of the state. Chroniclers claimed that over a hundred murders had been committed by clerks in the first years of his reign with impunity.19 For a King dedicated to the "King’s Peace," this was an intolerable failure of justice.

5.2 Specific Cases

The tension was brought to a head by several high-profile cases in the late 1150s and early 1160s:

The Case of Philip de Broi: Philip, a canon of Bedford, was accused of killing a knight. He was acquitted in the bishop’s court by "compurgation" (swearing an oath with oath-helpers). Later, a royal justice attempted to reopen the case. Philip insulted the justice, leading to a charge of contempt. Henry II was furious, seeing this as a direct challenge to royal authority.14
The Clerk of Worcester: A clerk accused of murdering a father and raping his daughter was seemingly protected from the full weight of royal justice, further inciting the King’s rage.
The Battle Case: A dispute involving the Abbey of Battle saw the King intervene directly to assert that the royal court had the final say in matters touching the Crown's interests, foreshadowing the jurisdictional battles of Clarendon.20

5.3 The Failure of Oral Agreement

In 1163, at the Council of Westminster, Henry II demanded that the bishops agree to observe his "royal customs." Led by Becket, they agreed only with the qualifying clause salvo ordine nostro ("saving our order")—a caveat that effectively nullified their consent.17 Henry, realizing that oral ambiguity allowed the bishops to evade his authority, decided to define exactly what those customs were. This decision led directly to the Council of Clarendon in January 1164.

6. The Constitutions of Clarendon: A Forensic Analysis (Clauses 1–8)

The Constitutions consist of 16 clauses. While Henry claimed they were all avitae consuetudines, a textual analysis reveals a mix of restoration, procedural innovation, and radical expansion of jurisdiction.

6.1 Clause 3: The Procedure for Criminous Clerks

This was the most controversial clause. It outlined a sophisticated procedural mechanism:

Accusation: The clerk is accused and summoned to the King's Court.
Plea: He pleads to the jurisdiction (unde).
Transfer: He is sent to the Ecclesiastical Court for trial.
Observation: A royal official is sent to watch the trial (to ensure no leniency/escape).
Judgment: If convicted or confesses, the Church strips him of orders (degradation).
Punishment: The Church "ought not to protect him further," and he is handed to the Royal Court for physical punishment (lay penalty).10

Innovation or Restoration?

Restoration: Henry II could point to Henry I’s reign where clerks were punished.
Innovation: The procedure was radically new. The requirement for an initial appearance in the royal court and the presence of a royal observer in the bishop’s court systematized what had been ad hoc. It integrated the Church’s judicial process into the machinery of the royal bureaucracy.21
The "Double Punishment" Argument: Becket, utilizing Canon Law, argued Nemo bis in idipsum—God does not judge twice for the same offense. He contended that degradation was a penalty in itself; to hang the man afterwards was double jeopardy. This theological defense was a direct application of the new Gratianean jurisprudence.17

6.2 Clause 4: Travel Restrictions

Clause 4 forbade archbishops, bishops, and "persons of the kingdom" from leaving the country without the King's permission. If they did leave, they had to give security that they would not seek the "hurt or harm of king or kingdom".19

Verdict: Restoration. This was a clear restatement of the practice of William I and Henry I. It was designed to prevent prelates from attending papal councils where they might conspire against the King.

6.3 Clause 8: Appeals to Rome

Clause 8 established a strict hierarchy of appeals: Archdeacon -> Bishop -> Archbishop -> King. "And if the archbishop shall fail to render justice, they must come finally to the lord king... so that it shall not proceed further without the consent of the lord king".19

Verdict: Restoration. Henry I had effectively blocked appeals to Rome.
Contextual Change: In 1164, after the "Anarchy," appeals to Rome were common. To ban them by statute was to challenge the Pope's universal jurisdiction, which was now a dogma of the Church. What was a practice of power for Henry I became a statutory challenge to papal theology for Henry II.

6.4 Clause 7: Excommunication of Tenants-in-Chief

No tenant-in-chief or royal servant could be excommunicated without the King's consent.19

Feudal Logic: Excommunication had civil consequences (shunning, confiscation). Henry argued he had a feudal right to know if his military tenants were being disabled.
Verdict: Restoration. This was standard Norman practice, essential for the security of the feudal state.

7. The Constitutions of Clarendon: A Forensic Analysis (Clauses 9–16)

While the first eight clauses dealt largely with high politics and security, the latter clauses (particularly 1 and 9) were instrumental in the development of the English Common Law.

7.1 Clause 9: The Assize Utrum

"If a quarrel arise between a clerk and a layman... concerning any tenement which the clerk wishes to attach to the church property but the layman to a lay fee: by the inquest of twelve lawful men, through the judgment of the chief Justice of the king, it shall be determined...".19

This clause established a procedure to determine the nature of land tenure. Was it "alms" (Church) or "lay fee" (State)?

Mechanism: The "Recognition" by twelve sworn men (a jury).
Innovation: This is the origin of the Assize Utrum, often called "the parson's writ of right."
Significance: Henry II used a new legal technology—the jury of presentment—to solve a jurisdictional deadlock. While Henry I protected royal fiefs, he had no such systematic jury mechanism. This is a clear case of administrative innovation serving a conservative goal (defining jurisdiction).21

7.2 Clause 1: Advowson

"If a controversy concerning advowson and presentation of churches arise... it shall be treated of and terminated in the court of the lord king".19

Definition: Advowson is the right to appoint a priest to a benefice.
The Conflict: The Church argued this was a spiritual matter (cure of souls). Henry II argued it was a property right (attached to the land).
Verdict: Radical Innovation. By claiming exclusive jurisdiction over advowson, Henry II turned a spiritual appointment into a piece of real property. This laid the foundation for the Assize of Darrein Presentment and permanently removed these cases from Canon Law jurisdiction in England.20

7.3 Clause 15: Debt

"Pleas concerning debts... shall be in the jurisdiction of the king".19

Context: Church courts often heard debt cases under the guise of "pledge of faith" (laesio fidei). If a debtor swore an oath to pay and failed, he was a sinner.
Henry's Move: Henry claimed all debt disputes for the royal court. This was crucial for the economic centralization of the realm and the power of the Exchequer.

8. The Innovation of Codification: From Memory to Written Record

A critical, often overlooked dimension of the Constitutions is their medium. The transition "from memory to written record," as analyzed by M.T. Clanchy, was in itself a radical innovation of the twelfth century.26

8.1 The Trap of Writing

In the oral culture of Henry I’s court, "custom" was flexible. It resided in the memory of the King and his barons. It could be pressed when the King was strong and ignored when he was weak. It allowed for ambiguity and modus vivendi.

By forcing the bishops to agree to a written text (chirograph), Henry II stripped away this protective ambiguity.

Definition: Writing forced a definition of rights that was sharper than reality.
Confrontation: Once written down, the "customs" could be compared side-by-side with the text of the Decretum. The incompatibility, previously glossed over by practice, became undeniable.
Innovation: The act of codification—transforming fluid custom into fixed statute—was a modernizing act of state-building. It created a "constitutional" crisis where previously there had been only political friction.26

9. The Resistance: Becket, Foliot, and the Bishops

The response to the Constitutions was not monolithic. It reveals a deep split within the English Church between the rigorous Gregorianism of Becket and the moderate dualism of Gilbert Foliot.

9.1 Thomas Becket: The Convert’s Zeal

Becket’s transformation from the King's Chancellor (who had taxed the Church) to the Archbishop (who defended it) is pivotal. Becket adopted the persona of the defender of the Church’s liberties.

The Theological Argument: Becket relied on the "Two Swords" theory but emphasized the superiority of the spiritual. He utilized the Nemo bis in idipsum argument to block Clause 3, turning a procedural dispute into a theological stand.17
The Appeal to Rome: Becket internationalized the conflict, appealing to Pope Alexander III and the King of France, precisely what Clauses 4 and 8 sought to prevent.

9.2 Gilbert Foliot: The Royalist Alternative

Gilbert Foliot, Bishop of London, was Becket’s great rival. In his famous letter Multiplicem nobis, Foliot articulated a different vision of Church-State relations.28

Dualism: Foliot argued that the King was God’s anointed minister of justice. The Church relied on the King’s sword to maintain peace.
Critique of Becket: Foliot argued that Becket’s rigidity was endangering the Church. By alienating the King, Becket was provoking a persecution that was unnecessary.
Legitimacy of Royal Justice: Foliot was inclined to accept that "criminous clerks" should be punished by the King, seeing no theological contradiction in the secular arm purifying the realm of evil men, regardless of their tonsure.29

Foliot’s arguments suggest that Henry II’s view of "custom" was not entirely alien to the English episcopate. Becket’s radical stance was not the only "Church" view; it was the one that eventually won the propaganda war through martyrdom.

10. The Aftermath and Legacy

The murder of Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral in 1170 transformed the political landscape. Henry II, facing universal condemnation, was forced to negotiate the Compromise of Avranches (1172).

Table 2: The Fate of the Constitutions after 1172

Clause	Outcome	Long-Term Impact
Clause 3 (Criminous Clerks)	Formally Revoked. Henry promised not to punish clerks for secular crimes (except treason/forest offenses).	Emergence of "Benefit of Clergy" as a persistent anomaly in English law until the 19th century.30
Clause 8 (Appeals)	Modified. Appeals to Rome were allowed, but the King retained the right to exact security.	Appeals continued, but the Crown maintained de facto control through Praemunire statutes later.
Clause 1 (Advowson)	Retained. The King’s court kept jurisdiction.	A permanent victory for Common Law; advowson remained a property right.
Clause 9 (Utrum)	Retained. The Assize Utrum became a standard remedy.	Contributed to the growth of the jury system and Common Law property litigation.

The Victory of Common Law: Despite the formal concession on criminous clerks, Henry II succeeded in insulating the core of English land and property law (including advowson) from Canon Law. The administrative innovations of the Constitutions—the use of juries, writs, and royal justices—survived and flourished, becoming the backbone of the English Common Law.23

11. Conclusion: Radical Restoration

To what extent were the Constitutions of Clarendon a radical innovation or a restoration?

The evidence suggests that they were a radical innovation in form and procedure, deployed to achieve a conservative restoration of sovereign power.

Restoration in Substance: Henry II was historically accurate. His grandfather, Henry I, had controlled the Church, limited appeals, and punished clerks. The content of the Constitutions was not an invention of Henry II’s tyranny but a reflection of the Anglo-Norman theocratic tradition.
Innovation in Mechanism: The means by which Henry sought to secure these customs were profoundly innovative.

Codification: The transition from oral custom to written statute was a modernizing act that shattered the diplomatic ambiguity essential to Church-State relations.
Procedure: The integration of ecclesiastical discipline into the machinery of the royal bureaucracy (Clause 3) and the use of the recognition jury (Clause 9) were administrative technologies of the 1160s, unknown to the 1130s.

The Canon Law Context: The true "innovation" lay in the context. By 1164, the "customs" of 1130 had become the "abuses" of the post-Gratian Church. Henry II’s attempt to enforce them was legally reactionary but administratively revolutionary.

Ultimately, the Constitutions of Clarendon failed as a concordance between Church and State but succeeded as a manifesto of the secular state. They marked the moment when the English Crown asserted that its law was not merely a collection of customs, but a sovereign system capable of defining the boundaries of all other jurisdictions within the realm.

Bibliography and Citations

Primary Sources: Constitutions of Clarendon 19; Leges Henrici Primi 13; Gilbert Foliot's Multiplicem nobis 28; Vie de Saint Thomas.34
Historical Context: Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Stephen's Reign) 3; Z.N. Brooke, The English Church and the Papacy.35
Canon Law: Gratian, Decretum 15; Charles Duggan, The Becket Dispute and Criminous Clerks.22
Legal & Administrative History: F.W. Maitland, Roman Canon Law in the Church of England & History of English Law 21; John Hudson, Constitutions of Clarendon, Clause 3 21; Paul Brand, Henry II and the Creation of the English Common Law 23; M.T. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record.26

Works cited

Henry II summary | Britannica, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.britannica.com/summary/Henry-II-king-of-England
Henry II of England - dlab @ EPFL, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://dlab.epfl.ch/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/h/Henry_II_of_England.htm
The Anarchy of King Stephen's Reign - Google Books, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Anarchy_of_King_Stephen_s_Reign.html?id=ychyAQ1JTVAC
King Stephen and The Anarchy - Historic UK, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/King-Stephen-Anarchy/
King Stephen and The Anarchy: A Reign Reconsidered | Origins, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://origins.osu.edu/read/king-stephen-anarchy-matilda
A Brief History of Medieval Roman Canon Law in England, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7774&context=penn_law_review
Canon Law and the Common Law, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://repository.uclawsf.edu/context/hastings_law_journal/article/2565/viewcontent/60_29HastingsLJ1383_281977_1978_29.pdf
Stephen, King of England - Wikipedia, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen,_King_of_England
Investiture Struggle - The Episcopal Church, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.episcopalchurch.org/glossary/investiture-struggle/
Clarendon Constitutions - McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/C/clarendon-constitutions.html
Investiture Controversy - Wikipedia, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investiture_Controversy
The Reign of Henry I - History - Britain Express, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.britainexpress.com/History/Reign-of-Henry-I.htm
Benefit of clergy | Catholic Answers Encyclopedia, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/benefit-of-clergy
Benefit of Clergy--A Legal Anomaly - UKnowledge, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4977&context=klj
Gratian, Concordia discordantium canonum, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://data.mgh.de/databases/clavis/wiki/index.php/Gratian,_Concordia_discordantium_canonum
Gratian's Decretum | Medieval, Jurisprudence, Canonical - Britannica, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Gratians-Decretum
THOMAS BECKET AND HIS BIOGRAPHERS, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://politicayderechoenlaedadmedia.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/staunton-thomas-becket-and-his-biographers-cap-9.pdf
redefining benefit of clergy during the english reformation, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/65455/SkousenMAThesis.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Constitutions of Clarendon. 1164. - The Avalon Project, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/constcla.asp
The Writ of Right and the start of Henry II's legal reforms, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://historyoflaw.co.uk/writ-of-right-start-of-henry-iis-legal-reforms/
Constitutions of Clarendon, Clause 3, and Henry ii's - Brill, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://brill.com/previewpdf/book/edcoll/9789004232570/B9789004232570_002.xml
Thomas Becket and Clerical Immunity - CORE, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/217158281.pdf
Henry II new interpretations, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://politicayderechoenlaedadmedia.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/brand-henry-ii-and-the-creation-of-the-englis-common-law.pdf
Conflicts between Religious and Secular Law - Chicago Unbound, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2487&context=journal_articles
Constitutions of Clarendon (1164) - Verfassungsgeschichte.ch, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.verfassungsgeschichte.ch/GB_1164_Constitutions%20of%20Clarendon.pdf
From Memory to Written Record: England 1066 - 1307 - Google Books, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://books.google.com/books/about/From_Memory_to_Written_Record.html?id=FMtNaLEHjeQC
Writing and the Reinvention of Customary Law in Medieval France., accessed on February 5, 2026, https://sharpweb.org/sharpnews/2024/11/15/ada-maria-kuskowski-vernacular-law-writing-and-the-reinvention-of-customary-law-in-medieval-france/
Gilbert Foliot and the Two Swords: Law and Political Theory in ..., accessed on February 5, 2026, https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstreams/be8c5af7-355a-454a-baee-bb098f70770f/download
The Becket Controversy in Recent Historiography | Journal of British ..., accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-british-studies/article/becket-controversy-in-recent-historiography/4CAFB036E10779E8C742F7E162E24B7C
Benefit of clergy | Criminal Immunity, Ecclesiastical ... - Britannica, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.britannica.com/topic/benefit-of-clergy
Benefit of clergy - Wikipedia, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_of_clergy
The Constitutions of Clarendon - Britain Express, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.britainexpress.com/History/medieval/clarendon.htm
Gilbert Foliot's letter to Becket (Summer 1166): Multiplicem nobis, accessed on February 5, 2026, http://conclarendon.blogspot.com/2013/07/gilbert-foliots-letter-to-becket-summer.html
13 - The Abbess, the Empress and the 'Constitutions of Clarendon', accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/english-legal-history-and-its-sources/abbess-the-empress-and-the-constitutions-of-clarendon/7F8BDA438774C8EAA6C512A37677BE89
From the Conquest to the Reign of John - Zachary Nugent Brooke, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://books.google.com.na/books?id=o54pyg3LtiUC&printsec=frontcover
8 Henry I and the English Church: The Archbishops and the King, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://resolve.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/2472FAA42208E964310BF8B5AE135D73/9781846155529c8_p133-157_CBO.pdf/henry_i_and_the_english_church_the_archbishops_and_the_king.pdf
The Learned Laws in 'Pollock and Maitland' - The British Academy, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/3940/89p145.pdf
Criminal Law (Chapter 26) - The Cambridge History of Medieval ..., accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-medieval-canon-law/criminal-law/76028B5B222F45784E7333657CAE5CE8
Maitland and the Rest of Us - The British Academy, accessed on February 5, 2026, https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/3942/89p215.pdf

Constitutions of Clarendon

Thursday, 5 February 2026

Henry II's Motivation for his introducing the Constitutions of Clarendon