The dates and circumstances of these two visits are a subject of some importance and interest. Fortunately, they can be accurately ascertained.
It is certain that, on Henry's first visit, he landed with his uncle at Wareham towards the close of 1142. Stephen had been besieging the Empress in Oxford since the 26th of September,[1159] and her brother, recalled to England by her danger, must have landed, with Henry, about the beginning of December, for she had then been besieged more than two months, and Christmas was at hand.[1160] This date is confirmed by another calculation. For the earl, on landing, we are told, laid siege to the castle of Wareham, and took it, after three weeks.[1161] But as the flight of the Empress from Oxford coincided with, or followed immediately after, his capture of the castle,[1162] and as that flight took place on the eve of Christmas,[1163] after a siege of three months,[1164] this would similarly throw back the landing of the earl at Wareham to the beginning of December (1142).
By a strange oversight, Dr. Stubbs, the supreme authority on his life, makes Henry arrive in 1141, "when he was eight years old, to be trained in arms;"[1165] whereas, as we have seen, he did not arrive till towards the end of 1142, when he was nine years and three-quarters old. Nor, it would seem, was there any intention that he should be then trained in arms. This point is here mentioned because it bears on the chronology of Gervase, as criticised by Dr. Stubbs, who, I venture to think, may have been thus led to pronounce it, as he does, "unsound."
On recovering Wareham, Henry and his uncle set out for Cirencester, where the earl appointed a rendezvous of his party, with a view to an advance on Oxford. The Empress, however, in the mean time, unable to hold out any longer, effected her well-known romantic escape and fled to Wallingford, where those of her supporters who ought to have been with her when Stephen assailed her, had gathered round the stronghold of Brian fitz Count, having decided that their forces were not equal to raising the siege of Oxford.[1166] Thither, therefore, the earl now hastened with his charge, and the Empress, we are told, forgot all her troubles in the joy of the meeting with her son.[1167]
Stephen had been as eager to relieve his beleaguered garrison at Wareham as the earl had been, at the same time, to raise the siege of Oxford. Neither of them, however, would attempt the task till he had finished the enterprise he had in hand.[1168] But now that the fall of Oxford had set Stephen free, he determined, though Wareham had fallen, that he would at least regain possession.[1169] But the earl had profited, it seems, by his experience of the preceding year, and Stephen found the fortress was now too strong for him.[1170] He accordingly revenged himself for this disappointment by ravaging the district with fire and sword.[1171] Thus passed the earlier months of 1143. Eventually, with his brother, the Bishop of Winchester, he marched to Wilton, where he proceeded to convert the nunnery of St. Etheldred into a fortified post, which should act as a check on the garrison of the Empress at Salisbury.[1172] The Earl of Gloucester, on hearing of this, burst upon his forces in the night, and scattered them in all directions. Stephen himself had a narrow escape, and the enemy made a prisoner of William Martel, his minister and faithful adherent.[1173] This event is dated by Gervase July 1 (1143).
I have been thus particular in dealing with this episode because, as Dr. Stubbs rightly observes, "the chronology of Gervase is here quite irreconcilable with that of Henry of Huntingdon, who places the capture of William Martel in 1142."[1174] But a careful collation of Gervase's narrative with that given in the Gesta removes all doubt as to the date, for it is certain, from the sequence of events in 1142, that at no period of that year can Stephen and the Earl of Gloucester have been in Wiltshire at the same time. There is, therefore, no question that the two detailed narratives I have referred to are right in assigning the event to 1143, and that Henry of Huntingdon, who only mentions it briefly, has placed it under a wrong date, having doubtless confused the two attacks (1142 and 1143) that Stephen made on Wareham.[1175]
Henry, says Gervase (i. 131), now spent four years in England, during which he remained at Bristol under the wing of his mighty uncle, by whom his education was entrusted to a certain Master Mathew.[1176] A curious reference by Henry himself to this period of his life will be found in the Monasticon (vol. vi.), where, in a charter (? 1153) to St. Augustine's, Bristol, he refers to that abbey as one
"quam inicio juventutis meæ beneficiis et protectione cœpi juvare et fovere."
It should be noticed that Gervase twice refers to Henry's stay as one of four years (i. 125, 133), and that this statement is strictly in harmony with those by which it is succeeded. Dr. Stubbs admits that Henry's departure is placed by him "at the end of 1146,"[1177] and this would be exactly four years from the date when, as we saw, he landed. Again, Gervase goes on to state that two years and four months elapsed before his return.[1178] This would bring us to April, 1149; and "here," as Dr. Stubbs observes, "we get a certain date," for "Henry was certainly knighted at Carlisle at Whitsuntide [May 22], 1149."[1179] It will be seen then that the chronology of Gervase is thoroughly consistent throughout.[1180] When Dr. Stubbs writes: "Gervase's chronology is evidently unsound here, but the sequence of events is really obscure,"[1181] he alludes to the mention of the Earl of Gloucester's death. But it will be found, on reference to the passage, that its meaning is quite clear, namely, that the earl died during Henry's absence (interea), and in the November after his departure. And such was, admittedly, the case.
The second visit of Henry to England has scarcely obtained the attention it deserved. It was fully intended, I believe, at the time, that his arrival should give the signal for a renewal of the civil war. This is, by Gervase (i. 140), distinctly implied. He also tells us that it was now that Henry abandoned his studies to devote himself to arms.[1182] It would seem, however, to be generally supposed that the sole incident of this visit was his receiving knighthood from his great-uncle, the King of Scots, at Carlisle. But it is at Devizes that he first appears, charter evidence informing us of the fact that he was there, surrounded by some leading partisans, on April 13.[1183] Again, it has, apparently, escaped notice that the author of the Gesta, at some length, refers to this second visit (pp. 127-129). His editor, at least, supposed him to be referring to Henry's first (1142) and third (1153) visits; these, in that gentleman's opinion, being evidently one and the same.[1184] According to the Gesta, Henry began by attacking the royal garrisons in Cricklade and Bourton, which would harmonize, it will be seen, exactly with a northerly advance from Devizes. He was, however, unsuccessful in these attempts. Among those who joined him, says Gervase, were the Earls of Hereford and of Chester. The former duly appears with him at Devizes in the charter to which I have referred; the latter is mentioned by John of Hexham as being present with him at Carlisle.[1185] This brings us to the strange story, told by the author of the Gesta, that Henry, before long, deserted by his friends, was forced to appeal to Stephen for supplies. There is this much to be said in favour of the story, namely, that the Earl of Chester did play him false.[1186] Moreover, the Earl of Gloucester, who is said to have refused to help him,[1187] certainly does not appear as taking any steps on his behalf. Lastly, it is not impossible that Stephen, whose generosity, in thus acting, is so highly extolled by the writer, may have taken advantage of Henry's trouble, to send him supplies on the condition that he should abandon his enterprise and depart. It is, in any case, certain that he did depart at the commencement of the following year (1150).[1188]