History of the state and law of foreign countries. Chapter XXIV

House of Lords

(clergy, secular authorities invited by the king)

House of Commons

(knights, citizens elected by their voters)

Theme: England from the Norman Conquest to Freedom

Goals: to characterize the features of the state structure during the period of the Norman dynasty; consider the reforms of Henry II Plantagenet; show the formation of parliamentarism in England.

Lesson plan:

Checking homework

Explanation of new material

Consolidation of the studied material

Lesson summary

Homework

Checking homework.

Who was interested in the unification of France (oral answer)

Reasons for the unification of France (work with the int.board)

What successes have been achieved in the unification of France (oral answer)

Conflict of King Philip 4 and Pope Bonifotius 8 (oral answer)

States General:

1. Estates of the States General (internet board)

   Definition of the States General (int.board).

Activities of the States General.

From all of the above, let's conclude: what was the meaning of unification for France

Explanation of new material #1

Norman conquest. In 1066, the conquest of England by the Duke of Normandy William began. Since he was related to the ending old dynasty, he laid claim to the royal throne.

He received the support of: the Pope; his vassals and knights from other regions of France.

William's troops crossed the English Channel and landed on the south coast of England. Here the battle took place Hastings that decided the fate of the country.

Battle of Hastings.

England was ruled by the Norman dynasty. William took away land holdings from most of the large feudal lords and distributed them to his knights.

What are the consequences of the Norman Conquest?

Strengthening royal power (all swore allegiance to William and became his vassals);

The beginning of the formation of a centralized state;

Strengthening of feudal oppression (a census of land and population was carried out - the income of the population began to be taken into account more fully).

How did the Norman Conquest affect the development of England?

Explanation of new material #2

HenryIIand his reforms.

What can you say about Henry?II. (page 161 – read)

During his reign, a lot of changes took place in the country and a number of reforms were carried out:

Judicial reform

• creation of a royal court

(bypassing the court of the local feudal lord);

court for the free

12 jurors;

court for dependent peasants -

feudal court.

Military reform:

• Introduction of shield money

(special contribution of the knights to the king instead of campaigns);

Shield money contained:

militia, permanent mercenary army.

Strengthening the power of sheriffs:

• On the ground, the power of sheriffs was formed -

royal officials who

ruled the county: the sheriff collected taxes,

pursued a breach of the order.

What was the significance of these reforms for France?

Explanation of new material #3

Magna Carta.

After the death of Henry II, power passed to his eldest son, Richard I the Lionheart. After the death of Richard, the youngest son of Henry II, John the Landless, became king. In 1215 he signed Magna Carta- the great charter protected the nobility from the arbitrariness of the king, as well as knights and townspeople. However, having signed the Charter, John was not going to fulfill its requirements, having secured the support of the pope, he started a war against his opponents, but died in the midst of hostilities.

Working with a document (p.163.Semantic Reading Strategy )

Stage 1 - Before reading the text:

Read the title, highlight familiar and new terms in it.

Try to guess what will be discussed.

Stage 2 - While reading the text:

Find new words and determine their meanings in a dictionary.

Stage 3 - After reading the text:

Answer the questions for the test and comment on them;

The power of the king was limited, the guilty succumbed to the court.

The charter was beneficial to free people, barons, merchants.

They got freedom, they could defend it through the courts - a law appeared.

Explanation of new material #4

Parliament. The son of John Henry III was a spineless man, was under the influence of his wife. He generously granted land and income to foreigners, which caused discontent among the population.

In 1258, the harrows convened a royal council, called the "frantic council". The barons made demands to the king and he was forced to accept the demands:

Without barons, the king could not decide important matters;

Foreigners had to return the castles and estates received from the king.

Having achieved their goal, the barons did not take care of the knights and townspeople. In 1265, in order to strengthen his power, Count Monifort convened a meeting, which included: large spiritual and secular feudal lords, representatives of knights and townspeople. This class is called parliament.

Functions of Parliament:

Participation in the creation of laws;

Tax clearance;

Control over the use of taxes;

Baron restrictions.

In Parliament, these two houses acted jointly, so they were able to pass a law that no tax would be collected without the consent of the House of Commons. When approving a new tax, parliament usually presented its demands to the king and obtained concessions from him. Gradually, Parliament began to participate in changing laws. The English Parliament had a great influence on state affairs. But the peasants did not participate in the work of parliament. Many fled from their masters - the fugitives gathered in detachments, attacked the feudal lords, bishops and officials. About their adventures, the people composed songs - ballads. The favorite hero of English ballads was the good robber - Robin Hood.

Is there a difference between Parliament and the Estates General?

How many years has the English Parliament been in existence?

Let's highlight what qualities Robin Hood possessed?

Consolidation of the studied material:

• Tic-tac-toe game

Lesson Summary:

What new did you learn at the lesson today?

The formation of a feudal state in England is associated with numerous conquests of the British Isles by tribes of Germanic and Scandinavian origin. The Roman conquest left about itself almost only architectural and linguistic monuments (names of towns, cities). After the departure of the Romans in the 5th c. AD the Celtic tribes inhabiting England were invaded by the Germanic tribes of the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, who pushed the Celtic population to the outskirts of the island (Scotland, Wales, Cornwall) - In the 7th century. the Anglo-Saxons adopted Christianity and formed seven early feudal kingdoms (Wessex, Sussex, Kent, Mercia, etc.), which in the 9th century. Under the leadership of Wessex, they formed the Anglo-Saxon state - England. At the beginning of the XI century. the English throne was captured by the Danes, who ruled until the return of the Anglo-Saxon dynasty in the person of Edward the Confessor (1042) -

In 1066, the ruler of Normandy, Duke William, having the blessing of the Pope and the French king, landed with an army on the island and, having defeated the Anglo-Saxon militia, became the English king. The Norman Conquest had a great influence on the further history of the English state, which developed largely in the same way as the medieval states of the continent. However, a distinctive feature of its evolution since the XI century. was early centralization, lack of feudalism: fragmentation and the rapid development of public principles of royal power.

The main stages in the development of the English feudal state can be distinguished:

1) the period of the Anglo-Saxon early feudal monarchy in the IX-XI centuries;

2) the period of centralized senior monarchy (XI-XII centuries) and civil wars to limit royal power (XII century);

3) the period of a class-representative monarchy (the second half of the XIII-XV centuries);

4) the period of absolute monarchy (the end of the 15th - the middle of the 17th century).

§ 1. Anglo-Saxon early feudal monarchy

The rise of feudal society. The formation of a feudal society among the Germanic tribes in Britain took place at a slow pace, which is to some extent due to the conservation of the Anglo-Saxon tribal customs on the island and the persistent influence of Scandinavian traditions. In truth VI-VII centuries. tribal nobility (Erls), free community members (Kerls), semi-free (Lets) and domestic servants-slaves stand out among the population. Priests and the king are also mentioned, with the bishop's wergeld being higher than the king's wergeld. In the 8th century the practice of individual patronage is spreading, when a person had to look for a patron (glaford) and had no right to leave him without his permission. In the monuments of the VII-IX centuries. special mention is made of the warrior-tans, which included both earls and kaerls, who were obliged to carry out military service in favor of the king. The only criterion for entering this category was the possession of a land plot of a certain size (5 guides). Thus, the boundaries between various social groups of the free were not closed and sharply limited: an English peasant and even a descendant of a freedman could become a thane, having received a plot of land from a lord or king. According to historians, almost a quarter of the English thanes of this period descended from peasants and artisans.

At the same time, the development of relations of domination and subordination continues. In the tenth century all who were unable to answer for themselves in court were ordered to find themselves a Glaford (compulsory commendation). Any person, before turning to the king for justice, had to turn to his glaford. The master's life was declared inviolable to both earls and kaerls. At the same time, the institute of guarantee is being strengthened - for any person, his glaford and a certain number of free people (no more than 12 people) were guaranteed.

By the 11th century the land services of both the thanes and the dependent peasantry were determined. Tans had the right to own land based on a royal act and had to perform three main duties: to participate in the campaign, in the construction of fortifications and in the repair of bridges. In addition, for many landowners, by order of the king, other services could be introduced: the arrangement of reserved royal parks, equipment of ships, coastal protection, church tithes, etc. Gradually, thanes form a military class.

From the impoverished kaerls, numerous categories of dependent peasantry were formed - both with fixed duties and without them. Duties were determined by the custom of the estate. After the death of a peasant, Glaford received all his property.

The slave labor of the conquered population still had a significant distribution. The Church condemned arbitrariness and cruel treatment of the unfree: a slave who worked on Sunday at the direction of his master became free.

The English clergy, led by the Archbishop of Canterbury, enjoyed a more independent position with regard to papal authority than the church on the Continent. The service was conducted in the local language. Representatives of the clergy participated in the resolution of secular affairs in local and royal assemblies.

The English Church was a large landowner - it owned up to one third of all land. At the same time, clerics were not excluded from the nationwide system of taxes and duties.

In general, by the time of the Norman Conquest, the processes of feudalization of Anglo-Saxon society, the formation of feudal land ownership, the vassal-feudal hierarchy were still far from completed. There was a significant stratum of free peasantry, especially in the east of the country ("area of ​​Danish law").

Anglo-Saxon State. Despite the rise and strengthening of royal power in the Anglo-Saxon period, the attitude towards the king as a military leader and the principle of elections when replacing the throne are preserved. Gradually, however, the monarch asserted his right to supreme ownership of the land, the monopoly right to mint coins, duties, to receive supplies in kind from the entire free population, to military service from the free. The Anglo-Saxons had a direct tax in favor of the king - the so-called "Danish money", and a fine was levied for refusing to participate in the campaign. The royal court gradually became the center of government of the country, and the royal confidants - officials of the state.

At the same time, legal monuments of the IX-XI centuries. already testify to a certain tendency to transfer to large landowners the rights and powers of royal power: the right to judge their people, collect fines and fees, collect militia on their territory. Powerful thanes were often appointed by royal representatives - managers in administrative districts.

The highest state body in the Anglo-Saxon era was the witanagemot, the council of the witans, the "wise." This assembly of worthy, "rich" men included the king himself, the higher clergy, the secular nobility, including the so-called royal thanes, who received a personal invitation from the king. Under Edward the Confessor, a significant group of Normans, who received lands and positions at court, also sat in the witanagemote. In addition, the kings of Scotland and Wales and elected from the city of London were invited.

All important state affairs were decided "on the advice and with the consent" of this assembly. Its main functions are the election of kings and the highest court. Royal power in the IX-X centuries. managed to somewhat limit the desire of the witanagemot to interfere in the most important issues of social policy - in particular, in the distribution of land.

Local government in England was largely based on the principles of self-government. The laws of the Anglo-Saxon king Athelstan (X century) and his followers mention the lower units of local government - hundreds and tens. The hundred, led by a centurion, were governed by a general assembly that met about once a month. Hundreds were divided into ten dozen - families headed by a foreman, whose main task was to maintain law and order and pay taxes. In hundreds of people's assemblies, all local cases, including court cases, were considered and dozens were checked twice a year to make sure that every ten was bound by mutual responsibility, and that all offenses were known and properly presented to the authorities. Around the same time, the country was divided, mainly for military purposes, into 32 large districts (counties). The center of the county was, as a rule, a fortified city. County collection from the end of the tenth century. met twice a year to discuss the most important local cases, including the civil and criminal court. All the free people of the district, and above all the secular and church nobility, were to participate in it. Cities and ports had their own assemblies, which later turned into city and merchant courts. There were also assemblies of villages. Dozens, hundreds and counties did not form a clear hierarchical system and were governed largely autonomously from each other.

At the head of the county was, as a rule, an ealdorman, appointed by the king with the consent of the witanagemot from among the representatives of the local nobility. His main role was to lead the county assembly and its military forces. Gradually, in the management of a hundred and a county, the role of the personal representative of the king, the gerefa, increases.

Herefa - the royal ministerial - was appointed by the king from the middle layer of the service nobility and, like a count among the Franks, could be the manager of a certain district or city. By the X century. The gerefa gradually acquires important police and judicial powers, controlling the timely receipt of taxes and court fines into the treasury.

Thus, already in the Anglo-Saxon era, a mechanism of centralized bureaucratic control began to take shape locally through officials of administrative districts, accountable to the king and acting on the basis of written orders under the royal seal.

§ 2. Norman conquest and its consequences. Features of the seigneurial monarchy

The Norman conquest of England led to the deepening of the feudalization of English society.

The basis of the feudal economy in Norman England was the manor - the totality of land holdings of an individual feudal lord. The position of the peasants of the manor, subject to the judgment of their lord, was determined by manorial customs. More than half of the hundreds of courts turned into manorial courts - private curia of feudal lords. At the same time, William the Conqueror, using both his position and English political traditions, pursued a policy that contributed to the centralization of the state and strengthening the foundations of royal power.

A significant part of the land confiscated from the Anglo-Saxon nobility became part of the royal domain, and the rest was distributed between the Norman and Anglo-Saxon feudal lords not in solid arrays, but in separate areas among other holdings. The conquerors also brought with them a strict "forest law", which made it possible to declare significant forest areas as royal reserves and severely punish for violating their borders. Moreover, the king declared himself the supreme owner of all the land and demanded that all free landowners take an oath of allegiance to him. Such an oath made feudal lords of all ranks vassals of the king, indebted to him primarily for military service. The principle "a vassal of my vassal is not my vassal", characteristic of the continent, was not established in England. All feudal lords were divided into two main categories: direct vassals of the crown, which were usually large landowners (earls, barons), and vassals of the second stage (subvassals), consisting of a mass of medium and small landowners. A significant part of the clergy carried the same services in favor of the king as secular vassals.

Thus, the feudal lords in England did not acquire the independence and immunities that they enjoyed on the Continent. The right of the king's supreme ownership of land, which gave him the opportunity to redistribute plots of land and intervene in the relations of landowners, served to establish the principle of the supremacy of royal justice in relation to the courts of feudal lords of all ranks.

In order to tax policy and identify the social composition of the country's population in 1086, a census of lands and inhabitants was carried out, the results of which are known as the Doomsday Book. According to the census, most of the peasants were enslaved and acted as personally not free, hereditary land holders from the lord (villans). However, in the "area of ​​Danish law" (East Anglia) and in some other localities, a stratum of free peasantry and close to them in position sockmen, who were subject only to the judicial power of the lord of the manor, remained.

Free peasant population in the XI-XII centuries. was influenced by conflicting factors. On the one hand, royal power contributed to the enslavement of the lower categories of the free peasantry, turning them into villans. On the other hand, the development of the market at the end of the 12th century. led to the emergence of more prosperous peasant holders, whom the royal government considered as political allies in the fight against the separatism of large feudal lords. The royal courts often protected such holders from the arbitrariness of the lords. Formally, the same protection by the royal "common" right of any freehold (knightly, urban, peasant) contributed at the end of the 12th century. smoothing legal and social differences between the top. free peasantry, townspeople, petty chivalry. These strata were also brought together by a certain commonality of their economic interests.

The relative unity of the state, ties with Normandy and France contributed to the development of trade. With the strengthening of central power, English cities did not receive such autonomy as in the south of the continent or in Germany, and were increasingly forced to buy royal charters, which contained only some trading privileges.

Centralization of state power. Reforms of Henry II. The activities of the Norman kings contributed to state centralization and the preservation of state unity, despite the deepening feudalization of society. However, until the end of the XII century. centralization was ensured mainly through the senior, private rights of the Anglo-Norman kings, and depended on their ability to act as an authoritative head of the feudal-hierarchical system and the local church. The judicial and fiscal rights of the crown in relation to its subjects were only the rights of the high lord in relation to its vassals and were based on an oath of allegiance. They were regulated to a large extent by feudal custom, although they had already begun to outgrow its limits.

Accordingly, they could be challenged at any time by disgruntled vassals. Evidence of this are the ongoing in the XI-XII centuries. revolts of barons accusing the crown of abuse of their seigneurial rights. From the moment of the Norman conquest and throughout the XII century. the kings were forced to constantly reaffirm their adherence to the original customs and liberties of the Anglo-Saxons, and to grant the barons and the church "cartas". These charters contained provisions on peace, on the eradication of "bad" and the support of ancient, "just" customs, on the obligations of the crown to respect the privileges and liberties of feudal lords, churches and cities. However, from the middle of the XII century. attempts to bind royal power within the framework of feudal custom and their own oath began to run into the strengthening of public principles in public administration.

Until the second half of the XII century. in England there were no professional administrative-judicial bodies. The control center - the royal court (curia) - constantly moved and was absent from England for a long time, since the king often lived in Normandy. In its expanded composition, the royal curia was a collection of direct vassals and close associates of the king. During the absence of the king, England was actually ruled by the chief justiciar - a clergyman, an expert in canon and Roman law. His assistant was the chancellor, who was in charge of the secretariat. The central government was represented locally by "traveling" messengers and sheriffs from local magnates, who often got out of control of the center. Their leadership consisted mainly of sending them executive orders (writ) from the king's office with instructions to correct certain violations that became known to the crown. Most court cases were decided by local (hundreds, counts) assemblies and manorial courts, which used archaic procedures such as ordeals and duel. Royal justice was thus of an exceptional nature and could only be granted in the event of a denial of justice in local courts or special appeal for "royal favor". A case is known when a baron, a direct vassal of the crown, spent almost five years and a huge amount of money for those times in search of the king to bring him a complaint in a civil case.

The strengthening of the prerogatives of the crown, the bureaucratization and professionalization of the state apparatus, which made it possible to make centralization in England irreversible, are mainly associated with the activities of Henry 11 (1154-1189). The reforms of Henry II, which contributed to the creation of a nationwide bureaucratic system of government and court, not related to the seigneurial rights of the crown, can be roughly summarized in three main areas:

1) bringing into the system and giving a clearer structure to royal justice (improving the forms of the process, creating a system of royal traveling justice that competes with traditional and medieval courts and permanent central courts);

2) reforming the army based on a combination of the principles of the militia system and mercenarism;

3) establishment of new types of taxation of the population. The strengthening of the judicial, military and financial powers of the crown was formalized by a whole series of royal decrees - the Great, Clarendon (1166), Northampton (1176) Assizes, the Assize "On Armament" (1181), etc.

During the restructuring of the judicial and administrative system by Henry II, themes were used in practice from case to case, Anglo-Saxon, Norman and church regulations. -Typical for the early Middle Ages, the practice of traveling management took on a more permanent and orderly character in England. Since that time, the activities of traveling courts - visiting sessions of royal judges - have been firmly established in England. If in 1166 only two judges were appointed to circuit the counties, then in 1176 six circuit districts were organized and the number of circuit judges increased to two or three dozen. The appointment of traveling judges was made by royal order on the beginning of a general judicial tour. By the same order, judges were endowed with extraordinary powers (not only judicial, but also administrative and financial). During the judicial detour, all claims under the jurisdiction of the crown were examined, criminals were arrested, and the abuses of local officials were investigated.

At the same time, the system of royal orders was streamlined and a special procedure was legalized for investigating cases of land disputes and offenses. Such a procedure was granted to all the free as a "privilege" and "benefit" applicable only in royal courts. To start this procedure, it was necessary to buy a special order of the royal office - an order of right (writ of rignt), without which a civil or criminal action could not be initiated in the royal courts. After that, the investigation was to be carried out by traveling judges or sheriffs with the help of juries - twelve full citizens of a hundred who swore in as witnesses or accusers. This order of investigation created an opportunity for a more objective solution of cases compared to ordeals and duel in the courts of the feudal lords. The gradually developed system of royal orders led to the limitation of the jurisdiction of the manorial curia in claims for title to land. As for offenses, even a villan could apply to the royal court with a criminal suit. Sheriffs could, regardless of the rights of the feudal lords, enter into their possessions in order to catch criminals and verify compliance with mutual responsibility.

Thus, in the second half of the XII century. Henry 11 created a special mechanism of royal justice in civil and criminal cases, which increased the authority and expanded the jurisdiction of the royal courts.

In connection with the introduction of improved judicial procedures from the middle of the XII century. there is an ordering of the structure of competence of the highest body of central government - the royal curia. In the process of specialization of the function and the separation of a number of separate departments within the curia, the chancellery headed by the chancellor, the central ("personal") court of the king and the treasury were finally formed. As part of the "personal" royal court, where since 1175 permanent spiritual and secular judges have been appointed and which acquires a permanent residence in Westminster, the Court of General Litigation is gradually separated. This court could sit without the participation of the king and did not have to follow him when he moved. The activities of the Court of General Claims played a decisive role in the creation of the "common law" of England.

The situation was more complicated in the relationship between the royal power and the English church, between secular and ecclesiastical justice. After the Norman Conquest, ecclesiastical and secular courts were separated, and ecclesiastical courts began to consider all spiritual and some secular cases (marriages, wills, etc.). However, the royal power retained control over the church. The Norman kings themselves appointed bishops, issued church decrees for England and Normandy, and received income from vacant bishoprics. However, with the strengthening of papal power and the Catholic center in Rome, the English crown began to face more and more resistance from the church, and the question of the "freedoms of the church" in England became one of the reasons for future dramatic conflicts between church and secular authorities.

Under Henry 1, a concordat with the pope was concluded in Normandy, according to which, as later in Germany, the spiritual investiture of the canons passed to the pope, while the secular one remained with the king.

Henry II, trying to increase the influence of the crown on the local church, issued the Clarendon Constitutions in 1164. According to them, the king was recognized as the supreme judge in cases considered by church courts. All disputes over ecclesiastical appointments were to be settled in the royal court. Royal jurisdiction was also established in relation to investigations of church property, in claims for debts, in the pronouncement and execution of sentences against clerics accused of serious crimes. Without the consent of the king, none of his vassals and officials could be excommunicated. The principles of secular investiture of the king and the possibility of his interference in the election of the highest spiritual hierarchs by the church were confirmed. However, under strong pressure from the pope and the local clergy, the king was forced to abandon a number of provisions of these constitutions.

After the Norman Conquest, the structure of local government did not change. The division of the country into hundreds and counties has been preserved. Sheriffs became representatives of the royal administration in the counties, and their assistants, bailiffs, in hundreds. The sheriff had the highest military, financial and police power in the county, was the main executor of the orders of the royal office.

The sheriffs carried out their administrative and judicial functions in close cooperation with the assemblies of counties and hundreds, convening them and presiding over sessions. These institutions were preserved in England in the subsequent period, although they gradually lost their independence and more and more turned into an instrument of the central government in the localities. Despite the removal of most civil suits from their judicial competence, their role has somewhat increased in connection with the appointment of persons participating in investigations in criminal cases (accusatory jurors). Participation of the population in the royal courts has become a characteristic feature of the English system of local government.

The military reform of Henry II consisted in extending military service to the entire free population of the country: any free - feudal lord, peasant, city dweller - had to have weapons corresponding to his property status. Having their own equipment, the army was nevertheless maintained at the expense of the state treasury, the revenues to which were significantly increased.

First of all, the replacement of personal military service by the payment of "shield money" was legalized, which began to be collected not only from the feudal lords, but even from the not free. This measure opened up the opportunity for the king to maintain a hired knightly militia. In addition to the practice of collecting "shield money" from feudal lords and a direct tax (tali) from cities, a tax on movable property was gradually established.

The military and financial reforms of Henry II made it possible to sharply increase the number of troops loyal to the king and undermine the leadership of the army from the side of the largest feudal lords, as well as to receive funds for the maintenance of professional officials. In addition, the administration of justice remained a very profitable budget item.

§ 3. Estate-representative monarchy

Features of the estate structure. In the XIII century. the balance of social and political forces in the country continued to change in favor of strengthening the principles of centralization and concentration of all power in the hands of the monarch.

As direct vassals of the king, the barons bore numerous financial and personal obligations to the overlord, in the event of a malicious failure to fulfill which, the confiscation of their lands could follow.

During the XIII century. the immunity rights of large feudal lords were also significantly limited. The Statute of Gloucester of 1278 proclaimed a judicial review of the immunity of English feudal lords. In general, the title of nobility in England was not accompanied by any tax and judicial privileges. The feudal lords paid taxes formally on an equal footing with other freemen and were subject to the same courts. However, the political weight of the English high nobility was significant: it was an indispensable participant in the work of the highest deliberative and some other bodies under the king. In the XIII century. The great feudal lords of England constantly waged a fierce struggle among themselves and with the king for land and sources of income, for political influence in the country.

As a result of the sub-infeodation and the fragmentation of large baronies, the number of medium and small feudal lords increased, reaching by the end of the 13th century. at least 3/4 of the ruling class in England. These strata of feudal lords especially needed to strengthen state centralization and rallied around the king.

The development of commodity-money relations markedly affected the position of the peasantry. The stratification of the peasantry is intensifying, the number of personally free peasant elites is growing. Wealthy freeholder peasants often acquire a knighthood, moving closer to the lower strata of the feudal lords.

The serf peasantry - villans - in the XIII century. remained powerless. The exclusion of the villains from all the privileges of the "common law", formally guaranteed to all the free, was called the principle of "exclusion of villanism". The owner of all property belonging to the villan was recognized by his lord. At the same time, legal theory and legislation of the XIII century. recognized the right of the villans to bring a criminal action in the royal court even against their master. This fact reflected the objective processes of the development of feudalism and certain interests of the royal power, which was interested in the nationwide taxation of the villans along with the free population (in the payment of all local taxes, talis, tax on movable property). From the end of the XIV century. villans are gradually redeeming personal freedom, corvée disappears, monetary rent becomes the main form of feudal rent.

Among the townspeople, as well as among other segments of the population, in the XIII-XIV centuries. social differentiation is intensifying, which went in parallel with the consolidation of the urban class throughout the country. The cities of England, with the exception of London, were small. City corporations, like the city as a whole, did not receive such independence here as on the European continent.

Thus, the processes of state centralization in England (XIII century) were accelerated by the presence of an ever-increasing stratum of free peasantry, the economic and legal convergence of chivalry, townspeople and prosperous peasantry, and, on the contrary, increased differences between the top of the feudal lords and their other layers. The common economic and political interests of the chivalry and the entire freeholder mass contributed to the establishment of their political union. The growth of the economic and political role of these strata ensured their subsequent political recognition and participation in the newly formed parliament.

Magna Carta. By the beginning of the XIII century. in England, objective prerequisites are being formed for the transition to a new form of a feudal state - a monarchy with estate representation. However, the royal power, having strengthened its position, did not show readiness to involve representatives of the ruling classes in solving issues of state life. On the contrary, under the successors of Henry II, who failed in foreign policy, extreme manifestations of monarchical power increase, the administrative and financial arbitrariness of the king and his officials intensifies. In this regard, the recognition of the right of estates to participate in solving important political and financial issues took place in England in the course of acute socio-political conflicts. They took the form of a movement to limit the abuses of central power. This movement was led by the barons, who were periodically joined by the chivalry and the mass of freeholders, dissatisfied with the excessive exactions and extortion of royal officials. The social nature of anti-royal speeches was a feature of the political conflicts of the XIII century. compared with the baronial revolts of the XI-XII centuries. It is no coincidence that these powerful performances in the XIII century. were accompanied by the adoption of documents of great historical significance.

The main milestones of this struggle were the conflict of 1215, which ended with the adoption of the Magna Carta, and the civil war of 1258-1267, which led to the emergence of parliament.

The Magna Carta of 1215 was adopted as a result of the action of the barons, with the participation of chivalry and townspeople, against King John the Landless. Officially in England, this document is considered the first constitutional act. However, the historical significance of the Charter can only be assessed taking into account the real conditions of the development of England at the end of the 12th and beginning of the 13th centuries. Fixing the demands and interests of heterogeneous and even opposing, but temporarily united forces, the Charter is a controversial document that does not go beyond the feudal agreement between the king and the top of the opposition.

Most of the articles of the Charter deal with the vassal-fief relations of the king and the barons and seek to limit the king's arbitrariness in the use of his seigneurial rights related to land holdings. These articles regulate the procedure for guardianship, obtaining relief, debt collection, etc. (Art. 2-II, etc.). Yes, Art. 2 of the Charter made the determination of the amount of relief from the vassals of the king dependent on the size of land ownership, which was inherited. Lazy guardian under Art. 4 was supposed to receive moderate income for his own benefit and not cause damage to either people or things of the ward property. A concession to the great feudal lords was also made in articles that speak of protected royal forests and rivers (Articles 44, 47, 48).

At the same time, among the purely "baronial" articles of the Charter, those that had a general political character stand out. The barony's most openly political claims are expressed in Art. 61. It traces the desire to create a baronial oligarchy through the establishment of a committee of 25 barons with control functions in relation to the king. Despite a number of reservations (about the control procedure, references to the "community of the whole earth"), this article directly sanctioned the possibility of a baronial war against the central government. Articles 12 and 14 provided for the creation of a council of the kingdom, limiting the power of the king on one of the important financial issues - the collection of "shield money". Accordingly, the composition of this "common" council (Article 14) was determined only from the direct vassals of the king. Characteristically, this council was supposed to decide on the collection of feudal assistance from the city of London. Other types of taxes and fees, including the heaviest requisition from the cities - talyu, the king could still levy alone. Articles 21 and 34 were intended to weaken the crown's judicial prerogatives. Article 21 provided for the jurisdiction of earls and barons to the court of "equals", removing them from the action of royal courts with the participation of juries. Article 34 prohibited the use of one of the types of court orders (an order for the immediate restoration of the plaintiff's rights or the appearance of the defendant in the royal court), thereby limiting the intervention of the king in disputes between large feudal lords and their vassals over free holdings. This was motivated in the Charter by concern for the preservation of "free people" of their judicial curia. However, the term "free man" is here clearly used to disguise a purely baronial demand. After all, in the conditions of England of the XIII century. only a few major immunists could be owners of the judicial curia.

A much more modest place is occupied by articles reflecting the interests of other participants in the conflict. The interests of chivalry in the most general form are expressed in Art. 16 and 60, which speaks of carrying out only the prescribed service for a knightly fief and that the provisions of the Charter regarding the relationship of the king with his vassals apply to the relationship of barons with their vassals.

The Charter speaks very sparingly of the rights of citizens and merchants. Article 13 confirms ancient liberties and customs outside the cities, v. 41 allows all merchants free and safe movement and trade without the collection of illegal duties from them. Finally, Art. 35 establishes the unity of weights and measures, which is important for the development of trade.

Of great importance was a large group of articles aimed at streamlining the activities of the royal judicial and administrative apparatus. This group of articles (Articles 18-20, 38, 39, 40, 45, etc.) confirms and consolidates the traditions that have developed since the 12th century. judicial-administrative and legal institutions, limits the arbitrariness of royal officials in the center and in the field. So, according to Art. 38 officials could not bring anyone to justice only on a verbal statement and without credible witnesses. In Art. 45 the king promised not to appoint to the posts of judges, constables, sheriffs and bailiffs of persons who do not know the laws of the country and do not wish to fulfill them voluntarily. The Charter also prohibited in Art. 40 to collect arbitrary and disproportionate court fees. Particularly famous was Art. 39 of the Charter. It forbade the arrest, imprisonment, dispossession, outlawing, expulsion, or "deprivation in any way" of free people except by the lawful judgment of peers and the law of the land. In the XIV century. Art. 39 of the Charter was repeatedly refined and edited by Parliament as guaranteeing the inviolability of the person of all free people.

Thus, the Magna Carta reflected the balance of socio-political forces in England at the beginning of the 13th century, and above all the compromise between the king and the barons. The political articles of the Charter testify that the barons sought to preserve some of their immunities and privileges by placing the exercise of certain prerogatives of the central government under their control or by limiting their use in relation to the feudal elite.

The fate of the Charter clearly demonstrated the futility of baronial claims and the irreversibility of the process of state centralization in England. A few months after the end of the conflict, John Landless, relying on the support of the pope, refused to comply with the Charter. Subsequently, the kings repeatedly confirmed the Charter (1216, 1217, 1225, 1297), but more than 20 articles were withdrawn from it, including 12, 14 and 61st.

Of the political institutions provided for by the "baronial" articles of the Charter, the Grand Council of the kingdom, which had advisory functions and consisted of large feudal magnates, more or less established itself. In the middle of the XIII century. it was often referred to as "parliament". However, such a "parliament" was neither estate nor representative institutions.

Formation of parliament and expansion of its competence. More complex and important in its political results was the conflict in 1258-1267. In 1258, at the Council of Oxford, armed barons, once again taking advantage of the dissatisfaction of large sections of the free population with royal policy, forced the king to accept the so-called Oxford provisions. They provided for the transfer of all executive power in the country to the Council of 15 barons. Along with the Executive Council, a Great Council of Magnates, consisting of 27 members, was to meet three times a year or more often to resolve important issues. Thus, it was a new attempt to establish a baronial oligarchy, which failed in 1215. Followed in 1259 Westminster provisions provided some guarantees to small landowners from arbitrariness on the part of seniors. However, the demands of the chivalry to participate in the central administration of the country were not satisfied. Under these conditions, part of the barons, led by Simon de Montfort, who were looking for a stronger alliance with the chivalry, broke away from the oligarchic group and united with the chivalry and cities into an independent camp opposing the king and his supporters.

The split in the opposition camp made it possible for the king to refuse to comply with the Oxford provisions. During the civil war that began in 1263, the forces of de Montfort managed to defeat the supporters of the king. In 1264, de Montfort became the supreme ruler of the state and implemented the requirement of chivalry to participate in public administration. The most important outcome of the civil war was the convening of the first estate-representative institution in the history of England - Parliament (1265). Along with the barons and spiritual feudal lords, representatives from the knights and the most significant cities were invited to it.

By the end of the XIII century. the royal power finally realized the need for a compromise, a political agreement with the feudal lords of all ranks and the elite of the townspeople in order to establish political and social stability. The consequence of such an agreement was the completion of the formation of the body of estate representation. In 1295, a "model" parliament was convened, the composition of which served as a model for subsequent parliaments in England. In addition to the large secular and spiritual feudal lords personally invited by the king, it included two representatives from 37 counties (knights) and two representatives from cities.

The creation of parliament led to a change in the form of the feudal state, the emergence of a monarchy with estate representation. The correlation of socio-political forces in the parliament itself and outside it determined the features of both the structure and the competence of the English medieval parliament. Until the middle of the XIV century. the English estates sat together, and then divided into two chambers. At the same time, the knights from the counties began to sit together with representatives of the cities in one chamber (the House of Commons) and separated from the largest magnates, who formed the upper house (the House of Lords). The English clergy was not a special element of estate representation. The higher clergy sat with the barons, while the lower clergy sat in the House of Commons. Initially, there was no electoral qualification for parliamentary elections. The statute of 1430 established that freeholders who received at least 40 shillings of annual income could participate in county assemblies that elected representatives to parliament.

At first, the possibilities of parliament to influence the policy of the royal power were insignificant. Its functions were reduced to determining the amount of taxes on personal property and to filing collective petitions addressed to the king. True, in 1297, Edward 1 confirmed the Magna Carta in parliament, as a result of which the Statute "on the non-permission of taxes" appeared. It stated that taxation, allowances and extortions would not take place without the general consent of the clergy and secular magnates, knights, citizens and other free people of the kingdom. However, the Statute contained reservations that allowed for the possibility for the king to levy pre-existing fees.

Gradually, the Parliament of medieval England acquired three important powers: the right to participate in the issuance of laws, the right to decide on issues of extortion from the population in favor of the royal treasury, and the right to exercise control over senior officials and act in some cases as a special judicial body.

The right of parliamentary initiative arose from the practice of filing collective parliamentary petitions with the king. Most often, they contained a request to prohibit the violation of old laws or to issue new ones. The king could grant the request of Parliament or reject it. However, during the XIV century. it was established that no law should be passed without the consent of the King and the Houses of Parliament. In the XV century. a rule was established that the petitions of Parliament should be clothed in the form of bills, which were called "bills". This is how the concept of law (statute) took shape as an act emanating from the king, the House of Lords and the House of Commons.

During the XIV century. the competence of parliament in financial matters was gradually consolidated. The statute of 1340 proclaimed, without any reservations, the inadmissibility of levying direct taxes without the consent of Parliament, and the statutes of 1362 and 1371 extended this provision to indirect taxes. In the XV century. Parliament began to indicate the purpose of the subsidies provided to them and seek control over their spending.

In an effort to bring state administration under its control, parliament from the end of the 14th century. gradually introduced the procedure impeachment. It consisted in initiating by the House of Commons before the House of Lords, as the highest court of the country, accusations against one or another royal official of abuse of power. In addition, in the XV century. the right of parliament to directly declare criminal these or those abuses was affirmed. At the same time, a special act was issued, approved by the king and called the "bill of disgrace."

During the XIII century. there is also a development of a new executive body - Royal Council. He began to represent a narrow group of the king's closest advisers, in whose hands the highest executive and judicial power was concentrated. This group usually included the chancellor, treasurer, judges, ministerials closest to the king, mostly from knightly strata. The Grand Council of the largest vassals of the crown lost its functions, which went to Parliament.

Development of the system of local government and justice. During the period of estate-representative monarchy, the role of the old courts and county assemblies in local government was reduced to a minimum, and their functions were transferred to new officials and new types of traveling courts, whose competence was steadily expanding.

Collections of counties at the end of the XIII-XV centuries. convened primarily to elect representatives to parliament and local officials. They could consider disputes on claims, the amounts of which did not exceed 40 shillings.

In the XIII century. the sheriff continued to be the head of the royal administration, and his assistant in the hundred, bailiff. In addition to them, local representatives of the royal administration were coroners and constables, elected in local assemblies. Coroners carried out investigation in case of violent death, constables were endowed with police functions. The huge power of the sheriff eventually began to cause distrust of the crown, who feared the "feudalization" of this position, turning it into a hereditary one. It is no coincidence that after the internecine wars in the XIII century. the office of sheriff became short-term and subject to control by the treasury. Article 24 of the Magna Carta of 1215 forbade the sheriffs to examine the claims of the crown, and from that time the office of sheriff began to gradually lose its importance, at least in the field of justice.

From the end of the XIII century. the practice of appointing from the local landowners in the counties the so-called guardians of peace, or world judges. Initially, they had police and judicial powers, but over time they began to perform the most important functions of local government instead of sheriffs. A statute of 1390 appointed eight justices of the peace for each county. Justices of the peace controlled food prices, monitored the uniformity of measures and weights, the export of wool, oversaw the implementation of the laws on workers (1349 and 1351), on heretics (1414) and even set wages (statute 1427 of the year). The property requirement for this position was 20 pounds sterlingor of annual income.

The judicial competence of justices of the peace included the trial of criminal cases, except for murders and especially grave crimes. Proceedings were held at sessions of justices of the peace, convened four times a year. These meetings were called the courts of "quarter sessions".

In the XIII-XIV centuries. the number of royal courts of various ranks is growing, their specialization is increasing. However, the judicial and administrative functions of many institutions have not yet been separated. The highest courts of "common law" in England during this period were Court of King's Bench, Court of General Litigation and Treasury Court.

The Treasury Court, which was the first to record its hearings (as early as the 1220s), was mainly specialized in resolving financial disputes, and above all disputes relating to the debts of the treasury and the crown.

The Court of General Claims, or "Common Bench", dealt with most private civil claims and became the main court of common law. All debates in court were recorded and reproduced for the familiarization of interested parties and from the 14th century. published regularly. This court was also a place of practice for all law students.

The Court of General Claims also supervised local and manorial courts. By order from the chancellery, complaints could be transferred to this court from any other lower court, and by special writ, the Court of General Claims could correct miscarriages of justice in other courts.

From the personal Court of the king, the Court of the Royal Bench gradually formed, sitting until the end of the 14th century. only in the presence of the king and his closest advisors. It became the highest appellate and supervisory authority for all other courts, including "general litigation", but eventually became specialized in criminal appeals.

With the development of civil circulation, the general system of higher royal courts stood out Court of the Lord Chancellor who dealt with issues "justly". The emergence of new forms of process and rules of law (rights of justice) was associated with the activities of this court.

It became more branched and diverse in the XIII-XIV centuries. royal court system.

Since the procedure for general judicial detours was cumbersome and expensive, in the 13th century. The frequency of general detours was established no more than once every seven years. In the XIV century. general detours lost their importance and gave way to more specialized traveling commissions, among which are the Courts of Assizes (to consider disputes over the preferential right to own fief), the commission for rebellions and the commission for the general inspection of prisons.

A significant role in the administration of justice is acquired by the grand and petty juries of jurors. large, or indictment, jury took shape in connection with the procedure for questioning the accusatory jurors by the traveling courts. It became the organ of judgment. There were 23 members of the jury in total. The unanimous opinion of 12 jury members was enough to confirm the indictment against the suspect.

Small jury, consisting of 12 jurors, became an integral part of the English court. Members of this jury participated in the consideration of the case on the merits and delivered a verdict that required the unanimity of the jury. Under the law of 1239, the jury was set a qualification of 40 shillings of annual income.

Jurisdiction of manorial courts in the thirteenth century. continued to steadily decline. Only a few of the largest feudal lords retained the right to judge cases within the jurisdiction of the crown. Statutes 1260-1280 they forbade the magnates to put pressure on free holders with the aim of their appearance in the curia, to act as an appeal instance. Sheriffs were allowed to violate the immunities of the lords in order to seize the cattle they captured, as well as in all cases if the lord or his assistant at least once did not comply with the royal order. The relationship between secular and ecclesiastical courts was still distinguished by considerable tension and complexity in matters of delimitation of competence. As a result of numerous collisions, the principle was established according to which the jurisdiction of both types of courts was determined by the nature of punishments: only secular courts could impose secular punishments, for example, levy fines. The royal authorities constantly tried to limit the competence of church courts, however, as you know, these attempts were the least successful. In the end, the crown limited itself to using the traditional means - issuing a "prohibition" court order, which was issued in each specific case when the ecclesiastical courts, in the opinion of the crown, or rather, the officials of the royal curia, went beyond their competence.

Changes in the social order. During the XIV-XV centuries. significant changes took place in the economy and social structure of England, which led to the formation of absolutism.

The capitalist degeneration of feudal landownership is gradually taking place. The development of commodity-money relations and industry, the increase in demand for English wool led to the transformation of the estates of the feudal lords into commodity farms. All this corresponded to the accumulation of capital and the emergence of the first manufactories, primarily in ports and villages, where there was no guild system, which became a brake on the development of capitalist production. The formation of capitalist elements in the countryside earlier than in the city was a feature of the economic development of England in this period.

In an attempt to expand their possessions in order to turn them into pastures for sheep, the feudal lords seize communal lands, driving peasants from their plots ("fencing"). This led to an accelerated differentiation of the rural population into farmers, landless tenants and landless laborers.

By the end of the XV century. The English peasantry was divided into two main groups - freeholders and copyholders. Unlike freeholders, copyholders - the descendants of the former serfs - continued to bear a number of natural and monetary duties in relation to the feudal lords. Their rights to land plots were based on copies of the decisions of the manorial courts.

In the second half of the XV century. there are significant changes in the structure of the class of feudal lords. The internecine wars of the Scarlet and White Roses undermined the power of large feudal land ownership, led to the extermination of the old feudal nobility. The vast estates of the secular and spiritual feudal lords were sold by the crown and bought by the urban bourgeoisie and the top of the peasantry. At the same time, the role of the middle strata of the nobility, whose interests were close to those of the bourgeoisie, increased. These layers formed the so-called new nobility (gentry), a feature of which was the management of the economy on a capitalological basis.

The development of a single national market, as well as the aggravation of the social struggle, determined the interest of the new nobility and the urban bourgeoisie in further strengthening the central government.

During the period of primitive accumulation of capital, the colonization of overseas territories intensified: under the Tudors, the first English colony in North America, Virginia, was founded, and at the beginning of the 17th century. The colonial East India Company was founded.

Features of English absolutism. Absolute monarchy was established in England, as in other countries, during the period of the decline of feudalism and the emergence of capitalist production relations. At the same time, English absolutism had its own characteristics, due to which it received the name “incomplete” in the literature. The incompleteness of this political form in the conditions of England meant the preservation of the political institutions characteristic of the previous era, as well as the absence of some new elements typical of classical French absolutism. .

The main feature of the English absolute monarchy was that, along with strong royal power, a parliament continued to exist in England. Other features of English absolutism include the preservation of local self-government, the absence in England of such centralization and bureaucratization of the state apparatus as on the continent. England also lacked a large standing army.

The central authorities and administration during the period of absolute monarchy in England were the king, the Privy Council and Parliament. Real power was concentrated during this period entirely in the hands of the king.

The King's Privy Council, which finally took shape during the period of absolutism, consisted of the highest officials of the state: the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer, the Lord Privy Seal, etc.

The strengthened royal power could not abolish the Parliament. Its stability was a consequence of the alliance between the gentry and the bourgeoisie, the foundations of which had been laid in the preceding period. This union did not allow the royal power, using the strife of the estates, to eliminate representative institutions in the center and in the regions.

The supremacy of the crown in relations with Parliament was formalized by a statute of 1539, which equated the decrees of the King in Council with the laws of Parliament. Although the statute was formally repealed by Parliament in 1547, the predominance of the Crown over Parliament was effectively maintained.

Parliament continued to retain the prerogative of approving fees and taxes. Parliament's opposition to the establishment of new taxes forced the English kings to resort to loans, the introduction of duties on the import and export of goods, and the issuance of privileges for large cash payments to companies for the exclusive right to trade (the so-called monopolies). These actions were sometimes resisted by Parliament, but its ability to influence the policy of the royal power weakened during this period.

In connection with the rapid colonization of non-English territories of the British Isles, the English system of government gradually spread to all of Britain. In 1536-1542. Wales was finally integrated into the English state. In 1603, the northeastern province of Ireland, Ulster, came under the authority of the English crown. Since 1603, as a result of the dynastic succession to the throne, Scotland began to be in a personal union with England (under the rule of one king). In fact, this association was nominal, and Scotland retained the status of an independent state entity.

During the period of absolutism, the supremacy of royal power over the English Church was finally affirmed. In order to establish a church in the country, subordinate to the royal authority, the Reformation was carried out in England, accompanied by the seizure of church lands and their transformation into state property (secularization). The Parliament of England under Henry VIII from 1529 to 1536 passed a series of laws declaring the king the head of the church and giving him the right to nominate candidates for the highest church positions. At the end of the XVI century. the content of the dogma of the new church, as well as the order of worship, was established by legislative means. Thus, the so-called Anglican Church ceased to depend on the Pope and became part of the state apparatus.

The highest ecclesiastical body of the country was High commission. Along with the clergy, it included members of the Privy Council and other officials. The competence of the commission was extremely extensive. She investigated cases related to the violation of laws on the supremacy of royal power in church affairs, "disturbances of a spiritual and church nature." The main task of the commission was to fight against the opponents of the reformed church. - both with Catholics and with supporters of the most radical and democratic forms of Protestantism (for example, Presbyterianism, rooted in Scotland). Any three members of the commission, if there was one bishop among them, had the right to punish those who did not attend church, to suppress heresies, to remove pastors. Subsequently, a number of purely secular cases were assigned to the jurisdiction of the High Commission - about vagrants in London, about censorship, etc. The reformed church, having retained many features of Catholicism both in structure and worship, turned into an organ, one of the tasks of which was to promote the theory of the divine origin of the power of the king.

With the establishment of absolutism, the system of local governments became more harmonious, and their dependence on the central authorities increased. The main changes in local government during this period were expressed in the establishment of the position of Lord Lieutenant and the administrative design of the local unit - the parish. The Lord Lieutenant, appointed directly to the county by the king, led the local militia, supervised the activities of justices of the peace and constables.

The parish was a grassroots self-governing unit that combined the functions of local church and territorial administration. The meeting of parishioners who paid taxes decided on the distribution of taxes, the repair of roads and bridges, and so on. In addition, the assembly elected parish officials (church elders, overseers for the poor, etc.). The conduct of church affairs in the parish was carried out by the rector of the parish. All his activities were placed under the control of justices of the peace, and through them -^ under the control of county governments and central governments. The quarterly sessions of justices of the peace have become the highest instances in all matters relating to the affairs of the administration of the parishes. The county assemblies, which are still preserved from the former period, completely lose their significance.

Under absolutism, the structure and jurisdiction of the central Westminster courts, including the Court of Justice and the High Court of the Admiralty, finally took shape. However, in addition to them, emergency courts are created, such as star chamber and judicial councils in "rebellious" counties. The Star Chamber, as a special branch of the Privy Council, was an instrument of struggle against opponents of royal power (initially, against recalcitrant feudal lords). Judicial proceedings in it were mainly inquisitorial in nature, and decisions were made at the discretion of the judges. Subsequently, the Star Chamber also began to perform the functions of a censor and an oversight body for the correctness of verdicts by the jury. Judicial councils subordinate to the Privy Council were created in those areas of England where "public peace" was often disturbed (Wales, Scotland).

During the period of absolutism, the judicial competence of justices of the peace expanded. All criminal cases were ordered to be considered by traveling and magistrate judges after the approval of the indictment on them by a grand jury. Jurors were included in the composition of the court. The property requirement for jurors under the law of Elizabeth I was raised from 40 shillings to 4 pounds sterling.

The basic principles of army organization have changed slightly. During the establishment of absolute monarchy, Henry VII (1485-1509), in order to undermine the final military power of the old aristocracy, issued a law forbidding feudal lords to have a retinue and approved the monopoly right of the crown to use artillery pieces.

The abolition of the armed forces of large feudal lords in England did not entail the creation of a permanent royal army. The guards of the fortresses and the royal guard remained small. The land army continued to be based on the militia in the form of police units.

The English state, occupying an island position, needed a strong navy to protect its territory. The navy became the backbone of the armed forces of England, an instrument of dominance on the seas and the colonization of other territories.

Key concepts and terms: "The Book of the Last Judgment", Angevin power, "shield money", jury trial, Magna Carta, Parliament, House of Lords, House of Commons, Cortes, Reichstag, Sejm.

current control. Along with questions and tasks on the material of the previous lesson (see questions for § 15 of the textbook, as well as tasks 2-7 for § 15 of the workbook), it is desirable that students in general terms remember the material about the previous history of England, including the Norman Conquest itself ( § 4).

Plan for the study of new material: 1. The consequences of the Norman Conquest for the development of England. 2. Henry II Plantagenet and his reforms. 3. Magna Carta. 4. The emergence of the English Parliament.

Comment. This lesson not only introduces material on another important European country, but also shows a largely different version of socio-political development. On the one hand, the conquest of a less developed country/region (Normandy) by a less developed one (England) contributed to the acceleration of the pace of social development, and above all the development of feudal relations. On the other hand, Wilhelm, having more solid power in his duchy than any other French feudal lord, probably in some form was aware of the negative experience of fragmentation of power and strife in France and sought to avoid them. Together with the very fact of the conquest, this led to a much stronger position of royal power, which formed a somewhat different path of centralization from the French. In this sense, the policy of William after the conquest of England and the reform of Henry II can be seen as a kind of response to the challenges - the challenges of French feudalism. But such a situation, for all its advantages, was fraught with the opposite danger compared to France - the danger of authoritarian royal power, fraught with despotism. And in this, as well as in relation to the strengthening of royal power, as such, the active and important role of the individual should be emphasized. With regard to this perspective, first of all, the personality on the throne. The problem of the moral authority of the government, its observance of the accepted rules of relations with vassals or subjects, arose in England differently than in France, and at the same time, perhaps, even more acutely. As the English experience of the beginning of the thirteenth century showed, non-observance of them proved capable of quickly weakening even the strongest positions of royal power. The Magna Carta and the emergence of the English Parliament laid down the centuries-old tradition of English freedom. At the same time, the emergence of a parliament, which ensured a certain degree of participation of citizens in the affairs of government, obviously made the state more stable. Finally, the material of the lesson introduces new facets into the topic of relations between the state and the Church (the story of Thomas Becket, the conflict between John Landless and the Pope).

1. If in § 4 it was about the Norman Conquest itself, which drew a line under the Anglo-Saxon period in the history of England, then in this section we are talking about it as the starting point for the subsequent development of England. First you need to remember together with the students who conquered England and when. Further, it is advisable to ask the guys: how would you, in the place of William the Conqueror, strengthen your power in the occupied country, taking into account that most of the land cannot be given away to your associates? If necessary, you can push the guys with leading questions and remarks to the decisions that Wilhelm actually made. It is advisable to briefly mention the Domesday Book and ask students the question: how could a king in a country not yet too familiar to him determine how much taxes to collect from the population of a city or village and what service can be required from a particular vassal so that she corresponded to the size of his possessions and was not too ruinous? Continuing the theme of the peculiarities of the position of royal power in England in the 11th-13th centuries, you can ask children questions: do you think the fact that the English king was now also the Duke of Normandy, and thus a vassal of the French king, strengthened his position in England or weakened them? And did the fact that the duke was also the king of England strengthen the position of the Norman duke as a vassal of the French king? Children's answers may be different, it is important that they justify their point of view. In fact, given that both the power of the king in England and the power of the duke in Normandy were at this time quite strong, the ability, if necessary, to use the resources of one of their possessions in the interests (or for the protection) of the other, of course, gave significant advantages. At the same time, the position of a powerful vassal of the French king provided the English monarch with ideal opportunities to interfere in the affairs of the French crown.

2. It should be borne in mind that in the period from the death of William to the accession of Henry II (in the textbook this material is necessarily omitted) events took place in England that are important for understanding the subsequent period. Firstly, the younger son of William Henry I (1100-1135) came to power bypassing his older brother and therefore, in order to enlist the support of the ruling elites, he granted them extensive privileges (Charter of Henry I), which he tried to nullify in his further activities. . Secondly, since Henry left no sons, a power struggle began between his daughter Matilda and his nephew (sister's son) Stephen, Count of Blois. Matilda was married to Geoffroy Plantagenet, Count of Anjou; their son was Henry II. The period of civil strife lasted almost 20 years. Eventually a compromise was reached: Matilda recognized Stephen as king in exchange for a promise that her son Henry would succeed him. Since in the course of this struggle both sides, in order to enlist the support of the English nobility, made concessions to her, royal power naturally weakened. Thus, the reforms of Henry II did not begin at the level of centralization that was achieved by the end of the reign of William the Conqueror.

Turning to the reign of Henry II and his reforms (many of which concerned not only England, but also his French possessions), you should turn to the map and invite the children to remember what lands Henry II owned in France and for what reason. The reforms themselves can be considered during the conversation, asking students questions: if the king was faced with the unwillingness of the feudal lords to come to his service on time and serve wherever the king needed it, how could he solve this problem? (Answer: replacing vassal military service with "shield money".) How could the king weaken the judicial power of the lords, and why was this important? At the same time, one should distinguish between the actual reforms and the desire of the king for authoritarianism, for subjugation to his control of all institutions of the country, including the Church. Without meeting strong resistance in society, the king in this situation could easily embark on the path of abuse, which happened in the case of the murder of Thomas Becket. In this respect, Becket's story partly anticipates the situation in which Magna Carta was adopted.

3. The adoption of the Magna Carta was a natural consequence of the strengthening of royal power, not balanced by other social forces or institutions. The fact that the forces usually inclined to support the king against the barons united around the barons, who in this situation turned out to be in fact the spokesman for the interests of the whole society, shows that not only the barons, but also the knights and townspeople saw a threat to themselves in the authoritarian tendencies of royal power. In order for the children to have a concrete idea of ​​the abuses of John the Landless, it is advisable to quote a few quotations from the chronicles of the time: e. to France], the king took from each of them the money that they had to spend in the service, and allowed them to return home. 2. (1210) "King John, under the pretext of returning Normandy and his other lands, which the King of France Philip had taken from him, exacted an incalculable and incomparable tax in pure money, sparing neither church people nor laity." You can discuss with the children the question of whether it seems fair to them that the dissatisfaction of the vassals with such actions of the king is fair. After that, it is advisable to proceed to work with the source (see below).

Turning to the question of the meaning of the Magna Carta, you can ask the children: is there any indication in the text that they analyzed, when and against which king the Charter was drawn up? There are no such indications, and it was precisely because of the “abstract” wording of the Charter that it was already able in the 17th century. become the banner of the British struggle for their freedom.

4. The creation of the English Parliament is the result of the natural development of previously manifested tendencies towards the establishment of a balance of social forces. Already in the Magna Carta there was a clause on the creation of a body that would control the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken by the king (this article is not included in the textbook document), but such a body never became permanent, and therefore new abuses of royal power could not but cause in a society of new clashes that escalated at a certain stage into a civil war. In this situation, the creation of a permanent body that would represent the interests of the main classes of society and at least partially limit royal power became an extremely urgent task. The issue of the structure of Parliament is best considered in comparison with the Estates General (in this case, children can be invited to draw two diagrams in a notebook), identifying similarities and differences and trying to lead the children to understand the reasons for the differences with leading questions. It is important to emphasize the great importance of the emergence of Parliament (as well as the Estates General) not only as a direct predecessor of modern democracy, but also from the point of view of stabilizing the situation, reducing the degree of socio-political tension in English society of the 13th century. and later.

Working with the source. The Magna Carta is one of the most famous documents in English history. It is curious that the document played its most important role several centuries after it was written, in completely different historical conditions, in the context of the struggle of the British against the abuses of absolutism. However, in the context of English history of the XIII century. this text is of great importance, being the most interesting source on the history of feudal law. The 63 articles of the Magna Carta are outwardly not very ordered, but it is noticeable that the articles that provide the privileges and liberties of the barons both numerically predominate in comparison with others, and are located mainly at the beginning of the text. At the same time, the drafters of the Charter sought to take into account, at least minimally, the interests of the allies of the barons - knights, townspeople, and, in part, all free people. Questions to the source are formulated in the textbook. If the children have problems answering the question about Article 39, you can help them by asking them a leading question: about whom the king could say: “we will not go against him [meaning with an army] and we will not send against him ...”?

Map work. Map on p. 151 can be used when working on the topic "The Norman Conquest of England", as well as to determine the scale of the Angevin empire. At the same time, the very absence on the map of England of dividing into many feudal estates, as in France, is very significant, as it demonstrates a different position of large feudal lords - vassals of the king (see task 5 on p. 163 of the textbook).

Work with illustrations. The castle at Rochester is very expressive in characterizing the methods by which the Normans consolidated their power over the conquered country. The central part of the Tower of London dates back to the same time (p. 212), the appearance of which, however, has since undergone more significant changes. To the illustration on p. 158 "Tombstone of Henry II in France" begs the question: why was the English king buried in France? Children may remember that Henry owned vast estates in France, that he received the rights to the English throne through his mother, while on his father's side he was Count of Anjou.