MONTFORT, Simon de, Earl of Leicester (c. 1200- 1265), a great political leader, and sometimes even referred to as the “founder of the English House of Commons,” born in France about the beginning of the 13th century, was the fourth and youngest son of Simon IV. de Montfort and of Alice de Montmorency. Of his early life and education nothing is known, the first definitely recorded fact about him being that in April 1230 he was in England and had attached himself to the service of Henry III., who granted him a temporary pension of 400 marks, with a promise of the earldom which his father had held. In the following year he did homage for the honour of Leicester, and in 1232 the king confirmed to him all the land with appurtenances which had belonged to the late earl in England. But, though thus formally admitted to the ranks of the English baronage, he did not for several years succeed in making way against the strong dislike in which “aliens” were now held, and until 1236 most of his time was spent, in considerable poverty, abroad. In that year, however, he attended the king’s marriage to Eleanor of Provence as lord high steward, and thenceforward began to take part in the business of the royal council. Handsome, talented, and brave, he gained the love of Eleanor, widow of the earl of Pembroke, and sister of the king, to whom he was privately married at Westminster on 7th January 1238, Henry himself giving away the bride. When the fact became known, the indignation of the baronage and of the people had almost broken out in open rebellion, and, after Simon had with difficulty averted this by propitiating his brother-in-law, Richard, earl of Cornwall, he found it necessary to go to Rome to meet the objections which the church had raised on the ground of an ...alleged previous vow made by Eleanor. Having succeeded in obtaining (by bribery, it would seem) the papal sanction to his marriage, he returned to England in October, and early next year, still in the enjoyment of the royal favour, he had the earldom of Leicester formally conferred upon him in presence of the assembled barons. In June (1239) he assisted as godfather and high steward at the baptism of Prince Edward; but the machinations of his enemies were soon afterwards successful in bringing about a change in the fickle humour of Henry, and when Simon came back to Westminster in August to attend the churching of the queen the king met him with the information that he was an excommunicated person, and ordered him to leave the church. Along with his wife he forthwith went into voluntary exile in France; but in April 1240 he returned to England, and was received by the king on a footing of at least outward friendship. Of his private and public life during the next eight years very few facts» have been preserved. There is some ground for believing that he went to the Holy Land in 1240, and a letter is still extant in which the nobility of the kingdom of Jerusalem ask Frederick II. (June 1241) to allow Simon de Montfort, earl of Leicester, to act as regent till the arrival of his son Conrad. In 1242 he accompanied Henry’s unsuccessful expedition to France. In the parliamentary history of these years his name appears but seldom, but where he is mentioned he is invariably found on the side of the people, resisting alike the arbitrary wastefulness of the king and the rapacious exactions of the pope. In 1248 De Montfort was appointed for six years the king’s “seneschal,” or “locum-tenens,” in Gascony. In this capacity he was very inadequately supported from home with either men or money; he more than once subdued the rebellious provinces, indeed, but meanwhile his enemies at home gained strength and encouraged the Gascons in repeated accusations and complaints against the seneschal. These resulted in one-sided inquiries, but ultimately in his acquittal, and led to a demand on his part for reparation, and a consequent quarrel with the king. Towards the end of 1252 De Montfort retired into France, where such was the reputation he enjoyed as a statesman that, on the death of the queen-regent and in the absence of Louis IX., he was offered the office of high steward and a place among the guardians of the crown. This, however, he declined, “being unwilling to prove a renegade;” and, after a partial reconciliation with Henry, he returned to England in 1254. In the following year he was sent on a secret mission into Scotland, and in 1257 he was one of the king’s ambassadors to France; but his chief activity between 1254 and 1258, if we are to judge by the prominent place he took in the revolution of the last-named year, must have been in the meetings of parliament. At the Westminster parliament in April 1258 it was significantly upon the earls of Gloucester and Leicester that the king’s half-brother, William de Valence, laid the blame of all the evils under which the country was groaning, De Montfort in particular being called by him “an old traitor and a liar.” At Leicester’s suggestion the barons leagued for the defence of their rights, and presented themselves armed at the meeting, which extorted the appointment of the committee of twenty-four to meet at Oxford and proceed at once with the reform of the realm. The Provisions of Oxford having been signed (October 1258), De Montfort received the custody of the castle of Winchester, where the parliament continued its session, he meanwhile apparently holding the position of military commander-in-chief; and, after the removal of the barons to London, he was appointed member of an embassy to Scotland. In the early part of 1259 he was chiefly busied with the task of adjusting the terms of a peace with France, which was not settled until the end of that year. From the date of the conclusion of that peace, owing to divisions in the reforming party, the king began to regain his lost power, and in 1262 he felt himself strong enough to repudiate the Provisions of Oxford, thus giving the signal for civil war. The successes of the barons, led by De Montfort, in the west, and his victorious entry into London again reduced the king to submission, but only to bring once more also into prominence the divided state of Leicester’s supporters. Louis’s one-sided Mise of Amiens (1264), however, rendered another appeal to arms on the part of the barons inevitable, and by the victory of Lewes (14th May 1264) De Montfort for the time became master of England. Taking Henry, his prisoner, along with him to London, he summoned thither the parliament, which met in June, and drew up the constitution or scheme of government associated with his name, of which the most striking feature is the new development it gives to the representative system. A still further advance in the development took place in 1265, when borough members, as distinguished from county members, were for the first time summoned. Meanwhile troubles in the west required De Montfort’s presence in the field, and, by the alliance of his rival Gloucester with Roger Mortimer, as well as by the escape of Prince Edward, who put himself at the head of the royalist opposition, the great parliamentary leader was placed in serious straits. At Evesham, where he had halted on his march to join his son at Kenilworth, he was surprised by the army of Prince Edward, and after a struggle of about two hours was slain on the field of battle (4th August 1265). As regards the personal character of De Montfort, it is not surprising to find that contemporary opinion was divided; but of his determination, constancy, and energy there can be no question, while much is revealed by the fact that, though in an unauthorized way, his memory was revered in England as a saint and martyr, offices were drawn up in his honour, his intercession invoked, and miraculous virtues attributed to his relics. The painstaking labours of recent investigators have tended to bring into clearer light the purity and nobleness of purpose of Simon de Montfort as a consistent defender of the rights of the governed; on the other hand, it has also become obvious that the representative institutions of England, though largely helped forward by him, can hardly be claimed as his creation. Thus on both sides the statement of Hume that the House of Commons was planted by the inauspicious hand of this bold and artful conspirator must be rejected as inconsistent with the facts.
[1,512 words — estimated reading time: 9 minutes]
