Dr. William Urry (1913-81) was Keeper of the Manuscripts and Librarian at Canterbury Cathedral, City Archivist of Canterbury and later became University Reader in Medieval Western Palaeography at Oxford and a professorial fellow of St Edmund Hall. Born in Canterbury, Urry pursued a life-long interest in the local history of the cathedral city which included a familiarity with the details and minutiae of Becket's life and career. He was the author of Canterbury under the Angevin Kings, published in 1967. At the time of his death in 1981, Urry left two completed books in manuscript. The first of these, Christopher Marlowe and Canterbury, was subsequently published.
The second book on Thomas Becket remained unpublished and its eventual publication in the volume under review has in itself an interesting history. Urry's first draft had the working title: The Murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket. Encouraged to expand the earlier sections, Urry died before he finished a more extended history of the martyred archbishop of Canterbury. There the matter stood, and the ensuing years brought no news about the book on Becket. In the meantime, Frank Barlow published his major study of Thomas Becket in 1986 which has come to be recognized as the standard Life. Although not available in print to the scholarly world, Urry's manuscript did not go unnoticed at Canterbury. In more recent years, for example, John Butler consulted it for his 1995 volume, The Quest for Becket's Bones. Peter Rowe, who has himself had a long interest in the history of Becket and Canterbury, received the permission and encouragement of Mrs. Kate Urry to examine her late husband's manuscript with a view to its publication. What Rowe found was material for at least one and a half books, but at its core was a gripping and vivid story of Becket's 'last days'. Rowe has, for the most part, retained Urry's own wording. The four original opening chapters have been largely condensed into the "Prologue" of the current volume. Editorial notes, which are kept at a minimum, contain some comment, especially where more recent research has corrected Urry's account. For the specialist, the author's precise notes and sources are available in the copy of the original typescript in the Cathedral Library at Canterbury. This account of Becket's 'last days' is a book which can also engage the interest of an educated general audience. Urry's engaging narrative is supplemented by numerous photographs and illustrations relating to the Becket story and Canterbury in this attractive volume published by Sutton.
Six chapters are enclosed by a Prologue and Epilogue. The Prologue is an extensive excursus into the background story of the king and Becket. Familiar biographical details about Becket are summarized here. Becket's Norman origins clearly emerge. The family apparently had its origins in a hamlet called Becquet on the Le Havre peninsula. Becket's education, his rise in the court of Theobald of Canterbury, and his close friendship with King Henry are treated here with sufficient detail to give us a picture of a man who, as archbishop, would enter into a long and angry conflict with his king. Urry is at his best as he takes us into the story of specific incidents: note, for example, the account of Becket's flight from Northampton to Lincolnshire in October 1164, making his way then to Sandwich.
We also come to appreciate Urry's sensitivity to evidence of Becket's personal characteristics. Apparently Becket's propensity to make many enemies appeared in his rise to the chancellorship. Barons from well-established families seemed to resent the rise of this London burgess's son. There are also frequent reminders of the effects of recurrent illness and bouts of pain which, Urry suggests, may help to explain Becket's erratic and irascible conduct. The ravages of age and illness and the tensions of exile made for a drastically changed Becket as he returned to Canterbury in December, 1170.
While the issue of the jurisdiction over criminous clerks was a constant theme in the legal and jurisdictional conflict between archbishop and king, the news that the young Prince Henry had been crowned 14 June, 1170 by Roger, Archbishop of York, stunned Becket and his circle. Grievances on both sides continued to mount as Becket prepared to return from exile.
Urry turns now in six chapters to the account of Becket's return to England, the evidence of a plot against him, a description of Christmas at Canterbury in 1170, the interview between the knights and Becket at the archbishop's palace, a description of the murder and its aftermath. Much of this story is familiar terrain. The abundance of medieval source material on Becket is formidable, but it apparently has not answered all the questions that continue to flurry about the motives for his conversion, the escalating conflict with the king, the ultimate responsibility for the murder and the assessment of the cult that grew about the martyred archbishop.
It is this continued fascination with Becket and his last days that Urry shares with his readers in a swift-moving narrative, full of local color and detail. The author is steeped in his sources, giving us frequent quotations from the various lives of Becket. There is, for example, the description of Becket's arrival at Sandwich on 1 December when he ordered his archiepiscopal cross to be raised in the prow of the boat to distinguish it from the rest. The twelve mile trek to Canterbury was marked by crowds of Kentish peasantry who turned out to witness the archbishop's triumphant progress and Canterbury itself was alive with excitement.
Urry provides us with some interesting insights into the plot against Becket. The famous passage, "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" is apparently missing from contemporary records. What was said when the king asked advice of the three prelates (York, Salisbury and London), possibly by one of the bishops was "Look, my lord, all the while Thomas is alive you never will have good days, nor a peaceful kingdom, nor any quiet times." Knowles, in his 1970 biography of Becket, writes (139) that what exactly was said by the king and others is uncertain. The above quotation is attributed to Roger of York by Edward Grim, while other biographers quote the king saying: "What a set of idle cowards I keep in my kingdom who allow me to be mocked so shamefully by a low-born clerk." Barlow (1986, p. 235) also describes an increasingly tense and angry situation where many "contemptuous things" and "reckless charges" were being made. It was probably on Christmas Day itself that Henry uttered the fatal words reported by Edward Grim. This became the signal for the plot to be hatched by four of the king's knights.
As the four men of the court [William de Tracy, Richard le Bret, Reginald Fitzurse, and Hugh de Morville] decide to take action, planning their rendezvous at Saltwood Castle, the narrative takes on a suspenseful quality. For all that the story of the murder is so well known, Urry provides us with a masterful account of the historical background, the plot itself and the events surrounding Christmas at Canterbury. Urry's description of the archbishop's palace and other physical features at Canterbury has been revised in the light of excavations and building works carried out since the author's death (Rowe makes a point of calling our attention to the corrections that have been incorporated in Barlow's biography).
We have to be impressed again and again at the copious details provided by the sources, and these Urry skillfully draws upon in this description of the plot, the arrival of the knights, and the interview with the archbishop in his chamber. Here there is a conflation of various accounts, but the scene is dramatic. The conversation was in French as the grievances and demands of the king were rehearsed again and again. There was much gesticulating and shouting, culminating in Fitzurse's utterance of the solemn formula: "Thomas, in the name of the king, I repudiate your fealty". This was no small matter since possession of all the vast archiepiscopal estates depended upon the feudal tie. At one point in the interview, Becket said" "I know that you have come to kill me, but I make God my protection." It is not all that obvious that the knights had come to Canterbury intending to carry out the murder of the archbishop. In fact, they entered the archbishop's chamber, having left their arms and swords outside. It is clear, however, that as the afternoon ensued, and as tempers flared and in the confusion of a crowd milling around in time for Vespers, the knights went out to recover their arms, and our sources report a sudden and general realization of the dire danger facing them all. Becket remained in his bedchamber, ready to face death. He could easily have avoided the fatal confrontation; there were many hiding places in the church. Instead, he made his way into the cathedral, certain that the knights would not violate this sacred space.
The knights mounted the few steps into the cathedral transept, and Becket came forward to meet them. There was an initial blow across his shoulders with much pushing and pulling to try to take Becket prisoner. Finally, Becket was fatally struck on the head. Monks nearby were also injured followed by looting of the archiepiscopal palace. As the news of the murder spread, there were reports of widespread grief and hysterical cries.
In his account of the aftermath of Becket's death, Urry describes the reactions of the king and his decision (not immediate, however) to do a public penance at Avranches, 21 May, 1172, which was followed by his penance at Canterbury on 12 July. Urry also observes that neither king nor court fully comprehended the implications of the archbishop's death and the immense forces that had been unleashed as miracles early on came to be associated with Thomas. In his Epilogue, the author touches on Becket's swift canonization in March 1173, the translation of the relics and the dedication of the shrine in the Trinity Chapel by Stephen Langton in July 1220, which made Canterbury a major site of pilgrimage in medieval England.
William Urry has been described as a scholar of great distinction and a highly gifted teller of stories. Both skills are clearly evident in this posthumous volume, meticulously edited by Peter Rowe and published by Sutton. All those involved in its publication deserve our heartfelt thanks.