What happened to Henry II after he ordered Thomas Becket killed? People in the Middle Ages were incredibly religious. It seems like spilling blood in the house of god and killing a high ranking religious figure would’ve came with huge political consequences. People were excommunicated for less back then. Was Henry excommunicated too? What happened to him and what did the political climate look like following Becket’s death?
I was interested in this story, having never heard of it before and found the following:
In this post asking for the real story of the events that occurred, u/Gadarn writes about some excommunications that led up to the murder, which may be of interest to you, and regarding the aftermath states
Huscroft writes:
"If Henry II had not intended Becket's murder, he was deeply implicated in it and eventually had to perform humiliating penance to atone."
In addition to humiliatingly being scourged outside of the cathedral, he was forced to provide knights to go crusading and to repeal the customs hostile to the Church that he had introduced.
In this post, which covers more in the area of interest for your question, u/tim_mcdaniel answers a question about who won in the outcome of the murder, the crown or the church?
After the
justifiable homicidemurder, it should be noted that the pope abhorred the deed, but did not excommunicate King Henry II (just prohibited him from entering a church) and merely confirmed the existing interdict on Henry's Continental domains only that had already been imposed by the archbishop of Sens. Instead, he seemed to be convinced in part by the king's own reported abhorrence and penance, and by the arguments of a partisan bishop of Thomas, and so sent legates. And so negotiations happened, piecemeal and gradually, and one by one over years the issues were settled.
Truthfully, I do not have the necessary knowledge to paraphrase the legal maneuvering and concessions between the two being discussed without risk of being inaccurate so I highly recommend you read the entire post. But tim_mcdaniel makes the point that both sides essentially benefitted from the situation.
The following also clarifies the 'humiliating penance' Henry II endured that was mentioned in the previous post.
And Henry II even came out the better on it in at least one case. Near the end of the great rebellion, in 1174, he went back to England and "barefoot and fasting submitted to scourging for the rash words which had caused the martyr's death". Very soon thereafter a party of Yorkshiremen had surprised a party of invading Scots and killed and captured them all, including capturing William I, king of Scots. The rebellion and invasions collapsed then. "There were some who attributed the unparalleled victory to the intervention of God at the mediation of St Thomas of Canterbury;