William had repeatedly left England since the Revolution. In 1691 he was absent from January to March, and from May to October; in 1692 from March to October; in 1693 from March to November; in 1694 from May to November. Like Richard Coeur de Lion, like the three Edwards, like the fifth Henry, William of Orange was a man of war from his youth, and his military vocation led him, as it led them, away from the peaceful duties of home government. As they at the head of steel-clad knights and sturdy bowmen marched over the Tweed or through Normandy, Picardy, and Poitou; as they led crusaders to fight battles at Jaffa, Askelon, and Jerusalem, so did he who now swayed the English sceptre, carry his troops over into the Netherlands to bear the brunt of the Landen fight, or recover the strongholds of Namur. [Sidenote: LORDS JUSTICES.] When William had been abroad before in the life-time of Mary, she ruled as Queen Consort, rendering a special regency needless; now that she slept in her grave, it was necessary that representatives appointed by the Crown should during the Royal absence govern the threefold realm. Churchmen in ancient times had held the highest offices in the State, and had been the Prime Ministers of Kings. Whilst Richard I. was pining in captivity on his return from Palestine, Archbishop Hubert Walter acted as Chief Justiciary of the kingdom, and even in person laid siege to the castles of malcontents and reduced them to his master’s sway; and whilst the not less brave, but more prudent, Henry V. was winning laurels at Agincourt, Archbishop Chicheley acted as Prime Minister at home, and took his place at the head of the Council-Board.[246] After the Reformation, Churchmen, though of diminished influence, appeared in high political positions. Juxon held the staff of Lord Treasurer, and Williams kept the Great Seal; but after the blow struck at the Church by the Long Parliament, no ecclesiastic occupied any important State office until the reign of William III. Upon this new turn in the wheel, curiously enough, came the restoration of high civil authority to ecclesiastical hands. At the same moment, the Church appeared submissive to the State, and the State appeared in submission to the chief ruler of the Church. The former kind of submission was real, the latter only apparent. [Sidenote: 1695.]