Henry III., died; and so completely was the kingdom then at peace, that Edward, although far away from England, was at once proclaimed king, and oaths of fealty were taken to him in his absence. [Sidenote: The struggle continued. ] The long struggle had not yet come to an end: more than twenty years were yet to elapse before Edward I. recognized the fundamental justice of the claims of his subjects, and admitted all the estates to that full and equal share in the action of the country which lies at the basis of our national constitution. We may perhaps ask whether Simon de Montfort deserves that character of a hero, the hero of mediæval history, which is commonly attributed to him. We can only attempt to realize the motives that swayed him. There is no doubt that he was a great man, a much greater man as he was a much better and wiser man than Henry, and perhaps better, certainly wiser and greater, than such men as Gloucester. But that he was absolutely a patriot, or absolutely wise and good, it is needless to affirm and impossible to prove; nor is it necessary that in attempting to estimate his personal eminence we are to look at him through the medium of his political glories. There is no question that the objects which were aimed at by the baronial policy were necessary, and the attainment of them, when they were attained, was beneficial. It is possible, though not probable, that had Simon never existed those objects would never have been attained; also it is quite possible that if he had not forced on rebellion the objects might have been attained long before they were. That we cannot decide. But there are three points to be considered. Were the aims of the barons beneficial? Was Simon a great and good man? Were all the motives of his party and the means taken to realize them good and justifiable? To the first two questions unhesitatingly we may answer, yes. The barons wanted only what was fair. Simon de Montfort was a great and good man. The third question is not so easy. It is better to allow that there were mixed motives and unjustifiable expedients. Simon was not successful as an administrator, he could not maintain peace even when he had the whole kingdom at his feet. His expedient for governing was fanciful and cumbrous. His own conduct in his elevation was not quite free from the charge of rapacity. He stands out best and most grandly in comparison with the meanness with which he was surrounded--the paltry, faithless king, the selfish and unscrupulous baronage. He is relatively great; but he is not perfect. He is scarcely a patriot--a foreigner could hardly be expected to be so. He is somewhat more distinctly a hero, but he never quite rids himself of the character of the adventurer. CHAPTER X. EDWARD I. Position and character of Edward--The Crusade--The Accession--The Conquest of Wales--Edward’s legal reforms--Financial system--Growth of Parliament. [Sidenote: Political education of Edward I. ]