English Historical Documents - PDF Free Download

ENGLISH HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS General Editor DAVID C.DOUGLAS M.A., D.LITT., F.B.A. Emeritus Professor of History Univer...

Author: A. R. Myers

625 downloads 4856 Views 7MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

ENGLISH HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS General Editor

DAVID C.DOUGLAS M.A., D.LITT., F.B.A. Emeritus Professor of History University of Bristol

ENGLISH HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS General Editor: DAVID C.DOUGLAS, M.A., D.LITT., F.B.A.

The following is a complete list of volumes; those marked* are still in preparation. I c. 500–1042 DOROTHY WHITELOCK, M.A., LITT.D., F.B.A., F.R.HIST.S., F.S.A. II 1042–1189 DAVID C.DOUGLAS, M.A., D.LITT., F.B.A., and G.W.GREBNAWAY, M.A. *III 1189–1327 HARRY ROTHWELL, M.A., PH.D. IV 1327–1485 A.R.MYERS, M.A., PH.D., F.R.HIST.S., F.S.A. V 1485–1558 C.H.WILLIAMS, M.A. *VI 1558–1603 DOUGLAS PRICE, M.A., B.LITT., F.S.A. *VII 1603–1660 MARY COATE, M.A. VIII 1660–1714 ANDREW BROWNING, M.A., D.LITT., F.B.A. IX American Colonial Documents to 1776 MERRILL JENSEN, M.A., PH.D. X 1714–1783 D.B.HORN, M.A., D.LITT., and MARY RANSOME, M.A. XI 1783–1832 A.ASPINALL, M.A., D.LITT., and E.ANTHONY SMITH, M.A. XII Part I, 1833–1874 The late G.M.YOUNG, M.A., D.LITT., and W.D. HANDCOCK, M.A., B.LITT. *XII Part II, 1874–1914 W.D.HANDCOCK, M.A., B.LITT.

GENERAL PREFACE ENGLISH HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS is a work designed to meet a present need. Its purpose is to make generally accessible a wide selection of the fundamental sources of English history. During the past half-century there has been an immense accumulation of historical material, but only a fraction of this has been made readily available to the majority of those who teach or who study history. The transcendent importance of the original authorities is recognised, but direct approach to them remains difficult, and even some of the basic texts (which are frequently quoted) are hard to consult. A gulf has thus opened between the work of the specialist scholar and those students, both at schools and universities, who best can profit by his labours. Historical studies tend too often today to consist of a commentary on documents which are not included in the available books; and, in the absence of any representative and accessible collection of the sources, the formation of opinion proceeds without that direct study of the evidence which alone can give validity to historical judgement. The editors of these volumes consider that this situation calls for a remedy. They have striven to supply one by providing what they hope can be regarded as an authoritative work of primary reference. An enterprise of this nature could be effective only if planned on a large scale. In scope and content, therefore, these volumes differ materially from the conventional “source-books” which usually contain only a restricted number of selected extracts. Here, within much wider limits, the editors have sought to produce a comprehensive corpus of evidence relating generally to the period with which they deal. Their aim, in each case, has been to present the material with scholarly accuracy, and without bias. Editorial comment has thus been directed, in the main, towards making the evidence intelligible, and not to drawing conclusions from it. Full account has been taken of modern textual criticism to compile a reliable collection of authentic testimony, but the reader has in general been left to pass his own judgement upon it, and to appraise for himself the value of current historical verdicts. Critical bibliographies have been added to assist further investigation. The decision to display the texts, when necessary, in an English translation was thus dictated by the general purpose of the work. A translated text can, of course, never be a complete substitute for the original, but those who, today, can utilise a document in Anglo-Saxon, Latin or old French are few and are decreasing in number. This is doubtless to be regretted. But there seems no adequate reason why the majority of those interested in English history should be arbitrarily deprived of the opportunity to consult the basic sources of their study. In this work, therefore, there is nothing that cannot be used by those who can only read English. The material to be included in each volume naturally varies according to the needs of each period as assessed by the editors. The years 1327–1485 are widely recognised as

having witnessed developments of exceptional interest alike in the political, the administrative, the ecclesiastical and the social history of England. The period has, moreover, a unity of its own since at this time occurred the slow disintegration of the medieval system in Church and State and the beginnings of a new political and social order. For this reason it was decided to treat this period as a whole, despite its length and despite the fact that historical documentation during these years was becoming fuller and more voluminous. This volume is, in consequence, somewhat longer than its fellows and the editor has provided fuller introductions to each part. These historical surveys replace the editor’s general introduction which is a feature of other volumes. All concerned in this Series are fully aware of the magnitude of the undertaking to which they have addressed themselves. They are conscious of the hazards of selecting from the inexhaustible store of historical material. They realise also the difficulties involved in editing so large a mass of very varied texts in accordance with the exigent demands of modern scholarship. They believe, however, that the essential prerequisite for the healthy development of English historical studies is wider acquaintance with the original authorities for English history. And they are content that their work should be judged by the degree to which they have promoted this object. DAVID DOUGLAS VOLUME IV ENGLISH HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 1327–1485

ENGLISH HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 1327–1485 Edited by

A.R.MYERS M.A., PH.D., F.R.HIST.S., F.S.A. Professor of Medieval History University of Liverpool

London and New York

Dedication For C.N.L.B.

First published in 1969 by Eyre & Spottiswoode Ltd Reissued in 1996 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane London EC4P 4EE Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29 West 35th Street New York, NY 10001 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2006. “ To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/.” © 1969 Routledge All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN 0-203-62693-1 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-203-63079-3 (Adobe e-Reader Format) ISBN 0-415-14369-1 (Print Edition) Complete set 0-415-14361-6 Boxed set 1 0-415-14362-4 Boxed set 2 0-415-14363-2 Boxed set 3 0-415-14364-0 Boxed set 4 0-415-14365-9 Vol.I 0-415-14366-7 Vol.II 0-415-14367-5 Vol.III 0-415-14368-3 Vol.IV 0-415-14369-1 Vol.V 0-415-14370-5 Vol.VI 0-415-14371-3 Vol. VII 0-415-14372-1 Vol. VIII 0-415-14373-X Vol.IX 0-415-14374-8 Vol.X 0-415-14375-6

EDITOR’S FOREWORD READERS of the first two volumes of this Series will have been made aware of the comparative scarcity of documents available for most aspects of the history of England down to the end of the twelfth century. For English history of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the materials are far more abundant. The civilisation of Western Europe had become sophisticated and complex, and since the twelfth century it had developed the habit of preserving literary evidence of its activities in rapidly increasing quantities. The spread of education stimulated a large increase in the number of letters, memoirs, chronicles, poems, treatises, devotional works, romances and various kinds of instructive books. England is especially rich in documents of this period for many reasons, of which two are of major importance. First, the early unification of the country under a comparatively strong monarch had been a powerful stimulus to the growth of royal law and administration; this had led to an early habit of royal record-keeping, which had stimulated bishops, monasteries, towns, and even lay lords, to do the same. Secondly, England’s immunity from violent revolution, destructive foreign conquest and ruinous civil war has ensured the survival of this mass of records to a unique degree. As in so many other respects, so here, the contrast between the two ends of the millennium traditionally unified as “the middle ages” is very great. For Anglo-Saxon England Professor Whitelock was able to include in a volume of less than 900 pages virtually all the literary materials of significance, except works of imagination like Beowulf. For the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries it is possible to print in one volume only a tiny selection of the mass of records that has been preserved. It is true that for much we should like to know about England in this period little or no evidence survives; but the extant documents are so abundant and varied that the problem of selection is far more akin to that for Tudor or Stuart England than that for Anglo-Saxon times. The span of years covered by this volume is we ll over twice as long as that of any subsequent volume in the Series; and it was desirable to attempt some conformity of treatment, both in the range of aspects to be illustrated and the density of documentation to be provided. It has therefore proved necessary to construct a larger volume than has hitherto been published in this Series. Great efforts have been made, both at national and local levels, to print the more important of the documents that have survived from this period; but the majority of the records remain unpublished and it would have been easy to fill the volume with a small selection of them. It seemed, however, that most users of this volume would not be best served by limiting it to hitherto unpublished material. The criterion was rather to choose those documents which appeared to be of most importance or relevance to the most significant themes of English history of this period. Moreover, many documents already in print have been published in places not generally known. Most of the documents selected for this volume are therefore translated from published sources. All the translations, whether from printed books or from manuscripts, are, unless otherwise

stated, made by me and I am also usually responsible for the modernisations of documents written in fourteenth- or fifteenth-century English. The life of a society is a seamless web; and most documents illustrate more than one aspect of English life between 1327 and 1485. Nevertheless, for ease of consultation the documents have been grouped in four parts. In the first of these, on the political framework, it was felt that any other than strictly chronological arrangement would probably confuse and obscure. On the other hand, in the remaining three parts—on the government of the realm, the Church and education, and economic and social developments—an analytical treatment seemed to be the most satisfactory. Considerations of length preclude the provision of a general index; but there is a guide to the sources and, as usual in this Series, a detailed table of contents. A.R.MYERS Liverpool, 1969

CONTENTS GENERAL PREFACE EDITOR’S FOREWORD

Page iii ix

EDITOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

xiv

GUIDE TO THE SOURCES

xv

NOTE ON DATES

liv

ABBREVIATIONS

lv

GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

lvi

Part I. THE POLITICAL FRAMEWORK INTRODUCTION TO PART I SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

2 34

Part II. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REALM INTRODUCTION TO PART II

345

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

393

A. THE KING

398

B. COUNCIL AND PARLIAMENT

415

C. THE ROYAL COURTS OF LAW

478

D. ROYAL ADMINISTRATION: CHANCERY, PRIVY SEAL AND SIGNET E. ROYAL FINANCE

494

F. LOCAL GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE THE TOWNS

532

510

G. TOWN GOVERNMENT

559

Part III. THE CHURCH AND EDUCATION INTRODUCTION TO PART III

586

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

637

A. THE RELATIONSHIP OF CHURCH AND KING

652

B. THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE OF THE CHURCH

700

C. PARISHES AND CHANTRIES

728

D. PECULIAR JURISDICTIONS

761

E. THE MONKS

786

F. DEVOTIONAL WRITINGS AND THE SPREAD OF LITERACY AMONG THE LAITY G. THE LOLLARDS AND WITCHCRAFT

821

H. THE UNIVERSITIES

889

I. THE SCHOOLS

849

919

Part IV. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENTS

INTRODUCTION TO PART IV

937

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

982

A. THE PEOPLE AND THE LAND

997

B. WOOL AND CLOTH

1032

C. OVERSEAS TRADE

1046

D. TOWN LIFE, TRADE AND GILDS

1069

E. THE NOBILITY AND GENTRY

1134

F. HOUSES AND HOUSEHOLDS

1156

G. STANDARDS OF LIVING

1173

H. WAYS OF LIFE

1200

I. TRAVEL

1232

J. VIOLENCE

1247

APPENDIX GENEALOGICAL TABLES

1263

EDITOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS FOR the reasons indicated in the Foreword, most of the documents included in this volume are translated from published sources. For all these, acknowledgements are made in the following guide to the sources. Many scholars have given help in the making of this book. Where they kindly assisted with one particular document their aid is acknowledged, if possible, at that point. Three scholars, have however, contributed more general help, which it is a pleasure to acknowledge here. I am very grateful to Professor E.F.Jacob for inspecting the first three of the introductions and to Dr G.A. Holmes for reading all of them. It was good of them to do this in the midst of many pressing duties and for their valuable suggestions I am much indebted. My deepest obligation is to Professor C.N.L.Brooke, who in spite of heavy and urgent pressures of other work found time to read not only the introductions but the whole of the texts and the bibliographies. Not only did he make many useful suggestions as he read through the volume, but without his encouraging friendship such a large enterprise would have taken longer to complete. His constant scholarly interest during the whole period the volume has been in preparation has been very heartening to the editor. I should also like to thank the General Editor of the Series, Emeritus Professor David C.Douglas, and the publishers, Eyre & Spottiswoode (Publishers) Ltd, not only for their valued aid in its publication but for their unfailing courtesy and understanding in waiting for the completion of the volume. I should like to thank Miss Marion Weir in particular for all the hard work and care she has devoted to its production. I also wish to acknowledge the services of the reading department of R. & R.Clark Ltd who have devoted so much care to their work during the printing of this book. With a large and complicated volume like this much depends on those concerned with its production; and I count myself fortunate in those who have been responsible for its publication. Lastly I wish to thank all who have contributed their patience and skill to the large task of typing the manuscript. I should especially like to mention the latest in the succession, Mrs Rita Owens, who has helped so ably and cheerfully in this task. A.R MYERS

GUIDE TO THE SOURCES The numerical order follows that of the Contents. Acknowledgements. For permission to reproduce copyright material thanks are tendered to authors, editors and publishers, respectively. Some documents are taken from editions for which no copyright exists, so far as is known, and works printed down to the year 1889, deemed to be outside the unrestricted period, are indicated in the margin by “n.c.” (no copyright); but if there has been inadvertently any oversight in this matter apologies are hereby offered to those concerned. The marginal note “n.t.” (not traced) refers to editions the proprietor of which has proved impossible to trace through the usual channels, but in the event of information coming to light after publication these references would be amended in any future reprint. From 1890 down to the 5present year, small capitals are used to distinguish the first mention of a copyright source, where the full acknowledgement is made, and thereafter a short-title form is given, linked in the margin to the document number of the first mention. Manuscripts. Thanks are offered to public and local bodies, and to private collections, for research facilities and for the use of MSS or transcripts in this volume. To facilitate reference the marginal “MS.”is given in each case. Thanks are also offered to the Trustees of the British Museum; and to the Controller of H.M.Stationery Office for permission to include transcripts or translations of Crown copyright records in the Public Record Office, for the extracts from Public Record Office publications, and for those from the Rolls Series. Copyright in this volume is vested in the Publishers, to whom all enquiries should be in the first instance directed. The formal acknowledgement for quotations, following citation, is “English Historical Documents 12 vols (Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1953), IV, edited by A.R.Myers (1969), D.N.”. Guide to the sources. This list is derivative from source lines placed after document titles throughout the text. If used in conjunction with the Contents a complete reference is thereby obtained. Part I. THE POLITICAL FRAMEWORK n.c.

1. T.Rymer, Foedera, Conventions, Literae et cujuscunque generis Acta Publica (The Hague edn, 1739–45), II, ii, 185, from Patent Roll, I Edward III 2. CHRONICON DE LANERCOST, ED.J.STEVENSON (EDINBURGH, 1839), YEARS 1272–1346 TRANS. SIR HERBERT MAXWELL, SCOTTISH HISTORICAL REVIEW, VOLS. 6–10 (1909–13), VOL. 9, 168 (by permission of the Company of Scottish History Ltd)

n.c.

3. Chronicon Galfridi le Baker de Swynbroke, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson (Oxford, 1889), 43

D.N. 4. Rymer, Foedera, II, iii, 27, from Close Roll, 3 Edw. III

1 D.N. 5. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 45–6 3 n.c.

6. Rotuli Parliamentorum (Rolls of Parliament), 1272–1503, 6 vols (J.Strachey and others, 1767) and Index (Record Commission, 1832), II, 52

n.c.

7. Gesta Edwardi de Carnarvon auctore Canonico Bridlingtoniensi, etc., ed. W.Stubbs, Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I and II (Rolls Series, 1882–3), II, 103

D.N. 8. Canon of Bridlington, 107 7 D.N. 9. Canon of Bridlington, 114–16 7 D.N. 2

10. Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 9, 392

n.c.

11. J.Froissart, Chronicles, trans. J.Bourchier, Lord Berners (1523–1525), 4 vols, ch. 17

D.N. 11

12. Froissart, Chronicles, ch. 28

D.N. 2

13. Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 9, 408

D.N. 1

14. Rymer, Foedera, II, iii, 187, from Close Roll, II Edw. III

D.N. 2

15. Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 9, 409

D.N. 11

16. Froissart, Chronicles, ch. 34

D.N. 3

17. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 64

n.c.

18. Robert of Avesbury, De Gestis mirabilibus regis Edwardi Tertii, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson (Rolls Series, 1889), 309

public record, Italy

19. Commemoriali (Archivio di Stato, Venice), III, Nos 679, 680

D.N. 3

20. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 68

n.c.

21. Statutes of the Realm, vols I, II (Record Commission, 1810,1816), I, 282, 292

n.c.

22. Adae Murimuth, Continuatio Chronicarum, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson (Rolls Series, 1889), 116

D.N. 18

23. Robert of Avesbury, Chronicle, 324

D.N. 1

24. Rymer, Foedera, II, iv, 112, from Pat. Roll, 15 Edw. III

D.N. 22

25. (i) Adam of Murimuth, Chronicle, 231–2, from British Museum, Cottonian Collection, MS. Nero, D.10 (ii) W.H.ST JOHN HOPE, WINDSOR CASTLE (COUNTRY LIFE, 1913),

*Hamlyn Publishing Group Ltd

I, 113–14, 124–5, FROM PIPE ROLL, 18 EDW. III, M. 45, AND EXCHEQUER, KING’S REMEMBRANCER, ACCOUNTS, 492/26 (by permission*)

D.N. 3

26. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 79

D.N. 2

27. Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 10, 179–82

D.N. 1

28. Rymer, Foedera, III, i, 8, from Scottish Roll, 21 Edw. III

D.N. 18

29. Robert of Avesbury, Chronicle, 389

D.N. 3

30. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 89 31. CHRONICON HENRICI KNIGHTON, ED.J.R.LUMBY (ROLLS SERIES 1889–95), II, 58

D.N. 3

32. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 108

D.N. 3

33. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 120

D.N. 3

34. Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 139

D.N. 11

35. Froissart, Chronicles, ch. 168

n.t.

36. A.GUESNON, “DOCUMENTS INÉDITS SUR L’INVASION ANGLAISE ET LES ÉTATS AU TEMPS DE PHILIPPE VI ET JEAN LE BON”, BULLETIN HISTORIQUE ET PHILOLOGIQUE (1897), 244

D.N. 1

37. Rymer, Foedera, III, i, 151, from Scottish Roll, 31 Edw. III 38. THE CHRONICLE OF JEAN DE VENETTE, TRANS. JEAN BIRDSALL, ED. R.A.NEWHALL (NEW YORK, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1953), 93

D.N. 1

39. Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, I, from French Treaty Roll, 34 Edw. III

D.N. 38

40. Venette, Chronicle, 126

D.N. 1

41. Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 116

n.c.

42. Pedro López de Ayala, Crónicas de los Reyes de Castilla (Madrid, 1779), tomo I, 407 ff.

D.N. 1

43. Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 157, from Close Roll, 43 Edw. III

D.N. 1

44. Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 186, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Titus, A.3

n.c.

45. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, ed. D.Wilkins, 4 vols (1737), m, 93, from Register of William Whittlesey, Archbishop of Canterbury 46. THE ANONIMALLE CHRONICLE, 1333–81, ED. V.H.GALBRAITH (MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1927), 79 ff.

D.N. 6

47. Rot. Parl. II, 330

D.N. 1

48. Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 64, from Pat. Roll, I Richard II

n.c.

49. (i) T.Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, ed. H.T.Riley, 2 vols (Rolls Series, 1863–4), 1, 411

D.N. 46

(ii) Anonimalle Chronicle, 123

D.N. 6

50. Rot. Parl. III, 57

D.N. 6

51. Rot. Parl. III, 90

D.N. 46

52. Anonimalle Chronicle, 134

D.N. 49 (i)

53. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 32

D.N. 6

54. Rot. Parl. III, 100 55. JOHN OF GAUNT’S REGISTER, 1379–83, ED. E.C.LODGE AND R. SOMERVILLE (CAMDEN SOCIETY, 3RD SERIES, 1937), II, 241, 351 (by permission of the Royal Historical Society)

D.N. 6

56. Rot. Parl. III, 123

D.N. 49 (i)

57. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 71, 76, 80, 84, 88, 104 58. L.C.HECTOR, ED., CHRONICLE OF THE MONK OF WESTMINSTER, ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1953), VOL. 68, 62–5

D.N. 1

59. Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 192, 200, from French Roll, 46 Edw. III, etc.

D.N. 31

60. Knighton, Chronicle, II, 215 ff.

D.N. 49 (i)

61. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 153

n.c.

62. Monk of Westminster, Continuation, from Ranulf Higden, Polychronicon, ed. J.R.Lumby (Rolls Series, 1866), vol.9, 103, 114

D.N. 6

63. Rot. Parl. III, 229, 233, 236, 250, 244 64. HISTORIA SIVE NARRACIO DE MODO ET FORMA MIRABILIS PARLIAMENTI PER THOMAM FAVENT CLERICUM INDICTATA, ED. M. McKISACK, CAMDEN MISCELLANY, XIV (CAMDEN SOCIETY, 1926, XXXVII) (by permission of the Royal Historical Society)

n.c.

65. Johannis de Fordun Scotichroniconi Continuatio, ed. T.Hearne (Oxford, 1722), iv, 1075

D.N. 49 (i)

66. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 181

D.N. 62

67. Monk of Westminster, from Higden, Polychronicon, vol. 9, 267, 270, 272, 278

D.N. 1

68. Rymer, Foedera, III, iv, 111

D.N. 6 69. Rot. Parl. III, 338 D.N. 6 70. Rot. Parl. III, 343 D.N. 6 71. Rot. Parl. III, 350, 352 D.N. 6 72. Rot. Parl. III, 378 n.c.

73. Continuatio Eulogii Historiarum, ed. F.S.Haydon (Rolls Series, 1863)

D.N. 6 74. Rot. Parl. III, 368 n.c.

75. The Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, Secretary to Henry VI and Bishop of Bath and Wells, ed. G.Williams, 2 vols (Rolls Series, 1872), I, 285, from Lambeth Library, MS. 211

D.N. 6 76. Rot. Parl. III, 360, 382 D.N. 49 (i)

77. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 230

D.N. 6 78. Rot. Parl. III, 372 79. R.L.STOREY, “THE WARDENS OF THE MARCHES OF ENGLAND TOWARDS SCOTLAND, 1377–1489”, ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1957), VOL. 72, 593– 615, FROM P.R.O., WARRANTS UNDER THE PRIVY SEAL, E.404, NO. 46 n.c.

80. Chronicon Adae de Usk, 1377–1421, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson, 2nd edn (Henry Frowde, for the Royal Society of Literature, 1904), 181

n.c.

81. Chronique de la traison et mort de Richard Deux, roy Dengleterre, ed. B.Williams (English Historical Society, 1846), 193 ff.

D.N. 6 82. Rot. Parl. III, 425, 426–7, 430, 434, 442 D.N. 49 (i)

83. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 243

D.N. 80

84. Adam of Usk, Chronicle, 237, 246

n.c.

85. An English Chronicle from 1377 to 1461, ed. J.S.Davies (Camden Society, 1856), 25

D.N. 49 (i)

86. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 251

n.c.

87. Original Letters Illustrative of English History, ed. Sir Henry Ellis, 3 series, 11 vols (1824–46), 2nd series (1827), I, 24, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.III

n.c.

88. (i) T.Walsingham, Annales Ricardi Secundi et Henrici Quarti, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1886), 361

D.N. 49 (i)

(ii) Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 257–8

D.N. 88 (i)

89. Walsingham, Annales Henrici Quarti, 375, 378, 381, 383

D.N. 87

90. Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series, I, 33

D.N. 49 (i)

91. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 272

D.N. 85

92. Davies, English Chronicle, 31 93. S.B.CHRIMES, SPECULUM, XIV (JANUARY 1939), 20, FROM B.M., COTTONIAN MS. VESPASIAN, F. VII (by permission of the Mediaeval Academy of America)

D.N. 88 (i)

94 (i) Walsingham, Annales Henrici Quarti, 418

D.N. 65

(ii) Fordun, Scotichronicon, IV, 1161

n.c.

95. Jean Juvenal des Ursins, Histoire de Charles VI, 1380–1422, ed. J.A.C.Buchon, Choix de chroniques et mémoires sur l’histoire de France (1841), 437 96. T.WALSINGHAM, THE ST ALBANS CHRONICLE, ED. V.H.GALBRAITH (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1937), 27, FROM BODLEIAN LIBRARY, MS. BODLEY, 462

D.N. 6

97. Rot. Parl. III, 649–50

D.N. 1

98. (i) Rymer, Foedera, IV, i, 196, from Pat. Roll. 12 Henry IV

D.N. 1

(ii) Rymer, Foedera, IV, ii, 12

D.N. 73

99. (i) Eulogium Historiarum, 420 (iia) THE FIRST ENGLISH LIFE OF HENRY V, ED. C.L.KINGSFORD (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1911), 11

n.c.

(iib) Robert Fabyan, The New Chronicles of England and France, ed. Henry Ellis (1811), 576 100. THE BRUT CHRONICLE, ED. F.W.D.BRIE (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1906, 1908, ORIGINAL SERIES, NOS 131, 136), 594 101. “THE CHRONICLE OF JOHN STRECCHE FOR THE REIGN OF HENRY V”, ED. F.TAYLOR, BULLETIN OF THE JOHN RYLANDS LIBRARY (MANCHESTER, 1932), XVI, 149

D.N. 1

102. Rymer, Foedera, IV, ii, 106–9, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Caligula, D.5

D.N. 49 (i)

103. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 305

D.N. 1

104. Rymer, Foedera, IV, ii, 142, from B.M., Cottonian, MS. Vespasian, C.XIV

n.c.

105. Henrici Quinti Angliae Regis Gesta, ed. B.Williams (English Historical Society, 1850), 44–60 106. RUSSELL HOPE ROBBINS, HISTORICAL POEMS OF THE XIVTH AND XVTH CENTURIES (NEW YORK, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1959),

91, FROM BODLEIAN, MS. ARCH. SELDEN, B. 26 D.N. 105

107. Henrici Quinti Gesta, 60–8

n.c.

108. J.Caro, Aus der Kanzlei Sigmunds (Vienna, 1879), 111, 121

n.c.

109. A Chronicle of London, ed. Sir N.H.Nicolas and E.Tyrell (1827), 104, 105, from B.M., Harleian MS. 565, and Cottonian MS. Julius, B.I

n.c.

110. John Page, “The Siege of Rouen”, The Historical Collections of a Citizen of London in the 15th Century, ed. J.Gairdner (Camden Society, New Series, 1876), I, 18, 35, 40

D.N. 87

111. Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series, 1,69, from B.M., Add. MS. 4602

D.N. 95

112. Juvenal des Ursins, Histoire, 556

D.N. 1

113. (i) Rymer, Foedera, IV, iii, 179, from Close Roll, 8 Hen. V

D.N. 6

(ii) Rot. Parl. IV, 127

D.N. 6

(iii) Rot. Parl. IV, 135

MS. (transcript)

114. Public Record Office, “Memoranda de la chambre des Comptes, Paris”

D.N. 101

115. John Strecche, Chronicle, 184

n.c.

116. John Hardyng, Chronicle, ed. H.Ellis (1812), 384

D.N. 105

117. Pseudo-Elmham, Henrici Quinti Gesta, ed. B.Williams, 157

n.c.

118. Journal d’un bourgeois de Paris, 1405–49, ed. A.Tuetey (Paris, 1881), 164, 187

n.c.

119. (i) Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council of England, ed. Sir N.H.Nicolas, 7 vols (Record Commission, 1834–7), III, 6, from B.M., Cottonian, MS. Cleopatra, F.IV

D.N. 6 (ii) Rot. Parl. IV, 169 D.N. 109

120. Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, III

D.N. 1 121. Rymer, Foedera, IV, iv, 91, from Treaty Roll 122. J.DE WAURIN, RECUEIL DES CRONIQUES ET ANCHIENNES HISTORIES DE LA GRANT BRETAIGNE, ED. W. AND E.L.C.P.HARDY, 5 VOLS (ROLLS SERIES, 1864–91), III, 57–69 D.N. 109

123. Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, 113

D.N. 122

124. Waurin, Chronicle, III, 107–19

D.N. no

125. (i) William Gregory, Chronicle of London, ed. J.Gairdner, Historical Collections of a Citizen of London, 159

D.N.

(ii) Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Julius, B.I

109 D.N. 122

126. Waurin, Chronicle, III, 244

D.N. 122

127. Waurin, Chronicle, III, 261

D.N. 1 128. Rymer, Foedera, IV, iv, 147, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F. IV D.N. 6 129. Rot. Parl. IV, 336–7 D.N. 122

130. Waurin, Chronicle, III, 397

D.N. 122

131. Waurin, Chronicle, IV, 35

D.N. 6 132. Rot. Parl. IV, 423 D.N. 133. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, IV, 222, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F. IV 119 (i) D.N. 122

134. Waurin, Chronicle, IV, 69–87

D.N. 122

135. Waurin, Chronicle, IV, 137

n.c.

136. William of Worcester, Letters and Papers illustrative of the Wars of the English in France during the reign of Henry VI, ed. J.Stevenson, 2 vols in 3 (Rolls Series, 1861–4), II, ii, 440, from Bodleian, MS. Ashmole, 856

D.N. 75

137. Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, II, 181, 183, from Bodleian, MS. Ashmole, 789

D.N. 85

138. Davies, English Chronicle, 62

n.c.

139. Jacques le Bouvier, Hérault du Roy Berry, “Le Recouvrement de Normandie”, ed. J.Stevenson, Narratives of the Expulsion of the English from Normandy (Rolls Series, 1863), 239 140. THE PASTON LETTERSE, D.J.GAIRDNER, 4 VOLS (JOHN GRANT, EDINBURGH, 1910), I, 84

D.N. 85

141. Davies, English Chronicle, 64

D.N. 139

142. Bouvier, “Le Recouvrement de Normandie”, 330

n.c.

143. J.Chartier, Chronique française du roi de France Charles VII, ed. Vallet de Viriville (1858), II, 235

D.N. 140

144. Paston Letters, I, 124

MS.

145. P.R.O., King’s Bench, Ancient Indictments (K.B., 9), f. 122, m. 28

D.N. 85

146. (i) Davies, English Chronicle, 64

n.c.

(ii) Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, ed. J.Gairdner (Camden Society, 1880), from Lambeth, MS. 306

D.N. 146 (ii)

(iii) Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, 94, from Stow’s Memo-randa

147. ROBERT BALE’S CHRONICLE, ED. R.FLENLEY, six TOWN CHRONICLES (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1911), 136 D.N. 6

148. Rot. Parl. V, 224

D.N. 87

149. Ellis, Original Letters, 1st Series, I, II

D.N. 143

150. Chartier, Chronicle, III, 1–7

D.N. 140

151. Paston Letters, I, 263 152. C.L.KINGSFORD, “EXTRACTS FROM THE FIRST VERSION OF HARDYNG’S CHRONICLE”, ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1912), VOL. 27, 744–5, 749

D.N. 85

153. (i) Davies, English Chronicle, 71

D.N. 140

(ii) Paston Letters, I, 327 (iii) “THE DIJON RELATION”, ED. C.A.J.ARMSTRONG, BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH (1960), VOL. 33, 63–5, FROM DIJON, ARCHIVES DE LA CÔTE-D’OR, B. 11942, NO. 258 (by permission of Mr C.A.J.Armstrong, the Institute of Historical Research, and the Keeper, Archives de France, Département de la Côte-d’Or)

D.N. 6

154. Rot. Parl. V, 282

D.N. 1

155. Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 64, from Pat. Roll, 34 Hen. VI

D.N. 99 (iib)

156. (i) Fabyan, Chronicle, 633

D.N. 125 (i)

(ii) Gregory, Chronicle, 199

MS.

157. (i) Exeter Cathedral, MS. 3498/23

MS.

(ii) Exeter Cathedral, MS. 3498/22

n.c.

158. Calendar of State Papers of Venice etc., ed. Rawdon Brown (1864), I, 84, from

Archivio di Stato, Venice, Senato Mar, VI, f. 33a D.N. 85

159. Davies, English Chronicle, 79–80

D.N. 6

160. Rot. Parl. V, 348

n.c.

161. Registrum Abbatiae Johannis Whethamstede, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1872), I, 376–8

D.N. 125 (i)

162. Gregory, Chronicle, 208, 211

D.N. 136

163. Annales Rerum Anglicarum, formerly attributed to William of Worcester, ed. J.Stevenson, Letters and Papers, II, ii, 775

D.N. 125 (i)

164. Gregory, Chronicle, 212

Cf. D.N. 147

165. Six Town Chronicles, 161, from. MS. Gough, London, 10, f. 60V

n.c.

166. Hearne’s Fragment, Thomae Sprotti Chronica, ed. T.Hearne (Oxford, 1719), 286 167. CALENDAR OF THE STATE PAPERS AND MANUSCRIPTS OF MILAN, ED. A.B.HINDS (H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE, 1912), I, NOS 91, 117, 120

MS.

168. P.R.O., Exchequer, Warrants for Issues, 3 Edw. IV, E.404/ 72/3/50

D.N. 125 (i)

169. Gregory, Chronicle, 218 ff.

MS.

170. P.R.O., King’s Bench, Ancient Indictments, F.33, No. 49

n.c.

171. John Warkworth, Chronicle, ed. J.O.Halliwell (Camden Series, 1839), 3

D.N. 171

172. Warkworth, Chronicle, 37 ff., from College of Arms, MS. L. 9

D.N. 171

173. (i) Warkworth, Chronicle, 5

MS.

(ii) P.R.O., Duchy of Lancaster, Warrants, D.L. 37/51/31

D.N. 122

174. Waurin, Chronicle, V, 543

D.N. 1

175. Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 149, from French Roll, 7 Edw. IV

D.N. 6

176. Rot. Parl. V, 622

D.N. 122

177. Waurin, Chronicle, V, 559

D.N. 171

178. Warkworth, Chronicle, 46, from Bodleian, MS. Ashmole, 1160

D.N. 122

179. Waurin, Chronicle, V, 585

n.c.

180. Camden Miscellany (1847), I, 21–3, and Excerpta Historica, ed. S. Bentley (1831), 282, from B.M., Harleian, MS. 283, f. 2

D.N. 167

181. Cal. S.P.Milan, I, 138

MS.

182. P.R.O., Exchequer, Warrants for Issues, 49 Hen. VI, E.404/ 71/6/20

MS.

183. P.R.O., Exchequer, Warrants for Issues, 49 Hen. VI, E.404/ 71/6/35

MS.

184. P.R.O., Exchequer, Warrants for Issues, 49 Hen. VI, E.404/ 71/6/36 185. LETTER FROM WARWICK TO LOUIS XI, 12 FEBRUARY 1471, ED. A.R. MYERS, B.I.H.R. (1960), VOL. 33, 115, FROM B.M., ADD. MS. 48988 (1)

D.N. 171

186. (i) Warkworth, Chronicle, 13 (ii) PHILIPPE DE COMMINES, MÉMOIRES, ED. B.DE MANDRET, 2 VOLS (PARIS, 1901, 1903), Bk 3, ch. 7

n.c.

187. Historie of the Arrivall of Edward IV in England, ed. J.Bruce (Camden Society, 1838), 22 188. (i) THE TEWKESBURY ABBEY CHRONICLE, 1471, ED. C.L.KINGSFORD, ENGLISH HISTORICAL LITERATURE IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1913), 376, 377

D.N. 171

(ii) Warkworth, Chronicle, 18 (iii) THE SECOND CONTINUATION OF THE CROYLAND CHRONICLE, 1486, ED. W.FULMAN, RERUM ANGLICARUM SCRIPTORES (1684), 555, TRANS. H.T.RILBY (BOHN’S ANTIQUARIAN LIBRARY, 1893), 466 (by permission of G.Bell & Sons Ltd) (iv) THE GREAT CHRONICLE OF LONDON, 1512, ED. A.H.THOMAS AND I.D.THORNLEY, LIMITED EDN, 500 COPIES (PRINTED BY GEORGE W.JONES AT THE SIGN OF THE DOLPHIN, LONDON AND AYLESBURY, UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE LIBRARY COMMITTEE OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF LONDON, FOR PRESENTATION ONLY, 1938), 218 (by permission of the Corporation of London)

n.c.

(v) Edward Hall, The Union of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre and York (1542), ed. H.Ellis (1809), 301 189. R.R.SHARPE, LONDON AND THE KINGDOM (LONGMANS, GREEN, 1895), III, 391, FROM CITY OF LONDON RECORD OFFICE, JOURNAL 8, F. 7 (by permission of the Corporation of London)

D.N. 187 190. (i) Arrival! of Edward IV, 38 D.N. 171 (ii) Warkworth, Chronicle, 21 D.N. 188 (iii) Great Chronicle of London, 220 (iv)

D.N. 99 (iib)

(iv) Fabyan, Chronicle, 662

MS.

191. P.R.O., Exchequer of Receipt, Issue Rolls, II Edw. IV, E.403, No. 844

D.N. 188 192. Croyland Chronicle Continuator, 469 (iii) D.N. 1

193. Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 41 and 43, from French Roll, 14 Edw. IV

D.N. 1

194. Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 48, from Scottish Roll, 14 Edw. IV

D.N. 167 195. Cal. S.P.Milan, I, 189, 191 D.N. 1

196. Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 65

D.N. 167 197. Cal. S.P.Milan, I, 218 D.N. 188 198. Croyland Chronicle Continuator, 474 (iii) D.N. 188 199. (i) Croyland Chronicle Continuator, 477 ff., trans, amended by A.R.Myers (iii) D.N. 188 (ii) Great Chronicle of London, 226 (iv) D.N. 188 200. Great Chronicle of London, 228, and Fabyan, Chronicle, 667 (iv) and D.N. 99 (iii) 201. DOMENICO MANCINI, THE USURPATION OF RICHARD III, ED. C.A.J. ARMSTRONG (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1936), 73 et passim D.N. 188 202. Great Chronicle of London, 230 (iv) 203. THE STONOR LETTERS AND PAPERS, 1290–1483, ED. C.L.KINGSFORD, 2 VOLS (CAMDEN SERIES, 1919), II, 161 (by permission of the Royal Historical Society) n.c.

204. Christ Church Letters, ed. J.B.Sheppard (Camden Society, 1877), 45

n.c.

205. (i) J.Masselin, Journal des États Généraux de France tenus a Tours en 1484, ed. A.Bernier (1835), 37–9

D.N. 188 (iv)

(ii) Great Chronicle of London, 234, 236

D.N. 188 (iii)

206. Croyland Chronicle Continuator, 490

MS.

207. British Museum, Harleian MS. 433

D.N. 6

208. Rot. Parl. VI, 240 209. ACTS OF THE COURT OF THE MERCERS’ COMPANY, 1453–1527, ED. L.LYELL AND F.D.WITNEY (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1936), 173

D.N. 140

210. Paston Letters, III, 316

n.c.

211. J.Rous, Historia Regum Anglie, ed. T.Hearne (1729), 214

n.c.

212. Polydore Vergil, Anglica Historia, ed. H.Ellis (Camden Society, 1844), 221

D.N. 188 (iv)

213. Great Chronicle of London, 238

Part II. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REALM D.N. 21 214. S.R. I, 319 215. L.G.WICKHAM LEGG, ENGLISH CORONATION RECORDS (CONSTABLE & CO. LTD, 1901), 91–5, 118–20, FROM THE LIBER REGALIS D.N. 1

216. Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 63, from Close Roll, I Ric. II

D.N. 6

217. Rot. Parl. III, 347

D.N. 21 218. S.R. II, 98–9 D.N. 6

219. Rot. Parl. III, 416

D.N. 49 220. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 239 (i) D.N. 6

221. Rot. Parl. III, 415

D.N. 6

222. Rot. Parl. III, 658

D.N. 6

223. Rot. Parl. V, 375–9

n.c.

224. Sir John Fortescue, The Governance of England, ed. C.Plummer (1885), ch. 1, 109

n.c.

225. Grants from the Crown during the Reign of Edward V, and Two Speeches, etc., ed. J.G.Nichols (Camden Society, 1854), li–lii, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Vitellius, E.X 226. SELECT CASES BEFORE THE KING’S COUNCIL, ED. I.S.LBADAM AND J F.BALDWIN (SELDEN SOCIETY, 1918), 47

MS.

227. P.R.O., Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer, Accounts Various, E. 101/26/8

D.N. 6

228. Rot. Parl. III, 55–6

D.N. 119 (i)

229. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, I, 18, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.III

D.N. 6

230. Rot. Parl, IV, 175

D.N. 119 (i)

231. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 148, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.IV

D.N. 119 (i)

232. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 22, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.IV

D.N. 6

233. Rot. Parl. IV, 334

D.N. 119 (i)

234. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 312, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Titus, E.V

MS.

235. P.R.O., Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer, Accounts Various, E.101/96

D.N. 226

236. Leadam and Baldwin, Select Cases before the Kings Council, 104, 106, 107

D.N. 119 (i)

237. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 316–20, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.V

MS.

238. P.R.O., Exchequer, Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer, Council and Privy Seal, E.28/78/38, 39

D.N. 6

239. Rot. Parl. V, 240–1

D.N. 119 (i)

240. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 293, from B.M., Add. MS. 4612

D.N. 224

241. Fortescue, Governance of England, ch. 15, 146

n.c.

242. Records of the Borough of Nottingham, ed. W.H.Stevenson (Nottingham, 1882– 1900), II (1883), 384 243. (i) “THE BLACK BOOK OF THE HOUSEHOLD OF EDWARD IV”, ED. A.R.MYERS, THE HOUSEHOLD OF EDWARD IV (MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1959), 86–7

D.N. 243 (i)

(ii) “The Black Book of the Household of Edward IV”, 211, from P.R.O., Warrants under the Signet, C.81/1386/8 244. CALENDAR OF PATENT ROLLS, 1476–85 (1901), 413

D.N. 6

245. Rot. Parl. II, 66

D.N. 6

246. Rot. Parl. II, 112

D.N. 6

247. Rot. Parl. II, 127

D.N. 6

248. Rot. Parl. II, 128

D.N. 6

249. Rot. Parl. II, 131

D.N. 1

250. Rymer, Foedera, II, iv, 112, from Close Roll, 15 Edw. III

D.N. 6

251. Rot. Parl. II, 164–5

D.N. 6

252. Rot. Parl. II, 203

D.N. 6

253. Rot. Parl. II, 280

D.N. 21

254. S.R. 1, 393

D.N. 6

255. Rot. Parl. II, 304

D.N. 6

256. Rot. Parl. II, 310

D.N. 6

257. Rot. Parl. II, 310

D.N. 6

258. Rot. Parl. II, 317

D.N. 6

259. Rot. Parl. II, 321

D.N. 6

260. Rot. Parl. III, 5

D.N. 6

261. Rot. Parl. III, 55

D.N. 6

262. Rot. Parl. III, 211

n.c.

263. Memorials of London and London Life, ed. H.T.Riley (1868), 511, from City of London, Letter-Book H

D.N. 6

264. Rot. Parl. III, 321a

D.N. 6

265. Rot. Parl. III, 348 266. MUM AND THE SOTHSEGGER, PASSUS IV, LINES 24–93, ED. M.DAY AND R.STEELE (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1936), 24–6

D.N. 6

267. Rot. Parl. III, 456, 457, 458, 465

D.N. 6

268. Rot. Parl. III, 525, 528, 530, 542

D.N. 21

269. S.R. II, 156

D.N. 6

270. Rot. Parl. III, 611

D.N. 21

271. S.R. II, 170

D.N. 6

272. Rot. Parl. IV, 22

D.N. 6

273. Rot. Parl. IV, 63

D.N. 6

274. Rot. Parl. IV, 267

D.N. 6

275. Rot. Parl. IV, 326

D.N. 21

276. S.R. II, 243

D.N. 6

277. Rot. Parl. IV, 350

D.N. 6

278. Rot. Parl. V, 56

D.N. 6

279. Rot. Parl. V, 59–60 280. (i) A.R.MYERS, ED., BULLETIN OF THE JOHN RYLANDS LIBRARY (1938), VOL. 22, FROM B.M., HARLEIAN MS. 6849 (ii) B.M., Lansdowne MS. 229, ed. R.Virgoe, B.I.H.R., vol. 34 (1961)

D.N. 6

281. Rot. Parl. V, 239

D.N. 6

282. Rot. Parl. V, 248

n.c.

283. Year Book 33 Henry VI (Richard Tottel, 1575), xvii–xviii

D.N. 6

284. Rot. Parl. V, 337 285. W.H.DUNHAM, JR, THE FANE FRAGMENT OF THE 1461 LORDS JOURNAL (NEW HAVEN, YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1935), 12, 18, FROM B.M., ADD. MS. 34218

D.N. 21

286. S.R. II, 380

D.N. 140

287. Paston Letters, III, 51–5

D.N. 6

288. Rot. Parl. VI, 160

D.N. 6

289. Rot. Parl. VI, 173

MS.

290. (i) K.N.Houghton, “Borough representation and the parliamentary burgesses in the Yorkist period, 1460–1485” (MS., M.A. (Liverpool) thesis), from P.R.O., Writs and Returns, 0.219/17/3 (ii) K.N.HOUGHTON, TRANSACTIONS OF THE SHROPSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY (1962–3), VOL. 57, PT II, 164, FROM P.R.O., WRITS AND RETURNS

MS.

291. Salisbury Muniment Room, Ledger Book B

D.N. 6

292. Rot. Parl. VI, 237 ff. 293. C.JOHNSON, ED., CAMDEN MISCELLANY (1929), XV, 1–5, FROM CHANCERY MISCELLANEA, BUNDLE 6 (by permission of the Royal Historical Society)

D.N. 21

294. S.R. II, 375

D.N. 6 295. Rot. Parl. III, 200 D.N. 6 296. Rot. Parl. III, 269 D.N. 21

297. S.R. II, 61

D.N. 6 298. Rot. Parl. IV, 84 n.c.

299. The Black Book of the Admiralty, ed. T.Twiss, 4 vols (Rolls Series, 1871–6), I, 281 300. SELECT CASES IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, ED. M.HEMMANT

(SELDEN SOCIETY, 1933), 27 D.N. 301. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Titus, C.I 119 (i) 302. SELECT CASES IN CHANCERY, ED. W.P.BAILDON (SELDEN SOCIETY, 1896), 141–3 MS.

303. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 27 304. SIR JOHN FORTESCUE, DE LAUDIBUS LEGUM ANGLIE, ED. S.B. CHRIMES (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1949), 114–21

n.c.

305. Calendar of Proceedings in Chancery in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, ed. J.Caley and J.Bayley (Record Commission, 1827), I, xciv

MS.

306. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, 64/785

MS.

307. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, 67/93–7, C. 1/67/93 308. C.G.CRUMP, ED., ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1911), VOL. 26, 332, FROM MS. ARCHTVIO DEL CASTELLO DI SANT’ANGELO, ARM. C. FASC. 79 309. T.F.TOUT, CHAPTERS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL ENGLAND (MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1928), III, 143–50, FROM P.R.O., CHANCERY WARRANTS, 248/11238

n.t.

310. G.WROTTESLBY, CRÉCY AND CALAIS, FROM THE ORIGINAL RECORDS (1898), 191–204, FROM COLLEGE OF ARMS MS. 2. m. 16 311. CALENDAR OF INQUISITIONS POST MORTEM (1954), XIII, 44 312. B.WILKINSON, THE CHANCERY UNDER EDWARD III (MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1929), APP. VI, 217–23, FROM B.M., HARGRAVE MSS 189, 219; AND BODLEIAN, MS. ASHMOLE 1147 313. CALENDAR OF CLOSE ROLLS, 36 VOLS (1896–1954), Vol. for 1429–1435, 254–6

D.N. 75

314. Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, II, 179–80, 196, from Bodleian MS. 789

MS.

315. P.R.O., Exchequer of Receipt, Warrants for Issue, E.404/72

D.N. 140

316. Paston Letters, II, 53

MS.

317. Salisbury City Muniment Room, Ledger Book B, II

MS.

318. P.R.O., Warrants to the Exchequer, 71/6/43, 18

D.N. 319. “Black Book of the Household of Edward IV”, 110 243 (i) D.N. 225

320. Grants from the Crown during the Reign of Edward V, 72, from B.M., Harleian MS. 433

MS.

321. B.M., Harleian MS. 433

D.N.

322. Tout, Chapters IV, 298, n. I, from P.R.O., Exchequer, K.R., Memoranda Roll, Easter

309

Term, 14 Edw. III 323. “A NATIONAL BALANCE SHEET FOR 1362–3, WITH DOCUMENTS SUBSIDING THERETO”, ED. T.F.TOUT AND DOROTHY BROOME, ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1924), XXXIX, 412–13, FROM P.R.O., EXCHEQUER, K.R., ACCOUNTS VARIOUS, B. 101/394/17

D.N. 6 324. Rot. Parl. II, 303 325. THE REGISTER OF THOMAS SPOFFORD, BISHOP OF HEREFORD, 1422–1428 (CANTERBURY AND YORK SOCIETY, 1919), 95, 98 D.N. 6 326. Rot. Parl. IV, 432, 433 MS.

327. P.R.O., Exchequer, K.R., Memoranda Roll, Michaelmas Term, 36 Hen. VI, E. 159/234

MS.

328. P.R.O., Exchequer, K.R., Memoranda Roll, Michaelmas Term, 36 Hen. VI, E. 159/234

MS.

329. P.R.O., Exchequer of Receipt, Warrants for Issues, E. 404/72

D.N. 6 330. Rot. Parl. V, 572 D.N. 224

331. Fortescue, Governance of England, 118, 120, 123

MS.

332. Archivio di Stato, Milan, Potenze Estere, Inghilterra, Cassa 567 333. A.R.MYERS, ED., TRANSACTIONS OF THE HISTORIC SOCIETY OF LANCASHIRE AND CHESHIRE (1964), H, FROM P.R.O., DUCHY OF LANCASTER COUNCIL REGISTER, D.L. 5/1

MS.

334. P.R.O., Duchy of Lancaster Council Register, D.L. 5/1

n.c.

335. Letters and Papers…of Richard III and Henry VII, ed. J.Gairdner (Rolls Series, 1861), 81, from B.M., Harleian MS. 433

D.N. 21

336. S.R. I, 257, 261

D.N. 313

337. Calendar of Close Rolls, vol. for 1330–3, 147

D.N. 6 338. Rot. Parl. II, 64 339. R.CUNLIFFE SHAW, THE ROYAL FOREST OF LANCASTER (PRESTON, GUARDIAN PRESS, 1936), 150, FROM P.R.O., D.L., FOREST PROCEEDINGS, 39/17/1 (by permission of Mr R.Cunliffe Shaw) D.N. 21

340. S.R. I, 283; II, 4

D.N. 6 341. Rot. Parl. II, 169 342. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE JUSTICES OF THE PEACE IN THE 14TH AND 15TH CENTURIES, ED. B.H.PUTNAM (AMES FOUNDATION, 1938), 66, 109, 110, 111, 113, 117 343. THE REGISTER OF EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE, ED. M.C.B.DAWES

(H.M.S.O., 1932), PT III, 313–14 344. (i) THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE STATUTE OF LABOURERS, ED. B.H. PUTNAM (NEW YORK, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1908), APP., 31, FROM P.R.O., CHANCERY, WRITS OF PRIVY SEAL, 1/369/23, 335 D.N. (ii) The Enforcement of the Statute of Labourers, 31–2, from Close Roll, 33 Edw. III 344 (i) D.N. 21

345. S.R. I, 364–5

D.N. 21

346. S.R. I, 374

D.N. 21

347. S.R. I, 388

D.N. 6 348. Rot. Parl. III, 21 D.N. 6 349. Rot. Parl. III, 526–7 D.N. 6 350. Rot. Parl. III, 624 D.N. 21

351. S.R. II, 177 352. THE MARCHER LORDSHIPS OF SOUTH WALES, 1415–1536, ED. T.B. PUGH (UNIVERSITY OF WALES PRESS, 1963), 49, FROM CARDIFF PUBLIC LIBRARY, PHILLIPPS MS. 30341

D.N. 353. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 219, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.IV 119 (i) D.N. 100

354. Brut Chronicle, 442

MS.

355. B.M., Harleian MS. 773 356. ARCHAEOLOGIA (1900), VOL. 57, 75, FROM SHAVINGTON ESTATE MSS (by permission of the Society of Antiquaries of London)

n.c.

357. Literae Cantuarienses (Rolls Series, 1889), III, 235, from Christ Church, Canterbury, MSS Reg. N. 190

D.N. 21

358. S.R. II, 389–91

D.N. 244

359. Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1467–77, 283, 366, 401, 574, 605

D.N. 335

360. Letters and Papers…of Richard III and Henry VII, I, 56, from B.M., Harleian MS. 433 361. BRISTOL CHARTERS, I, 142, 166 (1155–1373), ED. N.D.HARDING (BRISTOL RECORD SOCIETY, 1930)

D.N. 242

362. Records of the Borough of Nottingham, II, 61–4, from Presentment Rolls of the Mickletorn Jury, Great Tourn Inquisition, 1408

MS.

363. Shrewsbury Borough Archives, Guildhall, Shrewsbury, Assembly Book No. 1

D.N. 244

364. Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1391–6, 219; 1436–41, 244 365. THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF WINCHESTER FROM THE RECORDS OF THE 14TH AND 15TH CENTURIES, ED. J.S.FURLEY (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1923), 185, FROM CITY MUNIMENTS, PIE-POWDER COURT ROLLS, 5 HEN. VI

MS.

366. Bodleian, MS. Tanner, 165

MS.

367. Bodleian, MS. Tanner, 165, Register of Prior William Molassh of Christ Church, Canterbury from 1428 368. CALENDAR OF CHARTER ROLLS, VOL. FOR 1427–1516 (1927), 8–11 369. THE DIARY OF THE CORPORATION OF READING, ED. J.M.GUILDING (1892), vol. 1, 32, 33, 37, 43, 75 (by permission of Reading Corporation)

MS.

370. Ludlow Corporation, Town Court Estreat Rolls, 3 Edw. IV (Shropshire County Record Office, Shrewsbury) 371. RECORDS OF THE BOROUGH OF LEICESTER, ED. M.BATESON (1901), II, 285, 286, FROM VELLUM BOOK NO. 90; HALL BOOK, 226 (by permission of the Borough of Leicester)

D.N. 371

372. Leicester Records, II, 287, from Hall Book, 229

D.N. 242

373. Nottingham Records, II, 263–5, from Sessions Presentments, 1467

374. THE COVENTRY LEET BOOK OR MAYOR’S REGISTER CONTAINING RECORDS OF CITY COURT LEET, ED. M.D.HARRIS, 4 PTS (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1907–1913), II, 389 375. YORK CIVIC RECORDS, ED. A.RAINE (YORKSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, RECORD SERIES, VOL. 98), I (1939), 73, 74, 77, 78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 92, 103, 106, 115, 117, 118, 119, FROM THE HOUSE BOOKS

Part III. THE CHURCH AND EDUCATION D.N. 6

376. Rot. Parl. II, 290

D.N. 1

377. Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 55, from Pat. Roll, 51 Edw. III

D.N. 6

378. Rot. Parl. II, 338

n.c.

379. Fasciculi Zizaniorum Magistri Johannis Wyclif, ed. W.W.Shirley (Rolls Series, 1858), 258, from Bodleian MS. E.Mus., 86

D.N. 45

380. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 141, from Register of Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury

D.N.

381. Rot. Parl. III, 405

6 D.N. 21

382. S.R. II, 69

D.N. 21

383. S.R. II, 84–6

n.t.

384. E.PERROY, L’ANGLETERRE ET LE GRAND SCHISME D’OCCIDENT (PARIS, J.MONNIER, 1933), 419, FROM P.R.O., CHANCERY, MISCELLANEA, Bundle 19

MS.

385. B.M., Cottonian MS. Galba, E. 10

D.N. 45

386. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 238, from Register of Thomas Arundel, Archbishop of Canterbury 387. ANGLO-NORMAN LETTERS AND PETITIONS, ED. M.D.LEGGE (BASIL BLACKWELL, 1941), 7, FROM OXFORD, ALL SOULS COLLEGE, MS. 182 388. H.P.KING, ARCHIVES (1959), IV, 82–3, FROM LINCOLN CHAPTER ACTS, A. 2/29 (by permission of Mr H.P.King; the Dean of Lincoln; and the British Records Association)

MS.

389. Durham Cathedral, Dean and Chapter Muniments, Locellus 25, No. 92

D.N. 390. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 279, 280, 281 49 (i) 391. C.L.KINGSFORD, ED., THE CHRONICLES OF LONDON (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1905), 65, FROM B.M., COTTONIAN MS. JULIUS, B.II D.N. 6

392. Rot. Parl. IV, 22 393. THE REGISTER OF HENRY CHICHELE, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, 1414–43, 4 VOLS (CANTERBURY AND YORK SOCIETY, 1938–48), II, ED. E.F.JACOB AND H.C.JOHNSON (1943), 7, 12, 17 (by permission of the Canterbury and York Society, and Professor E.F.Jacob for the Warden and Fellows of All Souls, Oxford)

D.N. 49 (i)

394. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 302, 319 395. HENRY V, BISHOP BEAUFORT AND THE RED HAT, 1417–21, ED.K. B.McFARLANE, ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1954), VOL. 60, 325–326, 329– 31, from Ancient Correspondence, S.C.I./xliii/192, and S.C.I./lx/9

D.N. 119 (i)

396. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 180–1, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.IV

D.N. 45

397. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 480, from Bodleian, MS. Ashmole, 789

MS.

398. Cambridge University Library, MS. Mm., I, 45, 7

D.N. 21

399. S.R. II, 238

D.N.

400. Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton II, 260, from Bodleian, MS. Ashmole,

75

789

n.t.

401. J.HALLER, PIERO DA MONTE: I EIN GELEHRTER UND PAPSTLICHBR BEAMTER DES 15 JAHRHUNDERTS: SEINE BRIEFSAMMLUNG (BIBLIO-THEK DES DEUTSCHEN HISTORISCHEN INSTITUTS IN ROM, BD. 19, 1941), 15, FROM ROME, VATICAN, MS. LAT., 2694

D.N. 1

402. Rymer, Foedera, V, i, 157, from Pat. Roll. 24 Hen. VI

D.N. 45

403. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 555, from Register of Archbishop Stafford

D.N. 119 (i)

404. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 40–5, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, E.III

405. CALENDARS OF FINE ROLLS, 21 VOLS (1912–61), VOL. FOR 1445–52, 139 D.N. 45

406. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 583, from Pat. Roll, 2 Edw. IV 407. REGISTRUM THOME BOURGCHIER, ED. F.R.H.DU BOULAY (CANTERBURY AND YORK SOCIETY, 1957)

D.N. 357

408. Literae Cantuarienses, III, 243, from Christ Church Register, N.202

D.N. 125 (i)

409. Gregory, Chronicle, 238

D.N. 167

410. Cal. S.P. Milan, I, 164 411. THE REGISTER OF THOMAS MYLLYNG, BISHOP OF HEREFORD, 1474–1492, ED. A.T.BANNISTER (CANTERBURY AND YORK SOCIETY, 1920), I

D.N. 158

412. Cal. S.P.Venice, I (1202–1509), 138, from Archivio di Stato, Venice, Busta 7, No. 412

D.N. 158

413. Cal. S.P.Venice, I (1202–1509), 142, from Archivio di Stato, Venice, Collezione Podocatoro, No. 415 414. CALENDARS OF ENTRIES IN THE PAPAL REGISTERS RELATING TO GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, ED. W.H.BLISS, J.A.TWEMLOW AND OTHERS, 14 VOLS (H.M.S.O., 1893–1961), PAPAL LETTERS, 1471–84, ED. J.A.TWEMLOW (1955), PT II, 714; PT I, 274 415. THE REGISTER OF JOHN DE GRANDISSON, BISHOP OF EXETER, 1327–1369, ED. F.S.HINGESTON-RANDOLPH (EXETER, HENRY S.ELAND, AND LONDON, G.BELL & SONS LTD, 1897), II, 662

D.N. 49 (i)

416. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 65

n.c.

417. Testamenta Eboracensia (Surtees Society, 1865), vol. 45, III, 9 418. VETUS LIBER ARCHIDIACONI ELIENSIS, ED. C.L.FELTOE AND E.H.

MINNS (CAMBRIDGE ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY, OCTAVO PUBLICATIONS, 1919, NO. 48), 180, 182 419. THE ENGLISH CLERGY AND THEIR ORGANIZATION IN THE LATER MIDDLE AGES, ED. A.H.THOMPSON (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1947), 200, FROM REGISTER OF ARCHBISHOP HENRY BO WET OF YORK D.N. 263

420. Memorials of London and London Life, 593, from London, Letter-Book I

D.N. 393

421. Chichele, Register, III, 152 422. SURTEES SOCIETY MISCELLANEA (1916), II, 218–20, FROM ARCHBISHOP KEMPE’S REGISTER

MS.

423. B.M., Harleian MS. 2179

D.N. 75

424. Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, I, 109–13, from Lambeth, MS. 211

n.c.

425. T.Gascoigne, Loci e libro veritatum, ed. J.E.T.Rogers (1881)

MS.

426. Register of Reginald Bowlers, 1453–9 (Lichfield Diocesan Registry)

MS.

427. Register of William Booth, Archbishop of York, R.I. 20 (University of York, Borthwick Institute of Historical Research)

MS.

428. Instance Book of the Consistory Court of Lichfield, 1464–71 (Lichfield Diocesan Record Office), MS. B/C/I/I

n.c.

429. A series of precedents and proceedings in criminal causes extending from the year 1475 to 1640, extracted from Act-Books of Ecclesiastical Courts in the Diocese of London, ed. W.H.Hale (1847), 1–16

n.c.

430. Calendars of Proceedings in Chancery (Record Commission, 1827), I, xcix

MS., D.N. 427

431. Register of Laurence Booth, Archbishop of York, R.I. 20

n c.

432. PAPAL REVENUES IN THE MIDDLE AGES, ED. W.LUNT (NEW YORK, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1934), II, 286, FROM BOOK OF ASSESSMENTS OF THE PAPAL CAMERA; and Valor Ecclesiasticus, ed. J.Caley, 6 vols (Record Commission, 1810–34) 433. THE REGISTER OF RALPH OF SHREWSBURY, BISHOP OF BATH AND WELLS, 1329–63, ED. T.S.HOLMES (SOMERSET RECORD SOCIETY, 1896), 510– 11

n.c.

43 4. The Churchwardens’ Accounts of the Church and Parish of St Michael without the North Gate, Bath, 1349–1575, ed. C.B.Pearson (Somersetshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 1878), 1

n.c.

435. Provinciale seu Constitutiones Angliae, ed. W.Lyndwood (Oxford, 1679), App. 58

D.N. 263 436. Memorials of London and London Life, from London, Letter-Book H D.N. 387 437. Anglo-Norman Letters and Petitions 35–6, from Oxford, All Souls College, MS.

182 MS., 438. Durham, Dean and Chapter Muniments, Locellus 25, No. 29 D.N. 389 D.N. 45 439. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 401; and E.F.Jacob, Register, both from and D.N. Chichele’s Register, II, f. 27a 393 n.c.

440. G.Ormerod, The History of the County Palatine and City of Chester, revised by T.Helsby (2nd edn, 1880), II, 41, from a charter in the possession of the earl of Shrewsbury, 1807

n.c.

441. Ordinances of the Secular Guilds of London, ed. H.C.Coote (1871), 85, from Registry of the Commissary Court of London, Book “Prowet”

n.c.

442. G.P.Scrope, History of Castle Combe (1852), 227, from William of Worcester’s abstract of the court rolls and receipts of the manor of Castle Combe from 1375 to 1460

D.N. 357 443. Literae Cantuarienses, III, 210, from Christ Church, MS. N.182 n.c.

444. R.Willis and J.W.Clark, The Architectural History of the University of Cambridge (1886), I, 282 445. A SMALL HOUSEHOLD OF THE XVTH CENTURY, ED. K.L.WOODLEGH (MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1956), 33–45, FROM BRIDPORT CORPORATION ARCHIVES

n.c.

446. Camden Society Miscellany (1875), No. VII, 1, 8–11, 11–28, 28, 30, 32–49, from a MS. in Bodmin Church, ed. Rev. J.J.Wilkinson 447. THE MEDIEVAL RECORDS OF A LONDON CITY CHURCH, ED. H. LITTLEHALES (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1905), 76, 91, FROM LONDON GUILDHALL LIBRARY, MS. 1239/1

D.N. 434 448. Churchwardens’ Accounts of St Michael, Bath, 83 449. MEDIEVAL CLERICAL ACCOUNTS, ED. P.HEATH (ST ANTHONY’S HALL PUBLICATIONS, 1964), NO. 26, FROM YORK, BORTHWICK INSTITUTE, R.VII, f. 306 n.c.

450. J.Raine, The Fabric Rolls of York Minster (Surtees Society, 1859), XXXV, App. 53, 250, 254, 258 451. THE RECORDS OF THE NORTHERN CONVOCATION (SURTEES SOCIETY, 1906), VOL. 113, 100, FROM DURHAM, BISHOP HATFIELD’S REGISTER

MS.

452. Register of William Courtenay, Archbishop of Canterbury, from Lambeth Palace MS.

MS.

453. Exeter Archives, Dean and Chapter, MS. 3550 454. THE REGISTER OF THOMAS LANGLEY, BISHOP OF DURHAM, 1406–37, ED. R.STOREY (SURTEES SOCIETY, 1956), I, 13

D.N. 325 455. Register of Thomas Spofford, 19

456. LINCOLN CATHEDRAL STATUTES, ED. H.BRADSHAW AND C.WORDSWORTH (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1897), III, 189–94, 200–2 MS.

457. Exeter Archives, Dean and Chapter, MS. 3771, Obit Book

n.c.

458. The Letters and Papers of John Shillingford, Mayor of Exeter, 1447–50, ed. S.A.Moore (Camden Society, 1871), 75, 78, 5, 7, 8, 37, 9

MS.

459. Exeter Archives, Dean and Chapter, MS. 3774

MS., D.N. 389

460. Durham, Dean and Chapter Muniments, Locellus 25, No. 87

MS.

461. Salisbury Diocesan Archives, Sub-Dean Act Book, 1476–8 462. F.L.HARRISON, MUSIC IN MEDIEVAL BRITAIN (ROUTLEDGE & KEGAN PAUL LTD, 1958), 425, FROM WELLS MUSEUM, MS. 22, NOW IN THE CATHEDRAL LIBRARY

n.c.

463. Historia et Cartularium Monasterii Sanctii Petri Gloucestriae, ed. W.H.Hart (Rolls Series, 1863), 1, 46, 47, 48

D.N. 45

464. (i) Concilia Magnae Britanniae, II, 585, from Durham Cathedral, MS. B. IV, 41 (ii) DOCUMENTS ILLUSTRATING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE GENERAL AND PROVINCIAL CHAPTERS OF THE ENGLISH BLACK MONKS, 1215–1540, ED. W.A.PANTIN (CAMDEN SOCIETY, 3RD SERIES, 1933), II, 55 (by permission of the Royal Historical Society) 465. THE HISTORY OF THE LONDON CHARTERHOUSE, ED. SIR WILLIAM ST JOHN HOPE (S.P.C.K., 1925), 24

D.N. 357

466. Literae Cantuarienses, III, 4, from Christ Church, MS. Cart. Antiquae, C. 206

D.N. 31

467. Knighton, Chronicle, II, 125–7

n.c.

468. J.Raine, Historiae Dunelmensis Scriptores Tres (Surtees Society, 1839), vol. 9, App. cxlvii, from Durham, Prior and Convent MS., Cart. I, f. 18b

D.N. 96

469. Walsingham, St Albans Chronicle, 82

D.N. 464 (ii)

470. Documents Illustrating…the Chapters of the English Black Monks, II, 105 ff., from B.M., Cottonian MS. Titus, C.IX., and various other MSS

n.c.

471. J.Amundesham, Annales Monasterii Sancti Albani, ed. H.T. Riley (Rolls Series, 1870), I, 333, 352, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Claudius, D.I

D.N. 357

472. Literae Cantuarienses, III, 165 473. THE REGISTER OF ABBOT RICHARD ASSHETON OF PETERBOROUGH, TRANS. A.H.THOMPSON FOR THE NORTHAMPTONSHIRE AND OAKHAM ARCHITECTURAL SOCIETY (ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTURAL SOCIETIES’

REPORTS AND PAPERS, 1917), XXXIV, 275 474. VISITATIONS OF RELIGIOUS HOUSES IN THE DIOCESE OF LINCOLN, ED. A.H.THOMPSON (LINCOLN RECORD SOCIETY, 1918), II, 9 D.N. 474

475. Visitations of Religious Houses, II, 174–6

MS.

476. Cambridge University Library, MS. Mm, I, 45, 5

MS,

477. Lambeth, MS. C.R.298

MS.

478. Register of Abbot Richard Ashton, MS. 2 of the Dean and Chapter Library, Peterborough Cathedral

n.c.

479. Christ Church Letters, ed. J.B.Sheppard (Camden Society, 1877), 17, from Canterbury, Christ Church Archives

MS., D.N. 478

480. Register of Abbot Richard Ashton

D.N. 161

481. Whethamstede, Register, I, 459, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Nero, D.VII

MS.

482. Register of Ashton-Ramsey, Dean and Chapter of Peterborough Library

D.N. 414

483. Cal. Papal Letters, vol. 13, Pt I, 85 484. C.HORSTMANN, YORKSHIRE WRITERS: THE OLD ENGLISH LIBRARY, BEING PROSE TREATISES OF RICHARD ROLLE OF HAMPOLE AND HIS FOLLOWERS (SWANN, SONNENSCHEIN & CO., 1895), 193, FROM LINCOLN CATHEDRAL LIBRARY, MS. THORNTON, A.I.17 (by permission of George Allen & Unwin Ltd) 485. LE LIVRE DE SEYNTZ MEDICINES, ED. E.J.ARNOULD (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1940), 161, 194, 244, FROM A STONYHURST COLLEGE MS., AND CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, MS. 218 486. CARLETON BROWN, RELIGIOUS LYRICS OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1924), 102, FROM CAMBRIDGE, MS. Dd. 5.64 487. JULIAN OP NORWICH, REVELATIONS OF DIVINE LOVE, c. 1373, ED. GRACE WARRACK, 13TH EDN (METHUEN, 1949), 26, CH. XI; 105, CH. L; 107, CH. LI 488. DOROTHY JONES, THE MINOR WORKS OF WALTER HILTON (ORCHARD BOOKS, 1928), CH. V, 16–20, FROM LAMBETH PALACE, MS. 472 (by permission of Burns & Oates) 489. ANON., THE CLOUD OF UNKNOWING, ED. P.HODGSON (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1944), 21, CH. 4; 24, 52 490. (i) A COLLECTION OF HOMILIES BY JOHN MIRK (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1905), 15–18 (ii) J.W.BLENCH, PREACHING IN ENGLAND IN THE LATE 15TH AND 16TH

CENTURIES (BASIL BLACKWELL, 1964), FROM B.M., HARLEIAN MS. 2247 D.N. 486

491. Carleton Brown, Religious Lyrics of the Fourteenth Century, 234–7, from Bodleian, Douce MS. 322

MS.

492. B.M., Add. MS., 22, 283

n.t.

493. A.W.POLLARD, FIFTEENTH CENTURY PROSE AND VERSE (CONSTABLE, 1903), 193 ff. 494. THE BOOK OF MARGERY KEMPE, ED. S.B.MEECH AND H.B.ALLEN (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1940), CH. 15, P. 32; CH. 16, P. 36

MS.

495. Gloucester, Guildhall Muniments, No. 1127 496. H.S.BENNETT, CHAUCER AND THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY, OXFORD HISTORY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1947), 116–17, FROM B.M., ADD. MS., 16165

MS.

497. Worcestershire Record Office, The Register of John Carpenter, Bishop of Worcester

n.c.

498. A collection of ordinances and regulations for the government of the Royal Household, ed. J.Nichols (1790), 37

n.c.

499. The English Works of John Wyclif hitherto unprinted, ed. F.D. Matthew (Early English Text Society, 1880), 462, 472, 481, 445, 415, 431, 417, 191, 328;

n.c.

and Select English Works of John Wyclif, ed. T.Arnold, 3 vols (Oxford, 1869), I, 350, 50; III, 338–65

D.N. 31

500. Knighton, Chronicle, II, 151–2, 183

D.N. 379

501. Fasciculi Zizaniorum Magistri Johannis Wyclif, 275 ff, 296–7, 299, 302, 304, from Bodleian MS. E.Mus. 8, 6 502. ROGER DYMOK, “AGAINST THE XII HERESIES OF THE LOLLARDS”, ED. H.S.CRONIN (ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW, XXII, 1907), 295–304, FROM CAMBRIDGE, TRINITY HALL LIBRARY MS.

D.N. 21

503. S.R. II, 125

D.N. 493

504. A.W.Pollard, Fifteenth Century Prose and Verse, 97 ff. 505. THE LANTERN OF LIGHT, ED. L.M.SWINBURN (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1917), 16, 22–3, 31–2, 48, 50, 54–5, 56, 57–8, 59–60

D.N. 45

506. Concilia Magnae Britanniae, III, 314, from Register of Archbishop Arundel

D.N. 49 (i)

507. Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 282 508. JOHN LYDGATE, TROY BOOK (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1906), 60

509. THE EPISCOPAL REGISTER OF ROBERT REDE, BISHOP OF CHICHESTER, 1397–1415, ED. C.DEEDES (SUSSEX RECORD SOCIETY, 1908), 151, FROM LAMBETH MS., ARUNDEL REGISTER, ii D.N. 510. “A London Chronicle for 1413–18”, ed. C.L.Kingsford, English Historical Literature 188 (i) in the Fifteenth Century, 292–3; D.N. 6 and Rot. Parl. IV, 107 MS.

511. The Archbishop of Westminster’s MSS, B. 2

MS.

512. The Archbishop of Westminster’s MSS, B. 2

D.N. 513. Nicolas, Council Proceedings, IV, 89, 99, 105, 107, from B.M., Cottonian MS. 119 (i) Cleopatra, F.IV, and Cottonian, Charter IV, 24 D.N. 85

514. Davies, English Chronicle, 57

n.c.

515. R.Pecock, The Repressor of Overmuch Blaming of the Clergy, c. 1450, ed. C.Babington (Rolls Series, 1860), I, 5, 21, 25, 28, 29, 43, 60, 83, 75, 85, 136, 148, 155, 16

D.N. 85

516. Davies, English Chronicle, 75

D.N. 414

517. Papal Letters, II, 1455–64 (1921)

D.N. 515

518. The Represser of Overmuch Blaming of the Clergy, I, lvii, from B.M., Harleian 7048; and Lambeth MS. 577

MS.

519. B.M., Cottonian, MS. Faustina, C.VII

n.c.

520. Munimenta Academica, ed. H.Anstey (Rolls Series, 1868), I, Pt I, 128

n.c.

521. T.Bradwardine, De Causa Dei Libri Tres, ed. H.Savile (1618), I, 146, 174, 181, 208, 237, 294, 307, 420

n.c.

522. The Philobiblion of Richard de Bury, Bishop of Durham, ed. E.C. Thomas (Basil Blackwell, 1960), 30–1, 155 523. J.A.ROBSON, WYCLIF AND THE OXFORD SCHOOLS (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1961), 324, 57–8, FROM OXFORD, NEW COLLEGE MS. 134

n.c.

524. Johannis Wycliffe Tractatus de Civili Dominio, ed. R.L.Poole and J.Loserth, 4 vols (Wyclif Society, 1885–1904), I, I, 2, 74, 252, 259, 265; IV, 441, 466;

n.c.

and Archbishop Fitzralph of Armagh, De Pauperie Salvatoris, ed. R.L.Poole, De Dominio Divino (Wyclif Society, 1890), 281, 351, 441, from Bodleian, MS. Auct. F, infra, I, 2 525. A.F.LEACH, EDUCATIONAL CHARTERS (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1911), 349, FROM OXFORD, NEW COLLEGE MS.

D.N. 6 526. Rot. Parl. IV, 131 527. H.E.SALTER, “AN OXFORD HALL IN 1424”, ESSAYS IN HISTORY PRESENTED TO R.L.POOLE (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1927), 442 ff., FROM A MS. OF 1424 D.N.

528. Munimenta Academica, I, 285, from Oxford University Archives, A. 87; 0.124; B. 41

520 D.N. 444

529. Willis and Clark, The Architectural History of Cambridge, I, 72

D.N. 520

530. Munimenta Academica, I, 302, from Oxford University Archives, A. 91; B. 51; C. 118

D.N. 520

531. Munimenta Academica, I, 326, from Oxford University Archives, B. 63

D.N. 525

532. A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 402–3, from Cambridge, King’s College MS.

n.c.

533. J.Hey wood and T.Wright, The Ancient Laws of…King’s College, Cambridge and Eton College (1850), 18, from B.M., Harleian MS. 7323

D.N. 444

534. Willis and Clark, The Architectural History of Cambridge, I, 368 535. EPISTOLAE ACADEMICAE OXON, ED. H.ANSTEY, OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY PUBLICATIONS, VOL. 36 (1898), II, 448 (by permission of Oxford Historical Society)

n.c.

536. Statutes of the Colleges of Oxford (1853), II, 47, 60

D.N. 535

537. Epistolae Academicae, II, 495, 500 538. W.NELSON, A FIFTEENTH CENTURY SCHOOL BOOK (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1956), 51, FROM B.M., ARUNDEL MS. 249

D.N. 161

539. Whethamstede, Register, II, 314–15, from B.M., Lansdowne 375

D.N. 525

540. A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 29 ff. from Oxford, Merton College Muniments, 4105

D.N. 525

541. A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 314–16, from Register of John Grandisson, Bishop of Exeter, II, 1192 542. B.RICKBRT, MODERN PHILOLOGY (1926–7), VOL. 24, 251, FROM P.R.O., EXCHEQUER, KING’S REMEMBRANCER, ACCOUNTS VARIOUS, E. 101/509/19 (Copyright. By permission of the University of Chicago Press)

D.N. 21

543. S.R. II, 157 544. J.E.G.DE MONTMORENCY, STATE INTERVENTION IN ENGLISH EDUCATION (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1902), 241–2, FROM YEAR BOOK OF 1410, HILARY TERM, II HEN. IV

D.N. 525

545. A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 398, from Somerset House, Prerogative Court of Canterbury, 3 Luffenham, 16

D.N. 6

546. Rot. Parl. V, 137 547. Historical Manuscripts Commission 9th Report (1883), Pt I, 217, from Ewelme

Almshouse MS.

548. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 19, No. 33

D.N. 525

549. A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 377, 381, from Stratford-on-Avon, Shakespeare Muniments

D.N. 6

550. (i) Rot. Parl. V, 45

D.N. 525

(ii) A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 412, from Chancery Warrants, Series 1

MS.

551. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 19, No. 492

MS.

552. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 44, No. 227

D.N. 525

553. A.F.Leach, Educational Charters, 422, from B.M., Add. MS. 30158

D.N. 140

554. Paston Letters, III, 240, No. 827 555. A.F.LEACH, EARLY YORKSHIRE SCHOOLS (YORKSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 1903), VOL. 23, 109, FROM CAMBRIDGE, SIDNEY SUSSEX COLLEGE MS., AND B.M., COTTONIAN MS. VITELLIUS, E.X

Part IV. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENTS 556. DEVONSHIRE STUDIES, ED. W.G.HOSKINS AND H.P.R.FINBERG (CAPE, 1952), 215–16, FROM P.R.O., EXCHEQUER, ENROLLED ACCOUNTS, E.359, NO. 8B (by permission of Dr W.G.Hoskins) 557. THE CARTE NATIVORUM OF PETERBOROUGH ABBEY, NO. 73, ED. W.T. MELLOWS, M.M.POSTAN AND C.N.L.BROOKE (NORTHANTS RECORD SOCIETY, XX, NO. 73, 1960), FROM PETERBOROUGH, DEAN AND CHAPTER, MS. 39 558. B.H.SLICKER VAN BATH, THE AGRARIAN HISTORY OF WESTERN EUROPE, A.D. 500–1850, TRANS. OLIVE ORDISH (EDWARD ARNOLD, 1963), 138, 180, FROM THE ESTATE ACCOUNTS OF THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER n.c.

559. J.Smyth, The Lives of the Berkeleys (1618), ed. Sir John Maclean (Gloucester, 1883–4), I, 301–3 560. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE MANOR AND BOROUGH OF LEEDS, 1066–1400, ED. J.LE PATOUREL (THORESBY SOCIETY, 1957), 29–42 561. P.R.O. ANCIENT DEEDS (H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE, 1902), VOL. 4, 357, FROM P.R.O., E.40/8768

D.N. 21 562. S.R. II, 311 n.c.

563. Calendar of Letters from the Mayor and Corporation of the City of London, c. 1350–70, ed. R.R.Sharpe (1885), 94 564. E.POWELL, THE RISING IN EAST ANGLIA IN 1381 (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1896), 121–3, FROM LAY POLL-TAX RETURNS OF 1377

n.c.

565. Halmota Prioratus Dunelmensis, containing extracts from the Halmote or Manor Rolls of the Prior and Convent of Durham, ed. J.Booth (Surtees Society, 1889), 148

D.N. 55 566. John of Gaunt’s Register, II, 236 D.N. 559

567. J.Smyth, The Lives of the Berkeleys, II, 5–6, 7

D.N. 62 568. The Monk of Westminster, Continuation of Higden’s Polychronicon, IX, 192–6 D.N. 6

569. Rot. Parl. III, 273 570. G.A.HOLMES, THE ESTATES OF THE HIGHER NOBILITY IN FOURTEENTH CENTURY ENGLAND (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1957), 128, FROM EXCHEQUER, MINISTERS’ ACCOUNTS 571. G.LAPSLEY, ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW (1899), vol. 14, 509–29, FROM P.R.O., DURHAM AUDITOR’S RECORDS, 5, 149

D.N. 6

572. Rot. Parl. IV, 148, No. 35

n.c.

573. J.Raine, Historiae Dunelmensis Scriptores Tres (Selden Society, vol. 9, 1839), Appendix, cccxii, from Prior and Convent of Durham, Reg. III, Parv.

MS.

574. P.R.O., Ministers’ Accounts of the Duchy of Lancaster, Bundle 507, No. 8231

MS., D.N. 478

575. Register of Abbot Richard Ashton, Dean and Chapter of Peter-borough Library

576. K.B.McFARLANE, TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY, 5TH SERIES (1957), VOL. 7, 110, FROM B.M., ROYAL MS. 17. B, xlvii D.N. 352

577. The Marcher Lordships of South Wales, 277–8, from National Library of Wales, MS. Wynnstay, 118

D.N. 211

578. Rous, Historia Regum Angliae, 120

D.N. 244

579. Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1467–77, 505–6

n.c.

580. Grants…of Edward the Fifth, ed. J.G.Nichols (Camden Society, 1854), from B.M., Cottonian MS. Vitellius, E. X 581. E.B.FRYDE, THE WOOL ACCOUNTS OF WILLIAM DE LA POLE (ST ANTHONY’S HALL PUBLICATIONS, 1964), NO. 25, FROM P.R.O., EXCHEQUER, KING’S REMEMBRANCER, ACCOUNTS VARIOUS, E.101/ 457/8

D.N. 55

582. John of Gaunt’s Register, II, 316

MS.

583. Lancashire County Record Office, MS. DDF/445

D.N. 226

584. Select Cases before the Kings Council 103

n.c.

585. The Court Rolls of the manor of Castle Combe, ed. G.P. Scrope, The History of Castle Combe (1852), 223

MS.

586. P.R.O., Exchequer, Customs Accounts, 4 Edw. IV, E.122, Box 73, No. 36

D.N. 21

587. S.R. II, 403–7

D.N. 6

588. Rot. Parl. VI, 55

MS.

589. P.R.O., Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer, Accounts Various, 15 Edw. IV, E. 101/55/8

MS.

590. B.M., Cottonian MS. Vespasian, E. IX 591. THE CELY PAPERS, ED. H.E.MALDEN (CAMDEN SERIES, 1900), No. 105, 121 (by permission of the Royal Historical Society)

D.N. 21

592. S.R. II, 18

D.N. 19

593. Archivio di Stato, Venice, Commemmoriale, IX

D.N. 1

594. Rymer, Foedera, IV, i, 107, from Pat. Roll. 8 Hen. IV 595. THE LIBELLE OF ENGLYSHE POLYCYE, ED. G.WARNER (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1926), I ff.

D.N. 1

596. Rymer, Foedera, V, i, 39, 79, from Pat. Roll, 15 Hen. VI, etc.

*Bureau der Rijkscommissie voor vaderlandse Geschiedenis

597. H.J.SMIT, BRONNEN TOT DE GESCHIBDBNIS VAN DEN HANDEL MET ENGELAND, ETC., VOL. 2, 1435–85 (THE HAGUE, RIJKS GESCHIED-KUNDIGB PUBLICATION, 1928), 735–6, NO. 1187, FROM P.R.O., EXCHEQUER, KING’S REMEMBRANCER’S MEMORANDA ROLL, 18 HEN. VI, EASTER TERM (by permission*)

D.N. 19

598. Archivio di Stato, Venice, Senato Mar, I, 21

D.N. 597

599. Smit, Bronnen, vol. 2, 751, No. 1213, from Gemeentearchief, Middelburg

D.N. 188 (i)

600. C.L.Kingsford, English Historical Literature in the 15th Century, 362, from B.M., Cottonian Roll II

D.N. 597

601. Smit, Bronnen, vol. 2, 897, No. 1398, from P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 17

D.N. 21

602. S.R. II, 392–6, 395

MS.

603. Antwerp City Archives, Act Book 604. THE PORT BOOKS OR LOCAL CUSTOMS ACCOUNTS OF SOUTHAMPTON FOR THE REIGN OF EDWARD IV, ED. D.B.QUINN (SOUTHAMPTON RECORD SOCIETY, 1937), 1 (1469–71), 45, 46, 47 (by permission of Southampton Record Series, successor to the Record Society, and the City Archivist, on behalf of the City of Southampton)

D.N. 6

605. (i) Rot. Parl. VI, 65

D.N. 1

(ii) Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 36, from French Roll, 14 Edw. IV 606. M.SELLARS, THE YORK MERCHANTS AND MERCHANT ADVENTURERS, 1356–1917 (SURTEES SOCIETY, 1918), 75, 79

D.N. 158

607. Cal. S.P., Venice, I, 148

D.N. 21

608. S.R. II, 489

MS.

609. Lancashire County Record Office, MS. DDHe/75/1 610. THE LITTLE RED BOOK OF BRISTOL, ED. F.B.BICKLEY (BRISTOL RECORD SOCIETY, 1900), II, 2

D.N. 610

611. The Little Red Book of Bristol, II, 29

n.c.

612. Reliquiae Antiquae, ed. T.Wright (1845), I, 240, from B.M., Arundel MS. 292 613. (i) CALENDARS OF LETTER BOOKS F, H AND L OF THE CITY OF LONDON, ED. R.R.SHARPE (1904, 1907, 1912), BOOK F, 1337–52 (1904), 237 (by permission of the Corporation of London)

n.c.

(ii), (iii) Munimenta Gildhallae Londoniensis: Liber Albus, ed. H.T. Riley (Rolls Series, 1849), 461–3, 41

D.N. 613 (i)

(iv) R.R.Sharpe, Letter Book L (1912), 73, 132

D.N. 371

614. Records of the Borough of Leicester, II, 106

n.c.

615. English Gilds, ed. L.Toulmin Smith (Early English Text Society, 1870), 155, 160, 376, 382

D.N. 263

616. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 318, from London Letter Book G

D.N. 263

617. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 365, from London Letter Book G 618. A.AMHERST, A HISTORY OF GARDENING IN ENGLAND (QUARITCH, 1896), 27 (by permission of Lord Rockley of Lytchett Heath)

D.N. 263

619. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 386, from London Letter Book H 620. THE CHESTER PLAYS, ED. H. DEIMLING (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, E.S., 62, 1892), 51–8 621. HISTORICAL MANUSCRIPTS COMMISSION: REPORT ON THE MSS OF THE CORPORATION OF BEVERLEY (1900), 65, 66, 67, 142

D.N. 263

622. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 467, from London Letter Book H

D.N. 613 (i)

623. Calendar of Letter Books, H, 266; I, 86, 93

D.N. 615

624. English Gilds, ed. L.Toulmin Smith 625. CALENDAR OF SELECT PLEAS AND MEMORANDA OF THE CITY OF

LONDON, 1381–1412, ED. A.H.THOMAS (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1932), 209–15 MS.

626. Lancashire Record Office, MS. DDHO/M, 686 (310)

D.N. 263

627. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 534, from London Letter Book H

D.N. 542

628. E.Rickert, “Documents and Records: Extracts from a 14th c. Account Book”, Modern Philology (1926–7), vol. 24, 113–19, from P.R.O., E.101/509/19

MS.

629. P.R.O., Chancery Extents on Debts, 21 Ric. II, 0.131/48/25 630. E.P.HAMMOND, ANGLIA, VOL. 20 (1898), 410 ff., FROM B.M., HARLEIAN MS. 542 (by permission of Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen)

D.N. 263

631. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 562, from London Letter Book F 632. L.F.SALZMAN, BUILDING IN ENGLAND DOWN TO 1540 (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1952), 483, FROM ST PAUL’S CATHEDRAL, MS. 1462 633. R.W.CHAMBERS AND M.DAUNT, A BOOK OF LONDON ENGLISH, 1384– 1425 (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1931), 121, FROM LONDON, GUILDHALL MS.

D.N. 633

634. Chambers and Daunt, A Book of London English, 139, from The London Brewers’ First Book

D.N. 633

635. Chambers and Daunt, A Book of London English, 168, from The London Brewers’ First Book 636. RECORDS OF THE CITY OF NORWICH, ED. W.HUDSON AND J.C. TINGEY (1906), I, 279 (by permission of the City and County of Norwich)

D.N. 606

637. The York Merchants and Merchant Adventurers, 33–4 638. HISTORICAL MANUSCRIPTS COMMISSION, 9TH REPORT (1883), PT I, APPENDIX, 139, FROM RECORDS OF THE CITY OF CANTERBURY, COFFERER’S ACCOUNTS 639. A.H.JOHNSON, THE HISTORY OF THE WORSHIPFUL COMPANY OF DRAPERS OF LONDON (OXFORD, 1914), I, 214–15, FROM DRAPERS’ HALL, BOOK OF EVIDENCE A (by permission of the Drapers’ Company) 640. THE BROKAGB BOOK OF SOUTHAMPTON, I, 1439–40, ED. B.D.M. BUNYARD (SOUTHAMPTON RECORD SOCIETY, 1941), XV–XVI 7, 9, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 27, 29, 41, 43 (by permission of Southampton Record Series, successor to the Record Society, and the City Archivist, on behalf of the City of Southampton)

n.c.

641. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London (2nd Series, 1871), vol. 5, 121–4, from Inventory of the Property of the Gild of the Holy Trinity of Coventry, 1441

MS.

642. Shrewsbury Borough Archives, Assembly Book No. I

D.N. 636

643. Hudson and Tingey, Records of the City of Norwich, II, 230, from the Old Free Book

n.c.

644. Archaeologia, I (1770), 91, 93, 94, from a petition of Winchester to the king, 30 Hen. VI

D.N. 209

645. Acts of the Court of the Mercers’ Company, 1453–1527, 58, 61, 65, 101, 138, 145, 159, 277, 280, 284, from the Act Book 1 at Mercers’ Hall, London

D.N. 613 (i)

646. R.R.Sharpe, Letter Book L, 21, 129, 160, 185

D.N. 110

647. The Historical Collections of a Citizen of London in the 15th Century, 222

D.N. 638

648. H.M.C. 9th Report, Pt I, Appendix, 141, from Records of the City of Canterbury, Chamberlain’s Accounts

D.N. 374

649. Coventry Leet Book, II, 405, 407

MS.

650. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, 64/764

MS.

651. P.R.O., Duchy of Lancaster Warrants, D.L. 42/19

D.N. 374

652. Coventry Leet Book, II, 430, 440, 510

MS.

653. Lancashire County Record Office, MS. DDBL/21/1

MS.

654. Lancashire County Record Office, MS. DDX/293/34

D.N. 21

655. S.R. II, 74–5

D.N. 1

656. Rymer, Foedera, IV, ii, 201, from Close Roll, 5 Hen. V

MS.

657. Lancashire County Record Office, MS. DDN/29 658. THE BUILDING ACCOUNTS OF TATTERSHALL CASTLE, ED. AND TRANS. W.D.SIMPSON (LINCOLN RECORD SOCIETY, 1960), 44–50

MS.

659. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, C. 1/94/22

D.N. 87

660. H.Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series, I (1827), 110, from B.M., Add. MS. 4609 661. “MS. COLLECTION OF ORDINANCES OF CHIVALRY”, H.A.DILLON, ARCHAEOLOGIA, VOL. 57 (1900), 43 (by permission of the Society of Antiquaries of London)

D.N. 6

662. Rot. Parl. V, 285, 286

MS.

663. Lancashire County Record Office, MS. DDTR/3/156

D.N. 559

664. J.Smyth, The Lives of the Berkeleys, H, 109, 110, 111, 113

n.t.

665. VESPASIANO DA BISTICCI, VITE DI UOMINI ILLUSTRI DEL SECOLO XV, ED. L.FRATI (1892), I, 322

D.N. 374

666. Coventry Leet Book, 373

n.c.

667. The Plumpton Correspondence, ed. T.Stapleton (Camden Society, 1839), 31–3

n.c.

668. William Worcester, The Boke of Noblesse, ed. J.G.Nichols (Roxburghe Club, 1860), 76

D.N. 1

669. Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 142, from Pat. Roll, I Ric. III

D.N. 493

670. A.W.Pollard, Fifteenth Century Prose and Verse, 234 ff., from Caxton’s Prologue to his edition of Malory’s King Arthur (1485)

MS.

671. Longleat, MS. 11239B, Garden account of Glastonbury Abbey, 1333–4

MS.

672. William Langland, Vision of Piers Plowman, B Text, X, 999–106 673. D.KNOOP, N.B.LEWIS AND G.P.JONES, “SOME BUILDING ACTIVITIES OF JOHN, LORD COBHAM”, ARS QUATUOR CORONATORUM, XLV (1932), FROM B.M., HARLEIAN CHARTERS, 48.E.44 AND 37 (by permission of Emeritus Professor G.P.Jones, Professor N.B. Lewis, and Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076) 674. C.L.KINGSFORD, “A LONDON MERCHANT’ HOUSE AND ITS OWNERS”, ARCHAEOLOGIA (1923–4), VOL. 74, 137–58, FROM P.R.O., TREASURY OF THE RECEIPT, ANCIENT DEEDS, A.1779; AND LONDON, GUILDHALL, HUSTINGS ROLL, 196 (10) (by permission of the Society of Antiquaries of London)

D.N. 1 675. Rymer, Foedera, III, IV, 105, from Exchequer, K.R., Accounts, 473/21, L.F.Salzman, Building in England to 1540 (Oxford, 1952), 473 676. THE HOUSEHOLD BOOK OF DAME ALICE DE BRYENE OF ACTON HALL, SEPTEMBER 1412-SEPTBMBER 1413, TRANS. M.K.DALE, ED. V.B. REDSTONE (SUFFOLK INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 1913), 84– 6, FROM P.R.O., CHANCERY MISCELLANEA, 4/8B n.c.

677. T.Wright, A Volume of Vocabularies (1857), 197, from B.M., Royal MS., 17.C.XVII

MS., D.N. 478

678. The Register of Abbot Richard Ashton, MS. 2 in Dean and Chapter Library, Peterborough Cathedral

n.c.

679. Wills and Inventories from the Registers of the Commissary of Bury St Edmunds and the Archdeacon of Sudbury, ed. S.Tymms (Camden Society, 1850), 45

MS.

680. Salisbury Diocesan Archives, Sub-Dean’s Act Book, 1476–8

D.N. 21

681. S.R. I, 380

D.N. 1 682. Rymer, Foedera, III, IV, 105, 106, from Exchequer, K.R., Accounts, 473/7 683. THE MASTER OF GAME, BY EDWARD, 2ND DUKE OF YORK, ED. W.A. AND F.BAILLIE-GROHMAN (CHATTO & WINDUS, 1909), 188 (by permission of the Editor’s Literary Estate and Chatto & Windus Ltd) n.c.

684. Two Fifteenth-Century Cookery Books, ed. T.Austin (Early English Text Society, 1888), 29, 47, 72, 73, 79, 98, from B.M., Harleian MS. 279 (c. 1430); and B.M., Harleian,

4016 (c. 1450) D.N. 109

685. Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, 168, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Julius, B.I

n.c.

686. W.Dugdale, Antiquities of Warwickshire (1656), 354–6, from B.M., Add. MS. 28, 564

n.c.

687. John Russell, The Boke of Nurture, ed. F.J.Furnivall, The Babees Book (Early English Text Society, 1868), 187

n.c.

688. Des Böhmischen Herrn Leos von Rozmital Ritter-, Hof-, und Pilger-Reise durch die Abendlande, 1465–7 (Stuttgart, 1844), 152 ff; TRANS. COMPARED WITH M. LETTS, THE TRAVELS OF LEO VON ROZMITAL (HAKLUYT SOCIETY, 2ND SERIES (CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1957), VOL. 108)

n.c.

689. S.Bentley, Excerpta Historica (1831), 176 ff, collated from B.M., Lansdowne MS. 285; Harleian MS. 4632; and College of Heralds, Arundel MS. 48

D.N. 689

690. (i) S.Bentley, Excerpta Historica, 234–5, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Nero, C.IX

D.N. 140

(ii) Paston Letters, II, 317–19, No. 585

D.N. 125 (i)

(iii) Gregory, Chronicle, 237–8

D.N. 188(i)

691. “The Record of Bluemantle Pursuivant”, ed. C.L.Kingsford, English Historical Literature in the 15th Century, 386–8, from B.M., Cottonian, Julius, C.6

D.N. 21

692. S.R. II, 468–70 693. E.A.BOND AND W.D.SELBY, LIFE RECORDS OF CHAUCER (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1900), PT. IV, 153, 191, 202, 218, 286, 292, FROM VARIOUS EXCHEQUER AND KING’S BENCH RECORDS

D.N. 1

694. Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 79, from Close Roll, 37 Edw. III

n.c.

695. The Fabric Rolls of York Minster and Illustrative Documents, ed. J.Raine (Surtees Society, 1859), 181–2 696. JOHN OF ARDERNE, TREATISE OF FISTULA IN ANO, ED. D’ARCY POWER (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1910), 4

D.N. 696

697. John of Arderne, Treatise of Fistula in Ano, 17, 23, 87

D.N. 672

698. Vision of Piers Plowman, B Text, V, 304–69; VI, 282–332; XVII, 315–26; C Text, X, 71–97 699. MEDICAL WORKS OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY, ED. G.HENSLOW (CHAPMAN & HALL, 1899), 27, 35, 37, 67, 77, 90, 95, 105, 113, 114 134, 140, 38

D.N. 387

700. Anglo-Norman Letters and Petitions, 118

701. P.MEYER, ROMANIA, XXXII (1903), 49–58, FROM CAMBRIDGE, TRINITY COLLEGE, MSS 39, 40; B.M., ADD. MS. 17,716; AND CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY MS. Dd. 12.23 (by permission of M.Felix Leccy, College de France) 702. THE KINGIS QUAIR, ED. W.M.MACKENZIE (FABER & FABER LTD, 1939), 53 703. A.M.T.AMHERST, ARCHAEOLOGIA, VOL. 54 (1893), 157–67, FROM CAMBRIDGE, TRINITY COLLEGE MS. (by permission of the Society of Antiquaries of London) D.N. 1

704. Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 13

D.N. 667

705. Plumpton Correspondence, lxxvi–lxxvii, from Plumpton Coucher Book

D.N. 1

706. Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 169, from Pat. Roll, 9 Edw. IV

D.N. 140

707. Paston Letters, II, 350, No. 609; 363, No. 617

D.N. 203

708. Stonor Letters and Papers, 6

D.N. 140

709. Paston Letters, III, 300, No. 869 710. A.G.LITTLE, ARCHAEOLOGIA CANTIANA, VOL. 54 (1941), 2–4, FROM A POEM BY JAMES RYMAN, FRANCISCAN FRIAR, FROM A CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY MS. (by permission of the Council of the Kent Archaeological Society)

D.N. 140

711. Paston Letters, III, 314, No. 881

D.N. 244

712. Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1350–54, 530, 538 713, THE TRAVELS OF SIR JOHN MANDEVILLE, C. 1366, ED. P.HAMELIUS (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1919), 3, 121, 179

n.c.

714. P.Meyer, Revue critique d’histoire et de littérature, vol. 10 (1870), 373–404, from a French conversation manual, c. 1396 715. THE TALE OF BERYN, ED. F.J.FURNIVALL AND W.G.STONE (OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY, 1909), 1–14, FROM THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND’S UNIQUE MS.

D.N. 612

716. T.Wright, Reliquiae Antiquae, 1 (1845), 2–3, from Cambridge, Trinity College MS. R. 3.19

D.N. 242

717. Records of the Borough of Nottingham, II, 220–1, 364

MS.

718. Durham, Dean and Chapter Muniments, Locellus 25, No. 2

D.N. 243

719. “The Black Book of the Household of Edward IV”, 135, 159

D.N. 244

720. Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1391–6, 551

MS.

721. B.M., Harleian MS. 2057

D.N. 302

722. Select Cases in Chancery, 134 723. (i) THE PASTON LETTERS, ED. N.DAVIS (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1958), 9

D.N. 140

(ii), (iii), (iv) Paston Letters, I, 105, No. 77; 207, No. 155; 213, No. 159

MS.

724. Cambridge, University Library MS. Mm. I. 45

MS.

725. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 19, No. 471

MS.

726. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 19, No. 478 727. MRS G.H.RADFORD, TRANSACTIONS OF THE DEVON ASSOCIATION (1903), VOL. 35, 264–8, FROM THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND’S MSS, VOL. 475 (by permission of Miss Ursula Radford and the Devonshire Association) 728. MRS G.H.RADFORD, TRANS. OF THE DEVONSHIRE ASSOC. (1912), VOL. 44, 261, FROM CITY OF EXETER, MAYOR’S S COURT ROLL, 34 HEN. VI (by permission of Miss Ursula Radford and the Devon-shire Association) 729. C.L.KINGSFORD, PREJUDICE AND PROMISE IN FIFTEENTH CENTURY ENGLAND (OXFORD, CLARENDON PRESS, 1925), 200–3, FROM P.R.O., EARLY CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS

MS.

730. P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 31, No. 516

NOTE ON DATES Until 1752 the year began in England on Lady Day, 25 March, not 1 January when we should now start a New Year. Thus the reign of Edward III began on 25 January of what was then reckoned as 1326 and what we call 1327. Throughout this volume the dates have been adjusted to our reckoning of time, except in rare instances when the reader is specially informed of the fact.

ABBREVIATIONS B.I.H.R.

Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research

B.J.R.L.

Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, Manchester

B.M.

British Museum

Econ. Hist. Rev.

Economic History Review

E.H.R.

English Historical Review

Exchequer K.R.

Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer’s Department

Exchequer L.T.R.

Exchequer, Lord Treasurer’s Remembrancer’s Department

Exchequer T.R.

Exchequer, Treasury of the Receipt

P.R.O.

Public Record Office

Rot. Parl.

Rotuli Parliamentorum

GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHIES, BOOKS OF REFERENCE AND MODERN WORKS DEALING GENERALLY WITH ENGLISH HISTORY BETWEEN 1327 AND 1485 A. BIBLIOGRAPHIES, BOOKS OF REFERENCE AND GUIDES TO ORIGINAL SOURCES C.Gross, The Sources and Literature of English History from the earliest times to 1485 (2nd edn, 1915), is still the most comprehensive annotated guide to the original sources for this period; but it is over fifty years since this revised edition appeared, and until the promised new version is published, it needs to be supplemented by other works. Volumes 7 and 8 of the Cambridge Medieval History (1932 and 1936) provide very detailed bibliographies of both original and secondary sources; and of course it is not only the chapters on English history that supply bibliographies useful for the themes of this book. M.McKisack, The Fourteenth Century (1959), and E.F.Jacob, The Fifteenth Century (1961), volumes 5 and 6 in the Oxford History of England series, have valuable annotated bibliographies. The Annual Bulletins of Historical Literature, published by the Historical Association, review briefly the most important of the original and secondary sources in books and periodicals published during the previous year. The critical bibliographies in L.J.Paetow, Guide to the study of medieval history (revised edn, 1931), A. Potthast, Bibliotheca historica medii aevi (2nd edn, 1896), and A.Molinier, Les sources de l’histoire de France des origines aux guerres d’Italic (1494) (6 vols, Paris, 1901–6), are all useful for the European background, though all are now to some degree out-of-date. A new edition of Potthast’s work is in process of appearing as Repertorium fontium historiae medii aevi, vol. I (Rome, 1962). C.L. Kingsford, English Historical Literature in the Fifteenth Century (Oxford, 1913), discusses the narrative sources for this period, including correspondence and political poetry, and prints a score of sources in the appendix. The University of London Intermediate Source-Books of History: No I, Illustrations of Chaucer’s England, ed. D.Hughes (1918); No II, England under the Yorkists, ed. I.D.Thornley (1921); No in, England under the Lancastrians, ed. J.H.Flemming (1921), are useful collections of translated documents, and Nos II and in have detailed prefaces surveying the sources for the period covered by the book. For the immense collection of documents in the Public Record Office the new edition (1963, 2 vols) of M.Giuseppi’s Guide to the Manuscripts preserved in the Public Record Office offers a general conspectus, with useful brief introductions to the various classes. V.H.Galbraith, An introduction to the use of the Public Records (Oxford, 1934), supplements this. For government publications in general, including those of the Historical Manuscripts Commission cataloguing municipal and private collections, see Record Publications, Sectional List No 24 (H.M.S.O.). For the manuscripts in the British Museum, Arundell Esdaile, The British Museum Library (1946), gives a good introduction to the various collections, with particulars of the appropriate catalogues. The

inquirer who is in a hurry may find more useful T.C.Skeat’s British Museum: The Catalogues of the Manuscript Collections, published by the Trustees of the British Museum in 1953. For other repositories in London, see R.A.Rye, The Students’ Guide to the Libraries of London (3rd edn, 1927). Since the last war a great deal of material has become available in County Record Offices. Some, like Essex and Lancashire, have published helpful guides, and information about collections of manuscripts in them all can be sought in the National Register of Archives Bulletins, and its “Lists of Accessions to Repositories”. It should be remembered that county record offices often contain not only documents of royal and seignorial but of diocesan administration, by recent agreements with the ecclesiastical authorities. For the shires for which it has been published, The Victoria History of the Counties of England is a valuable guide to the sources. The later volumes are written with a wider conception of the scope of history than are the earlier ones. For the publication of both central and local records by societies see the British Records Association Pamphlet No 3 (1951), Handlist of Record Publications, by Sir Robert Somerville, and E.L.C.Mullins, Texts and Calendars: an analytical guide (Royal Historical Society, Guides and Handbooks, No 7, 1958). The latter is the best guide to serial publications generally, whether they are government publications, like the P.R.O.calendars, documents published by specialist societies like the Selden Society or the volumes of local record and history societies. Other Guides and Handbooks of the Royal Historical Society of use to the student of this period are No 2, Handbook of British Chronology (2nd edn, ed. F.M.Powicke and E.B.Fryde, 1961); No 3, Medieval Libraries of Great Britain (ed. N.R.Ker, 2nd edn, 1964); No 4, Handbook of Dates (ed. C.R.Cheney, 2nd edn, 1961). The student who wishes to read documents in the original manuscripts will find useful J.H.Baxter and C.Johnson, Medieval Latin WordList from British and Irish Sources (revised by R.C.Latham, 1965), and A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles (11 vols in 18 parts, Oxford, 1888–1933, generally known as the Oxford English Dictionary, ed. J.A.H. Murray, H.Bradley, W.A.Craigie and C.T.Onions). For French words the best available work of reference is probably F.Godefroy, Dictionnaire de l’ancienne langue française (10 vols, 1881–1902), but it took no account of the vocabulary of French works printed in England. Both the Selden Society and the Anglo-Norman Text Society have promised medieval French dictionaries; the latter’s may appear in 1970. For an introduction to the handwriting of the period, see C.Johnson and C.H.Jenkinson, English Court Hand A.D. 1066 to 1500 (2 vols, Oxford, 1915), and L.C.Hector, The Handwriting of English Documents (1958). B. SECONDARY WORKS The Oxford histories by M.McKisack and E.F.Jacob, mentioned above, form the most up-to-date detailed surveys of the field generally. G.A.Holmes, The Later Middle Ages, 1272–1485 (Edinburgh, 1962), is an attractive and stimulating analysis. V.H.H.Green’s The Later Plantagenets (1955) is a useful survey, with good genealogical tables. A.R.Myers, A History of England in the Late Middle Ages (6th edn, 1965), tries to give an impression of the creative variety and complexity of this age. A volume issued as a companion to this and the previous volume by Lady Stenton in the same series of the Pelican History of England is J.J.Bagley, Historical Interpretation: The Sources of English History, 1066–1540 (Pelican Books, 1965).

For the European background, see the appropriate chapters in vols 7 and 8 of the Cambridge Medieval History, mentioned above; the Histoire Generate, ed. G.Glotz, vols 5–10 (1937–41); C.W.Previté-Orton, A History of Europe, 1198–1378, and W.T.Waugh, A History of Europe, 1378–1494, both in the Methuen History of England series (3rd edns, 1951, 1949); D.P.Waley, Late-Medieval Europe from St Louis to Luther (Oxford, 1964).

Part I THE POLITICAL FRAMEWORK

INTRODUCTION To divide English history into periods is to part the waters of a continuous river; yet the crisis of 1326–7 is an important bend in the flow. The “deposition of Edward II”, says Professor McKisack, “is the great divide in our later medieval history, the greatest since 1066”.1 Previous kings might have had their setbacks, but no king since the Norman Conquest had been deposed and murdered. The English monarchy had been strong at a very early date in the history of Western Europe; and this had differentiated the evolution of the English realm from that of other states of Western Europe. The disaster that had overtaken Edward II, at the instigation of his own queen, was therefore all the more a dark shadow over the early years of his son’s reign; and “the most urgent need for Edward II’s successor was the need at all costs to prevent a recurrence of the disaster of 1326–7”.2 A warrior by inclination, deeply imbued with the chivalric ideas of his age, Edward III was likely from the first, when he had overthrown the tyranny of Roger Mortimer and Isabella, to look to a policy of war abroad which should “busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels”. The success of this policy depended on the maintenance of harmony at home with politically powerful elements and the reconciliation of former opponents or their sons. Here again, the needs of policy chimed in with the inclinations of the king. Affable and courteous to all, seldom giving way to anger, he felt no temptation to disgrace himself by shunning the company of his nobles for that of lowborn companions, such as “singers, actors, grooms, sailors, and others of this kind, artists and mechanics”.3 Edward’s only quarrel with leading magnates, that with John Stratford, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1340–1, ended in complete reconciliation; and it was a fitting symbol of his general policy that the descendants of two of the greatest rivals of his father’s reign, Hugh le Despenser and Roger Mortimer, served side by side in the Crécy campaign as brothers in arms along with the flower of the English baronage.4 This policy of harmony at home combined with military adventure abroad was further encouraged by the circumstances of Edward III’s seizure of power from Isabella and Mortimer. During their three years’ tenure of authority they had alienated every important section of the ruling class; yet so greatly was Mortimer feared, and so careful were his precautions against rebellion that it took a considerable effort to overthrow him. Isabella and Mortimer had aroused disgust by the flaunting of their relationship and their vindictiveness towards a fallen king. They had provoked resentment by their greed. Conscious of their unpopularity, they made peace first with France (1327),5 then with Scotland (1328);6 but these acts, intended to strengthen them by relieving them of the 1

History, vol. 45 (1960), 5. Ibid. 6. Also Documents Nos 6, 23. 3 Gesta Edwardi de Caernarvon, Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward II and Edward III (Rolls Series, II, 91). 4 D[oc.]. N[o.] 310. 5 D.N. I. 6 D.N. I, 2. 2

The political framework

3

heavy burden of costly and unsuccessful wars, increased the unrest at home. Many barons, already repelled by Mortimer’s rapacity, were still further alienated by the ambition which led him to acquire the vaunting title of Earl of March. The growing unpopularity of his rule caused him to be increasingly apprehensive and to look for conspiracies against himself. So Edmund Earl of Kent was encouraged to believe that his half-brother, Edward II, was still alive and to plot his restoration; then he was executed as a traitor.1 This act sealed Mortimer’s doom, for no one, however exalted, could now feel safe. A conspiracy was formed by a large group of magnates, including the Earl of Lancaster,2 brother of the chief opponent of Edward II, who had already tried to oppose Mortimer and been heavily fined for his effort; and this conspiracy was supported by the young king, who chafed at his shameful tutelage. At Nottingham Castle in October 1330 they gained entry by an underground passage and Mortimer was seized; in November he was executed as a traitor after an indictment of fourteen counts.3 So Edward III came to power, not as the leader of an ultra-royalist reaction, but as the head of a group of nobles many of whom had opposed his father. This alone would have made it difficult to pursue a policy of hostility to seignorial powers and ambitions; and reinforced by the other considerations already mentioned, it set the stage for the policy of harmony at home and conquest abroad which Edward was to pursue as long as he had the strength to do so. His first military adventure was in Scotland, which was weakened and confused by the death of Robert Bruce in 1329 and the accession of a five year old son, David H.Edward supported a band of disinherited Scottish magnates, headed by the Bruces’ rival, Edward Balliol, and with English help they won striking victories at Dupplin Moor (1332)4 and Halidon Hill (1333).5 Hence Edward Balliol could be crowned king of Scots but at the price of ceding to the English king a large part of the low-lands.6 This discredited him irrevocably in the eyes of the Scots and the war7 ended in 1341 with the complete expulsion of the English. This did Edward’s prestige no harm, however, for by this time English attention was taken up by the greater struggle in France. The English possessions in France had been a source of friction for generations. The English monarchy could not fail to defend them without loss of prestige and power, at home as well as abroad; but the French monarchy tried to subordinate all its fiefs, such as Gascony, more closely as its power grew stronger.8 The hostility engendered by this chronic irritant inflamed other causes of dispute—English protection of discontented French nobles, French support of the Scots, Flemish appeals for aid to Edward against the King of France, the efforts of both sides to build up alliances in the Netherlands and Germany against each other, the sea fights of English and Norman sailors.9 Added to all these specific causes of conflict were English irritation at the rejection of Edward’s claim 1

D.N. 3. D.N. 5. 3 D.N. 6. 4 D.N. 7. 5 D.N. 9. 6 D.N. 8, 10. 7 D.N. 11. 8 D.N. 4. 9 D.N. 13, 14. 2

English historical documents

4

to the French throne and, as Froissart vividly shows, the ardent desire for war which animated the English court.10 Though the chivalric Philip VI was preparing for a crusade against the Turks, Edward III made it clear in 1336 that he was determined on war against France. He tried hard to raise huge sums of money for the war, and to build up a network of alliances with the princes and powers on France’s eastern borders, from the Emperor1 down to the Flemish cloth towns, concerned for their wool trade with England. In November 1337 what proved to be the Hundred Years War began with an English attack on Philip’s ally, the count of Flanders.2 From 1337 to 1340 Edward tried to take advantage of his alliance with the Flemish cloth towns to mount a big invasion of France from the north-east.3 The attempt was marked by a resounding English naval victory at Sluys which secured English command of the sea for many years,4 and by the acceptance by Edward III of the title of king of France in 13405 to please his Flemish burgess allies6 and protect them against the wrath of Philip and their count. But otherwise the plan was such a dismal failure by November 1340 that Edward rushed home in anger to punish the officials whom he felt to be responsible7 and the Archbishop of Canterbury whom he regarded as the ringleader.8 In so doing he stumbled into a crisis of opposition. The magnates rallied to the support of the archbishop, for they felt that the king’s high-handed methods might later be used against them. At a parliament necessitated by the king’s financial plight, he was forced to agree to the trial of magnates by their peers in parliament and to the appointment of his ministers and officials in parliament.9 The commons further demanded that tax accounts should be audited by commissioners responsible to parliament, and that the king’s judges and officials should swear to observe the Great Charter and other statutes, and act according to law. But though he repudiated his concession five months later, as extorted under duress,10 he learned from this crisis never to provoke another; and from then until 1369 there was complete harmony between king and magnates on the basis of concessions by the king to the magnates at home, cooperation in warfare in France and magnificence and largesse at the royal court. England and France had made a truce in 1340 after the fiasco in Flanders but in 1341 a fresh opportunity for the English came with a disputed succession to the dukedom in Brittany.11 Soon England and France supported the rival claimants, and Philip VI’s attacks on the English protégé in time of truce gave Edward an excuse to denounce the truce with France in 1345. In that year and the following one, Henry earl of Lancaster, 10

D.N. 12. D.N. 13, 16. 2 D.N. 15. 3 D.N. 17. 4 D.N. 20. 5 D.N. 18. 6 Cf. D.N. 19. 7 D.N. 22. 8 D.N. 23. 9 D.N. 247, 248. Cf. D.N. 21 for the insular feeling shown in this parliament. 10 D.N. 250. 11 D.N. 24. 1

The political framework

5

son of the king’s ally in 1330, added to his renown by three successful raids from Gascony far into enemy territory. In 1346 Edward himself led a small army from the Cotentin through Normandy nearly to the walls of Paris and then turned north to join his allies the Flemings. Overtaken at Crécy in August 1346 by a much larger French army, he won a brilliant victory by the tactics of Dupplin Moor and Halidon Hill—the use of long-bow archers to break up the opposing army and stop its cavalry charges, and dismounted men-at-arms to finish off the thoroughly disordered foe.12 This victory brought Edward immense prestige but no strategic gains. From Crécy he advanced to Calais which he had to besiege for almost a year before it surrendered.13 Most of the inhabitants were expelled and replaced by Englishmen, and the town became for the next two hundred years a valuable military bridgehead for the English in France. In October 1347 Edward returned to England, his army laden with booty, to begin a round of triumphant festivities. His prestige had been enhanced by other English victories of 1346 and 1347. David II, King of Scots, had invaded the north of England to help his French ally, but in October 1346 he was severely defeated and captured at Neville’s Cross by the Nevilles, Percies and the Archbishop of York.1 Lodged in the Tower of London, he was joined there next year by Charles of Blois, the French-supported claimant to the duchy of Brittany, who had been captured in the siege of La Roche Derrien.2 And not only was Edward’s prestige increased by these successes but his popularity was enhanced by the prosperity which the war brought to various classes in England. Successful war produced rich booty and valuable prisoners to hold to ransom, and the wages paid by the king for service in his army benefited different orders of society from nobles to simple archers.3 The supply of food and clothing for the army enriched not only the contractors but those who supplied them in town and country. It is true that the war boom received a check from the Black Death, a deadly form of the highly infectious bubonic plague. Carried from the east by black rats, it reached England in July 1348 and raged for over a year;4 the mortality is not easy to estimate, but it is generally thought that the plague carried away about a third of England’s population. There were further attacks of the plague in 1361–2 and 1369, so that even allowing for a high birth-rate, by 1370 the population may have been only two-thirds what it had been in 1340. The mortality was especially great amongst the lower orders and in the insanitary towns; but the various attacks claimed many notable victims. The most illustrious was Henry of Lancaster, who died in 1361, mourned by his contemporaries as the pattern of English chivalry. But these deaths did not lessen the martial ardour of the king and his lords. Even while the first attack of the plague was ravaging the country, the newly founded Order of the Garter5 celebrated St George’s Day at Windsor with splendour in 1349.6 St George had originally been the patron saint of all warriors; by the widely 12

D.N. 26. D.N. 30; cf. D.N. 310. 1 D.N. 27. 2 D.N. 29. 3 D.N. 28. 4 D.N. 31. 5 D.N. 25. 6 D.N. 32. 13

English historical documents

6

publicised foundation of this Order in his honour, Edward was proclaiming to the chivalry of Europe that St George had taken the English into his special favour. The continued military and naval successes of the English ensured the permanence and prestige of the Order, which encouraged the development of lay and national orders of chivalry in Western Europe. Edward’s chance of fresh victories7 in France was to come from the political and military ineptitude of the King of France, John the Good, who ascended the throne in 1350. Fearing his kinsman, Charles the Bad, King of Navarre, who, but for the illustrates the way in which English soldiers, looking for employment wherever there was a chance of booty, helped the English claimant to the duchy of Brittany, John de Montfort. The battle of Mauron was a great victory for English arms; amongst the French who fell there were some fourteen knights of King John’s Order of the Star, newly founded to rival the Order of the Garter. Under the weight of this disaster the Order of the Star collapsed, and the English could boast that St George, the patron saint of warriors, was clearly on their side. Henceforth St George was adopted more and more as the patron saint of England. Cf. Yves Renouard, “L’Ordre de la Jarretière et l’Ordre de l’Étoile”, Le Moyen Age, 55 (1949), 281–300.operation of the Salic Law, would have been King of France, John fell into a violent quarrel with him. Thereupon Charles invited Edward to land in France; and in 1355 devastating raids were made far into France from Calais and from Bordeaux by Edward and by his eldest son, the Black Prince. The next year Henry Duke of Lancaster made a raid into Normandy from La Hogue, and the Black Prince marched right from Gascony to the Loire to try to meet him. Finding the river impassable, the prince turned back and was overtaken by King John and his army at Poitiers.1 There he won a victory even more complete than that of Crécy; King John and his youngest son were taken prisoner2 and joined the King of Scots in the Tower of London. It remained to gather the fruits of these victories. In October 1357 David II accepted the treaty of Berwick, whereby he was freed in return for a promised ransom of a hundred thousand marks.3 This was a huge sum for a poor country to pay; and the effort of trying to do so, combined with the feuds between the Scottish lords, their distrust of David, and his quarrels with his nephew and heir, Robert, the Steward of Scotland,4 prevented the Scots from making any trouble for the rest of David’s reign. King John proved equally complaisant in negotiation and was indeed willing to cede about two-thirds of France to recover his freedom;5 but the French government was not prepared to sink so low, in spite of its dearth of resources, a revolutionary opposition in Paris, and a peasant rising. Edward therefore invaded France again to bring the French to terms; but he proved incapable, for lack of resources, of capturing Rheims, Paris, or any other towns, and the French dared not. oppose him in the field.6 In May 1360 the two sides therefore came to 7

D.N. 33 D.N. 34. 2 D.N. 35. 3 D.N. 37. 4 David was on such bad terms with his subjects and with his heir that he entertained proposals of Edward III that the latter should succeed him as king. 5 D.N. 36. 6 Like its predecessors, this raid was marked by widespread plundering and devastation and the distress of the invaded areas of France was very great. D.N. 38. 1

The political framework

7

terms at Brétigny. By these terms, as modified in October at Calais,7 Edward renounced his claim to the French throne, but received in full sovereignty Calais, Ponthieu and the whole of Aquitaine, together with a promise of the enormous sum of three million gold crowns for the ransom of King John. The rejoicings of the English were great; but they proved to be short-lived. The people in the ceded territories were very unwilling to accept English rule; and the English were slow to give up their captured strongholds, which were largely held by soldiers of fortune who did not want to be put out of a living. If they were turned out of their fortresses, they often proceeded to ravage the countryside as “Free Companies” and the English were blamed for not restraining them. Officially disowned but secretly encouraged by Edward III, they not only plundered but indulged in open warfare, and in 1364 welcomed the outbreak of war in Brittany once more between the two claimants. With their help the candidate favoured by the English, John de Montfort, won a decisive victory at Auray where his rival was killed.8 The French did not like this outcome, though they had to recognise de Montfort as duke. They were by this time well in arrears with the instalments of the ransom; and Edward for his part had never renounced his claims to the French crown in the form required by the treaty. The smouldering resentment on both sides caused by these areas of friction was fanned into a flame of renewed war by the outcome of the civil war in Spain. The Black Prince, created Duke of Aquitaine in 1362, invaded Castile in support of his ally,1 King Pedro the Cruel, in 13672 and won for him a brilliant victory at Nájera against Pedro’s half-brother, Henry of Trastamara and his French allies. But the Black Prince’s army was ravaged by dysentery, his own health was ruined by the campaign and Pedro failed to pay his debts. The prince had no alternative but to retreat to Aquitaine. Pedro, left to his own resources, was shortly afterwards defeated and killed, and the new ruler of Castile, Henry of Trastamara, naturally supported the French. The King of France, now the wise Charles V, soon had his opportunity for action against the English, for the great expenditure of the Castilian adventure necessitated the levy of heavy taxation on Aquitaine; and the discontent caused by this was used by turbulent Gascon lords as a pretext for revolt. This was used by the French government as an opportunity to undo the effects of the treaty of Brétigny-Calais. The Gascon rebels appealed to Charles V, who cited the Black Prince to appear at his court; and when he refused, the war began again.3 The fortunes of the opponents were now very different from those of a generation earlier. Edward III was sinking into senility, the Black Prince was mortally ill with dropsy and Henry of Lancaster was dead; whereas the French now had an able king and skilful generals, such as Bertrand du Guesclin.4 These realised that they must not let the English have the chance to use their favourite tactics of long-bow archers in combination with men at arms; and the repeated raids of the English achieved nothing. In 1372 a 7

D.N. 39 D.N. 40. 1 D.N. 41. 2 D.N. 42. 3 D.N. 43. 4 In 1371 the new King of Scots, Robert II, renewed the alliance with France, but he was careful to make his alliance with France subject to the existing truce with England. D.N. 44. 8

English historical documents

8

Castilian fleet utterly destroyed off La Rochelle an English expeditionary force on its way to Gascony; the French were victorious in Gascony and England’s ally had to make a humiliating peace with Castile. The prudent Charles V had used the years of peace to restore somewhat the resources of his devastated kingdom; and although these resources were not enough to turn the English completely out of France, they were sufficient, combined with French skill and English incompetence, to recover all the cessions made at Brétigny and more besides. In 1373 Duke John was expelled from Brittany,5 and by the time that Edward III died in July 1377 all that was left of the English possessions in France were the four fortified towns of Calais, Brest, Bordeaux and Bayonne and the coastal lands around them. The remarkable change in fortune in France was bound to have an important effect on the balance of forces and the atmosphere of politics in England. Success in the French war had for the time being solved the political problem in England; but it meant that despite frequent grants from the commons, the crown was thereby impoverished, whereas the nobles, by their pay from the government and by ransoms and booty, were enriched. In order to secure maximum support for the French war Edward had had to make concessions to the powerful classes at home, ranging from parliamentary control of taxation to the domination of magnates in his councils. But his great prestige as a successful and bountiful war leader, the magnetism of his chivalric court and his gifts of conciliation, companionship and charm enabled him to maintain an unbroken ascendancy for a generation. Now he had sunk into dotage and was of almost no account in politics; and the French war had turned from victory to disaster. Englishmen refused to believe that this could be due to the superiority of French skill or resources and preferred to keep their self-esteem by blaming the defeats on mismanagement and corruption in the government. Failure abroad thus fostered recriminations at home and these divisions were led by nobles whose power had been fostered by the royal policy and the prolonged warfare in France. Edward had married several of his numerous children to members of great baronial houses, partly to provide for his sons and daughters, partly to strengthen the links with the nobility. This policy had worked well during the period of his ascendancy; but it now meant that baronial factions could look for leaders in the royal family itself. At the centre of these controversies was John of Gaunt, fourth son of Edward III and in the 1370s the eldest active member of the royal family. Married in 1359 to Blanche, heiress of the vast Lancastrian inheritance, in 1362 he had been created Duke of Lancaster.1 Unsuccessful leader of important English forces in France in 1369 and 1370, he diverted attention from his own failures by joining in the widespread attack on the king’s ministers, who were blamed for the continuous reverses in France. As the chancellor and treasurer were bishops, as usual, the anti-clericalism current in England in this generation was harnessed to a demand for their dismissal and replacement by laymen, who would be more easily brought to account in the king’s courts than ecclesiastics.2 John of Gaunt supported this move and encouraged John Wyclif to 5

In 1372 a treaty of alliance had been made between Edward III and Duke John. See Genealogical Table. 2 D.N. 255. 1

The political framework

9

expound the arguments in favour of it; and when the agitation won its aims in the parliament of 1371 the new ministers were under Gaunt’s influence. The new administration was however no more successful than the previous one had been. In 1373 a great armament was entrusted to the command of John of Gaunt;3 but it was distinguished from its disastrous predecessors only by its outstanding costliness. His unsuccessful diplomacy increased his unpopularity; and the royal mistress, Alice Perrers, the courtier nobles and the rich London financiers who supported John of Gaunt were accused of enriching themselves at the expense of the government and of the war effort. A strong opposition arose, headed by the dying Black Prince, and his niece’s husband, Edmund Mortimer Earl of March. Edward III had married his third son, Lionel, to a great heiress of the time, Elizabeth de Burgh, only daughter of the Earl of Ulster, and their only child Philippa had married Edmund Mortimer, great-grandson of Queen Isabella’s lover,4 whose family had been restored to favour and fortune by Edward III. In 1376 was held the first parliament since 1373; and when it became known that the government would ask for further supplies of money there was an explosion of indignation. Inspired by the Earl of March and various other earls, barons and bishops, the commons vigorously attacked the administration. Their leader and mouthpiece was Peter de la Mare, steward of the Earl of March, the first speaker of the commons of whom we have any clear picture, thanks to the combined evidence of the rolls of parliament and the Anonimalle Chronicle.1 Through him the commons accused various courtiers of misappropriation of funds and other corrupt practices, especially Richard Lyons, a London financial agent of the king, and Lord Latimer, the king’s chamberlain. In their eagerness to bring these men to justice the commons stumbled on the process of impeachment; by this they collectively accused the offenders to the lords, who adjudged them to deprivation of office, fine and imprisonment. The corrupt favourites, including Alice Perrers, were banished from court, and the royal council was afforced with nine trusted bishops and secular lords, without whom no great business was to be transacted. But before the parliament ended the Black Prince died leaving as his heir his son Richard, then only nine years old;2 and this made it easier for John of Gaunt to seize power again as soon as the Good Parliament was dissolved. The men impeached by the commons were recalled to office and power, Alice Perrers returned to court, the advisory lords were dismissed, Peter de la Mare was thrown into prison and all the acts of the Good Parliament were cancelled. In January 1377 a new parliament met under John of Gaunt’s influence; the commons elected John of Gaunt’s steward, Sir Thomas Hungerford, as their speaker and supported petitions for the reinstatement of all persons condemned by the last parliament.3 The duke’s most important opponents were now the bishops, primarily because of his attacks on William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester. John of Gaunt therefore maintained against them John Wyclif, even to the point of backing him in person when he was arraigned for heresy before William Courtenay, Bishop of London, in St Paul’s Cathedral in February 1377. When John of Gaunt threatened the bishop in his own cathedral, the Londoners rose in tumult against this threat to their bishop and John of Gaunt had to flee the 3

D.N. 45. See Genealogical Table. 1 D.N. 259, 46. 2 D.N. 47. 3 Rot, parl. II, 364. 4

English historical documents

10

protection of the princess of Wales at Kennington.4 The Londoners realised, however, that they had gone too far in thus defying the powerful duke and besought the king’s pardon. The king granted this to celebrate his jubilee and William of Wykeham bought his restoration to favour through the mediation of Alice Perrers. These acts of reconciliation were some of the last deeds that the king was to perform. In June 1377 he died at Richmond, deserted by his courtiers and robbed of the rings on his fingers by his mistress before she fled. The new king was a boy often years old. Not only his coronation5 and assumption of the dignity of royalty, with all the adulation that it brought, but the circumstances of his accession were such as to encourage in him the notion that he was a singularly exalted person. John of Gaunt seems in fact to have been unwaveringly loyal to his nephew; but it had been believed just before the death of Edward III that he was aiming at the crown.6 Richard’s accession in spite of this might well seem to the boy to show a special divine protection of his rights. His mother and tutors are likely to have taught him to revere the memory of his father, who was already becoming something of a legendary figure. Unfortunately, Richard found as he grew up that he possessed neither the aptitude nor the taste for his father’s prowess in warfare and tournament; and this may well have stimulated him to emulate his father’s distinction by stressing the royal dignity. These tendencies were probably fostered by his experiences in the Peasants’ Revolt. At the age of fourteen he found that all these great lords, who dominated him and claimed to rule in his name and talked so much of martial valour, had lost their courage in the face of mere peasants, and that the magic of his kingship, so it seemed, enabled him to win over an angry throng and disperse a rebel host.1 To be able to promise then to admiring peasants redress of grievances and pardon for rebellion must have been an exhilarating experience which would feed still more his exalted notions of his regality and prerogative. His marriage to Anne of Bohemia in the next year would encourage the sense of growing up and his resentment at the tutelage in which he was still kept. That resentment would be increased by the dismal record of the government of the minority. On the death of Edward III, the government had been placed in the hands of a council of nine, in which the various aristocratic interests were represented;2 this attempt at a coalition ministry was not a success, for it was much weakened by the hostility between John of Gaunt and his enemies, and by the incompetence of its members.3 The war with France went from bad to worse. England had lost command of the sea in face of the opposition from the combined Franco-Castilian fleets, and the French were able to make raids with impunity along the south coast of England.4 Counter-expeditions were sent to 4

Chronicon Angliae, ed. E.M.Thompson (Rolls Series, 1874), 118–27. D.N. 216. 6 D.N. 47. 1 D.N. 52. 2 D.N. 48. 3 The government’s authority was also shaken by the uproar that arose when a squire Robert Hawley, who had escaped from the Tower of London and had taken sanctuary in Westminster Abbey, was pursued by the men of the Constable of the Tower into the choir of the Abbey and murdered there during the celebration of High Mass. D.N. 49. 4 Cf. D.N. 592 for a navigation act of 1382 to encourage the building of English ships. 5

The political framework

11

Brittany and Gascony, but they ended in disaster. Indeed if it had not been for the death of King Charles V of France in 1380 and the succession of a child, with the consequent struggles for power between his uncles, the English might have lost their last footholds in France. As it was, the efforts of the expeditions, coupled with the extravagance of the government at home, caused the administration to be very short of money, especially as the London financiers were very annoyed with John of Gaunt over a violation of the sanctuary at Westminster for which he was (probably without foundation) blamed.5 But the normal forms of taxation affected especially the landed classes which dominated parliament and they were tired of voting taxes for a government that seemed incompetent and a war that appeared to offer no hope of success. The commons therefore tried the expedient of poll-taxes which were levied on everybody except paupers. Three such taxes were levied between 1377 and 1380,6 the last being the hardest of them all on the poor. The result was widespread resistance; and when commissioners were appointed to inquire into suspected tax evasion in the south-eastern shires, this touched off a rebellion. The Peasants’ Revolt was due to a combination of causes, such as discontent with the government’s mismanagement, hatred of the propertied classes’ policy of coercion in the shortage of labour after the Black Death, dissatisfaction with the wealth and worldliness of many of the bishops and abbots, hopes of better conditions stimulated by the French wars and the social changes of the age. The revolt affected areas as far apart as Norfolk and Wirral, Hampshire and the Scottish borders; but the main risings were in Essex and Kent. Owing to the cowardice and inertia of the government the rebels of the home counties were able to occupy London for three days. This occupation might have ended in disaster but for the courage of the young king, who led the rebels away from the city when their leader was killed and issued a pardon to them all to persuade them to disperse.1 He had already promised them that villeinage should be abolished, that labour services should be on the basis of free contract and that land should be leased at a rent of fourpence an acre; but when the rebels had dispersed, these promises were repudiated by the government. Elsewhere in the eastern counties tenants of great abbeys such as St Albans and Bury St Edmunds strove to destroy all evidence of the abbey’s manoral rights and to obtain a charter for the town which had grown up around the abbey walls; townsmen of Cambridge worked off old grievances against the university; the poor of towns attacked rich burgesses, lower clergy revolted against their superiors, crowds demonstrated against foreigners and agrarian tenants destroyed manorial records and attacked judges and lawyers. All was in vain; the upper classes were terrified into severe repression and repudiation of all concessions when the revolt was safely crushed,2 and the rebellion thus had no effect on the disabilities of artisans and peasants. The main effects of the revolt on politics were to encourage a startled nobility into fresh adventures abroad to recover their prestige as military leaders,3 and to enhance the king’s sense of his importance and his humiliation.4 5

D.N. 49. D.N. 50, 51. 1 D.N. 52. 2 D.N. 53, 54. Cf. D.N. 55. 3 E.g. D.N. 59. 4 For the merchants’ lack of confidence in the government, see D.N. 56. 6

English historical documents

12

He therefore began to build up a party of confidants devoted to himself and to try to exercise the powers of government through them. After the ignominious failure of a socalled crusade in Flanders against the French anti-pope in 1383,5 John of Gaunt persuaded parliament to let him try another “crusade” against the usurper (and the French who supported him) by way of Portugal.6 He hoped to realize his own ambitions to become King of Castile, as heir to his murdered father-in-law, Pedro the Cruel; and parliament was willing to back an enterprise which, in contrast to the failure in Flanders and a more recent one in Scotland, seemed to offer a chance of success at last, in view of the striking victory of the Portuguese at Aljubarrota over the Castilians in 1385. The growing extravagance, waywardness and unpopularity of the young king and his little circle of favourites made John of Gaunt eager to be gone.7 The king was glad to see him go; he did not realise that the departure of this powerful uncle would mean for him, not freedom to indulge his wishes, but exposure to the criticism of nobles less moderate and responsible than John of Gaunt. Within four months of Gaunt’s departure Richard had to summon a parliament to ask for supplies against a threatened invasion of the French; but so alienated was public opinion by the extravagance, self-seeking and reputed effeminacy of his circle of friends that the commons replied by demanding the dismissal of the chancellor and treasurer. Richard absented himself from parliament and refused these demands with tactless arrogance;1 the result was a threat of deposition, the impeachment of the chancellor, Michael de la Pole, and the appointment of a council with wide powers to reform the government and the royal household.2 Richard’s answer, as soon as parliament was dissolved, was to release De la Pole, raise an army and persuade the judges to define the acts of the recent parliament as treasonable.3 In self-defence his opponents, headed by his youngest uncle, the Duke of Gloucester, and by the Earls of Arundel and Warwick, appealed4 or accused Richard’s chief supporters of treason and raised an army against him. Unfortunately for Richard, their army was bigger and better led than his; and when the forces of the opposition or appellant lords met his under the leadership of his favourite, Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland at Radcot Bridge in December 1387, De Vere walked into a trap, lost his nerve and fled. Public opinion was on the side, it seems, of the victorious appellant lords; for Richard and his friends appeared to be viciously wasteful bunglers who were prepared to sell the country to the French to overcome their opponents at home, whereas the Earl of Arundel had gained popularity by a brilliant victory in the Channel over a combined Franco-Castilian fleet.5 The appellant lords now had Richard at their mercy; they proceeded to show its quality 5

D.N. 57. D.N. 59. 7 One of the arguments for the instability of the king and his estrangement from the duke rests, however, on a misreading of the Chronicle of the Monk of Westminster. See D.N. 58. 1 D.N. 60. 2 Ibid. 3 D.N. 62, 63. 4 These lords had accused his friends by the method of “appeal”; see Part II, “The Government of the Realm”. 5 D.N. 61. The popularity of the victory was increased by the capture of an enormous quantity of wine, which the earl put on the market in England without making any profit for himself. 6

The political framework

13

by forcing him to summon a parliament which earned the name of “Merciless”. By “appeal” or by impeachment Richard’s friends were executed, exiled, imprisoned or otherwise removed.6 Richard was threatened with deposition, and put under the tutelage of a council once more. Never before in the history of parliament had so many men of high position been destroyed for such inadequate reasons; and the appellants completed their work by rewarding themselves with £20,000 for the “costs, troubles and expenses” to which they had been put for the honour and profit of the realm. Though they had criticised Richard’s ministers for lack of martial spirit, the appellants found themselves compelled to negotiate a truce with France. The Scots won a crushing victory at Otterburn which endangered the safety of the north for many years thereafter;7 and the new government cost a great deal of money with nothing to show for it. There was therefore no opposition when in May 1389 the king declared himself of age and took over the direction of government.8 But Richard behaved with studious moderation; he did not even try to exclude the appellants from the council. He made no attempt to recall his exiled friends nor to undo the work of the Merciless Parliament, and his only major highhanded act of the next few years was the heavy fine that he imposed on London in 1392 for refusing to make him a loan.9 He welcomed John of Gaunt on his return to England in 1389 from his failure in Spain and in the atmosphere of goodwill that prevailed thereafter Richard seemed to be casting himself for the role of a beneficent ruler of a land at peace. In reality he appears to have been preparing for revenge. In 1394 he undertook an expedition to Ireland to restore English fortunes there; and this visit was doubly useful in raising his prestige and providing a good reason for recruiting a private army which might be useful in England later. His policy of peace abroad, supported now by the ageing John of Gaunt, enabled him to make a long-term truce with France in 1396. The French king promised to help him against his own subjects if need be, and the rapprochement was sealed by a marriage.1 Richard’s beloved first queen, Anne of Bohemia, had died in 13942 and in 1396 Richard married Isabella, the seven year old daughter of Charles VI. The Duke of Gloucester led a jingoistic opposition to the treaty, but this only increased Richard’s hatred of Gloucester and his allies and his determination to insist on his royal prerogative. He sought another ally abroad in Pope Boniface IX, who was the more ready to oblige because of the existence of a rival pope at Avignon; and in 1398 a concordat was arranged.3 By 1397 Richard was ready to strike. Gloucester, Arundel and Warwick, whom Richard had never forgiven for their attack on him and his friends in 1388, were suddenly arrested and eight lords of the king’s party “appealed” them of treason, just as the king’s friends had been appealed of treason in 1388. A parliament was summoned to meet at Westminster; and owing to the reconstruction of Westminster Hall it met in an opensided temporary building in the palace yard. Through these open sides could be seen Richard’s armed retainers, wearing his badge of the white hart and mustered in strength. 6

D.N. 63, 64. D.N. 65. 8 D.N. 66. 9 D.N. 67. 1 D.N. 68. 2 D.N. 682. 3 D.N. 384. Richard also obtained promises of help from his former brother-in-law, the Emperor Wenceslas. 7

English historical documents

14

This parliament executed, imprisoned or exiled the king’s opponents, as his had been in 1388,4 and Richard’s friends were rewarded with higher titles.5 The parliament was then adjourned to Shrewsbury, away from hostile London and near to Cheshire, where Richard had recruited most of his archers. At Shrewsbury the acts of the Merciless Parliament were repealed, and defenders of the royal prerogative were rehabilitated, not only recent ones like the judges of 1387, but even royalists so remote as the Despensers of Edward II’s reign. By an unprecedented grant the commons granted to the king the duties on wool and leather for the rest of his life. The king’s success encouraged him to throw off the last restraints. He seized the opportunity of a quarrel between two lords, Thomas Mowbray and Gaunt’s son, Henry of Bolingbroke, to exile both;6 they had been supporters of his in 1397 but amongst his opponents in 1388, and so they had to go. He extorted large loans, he extended the definition of treason, he made suspected persons seal blank charters which he could later fill up as he pleased if they offended him, he used prerogative courts of law with their authoritarian tendencies, he tried to control local government closely, he used his personal seal to issue charters and he fined the seventeen southern counties for supporting the king’s foes in 1387.7 His authority, already weakened by these arbitrary acts, was endangered still further by the death in July 1398 of his cousin and designated heir, Roger Mortimer Earl of March, who had acquiesced in his rule. In February 1399 John of Gaunt died, and Richard was afraid to have his enemy Henry of Bolingbroke in the realm as Duke of Lancaster, the greatest of the peers. The king therefore resorted to the arbitrary and desperate step of exiling Henry for life;1 and then, as if blinded to realities by his increasing megalomania, he went to Ireland in June 1399. The following month Henry landed at Ravenspur in Yorkshire to claim his Lancastrian inheritance and won over many northern lords, especially the powerful Henry Percy Earl of Northumberland.2 The government of Richard II was so unpopular and Lancaster’s speed, reputation and skill were so great, that by the time Richard returned from Ireland Henry of Lancaster was master of the realm. When the king reached Conway Castle his following was reduced to a small band; but from Henry’s point of view he might be still dangerous. There might be a revulsion of feeling in time in favour of one who had, perhaps, acted tyrannically but was after all an anointed king to whom all had sworn allegiance. It was, however, impossible to leave him on the throne; for might he not secretly plot revenge as he had been seen to do before? So he was induced to surrender, by false promises as it seems3, and a revolution was hurried through before any opposition could be organised. To arrange for the 4

D.N. 71, 72. Cf. D.N. 69. D.N. 73. John of Gaunt was rewarded for his complacency by the legitimation of his children by Katherine Swynford, the Beauforts. D.N. 70. 6 D.N. 76. 7 D.N. 74, 77. Cf. D.N. 75, 217, 218. 1 D.N. 78. 2 Although Henry at first claimed only his Lancastrian inheritance, he must have realized from the outset of his invasion that he could enjoy his patrimony in safety only if Richard was deprived of all power to harm him; and, as Dr R.L.Storey has pointed out, we find him exercising as early as 2 August 1399, a royal prerogative by appointing the Earl of Northumberland custodian of the castle and town of Carlisle. D.N. 79. 3 D.N. 81. 5

The political framework

15

succession of Lancaster was a tricky matter, for he was not the direct heir by primogeniture.4 Hence every possible means was used to give the revolution an air of legality: a declaration by Richard—in prison in the Tower of London—renouncing (cheerfully, it was said) all his rights; the acceptance of this by an assembly of estates summoned as a parliament in his name; the adoption by the assembly of thirty-three counts of accusation against Richard; Henry’s immediate announcement that he claimed the throne on the triple ground of descent from Henry III, conquest and default of good governance; his acceptance by the estates; the homage to Henry of the new officials of the government; and the renunciation of all homage and fealty to Richard by a representative deputation of the estates which visited him in the Tower of London.5 The assembly, which was turned into Henry IV’s first parliament, agreed that Richard should be kept in strict confinement and that none of his old “familiars” should be allowed any contact with him.6 He was taken secretly to Pontefract Castle and there kept in close confinement until a rising in his favour took place in January 1400.7 Thereafter he was too dangerous to be allowed to live; and by February 1400 he was dead. In the last two years of his reign Richard had acted with increasing arbitrariness and illegality; and it may be that in these last years he was becoming dangerously unhinged in mind. Between 1389 and 1397 he had shown that he could follow an intelligible policy and some of his aims had been similar to later much-praised aims of the Tudors—to strengthen the authority of the crown against aristocratic faction and civil strife, to increase the prestige of the crown by magnificence and a stress on its dignity, to end the waste of resources in the French war and to assert instead the power of the English crown in the British Isles. But Richard was not only less fortunate than the Tudors in the condition of England in his time; he showed serious flaws of character even before his final derangement—lack of self-control, inability to judge either men or situations-and “hissuccess would have been the tragedy ofanation”.1 Nevertheless his deposition, however justified and necessitated by his acts, was the beginning of an era of troubles for the crown and for English society, as Tudor historians and Elizabethan playwrights were vividly aware. Henry might use all the devices he could to stress the legality and justice of his accession; he could not hide from men the fact that the Lord’s anointed had been deposed without a hearing and that a great baron who was not the direct heir had seized the throne. The new government repeatedly stressed that it was only the tyrannical excesses of Richard II which had been repudiated and that Henry should enjoy as great a liberty of prerogative as his predecessors;2 in reality the authority of the crown had been greatly weakened. Henry tried to maintain the mystique of monarchy by being anointed with the Virgin’s holy oil;3 but the prestige of the office had been shaken by the deposition of Richard II who had insisted on the dignity of kingship so much. Henry had based his claim partly on the default of governance of Richard; but this was a two-edged weapon which was soon to be turned against him. The magnates who had made the revolution, especially the Percies and the Nevilles whose 4

D.N. 80. D.N. 219. 6 D.N. 82. 7 D.N. 83. 1 M.McKisack, The Fourteenth Century (Oxford, 1959), 498. 2 D.N. 82, 222. 3 D.N. 220. 5

English historical documents

16

support had been vital in the initial stage, had to be lavishly rewarded. This impoverished the crown and made it more susceptible to the behests of the nobility. The revolution had encouraged the enemies of England in Scotland and France to seize their chance and the injustice of one of Henry’s councillors in Wales caused the rebellion in 1400 of a gifted Welsh gentleman, Owen Glyndŵr, who soon had nearly the whole of Wales on his side.4 All these commitments together imposed a greater burden of military expenditure than any for the last sixty years. The inadequacy of the royal resources and the weakened power of the crown meant that there was more disorder in the realm, which was resented throughout the shires. This resentment was voiced by the commons in parliament, who naturally wanted to keep taxation down to the minimum, and therefore argued that if the king was less extravagant and less prodigal in his grants he would have sufficient resources to deal with his enemies and to keep order within the realm. Hence as a condition of their grants they insisted on methods of control which were humiliating to the king, such as appointing treasurers and auditors of their taxes, demanding the acceptance of named councillors and even interfering in the personnel and expenditure of the royal households.5 Such constraint was the more irksome because until 1408 the existence of Henry’s throne was in constant danger. Once the first shock of Richard’s deposition had died away, the weakness of the new government6 encouraged a series of plots and rebellions which, in view of the menaces from Scotland, France and Owen Glyndŵr, were of critical importance. The most serious of these were the revolt of the four earls, personal adherents of Richard II, in 14001 and the rebellion of the Percies in 1403.2 The four earls missed capturing Henry at Windsor by only a few hours; and he was saved only by the treachery of one of the conspirators and the hostility to them of the common people. The revolt sealed the fate of Richard II; but his murder in February 1400 at Pontefract Castle made the French still more hostile to the new regime. By 1403 Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, and his warlike son, Harry Hotspur, whose sense of importance and touchiness had been inflated by their leading part in the revolution of 1399, by lavish grants made by Henry IV as a reward, and by their striking success against the Scots at Homildon Hill in 1402,3 decided to rebel. They claimed that they had been tricked by Henry into supporting his revolution in 1399 and that his government was extortionate and incompetent. They made an alliance with the Scots, and Harry Hotspur and the earl of Douglas marched with their forces in July 1403 to join Owen Glyndŵr. Henry without delay intercepted them at Shrewsbury and in the hard-fought fight that ensued he and his army killed or captured all the rebel leaders.4 A defeat for him at this point might have 4

D.N. 84. For the case on behalf of Owen’s opponent, Lord Grey of Ruthin, see R.I.Jack, “Owain Glyn Dŵr and the Lordship of Ruthin”, The Welsh History Review, 2 (1965), 303–22. 5 E.g. D.N. 268; and cf. Rot. Parl. III, 572, 585, for equally bold requests of the commons in 1406. 6 In spite of its attempts at conciliation such as the king’s pardon of a debt of the widow of Robert de Vere, P.R.O., Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer’s Memoranda Roll, I Henry IV, Brevia directa baronibus, Michaelmas Term, m.13. Cf. the Franciscan support for Richard II. D.N. 85. 1 D.N. 83. 2 D.N. 88. 3 D.N. 86. It was in 1402 that Edmund Mortimer, brother-in-law of Hotspur and uncle of the Earl of March, was captured by Owen Glyndŵr and joined his cause. D.N. 87. 4 D.N. 88.

The political framework

17

meant the end of his reign; the victory enabled him simply to struggle on. The Earl of North-umberland was still at large; and so great were the disorder, financial needs5 and discontent at home, so serious was the menace from Owen Glyndŵr and the French,6 that in 1405 Percy was able to induce even the saintly Archbishop of York, Richard Scrope, to rebel, accusing Henry of usurpation, extortion, impiety and general misgovernment.7 After capturing the archbishop by trickery, Henry in anger be-headed him, contrary to all clerical privilege; but he eluded punishment because the schism in the church made the Roman pope afraid to offend him too much lest the king should desert to the rival obedience. It was not however until Northumberland was brought to bay in 1408 at the battle of Bramham Moor, where he was defeated and killed,8 that Henry could reckon himself secure inside England. Against external foes Henry had had more luck. After their defeat at Homildon Hill the Scots were too divided by internal feuds to invade England again; and in 1406 they were reduced to impotence by the capture of the Crown Prince James off Flamborough Head on his way to France.9 His father Robert III died of grief at the news and as the regent, James’s uncle, dreaded nothing more than his nephew’s return, Henry was able to keep the Scots quiet for the rest of his reign by threatening to release their king. The French continued to be a menace longer than the Scots and they were not only able to make raids on the south coast in 1403 and 1404, but in 1405 they succeeded in sending an expeditionary force to help their ally Owen Glyndŵr.10 From 1406 however French efforts were hindered by the rivalry of the Dukes of Burgundy and Orléans; and in November 1407 the murder of the Duke of Orléans by the agents of the Duke of Burgundy in the streets of Paris11 began nearly thirty years of civil strife. Freed from the threats of attack from without the realm and of rebellion within, the English government was able to devote more resources to the Welsh war, where Henry prince of Wales was beginning to prove his military skill. In the year after Bramham Moor, Owen Glyndŵr lost the strongholds of Aberystwyth and Harlech, the basis of his control of central Wales; and after this Owen and his son vanished into the mountains, from which they fought a sporadic and losing struggle. The king was not able to enjoy his hard-won ascendancy. The constant perils and anxieties since 1399 had worn away his health, and in 1405 he had a mild stroke. Thereafter he suffered from increasingly serious bouts of illness, which usually incapacitated him while they lasted, and encouraged the masterful personalities around the throne to strive with each other for power. On the one side was usually the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Arundel, supported by the king’s second son, Thomas; on the other, the Prince of Wales, assisted by his half-brothers, the Beauforts.1 5

D.N. 268, 93. D.N. 89, 90, 91. 7 D.N. 92. 8 D.N. 96. 9 D.N. 94. 10 D.N. 91. 11 D.N. 95. 1 The Beauforts were the sons of John of Gaunt by his mistress, Katherine Swynford; they had been legitimated by Richard II in 1397 to please John of Gaunt. See D.N. 70 and Genealogical Table. 6

English historical documents

18

Early in 1410 the prince and his friends, aided by the commons, won command of the king’s council,2 and soon took an independent line in foreign policy. Both factions in France were anxious for English support; the prince and his supporters made an alliance with the Duke of Burgundy.3 A small force was sent to France to help Burgundy and, almost unopposed, advanced to St Denis and St Cloud, thus revealing to the prince how weak France had become. But he could not at the moment reap the fruit of this success. His uncle Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester, suggested to the ailing king that he should abdicate in favour of his son, whereupon Henry IV indignantly dismissed the prince and his friends from office, called upon his son Thomas and upon Archbishop Arundel, and made an alliance with the enemies of Burgundy, the Armagnacs.4 These offered to cede the whole of Aquitaine in full sovereignty in return for help against the Burgundians. A force of English was sent to Normandy under Thomas, now created Duke of Clarence; but after achieving some success they were bought off by the Armagnacs. The failure of the expedition to achieve its aims encouraged the Prince of Wales to assert himself once more, and rumours that he intended to seize the throne5 moved him to protest his loyalty to his father. The life of the wearied king was however fast drawing to a close; and in March 1413 he died at the age of forty-six.6 “The unquiet time of King Henry IV”,7 as Hall puts it, was to be succeeded by “the victorious acts of King Henry V”. The young king’s recent behaviour had given cause for misgivings; but he quickly showed a sense of dedication to his office.8 He was determined to restore order and unity within his realm9 and he had many qualities to help him to do this. Handsome and dignified in appearance, he was energetic, thorough, just, devout, sober, conciliatory, a good organiser, a skilful diplomat. Nevertheless even a king of his varied abilities and devoted service might have failed in this aim if he had not adopted the same expedient as Edward III—an aggressive war on French soil. The expeditions of 1411 and 1412 had revealed the weakness of France, which had become even more enfeebled since then by continued civil strife. So in 1413 Henry renewed the English claim to the French throne and the enforcement of the terms of the treaty of Brétigny of 1360. At home he sought to conciliate opponents by burying Richard II’s corpse in the tomb that he had prepared in his life-time in Westminster Abbey, by founding the London Charterhouse and Sion Abbey as expiation for the murder of Richard II,1 by pardoning the heirs of his father’s enemies such as Henry Percy; and he tried to please the church by persecuting the Lollards more severely.2 At the same time he made a secret treaty with the Burgundians for the division of France and prepared for war.3 Simultaneously he negotiated with the 2

Rot. Parl., III, 632. D.N. 98. 4 Ibid. 5 D.N. 99. 6 D.N. 99. 7 D.N. 97. 8 D.N. 100. 9 For complaints of the commons in 1413 of grave and widespread disorder in the realm, cf. Rot. Parl. IV, 4. 1 D.N. 469. 2 D.N. 509, 510; and cf. the more stringent statute passed against heresy in 1414. (S.R. II, 181–3). 3 Rymer, Foedera (Hague edn), IV; ii: 88. 3

The political framework

19

Armagnacs who at this time controlled the French government, but chiefly as a propaganda justification for the English demands and to give time for diplomatic and military preparations for invasion.4 The French were almost desperately anxious to buy Catharine and the unprecedented dowry of 850,000 crowns.5 But Henry was now ready for invasion (July 1415) and the negotiations were broken off, after Henry had called Heaven to witness his desire for peace, which the French had thwarted. The prospect of lucrative war in France aroused enthusiasm in England and parliament voted generous supplies; but Henry’s as yet precarious hold on England was revealed by the expression of anxiety by many nobles and knights about the state of the country in the summer of 1415 and by the discovery of a dangerous conspiracy in favour of the Earl of March on the very eve of Henry’s departure for France.6 On 11 August 1415 Henry sailed for France, with some 2,000 men at arms and 6,000 archers, together with carefully collected stores and arms, specialist and supporting units, in 1,500 ships, mostly hired or impressed. The expedition showed Henry’s mastery of military organisation; but his forces were held up for more than a month by the siege of Harfleur, the capture of which was necessary to provide a base. When it fell, the campaigning season was far advanced and Henry’s forces greatly reduced by dysentery. But Henry could not afford to go home with the capture of one not very important town to his credit; so, perhaps influenced by the example of Edward III in 1346, he decided to show up French weakness by marching to Calais with a force reduced to less than 4,000 troops. The French thought that he had delivered himself into their hands and blocked his way at Agincourt with a force many times the size of his. Henry was, however, a shrewd and seasoned general, enjoying the confidence of a well-disciplined army; the French forces were badly led and undisciplined, their units so jealous of each other and so illcoordinated that their great numbers were a source of confusion instead of an asset. The English used their favourite method of combining long-bow archers and dismounted men at arms and won a victory even more brilliant than that of Crécy or Poitiers;7whereas the chroniclers’ estimates of the French losses range from 4,000 to 11,000, the English seem to have lost just over a hundred men. It is true that the English army was too exhausted to do more than struggle on to Calais; but the gain in Henry’s prestige was immense. In Europe he was accounted the most brilliant commander of the day; and in England he was given a magnificent welcome1 and was granted the customs duties for life.2 His ascendancy stilled all opposition at home for the rest of his days. Nevertheless he was too good a general not to realise that but for French folly the Agincourt campaign might have ended his career. For the French conquests on which he was still determined, careful military and diplomatic preparations would be necessary. Until July 1417 he therefore waited to conclude an alliance with the emperor,3 to clear the Channel of enemy ships4 and to collect men and materials for prolonged siege warfare. 4

D.N. 101. D.N. 102. 6 D.N. 103, 104. 7 D.N. 105. 1 D.N. 106, 107. 2 D.N. 273. 3 D.N. 108. 7. 2 D.N. 273. 3 D.N. 108. 4 D.N. 109. Cf. D.N. III for the building of a great ship for the king. 5

English historical documents

20

Then he invaded France again and for the next two years was engaged in the conquest of Normandy, in campaigns of long, hard, careful sieges, culminating in the six months’ siege of the key town of Rouen.5 His steady successes caused the two French factions to draw together and a meeting of their leaders, the duke of Burgundy and the Dauphin, was arranged in September 1419 at the bridge of Montereau. There with incredible folly the Dauphin’s followers murdered the duke;6 and his son, Duke Philip, longed so ardently for revenge that he was willing to accept all English demands. He was allied to the French queen who controlled the mad king; and as she hated the Dauphin so much that she was prepared to deny publicly that Charles VI was his father, agreement was soon reached. By the treaty of Troyes, sealed in May 1420, it was concluded that Henry was to marry Catherine, daughter of Charles VI, and that after the death of Charles the French crown was to belong to Henry and his heirs for ever.7 This glittering triumph was to prove only a disappointing and exhausting mirage. After the first stunning shock most Frenchmen not under direct Burgundian influence or living in English-occupied territory refused to accept the treaty.8 They were too discouraged and badly led to put up a vigorous resistance at present, yet only firm conquest would make them acquiesce in Henry’s claim to be heir to the French throne. And so Henry took only one day’s honeymoon before beginning again the wearisome task of sieges. Before long, however, he had to return to England for a money-raising tour.9 The war was becoming more expensive as it went on, for there were conquered territories to be administered and protected, the fighting was on an ever-widening front and the devastations10 made it less possible for troops to live off the land or to tax the conquered French effectively. But as the ending of the war faded out of sight the English parliament became increasingly reluctant to vote adequate supplies. The result was that the government’s debt mounted rapidly and its credit became weaker. But Henry’s tour of England was abruptly concluded by the news of the death of the Duke of Clarence in a foolish raid in France.11 Henry returned to restore English prestige; and in the long cold winter of 1421–2, although previously healthy and athletic, he contracted dysentery at the six months’ siege of Meaux. In the state of medical ignorance of the time the disease was fatal; his strength and regular life enabled him to linger until August 1422, when he died at the age of thirty-five.1 In the dark days to come he was mourned by Englishmen as the ideal warrior-king, cut off in the flower of manhood, who if he had lived would have carried forward the war to a gloriously successful conclusion. Although Henry V left as his heir a child nine months old, it was possible for several years to nurse the delusion that the conquest of France was feasible. The French government was corrupt and inefficient, its titular head, the Dauphin, was listless and doubtful of his paternity, and the influence of his rapacious favourites prevented any competent direction of the war. On the English side however Henry had left a worthy successor as Regent of France, his next brother John, Duke of Bedford; indefatigable, 5 6

D.N. 110.

D.N. 112. D.N. 113. 8 D.N. 114. 9 D.N. 115. 10 D.N. 118. 11 D.N. 116. 1 D.N. 117. 7

The political framework

21

diplomatic, resourceful, unselfish, an able administrator and a skilful soldier. His military talent was shown by his victory at Cravant in 1423,2 where he prevented the Dauphinists from opening up communications with Champagne, and his still more notable success next year at Verneuil,3 where he stopped a serious Dauphinist penetration of Normandy. Soon after this he and his captains organised the conquest of the county of Maine and by 1428 they had reached the River Loire. His ability as an administrator was shown in his government of Normandy, where he was more conciliatory than Henry V had been; and his diplomatic skill was used to good effect to keep in the English alliance two such slippery allies as the Dukes of Burgundy and Brittany.4 And he was the only man who could exercise any restraining influence over his difficult brother Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester.5 When he was dying, Henry V had nominated Humphrey to some kind of regency in England and Humphrey naturally wished this direction to take effect.6 But the magnates had just lost one strong master and they did not want to have another who was not the king. Moreover, they knew Humphrey and must have already seen some of his defects. A patron of art and letters, Gloucester’s affability and warlike sentiments made him popular with the people of London, where he was to be remembered as “the good Duke Humphrey”. He was, however, quite irresponsible in his ambition, greed, rashness and amorous desires, often unsound in judgement and incapable of hard and steady work. At the beginning of the reign the lords, both spiritual and temporal, therefore combined to deny him any more powerful position than that of protector, which was little more than chief councillor, and the real power was vested in an aristocratic council which controlled the whole royal prerogative during the king’s minority.7 The leading councillor was Bishop Beaufort, the chancellor, who was as grasping as Humphrey and in fact became the richest man in England, largely by the various rewards he gained for loans to the crown. But he was far more able and discreet than Humphrey, whom he greatly excelled in statesmanship; and he would have been altogether too strong for Gloucester had he possessed the latter’s gifts of popularity. In 1425 Humphrey returned to England from a wild-cat expedition to Hainault against the Duke of Burgundy;8 this would have cost England the Burgundian alliance but for Bedford’s skill. No sooner had Humphrey come home than he stirred up the Londoners against Beaufort, whom he regarded as the moving spirit behind his own exclusion from the regency; and so great was the danger of civil strife that Bedford had to be sent for poste-haste from France as the only man who could reconcile his brother and his uncle.1 Bedford could ill be spared from France even for a few months. In spite of the advance of the English there and the listlessness of the French, the future was not promising for the English cause. The task was fundamentally too great for the resources of the English crown. The war was becoming more and more expensive, as the extent of occupied territory grew, and the resistance of occupied France to taxation increased. Moreover the 2

D.N. 122. D.N. 124. 4 D.N. 121. 5 D.N. 125. 6 D.N. 119. 7 D.N. 230, 231. 8 D.N. 123. 1 D.N. 125. 3

English historical documents

22

English parliaments were becoming more and more reluctant to continue voting money for an endless war and the financial deficit was becoming grave.2 It was difficult to scrape together men and money for the next intended advance, the crossing of the Loire after the capture of a bridgehead at Orléans, in 1428.3 It was at this moment that Joan of Arc appeared.4 Her real miracle was to restore the faith of the French in their cause, from the king downwards. The English siege of Orléans was such a travesty of a siege that only vigour in counter-attack was necessary to defeat it; and in St Joan’s subsequent campaigns her tactics were simple to the point of naïvety—always attack. When in May 1430 she was captured by the Burgundians and handed over to the English her real mission was already accomplished. The wonderful restoration of French confidence and the coronation of Charles VII at Rheims in 1429 convinced the English that, as her power could not come from God, it must be derived from the devil.5 They thought that they had finished with her by burning her as a witch;6 and Bedford tried to efface the impression of her achievements by having Henry VI crowned at Paris in 1431. But the affair was mismanaged and only alienated the Parisians whom it was designed to impress. The French made some gains in Maine, Champagne and Picardy and in 1433 a palace revolution got rid of the most incompetent and corrupt of Charles VII’s favourites. Bedford put up a tireless resistance; but his resources had sunk so low that in 1433 he had to return to England to try to shame the commons into greater generosity. The treasurer revealed the alarming character of the financial situation; but the commons were inadequately moved.7 Soon Bedford had to hurry back to France to deal with a rising in Normandy; and, worse still, the duke of Burgundy was thinking it was time for him to change sides.8 Philip retained sufficient regard for his old allies to want to secure terms for them too; but the English were haunted by the achievements of Henry V. Taking their stand on the treaty of Troyes, they demanded that his son must retain the crown of France as an indispensable condition. The French insisted however on the renunciation of the crown as a necessary condition; so the English withdrew from the great peace conference of Arras.1 Thereupon Philip abandoned them as unjustifiably obstinate and made his peace with Charles VII on his own terms. Before the conference ended, the last hope of English success, John Duke of Bedford, died in Rouen, in the sad knowledge that “after all he had done and suffered, he had lived and laboured in vain”.2 2

Early in 1428, however, it was possible to be still optimistic about the course of the war in France. Cf. the optimistic letter of the English commnader, the Earl of Salisbury to the city of London (R.R.Sharpe, London and the Kingdom, III, 1895), 370. 3 D.N. 126. 4 D.N. 127. 5 Cf. D.N. 128. 6 D.N. 130. 7 D.N. 326, 132, 133. 8 He was encouraged to do so by the weakening of his ties of kinship with Bedford. When Anne, Philip’s sister and Bedford’s wife, died in 1432, Bedford quickly married Jacquetta or Jacqueline of Luxemburg, daughter of the count of St Pol, without consulting the duke who was greatly offended. D.N. 131. 1 D.N. 134. The instructions of the English envoys to the council of Basel in 1434 made it clear that they were to do nothing which would admit, even tacitly, the French claim to the throne of France. D.N. 400.

The political framework

23

These events of 1435 mark an important stage in the decline of the English cause in France. Now that Bedford was dead, the Burgundian alliance lost, the French government in more capable hands, the pace of English reverses gathered speed. In 1436 Paris fell to French attack;3 and French advances continued in the He de France and in Gascony. Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, now heir to the throne, continued to proclaim the duty of resistance to the end;4 but his uncle, Cardinal Beaufort, who saw more clearly the immense financial and administrative problems posed by continued war, was gradually coming round to the wise but unpopular view that England must soon seek peace or at least a truce. Most of the royal household officials were inclined to the same view, for they shared the burden of finding money and men for the war. Hence the young king tended to be surrounded by men inclined to a peace policy; and as he was very pacific by nature, he was not loth to support this policy. His wishes were now of importance, for in 1437 he came of age.5 He had grown up into a gentle and saintly6 scholar, who lacked the force of character, military skill, administrative ability and power of leadership essential for the kingship at this time. Too humble to defend with vigour the interests of the crown, too generous to resist any requests at his expense, as formal head of the government from 1437 he incurred the blame for the growing failure of the war, the increasing debts of the crown and the mismanagement and acquisitiveness of the Beaufort party which henceforth virtually controlled the government. Too kind to reprimand those around him, too loyal to dismiss unpopular ministers, he upheld the Beaufort party until the crown itself was discredited. The domination of the Beaufort faction resulted increasingly in the alienation of the Duke of Gloucester, whose views were more and more ignored. However misguided his opinions might be, especially his jingoistic advocacy of “No surrender!”7 it was a serious matter to estrange the heir to the crown. More serious still in the long run was to prove the alienation of Richard Duke of York, heir to the vast estates of the Mortimers and descended from both the third and fifth sons of Edward III.8 Though inferior in generalship to Henry V and Bedford, he had achieved some success in campaigns in France in the 1430s. He was therefore naturally annoyed when his appointment as Lieutenant-General of France was virtually superseded in 1442 by a commission to the nephew of Cardinal Beaufort, John Beaufort Earl of Somerset, especially as Somerset’s expedition to Northern France in 1443 proved a fiasco. Its failure helped to convince the English government that an early truce was essential;1 and so it sent another member of 2

W.Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, III (5th edn, 1896), 124. D.N. 135. 4 D.N. 136. But his influence had been declining since his title of protector had been abolished in 1429. D.N. 129. 5 D.N. 234. 6 It was later said that he had given evidence of his piety as a baby, by refusing then to travel on a Sunday. D.N. 120. 7 D.N. 136. 8 See Genealogical Table. 1 The English government was trying to gain an ally in France by using the bargaining counter of their king’s eligibility as a bridegroom; though Henry was human enough to be interested in the appearance of any bride that might be offered to him. D.N. 137. 3

English historical documents

24

the Beaufort party, William de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, to France to negotiate. As the French were now winning, they were in no mood for concessions; but for the sake of the prestige of both himself and his party, Suffolk, was desperately anxious not to go home empty-handed. Hence he agreed to a truce of only two years in return for a promise to surrender Maine; and he accepted Margaret of Anjou as Henry’s bride without any dowry.2 So in April 1445 she came to England, disliked from the start, for she appeared to Humphrey and his supporters as the symbol of surrender to France; and her unpopularity increased as the news of the promise of the cession of Maine gradually leaked out. Moreover, Margaret came to England as a girl of sixteen, without any training for affairs of state, but strongwilled and ardent. Grateful to Suffolk and the Beauforts for her elevation, but wholly inexperienced in politics, she fell into the grave blunder of assuming that their friends must be her friends and their foes her foes. Her indomitable spirit soon established a complete ascendancy over the impressionable king; and so the crown became even more closely associated with a party than before. By 1446 the French were pressing for the fulfilment of the pledge to surrender Maine; but it was clear that Gloucester would oppose this to the utmost. Hence Margaret and the Beauforts determined to silence him. An impeachment was pre-pared and he was summoned to a parliament to be held, not at Westminster, near to his friends in London, but at Bury St Edmunds, a place where Suffolk was influential. As soon as Gloucester arrived at Bury he was arrested; and five days later he died.3 Probably he died from shock and the weakening of his constitution by his own excesses; but in the circumstances his death looked very suspicious. It was soon believed that he had been murdered, and in contrast to the increasingly unpopular Beauforts he was remembered as “the good Duke Humphrey”. His death weakened the regime, for not only did it supply the opposition with a “martyr”, but it left as the heir presumptive to the throne Richard Duke of York, more formidable than Humphrey in the intelligence of his mind, the wealth of his estates, the importance of his kindred, and the claims of his ancestry. Richard would have liked to be reappointed Lieutenant of France; but through the influence of Margaret and Suffolk, Edmund Beaufort secured the post and was made Duke of Somerset. York was in effect banished by being made Lieutenant of Ireland for ten years. Regarded as a defeat by himself and his friends, this appointment was a blessing in disguise for York, for he used it to win for himself in Ireland a popularity and a following which were to stand him in good stead later, and his absence from France absolved him from responsibility for the disasters that were soon to befall the English cause there. The English government, by this time in debt to the extent of nearly £400,000, was almost desperately short of men and supplies for the defence of Normandy; yet it not only planned an attack from Normandy on Brittany in time of truce by a military adventurer, but refused reparation when the French government complained of the aggression. In July 1449 Charles VII therefore naturally declared war.1 The campaign that followed was an almost uninterrupted series of victories for the French, strengthened as they were by the reforms of the last decade in army organisation and artillery production. On 23 October 1449 2

T.Gascoigne, Loci e Libro Veritatum (ed. J.E.T.Rogers, 1881), 190, 204, 219. D.N. 136. For his discrediting in 1441 by the condemnation of his wife for witchcraft, see D.N. 514. For the contemporary belief in witchcraft, see D.N. 508. 1 D.N. 139. 3

The political framework

25

Somerset surrendered the key city of Rouen; and on 15 April 1450, the last relief force sent out from England under Sir Thomas Kyriell was overwhelmed at Formigny.2 On 12 August 1450 the French entered Cherbourg; and the last foothold of the English in Normandy was lost. We are not surprised by these swift disasters; for we can review the financial exhaustion of the English crown, the pitifully feeble defences of Normandy, the welcome given by its inhabitants to the French forces, the military and psychological revival of the French monarchy.3 But to the English people of the time the rapid loss of Normandy came as an unexpected catastrophe; and the result was a great surge of resentment against those in the government who were held responsible. The former Keeper of the Privy Seal, Bishop Adam Moleyns, who went to Portsmouth in January 1450 with arrears of pay for Kyriell’s soldiers, was lynched by them as a traitor.4 Shortly afterwards Suffolk was impeached in parliament for mismanagement, corruption and treasonable relations with the French. The king tried to save him by banishing him for five years; but on his way to France Suffolk’s ship was intercepted by a mutinous royal ship and he was beheaded by its crew.5 Four weeks later a large and not unrepresentative part of the people of Kent rose under Jack Cade, protesting against the government’s feebleness, corruption, failure to do justice and loss of the king’s lands in France through treason; they sought the dismissal of all Suffolk’s “false progeny and affinity” and the recall of the Duke of York.6 As soon as the rising was suppressed, York answered the call by returning unbidden from Ireland and demanding the immediate imprisonment of persons accused of high treason. This demand was echoed in parliament in 1451 when the commons accused thirty persons, headed by the Duke of Somerset, of causing the loss of Normandy and disturbing the peace at home; and Thomas Yonge, member for Bristol, petitioned that York be recognised as heir to the throne.7 The government’s alarm is shown by Yonge’s immediate imprisonment; but its attention had now to be turned to Gascony. When Normandy had been conquered, there was a short pause while the French regrouped their forces and made their plans. Then between October 1450 and June 1451 they overran the land of Gascony which had been a possession of the English crown for three hundred years; the artillery arm developed by the Bureau brothers was 2

D.N. 142. D.N. 143. 4 D.N. 141. 5 D.N. 144. Henry V had built up a navy and in 1419 was constructing at Bayonne one of the biggest ships yet constructed in northern waters, D.N. in. The council of Henry VI’s minority sold off most of the ships, however, and used most of the proceeds for current expenses (ibid.). The result was widespread discontent, especially amongst the merchant class, at the weakness of English sea-power and the resulting piracy, even in the English Channel. By 1449 the situation had grown so bad that the council authorized a group of nobles, knights and squires to send out ships as privateers, D.N. 238. The result of this was to make the maritime anarchy worse, and to alienate friendly powers at a critical moment in the French war. For in 1449 the privateers captured a large fleet of Flemish, Dutch and Hanseatic merchant ships, for which they at first refused to pay compensation. D.N. 140. 6 D.N. 146. Cf. D.N. 145, 147. 7 D.N. 284 Cf. D.N. 148. 3

English historical documents

26

especially conspicuous in these successes. This fresh disaster undermined still further the authority of the government, prompting York to issue on 3 February 1452 a manifesto against the Duke of Somerset, who was blamed for the reverses in Normandy and Gascony and the threat to Calais and England that might follow; then Richard marched on London.1 The government was too weak to oppose him by force; so it resorted to trickery. It induced Richard to disband his forces on promise of redress of grievances; when he had done this, he found himself a prisoner. He was released only on condition that he would never take the law into his own hands again; and the government turned to the task of winning friends in England and helping a rising in Gascony, whose leaders were mindful of old ties with the English crown and resentful of taxation by the French conqueror. An expeditionary force under a veteran of the French wars, John Talbot Earl of Shrewsbury, was sent out to Gascony in October 1452 and was welcomed throughout the Bordelais. In the spring of 1453, however, Charles VII sent a large army to Gascony; and on 17 July 1453 the two armies met in battle at Castillon. There Talbot was killed and his force overwhelmed;2 significantly, he tried to use the old English device of a combination of archers and men at arms, and his force was destroyed by the gun batteries of Jean Bureau. Except for Calais, the English crown held henceforth not a foot of land in France, and now there was no hope of recovery. This crowning disaster might in any event have brought the downfall of Somerset; but his ruin was hastened by the fact that in August 1453 the anxieties of the overtaxed king led to a mental breakdown.3 As soon as his madness became known, both the queen and the Duke of York claimed the regency. The commons in the parliament of 1453 were Lancastrian in sympathy; but their speaker, Thomas Thorpe, was imprisoned for rashly laying hands on some arms and armour of the Duke of York,4 whose friends in the lords secured the imprisonment of the Duke of Somerset. By March 1454 York could be resisted no longer and he was appointed Protector and Defender of the Realm; but the precariousness of his position even among the lords is shown by the provision of penalties for lords who failed to attend parliament.5 The fact was that the nobility was so divided by disputes and private wars that although the government was unpopular because of its failures,6 the adherence of one magnate to York meant the automatic devotion of his rival to Somerset. Thus the support of Courtenays in Devon and Nevilles in Yorkshire cost York the hostility there of Bonvilles and Percies.7 Hence when Henry recovered his wits at Christmas 1454 and resumed nominal control of the government, Margaret resolved to prevent York from ever gaining power again. In October 1453 she had borne a son, the defence of whom at once became the prime object of her life. In spite of his disappointment and surprise, York had recognised the child as heir to the throne; but Margaret’s fear of the duke as a possible rival made her his implacable foe. Early in 1455 she secured the release of Somerset and the dismissal of the ministers appointed by York; then she and Somerset prepared to crush their opponent. Hence in 1

D.N. 149. D.N. 150. 3 D.N. 151. 4 D.N. 281. 5 D.N. 282. 6 D.N. 152. 7 cf. D.N. 727, 728. 2

The political framework

27

May 1455 York and his wife’s kinsmen, the powerful Neville clan, took up arms and marched on London. They were confronted at St Albans by Somerset and his supporters, including the king. After half an hour’s battle the Dukes of Somerset and Northumberland lay dead with Lord Clifford, and the Lancastrians were routed.1 The victorious Yorkists treated the king with respect,2 for many men were shocked by the attack on the king’s standard and person. But Margaret was irreconcilable, and both sides began to manœuvre for a decisive conflict.3 Thus by the end of 1456 Margaret had secured the dismissal of Yorkist ministers and councillors, whereas the Yorkists had succeeded in obtaining the important post of Captain of Calais4 for Richard Neville Earl of Warwick, and prepared to discredit the government still further by assisting in 1457 in an attack on one of the government’s episcopal supporters, Bishop Reginald Pecock, who was accused of heresy.5 Both sides tried to increase their influence in the countryside, and to increase the size of their affinities. Henry tried to keep the peace between both parties but by 1459 they were ready for civil war. Many of the merchant class sympathised with the Yorkists, as trade and order had so little chance of protection from the Lancastrian government;6 but in general the middle and lower classes stood aside and let the barons and their followers fight it out. In September 1459 Richard Neville earl of Salisbury raised troops in Yorkshire and marched to join York and Warwick at Ludlow Castle, after defeating Lancastrian forces at Blore Heath near Market Drayton.7 The king led an army to Ludlow and the loyalty to the crown was still sufficient to cause the Yorkist forces to refuse to fight against the king in person; the Yorkist leaders fled to Calais and Ireland,8 whence they returned in 1460. After Salisbury, Warwick, and York’s eldest son, Edward, had won the battle of Northampton in July 1460 and captured the king, York returned from Ireland and claimed the throne.9 The queen was however still at large in the north,10 gathering forces; and when in December York went to his castle at Sandal near Wakefield to watch her, he was by his own rashness surprised and killed at the battle of Wakefield.11 But Margaret’s ruthlessness after the battle, and the plundering of her wild Welsh and northern levies as she marched south, alienated many. In February 1461 in the second battle of St Albans, she defeated the Earl of Warwick in a conflict notable for the Yorkists’ use of hand guns;12 but King Henry begged her not to enter London, where her savage troops might 1

D.N. 153. D.N. 154, 155. 3 D.N. 157. 4 Cf. G.L.Harriss: “The Struggle for Calais: An Aspect of the Rivalry between Lancaster and York” E.H.R. 75 (1960), 30–53. 5 D.N. 516, 517, 518. 6 D.N. 156, 158. 7 D.N. 159. 8 The victorious Lancastrians held a parliament at Coventry, a centre of Lancastrian influence, and attainted the Yorkist leaders. D.N. 160. 9 D.N. 161. 10 D.N. 162. 11 D.N. 163. 12 D.N. 164. 2

English historical documents

28

have alienated support by their plundering. While she hesitated, Richard’s eldest son Edward, after winning a battle at Mortimer’s Cross near Wigmore, marched swiftly to London, which he and Warwick entered with their combined forces. The killing of Yorkist leaders at Wakefield and the outrages afterwards of Margaret’s army had swept away the last hesitations of Edward and the Nevilles. On 4 March 1461 Edward seated himself on a throne in Westminster Hall and was hailed by the crowd there as king by hereditary right.13 Then, with that speed which helped to make him the best general of the civil war, he hastily assembled his forces and flew after the retreating Lancastrians. He overtook them at Towton in Yorkshire where on Palm Sunday the Lancastrians were defeated with terrible slaughter; Henry, Margaret and their son had to flee for their lives.1 Edward then returned to London for his coronation. He was at this time a tall handsome youth of nineteen; his good looks and affable ways made him popular, especially with the Londoners, whose favour he was always careful to seek.2 He was to reveal himself in time as a born general and a strong ruler; but as yet he seemed to be only an able soldier, who thought only of wine, women and pageantry when the fighting was done.3 The most important man in the realm was thought to be Richard Neville Earl of Warwick in right of his wife and Earl of Salisbury by inheritance from his father. Lord of vast estates, he wielded great influence by his liberality and his large affinity.4 Captain of Calais since 1456, he had won popularity by his naval exploits. A skilful diplomat, who had gained a papal legate for the Yorkist cause at a critical moment, Warwick’s prestige rose higher still during the campaigns of 1462 to 1464 when he and his brother John Neville, Lord Montagu, helped to capture the remaining Lancastrian strongholds in the north-east and to crush the attempts of the indomitable Queen Margaret, aided by the French, to gain a foothold there.5 When in 1465 Henry VI was captured in his hiding place near Clitheroe,6 it seemed as though the Nevilles’ efforts to defeat the Lancastrians had been completely successful. Already another threat to Warwick’s power had, however, appeared in the royal household itself. In 1464 when he was in the midst of negotiations with France for the marriage of Edward to a French princess, to seal an agreement with that country which would end French support for the Lancastrians, he was astounded and dis-gusted to hear that the king had made a secret marriage with a beautiful young widow, Elizabeth Woodville.7 Not only was her family of no great importance, but she was the widow and daughter of Lancastrians. Moreover, Edward began to shower favours on her two sons, her five brothers and her seven sisters, building up a group of magnates who would be a counterpoise to Warwick and the Nevilles. It has been pointed out that the Nevilles had 13

D.N. 165. D.N. 165. 1 D.N. 166. 2 D.N. 200. 3 D.N. 167; but cf. D.N. 168. 4 D.N. 167. His lavish hospitality to all comers was outstanding even in an age of open great households. Whenever he stayed in London, he provided six oxen for breakfast. (The Great Chronicle of London, ed. A.H. Thomas and I.D.Thornley (1939), 207). 5 D.N. 169, 172. Cf. D.N. 170. 6 D.N. 173. 7 D.N. 171. 13

The political framework

29

also risen to power not so long before by matri-monial triumphs, and that the Nevilles took more from the royal bounty in titles, lands, offices and money grants than the Woodvilles.8 Nevertheless, it was humiliat-ing for Warwick, after years of undisputed dominance, to have powerful rivals for the royal favour; and some contemporaries dated the beginning of the rift between Edward and Warwick from this marriage.9 Moreover, Warwick was henceforth increasingly thwarted in his special field of foreign policy, where he found himself publicly humiliated for a second time in 1467. While he was away in France, negotiat-ing for an alliance with Louis XI, who flattered him by treating him as a powerful prince, Edward held a splendid tournament in London between the Bastard of Burgundy and the queen’s brother, Anthony Woodville, Lord Scales.1 Not only were the Woodvilles conspicuously present and the Nevilles notably absent, but the tournament was used as a cover for negotiations for an alliance with the Duke of Burgundy against France, an alliance sealed the next year by a magnificent wedding between Charles Duke of Burgundy and the king’s sister Margaret.2 Warwick in his disappointment fomented conspiracies against the king in 1468 and 1469, aided by Louis, who was alarmed at the prospect of an Anglo-Burgundian coalition against France.3 Warwick found an ally in King Edward’s weak brother, George Duke of Clarence,4 who resented the influence of the Woodvilles; and in 1469 Warwick married his elder daughter and co-heiress to Clarence in defiance of Edward’s orders.5 When the complicity of Warwick and Clarence in a Lincolnshire rising of 1470 was clearly proved, they fled for their lives to the court of Louis XI.6 He was willing to help, on condition that they became reconciled with Queen Margaret and that they made war on Burgundy as soon as they were back in power in England. Both sides found reconciliation very difficult, in view of past events; but Louis eventually induced them to come to terms. Warwick’s younger daughter Anne was betrothed to Margaret’s only son Edward; and a united invasion of England by Lancastrian and Neville exiles became possible. In September 1470 Warwick, Clarence and Lancastrian supporters landed in Devon and marched on London. Edward IV, decoyed to the north by a petty rising there, was betrayed by Warwick’s brother, Marquis Montagu, whom he had favoured and trusted implicitly. He had to flee to the Netherlands, where his brother-in-law sheltered him but gave him no help, as Charles hoped to retain the friendship of England under its new rulers. But as soon as Warwick had released Henry VI from the Tower7 and made arrangements for the government,8 Louis reminded him of his obligation to attack Burgundy; and in January 1471 Warwick, under pressure from France, began an attack 8

J.R.Lander, “Marriage and Politics in the Fifteenth Century: The Nevilles and the Wydevilles”, B.I.H.R. 36 (1963), 119–52. 9 D.N. 171. 1 D.N. 689. 2 D.N. 177, 690. Cf. D.N. 175, the treaty with Burgundy; treaties for friendship and trade had already been made with Denmark and Castile. 3 D.N. 176. 4 D.N. 174, 178. 5 In 1469 Warwick and Clarence captured the king, but soon had to release him in order to raise men by royal authority to suppress a Lancastrian rising. D.N. 179. 6 D.N. 180, 181. 7 D.N. 184. 8 D.N. 182.

English historical documents

30

on Burgundy from Calais.9 Naturally the Duke of Burgundy at once arranged to support Edward in an attempt to recover his inheritance; and in March 1471 the exiled king landed in Yorkshire. He swiftly out-manoeuvred Warwick and was joined by his brother Clarence, who had realised that his ambitions were thwarted by Warwick’s alliance with Margaret. Edward speedily entered London, where he was welcomed, and then marched out to encounter Warwick at Barnet. The ensuing battle, on Easter Day 1471, was confused because of the thick mist, but it ended in the death of Warwick and other leaders of his forces and complete disaster for his army.10 On that very day Margaret landed at Weymouth with her son and other fellow exiles.11 To save her son from a hazardous attempt she would have returned to France when she heard of Warwick’s disaster, but her advisers persuaded her that it was now or never and that she might gain support in Wales. It then became a race between her forces and those of King Edward as to who should reach the Welsh border first; but Edward with his usual gift for speed, overtook the Lancastrians at Tewkesbury and there won a crushing victory.1 Margaret’s son was slain on the field, nearly all the Lancastrian leaders were killed in battle or executed afterwards and Margaret was captured. Now that Henry’s son was dead, there was no ground, apart from moral principles, to keep the mad king alive; and the day after Edward’s triumphant return to London it was officially announced that Henry died in the Tower of London “of pure displeasure and melancholy”.2 These events saw the end of Lancastrian hopes and of Edward’s dangers; and they mark the end of the period of weakness of the monarchy and the beginning of a period of strength. It is true that the nobility was less reduced by death in the civil wars than was formerly thought3 and that attainders were not such a pure financial gain to the crown as was previously supposed, since loyal followers had to be rewarded and opponents to be reconciled by judicious grants.4 But the monarchy’s chronic lack of resources was being filled in part by the wide estates of the house of York and by confiscations and resumptions of land. And in the coming century the crown would be greatly helped by the memories of the disorders, divisions, cruelties and impoverishment of the civil war; for Englishmen would now rather submit to arbitrary acts and oppressive policies than risk by rebellion a revival of family feuds and civil strife. Once he was safe on his throne, Edward could turn to the punishment of Louis XI and the gratification of his subjects’ wishes by planning the invasion of France.5 Parliament granted more money for the war than Edward had received in all the previous years of his reign; and in June 1475 he invaded France with the largest army of the century.6 But 9

D.N. 185. D.N. 186. 11 D.N. 183. 1 D.N. 187, 188. Even so faithful a supporter of the Lancastrians as Sir John Fortescue submitted after Tewkesbury to Edward IV. 2 D.N. 189, 190, 191. 3 Of sixty-five peers in 1487, forty-eight had at least one title of nobility dating from before 1455. Only a dozen or so of the titles of nobility were finally extinguished by the Wars of the Roses. Cf. K.B.McFarlane “The Wars of the Roses”, Proceedings of the British Academy, 50 (1966), 115– 117. 4 Cf. J.R.Lander, “Attainder and Forfeiture, 1453 to 1509”, The Historical Journal, 4 (1961), 119– 51.5 D.N. 193, 194. 6 D.N. 195. 10

The political framework

31

France was now united and prepared, the Duke of Burgundy was not ready, and memories of English failures in the reign of Henry VI must have been discouraging. When Louis offered to buy Edward off, the King of England agreed; and the grant of 75,000 gold crowns down and an annual pension of 50,000 crowns helped to make Edward independent of parliamentary grants for over seven years.7 The treaty of Picquigny was humiliating to English pride, but it did not alienate the merchant classes; for its commercial clauses, together with the treaty with the Hanseatic League in 14748 and the increased peacefulness at home,9 helped to promote a great revival of trade and prosperity. After Picquigny, Edward turned to trade as one way of making money;10 for he became increasingly avaricious, and built up a hoard, partly by abstaining from warfare, partly by making economies in administration, partly by raising more money from his estates, from the customs duties and from his rights as king and as feudal overlord.1 The downfall and death of “false, fleeting perjured Clarence” in 14782 brought in more revenues from Clarence’s wide estates, administered profitably, like other recent acquisitions of property, by the treasurer of the household and his officials instead of by the Exchequer.3 When Edward died in 1483, he left a fortune—the first English king to do so since the twelfth century. He had begun to solve the chronic disorder and insubordination of Wales and the Marches and the north by councils based on Ludlow and York, under his eldest son, the Prince of Wales, and under his brother, the Duke of Gloucester.4 They wielded by royal commission wide judicial and military authority; and their power was backed by the great Mortimer estates, placed at the disposal of the Prince of Wales, and the vast Neville estates in the north, conferred on the Duke of Gloucester. So well did each of these councils do their work that they became the basis of the Councils of Wales and the Marches and the Council of the North under Tudor rule. Even in the early 14808 it looked as though they were contributing towards the establishment of a strong monarchy, basing its claims on the indefeasible divine right of hereditary kingship, powerful enough to preserve order and unity within the realm, and wealthy enough to dispense with parliamentary grants, and hence with parliamentary criticism in time of peace. But in 1483 Edward IV died at the age of forty, perhaps worn out by dissolute living, perhaps killed by anxiety and malaria, leaving as his successor, not a competent grownup son, but a boy of twelve.5 His youth seemed to open up a dismal prospect of a minority weakened by quarrels between the Woodvilles and Greys on the one hand and the older nobility and the administrators of Edward IV like Lord Hastings on the other. 7

D.N. 196. Queen Margaret was shortly afterwards ransomed for 50,000 crowns in return for her renunciation to Louis XI of all claims to her father’s inheritance, Rymer, Foedera (Hague edn), V. iii. 68, 79. 8 D.N. 605. 9 Some soldiers were sent off to fight for Burgundy. D.N. 197. 10 He had gone into the shipping business as a merchant very early in his reign. D.N. 168, 586. 1 D.N. 198, 333, 334. 2 D.N. 192, 199. 3 D.N. 335; cf. B.P.Wolffe, “The Management of English Royal Estates under the Yorkist Kings”, E.H.R. 71 (1956). 4 D.N. 359, 360. 5 He was born in sanctuary at Westminster at the beginning of November 1470 (Croyland Chronicle Continuation, ed. W.Fulman (1684), 554).

English historical documents

32

The Woodvilles were unpopular and most Englishmen were heartily tired of civil war; these factors helped to account for Gloucester’s easy triumph. As Edward IV’s only surviving brother he had a claim to an important share in the government of the minority; and he had a good reputation at his brother’s death.6 In contrast to his brother Clarence he had always been faithful to Edward IV, and he was known as a good soldier, a capable administrator and a humane arbitrator in the north. He therefore gained approval when he struck down the Woodvilles and Greys as they seemed to be about to attempt a coup d’état against him. Then he appears to have realised that in doing so he had probably incurred the lasting hostility of the young king, brought up by Anthony Woodville, Lord Rivers and Sir Richard Grey. Hence he determined to take the plunge and usurp the throne. So he accepted a story that Edward’s children were all bastards,7 though without any public investigation by any ecclesiastical court, the lawful authority to pronounce on such matters; and he executed a number of determined opponents such as Hastings,8 Rivers and Grey without trial. There was no opposition, partly because men were cowed, and partly because a grown and capable man seemed likely to give the realm firmer government than a child could do. But when he shut up the ex-king and his younger brother in the Tower of London so closely that no one ever saw them after July 1483,1 there was a revulsion of feeling against him, except in the north where he had made himself popular. The disappearance of these innocent boys broke up the Yorkist party into those who upheld the cause of Edward IV’s children and the small number who were prepared to stand by Richard through thick and thin. One of his chief supporters, the Duke of Buckingham, rebelled against him in October 1483; and it was ominous that he was supported by a coalition of diverse elements—adherents of Edward IV, Clarence, the Woodvilles and Greys and the Lancastrians.2 The rebellion was defeated by Richard’s promptness and Buckingham’s ill-luck with floods barring his way; but the king could not feel safe. It was in vain that Richard strove to make himself popular by acts of parliament to encourage trade, to suppress intimidation and corruption injustice, to stop the extortion of benevolences.3 In vain did he uphold the clergy4 and the building of churches, advocate morality among the people, patronise learning, practise kingly magnificence, show magnanimity towards dependants of some of his fallen opponents. Had he come to the throne in a normal way, his skill as a soldier and administrator, his courage, intelligence, culture and generosity might have given him a long and successful reign.5 He may have hoped that, like King John, he would live down the sinister disappearance of his nephew6 and survive to become a favoured son of the church; but time was not on his side. His only son died in April 14847 and the insecure basis of his 6 7

D.N. 201.

D.N. 202. 8 D.N. 203. 1 D.N. 205. 2 D.N. 206; Rot. Parl., VI, 244–9. 3 D.N. 204, 608. For the act forbidding benevolences, see S.R., II, 478. 4 British Museum, Harleian, MS. 433, f. 281b. 5 For Richard’s popularity in York, see D.N. 375. 6 D.N. 207, 208. 7 D.N. 209.

The political framework

33

power was still further weakened by forced loans which he had to raise in the spring of 1485 to finance defences against invasion threatened by the Lancastrian claimant, Henry Tudor. Until 1483 Henry had seemed of little account; for he was descended only from the originally illegitimate Beauforts through his mother, and his paternal grandfather, Owen Tudor, was merely a minor Welsh squire. Ever since 1471 Henry had had to live in hazardous and impoverished exile, first in Brittany, latterly in France. But now the weakness of Richard’s power gave Henry his unexpected chance.8 When Henry landed at Milford Haven in August 1485 he was able to collect enough soldiers in his native Wales to march forward to meet Richard in battle at Bosworth in Leicestershire; whereas too many of Richard’s principal subjects, on whom the raising of troops depended, doubted his survival and waited to see what happened. At the battle Richard had the larger army and attacked with vigour and courage; but part of his army under Northumberland failed to support him and part under the Stanleys joined in on Henry Tudor’s side.9 These disaffections cost Richard not only the victory but his life.10 At the time Bosworth did not seem to have any special significance other than the obvious fact that one rival for the throne had killed another. There had been so many upheavals within living memory that many men were very doubtful whether Henry could remain king for long. His accession seemed of less importance to contemporaries than the upheavals of 1461 and 1399 had done in their time. His title to the throne by inheritance was weak, and his claim by possession could be acquired by any successful usurper. The Yorkist cause was still popular in many parts of the realm, especially the north and Ireland, and the Burgundian-Hapsburg house worked for his overthrow. As late as 1495 he was still so insecure that an act was passed exonerating any who assisted him from subsequent impeachment or attainder. He did not feel at all safe until 1499, when Clarence’s son, Warwick and Warbeck, the skilful impersonator of the younger son of Edward IV, had been beheaded. Even in the days of Henry VIII the fear persisted that the battle of Bosworth might not have been permanently decisive; this helps to explain not only his ardent longing for a male heir, but his execution of possible Yorkist rivals as late as 1541. This anxiety also helps us to understand the creation of the “Tudor myth”—that the deposition and death of Richard II, however understandable in the light of circumstances, had been a break with the natural order of the world, as ordained by God. Hence such unnatural deeds, save for the intervals of the reigns of Henry V and Edward IV, could lead only to disorder, crimes and civil war, until the poison in the body politic was concentrated in an epitome of villainy, Richard III.1 Then God could deliver England from this evil spell by sending His angel of light, Henry Tudor, to slay this monster at Bosworth and restore order and justice, peace and prosperity, to a grateful land.2 The 8

D.N. 210. D.N. 212. 10 D.N. 213. 1 D.N. 211. 2 Within twenty years after Bosworth, Bernard André, tutor to Prince Arthur, was writing of Henry Tudor’s return to England in 1485 as that of God’s deliverer, to free the realm from the oppression of a tyrant (Historia Regis Henrici Septimi, ed. J.Gairdner, Rolls Series, 1858, pp 25–33); within another fifty years Edward Hall could allow no lesser power than the Holy Ghost to convince the Duke of Buckingham of Henry Tudor’s title to the throne, and he could compare the union of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York to the union of Godhead and manhood in Jesus Christ (E.Hall, Chronicle, (ed. Henry Ellis, 1809), 387, 389, 2. 9

English historical documents

34

battle of Bosworth was thus endowed with great significance in the political life of England; and by the end of the reign of Henry VIII the supporters of the developing “Tudor Myth” were coming to see in it the introduction also to the Renaissance and Reformation in England. By Shakespeare’s day the battle of Bosworth thus came to seem the most important date in English history, marking the “end of medieval England” and the “beginning of modern times”.3 This tradition persisted until the early twentieth century; but few, if any, would now ascribe to it such epoch-making significance. It was merely an episode, albeit an important one, in the political history of “medieval England”. SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY I. ORIGINAL SOURCES A. PUBLIC RECORDS Like most of the sources, these records are nearly all of use for more than one aspect of the period. Of particular value for the political background, however, are most of the Chancery enrolments. Indispensable for some political events are the Rolls of Parliament, vols 2 to 6 (London, 1767), of which more will be said under “The Government of the Realm” (Part 11). There is a useful index volume (Record Commission, 1832). The Calendar of Charter Rolls, vols 4 to 6 (1912–27) summarise the royal charters and confirmations enrolled in the Chancery; these are the most honorific of the Chancery’s administrative records, but by the end of the period they were giving place for most purposes to letters patents, which did the job as well but with less ceremony and cost. The letters patents, which include a great range of public orders, from letters of incorporation of London gilds to instructions restoring temporalities to newly elected bishops, are calendared for this period in 37 volumes (1891–1916). The Calendars of Close Rolls (36 vols, 1896–1954) give abstracts of letters close, which were closed or sealed letters addressed to one or more persons. As the means of transmitting the private instructions of the king and his government they were rapidly being supplanted towards the end of this period by letters issued under the privy seal and signet; and the close rolls were coming to be of interest mainly for the enrolments on the dorse or back, such as private deeds of conveyance, recorded there for security. The Calendars of Fine Rolls (21 vols, 1912–61) record payments made to the king for various concessions, such as pardons and licences. Calendars of French Rolls for the reigns of Henry V and Henry VI are printed in the Deputy Keeper’s 44th Report (1883), App., 545–638, and 48th Report (1887), App., 217– 450. A Calendar of Norman Rolls, 6–10 Henry V is published in the Deputy Keeper’s 41st Report (1880), App., 671–810, and 42nd Report (1881), App., 313–472; the Norman Roll for 5 Henry V has been printed in full (Record Commission, 1835). This commission also published the Scottish Rolls from Edward I to Henry VIII (2 vols, 1814–19). Most important of all for treaties and state letters is T.Rymer’s Foedera, Conventiones, Literae, et cujuscunque generis Acta Publica (The Hague edn, 1739–45, vols 2 to 5), which, in spite of imperfections, was a remarkable feat for one man to achieve in early eighteenth3

Cf. especially Henry Tudor’s final speech in King Richard III, Act V, scene 5.

The political framework

35

century conditions, and is still indispensable. Another important collection of documents is the Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council in England, ed. Sir N.H.Nicolas (7 vols, Record Commission, 1834–7) which, drawn from various sources, illuminate the varied work of the King’s Council. Nicolas found many documents in the Cottonian collection in the British Museum, as Sir Robert Cotton, the noted Jacobean antiquary, had abstracted them from the public records. It is fortunate for their survival that he did so, for nearly all the records of the Privy Seal and Signet offices (in which one would have expected to find most information about the activities of the council) were destroyed in the great Whitehall fire of January 1619 in the old banqueting hall. Partly for this reason it has not been possible to build up a series of domestic state papers for this period comparable to that which exists for the reign of Henry VIII onwards; but state papers in some foreign archives throw important light on English history in the later fifteenth century. The Calendar of State Papers of Venice, etc. (vol. I, ed. R.Brown, 1864) abstracted documents relating to English affairs, at first from various archives of Northern Italy, but soon, owing to the wealth of material, from those of Venice alone. The Calendar of State Papers of Milan relating to English affairs (vol. 1, ed. A.B.Hinds, 1912) is even more valuable for English politics, for the precarious position of the Sforza dukes of Milan in the later fifteenth century made them eager for reports on every political development in Western Europe that could possibly have any repercussion on their position in Milan. A register of signet letters for the reigns of Edward V and Richard III survives as Harleian MS. 433, and many of the documents for the reign of Edward V have been included in Grants from the Crown during the Reign of King Edward V, ed. J.G.Nichols (Camden Society, 1854). A few other documents from this register were printed by J.Gairdner in Letters and Papers Illustrative of the Reigns of Richard III and Henry VII, vol. 1 (Rolls Series, 1861); but most of Harleian MS. 433 remains unpublished. Useful collections of letters and other documents from public records have been printed by various persons to illustrate particular subjects. Good examples are: (a) Crécy and Calais, ed. G.Wrottesley (William Salt Arch. Soc., Collections, 18, Pt II, 1897) which includes translated extracts from the Calais, Norman, French and memoranda rolls, and from the accounts of the treasurer of the household; (b) The Diplomatic Correspondence of Richard II, ed. E.Perroy (Camden, 3rd Series, 48, 1933); (c) Expeditions to Prussia and the Holy Land made by Henry, Earl of Derby afterwards Henry IV) in the years 1390–1 and 1392–3, being the Accounts kept by his treasurer during two years, ed. L.T.Smith (Camden, 2nd Series, 52, 1894); (d) Letters of Queen Margaret of Anjou and Bishop Beckington and others, ed. C.Munro (Camden Society, 86, 1863); (e) The Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, Secretary to Henry VI and Bishop of Bath and Wells, ed. G.Williams (2 vols, Rolls Series, 1872); (f) Letters and Papers illustrative of the Wars of the English in France during the reign of Henry VI, ed. J.Stevenson (2 vols in 3, Rolls Series, 1861–4). Collections and individual documents of this kind have often been printed in serial publications, for which the best guide, as noted in General Bibliography, above, is E.L.C.Mullins, Texts and Calendars (1958). For royal letters, Original Letters illustrative of English history, ed. H.Ellis, Three Series (11 vols, 1824–46) are still useful, as are Lettres de rois, reines, et autres personnages des cours de France et d’Angleterre, ed. A.Champollion-Figeac (Paris, 1839–47), and also Lettres de Louis XI, ed. J. Vaesen and E.Charavey (11 vols, Paris, 1883–1909). Letters and other documents in the public records of towns can be of value for political history, but to save

English historical documents

36

repetition these will be noted in the bibliography for “The Government of the Realm”. A useful introduction to relevant Scottish records of this period, both for political and for other aspects, will be found in the selections given in A Source Book of Scottish History, vols 1 and 2 (Edinburgh, 1952 and 1953), ed. W.Croft Dickinson, Gordon Donaldson and Isabel A.Milne. B. NARRATIVE SOURCES A significant shift took place in this period in the character of the narrative sources, with the rise to importance of narratives written by or for laymen in English. This was largely a fifteenth-century development and in the fourteenth century the composition of such narratives was still predominantly a matter for clerics. (a) Fourteenth Century, 1327–99 (i) Clerical writers. For the earlier years of Edward III a number of secular (i.e. nonmonastic) clerics are important. First a canon of St Paul’s cathedral, Adam of Murimuth, wrote a Continuatio Chronicorum (ed. E.M.Thompson, Rolls Series, 1889) which is meagre to 1337 but thenceforward a first-rate authority to 1347; he has much informed knowledge on events in London and on ecclesiastical and military affairs. Also useful for the history of the French wars is the De gestis mirabilibus regis Edwardi tertii of Robert of Avesbury (ed. E.M.Thompson, in the same volume as Murimuth) who, though registrar of the court of Canterbury, was specially interested in military affairs and included many diplomatic letters and dispatches. Geoffrey le Baker was an Oxfordshire man, who, at the request of his patron Sir Thomas de la More, wrote after 1341 a Chronicon (ed. E.M.Thompson, Oxford, 1889) which has independent value after 1324 and ends with the best account of the battle of Poitiers—though no description of this battle is free from difficulties. For the Scottish wars of the 1330s the two best accounts are by Austin canons. One was a canon of Bridlington, who wrote a Gesta Edwardi de Carnarvon, to which a continuation down to the death of Edward III was added, of little value after 1339. This chronicle was edited by Bishop Stubbs in Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I and II (Rolls Series, 1882–3, II, 25–151). The other account was written in the priory of Lanercost, Cumberland, and carries on to 1346, with a strong anti-Scottish bias. It was edited by J.Stevenson (Edinburgh, 1839) and translated for the years 1272– 1346 by Sir Henry Maxwell in the Scottish Historical Review, vols 6–10 (1909–13). A useful commentary by A.G.Little entitled, “The authorship of the Lanercost Chronicle”, was printed in his Franciscan Papers, Lists, and Documents (March 1943), 42–54. The Chronicon Monasterii de Melsa, 1150–1406, ed. E.A.Bond (3 vols, Rolls Series, 1866– 8), though written after 1399 and mainly useful for the abbey’s own affairs, has some information on Anglo-Scottish relations that is of value. From the Scottish side was written the Scotichronicon or Chronica gentis Scotorum, by John of Fordun (d. circa 1384). Probably a chantry priest in the cathedral of Aberdeen, Fordun made the first attempt to write a complete history of Scotland, from Noah to 1383, and his chronicle is valuable for the history of relations between Scotland and England. It was edited by W.F.Skene in Historians of Scotland, vols I and iv (Edinburgh, 1871–2). For the later years of the reign of Edward III there are fewer clerical chronicles, though an anonymous author added to Adam of Murimuth’s Chronicle a Continuation (to 1380) which, for the period 1359–77, seems to be the work of a well-informed contemporary. Murimuth’s

The political framework

37

Chronicle and the Continuation were edited by T.Hog for the English Historical Society, 1846. The tradition of historical composition at St Albans, which had been outstanding in the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries and had then died away, revived with the work of Thomas Walsingham. He wrote a Chronicon Angliae (ed. E.M.Thompson, Rolls Series, 1874) which, though it begins in 1322, does not become personal until 1376; thenceforward until it ends in 1388 it is a lively account, marked not only by its hostility to the Lollards but to John of Gaunt. The part to 1382 is really part of a Chronica Majora which is continued to 1392 in the Historia Anglicana, vol. 2 (ed. H.T. Riley, Rolls Series, 1864) and from 1392 to 1406 in Annales Ricardi II et Henrici IV (ed.H. T.Riley, Rolls Series, 1866). The interconnection of these sections and the fact of Walsingham’s authorship of them all is proved by V.H.Galbraith in the English Historical Review, 47 (1932), 12–30, and the introduction to The St Albans Chronicle (Oxford, 1937). Walsingham had strong prejudices (e.g. first against John of Gaunt, later against Richard II) but is from 1376 onwards of first-rate importance as a source. Professor Galbraith has also cleared up the nature of Knighton s Chronicon (ed. J.R.Lumby, Rolls Series, 1889– 95). He has shown that this important source for the history of the reign of Richard II was written by Knighton himself and not by a continuator as was formerly supposed. Galbraith also demonstrated that the last part of the chronicle (1377–95) was written first, though the earlier section contains information of special value (e.g. the account of the Black Death in 1348–9). See V.H. Galbraith, “The Chronicle of Henry Knighton”, Fritz Saxl, 1890–1948, ed. D.J.Gordon (1957), 136–45. Galbraith also drew attention to the importance of the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary’s, York (ed. V.H.Galbraith, Manchester, 1927) for the proceedings in the Good Parliament of 1376 and the events of the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 in London; both accounts seem to be those of eye-witnesses of the occurrences. Useful for some of the events of the reign of Richard H, especially of its final years, is the shorter chronicle of The Kirkstall Abbey Chronicles, ed. J.Taylor (Thoresby Soc. Publications, 42 (1952)). Also an eye-witness of some of the events he describes is that unscrupulous canon lawyer, Adam of Usk, whose Chronicon (ed. E.M.Thompson, 1904), written in the reign of Henry V, is a first-hand source for the parliament of 1397 and the revolution of 1399; in 1399 he was one of the special commission of “sages in the law” who advised on Henry’s claim to the crown. Though slight in general, the Dieulacres Chronicle (ed. V.H.Galbraith and M.V.Clarke, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 13 (1930)),1 is of interest for the revolution of 1399 because it provides independent confirmation for some of the statements in two French sources that were hitherto discounted; between them they cast doubt on the official version in the Rolls of Parliament and some of the chroniclers as in part misleading propaganda. Of these French sources, one was composed by a person, probably a clerk, in the household of Richard II’s second wife Isabella, with whom he probably came to England in 1396; this narrative, the Traïson et Mort de Richard II (ed. B.Williams, English Historical Society, 1846) gives an eye-witness account of Richard’s last farewell to his child-queen when he set off for Ireland and resumes its importance on his return until the end of the reign. Another eye-witness of Richard II’s reign for many of the events at Westminster 1

Another short narrative that throws some light on the final years of Richard II’s reign is the Kirkstall Chronicle, ed. J.Taylor; see above.

English historical documents

38

between 1381 and 1394 was “the Monk of Westminster”, possibly the royalist Lakyngheth, cellarer and twice treasurer of Westminster Abbey, whom the king wanted to make abbot in 1386–7. See J.A.Robinson, “An Unrecognized Westminster Chronicler”, Proceedings of the British Academy (1907–8), 61–77. This chronicle was written at the end of one of the MSS of Ranulf Higden’s Polychronicon and is printed as vol. ix of the Rolls Series edition of Higden by J.R.Lumby (1886). Ranulf Higden, a monk of St Werburgh’s, Chester, wrote a history in the 1340s on the grand scale, intended to cover all known lands since the creation of mankind, with special attention to England in the latter part. Perhaps because it claimed to be comprehensive, even if in consequence it was often scrappy and derivative, it became very popular with the growing public of literate laymen and in 1387 was translated into English by John of Trevisa. Its popularity continued so strongly that iu 1482 Caxton published a modernised version of Trevisa’s translation. Not only Caxton’s edition but over a hundred surviving MSS of this chronicle testify to the continuing demand for it throughout this period.1 John Taylor’s The Universal Chronicle of Ranulf Higden (Oxford, 1966) is a very useful study of this very influential work. (ii) Lay writers. When in 1482 Caxton printed his revision of Trevisa’s translation of Higden he added an eighth book continuing the history from 1377 to 1461. For his main narrative Caxton was dependent on various versions of a chronicle in English which he had already used for his Chronicles of England, published in 1480. This chronicle was the Brut, derived from London chronicles, and called the Brut because it was a history of Britain from the times of the mythical first king, Brutus, great-grandson of Aeneas. The Brut Chronicle was edited by F.W.D.Brie for the E.E.T.S. (o.s. Nos 131, 136, A.D. 1906, 1908). Unduly neglected by historians, it is important for three reasons. First, from the reign of Edward III it often preserves material otherwise unknown (see E.M.Thompson, Chronicon Galfridi le Baker, 183); secondly, in view of its translation from French into English in the later fourteenth century, of the number of versions that were made, and of the one hundred and sixty-seven surviving MSS, it is of great interest as showing the taste in history of the increasing literate lay public; thirdly, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries other history writers made much use of it, and its version of English history remained the general tradition down to the days of Milton. (See T.D.Kendrick, British Antiquity, 1950, for this last point.) Probably the greatest demand for the Brut was in London, where in the reign of Edward III a set of French annals was written, published by G.J. Aungier as the Croniques de London, 1260–1344 (Camden Society, 1844); they are useful, in spite of their naïvety, for events in London. For the Scottish wars of the 1330s the Scalacronica of Sir Thomas Grey of Heton is useful (ed. J.Stevenson, Edinburgh, 1836; English translation by H. Maxwell, Glasgow, 1907); it is the work of a knight when he was a prisoner of war in Edinburgh gaol in 1355. Another soldier historian was the herald of Sir John Chandos, who wrote in French a metrical Life of the Black Prince (ed. M.K.Pope and E.C.Lodge, 1910) which is valuable for the Castilian campaign of 1366–7. 1

Its popularity and authority became so great that it could even be cited in an Act of Parliament. In 1449 a law was passed forbidding markets or fairs to be held on Sundays or principal feast days (Rot. Parl. v, 152); and the Polychronicon was adduced as authority for the story that an angel appeared to King Henry II at Cardiff to tell him that there must be no markets or other profane activity on Sundays.

The political framework

39

(iii) Foreign writers. Pre-eminent was Jean Froissart who came to England in 1361 as a young clerk from Valenciennes to seek a career in the household of his countrywoman, Queen Philippa. His famous chronicle, covering the years 1307 to 1400, is often wildly inaccurate and confused; but he conveys better than any other writer the spirit of the selfconscious chivalry, the magnificence and the martial ardour of the court of Edward III. The best edition is that of S.Luce and G.Raynaud (Société de l’Histoire de France, 11 vols, Paris, 1869–99); but much of the spirit was caught in Lord Berners’s translation (1523–5), ed. W.P.Ker in 6 volumes (Tudor Translations, 1901–3). G.C.Macaulay published a useful abridgement in 1899. Other foreign chronicles of especial use for English history in this period are (a) Chronique Nortnande du XIVe siècle, ed. A. and E.Molinier (Paris, 1882). Valuable for the Anglo-French wars, especially 1337–72; (b) Jan de Klerk, Van de Derden Edeweert, Coninc van Engelant, (Ghent, 1840). Trans, into French by O.Delepierre, Édouard III, roi d’Angleterre en Belgique (Ghent, 1841). Useful for the years 1337–41; pro-English; (c) Chronique des Premiers Quatres Valois, 1327– 93, ed. S.Luce (Paris, 1862). Original for the wars of Normandy after 1350; (d) Chroniques des règnes de Jean II et de Charles V, ed. R.Delachanel (4 vols, Paris, 1910– 20); (e) the Chronique du religieux de St Denis, 1380–1422, ed. L.Bellaguet, Documents inédits (6 vols, Paris, 1839–52). Written by a secretary of Charles VI and useful for Anglo-French relations; (f) The Chronicle of Jean de Venette, ed. R.A.Newhall (Columbia University Press, 1953)—useful for the later stages of the French war in Edward III’s reign. This edition has a good bibliography; (g) Pedro López de Ayala, Chancellor of Castile, Crónicas de los Reyes de Castilla (Zurita, Madrid, 1779)— valuable for the Black Prince’s expedition to Castile, 1367 and that of John of Gaunt in 1386; (h) Jean Creton, Histoire du roy d’Angletcrre Richard, ed. J.A.C.Buchon, Collection des chroniques françaises, 24 (Paris, 1826), 321–466—useful for Richard II’s expedition to Ireland in 1399 and his return and capture by a ruse at Conway. For the argument that the real author of this work was John Trevor, Bishop of St Asaph, see E.J.Jones, “An examination of the authorship of The Deposition and Death of Richard II attributed to Creton”, Speculum, 15 (1940), 460–77. (iv) Political Poems and other Propaganda Pieces. Not unknown earlier, this kind of literature becomes more copious from the reign of Edward III. Vol. I of Political Poems and Songs, ed. T. Wright (Rolls Series, 1859) is a collection of topical verses in French, Latin and English for the reigns of Edward III and Richard II; especially striking are the vigorous anti-Scottish songs of Laurence Minot. Some other political poems of the period are published by R.C.Robbins in Historical Poems (Columbia University Press, 1959). Thomas Fa vent’s Historia mirabilis parliament, ed. M.McKisack (Camden Miscellany, XIV (1926)) is a piece of propaganda for the lords appellant written soon after the parliament of 1388. The popular hostility to Richard II at the end of his reign is reflected in works like Mum and the Sothsegger (ed. M.Day and R.Steele, E.E.T.S., 1936), and Richard the Redeless (Wright, Political Poems, I, 368). (b) The Fifteenth Century, 1399–1485 (i) Clerical Writers. Thomas Walsingham, the monk of St Albans, was continuing his writing to the end of the reign of Henry V.V.H.Galbraith published in 1937 from MS. Bodley 462 the part of the Chronica Majora hitherto unprinted, i.e. The St Albans Chronicle, 1406–1420. The Historia Anglicana, ed. H.T.Riley (2 vols, Rolls Series,

English historical documents

40

1863–4), gives the longer version from 1272 to 1392 and a shorter version from 1392 to 1422. The Annales Ricardi II et Henrici IV (1392–1406), already mentioned, is valuable for Henry IV’s reign. Walsingham also wrote a summary of English history from 911 to 1419, the Ypodigma Neustriae (Rolls Series, 1876), which is clear and judicious, After his time, the writing of history at St Albans declined. The Annales of John of Amundesham and others (ed. H.T.Riley, 2 vols, Rolls Series), 1421 to 1440, are mostly concerned with the affairs of the abbey, as is the Registrum of Abbot John of Whethamstede which covers the period from 1451–61; but Whethamstede provides valuable information on some political incidents, e.g. the two battles of St Albans, the return of the duke of York from Ireland in 1460 and the last three years of Henry VI’s reign generally. Apart from Walsingham the clerical sources for the reign of Henry IV are minor ones. An unknown writer—perhaps a monk of Canterbury, perhaps the bishop of St Asaph (see E.J. Jones, Speculum, 12,1937)—continued a general survey of English history written at Malmesbury and though often derivative (e.g. from the Brut) his work has some details not recorded elsewhere. It was published as the Eulogium Historiarum, Continuatio (vol. 3, ed. F.S.Haydon, Rolls Series, 1863). The Historia Vitae et Regni Ricardi Secundi (ed. T.Hearne, 1729)—probably written by a monk of Evesham—not only gives a valuable account of the parliament of 1397 and the revolution of 1399, but has a continuation for the first three years of the reign of Henry IV which provides information not recorded elsewhere, e.g. the rising of 1400 and the beginning of Glyndŵr’s revolt. For the latter, Adam of Usk’s Chronicle is valuable, since he tried to worm his way into Glyndŵr’s confidence only in order to betray him to Henry IV. Both Usk and the Northern Chronicle (printed in C.L.Kingsford, English Historical Literature, 275–91) appear, like the work of the Monk of Evesham, as continuations of Higden’s Polychronicon, thus testifying to the latter’s continued popularity. The Northern Chronicle is useful for events in the north, especially the rebellion of the Percies. Also of value for the Percies is John Hardyng’s Chronicle (to 1461), ed. H.Ellis (1812), which though written much later and to gain favour, first with Henry VI and then with Edward IV, preserves special information about the Percies and Umfravilles. For the reign of Henry V we have several biographies, inspired by his striking success. The Gesta Henrici Quinti, ed. B.Williams (English Historical Society, 1850), and to be re-edited for the Oxford Medieval Texts series by J.S.Roskell and F.Taylor, was written by a chaplain of the king who accompanied him on the Agincourt campaign, and ends in 1416. Thomas Elmham, Cluniac prior of Lenton, wrote a Liber Metricus de Henrico Quinto, ed. C.A.Cole in Memorials of Henry V (Rolls Series, 1858), which also includes the Vita Henrici Quinti by Robert Redmayne about 1540, the latter of interest mainly for the growth of the traditions about Henry V. This tradition was already developing when Humphrey duke of Gloucester asked the Italian humanist Tito Livio to write a Vita Henrici Quinti (ed. T.Hearne, Oxford, 1716) about 1438 when Gloucester wanted to invoke Henry’s memory for his war policy. Livio’s biography is therefore martial in tone; but it is well written and Humphrey evidently helped him with reminiscences and access to materials. A few years later another biography was written by an unknown author, wrongly identified with Thomas Elmham by Thomas Hearne, who published his biography in 1727 as Vita et Gesta Henrici Quinti. This “Pseudo-Elmham” announced his intention of turning Livio’s “bare draft of formless matter” into an agreeable picture. Certainly the style is much more ornate, with many classical allusions; but for the last

The political framework

41

three years of the reign he provides much information additional to that of Tito Livio. Livio’s work was the better known, and about 1455 inspired an English biography which purported to be a translation but was in fact a compilation from a number of sources and included a few unique details derived from the earl of Ormonde who had served in Henry’s campaigns. A version of this life, made about 1513, was published by C.L.Kingsford, The First English Life of Henry V (Oxford, 1911) and shows the tradition almost in the form that Shakespeare knew. Apart from these biographies the Chronicle of John Strecche, ed. F.Taylor (Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 16, 1932), probably the work of a canon of Kenilworth, adds some details to those obtainable elsewhere, e.g. for the tennis-balls story, the French war, and Henry’s tour of England in 1421. In the reign of Henry VI the work of the clerical writers, apart from those already mentioned such as Whethamstede and Hardyng, is slight. The Chronicle of Henry VI, printed by J.A.Giles in Chronicon Angliae incerti scriptoris de regnis Henrici IV, Henrici V, et Henrici VI (1848), is the most nearly complete Latin history of the reign to 1455; it is written by a cleric who took his narrative to 1438 mostly from the Brut or a London chronicle, but thereafter provides original material from a strongly Yorkist standpoint. J.Blacman, Collectarium mansuetudinum et bonorum morum Regis Henrici VI (ed. and trans. M.R.James, 1919), is a eulogy of Henry’s virtues by a former Fellow of Eton College, probably in support of the suggested canonisation in the reign of Henry VII. For lesser clerical and possibly clerical compositions of this reign, see C.L. Kingsford, Eng. Hist. Lit., chapter VI and appendix. For the Yorkist period there are only a few clerical writers of general importance for political history, but one of these provides the best general account of the reign of Edward IV, especially for the last thirteen years. This is the second Continuation of the Cropland Chronicle, ed. W.Fulman in Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores (Oxford, 1684) (Eng. trans. H.T.Riley [Ingulph’s Chronicle of the Abbey of Croyland, with the Continuations of Peter of Blois and other writers], 1854, in Bohn’s Antiquarian Library). Sir J.G.Edwards published in the B.I.H.R., 39 (1966), 117–129, an important essay on the date and authorship of “The Second continuation of the Croyland Chronicle”. He argued that it was not necessarily written in 1486 nor by a councillor of Edward IV, as Kingsford thought. For the first thirteen years of Edward IV’s reign, the Chronicle (ed. J.O.Halliwell, Camden Soc., 1839), by John Warkworth, Master of Peterhouse, Cambridge, is of value, especially for the Lancastrian Restoration of 1470–1. A contemporary account of events between 1459 and 1462 was recorded, as the news came in, at Ely monastery; these Brief Notes are printed by J.Gairdner in Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles (Camden Series, 1880) where they are followed by a Latin translation of The Brut Chronicle to 1471. An Italian humanist, Domenico Mancini, wrote to his patron Angelo Cato an account of events in London between the death of Edward IV and the seizure of power by Richard in June; hostile to Richard, it gives a valuable account of opinion in London during this critical period. It was published by C.A.J.Armstrong as The Usurpation of Richard the Third (1936). The Historia Regum Angliae, by John Rous, a chantry priest of Warwick (ed. T.Hearne, 1716) devotes only seven pages to the reigns of Edward IV and Richard III. It is of some interest, however, as showing how within a few years of Richard III’s death stories of his monstrous physical deformities had gained acceptance, even with a man who in the first version of

English historical documents

42

his Roll of the Earls of Warwick (ed. W. Courthope, 1845) had praised Richard III fulsomely. (ii) Writings by or predominantly for laymen. The Brut Chronicle, already mentioned, increased in the fifteenth century in the number of versions and the number of copies extant. It was used by other writers, and was translated into Latin for the benefit of clerics (e.g. Tito Livio used this for his biography). One version was edited by the Rev. J.S.Davies for the Camden Society in 1856 as An English Chronicle from 1377 to 1461; it is remarkable that the only continuous chronicle of the whole Lancastrian period should have been composed in English. The patriotic fervour stimulated by Henry V’s victories in France produced ballads and poems used by the Brut; John Page’s long poem on the siege of Rouen in 1419 was printed separately by J.Gairdner in his Historical Collections of a London Citizen (Camden Soc., 1876). An inferior and more mutilated version of this vivid poem appears in one of the versions of the Brut printed by F.W.D. Brie, in The Brut or the Chronicles of England (Pt II, E.E.T.S., Original Series, 136, 1908). Another sign of the growing demand for histories in English is the number of versions made in London of a city chronicle in this language. Three of the more important versions were printed by C.L.Kingsford, in Chronicles of London (Oxford, 1905); one was published by J.Gairdner as Gregory’s Chronicle in Historical Collections of a London Citizen and gives a specially lively and personal account of the years 1440–70. Two versions are published in Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, ed. J.Gairdner (Camden Soc., 1880), and in A Chronicle of London, ed. N.H.Nicolas and E.Tyrell (1827); and R.Flenley published five fragments in Six Town Chronicles (Oxford, 1911). Flenley’s analysis of the meagre chronicles of other towns emphasizes the predominance of London in the field of town chronicles in this period. The various versions of the London chronicles and their relationships are discussed by C.L.Kingsford, Eng. Hist. Lit., chapter iv; but Mr A.H.Thomas and Miss I.D.Thornley thought his classification too simple when they discussed the matter in the introduction to The Great Chronicle of London (1938). This is an edition of a chronicle which made much use of the fullest previous versions. In its final form it dates from 1513 and the editors considered that it was probably written by Robert Fabyan, Alderman of London, who wrote a conflation of English and French history at about the same time, published by Henry Ellis in 1812 as The New Chronicles of England and France. Both chronicles have a close relationship to the version in Vitellius A XVI, printed by Kingsford in Chronicles of London; and between them they are major sources for the history of the later fifteenth century in England. By this time the lay public was so important that the government put out official versions in English of upheavals for which it was important that its own version should be known promptly and predominantly. Such an account was the Chronicle of the Rebellion in Lincolnshire in 1470, ed. J.G.Nichols, Camden Miscellany, vol. 1,1847, put forward on the king’s behalf by someone who had been with him during his visit to the north. Still more vivid, skilful, and clearly propagandist in intent was the Historic of the Arrivall of Edward IV (ed. J.Bruce, Camden Soc., 1838), dealing with the three months from the return of Edward IV to England in March 1471 to his defeat of the Bastard of Fauconberg three months later. It seems to be written by an eye-witness of the Barnet and Tewkesbury campaigns, and versions of it were probably sent to foreign governments. Another kind of writing composed—sometimes at least—to win over or hearten public opinion were political poems. See Wright and Robbins, op. cit., and C.L.Kingsford, English History in

The political framework

43

Contemporary Poetry, No. 2, Lancaster & York (Historical Association, 1913). Among the literary activities of William of Worcester, lay secretary to Sir John Fastolf, was a collection of documents printed by J.Stevenson from MS. Lambeth 506 in Letters and Papers illustrative of the Wars of the English in France during the reign of Henry VI (Rolls Series, 2 vols in 3, 1861–4). (iii) Sixteenth Century Historians. The views of Tudor historians are of particular interest in view of the immortality given to them by the history plays of Shakespeare. They also illustrate particularly well the interesting process by which in later generations a view of a period and of its leading personalities may be generally accepted even though it is at variance with the conclusions based on contemporary evidence. It is true that A Remarkable Fragment of an Old English Chronicle, published by T.Hearne in 1719 on pp. 283–306 of his edition of Thomas Sprott’s Chronicle, and generally known as “Hearne’s Fragment”, is an account written between 1516 and 1522 by a Yorkist sympathiser who claims to have been acquainted with Edward IV, and preserves between 1461 and 1470, where it breaks off, fresh and interesting detail. With Polydore Vergil’s Historia Anglica, published from an early translation by H.Ellis (Camden Soc., 1844), we begin to get the formation of a specifically Tudor view of fifteenth-century history. Vergil was a shrewd Italian scholar who tried to be fair; but his history was written at the instigation of Henry VII, and his judgements, particularly on Richard III, could not be repugnant to his employer. Sir Thomas More, on the other hand, did not write his History of Richard III (ed. R.S.Sylvester, Yale University Press, 1963) to please any patron. It is all the more striking therefore that it is a crushing indictment of Richard III, penned in very vivid English. The possible reasons for this cannot be discussed here; but for one explanation, see A.F.Pollard, “The Making of Sir Thomas More’s Richard III”, Historical Essays in Honour of James Tait (Manchester, 1933). More’s book made a deep impression as soon as it was published by Richard Grafton in 1543, with his prose continuation of Hardyng’s Chronicle, and it was used by Edward Hall in his The Union of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre and York, first published in 1548 and reprinted by H.Ellis in 1809. Hall, an enthusiastic supporter of Henry VIII and the Tudor dynasty, consulted many previous histories, both English and French, and preserved some information not available elsewhere. But his greatest interest for students of fifteenthcentury England is his expression of the developed sixteenth-century opinion of this period; for his work was the most influential of the Tudor age and was heavily drawn on by Raphael Holinshed and by Shakespeare. C. LETTERS AND PAPERS With the growth of literacy among the laity there was an increase in private correspondence in English. The collection which gives by far the most information on political affairs is that of the Paston Letters (ed. J.Gairdner, Edinburgh, 1910). A few letters are republished by Norman Davis (Oxford, 1958) as a preliminary to a new edition of the whole. For comment, see H.S. Bennett, The Pastons and their England (Cambridge, 2nd edn, 1932) and C.L.Kingsford, Eng. Hist. Lit. 196–209. The Stonor Letters and Papers (ed. C.L.Kingsford, 2 vols, Camden Series, 1919) preserved by confiscation to the crown in 1483 after Sir William Stonor had participated in Buckingham’s rebellion, and the Cely Papers, 1475–85 (ed. H.E.Maiden, Camden Series, 1900), preserved in the Chancery Miscellanea because of a law suit, are full of interest

English historical documents

44

for the social history of Yorkist England but have only a few documents of political relevance. Similarly the Plumpton Correspondence (ed. T.Stapleton, Camden Soc., 1839) has only a few letters of political interest, though the collection throws much light on the litigious affairs of a Yorkshire family. J.B.Sheppard’s editions of Litterae Cantuarienses (3 vols, Rolls Series, 1887–9) and of Christ Church Letters (Camden Soc., 1877) contain some letters of political value; but like the Epistolae Academicae, which comprise the correspondence of the University of Oxford from 1427 to 1509 (ed. H.Anstey, Oxford Hist. Soc., 1898), their main interest lies elsewhere. Besides letters, the fifteenth century begins to see the production of more occasional papers in English. Such is the Narrative of the Tournament between Anthony Wydeville, Lord Scales, and the Bastard of Burgundy, 1467, ed. S.Bentley, Excerpta Historica (1831), which recorded an event that made a deep impression on contemporaries; or the Record of Bluemantle Pursuivant, 1471–2, published by C.L.Kingsford, Eng. Hist. Lit., 379–88, which described the splendour of the reception of the Lord of Gruthuyse, Edward IV’s protector at Bruges in 1470–1. D. FOREIGN NARRATIVES The main ones, selected out of a great number, are: (a) Jean Juvenal des Ursins, Histoire de Charles VI, 1380–1422, ed. J.A.C.Buchon (Paris, 1838). Made Bishop of Beauvais and Archbishop of Rheims in 1449, he presided at the process of rehabilitation of Joan of Arc in 1456. Councillor of Charles VII, the tone of his history is pro-Armagnac. (b) E.de Monstrelet, Chronique, 1400–44, ed. L.Douët d’Arcq, Soc. de l’Hist. de France, Paris, 1857–62 (trans. T.Johnes, 13 vols, 1810). [Important for Tudor opinion, through Hall.] From 1400 to 1422 Monstrelet’s Chronicle was copied by Waurin; from 1422 to 1444 Monstrelet copied from Waurin. (c) Journal d’un Bourgeois de Paris, 1405–49, ed. A.Tuetey (Paris, 1881). Valuable for its detailed account of conditions in Paris in this period. (d) Berry, Hérault du Roy, Le recouvrement de Normandie, and R.Blondel, De Reductione Normanniae, both in Narratives of the Expulsion of the English from Normandy, 1449–50, ed. J.Stevenson (Rolls Series, 1863). (e) J.de Waurin, Recueil des croniques et anchiennes histories de la Grant Bretaigne, ed. W. and E.L.C.P.Hardy, 5 vols (Rolls Series, 1864–91). [Burgundian, used English sources, including Brut and Arrivall; present at Agincourt and Verneuil; often visited England.] (f) T.Basin, Histoire des règnes de Charles VII et de Louis XI, ed. J.Quicherat, 4 vols (S.H.F., Paris, 1855–9). New edition, ed. C.Samaran (3 vols, 1934–63). Made Bishop of Lisieux in 1448, he was driven from his see in 1468 by Louis XI. Naturally Basin was very critical of Louis XI in his History. (g) Commines, Philippe de, Mémoires, ed. J.Calmette and G.Durville, 3 vols (Paris, 1924–5). Also, ed. B.de Mandrot, 2 vols (1901–3). [Intimate councillor, first of Charles the Bold, then of Louis XI. Influenced Tudor view of Edward IV.] (h) Olivier de la Marche, Mémoires, ed. H.Beaune and J.d’Arbaumont, 4 vols (S.H.F., Paris, 1883–5). [Maître d’hôtel to Philip the Good and Charles the Bold; hence master of ceremonies for the wedding of Margaret of York, of which he wrote a long account.]

The political framework

45

(i) G.Chastellain, Oeuvres, ed. K.de Lettenhove, 8 vols (Paris, 1883–4). (j) Jean de Roye, Chronique scandaleuse, ed. B.Mandrot, 2 vols (Paris, 1894–6). (k) Leo von Rozmital, Ritter-, Hof-, und Pilger-Reise durch die Abendlande, 1465–7, trans. M. Letts, in “The Travels of Leo von Rozmital” (Hakluyt Society, 2nd Series, vol. 108 (Cambridge, 1957). [Accounts by followers of a Czech nobleman of a visit to the court of Edward IV in 1465 at the time of Elizabeth Woodville’s churching feast after the birth of Princess Elizabeth.] (l) Vespasiano da Bisticci, Vite di uomini illustri del secolo xv, ed. L.Frati, 2 vols (Bologna, 1892–1893), trans. W.G. and E.Waters, The Vespasiano Memoirs (1920). [Includes notice of John Tiptoft Earl of Worcester.] (m) Antonio Morosini, Chronique, ed. G.Lefèvre-Pontalis and L.Dorez (4 vols, Paris, 1898–1902). Useful for Anglo-French relations, 1405–33. II. SECONDARY SOURCES For the Oxford histories by McKisack and Jacob, and the general surveys by Green, Holmes and Myers, see the previous bibliography. A. THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY Allmand, C.T., “Historians reconsidered: Jean Froissart”, History Today (December 1966). Aston, M., “The Impeachment of Bishop Despenser”, B.I.H.R., 38 (1965). Balfour-Melville, E.W.M., Edward III and David II (Hist. Asscn. Pamphlet, 1954). Barnes, J., History of Edward III (Cambridge, 1688). Bellamy, J.G., “The Coterel Gang: an anatomy of fourteenth-century criminals”, E.H.R., 79 (1964). Bémont, C., La Guienne pendant la domination anglaise, 1152–1453 (Paris, 1920). Bird, R., The Turbulent London of Richard II (1948). Boutruche, R., La Crise d’une société: seigneurs et paysans du Bordelais pendant la guerre de cent ans (Paris, 1947). Bryant, A., The Age of Chivalry (1963). Burley, S.J., “The Victualling of Calais, 1347–65”, B.I.H.R., 31 (1958). Burne, A.H., The Crécy War (1955). Chrimes, S.B., “Richard II’s questions to the judges, 1387”, Law Quarterly Review, 72 (1956). Cuttino, G.P., English Diplomatic Administration, 1259–1339, (Oxford, 1940). Delachenal, R., Histoire de Charles V (5 vols, Paris, 1909–31). Déprez, E., Les préliminaires de la guerre de cent ans (Paris, 1902). Galbraith, V.H., “The Battle of Poitiers”, E.H.R., 54 (1939). Hewitt, H.J., The Black Prince’s Expedition of 1355–57 (Manchester, 1958). —, The Organization of War under Edward III, 1338–62 (Manchester, 1966). Jones, R.H., The Royal Policy of Richard II (1968). Le Patourel, J., “Edward III and the Kingdom of France”, History, 43 (1958). Lewis, N.B., “The Last Medieval Summons to the English Feudal Levy, 13 June, 1385”, E.H.R., 73 (1958). Lodge, E., Gascony under English Rule (1926). Lucas, H.S., The Low Countries and the Hundred Years War, 1326–47 (Ann Arbor, 1929). McKisack, M., “Edward III and the Historians”, History, 45 (1960). [Defends the king against undue modern denigration.] Nicholson, R., Edward III and the Scots (Oxford, 1965). Nicolas, N.H., A History of the Royal Navy (2 vols, 1847). Offler, H.T., “England and Germany at the beginning of the Hundred Years War”, E.H.R., 54 (1939).

English historical documents

46

Oman, C., The Great Revolt of 1381 (1906). Cf. the Marxist interpretation of R.H.Hilton and H.Pagan, The English Rising of 1381 (1950). Perroy, E., La guerre de cent ans (Paris, 1945). Trans. W.B.Wells as The Hundred Years War (1951). Ramsay, J.H., The Genesis of Lancaster (2 vols, Oxford, 1913). Pays special attention to war and finance. Rogers, A., “Hoton v. Shakell: a ransom case in the court of chivalry, 1390–5”, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 6 and 7 (1962, 1963). Russell, P.E., The English Intervention in Spain and Portugal in the time of Edward III and Richard II (Oxford, 1955). [Somewhat rehabilitates Pedro the Cruel and points out the disastrous effects for English command of the seas of the victory of Henry of Trastamara in Castile.] Smith, S.Armitage, John of Gaunt (1904). Steel, A.B., Richard II(Cambridge, 1941). Cf. the review by V.H.Galbraith, “A New life of Richard II”, History, 27 (1942). Stubbs, W., The Constitutional History of England, vol. 2 (Oxford, 4th edn, 1906). [The political narratives have become works of reference and points of departure for more modern studies.] Sturler, J. de, Les relations politiques et les échanges commerciaux entre le duché de Brabant et l’Angleterre au moyen age (Paris, 1936). Taylor, J., The Universal Chronicle of Ranulf Higden (Oxford, 1966). Templeman, G., “Edward III and the beginnings of the Hundred Years War”, T.R.Hist.S., 5th series, 2 (1952). Vaughan, R., Philip the Bold (1962). Wallon, H., Richard II (2 vols, Paris, 1864).

B. THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY Allmand, C.T., “The Anglo-French Negotiations 1439”, B.I.H.R., 40 (1967). —, Henry V (Historical Association Pamphlet, 1968). Bagley, J.J., Margaret of Anjou (1948). Barnard, F.P., Edward IV’s French Expedition of 1475 (Oxford, 1925). Barren, C.M., “The Tyranny of Richard II”, B.I.H.R., 41 (1968). Bean, J.W.M., “Henry IV and the Percies”, History, 44 (1959). Beaucourt, G. du Fresne de, Histoire de Charles VII (6 vols, Paris, 1881–91). Bonenfant, L., Du meurtre de Montereau au Traité de Troyes, (Paris, 1956). Burne, A.H., The Agincourt War (1956). Calmette, J., and Périnelle, G., Louis XI et l’Angleterre (Paris, 1930). Champion, P., Louis XI (Paris, 1927). Chrimes, S.B., “The Landing Place of Henry of Richmond, 1485”, Welsh History Review, 2 (1964). Churchill, G.B., Richard III up to Shakespeare (Berlin, 1900). Dickinson, J.G., The Congress of Arras, 1455 (Oxford, 1955). Fahy, C., “The Marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville”, E.H.R., 76 (1961). Griffiths, R.A.: “Local Rivalries and National Politics: The Percies, the Nevilles, and the Duke of Exeter, 1452–55”, Speculum, 43 (1968). Harriss, G.L., “The Struggle for Calais: an aspect of the rivalry between Lancaster and York”, E.H.R., 75 (1960). Jacob, E.F., Henry V and the Invasion of France (1947). Kendall, P.M., Richard III (1955). —, Warwick the Kingmaker (1957). Kingsford, C.L., Henry V (2nd edn, 1923). —, Prejudice and Promise in 15th Century England (Oxford, 1925). Kirby, J.L., “Calais sous les Anglais, 1399–1413”, Revue du Nord, 37 (1955).

The political framework

47

Knowlsen, G.A., Jean V, Duc de Bretagne, et l’Angleterre, 1399–1442 (Rennes, 1964). Kriehn, G., The English Rising in 1450 (Strasbourg, 1892). Lander, J.R., “Edward IV. The Modern Legend and a Revision”, History, 41 (1956). —, “Attainder and Forfeiture, 1453–1509”, The Historical Journal, 4 (1961). —, “Marriage and Politics in the 15th Century: The Nevilles and the Wydevilles”, B.I.H.R., 36 (1963). Levine, Mortimer: “Richard III—Usurper or Lawful King”, Speculum, 34 (1959). Lewis, P.S., “War Propaganda and Historiography in Fifteenth-Century France and England”, T.R.Hist.S., 5th Series, 15 (1965). Lloyd, J.E., Owen Glendower (Oxford, 1931). McFarlane, K.B., “England: the Lancastrian Kings, 1399–1461”, in Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 8 (1936). —, “At the Death-Bed of Cardinal Beaufort”, Essays in Medieval History presented to F.M. Powicke (1948). [Evidence of Beaufort’s grasping character as a financier.] —, “The Investment of Sir John Fastolf’s Profits of War”, T.R.Hist.S., 5th Series, 7 (1957). MacGibbon, D., Elizabeth Woodville, 1437–92 (1938). Myers, A.R., “The Captivity of a Royal Witch”, B.J.R.L., 24 (1940). (Queen Joan of Navarre.) —, “The household of Queen Margaret of Anjou, 1452–3”, B.J.R.L., 40 (1957–8). —, “The outbreak of war between England and Burgundy in February 1471”, B.I.H.R., 33 (1960). Myers, A.R., “The Character of Richard III”, History Today, 4 (1954). Newhall, R.A., The English Conquest of Normandy (1924). Pernoud, R., Joan of Arc (1961). Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, B.A., François II, due de Bretagne, et l’Angleterre (Paris, 1928). Ramsay, J.H., Lancaster and York (2 vols, Oxford, 1892). [As with the fourteenth century, specially interested in war and finance.] Ribner, I., The English History Play in the age of Shakespeare (Princeton, 1957). Richmond, C.F., “The keeping of the seas during the Hundred Years War, 1422–1440”, History, 49 (1964). Rowe, B.J.H., “The Estates of Normandy under the Duke of Bedford, 1422–35”, E.H.R., 46 (1931). Scofield, C.L., The Life and Reign of Edward IV (2 vols, 1923). Storey, R.L., “The Wardens of the Marches of England towards Scotland, 1377–1489”, E.H.R., 72 (1957). —, The End of the House of Lancaster (1966). —, Henry VII (1968). Stubbs, W., The Constitutional History of England, vol. 3 (5th edn, 1903). [The judgements on characters and politics there expressed have become classical points of departure for later historians.] Tanner, L.E., and Wright, W., “Recent investigations regarding the fate of the Princes in the Tower”, Archaeologia, 84 (1934), 1–26. Tillyard, E.W.M., Shakespeare’s History Plays (1944). Vaughan, R., John the Fearless (1966). Vickers, K.H., Humphrey Duke of Gloucester (1907). Williams, C.H., “England: The Yorkist Kings”, in Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 8 (Cambridge, 1936). Williams, E.Carleton, My Lord of Bedford, 1389–1435 (1963). Wylie, J.H., History of England under Henry IV (4 vols, 1884–98). —, The Reign of Henry V (3 vols, Cambridge, 1914–29; the last vol. completed by W.T. Waugh).

English historical documents

48

1. The treaty of Paris, March 1327 (T.Rymer, Foedera (Hague edn, 1740), II, ii, 185 [French], from Patent Roll, 1Edward III, m. 4, Pt I) I. First, that the land, taken from the King of France in the Duchy, against the form of the agreement which was lately made between the former king of England, should be restored without delay to the king of France, or to his representatives in his name, to hold according to the form of the agreement; and similarly the lands which the king of France, or his people, have occupied in the Duchy against the form of the agreement, should without delay be restored to the king of England, who now is, or to his order. IV. Item, for all manner of actions, expenses, damages, and all other losses, that the King of France or his subjects have sustained, or undergone because of the movements above-said, we, the messengers and proxies of the King of England and Duke of Guienne (although he has disavowed these enterprises, as we maintain) nevertheless, for the great desire which we know he has to have the grace and benevolence of the king of France, his lord and uncle, and to strengthen and nourish good love and affection between the realms, and the subjects of both, and to heal the evils, agree, by the authority and power which we have from our lord, and bind him in the sum of 50,000 marks sterling to the said king of France, to be taken at his will; So that, if it should please the king of England to submit himself to the gracious will of the king of France, in respect of the things contained in this article, the obligation of 50,000 marks shall be annulled. Saving to each of the subjects of both kings that they should have power to return, and ought to return to their inheritances, which have been occupied because of the disturbance, at the point and in the state in which they found them. [A general pardon was to be given to all involved in the recent disturbances, except Sir Oliver Ingham (the Seneschal of Gascony), Sir Girard de Tastes, Sir Ameron de Fossat, Sir Arnaud du Fort formerly Lord of Fesym, Le Bourc de Fois Lord of Leseu, Bertran Caillon, Seneschal of Landes, Raymond Bernard de Seinte Fey, Alexander de Caumont, Lord of Tournebeu, who were all to be banished.]

2. Isabella and Mortimer make peace with Scotland, 1328 (Chronicon de Lanercost, trans. Sir Herbert Maxwell, Scottish Historical Review, vol. 9, 168 [Latin]. Cf. A.G.Little, “The authorship of the Lanercost Chronicle”, Franciscan Papers, Lists and Documents (March 1943), 42–54) In the same year died the King of France without heir born of his body, just as his brother had died before him. When the King of England heard of his uncle’s death without an heir, he held himself to be the nearest rightful heir to the throne of France. He feared also, nevertheless, that the French would not admit this, but would elect somebody else of the blood (which they did immediately, to wit, the son of Charles, uncle of their deceased king); so acting on the pestilent advice of his mother and Sir Roger Mortimer (they being the chief controllers of the king, who was barely fifteen years of age), he was forced to

The political framework

49

release the Scots by his public deed from all exaction, right, claim or demand of the overlordship of the kingdom of Scotland on his part, or that of his heirs and successors in perpetuity, and from any homage to be done to the Kings of England. He restored to them also that piece of the Cross of Christ which the Scots call the Black Rood, and also a certain instrument or deed of subjection and homage to be done to the Kings of England, to which were appended the seals of all the chief men of Scotland, which they delivered, as related above, to the king’s grandsire, and which, owing to the multitude of seals hanging to it, is called “Ragman” by the Scots. But the people of London would in no wise allow to be taken away from them the Stone of Scone, whereon the Kings of Scotland used to be set at their coronation at Scone. All these objects the illustrious King Edward, son of Henry, had caused to be brought away from Scotland when he reduced the Scots to his rule. Also, the aforesaid young king gave his younger sister, my lady Joan of the Tower, in marriage to David, son of Robert de Brus, King of Scotland, he being then a boy five years old. All this was arranged by the king’s mother, the Queen of England, who at that time governed the realm. The nuptials were solemnly celebrated at Berwick on Sunday next before the feast of St Mary Magdalene. [For the terms of the treaty with Scotland see op. cit. Rymer, Foedera, II, III, 6.]

3. Edmund Earl of Kent is lured into treason and executed, 1329 (Chronicon Galfridi le Baker de Swynbroke, ed. Sir E.M. Thompson (Oxford, 1889), 43 [Latin]) In the year 1329 certain men, to the intent to try what friends King Edward the second, the king of England lately murdered, had in the land, pretended that he was living magnificently in Corfe castle, but never wished to be seen by day. Wherefore they caused dancing to take place on many nights on the walls and turrets of the castle, bearing before them tapers and flaming torches, so that they might be seen by the yokels of the countryside, as if they guarded within some great king, for whom they performed these solemnities. The news spread throughout England that the king’s father was still alive. The Earl of Kent therefore sent a certain Dominican friar, to find out the truth of the matter, who, thinking that he had corrupted the doorkeeper of the castle by bribes, was himself deceived. He was let in to hide by day in the door-keeper’s room and to see by night the person whom he wished to see. At night he was brought into the hall, clad in lay clothes, in case he was noticed; and there he saw, as he thought, Edward, the king’s father, sitting splendidly at supper; so he told the Earl of Kent what he believed he had seen. The earl therefore swore, in the presence of some whom he ought not to have trusted, that he would work to release his brother from prison. In the same year, at the instance of those who hated his father, the king held a parliament at Winchester where, at the instigation of his mother and Roger Mortimer, the Earl of Kent, uncle of the king, and many other nobles and religious persons, that is to say, the Provincials of the Orders of Preachers and Carmelites of the B.V.M. and Friar Richard de Blitone, were accused of conspiring, as it was said, to release the king’s father from prison and to restore him to

English historical documents

50

the throne, although this was all quite fantastic and false. Then the earl was beheaded, because of certain confessions which he had made and certain letters found on him, although none of the confessions or letters, even if they had been true, ought to have brought on such a man so great a punishment. Other accused persons, as for instance the Provincials of the Preachers and the Carmelites, were exiled; the Bishop of London was set free; Robert de Taunton, clerk, and certain friars of the orders of Carmelites and Preachers were committed to prison. The death of the earl was the less regretted by the common people, because he had an evil household, the members of which commandeered goods by royal right as they travelled through the countryside, paying little or nothing for them. 4. The instrument of homage made by Edward III to Philip VI of France at Amiens, 1329 (Rymer, Foedera, II, iii, 27 [French], from Close Roll, 3 Edward III, m. 20d) In the name of God, Amen. Know everyone by the tenor of this public instrument that, in the presence of us notaries and public scriveners and the undermentioned witnesses, there came into the presence of the very high, very excellent prince, our very dear lord, Philip, by the grace of God, King of France, and appeared in person, the high and noble prince, the Lord Edward, King of England, and, with him, the reverend father, the Bishop of Lincoln, and a great throng of his other people and counsellors to do his homage; for the Duchy of Gascony and the Peerage of France, to the King of France. And then the nobleman the lord Mille [Milo] de Noyers, who was by the side of the King of France, spoke on behalf of the King of France to the said King of England in this manner: Sire, the King does not intend you to receive anything, as your council has been told, of the things which he holds, and ought to hold in Gascony and in Agenais; which things King Charles held and ought to hold, and for which King Charles made protestation that he did not intend to receive you to his homage. And the Bishop of Lincoln spoke and protested, on behalf of the king of England, that for anything which the king of England, or anyone else acting on his behalf, might say or do, he did not intend to renounce any right which he had, or ought to have, in the Duchy of Guienne, and its appurtenances; and that no new rights were acquired there, on this account, by the King of France. And with this protest the Bishop presented to the nobleman, the Vicomte de Melun, the Chamberlain of France, a schedule about the homage, of which the tenor is written below. And then the Chamberlain spoke thus to the King of England: Sire, you become the man of the King of France, my lord, for the Duchy of Guienne and its appurtenances, which you acknowledge that you hold from him, as Duke of Guienne and Peer of France, according to the form of the peace made between his predecessors, kings of France, and yours, according to the services which you and your ancestors, kings of England and dukes of Guienne, had done for the same duchy to his ancestors, kings of France. And then the King of England said, Truly.

The political framework

51

And the chamberlain spoke afterwards thus: And the King of France, our lord, receives you, saving the protestations and reservations made above. And the King of France said, Truly. And then, when the hands of the King of England were placed between the hands of the King of France, the latter kissed the King of England on the mouth. The tenor of the schedule which the bishop presented on behalf of the king of England is as follows: I become your man for the Duchy of Guienne and its appurtenances, which I claim to hold from you, as Duke of Guienne, and Peer of France, according to the form of peace made between your predecessors and ours, according to the services which we and our ancestors, kings of England and dukes of Guienne, have done for the Duchy to your predecessors, kings of France. This was done at Amiens, in the choir of the cathedral, 6th June, 1329. 5. The seizure and execution of Roger Mortimer, 1330 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 45–6 [Latin]) In the year of Our Lord 1330, the fourth year of King Edward III, the Friday next after the feast of St Luke, a parliament was held at Nottingham. There Roger Mortimer, earl of March, the chief councillor, at whose will everything was done, shone too much in honour. No one dared to name him by any other name than that of Earl of March; a greater acclamation was given to him than to the king; he honoured whom he liked; he let the king stand in his presence, and was accustomed to walk arrogantly beside the new king, never letting the king go before him, but sometimes going in front himself. A certain official deputed by the lord king to assign houses to the nobles took a house in the town for the Earl of Lancaster, the king’s cousin. Thereupon the Earl of March vehemently rated the official, asking him what had made him house so bold an enemy of Queen Isabella so near to her. The terrified constable then assigned lodgings to the Earl of Lancaster outside the town, a league away from the earl, and quartered John de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex and Constable of England, in this lodging. Then there arose among the magnates a murmur which came to the ears of the people, a whisper that the lord of Mortimer, the paramour of the queen and the master of the king, thirsted for the destruction of the royal blood and the usurpation of the royal majesty. That rumour frightened the king and his friends, that is to say William Montague, Edward de Bohun, and others, who swore to safeguard the king and rightly thought that they would advance the cause of safety in the realm, if the lord of Mortimer could be put to death. They consulted one of their number, Robert de Heland [Holland], who had been constable of the castle for many years and to whom all the most secret passages of the castle were known, how the king and his friends might gain an entry by night into the queen’s chamber from outside the castle without the knowledge of the gate-keepers. The constable led his lord the king by tortuous ascents through a certain secret subterranean tunnel, which began quite a way outside the castle and ended in the middle of the kitchen or hall of the principal tower, where the queen’s bedroom was to be found. Having rushed out of the underground passage and subterranean route, the king’s friends advanced with drawn swords to the queen’s bedroom; the king waited, armed, outside the

English historical documents

52

chamber of their foes, lest he should be seen by his mother. As the conspirators charged in, they killed Hugh de Turpintone,1 knight, as he tried to resist them, Lord John de Neville of Hornby directing the blow. Then they found the queen mother almost ready for bed, and the Earl of March whom they wanted. They led him captive into the hall, while the queen cried: “Fair son, fair son, have pity on the gentle Mortimer”; for she suspected that her son was there, even though she had not seen him. They swiftly sent for the keys of the castle, taking all the custody of the place into the king’s hands, but so secretly that none outside the castle knew of it except the king’s friends. On the following morning a great hue and cry arose, the blind Earl of Lancaster leading it. They led Roger Mortimer and some of his friends captive through Loughborough and Leicester to London, where he was committed to prison in the Tower, as he had been years before. When the parliament of the realm sat at Westminster in the vigil of St Andrew next following, he was drawn and hanged on the common gallows of thieves at the Elms. So by his death he ended the civil wars which he had often stirred up throughout his life. He was condemned to death by his peers, but he did not appear before them nor was he allowed to make any defence, since from the deaths of the earls of Lancaster, Winchester, Gloucester and Kent nobles were not allowed to defend themselves, but perished without defence and lawful conviction. So the earl was condemned by the law which he had decreed for another, and the same measure which he had meted out to others was measured to him. 6. The judgement of Roger Mortimer, 1330 (Rot. Parl. II, 52 [French]) These are the treasons, felonies, and misdeeds, done to our lord the king and to his people by Roger Mortimer and others of his brood. First…Roger Mortimer usurped to himself the royal power and the government of the realm over the estate of the king, and dismissed and caused to be dismissed officials in the king’s household and elsewhere throughout the realm and others set in their place at his will…. Also, whereas the father of our lord the king was at Kenilworth by the ordinance and assent of the peers of the land, to stay there at his ease and to be served as befitted such a lord, Roger, by the royal power which he had usurped, did not rest until he had got the king into his control, and ordered him to be sent to Berkeley Castle, where by means of himself and his tools the king was traitorously, feloniously and falsely murdered. Also, Roger, by the royal power which he had usurped, caused an order to be issued under the great seal that no one should come to the parliament of Salisbury with force and arms, on pain of forfeiture to the king; whereas Roger and others of his brood came to parliament with force and arms, contrary to the order; wherefore several peers of the land, such as the Earl of Lancaster, did not come at all…. And at the same parliament, by his usurped power he contrived that our lord the king should make him Earl of March, 1

Hugh of Trumpington, the Steward of the Household.

The political framework

53

and give him many lands in heredity, to the disinheritance of our lord the king and his crown…. [Roger Mortimer had compelled the king to ride forcibly against the Earl of Lancaster and other peers of the realm, who were constrained to pay heavy fines to recover the royal favour. He had contrived the death of Edmund Earl of Kent. He had gained riches for himself by various unlawful means, including the plundering of the royal treasury and the extortion of fines and ransoms. He had sown discord between Edward II and Isabella.] Wherefore our sovereign lord the king charges you, earls and barons, peers of his realm, that since these matters closely affect him and you and all the people of the realm, you should pass right and loyal judgement on Roger, as befits such a one to have, who is so truly guilty of all the abovewritten crimes…and as the matters are notorious and known as true to you and to all the people of the realm. Which earls, barons, and peers, having examined the articles, came before the king again in the same parliament, and unanimously declared by the mouth of one of the peers, that all the things contained in the articles were notorious and known to them and to the people; and especially the article touching the death of the lord Edward, father to our present lord the king. Wherefore the earls, barons, and peers, as judges of parlia-ment, by assent of the king in the same parliament, awarded and adjudged, that the said Roger, as a traitor and enemy to the king and realm, should be drawn and hanged. And the earl marshal was commanded to carry out the judgement, which was executed and performed on the first Thursday after the first day of parliament, which was the 29th day of November. 7. The disinherited invade Scotland and win the battle of Dupplin Moor, 1332 (Gesta Edwardi de Carnarvon auctore Canonico Bridlingtoniensi cum continuatione ad A.D. 1377 (ed. W.Stubbs), 103, Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I and Edward II (Rolls Series, 1883), 2 [Latin]) A.D. 1332, the lord Edward, son and heir of John Balliol, formerly King of Scots with the lords Henry de Beaumont, Earl of Buchan, Gilbert de Umfraville, Earl of Angus, David of Strathbolgie, Earl of Athol, Richard Talbot, Henry de Ferrars, Fulk FitzWarin, Nicholas de la Beech, Ralph de Stafford, Thomas Uhtred, Alexander de Mowbray, John de Mowbray, Robert de Winchester, and Walter Comyn, barons and bannerets, with other English soldiers and horses, and their food and other neces-sities, in 88 ships, both greater and smaller, which had been collected together, on the last day of July, i.e. on the feast of St Germanus the bishop, set sail at Barton and Kingston-upon-Hull…. For six days and six nights they ploughed the seas and braved the hazards of the waves. On the seventh day, i.e. on the morrow of St Oswald, king and martyr, they landed at Kinghorn in Fife. As they were climbing the cliff, the Earl of Fife met them with 24,000 knights and foot-soldiers, that he might drive them away; as the horses had not yet been led

English historical documents

54

ashore, the English opposed them with foot-soldiers. After a struggle some of the Scots were killed, amongst them Sir Alexander de Seton, the Earl’s son, and the rest fled. The English pursued the fleeing Scots until the difficulty of the mountains forbade the armed men to follow the fugitives any longer. Seeing that God had given them so striking a victory, they humbly and devoutly prayed that as God had adorned their expedition and task with such a favourable beginning, so he would continue and end it. Having therefore brought the horses and other necessities from the ships, they came to Dunfermline abbey and stayed there two days. Then they advanced further into the kingdom to the river called the Earn, and pitched tents there, for across the river they could see a very large army of horse and foot assembled. The leader and commander of it was Donald, Earl of Mar, who by letters and messengers gave many promises of aid to the same lords. He came to the bank of the river on the far side and addressed them in these words. “O presumptuous knights,” he said, “from what regions have you been carried, and what do you seek in this place? Do not be slow to tell us by what name your leader is known.” They replied: “We are the sons of magnates of this land, and, trusting in their counsel and aid, we are come hither with the rightful heir of this land, Edward Balliol, to claim the lands and tenements which belong to us by hereditary right; we believe indeed that our arrival here will be praiseworthy and welcome to you, as has often been said between us. There is no need to recite the names of our company, since you have been the counsellor of this operation.” But he answered: “By no means, for now fate and fortune have changed this agreement. I grieve for your injury, since by your invasion and rash arrival, you have disturbed the whole kingdom of Scotland, and excited it to your destruction, as you perceive.” When these and similar speeches had been made, both sides drew away. The invaders saw that they could hope for no help from the earl, and about sunset they held a conference to discuss these words. Guided by natives of the place, who knew the tides of the river, they prepared to cross the waters by night. There on the bank they awaited the fall of darkness and then forded the river. Seeking out the tents of the enemy, they approached the beds of the sleeping men and without mercy slew their foes as they rose. The rest were roused by the cries of the dying, and as they had room neither to take up arms nor to flee, they ran about unarmed amongst the armed men, not in any premeditated way, flying hither and thither. As the English rushed in, their enemies fell, continually being wounded. Since the whole night was spent in this manner, and at dawn so many slain could be seen, the English sent out scouts to discover whether the fallen were footsoldiers or men-at-arms. When they returned they announced that all the infantry were killed; and it was true. For all the horsemen and men-at-arms were guarding the bridge, thinking that the invaders would not know about the ford across the river. But when the sun brought the next day, they sent out scouts, so that they would not fall unexpectedly into the hands of the enemy. And lo! at once the Earl of Mar, with the Scots arranged in the form of a wedge, advanced against them in very great numbers, the infantry leading, about 40,000 footmen and men-at-arms. The English were insignificant in their own eyes, and trusted not in their own courage but in the mercy of God. Although they were small in numbers, five hundred horsemen and men-at-arms, and 1,000 foot soldiers and archers, they directed their forces against the enemy. The Scots prepared for battle in a presumptuous fashion. When the troops of cavalry had been brought into formation, with the archers disposed so that they could attack the columns of the enemy from the flanks, these few men-at-arms overcame the great army. When the forces met,

The political framework

55

the English could not at first withstand the charge of the Scots and had to retreat a little, but resisted with courage drawn from heaven, spreading their shields to ward off the blows; the forward troops of the enemy were heavily wounded by the arrows and driven to close up to the main force; jammed together in a small space, one was crushed by another. Suffocated by each other, and beaten by that rather than by blows of swords, they fell in a remarkable way in a great heap. Pressed together in this way, and squeezed against each other as if by ropes, they perished miserably. When the Earl of Fife saw that he and his comrades were in extreme danger, he at once gave the order to retreat, for the Scots could only fight on longer to their own detriment. With this wise counsel he left the fight accompanied by only a few. When the Scots thus turned their backs, Henry de Beaumont with his horsemen sought to follow the scattered foe, and ordered the fleeing enemy to be cut down. Those who remained were ordered to surround the mass of the enemy described above and to harass them with vigorous attacks. From this heap, built up in this remarkable way by divine intervention, as was believed, not one could be brought out alive. On that day there fell of that proud Scottish host, three earls, i.e. Donald de Mar, the Regent of Scotland, to whose care the affairs of the kingdom appertained, and the Earls of Moray and Menteith, 18 bannerets, 58 knights, 800 horsemen, 1,200 men-atarms, and a great number of footsoldiers, besides the men in the heap, whose number no one knows. That mass or heap, produced miraculously as was related above, was fifteen feet high. 8. Edward Balliol is crowned King of Scots at Scone, 1332, but soon flees to England (The Canon of Bridlington, 107 [Latin]) [The victorious lords took and occupied Perth and held it against a siege, which was abandoned.] (Ibid. 108) A.D. 1332, when the Scots had dispersed, as was described above, the aforesaid conquerors entrusted the custody of the town of St John [Perth] to the Earl of Fife, who had recently made his peace with them and had sworn fidelity to them. Then they made their way to Scone, to which various Scottish magnates, bishops, and abbots had been summoned, with representatives of the clergy and gentry who had submitted; and the Bishop of Dunkeld crowned Edward Balliol with the royal diadem. It is related that of this solemn occasion there is very little to tell; for all who were present sat down to the coronation feast in their armour except for their helmets. Necessity persuaded them to do this, for the people and magnates were moved by fear rather than by love; and as the kingdom of Scotland had been conquered by a strong hand, so it was appropriate for Edward to have a coronation in arms. (Ibid. 109)

English historical documents

56

[The Scots attacked Edward Balliol’s army at Roxburgh but were beaten off.] When these events had taken place, the King of Scots made a liberal distribution of lands and tenements and various gifts, as compensation for their labours, to his companions in arms, who had endured steadfastly with him such great hazards. Not long afterwards the Earls of Buchan and Athol, and other lords, and almost all the English, returned to England, to visit their lands there. The King of Scots, surrounded by a few Englishmen and a large household of Scots, set out for Annan on Sunday, the feast of St Lucy the Virgin. He had two quiet days there, but on the third day he was driven out monstrously by a sudden attack of Scots. For, as he sought fidelity in the Scots as vainly as seeking strength in a knot tied in rushes, a very grave misfortune befell him. The watchmen allowed this treacherous attack to be made; the Earl of Moray1 and Sir Archibald Douglas,, with many others, rushed in suddenly by night, killing Sir Walter Comyn and some others, chiefly Scots, and capturing others. The king himself with a few of his followers leaped on their horses and just managed to escape by fleeing to England. 9. Edward Balliol seeks the aid of Edward III, who invades Scotland and wins the battle of Halidon Hill, 1333 (The Canon of Bridlmgton, 114–16 [Latin]) At a parliament held in York in January 1333, Edward Balliol requested the aid of Edward III, who agreed and helped Balliol to collect together a force which invaded Scotland anew, while Edward himself besieged Berwick. In July the Scots tried to relieve Berwick, and hence on 19 July the battle of Halidon Hill took place.

In this same year, on July 19th, the day before the feast of St Margaret the Virgin, which was a Monday, the King of England took the field, to draw up his army. And first he set a troop of 500 men-at-arms round about the town, along with archers and foot-soldiers, to guard against a sally of the besieged citizens, lest by a surprise attack they might take the English in the rear. In charge of these forces he placed Ralph Basset, Thomas de Furnival, bannerets, Simon Ward and John Multon, knights, and also the mayor of the town of Newcastle. The rest of the army was divided into three divisions. The first of these was commanded by the marshal [the Earl of Norfolk] and his brother John de Eltham Earl of Cornwall, Henry de Beaumont, Earl of Buchan, and Edward de Bohun acting on behalf of the Earl of Hereford. David Earl of Atholl was in command of the right wing of this division, next to the sea, and the Earl of Angus, Gilbert de Umfraville, similar command to the left wing. The King of England commanded the centre, which had wings, as described above; and he assigned the third division, also with wings as described above, to Balliol, the King of Scots. Archers were assigned to each wing; and 1

John Randolph, brother of Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray, who had been killed at Dupplin Moor.

The political framework

57

as the chief and supposed cause of immediate battle was that 200 horsemen, as aforesaid, ought to enter the town that day,1 the king carefully chose out horsemen who would fight together and stop the sally of the enemy. Meanwhile the scouts roamed about, and about nine in the morning the approach of the enemy was announced. Having mounted his charger, the lord king addressed his men with these encouraging words: “Consider, my comrades in arms, with what people we are to fight this day. For long they were rebels against our forefathers. It disgusts me to speak of the overthrow and butcheries of religious men and the common people, which often they have inflicted on our race. Already, if God is favourable, the day of revenge has arrived, because trusting in the protection of God and with your help we shall be a match for them in the conflict.” With these words, he leaped down from his horse and took his place in his division. He did not have long to wait. The Scottish army, to the number of almost 60,000, climbed a certain little hill, called “Halydounhill”, not far distant from Berwick, their horses having been sent away across the hill into a wood behind it. On the top of the hill the multitude was divided into three divisions; amongst them Archibald Douglas, appointed Regent of Scotland, seeing the two hundred horsemen galloping forward not far from the English army, is reported to have urged the Scots forward with these words: “Be strong, oh brothers, and take up arms with vigour. The leaders of our enemies have taken to their horses so that when the rest of us are engaged in the pursuit of booty, they may the better seek the protection of flight. Now another fortune has led them into our borders, as it were prisoners, behind them a fine town defended by warlike men, on the right hand a wide deep sea, on the left hand the hollow of the river Tweed which the rising tide fills to the margin of its banks. Therefore take courage and raise your hand to the slaughter, and do not give quarter to anyone; both leaders and common soldiers must perish equally today.” The English who were sitting on their horses watched the enemy troops advancing to battle, whereupon they sent away their horses and with a light step took their places in their divisions. And immediately one line of the enemy rushed to engage that troop which the King of Scots bravely commanded. Similarly another troop of Scots hurled itself against the line commanded by the king. But they could bear neither the storm of arrows nor the weapons of the knights, and soon they took to flight; quickly this was followed by a great slaughter of the Scots. For the king of England and other leaders, with their horsemen, ordered a pursuit of the enemy running hither and thither. The troop of Scots in which the best soldiers were placed, who were to enter the town, rushed with the ferocity of a lion against the foremost English line. A bloody battle developed there; for the Scots struggled to reach the town, and wanted to fulfil their oath; on the other hand the English resisted manfully. So most of the day was spent, until the English, by Divine favour, finally prevailed, and obtained the victory. In this prolonged struggle there perished 500 of the strongest and choicest of all the people of Scotland, in the spot called by the local inhabitants “Hevyside”. The fugitives were pursued for seven leagues, until the coming of night forced the English to return and seek their tents. On the morrow the inhabitants of the town and castle of Berwick surrendered to the king of England. In this battle 1

Edward had made an agreement with the Scots that Berwick was to be yielded at daybreak on 20 July if it had not been relieved by sunset on 19 July by at least 200 horsemen.

English historical documents

58

there were slain on the Scottish side seven earls, twenty-five bannerets, and 47 knights, besides those who fell into the sea from the top of the cliffs. Few were taken prisoner; but many escaped. The King of England ordered the bodies of the earls and other leaders to be buried in consecrated ground. In all this slaughter only one knight and one esquire of the English army were killed, and few foot soldiers fell. 10. Edward Balliol does homage to Edward III and cedes much of the Scottish lowlands, 1334 (Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 9, 392 [Latin]) On the nineteenth day of the month [June], to wit on the feast of the Holy Martyrs Gervase and Prothasius, the King of Scotland came to Newcastle-upon-Tyne; accompanied by the Earls of Atholl, Dunbar, Mar, and Buchan, and there in presence of the two English earls, four Scottish earls, the archbishop, the bishops, and an almost innumerable multitude of clergy and people, Edward de Balliol, King of Scotland, performed his homage to my lord Edward the Third, King of England, in token of holding the kingdom of Scotland from him as Lord Paramount, and so from his heirs and successours for all time. And whereas the king of England had assisted him in reclaiming and possessing his realm of Scotland, whence for a season he had been expelled by the Scots, and had supplied large funds [for that purpose] the King of Scotland ceded to him the five counties of Scotland which are nearest to the English March, to wit, the counties of Berwick and Roxburgh, Peebles and Dumfries, the town of Haddington, the town of Jedburgh with its castle, and the forests of Selkirk, Ettrich and Jedworth, so that all these should be separated from the crown of Scotland and annexed to the crown of England in perpetuity.1 Thus there remained to the king of Scotland on this side of the Scottish sea nothing but the other five counties, to wit, Ayr, Dumbarton, Lanark, Stirling, and Wigtown in Galloway beyond the Cree. All these aforesaid things were publicly confirmed by oath writing and sufficient witnesses; and after they had been duly settled, the king returned to England. For the collection of 1,200 marks in London in 1334 to pay for sending 100 norsemen and as many footmen to Scotland, see H.T.Riley, Memorials of London and London Life (1868), 187, from Letter-Book E, f. 2. 11. The Scottish mode of warfare (J.Froissart, Chronicles (Eng. trans. J.Bourchier, Lord Berners, 4 vols, 1523–5), ch. 17. Translation modernised where necessary) These Scottish men are right hardy and sore travailing in harness and in wars. For when they will enter into England, within a day and a night they will drive their whole host twenty-four miles, for they are all a horse-back, unless it be the followers and laggards of the host, who follow afoot. The knights and squires are well 1

In the deed of surrender Edinburgh and Linlithgow are included. T.Rymer, Foedera, II, iii, 115, 12 June 1334.

The political framework

59

horsed, and the common people and others on little hackneys and geldings: and they carry with them no carts nor chariots because of the diversities of the mountains that they must pass through in the country of Northumberland. They take with them no provision of bread nor wine, for their usage and soberness is such in time of war that they will pass in the journey a great long time with flesh half cooked, without bread, and drink of the river water without wine, and they neither care for pots nor pans, for they seethe beasts in their own skins. They are ever sure to find plenty of beasts in the country that they will pass through; therefore they carry with them none other provision, but on their horse between the saddle and the panel they truss a broad flat stone, and behind the saddle they will have a little sack full of oatmeal, to the intent that when they have eaten of the boiled flesh, then they lay this stone on the fire and temper a little of the oatmeal; and when the stone is hot, they cast some of the thin paste thereon, and so make a little cake in manner of a cracknel or a biscuit, and that they eat to comfort withal their stomachs. Wherefore it is no great marvel though they make greater journeys than other people do. And in this manner were the Scots entered into the county and wasted and burnt all about as they went, and took great number of beasts. 12. How King Edward was counselled to make war against the French king, 1337 (Froissart, Chronicles (trans. Barners), ch. 28) In this season, when this crusade was in great forwardness, for there was no speaking but thereof, Sir Robert of Artois was as then in England, banished out of France, and was ever about King Edward: and always he counselled him to defy the French king, who kept his heritages from him wrongfully: of the which matter the king oftentimes counselled with them of his secret council, for gladly he would have had his right if he had known how; and also he thought that if he should demand his right and it were refused, what he might do then to amend it; for if he should then sit still and do not his duty to recover his right, he should be more blamed than before. Yet he thought it were better to speak not thereof, for he saw well that by the power of his realm it would be hard for him to subdue the great realm of France, without help of some other great lords either of the Empire or in other places for his money…. These tidings came into France and multiplied little and little, so that King Philip’s enterprise of the said crusade began to lessen and wear cold, and he counter-manded his officers to cease making of any further provision, till he knew more what King Edward would do. Then King Edward ordained ten bannerets and forty other knights and sent them over the sea to Valenciennes, and the Bishop of Lincoln with them, to the intent to treat with the lords of the Empire, such as the Count of Hainault had named. When they were come to Valenciennes, each of them kept a great estate and port, and spared nothing, no more than if the King of England had been there in proper person, whereby they did get great renown and praise. They had with them young bachelors, who had each of them one of their eyes closed with a piece of silk: it was said how they had made a vow among the ladies of their country, that they would not see but with one eye, till they had done some deeds of arms in France: howbeit they would not be known thereof.

English historical documents

60

And when they had been well feasted at Valenciennes, then the Bishop of Lincoln and part of his company went to the Duke of Brabant, who feasted them greatly and agreed and promised to sustain the King of England and all his company in his country, so that he might go and come armed and unarmed, at his pleasure, and to give him the best counsel he could. And also, if the King of England would defy the French king, that he would do the same, and enter into the country of France with men of war, so that their wages might be borne, to the number of a thousand men of arms. Thus then the lords returned again to Valenciennes, and did so much by messengers and by promise of gold and silver, that the Duke of Gueldres [Geldern], who was the king’s brother-in-law, and the Marquis of Juliers [Jülich], the Archbishop of Cologne and Waleran his brother, and the lord of Fauquemont came to Valenciennes to speak with these lords of England before the Count of Hainault and the lord John his brother. And by the means of a great sum of florins, that each of them should have for themselves and for their men, they made promise to defy the French king and to go with the King of England when it pleased him, with certain men of war; promising also to get other lords to take their part for wages, such as be beyond the river of Rhine and be able to bring good numbers of men of war. Then the lords of Almaine [Germany] took their leave and returned into their own countries, and the Englishmen tarried still with the Count of Hainault, and sent certain messengers to the Bishop of Liège and would gladly have had him in their party; but he would never be against the French king, for he was become his man and entered into his fealty. King Charles of Bohemia was not desired, for they knew well he was so firmly joined with the French king by reason of the marriage of John Duke of Normandy, who had to wife the king’s daughter, whereby they knew well he would do nothing against the French king. 13. Edward III builds up an alliance against the King of France, 1337 (Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 9, 408 [Latin]) Now after the feast of All Saints the King of England sent ambassadors to France to arrange peace with the King of France, offering to that king for free possession of the land of Guienne, just as he held the other parts of Gascony, that his elder son, the heir of England, should take a wife from the King of France’s family, whom that king should accordingly give him in marriage, and that the King of France should possess the land of Gascony with all its revenues for seven years, and after seven years should restore it without dispute to the King of England, as formerly. Further that the King of England should accompany the King of France, with one thousand men-at-arms, to the Holy Land against the Saracens. These, I say, were the conditions offered by the King of England to that king, but that proud and avaricious person rejected them all, wherefore the King of England prepared to fight him, having and making alliance with the following nobles oversea as his mercenaries, to wit, my Lord the Emperor Lewis, who was then King of Germany, and Duke of Bavaria, and had married the Queen of England’s sister, and was at dire enmity with the King of France: item, the Duke of Brabant, son of the King of England’s maternal aunt; item, the Count of Hainault, the queen’s brother-german; item, the Count of Guelders, who had married the King of England’s sister; item, the Count of Juliers [Jülich], the Queen of England’s uncle; item, the Archbishop of Cologne; item, the

The political framework

61

Count of Trèves [i.e. the Archbishop of Trier]; item, the Dauphin de Vienne; item, my lord William de Châlons; item, my Lord de Faukemounde. The emperor had 50,000 helmed men under arms, the Duke of Brabant 15,000, the Count of Guelders 20,000, the Count of Hainault 15,000, the Count of Juliers 5,000, the Archbishop of Cologne 4,000, the Bishop of Trier 2,000, the Dauphin of Vienne and my lord William of Châlons 15,000, my lord de Faukemounde 3,000: in all 129,000 helmed men. The Count of Artois-Arras, whom the King of France had expelled from his country and of whose lands he had taken possession, was in England at that time under protection of the king, who treated him courteously in all respects. 14. Edward III’s manifesto explaining the causes of the French war, 1337 (Rymer, Foedera, II, iii, 187 [French], from Close Roll, II Edward III, Pt II, m. 28d) Schedule to be read by various magnates and royal officials commissioned to explain the king’s business to meetings to be held in all the shires. These are the offers made to the King of France by the King of England, to avoid war.

First, the King of England sent to the King of France various solemn messages, begging him to return to him the lands which he is withholding from him, arbitrarily and against reason, in the Duchy of Guienne; but to these requests the King of France did nothing, until, at last, he promised that, if the King of England would come in his own person, he would do him justice, grace, and favour. Trusting in this promise, the King of England crossed secretly into France and came to him, humbly requesting the delivery of his lands, offering and doing to the king as much as he ought and more; but the King of France always put him off with words and negotiations, and did nothing for him in fact; and moreover, during the negotiations, wrongfully drew to himself, more and more, the rights of the King of England in the Duchy. Also, the King of England, seeing the hardness of the King of France, in order to have his goodwill, and that which he wrongfully detains, held out to him the great offers written below, i.e. when one was refused, he put forward another. First, the marriage of his eldest son, now Duke of Cornwall, with the daughter of the king of France, without taking anything for the marriage. Item, the marriage of his sister, now Countess of Guelders, with his son, together with a very great sum of money. Item, the marriage of his brother, the Earl of Cornwall, whom God absolve, with any lady of the blood royal. Item, to make recompense for the inconvenience, he offered him as much money as he could reasonably demand. Item, because the King of England was given to understand that the King of France wished to undertake a crusade to the Holy Land, and wished to have the king of England

English historical documents

62

in his company, and therefore he wished to show him grace and favour, the King of England, so that no hindrance of the crusade could be alleged against him, offered to the King of France to go with a large force with him in the crusade; so that, however, before he set off, the French king should make him full restitution of all his lands. Item, then he offered to go with him on the said crusade, on condition that before he went, the French king should restore half, or a certain part of the lands. Item, afterwards he made him larger offers, that he would go with the French king if he would make such restitution on his return from the Holy Land. Item, then to stop the malice of the King of France, who was striving to blame the prevention of the said crusade on the King of England, he professed his readiness to go on the crusade with him, provided that on his return the King of France would do justice towards him. But the King of France, who was striving by all the means that he could to undo the King of England and his people, so that he could keep what he wrongfully withheld, and conquer more from him, would accept none of these offers; but, seeking his opportunities, busied himself in aid and maintenance of the Scots, the enemies of the King of England, attempting to delay him by the Scottish war, so that he would have no power to pursue his rights elsewhere. Item, then, in courtesy to the King of France, and at the request of his messages, the King of England granted to the Scots respite of war and truces, in hope of peace negotiations; but during this truce the Scots killed the Earl of Athol and others, and captured several great men of the King of England’s allegiance, and besieged and captured castles and other places belonging to the king and his men. 15. The beginning of hostilities in the Hundred Years War, 1337 (Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 9, 409 [Latin]) The King of England sent to the lords across the sea my lord William de Bohun, Earl of Northampton, the Earl of Huntingdon, and the Earl of Suffolk, with 15,000 men-at-arms, archers, and spearmen. Also he sent the Bishop of Lincoln with 14,000 sacks of wool to defray the wages of the troops for the meantime. Afterwards there were granted to him in the next parliament at London 20,000 sacks of wool of the English merchants for the fitting out and support of his war. He himself purchased from the English merchants one sack out of every two sacks of prime wool for half a mark, and inferior wool at less price and value; for he was obliged to spend an almost incalculable sum for the maintenance of so great an army. Thus it was said that he spent a thousand marks a day, according to others two thousand pounds. It so happened that my lord William and the other earls with the army encountered in their voyage over sea eighty French ships, which they captured and disposed of at will. The brother of the Count of Flanders was found in these ships and taken to the King of England, who received him with so much honour, setting him free, that peace was made between England and Flanders. But when they arrived in a certain town of Flanders, they found armed men who gave them battle, but were soon put to flight by the English archers. Then they raised the surrounding district to fight our people, but some of them were again put to flight and some took shelter in a certain church; and because, trusting in

The political framework

63

the strength of the place, they refused to surrender, the English set the church afire, and they were burnt in the church. 16. Edward III is made Vicar General of the Empire, 1338 (Froissart, Chronicles (trans. Berners), ch. 34) Thus the King of England made great preparations; and when the winter was past, he took to the sea, well accompanied with earls and barons, and divers other knights, and arrived at the town of Antwerp, as then pertaining to the Duke of Brabant. Thither came people from all parts to see him and the great estate that he kept. Then he sent to his cousin the Duke of Brabant and to the Duke of Gueldres, to the Marquis of Juliers, to the lord John of Hainault, and to all such as he trusted to have any comfort of, saying how he would gladly speak with them…. When these lords were all come to a conference at Hal, they had long counsel together. Finally they said to the King of England: “Sir, we see no cause why we should make defiance to the French king, all things considered, unless you can get the agreement of the emperor, and he would command us to do so in his name. The emperor may well do so, for of long time past there was a covenant sworn and sealed, that no king of France ought to take anything pertaining to the Empire; and this King Philip has taken the castle of Crèvecoeur in Cambrésis, and the castle of Arleux in Palluel. and divers other heritages in the county of Cambrésis; wherefore the emperor has good cause to defy him by us. Therefore, sir, if you can get his accord our honour shall be the more.” And the king said that he would follow their counsel. … And then about the feast of All Hallows…he sent to the Duke of Brabant, to know his mind where he wished the council to be held; and he answered, at Herck, in the county of Loos, near to his country. And then the king sent to all other of his allies that they should be there. And so the hall of the town was apparelled and hung as though it had been the king’s chamber; and there the king sat crowned with gold, five foot higher than any other, and there openly were read the letters of the emperor, by the which the king was made vicar-general and lieutenant for the emperor, and had power given him to make laws and to minister justice to every person in the emperor’s name, and to make money of gold and silver. The emperor also there commanded by his letters that all persons of his empire and all other of his subjects should obey the king of England his vicar as to himself, and do him homage. And at once there was claim and answer made between parties, as before the emperor, and right and judgement were given…. And King Edward, as vicar of the Empire, went then to Louvain to the queen, who was newly come thither out of England with great nobleness, and well accompanied with ladies and damsels of England. So there the king and queen kept their house right honourably all that winter, and caused money, gold and silver, to be made at Antwerp, in great plenty. 17. The Flanders campaign of 1339 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 64 [Latin]) The fresh bad tidings struck the ears of the king as he lay in Brabant, with the news that the cruel tyrants of France had devastated Southampton and other ports of England,

English historical documents

64

together with their shipping. Then he declared to his friends who were present, that is, the Marquis of Juliers and the cardinals, that it would be necessary to avenge himself against his adversary, the tyrant of the French; whereupon the cardinals declared: “The kingdom of France is surrounded by a silken thread which all the power of the kingdom of England will not suffice to break; wherefore, lord king, you must wait for the Germans and your other allies, the greater part whereof you now lack, that with their help you may at least seem to be able to hurt the French, and then be able, with our mediation, by the grace of God, to obtain an honourable peace with the powerful king of France.” At these words the king and his earls were offended, for they had no intention of waiting for the Germans or money from England, since the king knew that by waiting the time suitable for war would slip away. Finally he declared that he would ride into French territory with his banner displayed, and await the threatened power of the French, and that he would conquer any force sent against him or die honestly in the field. In the year of Our Lord 1339 and of his reign in England the twelfth, in the vigil of Saint Matthew [20 September], with 12,000 armed men our king began to ride against the tyrant, with his banner displayed, burning and destroying towns and castles everywhere he went. On the first night, which was very dark, Geoffrey Lord Scrope one of the king’s justices, led one of the cardinals, that is, Bertrand de Montfavez, deacon of the Blessed Mary in Aquirio up a great and high tower, showing him the whole countryside towards France for a distance of 15 miles burning in every place, and said: “Sir, does it not seem to you that the silken thread encompassing France is broken?” At this the cardinal fell without answering, as if dead, stretched out on the roof of the tower from grief and fear. So for five weeks the king journeyed through the kingdom of France, daily continuing his work, and caused his army so to labour that they destroyed the whole countryside of Cambrai, Tournai, Vermandois, and Landen, except walled towns and churches and castles, the inhabitants fleeing for fear. No one dared to resist him on these raids, although the tyrant of France had assembled large forces within his walled cities, himself lying in the strong town of St Quentin; and he did not dare to defend any land, which he called his, outside the walls of the cities against the King of England, by presiding over his army in the field…. When the Brabanters had decided to return home again and had entered on their journey, owing to lack of victuals and the rigours of the oncoming winter, the tyrant of the French, understanding this, moved towards the army of the King of England, who, gladly awaiting his coming, recalled the Brabanters. When he had received letters from the tyrant that he wished to fight, the King of England sent word to him that he would wait for him three days in the field. Therefore on the fourth day King Edward expected the tyrant who was, however, unwilling to come any nearer than two miles. He broke down bridges, and felled trees across the roads, so that the king could not follow him, and retired to Paris in dishonour. When he learnt this, the king of England, by the advice of his friends, on account of the lack of victuals returned through Hainault to Brabant, where he spent almost the whole winter.

The political framework

65

18. Edward III assumes the title and arms of the King of France, 1340 (Robert of Avesbury, De Gestis mirabilibus regis Edwardi Tertii, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson (Rolls Series, 1889), 309 [Latin]) Edward, by the grace of God King of France and England and Lord of Ireland, to all the prelates and other ecclesiastical persons, peers, dukes, counts, barons, gentle and simple, dwelling in the realm of France, gives true notice of all the underwritten matters. The high lord king, who has the right to put his will into effect, wishes however his power to be subject to law, ordering each to be given what is his, thus showing that justice and judgement ought to be the preparation of the seat of the king. Since therefore the kingdom of France has by divine disposition devolved upon us by the clearest right owing to the death of Charles of noted memory, the last king of France, brother germane to our lady mother, and the lord Philip of Valois, son of the king’s uncle and thus farther removed in blood from the said king, has intruded himself by force into the kingdom while we were yet of tender years, and holds that kingdom against God and justice, lest we should seem to neglect our right and the gift of heavenly grace or to be unwilling to conform the impulse of our will to the divine pleasure, we have recognised our right to the kingdom and have undertaken the burden of the rule of that kingdom, as we ought to do, resolving with unshakable purpose to act with good and devoted servants, to do justice to all men according to the just and laudable customs of all men, to revive the good laws and customs which were in force in the time of Louis, our predecessor, and to cast out that usurper when opportunity shall seem most propitious. We do not intend to seek our gain at your expense by unjust exactions, such as changes in the coinage or otherwise, since we have sufficient of our own resources, thanks be to God; and in the affairs of the kingdom we do not intend to act precipitately and arbitrarily, but, holding our will in check, we will be guided by the counsel and advice of the peers, prelates, magnates and faithful vassals of the kingdom, as shall seem best for the honour of God, the protection and advancement of the Church, which we revere in the fullness of devotion, and the furtherance of both the public and the private good, regulating our deeds by the grace of God, with the full display of justice. For your honour, convenience, and peace we are in the highest degree concerned, because, God knows, nothing would be more acceptable to us than that by our efforts, especially between ourselves and Christians generally, the Lover of Peace should send his peace, so that the sword of the Catholic princes might be turned against the blasphemers of the Christian name and towards the recovery of the Holy Land, sanctified by the blood of our Redeemer, to which object we strive by the grace of the Holy Ghost. And whereas we have held out to the lord Philip many loving and reasonable offers of peace, to which he would not respond nor make any reasonable reply, nay rather, levying unjust war against us, he has striven with all his might for the complete subversion of our estate, we have necessarily been compelled to resort to arms, for our defence and recovery of our rights, not seeking the overthrow or depression of the good and the poor but rather striving heartily for their safety and convenience; wherefore we benignly wish that all and each of the natives of the kingdom who will subject themselves willingly to us, as the true King of France according to wise counsel, before next Easter, offering due fidelity etc. to us, as King of France, performing their duties, as our beloved and faithful men of Flanders have already done and have offered themselves as ready to be effective in our service, should be

English historical documents

66

admitted to our peace and grace and to our special protection and defence, and we wish to maintain them, as is proper, and to protect them, without any molestation or disturbance to them either in persons or possessions by us or our servants, in whatever manner carried out, by reason of the former rebellion. And because the foregoing proclamations cannot easily be notified to each of you individually, we provide that they should be affixed publicly to the outer doors of churches and other public places, so that they may come to public notice, to the solace of our devoted subjects and for the true instruction of those who have been alienated from us by malevolent cancers. Given at Ghent on the 8th of February, in the first year of our reign over France and the 14th of our rule over England. 19. Edward III denounces Philip VI and offers his protection to the Venetians, 1340 (Commemoriali (Archivio di State, Venice), III, Nos 679, 680. Cf. the summary printed in Calendar of State Papers of Venice, etc., 1202–1509, ed. R.Brown (1864), 8–9 [Latin]) [The form of embassy presented to the distinguished lord the Doge of Venice by the venerable father, Brother Richard, Bishop of Bisaccia.] The most serene prince, Edward, by the grace of God King of England and France has committed strict instructions to me Brother Richard, by the grace of God Bishop of Bisaccia, chaplain to the most distinguished prince King Robert…to be put forward and expounded…. First, whereas Philip of Valois who calls himself King of France…occupies the Duchy of Normandy, the greater and more fertile part of the Duchy of Aquitaine, the Counties of Anjou, Saintonge with the isles, Ponthieu in Picardy, all of which from time out of mind have belonged to the kingdom of England by hereditary right, the most serene prince Edward has invited and does not cease to invite the said Philip, the deceptive and illegal occupant of the realm of France, to a pitched battle. But lest so much effusion of Christian blood, which might result from such a battle, might be a reproach to the most serene prince Edward, he at the beginning of the war sent letters to Philip, to offer to settle the dispute either by a single combat or by a tournament between six or eight on each side, or with any number which he pleased to choose on each side, and so the dispute might be ended by a few…. If he be the true King of France, as he claims, he should stand the test of braving ravenous lions who do not touch a true king or perform the miracle of touching for the king’s evil, as true kings are accustomed to do. If he cannot do this, he should be considered unworthy of the kingdom of France. But puffed up by pride he has refused all the measures and the various proposals of peace. And as by law human and divine those forcibly and unjustly oppressed are entitled to help, the most serene Prince Edward requests from the Doge and Republic of Venice the loan of forty or more galleys for one whole year, at whatever fee or reward the Doge and Republic see fit to charge …the fee to be paid in silver or gold or other merchandise before they leave the port of Venice. King Edward promises on the diadem of his head to defend both the crews and the galleys from his adversary as he would his own persons. But if your Excellency should refuse this request, he earnestly asks that no help in galleys or in any other way be given to his adversary and that the Doge and the Republic will at any rate be neutral.

The political framework

67

Also…the most serene prince…begs the ducal excellency and the Republic of Venice to direct letters to the Doge of Genoa to ask, by the truth and justice which the prince has shown and intends to show to that state, that they refuse to grant a subsidy to his adversary…. Also the most serene prince Edward…desiring to turn the hearts of the Doge and the Republic of Venice towards him, offers to the Doge and Republic and the citizens and merchants of Venice a status superior to that of all others except his own subjects, to whom the Venetian merchants shall be equal in privilege, with the express wish that they may enjoy these privileges and immunities in buying and selling…. [Edward was willing to grant a perpetual privilege, duly signed and sealed, to grant whatever guarantees might be required. By an additional clause Edward asked the bishop of Bisaccia to request the Doge to send his two sons to England, or at least one of them, and promised that they should be treated at the English court with every honour, including the honour of knighthood. In reply the Doge excused the Republic from granting a naval subsidy on the plea of the menace from the Turks, and said that it would not be suitable to write to the Doge of Genoa; he expressed gratitude, however, for the privileges offered to Venetian merchants, and for the honour done to his sons.]

20. The battle of Sluys, 1340 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 68 [Latin]) In the year of our Lord 1340 and of his reign in England the fourteenth the lord king kept his Whitsuntide at Ipswich, because he intended to cross thence to Flanders with a small following; but when he heard that the tyrant of the French had sent a great fleet of Spanish ships and almost all the shipping of the French kingdom to bar his crossing, he called together his ships of the Cinque Ports and elsewhere, so that he had 260 ships, both great and small. Therefore on the Thursday before the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist [22 June], with a favourable wind, he began his voyage prosperously, and on the Friday following, in the vigil of the Nativity, he saw the French fleet in the haven of the Zwyn, ready for the fray, and as if ordered in line of battle; and then, anchoring in the sea, he deliberated the whole day what it would be best to do. On the feast of St John, very early in the morning, the French fleet, dividing into three ranks, moved forward a mile towards the royal fleet. When he saw this, the King of England said that he would not wait longer and he and his men ran to arms and were soon ready. After nine o’clock when he had the wind and the sun at his back and the flow of the tide with him, with his ships divided into three columns, he gave his enemies the challenge they wished for. A terrifying shout rose to heavens above the wooden horses, according to the prophecy of Merlin; an iron shower of quarrels from crossbows and arrows from long bows brought death to thousands of people; all those who wished or dared to do so fought hand to hand with spears, battle-axes, and swords; stones hurled from the turrets of masts dashed out the brains of many; to sum up, there was joined without any doubt a great and terrible

English historical documents

68

naval battle. The greatness of the Spanish ships foiled many a stroke of the English; but at last the French ships were overcome, and the first contingent of vessels emptied of men, and the English seized the craft. The French ships were chained together, so that they could not be torn from one another; so a few English guarded one group of the captured ships; the others charged the second contingent and with great difficulty thrust home the blow. This contingent was, however, more easily emptied than the first, because the French, deserting their ships, for the most part leapt overboard without resisting. The first and second squadrons of ships were thus captured, and dusk was falling, so the English lay off until morning, because the night was so dark and they were so weary. During the night thirty ships of the third squadron fled; and one great ship, called the James of Dieppe, tried to take with it a certain ship of Sandwich, which belonged to the prior of Christchurch, Canterbury. The crew of that ship defended themselves manfully with the help of the Earl of Huntingdon, however, and their fight lasted throughout the night. In the morning the Normans were finally defeated, and the Englishmen found in the captured ship more than 400 men slain. Moreover, at daybreak, when the king realized that 30 ships had fled, he sent 40 well-armed ships to follow them, under the command of John Crabbe, whom the English accounted very experienced in naval matters and very informed about the French harbours; but what was the effect of this pursuit is not known. In the first squadron of captured ships the victors found those ships which the French had earlier, as is described above, carried off by stealth from the port of Sluys; they were the Dionysius, the George, the Christopher, and the Black Cock. The number of warships captured there amounted to 200, and the number of barges taken was thirty. The number of the enemy killed and drowned exceeded 25,000; of the English 4,000 were slain, amongst whom were 4 knights, Sir Thomas de Mounthermer, kinsman to the king, Sir Thomas le Latimer the son, Sir William le Botiller de Siortborne [Boteler or Butler of Northbourne], and a fourth, whose name we have not heard. 21 (i). Presentment of Englishry abolished, 1340 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 282 [French]) A so because many mischiefs have happened in divers counties of England, which had no knowledge of presentment of Englishry, whereby the commons of the shire were often amerced before the justices in eyre, to the great mischief of the people, it is agreed that henceforth no itinerant justice shall put in any article or opposition of presentment of Englishry against the commons of the shires nor against any of them; but that Englishry and presentment of the same be wholly abolished and void forever, so that no person may by this cause be henceforth impeached. (ii). England not to be subject to the king as king of France, 1340 (Ibid. 292 [French]) The king to all to whom these letters shall come, greeting. Know that whereas some people do think that by reason that the realm of France has devolved to us as rightful heir of the same, and for as much as we are King of France, our realm of England should be

The political framework

69

put in subjection to the king and to the realm of France in time to come, we, having regard to the estate of our realm of England and namely that it never was or ought to be in…the obedience of the kings of France…will and grant and establish for us and for our heirs and successors, by assent of the prelates, earls, barons, and commons of our realm of England…that our realm of England and the people of the same, of what estate or condition they be, shall not in any time to come be put in subjection or obedience to us, nor our heirs or successors as kings of France…. 22. The beginning of the crisis of 1341 (Adae Murimuth, Continuatio Chronicarum, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson (Rolls Series, 1889), 116 [Latin]) In the year 1340…and the 67th year of the present writer, at Michaelmas, the lord king was at Ghent, waiting for confirmation of the truce and also for money from England, which did not come. Later, when all the English who were with the king in Ghent believed that the King of England would spend Christmas there, the lord king with a few men, that is eight of his followers, pretending that he wished to go for a stroll, rode away secretly, without warning even his household staff, and came to Sluys, where he set sail. On the night of St Andrew’s Day [30 November] about cock crow, he entered the Tower of London by water, and with him were the Earl of Northampton, Walter de Manny, John D’Arcy the son, John de Beau-champ and Giles de Beauchamp, knights, William de Killesby and Philip de Weston, clerks, and a few others. And at cock crow he sent at once for the chancellor, treasurer, and other justices then present in London. And at once he removed the Bishop of Chichester [Robert Stratford] from the office of chancellor, and the Bishop of Coventry [Roger Northburgh] from the office of treasurer. He wanted to send them to Flanders to act as hostages there [for the payment of his debts], or, if they were unwilling to do this, to remain unwillingly in the Tower of London. But the Bishop of Chichester pointed out the danger to clerical privilege that would be caused by the imprisonment of bishops, and so he allowed them to leave the Tower. But he caused to be consigned to various prisons the greater justices, John de Stonor [Chief Justice of the Common Pleas], Richard de Willoughby [Chief Justice of the King’s Bench], Judge William de Shareshull, and Nicholas de la Beche, who was formerly the guardian of his son and of the Tower of London; also the merchants, John Pulteney and William de la Pole, and the greater clerks of the Chancery, John of St Pol, Michael de Wath, Henry de Stratford, Robert de Chigwell; the clerk of the Exchequer, John de Thorp and many others. But because this was done wilfully and in the heat of his anger, they were afterwards released. Also, after this arrival of the king John [Stratford], the Archbishop [of Canterbury] was publicly accused of ingratitude and other matters, first by the mouth of William Killesby at the Guildhall in London, and then by royal letters. He offered to be ready to answer these charges in the next parliament as will appear below. And shortly after his arrival the king removed all the sheriffs and other ministers from their public offices, and appointed other unwilling persons to take their places; and he made a certain knight, Robert de Bourchier, Chancellor of England, and another layman treasurer, that is, first, Robert le Sadington, and afterwards Robert de Parning [Chief

English historical documents

70

Justice of the King’s Bench]; and he listened to the counsel of young men, spurning the advice of the older ones. And he ordered that in every shire justices should sit and inquire about the collectors of the tenth, of the fifteenth, and of the wools, and about all his other ministers whatsoever. And in each shire he ordained one chief justice, that is an earl or great baron, with whom he associated lesser justices. These justices acted so sternly and wilfully that no one escaped punishment, whether he had served the king’s business well or ill, so that everybody without choice had to save himself by an excessive fine, if he wished to escape prison, even if he was not indicted or accused; and he did not allow anyone to purge himself as to his innocence or guilt…. And a fortnight after Easter…1341…the king held a parliament at London in which prelates, earls, and magnates, namely the peers and community of the realm together made many good petitions for the community of the realm, and especially that the great charter and the charter of the forest and other liberties of the church should be kept to the letter; and that those who contravened them, even if they were royal officials, should be punished. But the king, by the advice of his private council, long refused to grant these requests. And thus the parliament continued until the eve of Whitsuntide [26 May]. But finally the king conceded the greater part of the petitions; he would not, however, agree to the appointment and election of his officials. In the end he was willing that his officials should swear in parliament to show justice to all in their offices; and if they failed to do this in any parliament on the third day after the beginning of parliament, then they should resign their offices and answer every one who complained against them, to be punished, if guilty, by the judgment of their peers. On these and other matters a statute was made and the royal seal was affixed to it. And then the prelates and others were given leave to go away; but the Bishops of Durham and Salisbury, the Earls of Salisbury, Warwick and Northampton, were assigned to hear the replies of the archbishop to the charges made against him and to report to the king in the next parliament. And when the archbishop offered himself at once as ready to show and prove that he was innocent, the bishops and earls said that they could not acquit him at that time; and so the matter remained in suspense. 23. John Stratford’s letter to Edward III, January 1341 (Robert of Avesbury, Chronicle, 324 [French]) Very gentle lord, may it please you to know that the most sovereign thing which holds kings and princes in due and fitting estate is good and wise counsel. And therefore says the wise man: “In multitude of councillors there is safety.” (Prov. xxiv, 9.) And therefore it is written in the Book of Kings that Solomon, who was the wisest king that ever was, took to him the most aged men and the wisest of the earth, by whose advice and by his own sense he ever held the land of Israel in quiet and in peace, and moreover all the kings that were round about him altogether at his will. And after his death reigned his son, Rehoboam, who left the good counsel of his father and of the aged and wise men who had been with his father, and did according to the counsel of young men who wished to please him and knew little; whereby he lost all the land of Israel, save only the twelfth part. In like manner have many kings of Israel and of other lands been brought to trouble by evil counsel. And sire, let it not displease you, you may remember it in your own time;

The political framework

71

for by the evil counsel which our lord your father, whom God preserve, had, he caused to be taken, against the law of the land and of the great charter, the peers and other people of the land, and put some to shameful death, and of others he caused their goods to be seized and all that they had, and some he held to ransom; and what happened to him for that cause you, sire, know well. And then, sire, in your time you had certain counsellors by whom you nearly lost the hearts of your people; from whom God delivered you, as it pleased him. And from then, even until now, by good advice of the prelates, peers, great men and wise of the council of the land, your affairs have been brought into such a state that you have entirely the hearts of your people who have helped you, clerks as well as others, and will continue to give you as much aid, or more, as ever had any king of England; so that by means of your good counsel, the help of your people, and the grace of God, you have had the victory against your enemies of Scotland and France and all parties, so that at this day, honour be to God, you are held the most noble prince of Christendom. And now, by evil counsel, abetted by certain people of this land who are not so wise as they need to be, and by the counsel of others who seek rather their own profit than your honour or the safety of the land, you begin to seize various clerks, peers, and other people of the land, and to make unseemly process against the law of the land, and against the great charter, which you are bound to keep and maintain by the oath made at your coronation.. .. Wherefore, sire, for the salvation of your honour and your land and the maintenance of your enterprise, be willing to take to you the great and wise of your land and to act in your affairs by them and by their counsels, as has been the custom hitherto, without whose aid and counsel you cannot maintain your enterprise nor govern well your land. And since certain who are near to you do falsely charge us with treason and falsehood, therefore they are excommunicate, and for such we hold them and as your spiritual father we pray that you will hold them for such; and also they say of some others that they have served you evilly and falsely, so that you have lost the town of Tournai and many other honours that you might have had there. Be willing, sire, if it please you, to cause the prelates, great men, and peers of the land, to come together in a suitable place, whither we and others may safely come, and cause, if it please you, an enquiry to be made, to see into whose hands, from the beginning of your war, wools, money, and other things whatsoever, which have been granted to you in aid of your war right to this day, have come and have been expended, and by whose default you thus departed from Tournai; and those who shall be found guilty in any whit towards you, as a good lord, cause them to be chastised well according to the law. And in whatsoever concerns us, we will stand in all points at the judgement of our peers, saving always the estate of holy church, of us, and of our order, as we have written before this time. And for God’s sake, sire, be unwilling to believe of us and of your good people anything but good, before you know the truth; for if folk shall be punished without answer, judgement of the good and of the evil shall be all one. And, sire, consider well your great undertaking, and the strong adversary whom you have for that cause, and your enemies of Scotland, and the great peril of your land; for if your prelates, great men, and all the wise men of your land were, day and night, of one will, without division, to ordain that which should be best to do in such great matters, there would be enough to think about, to uphold your undertaking, your honour, and the safety of your land. And, sire, take it not ill that we send you so largely the truth; for the great affection which we have, and ever shall have, towards you, the safety of your honour and of your land, (and also because it belongs to us, since we

English historical documents

72

are, however unworthy, primate of all England and your spiritual father,) moves us to tell you and to warn you of the things that may be to the peril of your soul and the impoverishing of your land and of your estate. The Holy Ghost keep you, body and soul, and give you grace to have and to trust good counsel, and grant you victory over your enemies. Written at Canterbury, the first day of January, by your chaplain, the Archbishop of Canterbury. 24. Edward III and John de Montfort make an alliance, 1341 (Rymer, Foedera, II, iv, 112 [Latin], from Patent Roll, 15 Edward III, Pt II, m. 8) The king to all to whom it shall concern, etc. Greeting. Know that Whereas the illustrious John, Duke of Brittany and Count of Montfort, our most dear cousin, mindful of the injury done to us by the lord Philip of Valois, by his detention of the kingdom of France, with the zeal of justice has concluded a treaty and firm friendship with us against Philip, and because of this Philip has caused the county of Montfort to be seized into his hand, and is holding this county thus seized, We, considering the great affection which the same duke has voluntarily shown us, and wishing on this account to make some recompense, as is fitting, Concede to him for us and our heirs the county of Richmond, to have and to hold, with the castles, towns, hamlets, knights’ fees, advowsons of churches, abbeys, priories, hospitals, chapels, and other religious houses, wardships, marriages, reliefs, escheats, fishponds, parks, woods, warrens, fairs, markets, liberties, free customs, services, as well of free tenants as of bondmen, and all other rights whatsoever and wheresoever belonging to the county, in the same manner in which John, of famous memory, recently Duke of Brittany and Count of Richmond, held the same county, until the duke has recovered the county of Montfort, or until it shall have been returned to him. So that when the same duke has recovered the aforesaid county of Montfort, or had it restored, he shall be bound to give up the said county of Richmond, unless we show in this matter further grace (which may be hoped from the abundance of our royal munificence and thus continue to increase our laudable deed). Witnessed by the king at Westminster, 24th September. 25 (i). Edward III founds the Round Table at Windsor, 1344 (Adam of Murimuth, Chronicle, 231–2; the version from Cottonian MS., Nero D.10 [Latin]) Concerning a solemnity made at Windsor by the most illustrious King Edward, King of England and France, on the day of St George the Martyr. In the year of Our Lord 1343 [1344 N.S.]…on the Sunday next after the feast of the Blessed Mary [8 February] at Windsor, the lord king kept a very great solemnity and great feast, to which he invited his first-born son the Prince of Wales, the earls, barons and knights, and very many other nobles of his kingdom. There were also there the lady Queen Philippa, with their children, the lady queen-mother, the lady Isabella, countesses, baronesses, as well as ladies and gentlewomen, with an indescribable host of people

The political framework

73

about to delight in so great a solemnity. And so at expensive feasts and abundant drinks of the most delicate kind they were present to the satiety of everyone. Among the lords and ladies dances were not lacking, embraces and kisses alternately intermingling. Among the knights continuous joustings took place for three days; the best melody was made by the minstrels, and various joyous things; to these were given changes of clothing; to these gifts abounded; these were enriched with plenty of gold and silver. This same solemnity lasted throughout Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday; on which day, at night, after the conclusion of the jousts, the lord king caused to be proclaimed that no lord or lady should presume to depart, but await until morning, to know the lord king’s pleasure. When the morning, that is the Thursday, came, about the first hour the king caused himself to be solemnly arrayed in royal and festive vestures, and he had over all a mantle of most precious velvet, and the royal crown was placed on his head. The queen was likewise most nobly adorned. The earls and barons, and the rest of the lords and ladies, with all the decency they could, according to the king’s command, prepared themselves to go with him to the chapel in the castle of Windsor and hear mass. When this had been celebrated, the lord king left the chapel, preceded by the lord Henry, Earl of Derby, as steward of England and the lord William, Earl of Salisbury, as marshal of England, going before him, each in virtue of his office carrying a staff in his hand, and the lord king himself holding the royal sceptre in his hand. There followed the young lady queen and the lady queen mother, the Prince of Wales, the earls, barons, knights, and nobles, with the ladies and all the people about to see so unwonted a spectacle, to the place appointed for the assembly. In this place the lord king and all the others stood up together, and having been offered the book, the lord king, after touching the Gospels, took a corporal oath that he himself, at a certain time appointed for this, provided the power should remain in him, would begin a Round Table, in the same manner and estate as the lord Arthur, formerly King of England, maintained it, namely to the number of 300 knights, a number always to be maintained, and he would support and cherish it according to his power. To observe, sustain, and promote this with all its appendages, the Earls of Derby, Salisbury, Warwick, Arundel, Pembroke, and Suffolk, and many other barons and knights, whom uprightness and fame put forward to be worthy of praise, made a like oath. When this was done, the trumpets and drums sounded together, and the guests hastened to a feast; which feast was complete with richness of fare, variety of dishes, and overflowing abundance of drinks; the delight was inexpressible, the comfort inestimable, the merriment without murmuring, and the hilarity without care. The last things therefore corresponding to the first, the royal feast was ended so that on the fifth day each could return to his own concerns. (ii) The actual work in making the Round Table, 1345 (Pipe Roll, 18 Edward III, m. 45, and Exchequer K.R. Accounts, 492/26 (printed in W.H.St John Hope, Windsor Castle (1913), I, 113–14, 124–5 [Latin]) The account of Alan of Killum, the clerk appointed to perform certain works within the king’s castle of Windsor in the 18th year by the king’s writ under the privy seal dated 12 November of the same year, directed to the treasurers and barons, and enrolled in a memorandum of the 19th year, Michaelmas term, by which the king commanded them to

English historical documents

74

reckon with the same Alan of the sums received by him upon the performing of the king’s works at Windsor from which the same Alan wishes to clear himself, making to Alan reasonable allowance by the testimony of brother John Waleraund, overseer and controller of the works aforesaid, that is to say of his receipts and expenses and wages incurred and paid by Alan himself. Sum received: £461 8s 8d Expenses. The same accounts for divers stores both of Caen and Kentish rag and of Whateley for the king’s works aforesaid, for talwood and faggots, for lime at the lime pits, and timber, for making a well within the castle, bought of divers persons and at divers times between the 15th day of February in the 18th year, on which day the works were begun, and the 27th day of November next following, on which day those works came to an end, by view and testimony of brother John, £108 17s od. as is contained in a roll of particulars which he delivered into the treasury and also in the counter-roll of the aforesaid brother John likewise delivered into the treasury. And in tiles, laths, tile-pins and lath-nails bought for the works in the same place, together with the carriage of the tiles from Perm to the castle, £7 6s 8d. And in 77 barrows, of which 6 were of twigs, 5 tubs, 12 troughs for putting mortar in, 10 bowls for sprinkling water upon the mortar, one pipe, 2 casks for carrying water in, 6 tubs for putting water in, a tunder and a scoop for pouring water in the casks, 6 sieves and “culdors” for making mortar, 5 fir poles for measuring the house, 4 grindstones for sharpening the mason’s tools, 2 saws for sawing stone, 6 picks and 6 mattocks, 4 rakes of iron, 2 iron forks, 3 axes for chopping wood, 10 wedges for the quarry, 4 hammers, 4 trowels, 6 hurdles for the lime-pits, a sledge, an axe, 30 ladles for pouring cement, boards for squares, laths and lath-nails for chimney forges there, iron and steel for making and mending thence divers necessaries bought at divers times, together with the mending of the masons’ tools and the cleaning of two wells within the castle aforesaid for having water in the same place, £9 is And in boatage and cartage of stones, timber, earth, lime and sand both by land and by water from divers places to the castle within the time £82 1s 6d. And in wages of divers masons, carpenters, sawyers, smiths and divers other workmen working upon the king’s works during the whole time £254 3s And in wages of Alan tarrying about the works at the castle for 98 days within the aforesaid time, and of the aforesaid brother John Waleraund likewise tarrying about the same works for 286 days, namely during the whole time, £46 8s od to each of them, 2s per day by the King’s writ. Sum of the expenses, and he has in surplus

£507 17s £46 9s

John Waleraund’s account is entitled: The counter-roll of Brother John Walrande, controller of Alan of Killum, the king’s clerk, of certain expenses and wages incurred and paid by the same Alan about the foundation of a certain round house within the castle of Windsor, from the 16th day of February in the 18th year of the reign of King Edward III to the 18th day of November next following.

The political framework

75

[The account covers two membranes, of which the first is practically a wages sheet for the forty weeks during which the works were in progress. The second membrane contains the account of the commissioners who were engaged in seeking workmen; the wages of carpenters felling timber at various places; the wages of sawyers and plumbers; purchases of stone and timber and necessaries; the cost of cartage and boatage; and a memorandum of the purchase of tiles. Specimen entries of the weekly wage bills:-] First week—Cutting masons—To master William of Ramsey for his wages at 7s a week; of a mason-cutter for his wages at 4s; of four each 3s; of two each at 2s 6d; of three at 2s 4d; of two at 2s 3d; of one at 2s 2d and for a certain one at 2s a week; between the 16th day of February and the 21st day of the same month, reckoned in the 18th year—61s 8d. Carpenters—To master William of Hurley for his wages at 7s; of three carpenters each at 4d a day for 4 days within the said time—11s. Workmen—And for wages of four, each at 4d a day; and of thirteen, each at 2d a day at the lime pits for 4 days within the said time—14s. Sum £4 65 8d. Second week—Cutting masons—To master William of Ramsey for his wages at 7s; of two at 45 each; of four at 3s; of eight at 2s 6d each; of six at 2s 4d each; of six at 2s 3d each; of six at 2s 2d each; of fifteen at 2s each; of six at 21d each, and of five at 12d each per week from the 23rd day of February until the 28th day of the same month, each being reckoned for six days—£6 13s 0d. Laying masons—To William Bond, laying mason, for his wages at 2s 2d; of four at 2s each; of three at 22d each; of four at 20d each; of three at 18d each; and of three at 15d each per week for the same time…. 35s 7d. Labourers at Bustlesham—And for the wages of an overseer at the quarry of Bustlesham at 2s 4d; of five at 13d each; of 23 at 11d each; of 28 for days, of 10 for days, and three for days at 2d per day each, within the said time. 58s 9d. Carpenters—To master William of Hurley for his wages at 7s; of three carpenters at 2s each; of one at 21d; of two at 18d; and of one at 15d per week for the same time within the castle. 19s. Labourers—And for the wages of one smith at 2s; of meat 12d; and of meat 9d per week for the same time. 3s 9d. And for the wages of 191 men working within the castle and of 20 at the sand pits at 12d each per week. £10 us 0d.

English historical documents

76

Sum—£22 16s 1d. 26. Edward III lands at La Hogue, marches through the north of France and wins the battle of Crécy, 1346 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle [Latin]) (79) Afterwards the king hastened his passage into Normandy, his fleet awaiting him at Portsmouth and Porchester. So the king waited at these ports from the 1st of June to the 5th July for a favourable wind, having with him the Earls of North-ampton, Arundel, Warwick, Lords Harcourt, Huntingdon, Oxford and Suffolk, the Bishop of Durham, and William de Kyllesby, clerk, who had all brought with them a great supply of arms and arrows. At last with a thousand ships, pinnaces, and supply ships they began to make sail with a good wind. Then a royal council was secretly held; the masters of the ships but simply followed the admiral as ordered. On the same day the king sent messengers from his ship to the other vessels, now far from the shore, telling their skippers to follow the admiral to the port of La Hogue in Normandy. At last on the 13th of July they landed at the desired haven where, on reaching the shore, the king created his eldest son a knight and prince of Wales. At once the prince knighted Mortimer, de Montacute, and de Roos; and with them others were similarly promoted to the order of knighthood. For the rest of the day and the following night the king lodged in la Hogue, and on the morrow, Thursday, the army set the town on fire. Then they set out through the Cotentin and the following night the king lodged at Morsalines. There he stayed five days, during which the whole countryside and coast was devastated and the town of Barfleur was burnt. Then they marched to Valognes which they set on fire; then to St Côme-du-Mont, near the bridge over the Douve, and across the Douve to Carentan; thence to Serins and the city of St Lô and the fine town of Torigni, all of which were burnt; and the king spent the night at Cormolain. Thence they went on to Gerin, a cell of the monastery of Caen, and nothing was left unburnt. Afterwards, on Tuesday, they made an assault, and with a great struggle they entered the noble town of Caen, by the bridge, which was keenly defended. There were captured and killed 143 knights, amongst whom were the counts of Eu and the chamberlain of Tancarville, worthy knights, who were sent with other captives into England, and the abbess of Caen; of the citizens of the town who resisted more than 3,000 were killed. There the army stayed six days, and they sent or sold to the ships or by the ships which had followed the king along the coast all the booty which they had taken in the towns and countryside; the ships had wasted all they could along the coast. Then they went on to the strongly defended monastery and town of Troarn, situated in the march, and afterwards to Argences, a strong town. By night they came to Rumesnil, burning as they went. Then at the city of Lisieux they found the cardinals of Clermont and Naples and an archbishop, who offered to the king peace terms; and there the king stayed three days, refusing to treat of peace. Thence they set out for Le Teil-Nollent and Brionne, and lodged at Le Neubourg and afterwards at Elbeuf on the Seine; and there the Welsh swam across the Seine and killed many of the inhabitants who opposed them. Then they passed near the castle and town of Pont de l’Arche, which were too strong to be assaulted; and that night they lodged at Séry on the Seine, near the strong town of Louviers, which was burnt. Afterwards they moved on through the town and castle of

The political framework

77

Gaillon, which were captured and burnt, and lodged at Longueville, which is near the fortified town and castle of Vernon, which was neither taken nor touched, and there they entered the He de France. (Ibid. 81) And that night they burnt the castle of Rocheblanche, on the Seine, and lodged at Frevile [Freneuse] on the Seine. Next day they passed through Mantes to Epone, where they stayed the night. On the morrow, Friday, they marched through Fresnes; and on Saturday they came to the fortified town of Poissy, where the French had broken the bridge, so that the king could not cross the Seine, but the king had it repaired. On the same day, Sunday, there arrived from Amiens and the Ile de France three great columns of men to stop the king from crossing; but after a fierce struggle, in which 300 Frenchmen were killed and the rest put to flight, they burnt 32 carts and wagons full of crossbows, quarrels, and other arms and victuals. So, after a delay of two days, they went on to Gersile [Grisy] near Pontoise, and on Wednesday lodged at Auteuil; on the next day they passed by the city of Beauvais which they left untouched, and went on through Troissereux to Sommereux, where they lodged on Friday night. The next day they attacked the town of Poix, which was fiercely defended, and burnt the castle. Then, marching on Monday and Tuesday, they stayed at Airaines. The day following they lodged at Acheux, and on the Thursday they came to Noyelle-sur-Mer, a ford of the estuary of the Somme, where the tide goes in and out. The French came to the far side of this ford from the city of Abbeville and the countryside round about, with triumphant shouts, to stop their passage, arrayed in three terrifying divisions; against them the English had a fierce struggle, Hugh le Despenser leading the advance. By the grace of God, the opposite shore was gained in spite of the opposition, and more than two thousand of the foe were killed there. That night the town of Crotoy was taken and burnt and more than 300 Genoese mercenaries were killed after they had put up a stiff resistance. At Vespers on the Friday following, while the king was lodging on the banks of the Somme, there came to the bank, which they had just left, Philip of Valois, the tyrant of the French, and with him the Kings of Bohemia and Majorca, with an innumerable army divided into eight great divisions. The French shouted haughtily to the king and the English, and the men at arms skirmished in warlike manner both in the ford and on the bank above. The king sent to the tyrant offers of a peaceful and uninterrupted crossing of the ford so that he might choose some spot suitable for battle; but that cowardly Philip, who had previously threatened to follow the king, now declined battle. He went away to cross the water at another place, and the king waited for him throughout the night. On the morrow, that is Saturday, the king moved his army to the field of Crécy, where the army of the tyrant met him. Then the king prepared for battle. He placed his son the Prince of Wales in charge of the first division, the second was placed under the control [of the Earls of Arundel and Northampton], and the third he retained under his own control. He commended his cause to God and the Blessed Virgin, having noted that all his footsoldiers were prepared for the enemy’s attack, and that the war horses and coursers were kept with the food-train ready for the pursuit of the flying enemy. The army of the French was divided into nine divisions. The vanguard was led by the King of Bohemia, a man of great wisdom and experience in arms, who on the same day as a justification for his reputation sought from the tyrant the privilege of the command of

English historical documents

78

the first division and prophesied that he would die in conflict against the most noble knights of the world. He said that it was very foolish of the king of England not to have fled, and so he had the command of the vanguard owing to his insistence. So confident were the French leaders in the size of their army that each asked for particular Englishmen to be allotted to them as prisoners. (Ibid. 82) The King of Majorca besought the King of England as his prize, others wanted the prince, others the Earl of Northampton, others other leaders, according to the degree of nobility; but the tyrant, who had already armed, fearing lest they might be too preoccupied with the capture and ransoming of English leaders, and that this might make them more sluggish in striving for victory, ordered the banner called the Oriflamme to be unfurled. When this was done, it was not lawful for anyone, on pain of death, to spare any prisoner. This banner was called the Oliflamme [Oriflamme] to signify that the mercy of the French was so enflamed that it could not preserve any man’s life, just as oil on fire cannot spare anyone in its flames. So the banner on the right of the royal standard of France had a broad golden lily with gold threads by the side of the standard of the king of France, as if hanging in mid-air. On the other side the king of England ordered the unfurling of his banner on which a dragon was painted clothed with his arms, and from this he was nicknamed “Drago”, which signified that he had the savageness of a leopard and that the mildness of lilies was changed into draconian cruelty. The host so ordered stood in the field from daybreak until vespers, the already impressive multitude of the French being continually increased by fresh arrivals. At last, about sundown, after skirmishes of the redoubtable armies, the first charge was made by the French against the English with resounding trumpets, drums, and kettle-drums with strident clarions; and with shouting almost like thunder the crossbowmen of the French advanced, but none of their quarrels reached the English, falling a long way in front of them. At the tremendous clamour of the crossbowmen the archers were called forth and riddled their adversaries with arrows, and ended the shower of quarrels by a hail of arrows. When they saw that their crossbowmen were not harming the English at all, the French men-at-arms, mounted on young war-horses and agile coursers, rode down the crossbowmen, standing to the number of 7,000 between them and the English, crushing them under the feet of their horses, rushing impetuously forward to show the English how brave they were. So great cries of pain arose from those trampled underfoot by the horses, such shrieks that those in the rear of the great French host thought it was the English who were being slain. Upon hearing this all the French pressed forward on the heels of those in front; in this ill-considered ardour the most conspicuous were raw young knights, in whom the army abounded, all panting for the great honour, which filled their thoughts, of capturing the king of England. But the English in contrast, invoking the mother of Christ, having sanctified that day of Saturday with fasting, hastily dug many holes in the ground in front of their lines, one foot in depth and the same dimension in breadth, so that if the worst came to the worst and they were too hard pressed by the French cavalry, the horses would stumble in the holes. The archers were assigned their position so that they did not stand in front of the men-at-arms, and they did not meet the enemy face to face but shot their arrows from the sides of the King’s army.

The political framework

79

(Ibid. 84) Therefore a great outcry rose to the stars from the miserable crossbowmen, trampled underfoot by the great horses, and from the horses pierced by the arrows, and the order of the French was badly confused by the stumbling of the horses. Fighting with the English men-at-arms, they were beaten down with axes, lances and swords, and in the middle of the host many Frenchmen were crushed to death without any wound by the weight of numbers. In such a woeful encounter Edward of Woodstock, the king’s eldest son, being then sixteen years old, in the first division showed his valour to the French, piercing horses, laying low the riders, shattering helmets and breaking spears, skilfully parrying blows aimed against him, helping his men, defending himself, helping to their feet friends who had fallen, and showing to all an example in well-doing. He did not rest from his great labours until the foes, protected by the rampart of dead men, retreated. There his knightly honour learnt how he might skilfully perform knightly deeds at the battle of Poitiers, at which later he captured the king of France. In this struggle ill-disciplined forces fought against the young prince. The French repeatedly changed their front line, bringing up fresh hordes in place of those who were killed or tired or wounded. These continual accessions of strength to the enemy kept the prince and his companions so closely engaged that the great mass of the enemy compelled him to fight on his knees. Then someone ran or rode to the king his father, and, pointing out the peril which beset his eldest son, implored help; so he was sent with twenty knights to help the prince and found him and his men leaning on spears and swords, taking breath and resting quietly on long mounds of corpses, waiting for the enemy who had withdrawn. So from sunset to the third quarter of the night the dread face of Mars was shown. During this time the French thrice raised hostile shouts against our men, and attacked them fifteen times, but at last they fled in defeat. On the morrow four fresh divisions of Frenchmen arrived and as if no harm had befallen their side, they shouted at the English ostentatiously and began the sixteenth wave of attack. The English, although tired from yesterday’s labours, resisted them manfully all the same, and after a great and bitter struggle forced them to take to flight. Counting those who were overtaken in their flight, the number of men killed from the beginning of the conflict was 3,000, that is, on the aforesaid Saturday and Sunday. In this battle of Crécy there were slain the King of Bohemia, the Archbishop of Zanxen [Xanten], the Bishop of Noyon, the Duke of Lorraine, the Count of Alençon and his brother, Philip Count of Harcourt and his two sons, the Count of Auxerre, the Count of Aumale, the Count of Savoy, the Count of Blois, the Count of Flanders, the Count of Moreuil, the Count of Nevers, the Count of Grandpré; and also German counts whose names are not known. Other lords who were killed were Robert Lord Bertram, marshal of the army, the lord of Rosenberg, chief member of the tyrant’s council, the Prior of the French province of the order of St John of Jerusalem, the Abbot of Corbeil, the lord of Morelle, the lord of Caen, the lord of Sevenaunt, and many others, whose names captured Frenchmen, asked about this matter, did not know. (Ibid. 85) The total number of knights and men of superior dignity killed in this battle exceeded 4,000; no one troubled to count the others who were slain. It was ill-advised presumption

English historical documents

80

which brought destruction to these knights, as has been explained above, for they disputed with each other for the honour of taking or overcoming the king of England. From the ninth hour of that Sunday in which that two-day battle was ended, the king and his army, who had moved half a mile away from the dead, gave themselves up to thanking the Giver of victories, to resting themselves and to mustering their men; they did not discover that only forty of the whole army of the king had been slain. At length, at the time of vespers, they took the body of the King of Bohemia, and heated water to wash it and wrapped it in clean linen and placed it on a horse bier, and with the king and his earls standing by and a clerk present, the Bishop of Durham celebrated solemnly the office of the dead. Also on the morrow, after a requiem mass and other offices had been celebrated on a portable altar, and taking with them the body of the noble King of Bohemia, they passed by the monastery of Maintenay, and on the following Tuesday by a bad road to the town of Maintenay, and thence to the abbey of St Josse. Afterwards, crossing a certain ford, they came to Neufchâtel, where they stayed two days. Then they reached Calais, which they at once besieged, on the 4th day of September, in the 20th year of the reign of the King of England, and the seventh year from the beginning of the conquest of France. 27. The battle of Neville’s Cross, 1346 (Chronicon de Lanercost, S.H.R., vol. 10, 179–82 [Latin]) After the English had failed to take Dunbar, the party of Bruce in Scotland had re-won the greater part of the kingdom, and in 1341 the young David Bruce returned from France. Edward again led an army into Scotland, but could effect nothing; and in March 1345 a truce was agreed to. In the summer of 1346, at the instigation of Philip of France, David invaded the northern counties of England, but was met near Durham by the Archbishop of York and Lords Neville and Percy, the wardens of the border.

The archbishop, then, moved out of Richmond with his army on the 14th October and directed his march along the straight road to Barnard Castle, and on the morrow he and the other commanders reckoned up their force of men-at-arms, cavalry, foot-soldiers and fighting men upon a certain flat-topped hill, near the castle. Also the leaders did there set their army in order of battle, etc., as was proper. They arranged themselves in three columns, of which Sir Henry de Percy commanded the first, Sir Thomas de Rokeby the second and the [Arch] bishop of York the third—a wise father, chaste and pious, shepherd of his flock. These men marched cautiously to the town of Auckland, in no spirit of hatred as Cain felt when he slew Abel, nor inflated with any such pride as Absalom’s who hung in the tree, putting their trust, not in swords, helmets, lances, corselets or other gilded armour, but only in the name of Christ, bent upon no invasion

The political framework

81

but only upon resisting the invaders. Pitching their tents in a certain beautiful woodland near the town, the English army spent the whole night there. At dawn next morning, that is on the vigil of St Luke the Evangelist [17 October], William de Douglas rode forth from the Scottish army with 500 men to harry the country and gather spoil. Thus the Scots seized their prey in the early morning, but in the evening the English divided the spoil. On that morning, while the Scots were plundering the town of Merrington, suddenly the weather became inclement, with thick fog. And it came to pass that when they heard the trampling of horses and the shock of armoured men, there fell upon them such a spasm of panic that William and all those with him were utterly at a loss to know which way to turn. Wherefore, as God so willed, they unexpectedly stumbled, to their astonishment, upon the columns of my lord the Archbishop of York and Sir Thomas de Rokeby, by whom many of them were killed, but William and two hundred with him who were on armoured horses, escaped for the time but not without wounds. Then Robert de Ogle, who is of great strength and not without skill in the art of war, followed them over hill and dale, killing many of the enemy with his own hand, and would not stop until beside a great pool in a certain deep woodland glen his charger, being utterly at a standstill, was quite unable to go further. Now came William, greatly heated, to the Scottish army, crying aloud with much excitement: “David! arise quickly; see! all the English have attacked us!” But David declared that could not be so. “There are no men in England,” said he, “but wretched monks, lewd priests, swineherds, cobblers and skinners. They dare not face me: I am safe enough.” But they did face him, and, as was afterwards evident, they were in contact with his outposts. “Assuredly,” replied William, “oh dread king, by your leave if you will, it is otherwise. There are diverse valiant men [among them]; they are advancing quickly upon us and mean to fight.” But just before he spoke two Black Monks came from Durham to treat with David for a truce. “See,” said David, “these false monks are holding conference with me guilefully. For they are detaining me in conclave in order that the English army may attack us while we are thus deceived.” He ordered them, therefore, to be seized and beheaded at once; but all the Scots were so fully occupied at the time that the monks escaped secretly, serene and scatheless, footing it home without any loss. On that day David, like another Nebuchadnezzar, caused the fringes of his standard to be made much larger, and declared himself repeatedly to be king of Scots without any hindrance. He ordered his breakfast to be made ready, and said that he would return to it when he had slain the English at the point of sword. But soon afterwards, yea very soon after, all his servants had to hurry, allowing the food to fall into the fire. Thus David, prince of fools, wished to catch fish in front of the net and thereby lost many and caught but few. Therefore he failed to carry out the plan he had laid because, like Amasa and Achitophel,1 that which he had prepared for us befell himself. So David, having reckoned up his forces, called the Scots to arms—the folk that were eager for war and were about to be scattered; and like Jabin against Joshua,2 he 1 2

II Samuel, 17. Joshua, 11.

English historical documents

82

marshalled three great and strong columns to attack the English. He set Earl Patrick over the first division; but he, like an ignorant fellow, refused to lead the first line, demanding the third, more out of cowardice than eagerness. The Earl of Moray forth-with undertook his duty and so held chief command in the first division of the army, and afterwards expired in the battle. With him were many of the valiant men of Scotland, such as the Earl of Stratherne, the Earl of Fife, John de Douglas, brother of William de Douglas, Sir Alexander de Ramsay;1 and many other powerful earls and barons, knights and esquires, all of one mind, raging madly with unbridled hatred against the English, pressing forward without pause, relying on their own strength, and, like Satan, bursting with over-weening pride, they all thought to reach the stars. King David himself commanded the second division…. With him he took the Earl of Buchan, Malcolm Fleming, Sir Alexander de Straghern (father and son, without the holy spirit), the Earl of Menteith,2 and many others whom we do not know, and whom if we did know, it would be tedious to enumerate. In the third division was Earl Patrick, who should have been more appropriately named by his countrymen “Non hie” [Not here]. He was late in coming, but he did splendidly, standing all the time afar off, like another Peter; yet he would not wait to see the end of the business. In that battle he hurt no man, because he intended to take holy orders and to celebrate mass for the Scots who were killed, knowing how salutary it is to beseech the Lord for the peace of the departed. Nay, at that very time he was a priest [presbyter] because he led the way (prebuit iter) in flight. His colleague was Robert Stewart;3 if one was worth little, the other was worth nothing. Overcome by cowardice, he broke his vow to God that he would never await the first blow in battle. He fled with the priest4 and, as a good cleric, will assist the mass to be celebrated by the other. These two, turning their backs, fought with great success, for they entered Scotland with their division and without a single wound; and so they led off the dance, leaving David to dance as he felt inclined. About the third hour the English army attacked the Scots not far from Durham, the Earl of Angus5 being in the first division, a noble personage among all those of England, of high courage and remarkable probity, ever ready to fight with spirit for his country, whose good deeds no tongue would suffice to tell. Sir Henry de Percy, like another Judas Maccabeus, the son of Mattathias, was a fine fighter. This knight, small of stature but sagacious, encouraged all men to take the field by putting himself in the forefront of the battle. Sir Ralph de Neville, an honest and valiant man, bold, wary, and greatly to be feared, fought to such effect in the battle that, as afterwards appeared, his blows left their marks upon the enemy. Nor was Sir Henry de Scrope behindhand, but had taken his post from the first in the front of the fight, pressing on the enemy. In command of the second division was my lord the Archbishop of York who, having assembled his men, blessed them all, which devout blessing, by God’s grace, took good 1

Mistake for Sir William de Ramsay. Sir Alexander had been starved to death in Hermitage Castle. Sir John Graham, executed in London in March 1347. 3 King David’s nephew and heir presumptive, afterwards Robert II. 4 Earl Patrick. 5 Gilbert de Umfraville. 2

effect. There was also another bishop of the order of Minorite Friars, who, by way of benediction, commanded the English to fight manfully, always adding that, under the

The political framework

83

utmost penalty, no man should give quarter to the Scots; and when he attacked the enemy he gave them no indulgence of days from punishment or sin, but severe penance and good absolution with a certain cudgel. He had such power at that time that, with the aforesaid cudgel and without confession of any kind, he absolved the Scots from every lawful act. In the third division Sir John de Mowbray, deriving his name a re, was abounding in grace and merit. His auspicious renown deserves to be published far and wide with ungrudging praise, for he and all his men behaved in such manner as should earn them honour for all time to come. Sir Thomas de Rokeby, like a noble leader, presented such a cup to the Scots that, once they had tasted it, they had no wish for another draught; and thus he was an example to all beholders of how to fight gallantly for the sacred cause of fatherland. John of Coupland dealt such blows among the enemy that it was said that those who felt the weight of his buffets were not fit to fight any longer. Then with trumpets blaring, shields clashing, arrows flying, lances thrusting, wounded men yelling and troops shouting, the conflict ended about the hour of vespers, amid sundered armour, broken heads, and, sad to tell, many laid low in the field. The Scots were in full flight, our men slaying them. Praise be to the Most High! victory on that day was with the English. And thus, through the prayers of the blessed Virgin Mary and Saint Cuthbert, confessor of Christ, David and the flower of Scotland fell, by the just award of God, into the pit which they themselves had dug. This battle, therefore, was fought between the English and the Scots, wherein but few Englishmen were killed, but nearly the whole of the army of Scotland was either captured or slain. For in that battle fell Robert Earl of Moray,1 Maurice Earl of Stratherne, together with the best of the army of Scotland. But David, so-called King of Scotland, was taken prisoner, together with the Earls of Fife, of Menteith, and of Wigtown, and Sir William of Douglas and, in addition, a great number of men-at-arms. Not long afterwards David King of Scots was taken to London with many of the more distinguished captives and confined in prison, the Earl of Menteith being there drawn and hanged, quartered, and his limbs sent to various places in England and Scotland. 28. Order for payment of wages for the Scottish war, 1347 (Rymer, Foedera, III, i, 8 [Latin], from Scottish Roll, 21 Edward III, m. 10) The king to his beloved clerk, John de Wodehous, receiver of money, as well of the tenths granted by the clergy of the Province of York, as of the tenths and fifteenths granted to us by the laity of various counties of England beyond the Trent, greeting. We are sending to you, enclosed with the present letter, a schedule containing a quantity of wages, which are to be paid to the magnates and others in our service who will shortly set out for Scotland. 1

Not Robert but John.

Ordering you that when you have seen the schedule, you should cause the wages of the magnates and others to be paid to them according to the form of the schedule, from

English historical documents

84

the money coming from the tenths and fifteenths; receiving from those to whom these wages shall be paid their letters patent acknowledging each payment that you shall make in this way, and we will then have an allowance made accordingly in your account. Witnessed by the Guardian of England at Reading, on the 20th March And it is to be remembered that the schedule mentioned in the writ was sent into the Chancery on the 20th March by William of Edington, the Bishop of Winchester, the king’s treasurer, and was enrolled word for word, and remains amongst the king’s writs of this year, and a transcript of this schedule was sent to the aforesaid John de Wodehous for the payments to be made according to the form of the writ and schedule. The money which is to be paid to the lords of the North, and assigned for the quarter of the year and to the archers of the countryside. The King of Scots1 has 50 men at arms, and he himself is paid 16 shillings a day; a banneret has 4s a day; 8 knights at 2s a day each; 40 squires each at 12d a day; 50 archers on horseback, each at 4d a day; and all this amounts a day to £4 12s 8d, and for 8 days to £32 8s 8d, and for a month, reckoned as 28 days, £129 14s 8d, and for 3 months £389 4s, and for a quarter, reckoned as 90 days, £417. The Earl of Angus has 30 men at arms, each of whom has 7s 8d, 4 knights, 25 squires, 30 archers on horseback, taking wages as before, which amount per day to 49s 8d and for a quarter to £223 10s. Lord Percy has 100 men at arms; Sir Ralph Neville has 80. Also Lord Percy has 100 archers on horseback, and Ralph Neville has 80. These cost per day £15 3s and for 20 days £203 and for a quarter £1,363 10s. Lord Mowbray has 100 men at arms, of whom 2 are bannerets, 5 are knights, 43 are squires; and he has 100 archers on horseback. The cost amounts per day to 77s 8d and for 20 days to £77 13s 4d, and for a quarter to £349 10s. Sir Thomas de Lucy has 50 men at arms, of whom one is a banneret, 5 are knights, 44 are squires, and he has 50 archers on horseback; the cost amounts per day to 74s 8d, and for 20 days to £74 13s 4d and for a quarter to £336. Sir Thomas de Rokeby has 20 men at arms, of whom one is a banneret, 2 are knights, 17 are squires, and he has 20 archers on horseback; the cost amounts per day to 31s 8d and per quarter to £144 20d. Sir Robert Bertram has 10 men at arms and 10 archers on horseback; the cost amounts per quarter to £60. (Likewise for Sir William Dacre) Sir William Heroun has 20 men at arms and 20 archers on horseback; the cost amounts per quarter to £124 10s.

The political framework

85

29. The battle of La Roche-Derrien, 1347 (Robert of Avesbury, Chronicle) 389 [French]) Sir Thomas Dagworth’s dispatch to the chancellor announcing the victory of La Roche-Derrien (French). During the night of 19–20 June 1347 Dag worth, who had recently replaced the Earl of Northampton in Brittany, fell upon the army of Charles of Blois, who was besieging the English in La Roche-Derrien, and captured him.

Right dear and very honoured lord, please you to know news of the parts of Brittany, that my lord Charles of Blois had laid siege to the town and castle of La Roche-Derrien and had in his company 1,200 men at arms, knights, and squires, and 600 other men at arms, and 600 archers of the countryside, and 2,000 cross-bowmen, and of commons I know not how many. The which lord Charles had made great entrenchments round about him, and outside his stronghold had caused to be levelled and razed, for a half league breadth of the country round about him, all manner of ditches and hedges, whereby my archers might not find their advantage over him and his people, but they must needs in the end fight in the open fields. And he and his men knew by their scouts of my coming upon them, and were drawn up in arms all night. And we came, my comrades and I, upon them on the 20th day of June, about a quarter of an hour before day-break, and by the grace of God the business went in such a manner that he lost the field and was clearly discomforted, praised be God. And I had in my company about 300 men-at-arms and 4,000 archers, not reckoning my lord Richard of Totesham and Hankin of Isprede and the garrison of La Roche-Derrien, which sallied forth when it was clear daylight and they could recognize us, and came towards us on the enemy very chivalrously; for we came into conflict with the enemy before sunrise, in four battles, one after the other. And there were slain in the fight the lord of Laval, the viscount of Rohan, the lord of Chateaubriand, the lord of Malestroit, the lord of Quintin, the lord of Rouge, the lord of Derval and his son and heir, Sir Ralph de Montfort, and many other knights and squires; between 600 and 700 men-at-arms, and I cannot tell you the number of the common people for certain. And there were taken on that day my lord Charles of Blois, my lord Guy of Laval, son and heir of the lord of Laval who died in the battle, the lord of Rochefort, the lord of Beaumanoir, the lord of Loheac, the lord of Melac, the lord of Tinteniac, and other knights and squires in great number. 1

Edward Balliol.

English historical documents

86

30. The siege and capture of Calais, 1347 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle [Latin]) (89) While these things were happening in England, the King of England began the siege of the town of Calais, which is situated in the march of Artois, surrounded by a double wall and a double ditch. It looks over the shores of the English sea opposite the castle of Dover, having a harbour, which scorns the menaces of the deep in its security, where a safe shelter is afforded to ships…. The king made wide ditches round his camp, and brought a fleet to the mouth of the harbour, so that the French could not attack his men or provide the besieged with supplies by sea. Then the king kept a great fleet for besieging the town and did not allow it to leave. The Norman pirates captured at sundry times 15 of his ships, great and small, of which they took some for their own use and the rest they burnt…. Therefore, when the siege was strengthened, the king was unwilling to make an attack, knowing that it was not possible to fight his enemies without peril, in view of the high walls and ditches. Moreover, he could not construct siege machines against the town, so that, as he had been accustomed to do elsewhere, by catapults the walls could be shaken and thrown down; for there was no firm ground on which the machines could be placed. Besides this, even if the walls should be destroyed, the ditch was deep and daily filled with salt water, and could easily be defended against all comers…. Therefore the king abstained from attacks and bombardment of the walls, calculating that hunger, which enters closed doors, could and should conquer the pride of the besieged. From the shore to deep water was a stretch where the men of Boulogne were wont to victual those of Calais, not by ships sailing in the deep water which was barred to them but by small boats hugging the shore and filled with victuals. Here the Earl of Northampton made a staked fence or palisade to stop this kind of small boat; and when the Admiral of the French wished to attack the English ships with his fleet, so that in the mean time the small boats might revictual the besieged town, the Earl of Northampton powerfully prevented him. The siege continued from the feast of the Nativity of the Virgin through the whole winter and a great part of the following summer, until on the Monday before the feast of St John the Baptist the tyrant of the French came to the castle of Guînes with John his first-born and the son of the king of Bohemia, later emperor of the Romans,1 swearing that he would raise the siege either by war or by peace or else he would, in spite of the English, revictual the besieged. Then he approached with his army to within a mile of the English force; and having sought a truce through his messengers, he sent the Duke of Athènes and the counts of Bourbon and Armagnac. They negotiated with the Duke of Lancaster and the earls of Northampton and Huntingdon about a truce but could not win the assent of the English. So, after warlike tournaments, both parties went back to their tents. On the second day the tyrant sought to fix a day of battle to which the king of England agreed. Meanwhile the besieged made their distress clear to the tyrant of the French by signals; for on his first arrival they put up his banner on the chief tower of the castle, and adorned the towers with the banners of the dukes and counts of France; and shortly after dark they raised a clear light with a great clamour of trumpets, drums and clarions, on the highest tower towards the French army, for the space of half an hour. The 1

The later Emperor Charles IV.

The political framework

87

next night they raised a flame, but lower than before, with a clamour of middling strength. On the third night they displayed a light which the French could scarcely see, with a wailing and humbly submissive voice; and when it had been shown for an hour, they let it fall into the ditch of the castle; by this they signified that their power to protect the town was ended. On the same night they took down all their banners except the standard, and henceforth did not attempt any display. (Ibid. 91) Then the day of battle approached, for which 17,000 men from England and the Teutonic league in the pay of the king assembled together. Wherefore, on August 2nd, the tyrant of the French, seeing the king’s power increased so much, went away at dawn. On leaving he set fire to his tents, which was a melancholy sign to the besieged that he did not dare to help them but was foolishly withdrawing. As he did so, the Duke of Lancaster and the Earl of Northampton harassed the rearguard, causing casualties and taking prisoners. When the beleaguered garrison of Calais discovered the flight of the wicked tyrant of the French, they threw his standard with great mourning from the tower into the ditch. On the following Saturday their captain, a knight who had much experience in military affairs, called Jean de Vienne, opened the gates and, seated on a little nag, for gout prevented him from walking, with a rope round his neck, came to the king’s presence. Other knights and burgesses followed on foot, bare-headed and bare-footed, also having ropes round their necks.1 The captain offered to the king a warrior’s sword, as to the chief prince of arms amongst all Christians and as to one who had taken that town against the greatest king of Christendom by all honourable means. Secondly, he offered the keys of the town. Thirdly, he asked of the king mercy and pardon, and brought him the sword of peace, by which he might give good judgements and spare the lowly and humble the proud. The king received what was offered to him, and with royal clemency sent the captain, fifteen knights, and as many burgesses to England, granting them generous gifts and liberty to go where they liked. He ordered that the people found in the town should be refreshed by the royal alms and conducted unharmed to the castle of Guînes. After the town was taken, the knights by the king’s command took the manors of Marck and Oye, and built forts there with great difficulty, where the walls now are, by placing round them wine casks filled with stones, to serve as a defence against foes; while the keepers of these castles exerted themselves greatly within the ramparts for the building of the walls. (Cf. D.N. 310, Edward III’s army at Calais, 1347) 31. The Black Death, 1348–9 (Chronicon Henrici Knighton, ed. J.R.Lumby (Rolls Series, 1895), II, 58 [Latin]) In that year and the following year there was a general mortality of men throughout the world. It first began in India, then spread to Tharsis, thence to the Saracens, and at last to the Christians and Jews…. 1

This was the occasion when, according to Froissart, Queen Philippa fell on her knees and begged her husband for mercy to “the burghers of Calais” (chapter 146 of his Chronicles, translated by Lord Berners). It is only Jean Le Bel and Jean Froissart who mention Queen Philippa’s presence at Calais.

English historical documents

88

Then the dreadful pestilence penetrated through the coastal regions from Southampton and came to Bristol, and almost the whole strength of the town perished, as if overcome by sudden death; for few there were who kept their beds for more than two or three days, or even half a day. Then this cruel death spread everywhere, following the course of the sun. At Leicester, in the small parish of St Leonard’s there perished more than 3 80 people, in the parish of Holy Cross, 400, in the parish of St Margaret’s, Leicester, 700; and so in every parish a great multitude. Then the Bishop of Lincoln sent a message throughout his diocese, and gave general power to all priests, religious as well as secular, to hear confessions and give absolutions to all men with full episcopal authority, excepting only in cases of debt. And in such a case, the debtor was to pay the debt, if he were able to do so while he lived; or others were to be appointed to do so from his property after his death. Similarly the pope granted plenary remission of all sins to all receiving absolution at the point of death, and granted that this power should last until the following Easter, and that every one might choose his own confessor at will. In the same year there was a great murrain of sheep everywhere in the realm, so that in one place more than 5,000 sheep died in a single pasture; and they rotted so much that neither beast nor bird would approach them. And there was a great cheapness of all things for fear of death, for very few took any account of riches or of possessions of any kind. A man could have a horse which was formerly worth forty shillings for half a mark [6s 8d], a big fat ox for four shillings, a cow for 12d, a heifer for 6d, a fat wether for 4d, a sheep for 3d, a lamb for 2d, a large pig for 5d, and a stone of wool for 9d. Sheep and oxen strayed through the fields and among the crops, and there was none to drive them off or collect them, but they perished in uncounted numbers throughout all districts for lack of shepherds, because there was such a shortage of servants and labourers. For there was no recollection of such a severe mortality since the time of Vortigern, King of the Romans, in whose day, as Bede testifies, the living did not suffice to bury the dead. In the following autumn no one could get a reaper for less than 8d with food, a mower for less than 12d with food. For this reason many crops perished in the fields for lack of harvesters. But in the year of the plague, as is explained above, there was so great an abundance of all kinds of corn that they were scarcely regarded. The Scots, hearing of the cruel pestilence in England, imagined that it had come about at the hand of an avenging God, and they adopted it as an oath, according to the common report, under the form, when they wished to swear, “by the foul death of England”. And thus believing that a terrible vengeance of God had overtaken the English, they gathered in Selkirk forest with the intention of invading the kingdom of England. There the horrible death overtook them, and their ranks were thinned by sudden and terrible mortality, so that in a short time about 5,000 had perished. And as the rest, some strong, some feeble, were preparing to return to their own country, they were surprised by pursuing Englishmen, who killed a very great number of them. Master Thomas Bradwardine was consecrated by the pope as Archbishop of Canterbury, and when he returned to England he came to London and died within two days. He was famous beyond all other clerks of Christendom, especially in theology and in other liberal sciences. At this time there was so great a scarcity of priests everywhere that many churches were left destitute, lacking divine offices, masses, matins, vespers, and sacraments. A chaplain could scarcely be obtained to serve any church for less than £10 or 10 marks, and whereas when there was an abundance of priests before the plague,

The political framework

89

a chaplain could be obtained for 5 or 4 marks, or even 2 marks with his board, at this time there was scarcely one who would accept a vicarage at £20 or 20 marks. Within a short while, however, a great multitude of men, whose wives had died in the plague, flocked to take orders, many of whom were illiterate, and almost laymen, except that they could read a little but without understanding…. Meanwhile the king sent into each shire a message that reapers and other labourers should not take more than they had been wont to do under threat of penalties defined in the statute, and for this purpose he introduced a statute. The workmen were, however, so arrogant and obstinate that they did not heed the king’s mandate, but if anyone wanted to have them he had to give them what they asked; so he either had to satisfy the arrogant and greedy wishes of the workers or lose his fruit and crops. When the king was told that they were not observing his order, and had given higher wages to their workmen, he levied heavy fines on abbots, priors, knights of greater and lesser consequence and others, both great and small, throughout the countryside, taking 100s from some, 40s or 20s from others, according to their ability to pay…. Then the king caused many labourers to be arrested, and sent them to prison; and many of them escaped and fled to the forests and woods for a time, and those who were captured were severely punished. And most of such labourers swore that they would not take daily wages in excess of those allowed by ancient custom, and so they were set free from prison…. After the pestilence many buildings both great and small in all cities, towns, and boroughs fell into total ruin for lack of inhabitants; similarly many small villages and hamlets became desolate and no houses were left in them, for all those who had dwelt in them were dead, and it seemed likely that many such little villages would never again be inhabited. In the following winter there was such a dearth of servants for all kinds of work that, so men believed, there had scarcely ever been such a shortage before. For the beasts and cattle strayed in all directions without herdsmen, and all things were left without anyone to care for them. Thus all necessities became so dear that what in former days had cost a penny now sold for 4d or 5d. Moreover, all the magnates of the realm, and lesser lords too, who had tenants, remitted the payment of the rents lest the tenants should go away, because of the scarcity of servants and the dearness of things—some half their rents, some more, some less, some for 2 years, some for 3, some for one, according as they could come to arrangements with them. Similarly, those who had let lands by days’ works of a whole year, as is usual with bondmen, had to waive and remit such works, and either pardon them entirely or accept them on easier terms, at a small rent, lest their houses should be irreparably ruined and the land remain uncultivated. And all victuals and all necessities became too dear. [For another account of the Black Death’s effects in England, see Robert of Avesbury’s Chronicle, 406.]

English historical documents

90

32. The foundation of the Order of the Garter, 1349 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 108 [Latin]) In this year [1349], on St George’s Day, the king celebrated a great feast at Windsor castle, where he established a chantry of twelve priests, and founded a hospital, in which poor knights, who lacked sufficient means, could enjoy an adequate sustenance from the perpetual alms of the founders of that college. Besides the king others who participated in the foundation of this hospital were the king’s eldest son, the Earl of Northampton, the Earl of Warwick, the Earl of Suffolk, the Earl of Salisbury, and other barons; also simple knights, that, is Roger Mortimer, now Earl of March, Sir William Manny, Sir William Fitzgarin, John de Lisle, John de Mohun, John Beauchamp, Walter Paveley, and Hugh Wrothesley, who were associated with rich earls by reason of their proven worth. Along with the king all were clad in gowns of russet sprinkled with blue garters, wearing the like garters on their right legs, and wearing mantles of blue with escutcheons of St. George. In this sort of apparel and bare-headed they devoutly heard mass celebrated by the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishops of Winchester and Exeter, and afterwards sat in orderly array at a common table, in honour of the holy martyr, to whom they specially dedicated their noble fraternity, calling their company that of St George of the Garter [Sancti Georgii de la gartiere]. 33. The battle of Mauron, 1352 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 120 [Latin]) For an account of the naval victory over the Spaniards in the Channel in 1350, see ibid., 109.

In this year, in the vigil of the Assumption of the Virgin the Mother of God [14 August], Walter of Bentley, the captain, Robert Knowles, and other faithful subjects of the king resisted his enemies admirably in the march of Brittany, where in a long and perilous struggle there were killed the chief marshal of France, also the lords of Quintin, Tinteniac, Rochemont, Montauban, and de Raguenet, Lannoy, Montbouchier, Vielcastel, and de la Marche, also knights to the number of 140, and young noblemen to the number of 500, whose equipment was brought back; the number of common people was not counted. Those taken prisoner there were the lords of Briquebecq, son of the marshal Bertrand; Tristan de Maignelais; the lord of Malestroit; the vicomte of Coëtmen; Geoffrey de Coeyghem; William de la Val; Charles d’Argeville; John de la Muce; and more than 130 other knights with young noblemen. The French army, under the marshal’s leadership, of set purpose took up their position with a steep mountain slope behind them, so that they could not fly; their purpose was to increase their zeal for fighting by knowledge of the impossibility of flight, as is usual with courageous men. There were also present many of the Order of Knights of the Star, who in their profession had sworn never in fear to turn their backs on their foes; forty-five of them were numbered among the captured and slain. From this contest few escaped unwounded;

The political framework

91

Walter, the captain, who was badly hurt, ordered thirty of the archers to be beheaded, because at the height of the battle, frightened by the numbers of the French, they had fled.

34. The campaign and battle of Poitiers, 1356 (Geoffrey le Baker, Chronicle, 139 [Latin]) Several accounts of this battle have survived. Partly because of this, and partly because it was an unusually confusing struggle, it is singularly difficult to gain a clear picture of what happened there. For an analysis of the sources, see A.H.Burne, “The Battle of Poitiers”, E.H.R., 53, (1938), and the comments by V.H.Galbraith, “The Battle of Poitiers”, E.H.R., 54 (1959).

In the year of our Lord 1356…a fantasy arose among the terrified French and they spread the rumour that the King of England had invaded Normandy; the source of this rumour or dream was that the Duke of Lancaster, after strengthening with victuals and arms the fortresses and castles of the King of Navarre in the Ile de Constant and in many other places of Normandy, marched towards Brittany, of which he was again appointed captain. Another cause, as is believed, was that Philip, the brother of the King of Navarre, came to England, and urgently besought the help of the King of England against the French king, who was holding his brother in prison. The brothe rof the King of Navarre wanted to recover by force the estates which belonged by right to his brother and were now unjustly seized, and to strike a blow at those who were holding his brother prisoner. Therefore, when he had done homage and sworn fealty, he received by the king’s order Miles de Stapleton to be his faithful helper, for the latter was a man of great integrity, much devoted to the Blessed Virgin, and experienced in warlike affairs. These warriors, with 2,000 men set out to Normandy and rode across the countryside, taking walled towns and other fortified places, some of which were burnt down and others ransomed. They went forward to a certain castle [Verneuil] which was only 9 leagues from the city of Paris. They did not cease from their labours until they had made their foes agree to a truce, to last until next year; then they returned to England. The detailed report of these exploits struck terror into the ears of the French, and this panic came to the ears of the prince who was at La Réole and moved his heart greatly. He did not want his father to be involved in fighting while he was not there to share the burdens, light or heavy, of work and doubtful fortune. Therefore, he collected the forces which he had with him in the duchy, with the intention of marching across France to greet his father, and came to Bergerac, where he learnt that the Count of Armagnac intended to ravage the countryside after his departure, and for this purpose had equipped a large force. He therefore entrusted the defence of the region to the Seneschal of

English historical documents

92

Gascony and Bernard de Libret, the Mayor of Bordeaux, together with other Gascons and a great company of knights. Then the prince set out into France, by way of Limoges and Berney. The prince, in the manner of a good priest, exhorted his men to advance against the enemy, not helplessly, but prepared in body with bodily arms and in mind with the penitence of the Eucharist, so that they might be ready to struggle against the disturbers of the royal peace, living in temporal honour and dying in eternal honour and conquering on all sides by their forcefulness. Nor did he neglect the arts of the careful leader, who must consider the issue of events and foresee dangers. So he took care to send forward Sir John Chandos, Sir James Audley, and others skilled in the art of warfare to inspect the roads to discover the state of the enemy countryside, lest our men might be suddenly attacked by ambushes. He moved his camp daily, as if the enemy had been present, that is, protecting it by night with watches, and surrounding it with the more trust-worthy leaders, and marching with scouts in front and behind and on the flanks, so that no unexpected peril should appear. When he had entered Poitou, his scouts brought the news that the French king had gathered together a large army, which was at Orléans and knew of the prince’s advance, as appears from what followed. For the French king sent out to find our army a valiant man called Gris Mouton de Chambly, who had two hundred men under his command. Our scouts took from them 30 knights and their servants, and slew all the rest so that none of them got back to tell what had happened to their companions. Favoured by fortune and delighted with what had happened, our men marched to Romarantin where they found the lords of Craon and Boucicault, who had been sent as scouts. Our men occupied the town speedily and put many to the sword, so that the leaders had to flee to the castle. Billets were taken in the town, and the prince ordered proclamation to be made that on the morrow an attack would be made upon the castle. On the following day our men crossed the moats and attacked the walls of the castle. They hastened to climb the walls or to burn the doors by various means; this was not done in vain, for they made an entry and killed many of the bands of dwellers therein while the aforesaid lords with some knights made their way to the chief tower of the castle. Immediately the prince ordered his leaders to come together for advice to decide whether he should withdraw or compel the besieged to surrender. It was found, however, that the king of France was not more than 10 leagues away; so after discussion it was decided that it was better to stay there and await the savage attacks of the French king rather than seek out unexpected power, since the prince wished very much to come to grips. Moreover, he reckoned that the siege ought to provoke the French to come to his destruction; so he finally decided that he would not leave the place until the besieged were either taken or yielded, unless he was compelled by battle to desist. Then he gave orders that machines for hurling stones should be made and sheds provided to protect the sappers, and the roof and fortifications of the tower were attacked with round stones, and into the mound, which supported the base of the tower and had been excavated by the sappers, they put fire. The timber had scarcely availed to hold back the heap of earth of the diggers as they worked, and the burning of the timber caused the earth to slip forward into the weakened base of the tower. Powerless to avert these dangers the besieged feared for their safety, and therefore offered to surrender. This offer was fully accepted by the prince, and after a five days siege they came out.

The political framework

93

After this the scouts returned to say that the French king had come down to Tours, to set in order the armies of his fortresses. The prince, anxious for battle for the sake of the peace which usually follows battle, pitched his camp over against the king of France, hoping that, as formerly on the Garonne, so on the Loire he would find fords; but heavy rains had caused the Loire to overflow its bed with swelling floods, and the water did not permit our men to cross. A further impediment was that all the bridges between Blois and Tours over the Loire had been broken down by order of the French king, so that no way was open between the prince and the Duke of Lancaster, although each could easily see the camp fires of the other at night. The prince therefore left the Loire and moved laterally towards the east [west], and pitched his tents at Tours. There he waited four days, hoping that the French king, one league away, would fight; on the fourth day he learnt that the king had passed the prince, at Blois ten leagues behind him, crossing the Loire by the bridge between two fortified towns, and was now hastening towards Poitiers. As soon as it was found that the French king had declined battle, the prince turned back hastily, intending to intercept the king; but he did not succeed. However he pursued his march and taking, as he thought, the nearer route, he crossed three torrents and attacked the rearguard of the enemy forces so fiercely that he took prisoner the count of Joigny, the count of Auxerre, and the marshal of Burgundy. Having been taken prisoner and held to ransom, they died unexpectedly, because the struggle between such a great number of knights had been so hard fought. And this happened on Saturday, the day before the battle which followed. When night came on, our men sheltered in a wood; and on the morrow, as they moved towards Poitiers, they found, by the reports of scouts, that the French king had made great preparations for battle. Not long afterwards other scouts reported that the king had moved his camp towards ours; and they counselled the prince to choose a battlefield and array his forces, lest the enemy should be prepared and find him unready. At once the prince and all his men dismounted, entrusting their battle horses and other steeds to their grooms, to be mounted again when they hunted the foe. A few, however, rode between the armies, arrayed according to the manner of warriors with lances. The first division of our army was committed to the Earls of Warwick and Oxford; the second was commanded by the prince; and the third was entrusted to the Earls of Salisbury and Suffolk. In the whole army of the prince there were exactly 4,000 men-at-arms, 1,000 hobelars, and 2,000 archers. The arrogant French nobility approached, despising the fewness of the English, for their host contained 8,000 knights, without reckoning the hobelars, under 87 banners. Then many of our men murmured because a great part of our army which had first been gathered together had been a long time ago sent back to Gascony. Amongst the French there was a certain well-known Scotsman, William Douglas, powerful in Scotland, and experienced in the Scottish war by many hard labours. The French king made this man a knight and as he knew him to be a bitter adversary of the English who had fought much against them, he gladly heard his counsel and trusted in his advice. William was in charge of two hundred Scots, whom he had brought from his own country. It was not unknown to them that throughout the reign of the present king of the English they were accustomed to fight on foot, in imitation of the Scots, ever since the battle of Stirling. So it pleased William, after the manner of his race, to attack our men on foot rather than on horseback, and he incited the French king and the other Frenchmen to fight in the same way. The king agreed to this foolish advice, and gladly sent his war-horses into the town in healthy

English historical documents

94

exercise, lest they might give speed to anybody’s flight, except for 500 covered in armour against arrows. He ordered their riders to attack the archers at the beginning of the battle, and to trample them underfoot with the spurs of their horses; but this order was not carried out, as will appear later. When both lines were arrayed, in the light of dawn on Sunday, there came to the prince a certain cardinal of Périgord, and implored him for the honour of God who was crucified and the love of the Virgin His mother and the respect of ecclesiastical peace to avoid shedding Christian blood, that he would be pleased to delay the battle to give time for treating of peace; and the cardinal promised an honourable future by his intercession, if he might be allowed to intercede. The prince, who was entirely free from the will to tyranny, neither feared battle nor refused peace, but modestly agreed to the petition of the holy father. And so, through the whole of that day, assigned for making peace, the French army increased by a thousand men-at-arms and a great multitude of other people. On the morrow, that is to say, on Monday, the cardinal came back and besought on behalf of the French king a year’s truce, which the prince denied; at last at the great entreaty of the cardinal he conceded a truce to last until next Christmas. The cardinal therefore demanded from the king a truce, such as the prince had accepted; the Marshal of Claremont advised the king to concede this, but the Marshal d’Audrehem, Geoffrey de Chargny, and Douglas the Scot opposed the idea, and the king was strongly inclined to their side. They forecast that in the common course of nature the English could not prevail, when they were so few, and were tired out by their ignorance of the countryside and their arduous journeys, against the numbers of the French soldiers, who were defending their own soil and refreshed with all necessary victuals and quiet. All this ought to increase their boldness against plunderers; the grace of the king who had been crowned and anointed with holy oil, would then be experienced, with the benediction of the Bishops of Sens and Châlons fighting under the same king, in opposition to those who were striving to harm the royal majesty…. Therefore, as the marshals were disputing with each other and the rest were striving to set themselves in front of each other, the prince, hearing through the messengers of the cardinal that the leader, of the French did not want peace, except such as they could get by force of arms, made an oration to his men-at-arms collected together…. (Ibid. 146) When he had addressed his well-born followers, the wise leader gave them a noble look and then turned to the archers, whom he heartened with the following speech: Your courage and your faith are well known to me, for in many great dangers it has been evident that you are the worthy sons and kinsmen of those for whom, under the leadership of my father and my ancestors, the kings of England, no labour was too great, no place was invincible, no mountain was inaccessible, no tower was impregnable, no army impenetrable, no host of men too formidable. Their vigour tamed the French, the Cypriots, the Syracusans, the Calabrians, and the Palestinians, and subdued the stiffnecked Scots and Irish and the tenacious Welsh. Occasion, time, and peril are wont to make bold men out of timid ones, and quick-witted men out of dull ones; honour also, and patriotism, and the prospect of the rich spoils of the French, call you, more than my words, to follow in the footsteps of your fathers. Follow the standards, obey implicitly in body and mind the commands of your leaders, so that, if victory shall see us still alive,

The political framework

95

we shall always continue in firm friendship together, always being of one heart and mind; if envious fortune should decree (which God forbid) that in this present labour we must follow the final path of all flesh, your names will not be sullied with infamy, but I and my noble comrades will drink the same cup with you. To conquer the French will be glorious, to be defeated by them (which God forbid) will be a misfortune and a disaster but not a disgrace. So saying, he saw that there was a hill near at hand on one side of them, surrounded on the outside by hedges and ditches, but divided up within: that is, there was a pasture on one side, thick with brambles, on the other side was a vineyard and the rest was arable land. On this arable land he thought a company of French would be. Between us and the hill were a wide, deep valley and a marsh, watered by a stream. One company of the prince’s men, discovering a narrow path, crossed the stream with their baggage, and climbing out of the valley across the hedges and ditches took the hill, where they hid themselves easily amongst the bushes in a defensible place, lying higher than the enemy. The field in which our men lay, that is, the vanguard and middle section, was divided from the plain where the French army lay by a long hedge and ditch below, one end of which stretched down to the marsh below. The Earl of Warwick, leader of the vanguard, held the slope of the hill dipping down to the marsh. In the upper part of the hedge, near the top of the hill, was a big gap, which the carters had made in the autumn, a stone’s throw from which stood our rearguard. The Earl of Salisbury was in command of this. Our foes, seeing the prince’s banner above but moving from place to place and sometimes hidden from sight by the hill, thought that the prince had fled, though Douglas the Scot and Marshal de Clermont said that it was not so. Marshal D’Audreham, who was deceived, however, vehemently urged an advance, to overtake the prince whom he thought to be in flight; and he was supported in this course by Douglas, that he might enhance the reputation of his new knighthood, and by Clermont, who wanted to prove his fidelity; these had been put in charge of the vanguard. They were preceded by spearmen, as usual, who were met by horsemen of our vanguard specially equipped for work with spears lower down the slope where our vanguard was. When he saw the spearmen being cut down, Marshal D’Audreham halted his attack. Meanwhile Clermont, hoping to advance through the gap in the hedge and outflank our vanguard from behind, was opposed by the Earl of Salisbury, who seeing him coming, suspected his intent; and so those who were in charge of our rearguard made haste to occupy the gap and prevent the enemy from passing that way, and so sustained the first charge of the battle. Then began a terrible encounter between the the armed men, struggling with swords and spears. Nor did the archers neglect their duty, but standing safely above the ditch and behind the hedge, forced their arrows to prevail more than the swords and spears, and also shot quarrels from their crossbows repeatedly and in great numbers. Thus our rearguard, who slew the enemies who came straggling to the gap, and the vanguard under the Earl of Warwick, who were down on the slope towards the marsh laying low their foes, protected the archers of the vanguard in the marsh, so that the horsemen could not ride them down. Nevertheless these archers had only a moderate success; for the horsemen who had been assigned to ride down the archers and to safeguard their own men from the arrows were adequately protected against the arrows by their plate armour and their strongly-bound shields, so that the arrows directed against them either fell to the ground or glanced up into the sky, with doubtful effect on the enemy and terror to their friends. When he saw

English historical documents

96

this, the Earl of Warwick came down from the prince and ordered his archers to move to one side, where they could shoot at the legs of the horses. When this was done, the wounded horses reared and those who sat on their backs fell off, or the horses turned tail and ran against those that followed them, causing great destruction. When this had been done, the archers resumed their former position and shot through the flanks of the attacking Frenchmen…. In this struggle avenging death seized Clermont, who would neither flee nor yet be captured, while D’Audreham was taken prisoner. William Douglas was wounded and fled, taking with him his brother Archibald and a small band of Scots; for the fearful warlike fury almost destroyed them (the French first line)…. Not long afterwards the second line of French attacked, led by the first-born son of the French king, the so-called Dauphin of Vienne. The array of this army was more dreadful and fierce than the appearance of that which had previously been driven back; but they were not able to frighten our men, who were very desirous of honour and anxious to revenge both themselves and their comrades who had previously been wounded. Therefore they went to it boldly on both sides, with a clamour that rose to the skies of “St George!” or “St Denis”, to secure a favourable judgement of battle…. And though this second line resisted our men longer than the first, yet after they had lost a great number of their soldiers, they wisely saved a great many by a ruse, by the device of not running away but of a pretended retreat, a method which the French are accustomed to use. Our men, believing that victory was doubtful as long as the French king might be nearby with his forces, which lay in the neighbouring valley, were unwilling to leave the field when they chased fugitives…. In the meantime some of our men laid their wounded under bushes and hedges out of the way; others, having worn out their own weapons, took the spears and swords from those whom they had overcome, and the archers hastened to extract arrows from wretches who were only half dead. There was not one of them who was neither wounded nor worn out with great labour, except forty men, who, keeping the chief standard, were held in reserve to meet the French king and his chivalry. When the Dauphin had thus been put to flight, an observer of the field of battle came to the French king and said: “Sire, the field has fallen to the Englishmen, and your eldest son has retreated”; to whom the French king answered that he had sworn an oath that he would not forsake the field that day unless he were taken or killed, and so carried away by force. Therefore the standard-bearers were ordered to advance, and were followed by a numerous company of men, who, issuing forth from a valley, spread out before our astonished men in a wide field. Their numbers struck such despair in the hearts of our men that a man of great valour who stood by the prince exclaimed “Alas! We are overcome!” But the prince, trusting greatly in Christ and in His Mother the Virgin Mary, checked him, saying, “You lie, you miserable coward, for while I am alive it is blasphemy to say that we are conquered.” …But our men, except the leaders, despaired of victory and commended themselves to God, and as they thought their lives were lost, their concern was now only not to survive alone or unavenged. Then the prince ordered his standard-bearer, Sir Walter Woodland, to advance towards his enemies; and with a few fresh men he joined battle with the great army of the French king…. Then came on the menacing swarm of crossbowmen, darkening the skies with the thick clouds of quarrels which they shot; and the air reverberated with the glad storm of arrows shot by the English archers who were moved to fury because they were desperate. Out flew darts of ash, which struck the French when they were yet some distance away; but the French

The political framework

97

host, composed of closely packed troops, protecting their breasts by shields held closely together, hid their faces from the missiles. Therefore our archers, having emptied their quivers in vain and being armed only with swords and small shields, were forced to encounter heavily armed soldiers, with a glowing desire to sell their lives dearly, as they thought that that day would be their last. Then the Prince of Wales suddenly gave a roar and attacked the Frenchmen with his sharp sword, breaking spears, warding off blows, slaying those who sprang at him, raising up those who had fallen, and teaching the enemy how furious warlike desperation could be. Meanwhile the Captal de la Buch hurried down a side track, leading down the slope of the hill which he had recently descended with the prince, and secretly winding round the field he came to the place where the French camp lay. Thence he climbed to the higher position of the French by the route which they had trodden; and suddenly he burst, unsuspected, on the French, showing that he was our friend by displaying the banner of St George. Then the brave prince charged the French line again, seeking to break it before the captain had attacked the flank of the French which protected them…. Thus the unhappy French were attacked on both sides, cut to pieces from the back by the Captal de la Buch’s men and thrown into confusion by the archers assigned for this purpose, with a heavy hail of arrows. Then the French battle formation was broken…the banners began to totter, the standard bearers fell down…dying men fell on others’ blood, those who had fallen cried out, and yielded up their spirits and deserted their listless bodies, with fearful groans…. Thus raged the Boar of Cornwall who “rejoiced to have no other way than by the outpouring of blood” [Lucan, Pharsalia, ii, 439–40] to the standard of the French king. Here they found valiant resistance by very brave men. The Englishmen fought, and the Frenchmen fought back; their leader, although very young, wrought mighty deeds with the rage of a youthful warrior…showing in all his acts that he had not degenerated in any way from the quality of the royal stock of France. But, at last, Fortune turned her giddy wheel and the Prince of Wales penetrated the ranks of the enemy, and, like a lion with noble wrath, spared the lowly and put down the mighty, and took the king of France prisoner. Meanwhile the French were scattered abroad through the fields of Poitiers, and seeing that the standard of the lilies was cast down, fled with all speed to the neighbouring town. The English, although either badly wounded or wearied with their labours, were nevertheless heartened with the joy of having both life and victory and followed the fleeing Frenchmen right to the gates of Poitiers, where in a dangerous skirmish they routed the defeated Frenchmen with great slaughter. They would have slain more if they had not been eager to capture for ransom those of high value rather than to further the general triumph. At last our men being recalled by the blast of the trumpets, pavilions and tents were set up in the fields, and the whole company eagerly turned to the care of the wounded, the quiet rest of the wearied, the safe keeping of the prisoners, and the refreshment of the famished, until, having discovered which of their men were missing, they searched for them and brought them, alive or dead, into the camp with the utmost compassion.

English historical documents

98

35. The Black Prince waits on King John at supper after Poitiers, 1356 (Froissart, Chronicles (trans. Berners), ch. 168 [modernised]) The same day of the battle at night the prince made a supper in his lodging for the French king and for the most part of the great lords who were prisoners. The prince made the king and his son, the lord James of Bourbon, the lord John d’Artois, the count of Tancarville, the count of Estampes, the count Dammartin, the count of Joinville, and the lord of Partenay to sit all at one board, and other lords, knights and squires at other tables; and always the prince served before the king as humbly as he could, and would not sit at the king’s board for any desire that the king could make, but he said he was not sufficient to sit at the table with so great a prince as the king was. But then he said to the king: “Sir, for God’s sake, think no evil and be not dismayed, though God this day did not consent to follow your will; for, sir, surely the king my father shall bear you as much honour and friendship as he can possibly do, and shall agree with you so reasonably that you shall ever be friends together hereafter. And, sir, methinks you ought to rejoice, though the day did not go as you would have had it, for this day you have won the high renown of prowess and you have surpassed this day in valour all others of your party. Sir, I say not this to mock you, for all that are on our side, that saw every man’s deeds, are plainly agreed by true sentence to give you the prize and crown.” Therewith the Frenchmen began to whisper and said among themselves how the prince had spoken nobly, and that by all estimation he should prove a noble man, if God should send him life and allow him to persevere in such good fortune. 36. King John of France thanks Paris for its fidelity, and urges its rulers to submit to the English terms, 1356 (A.Guesnon, “Documents inédits sur l’inyasion anglaise et les états au temps de Philippe VI et Jean le Bon”, Bulletin historique et philologique (1897, 244 [French]) On behalf of the king, to the provost of the merchants and the bailiffs of our good town of Paris. We are writing by our other letters to the prelates and other people of Holy Church, to nobles, to the other burgesses and inhabitants of the good towns of our kingdom in general, that we have heard often by several prisoners and others who have come from France constant reports of the good affection and great desire and wish that you and they have for our deliverance and return of our person from the hands of our enemies. For these we thank you and them…. And especially …we are bound to make known to you our good will and gratitude for the great love and fidelity which you have shown towards us…for we know well that you who are the governors of our good town of Paris, which is the principal of all the towns of our realm, have been prime supporters of this need, and that the others… have consented and agreed to what you have first wished and proposed… . We pray and require you very affectionately that you will be pleased to persevere in this fealty and love, and to have the aim of the deliverance of our person every day in your heart and memory. And certainly, if you are at this time good subjects, as you have always been and as we expect that you will continue, you will find us throughout our life good and gracious, and we shall attend to your government to give you the best and the most diligent that we can according to God and justice. And if any of

The political framework

99

our councillors or any others have done anything which could turn to your prejudice and hurt…we will make redress, if God wills, as soon as we have returned home, if that will be agreeable to you. And whereas we have heard that, for love of us, you and our other subjects have granted to Charles, our eldest son, great succour and help of men to deliver our person as well and as quickly as possible and to make war on our enemies, we thank you very warmly and from our heart; but we wish you to know clearly that it is impossible for you ever to have us back by war, or otherwise than by treaty of accord and peace. For if our enemies, in whose hands we now are, thought that you sought to recover us by war, they would move us often from one place to another, so that neither you nor anyone else would ever find us. And…the fortunes of war are doubtful, and considering the great evils which have befallen by reason of the war between us and our adversary, and which will become greater if the war should last longer…it seems to us that you and all our good and loyal subjects ought to agree to what good and honourable peace may be made. We pray you also that you will write to us soon and often of the news and of the whole situation with you, for it would be a very great comfort to us in our prison. Given at Bordeaux under our new signet, 12th December. And so that you may the better know that this comes from our intention and initiative, we have appended our name with our own hand to this letter—John. 37. The treaty of Berwick, 1357 (Rymer, Foedera, III, i, 151, from Scottish Roll, 31 Edward III, m. 2d [French]) This indenture, made at Berwick-on-Tweed, 3rd October, 1357, between the honourable fathers in God, John Archbishop of York, Primate of England, Thomas Bishop of Durham, Gilbert Bishop of Carlisle, and the noblemen Henry de Percy, Ralph de Neville, Henry le Scrope, and Thomas de Musgrave, ambassadors and deputies on behalf of the noble prince Edward, King of England and France, on the one part and the honourable fathers in God, William Bishop of St Andrews, Thomas Bishop of Caithness, Patrick Bishop of Brechin Chancellor of Scotland, and the noblemen Patrick de la Marche, Robert de Erskine, and William de Livingstone, knights, ambassadors and deputies on behalf of Robert the Steward, Guardian of Scotland, Prelates, Lords, and Commons of Scotland, on the other part, witnesses that it is treated and agreed between the parties that the noble prince David, King of Scotland, should be freely delivered out of prison and ransomed for a certain sum of money, on the following conditions and in the following manner: For 100,000 marks sterling, to be paid within ten years next following after the making of this treaty, by equal portions, that is to say, 10,000 marks at the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist next coming, as first instalment, and another 10,000 marks at the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist next following that, and so from year to year, at the same feast of the Nativity of St John, until the said sum of 100,000 marks shall be fully paid. And it is agreed that the payments shall be made to him who shall be assigned on behalf of the King of England by letters under his Great Seal, that is to say, at Berwick on Tweed, if Berwick should be in the hands of the King of England, and if not, at Norham, or if it should please the King of England that the payments should be made at

English historical documents

100

Bamburgh, they should be made there. And if the King of England shall give a safe conduct to those of Scotland, who will come to make the payment there, across the March of England, even if the neighbourhood of Bamburgh shall be perilous for his subjects and adherents, and for all other Scots, and if in that case the Scots wish to make any payments at London, they shall be accepted there, and the payments shall be made in sterling or in other coin of the King of England, or in other gold or silver money of the same value as English money. Also that a truce shall be confirmed and maintained by sufficient surety of letters and oaths between the King of England and all his people, as well in England as in Scotland, and also the Isle of Man and the King of Scots, and all the other people of Scotland and their adherents, by land and by sea, and all other regions and places, without fraud or guile, until the sum shall be fully paid; and that Edward Balliol and John of the Isles and all other allies and adherents of the King of England shall be included in the truce. Also that during the truce all those on one side and on the other shall be able to go freely to and fro, excepting castles and towns which are shut and barred. And if any ship, from one side or the other, should be driven to take shelter in any of the ports of England or of Scotland, by reason of the tempest or any other necessity, they should be able to arrive and stay there peacefully, and take their rest, and if need should arise shall revictual for a reasonable, time and leave the port freely with their goods and people, without any kind of let or hindrance. And if, during the truce any region, town, borough, land, possession, castle, or person shall be taken or received from one allegiance or peace to the other, full restitution shall be made without delay, gainsaying, or guile, as soon as it shall be demanded, and this shall be done within three weeks from the time that the request was made. [No ransoms shall be demanded or taken during the time of truce. For the payment of the sum of money the King of Scotland shall give twenty hostages; the names follow; in addition three of the nobility of Scotland at a time, out of a rota of nine, shall come as hostages, until the ransom has been fully paid.] Also it is agreed that if there be any default of payment at any of the terms, the King of Scotland, without any request or delay, shall come to England, give himself up at the king of England’s prison within the castle of Newcastle-on-Tyne, within three weeks next following the default of payment, to remain a prisoner until the payment of the arrears shall have been completed; the hostages named above with the afforcement of the lords, still remaining all the time. And if in case of default of payments the King of Scotland is unable for any reasonable cause to come to give himself up at the prison, he shall send in his stead, within the space of three weeks, two noble earls, or two or three Scottish lords, that is to say, the Steward of Scotland, the Earl of Douglas, and Thomas Moray (Lord Bothwell). [There follow arrangements for replacing hostages who may die in captivity, and elaborate precautions to try to ensure that the estates of Scotland shall never seek to repudiate the treaty or impugn its validity by privilege or in any other manner.] And it is also agreed that the King of England and prince on their part and the King of Scotland on his part shall ratify, confirm, and approve the indenture, and everything

The political framework

101

contained in it, by letters patent under their great seals, and they shall send the letters, sealed, by either party, to the Warden of Berwick on Tweed at Martinmas next coming [11 November] or within eight days next following at the latest, so that they may be handed over one to the other. 38. The devastation of the French countryside, 1359 (The Chronicle of Jean de Venette, trans. Jean Birdsall, ed. R.A.Newhall (Columbia University Press, 1953), 93 [Latin]) The loss by fire of the village where I was born, Venette near Compiègne, is to be lamented, together with that of many others near by. The vines in this region… were not pruned or kept from rotting by the labours of men’s hands. The fields were not sown or ploughed. There were no cattle or fowls in the fields…. No lambs or calves bleated after their mothers in this region. The wolf might seek its prey elsewhere and here fill his rapacious gullet with green grass instead of rams. At this time rabbits and hares played freely about in the deserted fields with no fear of hunting dogs, for no one dared go coursing through the pleasant woods and fields…. No wayfarers went along the roads, carrying their best cheese and dairy produce to market…. Houses and churches no longer presented a smiling appearance with newly repaired roofs but rather the lamentable spectacle of scattered smoking ruins to which they had been reduced by devouring flames. The eye of man was no longer rejoiced by the accustomed sight of green pastures and fields charmingly coloured by the growing grain, but rather saddened by the looks of the nettles and thistles springing up on every side. The pleasant sound of bells was heard indeed, not as a summons to divine worship, but as a warning of hostile intentions, in order that men might seek out hiding places while the enemy were yet on the way. What more can I say? Every misery increased on every hand, especially among the rural population, the peasants, for their lords bore hard upon them, extorting from them all their substance and poor means of livelihood. Though there were few flocks or herds, those who owned any were forced to pay their lords for each animal, 10 solidi for an ox, 4 or 5 for a sheep. Yet their lords did not, in return, repel their enemies, or attempt to attack them, except occasionally. 39. The treaty of Calais, 1360 (Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, I, from Treaty Roll, 34 Edw. III, m.2 [French]) The Treaty of Brétigny, transacted on the 8th May last past, corrected with the articles of Calais, and ratified by the King of France at the same place, 1. … First, that the King of England, in addition to what he holds in Guienne and Gascony, shall have perpetually, for himself and his heirs, all the things which follow, to be held in the same manner as the king of France and his son or any of his ancestors, Kings of France, held them; that is to say, what was held in demesne, in demesne, and what in fee, in fee, for the time and in the manner specified below: The city, castle, and county of Poitiers, and all the land and country of Poitou, with the fief of Thouars and the land of Belleville.

English historical documents

102

The city and castle of Saintes, and all the land and country of Saintonge, on both sides of the river Charente. The city and castle of Agen, and the land and country of Agenais. The city and castle and the whole country of Périgord, and the land and country of Périgueux. The city and castle of Limoges and the land and country of Limousin. The city and castle of Cahors, with the land and country of Caoursin. The city and castle and country of Tarbe, and the land, district, and county of Bigorre. The city, land and country of Gorre. The city and castle of Angoulême, and the county, land, and country of Angoumois. The city and castle of Rodez, and the land and country of Rouergue. And if there be any lords, like the Count of Foix, the Count of Armagnac, the Count of L’Isle, the Count of Périgord, the Viscount of Limoges, or others who hold any lands or places within the bounds of the said regions, they shall do homage to the King of England, and render all other services and payments, due on account of their lands and holdings, in the same manner as they have done in times past. 2. Also the King of England shall have that all the King of England or any of his predecessors formerly held in the town of Montreuil-sur-Mer and its appurtenances. 3. Also the King of England shall have the whole County of Ponthieu; save that if any of the County and its appurtenances have been alienated by former kings of England to any other person than the King of France, the latter shall not be bound to restore them to the King of England. And if such alienations have been made to former kings of France, and the King of France holds them at present in his hand, he shall release them wholly to the King of England; except that if the Kings of France have had them in exchange for other lands, the King of England shall either restore what was had in exchange or leave in his hands the land thus alienated. But if the former kings of England had alienated anything to other persons than the King of France and these be since come into the hands of the latter, the King of France shall not be bound to restore them. Also if such lands owe homage, the King shall deliver them to others, who shall do homage for them to the King of England; and if not, the King of France shall present them to a tenant who shall do homage for them within a year of his leaving Calais. 4. Also the King of England shall have the castle and town of Calais; the castle, town, and lordship of Marck; the towns, castles, and lordships of Sangatte, Coulogne, Ham, Le Wal, and Oye; with lands, woods, marshes, rivers, rents, lordships, advow-sons of churches, and all other appurtenances and places lying within the following limits and bounds [specified in detail]. 5. Also the King of England shall have the castle, town, and whole county of Guisnes [Guînes], with all the lands, towns, castles, fortresses, places, men, homages, seigneuries, woods, forests, and the rights within them, as wholly as the recently deceased Count of Guisnes held them at the time of his death. And the churches and the good people within the limits of the said County of Guisnes, of Calais, of Marck, and the other places, shall be subject to the King of England as they were to the King of France and the former Count of Guisnes. And all these possessions, of Marck and of Calais, contained in this article and that immediately preceding, the King of England shall hold in demesne, excepting the inheritance of churches, which shall remain wholly to them wherever they are situated; excepting also the inheritance of other persons of the districts of Marck and

The political framework

103

Calais, situated outside the town of Calais, to the annual value of £100 of land and below, in current coin of the countryside, which shall remain to them…. 7. Also, it is agreed that the King of France and his eldest son, the Regent, shall as soon as possible, and at latest before the Feast of St Michael next year, restore, transfer, and deliver to the King of England and his heirs and successors without fraud or cunning, all the honours, obediences, homages, allegiances, vassals, feofs, services, recognizances, and rights, etc…. by any cause, title, or colour of right, to the king or crown of France, on account of the cities, counties, castles, etc., and all their appurtenances and appanages, wherever they may be, and each one of them. And the king and his eldest son shall command, by their letters patent, all archbishops, bishops, and other prelates of the Holy Church, and also the counts, viscounts, barons, nobles, citizens, and all others whatsoever of the cities, counties, lands, countrysides, isles, and places, that they shall obey the King of England and his heirs, and be at their command, as they have obeyed the kings and crown of France. And by the same letters they shall acquit and absolve them, as well as they can, from all homage, faith, oaths, obligations, subjections, and promises made by any of them to the kings and to the crown of France in any manner whatsoever. 8. Also it is agreed that the King of England shall have the counties, cities, castles, lands, countrysides, isles, and places, with all their appurtenances and appanages, wherever they may be, to hold himself, and to be held in heredity and perpetuity by all his heirs and successors, in demesne in so far as the King of France held it in demesne, and also in fee and service, as the Kings of France did; excepting all that is said above in the article touching Calais and Marck…. 13. Also it is agreed that the King of France will pay to the King of England three million gold crowns, of which two are worth a noble of English money. And of this sum 600,000 crowns shall be paid to the King of England or his deputies at Calais within four months from the time of the King of France’s arrival there. And within the following year 400,000 crowns shall be paid in the city of London in England until the 3,000,000 crowns shall be paid. 14. Also it is agreed that in return for the payment of the 600,000 crowns at Calais and for the delivery of the hostages named below, and for the surrender of the town, castle, and fortresses of Guisnes, and the towns of its county, the king’s person shall be released from prison, and he shall be permitted to depart from Calais, and return to his own realm without any hindrance; but he shall not be able to arm himself or his people against the King of England until he shall have performed what he is bound to do by this present treaty…. [Here follow the names of 41 hostages and prisoners of war who are to be held by the English as pledges of good faith.] [17. Within three months of the King of France leaving Calais, four hostages from Paris and two from each of 18 other towns are to present themselves at Calais] 19. Also it is agreed that as soon as possible within a year from the King of France’s departure from Calais John, Count of Montfort, shall have the county of Montfort, with all the appurtenances, doing liege homage to the King of France and promising duty and service in all cases, as a good and loyal liege vassal should do to his liege lord, in respect of the county; and also there shall be delivered to him his other inheritances, which were never part of the duchy of Brittany, doing homage or any other duty which is fitting.

English historical documents

104

20. Also, on the question of the demesne of the duchy of Brittany, which is disputed between John of Montfort on the one hand and Charles of Blois on the other, it is agreed that the two kings should call before them or their deputies the principal parties of Blois and Montfort, either in person or by deputies, and should inform themselves of the rights of the two parties; and should try to bring the parties into accord on all matters in dispute between them or on as many as possible of these matters…. 21. And if it should happen that one of the parties should not wish to appear in satisfactory manner before the kings, or their deputies, when they shall meet; and also if the kings or their deputies shall have ordained or declared that the parties ought to be in agreement, or should have given their judgement in favour of one party, and one of the parties is unwilling to agree to this or to obey the declaration; then the said kings shall proceed against him with all their might and help the one who is willing to agree and obey; but in any event the two kings shall not, either in their own persons, or through others, make or undertake war against each other, for the cause abovesaid; and the sovereignty and homage over the duchy shall always remain with the King of France. [22. The lands of Philip of Navarre and his adherents to be restored with full pardon….] [25. All persons banished or deprived during the war as adherents of either party are to be restored entirely to their rights and possessions.] 26. Also it is agreed that the King of France must deliver to the King of England all the cities, towns, countrysides, and all other places above named, which must be handed over to the King of England by this present treaty, as soon as he can, and at the latest within a year of his departure from Calais. 27. Also…the King of England, at his own cost and expense, shall deliver all the fortresses taken and occupied by him and by his subjects, adherents, and allies, in France, Touraine, Anjou, Maine, Berri, Auvergne, Burgundy, Champagne, Picardy, and Normandy, and in all the other parts and places of the kingdom of France, except those of the duchy of Brittany, and of the districts and lands which by this present treaty ought to belong and remain to the King of England. 28. Also, it is agreed that the King of France shall cause to be offered and delivered to the king of England, or to his heirs or deputies, all the towns, castles, or fortresses and other lands, districts, and places above named, with their appurtenances at his own cost. And if there shall be any persons so rebellious that they should refuse to restore to the King of England any cities, towns, castles, districts, places, or fortresses, which by this present treaty ought to belong to him, the King of France shall be bound to deliver them to the King of England at his own expense. And in the same way the King of England shall deliver at his own expense the fortresses which by this present treaty ought to belong to the King of France. And the kings and their people shall be bound to help each other, if necessary, at the cost of whichever party shall make the request…. 29. Also, it is agreed that the archbishops, bishops, and other prelates and people of Holy Church, by reason of their temporalities, shall be subject to that one of the two kings under whom they hold their temporalities; and if they hold under both kings, they shall be subject to each of them for the temporalities which they hold of each…. [A firm alliance and friendship is to be established between the two kings and realms; and this shall involve the abrogation of alliances directed by either side against the other,

The political framework

105

including especially the French alliance with Scotland and the English alliance with Flanders. All the foregoing clauses of the treaty shall be confirmed by the pope.] 34. Also, all the subjects of the kingdoms who wish to study in the schools and universities of the kingdoms of France and England shall enjoy all privileges and liberties of such schools and universities as fully as they could before the war, and as they do at present…. 38. Also it is agreed that neither of the kings aforesaid shall procure or cause to be procured any innovations or hindrances to be made by the court of Rome or by others of Holy Church, whoever they may be, against this present treaty, and against the said kings, their helpers, adherents, and allies. . . . And if our Holy Father or any other wishes to do it, the two kings shall stop him to the best of their ability, without any deceit…. Given at Calais, 24 October, the year of grace, 1360. [The following important stipulations, included in Articles 11 and 12 of the treaty of Brétigny, were omitted from the final treaty of Calais.] 11. [The King of France and his eldest son promise that within a year from next Michaelmas they will transfer to the King of England all their rights within the ceded territories] without retaining or reserving for themselves or their heirs in these territories anything whereby they or their heirs and successors…might be able to challenge or demand in time to come anything of the King of England, his heirs and successor, or any of his vassals and subjects, by reason of the districts and places…. And that the King of England, his heirs and successors, shall have and hold in per-petuity all the above named districts, with their appurtenances and appanages, and shall retain them fully in their lordship, sovereignty, and obedience, allegiance, and subjection, as the kings of France had and held them at any time past; and that the King of England, his heirs and successors, shall have and hold in perpetuity all the districts above-named…in full franchise and perpetual liberty, as sovereign and liege lord, and as neighbours to the king and realm of France, without recognizing any sovereignty in them, or doing any obedience, homage, resort, or subjection, and without doing, at any time to come, any service or recognition to the kings or crown of France for any of the cities, counties, castles, lands, districts, islands, places and persons. 12. Also it is agreed that the King of France and his eldest son shall expressly renounce the jurisdictions and sovereignties, and all rights which they have or could have, in all things which by this present treaty ought to belong to the King of England. And similarly the King of England and his eldest son shall expressly renounce all the things which by this present treaty ought not to be offered to or remain with the King of England, and all the demands which he has made to the King of France, especially the claim to the name and right of the crown and kingdom of France, to the homage, sovereignty and demesne of the duchy of Normandy, Touraine, the Counties of Anjou and Maine, and the sovereignty and homage of the duchy of Brittany and of the county and districts of Flanders.

English historical documents

106

40. The campaign of 1364 in Brittany (The Chronicle of Jean de Venette, trans. Jean Birdsall, 126 [Latin]) The same year, 1364, during the reign of Charles the Dauphin in France, a lament-able war took place in Brittany…. Charles of Blois, who was acting as Duke of Brittany in his wife’s right…and John of Montfort, who claimed the duchy through his father…held many parleys concerning peace at this time in Brittany. … When neither side could reach a final settlement, they both agreed to fight a pitched battle. On the feast of St Michael in the month of September a great multi-tude of nobles in arms assembled and drew up their lines in a large field near the castle of Auray in the diocese of Vannes in Brittany. Each side attacked fiercely and fighting began. In this battle many nobles from France as well as from Brittany fought on the side of Charles of Blois, who was himself present, and large numbers of Englishmen as well as Bretons fought on the side of John of Montfort. Both sides fought hard, but John of Montfort’s side prevailed, so it pleased God in whose hands all things lie…. In this battle, alas! Charles of Blois fell. Thus died an illustrious nobleman, valiant and gentle, courteous and handsome. With him died likewise the brother of the count of Auxerre, a noble knight, and Guillaume de Rochefort in French Brittany, and many other knights and nobles, as well as 777 men at arms. All these lay dead upon the field of battle, and two thousand more stricken with mortal wounds were carried to hospices. On the losing side the count of Auxerre, the count of Joigny, Bertrand du Guesclin, a valiant knight, and many others gave themselves up. They were all ransomed in the end for large sums of money…. John of Montfort, the victor in this conflict, rode triumphantly about Brittany, vigorously stormed various towns, which had rebelled against him at one time or another, and took several castles, which he subjected to himself and from which he drove out the rebels. At length he came with a multitude of armed men to storm the city of Nantes, which was fortified very strongly and effectively with walls, ditches and other defences…. While John of Montfort was there and was disturbing that region and its fortresses, Charles, King of France, sent thither ambassadors of distinction, Jean de Craon, archbishop of Rheims, and many other nobles, to negotiate a peace in conjunction with the barons of Brittany between John of Montfort and the widow of Charles of Blois, who still considered herself as Duchess of Brittany, and to interpose their good offices between them. By the will of God Who had compassion on the land and people of Brittany, afflicted for years by war and spoliation and other miseries, and Who willed to grant them peace and quiet henceforth, and by the intervention of the arbitrators mentioned above, a good peace was established amidst great rejoicing. The opposing parties were to be united by the marriage of their children. Other provisions were that the whole duchy and county of Nantes should remain in the possession of John of Montfort and that he should be entitled Duke of Brittany for ever; that the widow of Charles of Blois should keep the lands which had formed part of her patrimony, such as Penthièvre and should receive from the duchy an annual rent of 14,000 librae in addition; furthermore, that one of her sons should marry another child, the sister of John of Montfort, and should have the viscounty of Limoges. Thus, praise God, was peace now established in that land. John, now duke of Brittany, was greeted with rejoicing by everyone and welcomed by cities and towns as he went about the duchy to receive the homage of his nobles and to expel all enemies and freebooters from his towns. In this

The political framework

107

way he obtained the Duchy of Brittany and did what his father, John, Count of Montfort…could not do so long as he lived…. 41. The alliance between Pedro of Castile, Charles of Navarre and Edward Prince of Wales, 1366 (Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 116 [Latin, Spanish and French]) [Latin] Pedro, by the grace of God, King of Castile and León, Charles, by the same grace King of Navarre and County of Évreux, and Edward first-born son of the King of England, Prince of Aquitaine and Wales, cause everybody to know, both now and for the future, that since Henry, Count of Trastamara, falsely assuming the name of King of Castile, has occupied the kingdoms, lands, places, cities, and castles belonging to us, King Pedro, as the true king of Castile, and occupied and still occupies them unjustly, despoiling us the said King Pedro of the said kingdoms, lands, and places, against all right and justice; Wherefore the same King Pedro asked and also required, as friends and relatives, us, Charles King of Navarre and Edward Prince to proceed against that Henry, who occupies and violently holds the throne, and against his adherents, helpers, and supporters, by war along with Pedro, so that he may be restored to the realm which is occupied and illicitly detained…. We therefore, Pedro King of Castile and León, Charles King of Navarre, and Edward Prince of Aquitaine, aforesaid, having assembled together in the city of Bayonne, for the aforesaid reason, have made the treaty, compositions, confederacies, pacts, and friendships in the following form: [Spanish] First, that they will be good, loyal, and true friends, and will help each other well and faithfully…against all who shall be opposed to them, or to each one of them…. Also, to sustain and maintain the war… King Don Pedro will pay to the King of Navarre 200,000 florins of gold, of which the King of Navarre will take at present 20,000 florins…and of the remainder King Don Pedro will pay the third part within the next six months, and the second third within the next six months, and the last third within the last six months, so that the whole sum will be paid within a year and a half; and for this the King Don Pedro will hold himself bound in such manner as shall be satisfactory to the said King of Navarre. [By a separate agreement in Latin Pedro recited the help that he expected to get from Edward Prince of Wales and in return he concedes:] We give and concede of our certain knowledge and especial gift, and by our royal donation and power, for us and our heirs and successors, to the Lord Edward, illustrious first-born son of the King of England, Prince of Aquitaine and Wales, our kinsman, for himself, his heirs and successors: The castle and place of Bermeo, the places of Bilbao, all the land, district and lordship of Castro Urdiales, with all their appurtenances, and all the lands, towns, and places, with

English historical documents

108

all their lordships and appurtenances which are between the countryside and places of Viscaya and Castro Urdiales…. The treaty was confirmed and sworn, in all and each of the matters therein contained…in the house of the Friars Minor at Libourne in the diocese of Bordeaux, on the 23rd September, 1366. 42. The Black Prince’s expedition to Castile, 1367 (Pedro López de Ayala, Crónicas de los Reyes de Castilla, (tomo 1, 1779), 407 ff. [Spanish]. [I should like to acknowledge the help of my colleague, Mr H.B.Hall, Department of Hispanic Studies, The University of Liverpool, in checking my translation.] For the Black Prince’s letter to his wife in Bordeaux, reporting the victory at Nájera, see Revue Historique, 136 (1921), 37– 59)

(407, 419, 430) [1366] After the king Don Pedro had left Burgos…the count, Don Enrique, entered it and was accepted as king…. And then Don Enrique caused very big preparations to be made in Las Huelgas, which is a royal convent of ladies near the city of Burgos, founded by the kings of Castile, and he was crowned there as king; and henceforward in this chronicle he is called king. And when King Enrique had been crowned, the citizens of Burgos kissed his hand as king and lord, as did many knights and noblemen who were there, and many others who came to the place. And many procuradores of cities and towns of the kingdom arrived to take him as king and lord; so that twenty-five days after he had been crowned in Burgos, all the kingdom was in his obedience and lordship, except Don Ferrando of Castro who held out in Galicia, and the town of Agreda, and the castles of Soria, Arnedo, Logroño, San Sebastián, Guetaria…. And (after losing Galicia as well) King Pedro…decided to go to Bayonne, in the hands of the English. And at Corunna there came to him… (two noblemen) sent by the Prince of Wales, to say that he should go to the domains of the King of England, his father, who would help him to recover his kingdom, and so he had sent this mission to promise help…. Thus it was that the king, Don Pedro, arrived at the city of Bayonne…. And the prince assured King Pedro that he was ready to help him with all the might of the King of England, his father, and to accompany him to recover his realm, and that he had let his father and lord, the King of England, know all this, and that he was very sure his father would be very glad that all his men should help Don Pedro…. And the King of England sent his messengers to King Pedro, and his letters to the prince, his son, by which he declared that he was very pleased with all the aid that his men might give, and he sent to tell the prince, his son, and the Duke of Lancaster, another son, to help Don Pedro personally. And the king sent his letters to all the dukes, counts, and lords of Guienne and Brittany, and to all those who, he knew, would, to please him, accompany the prince and the Duke of Lancaster, his sons, in such a time of need as this. . . . And from this time forward the prince went to

The political framework

109

sound as many companies as he could get for this campaign; and he found plenty, partly because the prince was then very powerful and he was the lord of Guienne, and had made peace with France, partly because of the good pay that Don Pedro could provide, especially in jewels of gold and precious stones, in addition to which the prince came to his aid with great sums. (Ibid. 434, 437, 438, 439, 442) [1367] Right at the beginning of the year King Enrique entered into negotiations with the King of Navarre, Don Carlos, because those companies who were to come with the king, Don Pedro, and with the Prince of Wales, had no pass as good as the passes of Roncesvalles, which are in the kingdom of Navarre. And it was agreed that Charles King of Navarre would not let through…the pass of Roncesvalles King Pedro and the Prince of Wales, and those who should come with them, and…he would serve in battle with all his might in support of the king, Don Enrique…. King Enrique had to give to the King of Navarre, so that he should carry out his promise to defend the pass of Roncesvalles against King Pedro and the Prince of Wales and to aid King Enrique in battle, the town of Logroño, which King Pedro had promised to him for such aid if the King of Navarre would provide it for him. And when this was done, the King of Navarre went to Pamplona, and…he made other treaties with King Pedro and with the Prince of Wales in this manner: that the King of Navarre would let them use the pass of Roncesvalles, and would serve them with his body in battle, and King Pedro would give him the towns of Vittoria and Logroño. And the king of Navarre, thinking how the power which King Pedro and the Prince of Wales could command was great, and greater than that which King Enrique could muster, granted King Pedro and the Prince of Wales free access to the pass of Roncesvalles…. And Sir Hugh de Calveley, who was an English knight, with 400 horsemen of his company whom he had brought from England, left King Enrique, and went to Navarre, for the Prince of Wales was on the other side, and he could not fight against the prince…. And King Enrique learnt that King Pedro and the Prince of Wales had crossed the pass of Roncesvalles, and that the King of Navarre had put no obstacle in their way, nor thought of doing so…. And he learnt how King Pedro and the prince with all their companies had arrived in the valley of Pamplona and were all united there…. And he learnt how King Pedro and the prince, and their armies, sought to enter the province of Alava; and…he moved to the Ebro, and pitched his camp near a village called Añastro, belonging to the town of Treviño (some ten miles south of Vittoria). And when he was there he learnt that as many as 600 horsemen…whom he had sent to take the town of Agreda, which was holding out against him, had all gone over to King Pedro. And so King Enrique had in his company on the day of battle…4,500 horsemen. And of King Pedro’s party there were in the vanguard…the Duke of Lancaster…and Sir John Chandos… Constable of Guienne…and Sir Hugh Calveley and Sir Oliver de Clisson, and many other knights and squires of England, and of Brittany, who were in number three thousand men-at-arms. On the right wing came the Count of Armagnac…and other great knights and squires, as many as two thousand lances. And on the left wing came the Captal de Buch…and many knights and squires of Guienne…as many as two thousand men-at-arms. And in the rearguard came King Pedro, and the King of Naples, who was the son of the former King of Majorca, Dom Jayme, and the Prince of Wales, and the pennant of the King of Navarre, with his nobles, knights and squires, as many as three

English historical documents

110

hundred men-at-arms, and many other knights of England, and there were in this section three thousand lances, so that there were altogether ten thousand men-at-arms, and as many archers. And these men-at-arms were then the flower of the chivalry of Christendom; for there was then peace between France and England, and all the duchy of Guienne accompanied the Prince of Wales…and all the nobles and chivalry of Brittany, and all the chivalry of England; and also there came with King Pedro…as many as eight hundred Castilian men at arms and light horsemen. (Ibid. 444) [The King of France sent two envoys to King Enrique to warn him not to challenge the Black Prince to battle; but Enrique’s proud Castilian advisers counselled otherwise.] And all those who were King Enrique’s councillors, and loved his service, said that if he were to hesitate at all about giving battle, he could be sure that the greater part of his kingdom would desert him and go over to King Pedro, and the same was true of the cities and towns. For they were all greatly afraid of King Pedro, and if they saw that they had no one to defend the countryside, they would desert him and give their adherence to King Pedro; but if they saw that he was trying to fight, they would all hope for the success of the battle, and they would trust in the mercy of God to give him the victory. [Nevertheless Enrique decided not to fight at Treviño.] (Ibid. 447) When King Pedro and the Prince of Wales saw that King Enrique would not come down from the ridge to the plain, and that they could not fight with him except at great peril, nor pass that way to go to Castile, since he held the passes of that region, they left Alava, and crossed Navarre. And they made for the town of Logroño, which held out for King Pedro; and there lay a fine bridge over the Ebro, and King Pedro and the prince and all their companies passed over it…. When King Enrique knew that King Pedro and the Prince of Wales and those who were with him had taken the Logroño road, and were marching thither to cross the River Ebro there, he departed and went to Nájera. And he pitched his camp on this side of the town, so that the River Najarilla flowed between his camp and the road by which King Pedro and the prince must come to get to Rioja, and make their way to Burgos. And King Pedro and the prince and the other companies left Logroño and went on to Navarrete; and from there the prince sent to King Enrique his herald with a letter [deliberately couched in contemptuous terms to sting him into giving battle; and Enrique sent a spirited and defiant reply]. (Ibid. 453) King Enrique, as we have said, had his camp so sited that the River Najarilla flowed between him and the spot through which King Pedro and the prince had to go; and he took the decision to cross the river and pitch battle in a great space opposite Navarrete, through which his foes were coming, and he did this. And this troubled many of those who were with him, since they held that his camp was in a better position before he moved than afterwards, but King Enrique was a man of very great courage…and he said that in all ways he would seek to pitch battle in a flat plain, without any advantage. And King Pedro and the prince and all their companies left Navarrete on the Saturday [3 April] and…they all dismounted a great way off before they reached the spot where King

The political framework

111

Enrique and his side were…. And they joined battle so violently, one side against the other, that on both sides their lances fell to the ground, and they closed up hand to hand, and began to strike with their swords and axes and daggers, those of the party of King Pedro and the Prince of Wales shouting their cry of “Guienne and St George” and those of Enrique’s party, “Castile and St James”. And the prince’s vanguard gave way a little, so King Enrique’s vanguard believed that they were winning, and advanced more hotly against their foes and began to strike with greater vigour. And Don Tello, King Enrique’s brother…who was on horseback on the left hand of King Enrique’s vanguard, did not move to fight; and those on the right wing of the prince’s vanguard …attacked Don Tello. And he and those who were with him did not wait for the attack, but left the field, fleeing in total disorder. And when [the prince’s right wing] saw the horsemen flee, they wheeled against the backs of the foot-soldiers in King Enrique’s vanguard, and…quickly began to kill them; and the other wing, on the left hand of the prince’s vanguard, began to do the same, since they could not find any cavalry to fight against. And they struck at those who were on foot in King Enrique’s vanguard, so that they were all dead or prisoners, for no one helped them, and they were surrounded by enemies on all sides. And King Enrique rode up two or three times, to help those who were on foot, thinking that all those who were with him on horseback would do the same…. But when he saw that his men did not fight, he had to withdraw, since he could not withstand his foes, who were very strong; and so did all his cavalry. And they forsook the field, and the English and Gascons and Bretons followed them to the town of Nájera. And of the vanguard of King Enrique…were slain…as many as 400 men-at-arms. [After this resounding victory the allies advanced to Burgos. Pedro undertook to pay the Black Prince for his help within a year and hastened south to hurry on the collection of taxes. Left to support his men as best he could, the prince had to move slowly about the countryside, collecting supplies. The heat of a Spanish summer, together with Spanish food and wines, rendered his northern troops a ready prey to fever and dysentery. In September the Black Prince was forced to retreat across the Pyrenees to Gascony, burdened with debt and stricken with mortal illness. As soon as he had left Castile, Enrique reconquered most of the country, and then at an interview with Pedro murdered his brother, on 23 March 1369.]

43. Edward III resumes the name and title of King of France, 1369 (Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 157 [Latin], from Close Roll, 43 Edward III, m. 18d) Let it be remembered that it was shown in the last Parliament held at Westminster on the octave of the Holy Trinity [3 June], in the present year, how Charles, son of John, lately King of France, when the peace recently made between the most excellent prince Edward, illustrious King of England and John had been destroyed, usurped not only the superiority and jurisdiction which ought to belong to the King of England and his heirs in the lands conceded to him by the treaty, but expelled the King of England as well from his superiority and resort as from the castles, towns, and lands of the King of England in the lordship of Poitou, and from all the same lordship, and also from many other castles,

English historical documents

112

cities, and towns, in various other parts beyond the sea, by his people and his powers of war, with their banners displayed, and caused them to be placed in his hands, and occupied and holds them in hostile manner, and has caused various forces of ships and galleys with a great force of arms to be assembled in various places across the sea, to invade the realm of England and subdue the King of England and his realm by force, thus starting open war maliciously against the King of England, contrary to his oath and the form of the treaty. Therefore it was agreed by all the prelates and magnates and commons of the shires of England, assembled in this present parliament, with the assent of the whole parliament, that the King of England should resume the name of King of England and of France, as he held it before the peace, and should call himself King of England and France in his letters and seals, and use such a name or style henceforward, Wherefore the same King of England and France caused to be brought into his Chancery by the hands of William de Mulsho and John de Newenham, chamberlains of the Exchequer of the King of England and of France, at Westminster on Monday, the feast of St Barnabas the Apostle [11 June] all the seals, as well for the government of England as for the pleas of both the benches and the Exchequer and for the office of privy seal, on which the circumscription Edward King of England and of France or of France and of England is impressed, which seals were in the treasury, and the venerable father, William, Bishop of Winchester, chancellor of the king, took two great seals, each of them of two pieces, on one of which was impressed King of England and of France and on the other, King of France and of England, and one seal of two pieces he gave to John Knyvet, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench for the writs of that place, and another seal of two pieces to Robert Thorp, Chief Justice of the Common Bench for the writs of that place, and a third seal, of two pieces, to Master William Asheby, Archdeacon of Northampton, Chancellor of the King’s Exchequer, for sealing the writs of the Exchequer, and another seal, of one piece, to Peter de Lacy, Clerk of the Privy Seal, for the office of the privy seal. And the great seal, of two pieces, on which “Edward King of England Lord of Ireland and Aquitaine” was impressed, and which was ordained for the government of England according to the peace, and four other seals, for the pleas of the benches, the Exchequer, and the office of the privy seal, of the style of “King of England, Lord of Ireland and Aquitaine”, which were always used after the peace, he handed back to the chamberlain to be kept in the treasury. 44. Robert II renews the alliance with France, 1371 (Rymer, Foedera, III, ii, 186 [French], from British Museum, Cottonian MS., Titus A.3. For Edward III’s proposals in 1363 to become king of Scots after David II, see ibid, III, ii, 82) Robert, by the grace of God, King of Scotland, causes everyone to know, both present and to come, that…. We, considering the friendships and alliances, confederations and benevolences which for a long time past have been contracted, kept, and maintained between the King of France, our cousin, and his predecessors and us and our predecessors and our kingdoms, communities and subjects, wishing this to be renewed, kept, and

The political framework

113

strengthened, have made a treaty and agreement with the King of France, for himself and his heirs and successors, for us and our heirs and successors, in the following manner, that is, That the King of France and his heirs and successors, kings of France, and we, our heirs and successors, Kings of Scotland, the communities and subjects of the Kingdoms of France and Scotland, shall be bound and linked for all time to come, by bonds of union and friendship, and henceforward shall offer, give, and furnish love, help, counsel, and comfort in all respects, whenever we can, as loyal allies, to each other. And whereas the King of England and his predecessors have often used force and power to trouble and harass, with all their strength, the Kingdom of France, his heirs and successors, we, our heirs and successors, are and shall be bound and obliged to restrain and prevent the attacks…and also similarly every time that we, our heirs and successors, kings of Scotland, shall be in need of help or counsel in time of peace or war, against the King of England, his heirs and successors, and his subjects, the King of France and his heirs and successors shall provide help and counsel as far as possible, as loyal allies, to us, our heirs, and successors, our kingdom and our communities. Also that if war should break out between the King of France, his heirs and successors and the King of England, his heirs and successors, we, our heirs and successors shall be obliged and bound to make war, with all our force, against the King of England and his heirs and successors in the Kingdom of England, as soon as we, our heirs and successors, shall be informed of the outbreak of war by authentic writing or by sure account of common fame, provided however that the truce which has been undertaken and is in force between us and the King of England shall be ended or annulled or in any way broken by the English. [The King of France made an identical promise to the King of Scotland.] Also that the King of France, his heirs and successors, shall not be able to make peace with the King of England, his heirs, or successors, without express consent of us and our heirs and successors, and unless we, our kingdom, and our communities are entirely included; and also we, our heirs and successors shall not be able to make peace with the King of England, his heirs and successors, without express consent of the King of France and of his heirs and successors, and unless he and his realm and his communities are entirely included…. Given under our seal, in our castle of Edinburgh, the 28th day of the month of October, in the year of grace 1371 and of our reign the first. 45. The Archbishop of Canterbury orders prayers for the king and for the success of John king of Castile against the French, 1373 (Register of William Whittlesey, f. 61a, printed in Concilia Magnae Britanniae, ed. D.Wilkins (1737), III, 93 [Latin]) William to our venerable brother Simon, by the grace of God Bishop of London. We have received the letters of the most excellent prince and our lord in Christ, Edward, by the grace of God illustrious King of England and France, and lord of Ireland, in the following terms:–

English historical documents

114

[The king writes to the Archbishop of Canterbury to say that whereas for the defence of Holy Church, the kingdom of England, and the recovery of his rights in France, he has arranged for his son John to lead an expedition to France, he would value the prayers, processions, preachings, and masses, in the province of Canterbury, for the success of the expedition. Given at Westminster, 16 June 1373.] Since therefore the apostolic text bids us to pray for each other,1 and teaches… that grace will smile upon us more readily if it is requested by a multitude of prayers;2 nor are we advised to pray alone, since we pray for each other, and pour our prayers to God with those who engage in bodily struggles and toils for our safety, prosperity, and peace…. Be it known to you, brother, that the most excellent prince, and our lord, the lord Edward, illustrious King of England and France, considering attentively that the realm of England in many of its borders is subjected to very grave perils, and that its rights in the parts across the sea are troubled with various plots and deceits, and unless the plotters can be foiled in good time, worse ills will befall the holy English Church and the kingdom of England, he has decided to send his renowned, noble, and famous son John, King of Castile and León, and Duke of Lancaster with a large army to the parts across the sea to meet and avert this losses. And this magnificent lord, a son, not only in nature but in obedience, acquiescing in filial devotion to the wishes of his father, has humbly assumed the burden laid upon him with all speed, and already has set forth on his expedition to these parts. And since we have no temporal fee with which we can compensate this magnificent lord for so incomparable a service, it is necessary that we should resort to the advantage of spiritual recompense, i.e. the support of prayers [Given at Oxford, 27 June 1373.] 46. Proceedings in the Good Parliament of 1376 (The Anonimalle Chronicle, 1333–81, ed. V.H.Galbraith (Manchester, 1927), 79 ff, [French]) In the year 1376 King Edward III held his parliament in London and no parliament had ever met for so long before; for it began on the Monday in the third week after Easter and lasted until the translation of St Benedict [11 July], that is, for ten whole weeks…. And on the Monday at the beginning of the parliament, in the presence of our lord the king and the lords and commons, were pronounced the points and articles usual in parliament by Sir John Knyvet, then Chancellor of England, among which [he described] how the realm of England was in peril and on the point of being destroyed by its adversaries of France, Spain, Gascony, Flanders, Scotland, and other nations, by land and by sea; wherefore Sir John asked on the king’s behalf aid and succour against his enemies, and requested that they would kindly grant a tenth from the clergy and a fifteenth from the laity, and the custom of wools and other merchandise for one year or two, to maintain the war. And on this the lords and commons deliberated concerning their reply as the law requires. And at the same time at the end of the speech the said Sir John Knyvet, the Chancellor, commanded, on the king’s behalf, the knights and burgesses and commons of the shire…that if there was anything to redress or amend in the realm, or if

The political framework

115

the realm should be badly ruled and governed or treacherously counselled, by their good advice and counsel they should ordain remedy…how the realm might be more profitably governed for the honour of the king and the profit of the realm. And so finished the first day…. And the second day after [Wednesday, 30 April], the archbishops and bishops and earls and barons assembled and took their places to treat and take council in the White Chamber in the king’s palace. And to the knights and commons was assigned the chapter house of Westminster Abbey, where they could take their counsel privately without being disturbed or bothered by other folk. And on this second day all the knights and commons assembled and entered together into the chapter house and sat down in a circle, each one next to the other; and they began to talk of their business on the points raised in parliament, saying that it would be well at the beginning to be sworn each to the other to keep secret what was discussed and agreed amongst them and to treat and ordain loyally for the profit of the realm without concealment. To do these things they agreed unanimously and took oath to be loyal to one another. And then one of them said: “If anyone of us knows anything to say for the profit of the king and the realm, it would be well for him to show his knowledge among us, and afterwards, one after another to show what is on his mind.” Then a south country knight arose and went to the lectern in the middle of the chapter house so that all could hear and, leaning on the lectern, began to speak in this manner: “Jube domine benedicere, etc. [Lord, bid thy blessing, etc.]1 Gentlemen, you have heard the points raised in parliament, how disturbing they are, how our lord the king has asked of the clergy and of the commons a tenth and a fifteenth and the custom on wools and other merchandise for one year or two; and it seems to me that this is too great to grant, for the commons are so weakened and impoverished by various tallages and taxes already paid that they cannot bear such a charge at this time, and, on the other hand, all that we have granted for war for a long time we have lost by malversation because it has been badly wasted and falsely spent. Therefore it would be well to consider how our lord the king could live and govern the kingdom and maintain the war with his own revenues and without demanding money from his loyal subjects. As I have heard, there are various people who have in their hands without the king’s knowledge his wealth and treasure amounting to a great sum of gold and silver and have falsely concealed the wealth and have evilly and extortionately acquired it in various ways to the great injury of our lord the king and of the realm. For the present I will say no more. Tu autem domine miserere nostris [And do thou, Lord, have mercy upon our people or affairs]”2 and he returned to his seat among his companions. 1

James 5:16. Acts 6:4. James 5:13, 15. 1 The opening prayer of the service of Compline. 2 If correctly reported, this is an adaptation of the prayer (Tu autem, Domine, miserere nobis) which is said at Compline after a short lesson from I Peter 5:8–9: “Be sober, be vigilant: because your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: whom resist steadfast in the faith.” Doubtless the “roaring lion” was identified either with John of Gaunt or with one or all of the persons whom the commons were about to accuse. 2

English historical documents

116

[Another knight also spoke on the wasting of the king’s resources especially in connexion with the staple of Calais, and a third said that it would be well to discuss with the lords before presenting the grievance to the king.] To this all agreed; and afterwards two or three arose in the same manner, each one after the other, and spoke of various motions and points, as will be more fully explained by what follows. And when they had all finished their speeches and had returned to their seats among their companions, they deliberated together how it would be most profitable to proceed in the matter. Thereupon a knight of the Welsh marches, the steward of the Earl of March, called Sir Peter de la Mare, began to speak where the others had spoken and said: “Gentlemen, you have heard the speeches and advice of our companions and how they have shown their purpose and it seems to me that they have spoken loyally and profitably.” Then he repeated, word for word, all the points which they had made, wisely and in good form. Moreover he advised them on various points and articles as will appear more fully later; and so ended the second day. [On the following days the denunciations of the extortions and corruptions which had gone in high places continued; and Sir Peter de la Mare continued to summarise his companions’ speeches so well and to advise them so wisely that they asked him to speak on their behalf in the “great Parliament” before the lords.] On Friday [9 May] when they were all assembled, the king sent a messenger, Sir Reynold Bukkeshill, praying them on the king’s behalf that they would consider his estate, for he was impatient for them to grant his petition and request which he had made on the first day of parliament, and that they would release the parliament as soon as they could, for he himself wished to be elsewhere for his pleasure. Then it was arranged among them that they should go together in a body before the lords and what Sir Peter should speak by their direction all would approve and maintain. And on that same Friday the commons set out to enter parliament and came to the house of parliament; some of them got in, but the others were pushed back and shut out and went whither they would. And when Sir Peter and some of his companions had come before the lords and saw that their comrades could not enter, they marvelled greatly at this occurrence. Then the Duke of Lancaster, at that time lieutenant of the king to hold the parliament in his absence and that of the prince [of Wales, who was dying], very ill at ease, began to say: “Which of you is the spokesman of what has been agreed among you?” And Sir Peter replied that by common consent he had the right to speak that day and the duke said: “Say what you will.” “Sir,” he answered, “gladly. Gentlemen, you know and understand that all the commons who are here have come by the king’s writ and by the choice of the sheriffs of the various shires, and that what one of us says all say and approve; wherefore, first of all, I demand the reason why some are kept outside and I shall not proceed to any other matter until they are all present.” Then the Duke of Lancaster said: “Sir Peter, there is no need for so many of the commons to come in to give a reply but two or three at a time are enough, as has been the custom previously.” But Sir Peter answered briefly that no word would he wish to speak until they were all assembled. Wherefore the duke at last gave orders that they should be sent for and enquiry made as to what had become of them; and they were sought in various places for fully two hours before they could all be found and brought back to their companions. And when they were all there, Sir Peter began to recount what had been talked and agreed

The political framework

117

amongst them in this manner: “Gentlemen, if you please, you have heard the charge which we have from our lord the king on our allegiance to treat and ordain for his estate and that of the realm, and to redress and amend the defects that we find so far as we can; and we have found many defects and grievous matters which it would be to the profit of our lord the king and the realm to have amended. We are so simple of wit and of wealth that we cannot redress such great matters without the counsel of wise folk; wherefore we ask you for the profit of the realm that you will grant and associate with us four bishops, four earls, and four barons and bannerets, to hear and witness what we say.” And the lords discussed this and agreed that it was reasonable and profitable. [A committee of twelve lords was therefore appointed to confer with the commons and discussed with them on Monday, 12 May, in the chapter house the proposals which the commons intended to make. Then the commons returned to the parliament.] And when all were settled and there was no noise, the Duke of Lancaster said: “Who will speak?” And Sir Peter answered [that he was the speaker and that the commons thought the demands for fresh taxes unreasonable, concluding] “we say that if he [the king] had been well served by his ministers and had had his treasure spent wisely and without waste, there would be no need of such a levy; but he has with him certain counsellors and servants who are not useful or loyal to him or the realm and they have taken advantage by their cunning to deceive our lord the king.” At this the Duke of Lancaster wondered and said: “How is this and who are they who have taken advantage?” [Sir Peter repeated the accusation about the staple, that whereas by statute it should be at Calais it had been removed to various towns in England without parliamentary assent, because Lord Latimer and Richard Lyons had cunningly obtained so many patents on the customs, and demanded that the staple should be restored to Calais.] When Lord Latimer heard these words, he said: “When the staple was removed from Calais, it was done by the king and his council.” Sir Peter answered that it was against the law of England and against the statute made about it in parliament, and that what was done in parliament by statute could not be undone without parliament, and that he would show them the statute. And he had a statute book ready with him and he opened the book and read the statute before all the lords and the commons so that he could not be contradicted. And there was much disputing among them, and Sir Peter said: “Sir, we will tell you more than this very soon. Gentlemen, the second point that we wish to make is that a loan was made by Lord Latimer, who is present, and Richard Lyons to their own great profit and the great damage and loss of the king, at a time when there was no need for a loan; and this loan amounted to 20,000 marks, for which the king had to pay £20,000, so that those who made the loan gained 10,000 marks.” To this Sir Peter replied that there was no need to make a loan at all, for he had heard that there were two citizens of London, that is, Adam Franceys and William Walworth, who offered to Sir Richard Lescrope, then treasurer of England, to put into the king’s hands 15,000 marks without damage or loss to the king, to be repaid out of the wool customs at Calais from year to year until the sum was repaid. [Peter de la Mare continued with further accusations of corruption against Lord Latimer and Richard Lyons and against Alice Perrers, the king’s mistress; then parliament was adjourned and a few days later the king agreed that the treasurers should tell all they knew. The commons had a further meeting with the representatives of the lords.]

English historical documents

118

And when they had finished their discussion, they rose in a body and went from the chapter house to the parliament chamber and came before the lords and greeted them and asked for an answer to their petition made to our lord the king. And then the Duke of Lancaster said: “Have you still some other articles to present?” And Sir Peter replied briefly that they would not wish to say anything more until the truth was made known on these points and redress had been given by those who had been guilty of such corrupt gain and malversation of the king’s money to his detriment and that of the realm. And they wished the staple to be restored entirely to Calais, and that account should be given of the loan which was made to the king without need, and of the great sum which Lord Latimer and Richard Lyons cunningly took …and demanded that Alice Perrers should be removed from the king’s company [Then with the aid of Sir Richard Lescrope the Duke of Lancaster and the lords investigated the circumstances of the loan and it was found that in spite of denials by Lord Latimer, he and Richard Lyons had in fact lent money to the king for their own advantage. After a final speech by Sir Peter de la Mare on 24 May the lords presented proposals for reform to the king on 26 May.] The duke and the other lords of the parliament sent certain lords to announce to him the advice of the commons and the assent of the lords, that he should be counselled to banish from his presence those who were neither good nor profitable…and to take to him such councillors as would be willing loyally and profitably to advise and to ordain for his estate and for the realm and not give faith and credence to evil counsellors and evil doers. And the king benignly told the lords that he wished entirely to do what would be for the profit of the realm; and the lords thanked him, praying his very excellent lordship that he would appoint three bishops, three earls, and three barons…. And the king replied patiently that he would willingly act by their advice and good ordinance. So the delegation discussed for a while who these councillors might be; and they chose the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, the Bishop of Worcester, the Earls of Arundel, March, and Stafford, Lord Percy, Sir Guy de Brian, and Sir Roger Beauchamp….. And at the same time Lord Latimer, Sir John Neville, Sir Richard Stafford, and Dame Alice Perrers were dismissed from the king’s presence; and the king even swore an oath before the lords that Alice should never come into his company again. And it was ordained by common consent that the nine lords should stay in London, or near the king wherever he was, so that they should always be at hand to advise him when need should arise. [The Duke of Lancaster was annoyed that he was not appointed one of the nine councillors; but the reform movement went on in spite of him, and Lord Latimer and Richard Lyons were impeached, condemned and imprisoned.] At the end of Parliament, when all the lords were preparing to depart, Sir Peter De La Mare and the knights of the shires made a great and excellent feast in the name of our lord the king and several great lords of the realm, that is, for several bishops and the Earls of Cambridge, Hereford, March, Warwick, Suffolk, Salisbury, and Stafford, and for several barons and knights and for the mayor and most worthy citizens and burgesses of London and other boroughs and towns of the realm. For this feast the king gave them two tons of red wine and eight deer [dames de sawagyn]. And other lords gave them for the said feast a great sum of gold and much wine. And so the parliament finished without a

The political framework

119

grant of a tenth and fifteenth; but the ordinances of the parliament were defeated within six months, as you will hear later. 47. Demand for the recognition of Richard of Bordeaux as heir apparent, 1376 (Rot. Parl. II, 330 [French]) [The Black Prince died during the meeting of the Good Parliament, on 8 June 1376; and his next eldest surviving brother, John of Gaunt, was suspected—probably without foundation—of seeking to usurp the throne when Edward III should die, as he was expected to do very shortly. The commons therefore presented the following petition, as John of Gaunt was so unpopular.]

Also, the commons prayed humbly to our lord the king in the parliament that it would please their lord the king, as a great comfort to the whole realm, to cause the noble child Richard of Bordeaux, the son and heir of the lord Edward, lately the eldest son of our lord the king and Prince of Wales, whom God preserve, to come before parliament, so that the lords and commons might see and honour Richard as true heir apparent to the realm. This request was granted, and so Richard came before all the prelates, lords and commons in parliament on the Wednesday the morrow of St John the Baptist’s Day [25 June], the year abovesaid, by commandment and wish of our lord the king. And the Archbishop of Canterbury, who had been briefed by the king our lord to speak on his behalf, said that although the very noble and powerful prince my lord Edward, recently Prince of Wales, was departed and called to God, nevertheless the prince was as if present and not in any way absent, because he had left behind him such a noble and fine son, who is his exact image or true likeness…. And on this the commons all prayed with one voice that it might please their noble liege lord to grant to Richard the name and honour of Prince of Wales, in the same manner as the lord Edward his father held them when he was alive. To which the answer was given that this could in no way be done by the prelates and lords in parliament; on the contrary, it belonged clearly to the king to do the same with great solemnity and feasting. But the prelates and lords promised to make urgent representations to our lord the king in this matter. 48. The proclamation of a council for Richard’s minority, July 1377 (Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 64 [French], from Patent Roll, 1 Richard II, Pt I, m. 16) The king to all who shall see these letters, greeting. By the assent of the prelates, dukes, earls, barons, and others assembled with us in our council held at West-minster on the morrow of our coronation, we have ordained that twelve persons, that is to say, two bishops, two earls, two barons, two bannerets, and four bachelors, should be elected by us

English historical documents

120

and them as our counsellors in our affairs, touching the estate, honour, and profit of our realms, lordships and lands, to aid our chancellor and treasurer, and that the said counsellors thus to be elected should have, after their election, our letters patent commissioning them to carry out and execute these matters; and that the said chancellor and treasurer should duly put into execution the things which shall be ordained by them and by the said elect, or by the majority of them. Whereupon the following men were elected by us and by the prelates and lords abovesaid: The honourable fathers in God, William, Bishop of London, and Ralph, Bishop of Salisbury; Our dear and faithful cousins, Edmund Earl of March and Richard Earl of Arundel; And our dear and faithful William, Lord Latimer and John, Lord Cobham, Barons; Roger Beauchamp and Richard Stafford, Bannerets, And John Knyvet, Ralph Ferreres, John Devereux, and Hugh Segrave, Bachelors. Which men were sworn in our presence as our counsellors to do and execute the said things, in the form abovesaid, as long as it should be our pleasure. We, wishing the said ordinance to be put into effect, have constituted and assigned the abovenamed, thus elected, as our councillors to do and execute the said matters, according to the form of the ordinance abovenamed, and especially, whereas, because of certain great and pressing demands, touching the safety and necessary defence of our realm of England, which demand great expenditure, we need at once certain sums of money, we constitute and assign, by this present letter, the said elect our counsellors, or six of them, together with the chancellor and treasurer abovesaid, to borrow, in our name, whatever sums of money, for our needs, by way of prest, engagement, or obligation, or in any other manner, as shall seem best to them, and from whatsoever persons that they can; and so we shall hold firm and agreeable whatever the said elected counsellors, together with the chancellor and treasurer or the greater part of them, shall do in our name, as stated above, in each and all of the aforesaid matters, and we wish that it should be strictly observed. In witness of which thing we have caused to be drawn up these our letters patent to continue at our pleasure. Given at our palace of Westminster, 20th July. By writ of the king himself under the signet. 49. The case of Hawley and Shakell (i) Fourteenth-century chivalry, 1377–9 (Thomas Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1863), I, 411 [Latin]) Robert Hawley and John Shakell, two esquires, had captured the count of Denia, a Spanish grandee, at the battle of Nájera. The count was allowed to go home on leaving his eldest son Alphonso as a hostage. In 1377 the money was said to be ready, and the English government therefore tried to get possession of the hostage. Hawley

The political framework

121

and Shakell refused to give him up, whereupon they were imprisoned in the Tower of London. Some months later they escaped and took sanctuary at West-minster. The Constable of the Tower followed them in force. Shakell was recaptured; but Hawley resisted and was killed in the choir of the Abbey, during the celebration of High Mass. Shakell remained in the Tower until 1379, when he came to terms with the government, and agreed to give up his hostage in return for his own release.

And it was moreover ordained that the lord king would give to the same John, for the possession of the aforesaid captive, lands to the value of 100 marks a year, and 500 marks in cash; and that the lord king would from the royal revenues found a chantry for the souls of those whom his servants had killed in the aforesaid church, the chantry to consist of five priests, to last in perpetuity. When these conditions had been established, the hostage was given up to the king and John Shakell was restored to his former liberty. Ordered to produce his captive, he astonished everyone by offering his servant, who had stood by him and waited on him in the manner of a servant in all his tribulations…and the hostage had waited on Shakell so faithfully, that he could well be taken to be his hired servant. One could then perceive among the English a great and shamefaced confusion at the spectacle of so much constancy in a man…everyone was asking each other which among them could be found like him, who could be injured and yet not retaliate, a man who could have been regarded as an honourable lord by the king and magnates of the realm; yet out of regard for the faith which he owed to his masters, he rejected all these things and when at last his masters were oppressed, he almost bowed his head to their swords out of consideration for his oath. [For the record of the case in the Court of Chivalry, to which the dispute over Denia’s ransom gave rise after Hawley’s death, see A.Rogers, “Hoton v. Shakell: A Ransom Case in the Court of Chivalry, 1390–5”, Nottingham Medieval Studies, 6 and 7 (1962 and 1963). Very few documents of the court have survived. Mr Rogers prints his account from Westminster Abbey Muniments 5958.] (ii) John Wyclif’s views on sanctuary, 1378 (The Anonimalle Chronicle, ed. V.H.Galbraith, 123 [French]) The chronicler has given an account of the violation of the sanctuary of Westminster Abbey in the case of Hawley and Shakell, and of the estrangement which ensued between the abbot and the royal court when the abbot excommunicated the murderers.

English historical documents

122

The king and his council thought of undoing all the royal franchise of Westminster and of taking away from the abbot all his temporalities for contempt because he was unwilling to deliver to the king the two esquires from his franchise; and the king’s council sent a message to the abbot that he had received the prisoner, about whom the dispute had arisen, against the king’s will when he could have had a ransom for him in aid of the realm, and that the abbot had no franchise to accept persons for debt or treason. The abbot therefore asked for time for consideration; and the king’s council granted him a day to make answer at the next parliament, to be held at Gloucester. To this parliament the abbot came and one day he went to the commons where they sat at their counsels in the chapter house, and showed them how their church was dedicated to St Peter the Apostle, and could not be reconciled by any bishop but the holy father the pope or his deputy and recounted to them how they were despoiled of the esquires and showed to them their charters of franchise, praying to them as a work of charity for remedy by their good counsel, so that redress and amends should be made to holy church for the harm that had been done, and restitution of the squire who had been dragged out of the church and imprisoned in the Tower of London. And because he had shown these matters to the commons, the king and his council were very angry, and much grieved against the abbot and convent. And at this time there was a great clerk of Oxford, master John Wyclyff by name, who had often preached in Oxford and determined that the king could take the possessions of possessioners to help him in his wars, and that no church had a franchise to receive a man for debt. Wherefore the king asked for the said master John to come to parliament, and, when he had arrived, on an appointed day he entered the chapter house to speak to the commons, having a doctor of laws with him, at the instigation of Sir Simon Brureley [Burley], then tutor to the king, and Sir Thomas Percy. And the said master John began to declare before the commons that the king and his council could safely and with a good conscience drag esquires out of holy church for debt or for treason, and that even God could not dispense for debt. And there were many orations with much clerical learning, and declarations of the same matter by these two, because there was no clerk of importance to argue against them, because it was done suddenly…. And therefore the king and his council were greatly heartened by their speeches, and the abbot and convent were greatly discomforted by the folly of the aforesaid clerks. 50. The Poll Tax of 1379 (Rot. Parl. III, 57 [French]) The Duke of Lancaster and the Duke of Brittany, each one

10 marks

Also, each earl of England

£4

Also, each widowed countess of England, the same as an earl

£4

Also, each baron and banneret, or knight of equal wealth

40s

Also, each widowed baroness shall pay as the baron, etc.

40s

Also, each bachelor and each squire who by the statute ought to be a knight

20s

The political framework

123

Also, each widowed lady, wife of a bachelor or squire, according to her condition

20s

Also, each squire of less estate

6s 8d

Also, each widow of such a squire or merchant of sufficient means

6s 8d

Also, each squire possessing neither land nor rent nor castles, who is in service or under arms

3s 4d

Also, the chief prior of the hospital of St John, as a baron

40s

Also, each commander of this order of England, as a bachelor

20s

Also, each other brother knight of the said order

13s 4d

Also, all the other brothers of the said order, each as a squire without possessions

3s 4d

Also, each justice, as well of one bench as the other, and those who have been justices of the same benches, and the chief baron of the exchequer, each

100s

Also, each sergeant and greater apprentice at law

40s

Also, other apprentices who follow the law, each

20s

Also, all the other apprentices of less estate, and attorneys, each

6s 8d

Also, the mayor of London, who pays as an earl

£4

Also, the aldermen of London, each as a baron

40s

Also, all the mayors of the large towns of England, each as a baron

40s

Also, the other mayors of the other smaller towns, according to the condition of their 20s, 10s, or estate mark And all the aldermen of the large towns, and the great merchants of the realm, pay as 20s bachelors Also, other merchants of sufficient means

13s 4d

Also, all the lesser merchants and artificers who have profit of the land, according to the condition of their estate

6s 8d, 3s 4d, 2s, 12d, or 6d

Also, each sergeant and franklin of the country, according to his estate

6s 8d or 40d

Also, the farmers of the manors, benefices, and granges, merchants of cattle and of other small merchandise, according to their estate

mark, 40d, 2s, or 12d

Also, all the advocates, notaries, and married solicitors pay as sergeants of the law, apprentices of the law, and attorneys, each according to his estate

40s, 20s, or

Also, married pardoners and summoners, each according to his estate

3s 4d, 2s, or 12d

Item, all the hostlers who do not belong to the estate of merchant, each according to his estate

40d, 2s, or 12d

Also, each married man, for himself and his wife, who do not belong to the above

4d

mark

English historical documents

124

named estates, above the age of sixteen, except veritable beggars And each single man and woman of such condition and above the said age

4d

Also, each foreign merchant, of whatsoever estate he may be, pays according to his condition as other residents. And these payments above named shall be levied from no person except in the place where he is living and nowhere else. And be it remembered that the sums above named which are not definitely determined shall be assessed at the discretion of the assessors and controllers appointed for this purpose. And that the collectors of the subsidy abovenamed shall have as the days of payment the feast of St John the Baptist next coming and the feast of St Peter ad Vincula next ensuing after that.

51. The Poll Tax of 1380 (Rot. Parl. III, 90 [French]) The declaration to our lord the king and his council by the commons of England on the matters with which the commons were charged in this present parliament, for various needs which were shown to them as well for the safety of the realm as for the keeping of the sea. In the first place the lords and commons are agreed that, for the abovesaid needs, contribution should be made by every lay person in the realm, both in franchises and outside, males and females alike, of whatever estate or condition, who has passed the age of fifteen years, of the sum of three groats, except for true beggars, who shall be charged nothing, always providing that the levy shall be made under the regulation and form that each lay person shall be charged equally according to his ability, and in the following manner: that is to say, that for the total sum to be accounted for in each township the well-to-do shall according to their ability help the less; so that the most affluent shall not pay more than the sum of sixty groats for himself and his wife, and no person shall pay less than a groat for himself and his wife; and that no person shall be charged to pay, except in the place where he and his wife and children dwell, or in the place where he remains in service. And that all artificers, labourers, servants, and other lay folk, as well servants dwelling with all prelates and temporal lords whatsoever, abbots, priors, clerks of the chancery, common pleas, king’s bench, exchequer, receipt and with all other officers, knights, squires, merchants, citizens, burgesses and with all other persons, should, each one of them, be assessed and taxed according to the value of their estate, and in the form aforesaid. And that commission should be given to suitable persons, as well of the shires as of the city and boroughs, to be collectors and controllers of the abovesaid sum, and that they should be sworn to act well and loyally in their offices. And it is not the intention of the said commons to make this present grant except solely for the sustenance of the Earl of Buckingham and the other lords and men in his company in Brittany, and for the defence of the realm, and keeping of the sea. And that this present grant should not be taken or levied in the form or example of any levy of groats before this time, but solely charged on persons who are now alive, so that two thirds shall be paid in the quinzaine of St Hilary next coming, and one third at the feast of Whitsuntide next following. And in any event none of the knights, citizens, or burgesses who have

The political framework

125

come to this present parliament should be made a collector or controller of the aforesaid sums, And that it should please our lord the king and his council to ordain for the said levy that the servants in the king’s household as well as those in the households of other lords throughout the realm should be equally charged, according to the intention of this grant. 52. The Peasants’ Revolt, 1381 (The Anonimalle Chronicle, ed. V.H.Galbraith, 134) In the year 1380, because the subsidies were lightly granted at the parliament of Northampton and because various lords and commons were advised that the subsidies were not duly or loyally levied, but commonly exacted from the poor and not from the rich, to the great profit and advantage of the collectors, and the deception of the king and the commons, the King’s council ordained certain commissions to make inquiry in each township how they were levied. One of these commissions was sent to Essex to a certain Thomas Bampton [i.e. John Bampton] steward of a lord, who was regarded as a king or great magnate in that area because of the great estate that he kept. And one day before Whitsuntide he held a court at Brentwood in Essex to make inquisition, and showed the commission directed to him to raise the money which was in default, and to inquire how the collectors had levied the subsidy. He had summoned before him a hundred of the neighbouring townships and wished to have from them a new subsidy, commanding the people of those townships to inquire diligently and to give their replies and to pay their dues. Amongst these townships all the people of Fobbing gave answer that they would not pay a penny more because they already had a receipt from him for the said subsidy. On this Thomas menaced them strongly, and he had with him two sergeants-at-arms of our lord the king; and for fear of his wrath the people of Fobbing took counsel with the people of Corringham, and the folks of these two townships made levies and assemblies, and sent messages to the men of Stanford-le-Hope to urge them to rise too, for their common profit. And then the men of the three townships came together to the number of a hundred or more and with one assent went to Thomas Bampton and roundly gave him answer that they would have nothing to do with him nor give him one penny. On this Thomas ordered the sergeants at arms to arrest these folks and put them into prison; and the commons rose against him and would not be arrested, but tried to kill Thomas and the two sergeants. On this Thomas fled towards London to the king’s council and the commons fled to the woods for fear of his malice and lay there a long time, till they were almost famished; and afterwards they went from place to place to stir up other people to rise against the lords and good folk of the countryside. And because of these doings of Thomas Sir Robert Belknap, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas of our lord the king, was sent to the shire with a commission of trailbaston, and indictments against various persons were laid before him, so that the people of the countryside were in such fear that they proposed to abandon their homes. Therefore the commons rose against him and came before him and told him that he was a traitor to the king and the realm, and that it was of pure wickedness and malice that he wished to put them in default by means of the false inquests made before him. And because of this evil they caused him to swear on the Bible that he would never again hold such a session nor act as a justice in such inquiries.

English historical documents

126

And they made him tell them the names of all the jurors, and they took all that they could catch and cut off their heads and cast their houses to the ground, and Sir Robert took his way home with all possible speed. And afterwards the commons assembled together before Whitsunday to the number of 50,000 and went to the manors and townships of those who did not wish to rise with them and rased their houses to the ground or set fire to them. At this time they caught three clerks of Thomas Bampton and cut off their heads, which they carried about with them for several days as an example to others; for it was their purpose to slay all lawyers and all jurors and all the servants of the king whom they could find. Meanwhile all the great lords of the countryside and other people of substance fled towards London and to other shires where they might be safe. At the same time the high master of the hospital of St John of Clerkenwell in London had a very beautiful and delectable manor-house in Essex, where he had ordered victuals and other neccessities to hold his chapter general, and it was well furnished with wines and was suitably appointed, as befits such a lord and his brethren. And at this time the commons came to the manor and ate the victuals and drank three tuns of good wine and rased the manor-house to the ground and set it alight, to the great damage and loss of the master. And then the commons sent various letters into Kent and Suffolk and Norfolk to urge them to rise with them; and when they had assembled they went about in many bands doing great mischief in all the countryside. After this on the Monday next after the feast of Whitsuntide [3 June] a knight of the household of our lord the king, Sir Simon Burley by name, had in his company two sergeants at arms of the king, and came on the Monday abovesaid to Gravesend and there challenged a man as being his serf. And the good folks of the town came to make a bargain for the man in civil fashion, because of their respect for the king; but Sir Simon would not take less than £300, a sum which would have been the man’s undoing. The good folks prayed him to lessen the sum, but they could not come to terms nor induce him to take a lesser sum, though they told Sir Simon that the man was a Christian and of good character and that therefore he ought not to be ruined for ever. But Sir Simon was very angry and irritable, and greatly despised these good folk, and for haughtiness of heart he bade his sergeants bind the said man and take him to Rochester Castle, to be kept in custody there; from which there came later great evil and mischief. And after his departure the commons began to rise, gathering to them the men of many townships of Kent. And at this juncture a justice was assigned by the king and council to go into Kent with a commission of trailbaston, as had been done before in Essex, and with him went a sergeant-at-arms of our lord the king, Master John Legge by name, carrying with him a great number of indictments against various folks of that area to make the king rich. And they would have held a session at Canterbury, but they were driven away by the commons. And after this the commons of Kent gathered together in great numbers day by day, without head and without chieftain, and on Friday before [a mistake for “after”, see E.H.R. XIII, 511] Whitsuntide came to Dartford; and they took counsel there and ordained that no one who dwelt near the sea in any place for the space of 12 leagues should come with them, but keep the coasts of the sea from the enemies, saying amongst themselves that there were more kings than one and that they would not suffer or have any king except King Richard. At the same time the commons of Kent came to Maidstone and cut off the head of one of the best men of the town, and rased to the ground various places and tenements of

The political framework

127

people who would not rise with them, as had been done before in Essex. And on the Friday following they came to Rochester and there met a great number of the commons from Essex. And because of the man of Gravesend, they laid siege to Rochester Castle, to deliver their friend from Gravesend, whom the aforesaid Sir Simon had imprisoned. They laid siege with energy to the Castle, and the constable defended himself vigorously for half a day, but at last, for fear that he had of such a multitude of men deaf to reason from Essex and Kent, he delivered up the castle to them. And the commons entered and took their companion and all the other prisoners out of prison: and those who had come from Gravesend repaired home with their fellow with great joy, without doing any more, but the men of Maidstone took their way with the other commons through the countryside. And there they made their chief a certain Wat Teghler of Maidstone to maintain them and be their counsellor. And on the next Monday after the feast of the Holy Trinity they came to Canterbury before the hour of noon, and 4,000 of them entered into the minster church of St Thomas and, kneeling down, they cried with one voice on the monks to elect a monk to be archbishop of Canterbury, “for he who is now archbishop is a traitor, and will be beheaded for his iniquity”. And so he was five days afterwards! And when they had done this, they went into the town to their fellows, and by one assent they summoned the mayor, bailiffs and commons of the said town and examined them whether there were any traitors amongst them; and the townsfolk said that there were three and named them. These three the commons dragged out of their houses and cut off their heads. And afterwards they took 500 men of the town with them to London, and left the others to guard the town. At this time the commons had as their counsellor a chaplain of evil character, Sir John Ball by name, who advised them to get rid of all the lords and archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, and most of the monks and canons, saying that there should be no bishop in England except one archbishop, and that he should be that archbishop, and that there should be no monks or canons in any religious houses save two, and that their possessions should be shared out amongst the laity. For these sayings he was esteemed amongst the commons as a prophet, and laboured with them day by day to strengthen them in their malice; and a fitting reward he had afterwards, for he was drawn, hanged, disembowelled, and beheaded as a traitor. After this the commons went to various towns and raised the people, whether they wished to do so or not, until they had gathered together fully 60,000. And as they journeyed towards London they encountered various lawyers and twelve knights of the king and the countryside, and they took them and made them swear to support them, or otherwise they would be beheaded. And they wrought much damage in Kent and especially to Thomas Haselden, a servant of the Duke of Lancaster, because of their hatred for the duke. They rased his manors to the ground and all his houses, and sold his beasts—his horses, oxen, cows, sheep, and pigs—and all his stores of corn, at cheap rates. And every day they wanted to have his head and that of Sir Thomas Orgrave, clerk of the receipt and sub-treasurer of England, And when the king heard of their doings he sent his messengers to them on the Tuesday next after Trinity Sunday, to ask them why they were behaving in this fashion and why they were raising a rebellion in his land. And they returned answer by the messengers that they were rising to deliver him and to destroy the traitors to him and to his kingdom. The king sent again to them to bid them cease their doings, in reverence for him, until he could speak with them, and he would

English historical documents

128

make reasonable amends, according to their will, of all that was amiss; and the commons begged him, by the said messengers, that he would be pleased to come and talk with them at Blackheath. And the king sent again the third time to say that he would willingly come next day at the hour of prime to hear their purpose; and then the king, who was at Windsor, removed with all speed to London. At this time the mayor and good folk of London came to meet him and conduct him safely to the Tower of London; there all the council and all the lords of the countryside round about assembled, that is, the Archbishop of Canterbury, chancellor of England, the Bishop of London, the Master of the Hospital of St John of Clerkenwell, then treasurer of England, and the Earls of Buckingham, Kent, Arundel, Warwick, Suffolk, Oxford, Salisbury and other persons to the number of 600. And on the vigil of Corpus Christi Day [12 June] the commons of Kent came to Blackheath, three leagues from London, to the number of 50,000, to await the king’s arrival, and they displayed two banners of St George and forty pennons and the commons of Essex came to the other side of the water to the number of 60,000 to help them and hear the king’s response. And on the Wednesday the king who was at the Tower of London, thinking to settle the affair, caused his barges to be assembled and took with him in his barge the archbishop and the treasurer and others of his council and four other barges for his retinue, and went to Greenwich, three leagues from London; and there the chancellor and treasurer warned the king that it would be too great a folly to go to them, for they were men without reason, and had not the sense to behave properly. But as the king, by the advice of the chancellor and treasurer, would not come to the commons of Kent, they sent a petition to him requiring him to grant them the heads of the Duke of Lancaster and fifteen other lords, of whom fourteen [?three] were bishops present with him in the Tower of London; and these were their names—Sir Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor of England, Sir Robert Hales, Prior of the Hospital, treasurer of England, the Bishop of London, Sir John Fordham, clerk of the privy seal and Bishop-elect of Durham, Sir Robert Belknap, chief justice of the common pleas, Sir Ralph Ferrers, Sir Robert Plessington, chief baron of the exchequer, John Legge, sergeant-at-arms of the king, and Thomas Bampton aforesaid and others. And to this the king would not agree, wherefore they sent again to him a yeoman, praying that he would come and speak with them; and he said that he would gladly do so, but the chancellor and treasurer gave him contrary advice, telling them that if they wished to come to Windsor the following Monday, they should have there a suitable answer. And the commons had among themselves a watch word in English, “With whom hold you?” and the response was, “With king Richard and with the true commons”, and those who could not or would not so answer were beheaded and put to death. And at this time there came a knight with all the haste that he could, crying to the king to wait; and the king was startled at this and awaited his arrival to hear what he had to say. And the knight came to the king to tell him that he had it from a servant who had been in the hands of the rebels that day, that if the king should come to them, all the land would be lost, for they would never let him loose for any consideration, but would take him round with them through all England, and that they would make him grant all their demands, and that their purpose was to slay all the lords and ladies of great renown, and all the archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, monks, and canons, parsons, and vicars, by the advice and

The political framework

129

counsel of the aforesaid Sir John Ball. Therefore the king returned to London as fast as he could and arrived at the Tower at the hour of terce. And at this time the yeoman already mentioned above hastened to Blackheath crying to his fellows that the king had gone, and that it would be well for them to press on to London to pursue their purpose. On the same day of Wednesday before the hour of vespers the commons of Kent came, as many as 60,000 of them, to Southwark, where the Marshalsea was, and they broke and threw down to the ground all the buildings of the Marshalsea, and took out of prison all the prisoners who were held captive there for debt or felony. And they levelled to the ground a fine house belonging to John Imworth, then marshal of the marshalsea of the king’s bench, and keeper of the prisoners of the said place, and all the houses of the jurors and quest-mongers belonging to the marshalsea, throughout that night. At the same time the commons of Essex reached Lambeth, near to London, a manor of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and entered the buildings there, and destroyed many goods of the archbishop, and burnt all the books of register and rolls of remembrance of the chancery which they found there. And the next day, Thursday, which was the feast of Corpus Christi, the 13th day of June, with the dominical letter F, the commons of Essex went in the morning to Highbury, two leagues north of London, a very fine manor-house of the Master of the Hospital of St John of Clerkenwell, and they set it on fire, to the great damage and loss of the Hospitallers of St John. Some of them then returned to London, while the others stayed in the open fields all night. And this same day of Corpus Christi, in the morning, the commons of Kent pulled down a house of ill fame near London Bridge, which was in the hands of Flemish women and they had the house to rent from the mayor of London. And then they surged on to the bridge to pass into the city, but the mayor was just before them and had the chain drawn up and the drawbridge lifted to stop their passage. And the commons of Southwark rose with them and cried to the keepers of the bridge to lower the drawbridge and let them in, or otherwise they would be undone. And for fear of their lives the keepers let them enter, though it was against their will. At this time all the religious and the parsons and the vicars of London were going devoutly in procession to pray God for peace. And at the same time the commons took their way through London and did no harm or molestation until they came to Fleet Street. (And at the same time, as was said, the commons of London set fire to the beautiful manor-house of the Savoy before the arrival of the commons from the country.) And in Fleet Street the said commons of Kent broke open the Fleet prison and released all the prisoners and let them go whither they would. Then they stopped and threw to the ground, and set fire to, the shop of a certain chandler and another shop of a certain blacksmith, in the middle of the said street. There there shall never again be houses, it is said, to deface the beauty of the street. And after that they went to the Temple to destroy the tenants of the Temple, and they cast down the house to the ground and tore off all the tiles, so that the buildings were in a bad state, without any roofing. And they went into the Temple Church and took all the books and rolls and remembrances which were in the cupboards of the apprentices at law in the Temple, and carried them into the highway and burnt them. And then they went towards the Savoy, destroying all the buildings belonging to the Master of the Hospital of St John. And then

English historical documents

130

they went to the house of the Bishop of Chester,1 near the church of St Mary-le-Strand, where was dwelling Sir John Fordham, the elect of Durham, and clerk of the privy seal, and they rolled barrels of wine out of his cellar, and drank their fill, and departed without doing further damage. And then they went towards the Savoy and set fire to various houses of various folks and questmongers on the western side, and at last they came to the Savoy. They broke open the gates and entered the place and came to the wardrobe, and they took all the torches they could find and set fire to all the sheets and coverlets and beds and head boards of great worth, for their whole value amounted, it was said, to 1,000 marks. And all the napery and other things which they could find they carried into the hall and set it on fire with their torches. And they burnt the hall and chambers and all the buildings within the gates belonging to the said palace or manor, which the commons of London had left unburnt. And, as was said, they found three barrels of gunpowder which they took to be gold or silver, and they threw them on the fire, and this powder blew up high and set the hall in a greater blaze than before, to the great loss and damage of the Duke of Lancaster. The commons of Kent got the blame, but some said that the Londoners were really responsible, because of their hatred for the said duke. Then one party of them went towards Westminster and set on fire a house belonging to John Butterwick, under-sheriff of Middlesex, and other houses of various people, and broke open the prison at Westminster and brought out all the prisoners condemned by the law, and afterwards they returned to London by way of Holborn, and in front of St Sepulchre’s Church they set fire to the houses of Simon Hosteler and several other houses, and broke open Newgate prison and let loose all the prisoners, for whatever cause they had been imprisoned. The same Thursday the commons went to St Martin-le-Grand and tore away from the high altar a certain Roger Legett, a great “assizer” and took him to Cheap-side and beheaded him there; on the same day eighteen others were beheaded in various parts of the town. At the same time a great body of commons went to the Tower to speak to the king, and could not gain speech with him, wherefore they laid siege to the Tower from the side of St Katherine’s, towards the south. And another part of the commons who were in the city went to the hospital of St John of Clerken-well and on the way burnt the house and buildings of Roger Legett the questmonger who had been beheaded in Cheapside and all the rented houses and tenements of the hospital of St John that they could; and afterwards they came to the beautiful priory of the said hospital and set on fire several fine and desirable buildings in the same priory, a great and horrible piece of damage for all time to come; and then they returned to London to rest or to do more mischief. At this time the king was in a turret of the great Tower of London, from which he could see the manor of the Savoy and the hospital of Clerkenwell, and the buildings of Simon Hosteler near Newgate, and John Butterwick’s house, all on fire at once. And he called all his lords about him to his chamber and asked their advice as to what he should do in such an emergency; and none of them could or would give him any counsel. Wherefore the young king said that he would send to the mayor of the city to bid him order the sheriffs and aldermen to have it cried round their wards that all men between the ages of 15 and 60, on pain of life and members, should go on the morrow, Friday, to Mile End and meet him at seven in the morning. He did this so that all the commons who 1

This was a frequent description in this period of the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield.

The political framework

131

were surrounding the Tower would raise the siege and go to Mile End to see and hear him, and all those who were in the Tower could go away safely whither they would and save themselves; but it was of no avail, for the besieged did not have the good fortune to get away. After this on the same Thursday, the feast of Corpus Christi, the king being in the Tower pensive and sorrowful, climbed up into a little turret towards St Katherine’s, where were lying a great number of the commons, and caused a proclamation to be made to them that they should all go home in a peaceful manner and that he would pardon them all manner of trespasses. But all cried with one voice that they would not leave before they had taken the traitors who were in the Tower and had been given charters to be free of all manner of serfdom and had been granted all the items which they wished to ask. And the king graciously granted all and caused a clerk to write a bill in their presence in this style: “Richard, king of England and of France, greatly thanks his good commons because they have such a great desire to see and hear their king, and pardons them for all manner of trespasses and misprisions and felonies committed until now, and wills and commands that now everyone should hasten to his own home and wishes and commands that each one should put his grievances into writing, and cause them to be sent to him, and he will provide, with the aid of his loyal lords and of his good counsel such remedy as shall be profitable for him and them and for the realm.” And to this document he set his signet seal in their presence, and sent out the said bill with two of his knights to them before St Katherine’s and caused it to be read to them. And the knight who read it stood up on an old chair before the others so that all could hear. All this time the king was in the Tower in great distress of mind. And when the commons had heard the bill, they said that this was nothing but trifles and mockery; wherefore they returned to London and caused it to be cried throughout the city that all lawyers and all the officials of the chancery and exchequer and all those who could write a writ or a letter should be beheaded, wherever they could be found; and at this time they burnt several more houses in the city. And the king climbed to a high garret of the Tower and watched the fires, and then came down again and sent for the lords to have their counsel; but they did not know how to advise him and all were wondrously abashed. Next day, the Friday, the commons of the countryside and the commons of London assembled in fearful strength to the number of 100,000 or more, besides some four score or more who stayed on Tower Hill to watch those who were in the Tower. And some went to Mile End towards Brentwood to await the coming of the king, because of the proclamation he had made, and the others came to Tower Hill. And when the king knew that they were there, he sent them orders by a messenger to join their friends at Mile End and he himself would join them soon. And at this time of the morning he advised the Archbishop of Canterbury and the others who were in the Tower to go down to the Little Water Gate and take a boat and save themselves. And the archbishop did so, but a wicked woman raised a cry against him and he had to return to the Tower, to his destruction. And by seven o’clock the king came to Mile End and with him his mother in a whirlecote [a wheeled carriage] with the Earls of Buckingham, Kent, Warwick, and Oxford, Sir Thomas Percy, Sir Robert Knolles, the mayor of London, and many knights and squires; and Sir Aubrey de Vere carried the king’s sword. And when he was come the commons all knelt down to him, saying; “Welcome, our lord, King Richard, if it pleases you, and we will have no other king but you.” And Wat Tyghler, their leader and chief, prayed to

English historical documents

132

him in the name of the commons that he would suffer them to take and hold all the traitors who were against him and the law; and the king granted that they should take at their wish those who were traitors and could be proved traitors by the law. And Wat and the commons were carrying two banners and many pennons and pennon-celles, while they made their petition to the king. And they required that no man should be a serf, nor do homage or any manner of service to any lord, but should give fourpence rent for an acre of land, and that no one should serve any man but at his own will, and on terms of regular covenant. And at this time the king caused the commons to arrange themselves in two lines, and caused a proclamation to be made before them that he would confirm and grant them their freedom and all their wishes generally, and that they should go through the realm of England and catch all traitors and bring them to him in safety and that he would deal with them as the law required. Under colour of this grant Wat Tyghler and the commons took their way to the Tower, to seize the archbishop and the others, the king being at Mile End. At this time the archbishop was chanting his mass devoutly in the Tower and shrove the prior of the hospital of Clerkenwell and others, and then he heard two masses or three, and chanted the commendation and the placebo and the dirige and the seven psalms and the litany; and when he was at the words “All saints, pray for us” the commons burst in and dragged him out of the chapel of the Tower, and struck and hustled him villainously, as they did the others who were with him and dragged them to Tower Hill. There they cut off the heads of Master Simon Sudbury, Arch-bishop of Canterbury, and of Sir Robert Hales, Prior of the Hospital of St John of Clerkenwell, Treasurer of England, Brother William Appleton, a great physician and surgeon, and one who had great influence with the king and the Duke of Lancaster. And some time afterwards they beheaded John Legge, the king’s sergeant-at-arms, and with him a juror; and at the same time the commons proclaimed that anyone who could catch any Fleming or other alien of any nation might cut off his head, and so they did after this. And then they took the heads of the archbishop and the others and stuck them on wooden poles and carried them before them in procession through the city, to the shrine of Westminster Abbey, in contempt of them and of God and of Holy Church, for vengeance descended on them not long afterwards. Then they returned to London Bridge and set the head of the archbishop above the bridge and the eight other heads of those that were murdered, so that they might be seen by all who passed over the bridge. And when this was done, they went to the church of St Martin’s in the Vintry, and found therein 35 Flemings, whom they dragged out and beheaded in the street. On that day were beheaded in all some 140 or 160 persons. And then they took their way to all the houses of the Lombards and other aliens, and broke into their dwellings and robbed them of all their goods which they could find. This went on throughout the day and the following night, with hideous cries and horrible tumult. At this time, because the chancellor had been beheaded, the king made the Earl of Arundel chancellor for the day and delivered to him the great seal, and throughout the day caused various clerks to write charters and patents and protections granted to the commons touching the matters before mentioned, without taking any fines for sealing or description. And on the next day, Saturday, a great number of the commons came to the abbey of Westminster at the hour of terce and there they found John Imworth, Marshal of the Marshalsea and warden of the prisoners, a tormentor without pity; he was near the

The political framework

133

shrine of St Edward, clinging to a marble pillar, as an aid and succour to save him from his enemies. And the commons wrenched his arms away from the pillar of the shrine and brought him to Cheapside and beheaded him. And at the same time they took from Bread Street a yeoman named John Greenfield because he had spoken well of Brother William Appleton and of other murdered persons, and brought him to Cheapside and beheaded him. All this time the king caused proclamation to be made round the city that everyone should go peacefully to his own country and his own house without doing any more evil; but to this the commons paid no heed. And on this same day, at three o’clock in the afternoon, the king came to West-minster Abbey, and some 200 persons with him. And the abbot and convent of the same abbey and the canons and vicars of the chapel of St Stephen came in procession to meet him, dressed in their copes and with bare feet, half way to Charing Cross, and they brought him to the abbey and the church and the high altar and the king made his prayer devoutly and left an offering for the altar and the relics. And afterwards he spoke to the anchorite and confessed to him and was with him for some time. And then the king caused a proclamation to be made that all those commons of the country who were still in London should come to meet him at Smithfield, and so they did. And when the king had come with his train he turned to the eastern side, near St Bartholomew’s, a house of canons; and the commons arrayed themselves on the west side in battle formation, in great numbers. At this moment the mayor of London, William Walworth, came up, and the king bade him go to the commons and cause their chieftain to come to him. And when he was called by the mayor, Wat Tyghler by name, of Maidstone, he came to the king in a haughty fashion, mounted on a little horse so that he could be seen by the commons. And he dismounted, carrying in his hand a dagger which he had taken from another man, and when he had dismounted he half bent his knee, and took the king by the hand, and shook his arm forcibly and roughly, saying to him, “Brother, be of good comfort and joyful, for you shall have within the next fortnight 40,000 more of the commons than you have now and we shall be good companions.” And the king said to Wat; “Why will you not go back to your own country?” And the other replied with a great oath that neither he nor his fellows would depart until they had their charter such as they wished to have, and such points rehearsed in their charter as they chose to demand, threatening that the lords of the realm would rue it badly if the points were not settled to their satisfaction. And the king asked him what were the points that he wanted, and he would have them freely without contradiction written down and sealed. And then Wat rehearsed points which were to be demanded; and he asked that there should be no law except the law of Winchester,1 and that there should be henceforth no outlawry in any process of law, and that no lord should have any lordship, except only to be respected according to their rank among all folks, and that the only lordship should be that of the king; and that the goods of Holy Church should not remain in the hands of the religious, nor of the parsons and vicars, and other churchmen; but those who were in possession should have their sustenance from the endowments and the remainder of their goods should be divided amongst the parishioners; and no bishop should remain in England save one, nor more than one prelate, and that all the lands and tenements now held by them should be confiscated and shared amongst the commons, saving to them a reasonable substance. And he demanded that there should be no more bondmen in England, no serfdom nor villeinage, but that all should be free and of one condition. And to this the king gave an easy answer, and said

English historical documents

134

that he should have all that could fairly be granted saving to himself the regality of the crown. And then he commanded him to go back to his home without further delay. And all this time that the king was speaking no lord nor any other of his council dared nor wished to give any answer to the commons in any place except the king himself. Presently Wat Tyghler, in the king’s presence, called for a flagon of water to rinse his mouth because he was in such a heat, and when it was brought he rinsed his mouth in a very rude and disgusting fashion before the king; and then he made them bring him a flagon of ale of which he drank a great deal, and in the king’s presence mounted his horse. At this time a yeoman of Kent, who was among the king’s retinue, asked to see Wat, the leader of the commons; and when Wat was pointed out to him, he said openly that he was the greatest thief and robber in all Kent. Wat heard these words and commanded him to come out to him, shaking his head at him in sign of malice; but the yeoman refused to go to him for fear of the mob. At last the lords made him go out to Wat, to see what he would do in the king’s presence; and when Wat saw him, he ordered one of his followers, who was riding on a horse carrying his banner displayed, to dismount and cut off the yeoman’s head. But the yeoman answered that he had done nothing worthy of death, for what he had said was true and he would not deny it, but in the presence of his liege lord he could not lawfully make debate without leave, except in his own defence; and that he could do without reproof, for if he was attacked he would strike back. And for these words Wat would have run him through with his dagger and killed him in the king’s presence; and because of this, the mayor of London, William Walworth by name, reasoned with the said Wat for his violent behaviour and contempt done in the king’s presence, and arrested him. And because he arrested him, the said Wat struck the mayor with his dagger in the stomach with great anger; but as God would have it, the mayor was wearing armour and took no harm. But like a hardy and vigorous man the said mayor drew his cutlass and struck back at the said Wat and gave him a deep cut on the neck and then a great cut on the head. And in this scuffle a yeoman of the king’s household drew his sword and ran Wat two or three times through the body, mortally wounding him. And the said Wat spurred his horse, crying to the commons to avenge him, and the horse carried him some four score paces, and there he fell to the ground half dead. And when the commons saw him fall, and did not know for certain how it was, they began to bend their bows and to shoot; wherefore the king himself spurred his horse and rode out to them, commanding them that they should all come to him at the field of St John of Clerkenwell. Meanwhile the mayor of London rode as fast as he could back to the city commanding all those who were in charge of the 24 wards to make proclamation in their wards that every man should arm himself as quickly as he could, and go to the king in St John’s Fields, where the commons were, for he was in great need and necessity. And at this time nearly all the knights and squires of the king’s household and many others, for fear that they had of this affray, left their liege lord and each went his own way. Afterwards when the king had reached the open fields he made the commons array themselves on the west 1

The most reasonable explanation is that Wat was demanding the abolition of all police laws that oppressed the peasantry, especially the hated Statute of Labourers of 1351. He was willing to allow Edward I’s great consolidating police statute, the Statute of Winchester of 1285, which was generally accepted as necessary.

The political framework

135

side. And soon the aldermen came to him in a body, bringing with them the wardens of the wards, by various routes, with a fine company of people well armed in great strength and they enveloped the commons like sheep in a pen. And when the mayor had sent the wardens to the king, he returned to Smithfield with a fine company of lances to make an end of the captain of the commons abovesaid. And when he came to Smithfield he could not find the said captain Wat Tyghler, and at this he marvelled greatly and asked what had become of the traitor; and he was told that Tyghler had been carried by some of the commons to the hospital of the poorfolks near St Bartholomew’s and was put to bed in the chamber of the master of the hospital. And the mayor went thither and found him and had him carried to Smithfield in the presence of his fellows and there he was beheaded. And so ended his wretched life. And the mayor caused his head to be set upon a pole and carried before him to the king who still abode in the fields. And when the king saw the head he had it brought near him to abash the commons and thanked the mayor warmly for what he had done. And when the commons saw that their leader, Wat Tyghler, was dead in such a manner, they fell to the ground among the wheat like men discomforted, crying to the king for mercy for their misdeeds. And the king benevolently granted them mercy and many of them took to flight; and the king ordered two knights to lead the rest of the Kentishmen through London and over London Bridge without doing them any harm, so that each of them could go in peace to his own home. Then the king ordered the mayor, William Walworth, to put on his head a helmet in anticipation of what was going to happen; the mayor asked why he was to do so and the king replied that he was greatly obliged to him and therefore was going to confer on him the order of knighthood. And the mayor answered that he was not worthy nor able to have or to keep up a knight’s estate, for he was but a merchant and had to live by merchandise; but at last the king made him put on the helmet and took a sword in both his hands and dubbed him knight resolutely and with great goodwill. And the same day he made three other knights from among the citizens of London on that same spot, and these are their names-John Philipot [Philpott], Nicholas Brymber [Brember] and [blank in the MS.]; and the king gave Sir William Walworth £100 in land and each of the others £40 in land for themselves and their heirs; and afterwards the king took his way towards London to his wardrobe to ease himself after his great labours. Meanwhile a party of the commons took their way towards Huntingdon to pass towards the north in their malice and evil will, to ravage the land and destroy honest men; but there they were repelled and could not cross the bridge of the said town, because William Wyghmane, spigurnel1 of the chancery, and Walter Rudham and other good folks of the town of Huntingdon and of the country round about met them at the said bridge and killed two or three of them. The rest of them were glad to flee and went to Ramsey to pass thereby and they took shelter in the town and sent to the abbey for victuals to refresh and strengthen themselves; and the abbot sent them bread, wine, ale, and other victuals in great abundance, for he dared not do otherwise. And they ate and drank until they could consume no more and then they went to bed and slept until late in the morning, to their destruction; for the men of Huntingdon arose and gathered to themselves other folk of the countryside and suddenly came upon the commons at Ramsey and killed twenty four of them and put the others to flight without more ado; and many of them were slain as they fled through the countryside, and their heads were set on high trees as example to others.

English historical documents

136

At the same time the commons had risen in Suffolk in great numbers and had as their captain a Suffolk chaplain, Sir John Wraw by name, who brought more than 10,000 men; and they robbed many honest folk and cast their houses down to the ground and set them on fire and Sir John took the valuables of gold and silver for his own use. And they came to Cambridge and there did great damage by burning houses and then betook themselves to Bury and found in the town a justice, Sir John Cavendish, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, and brought him to the pillory and cut off his head and set it on the pillory. And afterwards they dragged to the pillory the prior of that abbey, a good and wise man and an excellent singer, and a certain monk with him, and cut off their heads, and set them on poles before the pillory, that all who passed along that street might see them. And Sir John, the leader, was afterwards taken as a traitor and brought to London, and condemned to death, and was drawn, hanged, disembowelled, and beheaded. At the same time there were great levies in Norfolk and the rebels did great harm throughout the countryside; and therefore the Bishop of Norwich, Sir Henry Despenser, sent his letters to the commons to bid them cease their malice and go to their own homes, without perpetrating any more evil deeds. But they would not do so, and went throughout the countryside, destroying and despoiling many towns and houses of many folks. At this time they met a hardy and vigorous knight, Sir Robert Hall by name, but a great thief and brawler, and they cut off his head. Wherefore the said bishop, gathering to himself many men at arms and archers, assailed them at various places, wherever he could find them, and captured many of them; and the bishop first confessed them and then beheaded them for their evil deeds. And so the commons scattered through the countryside for default and mischief and for fear that they had of the king and the lords and took to flight like beasts that run to earth. Afterwards the king sent out his messengers into various districts to take the evil doers and put them to death; and many were taken and hanged in London and other cities and towns in the south country. And finally, as God willed, the king saw that too many of his lieges would be undone and too much blood spilt, so he took pity in his heart, and discussed with his councillors. And it was ordained with their assent that the commons ought to have grace and pardon for their misdeeds, on condition that they should never rise again, on pain of loss of life and members, and that each of them should have a charter of pardon and pay to the king as fee for his seal twenty shillings, to make him rich. And so ended this wicked war. 53. John Ball (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 32 [Latin]) A this time John Ball, priest, who had been taken by the men of Coventry and brought to St Albans to the king’s presence, whose majesty he was convicted of having shockingly injured, and who had confessed to the most wicked crimes, was sentenced by the same Robert [Tresilian, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench] to be drawn, hanged, beheaded, disembowelled and quartered. His death was delayed until Monday by the intervention of the lord William, Bishop of London, who, solicitous for the welfare of his soul, besought 1

The official sealer of writs for the chancery.

The political framework

137

for him the time for repentance. For twenty years and more this man had been always preaching in various places those things which he knew would be pleasing to the common people, speaking evil both of ecclesiastical and of temporal lords, and had won the goodwill of the common people rather than merit in the sight of God. For he taught the people that tithes ought not to be paid unless he who gave them should be richer than the vicar or rector who received them. He also taught that tithes and oblations ought to be withheld if the parishioner was known to be a better man than his priest. He also taught that no one is fit for the kingdom of God unless he is born in matrimony. He taught, moreover, the perverse doctrines of the perfidious John Wyclif, his opinions and insane follies, with many other things which it would be tedious to recite. Wherefore, being forbidden by the bishops to preach in churches, he began to preach in streets and villages and in the open fields. Nor did he lack hearers among the common people, whom he was always striving to entice to his sermons by slander of the prelates and by pleasing words. At last having been excommunicated because he would not desist, he was imprisoned, whereupon he prophesied that he would be freed by twenty thousand friends; this afterwards happened in the aforesaid rebellion, when the commons broke open all the prisons and set the prisoners free. And when he had been thus set free, he followed them, stirring them up to perpetrate many evil things, and preaching that such things must surely be done. And so that he might infect the more with his doctrines, at Blackheath where twenty thousand of the commons were gathered together, he began a sermon in this manner:

When Adam delved, and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman? And continuing the sermon thus begun, he strove, by the words of the proverb that he had taken for his theme, to introduce and to prove that from the beginning all men were created equal by nature, and that servitude had been introduced by the unjust oppression of wicked men, against God’s will; because, if it had pleased him to create serfs, surely in the beginning of the world he would have decreed who was to be a serf and who a lord. Let them consider, therefore, that a time was now given them by God, a time in which they might be able to lay aside the yoke of servitude, if they wished, and enjoy their hope for liberty. Wherefore they should be prudent men, and, with the love of a good husbandman tilling his fields and uprooting and destroying the tares which are wont to choke the grain, they should hasten to do the following things. First, they should kill the great lords of the kingdom; second, they should slay the lawyers, judges, and jurors of the country; finally they should root out all those whom they knew to be likely to be harmful to the commonwealth in future. Thus they would obtain peace and security in the future, if, when the great ones had been removed, there were among them equal liberty and nobility and like dignity and power. When he had preached this and much other madness, the commons held him in such high favour that they acclaimed him the future archbishop and chancellor of the realm; for they said he alone was worthy to be the metropolitan, for the present archbishop was a traitor to the realm and the commons, who should be beheaded wherever in England he could be seized.

English historical documents

138

Moreover, he sent a letter to the leaders of the commons in Essex, full of enigmatic statements, urging them to finish what they had begun. This was afterwards found in the tunic of a man who was about to be hanged for his part in the aforesaid rebellion, and the tenor of the letter was as follows: The letter of John Balle, sent to the Commons of Essex. John Schep, sometime priest of St Mary’s, York, and now of Colchester, greets well John Nameless, and John the Miller and John Carter, and bids them that they beware of guile in the town and stand together in God’s name; and bid Piers Plowman go to his work and chastise well Hob the robber and take with you John Trueman and all his fellows and more, and look sharp to your own head, and no more.

John the Miller hath ground small, small, small: The King’s Son of heaven shall pay for all, Beware or you will be in woe, Know well your true friend from your foe Have enough and say “Hello” And do well and better and flee from sin And seek true peace and hold therein, And so bids John Trueman and all his fellows. The said John Ball confessed that he had written this letter and sent it to the commons, and owned that he had written many more. Wherefore he was drawn, hanged, and beheaded at St Albans on the 15th of July, in the king’s presence; and his corpse was quartered and sent into the four parts of the kingdom. 54. Parliament supports the repeal of concessions made to the peasants and demands reforms in the government of the realm, 1381 (Rot. Parl. III, 100 [French]. For the statute annulling the charters, see Statutes of the Realm) II, 20–1) And the king ordered Sir Richard le Scrope, knight, then newly created chancellor of England to rehearse there their charge touching the points aforesaid. And so he clearly did; and in particular with regard to the repeal thus made of the grant of freedom and manumission of serfs and villeins of the land, it was again plainly asked on the king’s behalf of all those who were present in full parliament, whether this repeal pleased them or not. To which the prelates and temporal lords as well as the knights, citizens, and burgesses replied with one voice that this repeal had been well done; adding that such grant of manumission or enfranchisement of serfs could not be made without the assent of those who had the greatest interest. And to this they had never assented of their free will, nor would they ever have done so except to live and die the same day. And they humbly prayed to our lord the king, that is to say, the prelates and lords as well as the commons, that these manumissions and franchises thus made and granted by coercion, to

The political framework

139

their disinheritance and destruction of the whole realm, should be quashed and annulled by authority of this parliament, and the said repeal be affirmed as one well and justly made. And this was granted and agreed there by all with one voice. And then the commons prayed to our lord the king to let them have certain prelates and lords to discuss with them their said charges, because these matters touched very much the estate of the realm, and they greatly needed their advice. To which the answer was given that they should send in writing the names of those whom they wished to have, and should present them to the king, and the king would consider the request. [The commons asked for three bishops, the Duke of Lancaster, five earls, and eight lesser lords; and the king granted the request. After consultations with the deputation of prelates and lords, the commons came to the king in parliament and complained of the outrageous number of servants in the royal household, the distortion of justice by maintenance and embracery, the heavy burden of purveyance for the royal household, the weight of taxation, the oppressions of royal officials and the failure to defend the king’s subjects against the attacks of enemy ships, “on land and on sea”.] And it is to be noted that afterwards when the king had taken the advice of the lords of the realm and of the council on these requests made to him for the good of himself and of his realm, he willed and granted that certain prelates, lords, and others should be assigned to survey and examine in private council the estate and governance of the person of our lord the king, and also of his said household, and to advise themselves of the suitable remedies, if he should proceed with the matter of reform, and thereupon to make their report to the king. And the lords in parliament then declared to him that it seemed to them that, if reform of the government was to be made throughout the realm, it was fitting to begin with the principal member, the king himself, and then [pass] from person to person, as well those of Holy Church as others, and from place to place, from the highest degree to the lowest, sparing no person, degree nor office. And there were chosen to do this for the said household the following lords, that is, the Duke of Lancaster; the elect of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of Winchester, Ely, Exeter, and Rochester; the Earls of Arundel, Warwick, Stafford, Suffolk, and Salisbury; Lords Zouch, Neville, Grey de Ruthin, FitzWalter; Sir Richard le Scrope, Sir Guy de Brian and others. And on this charge they sat in private council several days, without doing anything else in parliament. And be it remembered, that the confessor of our lord the king was charged in the presence of the king and of the lords to abstain from coming to or remaining in the king’s household, except only at the four principal feasts of the year. And this was done by the assent of the lords, at the request of the commons, who had prayed to the king to have the confessor entirely removed from the king and from his office. (Ibid. 104) And it was reported to the commons on behalf of the king that the Earl of Arundel and Sir Michael de la Pole should be elected, ordained, and sworn, to attend the king in his household and to counsel and govern his person. And then the commons asked to be shown the appointment of the said nobles to this position, so that when they reported this in their own countrysides, the commons would be the better comforted.

English historical documents

140

55. John of Gaunt and the aftermath of the Peasants’ Revolt (i) The looting of the Savoy Palace, 1382 (John of Gaunt’s s Register, 1379–83 ed. E.C.Lodge and R.Somerville (Camden Society, 3rd Series, 1937), II, 241 [French]) John, etc. to our dear and well-loved auditors of accounts of our officers and servants who now are or who for the time being shall be, greeting. We order you that, in the next account which our very dear clerk Sir John de Norfolk is to render before you, you should cause him to be allowed £11 and 6d as the price of 427 lbs of ware lost in the Savoy by common rebels in the time of the “horrible rebellion”. And 105s as the price of 23 cart-loads of hay lost there at the same time. And a plate of silver and gilt, made for spices, marked with the arms of Lancaster, weighing by goldsmith’s weight 48s 4d and a little plate of silver with the arms of Sir John de Wynewyk and lost in the Savoy aforesaid at the same time. And these our letters shall be your warrant. Given, etc. at our castle of Pontefract the 8th day of September the 6th year of King Richard II. (ii) Tenants of John of Gaunt to be fined for damage during the Peasants’ Revolt, 1381 (Ibid. 351 [French]) John, etc., to all, etc., greeting. Know that we, confiding in the great loyalty and discretion of our very dear and very well beloved Edmund Gourney our steward in the county of Norfolk, Sir Adam Pope our receiver there, and Robert Kaylee, have ordained, constituted, and assigned three or two of them as our deputies to enquire well and diligently, by all good and reasonable ways that they best know for our honour and profit, of all the malefactors and their accomplices in our lordships in the said county, as well freemen and bondmen of our tenants…who have trespassed against us or done and borne to us and our grief, evil, and damage in the time of the horrible rebellion recently and to treat with the said malefactors of their misdeeds and trespasses made against us, according to their good and wise discretion, for reasonable amends to be made to us, and on this to report plainly and distinctly before us and our council at London on the quinzaine of St Hilary the full truth of what they have done and can find for us in this case…. Given, etc., at Fulham the 10th day of December, the 5th year of King Richard II. 56. The merchants refuse to raise a loan on wool for the government, 1382 (Rot. Parl. III, 123 [French]) The government tried to float a great loan of £6o,ooo on wool, to finance an invasion of France with 3,000 men at arms and 3,000 archers.

Alas, the Saturday following, when the commons had discussed a little this demand, the knights of the shires by themselves prayed to the lords of parliament, that since it was a

The political framework

141

matter known to all men that for making such a loan and arranging it, the chief means and aid was to make use of the merchants, that the merchants now present in parliament should be put in charge of raising this loan; for they knew more of this affair, and knew better how to handle it than any other estate in the realm. And on this the prelates and lords of the said parliament caused certain merchants to be specially named, to treat and discuss on their part, and by themselves, on this matter. They were charged there on their allegiance to do their utmost in the matter, so that a good conclusion could be made…. The merchants thus named and chosen were as follows:—Mr John Philipot, Mr Nicholas Brembre, John Haddeleye, Thomas Beaupyre, Hugh Fastolf, John Pulmond, Robert de Sutton, John Organ, William Grevell, William Spaigne, Stephen Heym, John de Gysburn, William More, vinter, and William Venour. And similarly the knights of the shires and the remnant of the citizens and burgesses were charged to treat and discuss on their part in the mean time. When the commons had long discussed and treated of the charge given to them, the knights of the shires reported to the lords of parliament that they did not know how any men would lend the sum demanded, nor any other great sum, except by the merchants. And the merchants fear to lend to their liege lord, or to do anything in this matter, whereby any man might afterwards accuse them, or any of them, of having tricked or deceived their said lord, as men formerly did in a similar case, as with Mr William de la Pole, John Wesenham, John Malewayn, Walter Chiryton, and several other great merchants, who for such loans made to the king in his great need for only a little gain have since been impeached for this cause and in other collateral ways, and in the end some of them have been utterly destroyed. Wherefore the said merchants now in parliament fear a similar impeachment if they make the said loan, and do not wish to act in any manner by way of a loan. But some merchants said that if the prelates and lords temporal, and other knights, squires, and clerks of the realm should wish on their part to lend to the king freely, with taking interest, any considerable sum, they would find among the merchants some who would do the same for sufficient surety; but they neither wish nor dare to lend anything in any other manner. 57. The bishop of Norwich’s “Crusade”, 1383 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 71, 76 [Latin]) The war with France was resumed in 1377, and the question was how to attack the French with most effect. In 1382 an opportunity seemed to have arisen for a campaign in Flanders, where the Flemings had driven out their count; he had taken refuge with the king of France, whereupon the Flemings appealed to the English government for help. The government decided to make use of the “Crusade” recently proclaimed against the French pope, Clement VII, by Urban VI. Tphe Bishop of Norwich, the lord Henry Despencer, a little before that time A received bulls from the lord pope directed to him, to enrol as Crusaders whomever wished to set out with him to France, for the destruction of the anti-pope, who called himself “Clement”, and to bless the war against all his adherents. He caused these bulls to be published in parliament, because they conferred on him great authority, and he caused exemplars of them to be distributed round about, and he ordered them to be affixed to the

English historical documents

142

doors of churches and the gates of monasteries for public inspection. Moreover he published there the bull which the pope sent to him, declaring his right and the injury which the anti-papalists had inflicted on him…. Moreover the lord pope conceded to those who were penitent and absolved and fought against the aforesaid Robert, the antipope, and the other aforesaid condemned persons, and their accomplices, in their own persons or by proxy, for one whole year…and also to those who would devote the right sums for expenses, according to their wealth and means, or would pay to the bishop or his deputy sufficient wages to keep suitable warriors fighting and staying there for the said time, that indulgence which is usually conceded to those setting forth to the relief of the Holy Land. (Ibid. 80) Hardly had parliament ended than bad news was brought from Flanders, about the raising of the siege of Audenarde and the death of Philip van Arteveldt, and the great confusion of the Flemish by reason of the war between the English and the French. For the King of France entered Flanders with all the militia of his land, and everyone else whom he could call from other regions to his aid. The men of Ghent went out quickly to bar his way, hoping for the help of their fellow cities and towns of Flanders; but this was the cause of a great disaster. [The men of Bruges came up as if to help them, but in fact attacked them in the rear, while the French pressed against them in front. The result was a disaster for the men of Ghent and their allies, of whom “25,000” were left dead on the field of battle. Hence the French were able to sweep over Flanders, where they maltreated even their own allies, the men of Bruges. If succour was to come to the Flemings, it could be only from England. Hence some wished to divert the bishop of Norwich’s crusade to Flanders, to help the Urbanist Flemings against the Clementine schismatics; but some wished any available money to be used to assist the duke of Lancaster’s project of an expedition to Spain. The issue was still undecided when parliament met on 23 February 1383; but many of the lords supported John of Gaunt, while the commons were strong for the bishop of Norwich. Walsingham, like the commons, strongly disliked John of Gaunt at this time.] (Ibid. 84) During Lent a parliament was held in London, in which for many days there was discussion about the power granted by a Supreme Pontiff to the Bishop of Norwich, and about him setting out against the schismatics; and there was vigorous disagreement on the issue. For one party, whose hearts God had touched, wished him to set out, as the champion of the Church, against the enemies of Christ; the opposite party opposed it, asserting that it was not safe to entrust the people of God and the realm to so inexperienced a priest; and there was open disagreement between them. Because of this the business of the pope and the whole Church was delayed until the Saturday on which special mention is made throughout the whole Church of the Cross and Passion of Our Lord. At last, after many evasions by the leaders of the realm…on that same Sunday, whereon Holy Church sings of the going forth of the royal banners, suddenly the whole party present in parliament which had stood out so strongly against the business of the Crusade, and the advancement of the faith of the Cross, struck by the thunder of that

The political framework

143

solemn antiphon “Behold the Cross of the Lord, flee, ye enemies!” gave a decision in favour of the crusading bishop. [Nevertheless there was still opposition to the expedition and none of the great lords would take service under Despenser. He, fearing that he might be stopped at the last moment, hastened his departure for Flanders.] (Ibid. 88) About the feast of the Holy Trinity, which fell this year in the middle of May, the crusading Bishop of Norwich, with certain of his army conducted by him, began their journey towards the sea, and crossing Kent in haste he turned aside to the manor of the Abbot of St Augustine’s, called “Northbourne”, there to await a favourable wind; while he was held up at this place, he received a royal writ, in which he was ordered to return to speak to the king, and learn his wishes. The bishop, fearing that if he returned to the king, he would be told to stay in England, and so all his labour, all his preparations, would be in vain, and not without scorn; so he chose to trust to fortune, with the small band which he had with him rather than by re-maining to become an object of envy. Therefore he caused a reply to be sent to the king, that he was all ready to set out on his expedition, and it was not fitting that he should be hindered by any talk, which might be of little or no consequence. It behoved him rather to set out on his prearranged journey, for the honour both of God and of the king. [At first Despenser won several successes, capturing Gravelines, Dunkirk, and several lesser towns; but when he laid siege to Ypres, the town put up a stout resistance, and Charles VI came up in person with a relief force far outnumbering that of the bishop. The English raised the siege, his captains abandoned town after town, and he himself fled home from the last stronghold, Gravelines, with the remnant of his army, landing in England on 29 September.] (Ibid. 104) Therefore the bishop…returned to England; and as soon as he had reached land, he went to the duke [of Lancaster], who was staying in that place; the duke scolded the bishop, finding fault where there was none, and sent him quickly away. He kept Sir Hugh Calverley with him for some time, however, showing him honour, because of former good military services. This then was the end of the expedition and the pontifical war. … In this parliament [October 1383] the king took the temporalities of the Bishop of Norwich into his hand, because he disobeyed his order, when, as we have seen, he recalled him by his writ, when he was ready to cross, but however the bishop was unwilling to come back. The knights who were with the bishop in Flanders were imprisoned, because they had disobeyed the bishop, and, what was worse, were traitors; but soon they were bailed out by their friends, making payment in gold. And this was the end and fruit of the present parliament.

English historical documents

144

58. An alleged hysterical outburst of Richard II, 1384 (Extract from Chronicle of the Monk of Westminster, printed in English Historical Review, vol. 68 (1953), 62–5, by L.C.Hector) In editing the Chronicle of the Monk of Westminster (in R.Higden, Polychronicon, Rolls Series (1886), IX, 33) J.R.Lumby misplaced a sentence, shown below in brackets. This has led historians of the last sixty years to ascribe to Richard II an hysterical outburst, whereas in fact what happened was that the friar shammed madness in order to extricate himself from a dangerous situation.

The aforesaid friar at once accused the Duke of Lancaster, and pressed his attack so savagely that the king ordered the duke to be killed without examination. But the nobles around the king flatly refused to allow this, saying that it was wrong for anyone to be condemned without judgement. After listening to them the king like a wise man promised to act according to their advice. (Therefore, according to a statement by Sir John Clanvowe, he at once acted like a madman, flinging off his cape and shoes and throwing them out of the window, and generally behaving like a madman.) And then he proceeded to ask the aforesaid friar whether anybody else knew of this matter, or whether he alone was aware of it. To this the friar replied: “Indeed Lord La Zouche has full knowledge of this matter, and I am well aware that this matter will lead to my death.” To which the king replied: “Take some parchment and draw up two indented bills, containing all the charges which you wish to make to me personally and hand one to me and keep the other yourself and we will then see what we will do about it.” But the friar was rather disconcerted because the Duke of Lancaster would be able to reply to his charges. Therefore, according to a statement by Sir John Clanvowe, he at once shammed insanity, flinging off his cape and shoes and throwing them out of the window, and generally behaving like a madman. When the king saw this, he ordered him to be kept in custody. 59. “The Way of Portugal”, 1386 (i) A treaty between Richard and John of Gaunt (Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 192 from French Roll, 46 Edw. III [French]) This indenture made between our very redoubted and sovereign lord, Richard, by the grace of God, King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, on the one hand, and the powerful prince, John, by the same grace, King of Castile and León and Duke of Lancaster, his uncle, on the other hand, witnesses that as the said John is disposed to go with a certain strength of men at arms and archers to the kingdoms of Castile and León to conquer them with the aid of God, King John has granted that if any agreement shall be discussed between him and his adversary of Spain, he will not make nor affirm any agreement with his said adversary,

The political framework

145

neither leaving to the adversary the crown of Spain nor any realm of it, if the adversary will not grant expressly by his letters and oblige himself to satisfy our said lord the king with the 200,000 gold doubles formerly offered to him in the name of the said adversary, as our lord the king can certify, or any other sum offered to the same lord the king on behalf of the adversary abovesaid, for the damages done to the kingdom of England and to its navy by the Spaniards; and the perpetual alliances shall be made between the said adversary, his heirs and successors, realms, lands, and lordships, and our lord the king, his heirs and successors, realms, lands, and lordships, according to the form of the alliances at present in force between our lord the king and King John; and also that in the event of such an agreement the said King John will be bound to repay to our lord the king, or to his heirs, the 20,000 marks lent to him by our lord the king, in aid of his abovenamed conquest, as soon as he can do so, and at the least within three years after the said agreement is made. In witness of which thing king John has caused his privy seal to be applied to the part of this indenture remaining in the possession of our lord the king. Given at Westminster, 7th February, in the year of the reign of our lord the king, Richard, the ninth. The 26th of May, in the 13th year of the king, at Westminster, being present there; the Duke of Guienne and Lancaster; the Duke of York; the Duke of Gloucester; the Bishop of Winchester, Chancellor; the Bishop of St David, Treasurer; Sir John Devereux, Steward; Sir Thomas Percy, Subchamberlain; Lord Lovell; Sir Richard le Scrope; and Sir Richard Atterbury broke the seal hanging from this indenture, wishing that the Duke of Guienne should be entirely discharged from the abovesaid obligation, because the king gave the duke permission, by his letters of privy seal, to treat and make agreement with the adversary of Spain, as the king recorded there by his own mouth. (ii) A treaty of perpetual alliance between England and Portugal, 1386 (Ibid. 200 [Latin]) … First, it is decided and finally agreed that for the public good and peace of the kings and their subjects of both kingdoms, firm, perpetual and true leagues, friendships, confederations and unions are in force and shall so remain in perpetuity between the two kingdoms aforesaid, and their heirs and successors, and the subjects of both kingdoms…so that each shall be bound to give aid and bring assistance to the other against all men who may live and die, who break the peace of the other or injure its status, with the exception of our lord the pope, Urban, and his successors who shall be canonically elected, the lord Wenceslas, by the grace of God King of the Romans and of Bohemia, and John by the same grace King of Castile and León, Duke of Lancaster, uncle to the aforesaid illustrious lord the King of England. Also, it is cordially agreed that if, in time to come, one of the kings or his heir shall need the support of the other, or his help, and in order to get such assistance applies to his ally in lawful manner, the ally shall be bound to give aid and succour to the other, so far as he is able (without any deceit, fraud, or pretence) to the extent required by the danger to his ally’s realms, lands, domains, and subjects; and he shall be firmly bound by these present alliances to do this; requiring however such reasonable expenses and costs as may be agreed between the two kings or their representatives or councils. Provided always

English historical documents

146

that the demand for aid or succour should be made six months before action on the part of the ally ought to be required. … Also, it is agreed that no truce or cessation of war by land or by sea should be concluded by either king or his heirs, unless both kings and their realms, lands, and domains and their subjects are included in the same; so that they may enjoy its benefits if it seems expedient to them. Given at Coimbra, 15th April, 1386, and at Westminster, 12th April, 9 Richard II. (iii) Promise of help from the king of Portugal for John of Gaunt’s expedition, 1386 [The ambassadors of the king of Portugal say:] Let it be known to you that by virtue of the power specially committed to us by our lord the king…we promise and concede that the aforesaid lord our King of Portugal will find and send next summer to the lord King of England ten galleys (at the expense and cost of our lord the King of Portugal) well armed in each galley with one master, three constables [alcaldos] six arrayers, two carpenters, eight or ten seamen, thirty crossbowmen, 180 rowers, and two stewards [sutanei]. These galleys shall come to England, and shall be bound to serve the King of England well and lawfully until Michaelmas next coming at the will and disposition of himself or his admirals, to destroy and confound his enemies, not seeking or demanding anything for the said service from the King of England…. Given at Windsor, 9th May, 1386. 60. The impeachment of Michael de la Pole and the appointment of the Commission of Reform, 1386 (Chronicon Henrici Knighton, II, 215 ff. [Latin]) The king held his parliament at Westminster on Monday the morrow of St Jerome [1 October] and ended it on the feast of St Andrew [30 November]. The Earl of Oxford, Marquis of Dublin, was made Duke of Ireland on the Feast of St Edward the Confessor. The king stayed at Eltham for the most part during this parliament. Therefore the magnates of the realm and the commons sent word to him, with common consent, that the chancellor and treasurer ought to be removed from their offices, because they were not profitable to the king and the realm; and also they had such business to do with Michael de la Pole which they could not transact with him as long as he remained in the chancellor’s office. The king was moved to anger and ordered them to be silent about this, and to make haste and proceed with the business of parliament, saying that he would not remove the meanest scullion in his kitchen from his office at their request…. But by common consent the lords and commons returned answer to the king that they could not and would not proceed in any business of parliament, nor speed forward the smallest point, until the king should come and show himself to them in parliament, and remove Michael de la Pole from his office. But the king sent back an order to them, that they should send him forty of the most experienced and worthy knights from the commons, to explain to him the wishes of them all. Then everyone feared for his own safety. For a dark rumour had reached their ears that he was plotting their destruction by guile. For it was said that when they went to their interview with the king, an armed band would

The political framework

147

attack and kill them, or that they would be invited to a feast and wicked armed men would rush out and slay them, or that they would be murdered in their lodgings in London…. Therefore acting on sound advice with the common consent of the whole parliament they sent lord Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, and Thomas Arundel, Bishop of Ely, to the king at Eltham, to greet him on behalf of the magnates and commons of parliament, reporting their wishes in words to this effect:– “O lord king, the lords and all the community of your parliament with most humble subjection commend themselves to your royal excellency, desiring a prosperous journey of your invincible honour against the power of the enemy and a most worthy bond of peace and affectionate heart with your subjects…. And on their behalf we intimate to you that we have an old law and a praiseworthy and approved custom, which cannot be gainsaid, that our king is to call the lords and magnates of the realm and the commons once a year to his parliament, as to the highest court of the whole realm, in which all justice ought to shine without any defect or blot, as the sun in the height of the sky, where sick and poor may seek infallible refuge for the refreshment of tranquillity and peace and the driving away of defects. More-over, the errors of the kingdom ought to be reformed there and wise counsel ought to be taken about the state and government of the king and the realm, and how the enemies of the king and the realm, both at home and abroad, may be destroyed…. They say also that they have another old statute which says that if the king stays away from parliament by his own will, without infirmity or other needful cause, but by his uncontrolled whim absents himself for 40 days as though heedless of the vexation of his people and their heavy expenses, then it is lawful to all and sundry of them without the king’s permission to return to their own homes…. And now for a long time you have absented yourself, for what reason we do not know, and refuse to come to them.” The king replied, “Now we think indeed that our people and commons intend to resist and rise up against us, and in view of such an attack it does not seem that we can do better than call on our cousin the King of France, to ask his counsel and aid against the plotters, and submit ourselves to him rather than surrender to our own subjects.” To this they answered: “That is no sane plan but rather one leading to inevitable ruin; for the King of France is your chief enemy and the mortal foe of your realm. And if he should set foot on your land, he would rather work to despoil you, seize your kingdom, and drive you from your throne, than lend you helping hands…. Recall to your memory therefore how your grandfather King Edward the third and your father, Prince Edward worked untiringly all their lives, in sweat and toil, in heat and cold, for the conquest of the realm of France, which was their hereditary right and is yours by succession after them. Remember also how innumerable lords and magnates and commons…have suffered death and mortal peril in that war . .. and how the commons of this realm have ceaselessly poured out countless treasures… for the maintenance of this war. And what is more seriously to be deplored is that in your day they have supported such burdens for the maintenance of your wars that…they can neither pay their rents for their tenements, nor help the king… and the kingdom is impoverished, the magnates are saddened, and the whole people is weakened. And these ills all come from evil counsellors of the king who govern the king and kingdom badly right until now. And unless we apply an aid and remedy quickly the kingdom of England will be sadly weakened in less time than we imagine.

English historical documents

148

“There remains one thing more for us to show to you on behalf of your people. It is permitted by another ancient law-and one put into practice not long ago, unfortunately— that if the king by malignant counsel or foolish contumacy or contempt or wanton will or for any other improper reason, should alienate himself from his people, and should be unwilling to be governed and guided by the laws and statutes and laudable ordinances with the wholesome counsel of the lords and magnates of the realm, but rashly in his insane counsels exercise his own peculiar desire, then it is lawful for them, with the common consent of the people of the realm to pluck down the king from his royal throne, and to raise to the throne in his stead some very near kinsman of the royal house….” By speeches such as these the king was recalled entirely from anger…and promised to come to parliament after three days…. The king therefore came to parliament as he had promised, and then lord John de Fortham, Bishop of Durham, was removed from the office of treasurer, and the Bishop of Hereford was appointed in his stead. Lord Michael de la Pole was removed in deep disgrace from the office of chancellor and Thomas Arundel, Bishop of Ely, was made chancellor by consent of parliament. After this the said Michael de la Pole was accused of many transgressions, frauds, falsehoods, and treasons, which he had committed to the grave prejudice and injury of the king and kingdom, and was convicted upon an amazing number of the aforesaid articles; but they were unwilling to punish him with death or to take away from him the name of earl, for honour of his knightly rank; so they condemned him to imprisonment in the castle of Windsor…. (Ibid. 223) The lords and magnates of parliament, seeing that by the greed of the king’s officers the goods of the kingdom were foolishly wasted, and the king was greatly deceived, and the people impoverished by heavy burdens, the revenues and profits of the lords and magnates much reduced, and the tillage of poor tenants abandoned to desolation in many places, and yet in contrast to all these the officers of the king were enriched beyond measure, chose fourteen lords of the realm who should exercise the government entirely; of these, three were the new ministers chosen by the parliament, i.e. the Bishop of Ely, chancellor, the Bishop of Hereford, treasurer, and lord John de Waltham, keeper of the privy seal, and eleven were other lords of the realm, i.e. the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, Edmund de Langley, Duke of York, Thomas de Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, the Bishops of Winchester and Exeter, the Abbot of Waltham Holy Cross, the Earl of Arundel, lord John Cobham, lord Richard le Scrope, lord John de Enrose [Devereux]. And they gave them licence and power to enquire, treat, define, and determine about all matters, causes, and complaints, arising from the time of Edward III, grandfather of King Richard, down to the present, as well within the realm as outside in distant parts. Similarly they were to inquire about the expenses of the king and his ministers and about all other things arising during the period assigned to them…and the king took an oath to abide by their ordinances, and to support them in carrying them out, and to revoke no article of their power; but to hold as firm and stable whatever the aforesaid counsellors should do and ordain during the time assigned to them. And if it should happen that all these fourteen cannot be present…at least six of them may, with the three aforesaid officers of the king, hear, inquire, discuss, and determine any cause whatever… affecting any matter whenever the king will have to act, as will appear more

The political framework

149

fully below. Similarly, it is ordained that if anyone shall counsel the king to revoke any of their powers…he shall be deprived of all his goods and possessions; and if he shall try to do so a second time, he shall be drawn through the city as a traitor to the king and kingdom, and be hanged. 61. The Earl of Arundel and the Duke of Gloucester win popularity by theirvictories over the French, 1387 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 153 [Latin]) Walsingham explains that whereas some of the contractors for raising troops used the opportunity to make as much money for themselves as possible, the Earl of Arundel and the Duke of Gloucester tried honestly to choose the best men, and to bring their forces to action with the enemy as quickly as possible.

Therefore they took to the sea, whether their men wished to go or not, with all their equipment, at a lucky hour, for not much time elapsed before they met their adversaries. On Sunday in the Vigil of the Annunciation of Our Lady, a great fleet of ships of Flanders, France, and Spain, crammed with men of war, and various machines of warfare, sailing from afar, were sighted by a look-out; this was soon announced to the admiral, the Earl of Arundel, and the news filled him and all his men with joy. The enemies suspected nothing, for, so it is reported, they had been assured by certain English traitors…that our fleet would not be ready before the month of May, and so they acted throughout rather unconcernedly, considering that they had the wind for conveyance and their arms for security. When they approached our ships, turning their sails as if they wished to attack us, our men pretended to flee, as if they were unequal to so much courage. Their ships, desiring more a safe passage than a battle, sailed by, whence it happened that when our men had secured the wind as they wished it, they followed their foes and rushed upon them suddenly, and began a fierce struggle. At last the victory fell to our men, with the capture of eighty ships, and much equipment of various kinds, although much of it was badly damaged. Some ships fled from the conflict, but the Earl of Arundel pursued them for two days and finally took them and added them to our fleet. The number of ships, great and small, was more than a hundred, and all were full of wine. The number of casks exceeded 19,000. This wine…was soon dispatched to Orwell and other ports of the realm…although the burghers of Middleburgh came to the Earl and begged him to let them buy the wine, and to give for each cask 100 shillings…. But the admiral replied, to be more just, that these wines ought to be enjoyed by those who had provided the expenses for him to put out to sea, i.e. the commons of England, rather than those who might carry them away for any sum whatsoever. The earl practised so much generosity, however, giving away to various persons that portion of the wine which fell to his lot, that not one barrel remained. Hence the praises of the earl grew immensely among the commons, because…he had preferred the common good to private gain; especially

English historical documents

150

because the commons felt that by the result they had not lost all that they had paid for his voyage. But the earl, desiring to serve the country more effectively with his ships…turned his sails towards the fortress of Brest, which seems to be the key to lesser Brittany. Against him the French or Bretons had built, or were to have built, two fortifications bigger and stronger than those overthrown and destroyed by the Duke of Lancaster when he was setting out to Spain. The admiral took one of them and…placed some of our men in it. The other fortification which was elaborately prepared but not yet built he burnt down by throwing fire on it…. He revictualled the fortress of Brest sufficiently for a whole year and gave the garrison clothes and shoes; and having made all other necessary arrangements returned to England with the blessing of the whole people. But those who were with the king, the Duke of Ireland, the Earl of Suffolk, and Simon Burley, with Richard Stury, were envious of such worth; they belittled his achievements to the king and said that he had done nothing of outstanding merit; unless, indeed, one counted his attack on the merchants, where it would have been more profitable to have kept their affection than to arouse their implacable hatred. 62. The development of the crisis of 1388, according to the Monk of West-minster (R.Higden, Polychronicon, ed. J.R.Lumby (Rolls Series, 1866), vol. 9, 103) [On the advice of some of his counsellors the king of England proposed to give back some castles and towns to France. It seemed to some to be better thus than to be continually taxed for wars; but this was one cause for the rising of the lords against the king. Another cause was the bad government of the king, and the king’s councillors were conspiring to procure the death of the opposition lords. The king asked the Londoners whether they were prepared to stand by him and they said they were. The king then summoned to him the Duke of Gloucester and the Earl of Arundel, but they said they were too afraid to come. Hence a proclamation was made to the Londoners that nobody should supply the Earl of Arundel with anything. Michael de la Pole urged the king to put the Earl of Warwick to death because he, with others, was said to be conspiring for the death of the king. The king did not consent but was advised to send for his retainers, whereupon the Duke of Gloucester and the other lords collected their forces on the north of London at Harringay Park in Middlesex where great numbers joined them. The king therefore summoned his counsellors and inquired into the meaning of this gathering of forces. The lords declared the realm to be in danger from the king’s evil advisers, and specially accused the Archbishop of York, the Duke of Ireland, the Earl of Suffolk, Robert Tresilian, and Nicholas Brembre. The king urged the lords to return to their allegiance, but they demanded that the accused should be put under arrest. They heard that Sir Thomas Tryvet had encouraged the king to take the field against them. At last the Duke of Gloucester and the Earls of Arundel and Warwick came to the king at Westminster, and expressed themselves in fear of their enemies round the king’s person. They requested the king to listen to a statement on their part from Sir Richard Scrope, who explained the cause of the rising of the lords, accusing the five persons and praying that they should be under arrest till the next parliament. But four of the five had

The political framework

151

absconded and only Nicholas Brembre could be taken. The king then asked the lord mayor what force he could supply but he pleaded that the citizens should not be called upon and asked to be relieved of his office. The king then summoned a council at Westminster, which the lords attended without delay; but the king did not put in any appearance. He showed himself very angry with the lords and tried to defend the Duke of Ireland.] When the lords heard how the king had uttered threats against them, they proposed to depose him, both because he had not kept the agreement made with them, and also because it appeared that he preferred to govern through false traitors rather than through his most faithful friends the lords and nobles of the realm. They were resisted by the Earl of Warwick, who opposed this view in the following speech. “Far be it from me,” he said, “that I should see such a glorious prince born from such a noble stock, and sprung from such a noble stem, to whom I and the others lords of the realm did homage and swore fealty at the coronation, now deposed and cast down…. Indeed such an act would be a disgrace to us and an eternal reproach to our posterity. Therefore withdraw your minds from this intention and give them to the virtuous work of resisting the Duke of Ireland, that perfidious traitor, who with a strong and powerful band coming from Cheshire through the middle of England is striving to reach the king, and may be bringing to us danger and ruin….” This advice pleased all the lords and they all agreed to do this, the contrary motions being entirely annulled. [The force was collected and set forth. The troops came to Northampton and proclaimed themselves faithful to the king, and only wished to drive away traitors. The lords heard of the Duke of Ireland being near Chepstow, so they spread their forces from Banbury to Bourton to bar the various routes to London. On 20 December the Duke of Ireland advancing along the Thames valley was stopped by the Earl of Arundel near Witney, near Radcot Bridge. There was a parley between the two parties and the supporters of the Duke of Ireland declared that they protected him by the king’s orders, but would give no help to traitors. The lords then bade them disperse and leave the duke. The other lords arrived with their forces, and the duke took to flight, losing some of his companions in swimming the Thames. He came hurriedly to the king in London, then fled across the sea. The lords received more offers of help than they could use. They determined to go to London to speak with the king. The king claimed to billet his forces inside the city as well as outside, but was resisted by the mayor and aldermen and gave way. The lords arrived in the north of London on 27 December and the mayor and aldermen went out to meet them.] (Ibid. 114) On the morrow the lords sent to the king asking him to give up those persons accused of treason or to give security to them with a warrant for charging such persons wherever they might be found in England. To this he replied that he did not know of such persons, nor was he willing to grant a warrant for them to be charged, for greater and many things had been done to them without a warrant. But the lords were not content with such replies, and said indeed that they wished to have a speedier conclusion on these matters. The more famous bishops of all England, the Duke of York, the Earl of Northumberland and the rest of the temporal lords were arbitrators and pacifiers between the king and the aforesaid lords, and morning and evening every day negotiated earnestly between them

English historical documents

152

for peace and concord. At last they induced them to come to the king to speak with him. Therefore the lords came on the sixth day after Christmas to the Guildhall of London where in the presence of the mayor and community of the city they declared how and under what form and wherefore they were doing these things and they rode there with a great multitude. When they had done this they came to the Tower of London with 500 men well armed, and seeing the king seated in the room next to the chapel on his throne under a canopy they made due obeisance, that is with a three-fold prostration to the ground. Then the king nodded to them and they modestly arose and started to converse with him. But the tumult of the people outside disturbed them and so with the king’s consent they went into the chapel, where they spoke strongly to the king about his conduct towards them; first, in contravening his own oath, not keeping those things which he had promised; secondly, plotting death at once against his nobility; thirdly, in defending false traitors to the destruction of himself and the subjugation of the whole kingdom. They said many more things there which have not been repeated in public. But finally they asserted that it was necessary for him to correct these errors and to submit himself to the rule of the lords. But if he refused to do this, he must know that his heir was undoubtedly of full age, and wished freely for the good of the realm and its salvation to obey them and to be governed under their rule. The king was stupefied and said that he wished to submit himself to them as was fitting in lawful things and to be governed by their wise counsel, saving his crown and royal dignity, and he affirmed this on his own oath. When this had been done, the lords said that he must not deceive them in any way in these promises nor henceforth change his will by force or guile in these matters, if he wished to enjoy his regality and crown in future. Therefore on the last day of December they came to Westminster where they discussed about those around the king, whether they were worthy to stay any longer with the king or not. And they investigated the number of officials existing in each office, and they found that there were 100 officials in the office of the buttery. Similarly in the office of the kitchen and all the other offices they found unnecessary officials; so they cut down the number and left a sufficient number in these offices. Also they deprived Sir Simon Burley of the custody of Dover Castle and Sir John Beauchamp, then steward of the household of the king, they removed from his office. And on the first of January they held a council at Westminster and caused many to be arrested, that is, Sir Thomas Tryvet, Sir Simon Burley, Sir John Beauchamp, Sir Nicholas Daggeworthe, Sir William Elmham, Sir James Berners, Sir John Salisbury and Sir Nicholas Brembre. Also Dom Richard Medford, Dom Richard Clifford, and Dom John Lincoln, clerks, who were all sent for safe custody to various fortresses by the aforesaid lords until the next parliament. 63. The Merciless Parliament of 1388 (Rot. Parl. III, 229 [French]) The appeal and process against Alexander Neville, Archbishop of York, Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland, Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk, Robert Tresilian, Chief Justice, Nicholas Brember Knight; and also against justices and others from 3rd February, 1387, to 12th May, 1388.

The political framework

153

Be it remembered that on Monday, 3rd February, the morrow of Candlemas, the 11th year of the reign of our lord the king Richard II, at the parliament held at Westminster at the same time, into the presence of the said king our lord in the White Hall came Thomas Duke of Gloucester, Constable of England, Henry Earl of Derby, Richard Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Thomas Earl of Warwick, and Thomas Earl Marshal, and delivered their petition, as appears in a certain roll sewn and annexed to this. To our very excellent and very redoubted lord the king and his council of this present parliament show Thomas Duke of Gloucester [Derby, Arundel, Warwick and Mowbray] that as the abovesaid [Gloucester, Arundel, and Warwick] as loyal lieges of the king, for his profit and that of the realm, on 14th November last past, at Waltham Cross, in the county of Hertford, before the very reverend father in God William Archbishop of Canterbury, Edmund Duke of York [and six others] then commissioners of our lord the king, ordained and made in the last parliament, appealed Alexander Archbishop of York, Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland, Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk, Robert Tresilian, false justice, and Nicholas Brember, false knight of London, of high treasons committed by them against the king and his realm…. Which thing was certified the same day to our lord the king by the said lords commissioners at Westminster, where several of the said appellees were present, fully informed and certified of the appeal…. Which appeal our lord the king accepted and on this assigned a day to the said parties at his first parliament which should be held at Westminster on the morrow of Candlemas next following, to take and receive then full justice on the appeal. And at the same time he took into his safeguard and special protection the said parties with all their people, goods, and chattels, and caused this to be proclaimed and published in his presence at the same time…. (Ibid. 233 [French]) Also, the malefactors and traitors, Alexander, Archbishop of York, Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland, Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk, and Robert Tresilian, by assent and counsel of Nicholas Brember, in full accomplishment of all their treasons and others, and to make the king believe in them and their counsel, and to show them more loyal to him and wiser than anyone else in his realm…caused the king to call before him, at various places within the realm, various justices and men of law…who were apposed and asked various questions, to which [they] answered in the following manner: [Latin] Be it remembered that on the 20th August, in the 11th year of King Richard II, at Nottingham Castle, in the presence of our lord the king, Robert Tresilian, Chief Justice, and Robert Bealknap, Chief Justice of the Common Bench of our lord the king, and John Holt, Roger Fulthorp, and William Burgh, knights, colleagues of the aforesaid Robert Bealknap, and John Loketon, king’s serjeant at law, in the presence of the lords and other witnesses who have personally subscribed, were asked by our lord king, on the faith and allegiance by which they are firmly bound to the king, that they should reply faithfully to certain questions given below and recited in their presence and state the law on these points according to their discretion. 1. First, they were asked whether the new statute and ordinance and commission made and published in the last parliament celebrated at Westminster derogate from the regality and prerogative of the said lord our king. To which question they unanimously replied that they do derogate, especially because they were against the king’s wishes.

English historical documents

154

2. Also, they were asked how those who procured the making of such a statute ordinance and commission are to be punished. To this question they unanimously replied that they deserve to be punished with the capital penalty of death, unless the king shall wish to show them grace in the matter. 3. Also they were asked, how those are to be punished who incited the king to consent to the making of a statute, ordinance, and commission of this kind. To which question they unanimously replied that unless the king shall show them his grace, they are worthy to be punished with the capital penalty. 4. Also they were asked, what penalty was merited by those who compelled or enticed the king to consent to the making of the said statute, ordinance, and commission. To which question they unanimously replied that they are worthy to be punished as traitors. 5. Also they were asked how those are to be punished who prevent the king from exercising those functions which belong to his regality and prerogative. To this question they unanimously replied that they are also to be punished as traitors. 6. Also, they were asked whether, when parliament has been assembled and the business of the realm and the cause of summons of parliament have been shown and declared by the king’s command, and certain articles have been defined by the king, upon which the lords and commons of the realm ought to proceed in the same parliament; if then the lords and commons wish to proceed entirely upon other articles, and not at all on the articles defined by the king, until the king should first have replied to the articles put forward by them, notwithstanding that they were enjoined by the king to the contrary; whether the king ought to have the direction of parliament in this matter, and in fact to rule to this effect that they ought first to proceed on the articles defined by the king, or whether the lords and commons ought first to have an answer from the king to the articles set forth by them before they proceed any further. To which question they unanimously replied that the king should have the governance in this matter; and similarly in turn in all other articles touching parliament until the end of parliament. And if anyone shall act against this rule of the king, he is to be punished as a traitor. 7. Also they were asked whether the king may dissolve parliament whenever he pleases and may order the lords and commons to go away, or not. To which question they unanimously answered that he can. And if anyone then proceeds to act against the king’s wishes, as if parliament were still in session, he is to be punished as a traitor. 8. Also they were asked, since the king may remove any of his ministers and justices whenever he pleases and examine and punish them for their offences, whether or not the lords and commons can without the king’s consent impeach those officials for their offences in parliament. To this question they unanimously replied that they cannot. And if anyone shall do the contrary, he is to be punished as a traitor. 9. Also they were asked how he is to be punished who moved in parliament that they should send for the statute by which King Edward, son of King Edward, greatgrandfather of the present king, was adjudged in parliament to be no longer king; by the inspection of which statute the new statute and ordinance and commission abovesaid were conceived in parliament. To which question they unanimously replied that both he who moved this as well as the other who by pretext of this motion brought the statute into parliament, deserve to be punished as traitors and criminals. 10. Also they were asked whether the judgement given in the last parliament held at Westminster and delivered against the Earl of Suffolk was erroneous and revocable or

The political framework

155

not. To which they unanimously replied that if they were called upon to give this judgement, these justices and sergeant would be unwilling to give it, because it seems to them that this judgement is revocable as so erroneous in all its parts. In witness of all these things the justices and Serjeant have apposed their seals to these presents. Witnessed by the reverend fathers the lords Alexander, Archbishop of York, Robert Archbishop of Dublin, John Bishop of Durham, Thomas Bishop of Chichester, John Bishop of Bangor, Robert Duke of Ireland, Michael Earl of Suffolk, John Rypon, Clerk, and John Blake, Esquire. Given in the place, day, month, and year aforesaid. (Ibid. 236 [French]) At which time the justices and sergeants and others wise in the law of the realm, and also those skilled in civil law, were charged on behalf of the king to give loyal counsel to the lords of parliament about the proper procedure in the process of appeal. Which justices, sergeants, and those wise in the law of the realm and the civil law, deliberated about the matter and replied to the lords of parliament, that they had seen and well understood the tenor of the appeal, and they said that the appeal was not made nor affirmed according to the order which either the one or the other of these laws requires. On which the lords of parliament took deliberation and counsel, and by the assent of our lord the king and of their common accord it was declared that in so high a crime as is claimed in this appeal, which touches the person of our said lord the king, and the estate of his whole realm, perpetrated by persons who are peers of the realm, with others, the process shall not be taken anywhere except in parliament, nor by any other law except the law and course of parliament; and that it belongs to the lords of parliament, and to their franchise and liberty by ancient custom of parliament, to be judges in such a case, and in such a process to judge by the assent of the king. And that it should be done thus in this case by award of parliament, because the realm of England was not in the past, nor is it the intention of the king our said lord or the lords of parliament that it ever shall be, ruled and governed by the civil law. And moreover their intention is not to rule or govern such a high case as this appeal is, which will not be tried or determined elsewhere than in parliament, as is said, by the course, process and order used in any lower court or place in the realm; which courts and places are only there to execute the ancient laws and customs of the realm and the ordinances and establishments of parliament. And the lords of parliament were of the opinion, with the assent of the king our lord, that this appeal was made and affirmed well and duly established, and the process upon it was good and effectual according to the laws and course of parliament, and as such they will regard it and judge upon it. [On the same day, Thursday, 13 February, Alexander Neville, Robert de Vere, Michael de la Pole and Robert Tresilian were solemnly cited to appear, and their default in absenting themselves was formally noted. The prelates then made a protestation that they were forbidden by canon law to take any further part in the proceedings and they withdrew. Then the four absent appellees were pronounced guilty and the duke, earl and chief justice were sentenced to be drawn and hanged as traitors and enemies of the king. On the following Monday, 17 February, the trial of Nicholas Brember began, as he was in custody.]

English historical documents

156

(Ibid. 250 [French]) Also (pray the commons) that the appeals, pursuits, accusations, processes, judgements, and executions made and given in this present parliament shall be approved, affirmed, and established, as a thing duly done for the welfare and profit of the king our said lord and of his whole realm, notwithstanding that the lords spiritual and the procurators of the lords spiritual were absent from parliament at the time the said judgements were given for the honesty and salvation of their estate, as is contained in a protestation for the same lords spiritual and procurators, delivered in this same parliament. And that by construction, interpretation, or any other device whatsoever none of these judgements shall be reversed, infringed, or annulled in any manner; and if anyone tries to infringe, annull, or reverse any of the points abovesaid…let him be adjudged and have execution as a traitor and enemy of the king and of the realm. Provided however, that these affirmations and establishments …shall not be treated as an example or a precedent in times to come; nor that the said commission made in the last parliament shall be treated as an example or precedent in times to come…. Also that none of the traitors attainted by the appeal or by the accusations of the commons, who are still alive, shall be reconciled or restored to the law by pardon or in any other manner…. And if any of the traitors returns…to England…let him be treated as a traitor to the king and the realm. The king consents [Le Roy le vœt]. (Ibid. 244 [French]) In this parliament all the lords both spiritual and temporal then present claimed as their liberty and franchise that the great matters moved in this present parliament, and to be moved in other parliaments in times to come, touching the peers of the land, should be considered, adjudged, and discussed by the course of parliament and not by the civil law nor by the common law of the land, used in other lower courts of the realm. Which claim, liberty, and franchise the king benignly allowed them and granted in full parliament. [For the petition of the mystery of Drapers against the election of Nicholas Brember as mayor in 1384, see P.R.O., Ancient Petition File 94, No. 4664, printed in A.H.Johnson, The History of the Worshipful Company of the Drapers of London (Oxford, 1914), 208– 11.] 64. The Merciless Parliament, according to Thomas Favent, 1388 (Historia sive narracio de modo et forma mirabilis parliamenti per Thomam Favent clericum indictata, ed. M.McKisack (Camden Miscellany, XIV, Camden Soc. XXXVII, 1926) [Latin]) Nevertheless, during this period, the three magnates, that is the duke and two earls, gathered their forces together in the same week, that is on November 14th of the same year at Waltham Cross in Hertfordshire, and they sent for the other members of the commission who were in the palace of Westminster with the king. There, in writing, they appealed the aforesaid five lordlings, that is, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Duke of Ireland, the Earl of Suffolk, Robert Tresilian and Nicholas Brembre, of the crime of lesemajesty, and they offered to prosecute their appeal, and to prove their indictment according to law, under a pledge of their goods and of competent sureties…. And when

The political framework

157

the news of this reached the ears of the king, he sent to enquire of them what was their proposal and wish. They sent back the following reply: There exist in the state certain traitors, gathered round you, who deserve to be dismissed and punished, since it is better that one should die for the people than that all the race should perish. They also asked for security in coming to the king and returning. When the king had heard their wish, he ordered them to come to him; and when they had come to Westminster and the king was in the great hall sitting in the middle of the commissioners, the three magnate appellants entered the hall with a great crowd of supporters and saluted the king together three times with bended knee. But they again put forward the charge in the same manner and form as they had done before at Waltham Cross, and appealed the archbishop, the duke, the earl, Tresilian, and Brembre, of the crime of lese-majesty. They were at that time hiding in the dark cells of the palace, and in secret hiding places…. Soon the king accepted the said appeal to be proved and prosecuted, and designated a day for it in the parliament to be held on the morrow of the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary next coming. In the meantime the king took both parties with their goods and men under his special protection to the effect that no one should molest another, and this was publicly proclaimed throughout England, and the appellant lords went away consoled. [When they were gone Richard at once gathered his forces; but they were utterly defeated and scattered at Radcot Bridge. The appellant lords then marched on London, took possession of the Tower of London, summoned the five accused to appear before parliament when it met, replaced the steward and chamberlain of the household by their own nominees, and arrested most of officials of the household and the confidants of the king. The justices who had supported Tresilian in the judgement of Nottingham were dismissed from office and arrested.] So that great parliament was begun on the second day of February in this manner. All of both estates, the magnates and illustrious men of the realm met in the White Hall at Westminster, and the king took his seat for the tribunal. Then the most noble five appellants…with a numerous throng, entered the hall together, arm in arm, wearing cloth of gold, and after staring at the king bent the knee to him in salutation. There was a mass of people filling the hall even to the corners…. When therefore the laymen had taken their seats on the left of the king and the clergy on the right, according to the ancient custom, of parliament, the chancellor standing behind the king in a position where he could be clearly seen, expounded the causes and matters of parliament, classifying these as is the custom. When this was done, the five lords arose and nominated Robert Plesyngton, a prudent knight, as their spokesman. He said: “Behold the Duke of Gloucester who has come to purge himself of the treason imputed to him by the fugitives.” Then the chancellor, receiving the reply from the king’s mouth, said in excusing the duke, “Lord duke, you have sprung from such a worthy royal stock, and you are so near us, in a collateral line, that you cannot be suspected of devising such things.” The duke with his four associates thanked the king, bending his knee low, as did they all. Then, silence having been commanded, the five magnates put forward in writing articles of accusation concerning the aforesaid treason. Geoffrey Martin, the clerk of the crown, stood in the midst of the parliament reading the articles rapidly for a period of two hours. The hearts of some were struck with sadness on account of the terrible things contained in the said articles; and many made their faces swollen with the tears on their cheeks. When the reading was finished, the king kindly intervened to ask what just and

English historical documents

158

convenient sentence ought to be passed on this false treason, according to what had been alleged and proved, so that due execution might be made on the persons of the fugitives; and the king promised this…. When the process had gone on for three days against the said fugitives, the chancellor of England, in the name of the clergy, protested in full parliament that they could not in any way take part in such a case, nor did they wish to be present at a time when any judgement of blood was being considered. To confirm this, the clerics issued a protest in writing which was read out in public; and they said in defence of themselves that this claim was made neither for reason of favour nor for fear of hatred nor for bribery, but because they wished to obey what the rules of canon law and all the laws laid down, that persuade and coerce the clergy to refrain from such a wicked action. The knights of the shire met in the chapter house of the abbey to deliberate about their counsels and matters, and the clergy sent the said protestation to them for their notification. Meanwhile, notwithstanding that protestation, the five magnates asked for sentence of condemnation to be passed against the contumacious four men. And when the said commons had come quickly, the protestation of the clergy was published and read out in their presence, but the aforesaid five magnates did not cease to demand judgement against the said contumacious men. Soon the clergy arose and went out for the time being into the king’s chamber next door. Nevertheless the king, moved by a charitable conscience…continued to put off the process. But the aggrieved magnates petitioned the king that no cause arising, happening or emerging could be put forward in any way until the present cause of treason should be finally settled…. At last, on 11th February, when nothing could be alleged for those absent, whereby the grave sentence of condemnation could be deferred, the said John Devereux, steward of the court and holding the place of the king, adjudged the archbishop, the duke, the earl and Tresilian to be drawn through the city from the Tower of London to Tyburn, and then forthwith to be hanged on the gallows there. And all their goods were to be confiscated, and their successors were not to enjoy them. 65. The battle of Otterburn, 1388 (Johannis de For dun Scotichroniconi Continuation ed. T.Hearne (Oxford, 1722), IV, 1075 [Latin]) Lord James, Earl of Douglas, made a promise…that he would be present in person with the army of the Earl of Fife on the West March. But, I know not by what counsel, he withdrew and collected his friends and followers…and found that he had 7,000 valiant warriors, with whose assistance…he seemed easily able to subdue the northern coasts of England. So, making an expedition towards the south, he led his army, burning and devastating, towards Newcastle. Making their assault on that town, and engaging in handto-hand combat with the inhabitants, they conducted themselves laudably and manfully. Within Newcastle all the militia of Northumbria [even from as far as] the town of York were waiting for them, with the lord Henry Percy junior, son of Henry, Earl of Northumberland, Henry Hotspur as he was commonly called, a very keen warrior, and an expert in fighting; they sought to gain an advantage over the Scots. While the Earl of Douglas was trying to get back to his own country, the said Henry Percy sought to find the army of the Earl of Fife; but as it was large, he turned away to attack the army of the

The political framework

159

Earl of Douglas, then in pitched camp at Otterburn in Redesdale. The Earl of Douglas did not suspect any evil from his foes, so with the Earls of March and Moray, his two brothers, and many other knights and nobles, he and they were dressed, unarmed, in gowns and long robes, ready for feasting on the day of St Oswald [5 August]. As they reclined at table a certain Scot came to them, sitting on a saddled horse, calling frantically to all to fly to arms, “because our enemies are speeding upon us”. At his voice all jumped up from their supper, and flew to put on their armour…so quickly did the Earl of Douglas apply himself to the order of battle that he was prevented from putting on his armour properly; so that night he was fatally wounded in his face and neck, by unknown persons. Therefore next morning he was alas! found dead, not leaving behind him an heir begotten of his body. To him succeeded the lord Archibald, lord of Galway, as Earl of Douglas. The lord John of Dunbar, Earl of Moray, was prevented by the suddenness of the fight from putting on his helmet. Henry Percy found that his men were crowded together, so he divided his army into two. He led one part himself, with Ralph Percy, his brother; the other part he entrusted to the lords Maurice Redmane and Robert Ogyl [Maurice Redmayne and Robert Ogle], to destroy pavilions and tents; he himself hastened to the field. The arrival of the English increased the hubbub amongst the Scots, who took to flight, keenly pursued by Redmayne and Ogle. But when the part led by Percy was waiting for the fugitive Scots, and was rejoicing at the prospect of their flight, the Earl of Douglas got his best men to mount their horses and advance unseen through thickets and thorn brakes. They approached the field unseen by the English, and suddenly burst out near the English line, with twelve banners unfurled, and gleaming in the setting sun. Shortly before sundown they dismounted and attacked the English. But the latter, three times as numerous as the Scots, counter-attacked manfully with their lances, and a fierce conflict arose. While this struggle began, a very experienced, strong, and brave Scot, John Swinton [rushed forward into the English line and did fearful execution there]. Because of this the Scots were able to penetrate the English line with their spears, so that the English were forced to give ground to this strong force. When this was generally apparent, the English began to retreat, so that throughout the night the Scots pursued their foes and took prisoners; and the leader of the English, Henry Hotspur, was captured with his brother. So those English who did not save themselves by flight were either killed or captured, and the prisoners were taken to Scotland in such numbers that the captives outnumbered their captors. On the English side 1,500 were killed; many Scots were slain too. Amongst these were the noble Earl of Douglas and two knights, Robert Hert and John of the Towers…. On the morrow of St Oswald this news saddened the ears of the Earl of Fife and his army, especially the death of the Earl of Douglas. But they were joyful over the victory gained by the Scots, and returned with glory to their own country. 1

Richard was by this time (May 1389) in truth twenty-two years of age; he had been born in January 1367. 2 A mistake for twenty-one (which the chronicler Knighton had correctly).

English historical documents

160

[This Scottish account omits to mention that Redmayne and Ogle had pursued the Scottish camp-guard and carried off James Lindsay of Crawford.] 66. The king takes the government into his own hands, 1389 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 181 [Latin]) In the same year the king, led by the advice of certain whisperers, convoked the magnates and many worthy men of the realm together, and suddenly entered the council house, where his magnates were awaiting him. Seating himself, he asked them how old he was. They replied that he was now twenty1 years old. “Then,” he said, “I am of full age to govern my house and household and also my kingdom. It seems to me unjust that my state should be worse than that of the least person in the kingdom. Surely any heir of my kingdom when he has reached the age of twenty2 years and his parent is dead, is permitted to conduct his own affairs freely. Why therefore should this be denied to me, when it is conceded by law to anyone else of lower rank?” The astonished barons replied that nothing ought to be subtracted from his rights, and that he ought to have the rule of his kingdom, which was due to him as his right. At this the king exclaimed: “Well! Know that I have for long been ruled by tutors; and it was not possible for me to act at all, or almost at all, without them. Now henceforth I will remove those from my council, and, as heir of lawful age, I will appoint whom I will to my council, and conduct my own affairs. And I order that in the first place the chancellor should resign to me his seal.” And when the Archbishop of York had returned his seal, the king collected it in a fold of his dress and suddenly rose and went out; and after a short while he came back and sat down again, and gave the seal to William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, although he was very reluctant to take it. And he created nine other officials, most of them former officials, using in all things his own judgement and authority. The Duke of Gloucester and the Earl of Warwick, and many other worthy persons, he removed from his council, and added others who were pleasing in his eyes. And at this time, the king created five new judges. 67. Richard II’s quarrel with the city of London, 1392, according to the Monk of Westminster (R.Higden, Polychronicon, vol. 9 [Latin]) (267) A this time the lord king, by the advice of his chancellor and treasurer, removed all his courts from London to York; these officials thought that by this move they would injure not a little the city of London, but they inflicted rather much greater injuries on the king and the men of the kingdom than on the said noble city. For poor men lost their pleas on account of this removal of the courts, not only because they did not have the money to go to such a remote place, but because such a sudden removal left them without the means of counsel…. These officials incited our lord king against the Londoners on account of certain seditions done recently amongst them and certain of his household. The Duke of Lancaster and the Earl of Huntingdon supported these officials. Behaving therefore as sons of iniquity, these officials, with others joined to them, wished to show all the malice

The political framework

161

they could think of against the Londoners, and devised a royal writ against them so terrible and horrible that it thundered in the ears of those who heard it. [The king’s letter, addressed to mayor, sheriffs and aldermen of London, ordered them peremptorily, on account of certain causes specially moving the king, to appear with twenty-one of their fellow citizens at Nottingham on the morrow of St John Baptist next coming, with full power on behalf of the city to reply to charges to be made and to do what should be ordained by the king and his council, on pain of loss of their lives, members and all their possessions if they did not appear. The mayor, aldermen and sheriffs expressed their readiness to answer this summons and chose twenty-one fellow citizens to accompany them to Nottingham as directed.] (Ibid. 270) The reason why the king was so angry with the Londoners was, according to some people, as follows. The king had been short of money and had therefore sent to certain citizens of London asking them on the security of a certain jewel of great price to lend him 5,000 marks or pounds. This jewel was worth more than the aforesaid sum. Nevertheless they excused themselves, saying that they could lend but little after the loss of their freedom, since the foreigners in the city enjoyed as much liberty as they did, and in view of such lost opportunities they could not raise such a large sum. The king was rather surprised by this answer and therefore consulted a certain Lombard, who at once promised to satisfy the king in his desires, and on the morrow came to the king with the needed sum. The king asked him how he had been able to raise such a large sum so quickly, to which he replied: “I borrowed from various merchants of London.” When the king heard this, he was most indignant against the Londoners, who were evidently willing to lend more readily to a foreigner than to him. [Ibid. 272] [On 19 June the Londoners came to Nottingham, where the chancellor explained the charges against them, and accused them of many derelictions of duty in the government of the city. The mayor was committed to Windsor Castle, the sheriffs were imprisoned in other castles, one at Odiham, the other at Wallingford, and the rest of the citizens were told to go home. A royal warden was appointed to govern London, along with two sheriffs chosen by the king, and all the liberties of London were revoked. In July the former mayor and former sheriffs made their humble submission to the king at Windsor and were released from prison, but the liberties of London were not restored. Various friends of theirs pleaded for them and several times the queen went down on her knees before the king to plead their cause. At last the king relented and yielded to the prayers of the queen and of various nobles, and condescended to agree to come to London on 21 August. The king was received with all the splendour of a coronation entry. Coming from Sheen he was met at Wandsworth by the warden, who presented him with the keys and sword of the city. The warden was followed by the craft gilds in their proper liveries “to the number of 20,000 horsemen, with an infinite number of men on foot”. At London Bridge the king was presented with two coursers, one white, one red, with silver gilt saddles, and the queen received a palfrey with a golden saddle. The streets of London were adorned with bunting, etc. In the Cheap two boys dressed like angels offered two golden crowns, of great value, to the king and queen, and at Temple Bar they were

English historical documents

162

presented with a gold table valued at a hundred marks. The royal party went on to Westminster, where they were received by the prior and convent in full vestments and entered the abbey for a solemn thanksgiving. This included a procession to the shrine of the Confessor, where the antiphon “Hail, holy St Edward!” was sung. On the morrow the warden of London invited the king to a feast at which the Londoners offered the lord king a silver gilt table nine feet in length worth five hundred marks. Not many days afterwards the king seated on his royal throne in the great hall at Westminster restored the liberties of London with three exceptions. The following October the Londoners elected a mayor as usual; and at the following Epiphany the Londoners came to the king at Eltham and presented him with a dromedary with a boy sitting on it, and they gave to the queen a great and wonderful bird with a very wide throat.] (Ibid. 278) Therefore after such immense rejoicing and such wonderful gifts, the king was much reconciled to the Londoners and at the instance of the queen and of other noble persons he pardoned to them £20,000 in which they were bound to him for the aforesaid forfeiture. And they still owed to him for the same offence another £20,000. In order to confirm at once his pardon after the solemnity [of the feast of the Epiphany], the king sent for his chancellor and treasurer and others of his council that they might announce his pardon publicly. So they came to the Guildhall, and explained all those things which the king had ordered them, and this caused great rejoicing among the people. [The grateful city made Richard a gift of £10,000 (Rymer, Foedera, III, iv, 84).]

68. Richard II obtains from Charles VI a promise of aid against his own subjects, if necessary, 1396 (Rymer, Foedera, III, iv, 111 [French]) This is the instruction and charge given to Edward, Earl of Rutland, Thomas, Earl Marshal and Earl of Nottingham, and to Sir William le Scrope, chamberlain of the lord king, going to France for the deed of marriage between our lord the king and Isabella, eldest daughter of his cousin of France, touching certain articles lately presented by the said cousin, in response to the messages of our said lord the king…. Also, as to the second article which speaks of the terms and manner of payment, that is to say, 200,000 francs in the present year, and 100,000 francs at the end of the year following, and so from year to year, until the full payment of the abovesaid sum, The wish of the king is to have 300,000 francs this year; or, if this should not be agreed, that he should have an obligation from the king, his uncles, and his brother, to have the abovesaid 100,000 francs quickly and without delay, when he shall send for them; and if this should not be agreed, that the 100,000 francs should not be paid, but only the 200,000 francs, provided that the king, his brother, and the uncles should be allied with him against all manner of men who ought to obey him in any way, and also that they should aid and sustain him with all their power against any of his subjects.

The political framework

163

69. Sir Thomas Haxey’s petition, 1397 (Rot. Parl. III, 338 [French]) Also on Friday after the feast of Candlemas the king caused to come to him at Westminster after dinner in parliament the lords spiritual and temporal and showed them how he had heard that on the Thursday they had been with the commons and that the commons had shown to them and touched on various matters, which seemed to the king to be against his regality and estate and his royal liberty, and he commanded the chancellor to tell him and declare the matters above said. On which the chancellor, by the king’s command, recounted to him these matters, which were in four points. [These were complaints about the appointment of sheriffs and escheators of insufficient income and for longer than a year; the failure to protect adequately the marches of Scotland; the evils arising from the grant of liveries to yeomen not members of seignorial households; and fourth, the great and excessive charge of the king’s household, especially owing to the costly maintenance of numerous bishops and ladies.] After this account the king himself declared and told his will to the lords, how by the gift of God he was by line and right of inheritance king and inheritor of the realm of England and wished to have his regality and royal liberty of his crown. And he replied to the articles that some of them were greatly against his regality and royal estate and liberty…. Also as to the fourth article, touching the expense of the royal household and the residence of bishops and ladies in his company, the king was greatly aggrieved and offended that the commons who are his lieges should wrongly take to themselves or presume to make any ordinance or governance of the king’s person, or of his household, or of any persons of estate whom he pleased to have in his company. And it seemed to the king that the commons herein committed a great offence against his regality and his royal majesty and the liberty both of himself and his honourable predecessors, which he is bound and wishes to maintain and uphold by the aid of God. Wherefore the king commanded the said lords spiritual and temporal that they should on the following Saturday morning show and declare the king’s will in this matter fully to the commons. Furthermore, when the king had heard how the commons had been moved and instigated by a bill presented to them to express and put forward the last article, he commanded the Duke of Guienne and Lancaster to charge Sir John Bussy, Speaker of the Commons, on his allegiance, to reveal and declare to him the name of the man who had presented the bill to the commons. On Saturday the morrow of the feast of Candlemas [3 February] the lords spiritual and temporal were with the commons and showed to them the will and command of the king and the commons delivered the bill to the lords, with the name of the man who had presented it to them, that is, Thomas Haxey.1 The bill was afterwards delivered at the king’s command to the clerk of the crown by the clerk of the parliament. Then by the king’s order the commons came before him in parliament; and there with all the humility and obedience of which they were capable, they expressed deep grief, as appeared from their demeanour, that the king was so displeased with them. They humbly besought the king to hear and accept their excuse, that it was never their intention or will to speak, declare, or do anything which was offensive or displeasing to the king’s royal majesty, or against his royal estate and liberty, neither in this matter touching his own person and the government of his household, nor the lords and ladies in his entourage, nor any other

English historical documents

164

matter that affected him; for they knew and understood very well that such matters did not pertain to them but only to the king himself and to his direction. Thus their intention was, and is, by the great affection which they bear the king as his loyal lieges that the lords should beseech the king to consider his honourable estate, and that on this he might do that which pleased him. If the king thought otherwise, this was not their intention, and the thought of it weighed heavily upon them. And on this the commons humbly submitted themselves to his grace and will, beseeching his royal majesty to have them graciously excused. They said moreover that they were always ready to the limits of their power to preserve his royal estate and liberty, and to do with their bodies and goods whatever loyal lieges are bound to do for the honour and safeguard of his royal majesty. 70. Richard II legitimates the Beauforts, 1397 (Rot. Parl. III, 343 [French and Latin]) Let it be remembered that on Tuesday, the 15th day of parliament, the chancellor, by the king’s command, declared how our holy father the pope, for reverence of the very excellent person of the king and of his honourable uncle the Duke of Guienne and Lancaster, and of his blood, has enabled and legitimated my lord John of Beaufort, his brothers, and his sister. And whereas our lord the king, as entire emperor of his realm of England, for honour of his blood, wishes, and has of his full royal power enabled and legitimated, of his own authority, the said John, his brothers, and sister, and also pronounced and published the enablement and legitimation, according to the form of the king’s charter thus made, which charter was read in open parliament and presented to the duke, father of the said John, and his brothers and sister, the tenor of which charter follows: Richard, by the grace of God, King of England and of France, and Lord of Ireland, to our most dear kinsmen the noble men John, knight, Henry, clerk, Thomas, young gentleman, and to the beloved noble woman, Joan Beaufort, young lady, children of our most dear uncle the noble man John, Duke of Lancaster, our lieges, greeting and benevolence of our royal majesty. Since we thought in our inner contemplation, how ceaselessly and with what honours we have been blessed by the paternal and sincere affection of our uncle, and by the maturity of his counsel, we thought it fitting and worthy that with our knowledge of his merits and contemplation of the grace of persons, we should confer the blessing of our special prerogative and of our favour and grace on you who shine by the quality of your great worth and the honesty of your life and manners, and are sprung from royal stock, and endowed with many virtues and signs of divine favour. Therefore, yielding to the prayers of our uncle, your father, with whom it is said, you bear a defect of birth…we wish nevertheless that whatsoever honours, dignities, preeminencies, status, ranks, and offices, public and private, perpetual and temporal, feudal and noble there may be… whether held mediately or directly from us…you may receive, hold, enjoy, and exercise, as fully, freely, and lawfully as if you were born in lawful 1

The king’s anger was probably increased by the fact that Haxey was a royal official of fifteen years standing (T.F.Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England (Manchester, 1928), IV, 17–19).

The political framework

165

wedlock…any statutes or customs of our realm of England existing to the contrary notwithstanding …and we dispense you from these by these presents by virtue of the plenitude of our royal power, and by assent of our parliament, and we legitimate you…and any children that you may have. 71. Richard II tries to safeguard the Acts of the parliament of 1397 from any revision (Rot. Parl. III, 350, 352 [French]) [The commission appointed in November 1386 for general reform of the realm and of the royal household was recited.] Which commission…seemed to the commons to be prejudicial to the king and his crown, and a usurpation of his dignity and royal power. Moreover the Duke of Gloucester and Earl of Arundel sent a great person, a peer of the realm, as messenger to our lord the king to tell him that unless he would grant, and assent to, the said commission and statute he would be in great peril of his life. And so the commission… was made by constraint and compulsion, against the will of the king. The commons prayed the king that the commission…should be…repealed in this parliament… as a thing made traitorously against his regality, crown, and dignity. On which our lord and king with the assent of all the lords spiritual and temporal, and the proxies of the clergy, assembled in this present parliament, and at the request of the said commons has repealed…the commission…and annulled it for ever. And moreover the king by assent of all the lords and commons has ordained and established that no such commission…should ever be procured, attempted, or made in future; and that anyone who procures, attempts to procure, or makes any such commission…in private or in public…shall be adjudged a traitor and guilty of high treason against the king and his crown. (Ibid. 352) Also, on 26th September the commons prayed the king that it might please him to ordain by statute that if any person or persons, of whatever state or condition they might be, in time to come should attempt or procure to annul, revise, or break any judgements given or rendered, or any statute or ordinance made, in this present parliament, or to be given or rendered in this present parliament, he should be accounted a traitor. [Such a statute was accordingly passed. The king made all the lords, spiritual and temporal, swear on the shrine of St Edward to observe it. All heirs of lords temporal were to swear to observe it before they would be allowed livery of their lands. The prelates were to pronounce excommunication on anyone who should break it; and Sir Thomas Percy, proctor for the clergy, swore an oath on their part to observe it.]

English historical documents

166

72. The confession of Thomas Duke of Gloucester, 1397 (Rot. Parl. III, 378 [English]) [The pardons granted to the appellants of 1388 were revoked. Then the commons impeached Thomas Arundel, Archbishop of Canterbury, who was condemned to forfeiture and banished. The king’s appellants then brought their charges against the earl of Arundel who was defiant and was consequently condemned and beheaded as a traitor. The Duke of Gloucester was then summoned to face an appeal; but in reply to an order to produce him his jailer, the Earl Marshal, announced that he was already dead. He was nevertheless condemned as a traitor and the following confession was read in support of this sentence.] Thomas Duke of Gloucester, by the name of Thomas of Woodstock, the 8th day of September, the year of King Richard one and twenty, in the castle of Calais by virtue of a commission of the king, as it is more plainly declared in the same commission directed to William Rickhill, justice, has acknowledged and confessed before the same all the matter and points written in this great roll annexed to this schedule, the which schedule and great roll are sealed under the seal of the aforesaid William…. I, Thomas of Woodstock, the 8th day of September, the twenty-first year of my lord the king, by virtue of a commission of my lord the king…to William Rykhill, justice…acknowledge that I incited other men to assent to the making of a commission, in which I with others restrained my lord of his freedom and took upon me with others royal power, truly not knowing nor understanding at that time, as I did afterwards and do now, that I acted against his estate and his royalty. And as I afterwards knew that I had done wrong, and had taken upon myself more than I ought to have done, I submitted myself to my lord and cried to him for mercy and grace, and still do, as lowly and meekly as a man may, and put myself high and low in his mercy and his grace, as to him who has always been full of mercy and of grace to all other men. Also, as to the time that I came armed into my lord’s presence and into his palace, even though I did it for dread of my life, I acknowledge for certain that I did evil and against his regality and his estate: Wherefore I submit myself in meek and lowly fashion to his mercy and his grace. Also, in that I took my lord’s letters from his messengers and opened them against his permission, I acknowledge that I did evil; wherefore I put myself lowly in his grace. Also, in that I slandered my lord, I acknowledge that I did evil and acted wickedly, in that I spoke it to him in slanderous fashion in the hearing of other folk. But by the way that my soul shall go, I did not mean any evil by this. Nevertheless I know and acknowledge that I did evil and acted ignorantly; wherefore I submit myself high and low to his grace. Also, in that I with others deliberated for fear of my life to give up my homage to my lord, I acknowledge well that with others I certainly talked to and asked certain clerks whether we might give up our homage for fear of our lives, or not. And whether we agreed to do that, truly and upon my oath I do not now rightly remember, but I rather think we did; wherefore I submit myself high and low evermore to his grace. Also, in that I was in a place where a discussion and conference took place about deposing my liege lord, truly I acknowledge well that we agreed to it for two or three days; and then we resumed our homage and our oaths and put him as high in his estate as

The political framework

167

he ever was. But indeed I acknowledge that I acted wrongly and unnaturally to him that is my liege lord, and has been so good and kind a lord to me. Wherefore notwithstanding my unnatural behaviour I beseech him evermore to exercise his mercy and grace, as lowly as any creature may beseech it to his liege lord. And as to any new thing or ordinance that I might have understood or known, ordained or agreed, privily or publicly, which would have been against my lord’s estate or his wish, or any of his confidants, since that day that I swore to him at Langley on God’s body truly, by that oath that I made there, I never knew of any gathering against him, nor against any of his supporters. [The last two paragraphs are more general pleas for mercy. When Rickhill asked him if he could remember any further offences against the king, the duke replied that he had said to the king that if he wanted to be king, he would not plead for Sir Simon Burley, to save him from death.] [James Tait showed, in Owens College Historical Essays, 1902, that this confession was tampered with by Richard, being read to parliament in a brief and mutilated form.]

73. The arbitrary rule of Richard II, 1397–9 (Continuatio Eulogii Historiarum, ed. F.S.Haydon (Rolls Series, 1863) [Latin]) [The chronicler records how the duke of Gloucester was murdered at Calais in September 1397, how a parliament was held at Westminster on 17 September and how Sir Thomas Percy was appointed procurator of the clergy on 18 September. On the same day the commission of 10 Richard II and the charter of pardon to the earl of Arundel were revoked. On 21 September the earl of Arundel was beheaded. On 28 September the earl of Warwick was brought before parliament, threw himself on the king’s grace, and was condemned to perpetual imprisonment in the Isle of Man. On 25 September Archbishop Arundel was banished and deprived of all his goods; on 28 September he left the country.] The king and parliament also decreed that all the lords should swear on the shrine of St Edward that they would observe all the statutes of this parliament with their whole strength…and that all the heirs and successors of the lords both spiritual and temporal should take an oath at all future times when their inheritances and possessions were delivered to them when they did homage and swore fealty. And at the request of parliament all the bishops excommunicated, by the cross of St Paul, all those who should do anything against the statutes and ordinances of this parliament. After this the king ordained the appellant earls as dukes, that is; Henry of Bolingbroke, Earl of Derby, he made Duke of Hereford, the Earl of Rutland he made Duke of Albemarle [Aumale], the Earl of Kent he made Duke of Surrey, the Earl of Huntingdon he made Duke of Exeter, the Earl of Nottingham he made Duke of Norfolk, and the Earl of Somerset he made Marquis of Dorset. Moreover the Lord Despenser he made Earl of Gloucester, Lord Neville of Raby he made Earl of Westmorland, Thomas Percy he made Earl of Worcester, William le Scrope, then treasurer of England, he made Earl of Wiltshire, and John Montagu he made Earl of Salisbury

English historical documents

168

In the same year [1398] the king wrote to the pope that he might promote a certain literate layman Roger Walden to be Archbishop of Canterbury, asserting, as some say, that Thomas Arundel was dead. And he caused parliament to appoint twelve persons who should continue parliament wherever and whenever it should please the king and ordain with him statutes that should please him. And when these things had been done, the king went into the west country. His ambassador, returning in haste from the Roman Curia, brought bulls with him and the king caused Roger to be consecrated; and soon afterwards Roger celebrated his entry into Canterbury with pomp. And after this the king on solemn days, when he was accustomed to celebrate them regally, ordered a throne to be prepared for himself in his chamber, where he was wont to sit after supper until vespers (“unto evensong time” as Davies’s Chronicle has it) speaking to none but looking at every one. And when he glanced at anyone, of whatever rank they were, that person had to bend the knee in obeisance. Then the king called together his councillors and the archbishop and bishops at Nottingham, and said that he could not safely ride through the kingdom on account of the hatred of the men of London and the seventeen adjacent shires, and therefore he wished to destroy them with the army that he would assemble unless they would find him a pledge of good behaviour. Therefore they ordered that the city and each shire should collect a great sum of money and offer it to him as a pledge of peace; and this was done. They ordered moreover that archbishops, bishops, abbots, priors, lords, and commons in the cities and towns should affix their seals to blank charters …in which the king intended later on, as it is said, to write this sentence: “As we have gravely offended your majesty in days gone by, we give ourselves and our goods to you, at the promptings of your will.” He deprived of money the households of the Duke of Gloucester and of the Earls, and of all those who had joined their forces. [The duke of Hereford accused the duke of Norfolk of slandering the king. A duel was appointed between the dukes at Coventry on 16 September, when the king banished the duke of Hereford for ten years and the duke of Norfolk for life. In July the earl of March was killed in Ireland, and the king decided to visit Ireland to avenge his death. But first of all he visited Canterbury, protected by a strong guard of Cheshire archers. He returned to London and took all the jewels out of the Tower, with the golden eagle and the stone phial given by the Virgin to St Thomas of Canterbury.]1 The Blessed Virgin had said to St Thomas: “From the oil of that phial future kings of England shall be anointed, and one of them shall recover without force land lost by his forefathers, and he shall be great amongst kings and he shall build many churches in the Holy Land…. And as often as he shall carry the eagle in his breast he shall have victory over his enemies, and his kingdom shall always be increased” This eagle the king always carried hung round his neck. A certain hermit from the north came to the Archbishop of Canterbury and said: “God has sent me to you to tell you that you ought to go to the king and tell him to restore the inheritances of the disinherited; otherwise great evils will befall both of you within a short time.” The archbishop replied: “Tell this to the king yourself.” “Willingly,” he replied; so the archbishop sent him to the king. The king by the advice of those standing round sent him to the Tower. Then the king made his will, very prejudicial 1

Cf. D.N. 220.

The political framework

169

to the realm, as those said who saw it. And he made the Duke of York guardian of the kingdom, and he sailed with a large army to Ireland. 74. Extensions of the royal power, 1397–8 Appointment of the parliamentary committee of 1398 with the amendments of 1399. (Rot. Parl. III, 368 [French]) Also, on the same Thursday, the commons besought the king that as they had before them several petitions as well for particular persons as for others, which had been neither read nor answered, and also a number of other matters and things have been moved in the kings presence, which cannot well, on account of the brevity of time be terminated at present; that it will please the king to commit full power to certain lords and other persons who will be pleasing to him to examine, answer, and terminate the said petitions and the matters and things abovesaid and all that arises from them. To which prayer the king agreed. And on this by authority and assent of parliament he has ordered and assigned John Duke of Lancaster, Edmund Duke of York, Edward Duke of Aumale, Thomas Duke of Surrey, John Duke of Exeter, John Marquis of Dorset, Roger Earl of March, John Earl of Salisbury, Henry Earl of Northumberland, Thomas Earl of Gloucester, Thomas Earl of Worcester, and Thomas Earl of Wiltshire, or six of them; John Bussy, Henry Grene, John Russell, Richard Chelmeswyk, Robert Teye, and John Golafre, knights coming from the parliament, or three of them, to examine, answer, and fully terminate as well all the said petitions and the matters contained in them, as all other matters and things moved in the king’s presence and all that arises from them which is not determined, according to what shall seem best by their good advice and discretion in this matter, by authority of the parliament abovesaid. [The words italicised were added in 1399. See J.G.Edwards, E.H.R. XL (July 1925).]

75. King Richard II cannot help the emperor Manuel Palaeologus at present because of the expense of struggling against some of his own subjects, 1398 (Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, ed. G.Williams (Rolls Series, 1872), I, 285 [Latin] from Lambeth Library, MS. 211) To the most illustrious prince the lord Manuel, by the grace of God the Emperor of Constantinople, our most dear brother, Richard by the same grace King of England and of France and lord of Ireland, greeting and the continuous abundance of successful wishes… [Richard excused himself from sending aid in men on the ground that the season was now so far advanced—he had only received the message, he says, on 23 April last past—that even if parliament should be summoned and the expedition be sent forthwith, it could not reach the front against the Turks until the winter was imminent. Richard will, however, send men next year.] As for sending money, you know, what I believe is notorious

English historical documents

170

enough throughout all quarters of the world, how some of our subject magnates and nobles, while we were yet of tender age and afterwards also, have made many attempts on the prerogative and royal right of our regal state, and have wickedly directed their malevolence even against our person. Wherefore when we could no longer endure their rebellion and wantonness, we collected the might of our prowess, and stretched forth our arm against these our enemies; and at length, by the aid of God’s grace, we have by our own valour trodden on the necks of the proud and haughty, and with a strong hand have ground them down, not to the bark only, but even to the root; and have restored to our subjects peace, which they had troubled, and which by God’s blessing shall endure for ever. Since then, for the purpose of bringing this to a happy completion, we have gone to vast expenses, which have exhausted our exchequer, and very little time has since elapsed—for scarce seven months have passed since these things began-and as yet we have not been able to recover this outlay; we pray your Magnificence that the notoriety of these facts may obtain for us more abundant pardon. 76. The quarrel between Hereford and Norfolk and their banishment, 1398 (Rot. Parl. III, 360, 382 [French]) Be it remembered that on Wednesday the 30th of January next after the quinzaine of St Hilary, in the 21st year of the reign of our lord the king, Henry of Lancaster, Duke of Hereford came before our lord the king in the parliament held at Shrewsbury…bearing in his hand a schedule and told the king that by his command he came into his honourable presence at Hawood, and after his coming there the king told him how he had heard that Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, had spoken many dishonourable words in slander of his person; the which words, as the king had heard, were spoken to the Duke of Hereford. Whereupon the king charged the duke, on his allegiance, to tell the king loyally the said words as they were spoken to him. The Duke of Hereford, not from malice nor enmity nor from any other cause, but solely to obey and comply with the king’s commandment as he was bound, wrote down the words in substance in the said schedule, so far as he had understood them and carried them in his memory. The which schedule the said Duke of Hereford presented to the king, with his protestation made upon it, in the following terms:— Making protestation, that I may add to or subtract from the content as often as I please or need shall arise, saving always the substance of my libel,—Sire in the month of December, in the 21st year of your reign, as the Duke of Hereford was riding between Brentford and London, the Duke of Norfolk overtook him in great haste and spoke with him on diverse matters, among which he said, “We are about to be undone.” And the Duke of Hereford asked, “Why?” And he replied that it was for the deed of Radcot Bridge. And the Duke of Hereford said, “How should this be, for he pardoned us, and made a declaration for us in parliament, saying that we have been good and loyal towards him.” And the Duke of Norfolk replied: “Notwithstanding this, it will be done with us as it has been done with others before, for he wishes to annul this record.” And the Duke of Hereford said that it would be a great marvel, since the king had said it before the people, that it should afterwards be annulled. The Duke of Norfolk said further that it was a wondrous world and false. “For I know well,” said he, “that if it had not been for some

The political framework

171

persons, my lord your father of Lancaster and you would have been seized and slain when you came to Windsor after the parliament. And he said that the Dukes of Aumale and Exeter, the Earl of Worcester and he were pledged that they would never agree to undo any lord without just and reasonable cause, and that the malice of this deed was in the Duke of Surrey, the Earl of Wiltshire, and the Earl of Salisbury, drawing to them the Earl of Gloucester, and that they had sworn to undo six other lords, namely, the Dukes of Lancaster, Hereford, Aumale, and Exeter, the Marquis, and him. And the Duke of Norfolk also said that they intended to reverse the judgement of Thomas Earl of Lancaster, “and that would be a great disinheritance to us and many others”. The Duke of Hereford replied: “God forbid, for it would be a great marvel if the king should agree to that”; for he had made him, as he thought, such good cheer, and promised to be good lord to him. And he himself knew well that he had sworn by St Edward to be good lord to him, and to all the others. The Duke of Norfolk answered, saying that so had he done to him many times, on the Body of Christ, and in spite of that he did not trust him the better. And he said further to the Duke of Hereford that the king was scheming to attract the Earl of March and others with the assent and purpose of the said four lords, to destroy those aforesaid. And the Duke of Hereford replied, saying: “If it be so, we can never trust them.” And the Duke of Norfolk replied, “Certainly not; for although they may not accomplish their purpose at present, they will destroy us in our houses ten years hence.” And on this, on the Thursday the 3 1st January next following, the king ordained, with the assent of all the estates of parliament, that the matters contained in the schedule should be terminated and finally discussed, by the good advice and discretion of certain commissioners assigned for this matter by authority of parliament…. And then on 19th March next following at Bristol, after the Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk had been before our said lord the king at Oswestry, it was assented and agreed by our lord the king and the lords and knights abovesaid, that the process and determination of the matters abovesaid should follow the course of the law of chivalry until it should be determined between the said dukes by the course of law, if sufficient proofs were not found. On which…on the 16th September the said dukes were ready at the said town of Coventry to do their duty. Nevertheless, our lord the king, considering the matter of the battle to be so high, that is, treason, and that the battle was announced in parliament, and the said Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk so near to the king’s blood and to his arms; our lord king…to avoid entirely dishonour for either of the Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk, who are so near to our lord the king, as aforesaid…as rightful, natural, and sovereign lord, of his especial grace took the battle into his own hand. And to Henry of Lancaster Duke of Hereford it was said, that our lord the king, by the full advice, authority and assent of parliament, wishes and ordains and adjudges, for the peace and tranquillity of himself, his realm, and his subjects, and to avoid debates and troubles, especially between the Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk, their friends and well wishers, that Henry of Lancaster, Duke of Hereford should avoid the realm for ten years. And that…he should not come into the company, in any way, of Thomas Duke of Norfolk, nor of Thomas Arundel, and that he should not send nor cause to be sent, nor receive nor cause to be received, any message from them nor have intercourse in any way with any of them…. And to Thomas Mowbray Duke of Norfolk it was said that as at Windsor on Monday the 29th April…he confessed certain civilian points1 in the appeal, which he had denied at Oswestry on 23rd February, and which points seemed very likely to have fostered great troubles in the realm, our lord the

English historical documents

172

king, wishing to punish, as rightful lord, all those who wish to sow such troubles and disputes, and also wishing to avoid all occasions of them, adjudges and ordains by the same advice, authority, and assent of parliament, that Thomas Mowbray Duke of Norfolk shall avoid his realm for the remainder of the life of the Duke of Norfolk. 77. The oppressions of Richard II, 1399 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 230 [Latin]) Meanwhile the king took as a loan great sums of money from many lords, both spiritual and temporal, and other persons in the realm, promising to them in good faith, under letters patent, that he would repay these borrowed sums within a limited period; but he never returned them to the creditors. In the same year he demanded greater sums of money from seventeen shires of the realm, under fear of death, charging them that they had supported the Duke of Gloucester, and the Earls of Arundel and Warwick in their opposition to him; wherefore he was ready to ride against them, as if they were public enemies. On this account he received from the shires new security under oath. When this had been done, he sent certain bishops, with other honourable men, to the shires, to induce the lords spiritual and temporal, and all the middling ranks of the shires, to submit to the king and acknowledge themselves as traitors by letters sealed with their seals. For this reason the clergy and commonalty, and the temporal lords, of the shires were compelled to pay to the king insupportable sums of money, to recover his favour. The king desiring, as it was said, to subdue and oppress the people of his realm, directed letters patent to all shires of his realm, and induced them by terror, both temporal and clerical subjects, to swear unaccustomed oaths of a kind which could really cause the final destruction of his people, and forced his lieges to confirm these oaths under their letters and seals. He compelled them to affix their seals to blank charters, so that, as often as he might wish to proceed against them, he should have the opportunity to oppress them singly or together. Moreover, he made the sheriffs throughout the realm swear unaccustomed oaths, that they should obey all the king’s commands, whether they were directed to them under the Great or the Privy Seal, and also letters directed to them under the signet. And if the sheriffs should know any of his bailiffs, of whatever condition they were, who should utter or speak any evil, publicly or privately, in dishonour or disgrace of the king’s person, they should imprison them, until they should receive orders from the king. From this it happened that many of his lieges were maliciously accused of saying something, either publicly or secretly, which could turn to the slander, disgrace, or dishonour of 1

An obscure phrase. J.H.Ramsey suggested that it meant “minor delinquencies or defalcations that might have warranted civil but not criminal proceedings, much less impeachment for treason” (The Genesis of Lancaster, II, 341); but if so, these points would have been unlikely to have “fostered great troubles in the realm”, and they would not have been sufficient ground for banishment for life. It seems more likely that they were points indictable under civil or Roman law, which took a high view of the royal office and was therefore severe towards any offence deemed to be derogatory to it.

The political framework

173

the king’s person; and they were taken and imprisoned and led before the Constable and Marshal of England in the court of chivalry. And they were not exonerated unless they had defended and acquitted themselves personally in single combat, notwithstanding the fact that their accusers and appealers were strong and healthy young men, whereas those who were accused were mostly weak, maimed, and infirm. This was not only a great destruction of the realm, but struck fear into all members of the community. 78. The revocation of Henry of Lancaster’s rights of inheritance, 1399 (Rot. Parl. III, 372. John of Gaunt had died on 3 February 1399) Be it remembered that on Tuesday, 18th March, in the 22nd year of the reign of our lord the king, at Westminster in the king’s presence it was shown by the chancellor of England to many lords spiritual and temporal who were present by the king’s command, how that Henry Duke of Hereford, after the judgement given against him at Coventry by authority of parliament, had made suit to our lord the king, by petition read before our lord the king and the lords, concerning various …matters…and especially that if any succession or any inheritance should descend or fall to him in his absence, for which he ought to do homage, that he might by his attornies sue and have livery of such heritages or successions…and that his homage and fealty might be respited, as fully appears by the letters patent made thereon. But these letters were granted to the duke by inadvertence and without suitable advice, or proper deliberation, as it appears; and when they were seen and diligently examined, with all the circumstances and dependencies thereof, it was found that the letters were clearly against the judgements given at Coventry, because the duke, after the judgment had thus been given, was not a person able to have or accept any benefit of the aforesaid letters. And therefore it was adjudged by our lord the king and by Edward Duke of York, Edward, Duke of Aumale, John Duke of Exeter, John Marquis of Dorset, John Earl of Salisbury, Henry Earl of Northumberland, Thomas Earl of Gloucester, Thomas Earl of Worcester, and William Earl of Wiltshire; John Bussy, Henry Grene, John Russell, and Robert Teye, knights coming from parliament, having power for this by virtue and authority of parliament, with the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal abovesaid, that the letters patent, with all their circumstances and dependencies, should be entirely revoked, annulled, broken, and repealed, and their enrolment in chancery cancelled. And that the letters patent, as well as the enrolment of them, should be void and held to be of no more force or virtue for all time to come. [A parallel revocation of letters patent safeguarding his inheritance was made in the case of Thomas Mowbray, duke of Norfolk.] To which judgements, ordinances, and establishments thus made, ordained, and assented on the said Tuesday the 18th day of March, and all the statutes, establishments, ordinances, and judgements made and given in the said parliament or at Coventry or elsewhere by virtue and authority of the same parliament, to be firmly held and kept, as well the lords spiritual and temporal and certain knights of the shires, being present there by authority of parliament on the same Tuesday, were sworn in the presence of the king on the Cross of Canterbury to keep and uphold the same, and to adhere to them without

English historical documents

174

guile, according to the form and effect of the oaths made by them before as is contained in the parliament roll. Of which lords and knights the names follow, that is: [Two archbishops, 14 bishops, 2 abbots, 3 dukes, one marquis, 8 earls, 4 lords and 4 knights.] And after these oaths were sworn, the chancellor, by the king’s command, publicly commanded that all those who were not sworn and wished to uphold these judgements, oaths, and ordinances, should lift up their right hands. Which thing was done and agreed by all the people who were there in the presence of the king. 79. Henry of Bolingbroke usurps regal powers soon after his landing, August 1399 (P.R.O. E404 (Warrants under the Privy Seal), No. 46 [French]. See R.L.Storey, “The Wardens of the Marches of England towards Scotland, 1377–1489” (E.H.R., vol. 72, 593–615)) Henry by the grace of God, King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland. To the Treasurer and Chamberlains of our Exchequer greeting. Since our very dear and faithful cousin Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, by force of our commission made to him under our seal of the Duchy of Lancaster has had the custody of our castle and town of Carlisle and of the West march towards Scotland from the second day of August last past until the 23rd day of this present month of October, we wish of our especial grace and order you that to our same cousin you should cause to be paid from our treasure from the duration of the said time, in the way that he takes at present by virtue of the indentures made between us and him for the custody abovesaid. Given under our privy seal at Westminster the 31st day of October, the first year of our reign. 80. The preparations for Richard II’s deposition, 1399 (Chronicon Adae de Usk, 1377–1421, ed. Sir E.M.Thompson, 2nd edn (1904), 181 [Latin]) Next, the matter of setting aside King Richard, and of choosing Henry, Duke of Lancaster, in his stead, and how it was to be done, and for what reasons, was judicially committed to be debated on by certain doctors, bishops and others, of whom I, who am now noting down these things, was one. And it was found by us that perjuries, sacrileges, unnatural crimes, exactions from his subjects, reduction of his people to slavery, cowardice, and weakness of rule—with all of which crimes king Richard was known to be tainted—were reasons enough for setting him aside, in accordance with the chapter: “ad apostolicae dignitatis”, under the title: “De re judicata” in the Sextus [Liber sextus Decretalium, ii, tit. xiv, § ij. This was the decree of deposition passed at the council of Lyons in 1245 by Pope Innocent IV against the emperor, Frederick II]: and, although he was ready himself to yield up the crown, yet for better security was it determined, for these reasons, that he should be deposed by the authority of the clergy and people; for which purpose they were summoned.

The political framework

175

On Saint Matthew’s day [21 September], just two years after the beheading of the earl of Arundel, I, the writer of this history, was in the Tower, wherein king Richard was a prisoner, and I was present while he dined, and I marked his mood and bearing, having been taken thither for that very purpose by Sir William Beauchamp. And there and then the king discoursed sorrowfully in these words: “My God! a wonderful land is this, and a fickle; which has exiled, slain, destroyed, or ruined so many kings, rulers and great men, and is ever tainted and toileth with strife and variance and envy”; and then he recounted the histories and names of sufferers from the earliest habitation of the kingdom. Perceiving, then the trouble of his mind, and how that none of his own men, nor such as were wont to serve him, but strangers who were but spies upon him, were appointed to his service, and musing on his ancient and wonted glory and on the fickle fortune of the world, I departed thence, much moved at heart. One day, in a council held by the doctors, the point was raised by some, that by the right of descent from the person of Edmund, Earl of Lancaster,—they declared that the same Edmund was the eldest son of king Henry the third, but that, on account of his mental weakness, his birthright had been set aside and his younger brother Edward preferred in his place—Richard’s succession in the direct line was barred. As to this, see the history in the pedigree, known throughout England, that Edward was first-born son of king Henry, and that after him, and before Edmund, Margaret, who was afterwards queen of Scotland, was born to the same king. 81. The deposition of Richard II according to a supporter of his (Chronique de la traison et mort de Richard Deux, roy Dengleterre, ed. B.Williams (English Historical Society, 1846), 193 ff. [French, trans. B.Williams]) And when the king arrived at Bellincardic (Beaumaris), he proceeded immediately to Conway, which was not far distant, and sent his brother with a message to Henry of Lancaster…. Also, the same day that the Earl of Huntingdon, Duke of Exeter, went to see the duke, he found him lodging in his own city of Chester, with his army. And that same day, which was Sunday the 20th August [an error for 17 August 1399]…the duke sent to King Richard the Earl of Northumberland, who was aged, that the king might rather believe his words, and not be so over-bearing with him as a younger person; and the said earl had with him a company of 100 lancers and 200 archers. And know that, as soon as the Duke of Lancaster and the Earl of Huntingdon had spoken together, the Earl of Huntingdon sent one of his people, by the command of the duke, to the Earl of Northumberland, and gave him two letters, one of which he was to take to the king his brother, requesting him to believe the message he should deliver to him, and the other to the Earl of Northumberland. It is a truth that the Earl of Northumberland went to King Richard with only seven attendants, for he had left his people in ambush between two mountains, and had commanded them that they should not stir until they had tidings from him, or of the king, whom they much longed to hold. And when the earl went towards the king, he found him in an exceedingly strong castle, surrounded on all sides by the sea, which is called Conway; and thither he went with all submission, he and his seven attendants, and saluted the king very humbly, as did his attendants….

English historical documents

176

When the king perceived the said earl, he caused him to rise and asked him, “What news?” Then said the earl, “My dear sire, I am sent to you by your cousin Henry of Lancaster.” The king asked him if he had not met his brother, whom he had sent there. “Yes, dear sire; and here is a letter he gave me for you.” The king took the letter and looked at the seal, and saw that it was the seal of his brother; then he opened the letter and read it. All that it contained was this: “My very dear lord, I commend me to you. I hope you will believe the earl in every thing that he shall say to you. For I found the Duke of Lancaster at my city of Chester, who has a great desire to have a good peace and agreement with you; and he has kept me to attend upon him till he shall know your pleasure.” When the king had read the letter, he said to the Earl of Northumberland, “Now then, Northumberland, what is your message?” “My dear sire,” said the earl, “my lord of Lancaster has sent me to you to tell you that what he most wishes for in this world is to have peace and a good understanding with you, and greatly repents with all his heart of the displeasure he has caused you now and at other times, and asks nothing of you in this living world save that you would please only to let him have his land and that he may be steward of England as his father and his predecessors have been, and that all other things of bygone time may be put in oblivion between you two; for which purpose he has chosen umpires for yourself and for him; that is to say, your brother, the Bishop of Carlisle, the Earl of Salisbury, Maudeleyn, and the Earl of Westmoreland…. Give me, if you please, an answer….” Then the king, with the Bishop of Carlisle, the Earl of Salisbury, Sir Stephen Scrope, Ferriby, and the Gascon squire, withdrew into the chapel of the castle; and the king said to them:”… It seems to me that a good peace would be made between us two, if it be as the earl says; but, in truth, whatever agreement or peace he may make with me, if I can ever get him into my power, I will cause him to be foully put to death, just as he has deserved.” The Bishop of Carlisle said, “My lord, peace is desirable, but it appears to me that it will be well that you should make the Earl of Northumberland swear upon the holy Gospels, and on the body of our Lord, that what he has said is true.” The Earl of Salisbury and the others said, “It is well spoken.” The king then said, “Tell Northumberland to come in.”… When he was in the presence, the king said to him as follows: “Northumberland, if you will assure us by your loyal oath, and swear upon the sacred body of our Lord, that what you have told us from your cousin of Lancaster is true, we will believe you, and go and lodge at Flint; and there our good cousin of Lancaster can come and speak to us.” Then said the earl, who was old and venerable, “Dear sire, I am quite ready to make what oath you wish!”… When mass had been chanted, [the king] caused the Earl of Northumberland to come forward, who placed his hand upon the body of our lord which was upon the altar, in the presence of the king and of the lords, and swore that all that he had said to the king from Henry of Lancaster was true; in which he perjured himself wickedly and falsely. After the oath had been taken, the king and those present went to dinner, and the king ordered that every one should get ready to set out to go to Flint after dinner…. “Dear sire,” said the earl, “I will go forward to order your supper, and will tell to my lord the duke what I have done.”… The earl then left with his seven attendants, as he had arrived, and rode to the mountain where he had left his men in ambush; who all made very merry, for he said to them, “We shall very soon have what we are looking for.” King Richard who was ignorant of all the villany and treason which the said earl had concocted, mounted to horse with all his company, who were only twelve in all, and rode as far as the mountain. And as he and his

The political framework

177

companions were going down the mountain, they perceived the people of the Earl of Northumberland who were in the valley, and who were all armed; and he said to the Earl of Salisbury, “Do you not see below banners and streamers?” The Earl of Salisbury replied. “Certainly, sire, I do; and my heart forebodes ill.” “Certainly,” said the Bishop of Carlisle, “I strongly suspect that man has betrayed you.” He had no sooner uttered these words than he saw the said earl, who came to meet them with eleven others…, “Northumberland,” said the king, “if I thought that you wished to betray me, I would return to Conway.” “By St George! my lord,” replied the earl, “you shall not return for this month to come; for I shall conduct you to my lord the Duke of Lancaster, as I have promised him.” As he spoke, Erpingham came up with all the people of the earl, his trumpets sounding aloud. The king and his companions then saw well enough that they had been betrayed; and the king said to the earl: “The God upon whom you have sworn reward you and all your accomplices at the day of judgement!” Then, turning to his companions who were weeping, he said with a sigh, “Ah! my good and faithful friends, we are all betrayed, and given without cause into the hands of our enemies….” So discoursing, with tears and lamentations, they came to Flint, where they lodged the king and his companions in the castle; and the earl and Erpingham set a strong guard over them; which done, the earl immediately took five horsemen, and rode to Chester to relate to the Duke of Lancaster how he had captured the king and conducted him to Flint. [Next day the Duke of Lancaster came to see Richard.] (Ibid. 209) When he approached the king he bowed very low to the ground; and then the king took off his hood, and said, “Fair cousin of Lancaster, ye are right welcome.” The Duke of Lancaster replied, “My lord, I am come before you sent for me; and I am come to help you to govern the kingdom of England, which you have not ruled well these twenty-two years that it has been in your government; and therefore, with the consent of the commons, I will help you to govern it.” [The king was then separated from his friends and taken as a prisoner to London.] (Ibid. 216) The Duke of Lancaster went on the morrow to the Tower, with the Duke of York and the Earl of Arundel in his company; and, when there, he desired the Earl of Arundel to send King Richard to him. The Earl went to deliver his message; and when the king heard it, he replied, “Arundel, go tell Henry of Lancaster from me that I will do no such thing, and that, if he wishes to speak with me, he must come to me; otherwise I will not speak to him.” The earl reported his answer to the duke, upon which he and the other lords went to the king…and…the king asked the Duke of Lancaster, “Why do you keep me so closely guarded by your men-at-arms? I wish to know if you acknowledge me as your lord and king, or what you mean to do with me?” The duke replied, “It is true you are my lord and king, but the council of the realm have ordered that you should be kept in confinement until the day of the meeting of parliament.” The king again swore, and desired that the queen his wife might come to speak to him. “Excuse me, my lord!” replied the duke, “it is forbidden by the council.” Then was the king in great wrath, but he could not help himself, and said to the duke, that he did great wrong both to him and to the crown. The duke replied, “My lord, we cannot do otherwise till the parliament meets.” The king was

English historical documents

178

so enraged by this speech that he could scarcely speak, and paced twenty-three steps down the room without uttering a word; and presently he broke out thus: “…you have acknowledged me as your king these twenty-two years, how dare you use me so cruelly? I say that you behave to me like false men, and like false traitors to their lord; and this I will prove, and fight four of the best of you, and this is my pledge”; saying which the king threw down his bonnet. The Duke of Lancaster fell down on his knees, and besought him to be quiet till the meeting of parliament, and there everyone would bring forward his reason. “At least, fair sirs, for God’s sake let me be brought to trial, that I may give an account of my conduct, and that I may answer to all they would say against me.” Then said the Duke of Lancaster, “My lord, be not afraid, nothing unreasonable shall be done to you.” And he took leave of the king, and not a lord who was there durst utter a word. After this began the parliament; and when Henry of Lancaster entered, he found there already seated all the prelates of the kingdom, to wit, eighteen bishops and thirty-two mitred abbots, besides the other prelates. [The duke seated himself on the throne and claimed the kingdom on the ground of the misdeeds of Richard II. He was promised a decision the following day.] (Ibid. 220) Also the morrow when the duke was seated on the throne, where King Richard had been accustomed to sit, he sent one of the dukes to tell a knight…to summon the lords of the council and the commons. It is true that the Bishop of Carlisle, who was of the order of St Benedict, rose from his seat and demanded leave to speak; and when he had obtained it, he spoke as follows: “My lords, consider well before you give judgement upon what my lord the duke has set forth, for I maintain that there is not one present who is competent and fit to judge such a sovereign as my lord the king whom we have acknowledged our liege lord for the space of twenty years and more, and I will give you my reasons; there never was…any false traitor nor wicked murderer, who, if he be taken prisoner by the hands of justice, is, at the least, brought before the judge to hear his sentence…. Moreover, I say that my lord the duke has more erred and offended against King Richard than has the king against him; for we know full well that my lord the duke was banished for ten years by the council of the realm…and he has returned to the country without the king’s permission; and moreover I say he has done still worse, for he has seated himself on the throne, where no lord ought to sit other than the lawfully crowned king of England; wherefore I declare that you ought to bring King Richard in presence of the full parliament to hear what he has to say, and to see whether he be willing to relinquish his crown to the duke or not.” Then the Duke of Lancaster commanded that they should lay hands on the bishop, and convey him to prison at St Albans. And after the bishop was led away to prison, the duke demanded sentence upon King Richard: upon which the Recorder of London said, “My lords, it is ordered by all the prelates, by all lords of the council, and by the commons of England, that… Richard King of England be sentenced and condemned to be imprisoned in a royal castle; that he have the best bread and the best meat that can be found for gold or silver; and if any should raise war for his deliverance he should be the first that should suffer death for that attempt.” Thus was he falsely sentenced by the said parliament.

The political framework

179

[After describing the rising of January 1400 in favour of Richard and the suppression of the rebellion, the author describes how Henry sent a knight called Sir Peter Exton to murder Richard at Pontefract Castle, where he was imprisoned. Richard vigorously resisted Exton and his seven armed men, but at length he was killed and his corpse was interred at Pontefract, before being taken to London. There the corpse was exhibited two days at St Paul’s Cathedral to show the Londoners that Richard was truly dead.] Cf. D.N. 219 for the deposition according to the Rolls of Parliament

82. The Acts of Henry IV’s first parliament, 1399 (i) The repeal of the Acts of parliament of 21 Richard II and the restoration of the Acts of parliament of 11 Richard II (Rot. Parl. III, 425 [French]) The commons prayed our lord the king and all the lords spiritual and temporal assembled in this present parliament that it might please them by their common consent to revoke, annul, reverse, break and repeal, all that was done in the parliament held in the 21st year or by its authority, and to hold it as no parliament…. And also the commons prayed to our lord the king, that if any statute…necessary and profitable for the good and profit of the realm should be included in any article made in that parliament…that the commons might have deliberation and advice upon it, and put it in their petitions…. Which prayer seems to the king just and reasonable, and the king has granted it by the common assent of the lords. Also on the same Wednesday [15 October] the said commons prayed to our lord the king that the parliament which was held at Westminster in the 11th year of King Richard should be considered valid and its acts enforced, as that parliament was held for the great honour and common profit of the whole realm. To which prayer the king, by common assent of all the lords severally examined in parliament, is very agreeable, and wishes that that parliament… be held and regarded in all points. And our lord the king also said, that as in the parliament held in the 21st year a certain power was committed by authority of parliament to certain lords and others …to answer and determine certain petitions and other matters arising in parliament, as appears more fully in the roll of the parliament, and this was very derogatory to all the estates of the realm; it was his will that no power should ever be granted henceforth by such authority of parliament and that this should never be treated as an example or precedent at any future time. (ii) The fate of Richard II (Ibid. 426–7) On Thursday, 23rd October, the Archbishop of Canterbury charged all the lords spiritual and temporal on behalf of the king and all the others who were present, on their allegiance, that what should be shown or spoken there should be kept secret and not shown to any one alive. And then afterwards they were asked by the Earl of

English historical documents

180

Northumberland, for the safety of the king and all the estates of the realm, how it seemed to them that it should be ordained about Richard, lately king, to put him in safe guard, saving his life, which the king wishes to be saved in all circumstances. On which the reply was given by all the lords spiritual and temporal examined severally, the names of whom follow hereafter, that it seemed to them that he should be put in safe and secret custody in a place where few people gathered and that he should be guarded by sure and trustworthy persons, and that no one who has been a servant of the former king should wait upon him, and that all this should be carried out in the most secret manner possible. On Monday, 27th October the king came into parliament in the great hall of Westminster, and there by assent of the lords spiritual and temporal Richard lately king of England was adjudged to perpetual prison, to remain there secretly in safe guard as stated above. (iii) The commons ask that they should not be parties to any judgements given in parliament (Ibid. 427) On Monday, the morrow of All Souls, which was the 3rd day of November, the commons made their protestation in the same manner as at the opening of parliament; and besides this they set forth to the king that as the judgements of parliament belong solely to the king and the lords, and not to the commons except in cases where it pleases the king of his especial grace to show them the same judgements for their satisfaction, that no record shall be made in parliament against the said commons that they are or shall be parties to any judgements given or to be given hereafter in parliament. To which at the king’s command the reply was given by the Archbishop of Canterbury that the commons are petitioners and beseechers, and that the king and the lords have always had, and have of right, the judgements in parliament, in the way that the commons have described; except that the king especially wishes to have their advice and assent in the making of statutes, or in agreeing to grants and subsidies, or such things to be done for the common profit of the realm, and that this order of procedure should be held and kept for all time to come. (iv) Nullification of Richard II’s blank charters (Ibid. 426) Also, on the same Wednesday [22 October], the commons besought our lord the king that as the city of London and 17 English shires, owing to the doubt and fear that they had of the late king Richard, were constrained to seal various writings and blank charters, to the great detriment of the inhabitants of the city and shires, and against the estate and freedom of the inhabitants, that it might please our lord the king to grant that these writings and blank charters thus sealed should be annulled, cancelled, and damned for all time, and they should never be of any record, force, or virtue in any time to come. Which prayer the king, by the advice of the abovesaid lords, has granted in all points.

The political framework

181

(v) The repeal of the judgement against Thomas Haxey (Ibid. 430, 434) Two versions of this petition are included on the roll, one as a private bill and the other as a common petition. Which petition, with the record and process of it was read and heard, and our lord the king by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal has ordained and judged that the judgement given against the said Thomas in the parliament held at Westminster in the 20th year of the late king Richard shall be broken, reversed, repelled, annulled, and held of no force or effect. And that Thomas shall be restored to his name and fame, and that he and his heirs shall be able to pursue, ask for, and have their inheritance as heirs to their ancestors, in the form in which matters stood for Thomas before the said judgement given against him, notwithstanding the same judgment by which the [right of inheritance by] blood was broken as between Thomas, together with his heirs, and any of their ancestors. (vi) Reaffirmation of the royal prerogative (Ibid. 434) Also at the request of Richard, lately king of England, in a parliament held at Winchester the commons of parliament granted to him that he should be in as great liberty as his progenitors were before him, by reason of which grant the king said that he could turn the laws to his will, and caused them so be turned against his oath, as is publicly well known in various instances. And now in this present parliament the commons of their good pleasure and will, confident in the nobility, high discretion, and gracious governance of the king our lord, have granted to him that they wish that he should be in as great royal liberty as his noble progenitors were before him. On which our lord, of his royal grace and tender conscience has granted in full parliament that it is not his intention or wish to pervert the laws, statutes, or good usages nor to take advantage in any other way by this grant, but to keep the ancient laws and statutes, ordained and used in the times of his noble predecessors, and to do right to all people, in mercy and truth, according to his oath. The king consents. (vii) Richard II’s use of the signet is denounced (Ibid. 442) Also the commons pray for Henry, your son, prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, and Earl of Chester, that as it has pleased you, of your grace and powerful lordship, to give and grant to him all the debts and arrears of debts, rents, farms, and issues whatsoever due to you, very redoubtable lord, and in arrears before this time, in the above said principality, duchy, and county; and some of your son’s council are informed that the late king, when he was last in Wales, made various releases and pardons, special as well as general, to several of the parties above said, which would be to his very great injury if

English historical documents

182

they were effectual and remained in force. May it therefore please your very powerful lordship to revoke and annul all such releases and pardons of debts and arrears, made contrary to your very honourable gift and grant to him in the manner aforesaid. Reply: If anyone has a pardon or release under the great seal, let it remain in force. And all the pardons and releases made under the signet, or other such small seals, or by word of mouth of the said late king, shall be repealed entirely. [For an Act of this parliament of 1399 forbidding appeals in parliament in view of the abuse of the procedure, see Statutes of the Realm, II, 116.]

83. The rebellion of the four earls, 1400 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 243 [Latin]. Cf. Eulogium Historiarum, 385) In the year of grace 1400 the Earls of Kent, Salisbury and Huntingdon, ungrateful for the clemency of the king, who had saved their lives, against the wishes of all the commons of the realm and many peers, heaped obloquy on themselves by holding secret assemblies in various places and making conspiracies, in which they decided to rush suddenly on the king in the castle of Windsor, under the guise of Christmas games, to kill him and his sons in cruel fashion; and to restore King Richard, for whom they had been searching, to his kingdom, and by such great crimes to recover the ducal titles and lands of which they had been deprived. But the king, fortunately informed of their intended guile, left the place, and hastened to London. The Earls of Kent and Salisbury, however, thinking that the king knew nothing of their conspiracy, arrived at dawn on the Sunday after the feast of the Circumcision of the Lord, i.e. on the octave of the Holy Innocents, to carry out their crimes and came to the castle with an armed band of about forty men. But when they realized that the king had been forewarned, they were greatly disturbed and wanted a refuge; and they came with great speed to Sunning near Reading, where the queen [Isabella] was then staying. And the Earl of Kent went in…and said: “Lords and friends, know that Henry of Lancaster, who has been pursuing me, has fled to the Tower of London with his sons and friends. And I mean to go to Richard, who was, and is, and will be our true king; because he has now escaped from prison, and lies at Ponte-fract with 100,000 defenders.” And to give support to his words, he took away the royal insignia, i.e. collars, from the necks of certain whom he saw having such cognizances, with contempt, saying that they ought not henceforth to wear such signs…. And so having rejoiced the heart of the queen, though vainly, he withdrew, and went first to Wallingford, and then to Abingdon, urging the common people, along all the roads, to take up arms and hasten to their king, Richard. At last he reached Cirencester after dark; but the men of the same town, suspicious of such an array, and thinking that, as was indeed true, the tales were lies, prevented anyone from going in or out of the house where the earls were staying. About midnight the earls tried to steal out secretly, but the townsmen, armed with bows and arrows, would not let them come out. The earls, knowing that they were in imminent peril, hastily snatched out their arms, thinking that the townsmen would easily be overcome. The fight raged, however, here and there from midnight until three o’clock in the morning. At last, worn out, the earls surrendered to the townsfolk, beseeching them to save them from death until they had spoken with the king.

The political framework

183

This would have been granted, if a certain priest of their household had not set fire to certain houses of the town, with the idea that while the townspeople were engrossed in putting out the fire, the earls would have a chance to escape; but his hope was in vain, for the townsfolk, leaving their houses in danger of burning, were the more enraged to punish the earls for the loss incurred by the fire. So they led them from the abbey, and at dawn that same morning they beheaded them. The Earl of Salisbury, who had been a supporter of Lollards all his life, and a scorner of images, a despiser of the canons, and a scoffer of the sacraments, ended his life without the sacrament of confession, so it is said. The Earl of Huntingdon, the lord John Holland, was not with the lords at the castle of Windsor, but awaited the result of the affair in London. When he learnt that the business had gone contrary to his wishes, he tried to escape in a boat, but was driven back by a contrary wind. So he took horse, and came to Essex, with a certain knight called J.Schevele…. While he sat at supper with the knight, he was taken by the commons of the countryside, and led first to the town of Chelmsford, then to the castle of Pleshey…where…he was beheaded. At the same time the lord Thomas de Spencer, who called himself “Earl of Gloucester”, while he was planning flight, was suddenly captured, and led to Bristol, where at the desire of the commons he was beheaded. Many others who were concerned in this conspiracy were captured, and put to death, some in Oxford, some in London. Some London clerks, J.Mawde and William Ferby, were condemned and put to death by drawing, hanging, and beheading. Bernard Brokays and J. Schevele, knights, and many others, suffered a similar fate. The Bishop of Carlisle was accused of conspiracy, and condemned, but his life was spared by the King’s mercy. Richard, former King of England, when he heard of these disasters, was reduced to despair and, so it is said, put an end to his life by refusing to eat. He died at Ponte-fract castle on St Valentine’s Day. His body was borne through most places between the castle and London, and displayed in those places where it remained overnight…. When the funeral service had been celebrated in St Paul’s Cathedral in London, in the presence of the king and the Londoners, Henry ordered the body to be carried at once to Langley, to be buried in the church of the Friars Preachers. [Early in February 1400 the council resolved that if Richard was still alive, he should be put in a secure place and if he was dead, his body should be shown to the people (Proceedings…of the Privy Council, ed. N.H.Nicolas (1834), I, in). By the end of February Richard was dead.]

84. The rebellion of Owen Glyndŵr, 1401–2 (Adam of Usk, Chronicon, 237 [Latin]) In this autumn [1401], Owen Glyndŵr, all North Wales and Cardigan and Powys siding with him, sorely harried with fire and sword the English who dwelt in those parts, and their towns, and specially the town of Pool. Wherefore the English, invading those parts with a strong power, and utterly laying them waste, and ravaging them with fire, famine, and sword, left them a desert, not even sparing children or churches, nor the monastery of

English historical documents

184

Strata Florida, wherein the king himself was being lodged and the church of which and its choir, even up to the high altar, they used as a stable and pillaged even the patens; and they carried away into England more than a thousand children of both sexes to be their servants. Yet the same Owen did no small hurt to the English, slaying many of them, and carrying off the arms, horses, and tents of the king’s eldest son, the prince of Wales, and of other lords, which he bore away for his own use to the mountain fastnesses of Snowdon…. Messengers of Owen, bearing letters as follows, addressed to the king of Scotland and lords of Ireland, were taken in Ireland and beheaded: “… I and my ancestors and all my said people have been, and are still, under the tyranny and bondage of mine and your mortal foes, the Saxons…and from this tyranny and bondage the prophecy saith that I shall be delivered by the aid and succour of your royal majesty Wherefore, most redoubted lord and right sovereign cousin, I humbly beseech you… that it may please your royal majesty to send unto me a certain number of men-at-arms who may aid me and may withstand, with God’s help, mine and your foes aforesaid…. But seeing that it is commonly reported by the prophecy that, before we can have the upper hand in this behalf, you and yours, our well-beloved cousins in Ireland, must stretch forth hereto a helping hand; therefore, most dread lord and right trusty cousin, with heart and soul we pray you that of your horsemen and footmen…you do despatch unto us as many as you shall conveniently and honourably be able…as quickly as may seem good unto you, bearing in mind our sore need.” (Ibid. 246) [1402] On the day of Saint Alban [22 June], near to Knighton in Wales, a hard battle was fought between the English under Sir Edmund Mortimer and the Welsh under Owen Glyndŵr, with woeful slaughter even to 8,000 souls, the victory being with Owen. And, alas! my lord the said Sir Edmund, whose father, the lord of Usk, gave me an exhibition at the schools, was by fortune of war carried away captive. And being by his enemies in England stripped of all his goods and hindered from paying ransom, in order to escape more easily the pains of captivity, he is known by common report to have wedded the daughter of the same Owen; by whom he had a son Lionel, and three daughters, all of whom, except one daughter, along with their mother are now dead. At last, being beleaguered by the English host in the castle of Harlech, he brought his days of sorrow to an end, his wonderful deeds being to this day told at the feast in song. 85. Franciscan opposition to Henry IV, 1402 (An English Chronicle from 1377 to 1461, ed. J.S.Davies (Camden Society, 1856) [English]) (25) And about this time [1401–2] the people of this land began to grudge against King Harry and think hardly of him, because he took their goods and did not pay for them, and desired to have again King Richard. Also letters came to certain friends of King Richard, as if they had been sent from himself, and said that he was alive; at which many people were glad and desired to have him king again.

The political framework

185

[A friar minor of Aylesbury who was accused and brought before the king said on cross-examination that Henry ought only to be duke of Lancaster, and was therefore condemned to death.] After this came another friar minor to the king, that owed no good will to a brother of his, asking mercy and grace, and said that 500 men, both secular clergy and religious, had agreed to meet together on the plain of Oxford on Midsummer Eve and go thence to seek King Richard. “And I and ten of my fellows of the convent of Leicester got ready to go with them; and there is in that convent a master of divinity, an old man, who speaks evil of you, and says that King Richard shall fight against you, and so it is prophesied, as he says.” The eight friars and the master of divinity were brought bound to London, and the other two who were accused could not be found. And the aforesaid friar accused other friars of various convents but they fled away. The king called the archbishop and other lords and the friars were brought before them, and some of them were young and some old and simply lettered…. Then said the king to the master: “These are ignorant men, without understanding; you ought to be a wise man. Do you say that King Richard still lives?” The master answered: “I say not that he lives, but I say that if he lives, he is in truth the king of England.” The king said: “He resigned.” The master answered: “He resigned against his will in prison, which is not according to the law.” The king answered, “He resigned with his good will.” “He would not have resigned,” said the master, “if he had had his freedom; and a resignation made in prison is not free.” Then said the king: “He was deposed.” The master answered: “When he was king he was taken by force, and put into prison, and despoiled of his realm and you have usurped the crown.” The king said: “I have not usurped the crown, but I was chosen thereto by election.” The master answered: “The election is void, if the true and lawful possessor is alive; and if he is dead, he is dead because of you, and if he is dead by your deed, you have lost all the right and title that you might have had to the crown.” Then the king said to him, “By my head you shall lose your head.” [The friars were therefore brought to Westminster before the justices, who advised them to put themselves on the king’s grace, but the friars chose trial by jury.] And neither men of London nor of Holborn would condemn them; and then they had an inquest of Islington, and they said “Guilty”. Then the justice gave judgement and said: “You shall be drawn from the Tower of London unto Tyburn, and there you shall be hanged, and hang a whole day and afterwards be taken down and your heads smitten off and set on London Bridge.” And so it was done. … And afterwards the men of the inquest who condemned them came to the [colleagues of these] friars praying their forgiveness and said that “unless they had said that the friars were guilty, they would have been slain”. 86. The battle of Homildon Hill, 1402 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 251 [Latin]) A that time the Scots, made restless by their usual arrogance, entered England in hostile fashion; for they thought that all the northern lords had been kept in Wales by the royal command; but the Earl of Northumberland the Lord Henry Percy, and Henry his son, and

English historical documents

186

the Earl of Dunbar who had lately left the Scots and sworn fealty to the King of England, with an armed band and a force of archers, suddenly flung themselves across the path of the Scots who, after burning and plundering, wanted to return to their own country, so that the Scots had no choice but to stop and choose a place of battle. They chose therefore a hill near the town of Wooler, called “Halweden Hil” [Homildon Hill], where they assembled with their men-at-arms and archers. When our men saw this, they left the road in which they had opposed the Scots and climbed a hill facing the Scots. Without delay, our archers, drawn up in the dale, shot arrows at the Scottish schiltron, to provoke them to come down. In reply the Scottish archers directed all their fire at our archers; but they felt the weight of our arrows, which fell like a storm of rain, and so they fled. The Earl of Douglas, who was the leader of the Scots, saw their flight, and did not want to seem to desert the battle-field; so he seized a lance and rode down the hill with a troop of his horse, trusting too much in his equipment and that of his men, who had been improving their armour for three years, and strove to rush on the archers. When the archers saw this, they retreated, but still firing, so vigorously, so resolutely, so effectively, that they pierced the armour, perforated the helmets, pitted the swords, split the lances, and pierced all the equipment with ease. The Earl of Douglas was pierced with five wounds, notwithstanding his elaborate armour. The rest of the Scots who had not descended the hill turned tail, and fled from the flight of arrows. But flight did not avail them, for the archers followed them, so that the Scots were forced to give themselves up, for fear of the death-dealing arrows. The Earl of Douglas was captured; many of those who fled were captured, but many were drowned in the river Tweed, so that the waters devoured, so it was said, 500 men. In this fight no lord or knight received a blow from the enemy; but God Almighty gave the victory miraculously to the English archers alone, and the magnates and men-at-arms remained idle spectators of the battle. On that day the flower of the Scottish chivalry was reduced to captivity. For with the Earl of Douglas was captured Murdach of Fife, first-born of the Duke of Albany, the heir apparent to the King of Scots. A similar fate befell the Earls of Moray, Angus, and Orkney, the Lords of Montgomery, Erskine, and Grame, with many other knights to the number of eighty, in addition to the squires and yeomen, whose numbers are unknown. Amongst the slain were Lords Gordon and John de Swyntone, who was unfaithful to both kingdoms. This battle was fought on the day of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross [14 September]. 87. Sir Edmund Mortimer announces to his tenantry his coalition with Owen Glyndŵr, 1402 (British Museum, Cottonian MS., Cleopatra, F. III, printed in Original Letters Illustrative of English History, ed. Henry Ellis, 2nd Series, vol. I (1827), 24 [French]) Very dear and well beloved, I greet you well, and make known to you that Owen Glyndŵr has raised a quarrel of which the object is, that if King Richard be alive, he be restored to his crown, and if not, that my honoured nephew, who is the rightful heir to the said crown shall be king of England, and that the said Owen will have his right in Wales. And I, seeing and considering that the said quarrel is good and reasonable, have consented to join in it, and to aid and maintain it, and by the grace of God to bring it to a good end, Amen! I earnestly hope, and from my heart that you will support and enable me to bring this struggle of mine to a successful issue. Moreover I wish you to know that the lordships of Mellenyth, Werthreonon, Raydre, Comot de Udor, Arwystly, Keveilloc, and Kereynon have lately come into our hands, wherefore I moreover entreat you that

The political framework

187

you will not make any inroad into my said lands, nor do any damage to my said tenantry, and that you will deliver victuals to them at a certain reasonable price as you would wish that I should treat you; and upon this point be good enough to send me an answer. Very dear and well beloved, God give you grace to prosper in your beginnings, and bring you to a good conclusion. Written at Mellenyth, the 13th day of December Edmund Mortimer. To my very dear and well beloved Mr John Greyndor, Howell Vougam [Vaughan] and all the gentles and commons of Radnor and Preshemde. 88. The rebellion of the Perries, 1403 (i) The manifesto of Harry Hotspur (T.Walsingham, Annales Ricardi Secundi et Henrici Quarti, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1866), 361 [Latin]) [Henry Percy and his uncle Thomas Percy, the earl of Worcester] as a defence of their conspiracy, wrote to various nobles of the realm, as well as to the people of the land, letters sealed with their own seals, asserting that the plan which they had put forward was not contrary to the allegiance or fealty which they had done to the king, and that they had not assembled an army for any other end, than to secure the enjoy-ment of personal safety, the reform of public government, and the appointment of wise counsellors for the good of the king and the realm. They wrote moreover that the taxes and tallages granted to the king or given to him for the safe-keeping of the realm had not been devoted to their proper uses but too much uselessly expended and consumed. Wherefore they had felt themselves, led by their consciences, bound by care for the commonwealth to gather their forces together, so that they would be the better able to ensure the reformation of the foregoing abuses. [Cf. The Brut Chronicle, ed. F.W.D.Brie (1908), 548, for the story that the quarrel was due to recriminations between Hotspur and Henry IV, ending with the king striking Hotspur on the cheek.] (ii) The battle of Shrewsbury, 1403 The best account is given in Annales Henrici Quarti (too long to be reproduced here), of which Walsingham included a shortened version in his Historia Anglicana, II, 257–8. Those who followed Henry suddenly came up, to the number of 14,000 excellent men, who promised to stand by Henry to the last breath…. The king stood firm with them…and when the fighters on both sides were waiting for battle, the Abbot of Shrewsbury and the clerk of the privy seal served as a delegation on behalf of the king, to offer Henry [Percy] peace and pardon, if he would desist from his adventure. As a result of their persuasions Henry was ready to negotiate; so he sent with them to the king his uncle, Thomas Percy, who explained the causes of this rebellion and demanded a real

English historical documents

188

reformation. When the king had condescended as far as reason would allow and had humiliated himself otherwise than became a king, Thomas Percy returned to his nephew and reported the contrary of the royal replies; thus he inflamed the mind of the young man and impelled him to battle, even though he was reluctant to fight. Therefore the archers of Henry Percy began the fight and the place for the missiles was not on the ground…for men fell on the king’s side as fast as leaves fall in autumn after the hoar-frost. Nor did the king’s archers fail to do their work, but sent a shower of sharp points against their adversaries…. Henry Percy, leader of the opposite party, and the Earl of Douglas, than whom no one was ever more spirited, in spite of the rain of arrows and the dense bodies of horsemen, urged their men against the king’s person alone, and concentrated their arms on him…. When the Earl of Dunbar had guessed their designs, he withdrew the king from his position at the front. This deed saved the king’s life, for the royal standardbearer was felled by the fury of the enemy, and his banner thrown down, and those who stood round were killed. Among these the Earl of Stafford and Walter Blount, a king’s knight, were killed; and the prince, the king’s first-born son, who was experiencing the first-fruits of war, was wounded by an arrow in the face. Meanwhile Henry Percy, while he led his men in the fight, rashly penetrating the enemy hosts, was unexpectedly cut down, by whose hand it is not known. When this was known, the rebels fled, and were permitted to flee. But the Earl of Douglas was captured, for the second time this year; fighting against the English he always found ill-fortune. For in the first battle his head was pierced and he lost an eye, and in the second he was wounded and fell into a second captivity. Also captured were the Earl of Worcester, Thomas Percy, the originator of all the evil and the cause of the present misfortune, with Sir Richard Vernon, Lord Kinderton and many others. There fell on the king’s side ten knights, many squires, more yeomen, and three thousand were gravely wounded. On the rebel side fell most of the knights and squires of the County of Chester, to the number of 200, beyond the gentlemen and footmen whose numbers we do not know…. On the following Monday…by judicial sentence there were beheaded at Shrewsbury the Earl of Worcester, Lord Kinderton, and Sir Richard Vernon. 89. French attacks on the English coast, 1403–4 (Walsingham, Annales Henrici Quarti, 375 [Latin]) The Armorican Britons, with their allies the French, came to the town of Plymouth at this time with a big fleet, and, bursting in by night, attacked the unwary townsmen and oppressed them, and burnt the town and plundered the whole night, until 3 o’clock the following day with no one coming to help. This disaster was the result of the wickedness and pride of the townsmen, who, trusting in their own strength, refused the aid of their neighbours. For when the hostile fleet was seen to approach, the patriots ran to the town, wishing to defend it. But the men of Plymouth, as if unworthy of so much kindness offered to them, soon doubled the price of victuals in the town. When the patriots asked why they did it, they replied that they had no need of such help, and had sufficient resources of their own. When they had been given such an impudent answer, those who had come to help went away again…. And so it happened that the enemy despoiled the town with impunity, and quietly took to the ships whatever they wished to carry away.

The political framework

189

[An aged Breton lord warned the raiders that the English would make reprisals.] And so it happened as the Armorican lord had prophesied, that Brittany would mourn what England had lost; for William de Wilford, with sailors from Dortmouth, Bristol and Plymouth, sailed to Brittany, and took six ships off the fortress of Brest; and on the morrow of his arrival his men took four ships laden with iron, oil and tallow. When this was done, they crossed to Belle Isle, where they took thirty vessels, filled with wine from Rochelle, to the number of 1,000 casks. Leaving there, about 4,000 of his men landed at Penare, and burnt farms and estates, penetrating inland six leagues. On their return to the sea they destroyed 40 vessels, great and small, by fire (the village of St Matthew was also burnt to ashes)…. The Captain of Brest, the Sieur de Castellis, and many other Breton leaders…sent a serjeant at arms, to ask if he was prepared to make satisfaction for the damage he had done to the region. To which our admiral replied that he wished to burn half of Brittany for satisfaction, and that they should have no other recompense…. So they came back home… bearing joyful news to their country, and leaving Brittany sad…. (Ibid. 378) A few days before Christmas the French, accompanied by a crowd of warriors, landed in the Isle of Wight, intending to celebrate Christmas there, in spite of the king. When a thousand had landed, and had already chased flocks and herds, so that they could return to the sea with a small booty, a force of militia met them, and they were compelled to relinquish their booty and rush to the ships, not without ridicule and loss. (Ibid. 381) [In the following summer, A.D. 1404, the French invaded the Isle of Wight again, and demanded tribute in the name of King Richard and Queen Isabella. The inhabi-tants refused, and the French eventually returned home.] (Ibid. 383) [The changes of fortune between English and Bretons is seen in the career of the Sieur de Castellis, the Breton leader:] … The Sieur de Castellis…thought in his rashness that there was no one equal to him, until he climbed up to land at Dartmouth, where he was beaten by the rustics, and killed by those whom he most despised…. The common people…who lived round about saw a great fleet anchor for several days off the port of Dartmouth, and thought rightly that it was an enemy; so at night they flocked into the town, to stop the ascent of the foe. The Sieur de Castellis, and those who were with him, imagined that the town lacked defenders, because they could see no one moving about to prepare resistance; so after six days they landed. [The countryfolk came out of hiding and after fierce fighting, in which the women joined valiantly, the Sieur de Castellis and many of his countrymen were slain.] Many were killed by the country-folk because they were ignorant of their language, although they offered great sums for ransom. The country-folk, misinterpreting them however, thought that they were threatening when they were really begging for their lives.

English historical documents

190

[Nevertheless, three lords and twenty knights were captured, with many squires and yeomen; and the king expressed his thankfulness for so unlooked-for a victory.] 90. The assault of Caernarvon Castle by Owen Glyndŵr and the French, 1404 (Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series, I, 33 [French]) Very powerful and very redoubted liege lord, we recommend us to your very sovereign lordship with all manner of honours and reverences. And may it please your royal majesty to hear that Robert Parys, the deputy constable of Caer-narvon Castle, has informed us through a woman, because there was no man who dared to come, for neither man nor woman dare carry letters on account of the rebels of Wales, whom Owen Glyndŵr, with the French and all his other power, is raising up to assault the town and castle of Caernarvon; and to begin the execution of this operation with engines, “sows”, and ladders of great lengths. And in the town and castle there are not in all more than twenty-eight fighting men, which is too small a force; for eleven of the abler men who were there at the last siege of the place are dead, some of the wounds they received at the time of the assault, and others of the plague. Therefore the castle and town are in great peril, as the bearer of this will be able to inform you by word of mouth, to whom, may it please your highness to give full faith and credence, as he can inform you of the whole matter truly. And may Almighty God grant to you, our very redoubted liege lord, prosperity and success in all your undertakings. And may it please your highness to read the enclosed letter, which Reginald de Baildon, one of the keepers of the town of Conway, sent us today, concerning the state of your lordship of North Wales. Written at Chester the 16th day of January. Your poor lieges. William Venables of Kinderton (Constable of Chester) and Roger Brescy [Reginald de Baildon informed William Venables in this letter (ibid. 35– 7) that not only was Caernarvon threatened but all Caernarvonshire was in a turmoil, and Harlech was in great danger, as the constable of the castle had been taken prisoner whilst parleying with the Welsh.]

91. The French invade Wales in alliance with Owen Glyndŵr, 1405 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 272 [Latin]) Owen Glyndŵr had made a treaty of alliance with the French in 1404 (Rymer, Foedera, IV, i, 69) and an expedition under the leadership of the Count de la Marche was planned for that year but came to nothing, except for a raid on Falmouth. In 1405 a stronger expeditionary force was assembled and landed at Milford Haven in August 1405.

The political framework

191

Meanwhile, the French came to the help of the Welsh, i.e. of Owen Glyndŵr, and arrived at the harbour of Milford with 140 ships, having lost almost all their horses, owing to the lack of fresh water. Lord Berkeley and Henry Pay burnt fifteen of their ships in the same harbour. The Frenchmen laid siege to the town of Carmarthen and took it, having first allowed the defenders the right to keep all their goods and chattels, and transfer themselves whithersoever they pleased. At the same time fourteen ships were captured by Lord Berkeley and Sir Thomas Swynburne, and Henry Pay, while they were sailing towards Wales to help Owen. With these ships the Seneschal of France and eight other captains were taken. A.D. 1406. At that time, while the French were hastening to help Owen Glyndŵr, with thirty-eight ships, eight of them, full of armed men, were captured, and the rest fled in fear from Wales. Not long afterwards fifteen ships, carrying wine and corn, were captured by our merchants to whom the keeping of the sea had been entrusted. 92. The rebellion of Archbishop Scrope and the Earl Marshal, 1405 (An English Chronicle, 1377–1461, ed. J.S.Davies, 31 [English]) For the articles of complaint of the rebels, see Walsingham, Annales Henrici Quarti, 403.

And this same year Master Richard Scrope, Archbishop of York, and the lord Mowbray that was Earl Marshal of England, and a knight called Sir William Plympton, gathered a strong power in the north country against the king…. And [they]…went towards the Earl of Westmoreland; and the earl came against them with another host sent from the king to take them. And when they were close together, the earl prayed the archbishop and the lord Mowbray that they might speak together and treat of peace. And they went to the earl and the earl had there bottles of wine and made them drink. And while the earl pretended to treat, a knight of his rode to the archbishop’s host, and said that the lords had reached agreement and in token thereof they drank together. “And therefore” [he said] “the archbishop commands every man to go home again, for he shall this night sup with the earl.” The archbishop’s men were afraid, for there was a little hill between the arch-bishop and them, so that they could neither see him nor the earl. None the less they thought it was true what the knight said, and went their way and were disarmed; and the knight returned at once to his company. And at once the earl and he, with their host, fell upon the archbishop and lord Mowbray, and took them, and led them to the king to Pontefract. After this the king came to York and the citizens of the city came out barefoot and ungirt, with halters about their necks, and fell down before the king, asking mercy and grace, because they rose with the archbishop. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Arundel, hearing all this, came in haste to the king and said to him: “Sire, I am your spiritual father and the second person of your realm, and you should accept no man’s counsel sooner than mine, if it be good. I counsel you that if the Archbishop of York has trespassed so much against you as is said, reserve him to the

English historical documents

192

pope’s judgement and he will so ordain that you shall be pleased; and if you will not so, I counsel let him be reserved to the judgement of the parliament, and keep your hands undefiled from his blood.” The king said: “I may not for the uproar of the people.” And the archbishop required a notary to make an instrument of the king’s answer, that if need be it might be presented to the pope. Then were the Archbishop of York and the lord Mowbray condemned to death, and Sir William Plympton with them, and were beheaded outside the city of York. And when the archbishop should die, he said: “Lo! I shall die for the laws and good rule of England.” And then he said unto those who were to die with him: “Let us suffer death meekly, for we shall this night, by God’s grace, be in Paradise.” Then said the archbishop to the man who had to cut off his head, “For His love that suffered five wounds for all mankind, give me five strokes, and I forgive you my death.” And so he did and thus they died. And immediately afterwards, the king was smitten with a leprosy; for the arch-bishop Almighty God soon afterwards wrought many great miracles. When the pope heard of the death of the Archbishop of York, he cursed all those that slew him, and all those who assented to his death or advised it, and commanded the archbishop of Canterbury that he would denounce all those who were cursed; but the Archbishop would not do it alone. Then sent the king to the pope, and said that the insurrection of the people would not allow him to live, and sent also to him the hauberk with which the archbishop was armed with these words: “Father, see whether this be thy son’s coat or no.”1 And the pope answered again in this way, as it was said: “Whether it be my son’s coat or no, I know that an evil beast has devoured him.”2 And so by secret payments of money the matter was ended. 93. John of Lancaster, warden of the East March of Scotland, warns the king and council of his plight, 1406? (British Museum, Cottonian MS., Vespasian, F. VII, f. 93, printed by S.B.Chrimes, in Speculum, XIV (1939), 20 [French]) John had already drawn the council’s attention to his plight in a letter of December 1405 (printed on p. 19 of the same article). In that letter John had stated that he had pledged all his vessels of silver and all his jewels to pay his soldiers.

May it please my very honoured and redoubted lord the prince and other very honourable and very wise lords of the king’s council…to consider the articles under written touching 1 2

Cf. Genesis, 37, 32. Cf. Genesis, 37, 33

The political framework

193

the state and governance of the Lord John, the king’s son, and of the East March towards Scotland committed to him in ward, and to ordain for him by your wise discretions good, speedy, and convenient remedy; or otherwise if any peril, grief, or harm should result in default of such governance, which God forbid, that the warden should be held excused and fully discharged of responsibility for it. First, may it please you to consider the distress which both the soldiers and the burgesses and inhabitants in the town of Berwick have suffered by the burning and destruction which have lately happened there, as is well known to your high discretions; nevertheless the same soldiers are in arrears with their pay, and have not received a penny since last Easter, so that their arrears amount to the sum of £4,430 17s 9d, and now victuals are becoming scarce and begin to be dear in these parts, so that they cannot have any provision for their sustenance without payment. Thus they experience distress on distress, which they cannot in any way endure without being furnished with good and ready payment in this situation. Also, a great part of the walls as well of the town as of the castle are ruined and fallen to the ground, some from feebleness, some by force of the destruction by the king’s guns at the time when the castle was held against him by way of rebellion, and more sections in various parts became in a short time decayed, in so much that no soldiers, burgesses, or others of any estate dare or wish to stay there for fear of the enemy, unless speedy repairs are undertaken. Also, may it please you to consider how the truce recently made on these marches will endure only until the feast of Easter next coming, and that the warden must have notice in time how and under what security these marches shall be governed after that, whether under truce or war, so that the lieges of the king in these parts can be put in security of their governance without loss or damage by the enemies of Scotland…. And moreover if war must come at that time, may sufficient ordinance be made by your wise discretions in time for the honour of the king our sovereign lord father and of his realm and for the safeguard and surety of the marches. Also from the feast of Easter next following until the feast of Michaelmas after that, for the truce—£2,415 8s Sum total—£7,246 6s 94. The capture of James I King of Scots by the English, 1406 (i) (Walsingham, Annales Henrici Quarti, 418 [Latin]) A the same time the Earl of Northumberland and Lord Bardolf, who fled into Scotland, suspected that the Scots wished to hand them over to the King of England in exchange for certain persons who were held as prisoners in England, for they were warned by the lord David Flemyng, who told them of the Scottish plot, and so they fled into Wales. Because of this, David was killed by the Scots. This murder led to dissension in Scotland, when all were moved against each other; in so much that, weakened by their feuds, they were compelled to seek annual truces, which the king granted to them. When these had been arranged and confirmed for the land, the Scots sent by sea the king’s son and heir so that

English historical documents

194

he might be brought up in France and learn there wit and the French tongue. In the midst of a tempest the men of Cleye,1 daring the sea, bravely captured him, a certain bishop, and the Earl of Orkney, to whom James had been entrusted by his father, and they led them to England, and handed them to the king. The king, dissolving into jocularity, said—“Certainly if gratitude had flourished among the Scots, they would have sent the youth to me, to be taught and brought up; for I know the French language also.” The young man and the Earl of Orkney were placed in the Tower; the bishop had slipped away. (ii) The capture according to a Scottish source (Johannis de Fordun Scotichronicon, ed. T.Hearne, IV, 1161 [Latin]) In 1404 Henry Wardlaw, the new bishop of St Andrews,2 a man of great magnificence, obtained his castle, in which, to protect him, he received James, then Earl or Carrick, the son and heir of the king, a boy of fourteen years, and treated him most humanely, along with a youth of his own age, Henry Percy, who recently with his grandfather, Henry, Earl of Northumberland…had fled into Scotland for shelter [i.e. in 1405], rejecting the crimes of King Henry IV. But there for a short time the Earl of Carrick stayed until his father, for greater safety, secretly sent his remaining son, with the noble Henry Sinclair, second Earl of Orkney, and an honest following, in a ship to his ally, Charles, King of France so that, brought up in right principles, he might, when he had reached manhood, come home in safety and govern the realm more wisely. Therefore the prince awaited the chance of a ship at the Bass Rock, and went on board there; but on the sea opposite Flamborough Head he fell into the hands of the English. He was captured on 30th March, and taken to the castle of Windsor for custody, until he was led to France by King Henry V…. And although shortly before truces were made, between England and Scotland, by sea and land, nevertheless James was kept prisoner in England for eighteen years…. When King Robert heard of the capture of his son, as he was sitting at supper in his castle of Rothesay…he was so much afflicted in spirit…that the vigour of his body ebbed away, his face grew pale, and thereafter for grief he did not taste food again, until he had given up his spirit to his Creator. He died at Rothesay on 4th April, i.e. Palm Sunday, and was buried before the high altar at Paisley, in the sixteenth year of his reign. 95. The murder of the Duke of Orléans, 1407 (Jean Juvenal des Ursins, Histoire de Charles VI, 1380–1422, ed. J.A.C.Buchon, Choix de chroniques et mémoires sur l’histoire de France (1841), 437 [French]) There had always been disputes between the Dukes of Orléans and Burgundy, and it was often necessary to make new treaties between them. So, on Sunday, 21st November, my lord of Berry and other lords brought together the lords of Orléans and Burgundy, they 1

Probably Cley-next-the-Sea in Norfolk. He was consecrated between 21 September and 4 October 1403 (F.M.Powicke, Handbook of British Chronology (1961), 301). 2

The political framework

195

heard mass together, and received the body of Our Lord; and beforehand they swore good love and friendship together. But the reconciliation did not last long, for the following Wednesday, in the evening, a man named Raoulet d’Octonville laid an ambush in a mansion in the Rue de Barbette. And the Duke of Orléans went to amuse himself at the Hotel de Barbette at which, it was said, the queen was staying. And when the Duke of Orléans left the Hotel to return to his own mansion, Raoulet, accompanied by ten or twelve men, sprang out and dealt the Duke of Orléans several blows, splitting open his head, cutting off his arm; and he died. And one of his followers, Allemand, threw himself on his master, to defend him, and he was killed, too. At the time no one knew who had killed the duke; it was said that it must have been the lord of Canny, because the duke had taken away his wife. No one thought that it was the Duke of Burgundy, in view of the oaths that they had taken, and the treaties and other friendships that had been promised and the reception of the body of Jesus Christ. And he was present at the funeral dressed in black, showing very great mourning, as it seemed. And they said that the blood of the corpse flowed out of the body. The duke was buried at the church of the Célestins, in a fine chapel that he had had built there. On the Saturday morning the Duke of Burgundy went to speak to the King of Sicily and to the Duke of Berry, who were together at Nesle. He confessed to them the truth, and said that he was the author of the deed. Then the Duke of Berry told him that he had better go away and take his departure. So he mounted his horse and left Paris…. The Duchess of Orléans came to Paris, to complain to the king about the death of her husband…. In February, 1408…the Duke of Burgundy came to Paris, accompanied by more than 1,000 men-at-arms. With him he had the Dukes of Limburg and Lorraine; he came to the queen accompanied by the dukes; and my lord of Berry held a dinner in his Hotel de Nesle, attended by the dauphin and the lords. And the Paris public cried out: Vive le Duc de Bourgogne…. The 18th March he caused a proposition to be made by a doctor called Master John Petit, who tried to justify the attack on the Duke of Orléans, the king’s brother, by the Duke of Burgundy. Petit alleged several instances of various kinds of oppression committed by the Duke of Orléans, for which he held that the duke could be accounted a tyrant. And he concluded that it was lawful to anyone to kill him, or have him killed, if, as he said, remedy could not be obtained in any other way. 96. The battle of Bramham Moor, 1408 (T.Walsingham, The St Albans Chronicle, ed. V.H.Galbraith (Clarendon Press, 1937), 27 [Latin] A that time, while the king was holding a great council in London, the Earl of Northumberland and Lord Bardolf, who had lately left the kingdom as they could not bear the success of the king, returned to England at an unfortunate hour. For they had gained so much from the common hatred against the king, and they had anticipated so much from the popular favour, that all the common people ran to their support and left the king. Followed by the Bishop of Bangor and his household, which was delighted by these new developments, they came to the place which is called Rodesquyre [Reidswire] and rode through the whole of Tynedale to Durham and Darlington, where they spent the night of the feast of St Valentine [14 February]. On the morrow they continued their

English historical documents

196

journey and spent the night at the town of Northallerton. When they reached the town of Thirsk, they caused a public proclamation to be made that they had come to the succour of the English people and the relief of the evil oppression with which they knew them to have been long burdened. Wherefore they advised them to follow their army if they wanted freedom at all. Therefore many of the people rose, thinking that all would turn out according to their wishes, and followed their leaders to Grymbalobrigge [Grimbald Bridge] near Knaresborough, where the sheriff of Yorkshire, Sir Thomas Rokeby, barred their way, with the help of Alexander Lourde, Peter de la Hay, and Robert Ellis, and others whom the sheriff could collect together in such a critical situation. As the aforesaid lords saw that they were unable to cross the bridge, they fell back and made a circuit round the de la Hay park and came to Wetherby that night. The sheriff with his following stayed behind them in the town of Knaresborough. The earl, however, on the morrow, which was Sunday, crossed to Tadcaster with his crowd following him. The sheriff pursued him through the town of Tadcaster, and placed sentinels round it, so that he could not escape without a battle. When they saw this, the said lords promised that they would hazard their fortunes on the battle-field. Therefore at about two o’clock in the afternoon, the earl with his men rode to Brehammore [Bramham Moor] near Hesywode [Hazelwood] where he chose the place of battle. Without delay the sheriff and his men chose their ground, displaying the banner of St George, with the pennon of his arms spread out. On the other side the Earl unfurled a pennon of his arms, and began with the sheriff a desperate battle in which he preferred to die for his cause than to be captured; and so he was slain and fell. And there he was stripped and his head was cut off. Lord Bardolf was captured alive but he was badly wounded and, so it is said, died soon afterwards…. These events happened at the battle fought on 20th February at Hazelwood. After the death of these lords envy gathered strength, and greed increased in the north country. A considerable crowd of informers sprang up, denouncing their fellowcountrymen near and far of adherence to the lords and treason to the king and realm. The king therefore by reason of their clamour came in person to York to pass judge-ment on transgressors and rebels. When he had condemned many, confiscated the possession of many, pacified the countryside, and hanged the Abbot of Hayles, who had borne arms with the lords, he returned to the south…. After the king had returned to the south, he fell into a fit and a coma at Mortlake meadow, so that he was thought to be dead. After some hours, however, he recovered his senses, and gave thanks to God, vowing amends for his rash acts. 97. A judge resorts to armed ambush, 1411 (Rot. Parl. III, 649–50 (French]) Let it be remembered that on Wednesday, 4th November, after the opening speech of Parliament, Lord Roos presented to our lord the king in Parliament a petition against Robert Tirwhitt, one of the judges of the King’s Bench, of which petition the tenure follows. To our very sovereign Lord the King, and the lords spiritual and temporal of this present parliament, shows and makes complaint William de Roos of Hamlake, knight, as well for our lord the king as for himself, that whereas Robert Tirwhitt, one of the justices of the King’s Bench, very redoubted lord, was lately in your said Bench responsible for a

The political framework

197

writ of trespass against John Rate, steward of the courts of the said William of his manor of Melton Roos, Richard Robynet, bailiff of the said William of his said manor, John Bernard, John Tottenay, Thomas Gurnall, John Hamond, Stephan Doye, William Bocher, John Kedy, John his son, John Moys, Robert Andrewe, and William Richardson, of whom some are tenants at will and some are bondmen of the said William de Roos; alleging that they roamed about in the various turbaries of the said Robert Tirwhitt at Wraweby, and cut his trees and brushwood growing there, and also his grass and ferns growing there, and took and carried away the said grass and ferns, and trees and brushwood, together with the turves of the said turbary, to the estimated value of £40,— whereas both the said William de Roos and his tenants abovesaid claimed of right common of pasture, turbary and estovers in these places. On which the said William de Roos for himself and his tenants and Robert came to an agreement in the suit to accept the award and judgement of William Gascoigne, the Chief Justice. And on this William Gascoigne, by assent of the parties abovesaid, ordered them to appear before him on the Saturday next after Michaelmas last past, at Wraweby in Lincolnshire, with their evidences, for a declaration of their titles and rights in this matter. And William Gascoigne agreed that William de Roos should come thither with two barons, his cousins, or other friends, in peaceful manner, with as many people as usually rode with him. And that Robert should come with two of his cousins or friends, with as many folks peacefully as appertained to their estate and degree. At this place and on this day, William Gascoigne was there, and William de Roos, according to the ordinance and agreement abovesaid, was ready to have declared his title and right, and to await the decision abovesaid. And Robert Tirwhitt, not obeying the compromise ordinance, and agreement, notwithstanding that he was a justice of assize, and a justice of the peace for Lincolnshire, and not considering the estate of William de Roos, that he was one of the Justices of the Peace for Lincolnshire, but intending to defeat the ordinance and award of the said William Gascoigne by conspiracy and malice aforethought, caused to be raised and assembled on the day and at the place abovesaid a great number of armed men, against your peace, and in contempt of you, dread lord, against the statutes ordained and provided in this case, to the great terror of all the countryside round about. And he caused them to lie there in ambush, in manner of war, very near the spot fixed by William Gascoigne, waiting for William de Roos, Henry Lord Beaumont, Thomas Lord de la Warre, cousins to the said William de Roos, then assembled together for the same matter according to the agreement, to overcome and dishonour them by force…. May it therefore please you, dread lord, by advice of your very wise lords in this present parliament, to ordain and make such remedy, punishment, and redress for this horrible trespass and offence, as well for you, dread lord, as for William de Roos, as shall seem to you necessary, and to avoid such assemblies and riots in times to come. This petition was read and heard, and the several reasons raised on both sides were heard, and also the answers and replies made to these on several days assigned to them by the king our lord in parliament. At last, i.e. on Friday, 27th November, Lord Roos and Robert Tirwhitt, with their counsels, came before the king and the lords in parliament, and there the said Lord Roos showed our lord the king how he had put in his petition…and whatever it should please the king to do in this matter, he wished to submit to his ordinance and governance…. And then afterwards Robert said to our lord the king, how by ignorance and lack of knowledge he had acted in this matter, other than he ought

English historical documents

198

to have done, to the king’s displeasure; and as he had acted wrongly towards the king, he prayed his grace and pardon…. And Robert agreed to submit to the decision and award of two lords of the blood of Lord Roos, as he should be pleased to name…. And there before the king and the lords Lord Roos named the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Grey, the king’s chamberlain. [Then follows, in English, the decision of the Archbishop and Lord Grey. At such reasonable time as Lord Roos should assign, both parties were to come to the disputed place of common of pasture and turbary, and Robert Tirwhitt should bring 2 fat oxen, 12 fat sheep and 2 tuns of Gascon wine; and in the presence of Lord Roos and all those who had been present at the “loveday” or day of arbitration, Robert Tirwhitt was to say:] “My Lord Roos I know well that you are of such birth, estate, and might, that if you had wished you might have come to the aforesaid loveday in such array that I should have been of no might to have made any party: but yet it pleased you to come in easy manner, having consideration to your degree. And of all that by sinister information, I, having doubt of harm of my body, in my intention for salvation of myself did assemble these persons who are here, and others more, nought to do harm nor offence to you, my Lord Roos, and that I will here excuse me as ye will devise. Yet, for as much as I am a justice, that more than another common man should have behaved more discreetly and peacefully, I know well that I have failed and offended you, my lord Roos, whereof I beseech you grace and mercy, and offer you 500 marks to be paid at your will.” [The award continues that Lord Roos was then to forgive Robert Tyrwhitt, and all the rest of his army, except four persons, Sir Richard Haunsard, William Kelk, Roger Berneston, and Roger Kelk, who were to be brought before Lord Roos, to kneel down and beg forgiveness.] 98 (i). Henry prince of Wales makes a league with Burgundy, 1411…and Henry IV an alliance with the Armagnacs, 1412 (Rymer, Foedera, IV, i, 196 [Latin], from Patent Roll, 12 Henry IV, m. 2) The king to all to whom, etc. greeting Know that from our certain knowledge, we concede and give permission to our most dear son, Henry Prince of Wales that he may send and charge certain commissioners, proxies, and deputies across the sea, to negotiate, speak, and communicate concerning the marriage and wedding of the same prince and one of the daughters of John, Duke of Burgundy and Count of Flanders. . . and of the dowry or gift on account of the marriage to negotiate, settle, and agree with any persons having or to be given sufficient authority and power concerning the necessities, uses, or consequences of this contract…and of all other things which are necessary in the foregoing matter. Saving always to us all those rights which belong to us by the rights of our crown or the custom of our kingdom of England. Witnessed by the king at Westminster, 1st September. By the king himself.

The political framework

199

(ii). Henry IV makes an alliance with the Armagnacs, 1412 (Ibid, IV, ii, 12 [Latin]) This is the final concord made between [Henry IV, on the one hand, and John Duke of Berri, Charles Duke of Orléans, John Duke of Bourbon, and John Count of Alençon] on certain articles and conventions concerning the restitution of the Duchy of Aquitaine to be made to the king…his heirs and deputies. In the first place it was appointed and agreed in this matter that the lords should venture their persons and their bodies, without any guile, fraud, or subterfuge on behalf of the king of England and his heirs and their deputies in all good and just quarrels, whenever required by the King of England, Duke of Aquitaine, or his heirs, saving always their fealty. Amongst these just and reasonable quarrels of the King of England, the lords and their proxies in their name recognize that this is one of his just quarrels, to recover the Duchy of Aquitaine with its rights and appurtenances, and to obtain it, since it belongs to him by hereditary right and natural succession, as they themselves recog-nize. The lords moreover declare and their deputies in their name that they do not offend or injure the fealty in helping the king of England, and in delivering the duchy of Aquitaine to him or his heirs or their deputies. Secondly it was appointed and agreed that the lords and their proxies in their name should offer their sons and daughters, their nephews and nieces, their relatives and kindred…for contracting marriages as the prudence and discretion of the lord king shall direct. Thirdly it was appointed and agreed that the lords and their proxies in their name shall offer the towns, castles, treasuries, and all their other goods, movable and immovable, to aid and succour the said lord king of England and his heirs, in defending, furthering and aiding his quarrels; saving however their fealty, which is not offended in this matter, as is declared in the first point. [Henry for his part made various promises to the French lords, the most important undertakings being indicated in the following clauses.] Seventh, it was agreed and appointed in this way that the King of England, Duke of Aquitaine, shall help the lords as well as their subjects and vassals, in all their good and just quarrels, including the reparation of the offences and injuries done by the Duke of Burgundy or his adherents to the lords, their supporters, servants, and allies and the king and duke will apply his diligence that they should be restored to their honours. Eighth, it was appointed and agreed that the present aid required by the said lords, that is, 1,000 men-at-arms and 3,000 archers, shall find their way to Blois by the best means that can be contrived, and there shall receive wages from the lords, that is, for the term of three months…[the monthly pay to be, 30 gold écus for each knight, 15 écus for each squire and écus for each archer].

English historical documents

200

99. The growth of a legend: the death of Henry IV, 1413 (i) (Eulogium Historiarum, 420 [Latin]) In that same year an agreement was made between Prince Henry, first-born son of the king, Henry, Bishop of Winchester, and almost all the lords of England, that they should ask the king to give up the crown of England, and permit his first-born to be crowned, because he was so horribly afflicted with leprosy. When this advice was given, he was unwilling to agree to this counsel of certain lords but at once rode on horseback through a great part of England notwithstanding the leprosy. And returning to London, he died at Westminster in the abbot’s lodging in a certain low chamber, called the Jerusalem Chamber, about the feast of St Cuthbert when he had reigned years; he was buried at Canterbury. And Henry his first-born, Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, Earl of Chester, born at Monmouth in Wales, was crowned at Westminster on 20th March, the Sunday in the Passion of Our Lord. (ii) a (C.L.Kingsford, ed., The First English Life of Henry V (Clarendon Press, 1911), II) [Prince Henry] was also taken of the king his father as the first and principal person of his council, and…he was right dear and welbeloved of the king, until such time as his fame appeared by the sinister report of some evil disposed people, who laboured to make dissension between the king and the prince his son; by reason whereof, and by the acts of his youth, which he exercised more than meanly, and for the great concourse of people unto him, of whom his court was at all times more abundant than the king his father’s, the king suspected that he would usurp the crown, he being alive, which suspicious jealousy was the occasion of him in part withdrawing his affection and singular love from the prince. But when this noble prince was informed of his father’s jealousy and mistrust by some of his secret friends of the kings council…he came to the king his father who at that time lay at West-minster…. Then the king caused himself to be borne in his chair (because he was diseased and could not walk) into his secret chamber; where in the presence of three or four persons in whom the king had his most confidence he commanded the prince to show what was in his mind. Then the prince, kneeling down before his father, said to him: “Most redoubted lord and father I am this time come to your presence as your liegeman, and as your true son, in all things to obey your grace as my sovereign lord and father. And whereas I understand that you have me in suspicion of my behaviour against your grace, and that you fear I would usurp your crown against the pleasure of your highness…how much rather ought I to suffer death to bring your grace, who has been and still is the most hardy and renowned king of the world, from that fear that you have of me, who am your true son and liegeman. And to that intent I have this day by confession, and by receiving my Maker prepared myself. And therefore most redoubted lord and father, I desire you in your honour of God, for the easing of your heart, here before your knees to slay me with this dagger.” And at that word with all reverence he delivered to the king his dagger, saying: “My lord and father, my life is not

The political framework

201

so dear to me that I would live one day that I should be to your displeasure…. And in your thus doing here in the presence of those lords, and before God and the Day of Judgement, I clearly forgive you my death.” At these words of the prince the king, taken with compassion of heart, cast from him the dagger, and embraced the prince, and kissed him, and with effusion of tears said to him: “My right dear and heartily beloved son, it is true that I partly suspected you, and as I now perceive, undeservedly on your part; but seeing this your humility and faithfulness, I shall neither slay you nor henceforth any more have you in distrust, for any report that shall be made to me. And therefore I raise you upon mine honour.” (ii) b (R.Fabyan, The New Chronicles of England and France, ed. Henry Ellis (1811), 567) In this year and 20th day of the month of November, a great council was held at the White Friars of London, by which it was amongst other things concluded that for the king’s great journey that he intended to take, in visiting of the holy sepulchre of Our Lord, certain galleys of war should be made, and other provision concerning the same journey. Whereupon all hasty and possible speed was made; but after the feast of Christmas, while he was making his progress at Saint Edward’s shrine, to take there his leave, and so to speed him upon his journey, he became so sick that such as were about him feared that he would have died right there, wherefore they, for his comfort, bore him into the abbot’s place, and lodged him in a chamber, and there upon a pallet laid him before the fire, where he lay in great agony a certain time. At length, when he was come to himself, not knowing where he was, he enquired of such of them as were about him, what place that was. They showed him that it belonged to the Abbot of Westminster; and because he felt himself so sick, he commanded them to ask if that chamber had any special name; whereunto it was answered that it was named Jerusalem. Then said the king: “Praise be to the Father of Heaven, for now I know I shall die in this chamber, according to the prophecy of me beforesaid, that I should die in Jerusalem.” And so after that he made himself ready, and died shortly afterwards, upon the day of St Cuthbert, or the 20th day of March, when he had reigned 13 years 5 months 21 days. 100. The tradition of Henry V’s conversion to sobriety on his accession, 1413 (The Brut Chronicle, ed. F.W.D.Brie (Early English Text Society, 1906,1908, original series, Nos. 131, 136), 594 [English]) And in the same year he was crowned King of England at Westminster on the 9th day of April; and he was a worthy king and a gracious man and a worthy conqueror. And before he was king, when he was Prince of Wales, he fell and inclined greatly to riot, and drew to wild company. And divers gentlemen and gentlewomen followed his will and his desire at his commandment; and likewise all his train of his household were round him and pleased with his governance, except three men of his household, who were very sad and sorry about his governance; and they counselled him ever contrary, and fain would

English historical documents

202

have had him to do well, and forsake riot. And therefore he hated those three most of all men in his house, unto the time that his father was dead. And then he began to reign as king, and he remembered the great charge and worship that he should take upon him. And at once he commanded all his people who were parties to his misgovernance before that time, and all his household, to come before him. And when they heard that, they were full glad, for they supposed that he would have promoted them into great offices, and that they would stand in great favour and trust with him, and be nearest of counsel, as they were before that time. And trusting thereupon, they were the homelier and bolder unto him, and did not dread him at all, insomuch that when they were come before him, some of them winked at him, and some smiled, and thus they made foolish grimaces unto him, many of them. But for all that, the prince kept his countenance very serious towards them, and said to them: “Sirs, you are the people that I have cherished and maintained in riot and wild governance, and here I give you all in commandment and charge you, that from this day forward you forsake all misgovernance and live according to the laws of Almighty God and the laws of our land. And whoever does the contrary, I make faithful promise to God, that he shall be truly punished according to the law, without any favour or grace.” And he charged them, on pain of death, that they should never give him comfort nor counsel to fall to riot any more; for he had taken a charge on him, for which all his wits and powers were too little, without the help of God and good governance. And so he rewarded them richly with gold and silver, and other jewels, and charged them all to leave his household, and live as good men, and never come any more into his presence, because he would have no occasion or remembrance whereby he should fall to riot again. And thus he sent away all his household, saving those three persons that he hated most, who were very sorry about his behaviour; and those he loved afterwards the best for their good counsel and good governance, and made them afterwards great lords. And thus were left in his household no more than those three men. And many of those who had aided and consented to his wildness, fell afterwards to great mischief and sorrow. 101. The Dauphin taunts Henry V by a gift of tennis-balls, 1414 (“The Chronicle of John Strecche for the Reign of Henry V”, ed. F.Taylor, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, XVI (1932), 149 [Latin]) The incident is said to have taken place at Kenilworth, and Strecche was at this time in charge of Brooke in Rutlandshire, a cell of Kenilworth Priory.

King Henry, conspicuous for the nobility of his character, in the second year of his reign sent to France certain ambassadors in state, i.e. a bishop, two doctors, and two knights in fitting array. They held a conference with the King of France and his council about a marriage to be solemnly celebrated between Henry, King of England, and the noble lady Katherine, daughter of the King of France; but these ambassadors of the King of England had only a short discussion with the French on this matter without reaching any

The political framework

203

conclusion consistent with the honour or convenience of our king, and so they returned home. For these Frenchmen, puffed up with pride and lacking in foresight, hurling mocking words at the ambassadors of the King of England, said foolishly to them that as Henry was but a young man, they would send to him little balls to play with and soft cushions to rest on until he should have grown to a man’s strength. When the king heard these words he was much moved and troubled in spirit; yet he addressed these short, wise, and honest words to those standing round him: “If God wills, and if my life shall be prolonged with health, in a few months I shall play with such balls in the Frenchmen’s court-yards that they will lose the game eventually and for their game win but grief. And if they shall sleep too long on their cushions in their chambers, I will awake them, before they wish it, from their slumbers at dawn by beating on their doors.” 102. The final demands of Henry V’s ambassadors, March 1415 (Rymer, Foedera, IV, ii, 106–9 [Latin], from B.M., Cottonian MS., Caligula D 5) For Henry V’s last and self-justifying letter to the king of France, see Chronique du religieux de Saint-Denys, V (Paris, 1844,) 526–30.

We sought, first, from his cousin of France the crown and kingdom of France, with all the rights and appurtenances belonging to it, to be effectually restored and handed over to our dread lord the king. And after a short interval, because it truly seemed to us that the commissaries and deputies of our kinsman of France would not accept this proposal at all, for the good of the negotiation and speedier conclusion of it, under certain protests we condescended to other proposals. We sought that at the least there might be restored to our aforesaid most dread lord other rights, inheritances, and lordships belonging to him in addition to the crown of France, and detained on behalf of his kinsman, that is The homage, superiority and lordship of the duchy of Normandy The homage, superiority, and lordship of the duchy of Touraine, and of the county of Anjou and Maine The superiority and homage of the duchy of Brittany The superiority and homage of the county and country of Flanders And all that part of Aquitaine which the aforesaid kinsman of France and others on his behalf, detains at present And all other duchies, counties, lordships, towns, estates, etc., which by the treaty of peace between Edward late king of England and John then his brother of France, of good memory, were assigned to the aforesaid Edward…. And moreover…we demand all the castles, towns, strongholds, lordships, etc. between the waters of the Somme and Gravelines. And that our most dread lord and his heirs may have and hold all the foregoing freely and quietly as a neighbour, without any superiority or appeal to be claimed from him or his heirs on behalf of the said kinsman of France or his heirs in any way whatsoever….

English historical documents

204

We demanded…half of the county of Provence with the castles and lordships of Beaufort and Nogent to be effectively delivered to our lord the king, to belong to him by hereditary right. We, the aforesaid ambassadors, demanded 1,600,000 crowns, of which two shall be worth an English noble, which ought to have been paid to the aforesaid former King Edward, for the ransom of John, lately his brother of France of excellent memory, which yet remain unpaid, to be effectively handed over to our lord King Henry And we demanded for the dowry of the aforesaid Lady Catherine in the event of her being joined in marriage by the favour of God to our most dread lord the king, 2,000,000 crowns, of which two shall always be worth one English noble. [These are extracts from the schedule of claims which had been rejected by the French the previous August but were now put forward again in their entirety. The French in reply were prepared to make extensive territorial concessions and finally to offer 800,000 crowns for Catherine’s dowry; but as the English would not reduce their demands below the simple execution of the whole of the Treaty of Brétigny, with the cession of the half of Provence and the lordships of Beaufort and Nogent and 1,000,000 crowns for the dowry, the conference ended with no agreement; and Henry completed his arrangements for the invasion of France.]

103. The conspiracy at Southampton in 1415 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 305 [Latin]) While the king was awaiting at Southampton the arrival of his magnates, who were to go with him on his expedition, three of the most powerful of them, in whom he specially trusted, conspired to kill him…. The first and chief of them was Henry Lord Le Scrope, in whose faith and constancy the king had trusted his whole heart…. He was so much esteemed by the king that when the latter held public or private deliberations, the discussion was concluded by the advice of Scrope…. If a solemn embassy had to be sent to France, the king thought that it ought to be carried out by the ability and person of Henry Le Scrope. But he entered into negotiations with the enemy, as a hidden foe to his lord the king, whom he soothed with false assurances…. He had as accomplices in his treason Richard, Earl of Cambridge, brother of the Duke of York, and Thomas Grey, a northern knight. The king had created this Richard an earl and had enriched him with many goods, and had honoured him outstandingly because of his lineage and parentage. But no goodwill shown towards them, no benefits conferred upon them, could deter the traitors from preparing to kill so great a benefactor. They were, however, discovered, thanks be to God, before they were able to bring their plan into effect, and by the judgements of their peers they were ordered to be beheaded. The king pardoned them the other penalties which might justly have been exacted for treason (except in the case of Henry Scrope, who is said to have been drawn), and he is even reported to have wept at their fate. Wherefore some, impressed by the king’s modesty, compassion, and piety, transferred to him the praises of Augustus composed by Ovid, who said: Let the prince be slow to punish, and swift to reward,

The political framework

205

And grieve as often as he is compelled to be fierce.

104. The appeal for mercy of Richard Earl of Cambridge to Henry V in 1415 (Rymer, Foedera, IV, ii, 142 [English] from B.M., Cottonian MS., Vespasian C.XIV, f. 47a. My most dreadful and sovereign liege lord, may it please your highness to know, concerning the plot hatched against your high estate, including the Earl of March by his own assent and myself by my assent, whereof I am more repentant than of anything else in the world, by the agreement of Lord Scrope and Sir Thomas Grey I purposed to have had the aforesaid earl into the land of Wales without your consent, to confer upon the earl the sovereignty of this land if that man whom they call King Richard had not been alive, as I know very well he is not; for the which point I put myself wholly at your mercy. And as for the form of a proclamation which was to have been read out in the earl’s name as the heir to the crown of England against you, my liege lord, to be called by the name of “Harry of Lancaster usurper of England”, with the intention of making people draw towards him and away from you, Scrope did not know of this proclamation from me but from Grey, I having along with the earl a banner of the arms of England and also the crown of Spain on a cushion, which, my liege lord, is one of your badges; for the which offence I put myself wholly in your mercy. And as for the plot hatched by Unfreuyle [Umfraville] and Wideryngtown [Widdrington] for bringing in that person whom they call King Richard and also Henry Percy out of Scotland with a force of Scots, their joint forces seeming to them strong enough to give you battle, Sir Thomas Grey knowing of this intention and I also but not Scrope, I submit myself entirely to your mercy. And as for the seizure of your castles in Wales which Davy Ho well undertook to hand over to me if there were a rising in the north, I put myself wholly in your grace on this point. And as for the Earl of March and Lusy [Lucy] his man, they both told me that the earl had for a great while not been shriven at his confessions without putting himself under penance to claim what he called his right-woe be the time that ever I knew any thing that belonged to him…. Of which points and articles written above, (and all others which I cannot now remember but truly as often as any come to my mind I shall duly and truly I shall confess them to you) I beseech you, my liege lord, for the love of him who suffered the Passion on the Good Friday, have compassion on me, your liege man. And if any of these persons whose names are contained in this bill should contradict the substance of what I have written at this time, I shall be ready with the might of God to make it good [i.e. to defend these assertions] as you, my liege lord, will award to me. 105. The battle of Agincourt, according to an eye-witness, 1415 (Henrici Quinti Angliae Regis Gesta, ed. B.Williams (English Historical Society, 1850), 44–60 [Latin]) Professor J.S.Roskell and Dr. F.Taylor are preparing a new edition of this work. I am grateful to them for elucidating difficulties in the rather obscure Latin style of this author.

English historical documents

206

And when on the following day, Thursday, we were descending the valley towards the River of the Swords, the king was told by scouts and cavalry skirmishers that there was a powerful adversary numbering many thousands on the other side of the river, almost a league to our right. We therefore crossed the river as fast as we could, and when we reached the crest of the hill on the other side, we saw emerging from the valley about a mile from us hateful swarms of Frenchmen, who appeared to us to be an incomparable multitude in their columns, lines and divisions. They took up their position just over half a mile ahead of us, filling a broad field like an innumerable swarm of locusts, having a small valley between us and them. Meanwhile our king was encouraging his army courteously and bravely, marshalling them into lines and wings, as if they were to go at once into battle. And then everyone who had not previously cleared his conscience by confession, put on the armour of penitence…. And among other sayings which I noted then, a certain knight, Sir Walter Hungerford, wished to the king’s face that in addition to the small band which he had there he could have had ten thousand of the better archers of England, who would have been glad to be with them. The king replied: “Thou speakest as a fool, for by the God of Heaven in whose grace I trust and in whom is my firm hope of victory, I would not have one more than I have, even if I could…. Dost thou not believe that the Almighty can through this humble little band overcome the pride of these Frenchmen, who boast of their numbers and their strength?”… And when the enemy in position saw and considered the disposition and fewness of our troops, they betook themselves to a field beyond a certain wood, which lay near to the left between us and them, where was our road to Calais. So our king, thinking that they might go round the wood to attack him along the road, or else might go round woods further away in the neighbourhood and surround us from all sides, at once moved his lines and he always stationed himself to face the enemy… And when at last we were at the last rays of light, and darkness fell between us and them, we still stood in the field and heard our foes, everyone calling as the manner is, for his comrade, servant and friend, dispersed by chance in so great a multitude. Our men began to do the same, but the king ordered silence throughout the whole army, under penalty of the loss of horse and harness in the case of a gentleman,… and of the right ear in the case of a yeoman or below, with no hope of pardon, for anyone who might presume to break the king’s order. And he at once went in silence to a hamlet nearby, in a place where we had only a few houses; most of us had to rest in gardens and orchards, through a night of pouring rain. And when our enemies considered the quietness of our men and our silence, they thought that we were struck with fright at our small numbers and contemplated flight during the night; so they established fires and strong watches throughout the fields and routes. And as it was said they thought they were so sure of us that they cast dice that night for our king and nobles. And on the morrow, Friday the feast of Saints Crispin and Crispinian, 25th October, the Frenchmen, at dawn, organized themselves into lines, battles, and wedges, and took up their position facing us in the field called Agincourt, through which lay our route to Calais, in terrific multitude; and they set squadrons of horsemen in many hundreds on either side of their front lines, to break our line and the strength of our archers. The front line was composed of dismounted men made up of all the noblest and choicest of their forces, who in the forest of spears…were by estimation thirty times more numerous than

The political framework

207

our men. But their rear lines…were all on horseback…and compared with our men they were an innumerable multitude. And meanwhile our king prepared himself for the field, after hearing lauds and masses and…arranged his small numbers in one “battle”, placing his vanguard as a wing to his right with the Duke of York in command and the rearguard as a wing to his left under Lord Camoys. Interspersed among the line were wedges of archers, whom the king ordered to affix stakes in front of them, as he had ordered earlier, to stop the attacks of the horsemen…. And when much of the day had been consumed…and both armies had stood and had not moved a foot, the king, seeing that the opposing army was abstaining from the attack which had been expected…either to cause us to break our order, or to strike terror into our hearts because of their numbers, or…because they expected more reinforcements to arrive, and knowing that our shortage of food would conquer us by hunger, ordered his men to move towards the enemy, sending orders to the baggage-train of the army to follow up close so that they should not fall as booty to the enemy…. After the king had estimated that all his baggage had come up to his rear, he advanced towards the enemy, with his men, in the name of Jesus… and of the glorious Virgin and St George, and the enemy moved towards him. [The priests, including the author, then prayed hard for deliverance.] And when they came near enough to attack, the French horsemen posted on the sides rushed against our archers on both flanks of our army; but quickly, God willing, they were compelled to retreat by the showers of arrows and to flee behind their lines…except the large numbers whom the points of the stakes or the sharpness of the arrows stopped from flight by piercing the horses or the horsemen. The crossbowmen of the enemy, who were behind the men at arms and on their flanks, fell back in face of the strength of our archers after the first draw, which was too hasty and injured only a few of our men…. But the French nobles who had first ap-proached in line, just as they had come from their muster nearby…divided themselves into three columns, either for fear of the arrows…or to penetrate more quickly our force to the banners, attacked our forces at the three places where there were banners; and at the first clash they met our men with such a fierce impact that they were compelled to fall back for almost the distance of a lance…. And then the battle grew hotter and our archers shot…their arrows through the flanks of the enemy, the battle continually renewing. And when their arrows were ex-hausted, they seized axes, swords and lances from those who were lying on the ground, and beat down, wounded and killed the enemy with them…. And the just Judge who wished to strike down the proud multitude of the enemy with the thunderbolts of vengeance…broke their powe…. No one had time to receive them as captives, but almost all of them without distinction of persons, when they fell to the ground, struck down by our men or by those following them, I know not by what hidden judgement of God, were killed without intermission…. For when some of them slain at the start of the engagement fell in front, such was the indisciplined violence and pressure of the host behind that the living fell on the dead, and others falling on the living were killed in turn; and so in the three places where there was a concentration of our forces, the piles of dead and those crushed in between grew so much that our men climbed on these heaps which grew higher than a man and slew those below with swords, axes, and other weapons. And when at last after two or three hours the vanguard was cut up and worn out, and the rest were forced into

English historical documents

208

flight, our men began to sort these heaps and separate the living from the dead, intending to keep the living as property to be ransomed. But behold! at once, we know not by what wrath of God, a cry arose that the enemy’s rearguard of cavalry, in overwhelming numbers had repaired the enemy line…and was coming against our small and tired band. And so they killed their prisoners with swords…without any distinction of persons, except for the Dukes of Orléans and Bourbon and other illustrious persons in the royal entourage, and a few others, lest the captives should be our ruin in the coming battle. But after a little while the troops of the enemy, having tasted the bitterness of our weapons, and at our king’s approach, left the field of blood to us, by God’s will, with carts and many other waggons filled with victuals, and spears, lances and bows…. Of the French there were according to their own enumeration more than 60,000 bearing the sword, whereas the number of our small company of fighters did not exceed 6,000 men. Of this multitude there fell the Dukes of Bar, Brabant, and Alençon, five counts, more than 90 barons and bannerets, whose names are given in the book of records, and more than 1,500 knights according to their own computation, and between 4,000 and 5,000 other gentle folk, almost the whole nobility of French chivalry. And of the rest there were captured the Dukes of Orléans and Bourbon, the Earls of Richmond, Vendôme, and Eu, and also that most valiant knight the Lord Boucicault, the marshal of France, but few other gentle folk. But there was great joy amongst our people and great astonishment, because of our small forces there were found dead on the field not more than nine or ten persons, beyond the illustrious and wise prince the Lord Edward Duke of York, and the lord Michael, Earl of Suffolk, a vigorous young man, and two newly created knights, who fell in the line of battle…. Therefore our England has cause for joy and cause for grief; for joy because of a great victory and the salvation of our men, for grief because of the suffering and death of Christians. And when our king after the battle was finished had spent the night in the same place…where he had rested the previous night, on the morrow he resumed his journey to Calais…and on the Tuesday on the morrow of the feast of Saints Simon and Jude, he reached Calais; and on the Saturday after the feast of St Martin…he returned to England by the port of Dover with his prisoners. And one cannot recall…that any prince ruled…more industriously, vigor-ously or humanely his people or acted in a more manly fashion on the field of battle; it is not recorded in chronicles or annals of the realm, in which our past is recorded, that any king of England ever accomplished so much in so short a time, and returned to his own realm with so great and glorious a triumph. To God alone be the honour and glory, world without end. Amen. 106. The Agincourt Carol, 1415 (MS. Arch. Selden, B.26 (Bodleian Library), printed by R.H.Robbins in Historical Poems of the XIVth and XVth Centuries (New York, Columbia University Press, 1959), 91 [English, with Latin refrain])

The political framework

209

Deo gracias anglia, redde pro victoria [To God give thanks, O England, for the victory.]

Our king went forth to Normandy, With grace and might of chivalry; There God for him wrought marvellously, Wherefore England may call and cry, Deo gracias! He set a siege, the sooth for to say, To Harfleur town with royal array; That town he won and made affray, That France shall rue till Domésday, Deo gracias! Then went our king with all his host Through France, for all the hostile host, He spared no dread of least or most, Until he came to Agincourt coast, Deo gracias! Then forsooth that knight comely In Agincourt field he fought manly; Through grace of God most mighty He had both the field and the victory. Deo gracias! There dukes and earls, lord and baron Were taken and slain, and that well soon; And some were led into London With joy and mirth and great renown Deo gracias! May gracious God now save our king His people and his well-willing; Give him good life and good ending,

English historical documents

210

That we with mirth may safely sing, Deo gracias!

107. Henry V’s reception into London after Agincourt, 1415 (Henrici Quinti Gesta, 60–8 [Latin]) He took his journey by way of the sacred thresholds of the churches of Canterbury and of St Augustine’s Canterbury to his manor of Eltham, proposing to honour the city of London on the following Saturday with his presence. The citizens, hearing with the greatest joy the news of his approach, prepared themselves and the city in the meanwhile…. And when the desired day of Saturday dawned, the citizens went out to meet the king at the brow of Blackheath, i.e. the mayor and 24 aldermen in scarlet, and the rest of the lesser citizens in red cloaks with red and white party-coloured hoods, to the number of about 20,000 horsemen…. And when the king came through the midst of them about ten o’clock, and the citizens had given glory and honour to God, and congratulations to the king…the citizens rode before him towards the city, and the king followed…. When they arrived at the tower at the entrance to the bridge…there placed on the top of the tower was an enormous figure, with…a great axe in his right hand and the keys of the city hanging from a staff in his left hand, like a door-keeper. On his right side stood an effigy not much smaller, of a woman dressed in a scarlet cloak and feminine ornaments, as if they were man and wife who in their best clothes were looking for the desired face of their lord and were receiving him with full honour. The tower was adorned with spears bearing the royal arms, projecting from the battlements, and trumpets and horns sounded in manifold melody; spread across the front of the tower was this elegant and convenient inscription, “The City of the King of Justice”. And when they reached the little bridge, they found on both sides before them a lofty pillar in the manner of a tower…made of wood, covered with linen cloth painted the colour of white marble and green jasper, to imitate the blocks and stones of mason’s work. On top of the column on the right hand side was the effigy of an antelope…with a splendid shield blazoned with the royal arms hanging from its neck, and bearing the royal sceptre in the right foot. On the top of the other column stood the image of a lion, which held aloft in its right claws…the banner of the king displayed; across…the road rose a turret…in the middle of which under a splendid canopy stood a most impressive image of St George, armed, except for his head, which was adorned with a laurel wreath sown with gems sparkling like precious stones, having behind him a scarlet tapestry gleaming with his arms in a number of shields. On his right hung a triumphal helmet, and on his left a great shield of his arms;…in his right hand he held the hilt of the sword with which he was girt and in his left he held a scroll extended across the battlements with the words: “Honour and glory be to God alone”. And aloft on the tower in front was displayed this prophesy of congratulation: “The streams of the river make glad the city of God”…. And in a house near the tower was a great crowd of boys representing the angelic host clad in white robes, with faces gleaming with gilt paint, with shining wings and the hair of girls

The political framework

211

crowned with laurel crowns, who sang on the king’s approach with sweet voices to the accompaniment of an organ a song according to the programme in English. [“Hail, flower of England, knight of Christendom” and “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord”, according to the Brut Chronicle, ed. F.W.D.Brie, II (1908), 558.] And when they reached the tower of the aqueduct in Cornhill they found the tower hidden under a scarlet cloth stretched in the form of a tent, on spears hidden under the cloth. Surrounding the middle of the tower in four prominent positions were the arms of St George, St Edward, St Edmund, and of England, interspersed with small shields of royal arms and inset with this pious legend: “Since the king hopes in the Lord and in the mercy of the Highest, he shall not be moved.”… Under a covering was a band of venerable white-haired prophets in tunics and golden cloaks, with their heads hidden in turbans of gold and red who released, when the king came by, sparrows and other small birds in a great cloud as a sacrifice of thanksgiving to God for the victory He had given, some of the birds resting on the king’s breast, some of them alighting on his shoulder, and some flying round his head, while the prophets sang in a sweet voice, according to the programme, this psalm of recognition: “Sing to the Lord a new song, Hallelujah. For he hath done marvellous things, Hallelujah.” Then they went on to the tower of the conduit at the entrance to Cheapside which was decked with an awning of green…woven with little shields of the city’s arms set in florid profusion, supported on posts covered in the same colour and erected to resemble a building. The tower was decorated above with shafts of spears of arms placed on the battlements…and below the awning were venerable old men, twelve in number, clothed like the apostles and having the names of the twelve apostles written on their brows. With them were twelve kings, martyrs and confessors of the succession of England, with golden girdles round their loins, sceptres in their hands, and crowns on their heads…who sang in unison on the king’s approach a sweet song…. And they wafted to him round foils of silver intermingled with thin round wafers, and wine from the channels and cocks of the conduit, so that they might receive him with bread and wine as Melchisedech received Abraham when he returned from the fall of the four kings. And when they came to the cross in Cheapside…it was hidden by a beautiful castle of wood, very ingeniously and prettily constructed, and adorned with three beautiful columns,…which had…arches on either side projecting over the street, and stretching to the buildings on each side of the road…. And across the front of the arches was written, “Glorious things of thee are spoken, O city of God”. This castle was covered with linen painted the colour of white marble, and green and red jasper, as if the whole work had been the result of the mason’s art, fashioned from blocks of masonry and perfect precious stones. The top of the castle…was adorned with the arms of St George, flanked on one side by the arms of the king and on the other by those of the emperor;…on the lower turrets were the arms of the king’s ancestors and of the greater magnates of the realm. From the middle of the castle… projected a beautiful gateway, no less cunningly contrived, from which stretched a wooden bridge almost fifteen paces in length, of good width and about the height of a man’s waist…adorned with tapestries. When the king

English historical documents

212

approached there came out on to the bridge a chorus of beautiful girls dressed in virgin white…and playing on tambourines as a mark of rejoicing, as if to a David rejoicing at the fall of Goliath, who…represented the pride of the French, and singing: “Welcome, Henry the Fifth, King of England and of France”. From the top of the castle downwards, on the turrets, battlements, arches, and columns, were innumerable boys, dressed in white garments as angels and archangels, with shining wings and hair strewn with gems…who threw down on the…king as he passed underneath gold coins and laurel leaves, to the honour of Almighty God and as a sign of victory; and all sang together this angelic hymn as previously arranged: “We praise thee O God, we acknowledge thee to be the Lord”. And when they came to the tower of the conduit at the exit of Cheapside towards St Paul’s, the tower had been surrounded with many…niches, and in each niche was a beautiful young girl, in the posture of a statue; and in their hands were golden cups from which they very lightly puffed gold leaf upon the king’s head as he rode by. Above the tower was stretched a canopy sky-blue in colour decorated with clouds and many other contrivances; and the top of the canopy was adorned by an archangel in shining gold, and the four posts which held up the canopy were supported by four angels equally cunning in workmanship. Below the canopy…was a figure of majesty represented by a sun darting out flashing rays. Round the top of the canopy fluttered archangels singing sweetly all kinds of music…. And so that this tower might conform in its legend to the preceding praises to the honour and glory of God, not of men, it presented to the gaze of the passers-by this conclusion of praise: “Thanks be to God”. … Such was the dense throng of people in Cheapside from one end to the other that horsemen had scarcely…room to ride through the crowds, and the upper storeys and windows on either side were filled with the more noble ladies and women of the realm and with honest and honourable men, who flocked to such a delectable sight, adorned in garments of gold and satin and scarlet, and other types of dress; so that a bigger or more impressive crowd had never gathered before in London. But the king himself went along, amidst these shouts of praise and celebrations of the citizens, dressed in a purple robe, not with a haughty look and a pompous train…but with a serious countenance and a reverend pace accompanied by only a few of his most faithful servants; following him, guarded by knights, were the captive dukes, counts and the marshal. From his silent face and…sober pace it could be inferred that the king, silently contemplating, was giving thanks and glory to God alone and not to man. And when he had visited the sanctuary of SS Peter and Paul, he rode away to his palace of Westminster, escorted by the citizens. 108. The Emperor Sigismund helps the English against the French, 1416 (J.Caro, Aus der Kanzlei Kaiser Sigismunds (Vienna, 1879), in [Latin]) For the treaty of alliance between Henry V and Sigismund, see Rymer, Foedera iv, ii, 171. [In 1416 the Emperor Sigismund, anxious to promote the success of the council of Constance, visited France and England, to bring the two countries into peace and

The political framework

213

harmony. Henry V was, however, much more successful than the French in impressing him, until he became convinced that the continuation of the war was the fault of the French, and that the support of the English was essential to the success of the council. On 15 August 1416 he therefore concluded an offensive and defensive alliance with the English, and wrote to the French to call them to the peace conference at Calais. The king of France refused the invitation, whereupon Sigismund sent to him the following remonstrance.]

Because we were not able to fulfil our wish in our own person, we have besought you by letters and messengers sent to you many times both before and after the battle fought with the King of England, and have entreated the King of England with fraternal prayers and earnest exhortations, to abstain from aggression, for the sake of God, of reverence for Holy Mother Church, and the peace of Christian people, so that our prayers may be fulfilled. For to secure a satisfactory peace between France and England we have often spent sleepless nights and turned dinner into supper, so that either by solitary thought or by conference with others, we could find useful means to achieve peace between you and him…. O, how many letters for the peace of yourself and your kingdom have we sent to weary the pens of notaries and dry the ink of scribes, persuading you and him…that you should turn your minds to peace, since by honest reasons and lawful means both could become readily attuned to a peace or at least a truce. (Ibid. 121) From such a peace between France and England many good consequences would result; the princes would be freed, as well as other captives, the town of Harfleur would be restored, the kingdoms of France and England would rest together in abundance of peace…. We are also concerned because the strife between the realms is hindering very much the consummation of the union of the Holy Church of God, for which we and you and the princes of the whole world and the prelates of the Church are labouring and will continue to labour. And…how perilously is the power of Christianity divided by these wars and lessened by these divisions, and those who ought to exert their endeavours against the blasphemers of Christ are not afraid to engage in activities damaging to the supporters of the orthodox faith. 109. The English clear the Channel of enemy ships, 1416–17 A Chronicle of London, ed. Sir N.H.Nicolas and E.Tyrell (1827), 104 [English], from B.M., Harleian MS. 565, and Cottonian MS. Julius, B.I) And the same year [3 Henry V] the king went to Calais to treat with his adversary of France; and the same year the Duke of Bedford, the king’s brother, was made captain of the sea for a quarter of a year. At the same time he and his retinue took three carracks and sank the fourth, and a great hulk was sunk also; and soon after, in the same year, was

English historical documents

214

taken a great carrack at Dartmouth…. Also in the beginning of the fourth year of the reign of King Henry the Fifth, the Duke of Bedford and the Earl of March, with other certain lords and their retinue, fought with seven carracks of Genoa, and with about 50 other vessels, some hulks, some barges, some galleys, and some galleasses; of which, blessed be God, he took three carracks with their masters, and sank a great hulk called the black hulk of Flanders. The rest fled away from that place; and this was done upon the day of the Assumption of Our Lady [15 August], the fourth year above said [1416]. (Ibid. 105) And the same year [1417] upon the feast of SS Peter and Paul [29 June] the Earl of Huntingdon, with certain other lords and their retinue, fought with nine carracks of Genoa, the greatest that ever were seen near these coasts, and discomfited them; of which, thanked be God, he took three great ships with their masters, and the admiral of them all was called the Bastard of Bourbon, with all the treasure with which their wages should have been paid for a quarter of a year. And the other carracks all fled away. 110. The siege of Rouen, July 1418-January 1419 (John Page, “The Siege of Rouen”, The Historical Collections of a Citizen of London, ed. J.Gairdner (Camden Soc., 1876) [English verse]) For the letter dated 10 August 1418, from the king to the mayor and aldermen of London, requesting supplies of provisions for the army besieging Rouen, see H.T.Riley, Memorials of London and London Life, 664, from Letter Book I, fol. ccxvi.

[In August 1417 Henry V landed in Normandy and began the systematic conquest of that province by the capture of its castles and towns in succession. In July 1418 he besieged Rouen, the capital of the province and the key to the passage up the Seine. John Page was an eye-witness of this siege.] (1)

… But I will tell you who are here If to my tale you will give ear How the fifth Harry who was our liege With his royal host he set a siege Unto Rouen, that rich city… Listen to me a little space, And I will tell you how it was, And the better tell I may

The political framework

215

For at that siege with the king I lay. [The town was thoroughly blockaded by the English, who established a specially strong watch at each gate and surrounded the town with a ditch hedged with stakes and filled with traps and pitfalls. The town was also surrounded with scores of towers which housed three large guns below and seven small guns up above. By October the blockade had proved so effective that the townspeople were on the verge of famine.] (Ibid. 18)

By that time their victuals waxed quite scarce. Meat and drink and other victual In that city began to fail. Save clean water, in plenty too, And vinegar to put thereto. Their bread was very nearly gone, And flesh save horsemeat had they none. They ate up dogs, they ate up cats; They ate up mice, horses and rats. For a horse’s quarter, lean or fat, One hundred shillings it was at. A horse’s head for half a pound, A dog for the same money round. For 30 pennies went a rat. For two nobles went a cat. For sixpence went a mouse, They left but few in any house. For bread as broad as is my hand Was worth a frank, I understand. It was very poor that they could find, For it was made of such a kind. Not of meal and not of oats, But of bran, as God it wots [knows]. Onions and leeks, as will appear, Were to them a food full dear. Thereof was a piece at a shilling. He did well who got a pilling [small piece]. An egg at 9d, an apple at 10d… Then to die they did begin,

English historical documents

216

All that rich city within. They died so fast on every day That men could not all them in the earth lay. Even if a child should otherwise be dead, The mother would not give it bread… Nor would a child to its mother give; Everyone tried himself to live As long as he could last. Love and kindness both were past. [The garrison therefore drove the poor out of the town to save feeding them; but Henry V regarded them as the responsibility of the garrison and would not let them pass through the English lines; so they had to stay in the ditch, where many of them perished miserably of cold and hunger. At Christmas the king took pity on these unfortunates and gave them some food and drink; but then the rigours of the siege were resumed and on New Year’s Eve the besieged called out at each gate to the besiegers. They were heard at the Porte du Pont de Seine by Sir Gilbert Umfraville who arranged for twelve leading Roueners to come to see Henry V. They begged him to have mercy on them as their poor were starving and many were dead. Henry V told the Roueners that it was not he who had put the poor folk into the ditch and swore that he would not go without having his city. The Roueners asked for time to consider and Henry arranged for four of his lords to meet the Roueners on a later day. By this time the people in the ditch were in a very bad state indeed.] (Ibid. 35)

There men might see a great pity, A child of two years or of three Go about and beg his bread, For father and mother both were dead. And under them the water stood [for it had rained much] And yet they lay crying after food. Some had starved in that place to death, And some had stopped both eyes and breath, And some were crooked in the knees And were now as lean as any trees. You saw a woman hold in her arm Her own dead child, with nothing warm. And babies sucking on the pap Within a dead woman’s lap.

The political framework

217

There men might find it at last arrive That twelve were dead to one alive. And the dead knew nought of death So secretly they gave up their breath Without a noise or any cry, As if they slept, so did they die. [The talks lasted a fortnight and then broke down; whereupon the poor of Rouen upbraided the rich and called them murderers, and appealed to God against them. The governors of the city therefore decided that they must yield. A conference was held and ended with the agreement that Rouen was to be given up if no rescue came within eight days.] (Ibid. 40)

Now if to my tale you will time afford I will tell you of their accord. In eight days time, as I you told, If no rescue came to that stronghold, They should deliver that city And all the burgesses English should be. And to our king of money sound, They should pay our king £50,000. And further they should undertake A castle for our king to make. Within six months, without a let [hindrance] And on the Seine it should be set… And all the soldiers that were there, Their goods to lose and to go bare In their doublets out of the town; And yet our king gave every man a gown. [As the French king sent no relief the governor of Rouen surrendered the keys of the town after eight days, and the king handed them to the Duke of Exeter so that he could take over the city that night. The duke was welcomed by music and shouts from thousands of French; but it was sad to see the skin and bone folk, some dying, and hundreds crying for bread. The next day the king entered the city.]

English historical documents

218

111. The building of a great ship for the king at Bayonne, 1419 (Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series, I, 69 from B.M., Add. MS. 4602 [English]) Most excellent, most high and mighty prince, and most sovereign lord, all manner of low subjection aforesaid. May it please your royal majesty to know the governance and the making of your ship at Bayonne. At the making of this letter it was in this state, that is to say, 36 strakes in height boarded, on the which strakes are laid 11 beams; the mast beam is 46 common feet in length, and the beam of the hameron [hold] is 39 feet in length, and the beam of the hameron behind is 33 feet in length; from the foremost end of the stem to the post behind is 186 feet in length; the stem is 86 feet in height and the post 48 feet. The keel is 112 feet in length; but it is rotten and must be changed. Also may it please your royal majesty to know that your ship will not be ready at the term that they have promised you; and as far as I can see, not this 4 or 5 years hereafter. For the mayor and his consorts have paid for your assize 4d of the lb, to your great damage and their profit; for it is worth thrice as much as they pay. Therefore as I have written to your royal majesty before now, if all the money that comes of your assize should go to the ship’s works, your ship would soon be ready, and yet of that assize but a little sum is paid, for they take thereof to their own use. And in this state of affairs your works of your ship may not go forward, and for anything that I can see they will leave the making of your ship in a short time, unless you make another order thereto. Also may it please your royal majesty to know that they may not excuse themselves on account of boards of timber, for they now have enough in the country, as good as any may be; and as regards carpenters they might have enough if they wished but they let them go where they will. Also may it please your royal majesty to know that I cannot find out about any costs or expenditure, or in what manner your money is laid out, except as they themselves please. And leaving all my occupations I busy myself and work about the construction of your ship. Most excellent, most high, most mighty prince and most sovereign lord, Almighty Jesus have you in his keeping. Written at Bay onne the 25th day of April, by your poor subject and true liege man. John Alectre. [This Bayonne ship was the biggest of all Henry V’s ships, but was probably never completed, for Henry V died soon afterwards, and the council of Henry VI’s minority sold most of the navy that Henry V had so carefully built up. The account of William Soper, clerk of the king’s ships from 31 August, 10 Henry V, to Michaelmas, 5 Henry VI, recorded in the Enrolled Foreign Account for 9 Henry VI (E. 364/65), shows that his sales of ships and stores brought in £1,320 45 the council seems to have used the proceeds for current general expenditure. For further comment on this letter of John Alectre, see J.H.Wylie, The Reign of Henry V, II, 384–5. For details of other shipbuilding activities of Henry V at Southampton, see the articles by Mrs W.J. Carpenter Turner in The Mariner’s Mirror, 40 (1954), 55–72, 270–81, especially for the construction of the Grâcedieu, the Valentine, the Falconer, and the Holy Ghost.]

The political framework

219

112. The murder of the Duke of Burgundy at Montereau, 1419 (Jean Juvenal des Ursins, op. cit. 556 [French]) Now was a day arranged to meet at Montereau, 26th August: and the Dauphin arranged that the castle there should be presented and delivered to the Duke of Burgundy and his men. And the lord and regent [the Dauphin] was at Montereau precisely on the day, but the Duke of Burgundy was not. He had been at Troyes where the king, the queen, and Princess Catherine were, and he arrived at the castle of Montereau on September 10th. He announced his arrival to the Dauphin, and after this each of them came, accompanied by ten lords, to the place where the agreement was to be made…. They were inspected on the one side and on the other, and neither side had any harness or arms except hauberks and swords. When they went in, they put a guard on the two gates, and checked each of the persons, the Dauphin those who entered from the side of the town and the Duke of Burgundy those who came from the side of the castle. Then when all had entered the enclosure, different accounts are given of what happened, in various words and narratives. For those who were attached to the party of the Duke of Burgundy say that when the Duke of Burgundy saw the Dauphin, he knelt down and did the reverence and honour that was appropriate and said, “Sir, I am come at your command: you know the desolation of the kingdom and of your domain: pay heed to its restoration. As for me, I am ready and prepared to expose my body and goods for this end, and those of my vassals, subjects, and allies.” Then, they say, the Dauphin raised his hat, thanked him, and told him to rise: and as the duke rose, the Dauphin made a sign to those who were with him: and then the Lord Tanneguy du Chastel came near the duke and pushed him by the shoulders, saying to him “Die!” and struck him with an axe on the head, and so he slew him in this way. There was another of the duke’s party, called the Seigneur de Nouailles, who was mortally wounded, so that at the end of three days he died too. But others tell quite a different tale, that is to say that the Dauphin, when they had reached the enclosure, spoke the first and said to the Duke of Burgundy: “Good cousin, you know that at the treaty of peace lately made at Melun between us, we agreed that within a month we should assemble in some place to treat of the needs of the realm, and to find a way of resisting the English, the ancient foes of this kingdom. You swore and promised this, and a place was chosen to which we came promptly on the day appointed: and we had to wait for you there fifteen days, during which time our people and yours did much harm to the people, and our foes were conquering the country everywhere: I pray you, let us discuss what can be done. I hold the peace between us as already made, as we have already sworn and promised it: that is why we can find a means of resisting the English.” Then the duke replied, “Nothing can be done or advised except in your father’s presence, and you must go to him.” At this the Dauphin said softly, that he would go to see his father when it should seem good to him and never at the will of the Duke of Burgundy, and everyone knew that what the two of them should agree would be acceptable to his father. Some further words followed. Then the Seigneur de Nouailles came near to the duke who reddened and said, “Sir, whoever may wish to see him, you will come now to your father” and tried to put his left hand on him while he half-drew his sword with the other. Then the said lord Tanneguy took the Dauphin in his arms, and lifted him outside the gate of the entrance to the enclosure. Then some of the Dauphin’s followers struck the Duke of Burgundy and the Seigneur de Nouailles, so that both of

English historical documents

220

them died. Those of the castle who were nearest to the enclosure did not worry, thinking that it was the Dauphin who had been slain. With the Duke of Burgundy was Charles of Bourbon, who was very pleased to meet the Dauphin, and said that the Dauphin knew nothing of the murder and had no part in plotting it. It was said that it will never be known or found that the lord Tanneguy du Chastel had any hand in it, but that he only tried to save his master. At this sudden death the Dauphin was aghast, as were several other men of his party. Those however who were extreme and passionate for the party of Orléans said that it was a divine punishment and several other things which are of no value and do not need to be repeated…. When the new Duke of Burgundy, named Philip, learnt of the death of his father, he was very grieved and angry and not without cause: and he assembled his council to know what he ought to do. Moreover he sent to the King of England to treat of peace, even more fully than his father had offered: and in this hope truce was made between the Duke of Burgundy, in the name of the king whom he abused, and the King of England. And their people considered themselves as all of the same party, English and Burgundians, to make mortal war on the Dauphin and those who supported him, to avenge themselves for this death. And this truce was to last until the following Easter…. And they did the worst they could to the lands of the Duke of Orléans, who was a prisoner in England and could not well defend and guard them. Notwithstanding the truce with the English, food was so dear in Paris that the sextier of wheat cost eleven gold franks, and the Parisians were in very great necessity. 113. The treaty of Troyes, 1420 (i) The text of the treaty (Rymer, Foedera, IV, iii, 179, from Close Roll, 8 Henry V, m. 12d [English]) [The duke of Burgundy had accepted Henry’s terms in December 1419; the preliminary articles of the treaty were agreed on 21 April 1420; and the final version of the treaty, from the English version of which extracts are given here, was ratified on 21 May 1420 in the cathedral of Troyes.]

Henry, by the grace of God, King of England, Heir and Regent of France, and Lord of Ireland, for perpetual remembrance, to all Christian people…we notify and declare that…we have taken a treaty with our father-in-law [Charles of France]; in the which treaty between our father and us, it is concluded and agreed, in the form according to the following manner: First, it is agreed between our said father of France and us, that for as much as by the bond of matrimony made for the good of peace between us and our most dear and most beloved Katherine, the daughter of our said father and of our most dear mother, Isabel his wife, those same Charles and Isabel are made our father and mother, therefore we shall regard them as our father and mother, and honour them as such, and as it fitteth such and

The political framework

221

so worthy a prince and princess, to be honoured especially before all other temporal princes of this world. Also, that we will not disturb, distress, nor harass our said father; but he shall hold and possess, as long as he lives, as he holds and possesses at this time, the crown and the royal dignity of France, and the rents, fruits, and profits of the same, to the sustenance of his estate and the charges of the realm; and our foresaid mother shall also hold, as long as she lives, the estate and dignity of queen, according to the manner of the said realm, with a suitable and convenient part of the said rents and profits. Also that the foresaid Katherine shall take and have dower in our realm of England as queens of England hitherto were wont to take and have, that is to say, to the sum of 40,000 crowns a year; of which two shall always be worth an English noble…. Also, that after the death of our said father, and from thence forward, the crown and realm of France, with all their rights and appurtenances, shall remain and abide and belong to us and our heirs for evermore. Also for as much as our said father is afflicted with various infirmities in such manner that he may not attend in his own person to arrange for the needs of the realm of France, therefore during the life of our said father the faculty and exercise of governance and disposition of the public good and common profit of the realm of France, with the counsel of nobles and wise men of the realm,…shall remain and abide with us, so that henceforward we may govern the same realm, both by ourself and also by others whom, with the counsel of the said nobles, we may be pleased to depute…. Also that we will do our utmost to see that the court of the parlement of France be kept and observed in its authority and superiority, and in all that is due to it, in all manner of places that now, or in time to come, are, or shall be, subject to our said father. Also that we diligently and truly to the utmost of our power, shall work and act so that justice may be administered and enforced in the realm of France, according to the laws, customs, and rights of the same realm without exception of persons…. Also that we to the utmost of our strength and as soon as it may conveniently be done, shall labour to put into obedience to our father all manner of cities, towns, castles, places, countries, and persons, within the realm of France disobedient and rebellious to our said father, holding or belonging to the party commonly called Dauphin or Armagnac. Also that all manner of conquests that shall be made by us in the realm of France over the said rebels, outside the duchy of Normandy, shall be done to the profit of the said father…. Also by God’s help when it shall happen to us to come to the crown of France, the duchy of Normandy and all other places conquered by us in the realm of France shall be under the commandment, obedience and monarchy of the crown of France. Also that we will not impose any impositions or exactions, or cause them to be imposed, on the subjects of our said father without reasonable and necessary cause, nor otherwise than for the common good of the said realm of France, and according to the rules and demands of the reasonable and approved laws and customs of the realm. Also that neither our father nor we nor our brother the Duke of Burgundy shall begin nor make with Charles, styling himself the Dauphin of Viennes, any treaty of peace or accord, except by the counsel and assent of all and each of us three and of the three estates of both of the aforesaid realms.

English historical documents

222

(ii) The commons fear for the independence of England when Henry becomes king of France, 1420 (Rot. Parl. IV, 127 [French]) Also pray the commons that as the Lord Edward, formerly king of England, greatgrandfather to our present king, at his parliament held at Westminster…in the 18th year of his reign in England and the first of his reign in France…the said late king, having regard to the estate of his said kingdom of England, and especially to the fact that it never had been, nor ought to be, in subjection nor obedience to the kings of France…willed, granted, and established for himself, his heirs, and successors, by assent of the prelates, earls, barons, and commons of his said realm of England in his said realm of England in his said parliament, that…his said realm of England and the people of it…should never in any time to come be put into subjection nor obedience to him, his heirs, and successors as kings of France, That it may please the very noble and very powerful prince the Duke of Gloucester, Guardian of England, to ordain and establish by authority of this present parliament, that the said grant and establishment of the said late King Edward may be affirmed and kept in all points. And moreover, to ordain by the aforesaid authority that because our said lord the king is heir and regent of the realm of France, and because he and his heirs shall be kings of France after the death of the said Charles, King of France…the said kingdom of England and the people of it…shall never be put in subjection or obedience to him, his heirs, and successors, as heir, regent, or king of France…. Reply: Let the statute then made be held and kept. (iii) Approval of the treaty by parliament, 1421 (Rot. Parl. IV, 135 [Latin]) The parliament roll recites how the treaty of Troyes had provided for the peace to be approved by the three estates of both kingdoms, and how this had already been done by the three estates of France on 10 December 1420.

Our most serene lord, for his part, wishing to have the said peace and all and each of its articles, in the like manner sworn, confirmed, and ratified by himself and the three estates of his realm, as he is bound and obliged to do by the terms of the said treaty, swore and promised to observe the said peace well and faithfully in all things, on the word of a king, and by the holy Gospels of God corporally touched by him, and caused to be summoned the said three estates, that is to say, the prelates and clergy, nobles and magnates, and the commons of the said realm, on the second day of May in the ninth year of his reign, for the greater confirmation and strengthening of the aforesaid peace, and for other reasons touching his estate, his kingdom and his realm…in the presence of these three estates the same most serene lord our king caused the tenor of the same peace and all and each of its articles to be solemnly expounded and declared in detail by the venerable father in God, Thomas by the grace of God, Bishop of Durham, his chancellor…. The three estates,

The political framework

223

considering, concluding, and deciding that the said treaty was praiseworthy, necessary, and useful to both realms and their subjects, and indeed to all Christendom, approved, praised, authorized, and accepted the treaty and all and each of the articles in it, by the command of our lord the king, as it appears, as the three estates of the aforesaid kingdom approved, praised, authorized, and accepted, and promised on behalf of themselves and their heirs and successors to observe and fulfil these articles and each of them well and faithfully in all time to come, as far as it lay in their power. 114. The manifesto of the Dauphin against the treaty of Troyes, 1421 (Public Record Office, “Memoranda de la chambre des Comptes, Paris” (transcript) [French]) Refutation of the Treaty of Troyes and an appeal to the French in favour of the Dauphin against the King of England. 31st January, 1421. [After 24 points against the treaty the document proceeds:] For the honour of the fleurs de lys there follow some considerations founded in right to rebut the damnable treaty which Henry of England has asked for and wishes to have. 1. The honour of the fleurs de lys and the right of the crown of France neither can nor ought to be conveyed to strangers, especially those who are ancient enemies, against the king’s consent and the consent of those who can reasonably claim right and interest in the said crown and its preservation. 2. The honour of the fleurs de lys and the right of the crown of France belongs clearly…to the very noble prince Charles, only son and heir of the said crown, so that neither the king nor any other person whatsoever can reasonably dispose of it against his will under pretext of peace by marriage or any other excuse. 3. The honour of the fleur de lys and of the crown of France extends not only to the king and queen and their children but to all those of the royal house of France present and future, such as nephews, cousins, nieces, and more generally to all the three estates of France according to various grades and obligations. 4. The honour of the fleurs de lys and of the crown ought to be upheld and guarded by all the faithful and loyal subjects of the crown without giving any consent to the contrary which might be to the prejudice of another right of interest or lordship, for to do otherwise would be against the law of God, natural, civil, and canonical, and against good judgement of reason. 5. The honour of the fleurs de lys and of the crown ought not to be damaged by those who owe fealty and loyalty to the crown, on pain of treason, crime of lèse-majesté, and rebellion, and concessions made to the contrary and confirmed by oaths would be felonious and iniquitous and tending to everlasting damnation. 6. The honour of the fleurs de lys and the right of the said crown ought to be guarded by those who are sworn and bound to it, so that they ought to bear all corporal pain that a loyal person ought to suffer before forsaking their faith and loyalty…. 7. The damnable treaty that Henry of England has asked for under pretext of marriage with the daughter of the King of France and of total peace between the said kingdoms of France and England is full of malignity and fraud and deception, for under pretext of peace and marriage it tends to innumerable and perpetual divisions….

English historical documents

224

11. The treaty tends to promote and nourish all treasons, perjuries, disloyalties, and rebellions, and tends to the shameful servitude of all those members of the noble kingdom of France—clerks, nobles, and laymen—and to very unworthy subjection. 12. The treaty must be resisted and prevented by every good Christian having ecclesiastical or temporal power, each one according to his right, and as they wish to expel from Christendom the evils named above, especially by the pope, the prelates, and the princes, and especially by the peers, notables, and citizens of France and all those who hate tyranny, and uphold virtue and freedom. 115. King Henry V’s tour of England, 1421 (The Chronicle of John Strecche, ed. F.Taylor, 184 [Latin]) When all these matters had been performed and completed, King Henry rode through his kingdom of England with a few followers in this way. First he visited Bristol, then other towns in the southern and western parts of England. And then he turned aside to his beloved castle of Kenilworth, and then visited his manor of Pleasant Marys…. And so he progressed to Coventry, then to Leicester, where he waited for a time the arrival of the Queen. She, after leaving Westminster, took her way to Leicester by way of Hertford, Bedford, and Northampton, until she came to Leicester, where she joined Henry on the eve of Palm Sunday, and in that city the king and queen solemnly kept the feast of Easter that year. When it was over, the king at once set off with his followers to the north. First he went to the city of Nottingham, then to the town of Pontefract, and so to the city of York, to Beverley also, and to Lincoln, where at that time Richard, Bishop of Lincoln, was consecrated as bishop. But while King Henry stayed a little while in that town, he received letters from overseas that Thomas, Duke of Clarence, his brother, who was king’s lieutenant in France and Normandy during his absence, had on the eve of last Easter been killed near the town of Pont de l’Arche in Normandy, along with the Earl of Kyme, Gilbert de Umfraville and Lord Roos, with other noblemen of his company. And the Earl of Huntingdon, who was there, was captured…. So King Henry, very saddened by the death of his brother, left the city of Lincoln, and came via Lynn and Walsingham to Norwich, and travelled on to London through other towns. And Queen Katherine made her way from Leicester to London through Stamford, Huntingdon, Cambridge, and Colchester, and joined the king again at London. From the cities thus visited the king and queen received precious gifts of gold and silver from the citizens and prelates of the towns. Moreover after this, when the king had reached London, he at once summoned a parliament to Westminster, and the Archbishop of Canterbury held a convocation of the clergy in which a tenth and a half was granted by the clergy. And in the same parliament the king asked for and received a fifteenth and a half from the inhabitants of the realm. Moreover the king demanded and received from the more powerful men of the realm, such as merchants and bishops, abbots and priors, a great loan of money. When these sums had been conceded and received, the king and queen with their household crossed to Calais about the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist [24 June].

The political framework

225

116. The battle of Baugé, 1421 (John Hardyng’s Chronicle, ed. H.Ellis (1812), 384 [English]) The original is in metre which would seem very ragged if modernised, so a prose version is given here.

And at Easter then in [King Henry’s] ninth year, the duke of Clarence had been found by his enemies near Baugé, so he arrayed his troops in fear and hurried to Baugé, and would not rest even though it was Easter Eve. With him were the Earl of Huntingdon, and his wife’s son, the Earl of Somerset: Gilbert Umfrevyle [Umfraville] Marshal of France came up to Baugé with only five horsemen and from good knowledge counselled the duke to keep the service of God and the Church during that season, and to seek out his foe after the festival. But the duke answered: “If you are afraid, go home and keep the church yard. For you have been with the king too long to make me lose my reputation and my name; you have always gained a reputation and I have none, so you would lose me fame by inaction.”… Upon this Umfraville said: “My lord, you have no adequate force to fight thus hastily with the enemy. Your men do not know how or when to bring you reinforcements; for truly my cousin Graye and I have here only ten men and no more, but still you shall never say we left you so.” So they rode forth, chiding each other on the way, until they crossed over the bridge to Baugé, where their enemies were assembled in battle array. There they alighted and fought with them at once. The duke was slain there that day and…with him were slain then the earl of Umfrevyle, and Sir John Graye, the earl of Tankervyle [Tancarville], Lord Roos, and Sir John Lumley, with many others. The earls of Huntingdon and Salisbury were taken prisoner there and put to great ransom, and lay a long time in prison in France. The English reinforcements came when all was over and rescued the dead men where they lay, and brought the lords home quickly who were laid upon the field that day, and buried them in England in good array, each one within his own abbey or college, founded previously within his ancestry. The duke of Clarence was buried beside his father at Canterbury. 117. The death of Henry V, 1422 (According to the Pseudo-Elmham, Henrici Quinti Gesta, ed. Williams, 157 [Latin] The king, unmindful of his own infirmity but remembering his alliance with the Duke of Burgundy, collected his army and set out to bring relief to the town [of Cosne]; but because of the seriousness of his illness he was too weak to ride and so he ordered himself to be carried in a litter drawn by horses such as invalids employ. But when he reached the town of Corbeil some days later he had become so ill that he was unable to proceed further against the enemy without the expenditure of his last strength…. And when after a few days the seriousness of his illness grew much worse than before, he turned to the castle of Vincennes, where he announced that he would rest during the period of his illness The devoted and prudent king, realizing that the gravity of his illness would not cease until death itself, disposed himself for his end by daily confessions and

English historical documents

226

largess of alms. Three days before his death he summoned the Dukes of Bedford and Exeter and other noble members of his household to his presence and was able to make to them a steady speech, “It is certain,” he said, “that according to the pleasure of the Saviour, I cannot avoid imminent death, according to the way of all flesh. If therefore during my reign I have ruled otherwise than I ought to have done, or have acted unjustly towards anyone, which I do not believe, I ask pardon. For the good services done to me in these wars, I give thanks to you and all my fellow knights; if I had not been prevented by death, I had intended to give to each a fitting reward for these services. To my brother the Duke of Bedford I commit the custody and rule of France and the Duchy of Normandy until my son shall reach years of discretion. My brother the Duke of Gloucester shall be the protector and defender of England. I will and decree that my uncles the Duke of Exeter and Henry Bishop of Winchester, along with the Earl of Warwick, shall be the tutors of my son.” … To those present he showed his will, first made in England, together with other attested codicils of his last will, in which he bequeathed large sums to pay the debts of himself and his father and also the arrears of pay of his household. And after this he would not concern himself and his senses with the affairs of this world…. At last, amidst many and great works of pious contemplation, he received the sacraments of the Body and Blood of the Lord and of extreme unction with a contrite heart and the humility of a penitent spirit. And when he laboured in his last moments he cried out, “Thou liest! Thou liest! My portion is with the Lord Jesus Christ!” as if he spoke boldly to an evil spirit. Then breathing his last breath and devoutly clasping the crucifix he cried, in a strong voice, “Into thy hands thou hast redeemed the term,” and passed away perfectly and devoutly, within the said castle, on the last day of August, in the tenth year of his reign. 118. The desolation of France, 1422 and 1423 (Journal d’un bourgeois de Paris, 1405–49, ed. A.Tuetey (Paris, 1881), 164 [French]) Also at this time the King of England was before Meaux and spent Christmas and Epiphany there: and all over Brie his men were pillaging everywhere: and on account of them and of the Burgundians (who left nothing that they could carry away), no one could work or sow anywhere. Often complaints were made to these lords (the English and the Burgundians) but they only mocked and laughed and egged on their troops worse than before. Hence most of the peasants ceased to work and were in despair and left their wives and children, saying to each other: “What shall we do? Let us put everything into the hands of the devil, for it cannot matter what becomes of us: it will benefit us as much to do our worst as to do our best. The Saracens would treat us better than the Christians, so let us do the worst we can. They cannot do more to us than kill us or take us prisoner; for by the false government of traitorous rulers we have had to leave our wives and children and to flee into the woods like wandering beasts. It is not one year or two but 14 or 15 years since this tragic dance began, and most of the nobles of France have died by the sword, by poison, or by treason, without confession, or by some evil and unnatural death.”

The political framework

227

(Ibid. 187) Also at this time [1423] the wolves came to Paris every night and often three or four were taken at once, and were carried through Paris by their feet upside down Also the day of the Finding of St Stephen,1 August 3rd, there was a great festival in Paris in the evening, with the making of great fires and dancing just like that of Midsummer’s Eve. But it was a pitiable thing to reflect why the festival took place… for it was said that 3,000 or more of the Armagnacs had been killed in battle (at Cravant) and some 2,000 captured and some 1,500 drowned to avoid the cruel death promised to them by those who pursued them. Now see what a pity is this and what an injury for all Christendom, for few of those who were thus killed had much re-membrance of their Creator at the hour of their death, and those who slew them had as little…. Also…alas, alas! how many orphans one can find in a Christian land as a result of such killings and how many poor wretched widows! Alas! would that each one of us considered well if such grief should strike or threaten us, what great lament and what great hatred would pierce our hearts…and how greatly we should wish to be revenged, and all because we pay no heed to the time which is to come… for the joy that we have in doing evil to others and for the destruction for which we can all be judged murderers, since it is said that intention is reputed as bad as the deed itself! And Our Saviour said by the mouth of the Apostle: “He who bears the sword, shall perish by the sword!” 119. The Duke of Gloucester declares the king’s commission for opening parliament in 1422 (i) (N.H.Nicolas, Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council of England (Record Commission, 1834–7), III, 6 [Latin] from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F. IV) In fairness to the duke of Gloucester it must be remembered that his upright elder brother, the Duke of Bedford, also thought that Henry V had left authority during the minority to a regent rather than to a council (London Letter Book, K, f. 2, printed by R.R.Sharpe, London and the Kingdom, III (1895), 367).

On the 5th day of November in the aforesaid year (I Henry VI) in the council chamber next to the parliament chamber at Westminster, on the day before the opening of the king’s parliament, the following lords spiritual and temporal were present, that is, Henry Archbishop of Canterbury, Henry Bishop of Winchester, Thomas Bishop of Durham, John Bishop of Norwich, Edmund Bishop of Exeter, Philip Bishop of Worcester, Richard Bishop of Lincoln, and John Bishop of Rochester, the Duke of Exeter, and the Earl Marshal, the Earl of Warwick, and the Earl of Northumberland, and the lords Ferrars, 1

i.e. the finding of the relics of St Stephen.

English historical documents

228

Talbot, Botreaux, Clinton, Audley, Fitzhugh, Poynings, Berkeley, and Cromwell, and there was communicated to them the text of a commission to be made to the most illustrious prince the lord Henry Duke of Gloucester uncle of the king, by whose authority that illustrious prince was to open and dissolve the said parliament with the assent of the council and do other things which were contained in a certain minute read there, the tenor of which is as follows…. To these words, that is, with the assent of the council, the Duke of Gloucester took objection; amongst other things he said that these words seemed to be prejudicial to his status and for many reasons it seemed to him that they were unaccustomed words in such commissions, since he had often presided in various parliaments in the name of his lord and brother the dead king by authority of his letters of commission and they had always been without these words or anything like them. Because of these words he would never be able to dissolve parliament if the lords objected in any way, and by this means they could keep it in being for a whole year, which was against his privilege, as he said; wherefore it seemed to him that these words were quite intolerable. The lords were asked to give their opinion one by one and they replied that considering the tender age of the king they neither could, ought, nor would consent to the omission of these words or ones having similar effect, especially as they were as necessary for the security of the duke as they were for that of the councillors. And many objections were seriously put forward on their behalf and declared to the duke on their part and so at last the duke consented to their petition and advice and agreed that the letters should be engrossed as aforesaid. (ii) (Rot. Parl. IV, 169 [Latin]) Henry, by the grace of God, King of England and France and Lord of Ireland, greeting. Know ye, that by the advice of our council…we have ordained a parliament to be held at Westminster, on the Monday next before the feast of St Martin next coming, and since for certain reasons we ourselves cannot be present personally at the parliament, and since we have trustworthy reports of the discretion and labours of our dearest uncle Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, we give full power, by the tenor of these presents, to our uncle to open the parliament in our name and to proceed in it and on our behalf to do all and every thing which it belongs to us to do there and for the good rule and governance of our realm aforesaid and of others of our lords belonging to the same realm; and also to terminate and dissolve parliament with the assent of our council. 120. Henry VI gives early evidence of his piety, 1423 (Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, in [English]) The king was at this time just under two years of age; he was born on 6 December 1421.

The political framework

229

This year on Saturday, that is, the 13th day of November, the king and the queen his mother removed from Windsor towards the parliament at London, which began at Westminster on the 21st day of October before; and on the aforesaid 13th day of November at night the king and queen were lodged at Staines; and upon the morrow, which was Sunday, the king was borne towards his mother’s chair, and he shrieked and cried and sprang, and would not be carried further. Wherefore he was borne again into the inn, and there he abode on Sunday all day; and on the Monday he was borne to the chair, and then he was glad and happy in spirits. In the evening he came to Kingston and there rested the night, and on the Tuesday he came to Kennington and on Wednesday he came to London with a glad countenance and happy spirits, and was borne in his mother’s bosom in a chair through London to Westminster; and on the morrow was brought into the parliament. 121. The triple alliance of England, Burgundy and Brittany, 1423 (Rymer, Foedera, IV, iv, 91 [French] from Treaty Roll) For a petition in 1422 from a wounded soldier for arrears of pay going back to Harfleur and Agincourt in 1415, see H.Ellis, ed., Original Letters of English History, 2nd Series, I (1827), 95.

John, Regent of the realm of France, Duke of Bedford, Philip Duke of Burgundy, and John Duke of Brittany, to all those to whom these letters shall come, greeting. Know ye, that in consideration of the great friendships and nearness of kinship which now exist between us on account of the marriages concluded between us, John Duke of Bedford Regent and our very dear and well-beloved sister and cousin Anne of Burgundy, on the one hand, and between Arthur, brother of John Duke of Brittany, and our very dear and well-beloved sister and cousin Margaret of Burgundy on the other hand, and for the general welfare of the lord king and of his realm of France and England, and of us and our lordships, lands, districts and subjects. We and each of us swear and promise to be and to remain as long as we shall live, in good and true love, brotherhood and union, one with the other, and we will love, cherish and uphold each other as brothers, kinsmen, and good friends. Also if we or any of us shall require or need help for the maintenance and defence of our honour or our countries, lands, and lordships against any who may wish to attack or injure us, we and each one of us shall be bound to assist and aid that one who shall be in need and shall demand it of us, from each one, 100 men-at-arms or archers as shall most please him who is in need. And if any of us shall wish to have greater help, he who is asked shall be bound to supply such aid at the expense of the applicant as speedily as possible.

English historical documents

230

122. The battle of Cravant, 1423 (J.de Waurin, Recueil des croniques et anchiennes histories de la Grant Bretaigne, ed. W. and E.L.C.P.Hardy, 5 vols (Rolls Series, 1864–91), III, 57–69 [French]) Cravant was a town of strategic importance on the right bank of the River Yonne. Held by the Burgundians, it was surprised by an army of the dauphinists, aided by the treachery of the Savoyards. Within a few days it was recaptured by Burgundian gentry of the neighbourhood. The French were displeased by this quick reversal of fortune and moreover Charles VII wanted to free communications between his territories and Champagne; so he ordered a mixed force of French and Scots to attack Cravant. They invested Cravant so closely that the besieged were on the verge of famine and had to eat their horses, and not even cats and dogs, rats and mice were spared. When the news of this reached Flanders, Burgundy and Artois, the Regent Bedford and the dowager Duchess of Burgundy sent troops to help the besieged. The Burgundians and English joined forces at Auxerre, and held a conference, about tactics, in the cathedral of Auxerre. When they came within a mile of the enemy they dismounted and went forward on foot; but what with the weight of their armour and what with the brilliance of the sun, they were much oppressed by the heat, and many had to lie down with their faces to the earth in order to rest themselves. Before they had left Auxerre, regulations had been proclaimed for the united army of Burgundians and English, who were bidden to treat each other as good friends. Proper parties were to be appointed to reconnoitre; when approaching the enemy the horses were to be left behind; each archer was to carry a stake sharpened at both ends; no prisoners were to be made while the battle was undecided; each man was to have two days’ provisions; all were to keep the places assigned to them.

[On Friday, 29 July] they took the field in great friendship and went to billet themselves together in the town of Vaucelles, at about a league from their foes, and next morning about 10 o’clock they turned out and drew up in battle array before their enemies whom they found faultlessly arrayed as if to receive them in a fine and great company. They had taken their place on a hill in front of the town of Cravant, where they stayed all day and night waiting for their enemies and yet had left their siege well supplied with men. When the Burgundians and English saw the equipment of their enemies, they went away and crossed to the other side of the river Yonne towards Coulange la Vineus. Then the French

The political framework

231

came down from their mountain, to advance against their enemies with a great show of boldness. They drew up in battle one against the other, and stayed for three hours without doing anything, and the river was between them. When they had remained like this, as you have heard, the English and Burgundians, who hated the French much, seeing that they made no sign of attacking them, suddenly advanced with the ardour of berserk courage and the archers began to shoot very valiantly, and the men at arms to enter the water quickly to rush forward to their enemies, and some had the water up to their knees and some to their waists. Then the Earl of Salisbury, admonishing his men to do well, cried “St George!” and with his banner borne before him passed the water and went to attack his foes. And on the wing towards the bridge Lord Willoughby did so well that with his banner he got up to the bridge and crossed it by force of arms, cutting down Scots and French with blows from lances, axes and swords…. Then those in the town of Cravant, that is to say, the lord of Chastelus and the others of the garrison which he led, seeing that their relieving force needed their help, very joyously and with great courage sallied forth. They came to attack their enemies from behind, but they were so enfeebled and broken down by famine that they had great difficulty in keeping on their feet. Yet their great delight and joy at seeing their relief, and their desire to be delivered from their present danger, gave them courage, and endowed them with such strength and boldness that, shouting their battle cries, they killed and cut down their foes so impetuously that it was horrifying to see it. On this the enemies seeing themselves fiercely attacked on all sides were greatly afraid, for with all diligence the English and Burgundians strove to gain the victory in each part of the field. Then on all sides they began to fight each other, but in conclusion by the vigour, force, and valour of the English and Burgundians, thus fraternally associated together, they obtained the victory. The French and Scots were at that time put to flight, and many of them were killed and wounded, which was a pitiable thing to see. In this battle were killed most of the Scots, for they were in the van, that is to say, about 4,000, and the Constable of Scotland, who had lost an eye, was taken prisoner by a gentleman of the lord of Chastelus, and the other Scots saved themselves as best they could. [Waurin estimates the number of important prisoners captured at 300 to 400 and the number of enemies slain at about 1,200. After this victory the English and Burgundians, well furnished with prisoners and great booty, reassembled, and the captains in great amity, rallying their men, entered the town of Cravant, giving thanks for their fine victory.]

123. The Duke of Gloucester’s expedition to Hainault, 1424 (Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, 113 [English]) This same year [1424] the Duke of Gloucester with his wife the Duchess of Holland went over the sea to Hainault, to take possession of his wife’s heritage, where he was worshipfully received and taken for chief lord of the land; but not long afterwards it happened that he wanted to return home again, and left his lady behind him with all the treasure that he brought thither, in a town that men call Mons in Hainault, which was sworn to him to be good and true, and to keep the lady in safe ward till he came again.

English historical documents

232

But at the last those who were in the aforesaid town became false, and delivered that worthy lady to the Duke of Burgundy; and he sent her to Ghent to be kept there. But as God would for her, within a short time she escaped thence in a man’s clothes, and came to a town of her own in Zealand that is called Zieriksee, and thence into Holland to a place called Gouda, where with the help of her friends that were there, she withstood the Duke of Burgundy and all his malice. 124. The battle of Verneuil, 1424 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, III, 107–19 [French]) Waurin, who was an eye-witness of these events, tells how the Regent Bedford set out from Rouen to receive the surrender of the castle of Ivry, and was joined at Évreux by L’Isle-Adam and other Burgundians who had been summoned from the siege of Nesle. The French sent a relieving force but it was too late, so it retired to Verneuil, where it pretended to have beaten the regent and so persuaded the people to surrender the town. The regent swore to fight the French if they did not run away, and sent back the lords of Montagu and L’Isle-Adam to the siege of Nesle. On 16 August he set out from Évreux towards Verneuil and halted early to prepare for the morrow. On the following morning, when it was time, the Duke of Bedford the Regent took the field in very good order, and rode until he had passed the woods near to Verneuil; and when he found himself in the plain, he saw the town and all the power of the French ranged and put in order of battle, which was a very fine thing to see, for without doubt I who am the author of this work have never seen a finer company, nor any place where there were so many nobles as there were there, nor better ordered, or showing greater appearance of wanting to fight. I saw the assembly at Agincourt, where there were many more princes and people, and also that of Cravant, which was a very pretty affair; but the assembly at Verneuil was certainly the most formidable of all and the best fought of them all. Now to return to our subject, the Duke of Bedford and his princes, seeing their enemies awaiting them on foot and drawn up in battle formation, rode forward a little; then when they seemed to be near enough to the front line of the enemy, the regent commanded his forces, on pain of death, to dismount, each one, and he ordered that all the archers were to be supplied with pointed stakes to put in front of them, according to the English custom, when they came to the attack and struggle, which command was carried out as it was ordered. Then it was proclaimed on behalf of the King of France and of England that all the horses should be coupled and tied together, and the pages and yeomen on their backs, and the waggons a little to one side…. [Henry VI was, of course, in English eyes the King of France and England and the order was issued in his name by the Duke of Bedford as Regent of France.] There were appointed to guard the baggage and horses 2,000 archers, so that their army should not be attacked from the rear nor thrown into any confusion. Then after these orders had been made, the English raised a great shout and began to march and go forward in good order, the archers on the two wings. On the other side the French had known since the previous evening that they would be attacked on the morrow. When the day had come, they knew in truth that the English were approaching, since they perceived them from afar by the dust raised by their

The political framework

233

men and horses, and were also informed by their spies and skirmishers whom they had on the fields; then at once and without delay they put themselves in order for fighting without forming a vanguard or a rearguard…except that they appointed a certain number of horsemen…for the purpose of dashing into their enemies from the rear or across them or otherwise, so as to their greatest advantage they might be able to do them damage; while the rest, all on foot, as has been said, ranged themselves in a single company. Then they began to march proudly towards their enemies, with their lances lowered; and when this attitude was seen by the English they ran very vigorously against them. At the onset there was a great noise and shout with a tumultuous clamour of trumpets and clarions; one side cried “St Denis” and the other side cried “St George”. The shouting was so horrible that there was no man so brave or assured but that he feared death; they began to strike with axes and lunge with lances, then they put their hands to their swords, with which they gave each other great blows and deadly strokes. The English archers, and the Scots who were with the French, began to shoot against each other so cruelly that it was horrible to look at them, for they brought death with full force to those whom they attacked. After the shooting the parties attacked each other furiously, hand to hand. This battle was on a Thursday, 17th August, beginning about two o’clock in the afternoon…. Many a capture and many a rescue was made there, and much blood was shed, and it was a great horror and irreparable pity to see Christians destroy one another thus…the blood of the dead spread upon the ground, and that of the wounded ran in great streams about the field. This battle lasted about three-quarters of an hour, very terrible and bloody, and it was not then in the memory of man to have seen two such mighty parties fighting for such a space of time evenly without being able to tell to whom the loss or the victory would turn…. The French who, as I have said, had been appointed before the battle to remain on horseback to attack the English from the rear or on the flank, in order to break their formation and throw them into disarray, came to attack at the rear, expecting to enter without resistance, making a great shout as they did so. But they found there barriers and resistance, that is, the horses and waggons of their enemies coupled together by the halters and the horses’ tails, and they also found there 2,000 archers of good courage who repelled them vigorously and put them to flight. The French did not gain any other profit there than to snatch up what they were able to take, such as some baggage and horses, killing the pages and yeomen who were mounted on them and guarding them. Just at this time the battle was very fell and cruel, so that there was no one who did not try to the utmost his valour and strength. I the author know truly that that day the earl of Salisbury sustained the greatest burden, notwithstanding that his force wavered greatly and had much to do to maintain his position. Certainly if it had not been for the skill and great valour and conduct of his single person amongst the valiant men who fought under his banner very vigorously, following his example, there is no doubt that the issue, which was in great uncertainty, would have gone very badly for the English, for never in all this war did the French fight more valiantly. Elsewhere the Duke of Bedford, as I have heard tell, for I could not see nor understand the whole, since I was sufficiently busy defending myself, did that day wonderful deeds of arms, and killed many a man, for with an axe that he held in his two hands he reached no one whom he did not fell, since he was great in body and large in limbs, wise and brave in arms. But he was very greatly harassed by the Scots, especially the Earl of Douglas and his followers, so much so that no one knew what to think, and could not imagine how the struggle would end, for the

English historical documents

234

French, who had half as many men again as the English, fought only to win. They applied themselves so vigorously to this work that I truly believe the English would not have been able to withstand them or endure much longer if it had not been for the misfortune and ill luck which now struck the French. According to what I can understand, and I have since then heard several express the same opinion, the 2,000 English archers who, as I have said, had repulsed the French on horseback…when they saw their enemies flee, gathered strength and were a great cause of victory. For seeing the conflict so evenly fought, they, fresh and new as they were, raised a wonderful shout and came wheeling round in front of their army, where at their coming they began to inflict great punishment on the French, who were much tired with fighting, and, much amazed by this new attack, they began a little to lose heart and to fall back. The English on the contrary, seeing that now was the time for it, exerted themselves, all at once regaining their strength, and fought so well that in many places they broke through the French line with this thrust and pushed in, shouting “St George”, beginning to kill and put cruelly to death all those whom they could reach, without any pity, which was not done without much shedding of blood. [The French then broke and fled, seeking shelter. Many fled towards the town of Verneuil, but the garrison would not open the gate for fear of letting in the English too; so many of the French threw themselves into the moat and perished there. Of the French forces more than 6,000 men were killed, many of them Scots, and about 200 were taken prisoner. Of the English about 1,600 were killed. Waurin then gives the names of the numerous French and Scottish notables who were slain; these included the Earl of Douglas, his son James and his son-in-law the Earl of Buchan. Amongst the prisoners was the Duke of Alençon. The corpse of the Viscount of Narbonne was quartered and gibbeted as one of those who had been involved in the murder of John Duke of Burgundy.] (Ibid. 118) After this glorious victory which the English obtained against these French, the Duke of Bedford gathered round him all his princes and barons, and in great humility gave thanks to his Creator, with eyes turned towards Heaven and hands joined, for the good success which He had sent. And as soon as the dead were despoiled by the yeomen and archers, who took away from them all that was of value, my lord the regent went away to camp for the night around the town of Verneuil. He had a very good watch kept about his army and good scouts appointed so that nothing untoward could happen to them, and to guard against his enemies gathering themselves together and coming to attack the camp of his men, to do him damage. On the morrow those who were previously lodged in the town and fortress of Verneuil, and those who had retreated thither after the defeat of the battle, were summoned on behalf of the regent to render up the town and fortress to the obedience of King Henry. Seized with fear at the great mortality inflicted on the men of their party, even on the princes and noblemen, the besieged, as wise and well advised men, made a treaty with the lord regent, on condition that they were to go away safely, and the lord of Rambures was there. Then after my lord the regent had taken possession of the town of Verneuil, and had refurnished it well with fresh men, victuals, and artillery, he departed in triumph and in very great joy, and returned to Normandy with his prisoners.

The political framework

235

125. The quarrel between Beaufort and Gloucester, 1425 (i) (The Historical Collections of a Citizen of London in the 15th Century (“Gregory’s Chronicle”), ed. J.Gairdner (Camden, New Series, 1876), 159 [English]) And that same year [1425] the mayor rode to Westminster to take his oath, that is, the 29th day of September; and when he had come home to his meal with his aldermen and his good commoners, before they had finished their meal, the Duke of Gloucester sent for the mayor and his aldermen that they should come and speak with him. And when they came he charged the mayor that he should keep well the city that night and make good watch; and so it was done, all that night, for my lord of Gloucester and the Bishop of Winchester were not good friends at that time. And on the morrow certain men kept the gates of the bridge of London by the commandment of the Lord of Gloucester and the mayor. And between nine and ten of the bell there came certain men of the Bishop of Winchester and drew the chains of the posts at the bridge end on the Southwark side. These men included both knights and squires, with a great many archers, and they made ready for battle, and barricaded windows and set up casks [as barriers] as if it had been in a land of war, as though they would have fought against the king’s people and breaking of the peace. And then the people of the city heard thereof and they in haste shut their shops and came down to the gates of the bridge in keeping of the city and salvation of the city against the king’s enemies, for all the shops in London were shut in one hour. And then came my lord of Canterbury and the Prince of Portugal,1 and negotiated between my lord of Gloucester and the Bishop of Winchester, for they rode eight times between the duke and the bishop that day. And, thanked be God, through the good government of the mayor and his aldermen, all the people were informed and went home again, every man; and no harm was done through all the city, thanks be to God. (ii) (B.M., Cottonian MS., Julius B.I (ed, Nicolas, A Chronicle of London, 166)) And immediately afterwards the Bishop of Winchester sent a letter over the sea to France to the Duke of Bedford, the tenor whereof follows hereafter: “Right high and mighty prince… I recommend me unto you with all my heart and affinity; and as you desire the welfare of the king our sovereign lord and of his realms of England and France, and your own welfare and that of us all, so haste you hither; for by my troth, if you tarry, we shall put this land in peril with a battle. Such a brother you have here, God make him a good man, for your wisdom knows well that the prosperity of France stands in the welfare of England. High and mighty prince, I beseech you…to give credence to your chamberlain, Sir William Boteller. The blessed Trinity keep you. Written in great haste on All Hallows Eve, by your true servant to my life’s end, Henry Winchester.” And towards Christmas the Duke of Bedford came out of France into England. And the king held his Christmas at Eltham, and the Bishop of Winchester held his Christmas at Merton. And because he would not come into the city of London, for ill will that he had thereto, the council was held at St Albans after Christmas; but the Duke of

English historical documents

236

Gloucester would not come there. At this council it was ordained that the parliament should meet at Leicester, which parliament began in the beginning of Lent. There, by good negotiation and arbitration of the lords spiritual and temporal, was made a good unity and agreement between the Duke of Gloucester and the Bishop of Winchester…. [For the proceedings in parliament to settle the dispute, see Rot. Parl. IV, 296.]

126. How the Earl of Salisbury besieged Orléans, 1428 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, m, 244 [French, trans. E.L.C.P.Hardy]) On 5 September 1428 the Earl of Salisbury wrote a letter to the mayor and aldermen of the city of London announcing the recent capture of over 40 towns and castles (R.R.Sharpe, London and the Kingdom, III, 370.)

As has been noted above, after good garrisons had been left in the places conquered by the Earl of Salisbury, he marched the residue of his army towards the town and city of Orléans, which was one of the noblest in all the kingdoms of France, and he arrived before it in the month of August with very great and fair array of war, to receive whom those within had diligently prepared their arrangements (for they had expected him a long time), as by providing artillery, provisions, and all munitions necessary for war, with chosen men exercised in arms to defend them and to resist their enemies; and in order that the earl and his men might not very easily encamp and fortify themselves near the town, they had even caused to be pulled down and demolished in all the suburbs many a fair and noted building, among which particularly destroyed were twelve good churches, including the convents of the four mendicant orders, besides other hospitals and handsome country houses which the citizens of the town had there, in such manner that all around the place was so well cleared for the distance of a cannon shot that there was no longer any impediment. But for all this it was not long before the Earl of Salisbury and his Englishmen encamped quite close to the town, although those from within carried on a vigorous defence with all their might, making many sallies and firing continually with every kind of artillery, by which they killed and wounded many of their enemies; nevertheless the English very often drove them back by force, so that they were astonished at their vigorous hardihood, and so much so that one day the earl ordered an assault on the tower at the end of the bridge which crosses over the waters of the Loire. This was easily taken and gained by the English with a small bulwark that was situated very near the town, notwithstanding the resistance of the French. Within this tower the earl placed a number of his men, in order that the people of the town might no longer be able to sally out that way upon his army; and on the other hand he posted himself and his 1

The Duke of Coimbra, a Portuguese cousin of the royal family, who happened to be in London.

The political framework

237

captains with all their men as near as possible to the wall in some old houses that had been left there, in which the English according to their custom made many lodging-places under ground and other contrivances to ward off the missiles shot by the people of the town, with which they were supplied very abundantly. The third day after the tower had been taken the Earl of Salisbury went there, and he mounted to the second story of it and there placed himself at a window whence he could see all over the town and all the country round about; and he looked very attentively on all sides to see and devise in what way he might surround and subdue it; when suddenly there came a stone ball from a cannon1 which struck one of the iron bars of the window at which the earl was leaning; and just as he was trying to draw himself in on account of the report of the cannon which he had heard, he was struck by the bar across the half of his face.2 With this blow he fell quite stunned upon the floor; but one of his gentlemen who was near him was struck stark dead by the stone. About this wound of the earl, all his people were greatly troubled and very sad at heart, and not without cause, for he was a good prince and was feared and loved by them all, and he was also accounted in his time throughout France and England the most expert, clever and successful in arms of all the commanders who had been famed during the last two hundred years: besides this there were in him all the virtues belonging to a good knight; he was mild, humble and courteous, a great almsgiver and liberal with what belonged to him; he was pitiful and merciful to the humble, but fierce as a lion or tiger to the proud; he well loved men who were valiant and of good courage, nor did he ever keep back the services of others, but gave to each his due according to what he was worth. So his death was a great loss, for he lived only eight days after the accident befell him. When he felt himself in this danger, being, as has been said, very wise and considerate, knowing that he must die of this wound, he sent for all his captains to come to him, whom he admonished and gave express command on behalf of King Henry to continue their present siege until the city should be taken and placed in the obedience of King Henry without any reservation; and they promised him that all of them would so loyally do their best, that no one should be able reasonably to find fault with them. Then the earl made many fine representations and admonitions to them but you may know for certain that many tears were shed there by the barons and knights of the army; and especially by his household servants was he much bewailed and regretted, but they could not have it otherwise, so they had to suffer it. When the Earl of Salisbury had been attended to by the surgeons, and they had done what they could for him, he was carried to Mehun-sur-Loire near Beaugency where he died of the wound at the end of eight days, and there he was buried. And in his place the Earl of Suffolk was made captain-general of all the army before Orléans, and under him lord Scales, lord Talbot, sir Lancelot de Lisle, Glacedale, and some others, who notwithstanding the loss which they had suffered in the death of the Earl of Salisbury, recovered their vigour and courage, and with common accord disposed themselves with all diligence by all manners and ways possible to them to continue what they had begun; so they made in many places towers and fortifications within which they lodged, in order not to be surprised nor attacked before they were aware. 1 2

Veuguelaire. In one MS. the bar is said to have carried.away his visor with nearly half his cheek.

English historical documents

238

[None of these other generals equalled Salisbury in skill; and the English forces were so weak in numbers that they could not invest the town properly, and the besieged could be reinforced with troops at their will.]

127. St Joan’s appearance to deliver France, 1429 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, III, 261 [French, trans. E.L.C.P.Hardy]) In that year, which was then reckoned one thousand four hundred and twentyeight, while Orléans was besieged, there came to King Charles of France, at Chinon where he was then staying, a young girl who described herself as a maid of twenty years of age or thereabout named Joan, who was clothed and habited in guise of a man, born in the parts between Burgundy and Lorraine at a town named Domrémy very near Vaucoulleurs. This Joan had remained a long time at an inn and she was very bold in riding horses and leading them to drink and also in performing other feats and exercises which young girls are not accustomed to do; and she was sent to the king of France by a knight named Sir Robert de Baudricourt, captain of the place of Vaucoulleurs appointed on behalf of King Charles. This sir Robert gave her horses and five or six companions, and likewise instructed her, and taught her what she ought to say and do, and the way in which she could conduct herself, since she asserted that she was a maid inspired by divine providence, and sent to King Charles to restore him and bring him back into the possession of all his kingdom generally, from which he was, as she said, wrongfully driven away and put out. And the maid was, at her coming, in very poor estate; and she was about two months in the house of the king, whom she many times admonished by her speeches, as she had been instructed, to give her troops and aid, and she would repel and drive away his enemies, and exalt his name, enlarging his lordships, certifying that she had had a sufficient revelation concerning this; but whatever she could say at this beginning neither the king nor those of his council put much faith in her words or admonitions. And she was then considered at court only as one deranged and deluded, because she boasted herself as able to achieve so great an enterprise, which seemed to the great princes a thing impossible, considering that all they together could not effect it; and so her words were turned into folly and derision, for it seemed indeed to the princes that it was a perilous thing to believe on account of the blasphemy which might follow upon it from the speeches or scoffs of the people, as it is a great reproach to a wise man to fall into deception through believing too readily, especially in perilous matters. Nevertheless, after the maid had remained a good space at the king’s court in the state that I have mentioned, she was brought forward and aided, and she raised a standard whereon she had painted the figure and representation of Our Lord Jesus Christ; indeed, all her words were full of the name of God, wherefore a great part of those who saw her and heard her speak, like fools, had great belief that she was inspired by God as she said, or hesitated about it; and she was many times examined by famous clerks and men of great authority in order to inquire and know more fully her intention, but she always held to her purpose, saying that if the king would believe her she would restore him to his dominion. Maintaining this purpose she accomplished some operations successfully, whereby she acquired great renown, fame, and exaltation, about which it shall be more fully declared hereafter.

The political framework

239

Now when she came to the king there were at court the Duke of Alençon, the Marshal de Raiz, and many other great lords and captains, with whom the king had held council concerning the matter of the siege of Orléans; and this maid went with him soon after from Chinon to Poitiers, where he ordered that the marshal should take provisions and artillery and other necessary things to Orléans in force, with whom the maid Joan wished to go; and she made request that they would give her a suit of armour to arm herself, which was delivered to her. Then, with her standard raised as has been said, she went to Blois where the muster was being made, and thence to Orléans with the others; and she was always armed, in complete armour, and in this same journey many men-at-arms placed themselves under her. When the maid had come into the city of Orléans, they gave her a good reception, and some were greatly rejoiced at seeing her in their company. And when the French troops who had brought the provisions into Orléans returned to the king, the maid remained there. And she was desired to go out to skirmish with the others by La Hire and some captains, but she made answer that she would not go unless the men-at-arms who had brought her were also with her: these were recalled from Blois and from the other places whither they had now withdrawn. And they returned to Orléans, where they were joyfully received by the maid. So she went out to them to welcome them, saying that she had well seen and considered the governance of the English, and that if they would believe in her she would make them all rich. So she began that day to sally out of the town, and went with great alacrity to attack one of the English towers, which she took by force; and going on from that time she did some very marvellous things, whereof mention shall be made hereafter in their order. 128. Cardinal Beaufort is forced to supply men for the French war, 1429 (Rymer, Foedera, VI, iv, 147, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F IV [English]) In 1427 Bishop Beaufort left England to receive a cardinal’s hat and to oppose the Hussites in Bohemia. In 1428 he returned to England to proclaim a papal crusade against the Hussites and went on a recruiting campaign as far as Scotland. In June 1429 he was given permission to raise 250 men-at-arms and 2,500 archers for the campaign; but news of the disasters in France caused the king’s advisers to change their minds, and Beaufort was forced to allow the force to be diverted to France. Characteristically he saw to it that the government would undertake to pay the wages of the troops.

Here follow the articles of the agreement made and settled at Rochester the first day of July, between the king by the advice of his council on the one hand, and my lord his cousin the cardinal, etc., on the other hand.

English historical documents

240

First, although the king by the advice of his said council has granted his licence to the said cardinal to take out of his realm of England the king’s subjects of the same to the number of 250 spears and 2,500 bows to accompany him to the realm of Bohemia for the reduction or conquest of the heretics there who intend to subvert the Christian faith; nevertheless for as much as it is thought by the king and his council that considering divers great and grievous reverses and fortunes of war which have happened very recently, since the time of the said licence, to the king’s subjects, and the great jeopardy in which stand my lord of Bedford his uncle and the remnant of his true subjects in the realm of France, and the same realm is likely to be lost and subverted unless speedy and undelayed provision of help and relief from this realm of England be disposed and sent thither, and that therefore the service of the men of arms and archers who have indented with the said cardinal is in all ways necessary and essential to the king. The said cardinal considering the things rehearsed above, for the most singular love, zeal, and tenderness that he bears to the security, welfare, and prosperity of the king, and of all his lands and subjects, and in especial of my lord of Bedford, of the realm of France, and of the king’s subjects there, has consented to the contents of the following articles, that is to say: That my said lord the cardinal has assented to go in his person and also lead his retinue that he has of the king’s subjects of this land, into the realm of France to my said lord of Bedford, and there to abide and, to the utmost of his power, to make all his said retinue to abide and serve the king in his wars in his realm of France, for the term of half a year, for which they have agreed with him…. The king offers and shall make to our said holy father notable and sufficient security or repayment of the whole sum to which the said wages amount; the said payment to be made without longer delay or tarrying, that is to say, one half the last day of February next coming, and the other half the first day of May next following. [For Gloucester’s attempt in 1429 to get Beaufort excluded from the king’s council and the council’s decision to allow Beaufort to take part in the council’s deliberations, except when relations with the papacy were under discussion, see Rot. Parl. IV, 338.]

129. The abolition of Gloucester’s title of Protector, 1429 (Rot. Parl. IV, 336–7 [Latin]) Whereas the lord our king on the 6th day of November in this present year took upon himself at his coronation the duties of protector and defender of the realm and Church, and himself swore an oath at the coronation to protect and defend the Church and realm, and careful consideration and mature deliberation took place amongst the lords spiritual and temporal of the present parliament, as to whether the Duke of Gloucester’s title of protector and defender ought to cease or not, and when they had heard and considered many important reasons and allegations made on his behalf at last it seemed to the lords spiritual and temporal that the title of protector and defender ought to cease from the time of the coronation, for the aforesaid reason: he might, however, bear the title of principal councillor of our lord the king, amongst the dukes and others of them, as long as it pleased the king. . . . When this advice and deliberation of the lords was notified to the

The political framework

241

Duke of Gloucester, he gave up and relinquished the name of protector and defender of the Church and realm, on the fifteenth day of November in the aforesaid year [8 Henry VI] as far as it affected his person (but entered a protest to save the rights of the Duke of Bedford). 130. The English government’s view of the condemnation of St Joan of Arc, 1431 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, III, 397 [French, trans. E.L.C.P.Hardy]) For a typical opinion of a contemporary London chronicler, of Joan as a false witch, see C.L. Kingsford, The Chronicles of London (1905), 133, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra C IV, f. 36.

Here follows the condemnation which was pronounced in the town of Rouen against Joan, the maid of France, of whom we have spoken above in many places, as the sentence may appear by the letter of King Henry of England sent to Duke Philip of Burgundy, the tenor of which follows: “Very dear and much loved uncle, the fervent love which we know that you have as a true Catholic prince to our holy mother the Church and to the exaltation of our faith reasonably exhorts and admonishes us to signify and write to you what has just been solemnly done in this our town of Rouen, to the honour of our mother holy Church, the strengthening of this our faith and the extirpation of pestilential errors. It is a sufficiently common report already spread abroad as it were everywhere how this woman who caused herself to be called Joan the maid, a false soothsayer, for two years or more, against the divine law and the condition of her female sex, has clothed and conducted herself in the dress and manner of a man, a thing displeasing and abominable to God, and in such condition was carried before our capital enemy and yours, to whom and to those of his party she often gave it out, and even to churchmen, nobles, and people, that she was sent by God, presumptuously boasting herself that she often had personal and visible communication with Saint Michael and a great multitude of other angels and saints of Paradise, with Saint Katherine and Saint Margaret; by which false givings-out, and by the hope of future victories which she promised, she turned away the hearts of many men and women from the truth, and turned them towards fables and lies. She also clothed herself with armour suitable for knights and esquires, raised a standard, and with too great excess, pride, and presumption demanded to have the very excellent arms of France, which in part she obtained, and bore them in many expeditions and assaults, that is to say, a shield with two fleurs-de-lis of gold on a field azure, and a sword with the point upwards fixed in a crown; and in this condition she has taken the field, with the leadership of men-at-arms and archers, in armies and great companies, to do and perpetrate inhuman cruelties, wickedly shedding human blood, and causing also commotions and seditions of the people, inciting them to perjuries, rebellions, superstitions, and false beliefs, perturbing all good peace and renewing mortal war,

English historical documents

242

suffering herself to be revered and adored by many persons as a sanctified soul, and otherwise acting damnably in many other matters too long to express, which nevertheless have been well enough known in many places, whereby nearly all Christendom has been greatly scandalized. But the Divine Power having pity on His loyal people, whom He has not long left in peril, nor suffered them to remain in the vain, perilous, and novel cruelties into which they had thoughtlessly thrown themselves, has been pleased to permit it in His great mercy and clemency that the shameful woman has been taken in your army and siege which you were then maintaining on our behalf before Compiègne, and put by your good help into our obedience and governance. And because we were afterwards requested by the bishop in whose diocese she had been taken that this Joan, branded and charged with crimes of high treason against God, we would cause to be delivered to him as to her ordinary ecclesiastical judge, as well for reverence of our mother holy Church, whose sacred ordinances we desire to prefer to our own deeds and wishes, as is right, as also for the honour and exaltation of our true faith, we caused the said Joan to be given up in order that he might try her, without wishing that any vengeance or punishment should be inflicted upon her by our secular officers of justice, as it was reasonably lawful for us to do, considering the great damages and inconveniences, the horrible homicides and detestable cruelties and evils as it were innumerable, that she had committed against our seignory and our loyal and obedient people. This bishop, the inquisitor of errors and heresies being associated with him, and a great and notable number of famous masters and doctors of theology and canon law being summoned with them, commenced with great solemnity and due gravity the trial of this Joan, and after he and the inquisitor, judges in this behalf, had on many different days questioned Joan, they caused her confessions and assertions to be maturely examined by the masters and doctors, and generally by all the faculties of learning of our very dear and much loved daughter the University of Paris, before which the assertions and confessions were sent; according to whose opinion and deliberation the judges found this Joan superstitious, a soothsayer by means of devils, a blasphemer of God and of the saints, a schismatic, and erring many times from the law of Jesus Christ. And to bring her back into the union and communion of our holy mother the Church, to cleanse her from such horrible and pernicious crimes and sins, and to keep and preserve her soul from perpetual torment and damnation, she was often, during a long time, very lovingly and gently admonished that all her errors should be rejected by her and put away, and that she should humbly return into the way and straight path of truth, or otherwise she would put herself in great peril of soul and body. But the very perilous and mad spirit of pride and outrageous presumption, which is always exerting itself to try to impede and disturb the path and way of loyal Christians, so seized upon and detained in its bonds this Joan and her heart, that for no holy doctrine, good counsels or exhortation that could be administered to her would her hardened and obstinate heart humble or soften itself, but she often again boasted that all things that she had done were well done, and she had done them at the commandment of God through the angels and the holy virgins who visibly appeared to her: and what is worse, she recognised not, nor would recognise, any upon earth save God only and the saints of Paradise, rejecting the authority of our holy father the pope, the general council and the universal Church militant. And then the ecclesiastical judges, seeing her disposition pertinaciously, and for so long a space, remain hardened and obstinate, caused her to be brought before the clergy and people there assembled in very great multitude, in whose

The political framework

243

presence her case, crimes, and errors were preached, made known, and declared by a notable master and doctor of theology, for the exaltation of our faith, the extirpation of errors, the edification and amendment of Christian people. And there, again, she was lovingly admonished to return to the union of holy Church, correcting her faults and errors; in which she still remained pertinacious and obstinate. This the judges seeing and considering, they proceeded further and pronounced against her the sentence in such case by law prescribed and ordained; but before the sentence was read through she began seemingly to change her disposition, saying that she wished to return to holy Church, which willingly and joyfully heard the judges and clergy, who thereto received her affectionately, hoping that her soul and body were redeemed from perdition and torment. Then she submitted herself entirely to the ordinance of the Church, and orally revoked and publicly abjured her errors and detestable crimes, signing with her own hand the schedule of the revocation and abjuration; and so our pitiful mother holy Church rejoicing over the sinner showing penitence, desiring to bring back to the shepherd, with the others, the returned and recovered sheep which had wandered and gone astray in the desert, condemned this Joan to prison to do salutary penance; but she was hardly there any time before the fire of her pride, which seemed to be extinguished, was rekindled in her with pestilential flames by the breathings of the enemy, and the unhappy woman immediately fell back into the errors and false extravagances which she had before uttered and afterwards revoked and abjured, as has been said. For which causes, according to what the judgments and institutions of holy Church ordain, in order that henceforward she might not contaminate the poor members of Jesus Christ, she was again publicly preached to, and as she had fallen back into the crimes and faults to which she was accustomed, left to secular justice, which immediately condemned her to be burned. And then she, seeing her end drawing near, recognised clearly that the spirits which she had said had appeared to her many times before were wicked and lying spirits, and that the promises which these spirits had formerly made to her of delivering her were false, and so she confessed it to have been a mockery and deceit; and she was taken by the lay justice to the old market-place in the town of Rouen, and there was publicly burnt in the sight of all the people.” After this the king of England signified it by his letters to Duke Philip of Burgundy, in order that this execution of justice should be published in many places both by him and by the other princes, and that their troops and subjects henceforward might be more sure and better informed, so as never to have faith in such or similar errors as had reigned through and on account of the infamous woman, Joan the maid. 131. The death of Anne Duchess of Bedford and the remarriage of the duke, 1432–3 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, IV, 35 [French]) In this year Anne wife of the Duke of Bedford, Regent of France, sister to Duke Philip of Burgundy, fell ill at the Hotel des Tournelles in Paris, where she was for a long time very distressed and labouring in great illness, so that at the last when she had been diligently visited by several doctors, she gave up her soul: she was buried at the house of the Célestines, in the chapel where formerly Louis of Orléans had been buried. The Duke of

English historical documents

244

Bedford was very sad indeed at the death of this noble lady, and so were all those who were of his party, for they feared that because of this unhappy event the love and alliance which for a long time had existed between her husband and Duke Philip of Burgundy, who had loved her very dearly, would grow somewhat cold…. At the beginning of the year 1433 the Duke of Bedford, Regent of France for King Henry his nephew, married in the town of Thérouanne Jacqueline, daughter of the Count of St Pol, eldest niece of Louis of Luxembourg, Bishop of Thérouanne, then chancellor of France for King Henry; she was also niece to Sir John of Luxembourg, brother of the count Peter of St Pol and of the bishop, who at this time was one of the principal governors and councillors of the Regent. The Duke of Bedford was displeased with the count of St Pol over this marriage, for it was made without his consent, as he told him when he had returned from Burgundy …nevertheless the marriage was celebrated with splendour at the episcopal house of the town of Théouanne. 132. The Duke of Bedford is asked to stay in England, 1433 (Rot. Parl. IV, 423 [English]) M Memorandum that the 24th day of November the commons of the land, appearing M before the king in this present parliament, told him through their speaker that they had communed and considered amongst themselves how that at the time of the death of the king, his father of noble memory…the obedience that he had in the realm of France…was right tender, young, and green, and the hearts of the people there were not so confirmed, established, and assured, in affection, love, and truth, to the king, by continuance of any time as with God’s grace they were now, and that few English men abode or would abide for you there, for the great peril…. My lord of Bedford…there abode for you many years, to the great jeopardy and risk of his person and took upon himself the defence and keeping of the rule and governance of the king’s obedience and country there…and exposed his person to the labour and the adventure of war, as the poorest knight or gentleman there in the king’s service, and achieved many great and fair things, worthy to be had in perpetual remembrance; and especially the battle of Verneuil, which was the greatest deed done by Englishmen in our days, save the battle of Agincourt…and besides this the commons, considering that the presence of my said lord of Bedford in this land, since his coming into it, has been very fruitful, and that the restful rule and governance of this land has greatly grown and been increased thereby, as well by the noble mirror and example he has given to others…so that the commons think that the abiding of my said lord of Bedford in this land so blessedly and so well disposed, as thanked be God he is, should be one of the greatest securities that could be imagined, for the welfare of the king’s noble person, and also for the good and peaceful governance and keeping as well of this land at home, as of the king’s lands overseas. [The chancellor at the king’s command then consulted the lords and on their advice the king commanded the chancellor to ask Bedford to stay in England.] To the which request and prayer of the king my Lord of Bedford answered saying that…he was abashed by it, hearing the great recommendation that the commons gave him, for so little service as he had done to the king…on the other hand he rejoiced that it had pleased God so to set in the hearts of the commons of the land, to have him in affection and love, that they would so especially

The political framework

245

recommend him and his service to the king…and he will with all his heart be as ready at the king’s commandment to do him service, such as shall lie in his power, as well in this land as in other places, as shall any subject that the king has. [On 18 December Bedford presented to parliament the conditions on which he would be willing to stay in England as the king’s chief councillor. These were that he should know who were to be the king’s councillors, and that he should be consulted on all appointments to offices and the council, all proposals to summon a parliament, all nominations to bishoprics, and that he should have a book made of the names of all those who had served John of Gaunt, Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI, and were still unrewarded for their services, so that provision might be made for them. These requests were granted.]

133. The declaration of the Duke of Bedford to the council, 1434 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, IV, 222 from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F. IV [English]) My right dread and sovereign lord, may it please your highness to be reminded how not long ago, to clear myself from any fault or blame that…might be laid upon me to the detriment of my name or fame or withdrawal of your gracious benevolence and favour undeservedly with regard to my conduct of the government of your realm of France, I defended myself and my conduct in your said realm of France by a document…which contains a declaration of the conduct of the war in your said kingdom for the time of your noble reign. And the truth is that after the death of my lord your father, on whose soul God have mercy, by the grace of God and by the good labour and diligence of your true men and servants there, I being one of them wishing to do what good I could, various great and fine victories were won there for you and in your cause against your foes, and your obedience there was notably enlarged and increased and a great part of Brie, Champagne, Auxerrois, Donzy, Nivernais, Mâconnais, Anjou, and Maine were brought under your sway, and all things prospered there for you until the time of the siege of Orléans undertaken by God knows whose advice. At which time, after the misadventure which befell the person of my cousin Salisbury, whom God absolve, there fell, by the hand of God as it seems, a great stroke upon your people who were assembled there, caused in great part, as I think, by lack of proper belief and of unlawful doubt that they had of a disciple and limb of the devil called La Pucelle who used false enchantments and sorcery. This stroke and discomfiture not only reduced greatly the number of your people there but drained away the courage of the remainder in a remarkable way and encouraged your adversaries and enemies to assemble at once in great numbers, and various of your great cities and towns, such as Rheims, Troyes, Châlons, Laon, Sens, Provins, Senlis, Laigny, Creyl, Beauvais, and the substance of the countries of Champagne, Brie, Beavoisin, and also a part of Picardy surrendered without resisting or waiting for help, so that immediately after the said discomfiture of Orléans I, anxious about their discouragement, sent to them various of your councillors of the same regions to offer them a garrison of men and help. And besides this, with those who are left to me and with

English historical documents

246

the help of my uncle the cardinal had collected for the Church, which were considerable and came thither very opportunely, I was able to take the field on various days against your enemies, who were trying to conquer the rest of your country. I was ready to employ my person in your cause, to the salvation of your land and of your true subjects, and to this end did what good I could. So with God’s grace it shall not be found that you have lost through my neglect the said cities towns or countries, the loss. .. of which and…the press of war to your good town of Paris and to the rest of your country of France [have meant that] your subjects of the same may not till their lands nor their vines nor occupy themselves with beasts or otherwise nor import or export any…merchandise, which has driven them to an extreme poverty such as they may not long endure, and…causes them to…ask you for…greater and more sustained help than ever they did before, and led me with others of your council of your realm of France to assemble at Calais with my brother and other lords of your council of this land. And for lack of comfort there, with other causes that moved me, I came into this your realm to show to your highness what provision should be made for this purpose, as it should please you by the advice of your council here to ordain; so that I in whose coming hither and labour here towards your highness they have set their hope and trust of their relief and comfort might on my return thither plainly report to them the provision ordained for them and reassure them thereby. If this be not done, they will despair, and take the opportunity to provide every man for himself in the best way that God will give him grace. And although I have made for this purpose what representations I could both in your parliament and in your great council and plainly, to acquit and discharge myself of blame or default, declared the notorious risk of loss of your said country unless substantial provision for it be made before my departure, nevertheless as far as I know the means have not as yet been found, to my great sorrow, as God knows. And [I must as your uncle do my duty by pointing out to you] how great a pity it would be if [you were to lose] that noble realm, for the gaining and keeping of which my lord who was your father (on whose soul God have mercy) and many noble princes, lords, knights, and squires and other persons in very great numbers have paid with their lives, and for which many who are still alive have shed their blood more precious to them than any temporal goods, and spent their days and their noble and true labours, and for which they and the commons of this land have spent an infinite treasure. (And remember too the years I have spent there in your service from the beginning of your reign until now, doing my best to keep your dominion there whole until the time when you shall be old enough to govern that realm yourself); and throughout the years of my service there I have found the multitude of your subjects there as well disposed and as desirous to keep their faith and truth to your highness as any people ever was and as loving and as kind to me as any people could be; so that the loss of your said country, and of your subjects who do not wish to part from you would cause me perpetual heaviness of heart and sorrow. And (I also recall) the great and tender love and affection which I have found in your subjects of this land in every degree and estate at all times and especially since I last came hither—and so I trust always to find—which subjects are not so prosperous and abounding in goods as I have seen them formerly and as I wish with all my heart that they did, for your good and for theirs, whose ease therefore and relief from financial burdens I desire and shall desire to the best of my ability. Therefore to show the unfeigned love and tenderness which I bear towards your welfare and prosperity and that of both your kingdoms, I shall make to your highness and

The political framework

247

offer in a certain manner and form and with it give you, subject to your noble correction, certain advice as to what can, as I think, be executed without great difficulty, and greatly serving the provision which is needed for your said realm of France and for the ease of the people of this your realm. [Bedford then made his proposals which were: (1) That the revenues of the Duchy of Lancaster estates “and other lands” which had been applied to carrying out the terms of Henry V’s will should, after guarantees to the feoffees for the execution of the remainder of the will, be diverted to the needs of the war in France, especially the maintenance of “200 spears and the bows”, i.e. 200 men-at-arms and 600 archers, (2) That the garrisons of Calais and the Calais March be mobilised and placed under the orders of the Duke of Bedford, so that they would be available for general service, and (3) Provided that these two requests were granted, that he would devote his own revenues in France to the maintenance for two years of another 200 men-at-arms and 600 archers.] 134. The Congress of Arras, 1435 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques IV, 69–87 [French]) In July 1435, two cardinals and other ambassadors were sent by the pope and the Council of Basle to Arras to arrange terms of peace between the English and French. They were honourably received and entertained by the Duke of Burgundy’s representatives as were the first ambassadors from England, headed by the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of St Davids, the Earl of Suffolk and John Radeclif, keeper of the privy seal. Many great nobles of Burgundy were already there and on 18 July the Duke of Burgundy himself arrived. On the first Sunday in August ambassadors arrived from King Charles, headed by the Duke of Bourbon, the Count of Richmond, Constable of France, the Count of Vendôme and the Archbishop of Rheims, Chancellor of France. The Duke of Burgundy went out to meet them, accompanied by all the nobles in Arras except the English. The French were led in procession into Arras, where the citizens received them joyfully. After the Duchess of Burgundy more delegations arrived, from universities and towns in France, including Paris, and from the Kings of Castile, Aragon, Navarre, Poland, Portugal, Denmark and from the cities of Rome, Florence and Venice. On 15 August the Duke of Burgundy and most of the nobles went to hear mass, which was followed by many banquets and assemblies; the English

English historical documents

248

were suspicious of these, as they feared that they were a means of fraternization between the Burgundians and the French. On 23 August Cardinal Beaufort arrived in Arras, and the conference could now begin in the abbey of St Waast. The cardinals set forth the evils of war, and exhorted them to strive after peace.

After these admonitions the parties gathered at the place of conference for several days, and the delegations drafted several treaties and put them forward, but these were very difficult and different from one another. Those who represented King Charles insisted that the King of England must stop and desist from calling himself King of France any more, conceding that on certain conditions he would be granted the duchies of Guienne and Normandy; but those who represented King Henry would not agree to this at all, so they parted ill contented, and went away to their lodgings. So on 5th September, after taking leave of the Duke and Duchess of Burgundy, the Cardinal of Winchester led the entire English delegation out of Arras without having reached any agreement with the French…. And they suspected what in fact was to happen soon afterwards, that is to say that King Charles and the Duke of Burgundy were growing cordial towards each other. For they perceived even before their departure that those two parties had a great liking for one another…. Soon after the departure of the English ambassadors from the town of Arras…to return to England…the two other parties who had stayed at Arras, that is the French and the Burgundians, met together again in conference at the accustomed place, where they had a great discussion together about various matters…and they agreed to make a final peace between King Charles on the one hand and Duke Philip of Burgundy on the other…and in order to reach this agreement fine and great reparations were made and promised to Duke Philip of Burgundy for the death of Duke John his father, by King Charles of France. This peace was made to the very great displeasure of the King of England…and of all his prelates, princes, and barons, and of all the English council, especially the Cardinal of Winchester. … Finally, peace was made between the two princes and published throughout the realm of France. This occasioned much thankfulness, and all kinds of people gave thanks and praise for it to Our Lord Jesus Christ. 135. Paris surrenders to the French, 1436 (Waurin, Recueil des Croniques, IV, 137 [French]) A the beginning of the year 1436 Arthur of Brittany, Count of Richemont, Constable of France, the Bastard of Orléans…and several other captains of the party of the French and Burgundians, accompanied by about 5,000 combatants, left Pontoise for Paris, hoping to enter therein by certain means that the seigneur of L’Isle Adam had contrived there in favour of the Duke of Burgundy, who was loved in this town of Paris more than any other prince in the world, and for love of him chiefly had so long stayed under the English. [The gates were not opened, however, so the besiegers lodged in the villages nearby and next day they assailed the town of St Denis, defeating the English garrison. Sir Thomas

The political framework

249

Beaumont came out of Paris to reconnoitre and was defeated and taken prisoner. The Parisians seeing the defeat of the English and the increasing power of the French, decided to drive out the English and let in the French. The lord of L’Isle Adam called forward the French army, which arrived at the gates of Paris. He treated with the Parisians and showed them a deed of amnesty from King Charles. They were therefore persuaded to return to the obedience of their natural lord, especially as the English were becoming so enfeebled.] And so ladders were set up against the wall, and by them the lord of L’Isle Adam climbed up and with him climbed up the Bastard of Orléans. With them gathered a very great number of burgesses and commons of this noble city, and began to cry excitedly in great tumult, “Long live King Charles and the noble Duke of Burgundy!” and soon afterwards caused the gates to be opened, by which came in quickly the Constable of France and with him several great lords of his company and their men at arms. All of them hastened to the Bastille of St Anthony where the English had retreated for fear of their danger. [There they were barricaded by the French, and the goods they had left in the town were pillaged. Citizens of the English party were made prisoner and new officers were appointed. The English in the Bastille made terms for surrender and were allowed to go to Rouen. They departed amidst the hooting and the mockery of the Parisians. The French displayed the banner of the Duke of Burgundy as they entered the city.] So at this time in France the affairs of King Henry of England suffered very great loss, damage and confusion, for since the hour when the treaty of Arras was published few places either in the Ile de France or the Beauvais region remained which did not turn to the wish of the Constable and of the French of his company for the cause of King Charles. 136. The protest of Humphrey Duke of Gloucester against the liberation of the duke of Orléans, 1440 (Letters and Papers illustrative of the Wars of the English in France, ed. J.Stevenson (Rolls Series, 1864), II, ii, 440, from Bodleian MS., Ashmak, 856 [English]) For the instructions of the English ambassadors who were sent to a peace conference in Calais in 1439, see Rymer, Foedera (Hague edn), v, i, 61. These instructions showed the will to peace of the Beaufort party. They also showed that the English still refused to accept the realities of the situation; for they demanded first the recognition of the English claim to the French crown, and then when this was refused, the cession in full sovereignty of all the lands ceded by the treaty of Bretigny-Calais in 1360. After the failure of the Calais peace conference, Cardinal Beaufort advocated to the the King and his Council the release of the Duke of Orléans, so that he might negotiate, as he said, acceptable peace terms for England. Beaufort was supported by John Kempe, Archbishop of York, who was rewarded for his present and past service by obtaining for

English historical documents

250

him from the Pope a cardinal’s hat. The indignation of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester knew no bounds at these latest moves of his old rival, Cardinal Beaufort.

The declaration of Humphrey, son, brother, and uncle of kings, Duke of Gloucester, etc., against the release and deliverance of Charles, Duke of Orléans, then prisoner in England, taken and given into the hands of the most victorious and mighty prince, King Henry V, at the battle of Agincourt, the day of SS Crispin and Crispinian…. First, the Cardinal the Bishop of Winchester took upon him the state of cardinal, which was vetoed and denied him by the king…my lord your father, whom God absolve, saying that he would as soon set his crown aside as see the bishop wear a cardinal’s hat…for he knew full well the pride and ambition that were in his person, he being then but a bishop, and that these would raise him into intolerable pride if he were to be a cardinal…. Although my said lord, your father, would have agreed that certain clerks of this land should be cardinals, if they had no lands in England, yet it was never his intention to do so great a derogation to the church of Canterbury as to make those who were his suffragans to sit above their ordinary and metropolitan. The cause was that in general councils and in all matters that might concern the welfare of himself and his realm, he would have promoters of his nation, as all other Christian kings had, in the court of Rome, and not to abide in this land as any part of your council, as are all other lords spiritual and temporal at the parliaments and great councils, when it pleases you to call them. And therefore, though it may please you to set him in your privy council wherever you like, yet in your parliaments where every lord spiritual and temporal has his place, he ought to occupy his place merely as a bishop. Also, it is not unknown to you, my right redoubted sovereign lord, that through your land it is reported that the said cardinal and the Archbishop of York have had, and have the governance of your highness, which none of your true liegemen ought to usurp…and have estranged me, your sole uncle, my cousin of York, my cousin of Hungerford, and many other lords of your kin, from having knowledge of any great matters that might touch your high estate or others of your realm…. Also, in the tender age of yourself…for the necessity of an army, the said cardinal lent you £4,000 upon the security of certain jewels valued at 22,000 marks, with a letter…that if they were not redeemed at a certain date you were to lose them; the said cardinal, seeing your money ready to redeem the said jewels, caused the treasurer of England…to pay the same money for part of another army, defrauding you…of your said jewels…. Also, whereas the said cardinal lent you…great and notable sums, he has had and has assignments on the port of Southampton, which is the best port of your realm, where the customers are his servants; it is in all probability to be supposed that since he acts as the chief merchant of wools of your land, you will thereby be greatly defrauded…. Also, whereas in your tender age the said cardinal, then being Bishop of Winchester and Chancellor of England, delivered the King of Scots upon certain conditions, as may be shown, and this was supposed to have been done by authority of parliament, in fact I have heard many notable men of the lower house say that they never heard of it amongst them. This was a great defrauding of your highness, and all to wed his niece to the said king, whom my lord your father (whom God absolve) would never have so delivered.

The political framework

251

And whereas he ought to have paid for his costs £40,000, the said cardinal, then being chancellor, caused you to pardon him 10,000 marks; and of the remainder the king has paid you very little indeed. Also, by the labour of the said cardinal and the Archbishop of York, there has been lost and spent too great an amount of money by divers embassies sent out of this your realm…. [Under the pretext of promoting peace with France the Duke of Orléans was taken to Calais and allowed to talk to the Duchess of Burgundy and the councillors of the Duke of Burgundy; thus two princes who might have remained at enmity, to England’s advantage, were now reconciled to each other.] [The Archbishop of York, who was sent by the said cardinal to France, had in the Duke of Gloucester’s presence urged on King Henry very damaging concessions, such as the renunciation of his claim to the French crown.] Also, it is said that the deliverance of the said Duke of Orléans is utterly appointed by the mediation, counsel, and intrigues of the said cardinal and archbishop of York… [whereas Henry V had by his last will ordered that the duke of Orléans should not be released until the conquest of France was fully accomplished]. [Cardinal Beaufort had used his position of authority in the government to obtain grants of royal estates, such as the castle and lordship of Chirk, and lands of the duchy of Lancaster in Normandy, to the detriment of the crown and the impoverishment of the realm.] [The cardinal had arrogated to himself royal authority by calling the king’s council on various occasions to meet at his own house, and had feathered his nest by obtaining from the king exemption from the tenths payable to the crown, for the duration of his life.] Also, my right redoubted lord, it is not unknown to your highness how often times I have offered my services to you for the defence of your realm of France and lordship there, but have been prevented therefrom by the work of the said cardinal, in preferring others who had his special confidence; and this has caused a great part of your duchy of Normandy, as well as of your said realm, of France, to be lost, as is well known…. Also, my right redoubted lord, it is well known that it would not have been possible for the said cardinal to have come to such great riches except by such means; for of his church it could not arise and inheritance he has none. WhereforeZsince there is great need of resources at this time for the welfare and salvation of your realms, in view of the poverty, need, want, and indigence of your liege people, may it please you to consider the great gains of the said cardinal and the great deceptions that are practised on you by the labour of him and of the said Archbishop of York, as well in this your realm as in your realm of France and duchy of Normandy, where neither office, remuneration, or captaincy could be obtained without too great a bribe to him, which is the cause of a greater part of all the losses there; for whosoever would give the most, his was the reward, without regard for the merits, service, or sufficiency of the persons…. Wherefore, considering that the said cardinal and the Archbishop of York are those who claim the governance of you and of your said realm, may it please your highness…to dismiss them from your council, so that men may be free to say what they think to be the truth…. And if the cardinal and Archbishop of York can afterwards clear themselves of what is, and shall be, said of them, you, my right redoubted lord, may then restore them again to your council at your pleasure.

English historical documents

252

137. Henry VI instructs his ambassadors to report on the looks of a possible bride, 1442 (Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, II, 181, 183, from Bodleian MS., Ashmak, 789 [English]) In 1442 Sir Robert Roos, one of the king’s carvers, and Master Thomas Bekynton, the king’s secretary, were sent to Aquitaine to try to arrange a marriage alliance with the Count of Armagnac, in order to secure his support against the alarming advance of the French forces in Gascony. The two letters of which parts are given below were from the king, or on behalf of the king, to these envoys.

(181) Right trusty and well beloved, we greet you well, letting you know that our trusty squire for our body Edward Hull has come to us out of our duchy of Guienne and has reported unto us certain things of that country, whereupon we purpose to send him thither again in all haste. Wherefore we will that you hold forth your way thither, using at your coming thither the power and instructions that you received in our presence, excepting only where there is the name of a person that you go for contained in an article of your same instructions…that instead thereof you set it general, to the intent that we may have choice…. And for as much as you have no instruction of this form, but this only which proceeds of our own motion… we have signed this letter of our own hand, which as you well know we are not accustomed to do in other cases. Given under our signet of the eagle at our castle of Windsor the 23rd day of June. (Ibid. 183) [The new instructions.] The king wishes, sires, that you should continue your journey, using the instructions that were delivered to you in his presence, saving only where you had the name of one especially the king wishes that you should treat generally, to the intent that he may have the choice. And whereas you have no instruction thereof, the king wishes that you take those letters signed with his own hand which he sent to you for your instruction, and that they be kept with your other instructions…. Furthermore the [envoy of the Count of Armagnac] offered to the king the choice of all his children…wherefore the king wishes you should…let them have knowledge which the king wishes to have before you leave the country. And at your first coming thither, in all haste possible, that you do portray the three daughters in their kirtles simple, and their faces, like as you see their stature and their beauty and colour of skin and their countenances, with all manner of features. And that one be delivered in all haste with the said portraiture to bring it to the king, and he to appoint and sign which he likes; and thereupon to send you word how you shall be governed. [The painter of the pictures was called Hans, perhaps a Dutchman or Fleming, ibid. 220, 222.]

The political framework

253

138. The death of Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, 1447 (An English Chronicle, ed. J.S.Davies, 62) And in the month of February next afterwards [1447] the 10th day thereof began the parliament at Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk; the which parliament was made only to slay the noble Duke of Gloucester, whose death the false Duke of Suffolk, William de la Pole, and Sir James Fiennes, Lord Say, and others of their assent, had for a long time conspired and devised. And they saw that they could not slay him by any true means of justice or law, and so informed the king falsely that he would raise the Welshmen to distress and destroy him, and ordained that every lord should come to the said parliament in their best array and with strength. And all the roads about the said town of Bury by commandment of the Duke of Suffolk, were kept with a great multitude of the local people, watching day and night, though they did not know why they had to do so. And the weather was so cold that some of the poor people who watched there died with cold. And towards the end of this parliament the said Duke of Gloucester was sent for, to come and answer to such points of treason as should be laid against him; and ere he came fully into the town of Bury, there were sent unto him messengers commanding him on the king’s behalf that he should go straight to his inn, and not come nigh the king until he had been otherwise commanded. And the second day afterwards, while he sat at meat in his inn, there came a sergeant of arms and arrested certain knights and squires and other special servants of his and led them to various prisons. And the third day afterwards, the Lord Beaumont with some soldiers, that is, the Duke of Buckingham, the Duke of Somerset, and others, came to the said Duke of Gloucester and arrested him; and then were certain of the king’s house commanded to wait on him. And the third day afterwards he died for sorrow, as some men said, because he might not come to his answer and excuse himself from such things as were falsely charged against him; for the said Duke of Suffolk and Lord Say and others of their group so stirred and excited the king against the said Duke of Gloucester that he might never come to his excuse; for they had decided amongst themselves a secret agreement which was not yet come to the knowledge of the common people, and they well knew that they would never bring it about until he was dead. 139. The war with France begins again, 1449 (Jacques le Bouvier, Berry king-of-arms, “Le Recouvrement de Normandie”, Narratives of the Expulsion of the English from Normandy, ed. J.Stevenson (Rolls Series, 1863), 239 [French]) For an urgent appeal to the commons for a fresh grant of money because of the parlous state of the defences of Normandy in 1449, see Rot. Parl. V, 147.

In the year one thousand four hundred and forty-eight, in the month of March, the English took by escalade and surprise the town and castle of Fougères, situated and

English historical documents

254

placed in the duchy of Brittany on the borders of Normandy, during the truce made and taken between the King of France, our sovereign lord, and the King of England. And the English were six hundred men-at-arms, of whom a knight of Aragon, named Sir François de Surienne, was the chief and leader. They pillaged the said town, which was a pity, for it was a very important and strong town, well peopled with respectable burgesses and other rich merchants; and there they found much money and property. The king of France had mounted his horse and had set out from Montils near the city of Tours to go to his city of Bourges; and having this intelligence at his departure he returned to Chinon in consequence, and by the mature advice of his great council he immediately sent an embassy consisting of M. de Culant, the great master of his household, master Guillem Cousinot, his councillor, and Pierre de Fonteuil, his esquireequerry, to the Duke of Somerset, at that time governor of Normandy for the King of England, to summon and require him to restore and deliver the said town and castle of Fougères, and moreover that he would restore, return, and re-establish the money, jewels, clothes, and all other wares and moveable goods which had been taken within it and removed elsewhere. The said Duke of Somerset answered that he disclaimed the persons who had taken it, although he was glad at it, and would not wish that it had happened otherwise; and therefore he would not meddle nor interfere to make them give it back. The Duke of Brittany (who at that time was named Francis) in like manner sent his herald-at-arms to summon them to surrender and repair (or to cause to be surrendered and repaired) the said town of Fougères, and to make good all the damages, losses, villanies, wrongs, and robberies which had there been done, perpetrated, and committed by the said English. But the Duke of Somerset himself gave this same answer, and in like form and manner as he had done to the ambassadors, as is mentioned above. 140. The capture of the Bay fleet, 1449 (The Paston Letters, ed. J.Gairdner (1910), I, 84 [English]) In April 1449 Robert Winnington, a Devon man, had been commissioned to “cleanse the sea of pirates” (J.Stevenson, Letters and Papers illustrative of the Wars of the English in France, I, 489). He wrote this letter on 25 May 1449 to Thomas Daniel.

First, I send you word that when we went to sea, we took two ships of Brest coming out of Flanders; and then afterwards there was made a great arming in Brittany to meet with me and my fellowship, that is to say, the great ship of Brest, the great ship of Morlaix, the great ship of Vannes, with eight other ships, barges, and balingers, to number of 3,000 men; and so we lay the in the sea to meet with them. And then we met with a fleet of 100 great ships of Prussian, Lubeck, Campen, Rostock, Holland, Zealand, and Flanders, between Guernsey and Portland. And then I came aboard the admiral’s ship and bade them strike in the name of the King of England; and they bade me “skite”1 in the name of the King of England. And then I and my fellows

The political framework

255

said that unless he would take down the sail, I would oversail him by the grace of God, if God would send me wind and weather; and they bade me do my worst, because I had so few ships and such small ones that they scorned me. And as God would, last Friday we had a good wind and then we armed to the number of 2,000 men in my fellowship, and made ready to oversail them; and then they launched a boat and set up a standard of truce and came and spoke with me. And there they yielded all the hundred ships to go with me into what ever port should please me and my fellows; but they fought with me the day before and shot at us 1,000 guns, and innumerable quarrels2 and have slain many of my fellows and maimed many more. Wherefore I consider that they have forfeited both ships and goods to the will of our sovereign lord the king. I beseech you that you do your part in this matter, for this I have written to my lord chancellor and all the lords of the king’s council; and so I have brought them, all the hundred ships, to the Isle of Wight, in spite of them all. 141. The murders of the Bishops of Chichester and Salisbury, 1450 (An English Chronicle, ed. J.S.Davies, 64 [English]) And this year, the 9th day of January, Master Adam Moleyns, Bishop of Chichester and keeper of the king’s privy seal, the king sent to Portsmouth, to make payment of money to certain soldiers and shipmen for their wages; and so it happened that with boisterous language, and also for curtailment of their wages, he fell at variance with them, and they fell on him, and cruelly killed him there. And this same year, in the feast of Saint Peter and Paul after midsummer, that is to say, the last day of June save one, Master William Aiscough, Bishop of Salisbury, was slain by his own parishioners and people of Edington after he had said mass, and was drawn from the altar and led up to a hill nearby, in his alb, and his stole about his neck; and there they slew him horribly, their father and their bishop, and despoiled him unto the naked skin, and rent his bloody shirt in pieces and bore them away with them, and made boast of their wickedness; and the day before his death his chariot was robbed by men of the same country of a huge store of treasure, to the value of 10,000 marks, as those who knew it said. These two bishops were amazingly covetous men, and badly liked among the common people, and were held suspect of many faults, and were assenting and willing to the death of the Duke of Gloucester, as it was said. 142. The battle of Formigny, 1450 (Jacques le Bouvier, “Le Recouvrement de Normandie”, op. cit. 330 [French]) At this time three thousand English of England disembarked at Cherbourg, of whom the leader was messire Thomas Quiriel [Kyriell], knight. They marched by journeys until they came to the suburbs of Valognes, to which they laid siege; the governor of which for the King of France was an esquire of Poitou, named Abel Rohault, who held it a 1

”Clear off” would convey the derogatory flavour of the word. Pyramid-headed arrows for crossbows.

2

English historical documents

256

considerable time. But in the end he surrendered it, and left it with his companions, their goods, horses, and armour. The French assembled from all sides, thinking to raise the siege, and the English in like manner collected their garrisons to continue the siege, and to keep the country. Five or six hundred fighting-men set out from the town of Caen, of whom the leader was messire Robert Ver, and from the city of Bayeux eight hundred fighting-men, of whom the leader was Matthew Gough, knight, and from the town of Vire four or five hundred [from four to six hundred] fighting-men, whose leader was messire Henry Norbery [Norbury]. The persons above-mentioned, and they who had newly arrived from England, amounted to from five to six thousand combatants. In the following year, one thousand four hundred and fifty, after Easter, the English struck camp, and set out altogether, and passed the fords of St Clement. The French who had assembled were aware of this, and pursued them, and rode hard to find them, and at the last messire Jeffrey Couvran and Joachim Rohault found them on the fourteenth day of the month of April, which was in the year one thousand four hundred and fifty, and charged their rear guard, of which they killed many. Then they let the Count of Clermont know this, and the Seneschal of Poitou, and others, who were seeking them on one side, and in like manner they sent to tell the Constable of France, who was at Saint-Lô, how the English had passed the fords on their march to Bayeux and Caen, and that they had already attacked their rear guard, and had killed many of them. In the year one thousand four hundred and fifty, on the tenth day of the said month of April, the Counts of Clermont, Castres, the Seneschal of Poitou, the lord of Mongacon, the lord of Raix, Admiral of France, the Seneschal of the Bourbonnois, the lord of Moy, the lord of Mannil [Morey de Manny, Oliver de Bron, Robert Conigtam], messire Jeffrey de Couvren, Joachim Rohault, Oliver and Robert Congray, rode so hard that on the fifteenth of April they came up with the English in a field near a village named Formigny, between Carentan and Bayeux. And when the English saw and perceived them, they put themselves in order of battle, and sent very hastily for Matthew Gough, who left them that morning to go to Bayeux, and he immediately returned. And then the French and the English were the one in presence of the other for the space of three hours, skirmishing. And in the mean time the English made large holes and trenches with their daggers and swords before them, in order that the French and their horses should stumble if they attacked them. And at the distance of a long bowshot behind the English there was a little river, with a great abundance of gardens full of various trees, as apples, pears, elms, and other trees; and they encamped in this place because they could not be attacked in the rear. And in the mean time the lord of Richmond, Constable of France, the lord of Laval, the lord of Loheac, marshal of France, the lord of Orval, the marshal of Bretaigne, the lord of Saint-Sévère, and many others set out from Trévières, where they had slept that night, and joined them, to the number of three hundred lances, and the archers. And when the English saw them come, they left the field, and the troops marched and came to the river to place it behind them; for they were afraid of the constable’s company, who had slept that night at a village named Trévières, and had put himself in order of battle upon the arrival of the said English at a windmill above Formigny. And then marched the troops of the lord of Clermont and his company, in which were from five to six hundred lances and the archers, and they charged the said English, as did also those of the

The political framework

257

constable, who crossed the said river by the high road to Formigny, near the village, by a ford and a little bridge of stone. And there they attacked the English on both sides very bravely, so that in the end they discomfited them close by the said river. And there there were killed, by the report of the heralds who were there, and of the priests and good people who buried them, three thousand seven hundred and seventy-four English. And there were taken prisoners messire Thomas Kyriel, messire Henry Norbery, Jennequin Vasquier, and many others, to the number of fourteen hundred. Matthew Gough fled and went to Bayeux, and the like did messire Robert Ver, who went to Caen. The said English were buried in fourteen trenches. On this day only five or six of the French were slain. They behaved themselves exceedingly well, for they were not in all, by the report of the heralds who were there [three thousand fighting-men, and the English were from five to six thousand]. And therefore wise men say that the grace of God was the cause of the victory of the French, and of those who were under the standard of the lord of Clermont. 143. How the French were enabled to reconquer Normandy, 1450 (J.Chartier, Chronique française du roi de France Charles VII, ed. Vallet de Viriville, II (1858), 235 [French]) Whoever might wish to make mention of all the valiant men and of their deeds which have been done during the recovery of the said duchy of Normandy would find it too long for recital or writing. But nevertheless one must make some mention and record of the matter for those who in time to come may wish to read or hear the method and means of the miraculous recovery of this duchy. First of all, the King of France imposed such good order on the conduct of his men-atarms that it was a fine thing. For he has caused all those men-at-arms to be equipped with good and sure armour and weapons; that is to say; the men-at-arms were all armed with good cuirasses, armour for their limbs, swords, salets, and most of the salets were adorned with silver; also with lances carried by pages of the menat-arms, each of whom had three good horses, for himself, his page, and his varlet, being armed with a salet, jacket, dirk, hauberk or brigandine, axe or bill. And each of the said men-at-arms had two mounted archers, armed mostly with brigandines, leg harness, and salets, of which the majority were also adorned with silver, or at least had jacks and hauberks. And these men at arms were paid each month, so that they did not dare nor venture during this war and conquest of Normandy to take any of the people of that countryside prisoners, nor to take or ransom any beast whatever it was, whether they were in the obedience of the English or of their own side; nor to seize any victuals wherever they were, without paying for them, except only from the English or their adherents, in which case they could take the victuals lawfully…. The said war was conducted in masterly fashion, valiantly and honourably, by the said Count of Dunois, lieutenant general of the king [twenty more names follow] with many other men at arms, great lords, knights, and squires, who all notably, each one according to his duty, subjected themselves to great labours, travails, dangers, discomforts, pains and perils of their bodies.

English historical documents

258

Just as important was the provision that the king had made in his artillery for warfare and…he had a very great number of great bombards, great canons, veuglaires, serpentines, crapaudins, culverins, and ribaudquins, so that never in the memory of man did a Christian king have such a numerous artillery at one time, nor so well furnished with powder, shot, and all other things necessary to approach and take towns and castles, nor had more carriages to drag them nor gunners more experienced to handle them, which gunners were paid from day to day. And the organizers of this artillery were Master Jehan Bureau, treasurer of France, and Jaspart or Gaspard Bureau, his brother, master of the said artillery; who during these wars have suffered great pains and were found in many perils, for they have done well their best and have acquitted themselves well of their duty, with satisfaction to all. It was a marvellous thing to see the bulwarks, mounds, ditches, moats, and mines that the Bureau brothers caused to be made before all the towns and castles that were besieged during the war; for indeed there was not a town taken by composition or otherwise which could not have been taken by assault and by force of arms, if one had wished, because of the great valour and subtlety of the men at arms who were there. But always when the places were hard pressed and ready to be taken by assault, the king, of his kindness, always wished to take them by composition, to avoid the shedding of human blood, and the destruction of his own country, and of the people who were besieged in the fortresses. [Jacques le Bouvier, Berry king-of-arms, “Le Recouvrement de Normandie”, in Narratives of the Expulsion of the English from Normandy, ed. J.Stevenson, 369, and J.de Waurin, Recueil des croniques, ed. W.Hardy, v, 163, both give the same reasons for the expulsion of the English from Normandy.]

144. The death of the Duke of Suffolk, 1450 (The Paston Letters, ed. J.Gairdner I, 124 [English]) Cf. Robert Bale’s Chronicle, ed. R.Flenley, Six Town Chronicles (1911), 128.

William Lomnor to John Paston. To my right worshipful sir, I recommend me to you, and am right sorry of what I shall say, and have so washed this little bill with sorrowful tears that you shall scarcely read it. As on Monday next after May Day [4 May] there came tidings to London, that on Thursday before the Duke of Suffolk came unto the coasts of Kent very near Dover with his two ships and a little pinnace; the which pinnace he sent with certain letters to certain of his trusted men towards Calais, to know how he would be received; and with him met a ship called the Nicholas of the Tower, with other ships waiting on him, and from those who were in the pinnace the master of the Nicholas had knowledge of the duke’s coming. And when he espied the duke’s ships, he sent forth his boat to know what they were, and the duke himself spoke to them and said that he was by the king’s commandment sent to

The political framework

259

Calais. And they said he must speak with their master; and so he with two or three of his men went forth with them in their boat to the Nicholas. And when he came, the master bade him “Welcome traitor!” as men say; and after this the master desired to know if the shipmen wished to support the duke, and they sent word that they would not in any way; and so he was in the Nicholas until the following Saturday. Some say he wrote many thanks to be delivered to the king, but that is not truly known. He had his confessor with him. And some say that he was arraigned in the ship, in their way, upon the impeachments, and found guilty. Also he asked the name of the ship, and when he knew it he remembered Stacy, who had said that if he could escape the danger of the Tower, he should be safe; and then his heart failed him, for he thought he was deceived. And in the sight of all his men he was drawn out of the great ship into the boat, and there was an axe and a block; and one of the most ignorant of the ship bade him lay down his head, and he should be fairly treated, and die by a sword; and the man took a rusty sword, and smote off his head with half a dozen strokes, and took away his gown of russet, and his doublet of velvet sewn with metal rings, and laid his body on the sands of Dover. And some say that his head was set on a pole by it, and his men were disembarked with great ceremony and deference. And the sheriff of Kent watches the body and has sent his under sheriff to the judges to know what to do, and also to the king. What shall be done further I do not know, but this is what has happened so far; if the process be erroneous, let his council reverse it. [For the attempt of the commons in parliament in 1451 to attaint the Duke of Suffolk, so that all his his possessions would have been confiscated to the crown, see Rot. Parl. V, 226.]

145. Treasonable language against Henry VI, 1450 (P.R.O., King’s Bench, Ancient Indictments (K.B. 9), file 122, m. 28 [Latin]) It is to be inquired for our sovereign lord the king whether John Merfeld of Brightling in the shire of Sussex, husbandman, and William Merfeld of Brightling in the shire aforesaid, husbandman, at Brightling in the open market the Sunday in the feast of Saint Anne, the 28th year of our sovereign lord [26 July 1450], falsely said that the king was a natural fool and would often hold a staff in his hands with a bird on the end, playing therewith as a fool, and that another king must be ordained to rule the land, saying that the king was no person able to rule the land. Also the said John at Brightling the Sunday next before St Luke’s Day, the 29th year of our said sovereign lord in the open alehouse falsely said to William Burford (senior) that the charter that our said sovereign lord made for the first insurrection was false and he also. Also the said John at Brightling on St James’s eve, the 28th year above said [24 July], falsely said that he and his fellowship would rise again and when they were up, they would leave no gentleman alive but such as they pleased to have. [An endorsement shows that on 1 July 1451 a jury declared this to be a true bill.]

English historical documents

260

146. Jack Cade’s rebellion, 1450 (i) (An English Chronicle, ed. J.S.Davies, 64 [English]) And this same year, in the month of May, arose the men of Kent and made them-selves a captain, a ribald, an Irishman, called John Cade, who at the beginning took upon him the name of a gentleman and called himself Mortimer for to have the favour of the people. And he called himself John Amend-All, for as much as then and long before the realm of England had been ruled by untrue counsel, wherefore the common profit was sore hurt and decreased; so that the common people, what with taxes and tallages and other oppressions, might not live by their handiwork and husbandry, wherefore they grudged sore against those who had the governance of the land. Then came the said captain and the Kentishmen to Blackheath, and there kept the field a month and more, pillaging the country round about; to whom the city of London at that time was very favourable and friendly, but it did not last long afterwards. In the mean time the king sent notable men to the captain and his fellowship, to know their purpose and the cause of their insurrection. The captain was a subtle man and…showed unto them the articles of his petitions concerning and touching the mischiefs and misgovernment of the realm, wherein was contained but what was right and reasonable, whereof a copy was sent to the parliament held at that time at Westminster; wherefore the said captain desired that such grievances should be amended and reformed by the parliament and that he should have answer thereof again, but he had none. Soon afterwards the king removed from Westminster to Greenwich; and while he was there he would have sent certain lords with a force to have distressed the Kentishmen, but their men who should have gone with them answered their lords and said that they would not fight against those who laboured to amend and reform the common profit; and when the lords heard this, they gave up their purpose. … The king then returned to London, and sent out a squire called William Stafford, and Sir Humphrey Stafford, knight, his cousin, to espy where the Kentishmen were; and when they knew that they were at Sevenoaks, they rode thither hastily with a few men, thinking to have gained a special respect and praise; but they were within danger of them before they knew it, and were both slain there, with most of their men who were with them. When this happened, the king dissolved parliament and retired to Kenilworth. And when the Kentishmen heard that the king was gone from London, they came again to Southwark, and their captain was lodging at the [White] Hart. And the Thursday afterwards by favour of some of the men of London, he came into the city, but soon after they repented, for they were divided among themselves… And when he had entered the city at once he and his men fell to robbery, and robbed certain worthy men of the city and put some of them into prison till they had paid notable sums of money to save their lives. And the said captain rode about the city bearing a naked sword in his hand, armed in a pair of brigandines, wearing a pair of gilt spurs, and a gilt salat1 and a gown of blue velvet, as if he had been a lord or a knight, and yet he was but a knave, and had his sword 1

Helmet.

The political framework

261

borne before him. [On Saturday, 4 July, the rebels negotiated with the governor of the Tower for the surrender of Lord Say, the treasurer, and William Crowmer, his son-in-law, who had formerly been member of parliament and sheriff for Kent; both were beheaded and their heads were carried on long staves to be set up on London bridge.] On the Sunday next the men of London who had seen the tyranny and robbery of the said cursed captain and his men, laid hands when it was night on those who were dispersed about the city and beat them and drove them out of the city and shut the gates. And when the captain who was in Southwark saw this, at once with his men he made an assault on London Bridge, and would have come in, and despoiled the city; and the lord Scales with his own men and men of the city fought with them from 9 o’clock in the evening to 10 o’clock on the morrow; and many men were slain on both sides; and there were killed Matthew Goghe [Gough], a squire of Wales and John Sutton, an alderman of London. And this skirmish lasted until the wooden bridge was set on fire…and then those of Kent withdrew little by little. And their captain put all his pillage…in a barge and sent it to Rochester by water; and he went by land and would have gone into the castle of Queenborough with a few men that were left with him but he was prevented from achieving his purpose. And at once he fled into the wooded country near Lewes and the sheriff of Kent pursued him and there he was wounded to the death, and taken and carried in a cart towards London, and on the way he died. And then his head was smitten off and set on London Bridge and his body quartered and sent to divers towns of England; whose tyranny endured from Trinity Sunday to the eve of St Thomas of Canterbury’s day. And thus ended this captain of mischief. (ii) The end of the rebellion (According to “A short English Chronicle, Lambeth MS. 306”, in Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, ed. J.Gairdner (Camden Soc., 1880)) And the same night the mayor and sheriffs and my lord Scales and Matthew Gowghe and the commons of London went to London Bridge, and there they fought from 9 of the clock in the evening till 9 on the morrow and at the last the captain fired the drawbridge. And forthwith the chancellor went to the captain and seized him and gave him a charter and his men another, and so with them sent them homeward. Then the 12th day of July it was proclaimed in every shire that any man who could capture the foresaid captain should have a thousand marks and bring him to the king alive or dead, and as for any man that lodged him, 10 marks, for it was openly known that his name was not Mortimer, but Cade, and therefore his charter stood in no strength. And so one Alexander Iden, a squire of Kent, took him in a garden in Sussex the 13th day of July; and in the taking of him he was hurt and died the same night, and on the morrow he was brought into the King’s Bench, and afterwards was drawn through London, and his head set on London Bridge. (iii) The demands of the rebels (Stow’s memoranda, in Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, 94 [English]) These are the points, causes, and mischiefs of gathering and assembling of us the king’s liege men of Kent the 4th day of June [1450]….

English historical documents

262

We, considering that the king our sovereign lord, by the insatiable covetous malicious pomps of…certain persons [who] daily and nightly are about his person and daily inform him that good is evil and evil is good…. Also they say that our sovereign lord is above his laws to his pleasure, and he may make them and break them as he will, without any distinction. Also they say that the commons of England would first destroy the king’s friends and afterwards himself, and then bring the Duke of York to be king, so that by their false means and lies they make him to hate and to destroy his friends, and cherish his false traitors. Also they say that the king should live upon his commons, and that their bodies and goods are the king’s…. Also they say that it would be a great reproof to the king to take again what he has given, so that they will not suffer him to have his own goods, lands, or forfeiture…. Also it is to be remedied that the false traitors will suffer no man to come to the king’s person for any cause without bribes where none ought to be had…. Also, it is a heavy thing that the good Duke of Gloucester was impeached to treason by one false traitor alone and was murdered so soon that he might never come to his answer; but the false traitor Pole was impeached by all the commons of England Also the law serves for nought else in these days but to do wrong, for nothing is sped almost but false matters by colour of the law for bribery, dread, and favour, and so no remedy is obtainable in the court of conscience in any way. Also we say our sovereign lord may understand that his false council has lost his law, his merchandise is lost, his common people is destroyed, the sea is lost, France is lost, the king himself is so beset that he may not pay for his meat and drink, and he owes more than ever any King of England ought, for daily his traitors about him, when any thing should come to him by his laws, at once ask it from him…. Also we will that it be known we will not rob nor levy nor steal, but that these faults be amended and then we will go home…. Also his true commons desire that he will dismiss from him all the false progeny and affinity of the Duke of Suffolk, who are openly known, and that they be punished according to the law of the land, and to take about his noble person his true blood of his royal realm, that is to say, the high and mighty prince the Duke of York, exiled from our sovereign lord’s person by the noising of the false traitor the Duke of Suffolk and his affinity. Also to take about his person the mighty prince the Duke of Exeter, the Duke of Buckingham, the Duke of Norfolk, and his true earls and barons of this land, and he shall be the richest Christian king. Also, the taking of wheat and other grains, beef, mutton, and other victuals, which is an insupportable hurt to the commons, without provision of our sovereign lord and his true council, for his commons may no longer bear it. Also, the state upon the labourers and the great extortioners of Kent, that is to say, Slegge, Crowmer, Isle, and Robert Est. Also, we move and desire that some true justice with certain true lords and knights may be sent in to Kent to enquire of all such traitors and bribers, and that the justice may do upon them true judgement, whoever they may be.

The political framework

263

147. The fears and sympathies of Londoners, 1450 (Robert Bale’s Chronicle, ed. R.Flenley, Six Town Chronicles (Clarendon Press, 1911), 136 [English]) Also the 6th day of November began the parliament at Westminster. And the commons chose Sir William Oldhall, knight with the Duke of York, as speaker of the parliament. Also the same time was ordained in various places of the city that chains should be drawn across the ways to keep the city safe; for people stood in great dread and doubt, for the variance between the lords. And a cry was made the said sixth day in the city that no one should speak or meddle with any matter done in the parliament nor of the lords. Also the same time was levied a great sum of money to convey and set towards Bordeaux the soldiers and such people as were driven out of France and Normandy and had not the means wherewith to live but robbed, and so to have occupied them in the wars, to save and keep the king’s right there. But there were so many false peculations and restraints of the money that the said soldiers should have had that they therefore did not leave the country, and so became thieves and murderers in various places of this land. And the eight day of November the commons of the parliament presented to the king a bill desiring the said Duke of Gloucester might be proclaimed a true knight.1 Also the 23rd day of November the said Duke of York with 3,000 men and more came riding through the city his sword borne before him and went to the parliament and the king. And on the following morning came riding through the city the Duke of Norfolk with a great crowd of men in brigandines, and six clarions blowing before him. Also on the following morning came the Earl of Warwick through the city with a great company of men arrayed for war, and the Monday the last day of November there was a marvellous and dreadful storming and noise of the commons and of lords’ men at Westminster crying and saying to the lords: “Do justice upon the false traitors or let us be avenged.” And upon the morning, which was the first day of December, the lords’ men made assault upon the Duke of Somerset’s house at Blackfriars in London, and there despoiled much of his goods. The mayor and the commons of the city gathered a power together and remedied it at once; otherwise the duke would have been taken or slain. 148. The attainder of Jack Cade, 1451 (Rot. Parl. V, 224 [English]) Pray your commons of this present parliament that whereas the false traitor John Cade, naming himself John Mortimer, lately called captain of Kent, the 8th day of July, the 28th year of your reign, at Southwark in the shire of Surrey, and on the 9th day of July of the aforesaid year at Dartford and Rochester in the shire of Kent, also at Rochester aforesaid and elsewhere the 10th and 11th day of July then next following, within this your noble 1

There is no record of any such petition on the parliament rolls, but there was considerable feeling, as D.N. 146 shows. Cf. also Rot. Parl. V, 335, for the demand in parliament in 1455–6 that the duke should be declared to have been “the King’s true liege man all the days of his life”.

realm of England, falsely and traitorously plotted your death, destruction, and subversion of this your said realm, in gathering and raising a great number of your people, and

English historical documents

264

stirring them to rise against you falsely and traitorously in the places aforesaid, and the times afore rehearsed, against your royalty, crown, and dignity, and there and then made and levied war falsely and traitorously against you and your highness, and although he is dead and beheaded, yet by the law of your said land not punished. To consider the premisses and to put such traitors in doubt so to do in time to come, and for the salvation of your self and your said realm, by advice of your said lords spiritual and temporal in this your present parliament assembled, to ordain by authority of the said parliament that he be attainted of these treasons, and by authority aforesaid forfeit to you all his goods, lands, tenements, rents, and possessions, which he had the said 8th day of July or after, and his blood corrupted and disabled for ever, and to be called within your said realm false traitor for evermore. Reply: The king consents. [Le roy le vœt.] 149. Richard Duke of York to the citizens of Shrewsbury, 1452, upon his march towards London to overthrow the Duke of Somerset (Ellis, Original Letters, 1st Series, I, II [English]) Right worshipful friends, I recommend me unto you, and I suppose it is well known unto you…what laud, what worship…was ascribed of all nations unto the people of this realm, whilst the kingdom’s sovereign lord stood possessed of his lordship in the realm of France and duchy of Normandy; and what derogation, loss of merchandize, lesion of honour, and villainy, is…reported generally unto the English nation, for loss of the same; namely unto the Duke of Somerset, when he had the command and charge thereof; the which loss has caused and encouraged the king’s enemies to conquer…Gascony and Guienne, and now daily they make their advance to lay siege to Calais and to other places in the marches there…to come into the land with great power, to the final destruction thereof if they might prevail, and to put the land in their subjection, which God defend. And on the other hand it is to be supposed it is not unknown to you how that after my coming out of Ireland, I, as the king’s true liege man, and servant, (and shall ever be to my life’s end)… advised his royal majesty of certain articles concerning the well-being and safeguard, both of his most royal person, and of the tranquillity and conservation of all this his realm; the which terms of advice, though they were thought fully necessary, were laid apart, and to be of no effect, through the envy, malice, and untruth of the Duke of Somerset; who…labours continually about the king’s highness for my undoing …and to disinherit me and my heirs…without any desert or cause done or attempted on my part or theirs, I make Our Lord the judge. Wherefore, worshipful friends, to the intent that every man shall know my purpose…I signify unto you that with the help and support of Almighty God, and of Our Lady, and of all the company of Heaven, I…seeing that the said Duke ever prevails and rules about the king’s person, that by this means the land is likely to be destroyed, am fully determined to proceed in all haste against him, with the help of my kinsmen and friends; in such a way, that it shall prove to promote ease, peace, tranquillity, and the safeguard of this land; and more, keeping me within the bounds of my liegeance as it pertains to my duty, praying and exhorting you, to strengthen, enforce, and assist me, and to come to me with all diligence, wheresoever I shall be, or draw, with as many goodly and likely men as you may muster to execute the intent abovesaid.

The political framework

265

Written under my signet at my castle of Ludlow, the 3rd day of February. Furthermore, I pray you that such strait appointment…be made, that the people which shall…be sent to me by your agreement…behave in such a manner, on the way, that they do no offence, robbery, or oppression upon the people, in injury of justice. Written as above, Your good friend, R.York. To my right worshipful friends, the bailiffs, burgesses, and commons of the good town of Shrewsbury. 150. The end of the war in France, 1453 (i) The battle of Castillon (J.Chartier, Chronique de Charles VII, ed. Vallet de Viriville, III, 1–7 [French]) In the same year, the thirteen day of July, the French laid siege to the castle of Castillon in Périgord, on the river Dordogne, which was occupied and held by the English. At first there were sent to start the siege…a great company of men-at-arms, to the number of 1600 or 1800 men-at-arms, and the archers…. There, too, were the greater and lesser artillery of the king, under the control of Master Jehan Bureau and his brother Jaspard Bureau…who had in their company 700 gunners When this had come to the knowledge of Lord Talbot, he at once left Bordeaux in great haste, accompanied by 800 to 1,000 English combatants on horseback…. And after him came from 4 to 5,000 Englishmen on foot. And the above-named Talbot and his followers arrived at the siege about day-break on Wednesday, 17th July; and when the French knew of the arrival of Talbot, they retreated to the camp, which was well protected by ditches…. And Talbot found there in his path some French free archers who had not retreated…for they were on foot…. The English therefore struck strongly and firmly at them, and killed 100 to 120 of them who could not withdraw in time into the camp…. However, Frenchmen arrived at the camp from all parts, and prepared to defend themselves. The gunners mounted their bombards, culverins, and rebaudquins on the ditches towards the approaching English. While this was going on, those within the town of Castillon found means to tell Talbot that if he were to advance quickly and promptly, the French would flee. But when he arrived, he was much surprised to see the contrary, and the fine fortifications which the Frenchmen had made, such ditches and artillery, so strongly emplaced, and their strong and firm resolution to fight Now Talbot and his company began to arrive in great force, and came up close to the barrier which protected the camp. But they found there a formidable array of valiant men, very expert in warfare. They showed themselves courageous and bold, and greeted the English bravely and with spirit, and sturdily pushed them back and made them retreat. This astonished them very much, in view of the message they had received from the defenders of the town…. In this encounter Talbot was mounted on a little hackney…because he was a very old man…. But he made all those of his company who had come on horseback fight on foot…. Then began a great and terrible assault, with acts of great bravery on both sides, hand to hand fighting, and marvellous struggles with axes, guisarmes, lances, and many valiant

English historical documents

266

blows. This struggle lasted for more than an hour; for the English kept on returning to the attack with great ardour, and the French were not slow to receive them with courage. [The French called for the help of Breton reinforcements.] As soon as these reinforcements arrived, they did so well, with the aid of God and by their prowess, that the English turned at last their backs, and were put to flight and defeated…. And all their banners were thrown down, and they left many dead on the field; in particular Talbot’s hackney was struck by a shot from a culverine, so that it fell at once to the ground quite dead; and at the same time Talbot, his master, was thrown under it, and was at once killed by some archers. And thus died this famous and renowned English leader, who for so long had been reputed to be one of the most formidable scourges of the French, and one of their most sworn enemies, and had seemed to be the dread and terror of France. (ii) The surrender of Bordeaux [On 17 July Charles VII left Angoulême to join the French army in the neighbourhood of Bordeaux. The French besieged Castelnau de Médoc, Blanquefort, Cadillac and SaintMacaire; and when these had all fallen by the end of September, Bordeaux was the only place which still held out for the English.] There were these two powers, the one before the other, each in his fortress, to watch their ships and vessels, from the 1 August to 17 October, always injuring and harassing each other, in all the ways they could. But at last when the said English and Gascons saw themselves oppressed and overwhelmed, and were running short of food, they were very amazed…for they saw all the strong places and fortresses of the surrounding countryside reduced by force of arms, and put in full and entire obedience to the King of France. They asked for favourable terms. The king agreed to this for two reasons; first, he was ready to render good for evil; secondly, he took account of the great mortality in his camp…so that in order to get a change of air, he was ready to make an agreement with the English in the following form…. The town and city of Bordeaux was to be restored and given up to the King of France, and all the inhabitants would remain his true and obedient subjects, and would take an oath never to rebel again or rise against the crown of France, and to recognize and affirm that the King of France was their sovereign lord. Then the English had permission to leave by means of their ships either for England or Calais, as should seem best to them. [Twenty lords from the neighbourhood of Bordeaux, who were particularly obnoxious to Charles VII because of their treachery, were to be banished.] This agreement was made on 17th October in the year fourteen hundred and fiftythree. 151. Some consequences of the madness of Henry VI and of the rivalry for the regency, 1454 (The Paston Letters, ed. J.Gairdner, 1, 263 [English]) John Stodeley, agent of the duke of Norfolk, to his master, 19 January 1454. As touching tidings, may it please you to know that at the prince’s coming to Windsor1 the Duke of Buckingham took him in his arms and presented him to the king in

The political framework

267

goodly fashion, beseeching the king to bless him; but the king gave no answer. Nevertheless the duke still stayed with the prince by the king; and when he could have no kind of answer, the queen came in and took the prince in her arms and presented him in like form as the duke had done, desiring that the king should bless him; but all their labour was in vain, for they departed thence without any answer or look from the king, saving only that once he looked on the prince and cast his eyes down, without any more [sign of recognition]. Also, the Cardinal [John Kempe, archbishop of Canterbury] has charged and commanded all his servants to be ready with bows and arrows, swords and bucklers, crossbows, and all other weapons of war, such as they can use, to wait on the safeguard of his person…. Also, the Earl of Wiltshire, the Lords Beaumont, Poynings, Clifford, Egremont, and Bonville, make all the power they can and may to come hither with them…. Also the Duke of Buckingham has caused to be made 2,000 bands with knots, to what entent men may construe as their wits will give them. Also, the Duke of Somerset’s harbinger has taken up all the lodging that may be gained near the Tower, in Thames Street, Mart Lane,2 St Katherine’s, Tower Hill, and thereabouts. Also, the queen has made a bill of five articles…whereof the first is that she desires to have the whole rule of this land; the second is that she may make the chancellor, the treasurer, the [keeper of the] privy seal, and all other officers of this land, with sheriffs and all other officers that the king should make; the third is that she may give all the bishoprics of this land, and all other benefices belonging to the king’s gift; the fourth is that she may have sufficient livelihood assigned to her for the king and the prince and herself. But as for the fifth article, I cannot yet find out what it is. Also the Duke of York will be at London definitely on Friday next coming at night, as his own men tell for certain, and he will come with his household train, cleanly set up and likely men. And the Earl of March comes with him, but he will have another fellowship of good men that shall be at London before him…and such jacks,3 salets4 and other harness as his followers shall have, shall come to London with them, or before them in carts. The Earl of Salisbury will be at London on Monday or Tuesday next coming with seven score knights and squires, besides other followers. The Earls of Warwick, Richmond, and Pembroke come with the Duke of York, as it is said, each of them with a goodly fellowship. And nevertheless the Earl of Warwick will have 1,000 men awaiting on him besides the fellowship that comes with him, as far as I can tell. And as Geoffrey Poole says, the king’s brothers1 are likely to be arrested at their coming to London, if they come. Wherefore it is thought by my lord’s servants and wellwishers here that my lord, at his coming hither, should come with a good and able company, such as is suitable and according to his estate to have about him; and their harness to come in carts, as my lord of York’s harness did the last term, and shall at this time also. And moreover, that my lord have another goodly fellowship to wait on him and 1

Edward, only son of Henry VI, born 13 October 1453. Mark Lane was then known as Mart Lane. 3 Quilted jackets, often reinforced with metal plates. 4 Helmets on the lines of a fisherman’s sou’-wester. 2

English historical documents

268

to be here before him, or else soon after him, in like manner as other lords of his blood will have. And so that such a fellowship will be ready all the sooner, let my lord send responsible and wise messengers to his servants and tenants in Sussex and elsewhere, that they be ready at London for his coming, to wait on my lord. But let my lord beware of writing letters for them, lest the letters be delivered to the cardinal and lords, as one of my Lord’s letters was now lately…for that letter has done much harm and no good. And as for such tidings as are contained in the letter sent home by John Sumpterman, I cannot so far hear the contrary of any of them, but that every man that is of the opinion of the Duke of Somerset makes himself ready to be as strong as he can. Wherefore it is necessary that my lord look well to himself and keep himself among his followers and depart not from them, for it is to be feared lest ambushes should be laid for him. And if that happened, and my lord came this way as he has been used to come, he might easily be ensnared and trapped, which God forbid. And therefore let my lord make good watch and be sure. The Duke of Somerset has spies about in every lord’s house of this land; some pose as friars, some as shipmen taken on the sea, and some as other kinds of men; they report to him all that they can see or hear touching the said duke. And therefore make good watch and beware of such spies. And as regards the [letter of] privy seal and my lord’s safety, my lord must be advised that if the chancellor [Cardinal Kempe] or any other make any question to my lord about his coming contrary to the tenor of the said privy seal [letter], my lord should by his wisdom make answer that he was credibly informed that both the Duke of Somerset, who is in prison, and others, who are still at large and support his views against the welfare of the king and of the land, made great assemblies and gatherings of the people, to maintain the views of the said Duke of Somerset and to distress my lord; and that the coming of my lord in such form as he shall come is only for the safeguard of his own person, and to no other intent, as my lord himself can say much better than anyone here can advise him…. Written at London, the 19th day of January. 1

Edmund and Jasper Tudor, Earls of Richmond and Pembroke, half-brothers to Henry VI.

152. A contrast between the strong rule of Henry V and the weak government of Henry VI, c. 1455 (C.L.Kingsford, “Extracts from the first version of Hardyng’s Chronicle”, in E.H.R. 27 (1912), 744–5, 749 [English]) (i) The Praise of King Henry V

o good lord God, why did you let so soon to pass This noble prince, that in all Christianity Had then no peer in any land, no more nor less; So excellent was his happy truth

The political framework

269

In flourishing age of all freshness of youth That might have let him live to greater age Till he had wholly gained his heritage. Above all things, he kept the law and peace Throughout all England, that no insurrection Nor any riots were not made to cease. No neighbours’ war remained without correction But peaceably all under his protection Complaints of wrongs always in general Reformed were under his justice equal. The peace at home and law so well maintained Were root and head of all his great conquest, Which exiled is away and foully now disdained In such degree that north and south and west And east also enjoys now little rest, But day and night in every shire throughout With salets bright and jacks make fearful rout. (ii) The Exhortation to Henry VI

In every shire with jacks and salets clean Misrule does rise, and makes the neighbours war. The weaker goes beneath, as oft is seen, The mightiest his quarrel will prefer That poor men’s causes are set back too far, Which if the peace and law were well conserved Might be amended, and thanks of God deserved. They kill your men always by one and one. And he who shall say aught shall be crushed doubtless; For in your realm is no just peace; there are none That dare aught now the quarrellers suppress. Such sickness now hath taken them and excess, They will naught heed of riot or debate, So common is it now in each estate. Withstand, good lord, the outbreak of debates, And chastise well also the rioters

English historical documents

270

Who in each shire are now confederates Against your peace, and all their maintainers; For truly else will fall the fairest flowers Of your great crown and noble monarchy, Which God defend and keep through his mercy.

153. The first battle of St Albans, 1455 (i) (An English Chronicle, ed. J.S.Davies, 71 [English]) For the release by the king of the Duke of Somerset from the Tower of London in February 1455, which so alarmed and alienated the Duke of York, see Rymer, Foedera, v, ii, 61.

Then there was a mortal debate and variance between Richard Duke of York, Richard Earl of Salisbury, Richard Earl of Warwick and Edmund Duke of Somerset, by whom at that time the king was principally guided and governed, as he had been before by the Duke of Suffolk. And this said duke always kept near to the king, and dared not depart from his presence, dreading always the power of the said Duke of York and of the aforesaid earls, and constantly excited and stirred the king against them; notwithstanding that the commons of this land hated this Duke Edmund and loved the Duke of York, because he loved the commons and preserved the common profit of this land. The said Duke Richard and the earls abovesaid, seeing that they might not prevail against nor withstand the malice of the aforesaid Duke Edmund…gathered privily a power of people and kept them…about the town of St Albans. (ii) (The Paston Letters, ed. J.S.Gairdner, I, 327 [English]) From a source used by J.Stow, the Elizabethan antiquary. Cf. C.L.Kingsford, The Stonor Letters (Camden Soc., 1919), 1, 52, for the observation that this account was written to be circulated on behalf of the Yorkists.

Be it known…that the 21st May, 33 Henry VI, our sovereign lord took his journey from Westminster towards St Albans and rested at Watford all night; and on the morrow betimes he came to St Albans, and with him…the Duke of Buckingham, the Duke of

The political framework

271

Somerset, the Earls of Pembroke, Northumberland, Devon, Stafford, Dorset, Wiltshire, Lords Clifford, Dudley, Barners, and Roos, with other divers… gentlemen and yeomen to the number of 2,000 and more. And upon the 22nd day of the said month…assembled the Duke of York and with him came in company the Earls of Salisbury and Warwick with divers knights and squires to…the Key Field, beside St Albans. Furthermore our said sovereign lord the king, hearing and knowing of the said duke’s coming…put his banner at the place called Butt’s Lane in St Peter’s Street, which place was called earlier Sandford, and commanded the ward and barriers to be kept in strong wise; the aforesaid Duke of York abiding in the field aforesaid from 7 of the clock in the morning till it was almost 10 without any stroke smitten on either side. [The duke sent a message to the king demanding that he should “deliver such as we will accuse”; the king in reply threatened him and his followers with the penalties of treason if they did not leave the field at once; the duke thereupon held a council with his leaders and they decided to give battle.] And when this was said the Duke of York and the said Earls of Salisbury and Warwick between 11 and 12 of the clock at noon broke into the town in three different places, and several places of the aforesaid street…. This done, the aforesaid Lord Clifford kept strongly the barriers that the Duke of York might not in any wise …enter nor break into the town. The Earl of Warwick, knowing thereof, took and gathered his men together and ferociously broke in by the garden side between the sign of the Key and the sign of the Chequer in Hollo well Street; and as soon as they were in the town they blew trumpets and shouted with a great voice: “A Warwick! A Warwick!” …and at once forthwith after the breaking in, they set on them manfully. [The Duke of Somerset, the Earl of Northumberland, Lord Clifford and about 50 more of the king’s followers were slain; the king was wounded, as were also the Duke of Buckingham, the Earl of Stafford, the Earl of Dorset, Sir John Wenlock and other Lancastrians.] This done, the said lords, that is, the Duke of York, the Earl of Salisbury, the Earl of Warwick, came to the king, our sovereign lord, and on their knees besought him of grace and forgiveness for what they had done in his presence, and besought him of his highness to take them as his true liege men, saying that they never intended hurt to his own person. And therefore the king our sovereign lord took them to grace, and desired them to stop their followers, and see that no more harm should be done. And they obeyed his command and caused a cry to be made in the king’s name that everybody should stop fighting and not be so bold as to strike one stroke more after the proclamations of the cry; and so ceased the said battle, thanks be to God. And on the morrow the king and the said duke, with other certain lords, came to the Bishop of London’s palace, and there kept residence with joy and solemnity, deciding to hold parliament at London the 9th of July next coming. (iii) The Dijon relation (Dijon, Archives de la Côte-d’Or, B. 11942, No. 258 [French], printed by C.A.J.Armstrong, in B.I.H.R. 33 (1960), 63–5) Written in England, copied for the Duke of Burgundy. A less biased account than the previous one.

English historical documents

272

When the Duke of Somerset and those who were of his party then in the town of London heard that the Duke of York and several other lords…were coming against him with a power of 5,000 men, and when he considered what he had done against the said Duke of York and how also he was in very bad odour with the people of London, he came to the conclusion that he would not await them in the town of London…. [So on 21 May he and the king with 5,000 men went to St Albans, near to their enemies.] When these foes knew of the king’s approach they at once drew near and on the 22nd May early in the morning the king sent a herald to the Duke of York to know the cause why he had come with so many people…. The duke replied that he had by no means come against the king and was always ready to do him obedience, but he intended in all ways to have the traitors who were with the king so that they could be punished, and that if he could not have them by friendly and voluntary means he intended in any event to have them by force. Reply was made on the king’s behalf to the said Duke of York that he did not have any traitors near him except the Duke of York himself who had risen against his crown. But before this reply came to the Duke of York a skirmish had already started between the men of both sides, before the town…. And first the people of the Duke of York approached the town and placed good guards on all the roads around it, and entered the town so vigorously that soon they took and barred the market-place, where… the real fighting began. The battle started just on 10 o’clock but because the place was small few combatants could fight there; and matters became so critical that four of those who were of the king’s bodyguard were killed in his presence by arrows, and even the king was wounded in the shoulder by an arrow, but it only grazed the skin. At last when they had fought for three hours the king’s party saw that they had the worst and broke away on one side and began to flee; and the Duke of Somerset retreated into a house to save himself by hiding, but he was seen by the men of the Duke of York, who at once surrounded the house. And the Duke of York ordered that the king should be taken out of the press and led into the abbey for safety and this was done. And into this abbey retreated with him the Duke of Buckingham who was wounded by three arrows. And at once York’s men began to fight Somerset and his men who were in the house, which they defended valiantly. And at last after the doors were broken, Somerset saw that there was nothing for it but to come out with his men…. And after…the Duke of Somerset had killed four men with his own hand, he was, it is said, felled with an axe, and was at once wounded in so many places that he died. And while Somerset was making his defence…others of his party fought those of York so that three lords of Somerset’s party were slain, that is, the Earl of Northumberland, Lord Clifford, and Sir Richard Harrington (controller of the king’s household)…. The battle lasted until half past two in the afternoon, and when it was over, the Duke of York’s men went to the abbey to kill the Duke of Buckingham and the treasurer whom they call the Earl of Wiltshire…. so the king willingly agreed to let York arrest the two lords; Buckingham was taken but the treasurer could not be found for he had already fled in a monk’s habit, and still until today, May 27th, no one knows whither he has gone. And when all these things were done the Duke of York entered the abbey and knelt before the king…protesting that he had not opposed him but had been against the traitors to his crown. And before York left, the king pardoned him and received him into grace. And that day the king, York, and all the other lords went to London, where they have been received with great joy and solemn procession.

The political framework

273

154. Pardon for the Yorkists, 1455, and their renewal of allegiance (Rot. Parl. V, 282 [English]) After the first battle of St Albans on 22 May 1455, parliament met on 9 July. Richard duke of York, Richard earl of Warwick and Richard earl of Salisbury made a defence of their actions, and the king made the following declaration.

We therefore considering the premises, declare…our said cousins and all those persons who came with them in their fellowship to the said town of St Albans, the said 22nd day, and all other persons who…helped them, our true and faithful liegemen…. And that none of our said cousins, the Duke of York, and the Earls of Warwick and Salisbury, nor any of the said persons coming or being with them, nor any of their…helpers…be impeached, sued, vexed, grieved, hurt or molested in any wise in their bodies, lands, or goods, for any thing supposed or claimed to have been done to or against our persons, crown, or dignity. [Then followed the oath of allegiance.] The 24th day of July, the 33rd year of our sovereign lord King Henry VI, at Westminster, in the great council chamber, in the time of parliament, in the presence of our said sovereign lord, the lords spiritual and temporal in showing their troth, faith and love that they have and bear to his highness, every lord spiritual laying his hand upon his breast, and every temporal lord taking our said sovereign lord, by the hand, freely swore and promised in manner and form as follows: I promise unto your highness by the faith and troth that I owe to God and to you that I shall truly and faithfully keep the allegiance that I owe unto you my most sovereign lord, and to put me in my duty to do all that may be to the welfare, honour, and safeguard of your most noble person, and royal estate, preeminence, and prerogative; and I shall at no time will or consent to anything which might be or sound to the hurt or prejudice of your said most noble person, dignity, crown, or estate. And moreover I shall with all my power resist and withstand all those who would in any wise presume to attempt the contrary. So God help me and his saints. [There follow the names of 33 lords spiritual and 27 lords temporal.] 155. The creation of the Duke of York as protector and defender of the realm, 1455 (i) (Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 64 [Latin], from Patent Roll, 34 Henry VI, m. 23) The king to all, etc. Greeting. Know that as the commons of our realm of England, assembled in the present parliament, have frequently and humbly petitioned us and urgently implored us that in order to put down the disturbances, rebellions, murders, and riots, which are attempted

English historical documents

274

and committed in various parts of the realm and to preserve the public good, the defence of our realm and of our peace, and the tranquillity of our subjects, we should be pleased to agree and consent to constitute and ordain some powerful and suitable person as protector and defender of the realm…. We, considering the petition of the commons and the infirmity with which it has pleased the Most High Saviour to visit our person, an affliction which hinders us from the actual execution of the protection and defence of the realm and of the church of England, and considering that if we are troubled with numerous matters of business, the speed of our recovery will be impaired, and reposing full confidence in the circumspection and industry of our most dear cousin Richard Duke of York. By the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal and the assent of the commons of our realm of England, assembled in our present parliament, ordain and constitute our cousin to be protector and defender and our principal councillor of our realm of England and of the church of England. The authority of the duke in occupying and exercising the burden of protector and defender to cease entirely when Edward our eldest son shall come to years of discretion. Witnessed by the king at Westminster, 19th November, 1455. (ii) The duke is given power to summon and dismiss parliament (Ibid.) We, on account of certain and notable causes, moving us and the said council, give and commit to our cousin full power and authority to prorogue and adjourn the parliament, for us and in our name, from the 13th day of the present month of December even to the 14th day of January next following, and to hold that parliament on that day and to proceed in the same, and to do all those things which need to be done there for us and for the good governance and rule of our realm and of our other lords belonging to the realm, and to finish and dissolve that parliament. … Witnessed by the king at Westminster, 12th December, 1455. [On 25 February 1456 the king, having recovered, came in person to parliament and relieved the duke of his protectorship (Rot. Parl. v, 321; Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 65).]

156. The destruction of Robert Sturmy and the riots in London against Italian merchants, 1457 (i) (R.Fabyan’s Chronicle, ed. H.Ellis, 633) In this year, according to some authors, a merchant of Bristol, named Sturmy, who with his ship had laboured in various parts of the Levant and other parts of the East, for so much as the fame ran upon him that he had got green pepper and other spices, to have set and sown in England, as the fame went, therefore the Genoese waited for him upon the sea, and despoiled his ship and another. But this is very likely to be untrue that the

The political framework

275

Genoese should despoil him for such a cause, for there is no nation in England that deals so little with spices. But whether it was for this cause or another, truth it is, that by that nation an offence was done, for which all the Genoese merchants in London were arrested and committed to the Fleet, until they had found sufficient surety to answer to the charges. And, finally, for the harms which their nation had done to the said Sturmy and to this realm, the sum of 6,000 marks was set to their pain to be paid; but how it was paid I find no mention. (ii) (Gregory’s Chronicle, ed. J.Gairdner, 199) Here was the rising and wanton rule of the mayor and mercers of London against the Lombards. The Lombards were so treated that they were glad to leave the City of London, and many of them came to Southampton and to Winchester to be inhabitants there. And they took great old mansions in Winchester for the term of their lives, and some only for a term of years, and they caused the land lords to do great costs in repairs; and when all was done they did not come here, and that caused great loss to the land lords. Also some of the Lombards were taken and put in ward, and the common talk and rumour was that they should never be delivered but continue in perpetual prison. 157. Queen Margaret tries to secure obedience to the king’s wishes, 1457 (Exeter Cathedral, MS. 3498/23 [English]) [To the chapter of the cathedral.] Trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. Keeping well in our remembrance how that both my lord and we have now lately written unto you at various times our several letters of especial recommendation for our right well beloved clerk master John Hals, our chancellor, to the deanery of the cathedral church of Exeter in your next election. Whereupon since our said writing we understand by various reports made to us that some persons of you, having no regard that my lord is your founder, whose request you owe in duty to obey before all other, labour the contrary of my said lord’s intention and ours, to our great marvel and displeasure if it be so. Wherefore we desire and heartily pray you forthwith that for reverence of us, leaving aside and apart all other labours and means, you will, considering the hearty and immutable desire that we have to our said clerk’s preservation at this time, be inclined and yield to the accomplishment of my lord’s invariable intention and ours in this matter, giving my lord’s highness and us no other cause than to have everyone of you according to your desert in such things as you may have to do towards us both, for your preservation and also otherwise in tender remembrance of our good grace for this in time to come. Praying you further that unto our trusty and well beloved squire Edward Ellesmere, master of our jewels, fully instructed of our intention, you will give full faith and credence in such things touching the foregoing as he shall declare unto you on our behalf. As we trust you in this thing you may deserve of us especial and singular thanks, to our great pleasure on this account in time to come. Given under our signet at Westminster the 7th day of November [1457]

English historical documents

276

[Signed] Marguerite. (ii) (Ibid. MS. 3498/22 [English]) By the king. Trusty and well beloved, we greet you well and hold for undoubted that you retain well in your remembrance how that we in time past for various notable con-siderations moving us directed to you our special letters recommending our trusty and well beloved clerk master John Hals to the deanery of the cathedral church of Exeter, wherein we trust for certain that you have done and will do your part and diligence to the accomplishment of our desire in this matter. And to the intent that you shall more clearly understand our immutable will in the said matter we send to you at this time our well beloved squire Edward Ellesmere, fully instructed of our purpose in the matter abovesaid; to whom we will that you give your full faith and credence in all such things as he shall open and disclose to you on our behalf touching the foregoing, and that you do your diligence herein as our full trust is in you, and as you desire to please us. Given under our signet at our palace of Westminster the last day of October [1457]. 158. The Venetian senate decides to remove the Venetian base in England to Winchester because of riots in London, 1457 (Archivio di Stato, Venice, Senate Mar, VI, f. 33a [Latin], summarised by Rawdon Brown, in Calendar of State papers…of Venice, I (1864), 84) On account of the insults and novelties perpetrated by certain artificers and apothecaries of London against the Italian nation, with evident risk to their lives and of loss of all their goods, the merchants of the Italian nation, that is, the Venetians, Genoese, Florentines, and Luccese, knowing of the risks and perils from the apothecaries, who were moved not by reason but by sudden passion…determined that it was necessary to leave London, for their personal safety and the security of their property. And for their refuge and habitation they chose Winchester, and they made agreements among themselves…that none of them would go or trade in London…. For the observance of these resolutions the merchants of each city wrote to their governments to make provision for their observance…. It is therefore now decreed that all the resolutions which have been read, as agreed by the merchants of the four nations, shall be confirmed and that all persons who defy them shall be subject to the penalties and sanctions; provided that the governments of the other three nations also confirm the resolutions, 159. Margaret prepares for war: the battle of Blore Heath, 1459 (An English Chronicle, ed. J.S.Davies, 79–80 [English]) In this same time the realm of England was out of all good governance as it had been many days before, for the king was simple and led by covetous counsel, and owed more than he was worth. His debts increased daily but payment there was none. All the

The political framework

277

possessions and lordships that pertained to the crown the king had given away, some to lords and some to other simple persons, so that he had almost nothing to live on. And the impositions that were imposed on the people, such as taxes, tallages, and fifteenths, all that came from them was spent in vain, for he maintained no household and waged no wars. Because of these misgovernances and many others the hearts of the people were turned away from those who governed the land, and their blessing was turned into cursing. The queen with such as were of her affinity ruled the realm as she liked, gathering riches innumerable. The officers of the realm, especially the Earl of Wiltshire, treasurer of England, to enrich himself, fleeced the poor people, and disinherited rightful heirs and did many wrongs. The queen was defamed and denounced, that he who was called prince was not her son but a bastard gotten in adultery; wherefore she, dreading that he should not succeed his father in the crown of England, sought the alliance of all the knights and squires of Cheshire, to have their goodwill, and held open household among them. And she made her son, called the prince, give a livery of swans to all the gentlemen of the countryside and to many others throughout the land, trusting through their strength to make her son king, and making secret approaches to some of the lords of England to stir the king that he should resign the crown to her son; but she could not bring her purpose about. The 28th year of King Harry, in the month of September, the year of Our Lord 1459, on the Sunday in the feast of St Matthew [23 September], Richard Earl of Salisbury, having with him 7,000 well arrayed men, dreading the malice of his enemies and especially of the queen and her company, which hated him mortally, and the Duke of York, and the Earl of Warwick too, took his way towards Ludlow where the Duke of York lay at that time, so that they both together could have ridden to the king at Coleshill in Staffordshire, to have cleared themselves of certain articles and false accusations touching their allegiance laid against them maliciously by their enemies. When the king heard of their coming, those who were about him counselled him to gather a power to withstand them, and informed him that they came to destroy him. The queen lay then at Eccleshall, and at once by her stirring the king assembled a great power, whereof Lord Audley was the chief and had the leading of them, and went forth to a field called Blore Heath, by which the said Duke of York and the Earl must needs pass. And there both hosts met and encountered and fought a deadly battle. And there was Lord Audley slain, and many of the notable knights and squires of Cheshire that had received the livery of the swans. And there were taken prisoners the Earl of Salisbury’s two sons, Thomas and John, and Sir Thomas Harington, and imprisoned in the castle of Chester; but soon afterwards they were delivered. After this discomfiture the earl went on to Duke Richard at Ludlow, and thither came to them from Calais the Earl of Warwick.

English historical documents

278

160. The attainder of the Yorkist leaders at Coventry, 1459 (Rot. Parl. V, 348 [English]) After the rout of the Yorkists at Ludlow on 12 October 1459 a Lancastrian parliament was summoned to meet at Coventry on 20 November.

Wherefore may it please your highness…by the advice and assent of your lords spiritual and temporal and of your commons assembled in this your present parliament, and by the authority of the same to ordain, establish, and enact, that the said… Richard Duke of York, Edward Earl of March, Richard Earl of Salisbury, Edmund Earl of Rutland, etc…. for their said traitorous levying of war against your said most noble person, at Ludford specified above in the fields of the same, in the way explained above, be declared…attainted of high treason, as false traitors and enemies against your most noble person high majesty, crown, and dignity…. Reply: The king agrees to this act: so that by virtue thereof he be not put from his prerogative, to show such mercy and grace as shall please his highness, according to his regality and dignity, to any person or persons whose names are expressed in this act, or to any other who might be hurt by the same…. 161. The Duke of York returns from Ireland and claims the throne, 1460 (Registrum Abbatiae Johannis Whethamstede, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1872), I, 376– 8 [Latin]) When the Duke of York returned from Ireland to the realm of England, landing at Red Bank1 near the town of Chester, there were varied and contrary rumours amongst the people about his return. Some said that his arrival was peaceful, and that he intended nothing else than to restore harmony among the quarrelling peers of the realm, and bring peace by his authority everywhere throughout the realm, and reform it. But others, amongst whom were the older and wiser in mind, suspected that he was going to be litigious and act litigiously against the lord king for the right of the royal crown and claim that crown by the title of hereditary right. While the people were wavering thus in doubt, and the lord king was assembled with the prelates, peers, and commons in parliament at Westminster, for the good government of the realm, soon, almost at the beginning of the parliament, the Duke of York, with the pomp of a great following, arrived in no small exultation of spirit; for he came with horns and trumpets and men at arms, and very many other servants. And entering the palace there, he marched straight through the great hall until he came to that solemn room where the king was accustomed to hold parliament with his commons. And when he arrived there, he advanced with determined step until he reached the royal throne, and there he l 1

An outport of Chester, at the mouth of the Dee near West Kirby, much used in this period because of the silting of the Dee at Chester itself.

The political framework

279

laid his hand on the cushion or bolster, like a man about to take possession of his right, and kept his hand there for a short while. At last, drawing it back, he turned his face towards the people, and standing still under the cloth of state, he looked attentively at the gazing assembly. And while he stood there, looking down at the people, and awaiting their applause, Master Thomas Bourgchier, the Archbishop of Canterbury, came up, and, after a suitable greeting, asked him whether he wished to come and see the lord king. At this request the duke seemed to be irritated, and replied curtly in this way: “I know of no person in this realm whom it does not behove to come to me and see my person, rather than that I should go and visit him.” When the archbishop had heard this reply, he retired in haste and told the king of the reply which he had from the mouth of the duke. When the archbishop had left, Richard retired also and went to the principal chamber of the whole palace and broke the locks (for the king was at that time staying in the queen’s apartments); and when the doors had been opened, he stayed there for some time in the manner of a king rather than of a duke. And when the news of the duke’s high-handedness was published among the people, and they heard how he had entered thus of his own ill-considered presumption without any weighty discussion, everyone, of whatever estate, rank, age, sex, order, or condition, at once began to murmur against him and say that he had acted in a rash manner. 162. The adventures of Queen Margaret after the battle of Northampton, 1460 (Gregory’s Chronicle, ed. J.Gairdner, 208 [English]) And that same night the king removed to London against his will, to the bishop’s palace of London, and the Duke of York came to him that same night by the torchlight and took upon himself as king, and said in many places that “this is ours by very right”. And then the queen, hearing this, went away into Wales, but she was encountered beside the castle of Malpas, and a servant of her own that she had made both yeoman and gentleman, and afterwards appointed to be in office with her son the prince, despoiled her and robbed her, and put her so in doubt of her life and her son’s life also. And then she came to the castle of Harlech in Wales, and she had many great gifts and was greatly comforted, for she had need thereof…. And most commonly she rode behind a young poor gentleman of fourteen years of age, named John Coombe, born at Amesbury in Wiltshire. And thence she moved very secretly to Jasper, Earl of Pembroke, for she dared not abide in any place that was open, but in secret. The reason was that counterfeit tokens were sent to her as though they had come from her most dread lord King Henry VI; but it was not of his sending… but forged things, for they that brought the tokens were of the king’s house, and some of the prince’s house, and some of her own house, and bade her beware of the tokens, that she gave no credence thereto. For at the king’s departing from Coventry towards the field of Northampton, he kissed her and blessed the prince and commanded her not to come to him till he should send her a special token that no man knew but the king and she. For the lords would have liked to have had her to London, for they well

English historical documents

280

knew that all the arts that were done were encouraged by her, for she was more intelligent than the king…. Then the queen, having knowledge of this, in a short while sent to the Duke of Somerset, at that time in Dorset at the castle of Corfe, and for the Earl of Devon, and for Alexander Hody, and prayed them to come to her as hastily as they could, with their tenants as strong in their armour as men of war, for the Lord Roos, the Lord Clifford, Baron Grestock, Lord Neville, Lord Latimer were waiting upon the Duke of Exeter to meet with her at Hull. And this matter was not delayed but very secretly done; and she sent letters to all her chief officers that they would do the same, and that they should warn all those servants that loved her or meant to preserve and encourage her royal office, to wait upon her at Hull by the day that she appointed. All these people were gathered and conveyed so secretly that they were assembled to the number of 15,000 before any man would believe it; so that if any man said, or told, or talked of such a gathering, he would be disgraced; and some were in great danger, for the common people said to those who told the truth “You talk just as if you wished it were so” …. And the 9th day of December next following set out the Duke of York, the Earl of Salisbury, the Earl of Rutland (he was the Duke of York’s second son, one of the best disposed lords in this land) and Sir Thomas Harington, with many more knights and squires and great people with them, and so departed out of London towards York. [Gregory then describes the Battle of Wakefield.] (Ibid. 211) Also Edward, Earl of March, the Duke of York’s son and heir, had a great victory at Mortimer’s Cross in Wales the 2nd day of February next following, and there he put to flight the Earl of Pembroke and the Earl of Wiltshire. And there he took and slew knights and squires and others to the number of 3,000. And in that conflict Owen Tudor was taken and brought to Haverford-West and he was beheaded at the market place, and his head was set on the highest pinnacle of the market cross, and a mad woman combed his hair, and washed away the blood off his face, and got candles, and set about him burning, more than a hundred. This Owen Tudor was father to the Earl of Pembroke and had wedded Queen Katherine, mother to King Henry VI. He thought and trusted all along that he would not be beheaded until he saw the axe and block, and when he was in his doublet he trusted on pardon and grace until the collar of his red velvet doublet was ripped off. Then he said: “That head shall lie on the stock that was wont to lie on Queen Katherine’s lap,” and put his heart and mind wholly on God, and very meekly took his death. Also the same day, that the Earl of March should take his journey towards Mortimer’s Cross from Haverford-West…over him men saw three suns shining. 163. From the battle of Wakefield to the accession of Edward IV (Attributed to William of Worcester, Annales Rerum Anglicarum, ed. Stevenson, Letters and Papers, II, ii, 775 [Latin]) On 21st December [1460] the Duke of York and the Earl of Salisbury, with 6,000 soldiers came to Sandal Castle, where they spent Christmas, the Duke of Somerset and

The political framework

281

the Earl of Northumberland with the opposite party lying meanwhile at Pontefract. King Henry with the Earl of Warwick and others spent Christmas in the palace of the Bishop of London at St Paul’s. Edward Earl of March spent Christmas in the town of Shrewsbury at the Friary. On December 29th at Wakefield when the Duke of York’s men were roaming through the countryside for victuals, a horrible battle took place between them and the Duke of Somerset, Earl of Northumberland and Lord Neville with a great army; and there were killed in the field the Duke of York, Thomas Neville, son of the Earl of Salisbury, Thomas Haryngtone, Thomas Parre, Edward Boucher [Bourgchier], James Pykeryng, and Henry Rath-forde, many other knights and squires, and common soldiers to the number of 2,000. And after the battle Lord de Clyfforde [Clifford] killed Lord Edmund, Earl of Rutland, son of the Duke of York, on the bridge at Wakefield as he fled. And the same night the Earl of Salisbury was captured by a servant of Andrew Trolloppe. And on the morrow at Pontefract the Bastard of Exeter killed the Earl of Salisbury, and there by the counsel of the lords they beheaded the bodies of the Duke of York, the Earls of Salisbury and Rutland, Thomas Nevyle, Edward Boucher, Thomas Haryngton, Thomas Parre, James Pykeryng, and John Harrowe of London, mercer, and placed their heads on various gateways of York. The head of the Duke of York they also in contempt crowned with a paper crown. When the battle was over, Queen Margaret came from Scotland to York where it was decided by the counsel of the lords to march in force to London, and to rescue King Henry from the hands of his enemies…. On the vigil of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary a battle took place near Wigmore at Mortimer’s Cross, when the Earl of March advanced with 51,000 men against the Earl of Pembroke with 8,000, and from the field there fled the Earl of Pembroke, the Earl of Wiltshire and many others. But Owen Tudor (the father of the said Earl of Pembroke) and John Throgmertone, esquire, with eight other captains, were beheaded at Hereford. Not long after the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary the lady Queen Margaret with the prince, the Dukes of Exeter and Somerset, the Earls of Northumberland, Devon, and Shrewsbury, Lords Roos, Gray, Codmore, Fitzhughe, Graystok, Welles, and Wylloughby, with many others, to the number of 80,000 fighting men, came toward St Albans… On Shrove Tuesday…took place the battle of St Albans, where the Duke of Norfolk and the Earls of Warwick and Arundel and many others fled from the field. And King Henry was captured on the field along with Lord Montagu, his chamberlain. And the prince came to the king in the field, where the king, his father, dubbed him knight. And in the battle were killed 2,000 men, not only in the field but in divers crofts…. And on Ash Wednesday William Bonville and Thomas Kyriell, knight, were taken and beheaded in the presence of the prince at St Albans. When the battle was ended, the aldermen of London sent the Duchesses of Bedford and Buckingham to sue to the queen for grace and the peace of the city, and other ambassadors were sent to the king and queen at Barnet. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Thomas Bourgchier, and the Bishop of Exeter, George Neville, then the chancellor of England, were then in Canterbury, awaiting better news. On the following Thursday the king and queen turned back from St Albans to Dunstable with their army, for fear that if their men had entered London, they would have sacked the city. And this was the downfall of King Henry and his queen; for if they had entered the city of London, they would have had all at their will.

English historical documents

282

On Friday morning at Newgate the commons of the city destroyed the cart with victuals ordered by the aldermen to go to Barnet for the queen’s ambassadors. And on the same day Baldwin Foulforthe, knight, of Devonshire, and Alexander Hody, knight, with a great crowd of armed men, came to Westminster on the queen’s behalf, because the commons of London rose against them. When he heard this news, Edward, the new Duke of York, who was then near Gloucester, hastened towards London, and at Chipping Norton, in Oxfordshire, met the Earl of Warwick. And then there were in the army of the Duke Edward, Walter Devereux, William Herbert, John Wenlock, William Hastings, and many others of the Welsh Marches, with 8,000 armed men, and entered London with him. … And Edward stayed at his house at Barnard’s Castle. On the Sunday following, i.e. [1] March, after midday, in the big field at Clerken-well the populace of the city congregated together with the army of the duke to the number of 3,000 or 4,000, whom the said reverend father George Neville, then the chancellor of England, ordered to stand in the field. And he caused to be proclaimed the title by which the said Edward could claim the crown of England and France, and at once all the people shouted that Edward was and should be king. I was there and heard this, and I went down with them at once into the city. On the third day of March the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of Salisbury and Exeter, and John, Duke of Norfolk, Richard, Earl of Warwick, Fethwater Fitzwalter], William Herbert, Lord Freers [Ferrers] of Chartley, and many others held a council at Baynard’s Castle, where they agreed and decided that Edward, Duke of York, should be king of England. And on the fourth of March the Lord Edward, Duke of York, went publicly to Westminster with the lords and was received with a procession. After the declaration of his title, he took the crown and sceptre of St Edward, and caused himself to be proclaimed King Edward IV. 164. The tactics and weapons of the second battle of St Albans, 1461 (Gregory’s Chronicle, ed. J.Gairdner, 212 [English]) The lords in King Henry’s party pitched a field and fortified it very strongly, and like unwise men broke their array and field and took another, and before they were prepared for battle the queen’s party was at hand with them in the town of St Albans, and then everything was to seek and out of order, for their scouts came not back to them to bring tidings how near the queen was, save one who came and said that she was nine miles away. And before the gunners and Burgundians could level their guns they were busily fighting, and many a gun of war was provided that was of little avail or none at all; for the Burgundians had such instruments that would shoot both pellets of lead and arrows of an ell in length with six feathers, three in the middle, and three at one end, with a very big head of iron at the other end, and wild fire, all together…. In time of need they could not shoot one of them, for the fire turned back on those who would shoot these three things. Also they had nets made of great cords of four fathoms long and four feet wide, like a hedge, and at every second knot there was a nail standing upright, so that no man could pass over it without a strong chance of getting hurt. Also they had a pavise1 borne as a door, made with a staff folding up and down to set the pavise where they like, and loop

The political framework

283

holes with shooting windows to shoot out at…. And when their shot was spent and finished, they cast the pavise before them; then no man might come over the pavise because of the nails that stood upright, unless he wished to do himself a mischief. Also they had a thing made like a lattice full of nails as the net was, but it could be moved as a man would: a man might squeeze it together so that the length would be more than two yards long, and if he wished, he might pull it wide, so that it would be four square. And that served to be at gaps where horsemen would enter…. And as the real opinion of worthy men who will not dissemble or curry favour for any bias, they could not understand that all these devices did any good or harm, except on our side with King Henry. Therefore they are much neglected, and men betake themselves to mallets of lead, bows, swords, glaives, and axes. As for spearmen, they are only good to ride before the footmen and eat and drink up their victuals, and many more such fine things they do. You must hold me excused for these expressions, but I say the best; for in foot soldiers is all the trust. 165. The accession of Edward IV, 1461 (MS. Gough, London, 10, f. 60V, ed. R.Flenley, Six Town Chronicles, 161 [English]) And the Thursday after [28 February 1461] the Earl of March and the Earl of Warwick came to London with a great power, and on Sunday afterwards all the host mustered in St John’s field and there were read among them certain articles and points in which King Henry VI had offended against the realm. And then it was demanded of the people whether the said Harry were worthy to reign still and the people cried “Nay!”; and then they were asked whether they would have the Earl of March as king and they cried “Yea!”; and then certain captains went to the Earl of March’s place at Baynard’s Castle and much people with them and told him that the people had chosen him as king; and he thanked them and by the advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Exeter, and the Earl of Warwick, with others, consented to take it upon him. And on Tuesday afterwards he caused it to be cried that all manner of people should meet him on the morrow that was the fourth day of March at St Paul’s at 9 o’clock and so they did. And thither came the Earl of March with the lords in goodly array and there went on procession through the town singing the litany. And after the procession was done, the Bishop of Exeter, the chancellor, made a sermon; and at the end of the sermon he declared the Earl of March’s right and title to the crown and demanded of the people whether they would have him as their king as their right demanded, and they cried “Yea!”; and then all the people were asked to go with him to Westminster to see him take his possession and so the people did. And then the Earl of March with the lords spiritual and temporal rode thither and when he came to the hall he alighted and went in and so up to the chancery and there he was sworn before the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Chancellor of England and the lords that he should truly and justly keep the realm and the laws thereof maintain as a true and just king. And then they put on him king’s robes and the cap of estate and then he went and sat in the chair as king; and then it was asked of 1

A large shield to cover the whole body; such a shield often had a hinged leg to prop it upright.

English historical documents

284

the people if they would have him as king and maintain support and obey him as true king and the people cried “Yea!”. And then he went through the palace to Westminster church; and the abbot with a procession awaited him in the church porch with St Edward’s sceptre and there took it to him and so he went into the church and offered at the high altar with great solemnity and afterwards at St Edward’s shrine; and then he came down into the quire and sat there in the seat while Te Deum was sung solemnly. And then he went into the palace again and changed his array; and afterwards came down by water and went to St Paul’s to the [bishop’s] palace and there lodged and dined. And the mayor and the aldermen and commons in Westminster Hall besought the king to be a good and gracious lord to the city and to its liberties, that they might enjoy them as they did before this time; and there he granted them good lordship and all their liberties as they were granted them, and promised to affirm them and charged the mayor aldermen and commons to keep the city to his benefit. And the said King Edward IV began his reign the said Wednesday that was the fourth day of March the year of Our Lord God 1461. 166. The battle of Towton, 1461 (Hearne’s Fragment, in Thomae Sprotti Chronica, ed. T.Hearne (Oxford, 1719), 286 [English]) The journey was determined by the newly elected King Edward, the fourth of that name, to follow his enemies King Harry the sixth and his queen northward. First on the morrow John Duke of Norfolk went in to his countryside with all diligence to prepare for the war on the part of King Edward. And on the next Saturday, the earl of Warwick with a great band of men departed out of London northward, followed on the next Wednesday by the king’s footmen in a great number, of whom most were Welshmen and Kentishmen. Then on the Friday ensuing King Edward issued out of the city in goodly order at Bishopsgate, on the ninth day of March, and held on his journey, following those others. And when the foreprickers [scouts] came to Ferrybridge, there was a great skirmish in which John Ratcliff then Lord Fitz-walter was slain. And thereupon they advanced themselves until they came to Towton eight miles out of York upon a Friday at night, awaiting the residue of their company, which were assembled in good order on the Saturday, the eve of Palm Sunday [28 March 1461]. And about four of the clock at night the two battles joined and fought all night till on the morrow in the afternoon. About noon the aforesaid John, Duke of Norfolk, with a fresh band of good men of war came to the aid of the newly elected King Edward. This field was sore fought; for there were slain on both sides 24,0001 men, and all the time it snowed. There were slain the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland with Sir Andrew Trolloppe and others, and the Earls of Devonshire and Wiltshire were taken and beheaded there. And the deposed King Henry and his queen with Harry, Duke of Somerset, and others, in great haste fled to Scotland. When this victory had been obtained, King Edward followed the chase for a little while, but shortly he returned to York where he kept his Easter.

The political framework

285

167. Italian impressions of English politics, 1461 (i) Prospero di Camulio, Milanese Ambassador to the Court of France, to Francesco Sforza, Duke of Milan, from Bruges, 18 April 1461 (Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts of Milans ed. and trans. A.B.Hinds (H.M. Stationery Office, 1912), I [Italian]) (No. 91) If they [Henry and Margaret] are taken, then that kingdom may be considered settled and quiet under King Edward and the Earl of Warwick; and then, as they are well affected to the Dauphin and the Duke of Burgundy, it seems likely…that they will pursue the plan to pass to France…. I have observed the great importance that the Duke of Burgundy attaches to England. Thus he has kept in with the Earl of Warwick, and his son with the Queen of England, so that whatever happens England will have friendship in the house of the Duke of Burgundy. (ii) Giovanni Pietro Cagnola of Lodi to Francesco Sforza, Duke of Milan, from London, 31 July 1461 (Ibid. No. 117) By my letters of the 9th I related how we had arrived here and the honours shown to us by the king at our entry, which continued throughout the day…. The king yesterday rode to a castle of his called Windsor for hunting; we shall go there tomorrow. The king’s desires seem to me to be directed towards having some sort of pleasure. It is true that he tries hard to afford every kind of pleasure that he can to the count, both festivities of ladies and hunting…. I have no news from here except that the Earl of Warwick has taken Monsig. de Ruvera and his son [Richard Wydeville, Lord Rivers, and Anthony Wydeville, Lord Scales], and sent them to the king, who had them imprisoned in the Tower. Thus they say that every day favours the Earl of Warwick, who seems to me to be everything in this kingdom, and as if anything lacked, he has made a brother of his, the archbishop, Lord Chancellor of England.2 (iii) Count Ludovico Dallugo to Francesco Sforza, Duke of Milan, from Bruges, 30 August 1461 (Ibid. No. 120) I have returned from England, having announced my journey thither in a former letter. I was well received, and as much honour as possible was done me by the king and the lords 1

This must be a gross exaggeration; there cannot have been so many men on the field on both sides put together. But the extent of the carnage impressed contemporaries so much that they gave inflated estimates of the number of dead. The Milanese ambassador in Bruges wrote to the Duke of Milan that “the number killed amounted to 28,000 and more, all counted by certain heralds” (Cal. State Papers Milan, I, 67). 2 George Neville, Bishop of Exeter, had been made chancellor at the instigation of the Yorkists on 25 July 1460, and was reappointed on 10 March 1461. He was kept in office until 8 June 1467, when Edward’s quarrel with Warwick caused him to be dismissed; but he was not made archbishop of York until 1465.

English historical documents

286

and the gentlemen of his court…. The lords adherent to King Henry are all quitting him, and come to tender obedience to this king, and at this present time one of the chief of them has come, by name Lord de Rivers with one of his sons, men of very great valour. I held several conversations with this Lord de Rivers about King Henry’s cause, and what he thought of it, and he answered me that the cause was lost irretrievably. 168. Edward IV goes into the shipping business, 1463 (Public Record Office, Warrants for Issues, E404/72/3/50 [English]) Edward by the grace of God, King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and chamberlains of our Exchequer greeting. Whereas we for the welfare of our persons and of this our realm, having considered many urgent and great causes touching the same, have entreated our trusty, faithful, and well-beloved Avery Corneburgh to pay for us of his own money in all haste to him possible £310 13s 4d upon and for the buying of certain vessels and carvels, and part of vessels and carvels,1 and for the tackling, manning, and setting forth of the same, and for payments and rewards about and upon the same as particularly hereafter ensues, that is to say, for the buying of five parts of a ship called “John Evangelist” of Dartmouth 100 marks; for the victualling, tackling, and manning of the same £40; for the buying of a carvel of Salcombe £80; for the setting forth of the same, 40 marks; for the victualling and manning of our carvel being at Fowey, 26 marks; for victualling, anchors, cables, stays, and shrouds and other equipment to the same ships and carvels, £60; and for the reward of the men of the Earl of Desmond, £20; the which payments so to be made the said Avery at our special instance and request has taken upon him to do to his great charge and to our singular pleasure, trusting thereof to have of us in all haste payment and settlement. We will and charge you that you do make sufficient assignments by tallies at our receipt of our said Exchequer, to be levied for the said Avery Corneburgh upon the collectors of an aid granted by the commonalty of this our realm in our parliament held at Westminster the third year of our reign, of the sum of £310 13s 4d to be had and paid by and for him of the collectors or receivers of the said aid in the shires of Devonshire and Cornwall in due and sufficient form at his desire, particularly to be raised…in all haste possible, without setting of any prest2 in the pell3 of the remembrance of the said Exchequer or otherwise upon the said Avery of or for the said sums in form abovesaid to be assigned, or any part thereof in any wise. And these our letters shall be your sufficient warrant and discharge in this matter. Given under our privy seal at our palace of Westminster the 5th day of July the third year of our reign. 1

The ordinary name from the fifteenth to the seventeenth century of a somewhat small, light and fast ship. 2 An allowance of money in advance, to be repaid later. 3 The account roll, so called because it was written on parchment or sheep-skin (pellis).

The political framework

287

169. The war in the north, 1463–4 (Gregory’s Chronicle, ed. J.Gairdner, 218 if., 223 [English]) This year Queen Margaret came out of France with 52 ships, with Frenchmen and some English men in the ships. And they landed in Northumberland; it was seven days before All Hallows-tide. And there she took the castle of Alnwick and put it full of Frenchmen. And then she returned to Scotland by water. And there arose such a tempest upon her that she forsook her ship and escaped with the boat of the ship. And the ship was sunk with much of her stuff and three great ships as well. And 406 Frenchmen were taken in the church of Holy Island. Then King Edward heard tell of this and made himself ready towards the North with many lords, gentles, and commons with him. And there he laid siege to Alnwick Castle and the castles of Bamborough, and Dunstanborough…. And Bamborough and Dunstanborough were surrendered by Sir Ralph Percy and Sir Harry Beaufort, late Duke of Somerset, to the king’s will, with the condition that the said Ralph Percy should have the keeping of the two castles, Bamborough and Dunstanborough. The said Sir Ralph Percy and Sir Harry Beaufort, late Duke of Somerset, were sworn to be true and faithful as true liege men to our king and sovereign lord Edward IV. And they came to Durham, and there they were sworn before our king…. And then the aforesaid Ralph Percy returned again to Northumberland and had the keeping of the said two castles according to the agreement. And the said Sir Harry Beaufort abode still with the king, and rode with him to London. And the king made much of him; so much so that he slept with the king in his own bed many nights, and some times rode hunting behind the king, the king having about him not more than six horsemen at the most, and yet three were men of the Duke of Somerset, The king loved him well, but the duke thought treason under fair cheer and words, as it appeared…. But within short time afterwards Sir Ralph Percy by false collusion and treason allowed the Frenchmen to take the castle of Bamborough from him…. And then King Edward made Sir John Ashley…captain of the castle [of Alnwick], and Sir Ralph Gray constable of the said castle of Alnwick. And within three or four months afterwards that false knight and traitor, Sir Ralph Gray, by false treason took the said Sir John Ashley prisoner and delivered him to Queen Margaret and then delivered the castle to the Lord Hungerford and unto the Frenchmen who accompanied him; and by this means he put the king our sovereign lord out of possession. And then after King Harry that was, and the Queen had come to the King of Scots, Sir Pierre de Brezé, with 80,000 Scots, laid a siege unto the castle of Norham, and lay there 18 days. And then my lord of Warwick and his brother the lord Montague laboured to rescue the said castle of Norham, and so they did, and put both King Harry and the King of Scots to flight. And Queen Margaret with all their counsel, and Sir Pierre de Brezé with the French men, fled away by water with four balingers;1 and they landed at Sluys in Flanders, and left King Harry that was behind them, and all their horse and harness, they were so hastily pursued by my lord of Warwick and his lord of Montague, and those who accompanied them…. And this same year about Christmas that false Duke of Somerset, without leave of the king, stole out of Wales with a private following towards Newcastle, for he and his men 1

Small, light sea-going vessels, akin to sloops.

English historical documents

288

were leagued to have betrayed the said Newcastle. And in the way thither he was noticed and was nearly taken beside Durham in his bed. But he escaped away in his shirt and barefoot and two of his men were taken…. And when his men knew that he had escaped, and his false treason was discovered, his men stole from Newcastle as very false traitors, and some of them were taken and lost their heads for their labour. And then the king…had knowledge of the false disposition of this false Duke Harry of Somerset. The king sent a great fellowship of his household men to keep the town of Newcastle, and made Lord Scrope of Bolton captain of the town; and so they kept it surely all that winter. And about Easter next after [1464] the Scots sued unto our sovereign lord the king for peace. And the king ordained commissioners to meet with the Scots…. [Lord Montague was sent to escort the Scots to York, but was nearly ambushed by the Duke of Somerset and Sir Ralph Percy in a wood near Newcastle.] And then the Lord Montague took another way, and made to be gathered a great fellowship and went to Newcastle and so took his journey towards Norham. And on the way thither they met that false Duke of Somerset, Sir Ralph Percy, Lord Hungerford, and Lord Roos, with all their company, to the number of 5,000 men at arms. And this meeting was upon St Mark’s Day [25 April, the battle of Hedgeley Moor], and that same day Sir Ralph Percy was slain. And when he was dead all the party was discomforted and put to rebuke; and every man fled…. And then my lord of Montague took his horse and rode to Norham, and fetched in the Scots, and brought them unto the Lords Commissioners. And there was concluded a peace for 25 years with the Scots…. And the 14th day of May next afterwards, my lord of Montague took his journey towards Hexham from Newcastle. And there he took that false Duke Harry Beaufort of Somerset, Lord Roos, Lord Hungerford, Sir Philip Wentworth, Sir Thomas Findern, with others. [All these men were beheaded at Hexham, Newcastle, Middleham, or York, between 15 and 26 May.] 170. Rebellion against Edward IV in Gloucestershire, 1464 (Public Record Office, King’s Bench, Ancient Indictments, File 33, No. 49 [Latin]) Pleas held at Gloucester in the county of Gloucester, before the aforesaid Richard, Earl of Warwick and Salisbury, John Earl of Worcester, Richard Widevile de Rivers, knight, John Markham, knight, and Robert Danby, knight, on Wednesday next after the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 3 Edward IV [8 February 1464]. On the said day…(before the same persons) by the oath of 12 jurors, it was presented that Robert Llewelyn, formerly of Aylburton in the county of Gloucester, yeoman, and other…felons, traitors, rebels, and unknown foes of the most Christian and dread prince Edward IV, King of England, on Tuesday next before the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 3 Edward IV, and on various other days and times at Pegthorn and elsewhere within the said county of Gloucester in great number, by force and arms, that is, with swords, sticks, bows, arrows, hauberks, salets…and other arms, armed and in manner of war came together and rose, and then and there the same traitors joined together and conspired against the king’s allegiance to raise war against the said king…and in order to achieve their proposed felony the aforesaid Robert Llewelyn and the other aforesaid conspirators caused various beacons to be raised and fire to be placed in them, and various bells to be rung in various townships of Gloucestershire, as in time

The political framework

289

of war, in order to levy war against the lord king in felonious and treasonable manner, contrary to their allegiance. [In the following week Robert Llewelyn and eight other men were condemned to be drawn, hanged, disembowelled, beheaded, and quartered, as traitors. Sir John Markham and Sir Robert Danby were at this time Chief Justice of King’s Bench and Common Pleas respectively.]1 171. The marriage of Edward IV, 1464 (J.Warkworth, Chronicle, ed. J.O.Halliwell (Camden Series, 1839), 3 [English]) Also the fourth year of King Edward the Earl of Warwick was sent into France for a marriage for the King, for one fair lady, sister-daughter2 to the King of France, which was concluded by the Earl of Warwick. And while the said Earl of Warwick was in France, the king was wedded to Elizabeth Gray, widow, the which Sir John Gray that was her husband was slain at York field [Towton] in King Harry’s party; and the same Elizabeth was daughter to the Lord Rivers; and the wedding was privily in a secret place, the first day of May, the year above said. And when the Earl of Warwick came home and heard this, then was he greatly displeased with the king; and after that great dissension rose ever more and more between the king and him, for that and other causes. And then the king put out of the chancellorship the Bishop of Exeter, brother to the Earl of Warwick, and made the Bishop of Bath chancellor of England. After that the Earl of Warwick took to him in fee as many knights, squires, and gentlemen as he might, to be strong; and King Edward did what he could to enfeeble the earl’s power. And yet they were reconciled several times; but they never loved each other afterwards. 172. The use of artillery in the siege of Bamborough, 1464 (MS. L9 in the College of Arms, printed in Warkworth’s Chronicle, 37 ff. [English]) Also, the 23rd June, my said lord of Warwick, with his forces, came before the castle of Alnwick, and had it delivered by appointment; and also the castle of Dunstanborough, where my said lord kept the feast of St John the Baptist. Also, my said lord of Warwick, and his brother the Earl of Northumberland, the 25th day of June, laid siege unto the Castle of Bamborough, there being within Sir Ralph Grey, with such forces as attended him to keep the said castle against the power of the king and my said lord…. And then my lord lieutenant had ordained all the king’s great guns that were charged to shoot at once into the said castle, Newcastle the king’s great gun, and London the second gun of iron; which so belaboured the place that stones of the walls flew into the sea. Dysyon, a brasin1 gun of the king’s, smote through Sir Ralph 1

The Gloucester Annals, ed. C.L.Kingsford, English Historical Literature in the Fifteenth Century, 355–7, say that in the suppression of these disorders the prime aim of the Earl of Warwick was to win popularity by his leniency, whereas Edward IV, who came to Gloucestershire afterwards, tried to promote peace by his severity. 2 Bona of Savoy, sister of the Queen of France, and, like a daughter, under the protection of Louis XI.

English historical documents

290

Grey’s chamber many times. Edward and Richard Bombartell and other men of the king’s ordnance…with men at arms and archers, won the castle of Bamborough by assault, in spite of Sir Ralph Grey, and took him, and brought him to the king at Doncaster, and there he was executed in this form as follows. My lord of Worcester, Constable of England, sitting in judgement… saying to him: [after giving at length a recital of his offences against the king and of Sir Ralph’s degradation from knighthood before execution, he went on] “Then, Sir Ralph Grey, this shall be thy penance,—thou shalt go upon thy feet to the town’s end, and there thou shalt be laid down and drawn to a scaffold made for thee, and thou shalt have thy head smitten off thy body; thy body to be buried in the friary, thy head where it may please the king.” 173. The capture of Henry VI, 1465 (i) (Warkworth, Chronicle, 5 [English]) Also the same year King Harry was taken near a house of religion in Lancashire, by the means of a black monk of Abingdon, in a wood called Clitherwood, near Bungerly stepping-stones, by Thomas Talbot, son and heir to Sir Edmund Talbot of Bashall, and John Talbot his cousin of Colebury,2 with others besides. He was betrayed, being at his dinner at Waddington Hall, and was carried to London on horse back, with his legs bound to the stirrups, and so was brought through London to the Tower, where he was kept a long time by two squires and two yeomen of the crown, and their men; and every man was suffered to come and speak with him, by licence of the keepers. (ii) (Public Record Office, Duchy of Lancaster Warrants, D.L. 37/51/31 [English]) Edward to our right trusty and well-beloved the receiver of our duchy of Lancaster within the county palatine of Lancaster and to his deputy there and to each of them greeting. Whereas we heretofore, for the true and faithful service that our well beloved subject John Wadyngton had done unto us in the taking of our great adversary and rebel Henry the Sixth, granted unto him an annuity of 10 marks for the term of his life, of which the said John was well and truly contented and paid until our last parliament…whereby the same annuity was resumed and the said John unpaid thereof by the space of two years to his great hurt. We, considering the premises, of our grace especial have given and granted unto him 5 marks, to be taken of our gift by way of reward. We will therefore and straitly charge you that of the revenues of your office due unto us you content and pay unto the said John the said sum of 5 marks, and we will that our auditors of our said duchy make unto you due allowance 1 2

Brazen, brass. I.e. Salesbury near Blackburn.

The political framework

291

thereof upon your accounts by these our letters…. Given at our palace of Westminster, 12th November, 16 Edward IV [1476]. [For Queen Margaret’s request for help from Louis XI in 1465, see Calendar of State Papers of Milan, I, 116.]

174. Warwick is annoyed with the king, and makes an alliance with Clarence, 1467 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, V, 543 [French]) On St John the Baptist’s Day [24 June] Monsieur Anthony Bastard of Burgundy, having taken leave of the king of England and the lords and ladies of the court, came to Dover, where he crossed the sea. And the same day the Earl of Warwick arrived at Sandwich returning from France where he had achieved part of his desires; but on his return he found that his brother the Archbishop of York, had been deprived of the seal which he used as chancellor of England. This troubled the earl very much, but he did not show his anger, for he was especially astute and cunning. The earl had brought with him an embassy from King Louis…. When these ambassadors had arrived in London and were all lodged, the earl went to Westminster to the king to tell him about his visit and to know when it would please the king to receive the French embassy…. [Warwick related to the king his great reception in France, but was chagrined to find that the king paid little attention to his narrative.] When on the morrow the Earl of Warwick knew that the ambassadors of King Louis were ready to go to King Edward, he announced the fact to the council of England, and then went to tell the French that the king and his council awaited them. They had caused two richly dressed barges to be ready to carry them up the Thames to Westminster. When the king learnt of their arrival he sent down from his chamber his brother of Clarence, accompanied by Lord Hastings, chamberlain to the king, Lord Scales, and his brother Lord Woodville, who came to them on the stage where they landed from their barge. When the Earl of Warwick saw the Duke of Clarence he greeted him warmly, for he wanted to talk to him…. When the king had heard the ambassadors, he went away and called his council to have advice, so that he could reply to their proposals, and soon afterwards he told them that they were very welcome and that he would appoint men to communicate with them, touching their proposals, for he could not do it himself because of other matters that had come to him. After this reply Lord Rivers caused wine and spices to be brought, then after taking leave of the king they returned to London; but as they returned in their barges they had many discussions, and the Earl of Warwick was so angry that he could not refrain from saying to the Admiral of France: “Have you not seen the traitors who surround the king?” To which the admiral replied: “Sire, will you not be revenged on them?” And the earl said, “Know that these are the men by whom my brother has been deprived of the office of chancellor and of the seal.” After this embassy had left the king…the king and queen left by water…and went to Windsor, where they stayed fully six weeks, chiefly because the king did not wish to communicate with the French. This troubled Warwick greatly, and the ambassadors knew well that the king did not regard them highly, nor was he prepared to entertain them, as

English historical documents

292

they had entertained the English in Normandy; though the Earl of Warwick saved his honour, for he feasted them greatly. While the king was at Windsor, and the French were in London, there came to London the Duke of Clarence, and had a talk with the Earl of Warwick, on the matter of the embassy, and how the ambassadors were grumbling because the king had shown them so little welcome. Then the Duke of Clarence replied that it was not his fault, and the Earl said he knew that very well. Then they spoke of the circle round the king, saying that he had scarcely any of the blood royal at court, and that Lord Rivers and his family dominated everything. And when they had discussed this matter, the duke asked the earl how they could remedy this. Then the Earl of Warwick replied that if the duke would trust him, he would make him king of England, or governor of the whole realm, and he need be in no doubt that most of the country would support him. When the Duke of Clarence, who was young and trusting, heard the earl promise so much to him, together with the hand of the earl’s elder daughter in marriage, he agreed, on these promises that the earl made to him, to take her as his wife. 175. Edward IV’s treaty with Burgundy, 1467–8 (Rymer, Foedera, V, ii, 149 [French], from French Roll, 7 Edward IV, m. 4) For Edward IV’s treaties with Denmark and Castile, dealing with both political and trade relations, see ibid. V, ii, 134–5, 140.

First, that all merchants, as well of the realm of England, Ireland, and of Calais, as the merchants of the duchy, country, and district of Brabant, Flanders, the town and lordship of Malines, and other regions of our said cousin the duke, whether they be merchants of wools, leathers, victuals, or other merchandise, their factors and servants, may go safely by land, on foot, on horseback, or otherwise, passing on and over the water of Gravelines, from Calais into Brabant, Flanders, Malines, and the other above-mentioned regions (and vice-versa)…keeping their road between the sea and the castles of Mark and Oye, to trade with each other in all manner of merchandise, victuals, and other things…except armour, artillery, cannon, powder, and other similar and warlike goods. Also, that all the merchants of England, Ireland, and Calais…may go by sea, pass, return, converse, come, be, and abide safely in the said duchy, county, and district of Brabant, Flanders, the lordship and town of Malines, and the other regions, and in the ports and harbours of the same with all their goods, merchandise, and ships, and trade with all merchants of Brabant, Flanders, and Malines…and all other merchants whatsoever. [Reciprocal rights were given to the subjects of the Duke of Burgundy in English dominions, except that Flemish merchants were to use only those English harbours which had customs officers there. The merchants of both countries were to pay the customs and tolls which were “due and accustomed when there was merchandising in times past

The political framework

293

between the above-mentioned kingdom and the countries included in this present agreement.”] … It shall be lawful for the merchants of both sides, their factors and servants, the masters of the ships and the sailors, to have with them in their ships armour and artillery for the protection and safety of their bodies and goods while going to sea, and to bring them with them into whatever harbours they visit; which armour… they shall leave in their ships…except knives, daggers, or swords, which they may carry, if it seems good to them, to their hostels, where they must leave their swords. [The merchants of each side may shelter in the ports of the other state, if driven thither by storm or by enemies, even if such port be not authorised for foreign trade.] Also, that the merchants of the realm of England and of Brabant, Flanders, Malines, and the abovesaid regions, their factors and servants, the masters of the ships and the seamen may enter the strongholds of the other party without asking leave, except for the first time only, each time that they travel from one country to the other, provided that at the gates of the towns, where there shall be need for the merchants [etc.] to enter to ask leave, there shall be set certain people with power to give them permission to enter. And if they do not find any such persons at the ports, they may lawfully and without any hindrance enter and ride or walk to their hostels, and stay there until their hosts have notified their arrival to the captains or officers of the towns…. Also, that all pilgrims of both sides going on pilgrimage and also clerks of England, Ireland, and Calais, or any other persons, of whatever estate or condition that they may be, in the church or otherwise, going to the court of Rome or the General Council, and returning thence, may enter by sea or land…the country of the other party and pass and return peacefully through them, and stay there in safety and freedom…provided that when they enter fortified towns, they shall ask permission to enter from the guards at the gates, and stay in the fortified town only one night, unless delayed by illness or the…sailing conditions, or…to change their money. Also, that all fishermen as well of England, Ireland, and Calais, as of Brabant, Flanders, and other countries of my lord the Duke…shall be able to fare peacefully on the sea, to fish and gain their livelihood, without being hindered or disturbed by the other party, and without requiring or obtaining any licence, permission, or safe-conduct…. Given at Brussels, 24th November, 1467. [On 20 September 1467, commissioners were appointed to negotiate or the marriage of Charles the Bold to Margaret of York and on 5 January 1468 commissioners were empowered to conclude a marriage treaty, ibid, V, iii, 149, 153. [For Edward IV’s commercial treaty with the duke of Brittany, 1468, see ibid, V ii, 159.]

English historical documents

294

176. The king declares his intention of invading France to recover his right there, 1468 (Rot. Parl. V, 622 [English]) Be it remembered that the 17th day of May, the 8th year of the king’s noble reign abovesaid, the king sitting in his royal seat in this present parliament, then being present the lords spiritual and temporal, and also the commons come for the commonalty of this land: it was shown by the king’s commandment, and in his name, by the mouth of the right reverend father in God the Bishop of Bath and Wells, chancellor of England, to the said lords and commons, that justice was the true ground and root of all the prosperity, peace and politic rule of every realm…. Wherefore first he asked, what is justice? Justice is, every person to do his office that he is put in according to his estate or degree; and as for this land, it is understood that it stands by three estates, and above that one principal; that is to say, lords spiritual, lords temporal, and commons, and besides that, the royal state above, as our sovereign lord the king, who had given to him in commandment to say to them that his final intention was to minister law and justice, and to plant, fix, and set peace through all this his realm, by the advice of his lords spiritual and temporal, and he also intended to provide an outward peace for the defence and surety of this realm. But first they must remember the state and condition of this realm, very different from what it was at the time of the king’s entry to use and take upon him his right and title, as true and rightful king of England; for at that time this land was quite naked and barren of justice, the peace not kept, nor laws duly administered in the same, and was also spoiled of the crown of France, the duchies of Normandy, Gascony, and Guienne, and also with enmity surrounded and laid about on every side, as with Denmark, Spain, Scotland, Brittany, and other countries, and also with our old and ancient enemies of France…. And what the king has done to the performing of his said intention, he declared how first his said highness had laboured to establish peace in his own realm, and also he had concluded with the King of Spain a league and perpetual peace, with intercourse of merchandise, also a peace and a league with the King of Denmark and intercourse of merchandise, also an amity and intercourse of merchandise with his old friends of Almayn, also a peace with Scotland for 50 winters, also an amity and a league with intercourse of merchandise taken with the King of Naples, and also that negotiations were well under way for a league and amity with intercourse to be taken with the king of Aragon…. And moreover he had made an amity and confederation with that high and mighty prince, the Duke of Burgundy, who is to wed the Lady Margaret, the king’s sister, and also an amity and confederation with the Duke of Brittany, which two dukes are the mightiest princes that hold of the crown of France. All these labours, confederations and conclusions he had laboured and borne at his great cost and charge, as well by sending out of ambassadors as in receiving ambassadors for the same…and all these labours and matters he had used and done at his own charge as means to a principal intent, that is to diminish and lessen the power of his old and ancient adversary of France, the French king, whereby his said highness should the more easily recover his right and title to the crown and land of France, and possession of the same. Wherefore his said highness was fully set and purposed, with the might and help of almighty God, and with the advice and assistance of his lords spiritual and temporal, and also of the commons of this land, to proceed and perform his said principal intention, for the defence of this land, that is to say, to go over

The political framework

295

the sea into France, and to subdue his great rebel and adversary Louis, usurping king of the same, and to recover and enjoy the title and possession of the said realm of France…. 177. A Burgundian’s reasons for the marriage of Charles Duke of Burgundy and Margaret of York, 1468 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, V, 559 [French]) The last day but one of June in 1468 there arrived at the port of Sluys in Flanders Margaret, sister of King Edward of England, whose marriage to Duke Charles of Burgundy took place notwithstanding the hindrances and impediments which the King of France had wished to put in the way. For he had striven with all his might to make alliances with the English, to try to destroy this Duke of Burgundy, as it was commonly said; and the king had so conducted his business that he had on his side the Earl of Warwick, who had the support of almost all the commons of England. And he made them believe that if the Duke of Burgundy had not made this alliance with King Edward’s sister, he would have had against him, both at once, the kingdoms of France and England. And so, in order to avoid such great perils, the duke had condescended to make this marriage. 178. The manifesto of Warwick, Clarence and Archbishop Neville, 1469 (Ashmolean MS. 1160, printed by J.O.Halliwell, in his edition of Warkworth’s Chronicle, 46 [English]) The Duke of Clarence, the Archbishop of York, and the Earl of Warwick. Right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. And well you know that the king our sovereign lord’s true subjects of diverse parts of this his realm of England have delivered to us certain bills of articles…remembering in the same the deceitful covetous rule and guiding of certain seditious persons, that is to say, the Lord Rivers, the Duchess of Bedford his wife, Sir William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, Humphrey Stafford, Earl of Devonshire, the Lords Scales and Audley, Sir John Woodville and his brothers, Sir John Fogge, and others of their mischievous rule, opinion and assent, which have caused our said sovereign lord and his said realm to fall in great poverty of misery, disturbing the administration of the laws, only tending to their own promotion and enrichment. The said true subjects with piteous lamentation calling upon us and other lords to be means to our said sovereign lord for a remedy and reformation; wherefore we, thinking the petition comprised in the said articles reasonable and profitable for the honour and profit of our said sovereign lord and the common weal of all this his realm, fully purposed, with other lords, to show the same to his good grace, (desiring and praying you to dispose and prepare yourself to accompany us thither) with as many persons defensibly arrayed as you can make, letting you know that by God’s grace we intend to be at Canterbury upon Sunday next coming. Written under our signets and sign manual the 12th day of July, 1469. In the three next articles underwitten are comprised and specified the occasions and true causes of the great inconveniences and mischiefs that befell in this land in the days

English historical documents

296

of King Edward II, King Richard II, and King Henry VI, to the destruction of them, and to the great hurt and impoverishment of this land. First, where the said kings estranged the great lords of their blood from their secret council, and were not advised by them, and taking about them others not of their blood, and inclining only to their counsel, rule and advice, which persons took no respect or consideration to the welfare of the said princes, nor to the commonwealth of this land, but only to their singular honour and enriching of themselves and their blood…by which the said princes were so impoverished that they had not sufficient livelihood or goods whereby they might keep and maintain their honourable estate and ordinary charges within this realm…. These underwritten are the petitions of us true and faithful subjects and commons of this land for the great welfare and surety of the king our sovereign lord and his heirs, and the commonweal of this land, ever to be continued…. First, that the said malicious persons above named, which by their subtle and malicious means have caused our said sovereign lord to estrange his good grace from the counsel of the noble and true lords of his blood, moved him to break laws and statutes, diminished his livelihood and household, changing his richest coinage, and charging this land with such great and inordinate impositions, as is above expressed …only to the enriching of themselves, may be punished according to their works and untruths, so that all others hereafter shall take warning from this. Also to avoid the occasions and causes of the great inconveniences and mischiefs that by the same have fallen in the king’s days, above expressed, both upon himself and upon this land… We, the king’s true and faithful commons and subjects of this land, meekly beseech him…to appoint, ordain, and establish for ever to be had such a sufficiency of livelihood and possessions by which he and all his heirs after him may maintain and keep their most honourable estate, with all other ordinary charges needed in this land. So that neither he nor any of his heirs…eed charge and lay upon his true commons and subjects such great impositions as is expressed earlier, except for the great and urgent causes concerning our welfare and that of our said sovereign lord, according to the promise that he made in his last parliament, openly with his own mouth to us. [Any person thereafter presuming to ask or take royal estates of land, except the king’s issue or brothers, shall be regarded as trying to diminish and impair the royal estate of the lord, and to be punished accordingly. The revenue of tunnage and poundage to be reserved for the keeping of the sea as it was granted. The laws and statutes made in King Edward III’s day for the keeping of the land in good peace, as well in Wales as in England, be duly observed.] 179. Edward IV is captured by the Nevilles, 1469 (Waurin, Recueil des croniques, V, 585 [French]) In 1469 Clarence was married to Warwick’s elder daughter by the Archbishop of York, in defiance of Edward’s wishes, and Warwick, Clarence and the archbishop issued a manifesto against the government. They stirred up a

The political framework

297

rebellion in the north, and their forces defeated a royalist army under the earls of Pembroke and Devon at the battle of Edgecote on 26 July 1469; Pembroke, Devon, Rivers and others loyal to Edward were executed, and Edward was left defenceless at a village near Coventry.

About midnight there came to the king the Archbishop of York, accompanied by many men of war, and thrust himself into the king’s lodgings, saying to the king’s bodyguard that he must speak to the king…but the king sent answer that he was resting, and would come in the morning, when he would gladly hear him. But the archbishop was not satisfied with this reply, and sent renewed messages to say that it was essential for him to speak to the king…and then the king commanded them to let him come [to] him to hear what he said, for he had no suspicion of him. When the archbishop came into the room, where he found the king in bed, he said to him brusquely: “Sire, get up!”, whereupon the king asked to be excused, saying that he had not yet had any rest: but the archbishop, false and disloyal as he was, said to him the second time: “You must get up and come to my brother Warwick, for you cannot oppose this.” And then the king, for fear that worse might befall, dressed himself and the archbishop brought him quietly to the place where the said earl and Clarence were between Warwick and Coventry, where he presented to them his king and sovereign lord, taken by him in the manner aforesaid. The Earl of Warwick greeted the king courteously without doing him any bodily harm; but to keep his person safe Edward was sent to Warwick Castle, and they provided him there with guards, who led him every day to take exercise where he wished, to the limit of one league or two. 180. The confession of Sir Robert Welles about the Lincolnshire rebellion, 1470 (Camden Miscellany, I (1847), 21–3; S.Bentley, Excerpta Historica (1831), 282, from B.M.Harl. MS. 283, f. 2 [English]) About last Candlemas a chaplain of my lord of Clarence called master John Barnby and with him John Clare, priests, came to my lord my father and me at Hellow with letters of credence given to the said master John which he revealed in this way. My lord of Warwick was at London with the king, whereupon for the safety of both of them he prayed us in both their names to be ready with all the fellowship that we could or might make and assemble of the commons whensoever my said lord of Clarence should send us word. Nevertheless he willed us to tarry and not stir until such time as my lord of Warwick should come again from London, for fear of his destruction. And soon afterwards my lord of Clarence sent me a patent of the stewardship of Cawlesby in Lincolnshire by the said John Clare. The cause of our great rising at this time was grounded upon this report raised amongst the people that the king was coming down with great power into Lincoln-shire, where the king’s judges would sit and hang and draw a great number of the commons. Wherefore with as many as we might collect by all possible means we came to Lincoln

English historical documents

298

upon the Tuesday; and upon the Wednesday a servant of my lord of Clarence, called Walter——, a yeoman of his chamber, by his commandment told us the same, and that the gentlemen of the countryside would judge us in such a way that necessarily a great multitude of the commons must die, thereupon desiring us to rise and proceed in our purpose, as we loved ourselves. And as my father was in London and perhaps would be endangered there, which he did not wish, he would go himself to London to help excuse my said lord my father and to delay the king’s coming forth. The said Walter——, servant of my lord of Clarence, went with me to the field, and took a great share in guiding our host, not departing from the same to the end. And before that, as soon as I came to Lincoln, I sent Sir John Clare to my lord of Warwick, to learn from him how he would have us guided forwards; but as he seemed to us to tarry long, we sent hastily after him one John Wright, of Lincoln, for the same cause; and thereupon I departed with our host towards Grantham. And in the way, about Temple Brewer, Sir John Clare met me, saying on my lord of War-wick’s behalf, that he greeted us well, and bade us be of good comfort, for he and my said lord of Clarence would raise all the people they could in all haste, and come towards us…. The following Sunday John Wright came to Grantham and brought me a ring from my said lord of Warwick, and desired me to go forward, bidding me and us all to be of good comfort, for he was raising all that he could persuade, and would be at Leicester on Monday night with 20,000 men, and join with us…. Also when my lord my father went to London, he charged me that if I understood him to be in jeopardy at any time I should come to his help with all the might that I could muster. Also, my lord of Clarence’s servant, Walter——, that came to us at Lincoln, exhorted and urged our host many times and in many places, that when the matter should come near the point of battle they should call upon my lord of Clarence to be king, and to destroy the king who was thus about to destroy them and all the realm; to such an extent, that when the king was before us in the field, he took a spear in his hand, and said that he would run with it as freely against the king as against the mortal enemy of himself and his master. Also, I have well understood by many messages, as well from my lord of Clarence as of Warwick, that they intended to make great risings, to such a degree as ever I could understand, that they intended to make the Duke of Clarence king; and so it was often and loudly reported in our host. 181. Louis XI arranges an alliance between Margaret and Warwick, 1470 (Calendar of State Papers of Milany I, 138 [Italian]) Sforza de Bettini of Florence, Milanese Ambassador in France, to Galeazzo Maria Sforza, Duke of Milan. Amboise June 2nd, 1470. His Majesty left here today for Angers, about eight leagues from Tours, where he is to meet the Earl of Warwick, who comes to make him reverence. It is considered certain that they will arrange a marriage between a daughter of the earl and the Prince of Wales, King Henry’s son, and by thus raising up once more the party of that king and earl will

The political framework

299

return forthwith to England. It is thought that in this way his affairs will prosper. His Majesty assists him with money and men, nothing being omitted to render him victorious, and he is very hopeful. The Duke of Burgundy is in his country of Holland, and we hear he is making great preparations of ships and men to go to the assistance of King Edward. Amboise, June 12th, 1470. The Duke of Clarence and the Earl of Warwick arrived in this place on the 8th inst., and were received by the Most Christian King in the most honourable and distinguished manner possible…. And so every day his Majesty has gone to visit them in their rooms, and has remained with them in long discussions, while he honours and feasts them, giving them tournaments and dancing, and everything else of distinction. Today they have left and gone away, the Duke of Clarence to Normandy… and the Earl of Warwick to Angers…until the arrival of the queen, wife of King Henry, and the Prince of Wales, her son, who will be here or at Tours in six or eight days. The Earl of Warwick does not want to be here when that queen first arrives, but wishes to allow his Majesty to shape matters a little with her and induce her to agree to an alliance between the prince, her son, and a daughter of Warwick, and to put aside all past injuries and enmities. That done, Warwick will return here to give the finishing touches to everything, and immediately afterwards, according to all accounts, he will return to England with a great fleet, taking with him the prince, in order to raise up the party of King Henry, and to see if his plan will prove successful this way. Many are very hopeful about it, and his Majesty the king more than all. Amboise, 29th June 1470. The Queen of England, wife of King Henry, and the prince, her son, arrived in this place on the 25th inst. and were received in a very friendly and honourable manner by his Majesty the king and the queen. His Majesty has spent and still spends every day in long discussions with that queen to induce her to make the alliance with Warwick and to let the prince, her son, go with the earl to the enterprise of England. Up to the present the queen has shown herself very hard and difficult, and although his Majesty offers her many assurances, it seems that on no account whatever will she agree to send her son with Warwick, as she mistrusts him. Nevertheless it is thought that in the end she will let herself be persuaded to do what his Majesty wishes. Angers, 24th July, 1470. The Queen of England and the Prince of Wales, her son, arrived here the day before yesterday, and on the same day the Earl of Warwick also arrived. The same evening the king presented him to the queen. With great reverence Warwick went on his knees and asked her pardon for the injuries and wrongs done to her in the past. She graciously forgave him and he afterwards did homage and fealty there, swearing to be a faithful and loyal subject of the king, queen, and prince as his liege lords unto death. They have not yet spoken of the marriage alliance, though it is considered as good as accomplished, and it is argued that they are only waiting for the arrival of King René, who may come any day, to announce it. Angers, 28th July, 1470. The marriage of Warwick’s daughter to the Prince of Wales is settled and announced. His Majesty has sent for the lady to Amboise, where the marriage will be consummated. In two days Warwick will leave for his fleet.

English historical documents

300

Angers, 7th August 1470. The Earl of Warwick departed, as your Excellency has heard. He did not wish to lose time in waiting for his daughter’s marriage. The ceremony will take place at Amboise, according to what they say. The Earl has not yet gone on board, but we expect to hear, at any moment, that he has sailed in the name of St George…. We shall wait to hear how matters progress in England, before any movement is made against the Duke of Burgundy, and if things go prosperously for Warwick, fire will be immediately applied. Omans, 14th September, 1470. The Earl of Warwick, in the name of St George, left the port of La Ogha [La Hogue] with all his fleet and with the fleet of Queen Margaret on the 9th inst., and sailed towards England. We are anxiously waiting to hear of their victorious progress. The fleet of the Duke of Burgundy has not since put in an appearance. It is thought to have gone to the English coast to prevent Warwick from landing… Warwick has taken the Duke of Clarence with him for more favour. 182. Henry VI appoints Sir William Catesby as Sheriff of Northampton, 1470 (Public Record Office, E 404/71/6/20 [English]) See “William Catesby” by J.S.Roskell, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 42 (1959), 145–74. (This document is not mentioned, but a very useful biography is to be found there.)

Henry by the grace of God King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and chamberlains of our Exchequer, greeting. Whereas we have appointed our trusty and well beloved William Catesby, knight, to be sheriff of our county of Northampton for the year now next ensuing, in which office as we certainly know he shall have great losses, costs, and charges, to his great hurt, unless our especial grace be shown to him in this matter. We, willing therefore that he be recompensed, charge you that you make assignment in due form to the said Sir William of the sum of £100 by tally or tallies, to be raised upon himself of the issues and profits of his bailiwick, and then to be delivered unto the said Sir William by way of reward without any prest or other charge therefore upon him to be set. And these our letters shall be to you herein sufficient warrant and discharge against us for ever. Given under our privy seal at our palace of Westminster the 19th day of November the 49th year from the beginning of our reign, and the 1st year of the readeption of our royal power.

The political framework

301

183. Arrangements for the return to England of Queen Margaret and Prince Edward, December 1470 (Public Record Office, Warrants to the Exchequer, E 404/71/6/35 [English]) Henry, by the grace of God, King of England and of France, and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and chamberlains of our Exchequer, greeting. For as much as we have ordained and deputed our right trusty and right well-beloved cousin the Earl of Warwick, with an army of ships and men to pass into the ports of France for the bringing home of our most dear and entirely beloved wife, the Queen, and of our son the prince, we will and charge you that as part of the charges and costs that our said cousin must have and bear in that matter you do pay unto him of our treasure the sum of £2,000. And these our letters shall be unto you herein sufficient warrant. Given under our privy seal in our city of London the 17th day of December, the 49th year from the beginning of our reign, and the first year of the re-adeption of our royal power. 184. Henry VI records his release from the Tower of London, 1470 (P.R.O., E 404/71/6/36, Warrants to the Exchequer [English]) For the flight of Queen Elizabeth to sanctuary at Westminster on I October, the release of Henry VI on 6 October, and his conducting by the mayor and aldermen to the apartments in the Tower vacated by Queen Elizabeth, see the London Journal 7, ff. 223b-4a, printed by R.R. Sharpe, in London and the Kingdom, III, 385.

Henry by the grace of God, King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and chamberlains of our exchequer greeting. We will ye should know that whereas on the 6th day of October last past, by the grace of Almighty God, and by the favour and true deliverance of our right entirely well beloved cousins, the Duke of Clarence, the Earls of Warwick and Oxford, accompanied with other lords, knights, squires, and gentlemen and many others of our true subjects in great number we departed from our Tower of London towards the bishop’s palace by St Paul’s Church, and there and then by the advice of the lords of our council ordained and made our right well beloved knight Henry Lewis ruler and governor of our household, and straitly commanded him to have the charge thereof; the which Henry occupied and had the rule, governance, and charge of our household, many people resorting daily thereto and in great numbers from the sixth day of October unto the nineteenth day of November last past, as by the space of six weeks and two days, by the which time all the parcels of the expenses of our household amount to the sum of £1,001 1s as has appeared by declarations thereof made by Sir Henry in our counting house and shown openly to us and the lords of our council at sundry times. Wherefore our cousin of Warwick has paid from his own income, and made himself responsible for a great part to his great charge and hurt. We will and straitly charge you that without difficulty or delay you make to Sir

English historical documents

302

Henry payment or sufficient assignment of the sum £1001 is without difficulty or delay, and without any prest [advance payment] to be set against him on this account. And we will that these our letters should be to you in this matter sufficient warrant at all times. Given under our privy seal in our city of London the 18th day of December, the 49th year from the beginning of our reign and the first year of the readeption of our royal power. 185. The outbreak of war between England and Burgundy in February 1471 (British Museum, Add. MS. 48988 (1), letter from Richard Neville, earl of Warwick, to Louis XI, 12 February 1471 [French], printed by A.R.Myers in B.I.H.R. 33 (1960), 115) It has long been well known that when Richard Neville, earl of Warwick, overthrew Edward IV in 1470, the price of the essential French support that he received was an Anglo-French alliance against Burgundy. It has, however, hitherto been obscure whether Warwick ever paid the price. This letter shows that Warwick did in fact order the garrison of Calais to begin the war against Burgundy and did promise to come himself to Louis’s aid as soon as he could. It is therefore not surprising that Charles the Bold threw aside his hesitations and helped Edward IV to invade England in March 1471.

Sir, I commend myself to your good grace in the humblest possible way. And may it please you to know that I have received your letters by this messenger, by which I have learnt that now war has begun between you, your adversary, and ours, wherefore I pray to Almighty God to give you the victory. In the matter of beginning the war at Calais, I have sent instructions to start it, and have today had certain news that the garrison of Calais has already begun and has advanced from Ardes, and has killed two of the garrison of Gravelines. As soon as I possibly can, I will come to you to serve you against this accursed Burgundian without any default, please God, to whom I pray to grant you all that your high heart desires. Written at London the 13th day of February. [Signed] Your very humble servant, R Warrewyk.

The political framework

303

186. Edward IV returns to England and wins the battle of Barnet, 1471 (i) (Warkworth, Chronicle, 13 [English]) And in the second week of March, the 49th year of the reign of King Harry the VIth, and in the 10th year of the reign of King Edward the IVth, the same King Edward took his shipping in Flanders, and had with him the Lord Hastings and the Lord Say, and 900 Englishmen and 300 Flemings with hand-guns, and sailed towards England. And they had great trouble upon the sea with storms, and lost a ship with horses. And they purposed to have landed in Norfolk, but one of the brothers of the Earl of Oxford with the commons of the country rose up together, and put him back to the sea again. And after that, he was so troubled in the sea that he was fain to land in Yorkshire at Ravenspur. And there rose against him all the country of Holderness, whose captain was a priest, and a parson in the same country called Sir John Westerdale, who afterwards for his hostile disposition was cast into prison in the Marshalsea at London by the same King Edward. For the same priest met King Edward and asked the cause of his landing; and he answered that he came thither by the Earl of Northumberland’s advice, and showed the earl’s letter sent to him under his seal, and also he came to claim the Duchy of York, which was his inheritance of right. And so he passed on to the city of York, where Thomas Clifford let him in, and there he was examined again. And he said to the mayor and aldermen and to all the commons of the city the same as he had done in Holderness at his landing; that was to say, that he would never claim any title, nor take upon him to be King of England, and that he would not have done so before that time, but for the incitement and stirring of the Earl of Warwick. And thereupon before all the people he cried “Hurrah! King Harry! Hurrah! King and Prince Edward!” and wore an ostrich feather, Prince Edward’s livery. And after this he was suffered to pass the city, and so held his way southwards, and no man hindered him nor hurt him. After that he came to Nottingham, and there Sir William Stanley came to him with 300 men and Sir William Norris, and various other men and tenants of Lord Hastings, so that he had 2,000 men and more; and immediately after this he made his proclamation and called himself King of England and France. Then he took his way to Leicester, where were the Earl of Warwick and the lord marquis his brother, with 4,000 men or more. And King Edward sent a messenger to them that if they would come out, he would fight with them. But the Earl of Warwick had a letter from the Duke of Clarence that he should not fight with the king until the duke came himself; and all was to the destruction of the Earl of Warwick, as it happened afterwards. Yet so the Earl of Warwick kept still the gates of the town shut, and suffered King Edward to pass towards London, and a little way out of Warwick the Duke of Clarence met with King Edward, with 7,000 men, and there they were reconciled, and made a proclamation forthwith in King Edward’s name. And so all covenants of fidelity, made between the Duke of Clarence, and the Earl of Warwick, Queen Margaret, and Prince Edward her son, both in England and in France, were clearly broken and forsaken of the said Duke of Clarence; which, in the end, brought destruction both to him and them, for perjury shall never have a better end, without the grace of God. King Harry was then in London, and the Archbishop of York, in the palace of the Bishop of London. And on the Wednesday next before Easter Day King Harry and the

English historical documents

304

Archbishop of York with him rode about London,1 and desired the people to be true to him; and every man said they would. Nevertheless, Christopher Urswick, Recorder of London, and divers aldermen, who had the government of the city, commanded all the people who were in arms, protecting the city and King Harry, to go home to dinner; and during the dinner time King Edward was let in, and so went to the palace of the Bishop of London and there took King Harry and the Archbishop of York and put them in ward, the Thursday next before Easter Day. And the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Earl of Essex, Lord Berners, and such others as bore towards King Edward good will, as well in London as in other places, produced as many men as they could to strengthen the said King Edward; so then he had 7,000 men and there they refreshed themselves well all that day and Good Friday [12 April 1471]. And upon Easter Eve he and all his host went towards Barnet and he took King Harry with him; for he understood that the Earl of Warwick and the Duke of Exeter, the Marquis Montagu, the Earl of Oxford, and many other knights, squires, and commons, to the number of 20,000 men, were gathered together to fight against King Edward.1 But it happened that he with his host entered the town of Barnet before the Earl of Warwick and his host. And so the Earl of Warwick and his host lay outside the town all night, and each of them fired guns at the other all night.2 And on Easter Day in the morning, the 14th April, right early, each of them came upon the other; and there was such a thick mist that neither of them might see the other perfectly. There they fought, from 4 o’clock in the morning unto 10 o’clock of the forenoon. And at various times the Earl of Warwick’s party had the victory, and supposed that they had won the field.3 But it happened so that the Earl of Oxford’s men had upon them their lord’s livery, both in front and behind, which was a star with streams, which was much like King Edward’s livery, a sun with streams. And the mist was so thick that a man might not properly judge one thing from another; so the Earl of Warwick’s men shot and fought against the Earl of Oxford’s men, 1

The Great Chronicle of London (ed. A.H.Thomas and I.D.Thornley, 1939), 215, comments on this showing of Henry VI to the people of London: “the which [progress] was more like a play than the showing of a prince to win men’s hearts, for by this means he lost many and won none or very few; and always he was shown in a long blue gown of velvet as though he had no more to change into.” 1 The Arrivall of Edward IV (ed. J.Bruce, Camden Soc. (1838)), written as an official, and therefore propagandist, account of Edward’s recovery of the throne, but nevertheless to be reckoned with as composed by an eye-witness, says (18) that the “afore-riders” of Warwick’s army entered St Albans first, but were chased out by Edward’s “afore-riders”. After dark Edward made all his men steal softly out of the town and take up their positions very close to Warwick’s army, says The Arrivall. 2 The Arrivall says that the king’s army was so close to that of Warwick’s (and presumably on lower ground) that Warwick’s guns overshot the king’s forces, which remained quite unharmed. The king guessed that Warwick was in ignorance of his exact position and therefore ordered his men to keep strict silence throughout the night. 3 The Arrivall tells us that because of the dark night and then the thick mist, the two lines were not drawn up directly opposite each other. Warwick’s right wing (under the earl of Oxford) overlapped Edward’s left wing, which was therefore enveloped, overwhelmed and chased off the field. Some fugitives from Edward’s left wing, fleeing as far as London, reported that Edward’s cause was lost.

The political framework

305

thinking and supposing that they had been King Edward’s men.4 And at once the Earl of Oxford and his men cried “Treason! Treason!” and fled away from the field with 800 men. The lord Marquis Montagu had an agreement and understanding with King Edward and put upon him King Edward’s livery; and a man of the Earl of Warwick saw that and fell upon him and killed him. And when the Earl of Warwick saw his brother dead, and the Earl of Oxford fled, he leapt upon his horse, and fled to a wood by the field of Barnet, from which there was no road. And one of King Edward’s men had espied him and came upon him and killed him and despoiled him naked. And so King Edward won that field. And there were slain of the Earl of Warwick’s party the Earl himself, Marquis Montagu, Sir William Tyrell, knight, and many others. The Duke of Exeter fought manfully there that day, and was greatly despoiled and wounded, and left naked for dead on the field, and so lay there from 7 o’clock until 4 in the afternoon; but he was taken up and brought to a house by a man of his own, and a physician was brought to him, and so afterwards he was brought into sanctuary at Westminster. And on King Edward’s side were slain the Lord Cromwell, son and heir to the Earl of Essex, Lord Berners’s son and heir, Lord Say, and various others, to the number (of both sides) of 4,000. And after the battle was over, King Edward commanded both the Earl of Warwick’s body and the marquis’s body to be put in a cart, and he returned with all his host again to London. And there he commanded the said two bodies to be laid in the church of St Paul’s, on the pavement, that every man might see them. And so they lay three or four days, and afterwards were buried. And King Harry, being in the van during the battle, was not hurt, but he was brought again to the Tower of London, there to be kept. (ii) The comment of Philippe de Commines (Memoires, ed. B.de Mandret, Bk 3, ch. 7 [French]) The Earl of Warwick was never accustomed to want to dismount, but he had the habit of mounting his horse when he had ordered his men to engage in fight. If the struggle went well for him, he was in the thick of it; and if it went badly, he fled in good time. On this occasion, however, he was constrained by his brother, the Marquis of Montagu, who was a very valiant knight, to dismount and to send away his horses. But this battle turned out in such a way that the earl died, and his brother the marquis, and a great number of high rank. And the slaughter was very great, for Edward had resolved, on his departure from Flanders, to call out no more, as he had been wont to do, that they should spare the common people and kill only the men of rank, as he had done in former battles. For he had conceived a very great hatred against the people of England, because of the great favour which he had seen them bear towards the Earl of Warwick, and also for other reasons; wherefore this time they were not spared.

4

The Arrivall tells us (19) that Edward’s right wing, which overlapped Warwick’s left wing, pressed their foes back, and then wheeled left to support their centre under Edward, who was doing great deeds of valour there. What with the defeat of Edward’s left wing, and the success of his right wing, it would seem that the two armies had almost wheeled right round. This would explain the fact that when the earl of Oxford returned to the battlefield from chasing fugitives, he came up behind Warwick’s men instead of behind those of Edward. Hall’s Chronicle (ed. H.Ellis, 1809), 296, informs us that the duke of Gloucester commanded Edward’s right wing.

English historical documents

306

187. The campaign and battle of Tewkesbury, 1471 (Historic of the Arrivall of Edward IV in England, ed. J.Bruce (Camden Soc., 1838), 22 [English]) After all these things had thus befallen, the Tuesday in Easter week, the 16th day of April, came certain tidings to the king how that Queen Margaret, her son called Prince of Wales, the Countess of Warwick, the Prior of St John, at that time called treasurer of England, Lord Wenlock, and many other knights, squires, and others of their party, who long had been out of the land with them…had arrived and landed in the west-country, upon Easter Day, at Weymouth, after long awaiting passage, and being on the sea, and landing again for default of good wind and weather…. And so at divers times they took the sea, and forsook it again, till it was the 13th day of April, Easter Even. That day they passed…. The queen, Margaret, and her son went from where she landed to an abbey near by, called Seern [Cerne] and all the lords, and the remnant of the fellowship with them. Thither came unto them Edmund, called Duke of Somerset, Thomas Courteney, called the Earl of Devonshire, with them, and welcomed them into England, comforted them, and put them in good hope that, although they had lost one field, whereof the queen had knowledge the same day, Monday, the 15th day of April, and was therefore right heavy and sorry, yet it was to be thought that they should have right good speed, and that, for that loss, their party was never the feebler, but rather the stronger, and that they doubted nothing but that they should assemble so great a power of people in divers parts of England, truly assured unto their party, that it would not lie in the king’s power to resist them; and in that country they would begin. And so, forthwith, they sent all about in Somerset, Dorset, and part of Wiltshire, for to get ready and raise the people by a certain day…and they raised the whole might of Cornwall and Devon, and so, with great numbers of people they departed out of Exeter and took the right way to Glastonbury and thence to the city of Bath…and as they went they gathered the able men of all those parts…. The king being at London and having knowledge of all this their movements from time to time, at once provided for the relief of his sick and hurt men, who had been with him at Barnet field, which were right many in number…and sent to all parts to get him fresh men and at once prepared all things that were thought necessary for a new field of battle…so he provided artillery, and ordnance, guns, and other things for the field, in great plenty…. And for as much as they (Edward’s enemies) at that season were in an angle of the land, and needs must take one of two ways (one way, to London, via Salisbury or via Sussex and Kent)…or else they, not thinking themselves powerful enough to have an encounter with the king and therefore, perhaps, would draw northward into Lancashire and Cheshire, trusting also to have in their way the assistance of Welshmen; for which considerations, the king caused great diligence to be done by means of scouts…. If they had taken their way eastwards, his intention was to have encountered them as soon as he could… but for as much as he understood well they took the other way, towards the northwest, he hastened with his host as fast as he could, upon the purpose that he had taken to stop them. They (his enemies)…therefore endeavoured greatly to deceive the king’s party in that matter, for which cause and purpose they sent their advance riders straight from Exeter to Shaftesbury, and afterwards to Salisbury, and took the straight way to Taunton, and to Glastonbury, to Wells, and thereabouts…

The political framework

307

whence, another time, they sent advance riders to a town called Yeovil and to a town called Bruton, to make men understand that they would have drawn towards Reading and… London…. Such manner of riding nevertheless served them of two things; one was, to call and raise the people to make towards them for their help out of all those parts; another was to have deceived the king in his approach towards them, but, thanked be God, he was not unaware of it, but by good and serious advice, provided for every way, as may appear in telling forth his progress from Windsor towards them. [Edward went from Windsor, to Abingdon, Cirencester, Bath, and Malmesbury….] And there he had knowledge that they, understanding his approaching and marching near to them, had left their purpose of giving battle, and turned aside, and went to Bristol, a good and strong walled town, where they were greatly refreshed and relieved, by such as were the king’s rebels in that town, of money, men, and artillery. [They therefore decided to meet Edward in battle at Sudbury; but when they heard of the king’s approach, they fled to Berkeley, then to Gloucester. The king sent a message to Richard Beauchamp, who was in charge of the defence of Gloucester, that the Lancastrians were not to be admitted to the city, and that Edward was coming to the relief as quickly as possible. The Lancastrians found themselves unable to gain admittance to Gloucester, and so, in order to cross the Severn into Wales, they had to go on to Tewkesbury]…. Therefore they shortly took their decision to go the next way to Tewkesbury, whither they came the same day, about four after noon, by which time they had so travelled with their host the previous night and day that they were right weary with their travelling. For by that time they had travelled 36 long miles, in a foul country, all in lanes and stony ways, between woods, without any good refreshment. And for as much as the greater part of their hosts were footmen, the other part of the host, when they were come to Tewkesbury, could not have laboured any further unless they had wilfully forsaken and left their footmen behind them, and those who were horsemen were right weary of that journey, as were their horses…. They therefore determined to abide there the chance that God would send them in the adventure they had taken in hand. And for that reason the same night they pitched camp in a field, in a close just at the town’s end with the town and the abbey at their backs; before them, and upon every side of them, foul lanes, and deep ditches, and many hedges, hills and valleys, a right evil place to approach…. The king, the same morning, Friday, early advanced his banners, and divided his whole host into three battles, and sent before him his forerunners, and scouts on every side of him, and so, in fair array and order, he took his way through the open country called Cotswold, making all his people, of whom there were more than 3,000 footmen, travel that Friday, which was a right hot day, thirty miles and more. His troops could not find, anywhere along the way, horsemeat or man’s meat, or so much as drink for their horses, save in one little brook, where there was very little relief, it was as soon muddied with the carriages that had passed through it. And all that day the king’s host was within five or six miles of his enemies; he in open country and they among woods, having always good reconnoitring of their position. So continuing that journey he came, with all his host, to a village called Cheltenham, only five miles from Tewkesbury, where the king had certain knowledge that, only a little before his coming thither, his enemies had come to Tewkesbury and there were taking a field…. Whereupon the king did not tarry long, but comforted himself a little and his people with such meat and drink as he had caused to be carried with him for the victualling of his host; and at once set forth towards

English historical documents

308

his enemies, and took the field, and lodged himself and all his host within three miles of them. Upon the morrow following, Saturday, the 4th day of May the king apparelled himself, and set all his host in good array, displayed his banners, did blow up the trumpets, committed his cause and quarrel to God, and advanced directly upon his enemies…who were pitched strongly in a marvellously strong ground, very difficult to assail. [The two sides exchanged showers of arrows and shots of guns, but the king had more missiles than his opponents.] In front of their field were such evil lanes and deep dikes, so many hedges, trees, and bushes, that it was very hard to approach near and come to hand fighting. But Edmund, called Duke of Somerset, having that day the vanguard…advanced with his troops somewhat on one side of the king’s vanguard, and by certain paths and ways previously surveyed, and unknown to the king’s party, he departed out of the field, passed a lane, and came to…a close, just in front of the king…and from the hill that was in one of the closes, he set right fiercely on the end of the king’s division. The king, in manly fashion, at once set upon them…won the dike and hedge and with great violence pushed them back up the hill, assisted by…the Duke of Gloucester. Here it is to be remembered that when the king had come to the field, before he attacked, he considered that, upon the right hand of the field was a park, with many trees. He, thinking to provide a remedy in case his said enemies had laid any ambush of horsemen in that wood, he chose, out of his troops, 200 spears and set them in a group together, about a quarter of a mile from the battlefield, charging them to keep a close watch on that part of the wood, and to do what was necessary if the need should arise, and if they saw no such need…to employ themselves in the best way they could…. This provision came as well to the point at this time of the battle as could well have been devised, for the said spears of the king’s party, seeing no likelihood of any ambush in the said corner of the wood, and seeing also a good opportunity to employ themselves well, all at once burst out upon the Duke of Somerset and his vanguard from one side, unexpectedly. Upon this his men, seeing that the king gave them enough to do before them, were greatly dismayed and abashed, and so took to flight in the park, and into the meadow that was near, and into lanes and dikes where they best hoped to escape the danger. Nevertheless, many were distressed, taken, and slain; and even at this point in their flight the king courageously set upon that other part of the field, where was Edward, called prince, and in a short while put him to discomforture and flight. And so it befell in the chase of them that many of them were slain, and at a mill, in the meadow by the town, many of them were drowned. Many ran towards the town, many to the church, to the abbey, and elsewhere, as best they might. In the winning of the field such as endured hand-strokes were slain at once. Edward, called prince, was taken, fleeing towards the town, and slain in the field. There were also slain, Thomas, called the Earl of Devonshire, John of Somerset; called Marquis Dorset; Lord Wenlock; with many others in great numbers. When this was done, and achieved with God’s might, the king took the direct way to the abbey there to give unto Almighty God praise and thanks for the victory that of his mercy he had that day granted and given him. [There followed the execution of all the leading rebels who had survived the battle, after they had been tried and condemned for rebellion in the court of the constable,

The political framework

309

Richard of Gloucester, and the marshal, the Duke of Norfolk. On 7 May Queen Margaret was captured in a “poor religious house” between Tewkesbury and Worcester.] 188. The growth of a legend: the death of Edward Prince of Wales at Tewkesbury, 1471 (i) (The Tewkesbury Abbey Chronicle, 1471, ed. C.L.Kingsford, English Historical Literature in the Fifteenth Century (Clarendon Press, 1913)) (376 [Latin]) Also in the same year, on May 3rd, that is, on the feast of the Finding of the Holy A Cross, there came to Tewkesbury Prince Edward, son of King Henry VI, with a great army, and on the morrow entered the great field which is called Gastons. When King Edward IV arrived with his army, he slew prince Edward in the field, when also John Somerset, brother of the Duke of Somerset, the Earl of Devon, and Lord Wenlock with many others were killed. (Ibid. 377 [English]) These are the names of the noblemen that were slain at Tewkesbury field. Lord Edward, prince of King Henry, in the field of Gastum beside Tewkesbury, slain, and buried in the midst of the convent quire in the monastery there; for whom God worketh. (ii) (Warkworth’s Chronicle, c. 1473, 18 [English]) And Prince Edward…held forth his way to the town of Tewkesbury, and there he made a field not far from the River Severn; and King Edward and his host came upon them, the Saturday the 4th day of May…1471…. And there was slain in the field Prince Edward, which cried for succour to his brother-in-law the Duke of Clarence. (iii) (The Second Continuation of the Croyland Chronicle) 1486 (W.Fulman, Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores (1684), 555 [Latin, trans. H.T.Riley (Bohn’s Antiquarian Library, 1893), 466]) When both armies had now become so extremely fatigued with the labour of marching and thirst that they could proceed no further, they joined battle near the town of Tewkesbury. After the result had long remained doubtful, King Edward at last gained a glorious victory. Upon this occasion, there were slain on the queen’s side, either on the field or after the battle, by the avenging hands of certain persons, Prince Edward, the only son of King Henry, the Duke of Somerset, the Earl of Devon, and all and every the other lords above-mentioned.

English historical documents

310

(iv) (The Great Chronicle of London, 1512, ed. A.H.Thomas and I.D.Thornley (1938), 218 [English]) The king assembled his people and drew towards his enemies and finally met with them at a place or village called Tewkesbury, where after a short fight he subdued his enemies and took Queen Margaret and her son alive. The which being brought into his presence, after the king had questioned a few words of the cause of his so landing within his realm, and he gave unto the king an answer contrary to his pleasure, the king smote him on the face with the back of his gauntlet. After which stroke so received by him, the king’s servants rid him out of life forthwith. (v) Edward Hall, The Union of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre and York (1542, ed. H.Ellis (1809), 301 [English]) [After the Battle of Tewkesbury] The queen was found in her chariot almost dead for sorrow, the prince was apprehended and kept close by Sir Richard Crofts. . . . After the field was ended, King Edward made a proclamation that whosoever could bring Prince Edward to him alive or dead should have an annuity of £100 during his life, and the prince’s life would be saved. Sir Richard Crofts, a wise and valiant knight, not at all mistrusting the king’s former promise, brought forth his prisoner Prince Edward, being a goodly girlish looking and well-featured young gentleman. When King Edward had viewed him well, he asked him how he durst so presumptuously enter into his realm with his banner displayed. The prince, being bold of stomach and of a good courage, answered saying, “To recover my father’s kingdom and heritage, from his father and grandfather to him, and from him, after him, to me lineally descended.” At which words King Edward said nothing, but with his hand thrust him from him (or, as some say, struck him with his gauntlet) whom at once they that stood about, which were George, Duke of Clarence, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, Thomas, Marquis of Dorset, and William, Lord Hastings, suddenly murdered and pitifully slew. The bitterness of which murder some of the actors afterwards in their latter days tasted and assayed by the very rod of justice and punishment of God. His body was interred in homely fashion…in the church of the monastery of black monks at Tewkesbury. 189. The Bastard of Fauconberge’s attack on London, May 1471 (Journal 8, f. 7, of the City of London, printed in R.R.Sharpe, London and the Kingdom (1895), III, 391 [Latin, trans, by the editor]) [Thomas Neville, the Bastard of Fauconberge, had been appointed as Vice-Admiral by War-wick with command of a fleet in the Channel. Too late he thought of the daring plan of taking London in Edward’s absence and restoring Henry VI. From Calais he landed in Kent early in May

The political framework

311

(probably the day after the battle of Tewkesbury) and raised a large force of men, mainly by hopes of plundering in London. Then on 12 May he appeared at London Bridge with his Kentishmen and his ships and demanded admission to London; but the citizens refused to listen to him. His attack failed, but it helped to convince Edward IV that he would never be free from trouble while Henry VI remained alive. See the next document, D.N. 190.]

Be it remembered that the mayor and aldermen with the assent of the common council fortified the banks of the river Thames from Castle Baynard as far as the Tower of London with men at arms, bombards, and other implements of war to prevent an attack by the seamen who had brought a large fleet of ships near the Tower, and the bank was held by the aldermen and the rest of the citizens in great numbers. Be it remembered also that on Sunday, viz. the 12th day of May in the 11th year of Edward IV, Kentish men and others, rebels of the lord the king, made an attack on London Bridge and on the new gate there and set fire to divers houses called “berehouses” near the hospital of St Katharine; and afterwards on the 14th day of May being Tuesday the 11th year aforesaid, about 11 o’clock in the morning, the Kentish seamen and other rebels made an attack with great force and set fire to 13 tenements on London Bridge. The Kentish seamen and others to the number of 3,000 persons also made an attack from the Thames upon the gates of Aldgate and Bishopsgate and set fire to divers tenements. The citizens, however, sallied out of the gates and made a stout resistance and put them to flight besides those who were drowned in endeavouring to get on board their ships at Blackwall, etc. And afterwards, viz. on the eve of the Ascension the eleventh year our lord King came with a great multitude of armed men to the city of London and there to the honour of the city created knights John Stockton the mayor, Thomas Urswyk, the recorder [and 10 aldermen]. And the lord king conferred on them knight’s badges. 190. The death of Henry VI, 1471 (i) The official account (Historie of the Arrival! of Edward IV, 38 [English]) The king this season, well accompanied and mightily with great lords and… many other able men, well arrayed for the war…came to the city of London… the 21st day of May, the Tuesday; where he was honourably received of all the people, the mayor, aldermen, and many other worshipful men, citizens of the said city…. Here it is to be remembered that, from the time of Tewkesbury field, where Edward, called prince, was slain…all the noblemen that came from beyond the sea with the said Edward, called prince, were taken and slain…and Queen Margaret herself was taken and brought to the king; and in every part of England where any commotion was begun for King Henry’s party, at once they were rebuked, so that it appeared to every man at a glance that the said party was extinct and repressed for ever, without any kind of hope of

English historical documents

312

revival…. The certainty of all this came to the knowledge of the said Henry, lately called king, being in the Tower of London; not having, before that, knowledge of the said matters, he took it to such great hatred, anger, and indignation, that of pure displeasure and melancholy he died the 23rd day of the month of May. The king caused his body to be brought to the Friars Preachers of London, and there his funeral service was sung. Then the body was carried by water to an abbey called Chertsey by the Thames, 16 miles from London, and there it was honourably interred. The King, immediately after coming to London, tarried there only one day, and went with his whole army after his said traitors into Kent, to repress them in case they were assembled in any place. (ii) (Warkworth’s Chronicle, 21) And the same night that King Edward came to London, King Harry being imprisoned on the Tower of London, was put to death, the 21st May, on a Tuesday night, between 11 and 12 o’clock, being then at the Tower the Duke of Gloucester, brother to King Edward, and many others. And on the morrow he was put in a coffin and brought to St Paul’s, and his face was open so that every man might see him; and in his lying he bled on the pavement there, and afterwards he was brought to the Blackfriars and there he bled new and fresh; and thence he was carried to Chertsey Abbey by boat, and was buried there in the chapel of Our Lady. (iii) (The Great Chronicle of London, 220) Upon Ascension Eve the corpse of King Henry VI was brought through Cornhill from the Tower with a great company of men of that place bearing weapons as if they would have led him to some place of execution. And so they conveyed him to St Paul’s where that night he was set in the body of the church over against the image of Our Lady of Grace, open visaged that he might be known. And upon the morrow with a few torches as he was brought thither, so was he thence conveyed unto the water’s side, and from thence to Chertsey and there buried. For him shortly afterwards God showed sundry miracles, of whose death the common fame then went that the Duke of Gloucester was not all guiltless. (iv) (Fabyan’s Chronicle, 662) On the death of this prince diverse tales were told; but the most common fame went that he was stabbed with a dagger by the hands of the Duke of Gloucester. [There is evidence from the exhumation of the skeleton in 1911 that Henry died from a fractured skull; see W.H.St John Hope, “The discovery of the remains of King Henry VI in St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle” (Archaeologia, LXII, ii, 533–42).]

The political framework

313

191. The expenses of the imprisonment and funeral of Henry VI, 1471 (Exchequer of Receipt, Issue Rolls (E 403), No. 844, m. 7 [Latin], Issues of Easter Term, II Edward IV) ‘To Robert Radclyff, in money delivered to him by his own hands…for the A expenses of Henry of Windsor, late in deed but not in right King of England, by a general writ running among the mandates of this term—£40. He will account for this. (Ibid. m. 8) To William Sayer, esquire, in money delivered to him by his own hands…for the expenses of Henry by the writ—20s. He will account. To Robert Cosyn, in money delivered to him by his own hands…or the provision of robes, beds, and other necessities by Robert for Henry in the Tower of London…£10. He will account. To Robert Radclyf and William Sayer, esquires, in money delivered to them by his own hands at different times, i.e. one time £6 9s 6d for wages and diets of Henry, and of 36 other persons waiting at the Tower for the safe custody of Henry, i.e. for 7 days beginning 29th April, 11 Edward IV, to each of them taking 6d a day, for this period, and another time 10s by the hands of the said Robert and William for the diets of the said Henry; for the period by the writ—£6 19s 6d. To Robert Cosyn in money delivered to him…as an advance at various times, i.e. at one time £4 and another time 40s for various necessities bought by him for Henry of Windsor by the writ—£6. He will account. To William Sayer, Esquire, in money delivered to him as an advance…for the diets of Henry of Windsor and 11 persons waiting in the Tower for the custody of Henry by the writ—50s. He will account. To William Sayer in money delivered to him…for the expenses and diets of Henry and 10 persons waiting in the Tower for the custody of Henry, i.e. for 14 days beginning 11th May; advanced by authority of the writ,—£4 5s 0d. To Robert Radclyf esquire in money delivered to him at various times, that is, at one time, 10 marks, another time 5 marks…for the costs and expenses of himself and 22 men waiting with him in the Tower for the custody of Henry by the writ… £10. To William Sayer in money delivered to him…at various times, that is at one time 7s for the carriage of three beds for William and others waiting in the Tower for the custody of Henry for 14 days, and for parts of the diets of Henry for two days within the Tower by the writ—10s 10d. To Robert Radclyf esquire in money delivered to him…as an advance for the expenses of Henry late in deed and not in right king of England, being within the Tower; advanced by the writ—40s. He will account. To Hugh Brice in money delivered to him…for money paid by him for wax cloth, linen, spices, and other ordinary expenses promised and incurred by him in connexion with the funeral of Henry of Windsor who died in the Tower of London, and for the wages and rewards of various men carrying torches from the Tower to the cathedral church of St Pauls, London, and thence to Chertsey with the body, by the writ—£15 3s To Master Richard Martyn in money delivered to him at different times, that is, at one time…£9 10s 11d for money paid by him for 28 yards of holland linen cloth, and

English historical documents

314

expenses incurred within the Tower at the last departure of Henry and also at Chertsey on the day of his burial and for wages given to various soldiers of Calais watching round the body and for the conducting of barges with masters and sailors rowing along the River Thames to Chertsey; and another time £8 12s 3d for money paid to the four orders of friars in the city of London and the brothers of the Holy Cross in the same and in other works of charity, that is, to the Carmelite friars 20s, to the Augustinian friars 20s, to the Franciscan friars 20s, to the Dominican friars for obsequies and celebrating masses 40s, and to the brethren of the Holy Cross 10s, and for saying obsequies and masses at Chertsey on the day of Henry’s burial 52s 3d by the writ, £18 3s 2d. 192. The quarrel of Richard Duke of Gloucester and George Duke of Clarence, 1472 (The Second Continuation of the Croyland Chronicle, [Latin, trans. H.T.Riley, 469)] It is my intention here to insert an account of the dissensions which arose during this Michaelmas Term [1472] between the two brothers of the king, and which were with difficulty quieted. After…the son of King Henry, to whom the lady Anne, the youngest daughter of the Earl of Warwick, had been married, was slain at the Battle of Tewkesbury, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, sought Anne in marriage. This proposal did not suit the views of his brother, the Duke of Clarence, who had previously married the elder daughter of the earl. Such being the case, he caused the damsel to be concealed, in order that it might not be known by his brother where she was; as he was afraid of a division of the earl’s property, which he wished to come to himself alone in right of his wife, and not to be obliged to share it with any other person. Still, however, the astuteness of the Duke of Gloucester so far prevailed that he discovered the young lady in the city of London disguised in the habit of a cook-maid; upon which he had her removed to the sanctuary of St Martin’s. In consequence of this, such violent dissensions arose between the brothers and so many arguments were, with the greatest acuteness, put forward on either side, in the king’s presence, who sat in judgement in the council chamber, that all present, and the lawyers even, were quite surprised that these princes should find arguments in such abundance by means of which to support their respective causes…. At last their most loving brother, King Edward, agreed to act as mediator between them; and in order that the discord between princes of such high rank might not cause any hindrance to the carrying out of his royal intentions in relation to the affairs of France, the whole misunderstanding was at last set at rest, upon the following terms. The marriage of the Duke of Gloucester with Anne was to take place, and he was to have such and so much of the earl’s lands as should be agreed upon between them through the mediation of arbitrators; while all the rest were to remain in the possession of the Duke of Clarence. The consequence was that little or nothing was left at the disposal of the true lady and heiress, the Countess of Warwick, to whom for the whole of her life the most noble inheritance of the Warwicks and the Despencers properly belonged.

The political framework

315

193. The treaties between Edward IV and the Duke of Burgundy, 1474 First they made a treaty of perpetual friendship with each other, and then went on to arrange for the conquest of France. This second agreement had two parts.

(i) The help to be given by the Duke of Burgundy for the recovery of the realm of France (Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 41 (25 July 1474) [Latin]) A the most famous realm of France is at present, alas! oppressed by intolerable tyranny, so that no place is left for piety, right, justice or religion, but everywhere in that land appears robbery, violence, slaughter, treason, poisonings…which all take their origin from Louis, usurper of the realm…and since it also greatly concerns us that that kingdom should be well and justly governed in the fear of the Lord, especially by him to whom it belongs by hereditary right, that is, by the most excellent and powerful prince, our lord and brother the honourable brother Edward, King of France and England, since he abounds in all these virtues which are required to govern rightly and devoutly, We make it known that we, desiring to help the people oppressed by the aforesaid Louis, and to exalt justice in that realm of France, whence it is exiled…have made an agreement with our brother…according to the following chapters and articles:— In the first place the most serene lord Edward, King of France and England, for the recovery of his duchies of Normandy and Aquitaine, and also of his kingdom of France, shall magnificently and fittingly equip and prepare himself and his army to the number of over 10,000, to be transported and taken into Normandy or other parts of France, before the first day of the month of July next coming, so far as sea and wind allow, and if Almighty God should of his benevolence permit. Also that the most illustrious Charles, Duke of Burgundy and Brabant, etc. should take the king’s part in person and with his power and assist him…until he achieves his right and title, which the lord king claims and has in the realm and crown of France…. Also, that the lord king will not henceforth negotiate with Louis, nor with any other who occupies or shall in future occupy the realm and crown of France…but as often as occasion arises (of receiving ambassadors or letters from the enemy) he will take care diligently to inform the lord duke, who may then depute others to hear, understand, and discuss, along with the lord king or his deputies, whatever shall be put forward in the name of Louis or the aforesaid persons, and the consent of the deputies of the lord duke, if they shall be present, shall be sought in all things. (ii) Edward IV promises in return a share of the spoils (26 July 1474) (Ibid. 43 [Latin], from the French Roll, 14 Edward IV, m. 19) The king to all, etc. greeting. Since our illustrious and very dear brother Charles, Duke of Burgundy…has decided to employ his great strength for the recovery of our realm of France…and we desire to show our gratitude to him from whom we have received and expect so many benefits that we may appear to have acted in equity and honesty,

English historical documents

316

We, after mature deliberation of our council, have given, ceded, and handed over for ever to our brother Duke Charles the principalities, lands, dominions, and rights which are written below… In the first place, the Barrisien Duchy, commonly called the Duchy of Bar. The County of Champagne The Nivernensen county, called in French the County of Nevers. The county of Rethell The county of Eu The county of Guise The barony of Douai The city of Tournai, with the bailiwick, territory and district of Tournai The city of Langres, with the county, bailiwick, and appurtenances The castle and town of Picquigny The towns and dominions on both sides of the river Somme formerly pledged to our brother or conceded under the name of lien And moreover all the lands and dominions which Louis of Luxembourg, called the Count of St Pol, at present possesses; provided that they are not of the ancient demesne and patrimony of the duchies of Normandy and Aquitaine or the crown of France. All and singular of which dominions, thus given by us and handed over, with their appurtenances and appanages, by whatever name and title they are known, our brother and his heirs and successors shall hold and possess in perpetuity free and exempt from us and our crown of France, with all rights of superiority; so that neither for the dominions nor for the duchy of Burgundy…nor for any other places or dominions at present possessed by our brother shall our same brother and his heirs and successors be bound by any means to pay to us or our successors or any other person any homage, fee, service, or oath of fealty; but they shall be true, sole, direct and supreme lords and princes in those their dominions, neither recognizing nor being bound to recognize any superior or superiors. [For the king’s speech to the commons in parliament in 1474 to ask them for a grant for the invasion of France, see Literae Cantuarienses, III (Rolls Series, 1889), 276. Parliament’s readiness to make a grant for this purpose so impressed Philippe de Commines that in his Memoires (Bk 4, ch. 1) he alleged that when the kings of England wanted money, they pretended quarrels with Scotland or France. “This trick King Edward understood very well and often practised it.”]

194. Edward IV’s treaty with Scotland, 1474 (Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 48 [Scots], from Scottish Roll, 14 Edward IV, m. 9) This indenture made at Edinburgh, the 26th day of October, the year of our lord 1474, witnesses that whereas among certain appointments passed between certain commissioners of the King of England on the one hand, and others sent from the King of Scotland on the other hand, at Westminster, the 30th July last past, concerning alliances by way of marriage between the son and heir of Scotland and the youngest daughter of

The political framework

317

the King of England, and other good and reasonable conventions for the welfare and prosperity of both the realms, it was in one article expressed that the King of England should send his ambassadors into Scotland, at the furthest by 8th of October, for a perfect conclusion to be taken and had in the same (and this has now been done)…. Here follow the things and matters which have been advised, appointed, accorded, and concluded, by the councils of the Kings of Scotland and England, for an alliance of marriage, to be had in the blood of the same princes, and for tenderness of life and affection to grow and increase between them, to the welfare of the peace and the tranquillity of their realms, countries, and subjects, Forasmuch as this noble isle, called Great Britain, cannot be kept and maintained better in wealth and prosperity than that such things should be practised and concluded between the kings of both the realms of Scotland and England, whereby they and their subjects might be encouraged to live in peace, love and tenderness, so that these should grow and increase among them, it has been agreed, decided, and concluded that, considering the long continued troubles, dissensions and debates between the two realms, with great and mortal war that has followed thereupon, for the appeasing and setting aside of the same, a nearer and more special way is to be found and had than merely the assurance of the present truce and abstinence of war…. Also, it is agreed…that the most convenient and direct road to this is to appoint and conclude upon a marriage, to be made between James, the only first begotten son and heir of the right high and mighty Prince, James King of Scotland, and Cecily, the youngest daughter of the right excellent and mighty prince, Edward King of England, etc…. It is agreed and settled that for the greater surety of both parties the present truce, made first at York, and then afterwards prolonged and amplified at… Newcastle, 12th December 1465, to last until 1519…shall be in substance affirmed and ratified by other indenture letters, similar to these…. Also, it is agreed…between the said kings…that neither of them during the time of the said truce shall favour nor give assistance to the traitors or rebels of the other (but, on the contrary, shall give whatever aid he can to the other high contracting party, if asked to do so). [As the prince was not yet two years of age, and the princess was only four, the two kings bound themselves to see that the arrangement should be carried into effect as soon as the children should reach the lawful age of marriage.] Also, it is agreed…that the said prince shall have, in dowry and joint-enfeoffment, whole and entire, the lands, rents, and revenues appertaining to the ancient inheritance of the prince, son and heir of Scotland, during the life-time of his father, that is to say, the Duchy of Rothesay, the Earldom of Carrick, the Lordships of the Stewart lands of Scotland, with all commodities, profits and appurtenances of the same…. Also it is appointed, agreed, and concluded that for the marriage and dowry the King of England shall give, with his daughter, to the King of Scotland 20,000 marks of English money (to be paid in annual instalments). Also it is further…agreed that…in case (which God forbid) the young prince and princess, or one of them, should chance to die…whensoever the King of Scotland should happen to have a son his heir…and the King of England a daughter of like age, or within three or four years above or below the age of the same son and heir, the two kings shall cause, as far as they can, such two persons, the son of Scotland and the daughter of

English historical documents

318

England, to be married together in manner and form, and with the charges as before are rehearsed. 195. The reactions of Louis XI to English invasion, 1475 (Calendar of State Papers of Milan, I, 189, 191 [trans, by editor from original Italian]) Christofforo de Bollato, Milanese Ambassador at the French court, to Galeazzo Maria Sforza, Duke of Milan. I think your lordship will have taken note of the words spoken by the very lips of the King of France, which I enclose herewith. I inform your lordship that his Majesty has had positive information that the English are preparing a large force to invade Normandy at once, and the King of England is coming in person with a good number of men. His Majesty is more discomposed than words can describe, and has almost lost his wits. In his desperation and bitterness he uttered the following precise words, among others, “Ah, Holy Mary, even now when I have given thee 1,400 crowns, thou dost not help me one whit!” February 11th, 1475. The affairs of the King of France are not in a good way. His Majesty is working with hand and foot for the truce with the Duke of Burgundy, and has never made more lavish promises. The matter is in the hands of the constable, and his Majesty has sent him instructions saying he will leave all his negotiations with the emperor and all Germany and help the Duke of Burgundy against them. His Majesty is also making every effort to get the Catalonia affair off his hands somehow. All this is due to the coming of the English, which is confirmed every day by letters and messengers, whom I have seen and heard speak to his Majesty. It is always to the effect that the King of England will cross to Calais with 30,000 persons, to join the Duke of Burgundy and 10,000 others in Normandy and 6,000 in Gascony, and he has had proclaimed at Calais a league, peace, and good accord between the Kings of Castile, England, Aragon, Scotland, Denmark, Portugal, Naples, and Sicily, and open war declared against the French…. The king has been advised that the King of England and the Duke of Burgundy requested the pope to grant them leave to exact a fifth of ecclesiastical revenue in their dominions for the expenses of their wars, and his Holiness gives them hope of his consent. Upon this, in my presence, the king waxed very wroth against his Holiness, saying that if he did this he would abolish the Pragmatic Sanction, and would appeal against the pope to a future council, which, he said, many princes demand; he would not rest until it was opened, and he would do this with the purpose of deposing and depriving his Holiness. He also said that if his enemies exact a fifth, he would take everything from the ecclesiastics of the realm until the war is over.

The political framework

319

196. The treaty of Picquigny, 1475 (Rymer, Foedera, V, iii, 65 [Latin]) The agreements known collectively as the treaty of Picquigny were four in number and the main emphasis of each is indicated in the following headings:

I. The withdrawal of the English army from France In the first place, we…agree…that all suits, questions, complaints and demands at present pending undiscussed between us and our cousin of France shall be entrusted to and arbitrated upon the most reverend father Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal, our uncle, and our most dear brother George, Duke of Clarence, for us and on our behalf, and the most reverend father Charles, Archbishop of Lyons, and John, Count of Dunois, for our said cousin and on his behalf, nominated and chosen as arbitrators and amiable conciliators in this matter…promising and binding ourselves to stand by the decision, arbitration, and determination of the said arbitrators upon the foregoing matters, on pain of three thousand crowns fine from him who shall not abide by the said decision…. Also we wish, promise, agree, and conclude that after we have received from our aforesaid cousin of France 75,000 gold crowns…the army and arms which we now have with us we will withdraw into England without any deception, ceasing entirely from war against our cousin and his subjects, and refraining from taking in hostile manner any city, town, or castle of the realm of France during our retreat. II. A truce for seven years Also that if within the seven years of the truce anything should be attempted against the truce and abstention from war, by land, sea, or fresh water, by any of the princes, their heirs, successors, subjects, and vassals…that all such infringements…should be rectified and repaired…by conservators of the truce nominated by their prince …within a month after complaint has been made and the expenses of indemnification shall be paid…so that these truces shall be neither broken nor terminated but last until the end of seven years…. [Each king provided a list of allies whom he wished to be included in the treaty. Edward’s list included the King of the Romans, the Kings of Castile, Scots, Portugal, Jerusalem, Aragon, Denmark, Hungary, the Duke of Burgundy and the Hanseatic League; Louis’s list contained the names of the Roman Emperor, the Electors, the Kings of Castile, Scots, Denmark, Jerusalem, Hungary, the Dukes of Savoy, Milan, Lorraine, the Bishop of Metz and the Communes of Florence and Berne.] III. Treaty of friendship, to be sealed by a marriage alliance First, that between the illustrious prince the King of England and the most serene prince Louis of France, his dear cousin, there shall be true, sincere and perfect friend-ship, to endure from the date of this present treaty, throughout the lives of these princes; so that as long as they shall live, wars, battles, and hostilities between them shall altogether cease, and they shall conduct themselves towards each other in benevolence and love.

English historical documents

320

Also, that the most illustrious prince of France shall help and assist the King of England against any of his subjects who shall invade with arms and make rebellion in the realm of England. Also, that neither of the princes of England and France shall in any way give aid and help to subjects of the other to invade the other’s realm with arms and make open war against their lord in his lands and dominions…. Also, if it shall happen that either of the princes be driven out of his lands and dominions (which God forbid) by the guile, cunning, and disobedience of a subject or subjects of either of them, and on this account shall ask for the succour of the other prince…that then the latter, so required and petitioned, shall receive the prince so expelled with all kindness and sustain him and his followers with all his might, so that he may be replaced in and restored to his former estate, making open war with all diligence and affection. Also that neither of the princes shall contract or make any leagues or understandings with any confederate or ally unless he first asks the prince with whom he is here allying, and obtains his consent. Also that within a year from the date of this treaty a new diet shall be held by the princes, in which their ambassadors and deputies shall appoint and settle such a system of reckoning of the lawful coins and money of both kingdoms of England and France that the kingdoms and the subjects of the princes may the more abound in wealth and prosper more usefully to their common good…. Also for the inviolate observation of the friendship, it is promised, settled, agreed, and concluded that a marriage shall be contracted between the most illustrious Prince Charles, son of the most powerful prince of France, and the most serene lady Elizabeth, daughter of the most invincible king of England, when they shall reach marriageable years; and the most illustrious prince Louis of France shall honourably conduct, or cause to be conducted, the same Lady Elizabeth from the kingdom of England into France, for the solemnization of her marriage, at his charges and expenses, and he shall endow her with an annual revenue of £60,000 in assignment of dowry, according to the custom of the realm of France…. And if it shall happen that the same Lady Elizabeth die (which God forbid) before the marriage shall be contracted, that then a marriage shall be contracted between the prince Charles and the most serene lady Mary, another daughter of the king of England…. IV. Arrangement for the payment to Edward of an annual pension Louis, by the grace of God King of the French, to all who shall see these present letters, greeting. We make it known that we have conceded, promised, and bound ourselves to pay…in the city of London in England to the most illustrious prince Edward, by the same grace King of England, our dearest cousin, each year, during the life of either of us, fifty thousand gold crowns…that is: We will pay and deliver…to our same cousin the King of England, in the city of London, twenty-five thousand gold crowns…at the feast of Easter next coming …and twenty-five thousand gold crowns…at the feast of Michaelmas next coming…and thus from year to year…we will pay…fifty thousand gold crowns…at the two terms of Easter and Michaelmas each year, by equal portions Given in our city of Amiens, 29th August, 1475.

The political framework

321

[For the ransom of Queen Margaret of Anjou in November 1475, for the payment of 50,000 gold crowns, see ibid, V, iii, 68, 79, and for Margaret’s consequent renunciation to Louis XI of all her rights to her father’s inheritance, see “Trésor des chartes”, J.582–32 in the P.R.O., MS., “Transcripts for the new edition of Rymer’s Foedera”, vol. 136.]

197. English soldiers are recruited for the Burgundian army after Picquigny, 1475 (Calendar of State Papers of Milan, I, 218 [trans, by editor from the Italian]) Giovanni Pietro Panicharolla, Milanese Ambassador at the Burgundian Court to Galeazzo Maria Sforza, Duke of Milan. Vaudemont, 22nd October, 1475. The King of England, to the great disgust of his kingdom, has returned with his army to England. He apologized to the duke for the treaty, and expressed the wish to be friends. More than 2,000 Englishmen have come to serve the duke, who has accepted them, saying that he well knows they will be cutting one another’s throats in England, and it will be better for them to fight against the French. In the opinion of intelligent persons there is likely to be disturbance in England, because the king exacted a great treasure and did nothing…. The King of France is trying his utmost to come to terms with the duke. He got the King of England to send an ambassador to his lordship to urge him to enter the truce for seven years, but the duke made them a spirited reply such as they deserved for the deed done. Lausanne, 22nd April, 1476. Yesterday there was a very great disturbance in the camp between the English and Italians, so that both sides seized their arms, owing to some disorders committed at an abbey near here. The duke had to go in person to bring peace, because the Italians had slain some English, and they wished for revenge. At last, after the utmost trouble the uproar was appeased, which has reached as far as Lausanne. Owing to this Englishmen cannot go safely in the streets…. These things disturb me, as seeing that the English and Lombards are slaying each other without remission the duke is making every effort to bring about peace. If he does not succeed, great disorders will follow, because the English are a proud race without any respect, and claim a superiority over all other nations. The duke’s camp before Morat, 9th June, 1476. The brother of the Queen of England, M. de Scales, arrived in camp on Friday. The duke has made much of him and sent to meet him…. The duke’s camp before Morat, 11th June, 1476. M.de Scales, brother of the Queen of England, has been to see the duke and offered to take his place in the line of battle. But hearing the day before yesterday that the enemy were near at hand, and they expected to meet them, he asked leave to depart, saying he was sorry he could not stay, and so he took leave and went…. The duke laughed about it to me, saying, “He has gone because he is afraid.”

English historical documents

322

198. Edward IV sets about building up a fortune after the treaty of Picquigny, 1475 (Second Continuation of the Croyland Chronicle, 474 [Latin, trans. H.T.Riley]) Acordingly, seeing that things had now come to such a pass, that from thenceforth he could not dare, in his emergencies, to ask the assistance of the English people, and finding that…it was through want of money that the French expedition had, in such a short time, come to nothing; he turned all his thoughts to the question, how he might in future collect an amount of treasure worthy of his royal station out of his own substance, and by the exercise of his own energies. Accordingly, having called parliament together, he resumed possession of nearly all the royal estates, without regard to whom they had been granted, and applied the whole thereof to the support of the expenses of the crown. Throughout all ports of the kingdom he appointed inspectors of the customs, men of remarkable shrewdness, but too hard, according to general report, upon the merchants. The king himself, also, having procured merchant ships, put on board of them the finest wools, cloth, tin, and other productions of the kingdom, and, like a private individual living by trade, exchanged merchandise for merchandise, by means of his factors, amongst both Italians and Greeks. The revenues of vacant prelacies which, according to Magna Carta, cannot be sold, he would only part with out of his hands at a stated sum, and on no other terms whatever. He also examined the registers and rolls of Chancery, and exacted heavy fines from those whom he found to have intruded and taken possession of estates without prosecuting their rights in form required by law, by way of return for the rents which they had in the meantime received. These and more of a similar nature than can possibly be conceived by a man who is inexperienced in such matters were his methods of making up a purse; added to which, there was the yearly tribute of ten thousand pounds due from France, together with numerous tenths from the churches, from which the prelates and clergy had been unable to get themselves excused. All these particulars, in the course of a very few years, rendered him an extremely wealthy prince; so much so that for collecting vessels of gold and silver, tapestries and decorations of the most precious nature, both for his palaces and for various churches, and for building castles, colleges, and other distinguished places, and making new acquisitions of lands and possessions, not one of his predecessors was at all able to equal his remarkable achievements. 199. The downfall and death of the Duke of Clarence, 1476–8 (i) (Second Continuation of the Croyland Chronicle, trans. H.T.Riley, 477 ff. [trans, amended by A.R.Myers from the original Latin]) A new dissension which sprang up shortly after between him and his brother the Duke of Clarence greatly disturbed the glories of this most prudent king. For that duke now seemed gradually more and more to estrange himself from the king’s presence, hardly ever to utter a word in council, and not willingly to eat or drink in the king’s house. Many accounted for this interruption of their former friendship by the fact that the duke had

The political framework

323

been angered because on the occasion of the general resumption which the king had lately made in parliament, the duke had lost the noble demesne of Tutbury, and several other lands which he had formerly obtained by royal grant…. After the death of Charles (of Burgundy), his widow, the duchess, Lady Margaret, whose affections were fixed on her brother Clarence beyond any of the rest of her kindred, exerted all her energies and strength that Mary, the only daughter and heiress of the late Duke Charles, might be married to the Duke of Clarence whose wife had recently died. So great an intended exaltation as this, however, of his ungrateful brother, displeased the king. Therefore he threw all possible hindrances in the way, so that the match could not be carried into effect, and exerted all his influence that the heiress might be given in marriage to Maximilian, the son of the emperor; and this was afterwards done. The duke’s indignation was probably still further increased by this; and now each began to look upon the other with unbrotherly looks. You might then have seen (as such men are generally to be found in the courts of princes) flatterers running to and fro, from the one side to the other, and carrying backwards and forwards the words which had fallen from the two brothers, even if they had happened to be spoken in the most secret discussions. [Then followed the arrest and condemnation for witchcraft of John Stacy and Thomas Burdet, the latter a servant of Clarence. Both men were executed at Tyburn on 20 May.] On the following day the Duke of Clarence came to the council chamber at Westminster, bringing with him a famous doctor of the Franciscan Order, Master William Goddard by name, in order that he might read the…declaration of innocence (of Stacy and Burdet on the scaffold); which he accordingly did and then withdrew. The king was then at Windsor; but when this deed was reported to him, he was greatly displeased and recalling to mind the information formerly laid against his brother, which he had long kept stored up in his breast, he summoned the duke to appear on a certain day in the royal palace of Westminster. There in the presence of the mayor and aldermen of the city of London the king began with his own lips most forcefully to inveigh amongst other things against the conduct of the duke, as derogatory to the laws of the realm and most dangerous to judges and jurors throughout the kingdom. But why should I say more? The duke was placed in custody, and from that day until his death never regained his liberty. My mind quite shudders to relate what happened in the following parliament; for then was to be witnessed a sad strife waged between these two brothers of such high quality. For no one uttered a word against the duke except the king; no one made answer to the king except the duke. Some persons were introduced, however, as to whom it was greatly doubted by many whether they performed the office of accuser or of witness; for these two offices are not suited to the same person in the same cause at one and the same time. The duke denied all the charges made against him and offered if he could only be heard to maintain his cause with his body…. Parliament, being of the opinion that the information it had heard was sufficient, passed sentence of condemnation against him, the same to be pronounced by the mouth of Henry, Duke of Buckingham, who was appointed steward of England for the occasion. After this the execution was delayed for some time, until the speaker of the commons coming to the upper house with his fellows, made a fresh request that the matter might be brought to a conclusion. As a result a few days later the execution, whatever may have been its mode, took place secretly in the Tower of London….

English historical documents

324

(ii) (The Great Chronicle of London, ed. A.H.Thomas and I.D.Thornley, 226) This year on the 18th day of February George, Duke of Clarence and brother to the king, who a certain time before had been held in the Tower as a prisoner, for considerations moving the king, was upon the aforesaid 18th day, put secretly to death within the said Tower, and, as the fame ran, drowned in a butt of Malmesey. 200. Edward IV tries to please the London ruling class, 1482 (The Great Chronicle of London, ed. A.H.Thomas and I.D.Thornley, 228, with additions from Fabyan’s Chronicle (ed. H.Ellis), 667 [English]) And in this year [Fabyan says: “In the month of July”] the king for favour that he bore to the city or for favour that he bore to the mayor, according to some opinions, his Grace commanded the said mayor with his brethren the aldermen, and a certain number of such head commoners as the mayor would assign, to give attendance on him in the forest of Waltham at a day assigned. At which day, when the mayor with his company was come thither, after goodly sport shown to them, the said mayor by the conducting of certain knights was brought to a strong and pleasant lodge made of green boughs and other pleasant things. Within which lodge were laid certain tables, whereat at once the said mayor and his company were set and served right plenteously with all manner of dainties as if they had been in London, and specially of venison both of red deer and of fallow, in all manner of ways that venison might be dressed, and besides that they were served with all kinds of Gascon wines in right plenteous manner; and two times during the dinner the lord chamberlain with other honourable persons was sent to them from the king to make them cheer; and the chamberlain showed unto the mayor and his company that the king tarried from his dinner till he saw that they were served. And when they had thus passed their dinner season, they were again brought unto the king’s presence, being in a pavilion not far thence, where after the recorder in a short speech had made humble thanks in the mayor’s name and that of the others unto his Grace for the great bounty and cheer shown unto them, he then rode forth to such places as the deer was lodged for him where they had course and course at red and at the fallow deer to their singular and joyous recreation; and of such deer as at that standing were slain, the king gave unto them great plenty; and so taking their leave they departed from his Grace, he giving unto the mayor good words and to them all favourable and cheerful countenances. And within a short season afterwards [Fabyan says: “in the month of August following”] he sent unto the mayoress and unto the aldermen’s wives and such as he would call unto her or they unto them two harts and six bucks with a tun of Gascon wine, which were shortly afterwards eaten and drunk at the Drapers’ Hall, whereunto were called all the aldermen and many worshipful commoners with their wives. [Fabyan adds: “The cause of which bounty, thus shown by the king was, as most men took it, that the mayor was a merchant of wondrous adventures into many and sundry countries, by reason whereof the king had yearly from him notable sums of money for his customs, besides other pleasures that he had shown to the king before times.”]

The political framework

325

[The mayor this year was William Haryott or Heryot. For his cooperation in wool-dealing with the king, see E.Power and M.Postan, English Trade in the Fifteenth Century, 45, 366.]

201. Richard III’s usurpation of the throne, 1483 (Domenico Mancini, The Usurpation of Richard the Third, ed. C.A.J.Armstrong (Clarendon Press, 1936), 73 et passim [Latin, trans, by editor]) In claiming the throne Richard was actuated not only by ambition and lust for power, for he also proclaimed that he was goaded by the ignoble family of the queen and the affronts of Edward’s relatives by marriage…. At that time [the execution of Clarence in 1478, at the instigation of the queen] Richard Duke of Gloucester was so overcome with grief for his brother, that…he was overheard to say that he would one day avenge his brother’s death. Thenceforth he came very rarely to court. He kept himself within his own lands and set out to acquire the loyalty of his people through favours and justice. The good reputation of his private life and public activities powerfully attracted the esteem of strangers. Such was his renown in warfare, that whenever a difficult and dangerous policy had to be undertaken, it would be entrusted to his discretion and his generalship. By these arts Richard acquired the favour of the people and avoided the jealousy of the queen, from whom he lived far separated…. Two opinions were propounded [in the council in London after the death of Edward IV]. One was that the Duke of Gloucester should govern because Edward in his will had so directed, and because by law the government ought to devolve on him. But this was the losing resolution; the winning was that the government should be carried on by many persons among whom the duke, far from being excluded, should be accounted the chief…. All who favoured the queen’s family voted for this proposal, as they were afraid that, if Richard took unto himself the crown or even governed alone, they, who bore the blame of Clarence’s death, would suffer death or at least be ejected from their high estate…. (Ibid. 91) … While in London these events were happening, in the country the Duke of Gloucester allied himself with the Duke of Buckingham, complaining to the latter of the insult done him by the ignoble family of the queen. Buckingham, since he was of the highest nobility, was disposed to sympathize with another noble; more especially because he had his own reasons for detesting the queen’s kin; for, when he was younger, he had been forced to marry the queen’s sister, whom he scorned to wed on account of her humble origin. Therefore, having exchanged views and united their resources, both dukes wrote to the young king in Wales, to ascertain from him on what day and by what route he intended to enter the capital, so that, coming from the country, they could alter their course and join him, that in their company his entry to the city might be more magnificent. [The dukes met the king at Stony Stratford and suddenly arrested Lord Rivers and Sir Richard Grey.]

English historical documents

326

(Ibid. 97) … When this news was announced in London the unexpectedness of the event horrified every one. The queen and the Marquis [of Dorset], who held the royal treasure, began collecting an army, to defend themselves, and to set free the young king from the clutches of the dukes. But when they had exhorted certain nobles who had come to the city, and others, to take up arms, they perceived that men’s minds were not only irresolute, but altogether hostile to themselves. Some even said openly that it was more just and profitable that the youthful sovereign should be with his paternal uncle than with his maternal uncles and uterine brothers. Comprehending this, the queen and marquis withdrew to the place of refuge at Westminster Abbey standing close to the royal palace and called by the English a sanctuary. (Ibid. 99) … Edward [Woodville], whom we spoke of as the queen’s other brother, appointed by the council captain of a fleet of twenty ships, had put out to sea the day before. For no sooner had the death of King Edward IV become known, than the French not only made the seas unsafe, but even bore off prizes from the English shores…. Therefore in the face of threatening hostilities, a council, held in the absence of the Duke of Gloucester, had appointed Edward Woodville; and it was commonly believed that the late king’s treasure, which had taken such years and such pains to gather, was divided between the queen, the marquess, and Edward. As there was current in the capital a sinister rumour that the duke had brought his nephew not under his care, but into his power, so as to gain for himself the crown, the duke of Gloucester amidst these doings wrote to the council and to the head of the city, whom they call mayor. (Ibid. 101) … After these letters had been read aloud in the council chamber and to the populace, all praised the Duke of Gloucester for his dutifulness toward his nephews and for his intention to punish their enemies. Some, however, who understood his ambition and deceit, always suspected whither his enterprises would lead. After a few days when he had ascertained the attitude of every one, and with the help of friends in the capital had provided against all eventualities, he and the young king entered the city, accompanied by no more than 500 soldiers drawn partly from his own and partly from the Duke of Buckingham’s estates. The latter was always at hand ready to assist Gloucester with his advice and resources. By turns they guarded the king, for they were afraid lest he should escape or be forcibly delivered from their hands, since the Welsh could not bear to think that owing to their stupidity their prince had been carried off. As these dukes were seeking at every turn to arouse hatred against the queen’s kin, and to estrange public opinion from her relatives, they took special pains to do so on the day they entered the city. For ahead of the procession they sent four wagons loaded with weapons bearing the devices of the queen’s brothers and sons, besides criers to make generally known, throughout the crowded places by whatsoever way they passed, that these arms had been collected by the duke’s enemies and stored at convenient spots outside the capital, so as to attack and slay the Duke of Gloucester coming from the country. Since many knew these charges to be false, because the arms in question had been placed there long before the late king’s death for an altogether different purpose, when war was being waged

The political framework

327

against the Scots, mistrust both of his accusation and designs upon the throne was exceedingly augmented. Having entered the city, the first thing he saw to was to have himself proclaimed, by authority of the council and all the lords, protector or regent of the king and the realm. Then he set his thoughts on removing, or at least undermining, everything that might stand in the way of his mastering the throne. [He removed Thomas Rotherham from the office of chancellor, beheaded Lord Hastings, and imprisoned Bishop Morton and Lord Stanley, because he thought they would be too faithful to Edward V. By a stratagem he recovered control of all but two ships of the fleet which had been commanded by Edward Woodville. He persuaded Queen Elizabeth Woodville, who had taken refuge with her younger children in the sanctuary of Westminster Abbey, to give up her younger son Richard, who was placed with Edward V in the Tower. He caused Earl Rivers and Sir Richard Grey to be executed at Pontefract.] (Ibid. 113) Thus far, though all the evidence looked as if he coveted the crown, yet there remained some hope, because he was not yet claiming the throne, inasmuch as he still professed to do all these things as an avenger of treason and old wrongs, and because all private deeds and official documents bore the title and name of King Edward V. But after Hastings was removed, all the attendants who had waited upon the king were debarred access to him. He and his brother were withdrawn into the inner apartments of the Tower proper, and day by day began to be seen more rarely behind the bars and windows, till at length they ceased to appear altogether. Dr Argentine, the last of his attendants whose service the king enjoyed, reported that the young king, like a victim prepared for sacrifice, sought remission of his sins by daily confession and penance, because he believed that death was facing him…. In word and deed he gave so many proofs of his liberal education, of polite, nay rather scholarly, attainments far beyond his age; all of these should be recounted, but require such labour, that I shall lawfully excuse myself the effort. There is one thing I shall not omit, and that is, his special knowledge of literature which enabled him to discourse elegantly, to understand fully, and to declaim most excellently from any work whether in verse or prose that came into his hands, unless it were from among the more abstruse authors. He had such dignity in his whole person, and in his face such charm, that however much they might gaze he never wearied the eyes of beholders. I have seen many men burst forth into tears and lamentations when mention was made of him after his removal from men’s sight; and already there was a suspicion that he had been done away with. Whether, however, he has been done away with, and by what manner of death, so far I have not at all discovered. 202. The accession of Richard III, 1483 (The Great Chronicle of London, ed. A.H.Thomas and I.D.Thornley, 230 [English]) Then upon the 11th day of April was my lord prince, being then in the Marches of Wales under the guiding of the lord Marquis of Dorset, brother unto the queen, this prince as a child about the age of 12 years openly was proclaimed in London as king, by the name of Edward V…the which in all goodly haste afterwards was by the said marquis and other honourable persons removed thence toward London. Whereof hearing this, the Duke of

English historical documents

328

Gloucester, calling unto him the Duke of Buckingham, and so they being well and strongly accompanied with sundry men of worship…met with the king at Stonyng Stratford [Stony Stratford] the first day of May and0…immediately discharged the said marquis of the guiding of the king and took him unto his rule and charge and forthwith commanded the lord [sic], the lord Richard the queen’s son, Sir Thomas Vawtham [Vaughan], Richard Hawt [Haute] and others unto safe keeping, and afterwards upon the next morn held on his journey with the king towards London. When report of this doing came unto the queen, at once she sped unto Westminster, taking with her the Duke of York with her daughters and there put her in like condition as she had done before the field of Barnet…. And thus was the king conveyed through the city unto the bishop’s palace in Paul’s churchyard and there lodged. And the Duke of Gloucester was lodged at Crosby’s Place in Bishopsgate Street. And shortly afterwards was the said Duke of Gloucester proclaimed protector of the realm of England, and many counsels were kept and held at the said Crosby’s Place, whereof all were not godly nor good as afterwards shall appear. Then was the king removed from the bishop’s palace unto the Tower, and much provision was made…for his coronation. In which time the protector, being accompanied by the Archbishop of Canterbury, then named Doctor Bowser [Bourghchier], went unto Westminster and there behaved him so excellently unto the queen with his manifold feigned fair promises that neither she nor yet the Archbishop had in them any manner of suspicion of guile. But in good and loving manner, trusting fully that it should be for the welfare of the child, she delivered unto them the Duke of York…whom the said protector conveyed straight to the king, and both were well treated within the king’s lodging being within the Tower, for a certain time afterwards. And all this season the Lord Hastings was had in great favour with the said protector and received of him many great benefits and gifts, as many other noble men did, and all to bring his evil purpose about. And thus driving and delaying the time till he had compassed his mind, upon the 13th day of June he appointed a council to be held within the Tower, to the which were invited the Earl of Derby, the Lord Hastings with many others, but most of such as he knew would favour his cause. And upon the same day dined the said Lord Hastings with him and after dinner rode behind him or behind the Duke of Buckingham to the Tower, where when they with the other lords were entered into the council chamber, and had communed for a while of such matters as he had previously proposed, suddenly one made an outcry at the said council chamber door, “Treason, treason!” and forthwith the usher opened the door and then pressed in such men as were before appointed and straightway laid hands upon the Earl of Derby and the Lord Hastings; and at once without any process of law or lawful examination led the said Lord Hastings out unto the green beside the chapel and there, upon an end of a squared piece of timber, without any long confession or other space of repentance, struck off his head. And thus was this noble man murdered for his truth and fidelity which he firmly bare unto his master, upon whose soul and those of all Christians may Jesus have mercy, Amen! And in like manner the Earl of Derby would have been dealt with, as rumour would have it, saving that the protector feared the Lord Strange, the said Earl’s son who was then in Lancashire, wherefore he was immediately set at his liberty without hurt, except that his face was grazed a little with some weapon when the tyrants first entered the chamber. Then were the Archbishop of York, Doctor Rotherham, and the Bishop of Ely, Doctor Morton, set in surety for a time, and forthwith a crew of men was arrayed in the north and

The political framework

329

the protector commanded them to speed towards London. After this the Prince and the Duke of York were held more straitly and then there was whispering in London that the lord protector should be king. Accordingly upon the Sunday next following the day of execution of the Lord Hastings, at Paul’s Cross, in the presence of the said Lord Protector and the Duke of Buckingham, with a huge audience of lords spiritual and temporal, it was declared by Dr Ralph Shaa brother to this mayor and proved by such reasons as he made there and then, that the children of King Edward were not rightful inheritors of the Crown, and that King Edward was not the legitimate son of the Duke of York as the lord protector was. By this declaration and many other allegations and opprobrious reports he then alleged that the lord protector was most worthy to be king and no other…. Then upon the Tuesday next ensuing after the aforesaid Sunday the Duke of Buckingham came unto the Guildhall, where in readiness for his coming the mayor with his brethren and a fair multitude of citizens were assembled in their liveries. To this assembly the said duke then made an oration, rehearsing the great excellency of the lord protector and the manifold virtues which God had endowed him with, and the rightful title which he had to the Crown. It lasted a good half hour, and was so well and eloquently uttered and with so angelic a countenance, and every pause and time was so well ordered that such as heard him marvelled and said that never before that day had they heard any man, learned or unlearned, make such a recital or oration as that was. When he had finished and had well exhorted the said assembly to admit the said lord protector for their liege lord and king, and they to satisfy his mind had cried in small number, more for fear than for love, “Yea! Yea!”, he departed. Whereupon the Thursday next following, being the nineteenth day of June, the said lord protector took possession at Westminster in the Great Hall. When he was set in the king’s chair or place where all kings take first possession, the Duke of Norfolk sitting upon his right hand…and upon his left hand the Duke of Suffolk, he called before him the judges, commanding them in right strait manner that they should administer his law justly and duly without delay or favour. After this commandment so given to them, and other ceremonies finished there, he then went into the Abbey, where at the church door he was met with a procession, and the abbot or his deputy there delivered to him the sceptre of St Edward. He then went to the shrine and offered there, and was then conveyed to the choir and was set there while Te Deum was sung in a feigned manner by the monks, After these ceremonies were ended, he returned to the king’s palace and was lodged there. Meanwhile the Lord Anthony [Woodville] with the Lord Richard [Gray], Thomas Vawgtham [Vaughan] and Richard Hawte [Haute] before named were beheaded at Pontefract, and at this time the Marquis of Dorset escaped secretly…. Then was hasty provision made for Richard’s coronation, so that upon the 6th day of July he and Queen Anne his wife were at one mass solemnly crowned and afterwards the accustomed feast, with all the circumstances belonging to it, was kept in Westminster Hall. When this feast was finished, the king sent home the lords into their countries, holding with him still the Earl of Derby for a season. And also unto such as went home he gave strait commandments that they should see the countries where they dwelt well guided, and that no extortions should be done to his subjects. And thus he taught others to exercise justice and goodness which he would not do himself.

English historical documents

330

[For verses said to have been composed by Earl Rivers when he was awaiting execution, see John Rous, Historia Regum Anglie (Oxford, 1716), 213.]

203. The critical situation in London on the execution of Lord Hastings, June 1483 (The Stonor Letters and Papers, 1290–1483, ed. C.L.Kingsford, II, (Camden Series, 1919), 161 [English]) In his introduction Mr C.L.Kingsford wrote, “The greater part of the letter, down to ‘men of my lord’, is not in Stallworth’s writing. Sir Clements Markham (Life of Richard III, 214) has argued that ‘As Saturday was the 21st, Friday last was the 20th. We have here evidence that Lord Hastings was not beheaded until a week after his arrest…. The story of Hastings about the hurried execution on the 13th, and the log of wood, is therefore false.’ Dr Gairdner (Eng. Hist. Review, VI, 454) contested this conclusion. But the fact that the letter was written in two hands affords an easy explanation; the first part may well have been written on Friday, the 20th, and the end added by Stallworth on the Saturday. This also explains the change of Stallworth’s opinion as to the likelihood of the early release of the bishops.” So Hastings was executed on Friday, 13 June 1483.

Worshipful sir, I commend myself to you, and for tidings I hold you happy that you are out of the press, for with us there is much trouble, and every man doubts the other. As on Friday last the lord chamberlain was beheaded soon upon noon. On Monday last there was at Westminster a great plenty of harnessed men; there was the deliverance of the Duke of York to my lord cardinal, my lord chancellor, and other many temporal lords. My lord of Buckingham met with him in the midst of the hall at Westminster, my lord protector receiving him at the Star Chamber door with many loving words, and so departed with my lord Cardinal to the Tower, where he is happy, blessed be Jesus. The Lord Lisle is come to my lord protector and waits upon him. It is thought there shall be 20,000 men of my lord protector and my lord of Buckingham in London this week; to what intent I know not but to keep the peace. My lord has much business and more than he is content withal, if any other ways would be taken. The Lord Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Ely, are yet in the Tower with Master Oliver King (I suppose they shall come out nevertheless).1 There are men in their places for sure keeping. And I suppose that there shall be sent men of my lord2 protector to these lords’ places in the country. They are not likely to come out of ward yet. As for Foster, he is in captivity and prison for his life. Mistress Shore is in prison: what shall happen to her, I know not. I pray you, pardon

The political framework

331

me of more writing, I am so sick that I may not well hold my pen; and Jesu preserve you. From London the 21st day of June by the hands of your servant. Simon Stallworthe. All the lord chamberlain’s men are become my lord of Buckingham’s men. To the right worshipful Sir William Stonor, knight. 204. A bishop’s opinion of Richard III in 1483 (Christ Church Letters, ed. J.B.Sheppard (Camden Soc., 1877), 45) Doctor Thomas Langton, Bishop of St Davids, to the Prior of Christ Church. If there happen to be any ships at Bordeaux at such time as your wine shall be ready to be shipped, the king will in no circumstances grant a licence to you or anybody else to ship your wine in a foreign ship. If there should be no English ships, you may well in that case ship your wine in a foreign ship; there is no law or statute against it, and so by the advice of the chief judge, Sir Fayreford Vavasor, Sir Jervas Clifton, and Medcalf, you need no licence; and so they all showed the law…. The king has at this time two messengers with his cousin of France. If they bring home good tidings I doubt not but that the king will write to his said cousin as specially as he can for your wine, if he has no good tidings you must have patience…. The King of Scots has sent a courteous and a wise letter to the king for his case, but I trust you will understand they shall have a sessions before the king leaves York. They lie still at the siege of Dunbar, but I trust to God it shall be kept from shame. I trust to God soon, by Michaelmas, the king shall be at London. He contents the people wherever he goes better than ever did any prince; for many a poor man that has suffered wrong many days has been relieved and helped by him and his commands in his progress. And in many great cities and towns were given to him great sums of money which he has refused. Upon my word I never liked the qualities of any prince so well as his; God has sent him to us for the welfare of us all. 205. The disappearance of the princes in the Tower, 1483 (See the report of Domenico Mancini (D.N. 201)) (i) The speech of the Chancellor of France to the States General of Tours, 15 January 1484 (J.Masselin, Journal des États Généraux de France tenus a Tours en 1484 (ed. A.Bernier, 1835), 37–9 [French]) If I were determined to recall special proofs of your loyalty to your prince and the treachery of others, a whole day would not suffice me. It will be enough to cite as an example our neighbours, the English. Look, I pray you, at the events which have happened in that land since the death of King Edward. Reflect how his children, already 1 2

A line has been drawn through these words in the original. The original hand ends here.

English historical documents

332

big and courageous, have been killed with impunity, and the crown has been transferred to their murderer by the favour of the people. (ii) (The Great Chronicle of London, ed. A.H.Thomas and I.D.Thornley, 234, 236 [English]) And during this mayor’s year [Sir Edmund Shaa, who laid down his mayoralty on 28 October 1483] the children of King Edward were seen shooting and playing in the garden of the Tower at sundry times. All the winter season of this mayor’s time [Robert Billesdon, whose mayoralty ended on 28 October 1484] the land was in good quiet, but after Easter there was much whispering among the people that the king had put the children of King Edward to death…. Word sprang quickly of a gentleman being in the parts of Brittany named Henry and Son to the Earl of Richmond that made speedy provision to come into England to claim the crown as his right, considering the death of King Edward’s children, of whom as then men feared not openly to say that they were rid out of this world. But of their death were many opinions, for some said that they were murdered between two feather beds, some said they were drowned in malmsey, and some said that they were pierced with a venomous potion. But howsoever they were put to death, certain it was that before that day they were departed from this world, of which cruel deed Sir James Tyrell was reported to be the doer, but others put that weight upon an old servant of King Richard’s. [Sir Thomas More’s account has been omitted because it has been made world famous by Shakespeare, because it is available in so many editions and because it is full of difficulties. For some account of these, see P.M.Kendall, King Richard III, 398–405. For suggestions as to why More wrote his book, see A.F.Pollard, “The Making of Sir Thomas More’s Richard III”, Historical Essays in Honour of James Tait (Manchester, 1933), 223–38, and R.S.Sylvester’s edn (New Haven, Yale U.P., 1963) of More’s History of King Richard III. Professor Sylvester’s comments are useful but are somewhat spoilt by his failure to realize that in the sixteenth century no clear distinction was drawn between the genres we should separate into history and historical drama.]

206. The Duke of Buckingham’s rebellion, 1483 (The Continuation of the Croyland Chronicle (1893), 490 [Latin, trans. H.T.Riley]) In the meantime, and while these things were going on, the two sons of king Edward before-named remained in the Tower of London, in the custody of certain persons appointed for that purpose. In order to deliver them from this captivity, the people of the southern and western parts of the kingdom began to murmur greatly, and to form meetings and confederacies. It soon became known that many things were going on in secret, and some in the face of all the world, for the purpose of promoting this object, especially on the part of those who, through fear, had availed themselves of the privileges of sanctuary and franchise. There was also a report that it had been recommended by

The political framework

333

those men who had taken refuge in the sanctuaries, that some of the king’s daughters should leave Westminster, and go in disguise to the parts beyond sea; in order that, if any fatal mishap should befall the said male children of the late king in the Tower, the kingdom might still, in consequence of the safety of the daughters, some day fall again into the hands of the rightful heirs. On this being discovered, the noble church of the monks at Westminster, and all the neighbouring parts, assumed the appearance of a castle and fortress, while men of the greatest austerity were appointed by king Richard to act as the keepers thereof. The captain and head of these was one John Nesfeld, Esquire, who set a watch upon all the inlets and outlets of the monastery, so that not one of the persons there shut up could go forth, and no one could enter, without his permission. At last, it was determined by the people in the vicinity of the city of London, throughout the counties of Kent, Essex, Sussex, Hampshire, Dorsetshire, Devonshire, Somersetshire, Wiltshire, and Berkshire, as well as some others of the southern counties of the kingdom, to avenge their grievances before-stated; upon which, public proclamation was made that Henry, Duke of Buckingham, who at this time was living at Brecknock [Brecon] in Wales, had repented of his former conduct, and would be the chief mover in this attempt, while a rumour was spread that the sons of King Edward before-named had died a violent death, but it was uncertain how. Accordingly, all those who had set on foot this insurrection, seeing that if they could find no one to take the lead in their designs, the ruin of all would speedily ensue, turned their thought to Henry, Earl of Richmond, who had been for many years living in exile in Brittany. To him a message was, accordingly, sent, by the Duke of Buckingham, by advice of the lord Bishop of Ely, who was then his prisoner at Brecknock, requesting him to hasten over to England as soon as he possibly could, for the purpose of marrying Elizabeth, the eldest daughter of the late king, and, at the same time, together with her, taking possession of the throne. The whole design of this plot, however, by means of spies, became perfectly well known to King Richard, who, as he exerted himself in the promotion of all his views in no drowsy manner, but with the greatest activity and vigilance, contrived that, throughout Wales, as well as in all parts of the marches thereof, armed men should be set in readiness around the said duke, as soon as ever he had set a foot from his home, to pounce upon all his property; who, accordingly, encouraged by the prospect of the duke’s wealth, which the king had, for that purpose, bestowed upon them, were in every way to obstruct his progress. The result was, that, on the side of the castle of Brecknock, which looks towards the interior of Wales, Thomas, the son of the late Sir Roger Vaughan, with the aid of his brethren and kinsmen, most carefully watched the whole of the surrounding country; while Humphrey Stafford partly destroyed the bridges and passes by which England was entered, and kept the other part closed by means of a strong force set there to guard the same. In the meantime, the duke was staying at Weobley, the house of Walter Devereux, lord Ferrers, together with the Bishop of Ely and his other advisers. Finding that he was placed in a position of extreme difficulty, and that he could in no direction find a safe mode of escape, he first changed his dress, and then secretly left his people; but was at last discovered in the cottage of a poor man, in consequence of a greater quantity of provisions than usual being carried thither. Upon this, he was led to the city of Salisbury, to which place the king had come with a very large army, on the day of the

English historical documents

334

commemoration of All Souls (2 November); and, notwithstanding the fact that it was the Lord’s day, the duke suffered capital punishment in the public market-place of that city. On the following day, the king proceeded with all his army towards the western parts of the kingdom, where all his enemies had made a stand, with the exception of those who had come from Kent, and were at Guildford, awaiting the issue of events. Proceeding onwards, he arrived at the city of Exeter; upon which, being struck with extreme terror at his approach, Peter Courteney, Bishop of Exeter, as well as Thomas, Marquis of Dorset, and various other nobles of the adjacent country, who had taken part in the rebellion, repaired to the sea-side; and those among them who could find ships in readiness, embarked, and at length arrived at the wished-for shores of Brittany. Others, for a time trusting to the fidelity of friends, and concealing themselves in secret spots, afterwards betook themselves to the protection of holy places. One most noble knight of that city perished, Thomas Saint Leger by name, to save whose life very large sums of money were offered; but all in vain, for he underwent his sentence of capital punishment. While the matters which have been mentioned above were going on here and there in the western parts, and the king was still in the said city of Exeter, Henry, Earl of Richmond, being unaware of these disturbances, had set sail with certain ships, and arrived with his adherents from Brittany, at the mouth of Plymouth harbour, where he came to anchor, in order to ascertain the real state of affairs. On news being at last brought him of the events which had happened, the death of the duke of Buckingham, and the flight of his own supporters, he at once hoisted sail, and again put to sea. [For Richard III’s own anguished comment on the rebellion from Lincoln on 12 October 1483, see Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series (1827), I, 129, “Here, praised be God, all is well and truly determined and ready to resist the malice of him that had the best cause to be true, the Duke of Buckingham, the most untrue creature living; and with God’s grace we shall not be long until we shall be in that region and subdue his malice”.]

207. Richard III to his mother, the Duchess of York, 1484 (B.M., Harleian MS. 433, f. 2b [English]) Madam, I recommend myself to you as heartily as is possible to me; beseeching you in my most humble and affectionate manner of your daily blessing to my especial comfort and defence in my need. And, Madam, I heartily beseech you that I may often hear from you to my comfort. And such news as there is here my servant Thomas Bryan, this bearer, shall show you; to whom may it please you to give credence. And, Madam, I beseech you to be good and gracious lady to my lord my chamberlain to be your officer in Wiltshire, in such matters as Colingbourne was. I trust he shall therein do you good service, and that it may please you that by this bearer I may understand your pleasure in this matter. And I pray God send you the accomplishment of your noble desires. Written at Pontefract, the 3rd day of June, with the hand of Your most humble son, Ricardus Rex.

The political framework

335

208. An Act of parliament settling the crown upon the king and his issue, 1484 (Rot. Parl. VI, 240 [English]) [The preamble recites how before the coronation of King Richard III a roll of parchment had been presented in the name of the three estates of the realm “that is to say, of the lords spiritual and temporal and of the commons”, containing a petition to which he had assented; but as these persons had not assembled in the form of a parliament, doubts had arisen in the minds of many. Therefore the petition is now ratified by parliament and entered on the parliament roll. It opens with a glowing account of the enviable state of the realm in former times, when prosperity and peace, concord and charity, justice and zeal reigned supreme. In late years conditions had much deteriorated, especially after the pretended marriage of Edward IV to Elizabeth Woodville.] And here also we consider how that the said pretended marriage between the abovenamed King Edward and Elizabeth Grey was made of great presumption, without the knowledge and assent of the lords of this land, and also by sorcery and witchcraft, committed by the said Elizabeth and her mother Jacquetta Duchess of Bedford, as the common opinion of the people and the public voice and fame is through all this land…. And here also we consider how that the said pretended marriage was made privily and secretly, without the giving out of banns, in a private chamber, a profane place, and not openly in the face of the church, according to the law of God’s church, but contrary to it, and to the laudable custom of the Church of England. And how also that at the time of contract of the same pretended marriage, and before and long after, the said King Edward was and stood married and troth-plighted to one Dame Eleanor Butler, daughter of the old Earl of Shrewsbury, with whom the same King Edward had made a precontract of marriage, a long time before he made the said pretended marriage [Wherefore] it appears and follows evidently that the said King Edward during his life and the said Elizabeth lived together sinfully and damnably in adultery…. Also it appears evidently and follows, that all the issue and children of the said King Edward are bastards, and unable to inherit or to claim anything by inheritance, by the law and custom of England. Moreover we consider how that afterwards by the three estates of this realm assembled in a parliament held at Westminster, the 17th year of the reign of the said King Edward IV…George, Duke of Clarence, brother to the said King Edward now deceased, was convicted and attainted of high treason…by reason whereof, all the issue of the said George was and is disabled and barred of all right and claim which in any wise they might have or challenge by inheritance to the crown and dignity royal of this realm, by the ancient law and custom of this same realm. Beyond this we consider how that you are the undoubted son and heir of Richard late Duke of York, truly inheritor to the said crown and dignity royal, and as in right King of England, by way of inheritance; and that at this time, the premises duly considered, there is no other person living but you only who may by right claim the said crown and royal dignity, by way of inheritance, and how that you were born within this land; by reason whereof, as we judge in our minds, you are more naturally inclined to the prosperity and common welfare of the same, and all the three estates of this land have, and may have, more certain knowledge of your birth and filiation abovesaid. We consider also the great wit, prudence, justice, princely courage, and memorable and laudable acts in diverse

English historical documents

336

battles, which as we know by experience you have hitherto done, for the salvation and defence of this same realm; and also the great nobility and excellence of your birth and blood, that is to say, England, France and Spain. Wherefore…we…choose you, high and mighty prince, as our king and sovereign lord, &c., to whom we know for certain it appertaineth of inheritance to be chosen. And hereupon we humbly desire, pray, and require your noble grace that according to this election of us the three estates of this land, as by your true inheritance, you will accept and take upon you the said crown and royal dignity…and in case you do so, we promise to serve and to assist your highness, as true and faithful subjects and liegemen, and to live and die with you in this matter, and every other just quarrel. For certainly we are determined to adventure and commit ourselves to the peril of our lives and jeopardy of death than to live in such thraldom and bondage as we have lived for a long time heretofore, oppressed and injured by extortions and new impositions against the laws of God and man, and the…laws of this realm, wherein every Englishman has an inheritance…so that, after great clouds, troubles, storms and tempests, the son of justice and of grace may shine upon us, to the comfort and gladness of all true Englishmen. Albeit that the right, title, and estate which our sovereign lord the king Richard III has to and in the Crown…of England…is grounded upon the laws of God and of Nature, and also upon the ancient laws and laudable customs of this said realm…yet nevertheless, for as much as it is considered that the greater part of the people of this land is not sufficiently learned in the abovesaid laws and customs, whereby the truth and right in this matter may very likely be hidden, and not clearly known to all the people, and thereupon put in doubt and question. And moreover, as the court of parliament is of such authority and the people of this land is of such nature and disposition, as experience teaches, that the manifestation and declaration of any truth and right made by the three estates of this realm assembled in parliament, and by authority of the same, makes, before all other things, most faith and certainty and, quieting men’s minds, removes the occasion of all doubts and seditious language. Therefore at the request and by assent of the three estates of this realm, that is to say, the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons of this land, assembled in this present parliament, by authority of the same, be it pronounced, decreed, and declared, that our sovereign lord the king was and is true and undoubted king of this realm of England…as well by right of consanguinity and inheritance, as well by lawful election, consecration, and coronation. And moreover that at the request and by the assent and authority abovesaid, be it ordained, enacted, and established, that the said crown and royal dignity of this realm…rest and abide in the person of our said sovereign lord the king, during his life, and after his decease in his heirs begotten of his body. And especially…that the high and excellent prince Edward, son of our said sovereign lord the king, be heir apparent of the same sovereign lord the king, to succeed to him in the abovesaid crown and royal dignity.

The political framework

337

209. Richard III denies the rumour that he intends to marry his niece Elizabeth, 1485 (Acts of the Court of the Mercers’ Company, 1453–1527, ed. L.Lyell and F.D.Witney (Cambridge, 1936), 173 [English]) Whereas as there have been long discussions and much uninformed talk among the people by evil-disposed persons, who have…sown these rumours to the very great displeasure of the king, showing how the queen was poisoned by consent and will of the king, so that he might marry and have to wife the Lady Elizabeth, eldest daughter of his brother, late King of England, deceased, whom God pardon… the king sent for and had before him at St John’s Day, yesterday, the mayor and aldermen. And in the great hall, in the presence of many of his lords and many other people he shewed his grief and displeasure, and said it never came into his thought or mind to marry in such manner, nor was he pleased or glad at the death of his queen but as sorry and heavy in heart as a man would be…. And he then admonished and charged every person to cease from such untrue talking, on peril of his indignation. And any person who henceforward tells or repeats any of these aforesaid untrue rumours, is to be put in prison until the author be produced from whom the said person heard the said untrue rumour. And in this way the king has given command and charge to the mayor to punish, and to call before him the wardens of all crafts, constables, and others, and to show to them the matter of his displeasure. 210. Richard III’s proclamation against Henry Tudor, 1485 (The Paston Letters, ed. J.Gairdner, III, 316 [English]. Cf. Henry Ellis, Original Letters, 2nd Series, I, 161) For as much as the king our sovereign lord has certain knowledge that Peter, Bishop of Exeter, Jasper Tudor, son of Owen Tudor, calling himself Earl of Pembroke, John, late Earl of Oxford, and Sir Edward Woodville, with other various men, his rebels and traitors, disabled and attainted by the authority of the high court of parliament, of whom many are known for open murderers, adulterers, and extortioners, contrary to the pleasure of God and against all truth, honour, and nature, have forsaken their natural country, betaking themselves first to be under the obedience of the Duke of Brittany, and have promised to him certain things which he and his council thought were things too greatly unnatural and abominable for them to grant, observe, keep and perform, and therefore utterly refused the same. The said traitors, seeing that the said duke and his council would not aid nor succour them nor follow their ways, secretly departed out of his country into France, and there betook themselves to be under the obedience of the king’s ancient enemy, Charles, calling himself King of France; and in order to abuse and blind the commons of this said realm, the said rebels and traitors have chosen to be their captain one Henry Tudor, son of Edmund Tudor, son of Owen Tudor, who of his ambition and anti-social covetousness encroaches and usurps upon him the name and title of royal estate of this realm of England, to which he has no manner of interest, right, title, or colour, as every man well knows; for he is descended of bastard blood both of the father’s side and of the mother’s

English historical documents

338

side. For the said Owen the grandfather was bastard born, and his mother was daughter to John, Duke of Somerset, son to John, Earl of Somerset, son to Dame Katherine Swynford, and born of her in double adultery; from which it clearly appears that no title can or may be in him, who fully intends to enter this realm, purposing a conquest. And if he should achieve his false intent and purpose, every man’s life, livelihood, and goods would be in his hands, liberty, and disposition, whereby would follow the disinheriting and destruction of all the noble and worshipful blood of this realm for ever, and to the resisting and withstanding of which every true and natural Englishman born must lay to his hands for our surety and welfare. And to the intent that the said Henry Tudor might the rather achieve his false intent and purpose by the aid, support and assistance of the king’s said ancient enemy of France, he has covenanted and bargained with him and all the council of France to give up and release in perpetuity all the right, title, and claim that the kings of England have, had, and ought to have, to the crown and realm of France, together with the duchies of Normandy, Anjou, and Maine, Gascony, and Guienne, the castles and towns of Calais, Guisnes, and Hammes, with the marches appertaining to the same, and sever and exclude the arms of France from the arms of England for ever. And in further proof and demonstration of his said purpose of conquest, the said Henry Tudor has given to various of the king’s enemies and also to his said rebels and traitors, archbishoprics, bishoprics, and other spiritual dignities, and also the duchies, earldoms, baronies, and other possessions and inheritances of knights, squires, gentlemen, and others of the king’s true subjects within the realm, and intends also to change and subvert the laws of the same, and to induce and establish new laws and ordinances amongst the king’s said subjects. And besides this and the alienation of the abovenamed into the possession of the king’s said ancient enemies, to the greatest destruction, shame, and rebuke that might ever fall to this said land, the said Henry Tudor and others, the king’s rebels and traitors aforesaid, have intended at their coming, if they should have the power, to do the most cruel murders, slaughters, and robberies, and disinheritances, that ever were seen in any Christian realm. For the avoidance of these and other incalculable dangers, and to the intent that the king’s said rebels, traitors, and enemies may be utterly driven away from their said malicious and false purpose, and soon discomfited, if they succeeded in landing by force, the king our sovereign lord wills, charges, and commands all and everyone of the natural and true subjects of this his realm to call the foregoing to their minds, and like good and true Englishmen to fortify themselves with all their might for the defence of themselves, their wives, their children, and goods and inheritances, against the said malicious purposes and conspiracies which the said ancient enemies have made with the king’s said rebels and traitors for the final destruction of this land as is aforesaid. And our said sovereign lord, as a benevolent, diligent, and courageous prince will put his most royal person to all necessary labour and pains in this regard for the resisting and subduing of his said enemies, rebels and traitors, to the greatest comfort, welfare, and surety of all his true and faithful liege men and subjects. And besides this, our said sovereign lord wills and commands all his said subjects to be ready in their most defensible array to do his highness military service, when by open proclamation or otherwise they shall be commanded to do so, for the resistance of the

The political framework

339

king’s said rebels, traitors, and enemies…. Witnessed by me at Westminster, 23rd June, in the second year of our reign. [For Richard’s appeal to London for help against Henry Tudor, see Lyell, op. cit. 180. The king’s appeal was considered at a general court of the Mercers’ Company held on 28 June 1485.]

211. Rous’s charges against Richard III (J.Rous, Historia Regum Anglie, ed. T.Hearne (1729), 214 [Latin]) And in short he [Richard of Gloucester] imprisoned King Edward V, king in deed but not crowned, with his brother Richard, taken from Westminster under promise of safety, so that it was afterwards known to very few by what death they were martyred. Then he ascended the throne of the dead princes, whose protector he had been in their minority, this tyrant King Richard, who was born at Fotheringhay in the county of Northampton, retained for two years in his mother’s womb and issuing forth with teeth and hair down to his shoulders…. At his birth Scorpio was in the ascendant, whose sign is the house of Mars. And as Scorpio was smooth in countenance but deadly with his tail, so Richard showed himself. He received his lord King Edward V blandly with embraces and kisses, and yet within about three months or little more he had killed him with his brother, and he poisoned the lady Anne, his queen, daughter of the Earl of Warwick. He imprisoned during his lifetime his mother-in-law Anne, the dowager countess, lady and just heir of that noble lordship…. And what was most detestable to God and to all the English, indeed to all nations who shall hear of it, he killed that most holy man king Henry VI, either by others or, as many believe, by his own hands. 212. The battle of Bosworth, 1485 (Polydore Vergil’s Anglica Historia, ed. H.Ellis (Camden Soc., 1844), 221, modernised from an English trans, of the Latin made about 1540) In the mean time King Richard, hearing that the enemy drew near, came first to the place of fight, a little beyond Leicester (the name of that village is Bos worth), and there, pitching his tents, refreshed his soldiers that night from their travails, and with many words exhorted them to the fight to come. It is reported that King Richard had that night a terrible dream; for he thought in his sleep that he saw horrible images as it were of evil spirits hovering clearly about him, as it were before his eyes, and that they would not let him rest…his heart told him upon this that the result of the following battle would be grievous, and he did not buckle himself to the conflict with such liveliness of courage and countenance as before…. But I believe it was no dream but a conscience guilty of heinous offences…. The next day afterwards King Richard, furnished thoroughly with all manner of things, drew his whole host out of their tents, and arrayed his vanguard, stretching it forth of a wondrous length…and in the front were placed his archers…of these archers he made John Duke of Norfolk the leader. After this long vanguard followed the king himself with a choice force of soldiers. In the mean time Henry, having

English historical documents

340

returned from the conference with his friends, began to take better heart, and without any delay encamped himself near his enemies, where he rested all night, and early in the morning commanded the soldiers to arm themselves, sending as well to Thomas Stanley, who had now approached the place of fight, as in the mid-way between the two battles, that he would come with his forces… He made a slender vanguard for the small number of his people; before the same he placed archers, of whom he made captain John, Earl of Oxford; in the right wing of the vanguard he placed Gilbert Talbot to defend the same; on the left truly he set John Savage; and himself, trusting to the aid of Thomas Stanley, did follow with one troop of horsemen, and a few footmen; for the number of all his soldiers, altogether, was scarcely 5,000, besides the Stanleyans, of whom about 3,000 were at the battle, under the conduct of William. The king’s forces were twice as many and more…. There was a marsh between both hosts, which Henry purposely left on the right hand, that it might serve his men instead of a fortress; by doing this he left the sun upon his back; but when the king saw the enemies past the marsh, he commended his soldiers to charge against them. They made suddenly great shouts and assaulted the enemy first with arrows; their foes were not at all loath to fight and began also to shoot fiercely; but when they came to hand strokes the matter then was dealt with by blades…. While the battle continued thus hot on both sides between the vanguards, King Richard understood…when Earl Henry was afar off with a small force of soldiers about him; then after drawing nearer he knew it perfectly by evident signs and tokens that it was Henry. Wherefore, all inflamed with ire, he struck his horse with the spurs, and ran against him out of his own army ahead of the vanguard…. King Richard at the first brunt killed some men, overthrew Henry’s standard, together with William Brandon the standard bearer. Then he matched himself against John Cheney, a man of much strength, far exceeding the common sort, who strove with him as he came; but the king with great force drove him to the ground, making way with his weapon on every side. But yet Henry abode the brunt longer than even his own soldiers would have thought, who were now almost out of hope of victory, when suddenly William Stanley with 3,000 men came to the rescue. Then truly in a moment the remainder all fled, and King Richard was killed fighting manfully in the thickest press of his enemies. In the mean time also the Earl of Oxford after a little skirmishing put to flight those who fought in the van, whereof a great company were killed in the chase. But many more forbore to fight, who came to the field with King Richard for awe, and for no goodwill, and departed without any danger, as men who desired not the safety but destruction of that prince whom they hated. There were about 1,000 men killed, and amongst them of warrior noblemen were John, Duke of Norfolk, “Gwalter L.Ferryse” (Walter, Lord Ferrers of Chartley), Robert Brackenbury, Richard Radcliffe, and many more…. And of those who took to their feet Francis Lovell, Humphrey Stafford, with Thomas his brother and much more company, fled into the sanctuary of St John, which is at Colchester…. As for the number of captives it was very great …amongst them the chief were Henry, Earl of Northumberland, and Thomas, Earl of Surrey. The latter was committed to prison, where he long remained; the former as a friend at heart was received unto favour. Henry lost in that battle scarcely a hundred soldiers, amongst whom there was one principal man, William Brandon, who bore Earl Henry’s standard…. The report is that King Richard might have sought to save himself by flight; but he…aid to have answered that that very day he would make an end either of war or of

The political framework

341

life, such great fierceness and such huge force of mind he had; wherefore, knowing certainly that that day would either yield him a peaceable and quiet reign thenceforth or else perpetually bereave him of the same, he came to the field with a crown upon his head, that thereby he might either make a beginning or end of his reign. After the victory was obtained, Henry gave forthwith thanks unto Almighty God for the same; then afterwards…the soldiers cried “God save King Henry, God save King Henry” and with heart and hand uttered all the show of joy that might be; which, when Thomas Stanley did see, he at once set King Richard’s crown, which was found among the spoil in the field, upon his head After that… Henry with his victorious army proceeded in the evening to Leicester where, for refreshing of his soldiers from their travail and pains, and to prepare for going to London he tarried two days. In the mean time the body of King Richard, naked of all clothing, and laid upon a horse’s back, with the arms and legs hanging down on both sides, was brought to the abbey of Franciscan monks [sic] at Leicester, a miserable spectacle in good truth, but not unworthy for the man’s life, and was buried there two days afterwards without any pomp or solemn funeral. He reigned two years and so many months and one day over. He was little of stature, deformed of body, the one shoulder being higher than the other, with a curt and sour countenance, which seemed to savour of mischief, and manifested clearly craft and deceit. While he was thinking of any matter, he did continually bite his nether lip, as though that cruel nature of his did so rage against itself in that little carcase. Also he was wont to be ever with his right hand pulling out of the sheath to the middle, and putting in again, the dagger which he did always wear. Truly he had a sharp wit, cautious and subtle, apt both to counterfeit and dissemble; his courage also high and fierce, which failed him not in the very death. When his men forsook him, he preferred rather to take death with the sword, than by foul flight to prolong his life, uncertain what death perchance soon afterwards to suffer by sickness or other violence. 213. The end of King Richard III, 1485 (The Great Chronicle of London, 238 [English]) The victory fell to King Henry; in this battle were slain King Richard, the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Lovell, with Brawgthyngbery (Brackenbury) and many others. And at once, as it was said, Sir William Stanley who won the possession of King Richard’s helmet with the crown being upon it, came straight to King Henry and set it upon his head saying, “Sir, here I make you King of England”. In this field was taken the Earl of Surrey with others. And thus by great fortune and grace upon the aforesaid 22nd day of August won this noble prince the possession of this land, and then was he conveyed to Leicester the same night, and there received with all honour and gladness. And Richard, late king, as gloriously as he in the morning departed from that town, so as irreverently was he that afternoon brought into that town. For his body was despoiled to the skin, and nothing was left about him so much as would cover his privy member, and he was trussed behind a pursuivant called Norroy as a hog or other vile beast. And so all bespattered with mire and filth he was brought to a church in Leicester for all men to wonder upon, and was there finally irreverently buried. And thus ended this man with dishonour as he that sought it; for had he continued still protector and have suffered the children to have

English historical documents

342

prospered according to his allegiance and fealty, he would have been honourably lauded over all, whereas now his fame is darkened and dishonoured as far as he is known; but God that is all merciful forgive him his misdeeds.

Part II THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REALM

INTRODUCTION A. THE KING ANY treatment of this subject that is to be in proper perspective must begin with the king; for it was agreed by all that it was the king’s right and duty to govern. Failure to govern efficiently was one of the grounds for the deposition of Edward II and Henry VI; and even when the king was subject to coercion in revolutionary situations, like those of 1311 or 1388, his opponents claimed, and may have believed, that they were merely getting rid of evil counsellors and officials, and making provision so that the king could in future govern better. Englishmen of this period would have heartily agreed with the dictum of St Isidore of Seville, “Reges a regendo vocati sunt”; rulers are so called because they rule—kings are so named because they govern. The right and duty of the king to govern the realm of England derived advantages from both geography and history. England was small enough for the important parts of it to be reached easily and effectively by the central government; but it was sufficiently big and productive to support a relatively powerful monarchy. The realm of England had moreover the luck to be protected by sea (if the king saw to the domination of the English Channel) from invasion by continental powers, and to have its seat of government in the south-east, which under contemporary conditions of transport was safe from sudden attack by Welsh or Scots. Moreover, the kingdom of England was the strongest and wealthiest political unit in the island of Great Britain. Its kings were therefore in a happier position than those of Scotland, rulers of a poor country whose fertile areas were only too vulnerable to devastation by the powerful English, warlike Highlanders and turbulent barons. It is true that the Scottish marches and most of Wales were only weakly controlled by the English government; but except in times of civil war the power and turbulence of marcher lords did not prevent the government of the economically important part of England, the area south-east of a line joining Exeter, Chester and York, from maintaining, comparatively, law and order there. The advantages of geography had in large measure been reinforced by the course of history. The tenth-century kings had created a strong and united monarchy of England and this had been strengthened by the results of the Norman Conquest. The kings were undisputed military leaders of the state, with valuable powers of organising military and police arrangements throughout the realm; and they had enjoyed since Anglo-Saxon times the right to financial aid from their subjects for the defence of the realm. From the reign of Henry II the law of the king’s court had increasingly become the common law of the realm, a steadily rising tide, which touched more and more of the king’s subjects and flowed further and deeper into both main channels and minor creeks of national life. Given a powerful impetus by Edward I, this process continued during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and by this time affected almost every court apart from those of the church. Even lords who still exercised strong and relatively independent franchises, like the marcher lords of Wales or the Bishop of Durham, succeeded in doing so only because their courts took over rules and processes of common law and made them their own. From the standpoint of the common lawyer this period saw a further increase in the

English historical documents

346

powers and range of functions of the monarchy. The importance of the common law for the government of the realm was now so great that new classes of officials, such as the justices of the peace, were evolved to administer it and the equitable jurisdiction of the chancellor was developed as an appendix to it. And in part stimulated by this development of common law, the king’s administration also grew during this period. There were more officials and more departments to put into effect royal decisions in 1485 than there had been in 1307. Not only was there an extension in the functions of monarchy during this period, but an increase in some ways in its pretensions. In the twelfth century, churchmen filled with confidence by the ideas of the Gregorian reform movement had been at pains to rebut the older notion that the coronation was a sacrament, conferring on the anointed king not only temporal but quasi-spiritual authority; and at that time they had been successful. But by the fourteenth century the prestige of the pope had gone down and that of the kings of France and England had risen; and this renewed confidence of monarchy was reflected in the coronation ceremony. In the order for the crowning of Edward II in 1308 and still more in that prepared for the coronation of Richard II in 1377,1 changes were made—for example in the details of anointing and the rubrics about the coronation—which emphasized once more the analogy with the consecration of a bishop. Moreover from the time of Edward I there was an increased emphasis on the claim of the anointed king to heal the skin disease scrofula by the royal touch. “The result of all this was that an unbiased spectator of a fourteenth century coronation could no more regard the King of England as a mere layman than could the people who had long believed in miracles”;2 and Edward III appealed to his anointing to justify his encroachments on the jurisdiction of the clergy. Then in 1399 came a further exaltation of the anointing of the king—the introduction of sacred oil. The Kings of England had long been envious of the Kings of France, who were anointed with an oil brought down from Heaven in a phial by an angel at the baptism of Clovis. In 1399 the English monarchy at last caught up with the French by the anointing of Henry IV with a miraculous oil received by St Thomas Becket during his exile from the hands of no less a person than the Blessed Virgin Mary.3 Some in the twentieth century may dismiss these developments as trivial fancies; but to the men of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries they were important. Richard II set great store by his anointing, the lords of Henry VI were long reluctant to depose an anointed king, and even so hard-headed a man as Henry VII is reported to have had scruples about proceeding to extremes against Lambert Simnel because he had been anointed in Dublin.4 This emphasis on the quasi-sanctity of monarchy was accompanied by a greater stress on the majesty of the office. This can be seen in the increasingly exalted notions of treason. Disloyalty to one’s lord had been a grave offence as long ago as Alfred’s time; but before the thirteenth century high treason had not been distinguished clearly from other kinds of disloyalty—the petty treason of a servant to his lord, of a wife to a husband. By the fourteenth century Edward III’s claim to be King of France, with its implication that the king owed allegiance to no one, and the victory of the common law, 1

D.N. 215, 216. P.E.Schramm, A History of the English Coronation (Oxford, 1937), 136. 3 D.N. 220. 4 K.Pickthorn, Early Tudor Government, Henry VII (Cambridge, 1934), 9. 2

The government of the realm

347

with its enhancement of the royal authority and dignity, made treason seem more heinous. It came to be thought that no benefit of clergy should be allowed against charges of treason, that the procedure in trials for treason should be heavily weighted against the accused, that the penalties for a man convicted of high treason should be terrifying— hanging, disembowelling while still alive, beheading, quartering, the confiscation of all his possessions and the disinheritance of his heirs. It was therefore a serious matter that during the reign of Edward II and the early years of that of Edward III the notion of treason was stretched for political reasons to include wide and vague charges, like that against the Despensers and Roger Mortimer, of “usurping the royal power”.1 It is true that Edward III, as part of his policy of promoting harmony at home, secured in 1352 the enactment of the Statute of Treasons which limited and defined the offences that should henceforth be regarded as high treason, and tried to guard against the creation of fresh treasons by judicial decision by a clause that required any other charges of treason to be referred to the king in parliament.2 But Richard II extended the definition of treason in several ways, notably in 1387 and 1398;3 and though his acts in this field were in 1399 denounced as tyrannical,4 the process of extending the notion of treason continued in the fifteenth century in a less flamboyant way. In spite of the clause in the act of 1352 against the extension of treason by judicial interpretation, this in fact occurred. Edward III’s statute had made the essence of treason in any attempt to kill the king, not the act of killing, but the intention to kill. So in the troubled times of the fifteenth century the judges took the view that any intention to kill or depose the king, however it was displayed, was high treason; and a number of cases from the reigns of Henry IV, Henry VI, Edward IV and Richard III show the judges taking the view that mere words which manifested such intentions were treasonable.5 The declaration of the judges at Nottingham in 1387, which extended so much the offence of high treason, was also remarkable as the first definite formulation of the theory of the royal prerogative. With the development of the common law, both in range and complexity, there would in any event have developed a notion of royal prerogative, acknowledging that in the king, the head of the state and the fountain of justice, there must be a reserve of undefined power to deal with unforeseen and unforeseeable contingencies of administration, law and political emergencies. But Richard II, exceptionally conscious of the royal dignity and of the need, as he saw it, to rescue the crown from recent usurpations of its authority by the aristocracy, forced the pace by his constant stress on his regality and prerogative. In 1399 what were deemed to be his excesses in this regard were repudiated; but his successor emphasized on several occasions that he wished to safeguard his prerogative,1 which now became a generally accepted notion. By litigation and the processes of law particular applications of the prerogative came in the fifteenth century to be defined and therefore restricted; thus the king could not use prerogative to defeat common law and right, his officials could not employ it to commit unlawful acts, he was bound by his predecessor’s 1

D.N. 6. D.N. 214. 3 D.N. 63, 218. Cf. D.N. 217. 4 D.N. 219. 5 D.N. 145; Rot. Parl. VI, 193–5, for indictment of Clarence in 1478. Cf. D.N. 199. 1 D.N. 82, 222. 2

English historical documents

348

judicial acts, his discretionary power might be limited by statute and so on.2 But the fifteenth century also saw a development of the notion of the king’s prerogative to the verge of royal sovereignty—especially in relation to the church; thus in 1482 it was judicially held that the authority of convocation must give way to the authority of the royal prerogative, and in 1486 precedents from the reigns of Henry VI and Edward IV were quoted in parliament by the Chief Justice of the King’s Bench and the Bishop of London for the proposition that the pope could not lawfully be allowed to act in derogation of the king and his crown.3 There is, of course, another side to the picture. The deposition of Edward II was a great blow to both the power and the prestige of the monarchy and the whole policy of Edward III was influenced by the need to restore what the crown had lost by the overthrow and murder of his father. But damaging as was the disaster which overtook Edward II, the deposition and death of Richard II were an even greater setback for the monarchy. As the opposition to Edward II wished his eldest son to follow him, it was possible to cloak the revolution with a formal show of normal succession; such a pretence was impossible in the case of Richard II, who was not followed by the heir by primogeniture. Moreover Richard II had been a more selfconscious and forceful defender of the rights of the monarchy, and the damage caused to the crown by his fall was therefore all the greater. The weakening effect on the monarchy could not fail to affect the government of the realm.4 The deposition of Richard II shook the hitherto consolidating tradition of primogeniture as the rule of succession; it inaugurated a century of doubt and conflict on the mode of accession until in 1485 parliament was reduced to enacting that Henry VII was king because he was in fact king. The application of notions of private property law to the succession to the crown tended to blur the distinction between the estate of the crown and the estate of a great noble,5 Even Edward III and Henry V had to persuade and conciliate where Edward I would have commanded; and the wars in France by which they sought to reassert the prestige of the monarchy impoverished the king and forced them into greater dependence upon parliamentary grants and parliamentary cooperation. Henry IV had to accept curtailments of his household, and Henry VI had to submit to attacks on his ministers6 which would have stirred Richard II to wrathful defiance and retribution; for both kinds of action were in his view unwarrantable encroachments on the royal prerogative. The fact was that under the Lancastrians there was, save for a few years under Henry V, a widening gap between the theory and practice of kingship; but fortunately for the monarchy the theory was adversely affected but little,1 so that when under the Yorkists and Tudors the monarchy recovered its strength, it could make effective rights that had never been lost. Yet the difficulties of the monarchy in this period did leave an important permanent mark on the government of the realm. In common with other monarchies of western Europe, the English monarchy had had two strands in its tradition. There had been the 2

S.B.Chrimes, English Constitutional Ideas in the Fifteenth Century (Cambridge, 1936), 53. Ibid. 41, 53, 374, 379. 4 D.N. 221. 5 Notions of real property law coloured the debate of 1460 on the claims of York (D.N. 223) and the writings of Sir John Fortescue on the succession, especially the De Natura Legis Naturae. 1 E.g. D.N. 268, 149. Cf. the bold petition of the Commons for reform in 1406 and the impeachment of the Duke of Suffolk in 1450 (Rot. Parl. III, 572 ff.; V, 177). 3

The government of the realm

349

“prerogatival” element, influenced strongly by the legacy of imperial Rome, and, through the later Roman empire, by the despotic theocratic monarchies of the east. But there had also been the “liberal” element which, derived from Germanic kingship, had been reinforced by the pressures from a church which was independent enough to insist on the duties of kingship and from an aristocracy which was sufficiently warlike and powerful not to be browbeaten. This element regarded the king as a “minister” of his people, set on his throne by God to protect them and rule justly according to divine law, natural law and the law of the land. This strand of tradition stressed the obligation of the king to govern with the advice and consent of his leading men, ecclesiastical and lay, and insisted on the contractual aspect of kingship as expressed in the coronation oath. The “liberal” element tended to be weakened by the growth of royal law and bureaucracy, spreading their influence throughout the land; and under Edward I the “prerogatival” element seemed in many ways to be gaining ground. As Tout pointed out, both the actual situation and the outlook for future development had many features in common with that of contemporary France.2 But the weakness of Edward II and the difficulties of the English monarchy during the next century and a half gave the “liberal” element a chance to reassert itself. To some extent it expressed itself in the disruptive form of the over-mighty subject, who was to remain a problem for the crown until the sixteenth century. But the comparatively strong and ancient unity of England had encouraged the development of a sense of the community of the realm and the habit of seeking nation-wide remedies for grievances and making use of royal techniques and royal institutions. This period therefore saw not only the tendency for great families like the Percies and the Nevilles to seek from the crown lands, offices and other privileges, to such an extent that they could overawe and resist the king; there was also a development in the forms of counsel used by the king in the work of government and a widening of the groups who had a claim to give counsel and consent. It is true that Richard II believed in an exclusively “prerogatival” view of kingship, and if he had triumphed permanently, the “liberal” element in the traditions of the English monarchy might have been killed. But his downfall ensured that this strand would not only survive but be stronger than ever. By the fifteenth century the view had become established that the most solemn forms of counsel and consent could and must be sought in parliament, in which all estates of the realm were deemed to be represented;3 and by the end of the period even a conventional observer like Sir John Fortescue could see that the English monarchy already differed in kind from the French.1 Whereas the highest authority in the French government was always the king, in England the highest authority, at any rate for the important functions of taxation and legislation, already resided in the king in parliament. The events of this period therefore helped to lead the development of the English monarchy into a distinctive channel; and though this distinctive character was not yet strong enough to be beyond challenge, it was, as the Stuarts were to find, to prove too strong to be overthrown. It is therefore of both interest and importance to consider the development of the forms of counsel and consent in this period. 1

Cf. D.N. 221; and C.A.J.Armstrong, “The Inauguration Ceremonies of the Yorkist Kings and their title to the Throne”, T.R.Hist.S. 4th Series, 30 (1948). 2 T.F.Tout, France and England: their relations in the Middle Ages and now (M.U.P., 1922). 3 D.N. 225.

English historical documents

350

B. COUNCIL AND PARLIAMENT (i) Counsel and consent As the king’s government became ever more extensive and complicated, there was an ever-growing need for counsel and for the devolution of many of the king’s duties to councillors. This was a necessity for any sophisticated government, however autocratic; and what the king wanted was complete freedom to appoint and dismiss his officials and councillors as he wished, and to disregard or override their actions and advice if he chose.2 This came, however, to be one of the main issues of controversy in the government of England in this period. It was an issue of growing importance since the actions of the king’s officials and councillors affected all the king’s subjects with increasing frequency and force. The king’s council could take varying forms which, though historically only different forms of one body, were in this period diverging so much that they were becoming separate institutions. The king might hold a large and formal session of his council, to which he invited not only all his important officials— administrative, financial, judicial—but a large number of magnates, ecclesiastical and lay and occasionally even knights and burgesses. It was not easy for contemporaries to distinguish such a meeting of the Great Council, especially at the beginning of this period, from a meeting of parliament, which had but recently emerged as also an enlarged and solemn session of the king’s council. Edward III was anxious to conciliate the magnates and held a number of Great Councils,3 summoned at first, like parliaments, by writs of the most solemn seal, the Great Seal. But from the latter part of his reign Great Councils were summoned by writs of the Privy Seal, and this helped to draw meetings of the Great Council nearer to those of the continual council, especially as it was now becoming an established doctrine that parliamentary statutes were superior in authority to conciliar ordinances, even the ordinances of a Great Council. Nevertheless, Great Councils continued to be held and even met with rather greater frequency in the latter part of this period. The government of Henry VI became so weak in his later years that it was necessary to send formal writs of summons to magnates to try to compel their attendance, especially desirable when the chief political issue, after the loss of Gascony, had come to be the relations between the king and the lords.1 Edward IV summoned Great Councils frequently, but rather to consult the magnates without the expense of a meeting of parliament or the hazards of parliamentary debate. Allegiance was sworn in July 1471 by the peers to his son in a Great Council;2 and relations with Burgundy and Scotland were discussed in such meetings in 1477 and 1480. There is a danger of underestimating the importance of Great Councils in the government of the realm in this period because they have left no successors in contemporary England. Nevertheless the more important form of the king’s council was that which met informally and privately from day to day and was often called the privy, secret or continual council. This was the mainstay of the king in government, and as it was so 1

D.N. 224. D.N. 63. 3 E.g. the Great Council held in 1353 to regulate the staple of wool, Rot. Parl. II, 246. 2

The government of the realm

351

closely associated with him, its functions were in practice almost as wide as his. Its importance was reflected in the habit from the time of Edward I of getting the more permanent councillors to swear an oath to serve the king loyally, honestly and diligently and to keep his secrets;3 though the taking of such an oath did not entitle a man to be summoned nor was it taken by all who attended the council. Under Edward I the continual council was normally a body of expert administrators rather than of magnates. It consisted essentially of the chancellor, the treasurer, the chief officials of the royal household, some justices and Exchequer barons, some Chancery and wardrobe clerks; to these were added a variable number of prelates, barons, knights and royal confidants. But under Edward II the lords ordainers soon became fiercely distrustful of the king; and mindful of their claim to be the natural counsellors of the king, they used the method which was to recur again and again in times of crisis for the next century and a half. They demanded a council of aristocratic complexion and fixed composition; the king must consult it on all important matters and accept its advice. Edward II strongly opposed such encroachments on his freedom of action and so did his son; but Edward III realised the need for cooperation with the magnates and except in 1340 and 1341 there was no clash between him and his lords about the council. After 1370 this harmony disappeared. The Good Parliament in 1376 demanded that the council should be strengthened by ten or twelve lords who were always to be in attendance, and at least six or four should always be present for the transaction of current business.4 This demand was afterwards evaded; but during the minority of his grandson the magnates set up at their will councils which governed the country as regency councils. In July 1377 the whole council received its commission by letters patent for the first time.5 These aristocratic councils did not govern efficiently, they were expensive6 and the members strove amongst themselves. Partly because of this, partly because of his belief in the royal prerogative and his headstrong character, Richard as he grew up tried to assert provocatively his right to choose his own councillors.7 This provoked a demand from the aristocracy in 1386 that a continual council should be nominated in parliament; and in 1388 this demand was enforced. Richard gradually recovered command of the council after 1389,8 and filled it with his officials and supporters among the magnates. But in 1399 his downfall was a setback to high royalist doctrines in this as in other spheres. The articles of deposition accused him of having prevented the annual renewal of the council and of having filled it with his favourites.1 The Lancastrian period saw the heyday of the aristocratic conception of the king’s council. Henry IV could as king not easily repudiate the views he had supported as a 1

D.N. 240. For the reluctance of the lords to attend parliament, see D.N. 282, and J.S.Roskell, “The Problem of the Attendance of the Lords in Medieval Parliaments”, B.I.H.R. 29 (1956). 2 Rot. Parl. VI, 234. 3 Rot. Parl. V, 407. 4 D.N. 259. 5 D.N. 260. 6 D.N. 227, 235. 7 D.N. 60, 63. 8 D.N. 66. 1 D.N. 219.

English historical documents

352

baron. At his first parliament Archbishop Arundel told the assembly that “it is the will of the king to be counselled and governed by the honourable, wise, and discreet persons of his realm, and by their common counsel and assent to do the best for the government of himself and of his realm”.2 Henry’s reign began with a large and aristocratic council; but as he was determined to guard his prerogative and the magnates were busy with their own concerns, the council soon came to consist mainly of duchy of Lancaster officials and members of the royal household. But the troubles of the reign soon produced demands in parliament in 1404 and 1406 for named councils.3 Thenceforward the lords were increasingly prominent in the council until, in the closing years of the reign, when the king was ill, the council was dominated by one of two rival aristocratic factions.4 This aristocratic domination of the council continued under Henry V, whose preferences were aristocratic and whose need of united support for the war in France caused him to cultivate the good will of the lords. His military victories and personal character enabled him to dominate the situation; but after his death the magnates became all-powerful. During the minority of Henry VI the whole royal prerogative was in the hands of the council,5 which secured that the protector, Duke Humphrey, could not perform any act of government without its consent. The councillors were irremovable and filled their own vacancies; and the lords of the council enriched themselves with large salaries, gifts, expenses and bribes. Gradually they began to divide about sharing the spoils and Gloucester and Beaufort became the leaders of the two factions.6 The council became increasingly impotent to raise money adequately for the war in France or to keep order against aristocratic faction in England. Henry’s personal assumption of power in 1437 made little difference, except that he now incurred the responsibility for the mismanagement and disorder. He confirmed the existing councillors in their office,7 and they, used to power, did not hesitate to impose their will upon the weak and kindly king. As he fell more and more exclusively under the influence of Suffolk and the Beauforts in the forties, however, the council faded into insignificance, for the ruling group got its way more effectively and unobtrusively by direct influence with the king and queen. As salaries were no longer paid, and the council was now concerned with very minor matters, the magnates ceased to attend, and council meetings sometimes consisted of only two or three officials. The disasters in France and disorders at home aroused widespread dissatisfaction with the government, as shown by Jack Cade’s rebellion,8 and the Yorkist line of propaganda in the early fifties was to demand “government by council”.9 From 1453 onwards, whenever they were in power, they ostentatiously made much use of councils with wide powers; but by the late fifties the government was clearly in the hands of a party to which the opposition refused to submit, and the council became powerless to compel obedience or even attendance. 2

D.N. 221. D.N. 268. 4 Cf. Rot. Parl., III, 632. 5 D.N. 129, 230, 231, 275. 6 D.N. 125. 7 D.N. 234, 235. 8 D.N. 146. 9 D.N. 239. 3

The government of the realm

353

The accession of Edward IV inaugurated a revival of the monarchy which the events of 1471 were to confirm. The gradual recovery in the power of the crown affected both the composition and the use of the council. As the king by degrees asserted his authority, he made more use of knights, squires, doctors of law and clerks, and less of magnates. The alleged lack of great lords in the council and its domination by mere upstarts, was one of the grounds of (exaggerated) complaint of Warwick and Clarence when they rebelled in 1469.1 After 1471 Edward was so completely master of his realm that he could choose his councillors at his will and accept or reject their advice as he wished. Sir John Fortescue but reflected current opinion when about this time he wrote in his book on The Governance of England of the dangers of inefficiency, insubordination and corruption in an aristocratic council, and advised the king to have a council predominantly of officials and lesser men, devoted to his interests.2 Indeed, many of Edward’s acts were done by his own authority, without the formal attestation or assent of his council at all. It is now known that the Yorkist kings made much more use of councillors and the council than was formerly thought;3 but it remains true that the crown had recovered its authority. The council had once more become the servant of the crown and not its master. The functions of the “privy” or “continual” council remained as wide at the end of this period as they had been at the beginning. The council was for the day-to-day government of the realm the supreme advisory and executive body. It was consulted on questions of finance, the maintenance of order, the administration of the realm, the regulation of trade, the conduct of foreign affairs, the conclusion of treaties and questions of peace and war. It helped the king in the conduct of his own affairs, such as the administration of his estates; even Edward IV consulted it about the making of ordinances for the more economical government of the royal household.4 Councillors, acting either individually or collectively, were often empowered to take action for the advantage of the king and the realm, such as raising troops, repairing castles, issuing orders, making enquiries, paying wages.5 And since the king was the fountain of justice, the council exercised important and varied judicial functions. Specialised courts of law had of course by this time developed, but it was the council’s job to supervise them all and see that neither by sins of commission nor omission was the king’s justice thwarted. Thus it was prepared to investigate charges of miscarriage of justice in common law courts because of violence, intimidation, maintenance or bribery. It would examine cases where it was alleged that the application of rules of common law led to palpable inequity. It would hear cases beyond the scope of the common law—such as maritime law and alien merchants.6 It dealt with parliamentary petitions of a judicial nature with which parliament had not had time to deal before its dissolution or prorogation. For the convenience of 1

D.N. 178. D.N. 241. 3 D.N. 243; and see J.R.Lander, “The Yorkist Council and Administration”, E.H.R. 73 (1958), 27– 46; “Council, Administration, and Councillors, 1461 to 1485”, B.I.H.R. 32 (1959), 138–80. 4 D.N. 243. Cf. D.N. 237. 5 D.N. 231. 6 J.F.Baldwin, The King’s Council in England during the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1913), 272. 2

English historical documents

354

both litigants and their proctors the sessions of the council for judicial purposes were usually held at Westminster or London; and from the 1340s they often took place in a building specially erected for the council on the water front of Westminster Palace, the Star Chamber;1 but though most of the meetings were thereafter held here, they still took place in other spots from time to time. It is however clear that the court of Star Chamber was not a creation of Henry VII’s reign; it was the royal council which had often sat in the Star Chamber since the fourteenth century. And at least some of the processes characteristic of the Star Chamber date back to this period—the writ quibusdam certis de causis ordering a person to appear before the council for certain causes, thus giving no warning of the charges to be made against him,2 under penalty of sums varied in amount to the defendant’s supposed resources, the practice of requiring parties to answer questions under oath, even if they should incriminate themselves, the examination of persons separately to bring out inconsistencies of testimony, the use of the pillory, imprisonments, and crushing fines and sureties as favourite punishments. Contested cases were usually begun, not by Latin writ as at common law, but by bill or petition in the vernacular—French in the fourteenth century, English in the fifteenth—to which the defendant would be invited to reply, not orally in public session as was usual at common law, but by answer in writing. The plaintiff and defendant might then be required to confront each other with further written evidence; and the case proceeded with examinations of the parties and witnesses by the council, if necessary, until the truth seemed to emerge.3 From time to time efforts were made to make special arrangements for the cases of poor suitors, and under Richard III a particular facility was given for the presentation of such bills.4 The sessions of the council to deal with poor men’s bills met under the presidency of the keeper of the privy seal, who had become increasingly prominent in the fifteenth century as president in the chancellor’s absence. This was natural, for the privy seal had become the peculiarly characteristic instrument of the council in its work, both administrative and judicial. (ii) Parliament The most solemn seal of all, that of the Chancery, was, however, used to summon the most solemn form of the king’s council, that of parliament. This period is of crucial importance in the development of parliament, for it was in these years that it became a form of the king’s council clearly distinguished from all others, with its own established composition and powers, and its special importance in the government of the realm. This period also saw the establishment of the uniqueness of the English parliament as a representative assembly in comparison with the numerous such assemblies on the continent of Europe. In the reign of Edward I the enlarged and solemn sessions of the king’s council colloquially known as parliaments had presented many points of similarity to enlarged and solemn sessions of the king’s council in contemporary France. During the period 1327 to 1485 it became quite clear that the English parliament was to become neither a French parliament, a supreme judicial 1

D.N. 226, 242, Cf. D.N. 227. D.N. 298. 3 D.N. 236, 307. 4 D.N. 229 (1390), 244 (1483). 2

The government of the realm

355

court composed of professional lawyers, nor an estates-general, a body of representatives of different classes of men in the kingdom. The events of Edward II’s reign had contributed to this differentiation which, however, did not become decisive until the reign of his son. In the days of Edward I parliament had been very much the king’s parliament, with the king dominating the proceedings and directing the course of business. The most essential element in its composition was the king’s “continual councillors”, such as his chief officials and justices, though the king might often wish to discuss the business of the realm with his magnates, and sometimes summon representatives of the shires and boroughs to give advice and aid when asked. The business could be as wide as the king’s concerns,1 but was always subject to the king’s wishes. In the reign of Edward II the magnates opposed to him had seen the advantages of legalising their designs by making use of this specially solemn and enlarged assembly of the king’s council, which was therefore in spirit transformed while the ordainers had the upper hand. The magnates and not the king and his confidants dominated the proceedings, and the debates and decisions were often opposed to the king’s wishes. But after his victory in 1322 the royalists tried to put the clock back to Edward I’s time so far as the king’s domination of parliament was concerned; and when Edward II was deposed, royalist measures like the Statute of York were not repealed. Nevertheless, Edward III had to accept the shift of balance which had occurred in his father’s day and indeed consolidate it. Not only did he come to power in 1330 as the result of an alliance with the magnates,2 headed by the brother of his father’s chief opponent, but both his character and the circumstances persuaded him to solve the problem of restoring the prestige of the monarchy by glorious foreign war based on harmony at home. Hence he had to accede tacitly to the claim of the magnates that they were the king’s chief councillors in parliament. In his reign the lords, spiritual and temporal, numbering about a hundred in all, were not only always in a large majority in parliament, but the justices and royal officials in the council in parliament tended to sink from principal councillors to mere advisers. Edward I often had as many as thirty such officials at a parliament, but Edward III rarely invited more than ten, and sometimes less than five. Moreover, the same lords tended now to be summoned time after time, and by 1341 they had arrived at a conception of parliamentary peerage, based on the idea that some lords were so regularly summoned by individual writ as to be members of parliament by right. In the crisis of that year they claimed that “the peers of the land ought not to be arrested, nor brought to judgement, except in parliament, and by their peers”.3 Though Edward subsequently repudiated his concession of this and other claims, as obtained under duress,4 he nevertheless tacitly acknowledged the notion of parliamentary peerage. It thenceforth became part of the accepted custom of the constitution, and was profoundly to affect the English concept of nobility. Instead of nobility being a matter of blood, transmitted to all one’s descendants, as in most countries of western Europe in these 1

J.G.Edwards, “Justice in Early English Parliaments”, B.I.H.R. 27 (1954), 39; cf. R.F.Treharne, “The Nature of Parliament in the reign of Henry III”, E.H.R. 74 (1959), 590–610. 2 D.N. 5. 3 D.N. 247. 4 D.N. 250.

English historical documents

356

centuries, nobility in England came in this period to be limited increasingly in general estimation to those lords who received a personal summons to parliament. By the end of the reign of Edward III the lords were so firmly entrenched as the king’s councillors in parliament par excellence that they could exercise the judicial functions of parliament, even if this meant trying ministers and favourites of the king in opposition to his wishes, as in 1376.1 In the next reign this claim was carried to the point where the lay lords of parliament passed sentences of death on the king’s confidants, as in 1388;2 the bishops and abbots abstained because by canon law they could not be parties to the shedding of blood. In spite of appointing a lay proctor to act for them in the trials of 1397,3 the result was that the spiritual lords came to be considered not so fully peers of parliament as the lords temporal. Under the Lancastrians the aristocracy continued to be powerful and so the king could not prevent them from strengthening their position in parliament. The tendency increased for the summons to become a right, even an hereditary right; and by the early fifteenth century the lords of parliament felt so assured of their places that they began to be interested in questions of precedence.4 By the middle of the fifteenth century the judicial privilege of lay peers was extended to their wives. In 1441 the Duchess of Gloucester was tried and condemned for witchcraft by an ecclesiastical tribunal, although she was the wife of the heir presumptive.5 Probably because of this it was enacted in 1442 that the wives or widows of peers of parliament should be treated as peeresses, entitled to the same judicial privileges as their husbands.6 But even by 1458 the position of the lords in parliament was not yet so entrenched that they had established an hereditary claim to a summons. The king still exercised some choice in the summons of lords to parliament, and some discretion in the qualifications for membership.7 The list of bishops and abbots which was to remain unchanged until the dissolution of the monasteries reached its final form by the end of the reign of Edward III; but as late as 1478 Edward IV deprived George Neville Duke of Bedford of his dukedom and all his titles because he was neither owner of nor heir to enough land.8 The predominance of the lords in parliament also had important effects on the business transacted there. In the reign of Edward I “Parliament was an omnicompetent organ of government at the summit of lay affairs in England”;9 and he made much use of it to discuss with the magnates affairs of state, such as war, peace and taxation. But at this time parliament was already a place of resort for suitors, some asking for administrative action, even more, it would seem, requesting judicial help. Petitions rapidly became so numerous that receivers and triers of petitions had to be appointed to prevent the 1

D.N. 259. D.N. 63, 64. 3 D.N. 71, 265. 4 D.N. 262, 274. 5 D.N. 514. 6 D.N. 278. 7 Debates in the Lords were, however, by now of such importance that a record of them was evidently being kept to supplement the formal and official record of the Rolls of Parliament. See D.N. 280, 285. 8 D.N. 289. 9 J.G.Edwards, op. cit., 53. 2

The government of the realm

357

consideration of them from taking up the whole time of parliament; and judicial petitions almost fill the early rolls of parliament. Moreover, while the king and his “continual council” dominated parliament, it was very easy for the hearing of a petition begun in parliament to be concluded in council; and the form of statutes was often left to the king’s professional councillors. But in the fourteenth century parliament and the “privy council” became much more clearly distinguished and the former came to be dominated by the magnates. Until the position of the lords in parliament became completely assured, they tended to be jealous of the council; and the policy of Edward III meant that he must pay heed to their fears and wishes. So in his reign the lords, usually supported by the commons, insisted that statutes of parliament were superior to ordinances of the council; and various ordinances were re-enacted as statutes to give them greater dignity and permanence.1 The council continued to dispense individuals from the operation of a statute, but this was increasingly resented. Moreover, the lords of parliament in the reigns of Edward III and Richard II were loth to allow the triers of petitions to deal with matters which might raise important points of judicial principle and so, said the magnates, should be dealt with in full sessions of parliament. As the time of the lords in parliament was now so much taken up with political and financial matters, this attitude resulted increasingly in an accumulation of petitions which the lords had no time to answer. They would not commit the work to the council because of their jealousy of that body; and so they made repeated use of special committees of lords to deal with any petitions still unanswered when parliament dispersed.2 Richard’s manipulation, however, of such a committee in 1398 for his high-handed purposes gave a great setback to this method; and under the Lancastrians it was undisputed that the lords in parliament were superior to the “continual councillors”. Hence the lords could now without risk of loss of dignity or power turn over unanswered petitions to the council, and under Henry VI this was repeatedly done.3 At first sight this might seem to be a reversion to something like the position in the days of Edward I; but in actual fact the intervening years had wrought a permanent change on the whole course of petitioning to the king. In the first place, the delays in securing replies to bills to parliament in the mid-fourteenth century caused an increasing number of petitioners to turn direct to the king and the continual council. Especially was this the case if the petition was one of grace, requesting the king’s favour, rather than one of right, requiring judicial or quasi-judicial action. Indeed, the king and council in turn began to be so overwhelmed with petitions of grace that they transferred some of the more subtly difficult cases to the chancellor, as we shall see. If, however, a petitioner of the late fourteenth century should wish to apply to parliament, he must do something which would attract attention to his request amongst the jostling throng, lest it should sink, unanswered, into oblivion. One device was to allege that his request affected, or was shared by, a considerable number of people; and Miss Rayner has shown us that at this time we must not take at their face value petitions purporting to come from “the commons of Kent”, “the clothmakers of the West Country” or even “the commons of the

1

E.g. D.N. 562 (Statute of Labourers, 1351). Rot. Parl., II, 149. 3 E.g. D.N. 233. Cf. D.N. 232 2

English historical documents

358

realm”; for there was no legal monopoly of such terms.4 But the use of such devices was probably not such a sure way of securing attention for a petition as obtaining the support of some important group in parliament. From the late fourteenth century more and more petitions therefore sought the backing of the commons of parliament. An inspection of the unprinted petitions has shown that in this matter the printed petitions may fairly be taken as representative of the trend; and whereas of over 160 private petitions printed in the Rolls of Parliament for the reign of Richard II only two are addressed to the commons, of 348 private petitions printed there for the reign of Henry VI no less than 120 are addressed to them.1 This is but one of the many indications of the growing importance of the commons in parliament. In the reign of Edward I the commons had not been an essential part of parliament, and if they came, their role was the relatively humble one of devising means of carrying into effect what the king and his councillors might wish them to do. And at this time there were no united commons—only representatives of the shires and boroughs, of whom the knights of the shires considered themselves distinct from, and superior to, the burgesses. But during the troubles of the reign of Edward II their support had been sought by both king and opposition; and in 1322 the victorious royalists even made their assent necessary to fundamental legislation, as an additional safeguard against baronial ordinances. When Edward III came to power in 1330 he needed the support of the country gentry and the burgesses, as well as the magnates, and the former were more regularly summoned to parliaments henceforth; though they failed to be called to four out of twenty-five of the parliaments which met between 1327 and 1336. But during the next two decades Edward needed all the money and political support he could get for the war in France. Especially in the first phase of the war he tried to raise large sums without parliamentary approval, particularly by taxes and exactions to entice loans from Italian and English financiers.2 But this proved an uncertain source and in any event aroused the hostility of parliament, thus threatening the united political backing which was also indispensable. Edward therefore turned increasingly to parliament and this meant consulting the knights and burgesses, who alone could say whether the communities of the shires and boroughs which they represented could and would contribute the taxes demanded. So the knights and burgesses became in these years regular members of parliament; and as they came so frequently (Edward held forty-eight parliaments in fifty years) and were confronted when they came with demands for taxes that affected both town and country, they developed the habit of meeting together as an assembly of representatives of communities.3 The knights might feel socially superior to the burgesses, and no burgess was to be elected speaker until 1544; but the repeated common demands drew them all together into one assembly.4 As the strongest bond between them at this stage was financial, it was natural that their strongest demand was for no taxation 4

D.Rayner, “The Form and Machinery of the ‘Commune Petition’ in the 14th Century”, E.H.R. 56 (1941), 198, 549 ff. Cf. D.N. 264. 1 A.R.Myers, “Parliamentary Petitions in the Fifteenth Century”, E.H.R. 52 (1937), 400. 2 Cf. E.B.Fryde, “Edward III’s Wool Monopoly of 1337”, History, 37 (1954), and “The English Farming of the Customs, 1343–51”, T.R.Hist.S. 5th Series, 9 (1959). 3 For an example of knights and burgesses meeting separately, see D.N. 245; for a meeting of the burgesses separately as late as 1372, see D.N. 256. 4 Cf. D.N. 46, 259.

The government of the realm

359

without parliamentary consent. Edward was ready to grant this demand in the case of the tax on moveables, or “tenths and fifteenths” (which became stereotyped after 1334 as a measure of conciliation on his part) since it was clearly levied by shire1 and by borough; but he did not see why he should give way in the case of lucrative taxes like customs duties, levied at the ports. The commons were determined on this point however; and the king therefore had no recourse but to yield, though his efforts to recover what he regarded as his prerogative in this matter forced them to repeat the demand.2 By the end of the reign the commons had won recognition of this claim. Though this right was to be challenged or circumvented by the government from time to time for the next three centuries, the acknowledgement of it put the commons in a strong bargaining position. Anxious not only for money but for political backing, Edward tried to get the commons sometimes to give an opinion on the conduct of the war; but by 1348, if not before, the commons had realised that if they fell into the trap of advising on ends, they might well be called upon to will the means in the form of taxation. So they refused to be drawn into responsibility for decisions of policy;3 but they did want to see that the taxes they granted were well spent. Hence even by 1340 they were asking for the parliamentary audit of tax accounts,4 and by 1353 they were appropriating a tax on wool to the sole purpose of the war. By 1376 there were not only widespread suspicions of incompetence and corruption in the government but the commons had the confidence born of nearly fifty years as a recognised and respected constituent of parliament. Hence they now dared to attack ministers and officials who had the confidence of the king and the court; and when one of them resisted, the commons stumbled in reply on to the method of impeachment, whereby they collectively made a detailed accusation on the grounds of exorbitant (and illegal) usury, corruption, mismanagement and illegality, and demanded the trial of the accused by the lords, acting in the capacity of judges of the high court of parliament,5 The condemnations of the accused were reversed in the next parliament; but the precedent of impeachment was not forgotten, nor the claim of the commons to criticise the expenditure of the government in less drastic ways. In 1386 Richard II sharply repudiated the right of the commons to criticise the expenditure of the royal household; but the only result of his action was to alienate the commons and convert them to an alliance with the appellant lords which was to bring him to disaster in 1388.6 In 1387 Richard had persuaded the judges at Nottingham to condemn as contrary to the royal prerogative and as a treasonable act any attempt of either lords or commons to proceed in parliament to items of business other than those indicated by the king, thus quashing as illegal any attempts at criticism. But the Merciless Parliament of 1388 not only condemned the judgements of 1387 as unlawful. In reply to the king’s last attempts to save his friends by questioning the legality of parliamentary appeals, the lords came out with the declaration that parliament was not bound by the rules of either common or 1

D.N. 556. D.N. 254, 258. Cf. D.N. 228. 3 D.N. 251. 4 Rot. Parl. II, 114; the request was conceded in 1341, D.N. 248. For grants made on conditions, see D.N. 246, 249, 258, 261. 5 D.N. 46, 259. 6 D.N. 60. Cf. the demand for such reform in 1381, D.N. 54. 2

English historical documents

360

civil law but could determine its own procedure, and that the lords of parliament had the right to be judges of such a case,7 with the king’s assent. It is true that in 1398 the proceedings of the Merciless Parliament were annulled and the pronouncements of the judges at Nottingham in 1387 were declared to be just1 but in the next year Richard himself was swept away. Richard’s fall spelt the end of his attempt, as seen in the judges’ declarations of 1387 and his actions from 1397 to 1399, to re-interpret parliament as solely the instrument of the king’s will.2 The reaction against the tyrannical acts of Richard II meant not only the triumph of the trend towards the development of parliament as a cooperative assembly in which king, lords and commons all had their rights. The financial impoverishment of the Lancastrians, the heavy demands of the renewed French war, the effects of the deposition of Richard II, all combined to make the Lancastrian kings more dependent on parliament and to enhance still further its importance. And in this development the prestige and cohesion of the commons especially increased. Henry IV could not venture to repress the commons when they asked for the redress of grievances before the voting of supplies, demanded parliamentary auditing of tax accounts, insisted on the dismissal of unpopular ministers, requested a nominated council whose advice the king should be bound to take, attacked abuses in the government, denounced it for its failure to keep order and protect the realm and even criticised the cost of the royal household.3 It is true that the commons asked in 1399 for a declaration that the judicial power of parliament resided in the lords alone4 for they did not wish to be involved in perilous judicial decisions like some of those of the previous reign. But in 1407 they insisted that the initiative in voting money must reside in them alone and that the king and lords must not discuss beforehand the amount of taxes which they might deem necessary,5 Henry V was in a stronger position and after Agincourt the grateful commons voted him the customs duties for life,6 but even in his reign the commons asked, without success, that the king would limit himself to granting or denying their petitions without amending them.7 And when disaster in France came in the reign of Henry VI the commons revived the weapon of impeachment against the king’s chief minister.8 Not only the boldness but the prestige of the commons increased in the Lancastrian period. The financial straits of the first two Lancastrians were so great that parliament was summoned twenty-one times in twenty-three years, and there was often more than one session of the same parliament. The result was that the same members were frequently re-elected and came to know each other well. This encouraged them to improve their methods of doing business. They began to standardise their methods of authenticating their assent to bills and petitions, and to scrutinise them more effectively.9 7

D.N. 63. Rot. Parl. III, 358. 2 D.N. 74. Also D.N. 69, 71, 217, 218. Cf. D.N. 266 for satire on Richard’s influence and on procedure in parliament at the end of his reign. 3 D.N. 267, 268; and cf. Rot. Parl. III, 572 ff. 4 D.N. 82. 5 D.N. 270. 6 D.N. 273. 7 D.N. 272. Cf. D.N. 252. 8 Rot. Parl. V, 176 ff. 9 Cf. D.N. 283, 292. 1

The government of the realm

361

More and more influential groups and people asked the commons to adopt their petition and make it their own as a “common” or public petition.10 More and more of the bills which had originally been initiated by or presented to king and lords were sent down to the commons for their approval. Hitherto the assent of the commons to legislation, though increasingly sought, had not been a necessity; during this period their assent became essential to the validity of an act of parliament. Even a great treaty like that of Troyes was submitted to the commons for their approval.1 Perhaps in part because bills initiated by the king had increasingly to run the gauntlet not only of the lords but of the commons, the government began in the reign of Henry VI to present to parliament bills in the form of the statute it wished to enact. The practice was then imitated by the commons, both in their public petitions and in the private petitions which they sponsored. The notion became more usual during this period to regard parliament as composed of three estates, lords spiritual, lords temporal and the commons, who between them represented all the natural social orders.2 Hence a statute made with their assent bound the whole of the realm in secular matters; and the king in parliament was therefore becoming the highest authority in the kingdom. The growing prestige of the commons was reflected in various ways. The Lancastrian period saw the first attempts of the commons to claim parliamentary privileges, such as freedom from arrest, for members and their servants,3 and freedom of speech.4 Generally speaking, these attempts were successful when no great persons were involved; but if they threatened the interests of the Beauforts or the Duke of York, they were overridden without hesitation, as we see in the cases of Thomas Yonge and Thomas Thorpe,5 This period also witnessed the first restrictions on the right to elect the “knights of the shire”, including the famous Forty-Shilling Freeholder Act,6 and an act of 1445 that required the county representatives to be either knights or squires, gentlemen born.7 And in spite of an act of 1413 requiring electors and elected to be bona fide residents of their constituencies,8 non-burgesses began to compete for borough seats. In the early days of parliament there had been reluctance to undertake such an onerous and humble duty as that of member of parliament; now, as Professors McKisack and Roskell especially have shown, the prestige and power of the commons was so considerable that country gentry, lawyers and civil servants, if unable to gain one of the coveted county seats, were glad to be returned as member for a borough.9 This arrangement suited both sides, for the borough would gain an influential member, who would secure favours for it more readily, and often serve without wages. By 1450 half the borough representatives were nonresident.10 Both king and lords were coming to recognise the advantages of having 10

Myers, op. cit. 401 ff. D.N. 113. 2 D.N. 176, 225. 3 D.N. 268, 288. 4 D.N. 267. 5 D.N. 281, 284. 1 D.N. 277. The statue was inspired both by the growing prestige of the commons and by the need to check growing disorder at elections. 7 Statutes of the Realm, II, 342. 8 D.N. 271. Cf. D.N. 269. 9 D.N. 287, 290. Cf. the dignified state expected of the representatives of London as early as 1389, D.N. 263; but cf. D.N. 291. 1

English historical documents

362

their supporters in the commons; but in spite of the disorder of the period even powerful magnates seem to have got their clients elected by influence and management rather than by force. By the time of the Yorkist kings the composition and connections of the commons already have a look which will be familiar to the student of Tudor parliaments. Indeed, in most respects the parliaments of the Yorkists are more akin in atmosphere to those of the early Tudors than to those of the Lancastrians. The recovery of the monarchy was reflected in its relations with parliament. A less impoverished crown did not need to ask parliament so often for money, and was to that extent less dependent on it. Henry V had summoned eleven parliaments in nine years; Edward IV held only seven in twenty-two years. After 1475 Edward IV was more financially independent than any king had been for nearly three centuries; and during the next seven years only one parliament was held.1 Its main business was not to ask the commons for a grant but to accuse and condemn the king’s brother; but whereas in the reign of Henry IV or Henry VI neither lords nor commons had hesitated to attack the mighty ones of the land, now no one dared to speak in accusation of the Duke of Clarence except the king. Like Henry VII, Edward IV claimed the infrequency of his parliaments as a relief of his subjects;2 and when parliament did meet, the initiative had passed back into the hands of the king. There were no more impeachments or attacks on royal administration and expenditure, save when Richard III for his own ends attacked the record of his brother’s government.3 Most of the important business was initiated by the government and prepared in advance by his councillors, who were represented in both “houses”. As Fortescue said, parliaments would do more good in a month to the amending of the law than they would otherwise in a year, if the councillors previously debated and prepared the business.4 Richard II would have approved the way in which the king now summoned, prorogued and dismissed parliaments at his pleasure, determined their agenda and directed their business. But the history of the intervening age of the Lancastrian kings had not been without its effect. It had strengthened the tradition that the king could neither levy taxes nor change the laws without the assent of parliament; and as Fortescue could see from his experience of high office in England and his exile in France, this had made monarchy in England of a different kind from that in France,5 Parliamentary control of taxation might at times be dodged by tricks such as that of Edward IV’s benevolences; and the power of that control was reduced by parliamentary grants of the customs duties for the life of the king in 1415, 1453, 1465 and 1484.6 Parliamentary control of legislation might be sometimes mitigated by devices such as dispensations and ordinances in council. But the authority of parliament was too firmly rooted now to be ignored, and the very fact that the king still retained so much initiative in the conduct of parliament, if he used his powers skilfully and tactfully, was an inducement to him to use parliament, not to flout

10

J.S.Roskell, The Commons in the Parliament of 1422 (Manchester, 1954), 134. D.N. 199. 2 D.N. 330. 3 D.N. 208. 4 D.N. 241. 5 D.N. 224. 6 D.N. 273, 292, for the grants of 1415 and 1484. 1

The government of the realm

363

it.7 It would not be long before Henry VIII would show Europe how parliament could be used to strengthen the royal authority, not diminish it. C. THE ROYAL COURTS OF LAW Parliament in the fifteenth century occupied much less of most Englishmen’s attention than the courts of law. In his book De Laudibus Legum Anglie Fortescue devoted only three hundred words to the making of statutes, and almost all the rest of the book to the administration of justice. In this sphere the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries saw very important developments. In the reign of Edward I the king still retained a large measure of control over the operations of his courts. The courts of Exchequer and Common Pleas had been independent of the royal household for some generations; but Edward could move these courts to York for six years because he was so much engaged in Scotland in these years, and the court of King’s Bench still had an intimate connection with the king’s council. It was still possible for the king and his councillors to influence the development of the common law without formality; for not only were the judges constantly in attendance on the king’s council but the chancellor, who issued the writs, was an intimate companion of the king. But when Edward I’s strong hand was removed, the forces which he had checked began to exert their full force. After over a hundred years of development the common law was growing so complicated that it was becoming difficult, if not impossible, for judges to cope with it without being trained in it from youth. The same complications were encouraging the rise of classes of pleaders and attorneys to represent litigants; and in the early fourteenth century the first of the inns of court, Lincoln’s Inn, began to train such pleaders for their work. Early in the reign of Edward II the most successful of the pleaders started to be distinguished as serjeants-atlaw; and from their ranks the king soon began to choose the justices. During the course of the fourteenth century the serjeants became a close guild in complete control of the legal profession, and they alone were admitted to the most lucrative court, that of Common Pleas. Their earnings were enormous and they began to rank as knights; in the poll-tax of 1379 they were taxed at the same rate as barons.1 When Fortescue wrote about the common law in the late fifteenth century he compared the serjeants to doctors in the universities;2 and although the doctors taught and the serjeants did not, the comparison drew attention to the important fact that the Inns of Court, and their subsidiaries the Inns of Chancery, had grown in effect into universities for common lawyers, providing not only legal training but a general education and a common life. The effect of these developments was to make the legal profession more selfcontained. Common lawyers became prouder of their own system of law, and less receptive to new ideas, for they now knew no other training in law. In the thirteenth 7

Even the Yorkists, with their high monarchical theory of indefeasible hereditary right, could use parliament to record the king’s title (Rot. Parl. V, 463–7; D.N. 208), to declare valid the acts of the “usurping” Lancastrians except those affecting the succession (D.N. 286); and an Act of parliament was of such consequence that it was worth an intrigue to alter it before it could take effect (Rot. Parl. VI, 29–30). 1 D.N. 50. 2 S.B.Chrimes De Laudibus Legum Anglie (Cambridge, 1949), 33; cf. D.N. 304.

English historical documents

364

century judges had been willing to assuage the growing rigidity and technicality of common law by the application of notions of equity; by the fourteenth century such flexibility had gone.3 Yet an increasingly complex and changing society could not be constrained for all time by rules worked out in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The common law tended to assume, in civil cases, that it was dealing with land, which could not run away, and its often leisurely processes were moulded by that assumption. It was reluctant to admit the evidence of parties and witnesses, preferring to rely on the verdict of juries given in open court. Influenced by the circumstances of its early development, it attached great importance to the exact wording of writs, records and other documents; and it was now possible for injustice to arise from an action at common law if the writ were incorrectly worded or wrongly chosen, or if the words of a record, strictly interpreted, did not allow for a righteous solution. Moreover, the common law was now so complicated that an alert litigant, aided by a cunning attorney and a skilful serjeant, could often find quite legal means to stave off a decision, or even progress in a law suit, for months or years; and during this time an unscrupulous defendant might hope that the plaintiff would become exhausted and impecunious, and would in any event be enjoying all this time the fruits of his wrong-doing.1 As hopes of the provision of remedies for such defects by the common lawyers themselves began to fade, persons who wanted extraordinary relief began to petition the king. We have seen how a great number of such petitions were presented to the king in parliament in the reign of Edward I, and how the developments of the fourteenth century tended to deter petitioners from running the risk of not getting an answer to a parliamentary petition. Aggrieved persons therefore began to turn increasingly to the king in council to such an extent that the continual council itself, immersed as we have seen in a great range of duties, could not cope with the mass of such petitions pouring in almost every day. It therefore began to refer many of the requests to the chancellor. He was more constantly in attendance at council meetings than anyone else, and so was intimately in touch with its activities and wishes. He had a large and well-organised office staff to help him with any investigations he might need to make to settle a dispute.2 He was in close touch with the processes of common law, for all the writs were issued in his name and he had frequent discussions with the judges. He was (save for the exceptional years of 1341 and 1371 to 1376) a bishop, who had usually been trained in civil and canon law and could therefore bring to bear on any legal problem the knowledge of the principles and methods of these two great systems. He was therefore peculiarly well suited to deal with disputes which needed learning, expertise and patience for their settlement. Such a case could arise where two parties had made a deed of contract, with the stipulation of a penalty for non-fulfilment. Usually if the defendant had failed to carry out the agreed contract or covenant, all that the common law court was prepared to do was to enforce the letter of the deed, i.e. award the stipulated penalty, whereas the plaintiff might 3

1

There was occasionally an adaptation to changed needs; cf. D.N. 294.

M.Hastings, The Court of Common Pleas in Fifteenth-Century England (New York, 1947), ch. 15: “Delays and Hindrances to Justice”, 211–36. 2 Cf. D.N. 312.

The government of the realm

365

ardently prefer the specific performance of the action laid down in the contract. The chancellor might well find on investigation that it was indeed more equitable to issue an injunction ordering specific performance of the contract.3 Still more important was the demand in the fourteenth century for the enforcement of enfeoffments to uses, or, as we might say, trusts in landed property. The device of property held in trust for the use of someone other than the legal owner had been popularised by the friars in the late thirteenth century, since they could legally own no property but (except for the Spiritual Franciscans) now wished to enjoy it. The method soon spread widely in the lay world, especially among the nobles, who might thus escape not only feudal dues, but acquire more control over the descent of estates after death. But the common law gave no remedy to the person for whose benefit the land was conveyed if the trustee abused this trust, because it fastened its attention on the conveyance of legal title recorded in the deed. To provide an equitable decision in such a case, what was wanted was not the formalism of the common law but a thorough investigation by a trained and subtle mind to determine whether there had been an intention to defraud. For such an investigation the chancellor was pre-eminently suited; and from the early fourteenth century he was increasingly occupied with such cases.1 His jurisdiction in such cases became so normal that litigants began to address their petitions direct to him, by-passing the council; though for generations he continued to give his decisions in the name of the king, or the king and council. At last in 1474 the chancellor ventured to acknowledge realities by making a decree in his own name—appropriately in a case of a dispute about enfeoffment to uses.2 As the popularity of the chancellor’s jurisdiction increased, the chancellor began to receive an increasing number of requests for swift action in cases where it was alleged, not so much that the common law was prevented by its own rules from giving a remedy, but that its course was perverted or even barred by the use of violence, intimidation, maintenance, or corruption.3 In such cases what might well be needed was not so much learning and acuteness in moral theology but speedy, resolute and strong action. Even in the days of Henry VI the government was trying to cope with some of these cases in Star Chamber and by the use of special commissions of oyer and terminer. Edward IV put more vigour into such remedies, and even sat in 1462 in the court of King’s Bench where the king had not appeared in person for generations.4 But for the kind of cases for which the chancellor was pre-eminently suited, patient and skilful investigation by an acute mind, rather than speed and might, were specially needed; and for such cases the chancellor adopted and developed the methods used by the council. Before him, too, contested cases normally began with the bill (in French or English) of the plaintiff, and 3

For another kind of injunction for specific performance, cf. D.N. 302. On the one hand, petitions to parliament were being referred to the chancellor as early as 1315 because the common law could provide no remedy in these cases (e.g. Rot. Parl. I, 340); on the other hand, as early as 1352 parliament secured the king’s promise that the council would not proceed without indictment or common law process on an original writ (Rot. Parl. III, 239). Cf. D.N. 298. 2 D.N. 305. 3 Cf. D.N. 303, 306, 307, 722, 725, 726, 729. Cf. D.N. 295 for seignorial influence even on justices of assize. 4 A Brief Latin Chronicle, in Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, ed. J.Gairdner (Camden Series, 1880), p. 175. 1

English historical documents

366

the written answer of the defendant. The case might well proceed with written replication and rejoinder, even sometimes rebuttal and counter-rebuttal, until the chancellor was satisfied that nothing further was to be gained by written statements. He might then examine the parties and witnesses in private, one by one if need be, to discover possible discrepancies in testimony. As with cases before the council, both parties and witnesses were commonly summoned by writ “quibusdam certis de causis”, i.e. not for a carefullyspecified reason, as at common law, but “for certain causes”, under pain of an intimidating fine for disobedience. When the chancellor came to give a decision, he was more apt to decide upon grounds of morality than upon those of technical law.1 All this was plainly a divergence from the principles and practice of common law, and occasioned grumbles by the common lawyers and the institution in which they were usually strongly represented, the commons in parliament. But generally speaking the common law judges and the chancellor worked together in our period in a spirit of cooperation. They were constantly in touch in the council and discussed difficult cases together in the Exchequer chamber.2 Although friction appeared when the haughty Wolsey was chancellor, real conflict did not break out until the days of James I. The jurisdiction of the chancellor was not the only one to develop in the fourteenth century to ease the labours of the council and supplement the deficiencies of the increasingly rigid common law. The court of admiralty developed a jurisdiction over maritime and commercial cases and the earliest distinct reference to the court occurs in 1361, when it was said: “this court, which is the office of the admiral, will not be ruled by the common law of the land, but is ruled by equity and maritime law”.3 The court of the constable and marshal took more definite form as a result of the great war in France in Edward III’s reign, and a statute of 1390 defined its jurisdiction as including deeds of arms and war outside the realm, and also things touching war within the realm which could not be determined by common law.4 Yet there continued to be complaints that the court continued to hear cases which could have been dealt with by common law. Appeals of treason could be heard there, and the court was much used for such cases under Edward IV.5 There was also a development in this period of the jurisdiction of the court of the marshalsea, held by the steward and marshal of the royal household, to deal with pleas of the crown, and pleas of debt, covenant and trespass, concerning members of the royal household;6 but petitions of the commons in Edward III’s reign secured a limitation of its powers to cases arising within twelve miles of the king’s court. D. ROYAL ADMINISTRATION: CHANCERY, PRIVY SEAL AND SIGNET Nevertheless, the rise of the chancellor’s jurisdiction was the most important of these supplements to the ordinary courts of common law; and the chancellor’s increasing absorption in his judicial and political duties had important repercussions on his secretarial functions. Even in the thirteenth century, the increasingly official character of 1

E.g. D.N. 307. D.N. 300. 3 D.N. 293. Cf. D.N. 296. Towns sometimes tried to exclude the admiral’s representatives (C. Pat.R. 1429–36, 471; C.Pat.R. 1441–6, 439). 4 D.N. 297. Cf. D.N. 299. 5 D.N. 301; J.Warkworth, Chronicle (Camden Soc., 1839), 5, 9. 6 D.N. 306. 2

The government of the realm

367

the great seal, kept by the chancellor, had caused the king to create a private or privy seal, which could be used more speedily and secretly. It was kept by a confidential official in the royal household, the controller of the king’s wardrobe, a room opening off the king’s bedchamber. With the aid of the privy seal to authenticate their documents the clerks of the wardrobe had been able to undertake not only secretarial but financial work for the king where speed, secrecy and flexibility were desirable; for both the Chancery and the Exchequer were becoming official departments, with elaborate routines to which they were already strongly attached.1 By 1310 the barons had realised something of the administrative importance of the wardrobe, and in the ordinances of 1311 it was laid down that the keeper of the privy seal should be an official separate from the controller and appointed only with the consent of the magnates in parliament. The ordinances were very imperfectly carried out and the barons were in any event not aiming to destroy the administrative importance of the royal household. Nevertheless, the troubles of his reign probably encouraged Edward II and his advisers to hasten a process which had already begun—the development of the chamber as a secretarial and financial office, with its own seal, the secret seal. This was soon being used to authenticate the king’s personal correspondence and to express his personal wishes in any kind of business;2 but this did not mean that the keeper of the privy seal ceased at once to be a confidential servant of the king. When Edward III came to power in 1330 he did so with the good will of the magnates; and so he might hope that they would not object to his re-establishment of the unity of the administration under royal direction. This was in line with the main tradition and it seemed to him necessary to carry out successfully the policy of war abroad, which the magnates wanted almost as much as he did. Hence in 1338, when Edward was eager to coordinate all elements of the administration to produce as much money as possible for the campaign in Flanders, he issued the Ordinances of Walton.3 The prime means of coordination was to be the privy seal. Warrants of privy seal were to be necessary for almost all payments under both the great seal and the exchequer seal, the clerk of the privy seal’s roll was to be used in the audit of Exchequer accounts, and the wardrobe of the household itself was in financial matters brought under the control of the privy seal. But this scheme failed to produce the supplies that the king wanted, and his resulting anger against the Chancery and Exchequer because of what he suspected to be their “goslow” policy provoked the crisis of 1340–1. This impressed on Edward III the need to preserve harmony at home. Hence the policy of the Ordinances of Walton was discreetly dropped. The Chancery and Exchequer were allowed to resume their traditional methods and autonomy, and the keeper of the privy seal reverted to his role of becoming an officer of state. There was plenty for him to do, for as a member of the continual council he was constantly used to convey its orders and wishes to other persons and departments, and to foreign courts. The privy seal became the recognised means for the council and other organs of the government to move the great seal, with its control over the immense royal patronage,4 ecclesiastical and lay, and to send orders to the officials of the Exchequer with their important resources. Council 1

Cf. D.N. 311, 312, 313. D.N. 308. 3 D.N. 309. 4 Cf. D.N. 312, 385, 579, 594. 2

English historical documents

368

meetings were often summoned by letters of privy seal, which continued to be during this period the linchpin of the administration.1 Its place as the king’s personal instrument was, however, of necessity taken by a more personal seal associated with the king’s chamber. During the 1330s Edward III had not only a secret seal for his personal concerns but created a griffin seal which was used in conjunction with the growing revenues of the chamber. Many crown lands were diverted to the control of the chamber, and large sums were paid into it from Exchequer and wardrobe.2 The resulting large revenues were used to finance much of Edward’s army, navy and munitions requirements in the 1340s. But the crisis of 1341 had taught Edward the need to keep on good terms with the Chancery and Exchequer; so the chamber lands were gradually restored to Exchequer control, and when this was completed in 13563 the griffin seal disappeared. The secret seal was gradually replaced by the signet seal, kept by a secretary; and during the reign of Richard II both secretary and signet grew in importance as instruments of his attempts to assert his prerogative.4 The remarkable ebb and flow of the prominence of the signet and the secretary with the changes in Richard’s fortunes shows that these instruments were of especial value to him until in 1397 he gained complete control over the Exchequer, Chancery and privy seal. Even then Richard continued to use the secretary, along with the chamberlainss and knights of his chamber, to extend his personal rule, and his alleged misuse of the signet was one of the charges brought against him in 1399.5 The signet and secretary were, however, too firmly established and too useful by this time to be abolished. Indeed under the Lancastrians the signet office usually had four or five clerks, and since clerks could no longer be relied on to know French as a matter of course, there appeared in the reign of Henry VI a French secretary, mainly for diplomatic correspondence.6 But the memory of Richard II’s use of the signet lingered, and throughout the Lancastrian period it tended to be viewed with suspicion. When Henry VI came of age and started to use the signet to send warrants to the Chancery, he was so rashly generous that in or about 1444 the council drew up regulations for the control of the signet.7 When the king granted a petition of grace, the secretary was to base on it a warrant which should be sent to the keeper of the privy seal, who should in turn send a warrant to the chancellor. The intention was that through the keeper of the privy seal the council would have the chance to scrutinise the king’s grants; and although the council was too divided to enforce this rule consistently, Henry VI was too weak to build up the power of the secretary. It is true that foreign policy was an important part of the royal prerogative; and the king’s correspondence with foreign powers was handled and expressed by the secretary, as the letters of Thomas Bekynton illustrate.8 But in home 1

Cf. D.N. 237, 316, 318. Cf. D.N. 321. Cf. D.N. 322. 3 T.F.Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England, IV, 305, note 2, printing a writ from Exchequer, K.R.Memoranda Roll, 30 Edw. III, Brevia directa Baronibtus, Hilary Term. 4 D.N. 77. 5 D.N. 219 (§20 of articles of deposition); D.N. 82 (vii). 6 J.Otway-Ruthven, The King’s Secretary and the Signet Office in the 15th Century (Cambridge, 1939), 89–105. 7 D.N. 237. 8 D.N. 137, 314. 2

The government of the realm

369

affairs the secretary remained little more than a confidential clerk, of small political significance, until the revival of the monarchy under Edward IV. With his accession the signet at once became more important. The proportion of signet to privy seal letters seems to have risen steadily. Throughout the reign signet letters were freely used to send a wide variety of administrative orders to local authorities, officials and private persons.1 The secretary was now usually a member of the king’s council and was frequently used for important embassies. Still a member of the royal household, and normally working there when he was at home,2 the secretary was very close in confidence to a king who, especially after 1471, was in a strong position to organise the administration as he wished. In 1422 the signet had been so unnecessary when the king was a child that during the minority of Henry VI it disappeared. By 1483 it was such an essential part of the administration that the secretary and the signet office remained at work during the minority of Edward V.3 By the reign of Henry VII the secretary had become such an important official that he could be made a bishop.4 E. ROYAL FINANCE AND THE ROYAL HOUSEHOLD The renewed strength of the monarchy in administration under the house of York is seen not only in the increased use of the secretary and the signet but in the revival of the king’s chamber as a financial office. The memory of Richard II’s use of the chamber made it difficult for the Lancastrians to assign to it a role of any importance. The important financial office under the Lancastrians was the Exchequer, and by the time that Henry VI was deposed, the Exchequer had gained a bad reputation. This was, broadly speaking, for three reasons, one of them peculiar to the Lancastrian dynasty and its policies, the second inherent in the Exchequer process, and the third a long-term deterioration in most of the sources of revenue. The first reason was the financial weakness of the Lancastrians, from which they were never able to extricate themselves. Henry IV had to bribe and reward his followers who helped him in the critical days just before and after his accession, by granting away crown lands and fee-farms, thus reducing his revenue; and the weakness of his control over the country lessened the amount that could be collected. The result was that the net average income of the crown, which had been nearly £120,000 in the reign of Richard II, sank to little more than £90,000 under the rule of Henry IV.5 It is true that the prestige of Henry V after Agincourt enabled him to obtain such generous parliamentary grants that for several years the revenue rose to a level nearly as high as that of Richard II’s.6 But 1

D.N. 317. For the continued use of the privy seal for important administrative purposes, see D.N. 316, 318; and for the complexity of the administration as illustrated by the number of seals, D.N. 315. 2 D.N. 319. 3 D.N. 320. 4 J.Otway-Ruthven, op. cit., 75, 178–9. 5 A.B.Steel, The Receipt of the Exchequer, 1377–1485 (Cambridge, 1954), 105–6. Cf. D.N. 323 for a statement of the government’s finances in 1362–3, and D.N. 326 for a statement in 1433. Such statements are valuable to us, as the complications of Exchequer accounting make it difficult for us to work out totals of income and expenditure for any financial year. 6 Ibid. 179.

English historical documents

370

even before the death of Henry V the propertied classes as a whole were becoming more reluctant to grant taxes in parliament at the very time that the cost of the war was rising steeply, so that by 1421 the government was having to borrow on a considerable scale. After the death of Henry V there was an immediate drop in revenue, which declined in the first decade of the reign of Henry VI by over a third, and there was a more widespread reluctance to lend. The position deteriorated rapidly in both respects, so that by the third decade of the reign the real revenue had declined to little more than £50,000 per annum, and the lenders shrank in numbers to a comparatively few great men— Cardinal Beaufort and Archbishop Chichele, leading London and staple merchants, a few wealthy laymen and the feoffees (or trustees) of the duchy of Lancaster.1 The revolution of 1399 had meant that the revenues of the duchy of Lancaster were now at the king’s disposal. They were kept separate from the income of the crown, probably so that they could remain more effectively under the king’s personal control; but much of the advantage of this arrangement was soon lost by the practice of assigning portions of the Lancaster revenues to particular purposes, such as the income of the dowager Queen Catharine, the jointure of Queen Margaret, and above all the execution of the will of Henry V. Much of the duchy’s revenues was placed in the hands of feoffees who nearly always had enough money to lend but for some reason retained control until 1443; and even then much of the duchy’s income was transferred to the control of feoffees for the execution of the will of Henry VI.2 The result was that the government of Henry VI was in the peculiar position of being increasingly dependent on loans borrowed from what was technically the king’s private income, yet mostly not under his control. Probably the moving spirit behind this arrangement was Cardinal Beaufort, who was one of the feoffees and made a fortune out of his own loans to the crown. Canon law forbade usury as unchristian, but by this time the prohibition was widely evaded by such devices as undervaluing the pledges that might be given (as we know that Cardinal Beaufort insisted in the case of the crown jewels entrusted to him as security for loans) and by naming in the bond a greater sum than was in fact lent.3 It has been argued that the king’s subjects were bound by their loyalty to lend to the king free of charge.;4 but the drastic shrinkage in the number of small lenders, such as the country gentlemen, during the reign of Henry VI, shows that when the power and credit of the government became very weak, appeals to loyalty were not enough.5 Those who continued to lend were either those who could not evade it, or could by their key positions, like Cardinal Beaufort, extract very high rates of interest to guard against the risk involved. Sir John Fortescue, who as a leading supporter of the regime was in a good position to know, afterwards said that Henry VI’s 1

Steel, op. cit., 270. R.Somerville, A History of the Duchy of Lancaster, I (London, 1953), 199, 206, 210. 3 K.B.McFarlane, “At the Death-Bed of Cardinal Beaufort”, Studies in Medieval History presented to F.M.Powicke (Oxford, 1948), 419–20, 415. 4 G.L.Harriss, “Aids, Loans, and Benevolences”, in The Historical Journal, VI (1963), 1–19. Cf. Steel, op. cit. xxxvii–xxxviii, 18–20. If the government was strong, as under Henry V or Edward IV, small lenders could be induced to advance sums without interest, by a combination of appeal and pressure. Edward IV, like Henry VII, persuaded many of his subjects to make gifts instead of loans. 5 Steel, op. cit., 193, 269. Cf. D.N. 325, 326. 2

The government of the realm

government had commonly had to pay between 25 and

371

per cent interest on its loans.6

The result of a falling revenue and a heavy rate of interest was not only the piling up of unpaid debts but was an excessive strain on the Exchequer system. The land was full of restive creditors,1 some of whom had claims of thirty years’ standing; and as there was usually no ready cash with which to satisfy even an instalment of their claims, the Exchequer was increasingly driven to try to keep them quiet by forestalling revenue, usually in the form of the issue of tallies, or receipts to be handed by the creditor to the revenue-collector in return for the cash. Such a device was not in itself necessarily injurious; indeed, ever since the thirteenth century it was a method which, like the modern short-term treasury bonds, had been employed to make the financial machine run more smoothly. But now the same revenue was often promised two or three times over and increasing numbers of disappointed creditors found that they had been handed the equivalent of a “dud cheque”. Some effort was made to prevent such disappointments by ear-marking named items of revenue for specific expenditure; but again confusion was created by ear-marking the same item for different purposes, as a desperate way of meeting the financial crisis. Thus in 1446 Queen Margaret was assigned by act of parliament £1,000 a year from the customs of Southampton as part of her dowry;2 but shortly afterwards parliament gave priority for the payment of £20,000 from the customs of Southampton to the king from 1451 to 1453 (with certain exceptions), with the result that Margaret got nothing from Southampton during this period.3 Moreover, all such assignments were apt to go by the board when the government had to meet urgent military crises, such as the need to send expeditionary forces to Normandy or Gascony in 1450 or 1453. The confusion in the Exchequer’s finances became worse in the last decade of Henry VI’s reign, when confidence in the administration broke down. Real revenue declined still further, to something like £33,000 a year, with the loss of the French possessions, the granting away of lands and offices to gain political support and the waning of the government’s control over the country.4 Borrowing and anticipation reached catastrophic proportions and the reputation not only of the Lancastrian regime but of the Exchequer suffered accordingly. A second cause of the discredit of the Exchequer was the inadequacy, rigidity and expensiveness of its methods. Its methods of auditing were designed to prevent peculation by its accountants, not to increase efficiency or revenue. The accountant would be examined about his obligations down to the last farthing, even for revenues which the crown had granted away years before; but no effort was made to see whether the yield of his revenue might be increased by better management or a review of charges. Moreover, Exchequer process, now centuries old, was bound by tradition; no claim for 6

Sir John Fortescue, The Governance of England (ed. C.Plummer, 1885), 118. The government had been paying 25 per cent interest regularly in 1384–6 (Steel, 19–20). Cf. D.N. 331 for Sir John Fortescue’s views on the king’s finances. 1 Cf. D.N. 329 for the efforts of Edward IV’s government to restore confidence in government finance by accepting responsibility for debts contracted by Henry VI, even though the Yorkists regarded Henry as a usurper. 2 Rot. Parl. V, 258–9. 3 Ibid. V, 214. 4 Steel, op. cit. 323.

English historical documents

372

allowances or cancellation of debt was allowed without the fullest authority and the process of accounting was almost as formal as pleadings in the court of common pleas.5 Hence accounting was slow, cumbrous and often out of touch with realities. Reforms had been introduced from time to time during the centuries of the Exchequer’s existence; but in such a conservative organisation reform had usually been attempted, not by drastic abolition or simplification, but by adding further officials and processes to those already in existence.1 All these officials had to be maintained, and fees played a prominent part in this, so that Exchequer processes became increasingly expensive. In 1455 the commons in parliament complained about the numerous and high fees charged by Exchequer officials and demanded their abolition.2 The Exchequer officials naturally resisted this as too drastic and in 1456 the king’s council issued an ordinance listing the fees which the various Exchequer departments might lawfully charge.3 A perusal of this document is likely to leave the reader with the feeling that if these charges represented a reduction in the number and weight of fees, the previous burden on unfortunate visitors to the Exchequer may well have been as grievous as the outcries of the period represent. Not only was the Exchequer system not devised to increase the efficiency of its accountants or the yield of their revenues; it was equally ill suited to stem the serious decline in royal revenues which took place during the Lancastrian regime. The king’s income was derived from two kinds of source—from the rights of his prerogative and from taxation. Prominent among the prerogative sources was the income from the royal estates; and all the kings from Edward III to Henry VI reduced the royal estates to reward their officials and other followers, to buy political support and to pay for wars. As early as 1404 the commons in parliament showed themselves restive about this alienation of royal estates, and when in 1450 the royal debts had risen to £372,000 the commons insisted on an act of resumption, revoking all grants of lands, rents, franchises, pensions or hereditary offices made since the first year of the king’s reign.4 The trouble with this and succeeding acts of resumption was that generally speaking those who had had the largest grants were those with the greatest influence and the best chance of securing an exemption from the act. In this case, for example, eventually over two hundred clauses of exemption were added to the act. As for the other sources of prerogative income, the Exchequer process was very tenacious in pursuing even small items, if necessary for years, once they were noted in the records; but it was not well organised to discover small obligations, especially of a casual nature, such as the feudal obligations of the lesser tenants in chief, or small cases of prerogative claims such as wreck and treasure-trove. It did have machinery for these purposes, e.g. escheators to keep watch over the king’s feudal rights in the shires; but their insufficiency by this time is attested by the marked drop in feudal revenues such as the profits of wardships and marriages.5 5

Cf. D.N. 328. Such as the addition of the Foreign Apposer in the Pipe Office, or the Auditors of the Foreign Accounts. See D.M.Broome, “The Auditors of Foreign Accounts of the Exchequer, 1320–1327”, E.H.R. 38 (1923). 2 Rot. Parl. V, 323–4. 3 D.N. 327. 4 Rot. Parl. V, 183. 5 B.P.Wolffe, “The Management of English Royal Estates under the Yorkist Kings”, E.H.R. 71 (1956), 1–27. 1

The government of the realm

373

This inadequacy also prevailed in relation to the supervision of the yields of taxation. beginning of this period the commons in parliament had not yet lost the notion that customs were an occasional evil, nor had the king entirely shed the idea that they Here, the most perennial source was that from the customs and the most important single source of royal income in this period was that from duties on imports and exports.6 At the were a prerogative right, to be imposed as he willed. But during the long reign of Edward III a compromise was reached whereby the king accepted parliamentary control of customs and the commons accepted the necessity of their permanence. Indeed in 1398 the commons granted the customs to Richard II for life, and this precedent was followed by the commons in 1415 in the enthusiasm generated by the victory of Agincourt.1 The same concession was made to the government of Henry VI in 1453 to help the grave financial situation. But not only was the collection of the customs difficult, and smuggling a perpetual problem which increased in gravity as the power of the government declined and its navy (in the reign of Henry VI) was reduced to vanishing point;2 there was the adverse factor of the decline in wool exports in the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The duties on wool were by far the most important item of the customs in the reign of Edward III, and the average export of wool between 1350 and 1360 was 32,000 sacks per annum. By the decade 1438–48 wool exports had fallen to an average of only 9,000 sacks per annum; other customs yields were less adversely affected, but the total yield was reduced during the century by something like a third. This was especially serious since the yield of direct taxation was also dropping. The idea persisted throughout this period that the king should live of his own save in emergencies and Edward IV gained popularity by promising in 1467 to live of his own and not to charge his subjects except in great and urgent causes for their welfare and the defence of the realm.3 The usual form of direct taxation on the laity throughout this period was that of tenths and fifteenths—originally a tax of one tenth of movable property in towns and of one fifteenth outside the towns. Already by the beginning of this period exemptions were granted for various reasons—for poverty, for necessities—but the re-assessments of property that had to be made each time the tax was levied were much resented. When therefore the method of assessment adopted in 1332 proved less obnoxious than usual it was repeated in 1334 and thenceforth became stereotyped. Hence the yield from it began to shrink, for as the amounts of contribution became fixed and attached to particular estates or plots of land, those who paid nothing or too little naturally kept quiet, whereas those who could not afford to pay or alleged that they could not, tried to get their assessments reduced or abolished. In 1332 the yield was about £38,000;4 by the early fifteenth century there were constant attempts at evasion or 6

E.g. D.N. 254, 258. D.N. 273. 2 See E.M.Carus-Wilson, England’s Export Trade, 1275–1547 (1962), 21–31, for the argument that wool was too bulky to smuggle; though even here the government of Edward IV thought it worthwhile to appoint commissions and inquiries into smuggling, and in the case of smaller items, such as wines, the temptation to smuggle must have been great (Lander, op. cit. B.I.H.R. 32 (1959), 145). Cf. D.N. 597. 3 D.N. 330. 4 J.F.Willard, Parliamentary Taxes on Personal Property, 1290–1334 (Cambridge, Mass., 1934). 343. Cf. D.N. 556. 1

English historical documents

374

reduction. Hence in 1433 parliament cut the value of a grant of a tenth and fifteenth by 10–4 per cent on the grounds of impoverishment;5 though every shire got an equal percentage remission and within the shire the distribution of the relief seems to have depended on indulgence and patronage rather than on need. In 1446 parliament increased the cut to 15 per cent even though the government’s financial needs were greater than ever and its income more precarious.6 The fact was that the propertied classes represented in the commons were tired of contributing direct taxation for the French war, and not only reduced the value of the grant but the frequency of their concession of tenths and fifteenths. They were also determined to resist any adequate investigation of the taxable capacity of the country. When in 1404 parliament was induced by the gravity of the financial position to grant a novel tax of 5 per cent on land rentals it stipulated that no record of the tax should be allowed to remain as a precedent.1 In 1451 it was stated in parliament that up to Christmas 1450 nothing at all had been collected of a graduated income tax voted in the previous spring, because of “lack of diligence” of all concerned—commissioners, sheriffs and taxpayers.2 In 1472 the commons, flushed with enthusiasm by the prospect of the renewal of the king’s claims in France, voted a special income tax of one tenth of landed revenues; but the government, feeling stronger than that of Henry VI and intending to profit by the experience of 1450, insisted that a man’s income should be assessed at its true value and not at his own estimation. The result was that the collection of the tax was much delayed and the yield was small. The commons were so alarmed by the information that the government might thus be acquiring about the taxable capacity of the country that in 1475 they converted the balance of the tax into ordinary tenths and fifteenths and asked that the records of the income tax might be destroyed.3 The hostility of the propertied classes to paying direct taxes or to accepting a revision of the fossilised and dwindling tenths and fifteenths meant that the Yorkists must try to do without direct taxation as much as possible if they wished to strengthen the hold of their rule on the country. As parliament voted the customs to Edward IV for life in 1465, he could gain credit by summoning parliament less frequently, provided that he could avoid the expense of war, and provided that he could increase his revenue by other means. To some extent a rise in income could be achieved by extracting “benevolences” from subjects who were undertaxed or not taxed at all; but this had to be done with restraint if dangerous opposition were not to be aroused. The dislike of benevolences is indicated by Richard III’s renunciation of them to gain popularity, even though he was short of money.4 The best way to try to increase the royal income with the minimum of opposition might well seem to be to review the administration of the royal estates and royal claims that fell casually, like feudal incidents. But as we have seen the Exchequer 1

Annales Ricardi Secundi et Henrici Quinti, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1866), 379; T.Walsingham, Historia Anglicana (Rolls Series, 1863–4), II, 260. 2 Rot. Parl. V, 211. 3 Ibid. VI, 5, 111–19, 149–53. The ignorance of the government about the taxable wealth of the country is shown by its belief in 1371 that there were over 40,000 parishes in the realm, whereas there proved to be on investigation less than 9,000—D.N. 324. 4 Statutes of the Realm, II, 478.

The government of the realm

375

was not well adapted to such a purpose; it does not appear to have investigated thoroughly the validity of claims to reduction of tenths and fifteenths or of fee-farms.5 Added to this was the fact that the Exchequer had gained a bad reputation for itself under the Lancastrians; and even if this was to some extent unjust, it nevertheless made it more difficult to use the Exchequer for a revitalising of the royal finances. Edward IV therefore decided to revive the chamber of the household as a financial office, and made a beginning by giving it control of the Yorkist estates on his accession. To these were added the Warwick and Salisbury estates after the attainder of the duke of Clarence in 1478, and other confiscated estates as occasion arose. Into the chamber were also paid other items of revenue, such as the French pension, the proceeds of benevolences,1 and profits from royal trading and recovered feudal dues. By the end of the reign the chamber seems to have become the king’s main treasury. It also rivalled the Exchequer as an auditing department, for the revenues which the chamber received were all audited by its own auditors. The chamber drew heavily on the example of the administration of the duchy of Lancaster, which had been annexed to the crown as a separate unit in 1461. Its efficiency and revenues were both much increased in this period by the tireless energy of the duchy council in reviewing rents and other charges, inquiring into forgotten rights, resisting encroachments, checking the efficiency of its accountants, touring the duchy lands to see what matters were really like on the spot.2 Following on their example, the lands responsible to the chamber were placed in charge of specially chosen receivers, often seconded from the royal household, and the accounts were audited by special auditors, some of whom had experience of the duchy of Lancaster’s accounting methods.3 In contrast to the traditional formalism of Exchequer accounting, the chamber placed great emphasis on the duty of both receivers and auditors to see that the king got all that was due to him, to try to increase the revenues by improved methods and greater vigilance, and to investigate suspected or known cases of negligence and evasion. Special commissioners were sent round to see for themselves how the estates were being administered and what was the local situation.4 The result of all this effort was that Edward IV was the first king for three centuries to die solvent,5 Richard III continued and extended the system of chamber finance, and the rules he made for the administration of chamber lands and for the increase of their revenues remained the basis of chamber finance under the early Tudors.6 5 D.N. 644. For the widespread movement in the fifteenth century for towns to claim reduction of fee-farms, and the discrepancy in some cases between their pleas of poverty and certain signs of prosperity in the town, see the unpublished thesis by A.P.M.Wright: “The Relations between the King’s government and the English Cities and Boroughs in the Fifteenth Century” (Oxford, D.Phil., 1965), and the book by Dr K.P.Wilson: Chester Customs Accounts, 1301–1565 (Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 1969). 1 Cf. D.N. 332. 2 D.N. 333. 3 Wolffe, op. cit. 26–7. 4 Cf. D.N. 333, 334. 5 Domenico Mancini, The Usurpation of Richard III, ed. C.A.J.Armstrong (1936), 99. 6 D.N. 335.

English historical documents

376

The greatly increased proportion of royal revenues paid into the chamber gave the king greater power and freedom, for he could use the chamber revenues with speed, secrecy and flexibility, unhindered by Exchequer slowness, publicity and rigidity. Not only were chamber revenues used for personal pleasures and artistic interests, such as the building of St George’s Chapel, Windsor, or the collection of books which forms the basis of the Old Royal Library;7 they enabled the king to reward without fuss those who had helped him, to pay for the construction of royal ships and the financing of lucrative trading ventures, and to raise the core of the army that he took with him to France in 1475.8 His reforms in the organisation of the royal household enabled him to reduce the cost much below that of Henry VI’s while increasing its magnificence to a degree that impressed experienced foreign observers.1 The devotion and skill of household clerks, knights and squires, could be used not only to increase royal revenues and magnificence but to extend royal influence in the kingdom.2 Many household officials sat as members of parliament, the more important like the treasurer and controller usually as knights of the shire, lesser ones as burgesses.3 The household also often played an important role in army organisation. As will be seen later, the most effective part of the army in this period was raised by contract, of which the details were usually set out in an indenture.4 Once the contract was made, the contractors could be relied upon to recruit their specified numbers of men-at-arms, hobelars or light horsemen, archers and so forth. One of the many advantages of the indenture system in the circumstances of this age was that the king could select his captains, who were likely to be proved and reliable men; and in any event the fear of not being chosen next time, or of being asked to bring a smaller contingent, was a spur to efficiency. But even when the contracts were made, much remained for the royal household to do. The king’s household was itself usually responsible for the provision of a contingent of men, usually the biggest or one of the biggest in the whole force; and these soldiers had to be recruited.5 Much could be done to facilitate this by appointing loyal and competent soldiers to positions in the royal household, such as that of king’s knight or squire of the household; and if they were chosen from different parts of the country, they would be in a good position to recruit archers from very extensive areas of the kingdom. The large household contingent had to be provided with uniforms of the king’s livery and with arms and armour. These were furnished by the great wardrobe and by the privy wardrobe respectively. If the king was fighting in Scotland the privy wardrobe might be most conveniently based at York; but after the start of the great French war the most suitable base for the privy wardrobe was the Tower of London. The privy wardrobe settled down at the Tower in the 1330s; and as the French war continued so long, the Tower became its permanent headquarters, developing from an armoury into 7

See G.F.Warner and J.P.Gilson, Catalogue of Western MSS in the Old Royal and King’s Collections, 1 (1921), xi–xii. 8 F.P.Barnard, Edward IV’s French Expedition of 1475 (Oxford, 1925). 1 D.N. 688. 2 Cf. the unpublished thesis of A.Purdy, “Members of the Parliament of 1472” (Liverpool, B.A., 1954); The Black Book of the Household of Edward IV, ed. Myers, 127. 3 Roskell, op. cit. 134–7. 4 See the introduction to Part IV (E) (infra, 952), and D.N. 653, 663. 5 D.N. 317.

The government of the realm

377

a factory and repair shop as well.6 The household also had to provide the headquarters and auxiliary staff which no single contingent could be expected to furnish. It therefore recruited the gunners and the artillery personnel and provided their cannon and other guns. It assembled necessary craftsmen like carpenters, fletchers, bowyers and provided their materials. If often supplied the clerks who organised the army’s food supplies, the receivers and keepers of the king’s victuals; these were often aided by the clerks of various royal household departments connected with food, such as the kitchen, the spicery, the poultry, and by the subordinate household staff.7 It furnished the physicians, surgeons, chaplains, trumpeters, pipers. As the army had to be transported overseas, it was often convenient to let the clerks of the royal household, in consultation with the admirals, selected Exchequer and Chancery clerks, and the clerk of the king’s ships, recruit by hiring or impressment the large number of merchant ships that were necessary in time of war to supplement the relatively few king’s ships. The household staff could then arrange for such merchantmen to be fitted with fighting forecastles and aftercastles by the king’s carpenters, and with guns from the armoury at the Tower.1 And members of the royal household were well fitted, by their nearness to the king and his interests, for use in those adjuncts of war, communications and diplomacy, whether it was a yeoman of the crown or of the bedchamber being sent as a messenger or the secretary or the treasurer of the household taking part in an embassy.2 Members of the royal household also helped with the administration of the king’s army in another way. The troops produced by indentured contract might be the most effective part of the royal forces but they were not the only one. It is true that he had lost the services of the feudal levy, which was by now so depleted and ineffective that after 1327 it never assembled again.3 But the king still had the right to call out all able-bodied men between the ages of sixteen and sixty for the maintenance of the public peace and the defence of the realm. This ancient obligation was systematised in 1285 by the Statute of Winchester which was reissued by Edward III in 1328 with minor modifications.4 This enacted that every free man was to provide himself with suitable weapons, according to the value of his lands and chattels. The men thus armed were to be organised into groups in the various hundreds, the horsed men-at-arms into constabularies and the foot-soldiers into millenaries, centenaries and vintenaries. Except in border counties in moments of crisis the whole of the shire levy was never called out, for this would have depleted the land too much of its husbandmen and left it undefended. A selection was made of the strongest and best armed, to be conducted by special officials known as

6

T.F.Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England, 4 (Manchester, 1928), 445 ff. 7 A.E.Prince, “The Army and the Navy”, The English Government at Work, 1327–1336, I (Cambridge, Mass., 1940), 369. 1 Ibid. 382. Cf. D.N. 279 for the attempt to keep the seas cheaply by leaving the work to privateers. 2 H.S.Lucas, “The Machinery of Diplomatic Intercourse”, ibid. 310 ff.; D.N. 719; J.OtwayRuthven, op. cit. 71 ff. 3 N.B.Lewis, “The Last Medieval Summons of the English Feudal Levy, 13 June 1385”, E.H.R. 73 (1958), 1–26. 4 Statutes of the Realm, I, 259.

English historical documents

378

commissioners of array,5 They were often chosen from the knights, esquires, yeomen and serjeants-at-arms F. LOCAL GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE THE TOWNS In the chartered towns the responsibility for raising the troops and the money to pay them usually fell on the mayor and aldermen; but outside these towns deputies of the commissioners were appointed to collect the money. Not infrequently, especially at the beginning of this period, the sheriff was employed for this purpose; but he was often accused of extorting sums beyond the needs of the array and of diverting money to his own uses. It was one of many charges of extortion and corruption made against him and his underlings that led to the repeated demand for the limitation of his term of office to one year, at the end of which his immunity from prosecution would cease. This demand was conceded by Edward III in 1340 as one of his many gestures of conciliation at home; and in 1377 it was enacted that no sheriff was to be re-appointed until after a three year interval.2 Like much legislation of this period, however, this expressed an aspiration rather than a rule to be thenceforward rigorously enforced. Even in the fifteenth century it was necessary to reaffirm the rule that the sheriff be appointed for one year only, and as late as 1474 Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland, was granted the office of that county for life, by royal letters patent.3 The office was in fact still worth having and holding as 5

Cf. D.N. 349. The government often enacted in this period that men should not waste their time in profitless games like football, cricket, hockey, quoits and the like, instead of practising archery, which could help the defence of the realm. For a specimen of such an enactment, see D.N. 694. of the royal household, as men likely to be specially devoted to the king’s interests in selecting soldiers. Otherwise they were country gentlemen of the shire in question, chosen for their prowess in war and their skill in choosing men. The commissioners usually did their work by getting the constables or bailiffs of the hundreds, townships or franchises, to summon all able-bodied men between sixteen and sixty; and the arrayers, either in person or by deputy, then chose from the “strongest and the most vigorous of them” the number required from that district. Doubtless influence and corruption played a part sometimes, in the way that Shakespeare caricatured in Henry IV, Part II; but in general the method must have produced not unsatisfactory results, for the government used it very frequently during this period. Moreover, although it had traditionally been intended for local defence, the government found the troops produced by the array good enough to be used in the French wars. The memory of the traditional local limitation on the service of the troops caused a clamour, however, that if the troops were going abroad they should be at the king’s wages from the day they left their own shires; and in 1344 Edward III, anxious as usual at this period to maintain harmony at home in order to ensure the success of the war in France, consented to a statute on this basis. For Scottish campaigns, however, the king could require the shire to pay their troops until they had reached the place of muster—Newcastle or wherever it might be. The shires also had to furnish armour, clothing, horses and sometimes provisions for their levies.1 1 For a detailed discussion of the organisation of commissions of array, see A.E.Prince, “The Army and the Navy”, Willard and Morris, op. cit. 1 (Cambridge, Mass., 1940), 355–64. For the form of the commission of array as sanctioned by parliament in 1404, see D.N. 349. For the statute of 1364 see Statutes of the Realm, I, 30. 2 D.N. 340. 3 C.G.Crump, “Eo Quod Expressa Mentio, etc.”, in Essays in History presented to R.L.Poole (Oxford, 1927), 39.

The government of the realm

379

long as possible; for not only did the sheriff have a share in calling out the shire levy, which could be useful in time of disturbance or civil war, but he was the official who was still the normal channel of communication between government and shire by means of the writ.4 Hence he was the man who usually empanelled a jury or summoned the shire court; and in an age of affinities and maintenance this could be of great importance in winning a law suit or returning a member of parliament, as the Paston Letters well show.5 Magnates who hoped to control a shire tried to secure the appointment of a sheriff favourable to themselves and a council ordinance of 1426 had to reaffirm the statute of Lincoln, that no bailiff or steward of a lord should act as sheriff unless he were for the time being not in seignorial employment.1 But although the sheriff was still of more importance in local government than is often realised, his power was waning. The crown disliked his opportunities of malversation of funds and in this period it had to be sensitive to complaints in parliament from the powerful country gentry class about oppressions perpetrated by the sheriff.2 So each fresh development in financial administration, such as the levies of tenths and fifteenths, poll taxes, income taxes, customs dues, brought into existence fresh commissioners who managed the tax instead of the sheriff; and the increasing financial autonomy of more and more boroughs, the granting away of crown lands and fee-farms, and the revival of chamber administration of crown lands under the Yorkists, all meant a further shrinking in the amount and importance of revenues collected by the sheriff. And in this period they continued to lose their formerly considerable power of administering justice. Twice a year the sheriff held his tourn in the hundreds of the shire, reviewing the now obsolescent police arrangement of view of frankpledge, and investigating and punishing petty crimes. A statute of 1461 deprived the sheriff of the power to arrest or to levy fines in the tourn,3 which thereafter quickly withered away. All indictments were to be transferred to the men whose office had experienced such a great development in this period, the justices of the peace. In view of the sheriff’s potentialities for oppression, extortion and other mischief, it is not surprising that the crown turned to other means of carrying out the law and protecting its interests. At the beginning of the fourteenth century the king was sending out at irregular intervals justices on general eyre, who were given commissions with extremely wide powers, not only judicial but fiscal and administrative. But they were so burdensome and rapacious that the commons asked for them to stop, and after 1348 they seem to have done so. and other civil actions, of trailbaston, with wide powers to inquire into charges of disorder and violence, of the peace, to punish breaches of the king’s peace, of gaol delivery to inspect gaols and try the suspects imprisoned within them, of oyer and terminer,4 to hear and determine all criminal pleas pending in the counties. After Revolt of 1381, the Lollard rising of 1414, or Jack Cade’s rebellion in 1450, the government usually sent out a special commission composed not only of justices but of 4

D.N. 357. D.N. 723, 287. Cf. a letter from James Gresham to John Paston in October 1450 to say that the Duke of York was thought likely to get Master Calthorp made either sheriff or knight of the shire for Norfolk ‘to the fortheryng of othir folks” (Paston Letters, I, 157, No. 117 (Edinburgh, 1910)). 1 D.N. 353. 2 E.g. Rot. Parl. IV, 306, 403. 3 D.N. 358. 4 D.N. 350. 5

English historical documents

380

local magnates and knights, with a leaven of royal councillors.5 In times of commotion such commissions seem to have inspired confidence and even the commons might petition for their appointment, as in 1410, to suppress disorder in the north;6 but in quieter times they wanted the issue of such commissions to be limited, and preferred the use of justices of the peace. The king himself recognised that the issue of such commissions could not be other than exceptional, and that he must have an acceptable permanent local official on whom he could rely for much of the normal jurisdiction in the countryside. Such an official the crown found in this period in the justice of the peace. In the thirteenth century it had seemed as if the coroner was the local official who would become the crown’s mainstay in the shire. But the office was elective and too apt therefore to fall under the influence of local magnates rather than that of the crown. In the fourteenth century the king therefore developed the office of justice of the peace. The office was evolved out of that of keeper or conservator of the peace, who in the thirteenth century was given military and police powers in the shire, in conjunction with the sheriff. By the end of the reign of Edward II the great expansion of the common law had made it very desirable that there should be local as well as central or itinerant judges to administer justice. The general suspicion of the sheriff prevented the entrusting of this function to him, and the financial straits of the king made it impossible for him to use paid officials for the purpose. Edward III had to conciliate the politically important classes of the community and these included the knight of the shire, who wanted such powers to be granted to members of their class. If the powers were entrusted to a commission of country gentry there would not be the same objections, from either the king’s or the county’s point of view, as if the powers had been given to one man, the sheriff. Hence during the reign of Edward III the king developed the office of justice of the peace held by a commission of country gentlemen in each shire. In 1328 the keepers were given power to punish those who disobeyed and contravened the great police statute of Winchester, and in 1332 they were empowered to hear and determine charges of felonies committed by riotous bands.1 Their judicial powers, developed along these lines, were greatly widened as a result of the Black Death. Parliament, dominated by landlords and employers, was determined to keep down the level of wages to that prevailing before the pestilence; and an Ordinance of Labourers of 1349, turned into a statute in 1351, provided that in every shire justices of labourers should fix maximum wages in various manual occupations, and punish employers and employed who contravened their rulings.2 But attempts to enforce this might provoke resistance and violence, and it was clearly inefficient to have one set of justices who were to enforce the Statute of Labourers and another set to suppress violence. So in 1359 the work of the justices of labourers was suspended, to be transferred to the keepers of the peace,3 and in 1368 this arrangement was made permanent.4 This amalgamation of powers greatly increased the range and 5

D.N. 145. D.N. 350. 1 D.N. 338. Cf. D.N. 336. 2 D.N. 562. 3 D.N. 344. 4 D.N. 347. 6

The government of the realm

381

amount of work of the keepers, who from 1361 onwards were called justices and from 1362 were bidden to meet in full session four times a year, in what were soon to be famous as quarter sessions.5 The future of the office was now assured, for it was well established and important.The king was determined to keep the right of nomination in council, even though the commons wished the office to become elective; but the commons were pleased to see increased powers being given to commissions largely drawn from the same class as the knights of the shire and repeatedly asked for an increase in their functions. The government of Richard II did this, not only defining more clearly their powers but adding functions such as the suppression of forcible entries and riots and the punishment of robbers under arrest. If the justices were to have important powers of trial and conviction, it was desirable that some of their number should be trained in the law; and in Richard II’s reign statutes began to require that a few lawyers should be included in the commission of the peace for each shire. By 1414 this practice was so well established that a statute of that year refers to “justices of the peace in each shire named in the quorum”.1 Lancastrian England saw further extensions of their powers, and in 1414 they were even made partly responsible for the enforcement of the laws against heresy. The office was now so important that its status was further defined; it was, for example, enacted in 14142 that nearly all justices of the peace were to be resident in their shires, and in 1439 that they must have lands to the annual value of £20 a year.3 As we have already seen, they were in the first parliament of Edward IV given the power to receive and deal with all indictments and presentments made before the sheriff in the tourn;4 and in 1484 they were allowed to release on bail persons imprisoned on suspicion of felony.5 Important as the justices might seem to be becoming in this period, and valuable as the king might appear to find them, we must beware of exaggerating their importance, and usefulness to him. In an age of affinities and maintenance justices, like jurors, might be influenced, corrupted or overawed by local magnates. It is true that cases before the justices could be called up into the King’s Bench, and it has been estimated by one of the greatest authorities on this subject that nine-tenths of the cases in the crown section of the King’s Bench rolls in the reigns of Henry VI and Edward IV had been started before the justices of the peace.6 But even under a strong king like Edward IV it was thought necessary to put one of the king’s closest companions, Lord Hastings, on the commissions of most of the shires,7 so that he could without fuss come to keep an eye on them; and under a weak king like Henry VI the influence of the magnates over justices could outweigh the control of the central government. In 1439 Lord Fanhope (a member 5

D.N. 345, 346. Cf. D.N. 342, 348. D.N. 351. 2 Statutes of the Realm, II, 187. The only exceptions were to be the lords and justices of assize named by the king and his council, and the chief stewards of the duchy of Lancaster. 3 Ibid. II, 309. 4 D.N. 358. 5 Statutes of the Realm, II, 478–9. Cf. B.Putnam, Proceedings before the Justices of the Peace, Edward III to Richard II (Ames Foundation, 1938), 1, 257. 6 Ibid. lxiv. 7 Cal. Pat, Rolls, 1461–1483, Appendices; and cf. W.H.Dunham, Jr., Lord Hastings’ Indentured Retainers, 1461–1483 (New Haven, 1955), 39. 1

English historical documents

382

of the king’s council) had succeeded in establishing control over the normal commission of the peace in Bedfordshire; so his local rival Lord Grey secured the appointment of a special commission, whose session Lord Fanhope tried to break up.8 A serious riot ensued, but no one was punished, because the king’s council pardoned both sides. Moreover, though the commission of the justices ran through every franchise, save the very greatest, there were still in operation many other local courts that mattered a good deal in the lives of ordinary folk, besides those of the justices of the peace, the coroners and the sheriffs. Many people still had to attend courts of the royal forests. It is true that after overthrowing Edward II Isabella and Mortimer tried to make themselves popular in 1327 by promising to make perambulations to define the limits of forests throughout the land; and in 1330 Edward III reaffirmed the limitation of the forests.9 But the administration of the areas which remained forest continued as before, with sessions of the court of swainmoot to regulate the pasture of cattle and pigs, the court of attachment every few weeks to punish minor offences against the vert, the commissions of inquiry, or “regards”, every three years to investigate offences against the vert and the venison, the courts of the itinerant justices of the forests every few years; and there are frequent complaints in parliament during the reign of Edward III about the oppressions of the forest officials.1 But the controversies about the question of hunting rights was about to change its character. Instead of being, as in the thirteenth century, mainly between king and aristocracy, it was soon to become a struggle between the king and the wealthy landowners, on the one hand, and the lower classes, clerical and lay, on the other. The rebels of 1381 demanded that hunting and fishing should be made entirely free;2 the parliament of 1390, dominated by wealthy landowners, replied by enacting that neither laymen with lands worth less then 40s a year nor clerics with preferments worth less then £10 should be allowed to keep hunting dogs, and that the justices of the peace should have power to inquire and to punish all offenders; for hunting was “the sport of gentle folk”.3 So in the fifteenth century the forest administration still went on, but now directed its energies rather to protect the king’s hunting of deer, hares, rabbits and other game against the common folk than to insist on a royal monopoly of hunting which no longer existed. In some areas the political weakness of the monarchy, especially in the Lancastrian period, allowed an increase in the judicial powers of great lords. Edward I had tried to reduce the powers of the marcher lords of Wales on the ground that with the conquest of the principality the reason for their special privileges had disappeared; but just because of this the marcher lords had less need of the support of the crown and less urge to obey it. During the troubled reign of Edward II they consolidated their claims which Edward III, with his policy of conciliation at home, felt bound to respect. Hence by the late fourteenth century it was established that the Welsh marcher lords had very important franchises. The king’s writ did not run in the marches, and each marcher lord could not only issue his own writs but even give judgements of life and limb in capital cases through his own 8

D.N. 236. 9 D.N. 337. 1 E.g. D.N. 341. Cf. D.N. 339. 2 Chronicon Henrici Knighton, ed. J.R.Lumby (Rolls Series, 1889–95, 2 vols.), II, 137; cf. letters patent of 12 May 1381 (C.Pat.R. 1377–81, 634). 3 D.N. 569.

The government of the realm

383

justices.4 When under the Yorkists the monarchy at last became strong enough to tackle the lawlessness of the marches, Edward IV did not venture to make a frontal attack on the privileges of the marcher lords. Instead, the council of his son, based on the great Mortimer lordship at Ludlow, was given special powers of oyer and terminer by virtue of the overriding royal prerogative and special royal duty to preserve order.5 Even in the earldom of Chester, which had reverted to the crown in 1237, the fourteenth and early fifteenth century saw a hardening of local privileges and legal customs, so that the earldom had its own justice holding a court for pleas of the crown and common pleas, its own chamberlain to supervise its finances and exercise its exchequer jurisdiction, its own judicial customs such as that of avowry which allowed Cheshire lords to avow or maintain men who come to them for protection, even hunted criminals from outside Cheshire.1 It was not until Henry VIII’s great Statute of Wales of 1536 that these peculiar powers were reduced with the abolition of the Welsh marcher lordships, the extension to those areas of the English shire system and the introduction there and in Cheshire of English writs and procedure. In that same year the great powers of another palatinate, that of Durham., were curtailed with the enactment that henceforth all justices in Durham should be appointed by the king, that all legal proceedings should be in his name, and that all fines and amercements should belong to him.2 In our period not only did many Englishmen live under such palatine jurisdictions in Durham, Cheshire, the marches of Wales or the duchy of Lancaster, but under the judicial control of great franchise holders like the Abbots of Ramsey or Glastonbury, who had important regal privileges such as the return of writs and the appointment of justices.3 Even the courts of lesser lords could still affect the lives of ordinary folk to a degree that is often forgotten. In the fifteenth century, manorial courts, though of less consequence than they had been two centuries earlier, still performed important functions, such as formally admitting new tenants, registering titles, sales and exchanges of land, and commutation of services, enrolling leases and rules of succession, settling boundary disputes, and regulating the village agriculture. Moreover, in many of them were exercised franchisal rights. These varied enormously, but the most common were view of frankpledge, or supervision of the police arrangements of the franchisal area; inspection of weights and measures, and of the quality and measurement of essential victuals such as bread and ale; the presentment and punishment of petty crimes, especially assault; encroachments on commons or roads, and diversion of water-courses. Very frequent were the presentment and punishment of failure to repair wells, ditches, roads and bridges; of nuisances such as fouling of wells, of deceitful methods of trading and of haunters of taverns; presentment of debtors who had failed to repay petty debts.4 Trivial as many of these matters may seem to us, they may well have mattered more in the lives of ordinary country folk than the doings of the chancellor or the King’s Bench, especially as the manorial courts, with or without franchise jurisdiction of the kinds mentioned above, were not only extremely num-erous but met very frequently, usually every three or four weeks. 4

D.N. 352.5 D.N. 359.

English historical documents

384

G. TOWN GOVERNMENT For those who dwelt in chartered towns there was yet another kind of jurisdiction to be reckoned with, that of the borough courts. The monarchy in England had always been strong enough to insist that no charters should be granted to towns without royal approval (save in exceptionally privileged areas like Durham, Cheshire or the Welsh marcher lordships), and that each case should be considered on its own merits. There was thus no opportunity for leagues of towns, as in Germany or Scotland, and no uniformity of privileges or progress. In detail one must say of the government of English towns as Eileen Power said of their craft gilds, that “the only generalisation one can make is that there are no generalisations”.1 Nevertheless, one can distinguish certain tendencies and trends. By the beginning of this period, for example, the leading towns had already acquired extensive privileges of self government, so much so that the general notion of what it took to make a “borough” was rising, and some towns at the lower end of the scale which had formerly ranked as boroughs were ceasing to be counted as such. By 1327 the leading boroughs had all gained the privilege of collecting royal dues in the town instead of being subject to the interference of the sheriff and other royal officials.2 They had also acquired the right to hold the borough court or courts themselves, to elect the royal officials, such as borough reeve or bailiff, originally set by the king over the town, and even to elect a mayor who would be the town’s own official and represent it to the outside world.3 If it had gained the right to have a mayor, a borough had usually won also the right to elect his assistants, now coming to be known by the English name of aldermen. There was no body of trained and paid municipal officials to do this work, so that it had to be done mostly by the heads of the town, and the mayor had a specially heavy responsibility. Not only did he preside over the deliberations of the town council, but he was usually the chief magistrate, often presided over the borough court,4 acted as clerk of the market, manager of the town property and overseer of the town’s finances. The leading towns now wanted to get rid of the last vestiges of the control of the surrounding shire, and in 1373 Bristol became the first provincial town to follow London’s lead in gaining the right to elect its own sheriff and become a county of a town.5 This meant that it dealt with royal writs direct from and to the Chancery and not through the sheriff, and that it had its own commission of the peace, headed by the mayor. The driving force behind the demands for concessions of self-government had usually been the traders of the town, for they were the townsmen who normally had most money to buy concessions and felt more keenly the need for them, in the early days. They therefore usually asked for and obtained at an early stage the right to a gild merchant, 1

D.N. 343. Cf. 721, 724, 356. For an example of ecclesiastical sanctuary, see D.N. 354. Statutes of the Realm, III, 555–8. Cf. G.Lapsley, The County Palatine of Durham (Harvard, 1900), 196–7. 3 Cf. W.O.Ault, Private Jurisdiction in England (Oxford, 1923). 4 D.N. 355. Cf. D.N. 362, 374. 1 History, 4 (1919–20), 212. 2 D.N. 317, 363. 3 D.N. 647, 370, 373. 4 D.N. 362, 365, 374. 5 D.N. 361. 2

The government of the realm

385

who should be able to control trade within the town, taking tolls from all traders who did not belong to it, and fining those who contravened its regulations. By the fourteenth century the governments of the gild merchants and the town were usually very closely linked and even sometimes tending to amalgamate; for it was usually the same small minority of townsmen who had fought for the privileges of each and formed the government of both.6 Even in towns on royal demesne, however, the rate of advance varied greatly. London, always the pacemaker in the race for privileges, had been so commercialised since Saxon days that it had never needed a gild merchant to protect its trading interests. Norwich, one of the leading towns of the realm, did not gain the right to elect a mayor until 1404 when it also leapt forward into the position of a county of a town, with two sheriffs.1 And many towns were much further behind, especially if they were on the lands of lay or ecclesiastical lords other than the king. In 1375 Leicester was only at the stage of gaining the elementary right of leasing its farm, or lump sum of town dues, from John of Gaunt, and then only on a short-term lease.2 Ecclesiastical lords usually felt that they had a sacred obligation to transmit the rights of their house or see unimpaired to their successors. Hence they were reluctant to give self-government to their towns. This resulted in legal battles in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in towns like those at Cirencester and Coventry, in brawls in Lynn and Canterbury, in violent explosions in towns like St Albans.3 More fortunate towns that had already obtained self-government had often begun to behave as a community, using a common seal, making communal agreements, acquiring common property. Yet such actions were precarious, for in the eyes of the law no community existed but only a collection of privileged persons; and the rules of the common law on corporations and their attributes became increasingly precise. Hence there arose a movement for the formal incorporation of self-governing towns; and when Hull was made a county of a town in 1440 its government was declared to be a corporation with right of perpetual succession, the power of suing and being sued as a whole and by the name of the corporation, the legal power to hold lands and a common seal, and the legal authority to issue by-laws.4 This example was quickly followed and by the end of the century all the leading towns had been incorporated. Incorporation had the additional attraction for the ruling classes in the towns that it would give firmer legal support for the constitution of the town as laid down by the charter of incorporation. The privileges of the town had, generally speaking, been exercised by those who had paid for them, and afterwards by their descendants and their friends,5 This meant that as the town population grew, the government of the town was usually in the hands of a shrinking minority of the total inhabitants. This resulted in growing opposition, sometimes violent, which often became serious in the fourteenth 6

Cf. Leicester, where the governments of the gild merchant and the town were coalescing by the fourteenth century. D.N. 371. 1 W.Hudson and J.C.Tingey, The Records of the City of Norwich, I (1906), 31. 2 M.Bateson, Records of the Borough of Leicester, II (1901), 149–52. Cf. D.N. 375. 3 D.N. 366; T.Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 15–31, 35–41; D.N. 369. 4 D.N. 368. 5 D.N. 366, 367.

English historical documents

386

century, when the rough and down-trodden labouring men of the town were backed by substantial craftsmen; these had grown prosperous on the growing demand for specialised manufactures, but were often shut out from the town government by the old trading element. The demands of the craft gilds for recognition and for a share in the government could not in the long run be resisted. To the government by mayor and aldermen was often added a common council on which the craft gilds were represented.6 During the fifteenth century, however, the wealthier members of the gilds, their demands now satisfied, often made common cause with the trading element; and the result was usually oligarchical government, its control often based at first on custom but normally by the end of the century confirmed by a new charter.7 Even in London where a comparatively large number of people and crafts continued to participate effectively in the city government, the period of disputes between the victualling and non-victualling gilds in the reign of Richard II was succeeded by a restoration of the undisputed dominance of the great traders. In 1376 John of Northampton, a draper who led the men of the lesser crafts and the minor members of the greater ones, secured the establishment of a powerful common council to be elected from the crafts; but his reforms were soon whittled away. The aldermen were made irremovable, the number of meetings of the common council was reduced and the power of election restored to the wards, which the aldermen could influence. Throughout the fifteenth century the overwhelming majority of the mayors (who had much power in the city government) were wealthy merchants—mercers, drapers or grocers. It is true, as Dr Bridbury has shown, that not all the developments pointed in the same direction. The number of men admitted to the freedom of the borough increased in some cases in the fifteenth century. At the end of the fourteenth century and in the early fifteenth century the more widely diffused prosperity in the towns and the development of many craft gilds often stimulated a movement for a widening of the town government. This frequently resulted in the addition to the government of the borough of a “common council”, as at Norwich, Lincoln or Lynn. Sometimes, as at Coventry or London, important matters were dealt with in town’s meetings attended by considerable numbers of burgesses. But the admission of an increasing number of men to citizenship is not necessarily any indication of a more democratic government, as we can see from many well-known examples, such as those of the Roman empire or Bismarckian Germany. Sometimes, as at Colchester, the common council was nominated by the existing government, or as at Coventry by the mayor. Some towns, such as Canterbury, Chester or Norwich, did acquire councils elected by the commonalty in some way; but even here restrictive practices often crept in during the fifteenth century. For example, an agreement made at Norwich in 1415 and confirmed by charter in 1417, created a common council of sixty, to be elected by the commonalty; but the twenty-four aldermen, who according to the agreement of 1415 were to be elected annually, were by the charter of 1417 to be appointed for life. Indeed, towards the end of our period many towns, like Leicester, were moving once more 6

D.N. 613. D.N. 371, 372; for the incorporation of the wealthier members of London gilds as livery companies, see D.N. 364. For the quarrels of victualling and non-victualling gilds, see the petition of the Drapers’ Gild against the election of Nicholas Brembre as mayor in 1384 (A.H.Johnson, The History of the Worshipful Company of the Drapers of London (Oxford, 1914), I, 208–11. 7

The government of the realm

387

towards greater restrictions on participation in town government or, like Southampton, had already become a close oligarchy; and if a small governing class managed to consolidate itself, it usually safeguarded its future by obtaining a new charter. Finally, it must be remembered that all these courts, diverse though they were, from parliament down to manorial court or leet, were concerned with the secular side of man’s activities, with the government of the realm. All Englishmen were deemed to be members of the church and as such subject to its courts, which were in principle independent of those of the realm. With these we must deal in Part III.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY I. ORIGINAL SOURCES A. KINGSHIP In this period much attention was paid to the oath and the symbolism of the coronation; these may be most conveniently studied in L.G.Wickham Legg, English Coronation Records (1901), which sets out the various ordines. There are few works by contemporary Englishmen which give prominence to the nature of monarchy, and references must be sought in many places, as S.B.Chrimes has shown in his English Constitutional Ideas in the Fifteenth Century (Cambridge, 1936). But use can be made for this purpose of John Wyclif’s De Officio Regis (ed. A.W.Pollard and C.Sayle, 1887) and the works of Sir John Fortescue. The Governance of England was edited by C.Plummer in 1885, Professor S.B.Chrimes re-edited the De Laudibus Legum Anglie (1942); and the rest of Fortescue’s works, including the De Natura Legis Nature, must be sought in the collected edition of his works published by his descendant Lord Clermont in 1869. B. COUNCIL AND PARLIAMENT The king governed largely through his councils, but for the continual council no organised records have survived for this period. Much of what there is, culled from documents in the British Museum and elsewhere for the period from 1386 onwards, was collected by N.H. Nicolas in Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council (Record Commn., 1834–7). Some of the cases which the council heard have been printed by I.S.Leadam and J.F.Baldwin in Select Cases before the King’s Council (Selden Soc., 1918), and some of the cases that it dealt with when it sat in the Star Chamber have been published in Select Pleas of the Court of Star Chamber, Vol. I, 1477–1509, ed. I.S.Leadam (Selden Soc., 1902). As with so much else in the king’s government, there is still a great quantity of relevant unpublished material in the Public Record Office, notably among the warrants under the privy seal and the signet, and the “Ancient Petitions”. For the most solemn session of the king’s council that developed into parliament we have the Rotuli Parliamentorum (1272–1503) published in 6 volumes by J.Strachey and others in 1767, with an index volume printed by the Record Commission in 1832. At the beginning of our period the records of parliament were still unorganised but after 1339 they improve and on the whole become increasingly full and informative about the proceedings until

English historical documents

388

the end of the century. In the fifteenth century they gradually become more formal until by the end of the period they are little more than records of legislation. So pronounced was this trend that the statute rolls exist only down to 1468, and the printed collection, the Statutes of the Realm, vols 1 and ii (Record Commn, 1810,1816) had to fill the gap with transcripts of the statutes amongst the Exchequer records and elsewhere. For the membership of the Lords the Reports from the Lords’ Committee…touching the Dignity of a Peer (5 vols, London, 1820–9) and W.Dugdale, A perfect copy of all summons of the nobility to the Great Councils and Parliaments of the Realm (1685), are useful; and helpful for the membership of the commons are the Official Return of Members of Parliament (Pt I, 1878), and W.Prynne, A Brief Register, Kalendar, and Survey of the several kinds of all parliamentary writs (4 pts, 1656–64), which includes many expenses writs and returns. H.G.Richardson and G.O.Sayles have printed some rolls of parliament additional to those of the Rotuli Parliamentorum for the period 1272 to 1373 in Rotuli Parliamentorum Anglie hactenus inediti. The Anonimalle Chronicle (ed. V.H.Galbraith, 1927), in its long account of the discussions of the commons in 1376, provides one of the rare glimpses in this period of the actual course of parliamentary proceedings. That records were being kept before 1509 of proceedings of the Lords is shown not only by the sophisticated appearance of the first extant Lords Journal of the series in 1509 but by the survival of a recorded fragment of a debate in 1461, published by W.H.Dunham, jr, as The Fane Fragment of the 1461 Lords’ Journal (New Haven, 1935), a shorter fragment for 1449 printed by A.R.Myers as “A Parliamentary Debate in the MidFifteenth Century” in B.J.R.L. 22 (1938) and another scrap for 1449 published by R.Virgoe in B.I.H.R. 34 (1961). C. LAW COURTS As both parliament and council were, in one aspect, royal courts, both could and did dispense justice; and numerous parliamentary petitions not printed in the Rotuli Parliamentorum are still preserved in the classes of Ancient Petitions and Chancery, Parliament and Council Proceedings in the Public Record Office. Some specialised law courts had, however, already evolved and some were developing during this period. Of the records of the common law courts for this period not much has been printed so far. G.O.Sayles has published Select Pleas in the Court of King’s Bench, 1327–40 (Selden Soc., 1958), with a valuable introduction on the officials and the records of the court in that period, and G.Wrottesley published a series of translations and abstracts from both Common Pleas and King’s Bench plea rolls of cases relating to Staffordshire in the collections of the William Salt Archaeological Society (1890–1903). The Selden Society has also printed Select Cases in the Exchequer of Pleas, ed. H Jenkinson and B.Fermoy (1932). For cases in courts that were developing to supplement the common law, see the Selden Society volumes: Select Cases in Chancery, ed. W.P.Baildon (1896); Select Pleas in the Court of Admiralty, ed. R.G.Marsden (vol. 1, Pt I, 1894); Select Cases concerning the Law Merchant, ed. C.Gross and H.Hall (3 vols, Nos 23, 46, 49; 1908–32). Other Chancery cases of this period may be found, despite the title, in Proceedings in Chancery in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, ed. J.Caley and J.Bayley (Record Commn., 1827). In The Scrope and Grosvenor Controversy (2 vols, 1832) Sir Harris Nicolas printed records of a famous case in the court of Chivalry in the 1380s. A rare and interesting surviving record of a case in the court of Chivalry was printed by A.Rogers in Nottingham

The government of the realm

389

Medieval Studies, vols 6 and 7 (1962 and 1963), as “Hoton versus Shakell: a Ransom Case in the Court of Chivalry, 1390–5”. For editions of the Year Books, notes made in the courts on the arguments of counsel and the pronouncements of the judges on points of law, and written by or for students at the Inns of Court, see Year Books of 11–20 Edward III, ed. A.J.Horwood and L.O.Pike, 15 vols (Rolls Series, 1883–1911); Year Books for the reign of Richard II have been printed for the Ames Foundation for 12 Richard II, ed. G.F.Deiser (1914), 13 Richard II, ed. T.F.T.Plucknett (1929), 11 Richard II, ed. I.D.Thornley and T.F.T.Plucknett (1937); Year book of 1 Henry VI, ed. C.H.Williams (Selden Soc., 1933); Year book 10 Edward IV, 49 Henry VI (1470), ed. N.Neilson (Selden Soc., 1931). For commissions on land drainage and the like, see Public Works in Medieval Law, ed. C.T.Flower, 2 vols (Selden Soc., 1915, 1923). The power of the King’s Bench and the itinerant justices to call up before them cases begun before the justices of the peace has been useful in enabling Miss Bertha Putnam and others to draw from the Assize Rolls and the indictments in King’s Bench records of cases before the justices of the peace, whose records for this period have in general not been preserved. See, for example, Miss B.H.Putnam, Proceedings before the Justices of the Peace in the 14th and 15th centuries (Ames Foundation, 1938: introduction by T.F.T.Plucknett); Yorkshire Sessions of the Peace, 1361–64 (Yorks Arch. Soc., 1939). See similar publications for Lincolnshire, 1360–75, 1381–96, ed. R.Sillem, E.Kimball (Lincoln Record Soc., 30, 49, 1937, 1955). For pleas of the forest, see Select Pleas of the Forest, ed. G.J.Turner (Selden Soc., 1901). No proceedings of the palatinate courts are in print for this period, except calendars for the plea rolls of Lancaster for 1401 in the Chetham Society, New Series, vol. 87 (1928) and for the feet of fines of Lancaster for 1308–77, 1377–1509 in the Lancashire and Cheshire Record Society Series, vols 46, 50 (1902, 1905); but the P.R.O. Lists and Indexes Nos 14 and 40 (1901, 1914) provide a cursory guide to the records in the Public Record Office, to be supplemented for the duchy of Lancaster by the information in R.Somerville, History of the Duchy of Lancaster, vol. 1, 1265–1603 (1953). T.B.Pugh prints some illuminating records for The Marcher Lordships of South Wales, 1415–1536: Select Documents (Cardiff, 1963). D. FINANCE When we turn to finance, there is not much available in print for the activities of the Exchequer in this period. F.Devon published translated extracts from the Issue Rolls in 1837 in Issues of the Exchequer (10 Henry III to 39 Henry VI) and a translation of the Issue Roll of Thomas de Brantingham, treasurer…1370 (1835), and H.M.Stationery Office has published six volumes of Inquisitions and Assessments relating to Feudal Aids (1899–1920). The Record Commission printed the assessment of the ninth in 1340 in Nonarum Inquisitiones and some of the assessments for tenths and fifteenths in Surrey appear in Surrey Taxation Returns (Surrey Record Society, 1932), with an introduction by H.C.Johnson. The mid-fifteenth-century reputation of the Exchequer for corruption is shown in Verses on the Exchequer in the Fifteenth Century, ed. C.H. and G.E. Haskins, E.H.R. 34 (1921). A summary of the poll-tax assessment of 1377 was published in Archaeologia, 7 (1785), and the Suffolk poll-tax lists of 1381 are printed as an appendix to E. Powell, The Rising in East Anglia (Cambridge, 1896). Many local societies have printed subsidy rolls for their county. See Handlist of Record Publications (British

English historical documents

390

Records Association, 1951), 12–13. Specially illuminating is Surrey taxation returns, fifteenths and tenths, with introductions by J.F.Willard and H.C.Johnson (Surrey Record Soc., 1922–32). For the palatinate of Chester the Chamberlains Accounts for 1301–60 have been calendared by R.Stewart-Brown for vol. 59 (1910) of the Lancashire and Cheshire Record Society. The Privy Purse Expenses of Elizabeth of York and Wardrobe Accounts of Edward IV, ed. N.H.Nicolas, 1830, is a misleading title, for the accounts of Edward IV’s time are those of the great wardrobe for 20 Edward IV; the great wardrobe dealt with clothing and the large stores of cloth that had to be bought and kept for the periodic distributions in the court. Some light on the way that the Yorkist kings tackled financial administration may be gleaned from Ministers Accounts of the Warwickshire Estates of the Duke of Clarence, 1477–80, ed. R.H.Hilton (1952). E. THE ROYAL HOUSEHOLD, THE PRIVY AND SIGNET SEALS Efforts were made from time to time to promote economy in great households— especially the royal household which carried the greater part of a thousand persons on its pay rolls. Edward IV made a great effort towards this end by having made, probably in 1471–2, a detailed survey of the authorised establishment and the allowances in every department of the household; and in 1478 he followed this up with an ordinance intended to tighten the checks on household expenditure. These documents, together with an ordinance of 1445 on which the ordinance of 1478 is partly based, are printed by A.R.Myers in The Household of Edward IV (Manchester, 1959). Besides illuminating many aspects of the social history of the time, the Black Book of 1471–2 throws light on some aspects of administration, e.g. the duties and position of the secretary and the clerks of the signet. For a bibliography of manuscript and printed sources for the office of secretary in the fifteenth century, see J.Otway-Ruthven, The King’s Secretary and the Signet Office in the 15th Century (Cambridge, 1939), 143–51. In addition to promoting economy in the running of the household and developing the office of secretary, Edward IV increased the use of the chamber of the household as a treasury, probably inspired by the methods of the duchy of Lancaster. For an example of these methods which sent up the duchy revenue from its Lancashire estates from £347 in 1476–7 to £885 in 1480–1, see the extracts from the Duchy Register printed by A.R.Myers in “An Official Progress through Lancashire and Cheshire in 1476”, in Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 115 (1963). The life of a young clerk of the privy seal is depicted in Thomas Hoccleve’s “La Male Regle” (printed in Hoccleve’s Minor Poems, ed. F.J.Furnivall, E.E.T.S., e.s. 61, 1892); and the hardships of a clerk of a signet, caught up in a political revolution, are described in George Ashby’s Poems, ed. M.Bateson (E.E.T.S., e.s. 76, 1899). F. THE ARMY AND THE NAVY For the army and the navy at the beginning of this period, see the references in A.E.Prince “The Army and Navy”, in The English Government at Work, 1327–1336, vol. 1 (Cambridge, Mass., 1940). Information about the military organisation for the battle of Crécy and the siege of Calais is given in Crécy and Calais, ed. G.Wrottesley, 1897, already noticed in the previous bibliography. N.H.Nicolas provides translations from both chronicles and records in his History of the Battle of Agincourt (1832), and F.P.Barnard, Edward IV’s s French Expedition of 1475 (Oxford, 1925), prints a contemporary record

The government of the realm

391

of the particulars of the contingents of the various retinues. The most effective part of the army in this period was normally the indentured retinues and many indentures of retinue are now in print. Some of these will be noted in the bibliography for Part IV, but one may mention here two sources which also throw light on the administration of two great honours—John of Gaunt’s Register, 1372–76, ed. S.ArmitageSmith (Camden Soc., 3rd Series, 20–1 (1911)) and John of Gaunt’s Register, 1379–83, ed. E.C. Lodge and R.Somerville (ibid. 56–7 (1937)); The Register of the Black Prince (4 pts, H.M.S.O., 1930–3). T.F.Tout wrote a useful essay on “Firearms in England in the fourteenth century”, now in Collected Papers, II (Manchester, 1934), 233–75. Some useful references to records on the supply of firearms to both army and navy in the fourteenth century by the privy wardrobe will be found in vol. IV, ch. XV, of T.F.Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England (Manchester, 1928). References to other aspects of naval administration, e.g. the clerks of the king’s ships, are given in M.Oppenheim, The Adminstration of the Royal Navy (1896). The chief source for the maritime law of the period is the Black Book of the Admiralty, ed. with trans, by T.Twiss (4 vols, Rolls Series, 1871–6). G. TOWNS The records of towns, like those of manors, are far too numerous to be treated exhaustively, and only a selection of a few of the more generally useful ones can be attempted here. However, C.Gross, A Bibliography of British Municipal History (Cambridge, 1915), and the Interim Report of the Committee on House of Commons Personnel and Politics, 1264–1832 (Cmd. Paper 4130, London, 1932) are valuable for this purpose, and references to other records may be gathered from many of the special studies mentioned later. London was outstanding in importance among English towns in this period, and its records therefore have a special importance. The Calendars of London Letter Books, C to L, ed. R.R. Sharpe (1901–12), include not only information on private law suits but various civic regulations. The Calendars of Plea and Memoranda Rolls of the City of London were edited from 1323 to 1437 in 4 vols by A.H.Thomas (1926–43) and from 1437 to 1482 in 2 vols by P.E.Jones (1954, 1961). Also useful are the Calendar of Letters from the Mayor and Corporation of the City of London, 1350–1370, ed. R.R.Sharpe (1885); Munimenta Gildhallae Londoniensis, Liber Albus, Liber Custumarum, and Liber Horn, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 2 vols, 1859–62); and Memorials of London and London Life: a series of extracts from the archives of the City of London, 1276–1419, ed. and trans. H.T.Riley, 1868. Some records for the government of other towns are: (a) Bath

Municipal Records, 1189–1604, ed. A.J.King and B.H.Watts (Bath, 1885).

(b) Beverley

Report on the MSS of the Corporation of Beverley (Hist. MSS Comm., 1900).

—

Beverley Town Documents, ed. A.F.Leach (Selden Soc., 14, 1900).

(c) Bristol

The Great Red Book of Bristol, Pts i–iv, ed. E.W.W.Veale (Bristol Record Society, 1931–53). (The first 55 pp. of Pt III are an introduction that usefully distinguishes the numerous courts of Bristol in the late fifteenth century.)

—

The Little Red Book of Bristol, ed. F.B.Bickley, 2 vols (Bristol, 1900).

English historical documents

—

392

Bristol Charters, vol. I, 1155–1373, ed. N.D.Harding, 1930; vol. II, 1378–1499, ed. H.A.Cronne, 1946 (Bristol Record Soc.).

(d) Cambridge Annals of Cambridge, by C.H.Cooper, vol. I (Cambridge, 1842). —

The Charters of the Borough of Cambridge, ed. F.W.Maitland and M. Bateson, 1901.

(e) Colchester Court Rolls of the Borough of Colchester, 1310–79, ed. W.Gurney Benham, 3 vols, 1921–41. —

The Red Paper Book of Colchester (Colchester, 1902).

(f) Coventry

The Coventry Leet Book; or Mayor’s Register containing Records of City Court Leet, ed. M.D.Harris, 4 Pts, E.E.T.S., 1907–13.

—

Historical MSS Commission, 15th Report, App. X (No. 47), 1899.

(g) Exeter

Letters and Papers of John Shillingford, Mayor of Exeter, 1447–50, ed. S.A. Moore (Camden Soc., 1871).

(h) Leicester

Records of the Borough of Leicester, ed. M.Bateson, vol. 2, 1327–1509 (1901).

(l) Northampton

Records of the Borough of Northampton, 2 vols, ed. C.A.Markham and J.C. Cox, 1898.

(j) Norwich

The Records of the City of Norwich, 2 vols, ed. W.Hudson and J.C.Tingey (Norwich, 1906–10).

(k) Nottingham

Records of the Borough of Nottingham, ed. W.H.Stevenson (Nottingham, 1882– 1900).

(l) Reading

Reading Records, ed. J.M.Guilding, vol. I, 1431–1602 (Reading, 1892). Historical MSS Commission, 11th Report, App. VII (No. 22), 1888.

(m) Southampton

The Black Book of Southampton, ed. A.B.Wallis-Chapman (Southampton Record Soc., 3 vols, 1912–15).

—

The Assembly Books of Southampton, ed. J.W.Horrocks (Southampton Record Soc., 4 vols, 1917).

—

The Oak Book of Southampton, ed. P.Studer (Southampton Record Soc., 3 vols, 1910).

—

Letters of the 15th and 16th centuries, ed. R.C.Anderson (Southampton Record Soc., 1921).

(n) Winchester

The Black Book of Winchester, ed. W.H.B.Bird (Winchester, 1925).

—

The City Government of Winchester from the Records of the 14th and 15th Centuries, ed. J.S.Furley (Oxford, 1925). Historical MSS Commission, 6th Report, 1877–8, Part 1.

(o) York

Extracts from the Municipal Records of the City of York during the reigns of Edward IV, Edward V, and Richard III, ed. R.Davies, 1843.

—

York Civic Records, ed. A.Raine, vol. 1 (Yorkshire Archaeological Soc., Record Series, 1939).

The government of the realm

—

393

York Memorandum Book, ed. M.Sellers (2 vols, Surtees Soc., vols 120, 125, 1912– 15).

For controversies between cathedral chapters and towns, see Letters and Papers of John Shillingford, Mayor of Exeter, 1447–50, ed. S.A.Moore (Camden Soc., 1871); E.F.Jacob, “Chichele and Canterbury”, Essays presented to F.M.Powicke (Oxford, 1948); and Hist. MSS Comm., 9th Report, App. (1883–4), for records of the Corporation of Canterbury and of the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church.

H. COLLECTIONS OF SOURCES S.B.Chrimes and A.L.Brown: Select Documents of English Constitutional History 1307–1485 (1961). (Mainly drawn from the Parliament and Statute Rolls and chiefly illustrative of the history of council and parliament.) E.C.Lodge and G.A.Thornton: English Constitutional Documents, 1307–1485 (Cambridge, 1935). (Text less carefully checked and related topics often sub-divided; but ranges more widely and includes sections on household, justice, Church, seignorial and local government, with bibliographies and comments.) B.Wilkinson: The Constitutional History of Medieval England, vol. 2, 1307–99 (1952); vol. 3, 1216–1399 (1958); The Constitutional History of England in the Fifteenth Century, 1399–1485 (1964). (Gives translations of documents grouped by topics, with bibliographies and introductory essays.)

II. SECONDARY SOURCES A. GENERAL Cam, H.M.: Liberties and Communities in Medieval England (Cambridge, 1944). Holdsworth, W.H.: History of English Law, vol. 1 (revised A.L.Goodhart and H.G.Hanbury, 1956); vols 2 and 3 (3rd edn, 1922–3). Jolliffe, J.E.A.: Constitutional History of Medieval England (1937). Lapsley, G.: Crown, Community and Parliament in the Later Middle Ages, ed. H.M.Cam and G.Barraclough (Oxford, 1951). F.Lot et R.Fawtier: Histoire des institutions françaises au moyen age (3 vols, 1958). Plucknett, T.F.T.: Concise History of the Common Law (5th edn, 1955). Stubbs, W.: Constitutional History of England, vols 2 and 3 (4th edn of vol. 2, 1906, 5th edn of vol. 3, 1903). (See H.M.Cam, “Stubbs Seventy Years After”, Cambridge Historical Journal, 9 (1948) and J.G.Edwards, “William Stubbs” (Hist. Assn. Pamphlet, 1952). Taswell-Langmead, T.P.: English Constitutional History, 11th edn, revised by T.F.T.Plucknett (1949).

B. THE MONARCHY Armstrong, C.A.J.: “The Inauguration Ceremonies of the Yorkist Kings and their Title to the Throne”, T.R.Hist.S. 30 (1948). Chrimes, S.B.: English Constitutional Ideas in the 15th Century (Cambridge, 1936). Gilbert, F.: “Sir John Fortescue’s Dominium Regale et Politicum”, Medievalia et Humanistica, II (1944). Hinton, R.W.K.: “English Constitutional Doctrines from Sir John Fortescue to Sir John Eliot”, E.H.R. 75 (1960).

English historical documents

394

McKenna, J.W., “The coronation oil of the Yorkist kings”, E.H.R., 82 (1967). Richardson, H.G.: “The English Coronation Oath”, Speculum, 24 (1949); “The Coronation in Medieval England”, Traditio, 16 (1960). Schramm, P.E.: A History of the English Coronation (trans. J.G.Wickham Legg, Oxford, 1937). Thornley, J.D.: “Treason by Words in the 15th century”, E.H.R. 32 (1917); “The Act of Treasons”, History, 6 (1921). Ullman, W.: Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages (1961). Wilkinson, B.: “Notes on the Coronation Records of the Fourteenth Century”, E.H.R. 70 (1955). Wormald, F., “The Wilton Diptych”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 17 (1954).

C. THE COUNCIL Baldwin, J.F.: The Kings Council in England during the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1913). Brooks, F.W.: The Council of the North (Hist. Assn. Pamphlet, 1953). Brown, A.L.: “The Commons and the Council in the reign of Henry IV”, E.H.R. 79 (1964). Elton, G.R.: The Tudor Revolution in Government (Cambridge, 1953). Kirby, J.L.: “Councils and Councillors of Henry IV, 1399–1413”, J.R.Hist.S., 5th series, 14 (1964). Lander, J.R.: “The Yorkist Council and Administration”, E.H.R. 73 (1958); “Council, Administration and Councillors”, B.I.H.R. 32 (1959). Lewis, N.B.: “‘The Continual Council’ in the early years of Richard II, 13 77–80”, E.H.R. 41 (1926). Plucknett, T.F.T.: “The Place of the Council in the 15th century”, T.R.Hist.S., 4th ser., 1 (1918). Reid, R.R.: The Kings Council in the North (1921). Roskell, J.S.: “The Office and Dignity of Protector of England”, E.H.R. 68 (1953). Scofield, C.L.: A Study of the Court of Star Chamber (Chicago, 1900). Skeel, C.A.J.: The Council in the Marches of Wales (1904). Williams, P.H.: The Council in the Marches of Wales under Elizabeth I (Cardiff, 1958).

D. PARLIAMENT Clarke, M.V.: Medieval Representation and Consent (1936); Fourteenth Century Studies, ed. M. McKisack and L.S.Sutherland (Oxford, 1937). Edwards, J.G.: The Commons in Medieval English Parliaments (Creighton Lecture, 1957); “The Parliamentary Committee of 1398”, E.H.R. 40 (1925); “The emergence of the majority rule in English Parliamentary elections”, T.R.Hist.S., 5th series, 14 (1964). Houghton, K.: “Theory and practice in borough elections to parliament during the later 15th century”, B.I.H.R., 39 (1966). Lander, J.R.: “Henry VI and the Duke of York’s Second Protectorate”, 1455–6, B.R.J.L. 43 (1960). Lapsley, G.: “The Parliamentary Title of Henry IV”, E.H.R. 49 (1934). Lewis, N.B.: “Re-election to Parliament in the Reign of Richard II”, E.H.R. 48 (1933). McFarlane, K.B.: “Parliament and Bastard Feudalism”, T.R.Hist.S., 4th ser., 26 (1944). McKisack, M.: The Parliamentary Representation of the English Boroughs during the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1932). Myers, A.R.: “Parliamentary Petitions in the Fifteenth Century”, E.H.R. 52 (1937); “Some Observations on the Procedure of the Commons in dealing with Bills in the Lancastrian Period”, Univ. of Toronto Law Journal, 3 (1939). Plucknett, T.F.T.: “Parliament”, The English Government at Work, 1326–37, ed. J.F.Willard and W.A.Morris, vol. 1 (Cambridge, Mass., 1940); “The Impeachments of 1376”, T.R.Hist.S., 5th ser., 1 (1951). Powell, J.E., and Wallis, K.: The House of Lords in the Middle Ages (1968). Rayner, D.: “The Forms and Machinery of the Commune Petition in the 14th Century”, E.H.R. 56 (1941).

The government of the realm

395

Richardson, H.G., and Sayles, G.O.: “The Parliaments of Edward III”, B.I.H.R. 8 (1930–1), 9 (1931–2). “The King’s Ministers in Parliament, 1272–1377”, E.H.R. 47 (1932). Roskell, J.S.: The Commons in the Parliament of 1422 (Manchester, 1954); The Commons and their Speakers in English Parliaments (Manchester, 1965); “The Problem of the Attendance of the Lords in Medieval Parliaments”, B.I.H.R. 29 (1956); The Knights of the Shire for the County Palatine of Lancaster 1377–1460 (Chetham Soc., New Series, 96, 1937); “Perspectives in English Parliamentary History”, B.J.R.L. 46 (1964). Templeman, G.: “The history of parliament to 1400 in the light of modern research”, Univ. of Birmingham Hist. Journal, 1 (1948). Tout, T.F.: “The English Parliament and Public Opinion 1376–88”, Collected Papers (Manchester, 1932). Trueman, J.H.: “The Statute of York and the Ordinances of 1311”, Medievalia et Humanistica, 10 (1956). Wedgwood, J.: ed., History of Parliament, 1439–1509, vol. 1, Biographies of the members of the Commons House (1936); vol. II, Register of the Ministers and the members of both Houses (1938). Wilkinson, B.: “The Deposition of Richard II and the Accession of Henry IV”, E.H.R. 54 (1930); “The Political Revolution of the 13th and 14th centuries”, Speculum, 24 (1949); Studies in the Constitutional History of the 13th and 14th Centuries (Manchester, 1937). Willard, J.F.: Parliamentary Taxes on Personal Property, 1290–1334 (Cambridge, Mass., 1934). Wolffe, B.P.: “Acts of Resumption in the Lancastrian Parliaments, 1399–1456”, E.H.R. 73 (1958). Wood-Legh, K.L.: “Sheriffs, Lawyers and Belted Knights in the Parliaments of Edward III”, E.H.R. 46 (1931).

E. THE ROYAL HOUSEHOLD, THE PRIVY AND SIGNET SEALS Chrimes, S.B.: An Introduction to the Administrative History of Medieval England (2nd edn, Oxford, 1959). (And for sections F and G, below.) Dibben, L.B.: “Secretaries in the 13th and 14th centuries”, E.H.R. 25 (1910). Hill, M.C.: The King’s Messengers, 1199–1377 (1961). Myers, A.R.: The Household of Edward IV (Manchester, 1959). Otway-Ruthven, J.: The King’s Secretary and the Signet Office in the 15th Century (Cambridge, 1939). Tout, T.F.: Chapters in the administrative history of medieval England (6 vols, Manchester, 1920– 1933).

F. THE CHANCERY Lyte, H.C.Maxwell: Historical Notes on the use of the Great Seal of England (1926). Maitland, F.W.: Equity (Cambridge, 1909). Tout, T.F.: “The household of the Chancery and its disintegration”, Essays in History presented to R.L.Poole (ed. H.W.C.Davis, Oxford, 1927), op. cit. Wilkinson, B.: The Chancery under Edward III (Manchester, 1929). Willard, J.F., and Morris, W.A.: The English Government at Work (3 vols, Cambridge, Mass., 1940–50). (And for sections G and H, below.)

G. THE EXCHEQUER AND OTHER ASPECTS OF ROYAL FINANCE Fryde, E.B.: “The Last Trials of Sir William de la Pole”, Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd ser. 16 (1963–4);—: “Loans to the English Crown, 1328–31”, E.H.R. 70 (1955); “Materials for the Study of Edward III’s Credit Operations, 1327–48”, B.I.H.R. 22–3 (1949–50); “Edward III’s Wool Monopoly of 1337: a 14th century royal trading venture”, History, 37 (1952); “The English Farmers of the Customs, 1343–51”, T.R.Hist.S., 5th ser., vol. 9 (1959). Harriss, G.L.: “Fictitious Loans”, Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd ser., 8 (1955).

English historical documents

396

Henneman, J.B.: “Financing the Hundred Years War; Royal Taxation in France in 1340”, Speculum, 42 (1967). Jenkinson, H., and Broome, D.M.: “An Exchequer Statement of Receipts and Issues, 1339–40”, E.H.R. 58 (1943). Kingsford, C.L.: “An Historical Collection of the 15th Century”, E.H.R. 29 (1914). Kirby, J.L.: “The Financing of Calais under Henry V”, B.I.H.R. 23 (1950); “The Issues of the Lancastrian Exchequer and Lord Cromwell’s Estimates of 1433”, B.I.H.R. 24 (1951). McFarlane, K.B.: “Loans to the Lancastrian Kings: the Problem of Inducement”, Cambridge Hist. Journal, 9 (1947). Newhall, R.A., “The war finances of Henry V and the Duke of Bedford”, E.H.R., 36 (1921). Pugh, T.B., and Ross, C.D.: “The English Baronage and the Income Tax of 1436”, B.I.H.R. 26 (1953); “Some materials for the study of Baronial Incomes in the 15th Century”, Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd ser. 6 (1954). Steel, A.: The Receipt of the Exchequer, 1377–1485 (Cambridge, 1954). (A summary for nonspecialists appeared in History, 40 (1955), as “The Financial Background of the Wars of the Roses”.) Wolffe, B.P.: “The Management of English Royal Estates under the Yorkist Kings”, E.H.R. 71 (1956).

H. THE LAW COURTS Barraclough, G.: “Law and Legislation in Medieval England”, Law Quarterly Review, 56 (1940). Bolland, W.C.: The general eyre (Cambridge, 1922). Ehrlich, L.: Proceedings against the Crown, 1216–1377 (Oxford, 1921). Harcourt, L.W.V.: His grace the steward and trial by peers (London, 1907). Hastings, M.: The Court of Common Pleas in the 15th Century (New York, 1947). Hemmant, M.: “The Exchequer Chamber, being the assembly of all the judges of England in matters of law”, B.I.H.R. 7 (1929–30). Ives, E.W.: “Promotion in the Legal Profession of Yorkist and Early Tudor England”, Law Quarterly Review, 75 (1959); “The Reputation of the Common Lawyer in English Society, 1450–1550”, Univ. of Birmingham Hist. Journal, 2 (1960). Plucknett, T.F.T.: Concise History of the Common Law (5th edn., 1955); Statutes and their Interpretation in the first half of the Fourteenth Century (Cambridge, 1922); “The relations between Roman Law and English Common Law down to the sixteenth century”, Univ. of Toronto Law Journal, III (1939). Putnam, B.H.: The Place in Legal History of Sir William Shareshull (Cambridge, 1950). (A prominent judge of Edward III’s reign.) Squibb, G.D.: The High Court of Chivalry (Oxford, 1959). Winfield, P.H.: Sources of English Legal History (Cambridge, 1925).

I. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN SHIRES, LORDSHIPS AND BOROUGHS Ault, W.O.: Private Jurisdiction in England (Oxford, 1923). (Not as wide in scope as the title implies. Deals in fact with a few great ecclesiastical lordships, such as the liberty of Ramsey Abbey.) Barraclough, G.: “The Earldom and County Palatine of Chester”, Trans, of the Hist. Soc. of Lancs, and Cheshire, 103 (1951). Beard, C.A.: The Office of Justice of the Peace in England (Columbia U.P., 1904). (Still of some value, but needs to be read in conjunction with the work of Miss B .H.Putnam on the development of the office.) Bridbury, A.R.: Economic Growth, England in the Later Middle Ages (1962). (Mentioned here because he opposes the generally accepted idea that the fifteenth century was a time of increasing oligarchy in town government.)

The government of the realm

397

Denholm-Young, N.: Seignorial Administration in England (Oxford, 1937). Gross, C.: The Gild Merchant, 2 vols (Oxford, 1890). Green, A.S.: Town Life in the 15th Century (1894). Jenkinson, H., and Mills, Mabel H.: “Rolls from a Sheriff’s Office of the 14th Century”, E.H.R. 43 (1928). (The rolls are from Bedfordshire and were edited by G.H.Fowler for the Beds. Hist. Soc., 1929.) Lapsley, G.T.: The County Palatine of Durham (Harvard U.P., 1900). Le Patourel, J.H.: The Medieval Administration of the Channel Isles (1937). Levett, A.E.: Studies in Manorial History (Oxford, 1938). (Especially useful for the development of baronial councils, often overriding manorial customs.) Putnam, B.H.: Early Treatises on the Practice of the Justices of the Peace in the 15th and 16th Centuries (Oxford, 1924); The Enforcement of the Statute of Labourers, 1349–59 (1908); “The Transformation of the Keepers of the Peace into the Justices of the Peace, 1327–80”, T.R.Hist.S., 4th ser., 12 (1929); (ed.) Proceedings before the Justices of the Peace, Edward III to Richard II (1938). Somerville, R.: History of the Duchy of Lancaster, vol. 1 (1953); “The Duchy and County Palatine of Lancaster”, Trans, of the Hist. Soc. of Lancs, and Cheshire, 103 (1951). Tait, J: The Medieval English Borough (Manchester, 1936). Trenholme, N.M.: The English Monastic Borough (Missouri, 1927). Unwin, G.: The Gilds and Companies of London (1908). Weinbaum, M.: The Incorporation of Boroughs (Manchester, 1937); British Borough Charters, 1307–1660 (Cambridge, 1943).

A. THE KING 214. The Statute of Treasons, 1352 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 319 [French]) Also whereas there have been divers opinions before this time as to what cases should be adjudged treason and what not; the king at the request of the lords and of the commons has made the following declaration, that is to say: When a man attempts or plots the death of our lord the king, or of our lady his queen or of their eldest son and heir; or if a man violates the king’s wife or the king’s eldest unmarried daughter, or the wife of the king’s eldest son and heir: or if a man levies war against our lord the king in his realm, or adheres to the king’s enemies, giving to them aid and comfort in his realm or elsewhere, and of this shall be attainted and proved of open deed by men of their rank; and if a man counterfeit the king’s great or privy seal or his money…and if a man slay the chancellor, treasurer, or the king’s justices of the one bench or the other, justices in eyre, or justices of assize, and any other justices assigned to hear and determine, being in their places, doing their offices. And it is to be understood that in the cases rehearsed above, [anything] ought to be judged treason which extends to our lord the king and his royal majesty; and of such treason the forfaiture of the escheats belongs to our sovereign lord the king…. And moreover there is another kind of treason, that is to say, when a servant slays his master, or a wife her husband, or when a secular cleric or a religious kills his prelate, to whom he owes faith and obedience; and in such kinds of treason the escheats ought to pertain to every lord of his own fee. And as many other similar cases of treason may happen in time to come, which a man cannot think nor declare at the present time, it is agreed that if any other case, supposed treason, which is not specified above, should come before any justices, the justices shall wait, without passing sentence of treason, till the case be shown and declared before the king and his parliament, whether it ought to be judged treason or some other felony. 215. The anointing and vesting of the king, 1377 (From the Liber Regalis, probably used at the coronation of Richard II. Printed by L.G. Wickham Legg, in English Coronation Records (Constable, 1901), 91–5 [Latin], trans., 118–20) These prayers done, the prince shall rise and sit in his chair before the metropolitan or bishop in the manner as aforesaid. The prince shall repose himself awhile in the chair and then arise and go to the altar and lay aside his robes except his silken tunic and shirt, which are open at the breast and between the shoulders, and on the shoulders and also at the elbows; and the openings of the tunic and shirt are to be bound together by silver loops…and his hands shall be anointed with holy oil…. Then shall he be anointed on the breast, between the shoulders, on the shoulders, and both elbows with the same holy oil,

The king

399

with which a cross shall be made on his head; and afterwards he shall be anointed there with chrism. And the sacrist is to provide that the phials for the oil and the chrism be ready, of which one is to be gilt and to contain the holy chrism. But the other is to be only of silver, and to contain only the holy oil…. Then shall he be clothed in the colobium sindonis shaped like a dalmatic, after his head has been covered with a coif on account of the anointing…. And after the ornaments have been blessed, the king shall be clothed in his vestments by the Abbot of Westminster or his deputy. And first he shall be clothed, over the colobium, with a long tunic reaching to the feet, wrought with golden figures before and behind; and buskins also and spurs shall be placed on his legs and feet…. Then shall he receive the sword from the bishops; and know that with the sword the whole kingdom has been given to him to rule faithfully according to the following words…. When he has been girded with the sword, he shall likewise receive the armils…. These armils shall hang like a stole round his neck, from both shoulders to the elbows, and shall be bound to the elbows by silken knots…. Then shall he be vested in the royal mantle, which is square and worked all over with golden eagles. Then shall the metropolitan or bishop say:— Receive this pall, which is formed with four corners, to let you understand that the four corners of the world are subject to the power of God: and that no man can happily reign upon earth, who has not received his authority from Heaven. Amen. Then shall the crown be blessed by the metropolitan or bishop…then shall holy water be sprinkled on the crown, and then the metropolitan or bishop shall cense the crown, and put it on the king’s head, saying: God crown thee with a crown of glory, etc. [The king also received a ring, sceptre and rod.] 216. The coronation of King Richard II, 1377 (Rymer, Foedera, III, iii, 63 [Latin], from Close Roll, I Richard II, m. 44) And after this a corporal oath was taken by the aforesaid archbishop from the king. (1) About conceding and preserving, with the confirmation of his oath, the laws and customs, conceded by ancient, just, and devout kings of England, predecessors of the present king, to the people of England, and especially the laws, customs and liberties conceded by the most glorious and holy King Edward to the clergy and people of the aforesaid kingdom. (2) And about serving God, and keeping peace and concord for the Holy Church of God, and for the clergy and people, according to his strength, (3) And about causing to be be done, in all his judgements, equal and right justice and decisions in mercy and truth,

English historical documents

400

(4) And also about holding and maintaining the just laws and customs of the church, and about enforcing what the people shall justly and reasonably have chosen and which the king shall protect and strengthen for the honour of God, according to his strength. The aforesaid archbishop, advancing to the four corners of the platform, expounded and narrated to the whole people how the said lord king had taken the oath, inquiring from the same people if they wished to have and obey him as king and liege lord, and they unanimously gave their consent. When these things had been done, the archbishop began with a loud voice the hymn Veni Creator Spiritus; and when this was finished and the archbishop had said certain devout prayers over the king, and a solemn litany had been sung by the prelates and clergy, the aforesaid lord king, whose clothes had been suitably cut open, was anointed with holy oil and chrism on various parts of his body, according to custom, by the hands of the aforesaid archbishop on the step of his chair, and at once he was crowned. And when the king had been adorned with the sword which is called Curtana, the sceptre, ring, spurs, and other regalia, as was fitting, the magnates and lords standing round raised him into his royal chair. 217. A high view of the royal prerogative, 1397 (Rot. Parl. III, 347 [French]) Let it be remembered that on Monday next after the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross [17 September], in the 21st year of the reign of King Richard the Second after the Conquest, the king being in parliament, the Bishop of Exeter, Chancellor of England, at the king’s command declared and pronounced the cause of summons of the parliament, saying, that the king had summoned his parliament for the honour and reverence of God and of Holy Church, and for the salvation and amendment of his realm. Wherefore he took for his theme the words of Ezekiel the Prophet, “There shall be one king over all” (Ezekiel, XXXVII, 22) alleging upon this various authorities of Holy Scripture, that there shall be one king and one governor and that by no other manner can any kingdom be governed. And. that to the good governance of each king three things are needed. First, the king must be powerful to govern. Secondly, that the laws by which he ought to govern should be kept and justly executed. Thirdly, that the subjects of the realm should duly obey the king and his laws. And by this cause, first, so that kings may be powerful enough to govern their subjects, they have of right several privileges given to them, as regalities, prerogatives, and many other rights annexed to the crown, which they are obliged by their coronation oath to guard and maintain; and these they may not alienate nor transfer to other use, so that if alienation be affirmed by oath, the law repeals such alienation and releases the oath. Wherefore the king has caused the estates of parliament to assemble at this time, to be informed if any rights of his crown are subtracted or taken away, so that by their good advice and discretion such remedy may be provided, that the king may be in his liberty and power as his progenitors have been before him, and as he ought to be of right, notwithstanding any ordinance to the contrary, and so he will be a king to all, and will govern them…. And also our lord the king considering how several high offences and misdeeds had been committed by the people of his realm, against their allegiance and the estate of our

The king

401

lord the king and the law of his land, before this time, for which his people stand in great peril and danger of the law and of their bodies and goods; and wishing in this matter of his royal benignity to show and perform grace to his said people, so that they should have a greater courage and wish to do well, and to behave better towards the king in time to come, he wishes and grants to be made… a general pardon to his lieges, excepting certain points defined by the king… except fifty persons whom it shall please the king to name, and all those who shall be impeached in this present parliament. 218. Extension of the law of treason, 13981 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 98–9 [French]) A 50 it is ordained that everyone who encompasses or purposes the death of the king, or plots to depose him, or to render up his liege homage, or who raises the people and rides against the king to make war within his realm, and of this shall be duly attainted and judged in parliament, shall be adjudged a traitor of high treason against the crown; and shall forfeit, for himself and all his heirs whatsoever, all his lands, tenements, possessions, and liberties…which he has or any one else has to his use, or had in the day when the treason was perpetrated…. And that this statute shall extend and have effect as well to them who shall be judged or attainted for any of these four points of treasons in this present parliament, as also to them who shall be adjudged or attainted in parliament in time to come of any of the four points of the treasons aforesaid. And it is not the intention of the king nor of his lords nor the assent of the commons that if any such, who forfeit in the manner aforesaid, be enfeoffed in any land, tenement or possession to the use of anyone else, that that shall be included in this forfeiture. Also the king with the aforesaid assent has ordained…that if anyone…pursues, procures, or counsels to repeal any of the judgements given against any statutes or ordinances made in the same parliament…his shall be duly proved in parliament, that he shall be adjudged…a traitor to the king and to the realm. To which ordinance and statute well and lawfully to be held and kept, the lords of the realm as well spiritual as temporal are sworn…before the king, as appears in the roll of the parliament. [In 1399 all treason legislation enacted since 1352 was repealed, Statutes of the Realm, II, 114, 1 Henry IV, c. 10.]

219. The deposition of Richard II, 1399 (Rot. Parl. III, 416 [Latin]) The record and process of the renunciation of King Richard, the Second after the Conquest, and of the acceptance of the same renunciation, together with the deposition of King Richard, follow hereafter. Memorandum that on Monday, the feast of St Michael the Archangel, in the 23rd year of King Richard II, the lords spiritual and temporal and other notable persons [16 names 1

Cf. D.N. 74.

English historical documents

402

follow] deputed for the following act, came into the presence of the said king Richard, being within the Tower of London, at nine o’clock. And the Earl of Northumberland recited before the king on behalf of the aforesaid deputation, how the same king at Conway in North Wales, being still at liberty, promised to the lord Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury and to the Earl of Northumberland that he was willing to cede and renounce the crown of England and France and his royal majesty, because of the inability and insufficiency to which the same king confessed, and to do this in the best manner and form which could be done as might be best devised by the counsel of experienced men. The king in the presence of the lords and others named above benignly replied that he was willing to give effect to what he had formerly promised; he desired however to have speech with Henry of Lancaster and the arch-bishop (Arundel) his kinsmen, before he fulfilled his promise. He asked for a copy of the resignation to be made by him to be given to him, so that he might in the mean-time deliberate on it; this copy was given to him, and the lords and the others returned to their lodgings. Afterwards on the same day after dinner the king greatly desiring the arrival of the Duke of Lancaster, who tarried for a long time, at last the Duke, the lords and persons named above and also the Archbishop of Canterbury, came into the king’s presence in the Tower, the lords Roos, Willoughby, and Abergavenny and many others being present. And after the king had spoken apart with the duke and the archbishop, looking from one to the other with a cheerful countenance, as it seemed to the bystanders, at last the king, calling all those present to him, declared publicly in their presence, that he was ready to make the renunciation and resignation according to his promise. And although, to save the labour of such a lengthy reading, he might, as he was told, have had the resignation and renunciation, which was drawn up in a certain parchment schedule, read by a deputy, the king willingly, as it seemed, and with a cheerful countenance, holding the same schedule in his hand, said that he would read it himself, and he did read it distinctly. And he absolved his lieges and made renunciation and cession, and swore this…and he signed it with his own hand, as is more fully contained in the schedule, of which the tenor follows in these words…. And immediately he added to the aforesaid renunciation and cession, in his own words, that if it were in his power the Duke of Lancaster should succeed him in the realm. But because this was in no wise in his power, as he said, he asked the Arch-bishop of York and Bishop of Hereford, whom he appointed as his proctors to declare and intimate his renunciation and cession to all the estates of the realm, to declare his intention and wish in this matter to the people. And as a token of his intention and wish in this matter, he took off his finger the gold ring with his signet, and put it on the duke’s finger, desiring the same, as he affirmed, to be known to all the estates of the realm. And when this was done, all said farewell to him and left the Tower to return to their lodgings. On the morrow, Tuesday, the feast of St Jerome, in the great hall at Westminster, in the place honourably prepared for holding parliament, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and the Duke of Lancaster, and other dukes, and lords both spiritual and temporal, whose names are written below, and a great multitude of the people of the realm being gathered there on account of parliament, the Duke of Lancaster occupying his usual and proper place, and the royal throne, solemnly prepared with cloth of gold being vacant, without any president, the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of Hereford according to the king’s injunction publicly declared the cession and renunciation to have been made by him, with the delivery of the seal, and the royal signature, and they caused the cession

The king

403

and renunciation to be read, first in Latin and then in English. And at once the Archbishop of Canterbury, to whom pertains by reason of the dignity and prerogative of the metropolitan church of Canterbury to have the first voice amongst the prelates and magnates of the realm, asked the estate of the people then present, whether they wished to accept the renunciation and cession for their interests and the good of the realm. The estates and people considering, for the reasons specified by the king himself in his renunciation and cession, that it would be very expedient, each one singly, and then in common with the people, unanimously and cordially gave his consent. After this acceptance it was publicly set forth that besides the cession and renunciation which had been accepted, it would in many ways be expedient and advantageous for the kingdom, to avoid all scruple and evil suspicion, that the many crimes and defects frequently committed by the king in the bad government of the realm—on account of which, as he himself had asserted in his abdication, he was worthy to be deposed—should by means of articles which had been drawn up in writing be publicly read, that they might be declared to the people. And so a large part of these articles was then publicly read, of which article the tenor is as follows: [Then follows a copy of the coronation oath of Richard II. After this comes the heading “Here follow the indictments against the king concerning his deposition”.] 1. In the first place the king is indicted on account of his evil rule, that is, he has given the goods and possessions which belong to the crown to unworthy persons and otherwise dissipated them indiscreetly, and therefore has imposed collections and other grave and insupportable burdens on his people without cause. And he has perpetrated innumerable other evils. By his assent and command certain prelates and other lords temporal were chosen and assigned by the whole parliament to govern the realm; and they faithfully laboured with their whole strength for the just government of the realm. Nevertheless the king made a conventicle with his accomplices and proposed to accuse of high treason the lords spiritual and temporal who were occupied for the good of the realm; and in order to strengthen his evil design he violently forced the justices of the realm by fear of death and torture of body to destroy the said lords. 2. Also the king caused the greater part of his justices to come before him and his adherents secretly at Shrewsbury, and he induced, made and compelled them to reply singly to certain questions put to them on behalf of the king, touching the laws of the realm. This was contrary to their wishes, and other than what they would have replied if they had been free and not under compulsion. By colour of these replies the king proposed to proceed later to the destruction of the Duke of Gloucester, the Earls of Arundel and Warwick and other lords, against whom the king was extremely indignant because they wished the king to be under good rule. But with divine help and the resistance and power of the said lords opposing him, the king could not bring his scheme into effect. 3. [Instead of satisfying the grievances of the appellant lords in parliament, the king incited Robert de Vere to raise an army against them, thus causing many deaths and other evils in the realm.] 4. [Although the king in full parliament and with its assent pardoned the Duke of Gloucester and the Earls of Arundel and Warwick, and for years acted in a friendly way towards them, nevertheless he carried venom in his heart, and when the opportunity came

English historical documents

404

he had the Duke of Gloucester murdered, the Earl of Arundel beheaded and the Earl of Warwick and Lord Cobham sentenced to perpetual imprisonment.] 5. [At the time when Gloucester, Arundel and Warwick were condemned, the king, in order to fulfil his harmful designs on others, caused a great multitude of malefactors to be raised in the county of Chester. These ruffians caused many injuries to the king’s subjects, as murders, beatings, woundings, robberies, rapes and other excesses, for none of which would the king give justice to plaintiffs.] 6. [Although the king made proclamation when he arrested Gloucester, Arundel and Warwick, that he did not intend to proceed against any of their households, nevertheless many of the households of these lords were compelled by fear of death to make fines and redemptions as if they were traitors.] 7. Also, after many of these people had made fines and redemptions, they sought from the king letters patent of general pardon, concerning the above; but they could secure no advantage from these letters of pardon until they had paid new fines and redemptions to save their lives; by this they were much impoverished. On account of this the royal name and estate were brought into great disrepute. 8 [Also, in the parliament of Shrewsbury the king secured the appointment of a commission to decide certain petitions.] By colour of this concession the persons thus deputed proceeded with other matters touching generally that parliament—and this at the will of the king, in derogation of the estate of parliament, and a great damage to the whole realm, and a pernicious example. And in order that those persons might seem to have a certain colour and authority for such deeds, the king caused the rolls of parliament to be deleted and changed to suit his purposes, against the intention of the commission. 9. [Contrary to his coronation oath he had denied justice to Henry duke of Lancaster.] 10. Also, although the crown of England and the rights of the crown, and the same realm, have been so free for all time past that neither the lord high pontiff nor anyone else outside the kingdom ought to intermeddle with the same, yet the king, in order to strengthen his erroneous statutes, begged the lord pope to confirm the statutes ordained in the last parliament. On which the king sought for apostolic letters, in which grave censures were threatened against all who presumed to contravene the statutes in any way…. 11. [When the Duke of Lancaster had been about to do battle with the Duke of Norfolk, the king had stopped the fight and had sentenced the Duke of Lancaster to ten years of exile, against all justice, the laws and customs of the realm and military rights.] 12. [He had revoked the letters patent which he had granted to the duke of Lancaster, allowing him to inherit his estates by attorney and to defer homage.] 13. [He had interfered with the ordinary course of election of sheriffs, in order to appoint those who, he knew, would not resist his will.] 14. [He had borrowed money from various lords and others of the realm, promising to repay the money at a certain term, and had failed to do so.] 15. [He imposed very heavy burdens of taxation on his subjects in nearly every year of his reign, to their great impoverishment, and used the income thus obtained, not for the benefit of the realm of England, but for his own ostentation, pomp and vainglory.] 16. Also, the king refused to keep and defend the just laws and customs of the realm, but according to the whim of his desire he wanted to do whatever appealed to his wishes. Sometimes—and often when the laws of the realm had been declared and expressed to

The king

405

him by the justices and others of his council and he should have done justice to those who sought it according to those laws—he said expressly, with harsh and determined looks, that the laws were in his own mouth, sometimes he said that they were in his breast, and that he alone could change or establish the laws of his realm. And deceived by this idea, he would not allow justice to be done to many of his lieges, but compelled very many persons to desist from suing for common justice by threats and fear. 17. Also, after certain statutes were established in his parliament, which should always bind until they should be especially repealed by the authority of another parliament the king, desiring to enjoy such liberty that no statutes should bind him …subtly procured that such a petition should be put forward in parliament on behalf of the community of the realm, and to be granted to him in general, that he might be as free as any of his predecessors were before him. By colour of this petition and concession the king frequently did and ordered many things contrary to such statutes which had never been repealed, acting expressly and knowingly against his oath made in his coronation. 18. [He continued his favourite sheriffs in office for two or three years instead of only the legal one year.] 19. Also, although by statute and custom of the realm, upon the summons of parliament the people of each shire ought to be free to choose and depute knights for the shire to be present in parliament to set forth their grievances, and sue for remedy as might seem to them expedient; yet the king, that he might be the more free to carry out in parliament his rash designs, directed his mandates frequently to his sheriffs, to sec that certain persons nominated by himself should come to parliament as knights of the shire. The knights thus favourable to him he could induce, as he frequently did, sometimes by fear and various threats, sometimes by gifts, to agree to measures prejudicial to the realm and extremely burdensome to the people; and especially he induced them to concede to the king the subsidy of wools for the term of his life, and another subsidy for a term of years, oppressing his people too much. 20. [The king caused the sheriffs to swear more than their accustomed oath, and especially to promise to obey all his mandates under the great and privy seals and also letters under the signet. And the sheriffs were to arrest any of their bailiffs whom they heard speaking in public or in private to the discredit or slander of the king, and cause them to be imprisoned at the king’s pleasure.] 21. Also, the king, wishing to crush the people under his feet and craftily acquire their goods, that he might have a superabundance of riches, induced the people of seventeen shires to make their submission to the king as traitors, by letters under their seals; by colour of which he obtained great sums of money conceded by the clergy and people of the shires, to be taken at the king’s pleasure. And although to please the people the king caused those forced letters to be restored to them, yet the king caused the proctors of the people, who had full powers conceded to them to bind themselves and their heirs to the king, to give undertakings to him under their seals in the name of the people. Thus he deceived his people, and craftily extorted their goods from them. 22. [He extorted large sums of money from abbots and priors for his expedition to Ireland.] 23. Also, in many great councils of the king, when the lords of the realm, the justices, and others were charged faithfully to counsel the king in matters touching the estate of himself and the realm, often the lords, justices and others when they were giving their

English historical documents

406

advice according to their discretion were suddenly and sharply rebuked and censured by him, so that they did not dare to speak the truth about the state of the king and the kingdom in giving their advice. 24. [The king took the treasures and crown jewels to Ireland without the consent of the estates of the realm. He also falsified the records of the realm.] 25. [The king was so variable and dissimulating in his words and writings, especially to popes and rulers outside the realm, that no one could trust him.] 26. Also, although the lands and tenements, goods and chattels of every freeman, according to the laws of the realm used through all past times, ought not to be seized unless they have been lawfully forfeited; nevertheless the king, proposing and determining to undo such laws, declared and affirmed in the presence of very many lords and others of the community of the realm that the lives of every one of his lieges and their lands, tenements, goods, and chattels are his at his pleasure, without any forfeiture; which is entirely against the laws and customs of the realm. 27. [Contrary to Clause 39 of Magna Carta of 1215 many persons were accused before the constable and marshal of England and were forced to defend themselves by trial by battle, regardless of their age or strength.] 28. [By his letters, directed to every shire of the realm, the king made his lieges take certain oaths which might be turned to their destruction and confirm such oaths with their seals.] 29. [The king hindered legitimate processes in ecclesiastical courts, contrary to Magna Carta, by the issue of writs of prohibition.] 30. [He exiled Archbishop Arundel, against the laws of the realm.] 31. [The king left money in his will to his successor, provided he should uphold all the enactments and judgements of the parliament begun on 17 September 1397 at Westminster and continued at Shrewsbury, and all the ordinances, etc., made at Coventry and Westminster in September 1398 and March 1399, and all ordinances and judgements which might be made in future by authority of the same parliament.] 32. [At King’s Langley, in the presence of the Dukes of Lancaster and York and many others, the king solemnly swore on the Host that he forgave the Duke of Gloucester for all past offences and would never proceed against him for them; yet afterwards he had the duke cruelly murdered for these offences.] 33. [When the Speaker of the Commons accused Archbishop Arundel in parliament, the king did not allow him to speak in his defence, but craftily told him to go away to his lodging to prepare his defence, and said that meanwhile the king would look after his interests. By these means the king kept him away for five days or more, and during this period got him condemned in his absence to exile and forfeiture of all his goods.] It seemed to all the estates who were interrogated thereupon, singly and in common, that those accusations of crime and defaults were sufficient and notorious enough for the deposition of the king; and they also considered his confession of inadequacy and other matters contained in the renunciation and cession, publicly announced; whereupon all the estates unanimously agreed that there was abundant reason for proceeding to deposition, for the greater security and tranquillity of the realm and the good of the kingdom. Therefore the estates and communities unanimously and cordially constituted and publicly deputed certain commissioners, i.e. the Bishop of St Asaph, the Abbot of Glastonbury, the Earl of Gloucester, Lord Berkeley, Sir Thomas Erpingham, Sir Thomas

The king

407

Grey, and William Thirnyng, Justice, to carry out this sentence of deposition and to depose King Richard from all his royal dignity, majesty, and honour, on behalf of, in the name of, and by authority of, all the estates, as has been observed in similar cases by the ancient custom of the realm. And soon the commissioners assuming the burden of the commission, and sitting before the royal seat as a tribunal, had some discussion on these matters and reduced the sentence of deposition to writing; and by the wish and authority of the commission the sentence was read and recited by the Bishop of St Asaph in these words…. And at once, it being manifest from the foregoing transactions and by reason of them that the realm of England with its appurtenances was vacant, Henry Duke of Lancaster, rising in his place, and standing erect so that he might be seen by the people, and humbly making the sign of the cross on his forehead and his breast, and invoking the name of Christ, claimed the realm of England, vacant as aforesaid, along with the crown and all its members and appurtenances, in his mother tongue in the following words: In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I, Henry of Lancaster, challenge this realm of England and the crown with all its members and appurtenances, as I am descended by right line of the blood coming from the good lord King Henry III, and through that right that God of his grace has sent me, with the help of my kindred and my friends to recover it; the which realm was on the point of being undone for default of governance and undoing of good laws. [The duke then showed Richard’s signet to the assembly, whereupon the arch-bishop led him by the right hand to the throne. In front of it Henry knelt and prayed a while, after which both archbishops seated him on the throne, amid great applause. Archbishop Arundel then preached a sermon on the text “Vir dominabitur populo” (1 Samuel ix, 17).] When this sermon was finished, the lord king Henry, in order to set at rest the minds of his subjects declared publicly in these words:— Sires, I thank God and you lords spiritual and temporal and all the estates of the land; and let you know that it is not my will that any man should think that by way of conquest I would disinherit any man of his heritage, franchise, or other rights that he ought to have, nor put him out of what he has and has had by the good laws and customs of the realm; except those persons who have been against the good purpose and the common profit of the realm. … And afterwards on the Wednesday next following the said proctors deputed as aforesaid, came to Richard lately king within the Tower and lord William Thirnyng, justice, on behalf of himself and his…fellow proctors and all the estates and people aforesaid…notified the…sentence of deposition to the same Richard, and renounced homage and fealty to him…in these words: Sire, it is well known to you that there was a parliament summoned of all the estates of the realm to be at Westminster and to begin on the Tuesday, the morrow of the feast of St Michael the Archangel [30 September], that was yesterday, and because of this summons all the estates of the land were gathered there and made these same persons who have come here to you now their proctors and given them full authority and power and charged them to say the words that we shall say to you in their name and on their behalf; that is to say, the Bishop of St Asaph for archbishops and bishops, the Abbot of Glastonbury for abbots and priors, and all other men of holy church, secular and regular; the Earl of Gloucester for dukes and earls; Lord Berkeley for barons and bannerets; Sir Thomas

English historical documents

408

Erpingham, chamberlain, for all the bachelors and commons of this land of the South, Sir Thomas Grey for all the bachelors and commons of the North; and my colleague John Markham and me, to come with them for all these estates. And so, sire, these words and the doing that we shall say to you are not only our words but the words and doings of all the estates of this land and our charge and in their name. And he answered and said that he knew well that we would not speak but as we were charged. [Sir William Thirning then recounted the previous stages of the deposition— Richard’s abdication on Monday, Michaelmas Day, in the Tower, the reading of this renunciation to the estates and people at Westminster, the reading of the thirtythree articles of default of governance, and the declaration of deposition.] And we, the proctors of all these estates and people, as we are charged by them, and by their authority given to us, and in their name, yield you up, for all the estates and people aforesaid, liege homage and fealty, and all allegiance and all other bonds, charges, and services which belong to it. And none of all these estates and people from this time forward shall bear you faith, nor do you obedience as to their king. And he answered and said, that he looked not thereafter; but he said, that after all this he hoped that his cousin would be a good lord to him. On Monday, the day of St Edward, King and Confessor, King Henry was crowned at Westminster, with all the solemnity and honour that was fitting; and certain lords and others did severally their services to king Henry according to their tenures, in the accustomed manner at the time of such a coronation. 220. The Holy Oil used at the coronation of Henry IV, 1399 (Walsingham, Historia Anglicana, II, 239 [Latin]) On the day of the translation of St Edward, King and Confessor, Henry IV was crowned King at Westminster by the hands of the Lord Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury…and as an augury of richer grace in the future, as it was believed, he was anointed with that heavenly oil which the Blessed Mary, Mother of God, once entrusted to the keeping of the Blessed Thomas, martyr, Archbishop of Canterbury, while he was in exile, prophesying to him that the Kings of England who should be anointed with this oil would be defenders and friends of the Church. This oil, kept in a golden eagle and stone phial, was hidden for a long time, but at last was miraculously revealed when the lord Henry, first Duke of Lancaster, was fighting the king’s battles across the seas. The eagle was handed over by a certain holy man, who found it by divine revelation. He gave it to the most noble prince Edward, first-born of the illustrious King of England, so that he might be anointed with this oil as king after his father’s death. Prince Edward deposited this oil in the Tower of London, enclosing it in a chest secured with many locks; and there it lay hidden, either through forgetfulness or neglect, until the time of King Richard, son of the prince. In 1399 King Richard, carefully investigating the treasures left to him by his predecessors, unexpectedly found the eagle and phial and the writing or prophecy of the Blessed Thomas the martyr1 with them. And when he had learnt what power this oil possessed, he asked the lord Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, to anoint him again with

The king

409

this oil. The latter quite refused, however, saying that it was sufficient for him to have received holy unction at his hands in his first coronation, and he ought not to have a repetition of such unction. King Richard carried this eagle, with the phial, with him when he set out for Ireland, and brought it back with him to this land. The Archbishop asked him for it at Chester, and he handed it over, saying that now he clearly perceived how it was not the divine will for him to be anointed with this oil, and how another ought to receive such a noble sacrament. The archbishop, preserving such treasures under reverent custody, kept them until the time of the coronation of the present king, who was the first king of England to be anointed with such a precious liquid. 221. The ideal of kingly rule with the aid of proper counsel, 1399 (Rot. Parl. III, 415 [French]) And on this the same archbishop took as his text the word of the 1st Book of Maccabees (I Maccabees, VI, 57), saying “It behoves us to ordain for the kingdom”, that is to say, that it is the wish of the king to be counselled and governed by the honourable wise and discreet persons of his realm, and by their common counsel and assent to do the best for the government of himself and of his realm; not wishing to be governed by his own whim, nor by his wilful purpose or singular opinion, but by common advice, counsel, and assent, as is stated above. 222. The king defends his prerogative, 1411 (Rot. Parl. III, 658 [French]) Also, on Saturday 19th December, which was the last day of parliament, the commons came before the king and the lords in parliament and there the speaker on behalf of the commons explained how the king had sent the chancellor of England to show the commons a certain article which had been made in the last parliament, and the speaker, in the name of the commons, prayed our lord the king to let him know his will concerning the article. To which our lord the king replied and said that he wished to maintain his liberty and prerogative in all points, as fully as any of his noble ancestors or predecessors had done, or enjoyed or used them before this time. To which the speaker, in the name of the commons, and the commons themselves, of their common assent, were well agreed; therefore the king thanked them and said that he wished to have and to enjoy as great a liberty, prerogative, and franchise, as any of his ancestors had had in times gone by. And on this our lord the king in full parliament annulled the article, and all the points consequent and dependent upon it. 1

I.e. the prophecy made by the BVM to St Thomas of Canterbury, who had recorded it in writing, and had, at her orders, buried the writing with the eagle and the phial in the church of St Gregory at Poitiers. St Mary had prophesied that the king who should be anointed with the oil would recover Normandy and Aquitaine peacefully, clear the Holy Land of unbelievers, and rebuild its churches (Annales Ricardi Secundi et Henrici Quarti, ed. H.T.Riley (Rolls Series, 1866), 297–300; Eulogium Historiarum, ed. F.S.Haydon (Rolls Series, 1858), III, 380).

English historical documents

410

223. The Duke of York’s claim to the throne, 1460 (Rot. Parl. V, 375–9 [English]) Memorandum, that the 16th day of October, the 9th day of this present parliament, the counsel, of the right high and mighty prince, Richard Duke of York, brought into the parliament chamber a writing, containing the claim and title of the right that the said Duke claimed to the crowns of England and of France, and the lordship of Ireland, and the same writing was delivered to the right reverend father in God, George, Bishop of Exeter, chancellor of England, desiring him that the same writing might be opened to the lords spiritual and temporal assembled in this present parliament, and that the said duke might have brief and expedient answer thereof. Whereupon the said chancellor opened and showed the said desire to the lords spiritual and temporal asking the question of them, whether they would the said writing should be openly read before them or no, to which question it was agreed and answered by all the said lords: In as much as every person, high and low, suing to this high court of parliament, must of right be heard, and his desire and petition understood, that the said writing should be read and heard, not to be answered without the king’s commandment, for so much as the matter is so high, and of such great weight and importance. Which writing was then read there, the tenor whereof follows, in these words: [Richard thereupon traced his pedigree from Henry III, and showed that his line was senior to that of John of Gaunt and Henry IV, and argued that the crown was therefore his by right.] And afterwards, the 17th day of October, the 10th day of this present parliament, the said chancellor showed and declared to the said lords spiritual and temporal, being in the same parliament, how that the council of the said Duke of York greatly desired to have an answer to such writing as was put into this present parliament upon the 16th day of October last past on behalf of the said Duke, and thereupon asked the said lords what they thought was to be done in that matter. To which question it was answered and thought by all the said lords that the matter was so high and of such weight that it was not right for any of the king’s subjects to enter into communication thereof without his high commandment, agreement and assent thereto And when the same matter was heard and understood by the king’s highness, it pleased him to pray and command all the said lords that they should search to find, in as much as was in them, all such things as might be objected and laid against the claim and title of the said Duke. Whereupon, on the morning of the 18th day of October, the 11th day of this parliament, the aforesaid lords sent for the king’s justices into the parliament chamber, to have their advice and counsel in this matter, and there delivered to them the writing of the claim of the said Duke, and in the king’s name gave them strictly in commandment earnestly to take counsel therein, and to search and find all such objections as might be laid against the same, in fortifying of the king’s right. Where-unto the same justices, the Monday the 20th day of October then next following… said that they were the King’s justices, and had to determine such matters as came before them in the law, between party and party, and in such matters as were between party and party they might not be of counsel; and since this matter was between the king and the said Duke of York as two parties, and also it has not been accustomed to call the justices to counsel in such matters, and especially the matter was so high, and touched the king’s high estate and regality,

The king

411

which is above the law and passed their learning; wherefore they durst not enter into any communication thereof, for it belonged to the lords of the king’s blood and the peerage of this his land to have communication and meddle in such matters; and therefore they humbly besought all the lords to have them utterly excused of any advice or counsel, to be given by them in that matter. [The lords then sent for the king’s serjeants and attorney, and commanded them to seek for the strongest objections to the duke’s claim.] Whereunto the said serjeants and attorney, the Wednesday then next following, answered and said that the said matter was put to the king’s justices…and since the said matter was so high that it passed the learning of the justices it must needs exceed their learning, and also they durst not enter into any communication in that matter and prayed and besought all the lords to have them excused from giving any advice or counsel therein. To whom it was answered by the advice of all the lords by the said chancellor that they might not be so excused, for they were the king’s particular councillors, and therefore they had their fees and wages. And as to that the said serjeants and attorney said that they were the king’s councillors in the law in such things as were under his authority or by commission, but this matter was above his authority, in which they might not meddle, and humbly besought the said lords to have them excused from giving any counsel in that matter. And it was answered again that the lords would not hold them excused but let the king’s highness have knowledge of what they said. And thereupon the said chancellor reminded the lords spiritual and temporal of the sayings and excuses of the justices, and the saying and excuses of the serjeants and attorney, and also the great commandment of the king’s highness that they had, to find all such objections as might be most mighty to defend the king’s right and title and…desired all the lords that everyone of them should say what he could say in defending the king’s title and in defeating the claim of the said duke. And then it was agreed by all the lords that every lord should have his freedom to say what he would say, without any reproving or ill-will to be had for his saying. And thereupon, after the saying of all the lords, everyone after the other, it was concluded that these matters and articles hereunder written should be alleged and objected against the said claim and title of the said duke. First it is thought that the lords of this land must needs call to their remembrance the great oaths which they have made to the king our sovereign lord, which may be laid to the said Duke of York, and that the lords may not break their oaths. Also, it is thought that it is to be called to remembrance the great and noble acts of parliaments made in divers parliaments of divers of the king’s progenitors, the which acts are sufficient and reasonable to be laid against the title of the said duke of York: the which acts are of much more authority than any chronicle and also of authority to defeat any manner of title made to any person. Also it is thought that there are to be laid against the said title divers entails made to the heirs males as for the crown of England, as it may appear by divers chronicles and parliaments. Also it is thought if the said duke should make any title or claim by the line of Sir Lionel, that the same duke should bear the arms of the same Lionel and not the arms of Edmund Langley, late Duke of York.

English historical documents

412

Also it is to be alleged against the title of the said Duke that when King Harry the Fourth took upon him the crown of England, he said he entered and took upon him the crown as right inheritor to King Harry the Third and not as a conqueror. [The Duke of York answered to the first point that every man is bound to obey God’s commandments and to observe truth and justice, and no promise or oath can discharge him from this duty to obedience. The duke’s claim and title was grounded on evident truth and justice, and therefore ought to be observed rather than any oath to the contrary, especially as by the law of the church an oath contrary to the truth is null and void. Indeed the lords of the realm ought by the law of both God and man to help him, notwithstanding any oath of fealty.] [To points two and three the duke replied:] The said Richard Plantagenet answers and says that in truth there are no such acts and entails made by any parliament before this, as it is surmised; save only in the sixth year of King Harry the Fourth a certain act and ordinance was made in a parliament called by him, wherein he made the realms of England and France amongst other [dominions] to belong unto him and to the heirs of his body, and to his four sons and the heirs of their bodies…. And if he might have obtained and enjoyed the said crowns, etc. by title of inheritance, descent, or succession, he would neither have needed or desired or made them to be granted in such manner as they are by the said act; the which is not valid, neither is of any force or effect against him that is the right inheritor of the said crowns, as it accords with God’s law and all natural laws; although all other acts and ordinances made in the said parliament and since are good and sufficient against all other persons. [Answer to point four:] The said duke answereth and saith, the truth is that he might lawfully have borne the arms of the said Sir Lionel before this, and also the same arms which King Edward III bore, that is to say, the arms of the realms of England and of France; but he abstained from bearing the said arms, just as he abstained from…pursuing his right and title for causes not unknown to all this realm; for though right rest for a time and be put to silence, yet it does not rot nor shall it perish. [Answer to point five:] The said duke says thereto that such saying of the said King Harry the Fourth may in no way be true, and that the contrary thereof, which is true, shall be adequately enough shown, approved and justified by sufficient authority and matter of record. And moreover this said saying was only to shade and colour fraudulently his said uprighteous and violent usurpation, and by that means to abuse in deceitful manner the people standing about him. Also the Saturday the 17th day of this present parliament it was shown to the lords…by the mouth of the said chancellor, that the said Duke of York called busily to have hasty and speedy answer to such matters as touched his title abovesaid; and for as much as it is thought by all the lords that the title of the said duke cannot be defeated, and in eschewing of the great inconvenience that may ensue, a means was found to save the king’s honour and estate, and to appease the said duke, if he would, which is this: That the king shall keep the crowns and his estate and royal dignity during his life, and the said duke and his heirs shall succeed him in the same; exhorting and stirring all the lords that if any of them could find any other or better means, that it might be shown…. And forthwith they went towards the king where he was in his chamber within his palace of

The king

413

Westminster…. All these premisses thus shown and opened to the king’s highness, he, inspired with the grace of the Holy Ghost, and in eschewing of effusion of Christian blood, by good and earnest deliberation and advice had with all his lords spiritual and temporal, condescended that between him and the said duke an agreement should be made, to be authorized by authority of this present parliament. [A concord embodying the Duke of York’s pedigree and the agreement reached was then drawn up and the duke and his sons Edward and Edmund swore to observe this agreement. Henry declared the duke to be heir to the crown, and enacted that Richard should succeed him as king “after his decease or when it shall please his highness to lay from him the said crowns…”. Henry IV’s act of settlement was repealed and the lords all promised to uphold the agreement.] 224. Sir John Fortescue on the differences between dominium regale and dominium politicum et regale, c. 1471–6 (Sir John Fortescue, The Governance of England) ed. C.Plummer (1885), ch. I, 109 [English]) There are two kinds of kingdoms, of which one is a lordship called in Latin dominium regale, and the other is called dominium politicum et regale. And they differ in that the first king may rule his people by such laws as he makes himself. And therefore he may set upon them such taxes and other impositions as he wishes himself, without their assent. The second king may not rule his people by other laws than such as they assent to. [England is an example of a dominium politicum et regale, as is also Scotland; but France is now an example of a dominium regale.] And though the French king reigns over his people dominio regali, yet neither St Louis, formerly king there, nor any of his progenitors set any taxes or other imposition upon the people of that land without the assent of the three estates, which when they are assembled are like the court of the parliament in England. And this order many of his successors kept unto recent days, when English men made such war in France, that the three estates dared not come together. And then for that cause and for great necessity which the French king had of goods for the defence of that land, he took upon him to set taxes and other impositions upon the commons without the consent of the three estates; but yet he would not set any such charges, nor has set them, upon the nobles for fear of rebellion. And because the commons there, though they have grumbled, have neither rebelled nor are hardy enough to rebel, the French king has yearly set such charges upon them, and so augmented the same charges that the commons are so impoverished and destroyed, that they can scarcely live. 225. The draft of Bishop Russell’s sermon prepared for the opening of Richard III’s parliament, 1483 (Grants from the Crown during the Reign of Edward V, and Two Speeches, etc., ed. J.G. Nichols (Camden Soc., 1854), li–lii, from B.M., Cottonian MS., Vitellius, E. x [English])

English historical documents

414

John Russell, Bishop of Lincoln since 1480, was made chancellor on 31 May 1483. Richard III kept him as chancellor and from the draft of this intended sermon it appears that Richard’s first parliament was originally planned to meet at Martinmas (11 November) 1483, but was probably postponed because of the rebellion of the duke of Buckingham.

In this body politic of England there are three estates as principal members under one head—the estate of the lords spiritual, the estate of the lords temporal, and the estate of the commonalty. The head is our sovereign lord the king here present. What due proportion and harmony ought to be in this body, amongst all the members, great and small, St Paul, taking his simile from the natural body of man, declares at large in the first book of Corinthians (xii, 25) that, like as in the natural body there is no member, be he never so noble, that may say to the least or the vilest of them all, “I have no need of you”, but that each has his necessary and appropriate work, so it is in the mystical or politic body of the congregation of the people, that every estate is ordained to support the other…. Would God that our people of England, where every man now severally studies his own singular advantage, and the accomplishment of his own particular desire, would think upon his own body, the common and public body of the realm, where of right a great person is often but a small member. And yet, be he never so great, if by his doing this body falls into decay, as we see daily it does by enclosure and emparking, by driving away of tenants and letting down of tenantries; and yet, which is most to be deplored, by unlawful assemblies and insurrections, putting not only the people but also the nobles to extreme jeopardy and peril of life and lands, whereby this [word missing—perhaps “realm”] is greatly dispeopled, such a one, whosoever he be, is but as it were a rotten member of the body, not able nor strong enough to save it from falling.

B. COUNCIL AND PARLIAMENT (i) Counsel and consent 226. An appeal to the council on error in the court of Chivalry, 1361 (Select Cases before the King’s Council, ed. I.S.Leadam and J.F.Baldwin (Selden Soc., 1918), 47 [French]) In this case, of the Parson of Langar v. Conyngsby, the parson alleged that the court of Chivalry, held by the constable and marshal, had erred in two respects: first that in a suit for damages an award had been made in the absence of the defendant (himself); secondly, that the court had no cognisance of such a plea. The petitioner has confused the Marshalsea, the court of the king’s household, under the steward and marshal, with the court of Chivalry before the constable of England and the earl marshal. The Marshalsea followed common law, the court of Chivalry the civil law. In the latter court suits were begun by bill, and trial was by witnesses, or, failing these, as in the present case, by wager of battle. The parson, therefore, had to withdraw from the suit because as a clerk he could neither shed blood nor be responsible for bloodshed. This is an early example of the meeting of the council for judicial purposes in the Star Chamber at Westminster.

PARSON OF LANGAR v. CONYNGSBY To our lord the king and his good council shows Thomas, parson of Langar in the county of Nottingham that whereas the portmanteau of Thomas was stolen before Chartres in France and the servant of Thomas sued a certain man, servant of William Conyngsby, in the marshalsea before the constable and marshal, where they were adjudged to combat, and because Thomas was afraid of [incurring] irregularity he withdrew his servant from his suit; and then came the said Sir William into the marshalsea and entered suit by bill against Thomas, alleging in his plaint that between Thomas and his servant by abetting of Thomas an understanding of the two had been reached, [whereby] the servant of the said Thomas brought suit against the servant of Sir William damaging Sir William [to the extent] of a hundred marks, and these damages were awarded him in the absence of Thomas contrary to law. And because of the error the king took the case into his hand, giving a day for the parties to be before his council in England, there to be judged

English historical documents

416

because the marshalsea has no cognisance of such a plea. And since the return of our lord the king to England there came Sir William and many others in his company at daybreak to the house of Thomas, parson of Langar, dragging him out of his bed and taking him to the house of Lord Tiptoft, and then into Sherwood and there forced him to make fine in 100 marks, paying £10 down and giving bond for 400 marks to secure the payment of the 100 marks agreed upon between them; thence they took him to Lenton, and before they permitted him to leave their company made him swear on the sacred body of God to keep the covenant. And because Thomas sues before our lord the king for recovery, Sir William and others of his company threaten him in life and limb so that he dares not go or be seen anywhere. Wherefore Thomas prays our lord the king that remedy may be afforded him, in the way of charity. Moreover Sir William and his company seized Thomas in Walbrook in London and imprisoned him lest he should sue our Lord the king now in time of parliament for remedy for the duresses. [Endorsed:—] The parties are agreed and John Arderne has given security before the council of the lord the king in the star chamber in the palace at Westminster on Wednesday the day after [the feast of] St Peter in Cathedra, that is, the 23rd day of February in the 35th year of the reign of our lord the king of England, for William Conyngsby, knight, that he would henceforth conduct himself well and faithfully towards the king and his people, and that he would neither commit nor procure to be committed any damage or violence against Thomas parson of Langar or any other of the aforesaid people, wherefore [William is released and dismissed by the king’s grace, while the fine which] William is bound to pay the king for the transgressions previously described is respited at the pleasure of the lord the king according to the good conduct of William; and John gave security before the king’s council that William would restore to him the £10 which the rector had paid him, that is, one half at the feast of Pentecost and the other half at Michaelmas, and that he would restore to the rector the letters of obligation of which mention is made in the bill. 227. The cost of breakfast for the king’s council, 1366 (P.R.O., Exchequer, King’s Remembrancer, Various Accounts, E101/26/8 [Latin]) Memorandum of diverse items bought for the breakfast of the lord chancellor and treasurer and William of Wykeham and many other magnates of the king’s council at Westminster, 12th May, 41 Edward III. Pantry. For various kinds of bread, 6s. Buttery. For 30 gallons of ale, price per gallon 2d, 5s. Item for carriage by boat of various kinds of drink to Westminster on various occasions, 4d. Kitchen. For beef, 10s 2d, For 2 calves, 9s. For 2 sheep, 8s. For 12 capons, 9s 6d. For 12 goslings, 8s 6d. For 3 capons, 6s 9d. For 10 bitterns, 33s 4d. For 24 doves, 3s 6d. For 18 rabbits, 4s 1d. For 1 lamb, 16d. For 16 chickens, 4s. For the drawing of the said birds, 6d. For 2 codfish, also for 3 pikerels, 8s. For 8 plaice, 3s 6d. Also for 1 turbot, 3s. Also for a congar eel, 3s. 6d. Also for 3 dories, 6s. For smoked salmon, 3s. For sea shrimps, 20d. For eels, 12d. For various sauces, 8d. For various spices, 4s 0d. Also for wood and coal, 3s 10d. Also for salt, 2d. Also for porterage and boat carnage of all the aforesaid things from London and from the lord’s household at Westminster, 18d. Also for fat, 10d. Also for porterage and boat carriage by John the cook, 5d.

Council and parliament

417

Total: £7 14s Also for the work of the officials—30s. Sum total: £9 4

228. A declaration in parliament that a Great Council cannot levy a tax, 1379 (Rot. Parl. III, 55–6 [French]) For a Great Council held in 1353 to regulate the staple of wool, see Rot. Parl. II, 246. The Great Council had then consisted of “prelates, dukes, earls, barons and commons”.

[The chancellor explained why parliament had been summoned and said that the continual council had summoned a Great Council soon after Christmas 1378, but the prelates and lay lords had excused themselves. Therefore, as the dangers facing the realm were great, they had been ordered to come on the Monday after Candlemas, 7 February, putting aside all excuses.] At which time came nearly all the prelates, as well abbots as others, dukes, earls, barons, bannerets, and other wise men of the realm; and there they were shown the great perils and mischiefs threatening the realm because of the great wars appearing by land and sea, for which no ordinance was provided for the next summer season. Moreover a declaration was made before them by all the officers and ministers of the king, and by the treasurers of the war, about the state of the king and the kingdom. And it was found by examination that nothing had been paid into the treasury for the war. In final conclusion it was said in the council that they could not remedy this mischief without charging the commons of the realm, and that they could not make such a charge or grant without parliament. Therefore by assent of them all, of whom most are now present, this parliament was summoned. [All the lords who were present lent money to the king, as did many towns to which the king applied by the advice of the Great Council]

229. Special arrangements in the council for the suits of poor men, 1390 (Minutes of the Council, Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council, ed. N.H.Nicolas, I, 18, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F. III [French]) Also that no gift or grant which may turn to the detriment of the king’s profit shall pass without the advice of the council and the assent of the Dukes of Guienne and of York and of Gloucester, and of the Chancellor, or two of them.

English historical documents

418

Also that all other business sent to the council to have their advice and other items of financial importance shall be determined by those of the council who are present with the officers. Also that all other bills of people of little financial consequence shall be examined and dealt with before the keeper of the privy seal and others of the council who shall be present at that time. 230. Powers of the council, 1422 (Rot. Parl. IV, 175 [French]) Be it known that after the king our sovereign lord, with the assent and advice of the lords spiritual and temporal present in this parliament, and also of the commons of England assembled in the same, had ordained and constituted the powerful prince Humphrey Duke of Gloucester his uncle as protector and defender of the realm and church of England, and his spiritual councillor, in the absence of the excellent Prince John, Duke of Bedford, also uncle to our sovereign lord, to have and to exercise such protection and defence under a certain form specified in the next but one act following, there were at the request of the said commons and by the advice and assent of all the lords, named and chosen certain persons of estate as well spiritual as temporal, to be councillors helping in the governance. The names of these persons written in a little schedule read openly in this parliament hereafter follow: [the Duke of Gloucester; the Archbishop of Canterbury; the Bishops of London, Winchester, Norwich and Worcester; the Duke of Exeter; the Earls of March, Warwick, Northumberland, Westmoreland, and the Earl Marshal; Lord Fitzhugh; Ralph, Lord Cromwell, Walter Lord Hungerford, John Lord Tip toft and Walter Lord Beauchamp.] And be it also known that the same persons thus named and chosen as assisting councillors…condescended to undertake such help in the governance in the manner and form contained in a schedule of paper written in English, containing as well all their names, and also five special articles presented in this same parliament by the same persons named assistant councillors, of which schedule the tenor here follows: The lords have condescended to take it upon them in the manner and form that follows: First, for as much as execution of law and keeping of peace stand much injustices of the peace, sheriffs and escheators, and the profits of the king and the revenues of the realm are greatly increased or reduced to nothing by customers, controllers, weighers, searchers and all such other officers, therefore the same lords will and desire that such officers and all others be made by advice and nomination of the lords, saving always and reserving to my lords of Bedford and Gloucester all that belongs to them by a special act made in parliament, and to the Bishop of Winchester what has been granted to him by our sovereign lord that last was, on whose soul God have mercy, and confirmed by authority of parliament. Also that all manners of wards, marriages, farms, and other incidents that belong to the crown, when they occur, be let, sold, and disposed by the lords of the council, and that indifferently at the dearest, without favour or any manner of partiality or fraud.

Council and parliament

419

Also, that if anything should be enacted by the council, six, or four at the least, of the council shall be present; and in all great matters that shall pass by council that all be present or else the greater part; and if it be such a matter that the king has been accustomed to be consulted, then the lords shall not proceed therein without the advice of my lord of Bedford or of Gloucester. Also, forasmuch as the two chamberlains of the exchequer have been ordered of old time to control the receipts and payments in any wise made, the lords desire that the treasurer of England for the time being and either of the chamberlains have a key of what should come into the receipt, and that they be sworn before my lord of Gloucester and all the lords of the council that for no friendship shall they let any man know, except the lords of the council, what the king has in his treasury. Also, that the clerk of the council be charged and sworn to enact truly and write daily the names of all the lords who shall be present from time to time, to see what, how, and by whom, anything passes. 231. Ordinances for the council, 1423 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 148, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.IV [English]) These are certain provisions for the good of the governance of this land which the lords of the king’s council desire. First, that my lord of Gloucester nor any other man of the council in any suit that shall be made to them shall not grant any favour, neither in bills of right nor of office nor of benefice that belong to the council; but they are only to answer that the bill shall be seen by all the council and the party suing so to have answer. Also that all the bills that shall be put unto the council shall be once in the week at least, that is to say on the Wednesday, read before the council, and their answers endorsed by the council, and on the Friday next following declared to the party suing. Also that all the bills that comprise matters terminable at the common law and which seem genuine, be remitted there to be determined; unless the discretion of the council feels too great a might on one side and lack of it on the other, or else other reasonable causes shall move the council. [Also, that all disputed matters be settled by the vote of a majority of the coun-cillors present.] Also that in all suits that are made to the council in matters the determination of which belongs to the council—unless they touch the welfare of the king our sovereign lord or of his realm and need to be sped hastily, they shall not be enacted as done by the council, unless at least six of the councillors with the officers who are present are all agreed; and at all times the names of the assenters are to be written with their own hands on the same bill. Also, for as much as it is too great a shame that our sovereign lord shall write his letters into foreign countries by the advice of his council, for such matters and persons as the council shall write in his name, if single persons of the council shall write to the contrary, let it be ordained that no man of the council presume to do it on pain of shame and reproof.

English historical documents

420

Also that the clerk of the council be sworn that every day when the council sits on any bills between party and party, he shall so far as he can espy which is the poorest suitor’s bill, and that shall be the first to be read and answered, and the king’s serjeants are to be sworn truly and plainly to give the poor man, who is accepted as such by the council, assistance and true counsel in his request, to be sued without taking any reward from him, on pain of discharge from their offices. Also, for as much as it is likely that many matters shall be treated before the council which on the one hand may touch the king’s prerogative and freehold and on the other hand some of his subjects, in which matters the council is not learned enough to keep the king’s rights and do justice to the parties without the advice of the king’s justices, who are learned both in his prerogatives and in his common law; that in all such matters his judges be called to the council, and their advice with their names shall also be entered of record, what and how they determine and advise in the matter. … My lord of Gloucester openly promised in his own person to all the rest of the lords there present to keep this ordinance, and they for their part assured him the same by their troth pledged by taking his hand. My Lord of Canterbury

Durham

Scrope

Winchester

Carlisle

Hungerford

Norwich

The Earl Marshal

Tiptoft

Worcester

The Earl of Stafford

The Treasurer

Rochester

The Lord Cromwell

The Privy Seal

232. The council arranges for the proclamation of statutes and the enrolment of parliamentary Acts, 1423 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 22, from B.M., Cottonian MS, Cleopatra, F.IV [Latin]) [At a council meeting held at the house of the Black Friars, London, there were present the Dukes of Gloucester and Exeter, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Earls of Worcester, March and Warwick, Lord Tiptoft, the chancellor, treasurer, the keeper of the privy seal and Sir Walter Hungerford.] On the same day the acts received and made in the last parliament were read by the clerk of the parliament before the lords, who made an order there to show the acts to the royal justices of both benches, so that those acts which were statutes of the realm could be seen by them and drawn up in proper form and then proclaimed; and that copies of the other acts touching the governance of the lords of the council and of the realm should be left with the clerk of the king’s council, and that all should be set down together in writing and enrolled in the Chancery, according to custom. [For the oath taken by councillors, see Rot. Parl. V, 407.]

Council and parliament

421

233. The commons ask for their unanswered petitions to be dealt with by the council, 1428 (Rot. Parl. IV, 334 [French]) Also, the 25th March, which was the last day of this present parliament, another petition was presented to our lord the king in the same parliament by the commons of the same; the tenor of which petition follows hereafter. May it please the king our sovereign lord to consider how several petitions have been presented and shown to your very noble highness by the commons of this present parliament to have a suitable remedy and have never been determined, and to ordain by advice of the lords spiritual and temporal, and the assent of the commons abovesaid, that the petitions should be delivered to the lords of your very wise council; who, calling before them the justices and other men learned in your law if need be, should have the power by authority of parliament, between now and the feast of St John the Baptist next coming, to hear and determine the petitions; and that those thus determined by the advice and assent abovesaid, should be enacted, enrolled, and recorded on the roll of this your parliament. 234. Henry VI appoints his councillors and defines their powers, 1437 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 312, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Titus, E.V [English]) The Wednesday, 13th November, the 16th year of the reign of King Henry VI, at the hospital of St John of Jerusalem fast by London, the king in his great council being there present, considering the great labours, occupations, and diligences which fall to him from time to time about the governance of his realm of England and France and his other lordships, for the conservation of his rights in the same, and that the revenues of them may be better gathered to his profit and increased as far as man justly may, and the better to keep and sustain his honourable estate. And also for the conservation of laws, customs, and statutes of his realm of England, to the intent that even right and justice may be done to every person, as well to poor as to rich, of his own good will, desiring to be supported in all such matters by the labours of wise and discreet persons, for as much as he may not be able to attend to them in his own person as often as he would, for the great love and trust that he has amongst others to his uncle Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, his greatuncle Henry, Cardinal of England, the full worshipful fathers in God and right worthy and noble lords and others of his said realm of England such as follow, that is to say, Henry, Archbishop of Canterbury, John, Archbishop of York, William, Bishop of Lincoln, Thomas, Bishop of St David, John, Earl of Huntingdon, Humphrey, Earl of Stafford, Richard, Earl of Salisbury, Henry, Earl of Northumberland, Walter, Lord Hungerford, John, Lord Tiptoft, John, Bishop of Bath, Chancellor of England, Ralph, Lord Cromwell, Treasurer of England, William Lyndewode, keeper of the privy seal, William Phelip, knight, chamberlain, John Sturton, knight, and Robert Rolleston, clerk, keeper of the great wardrobe, has chosen and deputed the said persons and each of them to be of his privy council, willing and commanding him that in the matters to be moved in his said council they try to employ their whole labours and diligences for his worship and profit, and namely for the conservation of the laws, customs, and statutes abovesaid,

English historical documents

422

giving them power to hear, treat, commune, appoint, conclude, and determine such matters as shall happen to be moved among them; always provided that charters of pardon of crime, collation of benefices which shall become void in deed, and offices and other things that stand in grace he reserved to the king to do and dispose for them as seems good to him. And also if it happens that any matter or matters of great weight and charge are moved amongst them, the king wills that they discuss the matters, but do not conclude fully therein without his advice. And in case that in matters to be discussed and treated amongst them, which may be determined and concluded by the said council, there should fall amongst them variance in opinions, perhaps half against half, or two parts against the third the king wishes in all such cases to be informed as well of the matters so moved as of the diversity of opinions of the said council, he therein to conclude and to dispose according to his good pleasure. [The king grants to the persons named thereafter, annual sums for the term of their lives, for their attendance in the council, rang-ing from 2,000 marks to the Duke of Gloucester down to £40 for Sir John Stourton.] 235. The payment of wages for attendances at the king’s council, 1438 (E 101/96, Exchequer, K.R., Accounts Various [Latin introduction, English text]) The account of John Bishop of Bath, Chancellor of England, for the money received from the treasurer and chamberlains at the receipt of the king’s treasury for his attendance at the king’s council by writ of the king, now Henry VI, of his privy seal dated 29th September, in the 17th year of his reign, directed to the treasurer and barons of Michaelmas term in the same 17th year, on behalf of the king’s remembrancer, in which writ were contained amongst other things the following words: Henry by the grace of God King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and barons of our Exchequer greeting. Now lately has shown unto us the right worshipful father in God John Bishop of Bath, our chancellor, how that the 12th day of July, the second of our reign, our right dear and well beloved uncle the Duke of Gloucester and the lords and other persons of our continual council then being assembled at Westminster, considering the great labours costs and charges that the lords and other persons of our said council and each of them had borne and sustained from the time that they received the charge of attendance to our said council, and must clearly bear and sustain for the time that was to come while that it should please us that they should so attend, and that as well in King Richard II’s days as in those of King Henry IV, on whose souls may God have mercy, the prelates, earls, barons and other persons for the time attending to their councils received for their yearly attendances divers and notable sums appropriate to the degrees and estates that they were of, that is to say, the Archbishop of Canterbury for the year 300 marks, Henry Bishop of Winchester 300 marks, and of the remainder a bishop 200 marks, an earl 200 marks, a baron 100 marks, and a squire £40, as it appears by divers records and letters of the privy seal addressed to the treasurer of England and chamberlains for the time being, for so much appointed that in likewise all the lords and nobles for the time being of our said council and from term to term continually attending thereto, should receive yearly of our treasurer similar fines for their attendance to our council, having respect to their degree and estate, that is to say Henry Archbishop of Canterbury yearly 300 marks, Henry Bishop of Winchester then our chancellor 300 marks, John then

Council and parliament

423

Bishop of London 200 marks, Thomas Bishop of Durham 200 marks, Philip then Bishop of Worcester 200 marks, Richard Earl of Warwick 200 marks, John Stafford then treasurer of England 200 marks, Ralph Cromwell £100, John Scrope £100, Walter Hungerford £100, John Tiptoft £100, Thomas Chaucer £40, and William Alyngton £40, the said sums to be paid yearly to our aforesaid councillors for their said attendance at four terms of the year by equal portions by the hands of our treasurer of England and chamberlains of our Exchequer for the time being, the payment thereof to begin from the 9th day of December the first year of our reign…so always that if any of our said councillors were absent from our council any day after the beginning of our council in full term, while our courts are sitting, without reasonable cause, to be approved by our said council, he who receives for his attendance £200 a year shall lack thereof 20s for the day that he is so absent, he that receives for his attendance 200 marks a year shall lack thereof a mark for the day that he is so absent, he that receives for his attendance £100 a year shall lack 10s for the day that he is so absent, he that receives £40 a year for his said attendance shall similarly lack thereof for the rate that day that he is so absent. The which appointment so made was and is enacted in the records of our said council and thereupon commandment given to the keeper of our privy seal to make from time to time our letters of our privy seal, directed to the treasurer and to the chamberlains of our exchequer for the time being for payment of the said yearly sums to be made to each of our said councillors in the manner before rehearsed…. Receipts from the Exchequer. Also he renders account of £2,251 16s 8d received by John Bishop of Bath and Chancellor of England from the treasurer and chamberlains at the receipt of the king’s Exchequer because of his attendance at the king’s council, as well during the time that he was treasurer of England as in the time that he was chancellor of England at various times within the period of this account [a long list of dates and the sums paid on them then follows], as is contained in the pells of the Exchequer of Receipt for the same terms and dates and also in a certain roll of particulars delivered into the treasury. [Two further items of £16 13s 4d and £40 are added.] Sum total of the receipt—£2,308 10s Expenses [Details given of his attendance at the council, which was paid for by his yearly salary of 2,000 marks, less wages for 196 days in 8 Henry VI when he was attending the king’s council in France, and less deductions for other periods when he had been absent from the king’s council in England, but plus £200 a year from the time [3 March, 10 Henry VI] when he had been made chancellor.] Sum of his expenses for his actual attendance at the king’s council, £2,453 19s 1d. And the debt owing to him is £145 9s 236. The examination by the king’s council into the Bedford riot, 1439 (Select cases before the King’s Council) ed. I.S.Leadam and J.F.Baldwin, 104 [English]) The 10th day of February the 17th year of the king at Westminster in the Star Chamber, being then present the high and mighty prince the Duke of Gloucester, the Bishops of Bath, Chancellor, and of St Davids, the Earls of Salisbury and Northumberland, the Lord

English historical documents

424

Cromwell, Treasurer of England, William Lyndewode, keeper of the king’s privy seal and Robert Rolleston, keeper of the great wardrobe, the king’s councillors, they examined the persons whose names hereafter follow about the riot that took place at Bedford the 12th day of January, the year abovesaid. And first was called before the said council Thomas Wawton and sworn upon a book to say the plain truth…. He was asked with what people the lord Fanhope came to the town of Bedford at that time and in what array; he answered as to the number of persons, about sixty, and as to their array, with thick doublets and swords and bucklers; and thus arrayed some of them came into the hall, and about two of them within the bar. It was asked whether the said lord Fanhope at other sessions before that time was wont to come in like array; he said, yes. He was asked whether he came to the hall before the lord Fanhope, and how many of the justices were there together before the lord Fanhope came; he answered that he and John Enderby, John Fitz, and Harry Etwell came to the hall before the lord Fanhope. He was asked if they all knew well that the lord Fanhope was in the town of Bedford, and if they had any speech of him amongst those four, and to all this he answered yes. He was asked if he sent to the lord Fanhope any word of their being there together, or if they warned him that they would proceed in the sessions, or else that they tarried until his coming; to each of these he answered, no, but those four sat down and proceeded not to the sessions but communed together. He was asked if he and his fellows at such time as the lord Fanhope came to them did him any reverence or what countenance they made; he said that his three fellows stood up and he sitting still doffed his hood. He was asked how the lord Fanhope behaved after he came to them. And he answered that he sat down and called to him John Fitz and William Pek and willed them to its down by him; and the said Fitz advised the lord Fanhope to take to him Wawton and Enderby, for they were above the said Fitz in the commission. And the said Lord Fanhope answered them: “Nay, come, and if you will, the one shall be welcome and the other may choose”; and after this communication they sat down together. He was asked how the clamour and noise arose among them. He answered, by discourteous language between John FitzGeoffrey and a servant of the lord Fanhope, who told his servant to answer what was said to him; and the same servant forthwith said, saving the reverence of his lord, that it was false as the life of the said John FitzGeoffrey. And forthwith Wawton says that he said to the lord Fanhope “It is the unruliest session that I have ever seen in Bedford, and if it be not otherwise ruled I will complain unto the king’s council”; to which Lord Fanhope is said to have replied: “Complain as you will, I defy your menacing and all your evil will”. Wawton said he answered: “I set little of your defiance”, and with this there was clamour and noise in the hall. And so they rose up, both the lord Fanhope, Wawton, Enderby, and all the rest, and the lord Fanhope stood upon the chequer board, which board stood before the bench. He was asked if he saw the lord Fanhope draw any dagger: he said “Indeed, no”. He was asked if he saw any dagger in his hand, and he said, yes. Furthermore he was asked in what way he held the dagger in his hand, the point forward, thrusting, or else the point towards his elbow downwards, and to this he said he knew not. He was also asked if he saw the lord Fanhope or any man of his smite any man or looked as though he was going to strike, and he said, no. He was also asked whether the lord Fanhope, at such time as he stood upon the board, laboured to the ceasing of the clamour and debate, or whether he stirred and moved the people to clamour, and he answered that he laboured to stop the noise and clamour that was in the

Council and parliament

425

hall. He was asked whether he laboured effectually or else faintly and under colour of his labour allowed harm to be done. He answered that to his understanding he laboured to the keeping of the peace, and to abate the noise and clamour that was in the hall, and also as diligently as ever he saw a man. He was asked what the said lord Fanhope did at such time as the noise was stopped; he answered that he went to his inn, and with his own servants accompanied the said Wawton and other of his fellows to their lodgings for their greater security. And the lord Fanhope willed Wawton to have come to drink with him, as he had done Enderby, saying to Wawton that he would be welcome, for he gave him drink whom he had less cause to love than some, meaning Enderby. [John Enderby, John Fitz and Henry Etwell were then examined separately. They agreed on most charges with Wawton, except that neither Enderby nor Fitz saw Fanhope with a dagger in his hand, and Enderby admitted that he himself had drawn a dagger.] (Ibid. 106) The 24th February the year abovesaid at Westminster Thomas Stratton, under-sheriff of Bedford, in the presence of the high and mighty prince the Duke of Gloucester, the Bishop of Bath, Chancellor of England, the Earl of Salisbury, the lord Cromwell, Treasurer of England, the lord Hungerford, William Lyndewood, Keeper of the King’s Privy Seal, the king’s councillors, swore upon a book to make true and just answer in what should be demanded of him of the riot done at Bedford. First he was asked if he was privy to the certificate that was made to the king by Wawton, Enderby, Fitz, and Etwell, and he said, yes. Moreover he was asked where he sat at the session time, and he answered, at the lord Fanhope’s seat, in as much as he was clerk of the sessions. He was asked how the riot began, and he agreed therein with what Wawton had said, and so he did in all his depositions, saving in the 11th article he varied from all, saying that the lord Fanhope, at such time as he stood upon the chequer board looked towards Enderby as though he would have struck him, but he says he did not strike him. (Signed) Adam Moleyns (clerk of the council). (Ibid. 107) Endorsed—The king has granted this bill in his great council the 23rd day of February the 17th year of his reign, commanding that such lords as were present at the examination, of which the matter is comprised in a copy hereto annexed, should see the same examination that it is truly enacted, which they have done. And moreover afterwards the king charges that the keeper of his privy seal by warrant under the same seal command the chancellor of England to exemplify the same examination and send the certificate to the king upon the same matter in due form. (Signed) Adam Moleyns. [The editors comment (cxiii): “When the record was finally read in the presence of many lords of the council, it was their opinion that, while they could not legally deny the certificate (of Wauton and his colleagues, reporting the riot), the conduct of Lord Fanhope and his followers was not without excuse, and that the justices had most likely been actuated by motives of malice and anger. Thus they reported to the king, who commanded the chancellor to issue a patent of pardon and release for Lord

English historical documents

426

Fanhope and all his followers. For a record which his lordship desired, these letters dated 7 March with an abstract of the case were exemplified on the Patent Roll (Cal. Pat. Rolls, 246). This result was not surprising, for on the very day when the testimony of the under-sheriff of Bedford was given, Lord Fanhope was present in the king’s council transacting business (N.H. Nicolas, Proceedings and Ordinances of the Privy Council, V, 282). But the vindication of Lord Fanhope was not satisfactory to his opponents, who then took steps toward getting a similar vindication for themselves. By letters patent dated 30 May, Wauton and his fellows, together with a host of men who had participated on their side in the riot of 12th January, were pardoned and released of all fines, sureties, and other obligations in regard to the matter (Cal. Pat. Volls, 17 Henry VI, 282). In the exact words used in the release of Lord Fanhope, it was declared that the certification against them had been made of mere malice. Thus, in the midst of feuds and strifes that were leading directly toward civil war, the king and council temporized…. It is not surprising to learn that judicial sessions in Bedfordshire were soon again disturbed (Nicolas, op. cit. V, 102).”]

237. Articles of the council, c. 1444 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 316–20, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F.V [English]) [The manuscript is defective, especially in the first paragraph. This says that in many important suits, for which the king is asked to grant petitions, the king is not clearly informed of what is contained in the bills, and of what may result if he grants them, so that these suits are laid on one side; to avoid the inconveniences that now result from this state of affairs, the lords of the king’s council think that the rule and order in granting and speeding of bills directed to his highness ought to be as follows, if it should please the king; humbly protesting that they put forward these rules only by way of advice, for they think that the king may do at all times as it shall please him, and use his power and will as it pertains to his royal estate. The document is headed by the royal autograph, R.H., so that Henry VI must presumably have approved of these rules.] First, if any lord of his council or any other, or any man about the king’s person sue…to him for the expediting of any bill for any other person, that he subscribe himself in the said bill, so that it may be known at all times by whose means and labour every bill is, and if he who sues the bill cannot write himself, that then some man who can write for him should write the said suitor’s name upon the same bill to the intent abovesaid. Item that all bills so subscribed and received by the king be delivered to such person or persons as it shall please his highness to assign and depute thereto, and that the said person or persons attend to and see the continuance of every bill. Item, if there are bills concerning justice which contain matters of common law, that they without further ado inform the king’s good grace thereof, to the intent that the king

Council and parliament

427

may, if he wishes, command them to be sent to his council, that they may by the advice of his said council be remitted to the common law and to such places where the matter is terminable, unless the party sueing has no power to sue at common law. Item, if the matter contained in the said bills are matters of grace, then the said person or persons shall clearly and truly put shortly in writing on the back of the said bills what by whom and how many things are asked therein, and subscribe the said writings with his own hand, so that his highness may verily understand what is desired and why, and so to use his grace or not, or command it to be sent to his council to have their advice as it shall please him. [The answer, whether favourable or not, is to be written by the petitioner at the end of the bill, with the date and the names of the witnesses; then the king or his chamberlain, or his secretary shall sign it, after which no man shall add or subtract anything written in the bill or the answer.] Item, that in all letters by which the king grants and gives any thing to any person, this clause be put in, provided always the king has not granted the things asked to any other person before that time. Item that the warrants to the signet, and also the copies of all that shall pass the signet, whether letters missives or any other, be truly and readily kept, to the intent that as often as the king will command, it may be seen what things are passed by him, and also that nothing be written contrary to what has passed before. Item, for as much as it is likely that such a thing as passes the hands of many persons shall the more readily and responsibly pass, and any hurt which might otherwise come to the king, or to the prejudice of any other person shall more certainly be avoided, it is thought that all bills, when the king of his good grace has granted them, be delivered to his secretary, and letters to be conceived upon them be directed under the signet to the keeper of the privy seal, and thence under the privy seal to the Chancellor of England. Item, when the keeper of the privy seal receives letters under the signet, if he should think that the matter contained in the same is important, he shall have recourse to the lords of the council and explain the matter to them, to the intent that if it be thought necessary to them the king shall be informed before the letter passes. Item, if the advice beforesaid pleased the king, and is acceptable to his highness, that the person or persons abovesaid deputed and ordained to examine bills be sworn in the following form: You shall swear that as far as you can, you, as well in examining and supervising as in writing and subscribing of bills, shall truly, justly, and faithfully observe and keep without any partiality or favour of person or persons the articles abovesaid and everyone of them that affects you, not omitting or avoiding so to do for affection, love, money, doubt, or dread of any person or persons, and that you shall not receive nor admit directly or by intermediary, any gift, money, goods, nor promise of goods, for promoting, favouring, declaring, speeding, preventing, or hindering of any bill to be granted by the king or to be laid apart. Item, in avoiding of riots, excesses, misgovernance, and disobedience against the king’s estate, and for the peaceable enforcement of his laws, and to give an example of tranquil rule and good government hereafter to all his subjects…it seems right …that it be ordained that no lord, of whatever…degree, should knowingly receive, cherish, hold in household, nor maintain, pillagers, robbers, oppressors of the people, manslayers, felons, outlaws, ravishers of women, or any other open misdoers, whereby the parties grieved by

English historical documents

428

him shall not dare to pursue against them lawfully because of such support of lordship, and also that neither by colour or occasion of feofment or otherwise shall any of the said lords take any other man’s cause or quarrel in maintenance, nor conceive against any judge or officer indignation or displeasure for doing his offices in form of law, nor prevent by word, writing, or otherwise the king’s common law from having its course and that they keep this to their power not only in their own persons, but that they see that all others in their counting, their servants, and other such as are below them in estate do the same. And if any councillor of the king, lord or other, be found by due examination to do the contrary of any of the things abovesaid in the same article he shall be put out of the king’s council. And if any lord or man that is not of the king’s council do the contrary of the things abovesaid contained in the said articles, that from henceforward he be not made justice of the peace, nor any other officer. 238. Henry VI attempts to improve the keeping of the seas, 1449 (Exchequer T.R., Council and Privy Seal (E 28), File 78, No. 38 [English]) By the king. Right trusty and well beloved cousin and trusty and well beloved. It is come to our knowledge by credible report and confirmation that a great number of villeins and robbers are continually abiding upon the sea in such a way that our subjects and others engaging in commerce dare not and may not safely come and go by the sea to this our realm and other places as the course and action of commerce demands and requires, and if this be not provided for, it is likely to be the grief and hurt of ourself and the common good and welfare of all our land and subjects, and too shameful a thing to be suffered, so that we will not allow it. We pray you therefore right specially that you will put yourself and everyone of you in your full duty and effective diligence by all the means possible to you to get and ordain such ships as you can, well victualled, armed, and filled with effective men to go to sea to chastise, rebuke, and scour the sea of such misruled folk and robbers, so that commerce may freely and surely have its course, and our subjects be in rest and peace, using such as shall be thought suitable to you to help in this matter, both cities and others, delivering such privy seals as we send you with blank tallies for the said cause. And to the intent that you may understand what the said privy seals contain, we send you a copy thereof within this, and we pray you that you fail not in this as you will do us singular pleasure. Given at Westminster the 27th day of March, 27 Henry VI. [In Latin:] To each of the underwritten to whom is directed the letter given above, let there be directed six other letters with white thongs of the substance of the one annexed to this. To our right trusty and well beloved cousin and trusty and well beloved the Earl of Arundel, Thomas Leukener, knight, and Richard Dalingrygge, squire, and to each of them. Also to our right trusty and well beloved cousins and trusty and well beloved, the Earl of Oxford, the Viscounts Bourgchier and Thomas Tyrell, knight, and to everyone of them. Also to our right trusty and well beloved cousin and trusty and well beloved the lord Scales, Miles Stapilton, and Henry Ingles, knights, and to everyone of them. Also to our trusty and well beloved cousin and trusty and well beloved James Ormonde and Waltier Rodeney, knight, the Mayor of Bristowe, Thomas Yenke and John Miscell and to

Council and parliament

429

everyone of them. Also to our right trusty and trusty [sic] and well beloved cousins and trusty and well beloved the Earl of Devonshire, the lord Fitzwaryn, and Bonville, Philip Courtenay, knight, and John Arundel, squire, and to everyone of them. Also to our trusty and wellbeloved John Lyle, knight, Thomas Ovedale, and William Soper, squires, and to everyone of them. By the command of the king by advice of his council T.Kent. [Appended to this document is the following letter:] (Ibid. No. 39 [English]) By the king. Trusty and well beloved, for as much as a great number of pillagers and robbers are continually upon the sea and do all the annoyance they can, so that no merchant may freely resort nor come into this land nor go out with their goods and merchandise as is their right, which is likely to be too harmful a thing to us, and all our lands and subjects, if remedy be not ordained for this evil. We pray you therefore heartily that you will do your effective work and diligence for the rebuking of the said robbers and scouring of the sea in such manner as by our right trusty and well beloved cousins and trusty and well beloved the Earl of Oxford, Viscount Bourgchier, and Thomas Tyrell, knight, or any of them, it shall be desired of you to do in this matter, so that you fail not them as you will and desire our honour and worship, welfare, and ease of this our land and subjects. Given under our privy seal at Westminster the 27th day of March. [In Latin:] This is the copy of the letter with white thongs to be directed to those who are to be asked by the aforesaid lords to help with the said armament. By the mandate of the king by the advice of his council. T.Kent. 239. Arrangements for a council, 1454 (Rot. Parl. V, 240–1 [English]) Instruction given by the Duke of York, the king’s lieutenant of his parliament, and other lords spiritual and temporal of the said parliament, to the right reverend fathers in God the Bishops of Winchester, Ely and Chester; the Earls of Warwick, Oxford and Shrewsbury; the Viscounts Beaumont and Bourgchier; the Lords the Prior of St John’s, Fauconberg, Dudley, and Stourton jointly; the which information they shall open, if they find the king’s disposition such that he may and will attend to the hearing and understanding thereof, and otherwise they shall open only the first and second articles. [Articles 1 and 2 commend the lieutenant and lords to the king and their wishes for a speedy recovery and state that they are applying themselves with diligence to the execution of justice and the advancement of the royal estate; articles 3 and 4 inform the king of the death of Cardinal John Kemp, archbishop of Canterbury and chancellor of England, and of the measures which the lords have taken for the safe custody of the great seal. Article 5 is as follows:]

English historical documents

430

Also they shall remember that it pleased the king’s highness in this his parliament at Reading, to command to be opened to the commons of this land his gracious intention to ordain and establish a discreet and earnest council, which was a great rejoicing and comfort to the said commons in so much that now lately by the mouth of their speaker among other things requests have twice been made to the said lieutenant and lords that the said commons might understand and have knowledge of effectual proceedings to the establishing of the said council, for which certain lords and persons have been named, subject to the king’s correction, to take upon them the said charge; and they shall be permitted to declare what persons are so named, and understand whether the king’s good grace is satisfied with the said persons, or whether he wishes to change or set aside any of them, to the intent that his will may be observed and kept. 240. Henry VI summons a Great Council to settle the private war between the Percies and the Nevilles, 1458 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 293, from B.M., Add. MS. 4612 [English]) In 1453 the Nevilles and Percies had collided at Stamford Bridge and a pitched battle had followed, afterwards regarded by some as the true beginning of the civil war. The feud had continued until in July 1457 another battle was fought at Castleton. The Nevilles gained a complete victory, carrying off Lord Egremont and his brother Sir Richard Percy as prisoners to Middleham; but in the autumn Lord Egremout escaped from prison and took refuge at court. A Great Council summoned in the previous November, perhaps for the condemnation of Bishop Reginald Pecock, was adjourned until the following January, ninety-two lords spiritual and temporal then being summoned (ibid. 290–3).

Letter from the king to the Earl of Arundel, 14 February 1458 By the king. Right trusty and well beloved cousin, we have assembled at this time at our palace of Westminster our great council, as you know well, and thought for certain that you would have been there before this, as we wrote unto you that you should, considering the great causes for which we called our said council, especially to set apart such variances as exist between various lords of this our realm; and, blessed be Jesus, there is such diligence done in that matter that we doubt not but that the said variance shall take fruitful conclusion, as we wish in all ways that they should do so. And in as much as you are a great lord of this our land, and that your presence is very necessary for the welfare of this land; we will and charge you forthwith right strictly that in all goodly haste after the sight of these our letters you address yourself unto our said council, all excuses set apart, notwithstanding any licence granted by us unto you or any other of our letters to the

Council and parliament

431

contrary; and we wish that you should not fail to do this, as you desire to do us singular pleasure and the welfare of this our land. Given at Westminster the 31th day of February, the 36th year. To the Earl of Arundel. In the year and at the place abovesaid the king by the advice of his council ordered the keeper of the privy seal to cause to be made letters under the same seal in the aforesaid form. [The variances between great lords, referred to above, probably included also the feud between York, Salisbury and Warwick on the one hand, and the Beauforts and the Cliffords on the other hand, arising out of the first battle of St Albans. This feud was also settled at this Great Council, and the settlement was signalised by a grand procession of the king, queen and the nobles to St Paul’s.]

241. How the king’s council may be chosen and established: Sir John Fortescue’s advice, c. 1471–6 (Sir John Fortescue, The Governance of England, ch. 15, 146 [English]) It is thought good that the king should have a council chosen and established in the form that follows, or in some other form like it. First, that there should be chosen twelve spiritual men, and twelve temporal men, of the wisest and best disposed men that can be found in all the parts of this land; and that they be sworn to counsel the king according to a form to be devised for their oath. And especially that they shall take no fee, nor clothing, nor any rewards of any man, save only of the king…. And though the wages of the said 24 councillors may seem a new and great charge to the king, yet when it is considered how great were the wages which the great lords and other men, that were of the king’s council in times past, took for their attendance there, which manner of council was not as beneficial to the king and to his realm as this will be, which wages will thenceforward cease, the wages of the 24 councillors will appear no great charge to the king…. And if the same wages be thought too great a charge to the king, the aforesaid councillors may be less numerous, as to be 16 councillors of private persons, with two lords spiritual and two lords temporal; so that they will be in all only 20 persons. These councillors may continually, at such hours as may be assigned to them, commune and deliberate upon the matters of difficulty that fall to the king; and then upon the matters of the policy of the realm; as how the going out of money may be restrained, how bullion may be brought into the land, how also plate, jewels, and money lately borne out, may be brought in again…. And also how the prices of merchandise grown in this land may be held up and increased, and the prices of merchandise brought into this land abated. How our navy may be maintained and augmented, and upon such other points of policy…. How also the laws may be amended in such things as need reformation, whereby the parliaments shall do more good in a month to the amending of the law than they shall probably do in a year, if the amending thereof be not debated, and by such counsel ripened to their hands.

English historical documents

432

There may be of this council, when they wish to come to it, or are desired to come by the said councillors, the great officers of the land, such as the chancellor, treasurer, and privy seal; of which the chancellor, when he is present, may be president, and have the supreme rule of all the council. Also the judges, the barons of the Exchequer, the clerk of the rolls, and such as the foresaid councillors will desire to be with them for matters of great difficulty…and else not. All other matters which shall concern this council, as when a councillor dies, how a new councillor shall be chosen, how many hours of the day the council shall sit, when they shall have any vacation, how long any of them may be absent…with all other articles necessary for the demeaning and rule of this council, may be conceived at leisure, and put in a book, and that book kept in this council as a register or a book of rules how they shall do in everything. 242. A decree in the Star Chamber against the maintenance of rioters by Lord Grey, 1472 (Records of the Borough of Nottingham, ed. W.H.Stevenson, II (1883), 384 [Latin introduction, English text]) Edward, by the grace of God, King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland, to all whom these present letters shall come, greeting. We have inspected the tenor of a certain act made and issued in the presence of us and out council on 24th October last past, and remaining in the office of the privy seal in our council chamber called the Star Chamber in our palace of Westminster, in these words: In the matter of the complaint of the mayor, aldermen, and commonalty of the town of Nottingham propounded before the king our sovereign lord and his council against Robert Hamson, Richard Alestre, Thomas Shawe, Thomas Hudson, and others, about great riots, excesses, and misgovernings, alleged to have been committed by the said Robert and others, all of which is expressed in the said bill of complaint. When the answer of the said Robert [etc.], being personally present, had been given to the said complaint, and the said mayor, aldermen, and commons had made their reply, and all that could be alleged by either party in that matter, with all other petitions and requests made on both sides, had been heard and understood, and when great deliberation had been taken thereon by our sovereign lord, then by the advice of his said council, the 24th day of October, the 11th year of the reign of our sovereign lord, in the Star Chamber at Westminster, in full council, the king’s highness being present, and before him both the parties abovesaid, it was, by the mouth of his chancellor of England, shown, opened, and declared in the following form: [Robert Hamson and his three companions were not to be imprisoned as the mayor, aldermen and commonalty had asked, because there was not sufficient proof against them; but they were each to find surety for good behaviour for twelve months, and then to appear again before the king and his said council.] And moreover, our said sovereign lord by his own mouth asked and questioned Henry, Lord Grey, then present, whether all the other persons named in the said complaint and articles of the same were his servants and followers, and whether he would bring them in or not to answer; the same Lord Grey then answering our sovereign lord that they were not his servants, and that he could not bring them in to answer. And thereupon our

Council and parliament

433

sovereign lord gave the same Lord Grey strict command and injunction that he should not support favour, nor maintain them… contrary to his laws henceforth, as he would answer to our said sovereign lord, and upon the pain that would fall thereon. [Lord Grey, and his tenants, servants and followers were told not to attempt anything against the mayor, aldermen, and commonalty of Nottingham. Lord Grey was to release and discharge all persons of Nottingham who were bound to him by retainer or promise of service and not to make any such retainers, or give any livery, in future contrary to the laws: Lord Grey said that he would keep and obey them according to the king’s command. The Mayor of Nottingham and his fellows were told to be of good bearing towards Lord Grey and his tenants, and not to do or attempt anything contrary to the laws.] 243. Edward IV consults his council about the reform of the royal household, c. 1472 and 1478 (i) c. 1472. The Black Book of the Household of Edward IV (A.R.Myers, The Household of Edward IV (Manchester, 1959), 86–7 [English]) Tphis is the new house of houses principal of England in times of peace, built upon I this king’s foundations, precedents, and upon other more notable and husbandly householders by the great counsel of lords spiritual and temporal, the Cardinal of Canterbury, George, Duke of Clarence, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, the wise and discreet judges, and other responsible, well-advised and well learned men of England in all trials. (ii) 1478. The Ordinance of 1478 (Ibid. 211 [English] (P.R.O.C 81/File 1386, warrants under the Signet 8)) [Monogram] RE By the king Right reverend father in God, right trusty and well beloved, we greet you well, and whereas we by the advice of our council have made certain ordinances for the establishing of our household comprised in a book which by our commandment shall be delivered unto you by our trusty and right well beloved clerk and councillor, Master Thomas Langtone, we will that you do put all the said ordinances in writing sealed under our great seal, and the same so sealed send unto us by our said councillor without delay. And these our letters shall be your warrant and discharge in relation to us in that matter. Given under our signet at our monastery of Syon the 9th day of July, the 18th year of our reign. [Across the dorse is the address] To the right reverend father in God our right trusty and well beloved the Bishop of Lincoln, our chancellor of England. 244. Special arrangements in the king’s council for the suits of poor men, 1483 (Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1476–85 (1901), 413 [English calendar from Latin])

English historical documents

434

For such arrangements in 1390, see above, D.N. 229. For similar ordinances, see Nicolas, op. cit. IV, 60–4; cf. Rot. Parl. IV, 343 [English].

December 27th, 1483. Grant for life to the king’s servitor John Haryngton, for his good service before the lords and others of the council and elsewhere and especially in the custody, registration, and expedition of bills, requests, and supplications of poor persons, of an annuity of £20 at the receipt of the Exchequer and the office of clerk of the council of the said requests and supplications, with all commodities. By the privy seal. (ii) Parliament 245. Parliamentary procedure, 1332 (Rot. Parl. II, 66 [French]) For a disclaimer by the commons in 1327 of all petitions not included in an indented bill, see ibid. II, 11a; for a commons disclaimer of 1348 of any bills delivered in their name but contrary to their wishes, see ibid. II, 203b; for a petition of the commons in 1351 that no statute should be changed by any private bill, see ibid. II, 230b.

On that Thursday took place a discussion and deliberation, that is to say, the prelates by themselves, and the earls, barons, and other magnates by themselves, and also the knights of the shires by themselves, and they replied…and counselled for the best that our lord the king should stay in England, and should betake himself to the north, and have with him wise and powerful men for the salvation of the realm and of his people, in case the Scots, or others, should try to invade to do evil. And they also advised that the king should send wise and powerful men to Ireland, and also money, to help his liege men there. And whereas our Lord the king cannot do these things without the help of his people, the prelates, earls, barons and other magnates, and the knights of the shire, and all the commons, of their free will, to carry out the recommendations, and to enable our lord the king to live of his own and pay his expenses, and not burden his people by outrageous prises in any way, have granted to our lord the king a fifteenth to be levied from the commonalty, and a tenth to be levied from the cities, boroughs, and demesnes of the king.

Council and parliament

435

246. A conditional grant in parliament, 1340 (Rot. Parl. II, 112 [French]) For a comment on this transaction, see G.L.Harriss, “The Commons’ Petitions of 1340”, E.H.R. 78 (1963), 625–54.

To which request the prelates, earls, and barons, for themselves and for the commons of the land, having regard to the mischiefs and perils on the one hand, if aid should fail, which God forbid, and to the honour, profit, and peace, on the other hand which could come, with the aid of God, to our lord the king, and to all the English nation, if he should be helped, on the same Monday granted to our lord the king for the abovesaid causes the following aid: that is to say, the ninth sheaf, the ninth fleece, and the ninth lamb of all their sheaves, lambs and fleeces, to be taken henceforward for the two years next following. And the citizens and burgesses of the realm granted the true ninth of all their goods; and merchants who do not dwell in cities and in boroughs, and other folk who dwell in forests and wastes, and scarcely manage to exist on their livelihood, or their store of sheep, the fifteenth of all their goods according to the true value. On the condition, that our lord the king of his good grace, considering the great charge and subsidies with which they have been charged at this time, and this new grant just made, which seems to them very heavy, should grant the petitions which they have put before him and his council, and which are continued below, and begin in this form: “These are the petitions, etc.” 247. The trial of peers in parliament, 1341 (Rot. Parl. II, 127 [French]) Honourable lord, saving your reverence, it seems to the prelates, earls, and barons, with one assent, that the peers of the land ought not to be arrested, nor led into judgement, except in parliament, and by their peers. And on this there has recently been some discussion whether any of the peers, who is or has been chancellor, treasurer, or any other officer whatsoever, ought to lose this privilege, as well by reason of his office as in any other manner. The peers of the land are advised that all the peers of the land, officers or otherwise, either by reason of their office or of the things relating to their office, or for any other cause, ought not to be led into judgement, nor lose their temporalities, lands, tenements, goods, or chattels; nor be arrested, imprisoned, outlawed, nor condemned, and ought not to respond or be judged, except in full parliament, and before the peers where the king takes part. Saving to our lord the king the laws rightly used by due process, and saving the suit of the party…. And then the archbishop prayed the king, that it would please his lordship, that since he was commonly denounced throughout the realm and elsewhere, he should be charged in full parliament before the peers, and reply there, so that he should be openly held for such as he is; which thing the king granted.

English historical documents

436

248. Petitions for audit of accounts and for appointment of ministers in parliament, 1341 (Rot. Parl. II, 128 [French]) A so pray the magnates and commons of the land, for common profit of the king and themselves, that certain people should be deputed by commission to hear the accounts of all those who have received the wool of our lord, or other aids granted to him; and also the accounts of those who have received and spent his money, as well on the other side of the sea as on this side, since the beginning of his war until now; and that rolls and other remembrances, obligations, and other things done overseas shall be delivered into the chancery, to be enrolled and put in remem-brance, as has been the custom before this time. Also, whereas many evils have arisen from having had counsellors and ministers, the magnates and commons pray that it may please the king to ordain, by advice of the prelates, earls and barons, that the king should appoint the chancellor, the chief justice of one bench and the other, the treasurer, chancellor, and chief baron of the Exchequer, the steward of his household, the keeper of the wardrobe, and the con-troller, and a clerk suitable for keeping his privy seal, the chief clerks of the king in the common bench, and this in parliament. And so it shall be done henceforward with such ministers when need shall arise, who shall be sworn before the peers in parliament to keep the laws, as is said above; and this according to the ordinances made on this subject before this time. 249. The king grants petitions in statute form, in return for a tax, 1341 (Rot. Parl. II, 131 [French]) And be it remembered, that on the abovesaid replies, as well to the requests of the lords as to those of the commons and of the clergy, the underwritten statutes were made by the lords and commons and shown to our lord the king, together with some conditions that the lords and commons requested from the king, for the grant that they would make to him of 30,000 sacks of wool, in recompense for the ninth sheaf, lamb, and fleece of the second year. These statutes and conditions were then read before the king. And the chancellor, treasurer, and some justices of one bench and the other, and the steward of the royal household, and the chamberlain, and some others, were sworn on the cross of Canterbury to hold and keep them henceforth as was fitting for them. But the chancellor, treasurer, and some of the justices, made their protestation, that they did not agree to the making nor to the form of the statutes, nor would they be able to keep them, if the statutes were contrary to the laws and usages of the realm, which they were sworn to defend. And then the statutes and conditions were sealed with the king’s great seal and delivered to the lords, and to the knights of the shire, which statutes and conditions, along with the advice of the lords and others on some points contained in the commissions made to the lords, to inquire into the oppressions, extortions, grievances, and excesses committed by ministers of the king and others, in various shires, are more fully contained on the back of this roll.

Council and parliament

437

250. The king revokes a statute, 1341 (Rymer, Foedera, II, iv, 112 [Latin], from Close Roll, 15 Edward III, Pt 2, m. 1d) The king to the sheriff of Lincoln, greeting. Whereas in our parliament, held at Westminster, in the quinzaine of Easter last past, certain articles expressly contrary to the laws and customs of the realm of England and to our royal rights and prerogatives were supposed to have been conceded by us by means of a statute, We, considering how much we are bound by the bond of our oath to the observance and defence of the laws, customs, rights and prerogatives of this kingdom, and therefore wishing to recall to their due state those things which are thus improvidently done, have taken counsel and advice on this with our earls and barons and other experienced men of our kingdom; and because we have never consented to the making of the pretended statute but as it then behoved us we dissimulated, having made protests for the revoking of the said statute (if it should indeed proceed) to avoid the dangers which we feared might come if we denied it, forasmuch as the parliament would have otherwise been dissolved in discord, without accomplishing anything, and so our important business would have been ruined (which Heaven forbid), and so we allowed the pretended statute to be sealed at that time; it seemed to the earls, barons, and other wise men, that since the pretended statute did not proceed from our own free will, it ought not to have the name or strength of a statute. And therefore by their counsel and assent we have decreed that the statute was void, and we have willed that it should be annulled, in so far as it took any effect, willing nevertheless that the articles contained in the pretended statute which by other statutes of ours or of our forebears, the kings of England, have been approved, shall be observed in all points, as is convenient, according to the form of the statutes; and we do this solely for the conservation and maintenance of the rights of our crown, as we are bound to do, and not that we should in any wise oppress or burden our subjects (whom we desire to rule in gentleness). And therefore we do command thee that thou shouldst cause all these things to be publicly proclaimed within thy bailiwick, wherever shall seem to thee expedient. Witnessed by the king at Westminster, the first day of October. 251. The commons are loth to be drawn into high politics, 1348 (Rot. Parl. II, 164–5 [French]) And whereas the magnates and others who were summoned to the parliament A had not all arrived, the opening was adjourned until the Tuesday next following. And then for the same cause, from the Tuesday until the Wednesday next following. And then for the same cause, from this Wednesday until the Thursday following. On this day the causes of parliament were propounded by Sir William Thorp, in the presence of our lord the king, and of the prelates, earls, barons, and commons of the realm there assembled; and there were two causes which specially affected our lord the king, and all the realm of England. That is, first, concerning the war which our lord the king has undertaken against his adversary of France by common assent of all the magnates and commons of his land, in

English historical documents

438

various parliaments held hitherto… [the question is] what shall be done when the present truce has ended. The other cause, concerning the peace of England, how and in what manner it could be better kept. And on this the knights of the shire and others of the commons were told that they must treat together and what they felt they must show to the king and the magnates of his council. These knights and commons discussed together on these matters for four days, and at last they answered to the article concerning the war in the following manner: Very dread lord, as for your war and the array of it, we are so ignorant and simple that we do not know how, nor are we able, to counsel on these matters. Wherefore we pray your gracious lordship to have us excused from your order, and may it please you, by the advice of the great and wise men of your council to ordain on this point what shall seem best to you for the honour and profit of you and your realm. And what shall be thus ordained by the assent and agreement of your and the magnates, we will readily agree to it, and hold it as firm and stable. 252. The commons ask for petitions not to be altered, 1348 (Rot. Parl. II, 203 [French]) For the appointment by the commons of a representative, Sir William Trussell, to speak for them to the king and lords, in 1343, see ibid. 136; for a commons request of 1344 that a committee be appointed to answer their petitions before they dispersed, see ibid. 149.

A so the Commons pray that the petitions delivered in the last parliament by the commons, and fully answered and granted by our lord the king, the prelates, and magnates of the land, should be kept; and that by no bill delivered in this parliament in the name of the commons or of any one else should the replies granted previously be changed. For the Commons avow no bill, if any should be delivered to him in parliament to do the contrary. Reply: Formerly the king, by advice of the prelates and magnates of the realm, caused answer to be made to the petitions of the commons concerning the laws of the land, that the laws held and used in times past, and the process thereof formerly employed, cannot be changed without making a new statute on the matter. To do this thing the king did not intend then, nor can he contemplate it yet. But as soon as possible when he can hear the matter, he will call the magnates and the wise men of his council before him, and will ordain on the basis of these articles and others touching the amendment of the law, by their advice and counsels, so that reason and equity will be done to all his lieges and subjects and to each one of them.

Council and parliament

439

253. The relative authority of statute and ordinance, 1363 (Rot. Parl. II, 280 [French]) See D.N. 681 for the text of this ordinance, described in the Statute Roll as a statute (S.R. I, 380).

And so the parliament continued to discuss various things, touching as well the petitions presented by the commons and other particular persons as also the needs of the king and his kingdom, until Friday, 13th November; on which day the king, prelates, dukes, earls, barons, and commons being in the White Chamber, and the petitions of the commons and the responses made to them having been read, the chancellor, by the king’s command, showed to the magnates and commons that the king’s will is to uphold and keep the ordinance made concerning apparel. And moreover he charged the said magnates and commons who were there that they, and each of them, should hold and cause to be held and kept the same ordinance of apparel, without attempting or doing anything to the contrary. And that the commons, at their coming into their own countryside, should cause it to be shown and published to the people, so that each should dress and cause his followers and servants to use the apparel according to the form of the ordinance…. And moreover he asked them if they wished to have the things thus agreed enacted by way of ordinance or statute. And they said that it would be well to enact these things by ordinance and not by statute, so that if anything needed to be amended it could be amended in the next parliament; and so it was done. 254. No taxation on wool except through parliament, 1371 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 393 [French]) The commons had a long struggle before they could get this principle finally accepted. The king had already agreed in 1348 that no imposition should be levied on wool without the consent of the commons in parliament (Rot. Parl. II, 200–1); a statute of 1362 had enacted that “no subsidy nor other charge shall be imposed or granted on wool by the merchants nor anyone else in future without the assent of parliament” (S.R. I, 374); and in the last parliament of Edward III in 1377 the government was forced to concede, in answer to a complaint of the commons, “And whereas impositions may not be laid on wool without the assent of the prelates, dukes, earls, barons, and other great men (grantz) of the commonalty of his realm, there is a statute made on this matter which the king wishes to remain in force” (Rot. Parl. II, 366).

English historical documents

440

Also it is agreed and established that no imposition or charge should be laid on wools, woolfells, or leathers, except the custom and subsidy granted to the king, in any manner without the assent of parliament; and if any such charge shall be imposed, it shall be repelled and treated as null and void. 255. A petition for the appointment of lay officers, 1371 (Rot. Parl. II, 304 [French]) And whereas in this present parliament it was shown to our lord the king by all the earls, barons, and commons of England, that the government of the realm has for a long time been administered by people of Holy Church who are never amenable to justice in any case, whereby great harm and damage has resulted in times past and more may follow in time to come, in disinheritance of the Crown, and great prejudice of the realm, for various reasons that could be stated. May it please our lord the king that lay folk of the realm sufficient and able in estate to be chosen for this, and no other persons, shall henceforth be made chancellor, treasurer, and clerk of the privy seal, barons of the Exchequer, chamberlains of the Exchequer, controller, and all other great officers and governors of the said realm; and that this thing should now be established in such manner in the form abovesaid, that in no way should it be undone, nor should anything to the contrary be done in any time to come, saving always to the king our lord the choice and removal of such officers, but that they should be always lay folk as is stated above. Reply: The king will ordain on this point as shall seem best to him by advice of his good counsel. 256. Grant of tonnage and poundage by the burgesses alone, 1372 (Rot. Parl. II, 310 [French]) And after this leave was given to the knights of the shires to depart and to sue out their writs for their expenses. And so they departed. But the citizens and burgesses who had come to the parliament were commanded to stay for certain reasons. When these citizens and burgesses had assembled, the day after, before the prince and others, prelates and great men, in a chamber near the White Chamber, it was shown to them how the year before a grant had been made for a certain term for the safe and sure conduct of the ships and merchandise coming to this land by sea and passing from it, a subsidy, that is to say, on each tun of wine coming to this land two shillings, and of each pound of merchandise of whatever sort, both entering and passing through, 6d; which term is already past. [And they were requested] to be willing to consider the perils and mischiefs which might come to their ships and merchandises at the hands of enemies on the sea, and to grant another such subsidy, to last for a year for the causes abovesaid. Which subsidy they granted to the king to be taken and levied in the way in which it was taken and levied in the year last past. And so they departed.

Council and parliament

441

257. Lawyers and sheriffs excluded from parliament, 1372 (Rot. Parl. II, 310 [French]) Whereas men of the law who follow divers matters in the king’s courts on behalf of various persons for whom they are proxies and cause to be brought into parliament many petitions in the name of the commons, which do not concern them at all but only the private persons with whom they are engaged. Also sheriffs who are common officials for the people, and ought to be abiding in their office to do right to everyone, are named, and have been before this time, and returned to parliament as knights of the shire, by the same sheriffs, It is agreed and assented in this parliament that henceforth no man of the law following business in the king’s court, nor any sheriff for the time that he is sheriff, shall be returned nor accepted as knight of the shires, and those who are men of the law and sheriffs now returned to parliament shall have no wages. But the king wishes that the knights and serjeants of the most worthy of the counties shall be returned henceforth as knights of the shires in parliament, and that they shall be chosen in the full shire court. 258. Grant of tonnage and poundage on conditions, 1373 (Rot. Parl. II, 317 [French]) Note, however, that as late as 1426 a government swept aside conditions which the commons attempted to attach to the grant of tunnage and poundage, ibid, IV, 301.

The lords and commons of England have granted to our lord the king in this present parliament the fifteenth in ancient manner, to be levied for the two years next coming, in the following way: to be paid at the feasts of the Purification and Pentecost next coming, by equal portions, the first year, and in the second year, to be paid at the same feasts, if the wars of the king and of his crown should last so long. And also there is granted for each pound of merchandise exported overseas out of the realm sixpence, except on wools, woolfells, leathers and wine; and on merchandise imported from abroad sixpence, in the aforesaid manner. And two shillings on each ton of wine to be levied for the same two years: that is to say, the first year without condition, and the second year on the abovesaid condition, if the war should last so long. And also they have granted the subsidy on wool, to be taken in the year following the feast of Michaelmas next coming, without condition. And the second year after on the abovesaid condition without any other charge or imposition on the people of England during the two years. And if the wars cease in the second year, all the grants and charges abovenamed shall be annulled…. And that no knights of the shires, nor squires, citizens, nor burgesses, who are returned for this present parliament, shall be collectors of this charge during the years abovesaid.

English historical documents

442

259. Impeachments in the Good Parliament, 1376, according to the rolls of parliament (Rot. Parl. II, 321 [French]) Cf. D.N. 46 for the account of the proceedings given in the Anonimalle Chronicle of St Mary’s, York.

First, Richard Lyons, merchant of London, was impeached and accused by the said commons of several deceits, extortions, and other evils done by him to our lord the king and to his people, both during the time that he has frequented the household and council of the king, and also formerly in the time when he was farmer of the king’s subsidies and customs. [He was especially accused of having procured to his own advantage the levy of various new impositions, unauthorised by parliament, on wool and other merchandise, and of having lent the king 20,000 marks and being repaid 30,000 marks. Richard appeared before parliament and tried to make a defence, which was rejected. He was ordered to be imprisoned at the king’s will, all his lands, goods and chattels were to be seized into the king’s hands, he was never to hold office again, he was to lose his franchise to the city of London, and he was to pay a fine and ransom to be assessed according to the extent and gravity of his offences.] Also, William, Lord Latimer, was impeached and accused by clamour of the commons of various deceits, extortions, grievances and other evils, committed by him and others of his servants and brood, from the time that he had been associated with the king, both in Brittany when he held office there with the king, as also in England from the time that he has been chamberlain and councillor of our lord the king [Latimer was accused particularly of oppressions and corrupt practices in Brittany, and of the same kinds of misdeed in England as Richard Lyons. Latimer also tried to make a defence, but after long deliberation, judgement was given in parliament against him in the following form.] Whereas Lord Latimer is found in full parliament in default…against the profit of the king and the realm; that is to say, of various usurious loans made to the loss of the king unnecessarily, and also of patents made in destruction of the staple of wool and the mint of Calais, to the great injury of the king and the realm of England, and destruction of the town of Calais; and also of various grievous impositions laid on wool against the statute of parliament recently made; he is adjudged by the prelates and lords in full parliament to be committed to prison in the charge of the marshal and to make fine and ransom at the king’s pleasure. Whereupon the commons petitioned the king that as Latimer was found in such default by his deeds, he should be deprived of all his royal offices and from being in any way a royal councillor for all time to come; which request the king has granted and wishes it and grants it. [Other persons were then impeached: William Elys, farmer of the customs in the port of Great Yarmouth, for extortions in his office; John Pecche of London, who, with the aid of Richard Lyons, had procured from the king a patent giving him a monopoly of the sweet wine trade in London, solely for his own profit; John, Lord Nevill, for buying tallies at a great discount from creditors of the king, and other offences; Adam de Bury, citizen of London, for various offences committed by him, especially as Mayor of Calais.

Council and parliament

443

All were to be fined heavily; Elys and Pecche were to be imprisoned. Alice Perrers was to be banished.] 260. The commons try to control the executive, 1377 (Rot. Parl. III, 5 [French]) And afterwards the commons came before the king in parliament, and there Sir Peter de la Mare, knight, who acted as speaker for the commons, made his protestation, that what he had to say was not said on his personal account, but by the resolve, assent, and express wish of all the commons there assembled; and if it should happen that he should trespass in anything, or should perchance say anything that did not have the assent of his companions, that it should be at once amended by these same companions, before they had left the palace…. And since our lord the king—whom God preserve—is at present innocent and of tender age, the said commons, for the amendment of the evils aforesaid and of others, and for the salvation of the kingdom which is now in great peril, and more so than ever before, besought our lord the king and the lords of parliament with regard to three things in particular:– First, that it might please them to ordain and nominate in this present parliament eight fit persons of various estates, to remain continually in council with the king’s officers on the needs of the king and the kingdom, such councillors to be chosen from such persons who are knowledgeable and can and will work the most diligently for the amendment of the evils aforesaid, and the good government and salvation of the realm; so that the commons may be clearly told what are the names of those counsellors, who may be the spenders and ordainers of what they may wish to grant for the wars, and yet to have the greatest courage to perform for our lord the king what they have from him in trust, as is aforesaid. Also, that it might please them to ordain and nominate in this parliament the persons who are to attend the person of our lord the king, who is of such a tender age. And that these persons should be of the most virtuous, honest, and fitting of the realm, so that our same lord, who is a consecrated and anointed person, should be nobly governed and nourished in good virtues to the pleasure of God, so that the whole realm may be saved and amended. And that it should also be ordained, that our same lord the king and his household should be governed with wise moderation in expenses, to be met solely from the (ordinary) revenues of the realm and from the other rights of his crown and dominions. And all that is or shall be granted to our lord the king in maintenance of his wars shall be applied and expended on the wars and on nothing else, in aid and relief of his commons aforesaid. Also that the common law, as well as the special laws, statutes, and ordinances of the land, made in former times for the common profit and good governance of the realm, should in their entirety be kept, ratified, and confirmed…. Request is also made to the lords of parliament, that whatever is ordained in this present parliament shall not be repealed without parliament…. And on this answer was given that the prelates and lords would consult together, and the commons were commanded to return to their place of assembly, and to discuss the other business which had been given to them, between now

English historical documents

444

and next Thursday, on which day they were instructed to return to parliament to hear the answer to their petitions aforesaid. As for the first request which the said commons presented to our lord the king and to the lords of parliament (for the appointment of eight councillors in this present parliament)…. Our lord the king, believing the said request to be honourable and profitable as well for him as for his realm abovesaid, has granted it, provided always that the chancellor, treasurer, keeper of the privy seal, the justices of both benches, and all the other officials of the king may perform and carry out the business relating to their office without the presence of such councillors. And our lord the king, for certain reasons that move him at present, by the advice of the lords of parliament, wishes to have, for this present year only, nine persons as such councillors and has caused them to be elected in this present parliament; that is to say, the Bishops of London, Carlisle, and Salisbury: the Earls of March and Stafford; Sir Richard Stafford and Sir Henry le Scrope, bannerets; and Sir John Devereux and Sir Hugh Segrave, bachelors. And it is ordained that the said nine councillors thus elected, and also the eight councillors who shall serve for the time being, shall not stay in office except for one whole year only. And when this year is finished, those same persons ought not to be re-elected to this office for two years next ensuing. And also it is ordained that no gift of any escheat, wardship, marriage rent, or any other thing belonging to the king, shall be made to any of the said councillors during the term of the said year, except by common consent of all the said councillors or the greater part of them; and they must not take anything from anybody by promise, either, except food and drink of little value, or anything else which can reasonably be held to be bribery, for any business which shall be brought or treated before them, on pain of returning to the party twice what they have taken from them, with the damages and expenses incurred, and to our lord the king six times as much as they have taken. And also it is ordained that no such councillor shall begin or support any quarrel by maintenance in the country in any way, on pain of such heavy penalty as shall be ordained by our lord the king, by the advice of the lords of the realm; the knowledge and jurisdiction of such things shall belong to the king himself, and to his uncles of Spain, Cambridge and Buckingham, taking to themselves no prelates and lords at the suit of the party accused…. And if anyone shall complain of such a councillor and cannot prove his contention, let him incur the penalties recently ordained by statute in the time of king Edward the grandfather of our present king, concerning accusers who make plaint to the king…. And as for the second request of the commons, that is to say, to name or assign the persons who shall attend the king’s person, the lords of parliament replied and said, that this seemed to them to be too hard and burdensome a request to place any person near their lord the king other than one well pleasing to him for various reasons, or to remove any of his officials or servants except by the express wish of the king, and then only for notable offence found or proved in such officers or servants; wherefore the lords do not wish to grant this request. But it seems to them very reasonable, necessary, and profitable to the king and the realm, that the knights, squires, and all others attending the king, should be forbidden on pain of heavy penalty, while the king is of tender age, to seek any favours from the king for themselves or others of any thing which would be a burden to the king or the realm…. And as for the reduction of the king’s household, and its

Council and parliament

445

expenses…the reply was given that the lords would see if they could have a talk to good effect with the chief officers of the household. And if by their advice this could be done, saving the king’s honour and profit, the commons’ request should be granted. And as for the third and last request (about enforcement of the laws against evil doers), it seems reasonable to all the lords that for the present this should be conceded and granted. 261. The control of taxation and accounts, 1379 (Rot. Parl. III, 55 [French]) On the said morrow, which was the Wednesday, the 27th of April, our lord the king came into parliament and nearly all the great men, prelates, and lords of the land; and there in the painted chamber, whither the said knights, citizens, and burgesses had been called, and others who had received the said summons, Sir Richard le Scrope, knight, Chancellor of England, by the command of our lord the king began to speak and said:— And so that you [the lords and commons] may be more fully informed about the truth of the necessary expenses made and to be made, the treasurers of the war will be ready and prepared, at whatever hour you please, to show you clearly in writing their receipts and expenses made since the last parliament, and the sums due, with the other necessary expenses above said, to be made as well for the marches of Calais, as for Cherbourg, Brest, the march of Scotland, Ireland, and elsewhere…. These are the names of the prelates and lords assigned to examine the estate of the king, at the request of the commons: that is to say, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, the Bishop of Rochester, the Earl of March, the Earl of Warwick, the Earl of Stafford, Lord Latimer, Sir Guy de Brien, or Sir John Cobham, and Sir Roger Beauchamp. First, [they are] to examine the revenues arising from the subsidies on wools received since the feast of St Michael last and those that ought to be received before the feast of St Michael next. Also, to supervise all the revenues of the realm received during the said time, as well as the revenues of alien priories, and of the ancient maltolt of wools, of the voidance of bishoprics, abbacies, and all other profits whatsoever, and those which are likely to be received and levied before the feast of St Michael, as well by the hands of the treasurers of war as in the receipt and the hanaper of the Chancery, and any other places of our lord the king. Also, to examine what sort of fees or wages the great and petty officers of the king were accustomed to have in the early days of King Edward, grandfather of our lord who now is. Also, to examine what annuities granted by our lord the king, the said grandfather, and the prince, whom God absolve, are paid. Also, to survey the movables of the king the grandfather, that is, what has become of them, and in whose hands they are now; and what persons are paid in discharge of the soul of the said grandfather; and what part remains in the king’s hands; and what has happened to the rest. And those who have the distribution of these sums must render account to the said lords, and whether the payments are made for the king’s profit and in discharge of his people or not. Also, to supervise and examine the sum of the expenses of the king’s household, calling before them the officers of the household, to inform themselves the better. Also, to examine wards, marriages, forfeitures, escheats, the revenues of Calais, and other castles and fortresses, and other revenues of the war by sea and by land. Also, the revenues of Bordeaux, that is, of wine and bullion and other such profits. Also the

English historical documents

446

subsidy on cloths, that is the cloth with the seal of 18d. Also, the profits of the possessions of the rebel cardinals. Also, to supervise those who have received wages for the war and to make them account and reply for what remains in their hands. Also, the moneys which are called Rome-pennies, which amount to a great sum, of the arrears of several years. And be it remembered that the lords assigned have a command from the king himself in parliament to enter, that is, all together or two or three at the least, including one from each rank, the offices and places of the king as may be necessary for this matter, with the officers or keepers of the same; and to make search with the said officers in the rolls, accounts, and any other records relating to this business…and to make a distinct report to our lord the king and his council as to what they have done and found and to give their good advice in this matter. And our lord the king wishes and commands that all his officers and ministers of his said offices should show to the officers assigned, or three of them, the rolls, accounts, tallies, and other evidences whatever touching the said matter, and should help them in the form abovesaid, as much and as often as they shall be required by the said lords or any of them. Also, the lords and commons of the realm of England gathered in parliament granted for themselves and the whole commons of England the subsidy of wools, leathers and wool-fells; and another subsidy to be taken of certain persons according to a certain form and in a certain manner prescribed in a schedule made and already presented in parliament, of which the tenor is word for word as follows…. 262. Precedence in parliament: Robert de Vere Earl of Oxford is made Marquis of Dublin, with precedence over the earls, 1386 (Rot. Parl. III, 211 [Latin]) Therefore the marquis came and stood before the king who was seated in full parliament, and was honourably dressed and adorned, as such solemnity required, and as befitted the conferment of such a dignity; and Michael de la Pole, that noble and discreet man, Earl of Suffolk and Chancellor of England, by the king’s command recited the foregoing [the charter creating Robert de Vere Marquis of Dublin with a suitable grant to uphold his dignity] with many reasons and causes of that creation. And the lord king, wishing…to honour the person of the said marquis richly…ratified, approved, and confirmed the charter and all its contents, for himself and his heirs as far as he had power to do…in the presence of the prelates and magnates and the commons, and invested the marquis with the aforesaid title, name, and honour, by girding him with a sword and placing a golden circle on his head, and handing…the charter into the hands of the same duke in full witness and perpetual memory and proof of the foregoing. And having immediately taken homage of him for the estate, lands, and domain aforesaid, he commanded him, with a glad countenance, to sit in a higher place among the peers of parliament, between the dukes and earls; and the marquis at once gratefully did this.

Council and parliament

447

263. Expenses incurred by the representatives of London, in attending the parliament, 1389 (Memorials of London and London Life, ed. H.T.Riley (1868), 511, from Letter-Book H, fol. ccxlv [French, trans, by editor]) Expenses incurred in attending the Parliament, at Cambridge, by Adam Bamme, Henry Vanner, William Tonge, and John Clenhond.— In the first place,—for timber and carpentry, tilers, and daubers, in preparing the house for their lodging, as well the chambers as the hall, buttery, kitchen, and stables for the horses; and for making stools and forms throughout, and for carting out the rubbish, such house being quite ruinous: as also, for payment made to the good man of the house, for the said lodging—£6 9s. Also,—for cloth bought for napery [table-linen], for canvas, doser,1 and costers2 for the hall, of striped worsted; and for all the other utensils, many in number, that pertain unto the hall, kitchen, pantry, and buttery; save and except vessels of pewter only, which were bought by the Chamberlain of the Guildhall,—£6 16s 8d. Also,—for firewood, charcoal, turf, and sedge,—£5 13s. Also,—for the hire of horses, and for hay and oats, and for straw for the beds, as well as for litter for the horses; and for horse-shoeing,—£12 15s 7d. Also,—for expenses incurred by Bamme, Vanner, etc., and their servants, in riding on horseback to Cambridge, and back; and for carriage of their wine, and all their harness, thither and back,—£7 16s 8d. Also,—for two pipes of red wine taken thither from London, and for other wine, bought at Cambridge,—£9 2s. Also,—for clothes for them and their servants, arrayed in like suit,—£22 15s. Also,—expended at Cambridge, throughout the time of the Parliament, on bread, ale, flesh-meat, fish, candles, sauce, the laundry-man, and in gifts to the minstrels of the King, and of other lords; together with divers other outlays made,—£23 5s 9d. Also,—for payments made to their officials, such as steward, butler, cook and others; and to servants helping in the kitchen, and elsewhere, £7 13s 4d. Sum total, £112 7s. 264. The commons repudiate a bill presented in their name, 1394 (Rot. Parl. III, 321a [French]) Also pray the commons that all the good laws which have been made in your time, and in the time of your very noble forebears, should be kept and observed, paying no heed to any special request. And since two chaplains, who claim to be in a chantry in the church of Aldermary in London, have presented a bill in the name of the commons, to our lord the king and the lords of this parliament, to make various testaments and devises of holdings in London…to be effective by statutes to be made in this present parliament…. May it please your very high lordship to consider the damages that can come to you and 1 2

Low tapestry hangings, often put over a chair back (dorsum). Tapestry for the side walls of a hall.

English historical documents

448

to the landholders in such a case, and not to enact any such statute as the said chaplains request, and especially for no such devise made before their time, before your very wise council should be fully informed what injury may come to you; and do not change your very noble law made and used before this time by you and by your very noble forebears. Reply: Let the common law be applied as before. 265. The commons ask that the clergy shall have a lay proctor, 1397 (Rot. Parl. III, 348 [French]) Also, the same Tuesday (September 18th) the commons made representations to the king, how before this time various judgements, and ordinances made in the time of the ancestors of our lord the king in parliament have been repealed and annulled because the estate of the clergy was not present in parliament for the making of these judgements and ordinances. And therefore they prayed to the king that for the surety of his person and the safety of his realm, the prelates and clergy should appoint a proctor, with sufficient power to consent in their name to all things and ordinances which might be decided in this present parliament; and that on this point each lord spiritual should plainly give his opinion. On which the lords spiritual were severally examined and were willing to commit their full power generally to a lay person, and they named especially Sir Thomas Percy, knight. And on this they presented to the king a schedule containing this power, which schedule our lord the king received and ordered that it be entered of record on the roll of parliament. Of which the tenor follows hereafter: We, Thomas, Cantuar’ and Robert Ebor’, archbishops, and the prelates and clergy of both provinces of Canterbury and York, having by right of our churches and of the same temporalities the right to be present at each parliament of our lord the king and of the kingdom of England, both for debating and expediting whatever is for the estate and honour of our lord the king and of his regality, and judicially assessing for the quiet, peace, and tranquillity of the kingdom, do commit fully our power to the venerable man of God, Thomas Percy, knight, so that each of the acts done by him in the foregoing shall be held valid for all time to come. 266. A satirist’s description of a typical parliament, 1399–1400 (Mum and the Sothsegger, Passus IV, lines 24–93, ed. Mabel Day and Robert Steele for the Early English Text Society (1936), 24–6 [English, alliterative poetry]) Richard sat up by the fire with his council at night to have a privy parliament to get profit for himself. So he had letters close, sealed with wax, sent to the peers and prelates, to order them to appear, and sent letters patent to the sheriffs to choose such knights as would undertake to represent the shires in the company of the great men. When it drew to the day of action, when the magnates were assembled and the knights of the shire, then, as the custom is, the cause of their coming was first declared and then the king’s will. A clerk then addressed them becomingly, explaining to them all the main points why they were summoned; and above all he asked for money, flattering the great men to avoid grumbling. And when he had finished his speech, the knights of the commons were told

Council and parliament

449

to meet on the morrow, before dinner, and discuss these matters with the citizens of the shires, to go through these articles and grant all the requests. But yet according to custom, to deceive men some of them argued then for a good while, and said: “We are servants and we draw a salary and are sent from the shires to expound their grievances, to speak for their profit and go no further, and to grant their money to the great men only in a regular way, unless there is a war. If we be false to those who send us here, we shall be quite unworthy to take our hire.” Some members sat there like a nought in arithmetic, that marks a place but has no value in itself. Some had supped with simony the previous evening, so that the shire they represented lost all value from their presence. Some were tattlers who went to the king and denounced as his foes men who were really good friends of his, and deserved no blame from king, council, or commons, if one listened carefully to the very end of their speeches. Some members slumbered and slept and said very little. Some mumbled and stammered and did not know what they meant to say. Some were hired men and would not take any step for fear of their masters. Some were so pompous and dullwitted that they got hopelessly muddled before they reached the close of their speeches. No one, whether he sat on the bench or whether he was a burgess, could have made out what they were driving at, their reasoning was so stupid and bald and thin. And some of them were so reckless that at the first puff of wind they crowded all the sail they could on the ship of their affairs, and flew on before the wind to make a speedy journey. Then the lords all came to the rescue with ballast and brought the ship about and blamed the master, who did not know the proper course which belonged to the ship, and warned him wisely of the dangers of shipwreck. Then the main-mast bent to bursting point and brought them well nigh on the rocks. And if they had not furled their sails and conducted themselves more wisely, before the gale arrived, they would each one have been hurled overboard backwards. Some of them had already been taken into the confidence of the council, and knew well how matters would have to end, or the assembly would rue it. Some went with the majority, whichever way it went, and some would only go a little way and no further. Some spoke with an eye quite openly to the main chance, and were clearly more concerned about the coin that the king owed to them than about the interests of the commons who were paying their wages, and they were promised their reward; if they would vote the taxes, their debts would be repaid. And some were so afraid of great men that they forsook well-doing. 267. Proceedings in the parliament of 1401 (i) The collective responsibility of the commons (Rot. Parl. III, 456 [French]) Also, on the same day (Tuesday, 25th January) the commons showed our lord the king how on certain matters to be taken up amongst themselves, one of their number, in order to please the king and advance himself, might recount to our lord the king such matters before they had been determined and discussed or agreed on by the commons, whereby our lord the king might be grievously moved against the commons or some of them. Therefore they very humbly prayed our lord the king that he would not receive any such person to recount to him such matters, nor give him any hearing, nor any faith or

English historical documents

450

credence in this matter. To which the reply was given on behalf of the king that his wish is that the commons should have deliberation and advice to commune and treat all their business amongst themselves, in order at their convenience to bring it to the best end and conclusion for the welfare and honour of himself and of all his realm: and that he would not listen to any such person or give him credence until such matters had been presented to the king by the advice and assent of all the commons, according to the content of their petition. (ii) Parliamentary business to be enrolled before the justices leave (Ibid. 457) Also, on the same Saturday (26th February) the said commons prayed to our lord the king that the business done and to be done in this parliament should be enacted and engrossed before the departure of the justices, and while they had it in their memory. To which the reply was given that the clerk of the parliament would, by the advice of the justices, do his duty in enacting and engrossing the substance of the proceedings of parliament and then show it to the king and the lords of parliament in order to know their opinion…. (iii) Demand for redress of grievances before supply (Ibid. 458) Also on the same Saturday the commons showed to our lord the king that in several parliaments before this time their common petitions have not been answered before they made their grant of some aid or subsidy to our lord the king. And therefore they prayed our lord the king that for the great ease and comfort of the commons, our lord the king might be pleased to grant to the commons that they might have knowledge of the answers to their petitions before any such grant had thus been made. To which the reply was given that in this matter the king wishes to confer with the lords of parliament and thereupon to do what seemed best to him by advice of the lords. And afterwards, that is to say, on the last day of parliament, the response was given that such procedure has not been seen nor used in the time of his progenitors or predecessors—that they should have any answer to their petitions or knowledge of them, before they had set forth and done all their other parliamentary business, whether by the making of a grant or in any other way. And in conclusion the king does not wish to change in any way the good customs and usages made and used in olden times. (iv) The commons protest against the enrolment of an act in a form different from that which had been approved by parliament (Ibid. 465) Also, on the same Thursday (10th March) the said commons showed our lord the king that on the Wednesday last, that is, on the 9th March, the same commons had especially shown him that the article touching the modification of the statute of provisors, made in the last parliament held in the first year of his reign, had been otherwise enacted and enrolled in the roll of parliament than had been determined in the last parliament aforesaid. And on this the commons prayed our lord the king that this matter should be

Council and parliament

451

examined by the lords spiritual and temporal sitting in parliament. The king granted this request but protested that it was not the king’s wish that any such examination should be made hereafter of any such record made in parliament nor that this should in any way be cited as an example or a precedent at any future time. 268. Proceedings in the parliament of 1404 (i) The commons ask for the control of the membership of the king’s household (Rot. Parl. III, 525 [French]) Also upon certain prayers and requests made earlier by the commons at various times touching the removal of various persons, aliens as well as others…it was in particular agreed by the lords that four persons should be entirely banished and removed from the king’s household, that is, the king’s confessor, the Abbot of Dore, Master Richard Derham, and Crosseby of the chamber. On which on Saturday, 9th February, the confessor, Master Richard and Crosseby came before the king and the lords in parliament, and there the king, in excusing the said four persons, said openly that he did not know, so far as they were concerned, of any special cause or occasion why they should be removed from his household. Nevertheless our lord the king, well understanding that what the lords or commons should do or ordain was for the good of himself and his realm, and yet wishing to conform himself to their intentions, heartily agreed to the ordinance, and charged the said confessor, Master Richard, and Crosseby to leave his household; and a similar order would have been given to the said abbot if he had been present. And our lord the king further said that he would act in the same way with anyone else who was near his royal person, if he should incur the hate or indignation of his people. Also on the same Saturday the commons besought our lord the king that in the ordinance to be drawn up for the household of our lord the king honest, virtuous, and reputable persons should be nominated and appointed to it, concerning whom notice should be given to the lords and commons in this parliament, and that such an ordinance should be made as might be pleasing to God, for the honour and profit of the estate of the king and of the kingdom. (ii) The commons seek to control the finances of the royal household (Ibid. 528) Also be it remembered that on 1st March it was granted by the king and the lords spiritual and temporal in parliament that certain farms, revenues, issues, profits, and emoluments, specified in the enrolment of the letters patent below, should be devoted to and used for the expenses of the royal household…. Also, on Saturday 1st March, in the presence of the king and the lords in parliament, the Archbishop of Canterbury at the king’s command explained to the lords the intention of our lord the king regarding his government…. That is, that whereas there had not been such good government in his household nor about his person, as there could have been if it had been well supervised in good time, and as our lord the king wished to conform to

English historical documents

452

all which could be pleasing to God and agreeable and profitable for the whole realm, and as he trusted entirely in the sense and discretion of the lords, he told them that it was his wish that these laws should be held and kept and that equal right and justice should be administered to poor and rich alike, and that the common law should not be disturbed on account of any letters under the secret seal or the privy seal or on account of any command or signed instruction whatsoever, nor the people in any way delayed in their pursuit (of justice). And moreover our lord the king, wishing that good administration should be maintained in his household, prayed the lords that they would give their aid and diligence to place it under good and satisfactory government and with a suitable complement of persons, so that the people could be paid for their victuals and for the (other) expenses of the royal household. And for his chamber and wardrobe he would be content if a single sum were assigned, provided that it were sufficient to pay the outstanding debts. And it was moreover our lord the king’s will that with regard to the grant to be made by the lords and commons in this present parliament for the wars, and for the defence of the realm, certain treasurers should be appointed for the same grant by the advice of the lords and commons, so that the money coming from that source should be devoted to the wars and to no other purpose. And it is intended, in the matter of these wars, that because of various troubles which have arisen since the coronation of the king our lord, by the levy of war of various rebels within his realm, that if any such levy should occur hereafter within his realm, which God forbid, that then the treasurers, to be ordained for the wars, should make payment as needed for the time being to resist such malice and rebellion, if any should arise, without being troubled, molested, or impeached for this action…. And then afterwards, by the king’s command, and by advice of the lords, the same matters were shown and declared by the archbishop to the commons in their house of assembly for the parliament in the Abbey of Westminster, and they were very agreeable to them, as the archbishop reported on behalf of the commons to our same lord the king and the lords. (iii) The commons insist on the appointment of a named council (Ibid. 530) Also, for the sake of good and just governance and of providing a remedy for the numerous complaints, grievances, and troubles shown to our lord the king in this parliament, our lord the king in reverence to God and in response to the very insistent and special requests brought to him at various times in this parliament by the commons of his realm, for the ease and comfort of all his realm, has ordained certain lords and other persons, whose names are written below, to be of his great and continual council: that is, The Archbishop of Canterbury

The Bishop of Worcester

The Bishop of Lincoln, Chancellor of England

The Bishop of Bath The Bishop of Bangor

The Bishop of Rochester The Duke of York

Lord Furnivall Lord Lovell

The Earl of Somerset The Earl of Westmoreland

Sir Peter Courteney Sir Hugh Waterton

Council and parliament

453

Sir John Cheyne Lord Roos, the Treasurer of England

Sir Arnold Savage

The Keeper of the Privy Seal

John Northbury

Lord Berkeley

John Doreward

Lord Willoughby

John Curson

(iv) The commons claim parliamentary control of elections. Thomas Thorp’s case (Ibid. 530) Also, whereas the writ of summons to parliament returned by the sheriff of Rutland was not satisfactory or properly returned, as the commons had heard, the commons prayed to our lord the king and to the lords in parliament, that this matter should be duly examined in parliament, and if a default should be found in this matter that such punishment should thereof be made as should serve as an example to others against trespass in such manner on some other occasion. Whereupon our lord the king in full parliament commanded the lords of parliament to examine the matter and at their discretion to deal with it as might seem to them best. And thereupon the said lords caused to come before them in parliament as well the sheriff as William Ondeby, who had been returned by the sheriff as one of the knights of the shire, and also Thomas Thorp, who was elected in the full county court as one of the knights of the shire for the parliament, and had not been returned by the sheriff. And after the same parties had been duly examined and their reasons had been well heard in the parliament, it was agreed by the lords that whereas the sheriff had not satisfactorily made return of the said writ, he should amend the return, and should return Thomas as one of the knights since he had been elected in the shire for the parliament. And moreover the sheriff on account of this default should be discharged from his office and committed to the Fleet prison and that he should make fine and ransom at the king’s pleasure. (v) Richard Cheddar’s case. Commons ask for protection of members of parliament from assault on their way to and from parliament (Ibid. 542) Also pray the commons that as all the lords, knights, citizens, and burgesses attending parliament by the king’s writ are, with their servants, under royal protection while coming, remaining, and returning; and whereas many troubles and molestations often happen to the lords, knights, citizens and burgesses, and their household servants, in such way as murder, mayhem, and battery, from men lying in ambush or otherwise, for which due remedy has never been provided; and especially in this present parliament a horrible battery and injury was done to Richard Cheddre, esquire, who had come to this present parliament with Sir Thomas Brook, knight, one of the knights for the county of Somerset, and a servant with him, an injury done by John Salage, otherwise called Savage, by whom Richard Cheddre was wounded and injured, to the danger of death. May it therefore please the king to ordain sufficient remedy in this matter and in other similar cases, so that the punishment may give an example and terror to others who may commit

English historical documents

454

such misdeeds in times to come; that is, if any one kills or murders a man who has thus come to parliament under your protection, he shall be adjudged guilty of treason; and if anyone maims or disfigures any man who has thus come under your protection, he shall lose a hand; and if anyone assaults or beats a man who has thus come, he shall be subjected to a year’s imprisonment as well as fine and ransom to the king. And that it may please you of your especial grace henceforth to abstain from charters of pardon in such a case, unless the parties are fully agreed. Reply: Because the deed was done in the time of this parliament, let proclamation be made where the said deed was done, that John Sallage [sic] abovementioned shall appear and present himself in the King’s Bench within a quarter of a year after the proclamation was made. And if he should not do so, let the said John be attainted of the deed abovesaid, and pay to the injured party double his damages to be assessed at the discretion of the judges. [In May 1406 the commons were again to harass the government by making a request for a named council and by putting forward a roll containing 31 articles for the reform of the government, including searching inquiries into the expenditure of all departments of the administration, the royal household as well as others. For these proceedings, see ibid. 572 onwards.]

269. Elections by indenture, 1406 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 156 [French]) Cf. J.S.Roskell, The Commons in the Parliament of 1422, 5–6, for comment on this act.

Also, our lord the king, at the grievous complaints of his commons of the undue election of knights of the shire for parliament, which are sometimes made by the partiality of the sheriffs, and at other times against the form of the writs directed to the sheriffs, to the great slander of the shires and hindrance of the business of the commonalty in the shire, Our sovereign lord the king…by the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and of all the commons in this present parliament, has ordained and established, that henceforth the election of such knights shall be made in the following form; that is, at the next shirecourt to be held after the delivery of the writ of the parliament, proclamation shall be made in the full shire-court of the day and place of the parliament, and all those who are present there, suitors duly summoned for the same cause and others as well, shall attend the election of their knights for the parliament; and then in the full shire-court they shall proceed to the election freely and indifferently, notwithstanding any request or commandment to the contrary; and after they are chosen, the names of the persons so chosen, whether they are present or absent, shall be written in an indenture under the seals of all those who chose them, and tacked to the same writ of the parliament, which indenture, so sealed and tacked, shall be held for the sheriff’s return of the said writ,

Council and parliament

455

touching the knights of the shires. [A statute of 1410 provided that any sheriff who should infringe the statute of 1406 on elections of knights of the shire should incur the penalty of £100 to be paid to the king.] 270. The commons claim the right to initiate money bills, 1407 (Rot. Parl. III, 611 [French]) Also on Friday, the 2nd of December, which was the last day of parliament, the commons came before the king and the lords in parliament and there by command of the king a schedule of indemnity was read concerning a certain altercation that had arisen between the lords and commons; and at the command of our lord the king the schedule was entered as of record in the roll of parliament. Of which schedule the tenor is as follows: Be it remembered that on Monday the 21st of November the king our sovereign lord sitting in the council chamber of the Abbey of Gloucester, the lords spiritual and temporal summoned to this present parliament being with him, they discussed amongst themselves the estate of the realm, and the means necessary for its defence against the malice of its enemies, who from every side threatened to attack the same realm and its faithful subjects, and they agreed that it would not be possible to resist their malice, unless our sovereign lord the king should be granted in this present parliament some notable aid and subsidy. And on this the lords were then asked the question, “What aid would suffice and be necessary in this case?” To which demand and question the lords answered severally that considering the needs of the king on the one hand, and the poverty of the people on the other, the least aid that would suffice would be to have one and a half tenths from the cities and boroughs and one and a half fifteenths from the other lay people; and in addition a prolongation of the subsidy on wools, leather, and woolfells, and the subsidy of three shillings on each tun and one shilling on each pound, from the feast of St Michael next coming until the feast of St Michael two years following. On which, by the king’s command, the commons were bidden to send before our lord the king and the lords a certain number of persons of their company to hear and report to their companions what our lord the king should have commanded them. And on this the commons sent to the presence of our lord the king and of the said lords twelve of their companions; to whom by command of the king was reported the question and the answer given severally by the lords to it. The king’s will was that they should report this answer to the remainder of their fellows, so that they might take action to conform as nearly as possible to the intention of the lords. When this was reported to the commons, they were much disturbed, saying and affirming that it was a great prejudice and derogation of their liberties. And when our lord the king heard that, not wishing that anything should be done either at present or at any future time which could turn against the liberty of the estate on whose behalf they had come to parliament nor against the liberties of the lords, granted and declared with the advice and assent of the same lords in the following manner. That is to say, that in this present parliament and those to be held in future the lords may well discuss together with regard to the state and remedies aforesaid. Always provided that the lords for their part and the commons on their part shall not make any report to our lord the king about any grant made by the commons and assented to by the lords, until the lords and commons are of one assent and agreement in this matter, and

English historical documents

456

then it shall be reported in manner and form as is customary, that is by the mouth of the speaker of the commons for the time being, so that the lords and commons may have the thanks of our lord the king. Moreover our lord the king wishes, with the assent of the lords, that the proceedings in this present parliament set forth above shall not be turned to the prejudice or derogation of the liberty of the estate for which the commons have come to this present parliament or shall come to any parliament in the future. But he wishes that he and all the other estates shall be as free as they were before. 271. Electors and elected to be resident, 1413 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 170 [French]) First, that the statutes of the election of the knights of the shire to come to parliament be held and kept in all points; adding to these, that the knights of the shire who shall henceforth be chosen in every shire shall not be chosen unless they be resident in the shire where they shall be elected on the day of the date of the writ of summons of the parliament; and that the knights and squires and others who shall be electors of such knights of the shire shall also dwell in the same shires, in manner and form as is aforesaid. And moreover, it is ordained and established that the citizens and burgesses of the cities and boroughs shall be men elected from citizens and burgesses resident, dwelling and enfranchised in the same cities and boroughs and no other sin any manner. 272. The commons ask that the king will not amend petitions but only accept or refuse them, 1414 (Rot. Parl. IV, 22 [English]) Our sovereign lord, your humble and true lieges who have come for the commons of your land beseech unto your very righteousness that as it has ever been their liberty and freedom that there should be no statute nor law made unless they gave their assent to it: considering that the commons of your land, who are, and ever have been, a member of your parliament, are assenters as well as petitioners. That from this time forward, by complaint of the commons of any mischief asking remedy by the mouth of their speaker for the commons, or else by written petition, no law be ever made thereupon, and engrossed as a statute or law, neither by additions nor by omissions, by any kind of term or terms, which should change the wording and the intention asked by the speaker’s mouth, or by the petitions beforesaid given up in writing in the manner beforesaid, without the assent of the commons. Considering, our sovereign lord, that it is in no wise the intention of your commons, if it be so that they ask you by speaking, or by writing, two things, or three, or as many as they wish, that it should not ever stand in the freedom of your high regality to grant which of them you wish and to refuse the rest. Reply: The king of his especial grace grants that from henceforth nothing be enacted to the petitions of his commons which should be contrary to their asking, whereby they should be bound without their assent; saving always to our liege lord his royal prerogative, to grant and deny what he likes of their petitions and askings.

Council and parliament

457

273. The commons grant to Henry V the customs duties for life, 1415 (Rot. Parl. IV, 63 [French]) The commons in this present parliament assembled, considering that the king our A sovereign lord, to the honour of God, and to avoid the shedding of Christian blood, has caused to be made to his adversary of France diverse requests for the restoration of his inheritance, according to right and justice; and that on this there have been various negotiations, as well on this side as on the other side of the sea, to the great cost of our very sovereign lord the king. Nevertheless the king our sovereign lord, in spite of the requests and negotiations, has not been able to obtain the said inheritance or any notable part of it. And whereas the king our sovereign lord has never had sufficient resources from the revenues of his kingdom, nor from any grant or subsidy conceded to him hitherto, to pursue his right by way of action, nevertheless hoping in God that in his just quarrel He would wish to sustain and support him, our lord the king of his good courage has recently undertaken a voyage to the regions beyond the sea, pledging his jewels to have provision of money for it and in his own person has passed the sea and arrived before the town of Harfleur, and besieged it, and has applied such force to the town that he has taken it and obtained it, and holds it at present, and for the safeguard of the said town has planted there some lords and many other men at arms and archers, to his great cost and expense. And when such order was made for the safeguard of the said town, our lord the king, of his excellent courage, with only a few of his men, compared to the power of France, set out to march from the said town of Harfleur by land towards the marches of Calais, where on his way many dukes, counts, and other lords, with the power of France in excessive numbers met him and fought him, until God by his grace had given the victory to the king our said lord, to the honour and exaltation of his crown and of his good fame, and to the singular comfort of his faithful lieges, and to the terror of all his enemies, and truly to the perpetual profit of all his realm, to the honour and reverence of God. And for the great affection and entire love that the commons of the realm of England have to our sovereign lord the king, by assent of the lords spiritual and temporal assembled in the parliament which met at Westminster on Monday next after the feast of All Saints, in the third year of our lord the king, granted to the same our sovereign lord the king, on the 12th day of November, in the same parliament for the defence of the realm, the subsidy of wools, leathers, and woolfells, to be levied on denizen merchants, for the subsidy of each sack of wool 43s 4d and for each 240 woolfells 43s 4d and for each last of leather 100s; and on alien merchants, for each sack of wool 60s, and for each 240 woolfells 60s and for each last of leather 106s 8d to be taken and received from the feast of St Michael next coming for the whole life of our sovereign lord the king, to be disposed and ordained at his very gracious will and discretion, for the defence abovesaid; provided nevertheless, that no grant shall be made to anyone by our sovereign lord the king by his letters patent for the term of his life, or for a term of years, from the subsidy or any part of it. And if any such grant should be made, it shall be held as null and void; and this grant shall not be taken as a precedent for kings of England in time to come.

English historical documents

458

274. A dispute about precedence in parliament, 1425 (Rot. Parl. IV, 267 [Latin record; English petition]) Memorandum, that John, Earl Marshal, by his counsel showed to the lord king, in the present parliament at Westminster, on the last day of April, 3 Henry VI, a certain roll, painted with circles and crowns, called a pedigree, sewn to this present roll; asserting, by his counsel, that he had sprung from royal stock, and was entitled for this reason to the royal arms of England, and sought and claimed, by his counsel, for this reason to have his seat in parliaments of this kind above Richard, Earl of Warwick, and to be received and admitted to those things which relate to his right, title, and possession in this matter. When the roll had been seen in parliament… and had been declared to the counsel of the aforesaid Earl of Warwick, by the venerable father Henry, Bishop of Winchester, Chancellor of England, by royal authority by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal in this parliament, Walter Beauchamp, knight, one of the Council of the Earl of Warwick, replying for the Earl of Warwick, and declaring certain articles concerning the right and title of the Earl of Warwick in this matter…showed in writing in parliament the protest, reply, and articles, in these words: … Then Walter, in strengthening of my lord of Warwick’s possession says that my lord’s ancestors of Warwick have had possession of his place in parliament above my lord’s ancestors marshal, being earls, of time that no mind is. Then, to draw in time of mind [the Earl of Warwick was named before the Earl Marshal amongst the appellant lords, 11 Richard II]. Yet Walter says that King Henry the Fourth called a great council at Westminster where that debate was moved between my lord of Kent and my lord of Arundel, for their places in parliament, and also there was debate between my lord of Warwick, that now is, for whom I speak, and my lord marshal, brother to my lord that now is, against whose claim I speak; and there it was by the same king ordained and determined that my lord of Kent should have his place in parliament above my lord of Arundel; and my lord of Warwick for whom I speak, above my lord marshal, brother to my lord marshal that now is, against whose claim I speak; and so they were personally put in possession. 275. Answer of the lords to Gloucester’s demand for a definition of his powers, 1427 (Rot. Parl. IV, 326 [English]) High and mighty prince, my lord of Gloucester, we lords spiritual and temporal, assembled by the commandment of the king our sovereign lord in this his present parliament, remember well how, soon after the beginning of this parliament, it pleased you to come to us and say that you are protector and defender of this land…willing and desiring to know of us what authority and power belonged to you. This desire you similarly repeated the third day of this present month of March, saying that we might well discuss matters of parliament in your absence, but we should not conclude them without you, affirming also that you would not in any way come into the house accustomed for the king and the lords in parliament until you knew what your authority and power were therein. And so that you should have no cause to absent yourself from this said parliament for lack of our answer to your said desire, we lords above-said call to mind

Council and parliament

459

how that in the first parliament held by the king our sovereign lord that now is, at Westminster, you desired to have had the governance of this land, affirming that it belonged to you of right, as well by reason of your birth as by the last will of the king that was, your brother, whom God absolve Wherefore the lords spiritual and temporal assembled there in parliament, among whom were there my lords your uncle, the Bishop of Winchester who still lives, and the Duke of Exeter, and your cousin the Earl of March, who are gone to God, and of Warwick, and others in great number who are still alive, had a great and lengthy deliberation and advice, with searching of precedents of the governance of the land in similar case and time, when kings of this land have been of tender age, and they also took information of the laws of the land, from such persons as are notably learned therein; and they finally found your said desire not justified or grounded in precedent, nor in the law of the land, which the dead king might not in his life, by his last will or otherwise, alter, change, or abrogate without the assent of the three estates, nor commit nor grant to any person the governance or rule of this land longer than he lived. On the other count the said lords found your said desire not in accordance with the laws of this land, and against the right and freedom of the estates of the same land. Moreover, let it not be thought that any such thing knowingly proceeded from your intention. Nevertheless, to keep peace and tranquillity, and in order to ease and appease you, it was advised and appointed by authority of the king, with the assent of the three estates of this land, that in the absence of my lord your brother of Bedford you should be chief of the king’s counsel, and therefore there was devised for you a name different from other councillors, not the name of tutor, lieutenant, governor, nor regent, nor any name that would imply authority of governance of the land, but the name of protector and defender, which signifies a personal duty of attendance to the actual defence of the land, as well against outside foes, if the case required, as against inward rebels, if there were any, which God forbid. And there was granted to you therewith a certain power, which is specified and contained in an act of the said parliament, to endure as long as it pleased the king; and if the intention of the estates had been that you should have had more power or authority, then more would have been expressed therein. To this appointment, ordinance and act you agreed as for your person, making nevertheless a protest that it was not your intention to derogate from in any way, or prejudice, the position of my lord your brother of Bedford by your said agreement, in respect of any right that he would claim or demand in the governance of this land. And as for any preeminence that might belong to you as chief of council, it is plainly declared in the said act and articles, subscribed by my said lord of Bedford, by yourself, and the other lords of the council. But as we know no power or authority that you have in parliament to which you are called upon your faith and allegiance as Duke of Gloucester, as other lords are and not otherwise, other than you should have as Duke of Gloucester, the king being in parliament…. We marvelling with all our hearts that considering the open declaration of the authority and power belonging to my lord of Bedford and to you in his absence…that you should in any way be stirred or moved, not to be contented therewith, or to claim any other, namely considering that the king, blessed be our lord, is, since the time that the said power was granted to you, far advanced and grown in person, in wit and understanding, and likely with the grace of God to occupy his own royal power within a few years. And…we lords aforesaid pray…you to be content with the power abovesaid and… to come to this present parliament and attend to…matters to be…treated in the same, as of right you ought to do.

English historical documents

460

276 The forty-shilling freeholders act, 1429 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 243 [French]) Also, whereas the elections of knights of the shires, elected to come to the king’s parliaments, in many shires of England have lately been made by too great and excessive a number of people dwelling in the same shires, of which the most part were folk of small means or no worth, yet each of them claims to have a voice equivalent, in such elections, to the most valiant knights or squires dwelling within the same shires; whereby manslaughters, riots, batteries, and divisions will most probably arise and prevail among the gentlemen and other people of the same shires, if a convenient remedy be not provided in this matter, Our lord the king considering the foregoing has provided and ordained by authority of this parliament that the knights of the shires in the realm of England, to be chosen to come to parliaments to be held hereafter shall be chosen in each shire by people dwelling and resident in the same, whereof every one of them shall have a freeholding to the value of forty shillings by the year at the least above all charges…. And every sheriff of England shall have power to examine upon the Holy Gospels every such elector, how much he may expend in a year. 277. The wages of burgesses, 1429 (Rot. Parl. IV, 350 [French]) Also pray the commons of this present parliament that whereas the citizens and burgesses elected to come to your parliament, by the elections of the people of the cities and boroughs within your realm, have had and by ancient custom ought to have, for their wages and expenses each day during your parliament, 2s; that is to say, each of them 2s for each day during your parliament; for which wages the citizens and burgesses and each of them from olden time have had, and of right ought to have, their writs from the sheriff of the county where such cities and boroughs lie, to levy their wages and pay them to the burgesses, as the knights of the shire coming to your parliament have had and used; which wages in various cities and boroughs for a bad example, are now recently withdrawn, so that whereas various notable and wise persons, formerly sustained by wages, used to come to parliament, for the good of you and all the realm, they are not elected and do not come, and in their place come most enfeebled, impoverished, and impotent persons, and while parliament meets they stay at their own charges, to their perpetual impoverishment, unless a remedy shall be provided in this case. That it may please your royal majesty to consider the matter, and to grant by authority of this present parliament, that the citizens and burgesses and each of them, should have their wages of 2s, for each day during your parliament, and at the end of the parliament should have their writ from the sheriff to levy the money, as the knights of the shire do, and of old have done; notwithstanding any usage, custom or ordinance, usurpation, or subtraction of wages, made to the contrary…. Reply. The King will think about it [Le roy s’advisera; a refusal].

Council and parliament

461

278. The trial of peeresses, 1442 (Rot. Parl. V, 56 [French]) Also pray the commons…that it may please you, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal in this present parliament assembled, to declare that such ladies (duchesses, countesses, or baronesses) thus indicted…of any treason or felony…whether they are married or single, should be held to reply and set for judgement before such judges and peers of the realm as are other peers of the realm, if hey are indicted or impeached of such treasons or felonies…. Reply: The king assents. 279. The commons ask for a fleet of privateers to keep the sea, 1442 (Rot. Parl. V, 59–60 [English]) For as much as it is thought by all the commons of this land, that it is necessary to keep the sea, provision must be made for certain ships, defensible in form and manner as follows: First, it is thought that the least provision that can be made for the worship of the king our sovereign lord, and the welfare and defence of this realm of England, is to have on the sea continually, for the seasons of the year from Candlemas to Martinmas, eight ships with forestages;1 which ships, as it is thought, must have one with another, each of them 150 men; total 1200 men. Also, every great ship must have attendant upon it a barge and a balinger;2 and every barge must have in it 80 men; total, 640 men. Also, the eight balingers must have in each of them 40 men; total 320 men. Also, there must be waiting and attendant on them four pinnaces, in each pinnace 25 men; total, 100 men. Total number of men, 2260. Every man taking 2s by the month; this amounts in the month to £226. Also, 24 masters, each of them over this in the month, 40d: total, £40. Also, over their reward for the quarter masters by the month £4; total of the wages, £334. Also, victualling for a month amounts to 14d per man per week, total £527 6s 8d; total for the month in victualling and wages, £761 6s 8d: total for six months of the year, £4,568; total for eight months yearly following, during the grant of tonnage and poundage, £6090 13s 4d. Also…such proclamation and ordinance to be made and established among and in the said navy, that no ship or ships harm nor hurt any other ship of our friends; whereby any trouble or breaking of the peace might befall between the king our sovereign lord and any of his friends. Also, it is thought that the goods and ships that may happen to be taken by them, or by any of them, in the sea of our enemies, shall be shared in the following way; that is to say, the masters of the ships, quarter masters, shipmen, and soldiers shall have half the ships and goods so taken; and the other half of the ships and goods shall be divided into 1 2

Forecastles. A vessel somewhat smaller than a barge, which was somewhat smaller than a “ship”.

English historical documents

462

three, of which the owners of the ships, barges, balingers, and pinnaces shall have two parts, and of the third part the chief captain shall have double the share which an under captain shall have. Also, that the fourth part of the half fifteenth now granted, after the form of exception and deduction in the same grant, and after the rate thereof, according to the deduction of such part of a fifteenth by knights of the shire last made, and according to the allowance of the exceptions in this grant, be collected by the collectors for it to be named, and by them paid into the king’s receipt, at the month of Easter next coming; and that sum to be delivered by the treasurer of England to the chief captain and under captain to be named by the king, by indenture between the king and the said captains thereof to be named, for the said governance and keeping of the sea and for no other purpose. This keeping shall begin the 15th day of May next coming and last until the 15th day of November next following. And then, at the first day of March next after the said 15 November, the keeping of the sea shall begin in manner and form as is abovesaid to last for the term of eight months then next following…. Always provided that if the said captains or any of them or any of their men under them absent themselves from the sea any of the months or part of them aforesaid, that then he or they be disallowed so much of their wages as the rate comes to for the time of their absence; unless then the said captain or captains, or any man under them so absent, should leave a sufficient man, or so many sufficient men in their stead, for the time of their absence. Reply: Let it be done as it is desired, during the time of the safeguard of the sea therein specified. 280. Debates in the parliament of 1449 (i) (British Museum, Harleian MS. 6849, printed by A.R.Myers in Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, vol. 22 (1938)) Present:—The Cardinal of York, The Archbishop of Canterbury, The Bishops of Winchester, Carlisle, Llandiff, Bath, Worcester, Chichester, Norwich, [Chester]1 Coventry, Bangor, the Abbots of Westminster and Gloucester, the Duke of Suffolk, the Earls of Warwick, Devon, Wiltshire, Worcester, Viscounts Beaumont and Bourchier, the Prior of St John of Jerusalem, Lords Roos, Grey of Ruthin, Groby, Moleyne, Dudley, Lisle, Cromwell, Sudley, Stourton, Southwick. The question is how supplies may be found for the setting forth of the armies into Normandy and Guienne. Lord Stourton thinks there should be certain commissioners of oyer and terminer to enquire of murders and riots against the peace. Also of liveries and that every sheriff should certify to the commissioners all the names of knights, squires, and all other men of might within his shire, that they may know whom they may empanel, such as be sufficient. Lords Sudley and Cromwell think that due justice might be had and a good agreement amongst the lords first.

Council and parliament

463

The Bishop of Chichester thinks there are two ways to have goods. One is that all those who have incomes should bind themselves to give the value of that income to defend the land. Also that those who have grants and annuities of the king’s grant give a year’s value of the grant and annuity beforehand to help the arms for the defence of that country. The Bishops of Norwich and Chester hold that justice may be had without difference, and that half the shire knights should be sent forth with the grants that are granted for the defence of those parts. The Bishops of Bath and Worcester hold the same. The Bishops of Salisbury and Ely hold that the precedents that have been in such matters should be seen. The Lord Treasurer thinks that the diligence that the lords do for this matter, both for ordnance and for men to be sent forth and to see the ways how goods may be procured for them to be sent forth, should be laid before the commons. And they to be entreated to consider this great diligence and to put their hands to their good benevolence to see how supplies may be had to perform the purpose of sending forth the said armies. The Lord of Winchester holds that due justice may be had and then to ordain of others of the shire archers. The Lord Cardinal and the Lord of Suffolk hold to the same opinion. The conclusion of this communication is to take the usual grant of goods for the defence of the land. Also this day the letter that Sir Francis Le Arragonois [François de Surienne] sent to the Duke of Suffolk was read before the lords in the parliament, the which was thought right notably written. (ii) (British Museum, Lansdowne MS. 229 [English]) See R.Virgoe, “A List of Members of the Parliament of February, 1449”, B.I.H.R. vol. 34 (1961), 200–10.

Memorandum that the 20 of March anno [27] Henry VI were present in the chamber of parliament these lords following: The Cardinal of York, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Duke of Suffolk, the Bishops of Winchester, Carlisle, Rochester, Ely, Salisbury, Bath, Chichester, Norwich, Coventry and Bangor, the Earls of Arundel and Salisbury, Viscount Beaumont, the Abbots of St Albans, Gloucester, Peterborough, and Winchcombe, Lords Cromwell, Dudley, Sudley, Say, Stourton, and Vescy. The question is whether the Earl of Arundel in the parliament held 12 Henry VI should there be earl by new creation, or else by admission to his old inheritance. Lord Hastings and Lord Say think it no new creation, but affirm the old title. 1

Chester is inserted as a gloss over the word Coventry; the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield was often referred to as the Bishop of Chester in this period.

English historical documents

464

Lord Stourton and Lord Dudley affirm according to the same, that my lord of Arundel should have the said earldom by inheritance and by no new creation. Lord Cromwell thinks the same, that it should be no new creation but admission to his former state. The Abbots of Winchcombe and Peterborough agree with Lord Cromwell. The Abbots of Gloucester and St Albans agree. Viscount Beaumont thinks the same The Earl of Salisbury the same The Bishops of Bangor, Chester, and Norwich the same The Bishop of Winchester of the contrary opinion The Bishops of Bath, Ely, and Salisbury hold the first opinion The Bishops of Rochester and Carlisle agree with the first opinion. Memorandum the 21st of March these lords were present: The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Duke of Buckingham, the Bishops of Winchester, Lincoln, Carlisle, Ely, Rochester, Bath, Chichester, Norwich, and Coventry, the Earls of Arundel and Salisbury, Viscount Beaumont, the Abbot of Gloucester, Lords Cromwell and Sudley. Memorandum the 24th day of March these lords following were present:—The Cardinal of York, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Dukes of Buckingham and of Suffolk, the Bishops of Winchester, Carlisle, Rochester, Ely, Bath, Chichester, Norwich, and Coventry, the Earl of Salisbury, Lords Cromwell, Sudley, Vescy, and Bonville. 281. Thomas Thorp’s case, 1454 (Rot. Parl. V, 239 [English]) For a grant by the commons in 1453 of such a sum as would support 20,000 archers for half a year at 6d a day each, and the allocation of this sum between the shire at the rate presumably based on their estimated capacity to pay, see ibid. 232. The archers may have been intended for use in the increasingly tense situation at home, rather than for employment in France. Thomas Thorp, speaker of the commons in 1453, attacked the interest of the Duke of York during the first session of this parliament. Upon reassembling after a prorogation, the commons learnt that their speaker was in the Fleet prison pending payment of 1,000 marks damages for trespass and theft, awarded by the court of Exchequer in favour of the Duke of York. The commons thereupon requested the king that Thorp might be delivered and set at liberty, so that the business of parliament might proceed. The king consulted the lords in the matter.

Council and parliament

465

The said lords spiritual and temporal, not intending to impeach or hurt the liberties and privileges of those who were come for the commons of this land to this present parliament, but equally after the course of law will weigh in that behalf, opened and declared to the justices the premisses and asked of them whether the said Thomas ought to be delivered from prison, by force and virtue of the privilege of parliament or no. To the which question the chief justice in the name of all the justices, after earnest communication and mature deliberation had amongst them, answered and said, that they ought not to answer that question, for it has not been used before this time that the justices should in any wise determine the privilege of this high court of parliament; for it is so high and mighty in its nature, that it may make law, and that which is law it may make no law; and the determination and knowledge of that privilege belongs to the lords of parliament, and not to the justices…and if any person that is a member of this high court of parliament be arrested in such cases as are not for treason or felony or surety of the peace, or for a condemnation had before the parliament, it is customary that all such persons should be released from such arrests and appoint an attorney, so that they may have their freedom and liberty, to attend freely upon the parliament. After which answer and declaration it was thoroughly agreed, assented, and concluded by the lords spiritual and temporal that the said Thomas, according to the law, should remain in prison for the causes abovesaid, the privilege of parliament notwithstanding; and that the premisses should be opened and declared to those who were come for the commons of this land, and that they should be charged and commanded in the king’s name that with all haste and godly speed they should proceed to the election of another speaker. 282. The reluctance of the lords to attend parliament, 1454 (Rot. Parl. V, 248 [English]) [Latin preamble] Memorandum, that on the last day of February, 32 Henry VI, a certain petition was presented to the lord king in the present parliament, worded as follows: [English text] May it please the king our sovereign lord, that for as much as many divers lords of this land, as well spiritual as temporal, who have been summoned and commanded by your writs directed unto each of them severally, to come and be at this your present parliament, yet in no way have come…but have absented themselves since the said 14th day of February of coming to the said parliament, where-unto they have been called, summoned, or warned; to ordain and establish by authority of this present parliament that each of the said lords so not come, but being absent, be charged to give and pay unto you and to your use such sums of money and in such manner as follows. That is to say, every archbishop and every duke, £100; every bishop and every earl, 100 marks; every abbot and every baron, £40; to be levied upon their lands and goods wheresoever they may be within this your realm; and by all means and process to be made out of your Exchequer such as has been accustomed to be had for the levy of other grants made unto you in your parliaments. [The Bishops of Bangor, St Asaph, and Llandaff, if absent, to be charged only £20 apiece.]

English historical documents

466

[Lords who plead sickness or infirmity, which is confirmed by the examination of the council, shall be fined at the discretion of the council a sum not exceeding the amount stated in the first clause of the bill.] [The act is not to extend to the duke of Somerset and Lord Cobham, who are in prison, nor to Lord Rivers, Lord Welles or Lord Moleyns, who are beyond the sea by the king’s command.] [This act is also not to extend to the Lords Beauchamp and St Amand who are attending to the king’s person in the time of his infirmity.] Provided also that this act extend not to any hurt, prejudice, burden, or charge of the said lords so absent, or any of them, saving only of payment of the said sums or fines; and the said sums to be applied to the safeguard of your town of Calais, your castle of Guînes, and your marches there, and to no other use; this present act to extend to such lords only as are not come as above for this time and no longer. [Latin conclusion] To which petition, read, heard, and fully understood in the aforesaid parliament, by the advice and assent aforesaid a reply was given in the following words: Le roy le vœt [i.e. The king consents]. [For fines levied on three bishops, one earl, five abbots, one lord, five knights, who managed to convince the council that they had been sick or feeble, see Nicolas, Proceedings, VI, 181–3; and for the context of this act, see J.S.Roskell, “The Problem of the Attendance of the Lords in Medieval Parliaments”, B.I.H.R. 29 (1956).]

283. Parliamentary procedure in dealing with bills, 1455 (Year Book 33 Henry VI, Easter Term, Case No. 8 (Richard Tottel’s edn, 1575), ff. xvii– xviii [French]) From a case in the court of Exchequer Chamber in which Thomas Kirby, “clerk of the rolls of parliament,” was summoned to give information as to proceedings in parliament. For a case in 1454 of three readings of a bill by the lords before it went to the commons, see Rot. Parl. V, 264.

Sir, the course of parliament is thus, etc. If any bill, whether it be private or otherwise, be first presented to the commons and be passed by them, it is customary for the bill to be endorsed in this form, to wit: let it be delivered to the lords. And if the king and the lords agree to the bill and do not wish to alter or change it, then they are not accustomed to endorse the bill, but it is given to the clerk of the parliament to be enrolled, and if it is a common bill, it will be enrolled and enacted, but if it is a private bill it is not enrolled but is filed on the file and that is good enough; but if the party wishes to have it entered in order to be more secure, it may be enrolled. And if the lords wish to make any change in the bill, and their amendment agrees with the grant of the commons, then the bill is not

Council and parliament

467

returned to the commons; thus, if the commons grant tonnage and poundage for four years, and the lords give their assent, but only for two years, it will not be returned to the commons because their assent may be assumed, but if on the other hand the commons make a grant of tonnage and poundage or something similar for two years, and the lords prolong the grant to four years, then in this case the bill ought to be returned to the commons and the lords must make a schedule of their intention or else must endorse the bill thus: The lords have given their assent for a period of four years. And when the bill has been returned to the commons, if they do not wish to agree to it, then it must not be enacted; but if the commons wish to agree with the lords, then the commons endorse their answer on the margin of the bill at the bottom in this form: The commons have assented to the schedule of the lords attached to this bill; and then it is delivered to the clerk of the parliament, as above. And if a bill be first of all delivered to the lords, and if the bill passes them, then in this case they are not accustomed to make any kind of endorsement, but they send the bill to the commons, and in such a case, if the bill passes the commons, it is endorsed by them in this form: The commons have assented; and this proves that the bill has first passed the lords. 284. Thomas Yong’s case, 1455 (Rot. Parl. V, 337 [English]) In the parliament of 1451 Thomas Yong had petitioned that the Duke of York might be recognised as heir to the throne and was imprisoned in the Tower for his temerity. After the Yorkist victory in 1455 it was safe for him to claim redress.

To the right wise and discreet commons assembled in this present parliament beseeches humbly Thomas Yong, that whereas he lately being one of the knights for the shire and town of Bristol, in various parliaments held before this, conducted himself in his speech in the same as well, faithfully, and with all such true diligent labour as his simpleness could or might, for the welfare of the king our sovereign lord and this his noble realm; and notwithstanding that by the old liberty and freedom of the commons of this land had, enjoyed, and prescribed, from time out of mind, all such persons as for the time being are assembled in any parliament for the same commons ought to have their freedom to speak and say in the house of their assembly what they think convenient or reasonable, without any kind of challenge, charge or punishment therefore to be laid to them in any wise. Nevertheless by untrue sinister reports made to the king’s highness of your said beseecher, for matters shown by him in the house accustomed for the commons in the said parliaments, he was therefore taken, arrested and rigorously in open manner led to the Tower of London, and there grievously in great duress imprisoned for a long time, against the said freedom and liberty, and was there put in great fear of intolerable punishment of his body and dread of loss of his life, without any indictment, presentment, due appeal, original accusation, or lawful cause, had or sued against him…whereby he

English historical documents

468

not only suffered great hurt, pain and discomfort in his body, but was by the occasion thereof put to great excessive losses and expenses of his goods, amounting to the sum of 1,000 marks and much more. May it please your great wisdoms carefully to consider the premisses and thereupon to pray the king our sovereign lord, that it may please his highness of his most noble grace to grant and provide by the advice of the lords spiritual and temporal assembled in this present parliament that for the said losses, costs, damages, and imprisonment, your said beseecher have sufficient and reasonable recompense, as good faith, truth, and conscience require. Reply: The king wishes that the lords of his council do and provide in this matter for the said suppliant as by their discretions shall be thought convenient and reasonable. 285. Reports of proceedings of the lords in parliament in 1461 (W.H.Dunham, Jr, The Fane Fragment of the 1461 Lords Journal (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1935), from B.M., Add. MS. 34218 [English]) (12) [List of attendances—76 lords spiritual and temporal.] The first article as for judicial acts and fines, it is agreed.1 As to the second of creations, it is agreed that lords shall have new grants of their annuities according to the old custom. And also they shall have a provision upon the act.2 Also as to the third of franchises and liberties, it is thought that divers lords should declare unto the commons, that the king’s pleasure is, that he will not authorize their franchises and liberties by authority of parliament no more than his progenitors have done, but that they shall have it of the king’s liberality and free disposition as far forth as it may accord with reason and the king’s consideration.3 Also, as to the fourth for signing of payment of judges,4 it is thought necessary that they be truly paid, but not to be signed by authority of parliament, but at the king’s pleasure, as it is entered on the names of the lords hereunder written. (Ibid. 18) [List of attendances of 77 lords spiritual and temporal.] Memorandum that this day the bill of confirmation for my lord of York was put in by my lord chancellor, and read, and also agreed by all the lords.5 Also this day the bill made against sheriffs was read, but not agreed, unless there be a provision made that the lords take no hurt thereby in their leets and franchises.6 Also another bill was read for the ease of sheriffs.7 1

Statutes of the Realm, I Edw. IV, c.1, § 1. Ibid., § 2. 3 Ibid., § 3. 4 Ibid., § 15. 5 Ibid., § 22. 6 Ibid., cap. 2, 7 Rot. Parl. V, 494–5. 2

Council and parliament

469

Also this day the bill containing the hurts and remedies of merchandise made by the merchants of London was put in by the king’s own hand and read.1 Also this day there came up from the lower house a notable number of the substance of the same house, and in the parliament chamber outside the bar had communication with my lords the chancellor, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Earls of Warwick and Worcester and other lords spiritual and temporal. The Earl of Worcester, the Earl of Essex, Lord Audley, and Peter Ardern are assigned to oversee the bill made for the ease of sheriffs, and thereupon to make report to the king. The Bishops of Salisbury and Lincoln, the Earls of Worcester and Essex, the Prior of St John, and Lords Audeley, Stourton, Hastings, and Herbert. Memorandum that these lords above written are assigned to have communication with the merchants of the staple.2 286. Act declaring valid acts of Lancastrian kings, 1461 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 380 [French]) For an intrigue in the parliament of 1461 to alter an act in irregular manner at the end of the session, see Rot. Parl. VI, 29–30.

Edward, by the grace of God king of England and of France, and lord of Ireland, the fourth after the conquest; to the honour of God and of Holy Church, to nourish peace, unity, and concord within his realm of England, which he entirely desires, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal of the realm, and at the special request of the commons of his realm assembled at his first parliament held at Westminster on the fourth day of November, in the first year of his reign, and by authority of the parliament, has caused to be ordained and established certain statutes, declarations, and ordinances, in the following form and manner. First, that for the eschewing of ambiguities, doubts, and diversities of opinions, which may rise, ensue, or be taken of and upon judicial acts and exemplifications of the same made or had in the time or times of Henry IV, Henry V his son, and Henry VI his son, late kings of England successively in deed and not of right; our lord the king, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and at the request of the commons in the said parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, has declared, established, and enacted in the parliament, that all fines, and final concords, levied or made of any lands, tenements, possessions, rents, inheritances, or other things, and all judicial acts, recoveries, and processes, determined or begun, and not revoked, reversed, or annulled, made or had in any court or courts of record,3 or any court or courts in any of the times of 1

Statutes of the Realm, 3 Edw. IV, cap. 4. Cf. Ibid., cap. 1. 3 Courts which the royal courts recognised as possessing lawful authority, with records that could be produced as evidence in courts of common law. 2

English historical documents

470

the pretended reigns of any of the said late kings, in deed and not in right, other than by authority of any parliament held in any of their times, and exemplifications of the fines, judicial acts, and recoveries, in any of the parliaments, and every one of them, shall be of quite as much force, virtue, and effect, as if the fines, final concords, acts, recoveries, processes, and other premisses had or made in any of the parliaments and exemplifications of the same were begun, sued, had, or determined in the time of any king lawfully reigning in this realm, and obtaining the crown of the same by just title. And also that all letters patent made by any of the pretended kings to any person or persons, of creation, ennobling, and advancement of any of them, to any estate, dignity, or pre-eminence, shall be of such force, avail, and effect, as touch ing such creation, ennobling, or advancement, as if the same letters patent had been made or granted to any of them by any king lawfully reigning in this realm and obtaining the crown by just title; and that they being so created, ennobled, or advanced, shall have new grants of the king of their annuities for the maintenance of their estates, as has been of old time accustomed; except such persons, and every one of them, whom our sovereign lord the king reputes and holds for his rebels or enemies. 287. The invasion of the borough seats by the gentry, 1472 (The Paston Letters, ed. J.Gairdner, III 51–5 [English]) See J.S.Roskell, The Commons in the Parliament of 1422 (Manchester, 1954), and M.McKisack, The Parliamentary Representation of the English Boroughs during the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1932).

(i) Letter from James Arblaster to the Bailiff of Maiden, 20 September 1472 Right trusty friend, I commend myself to you, praying you to call to your mind that as you and I discussed, it is necessary for my lady1 and you all, her servants and tenants, to have in this parliament as one of the burgesses of the town of Maldon, such a man of worship and of wit as should be friendly disposed towards my said lady, and also such a one as is in favour with the king, and of the lords of his council round about his person. I certify to you that my said lady for her part, and such as are her farmers and tenants and well wishers should give your voice to a worshipful knight, and one of my lord’s council, Sir John Paston, who stands greatly in favour with my lord chamberlain [Hastings]; and what my said lord chamberlain may do with all the lords of England, I believe it is not unknown to you most of any man alive. Wherefore by the means of the said Sir John Paston to my said lord chamberlain, both my lady and you of the town could not have a more suitable man to be for you in the parliament, to have your needs sped at all seasons. Wherefore I pray you urge all such as are my lord’s servants, tenants, and well-willers to give their voices to the said Sir John Paston, and that you fail not to speed my lady’s intent in this matter, as you intend to do her as great a pleasure as if you gave her a £100. 1

Elizabeth, duchess of Norfolk.

Council and parliament

471

And God have you in his keeping. (ii) John Paston to Sir John Paston, 21 September 1472 Right worshipful sir, I recommend myself to you, letting you know that your desire as for the knights of the shire was impossible to be brought about; for my lord of Norfolk and my lord of Suffolk were agreed more than a fortnight ago to have Sir Robert Wingfeld, and Sir Richard Harcourt, and that I did not know until last Friday. I had sent, before I rode to Framlingham, to warn as many of your friends to be at Norwich this Monday, to serve your intent, as I could; but when I came to Framlingham and knew the preparation that was made for the two knights, I sent warning again to as many as I could to tarry at home; and yet there came to Norwich this day as many as their costs drove me to spend 9s paid and reckoned by Pekok and R.Capron and yet they did but break their fast and departed. And I thanked them in your name and told them that you wanted no voice this day, for you expected not to be in England when the parliament should be, and so they came not to the shire house; for if they had, it was thought by such as be your friends here that your adversaries would have reported that you had laboured to have been elected, and you could not bring your purpose about. I sent to Yarmouth, and they have promised also to Doctor Aleyn and John Russe to be burgesses more than three weeks ago. James Arblaster has written a letter to the Bailiff of Maiden in Essex, to have you a burgess there; how Jude [a messenger] shall speed, let him tell you, when you speak together. … If you miss being chosen burgess of Maldon, and if my lord chamberlain will, you may be chosen in another place; there are a dozen towns in England which choose no burgess, which ought to do, and you may be set in for one of those towns, if you are befriended. 288. Parliamentary privilege: freedom of members from arrest, 1472 (Rot. Parl. VI, 160 [English]) For William Larke’s case of 1429, when the servant of one of the burgesses for the city of London was released from the Fleet prison for the duration of parliament, see ibid, IV, 357.

The commons in this present parliament assembled pray that for as much as William Hyde, esquire, elected burgess of the town and borough of Chippenham in Wiltshire, came by your high commandment to this your present parliament, and attending the same in the customary house for the commons, after his said coming and during this your said parliament, was arrested at Lambeth in the county of Surrey by colour of a writ capias ad satisfaciendum that was directed to the sheriff of Middlesex, and so there by mischievous men, murderers, unknown for any officers, taken, and without the showing of any

English historical documents

472

warrant carried him to London, at the suit of John Marshall, citizen and mercer of the same, for £69 supposed to be due to him by the said William, and for the same imprisoned in the Counter there, and thence had to Newgate, as if he had been a traitor, and then brought to your Bench before your justices, and by them remitted to Newgate…and also for £4 6 8d. in which he was condemned to Thomas Gay the younger, citizen and tailor of London, in an action of debt. And so for the foregoing is kept in the said prison of Newgate, to the great delay and retarding of proceedings, and the good speeding of such matters and needs as were to be done and sped for your highness and the common weal of this your realm in this present parliament. May it please your highness, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal in this present parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, to ordain and establish that your chancellor of England may have power to direct your writ or writs to the sheriffs of London, commanding them…to have the said William Hyde before him without delay, and then to dismiss him at large…so that the said William Hyde may attend to this your parliament as his duty is to do. And that by the said authority neither your said chancellor, sheriffs, nor any of them …be in any way hurt…because of the said dismissing at large of the said William Hyde. And…that the said John Marshall and Thomas Gay, and each of them, have a writ or writs of execution, in, of, and for the foregoing, after the dissolution of this present parliament, as plainly and effectually as if the said William Hyde had never been arrested at any time for any of the foregoing charges; the said arrest of the same William and his committal to ward notwithstanding. Saving always to your commons called now to this your parliament and their successors, their whole liberties, franchises, and privileges in as ample a form and manner as your said commons at any time before this day have had, used, and enjoyed…this present act and petition notwithstanding. Reply. The king consents [Le roy le vœt]. [A similar case occurred in 1478 when John Atwyll, one of the citizens in parliament for Exeter, was condemned at the instance of John Tayllour, merchant of Exeter, by a suit in the court of Exchequer for the sum of £160, so that John Atwyll did not dare to leave for home, for fear of arrest. The commons alleged that it was an immemorial privilege for them to be free from arrest in parliament and on their way to and from parliament. John Tayllour’s rights were to be safeguarded so that he could bring an action after the end of the parliament. The king again consented to the petition.]

289. George Duke of Bedford is deprived of his title on the ground of the insufficiency of his lands, 1478 (Rot. Parl. VI, 173 [English]) Whereas before this time the king our sovereign lord, for the great zeal and love he bore to John Neville, lately named Marquis Montagu, and other considerations which moved

Council and parliament

473

him…eorge Neville, the eldest son of the said Marquis, to be Duke of Bedford; and at that time, for the great love his said Highness bore to the said John Neville, purposed and intended to have given to the said George, for sustentation of the same dignity, sufficient livelihood, and for the great offences, unkindness, and misbehavings, that the said John Neville has done and committed to his said Highness, as is openly known, he has no cause to allot any livelihood to the said George. And for as much as it is openly known that the same George has not, nor by inheritance may have, any livelihood to support the said name, estate, and dignity, or any name of estate, and often it is seen that when any lord is called to high estate, and has not livelihood conveniently to support the same dignity, it induces great poverty and indigence, and often causes great extortion, embracery, and maintenance, to the great trouble of all such countries1 where such estates shall happen to dwell. Wherefore the king, by the advice and assent of his lords spiritual and temporal and the commons assembled in this present parliament, and by authority of the same, ordained…that from henceforth the same…making of a duke and all the names of dignity given to the said George, or to the said John Neville his father, be from henceforth void and of no effect. And that the same George and his heirs from henceforth be no dukes, nor marquesses, earls, or barons…for any creation before made; but of that name of duke and marquis, earl and baron, in him and his heirs cease and be void, and of no effect; the said erection or creation notwithstanding. 290. The Shrewsbury election of parliamentary burgesses of 1478 I owe the following two documents to the kindness of my friend and former pupil, Mr K.N. Houghton, who included them in his M.A. (Liverpool) thesis on “Borough representation and the parliamentary burgesses in the Yorkist period, 1460–1485”. They are of importance in showing that the official return was by this time a formal document, which may conceal a disputed election. The original text of the second document has been printed by Mr Houghton in Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological Society, vol. 57, Pt II (1962–3), 164.

(i) (P.R.O., Writs and Returns, C 219/17/3, m. 142 [English]) This indenture made the seventh day of January the year of the reign of King Edward IV after the Conquest the 17th between Roger Knyght and John Hoord, bailiffs of the borough and liberty of the town of Shrewsbury on the one hand, and Thomas Mytton, John Coll [here follow the names of ten other “squires” and 97 others], burgesses of the 1

Countrysides, regions.

English historical documents

474

said borough and liberty on the other hand, witnesses that whereas the said burgesses had a commandment to choose two burgesses of the same borough and liberty to be at the king’s parliament to be held at his palace of Westminster the 16th day of January, the said bailiffs assembled in the boothhall with the burgesses of the said borough and liberty for the performing of the said commandment. At which time the said burgesses chose and named Robert Beynyon and John Gyttons to be burgesses of the said borough of Shrewsbury at the said parliament, giving and granting to them full power and authority to grant, do, and consent to all such things as should be expedient to do at the said parliament, holding firm and stable all such things as the said Robert Beynyon and John Gyttons shall grant and consent to in the said parliament. In witness whereof the said Thomas Mytton, John Coll, and all the other burgesses above-named have set their seals to the one part of the present indenture remaining with the said bailiffs. And the said bailiffs have set their seals to the other part of the said indenture remaining with the said Thomas Mytton, John Coll, and the other said burgesses. Given the day and year abovesaid. (ii) (Ibid. m. 141) To all true Christian people to whom this present writing shall come to see or hear [then follow the names of seven “squires” and burgesses of the town of Shrewsbury, and 151 other names], resident burgesses of the said town of Shrewsbury with the greater number of all burgesses therein, send greeting in our Lord God everlasting. For as much as it is meritorious and a deed of charity to every true man to testify all matters of truth and to witness the same and especially as of a matter of the which the circumstance in truth follows hereafter. First, whereas it pleased the king our sovereign lord to ordain his high court of parliament to be held and begun at his palace of Westminster the 16th day of January the 17th year of his reign, for the welfare of his realm of England, and thereupon send his commandment by writ to his sheriff of Shropshire as it pleased his good grace to send to all other sheriffs of his realm, to warn the inhabitants of the shires and all cities and boroughs within the same to choose and elect knights for the shire, citizens for cities, and burgesses for boroughs, as it has been used and accustomed of old time, by a common and free election, to choose of the most able and discreet within the same to come unto the parliament. Whereupon the sheriff sent his precept with the tenor of the writ to John Hoorde and Roger Knyght, bailiffs of the town of Shrewsbury, to choose two burgesses of the town to come to the parliament. Then the bailiffs made open proclamation within the town that all burgesses should come to the booth-hall at a certain hour appointed. And when we the burgesses with many others were come to the boothhall the commandment by writ was published and openly declared to the burgesses, and upon that declaration the burgesses went to their free election and there all we burgesses before named and many others hereafter named, the which were there the greater number, chose and elected Robert Beynyon and John Guttens burgesses for the parliament for the town of Shrewsbury, and none other. And then John Horde, the one bailiff, saw and understood that the greater number of burgesses in that election was contrary to his intent with a whole voice, and suddenly John Hord, bailiff, left the booth-hall and would not abide there to receive the presentment and verdict of that election of the greater number

Council and parliament

475

of all burgesses of the said town. But Roger Knyght, who is the other bailiff, he tarried there, and there received the presentment and verdict of that election, that is to say, Robert Beynon and John Guttens and no other. In witness of all the foregoing Roger Knyght, bailiff of the said town, has put his seal to these present letters testimonial, with the seals of all the burgesses before named and many other burgesses there being present at the election that is to say [then follow 17 names] have affixed their seals. Given at Shrewsbury the 8th day of January in the seventeenth year of the king our sovereign lord Edward the Fourth after the Conquest. 291. A dispute over the payment of parliamentary expenses, 1479 (Salisbury Muniment Room, Ledger Book B [English]) (f. 133a) Convocation held on Wednesday next after the feast of Corpus Christi, 19 Edward IV. At this present assembly it is agreed that as for such suit which is taken by John Aporte and Thomas Pary against Nicholas Noble late mayor of the city of Salisbury by writ out of the king’s court at Westminster for the sum of £12 12 0d. for the wages of the said John Aporte and Thomas Pary as citizens of the said city, to appear for all the said city at a parliament held at Westminster the 3rd day of June the 7th year of our sovereign lord the king that now is, and there abiding and from thence to their proper places coming and going by the space of 63 days, each of them taking by the day according to the statute 2s, the said mayor and commons by this present assembly grant in all manner of things touching the said suit to save from harm and to support the said Nicholas Noble against the said John Aporte and Thomas Pary, with the common goods of the said mayor and commons within this city. And for as much as the said John Aporte and Thomas Pary wilfully purpose and intend to proceed in action to the uttermost in that matter against the same Nicholas Noble, contrary to the rule and good custom of the said city, the said mayor and commons by this present assembly utterly discharge the said John Aporte and Thomas Pary from the number of 24 of the citizens aforesaid. 292. Procedure in parliament at the end of the period: the parliament of 1484 (Rot. Parl. VI, 237 if.) (i) Proceedings at the opening of parliament [Latin]. Memorandum, that on Friday, the 23rd January, in the first year of King Richard the Third after the Conquest, that is to say, on the first day of parliament, our lord the king himself being seated on his royal throne in the Painted Chamber, in his palace of Westminster, there being then present very many lords spiritual and temporal and commons of the realm of England, called to parliament by the command of the king, the venerable father John, Bishop of Lincoln, Chancellor of England, pronounced and declared in notable manner the causes of the summons of the said parliament, taking as

English historical documents

476

his text: “We have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office”, etc. After the conclusion of this pronouncement and declaration the chancellor strictly charged the commons in the king’s name, that they should assemble on the morrow in their common and accustomed house, and elect for themselves a speaker; and after electing him they should present him to the lord king. The same chancellor moreover declared that the lord king, desirous that justice should speedily be done as well to natives as to strangers wishing to complain in parliament, has constituted and assigned certain receivers of petitions exhibited in the parliament, in the following form: [There follow the names of receivers and triers of petitions, organized, as usual, in two sets, to deal with the petitions of England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and with the petitions of Gascony and of the other lands and territories overseas and of the isles.] Also on Saturday the second day of parliament, the commons by certain of their number declared to the lords spiritual and temporal in the present parliament that they, executing with all diligence the lord king’s command of the day before, had chosen their speaker, not naming a person; humbly praying that they would deign to inform the king’s majesty, and when it should please the lord king they would present their speaker to him. Whereupon, after they had first spoken to the lord king, they answered the commons that on the following Monday the lord king would want the presentation to be made to him. Also on Wednesday, the fourth day of parliament, the commons, appearing before the lord king in open parliament, presented to the lord king William Catesby as their speaker, with whom the lord king was well content. And William, after making his excuse in the presence of the lord king, because his excuse could not be admitted on behalf of the lord king, very humbly prayed the lord king that all and singular matters to be uttered and declared by him in parliament in the name of the commons, he might set forth and declare under such a condition, that if he should declare anything enjoined upon him by his fellows otherwise than they had agreed, either by addition or omission, that declaration might be corrected and amended by his fellows; and that this his protestation might be entered on the roll of parliament. And answer was made to him by the lord chancellor at the command of the lord king, that the said William should have and enjoy such protestation as other speakers in the time of the noble progenitors of our lord the king had been accustomed to have and enjoy in parliament. (ii) Procedure in dealing with bills And it is to be remembered that a certain bill, with two schedules annexed to it, containing the form of a certain act of conviction and attainder of various persons, was exhibited before the lord king in the present parliament, the tenor of which is as follows…. Which bill and schedules were taken to the commons of the realm of England assembled in the said parliament, and the same commons gave their assent in these words: A cest bille, & a les deux cedules a ycell annexez, les communez sont assentuz. When this bill, the schedules, and the assent had been read, heard, and fully made known before the lord king in parliament, and mature deliberation had taken place on the matters contained in the bill and the schedules, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal in parliament and the commons, and by authority of parliament, reply was made

Council and parliament

477

to the same in following form: Le roy le vœt en toutz pointz, ovecque les deuz provisions cy assuantz. Also, a certain petition with a certain schedule attached to it was presented to the lord king, in parliament, by Henry Percy, now Earl of Northumberland, in these words…. When this petition had been read, heard, and fully understood in parliament, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal and of the commons of the realm of England assembled in parliament, reply was made to them in these words: Soit fait come il est desire. (iii) The grant of tunnage and poundage and of customs on wool, woolfells and hides for the king’s lifetime, on the last day of the parliament It is to be remembered that the commons of the realm of England assembled in the present parliament appeared before the lord king in full parliament on 20 February, that is to say, on the last day of the present parliament, and declared through William Catesby their speaker, that they, by the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal assembled in the aforesaid parliament, granted to the lord king certain subsidies, to be levied from both natives and aliens according to the form specified in a certain indenture drawn up for that purpose, the contents of which were then and there exhibited to the same lord king, the tenor of which indenture follows in these words…. Reply: Our lord the king, thanking his commons for their kindness in making the grants, has accepted those grants and has conceded everything specified in the intenture, with the following provisos: [Provisos safeguarding the privileges of the Hanseatic and Spanish merchants in England.]

C. THE ROYAL COURTS OF LAW 293. An early Admiralty case, 1361 (Ed. C.Johnson, in Camden Miscellany, XV (1929), 1–5, from Chancery Miscellanea, Bundle 6, No. 9. m. I [French]) Mr Johnson wrote: “The following case in Admiralty, dated 26 July 1361, may possibly have escaped the notice of the late Mr R.G.Marsden, since it is thirty years earlier than that of Sampson v. Curteys, which is the earliest printed in Select Pleas in the Court of Admiralty…. It deals with a case of piracy arising from the war with France. The plaintiffs, William Smale of Dartmouth, a well-known shipowner, and John Bronde, state that their ship, the St Mary Boat, sailing from Dartmouth for Flanders, was captured off Winchelsea on Friday before Whit-Sunday, 33 Edward III (7 June 1359) by John Houeel the defendant, and others, and taken to France. The ship was recaptured and taken to Great Yarmouth and was now in the hands of Bartholomew Noyan, who did not appear. They claimed £4,000 for the cargo and £2,000 as damages.” The defendant, a Frenchman, pleaded (1) that the capture was an act of war, (2) that if a truce had been proclaimed the captors had no notice of it, (3) that the treaty of Brétigny barred any claims for captures made during the war. The plaintiffs demurred to the plea on the ground of multiplicity, but the court held that as an Admiralty court it was not bound by the rules of common law, but must administer equity and the law of the sea, especially as the defendant was an alien, and overruled the objection.

(4) [Plaintiffs’ demurrer] And William and John Bronde say that John Houeel has alleged for himself three answers, of which each would avail him for sufficient reply; one that is to say that he alleged that the day of the seizure of the goods the war was in force between the two realms, and no truce was made. Another was that even if the truce was made it was not published and was unknown to them. The third that by the final agreement between the two kingdoms all actions of misprisions since the beginning of the war are barred. And

The royal courts of law

479

they do not believe that they are bound to reply to such a triple answer, and they demand judgement and pray for restitution of their ship and damages, etc. And whereas this court, which is the office of the admiral, will not be ruled so strictly as the other courts of the realm which are ruled by the common law of the land, but is ruled by equity and maritime law, whereby each man will be received to say the truth, and moreover John Houeel is an alien and has no knowledge of the laws of the land. Therefore we must listen to what he has to say to excuse himself from wrong, and William and John Bronde must say more if they wish. (Ibid. 5) … Wherefore the court awards the recovery of damages, and taxes by the assent of the parties abovesaid to William and John Bronde, to the value of 1,000 marks for the goods that were in the ship. And that John Houeel should be committed to the custody of the marshal, to remain until, etc. [The Admiralty court met a growing need for special jurisdiction in maritime cases; but it sometimes encountered opposition from established local authorities. Cf. C.P.R, 1429–36, 471, for Portsmouth’s attempt in 1435 to exclude the Admiral’s commissary for the south-east, and C.P.R., 1441–46, 439, for the payment by Bristol to Henry VI of £200 in 1446 to be freed from vexation by the Admiral’s servants. For the rules for the Admiral, made about 1338–40, see The Black Book of the Admiralty, ed. T. Twiss, vol. 1 (Rolls Series, 1871), 2–23.] 294. Pleadings to be made in the English tongue, 1362 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 375 [French]) A lso, because the prelates, dukes, earls, barons, and all the commons have often shown to the king the great mischiefs which have happened to many people of the realm because the laws, customs and statutes of this realm are not commonly known in the realm, because they are pleaded, shown, and judged in the French language, which is too unknown [trop desconue] in the realm; so that the people who plead or are impleaded in the king’s court and in the courts of others, have no knowledge or understanding of what is said for them or against them by their serjeants and other pleaders; and that reasonably the laws and customs will be better learnt and known and better understood in the tongue used in the realm, and by so much every man of the realm may the better govern himself without offending the law, and better keep, save, and defend his heritage and possessions; and in various regions and countries, where the king, the nobles, and others of the realm have been, good governance and full right is done to every person, because their laws and customs are learnt and used in the language of the countryside: The king, desiring the good governance and tranquillity of his people, and to avoid and eschew the evils and mischiefs which have arisen, and may yet arise, in this matter, has for the reasons abovesaid ordained and established by the assent abovesaid that all pleas which shall be pleaded in any courts whatsoever, before any of his justices whatsoever, or in his other places, or before any of his other ministers whatsoever, or in the courts and places of other lords whatsoever within the realm, shall be pleaded, shewn, defended, answered, debated, and judged in the English tongue, and that they shall be entered and enrolled in

English historical documents

480

Latin; and that the laws and customs of the realm, terms, and processes, shall be held and kept as they are, and have been before this time; and that by the ancient terms and forms of declaration no man shall be prejudiced, so that the matter of the action shall be fully shown in the declaration and in the writ; and it is agreed by the assent aforesaid that these ordinances and statute of pleading shall begin and have effect at the quinzaine of St Hilary next coming. [In 1363 the chancellor made his opening speech to parliament in English—Rot. Parl. II, 275.]

295. Seignorial influence on justices of assize, 1384 (Rot. Parl. III, 200 [French]) Also pray the commons that whereas when Justices of assize are in their own A country and are indebted for fees and robes to several lords of the same country, and have great alliances and other affinities there, great evils and grievances arise in various ways among the people, of which it is not honest to speak in detail, but amongst others one abuse is that it suits them to show and they do show, too great favour to some, and injustice towards others. May it please our sovereign lord the king in this present parliament to ordain by statute that no man of law shall henceforth be a justice of assize in his own country, for the great ease and relief of the commons; and that the chief of neither bench shall be a justice of any assizes, because if they commit an error this will be redressed before them…. Reply: As for the first point in the petition, the king consents. And as for the second point touching the chief justice of the common bench, the king wishes that he should be assigned a justice of assize. But as for the chief justice of the king’s bench, the king wishes that it should be done as it has been done and used for the greater part of a hundred years last past. 296. Definition of the jurisdiction of the courts of Admiralty, 1389 (Rot. Parl. III, 269 [French]) Also the commons pray that whereas the admirals and their deputies hold their sessions in diverse places in the realm, as well within franchises as without, arrogating to themselves greater power than belongs to their office, in prejudice of our lord the king, and the common law of the realm, and great damage to many franchises, in destruction and impoverishment of the common people. May it please you to ordain and define their power in this present parliament, so that they should not meddle in, or take upon themselves cognisance of, any contracts, covenants, or regratings [buying of commodities especially victuals, in order to sell again at a profit in the same or a neighbouring market] which ought to be and could be determined before other judges of our lord the king, within the four seas of England, within franchises and outside; and that the justices of the peace should have power to inquire about those who do anything to the contrary. And that if any of the admirals or their deputies shall be duly convicted of this, the admirals

The royal courts of law

481

shall lose their office and pay 500 marks to the king, and their deputies shall lose their office and pay 100 marks to the king. Reply: The king wills that the admirals and their deputies shall not meddle henceforward in anything done within the realm; but concern themselves solely with things done on the sea, according to what was duly used in the time of the noble King Edward, grandfather to our present lord the king. 297. The jurisdiction of the constable and marshal defined, 1390 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 61 [French]) Also, whereas the commons make a grievous complaint that the court of the A constable and marshal has usurped, and daily usurps, contracts, covenants, trespasses, debts, and detinues, and many other actions pleadable at the common law, in great prejudice of the king and of his courts, and to the great grievance and oppression of the people, Our lord the king, willing to ordain a remedy against the prejudices and grievances aforesaid, has declared in this parliament, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal, the power and jurisdiction of the constable in the following form: To the constable it appertains to have cognisance of contracts touching deeds of arms and of war outside the realm, and also of things that touch arms or war within the realm, which cannot be determined nor discussed by common law…. And if anyone will complain that any plea be started before the constable and marshal which could be tried by the common law of the land, the same plaintiff shall have a privy seal of the king without difficulty, directed to the constable and marshal to surcease in that plea, until it be discussed by the king’s council, whether that matter ought of right to pertain to that court or otherwise to be tried by the common law of the realm of England, and that they surcease in the mean time. 298. The commons protest against writs of sub poena and certis de causis, 1415 (Rot. Parl. IV, 84 [French]) A lso pray the commons that whereas several people of your realm feel greatly A harmed, because of your writs called writs sub poena and certis de causis, made and sued out of your chancery and exchequer, of matters determinable by your common law, which were never granted nor used before the time of the late King Richard; and whereas John Waltham, lately Bishop of Salisbury, of his subtlety caused such novelty to be invented and begun, against the form of the common law of your realm…. And also, your justices of one bench and the other, when they ought to be hearing in their courts other pleas and to be taking inquests for the deliverance of your people, are occupied with examinations on such writs, to the very great vexation, loss, and costs of your lieges, who are delayed for long in the sealing of their writs sued in your chancery, because of the great occupation attendant on the said examinations…. And such pleas cannot take place, except by examination and oath of the parties, according to the form of the civil law and law of Holy Church, in subversion of your common law. And if the same parties cannot

English historical documents

482

be convicted by their examination, then they are bound to find surety of your peace…without coming to your courts, or otherwise they are invited to treat and make agreement with their adversaries who pursue such writs, or otherwise they are kept in prison or in custody until they have done it. Therefore may it please your very sovereign lordship to ordain in this present parliament that everyone who sues out such writs shall put all the cause and matter of his suit in the same writs, and that all those writs shall be enrolled in the courts from which they issue, and made public…and if anyone feels himself hurt or vexed by such kind of writs in any matter which is determinable by the common law, let such person thus hurt or vexed have an action of debt for £40 against the person who has sued such writs…. Reply: The king refuses [Le roy soy avisera]. 299. The office of the constable and marshal in fifteenth-century England (The Black Book of the Admiralty, ed. T.Twiss (1871–6), I, 281 [English]) In the time of war their office is to punish all manner of men who break the statutes and ordinances made by the king to be kept in the host at the said time, and to punish the same according to the pains provided in the said statutes. The constable and marshal have knowledge of all manner of crimes, contracts, pleas, quarrels, trespasses, injuries, and offences committed beyond the sea in time of war between soldier and soldier, between merchants, victuallers, leaches, barbers, launderers, shoemakers, labourers, and artificers necessary to the host. And if any of these persons be one party and the other person be a stranger, the constable and marshal shall have cognisance in the said matter done in the war beyond the sea, and of all manner of deeds of arms done here within the land they have cognisance, and they have cognisance within this land of offences committed beyond the sea. [G.D.Squibb, The High Court of Chivalry (Oxford, 1959), denies that this is a description of the court of Chivalry. If that is so, then the constable and marshal held two courts, one for the enforcement of military discipline, the other which administered justice in chivalric and military matters not governed by common law. This seems a curious distinction.] 300. A case before the court of Exchequer Chamber, 1422. The case of the Hanse merchants (Select Cases in the Exchequer Chamber, ed. M.Hemmant (Selden Soc., 1933), 27 [Latin, trans, by the editor]) Here follows Trinity Term in the first year of Henry the Sixth. On the third day of the month of July in the first year, all the justices of both benches of our lord the King and the chief baron of the exchequer, all of whom by command of the lords of the council were sitting in the King’s Exchequer Chamber at Westminster, enquired into the matter of the Hanse merchants, which had long been prosecuted by them before the lords of the council, to wit, about the payment of the subsidy of three shillings a tun, due to the lord the King etc.

The royal courts of law

483

Proceeding to the Council Chamber at Westminster into the presence of all the lords there assembled, they reported what they had heard put forward in the cause, both on the King’s behalf and also on that of the Hanse merchants, and, finally, they said that it seemed to them, according to what had thus been said and advanced in their presence, that the Hanse merchants are bound to pay the subsidy of three shillings a tun, granted to the King in his last parliament1 held at Westminster, in the manner of foreigners and not as natives, as they themselves claim, notwithstanding any allegations of liberties and franchises put forward by them. All which things were reported in the presence of many of the merchants. Present in the council the Duke of Gloucester, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of Winchester and Worcester, the Earl of Warwick, Lords FitzHugh and Cromwell, the Chancellor and the Treasurer. 301. Trial by battle in the court of the constable and marshal, 1453 (British Museum, Titus C I, f. 234, printed in Nicolas, Council Proceedings, VI, 129–30 [English]) A dispute between John Lyalton, the appellant, and Robert Norreys, the defendant, on an appeal of high treason, 11 May, 31 Henry VI, 1453.

Memorandum that on the 11th day of May in the 31st year of the reign of our sovereign lord King Henry VI at a court held then in the White Hall at Westminster by John Hanford knight, lieutenant to the right noble prince, Edmund, Duke of Somerset and constable of England, John Lyalton appealed Robert Norres of high treason, which he alleged had been done to our said sovereign lord by the said Robert, and the said Robert denied that appeal to be true, whereupon the said parties joined battle to be done between them on the 25th day from then next following, and they were assigned and appointed there by the said lieutenant to do the said battle in Smithfield. And after that in the said White Hall at a court held before the said lieutenant at the special request of both the said parties it was assigned and appointed that each of the said parties should do that battle with certain weapons, that is to say, with glaive, short sword, dagger, and with axe instead of a long sword, and at the request of the said John Lyalton there were assigned John Astley knight, Thomas Parker, Edward Bronfeld, Thomas Montgomery, and Laurence Reynford squires, Philip Treher, and Thomas Parker, armourer, to be of counsel with the said John Lyalton for the foregoing and Thomas Bee, painter, for things concerning the foregoing, and also Hugh John, knight, Elias Longworth, Thomas Meryng, James Hyde, and Thomas Keyle, squires, and Thomas Cotton, wiredrawer, were assigned to be of counsel with the said Robert Norres for the foregoing, and also Everard Frere armourer and Peter Hulke, painter, were assigned to be attendant to the said defendant as for arming and painting, which reasonably should belong to the said defendant for the speeding of the foregoing. Wherefore there ought to be made a privy 1

Rot. Parl. IV, 173 (1 Henry VI).

English historical documents

484

seal to the chancellor of England to direct a writ to the sheriffs of London that they should make ready in all things the place in Smithfield in preparation for the said 25th day, that is to say, in gravelling and sanding the said place and in making a scaffold for the King and barriers and lists convenient and sufficient for battle to take place there. Also there ought to be several letters under the privy seal directed to every person assigned or appointed for each of the said parties to do as is rehearsed above, Also there ought to be a privy seal directed to the sergeant of the king’s armoury or to his deputy commanding him to ordain and provide sufficient and convenient armour and weapons for the performance of the said battle. By the said John Hanford, knight. 302. A case in chancery: request for specific performance, 1456 (Select Cases in Chancery, ed. W.P.Baildon (Selden Soc., 1896), 141–3 [English petition. Latin endorsement]) Beseeches to you fully meekly your true servant and continual petitioner William Cokayn, that for as much as of late time communication of a marriage was had and received between your said suppliant, on the one hand, and Amy, the daughter of Thomas Hurst, otherwise named Thomas Barbour, of Ashwell, in Hertfordshire, on the other hand, and agreement was made of the said marriage between the said parties in the presence of John Enderby, esquire, Thomas Boulasse, Thomas Crake, Henry Crosse of Biggliswade, and others, in manner and form as here follows:—First, that your said suppliant should take to wife the said Amy, and immediately after the wedding between them had been hallowed, her father should have ordained that of such lands and tenements as he was seized of in the town of Kimbolton in the shire of Huntingdon a sufficient and lawful estate of the said lands and tenements, to the yearly value of 40s and above, should be made to your said suppliant and the said Amy jointly, to have and to hold to them and to their heirs of their two bodies lawfully coming: for the which marriage jointure the said Thomas Hurst, father to the said Amy, should make a sufficient and lawful estate of a messuage with appurtenances in the said town of Ashwell to the yearly value of 20s. and in 30 acres of land in Steeple Morden to the yearly value of 25s above all charges, to have and to hold the said messuage and 30 acres with their appurtenances to your said suppliant and Amy and to the heirs of their two bodies lawfully coming. And how be it that your said suppliant has well and truly performed all manner of things abovesaid touching his part, and has often required the said Thomas Hurst to perform the foregoing touching his part, and he has refused to do that and still refuses against all right and conscience. May it please your highness tenderly to consider the foregoing, and for as much as the said Thomas Hurst is visited with such sickness that he may not travel, to grant a writ of dedimus potestatem direct to John Leek, clerk, William Saint George, knight, and William Hasilden, squire, that they and each of them may jointly and severally have power to examine the said Thomas Hurst and all other persons which shall seem to their discretions most necessary to be examined in the foregoing, and such as shall be found by that examination to certify to the king’s highness in his High Court of Chancery; and your said suppliant shall pray to God for you.

The royal courts of law

485

[A writ of dedimus potestatem, dated 8 May, 34 Henry VI, and addressed to John Leek and Walter Tayllard, is annexed, directing them to examine witnesses in the matter and to return the result into the chancery without delay. Their certificate, a lengthy document in bad condition, is also preserved.] [Endorsed on the bill.] Memorandum that on 15th February, 36 Henry VI, this petition having been presented before the lord king in his chancery, and the examinations taken in this matter having been read, heard, and fully understood, it seemed to the Court of Chancery aforesaid that the matter specified in the petition was true and just; and since Amy, in the petition mentioned above, is dead, leaving issue of her body, lawfully begotten from the body of William, therein mentioned and still surviving, it was considered in the same chancery that Thomas Hurst should make a sufficient estate of one messuage and thirty acres of land with the appurtenances in Ashwell and Steeple Morden, mentioned in the petition, to William and his heirs, lawfully begotten of his body and that of Amy, according to the tenor, form, and effect of the petition. 303. Disorder in the Home Counties, 1462 (Early Chancery Proceedings, Bundle 27, No. 408 [English]) To the right reverend father in God the Bishop of Exeter and Chancellor of England. Beseeches humbly your continual bedesman John Fetiplace of Wolvele in the county of Berkshire, gentleman, that whereas lately, that is to say, the Sunday next before the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (12 September), the second year of the reign of King Edward IV, he was in his house and in his bed, there came John Estbury, esquire, with the number of 40 persons arrayed in manner of war, with jacks, salets, bows, arrows, and swords about midnight of the same day, and there assaulted your said beseecher in his house, and shot at his doors, windows, and walls 100 arrows which he is still ready to show, and some stick still into the house and windows; and he shot through the walls that were only plaster walls and so into his hall, to the greatest fear of your beseecher, his wife, children, and servants. And not only this, but he there took in the most riotous manner the sons of your said beseecher, and also beat them and wounded them with daggers and swords, and robbed them of all that they had about them, both their money and other things. And your said suppliant is of great age and his wife also of great age, and this done in their sight was to their most heavy sorrow, and will be the cause of the shortening of their lives. And your said beseecher has at all times borne his faithful and true heart to the present king, Edward, as well before his reign as since, to your lordship, and to my lord of Warwick your brother and to all the lords of your true opinion for the welfare of this land, and bore his great charge thereto; and what opinion my said attacker has been in is known in the country and such rioters and misgoverned men as have been against the king in battle, and also in their language against him, he draws to them and favours them. Wherefore may it please your lordship for the reverence of Almighty God, to consider the foregoing, and how that continually by night time he [John Estbury] causes such rioters to come about his place, to such occasion that you will give in command by the

English historical documents

486

king’s authority to my lord of Suffolk that he bring the said John Estbury before you and the lords of the king’s council to answer the foregoing, and also that my said lord of Suffolk call to him others of the commission of the peace to enquire of this great riot and robbery. And unless your lordship will provide, with the power that you have of God and of the king, for the remedy of your said poor petitioner, there are so many riotous people in league with John Estbury that for fear of them and of others associated with him, truth cannot be found, as he will be still at large, and your poor petitioner and his children and servants are likely to be slain and murdered…. Pledges for prosecuting the case—John Hore of London, Grocer. —William Wylde of London, Sadler. [There is no record of the outcome.]

304. The Inns of Court, c. 1468–70 (Sir John Fortescue, De Laudibus Legum Anglie, ed. S.B.Chrimes (Cambridge, 1949), 114–21 [Latin, trans, by the editor]) The laws of England are learned in three languages, namely, English, French, and Latin…. Thus, since the laws of England are learned in these three languages, they could not be conveniently learned or studied in the Universities, where the Latin language alone is used. But those laws are taught and learned in a certain public academy, more convenient and suitable for their apprehension than any University. For this academy is situated near the king’s courts, where these laws are pleaded and disputed from day to day, and judgements are rendered in accordance with them by the judges, who are grave men, mature, expert and trained in these laws. So those laws are read and taught in these courts as if in public schools, to which students of the law flock every day in term-time. That academy, also, is situated between the site of those courts and the City of London, which is the richest of all the cities and towns of that realm in all the necessaries of life. And that academy is not situated in the city, where the tumult of the crowd could disturb the student’s quiet, but is a little isolated in a suburb of the city, and nearer to the aforesaid courts, so that the students are able to attend them daily at pleasure without the inconvenience of fatigue. But, prince, in order that the form and arrangement of this academy may be clear to you, I will now describe it as far as I can. For there are in this academy ten lesser inns, and sometimes more, which are called Inns of Chancery. To each of them at least a hundred students belong, and to some of them a much greater number, though they do not always gather in them all at the same time. These students are, indeed, for the most part, young men, learning the originals and something of the elements of law, who, becoming proficient therein as they mature, are absorbed into the greater inns of the academy, which are called the Inns of Court. Of these greater inns there are four in number, and some two hundred students belong in the aforementioned form to the least of them. In these greater inns, no student could be maintained on less expense than £13 6s 8d a year, and if he had servants to himself alone, as the majority have, then he will by so much the more bear expenses. Because of this costliness, there are not many who learn the laws in the inns except the sons of nobles. For poor and common people cannot bear so much

The royal courts of law

487

cost for the maintenance of their sons, and merchants rarely desire to reduce their stock by such annual burdens. Hence it comes about that there is scarcely a man learned in the laws to be found in the realm, who is not noble or sprung of noble lineage. So they care more for their nobility and for the preservation of their honour and reputation than others of like estate. In these greater inns, indeed, and also in the lesser, there is, beside as school of law, a kind of academy of all the manners that the nobles learn. There they learn to sing and to exercise themselves in every kind of harmonics. They are also taught there to practise dancing and all games proper for nobles, as those brought up in the king’s household are accustomed to practise. In the vacations most of them apply themselves to the study of legal science, and at festivals to the reading, after the divine services, of Holy Scripture and of chronicles. This is indeed a cultivation of virtues and a banishment of all vice. So for the sake of the acquisition of virtue and the discouragement of vice, knights, barons, and also other magnates, and the nobles of the realm place their sons in these inns, although they do not desire them to be trained in the science of the laws, nor to live by its practice, but only by their patrimonies. Scarcely any turbulence, quarrels, or disturbance ever occur there, but delinquents are punished with no other punishment than expulsion from communion with their society, which is a penalty they fear more than criminals elsewhere fear imprisonment and fetters. For a man once expelled from one of these societies is never received into the fellowship of any other of those societies. Hence the peace is unbroken and the conversation of all of them is as the friendship of united folk. It is not, forsooth, necessary to relate here the manner in which the laws are learned in these inns, for, prince, you are not to experience it. But be assured that it is pleasant, and in every way suited to the study of that law, and also worthy of every regard. But I want you to know one point—that neither in Orléans, where the canon as well as the civil laws are studied, and whither students resort from all parts, nor Angers, nor Caen, nor any other University of France, except only Paris, are so many students of mature age to be found as in this academy, though all the students there are of English birth alone. 305. The chancellor at last gives a judgement on his own authority, 1474 (Calendar of Proceedings in Chancery in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, ed. J.Caley and J.Bayley (Record Commission, I, 1827), xciv [English petition, Latin endorsements]) The plaintiffs seek to compel the defendant, who is feoffee in trust of the manor of Hinton Pipard in the counties of Wiltshire and Berkshire, to release the same to them.

To the right honourable and full noble lord the earl of Essex, guardian of the great seal of our liege lord the king. Beseech humbly, George Archbishop of York and Edward Gower, that whereas Alice Thorp, of Thorp in the county of Surrey, seized of the manor of Hinton Pipard…with other manors, lands, and tenements, enfeoffed John Bourghchier, Lord Berners, Thomas Kyrkby, Peter Ardern, knight Richard Ludlowe, William Skern, and Richard Osborn, to

English historical documents

488

have to them, their heirs and assigns, upon trust only, and to the use of the said Alice; and afterwards the said Alice entered again into the said manor, and put out her said feoffees, and the said Lord Berners, Master Thomas Peter [sic], Richard Ludlowe, and William Skern, in the lifetime of the said Alice, and at her request, released into the possession of the said Alice all their right and title in and of the said manor of Hinton, and in likewise the said Alice required the said Richard Osborn to release to her all his right in the said manor, and he refused to do so; and afterwards the said Alice bargained and sold to the said Edward the said manor of Hinton, and thereof enfeoffed the said archbishop and Edward, to have to them and the heirs of the said Edward, by force of which enfeoffment they were seized… after which enfeoffment and after the decease of the said Alice, the said George and Edward have often required the said Richard Osborn to release his right…and the said Richard has refused to do that. Wherefore may it please your good lordship to grant a writ sub poena to be directed to the said Richard Osborn, commanding him to appear before the king in his chancery, at a certain day within this term, to do what the court will award in this matter. Pledges of prosecution William Curteis of London, gentleman, and Clement Clerk of the same, gentleman. Endorsed: Before the king in his Chancery on Friday. A day was given to the parties to produce witnesses to prove the matter contained in this bill between now and the octaves of St Martin. The decree endorsed Memorandum that on 5th July, 14 Edward IV, this petition was exhibited before the lord king in his chancery, and the answer and replication, and the other examinations and proofs were similarly made and had in this matter, and were fully seen, read, and heard in the same chancery at Westminster, and understood, and mature and diligent deliberation was had in this matter; and it was considered and judged by the venerable father Thomas, the Bishop of Lincoln, Chancellor of the lord king, that Richard Osborn should make a sufficient estate in law to Edward Gower of and in the manor of Hinton Pipard with the appurtenances to be had by the same Edward Gower, and his heirs and assigns in perpetuity. 306. The king’s household and the court of Marshalsea, c. 1474–5 (P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, 64/785 [English]) Thomas Rotherham was Bishop of Lincoln from 1472 to 1480 and chancellor 1474–5, 1475–83. The dated petitions in this file are for the earlier period of office, 1474–5. This case illustrates very well how in this period one of the king’s courts could be used against the jurisdiction and officials of another of his courts, and how royal authority

The royal courts of law

489

could be used to extend unduly the powers of a prerogative court like the court of Marshalsea.

To the right reverend father in God and his full good and gracious lord, the Bishop of Lincoln, Chancellor of England. Meekly beseeches your good and gracious lordship your humble suppliant John Merlawe, constable of the franchise of the Savoy outside Temple Bar in the County of Middlesex, that whereas in the month of February last past, upon credible information made unto your said suppliant by his neighbours, that one, Watkyn Pembroke, vagabond, was issuing and selling various suspicious wares to certain prisoners within the said franchise, and so it was openly proved, your suppliant according to his office arrested the said Watkyn for suspicion of felony and brought him to the king’s gaol in London. And on the morrow after he was brought to prison he found such help of his acquaintance in the king’s house that he was removed out of London into the King’s Bench and there was suddenly acquitted by proclamation without any knowledge being given to those of the said franchise who were acquainted with the issue of the said suspicious wares. And now it is so that the said Watkyn is in service with one John Grene of the household of our liege lord the king, and for the evil will and malice that he bears to your suppliant for the executing of his said office, he has caused the said John Grene to commence an action of trespass against your said beseecher in the king’s court of Marshalsea, to the damages of £10. And thereupon the said John Grene has surmised the said trespass to be done in Southwark, where your said suppliant never had to do with any of them. And so by that means and because the said John Grene is of the household of our said sovereign lord, he is likely to have your suppliant condemned in the said action, contrary both to law and conscience. If your gracious lordship will consider these foregoing points and also how the said court ought not to proceed in any matter except where both parties are of the king’s household, may it please the same your lordship to grant a writ of certiorari, to be directed to the steward and marshal of the said Court of Marshalsea, commanding them to certify the king in his chancery of and upon the foregoing matters at such a day as it may please your lordship to assign. And your said suppliant shall duly pray God for the preservation of your good and gracious lordship. (On the dorse is written, “To be heard before the lord king in his chancery in the octave of St Hilary next coming”.]

307. A widow appeals to the chancellor for the restitution of her property, 1477–8 (P.R.O., Early Chancery Proceedings, 67/93–7 [English]) This case illustrates several points about the chancellor’s jurisdiction, (1) It was available to relatively humble and obscure folk as well as the great. (2) It was concerned with a wide variety of cases, not merely well-known types like

English historical documents

490

violence, and transfers of land to feoffees to uses. (3) Its procedure was becoming stereotyped into the characteristic pattern of bill and answer, replication and rejoinder, with the chancellor finally seeking the truth by examining these and other written statements and by interrogating the parties, and if necessary witnesses, before giving a verdict in accordance with what seemed to him right and equitable.

(i) The bill of Katharine Bee To the right reverend father in God and the right good and gracious lord, my lord the Bishop of Lincoln, Chancellor of England. Humbly beseeches your good and gracious lordship your poor and continual petitioner Katharine, formerly the wife of William Bee, widow, graciously to consider that whereas she for the tender love and affection which she had unto the said William and by means of the great labour, stirring, and enticing of one Robert Bee, cousin to the said William, intended to have paid during her life unto the same Robert weekly for her board and for her servant’s board, and also for her chamber as reason should require, to which the same Robert agreed, whereupon because she was at that time a sole woman and greatly aged and for the safe-guard of the goods comprised in a schedule attached to this bill, she gave the said goods in trust to the said Robert, to have those goods as his own proper goods on trust to the use and enjoyment of your said petitioner and to dispose them according to her will and pleasure and to her use, whereto also the same Robert agreed. And thereupon she put the same Robert in possession of the same goods; and although, gracious lord, your said petitioner has various and many times since desired and prayed the said Robert to help and relieve her with the said goods or to redeliver and give them to her again, to help and succour herself with the same in time of her necessity as reason would, the said Robert has refused to do that at all times, and still does, and keeps still the said goods and occupies a great part of them daily to his own proper use against all truth, right, and conscience, and the utter undoing of your said poor petitioner, unless your good lordship be the more graciously shown unto her in this matter. Wherefore may it please your good lordship to consider the foregoing facts and to grant a writ of sub poena directed to the said Robert, commanding him upon pain of penalty to appear before the king in his court of Chancery at a certain day to be appointed by your good lordship, there to take and obey such rule and direction on the foregoing case as shall be according to right reason and good conscience. And that for the love of God and the way of charity. [In Latin] Pledges for prosecuting the case: Richard Kneseworth of London, gentleman. William Alesop of the same, yeoman. (Ibid. 67/94) (ii) The schedule of Katharine Bee s goods attached to her bill In the first place, a great bowl partly of silver and gild. Also a chafing dish of silver.

The royal courts of law

491

Also many great precious stones. Also diverse rings of gold, some of them set with stones and some without stones. Also diverse small diamonds, rubies, and sapphires. Also a woman’s gown of murrey, furred with grey. Also a frontlet of velvet. Also a frontlet of fine lawn. Also a kerchief of fine lawn. Also two neck bands of holland cloth. Also one napkin of diaper. Also one old plain towel. Also one great bundle of red worsted. Also two candlesticks of latten. Also a pewter dish. Also one square pottle of pewter. Also one square quart pot of pewter. Also a chafer of brass. Also a pair of cupboards. Also three spits, two of them broad and one round. Also two saucers, a greater and a smaller. Also a fire pan to bear fire in. Also two little stools. Also another great stool. Also twelve stones of flocks. Also press boards and shelf boards. Which goods aforesaid are of the value of £40 and better. Also various copies of court rolls of lands and messuages which she has and claims to have and hold of the parish of Merton in Surrey and other things. (Ibid. 67/95) (iii) The answer of Robert Bee to the bill of Katharine Bee [The following is a summary of the answer, which is too long to give verbatim. Between Christmas and Candlemas twelve months ago, Katharine Bee had been very ill and lay speechless, and Robert and his wife and their servants had nursed her night and day at their own expense and restored her to strength, and Robert had brought her from her house in St Mildred’s parish in the Poultry in London to his own house in St John’s parish, Walbrook, and laid her in his own chamber. She used his goods except sheets and she brought all her goods into the same chamber, and he supplied both her and her servant with meat and drink until St Nicholas’s Day (6 December). She had promised to pay him 4d a day, for her meat and drink, but he had never received a penny so far. She had told him to sell the silver bowl and chafing dish because she had no ready money, so he had done so. She also directed him to sell two small diamonds and other small stones, which realized 20s and of this she gave him a noble [6s 8d] for his pains. And then twelve days ago when he was at Warwick with his wife attending on the Duke of Clarence, Katharine had removed all her goods from Robert’s house, save the said bowl, chafing dish, and some small stones, taking with her some of his goods as well as her

English historical documents

492

own. Although of her own wish she had asked him to look after her goods, he disclaimed all desire to have any property in them. He was willing to do what the court should direct, and prayed to be dismissed from the court with reasonable costs and damages for his vexation in this matter.] (Ibid. 67/96) (iv) The replication of Katharine Bee to the answer of Robert Bee [Katharine denied all Robert’s assertions. She had helped him in his need for a considerable time before her illness, so that whereas Robert had been but a simple waterman at the Temple she had bought him a new boat, with all the fittings and equipment, and this had cost her more than 6 marks [£4]; Robert had agreed to pay her this sum when he could, but she had never received a penny of it. Yet she had allowed him to have from her at one time since then 26s 8d and at another time 13s 4d with a promise from him on each occasion to repay these sums. Also at his request she had put part of her goods at his disposal so that by this means he was made a yeoman under a sergeant of London, and then he was made a sergeant himself; this had cost her 60s and more. Robert had promised to repay her this as well, but he had never repaid any of these sums. She asked for lawful restitution of her goods, as reason and conscience required.] (Ibid. 67/97) (v) The rejoinder of Robert Bee to the replication of Katharine Bee [He briefly said that his answer had been true as he was prepared to prove, and further held that her replication was not only untrue but largely dealt with points determinable at common law.] (Ibid. CI/67/93) (vi) The chancellor’s decision The bills in Chancery of this period mostly leave us in the dark as to the outcome; but in this case the chancellor’s decree in Latin is written on the back of the bill as follows.

Memorandum that on 5th February, 17 Edward IV, this petition was exhibited before the lord king in the chancery by Katharine Bee, and the answer, replication, rejoinder and all the proofs, examinations, and depositions made and obtained in this petition were read, and heard, and a good discussion took place leading to full understanding. Whereas it sufficiently appears from them that Katharine, out of the special trust that she had in Robert Bee, gave, transferred, and delivered to the same Robert all her goods, and amongst these goods she transferred and delivered to Robert a certain great bowl of silver gilt and a certain “calefactorium” of silver and part silver gilt, commonly called a chafing dish, with the intention that the same Robert would keep all the aforesaid goods and every part of them to the use and need of the aforesaid Katharine, safely and securely.

The royal courts of law

493

And whereas the aforesaid Robert in the court of chancery publicly acknowledged that he had received and had the aforesaid bowl and chafing dish from Katharine and the same Robert did not prove that Katharine gave or delivered this bowl and this dish to him to dispose of them and do with them what he would, as in his answer attached to the bill he asserted and alleged. Therefore it was considered and adjudged by the venerable father in Christ, Thomas [Rotherham], Bishop of Lincoln and Chancellor of the aforesaid court, that the aforesaid Robert should return, redeliver, and restore the aforesaid bowl and chafing dish and each of them, to Katharine without delay, since reason and equity demand and require that in this case. [Even a husbandman could appeal to the chancellor for justice; see ibid. 64/770 for such a case of 1474–5.]

D. ROYAL ADMINISTRATION: CHANCERY, PRIVY SEAL AND SIGNET 308. A secret password from King Edward III to the pope, 1330 (MS. Archivio del Castello di Sant’ Angelo, Arm. C.Fasc. 79, printed by C.G.Crump in E.H.R. 26 (1911), 332 [French]) In September 1329 Edward III sent envoys to Pope John XXII. When they returned to England in the spring of 1330, they brought a verbal message that the pope wished to have a private sign by which he might know which of the king’s requests were to be treated as coming from the king’s real desires and which might be disregarded. Edward was evidently trying to arrange to throw off the control of Isabella and Mortimer, but after the execution of Edmund Earl of Kent, in March 1330, it was necessary to be careful. In this letter written by Richard de Bury, the king’s secretary, later bishop of Durham, Edward says that in future all requests that he really wishes to see granted shall bear the words PATER SANCTE in the king’s own hand; and at the foot of the letter these words are written in a hand which is that of Edward III.

Most Holy Father, because it will suit us on many occasions to send letters to your Holiness, not only for our own needs but for the advancement of the people of our household and for others, and on this we are informed by my lord William de Montague that it would please you to have from us some private counter-sign by which you may tell which requests are important to us and dear to our heart, and which are not; We affectionately beseech your Holiness that the requests which we shall make to you in future by our letters in Latin or in French sealed under our privy seal or under our signet, on which shall be written these words in our own hand—Pater Sancte—you will be pleased to regard as specially recommended and to understand for certain that they are dear to our heart; for our intention is not to put pressure on you henceforward by this countersign, but to use it only as we can and ought. And know, Holy Father, that this arrangement is not known to anyone except my lord William aforesaid and to Master Richard de Bury, our secretary, of whom we are sure that they will keep it secret in every case. This document was written by the hand of the said master Richard, for because of various occupations that we had at the time of sending these letters, we could not undertake so much writing. PATER SANCTE

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

495

309. The ordinances of Walton, 1338 (P.R.O., Chancery Warrants, 248/11238, printed by T.F.Tout in Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England (Manchester, 1928), in, 143–50 [French]) Henceforth no debts, as well from times past as in times to come, obligations, assignments, payments, gifts, or rewards whatsoever shall be made, assigned, or paid in any manner, if not first authorized by sufficient warrants of the privy seal made by assent of the king, and of a sufficiently wise man, assigned by him for this purpose (except for the regular daily payments), so that the same warrants shall make express mention of the cause for which these debts, obligations, assignments, pay-ments, gifts, or rewards are made…. And all these warrants shall be enrolled by a certain clerk assigned to this and sworn in precise words, that is on such a day at such a place and in such a year, is issued such a warrant for such a need, authorizing such a sum…. And at the end of each year, the chamberlains of the Exchequer, in the presence of the treasurer, shall account before a bishop, a banneret, and a clerk, wise and experienced, before whom the man whom the king has assigned to this purpose, along with the clerk who keeps the privy seal, and the clerk of the king’s chamber who has counterrolled the warrants, shall cause to come a counterroll under their own seals, and under the privy seal, of the warrants, by witness of which roll and the agreement of the warrants, the chamberlains shall take allowance and not otherwise. [If the king should be abroad, taking with him the privy seal, and if in his absence the council should meet and take decisions which need the expenditure of the king’s money, then the members of the regency council shall make out under their own seals bills modelled on those of the privy seal. Such bills are to be shown to the king immediately on his return, they are to be recorded like privy seal warrants, and warrants under the privy seal are to be sent to those who have received such bills, in confirmation of them.] Nothing shall be issued out of the Chancery without especial and express warrant of the privy seal, except matters which touch the law and office of the chancellor only, but not of matters which touch especial grace or matters which are against the ordinances. And on this let the rolls of warrants in the Chancery, and the counterrolls of warrants, be seen and examined by a bishop, a banneret, and a clerk, in the presence of the man whom the king has assigned abovesaid, and of the clerk of the privy seal, and of the clerk of the chamber, every quarter of the year. …Also the treasurer of the household shall have no allowance for any outside expenditure which is not properly the expenses of the household, without good and express warrants of the privy seal, which shall be enrolled and counterrolled as is abovesaid…. And that the expenses shall be reviewed from week to week and from month to month…. 310. Edward III’s army at Calais, 1347 (The Account of Walter de Wetewang, Treasurer of the King’s Household, 12 April, 18 Edward III, to 24 November, 21 Edward III, in College of Arms MS. 2 M 16, printed by G.Wrottesley, in Crécy and Calais, from the original records (London, 1898), 191–204)

English historical documents

English ships

700

Foreign ships from Bayonne,

Mariners

8,151

Spain, Ireland, Flanders

496

and Guelderland

Ships

38

Mariners

1,204

The Army The Prince of Wales

1

Bishops and earls, with two of Germany

13

Barons and baronets

78

Knights with 91 of Germany

1,066

Esquires, sergeants-at-arms, and standard bearers

4,182

Centenaries1

52

2

794

Vintenaries 3

528

Hobelars

Archers (including 4,025 mounted archers) Yeomen of the king’s chamber

20,076 9

Yeomen of other offices of the king’s household

79

Minstrels

25

Messengers

27

Artificers

339

Standard bearers

6

Armorers

6 4

Pauncenars of Germany

339

Crossbow archers

111

Welshmen

4,572 Total: 32,303

1

Men in charge of 100 men on foot. (Equivalent to captains.) Men in charge of 20 men on foot. (Equivalent to subalterns.) 3 Light cavalry, wearing steel caps and coats of mail, carrying lance and sword and sometimes bows and arrows instead of lance. 4 Men selected for their bodily vigour and capable of marching on foot in armour. Probably held in reserve for difficult enterprises, such as storming of fortresses and castles. 2

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

497

The great lords who displayed banners in this expedition, with the number of men in their contingent (consisting of one banneret (more for the very highest leaders), one or more knights, one or more squires, and a greater number of archers). The Prince of Wales (of which 513 were Welsh) Henry, Earl of Lancaster

1,343 Sir John d’Arcy, the son

53

Sir Thomas Bradeston

61

1,376 Sir Hugh de Hastinges

75

William de Bohun, Earl of Northampton

302 Sir Michael de Ponynges Sir John de Stryvelyn (Stirling)

45 50

Thomas de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick

348 Sir Maurice de Berkeley Sir Edward de Montagu

70 45

Richard Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel

304 Sir John de Montgomery

69

Robert de Ufford, Earl of Suffolk

159 Sir William FitzWaryne

21

Ralph, Lord Stafford

205 Sir John de Lisle

41

Richard, Lord Talbot

157 Sir Thomas de Braose

40

John, Lord D’Arcy, the father

140 Sir Thomas de Lathom

33

Bartholomew, Lord Burghersh, the king’s chamberlain

187 Sir John Maltravers Sir Thomas Ughtred

42 48

Sir Walter de Mauny

326 Sir Robert de Morley

30

Sir Reginald de Cobham

112 Sir John Ho ward, Admiral of

Sir Robert de Ferrers

64 the North Fleet

Sir John de Lovedale, of Brabant

33 Sir Nigel Loryng Sir Ponnet de Rentt

5 3

Sir Fulk de la Freiyne, of Ireland

34 Sir Roger Lestraunge

1

Sir William de Groucy

19 Sir Menald de Cheshunt

9

Sir Auger de Mohaut, Lord of Mussenden

18 Sir Philip le Despencer Sir William Marmion

15 3

William de Clinton, Earl of Huntingdon

224 Sir Symon Basset Sir William Grantsone

6 16

John de Vere, Earl of Oxford

131 Sir Theobald de Rachecourt

5

Laurence de Hastings, Earl of Pembroke

259 Sir Thomas de Haukestone Sir Walter de la Pole

49 5

Earl of Kildare

53 Sir Hugh Calkyn of Flanders

78

5

Thomas de Hatfield, Bishop of Durham

295 Sir Peter of Spayne Sir Henry of Flanders

21 46

Hugh le Despencer (son of Hugh, Lord le Despencer, who was attainted and hanged in 1326)

234 Sir William de Warenne Sir Amyas de Brett

42 32

English historical documents

498

Sir Miles Stapleton

11

Sir John de Hampton

6 Sir John Berkeley

Sir Thomas de Hoggeshagh

8 Sir Guy Brian

13

Sir Alan de Claveryng

7 Sir Hugh de Courtenay

18

Sir Henry Tyes

7 Sir Stephen Waleys

19

Sir William Trussel of Cublesdon Sir John Ward

3

30 Sir John Ravensholme

3

6 Sir Henry de Lancaster

8

Sir John de Cobham

83 Sir Peter de Breux

13

Sir Thomas de Beaumont

15 Sir Adomar D’arcy

7

Sir William d’Arcy

7 Sir Henry Dengayne

1

Sir Rauf Ferrers

3 Sir Ivor Fitz Warren

7

Sir Thomas de Colville Sir John de Pontenhale Sir William Felton

20 Sir John Borhmant 5 Sir Walter de Wetewang, 13 treasurer of the wars

Sir Robert de Neville

7 Sir John de Thoresby, lately

Sir Adam de Asshehurst

7 Keeper of the Privy Seal

Sir John de Beauchamp, son of Sir Giles

10 Sir Simon Islep, then Keeper of the Privy Seal

Sir John de Carew

14 Sir William de Kilsdesby

64

69 34 156

Roger Mortimer, at this time a minor, served as a banneret or pennon bearer in the contingent of the Prince of Wales. The king’s household provided a contingent of 914, including 121 king’s archers. The minstrels consisted of 5 trumpeters, 1 citterner, 5 pipers, 1 taborer, 2 clarion players, 1 nakerer (kettledrummer), 1 fiddler, 3 waits, and 6 archers to protect them. 311. An inquisition post mortem to prove the age of a minor, 1370 (Calendar of Inquisitions post Mortem, XIII (1954), 44 [English cal., trans, from Latin]) Katherine, daughter of Hugh Child Writ to the escheator to take proof of the age of Katherine, who is kinswoman and one of the heirs of William de Theynton, tenant in chief by knight’s service of the heir of Roger Mortimer, late Earl of March, a minor in the king’s wardship, to wit, daughter of Hugh Child the son of Margaret one of the sisters of the said William; at the request of Richard Harnage, her husband. The lands of her inheritance are by the king’s commitment in the custody of Thomas Fililode, who is to be warned to attend the proof of age. 26 October, 44 Edward III.

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

499

Endorsement. Thomas de Fillilode was warned to be present at the proof of age, but did not come. Proof of age taken at Shrewsbury, 10 January, 44 Edward III. Thomas, son of Thomas Cresset, aged 50 years, says that Katherine was 16 years of age on 26 March last, having been born at Dudlebury and baptised in the church there on 26 March, 28 Edward III; and that John de Paunteleye, Katherine de Upton and Cecily de Perton lifted her from the font. This the deponent knows because he purchased a tenement in More by Dudlesbury from John de Glaseleye at the Invention of the Holy Cross following [3 May], and so he remembers by the date of the charter. Thomas, son of Ive Cresset, aged 40 years and more, agrees and says that he married Alice his wife at Whitsuntide following [1 June]. Adam le Carpenter, aged 60 years, agrees and says that John his eldest son was born at Le More at the Nativity of St John the Baptist following [24 June], as is written in a missal there. Richard de Rysshebury, aged 50 years and more, agrees and says that he buried Joan his wife at Dudlebury on the feast of St James the Apostle following [25 July], and the day of her death is written in a psalter there. David le Walsshe, aged 40 years and more, agrees and says that William West fought with him and broke his arm with a stick the Whitsuntide following. Hugh de Wassheborn, aged 45 years and more, agrees and says that he was bailiff of Hugh le Child at Dudlebury in that year. Thomas Croudepas, Adam de Cardeton, and Richard le Taillour, aged 40 years and more, agree and say that they were present before the Bishop of Chester at Dudlebury at the feast of the Assumption [15 August] in that year, at a visitation of the bishop held there. Thomas Daweson, Thomas le Tyler and John le Ferrour, aged 50 years and more, agree and say that they were witnesses at the taking of seisin at Dudlebury of a tenement purchased by John de Glaseley in that year. (C.Edw. III, File 218 (2)) 312. The ordinances of the chancery, 1388–9 (B.Wilkinson, The Chancery under Edward III (Manchester, 1929), App. VI, 217–23, from B.M., Hargrave MSS 189, 219, and Bodleian, MS. Ashmole 1147 [Latin]) Here are, written below, the ordinances of the chancery of the lord king made in the twelfth year of King Richard II. It has been ordained by the lord chancellor of England and by the twelve clerks of the first grade entitled to robes in the chancery of the lord king that the order given below shall be kept and observed amongst all the clerks of the chancery, both as to their number and their behaviour. In the first place whereas from of old it was ordained that the keeper of the rolls of chancery for the time being should have three clerks writing in the same rolls and not more, and whereas the business to be recorded in these rolls has increased far more than it used to be, it is ordained that the same keeper shall now have six clerks and not more, writing in the aforesaid rolls for the cause already mentioned, provided that none of these clerks shall be married.

English historical documents

500

Also each of the aforesaid twelve clerks entitled to robes shall have three unmarried clerks…writing under the name of his master for the seal of the lord king in the chancery…. [The twelve clerks shall dwell in their own households or together, provided that they do not dwell among those of less estate. The keeper of the hanaper shall not cause any letters to be written for the seal, unless he is of the first grade and knows the cursus of the chancery. Clerks of the second grade are to live in their households, and not among those of lower grades. Each of them shall have an unmarried clerk writing for him, except the two clerks of the crown of the same grade, who may have two clerks each working for them.] None of the clerks of the second grade shall bring to the hands of the lord chancellor writs “of course”, nor shall any cursitor bring any charters, letters patent, or writs, nor shall they produce these before the chancellor unless the document has first been examined by one of the clerks of the first grade, unless they have a special mandate from the lord chancellor. Similarly the clerks of the crown shall not place in the hands of the lord chancellor the writs and commissions which they make except for some special cause previously intimated to them by the chancellor himself. All the clerks of the second grade, except the clerks of the petty bag with one or two clerks, and the clerk for the secretary of the rolls of the chancery in the Tower of London, and a clerk for reading the records and pleas of chancery, shall sit outside the bar of the chancery in the time of sealing and hearing pleas, in places assigned to them, as has been customary of old…. Henceforth there shall be twenty-four cursitors in the chancery and not more, who shall write with their own hands the writs to be drawn up by them, unless they are too old, weak, or impotent, and the court has graciously dispensed them from serving. In that case each of them shall have a competent unmarried clerk writing for the seal in his name…. All the aforesaid clerks, of the first and second grades and the cursitors, and their successors, shall swear to keep and observe all and each of these rules, as is appropriate to each of them in the form given above. 313. An ingenious forgery, 1432 (Calendar of Close Rolls, 1429–35, 254–6 [English trans, of Latin original]) See L.C.Hector, Palaeography and Forgery (1959), 16. Memorandum, that on 20 June 11 Henry VI Robert Danvers presented himself to the Council in the Star Chamber in Westminster Palace, and made public declaration that about two years past he was first retained to be of the counsel of Thomas Seyntcler and his feoffees in matters of law touching the title of the manors of Barton St John and Staunton St John, co. Oxford, that for that an inquisition taken after the death of Roger St John before Ralph St Owen escheator in Surrey in 27 Edward III was clear and conclusive evidence of title, as one of their counsel he did sue in chancery for an exemplification thereof, that by letters patent, dated Westminster 13 July 9 Henry VI, the king did exemplify the tenor thereof, that among other things in the inquisition and exemplification was the following clause: “and that Peter St John is cousin and next heir

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

501

of Roger, and is of the age of forty years and more”, which clause was then in all things of clear and uniform writing and not faulty, in nowise erased or suspect, as Robert did publicly declare before the council, saying also that the number forty therein, so long as it was neither erased nor faulty, was strong evidence against the pretended title of John Lydeyarde and Clemence his wife, but long since the exemplification was made the number has been newly erased, and rewritten in fresh ink, as is apparent in the inquisition, and Robert has in divers parts of the realm been defamed by evil speakers for erasing and rewriting the name, to the prejudice of the title of Thomas and his feoffees. Wherefore he produced the exemplification publicly before the council, praying as well for the king as for restoring his own good fame that Thomas Smyth clerk, who has the keeping of that inquisition and of other the chancery records at the Tower of London under John Franke, clerk, keeper of the chancery rolls, and Robert Poleyn, servant of Thomas Smyth, be summoned to the council to acknowledge what they know or can say concerning the erasure. And Thomas and Robert did that day appear before the council, bringing with them the inquisition with the exemplification, and after viewing the inquisition and exemplification made acknowledgement upon their allegiance that Robert Poleyn did write the exemplification, that he and Thomas Smyth did afterwards examine the same with the inquisition, and in place of the erasure did find only the letters x and 1 written together in an ancient script for the number forty, with nought erased, suspicious, or defective, as in the exemplification it is written and witnessed. But as to the fact that the erasure was falsely made, and apparently only of late, they say that about the feast of St Katherine last William Broket came to the Tower with Robert Poleyn, by mediation of Gerard de la Hay, and when he had come there to the house where the inquisition remained, craved view thereof, as Robert Poleyn averred, that seeing it he requested Robert Poleyn to search for divers other records while he made a copy of the inquisition, that knowing William to be a clerk of the Exchequer and sworn to the king, as the manner is, Robert suffered him to be alone making the copy while he was busied elsewhere about the other search, wherefore he well remembers that he never suffered any man save William only freedom to make the erasure, and craved that William be summoned to the council, and examined touching the premises. And thereupon Robert Danvers, for better declaration and notice of his innocence concerning the erasure, produced copies of letters concerning the same after it was made known, written in the name of John Lydeyarde and addressed to William, and his answers written with his own hand, sealed with his seal and addressed to John Lydeyarde, William believing that these letters came into the possession of John Lydeyarde and of none other, in which copies among other things are of the following clauses, namely in the first copy: [English] “Right well-beloved friend, I commend myself to you, and want you to know that it is greatly rumoured in our county by Danvers that the clerks of the Tower say that you erased the record of Peter St John. Wherefore I pray you send me word by letter whether any of the clerks of the Tower might in any way espy you in the erasing of the record, and whether you have told your counsel to any of your fellows that is acquainted with Danvers.” And with regard to that he produced an answer in William’s hand, in which among other things are the clauses following, [English] “Reverent and worshipful sir, I recommend myself to you, desiring your good welfare, praying you to recommend me unto my mistress your wife, letting you

English historical documents

502

know that I understand your letter well; and as touching the clerk of the Tower, I believe that he did not see, and as touching the counsel, I will speak to noone unless you know.” Then Robert produced the copy of a second letter in the name of John to William addressed, in which among other things are the clauses following: [English] “I pray you to send me ready word whether the clerk might espy you in any way while the erasure was in hand, and whereabout the clerk was occupied in the meantime, and also send me ready word whether the old letter was clean away as you suppose or not.” And with regard to that he produced another answer in William’s hand, in which are the following clauses: [English] “As touching the clerk he was busy about other things there awhile, for I let you know that it was in a large house, and the old letter is clean away, as I suppose.” Then he produced a copy of another letter in John’s name, addressed to William in which among other things is the following clause: [English] “And also I pray you heartily, send me ready word whether the old letter in the record by ‘for’ etc, was just 40 as the new is now, and nothing more or less, or else more, as 44 or another sum, for yet I could never understand that clearly, for men speak much that there is a great space seen after that number, etc.” And with regard to that he produced another answer in William’s hand addressed to John, in which among other things are the following clauses: [English] “And as touching the old letter in the record, I saw it neither more nor less than the number 40….” And thereupon Robert Danvers craved that William be summoned to answer before the council to each of the copies, letters, and evidences against him; and he appeared in person, and after view of the same did acknowledge that such and so many letters in the name of John Lydeyard did come into his hands, and that he, believing them to be written and sent by John did with his own hand write the answers, and further that about the feast of St Katherine last he did alone with Robert Poleyn pass to the Tower, that none was then in the house where the records were but they two, as Robert set forth, that then he being alone with his finger nail erased the number xl which was in the inquisition when he came, and restored and blotted the same number with fresh ink that it might seem the more suspect: and being asked what number was in the place erased when he came, said it was xl only and neither more nor less, and being asked at whose instance he came to the Tower to make the erasure, said it was at the instance of John Lydeyard. And the treasurer, who was in divers ways troubled about William’s examination concerning the erasure, promised that for these trespasses he should no more remain in the Exchequer. Then with assent of the council, commending the travail of Robert Danvers in obtaining the letters for clearing up the erasure, the chancellor did publicly declare that he was not thereof guilty, and further that William should no more write nor remain in any court of the king where there were records; and Robert Danvers prayed that to clear him all these things should be enrolled, and it is granted.

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

503

314. The role of the secretary in foreign affairs, 1442 (The Official Correspondence of Thomas Bekynton, ed. G.Williams, II, 179–80, 196, from Bodleian MS. 789 [English]) In 1442 the Count of Armagnac, whose alliance the English desired to obtain against the advancing French in Gascony, proposed that one of his three daughters should marry Henry VI, then aged twenty-one. Henry therefore sent an embassy to Bordeaux; it consisted of three members of the royal household, Sir Robert Roos, one of the king’s carvers, Thomas Bekynton, the secretary, and Sir Edward Hull, squire of the king’s body. Someone in Bekynton’s suite kept a diary, now Ashmolean MS. No. 789 in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. The two letters taken from it give some idea of the way messages could be conveyed, of the importance of the secretary in foreign affairs, and of the gravity of the military situation in Gascony in 1442.

(179) [Latin] Friday, 29th June, 1442. This the following royal letter was received at Ply-mouth and delivered by the hand of John de Gules, Huse’s servant. (Ibid. 180) [English] By the king. Right trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well. And for as much as our trusty and well beloved squire for our body Edward Hull, who has lately come to us out of our duchy of Guienne, has among other things reported to us how our enemies and adversaries are coming towards our city of Bordeaux to besiege it, we let you know that we keep still our said squire about our person until we have ordained here our army to go thither for the help, succour, and defence of our said city and of all our countryside there; of which army our cousin of Suffolk has told us that he and you, our secretary, have divers time communed before this time. Wherefore we will that for the comfort and encouragement of our true subjects there, you will cause this to be known among them at your coming thither, as it shall seem best to your discretions to be done, wherein you shall do to us good pleasure. Given under our signet of the eagle at our Castle of Windsor the 23rd day of June. Also our said squire shall bring certain answer upon all the matters and articles that he has brought at his said coming thither. Given as above, etc. To our right trusty and well-beloved knight Sir Robert Roos, one of our carvers, and Master Thomas Bekynton, our secretary, and to each of them. (Ibid. 196) [Latin] Friday, 10th August. At home [i.e. at Bordeaux] with Bernard de Groos and N.Huse. This day, the feast of St Laurence, the following letter was sent in most secret

English historical documents

504

manner to the king, i.e. by a certain old pilgrim; and it was written in three lines in parchment in the length of the skin, and sewn into the border of his garment. [English] May it please your highness to know the tidings of this country; that on Friday the 3rd day of August the city of Ax [Dax] which is held to be the strongest of all Guienne, was won, and your adversary was in it. And his son called the Dauphin with the constable and marshal of France forthwith have laid siege to your city of Bayonne, which, as they say, makes them sure to have it within eight days. And thence they are to come straight to Bordeaux, where, as God knows, is division and never was so little help nor store of English people, the lack of whom is the cause of the loss of all this country; as we doubt not, unless succour be had without any delay, all is gone. This we write unto you for our last and true acquittal; God send you grace that you may soon and hastily send hither some comfort and succours to revive the hearts of the people who are here, who are plainly in despair, seeing that the promise of your letters, which you sent unto us unto Plymouth and we by your commandment opened unto them, is not fulfilled. And for the welfare of yourself and of this your country, trust no other word or writing, for by our allegiance this is the truth. Written at Bordeaux, the 9th day of August. The principal intention of all this is to let you have the fruit of our message. Roos R., T.Bekinton. 315. The complexity of royal administration as illustrated by the number of seals, 1461 (P.R.O., Exchequer of Receipt, Warrants for Issue (E 404), Box 72, Pt I, No. 36 [English]) Edward by the grace of God King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland to the treasurer and chamberlains of our Exchequer greeting. For as much as there are due to our trusty and well beloved John Orwell, goldsmith of our city of London divers sums of money for making and engraving by our commandment of certain of our seals, that is to say, for the engraving of our privy signet of gold, 3s 4d. Also for making and engraving of our first privy seal 40s. Also for making and engraving of our great patent seal, £10. Also for setting in of our name in three patent seals which were delivered to our chancellor, for each seal, 3s 4d. Also for making and engraving of our last privy signet, 6s 8d. Also for the weight of 8 ounces of silver for our latter privy seal, price the ounce 2s 8d, 21s 4d. Also for making and engraving of our great patent seal of Ireland which was delivered to Sir William Wells, £10; which sums in all amount to the sum of £26 1s 4d. We will and charge you that to the said John you make payment or sufficient assignment of the same sum of £26 1s 4d so to him due as is above rehearsed. Given under our privy seal at our castle of Ludlow, the 18th day of September, the first year of our reign.

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

505

316. Edward IV makes use of the privy seal to impose order, 1461 (The Paston Letters, ed. J.Gairdner, II, 53 [English]) John Paston was returned as member for Norfolk in the parliament of 1461, but not without a violent encounter with the sheriff Sir John Howard in the shire house. The matter was reported to the king, who was determined to restore order if possible, and unfortunately Paston delayed to obey the king’s summons to appear before him. On 11 October 1461 John’s brother Clement wrote this awed and breathless letter from London.

To his right reverend and worshipful brother, John Paston, esquire, be this delivered in great haste. —Sir, it was told me by a right worshipful man that loves you right well, and you him, and you shall know his name hereafter, but put all things out of doubt he is such a man as will not lie: on the 11th day of October the king said: “We have sent two privy seals to Paston by two yeomen of our chamber, and he disobeys them; but we will send him another tomorrow, and by God’s mercy if he come not then, he shall die for it. We will make all men beware by him how they shall disobey our writings. A servant of ours has made complaint of him. I cannot think that he has informed us quite truly, but for all that, we will not suffer him to disobey our writings; but since he does disobey our writings, we may believe the better that his guilding is as we are informed.” And therewith he made a great vow that if you do not come at the third command, you shall die for it…. This letter was written the same day that the king said these words…and on the next morning I will send forth a man to you with this letter, and on the same day the king will send the third privy seal to you…. Also, as I understand, the Duke of Norfolk has made a great complaint of you to the king, and my lord of Suffolk and Howard and Wingfeld…call upon the king against you…. Written the 11th day of October at midnight. My nephew told me also that he supposed there were proclamations out against you the same day. [On receipt of this terrible letter John Paston set off at once to London and was at once put into the Fleet prison.]

317. Edward IV raises troops from Salisbury to fight against the Scots, 1463 (Salisbury City Muniment Room, Ledger Book B II [English]) (f. 65) By the king. Trusty and well-beloved, we greet you well and for as much as with God’s grace we have fully determined to remove in our person with all diligence possible towards the

English historical documents

506

succour and relief of our right trusty and entirely beloved cousin, the Earl of Warwick, in the north parts of our land for the defence thereof against the malice and accustomed pride of our ancient enemies the Scots, adhering to our great traitors and rebels, we pray you that all men capable of defensible array that you may provide from our city of Salisbury you send to our presence at Doncaster the first day of August, to proceed there with us in reconnoitre and toward the repressing of the said malice, and that you assign and have a person of good governance to have the guiding and leading of the said men, certifying to us in writing the names of him or them so committed by you to his leading, and how long they are paid to attend on our person, assigning to them a mark or a token to be borne on a spear before them, whereby they may be known from others; not failing in this, as our trust is in you, and upon the faith and allegiance that you owe to us. Given under our signet at our town of Northampton the 20th day of June. To our trusty and well-beloved the mayor and community of our city of Salisbury. [Latin] It is agreed that the citizens and community of the city of New Sarum conceded to the lord king for the wages and expenses of forty men one hundred and five marks, to be in the service of the lord king for two months, by the mandate of the lord king directed to the same citizens and community, and that the forty men should have only one captain or governor at Doncaster, i.e. on the first day of August for the men. And that each of the forty men should receive for his wages for these months 33s 4d. (Ibid. f. 65b) [8 assessors and 9 collectors are appointed by name] [Latin] And that Henry Swayne at the special request of the citizens and community shall be the captain of the 40 men for these months in the service of the lord king, and that he shall keep the wages of the forty men in his own care for the second month if it should happen that the forty men are excused within these months. [Cf. (a) ibid. f. 89b, for an order under the privy seal from Nottingham, dated 31 March 1470, to Salisbury, ordering the town to send 40 horsemen to the king to pursue Warwick and Clarence into the west country and (b) an order under the signet, dated 9 February 1470, to the mayor of Coventry, directing him to supply men for the campaign against the Lincolnshire rebellion (Coventry Leet Book, 353).]

318. The office of privy seal, 1470 (P.R.O., Warrants to the Exchequer [English]) (i) Reward to a clerk in the privy seal office (71/6/43) [English]. Henry by the grace of God, King of England and of France, and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and chamberlains of our Exchequer, greeting. We will and charge you that unto our well-beloved Thomas Smyth, clerk in the office of our privy seal, for the attendance and labours that he has had in writing the truces and intercourse of merchandise and other

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

507

appointments lately taken between us and our cousin, Louis of France, by his and our ambassadors, orators, and commissioners, you do pay from our treasury the sum of 10 marks, to have it of our gift by way of reward for the cause abovesaid. And these our letters shall be unto you herein sufficient warrant. Given under our privy seal at Westminster the 21st day of February the 49th year from the beginning of our reign, and the first year of the readeption of our royal power. (ii) (Ibid. 71/6/18 [English]) Henry, by the grace of God, King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and chamberlains of our Exchequer greeting. We will and charge you that unto John Frampton and William Welles, ushers of the parliament chamber you deliver the sum of 54s, for canvas, cord, hammer, nails, cords, crochets and worsted, and other things necessary for the apparel and hanging of the parliament chamber in preparation for our next parliament to begin at Westminster the 21st day of the present month…. Given under our privy seal at Westminster the 18th day of November, the 49th year from the beginning of our reign, and the first year of the readeption of our royal power. 319. The office of secretary in the household of Edward IV, c. 1472 (The Black Book of the Household of Edward IV, § 30, printed by A.R.Myers, op. cit. 110 [English]) A secretary, sitting in the king’s chamber or hall with a person of like service. And he shall have eating in the hall, one gentleman. Item, for his chamber for all day, three loaves, two messes of great meat, half a pitcher of wine, two gallons of ale, one torch, one percher, two wax candles, three paris candles, in winter season, and three bundles of chopped wood; rushes and litter all the year from the sergeant usher of the hall and chamber. Parchment and paper sufficient from the office of the great spicery, by oversight of the controller of his clerks, and that to be allowed in the counting house, and also red wax. And when he has need of much writing, then he is to have commandment from the said counting house for perchers of tallow,1 or smaller paris candles. To this office belong four clerks, sufficient writers of the king’s signet under the said secretary, eating daily in the king’s hall. And for their livery at night a gallon of ale, and in winter season one paris candle; when their business requires, then by the secretary’s proper record these clerks to have their dinners and suppers in their scriptory…. The secretary and his clerks pay for their carriage of harness in court, except a little coffer in which the king’s warrants and bills assigned and other letters and memoranda are kept upon a file. This coffer is carried at the king’s cost, as the controller will assign. The secretary has into this court three persons, waiters on him for all that office; the remaining other servants are to be kept at his cost in the country, but the harbinger is to provide sufficiently for him and all the clerks. And when he himself is out of court, he has a yeoman to 1

Usually a tall candle that could be perched in a socket on a ledge or bracket.

English historical documents

508

keep his chamber, eating at the king’s board in the hall. Both he and his clerks take clothing of the king’s great wardrobe. [For the terms of the appointment in 1476 of Oliver King as principal secretary in the French language, see Rymer, Foedera, v, iii, 69.]

320. The use of the signet for administrative purposes under Edward V, 1483 (B.M., Harleian MS. 433, f. 2296, printed by J.G.Nichols in Grants from the Crown during the reign of Edward V, 72 [English]) To our right trusty and well beloved clerk and councillor, Master John Gunthorpe, Keeper of our privy seal. Right trusty, etc. And for as much as we this day have received a bull herein enclosed from our holy father the Pope, by which we clearly understand that his fatherhood has preferred our trusty and well beloved clerk and chaplain Master John Payne, doctor of divinity, unto the bishopric of Meath in our land of Ireland. We therefore, by the advice of our dearest uncle, the Duke of Gloucester, protector and defender of this our realm during our young age, will and charge you that, under our privy seal being in your ward, you cause our letters to be directed to our chancellor of Ireland aforesaid, commanding him by the same that, under our great seal of the same our land being in his keeping, he shall make out hereupon our writs such and as many as unto the said master John for the restitution of his temporalities of the said bishopric shall be necessary and requisite. Provided always that he shall do unto our deputy lieutenant of our said land or any other having our power there his fealty due and accustomed in that matter, and also renounce all things contained in the said bull or any other document which are prejudicial unto us and our Crown. And these our letters shall be your warrant and sufficient discharge in that matter. Given under our signet at our Tower of London the 8th day of June the first year of the reign of King Edward V. 321. Appointments in the privy seal office, 1483 (B.M., Harleian MS. 433, f. 123b [English]) (i) Richard, etc. To our right trusty and well beloved clerk and councillor John Gunthorp,1 keeper of our privy seal that now is, and to every other man that shall hereafter be keeper of the privy seal, greeting. Whereas, contrary to the old rule and due order in admitting of clerks in the office of our privy seal one, Richard Bele, by means of giving of great gifts and other sinister and ungodly ways, of late days made such solicitation that he, contrary to the wills of the keeper of the privy seal and the clerks of the same, was put into our said office and still occupies it, to the great discouragement of the under-clerks who have 1

Humanist, chaplain to Edward IV, dean of Wells 1472–98.

Royal administration: chancery, privy seal and signet

509

long continued therein; for they have the experience of seeing a stranger never brought up in the said office cheat them of their promotion; and if this precedent were ever suffered, it would very likely be the utter destruction of the due course of our said office within a short time.1 We, not willing that any such abuse be allowed in our office, nor that the under-clerks who have spent the flower of their age in the same should be thereby utterly discouraged and for other divers considerations moving us, charge and command you that upon the sight hereof you shall at once utterly discharge the said Richard Bele from any longer occupying a place in our said office. And moreover we will and ordain by this letter that no stranger not brought up in our said office shall succeed or occupy a place in the same hereafter. And these our letters, etc. Given, etc., at Winchester the 22nd day of November, the first year of our reign [1483]. (ii) Richard, etc. To etc. John Gunthorp, as above, greeting. We let you know that in consideration of the good and diligent service done unto us by our trusty servant Robert Bolman in the office of our privy seal, and specially now in this our great journey,2 and for his experience and long continuance in the same office, We have given and granted and by this letter give and grant unto the said Robert the room and place of one of our clerks in our said office, to have and enjoy the same for the term of his life, with all manner of duties, advantages and privileges belonging to a clerk of our said office in as ample a manner and form as any of the clerks of the same office have or ought to have. Wherefore we will and charge you to admit, receive and take the said Robert as one of our clerks of our said office. And moreover we will and grant by this letter that hereafter no more clerks shall be admitted in our said office until the time that the said office shall be reduced to the number ordered and established in the days of our noble progenitor, King Edward III.3 And this our letter shall be to you and every one of you in office at the time sufficient warrant and discharge. Given the 22nd day of November, the first year of our reign [1483]. 1

The poet Thomas Hoccleve (c. 1368–c. 1450) was a clerk in the privy seal office for the whole of his working life, and frequently complains in his poems about the hardness of the work, the lack of promotion and the meagreness of the pay. His works also provide vivid evidence of the way of life of a dissolute young clerk in Chaucer’s day. See F.J.Furnivall’s life of Hoccleve in the introduction of vol. 61 of the Extra Series of the Early English Text Society. Hoccleve’s minor works were edited by F.J.Furnivall and I.Gollanz in this volume and vol. 73 of E.E.T.S. (1892, 1897): and his one long work, The Regement of Princes (containing an interesting complaint of the lot of a scribe), a translation of the De Regimine Principum of Aegidius Romanus for Henry, Prince of Wales, made in 1411 or 1412, is printed by Furnivall, E.E.T.S., e.s. (1897). 2 Richard was just ending a “great journey” through the midlands, south and south-west of England for the complete suppression of all the duke of Buckingham’s adherents. 3 The normal number of clerks was four, with a number of under-clerks (seven in 1444). See T.F. Tout, Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England, 5 (1930), 76–8; and H.Maxwell-Lyte, Historical Notes on the Use of the Great Seal of England (1926), 33–4. The Black Book of the Household of Edward IV shows how the men of the late fifteenth century looked back to the time of Edward III for precedents in these matters (A.R.Myers, The Household of Edward IV, 84–5, 298–9).

E. ROYAL FINANCE 322. The king warns the Exchequer not to interfere with lands reserved to the king’s chamber, 1340 (A privy seal letter, enrolled on the King’s Remembrancer’s Memoranda Roll for the Easter Term of 14 Edward III, under the date 30 March 1340. Printed by T.F.Tout, Chapters, iv, 298, n. 1 [French]) Edward, etc. As we have at this time reserved to our chamber the farm of the alien priories in the Isle of Wight, the county of Southampton and of the priory of Burstall in Holderness in the county of York, and on this we have heard that you have made assignments of the priories, not having regard to our reservation, of which we hold you badly paid, We order you that henceforth you should not make any assignment of the said priories nor meddle at all with the lands or priories which we have reserved to our chamber. And if you have any assignment, made for Easter term next coming, we will that it should be cancelled at once. Given under our privy seal at Westminster, the 30th day of March, the 14th year of our reign in England and the first year of our reign in France. [For the king’s restoration of the chamber lands to the control of the Exchequer in 1356, see T.F.Tout, Chapters, iv, 305, n. 2, where he prints a royal writ enrolled among the Brevia directa Baronibus on the K.R.Memoranda Roll for Hilary Term, 30 Edward III, in the Exchequer records of the P.R.O.]

323. A national balance sheet, 1362–3 (From “A national balance sheet for 1362–3, with documents subsiding thereto”, printed by T.F.Tout and Dorothy Broome, from P.R.O., Exchequer, K.R., Accounts Various, E 101/394/17, m. 1, in E.H.R. XXXIX (1924), 412–13 [French]) [1 mark=13s 4d] (i) The revenues and expenses of our lord the king in the 37th year Shrievalties, farms, and other revenues of England by the exchequer amount each year to

9,687 mks. 5s 5d.

from which are assigned in wages and fees

5,552 mks. 8s 4d.

And there remain to the king clearly Also the customs and subsidies of wool in all the ports of England amount each year to

3,984 mks. 10s 5d. 57,310 mks.

Royal finance

511

of which there are assigned

10,400 mks.

And there remain to the king clearly

46,910 mks.

The hanaper in the chancery amounts each year to

3,400 mks.

of which there are assigned to the chancellor and others

1,000 mks.

And there remain to the king clearly

2,400 mks.

The sum total which remains is

53,294 mks. 10s 5d.

The expenses of the last year amount to

136,190 mks. 12s 2d.

of which were assigned, for the chamber

10,000 mks.

for the household and wardrobe

40,000 mks.

for the king’s works and purchase of lead

25,000 mks.

for Gascony and Ireland

22,500 mks.

for fees granted by patents

9,675 mks.

for Calais and other castles

6,035 mks.

for wages of war, victuals, wages of peace and clothes, by bills

8,365 mks.

And so the sum of payments exceeds the sums received by

82,896 mks. 1s 9d.

And let it be remembered that the exchange of the Tower is only of little value this year because of Calais.

(ii) Estimates of Expenditure (Ibid. 413–15, from Exchequer, m. 2) The memorandum of the expenses of our lord the king, from the feast of Michaelmas, in the 37th year, until the same feast in the following year, for one whole year, that is to say: To our lord the king for his chamber

10,000 mks.

To my lady the queen, from the grant which she draws at the exchequer

£1,756 19s 2d.

For the expense of the royal household

£11,994 0s 7d.

For the great wardrobe

£8,000 of which £2,000 is for the livery.

For the office of the buttery £6,700 for 10 pipes of sweet wine, 800 tons of Gascon wine, and 12 pipes of Rhenish wine For the king’s works and purchase of lead

£14,312 19s 0d.

English historical documents

512

For the prince and the earl of Warwick in respect of Gascony and for their long stay in England

£2,662 6s 8d.

For wages of war in Ireland

£7,504 12s 10d.

For wages of sailors and serjeants-at-arms during the prince’s voyage to Ireland

£4,091 2s 4d.

For Calais, Dover, Berwick, Roxburgh, and other castles of the king

£4,023 6s 8d.

For fees and wages granted by patents to various persons for the term of their lives For fees of justices, barons, and other ministers

£1,761 5s 0d.

For messengers for the court, and elsewhere beyond and to Calais for the hostages

£1,751 6s 7d.

For wages of war, victuals, wages, and robes, by bills, Buk’, Walton’, Farle, Feriby, and Newbiry

£5,594 10s 3d.

For friars and other alms

£497 7s 8d.

For the earl of Cambridge, the earl of Pembroke and the duchess of Brittany

£316 6s 8d.

For gifts to strangers and denizens

£866 17s 4d.

For the purchase of silver vessels, lands, and jewels

£4,068 13s 11d.

For prisoners recently bought for the king’s use

£600

For the purchase of destriers and other animals

£690

For the debts of the queen of Scots

£280 13s 4d.

For messengers, purchase of parchment, and other small payments Also there are assigned by patent, to be taken annually from the issues of customs and subsidies

£6,300

Also, there are to be paid for money but before the abovesaid time

£1,835 12s 0d.

The sum total

£98,929 10s 10d.

And let it be remembered that the customs of England amount for the aforesaid year to

£38,000

Also, the shrievalties, farms, hanaper, exchanges, and all other revenues of England paid into the exchequer amount in the same year by estimation, minus the assignments made by patents of the chancery of the said revenues and wages of the huntsmen and falconers

£4,254 13s 4d.

The total £42,254 13s 4d. And so the expenses exceed the revenues in the aforesaid year by Which are received and paid from the ransoms of France and Burgundy and the revenues of Poitou and Calais In addition there are the wages of huntsmen, falconers, future of falcons and dogs assigned on the same counties

£56,674 17s 6d.

Royal finance

513

Also the farms, wardships, and marriages assigned to my lady the queen, my lady Isabel, and other lords and knights.

324. Grant of a tax by parishes, 1371 (Rot. Parl. II, 303 [French]) (At the parliament held at Westminster on Monday in the first week of Lent 24 February 1371. It will be seen that the government had supposed there were 40,000 parishes in England; whereas it appeared from the bishops’ official returns that there were only about 8,600, excluding the county of Chester.) And then for the reasons expounded above [the resumption of the war with France and the resulting operations both by land and by sea] and when several forms of financial aid were touched on, treated, discussed and debated between the lords and the commons, and consideration had been given to the great costs and expenses which the king is bound to undertake and support for the reasons abovesaid, the lords and commons on the 28th day of March granted to the king a subsidy of £50,000, to be taken and levied in the following form; that is to say, from each parish throughout the land, 22s 3d, or more or less, so that each parish of greater value should help another parish of less value; and indentures should always be made on the collection between the collectors and the parishioners of each parish recording the sum collected. And then at the great council summoned and held at Winchester, on the octave of Trinity Sunday [8 June], it was shown by the chancellor to the lords and commons there assembled that the grant of 22s 3d which they had made to the king to be levied from each parish in England could not stretch to nor suffice to pay the sum of £50,000 which they had granted to the king in parliament, because there are not so many parishes in England as they had supposed, and this they can see and know by the certificates of all the archbishops, bishops, and sheriffs of the whole of England, made and returned into the chancery by the warrant and commandment of the king. (When these certificates had been seen and examined, and several discussions and conferences had taken place, at last, in full satisfaction of the said sum of £50,000 aforesaid, the lords and commons granted to the king from each of the parishes situated in the realm of England 116s, this sum to include the 22s 3d first granted to the king. Exempted from contribution to this grant are the county of Chester and the lands and possessions of Holy Church amortized before the 20th year of the king’s grandfather, and taxed with the clergy for tenths.) 325. The government is unable to raise a loan in Herefordshire, 1426 (The Register of Thomas Spofford, Bishop of Hereford, 1422–8 (Cant. and York Society (1919). 95 [Latin]) (i) The bishop is commissioned by the king to raise a loan for him and to pay it into the Exchequer, 23 July 1426 The king’s commission for a loan… Henry king, etc., to Thomas, etc.

English historical documents

514

Know that we, trusting in your fidelity, etc., have assigned you to negotiate with the prelates and others, etc., to make a loan…to us in our present necessity of as much money as half a tenth conceded in full convocation by the clergy of the province of Canterbury, and to be paid at the feast of the purification of the blessed Mary next coming, and to bring that sum to us at our receipt of the exchequer before the first day of September, and we will cause to be made our letters patent and writs and tallies for them, according to the form of the act made in the last parliament held at Leicester…. (ii) The bishop and three lay commissioners reply that they are unable to raise a loan for the king The reply of Thomas, etc., John Merbury, Richard de Lamare, and John Russell commissioners, in a written strip sewn to this commission…. We have communicated and discussed sufficiently with all secular persons of Herefordshire after the reception of the said commission in the best ways and means that we could in order to raise a loan for our king in his present necessity according to the tenor of the commission. When these persons appeared before us on Thursday, 12th August, at Hereford, and were separately examined, they said that their penury and poverty owing to diverse, numerous, and frequent misfortunes among them prevented them from making any loan at present. We have also communicated among ourselves [i.e. the clergy] about a loan, and when we discussed it on the same Thursday at Hereford, we found that on account of various great burdens and needs affecting each of us for the business and upkeep of our order we could at present make no loan, which grieves us very much. Therefore it is impossible to bring any sum to the said loan. Given at Hereford on the said day and in the 4th year of the king’s reign. (Ibid. 98) [The government evidently tried again a little later, and the bishop therefore held a conference with other prelates and notable clerics on 17 August but found them unable to contribute to the king’s needs.] 326. Lord Cromwell’s estimates of royal revenue and expenditure, 1433 (Rot. Parl. iv [English preamble, Latin accounts]) (432) Memorandum, that Ralph Cromwell, the treasurer of England, showed to the lord our king in the present parliament, 18th October, 12 Henry VI, a certain petition, the tenor of which follows below:— First, that it may please your highness to consider…that all the revenues and profits, ordinary and extraordinary, certain or casual…are not sufficient to the maintenance and satisfaction of your ordinary yearly charges, by the sum of £35,000 a year and more. And therefore to the intent to put the said lords and commons in full certainty and knowledge of the said matter, and out of all scruple and doubt therein, may it please you to persuade my said lords to give orders for the sight and diligent inspection of certain books and records of your Exchequer, made by your sworn officers of the same place, whereby they shall be able to understand clearly and conceive…the charges and necessities which rest

Royal finance

515

upon you and the realm… and to ordain such labour and diligence to be done that in this parliament provision of goods be made, such as shall be needed for the keeping of your noble estate and household, for the governance of your land internally, for the defence of your land against your external enemies, and for the payment of your debts. Unless this thing is done and carried out, I neither can, may, nor dare take upon me, to carry on in occupation of the said office. (Ibid. 433) The State of the Annual Revenues of the Realm, made by the officers of the exchequer, in Michaelmas term, in the 12th year of King Henry VI. Revenues 1.

Net.

From farms of the shires and other small farms From the green wax, per annum

£1,200

Less allowances, fees, and annuities 2.

Estimate of escheats, apart from wardships and marriages

3.

Fee-farms of various towns and manors less annuities

4.

Farms of lands in the king’s hands owing to the minorities of various heirs, except the lands of the Duke of Norfolk, and certain other farms Less the maintenance of the heir of Robert de la Mare

5.

Farm of lands of the Duke of Norfolk

6.

Various other farms in the king’s hands, exceeding 40s a Year less annuities

7.

Farm of subsidy and ulnage of cloth less annuities

8.

Issues of the hanaper, 1 September 1431–2

£1,903 8s 3d. £500 £3,612 11s 3d. £2,978 1s 0d.

£634 10s 3d.

£1,604 19s 11d.

£6 13s 4d.

£1,598 6s 7d. £1,333 6s 8d.

£79 10s 0d. £720 10s 1d. £542 6s 0d.

£178 4s 1d.

£1,668 3s 4d.

less chancery wages, etc., and annuities 9.

Issues of the royal mint, 31 march 1430–29 September 1431 less fees, wages, and payments

10. Issues of the exchange in London

£378 11s 5d. £66 13s 4d.

English historical documents

11.

516

by estimation as Stopyngdon says

12. Issues of the office of the coroner of the marshalsea of the royal household, 29 Sept., 1430–1431 less assignment to John Norfolk 13. Issues of alien priories in the king’s hands less annuities 14. Customs of wine, paid by aliens, 30 September 1429–1431, for 2 years

£13 6s 8d.

£26 5s 0d.

£8 0s 0d.

£18 5s 0d.

£277 5s 0d. £72 0s 0d.

£205 5s 0d.

£153 14s 0d.

£76 17s 0d. for one year

15. Issues and profits of the Duchy of Cornwall less fees, wages, annuities, repairs 16. Issues and profits of Carmarthenshire and Cardiganshire

£1,139 13s 11d.

less fees, wages, annuities, repairs 17. Issues and profits of Caernarvonshire and Merionethshire less fees, wages, annuities, repairs, etc. Md. Next year additional deductions will have to be made for the wages of two captains, at 8d a day, and 54

£1,097 17s 3d. £590 18s 4d. [sic]

is soldiers, at 4d a day. Md. assigned to John Radclyf by letters patent. 18. Issues and profits of the Earldom of Chester less fees, wages, annuities, repairs, etc. Md. Sir William Porter has the manor of Shotwick, valued at 50 marks a year. 19. Issues and profits of Ireland less fees, wages, annuities, repairs, etc. 20. Issues and profits of the Duchy of Lancaster less annual expenses ministers’ fees and wages annuities £866 1s 1d.

£44 10s 8d.

£2,339 18s 6d. Deficit of

Royal finance

517

repairs Queen Catherine £78 4s 6d. justices of the peace £15 2s 0d. 21. Issues of the Duchy of Aquitaine less fees, wages, annuities, repairs, etc. 22. Revenues of the town and manor of Calais Deficit of

less wages, fees, rewards, annuities, repairs, etc. 23. Fines, reliefs, and amercements in the exchequer

£100 Deficit of

24. Issues and revenues of Windsor castle less wages, fees, repairs, etc. Total of the above revenues, apart from those of the Duchy of Lancaster and the manor of Shot wick

£72 8s 5d.

£8,399 19s 2d.

Less £590 18s 4d from the revenues of North Wales, assigned to John Radclyff, by royal letters patent per annum until he is Memorandum of paid Chirk and Chirk lands, vacancies in bishoprics, search-ers, reliefs, and fines. 25. Customs and subsidies, Michaelmas 1430 to Michaelmas 1433 1430–31 Wool custom and parva custuma Subsidy on wool Tunnage and poundage

£6,920 14s 5d.

1431–32 Wool custom and parva custuma Subsidy on wool Tunnage and poundage 1432–33 Wool custom and parva custuma Subsidy on wool

£6,998 17s 10d. £6,048 0s 8d.

English historical documents

Tunnage and poundage (except Newcastle)

518

£6,203 1s 6d.

Average annual total Less fees, costs, annuities, etc.

Expenses A. Household, Chamber, Wardrobe, Royal Works, and Repairs at Windsor 1. Estimate by the treasurer of the household of the expenses of the household—except choice wine, estimated at £95

£10,978 12s 11d.

2. King’s chamber

£666 13s 4d.

3. King’s wardrobe

£1,300 0s 0d.

4. King’s works

£666 13s 4d.

5. Repairs at Windsor Castle

£66 13s £13,678 4d. 12s 11d.

B. Annuities, fees, rewards of lords and others paid at the Exchequer 1.

Queen Joanna, £333 6s 8d; John, Queen Katherine Duke of Bedford, £666 13s 4d; Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, £333 6s 8d; Richard, Duke of York,

£7,556 2s 11d.

the Duke of Bavaria, £666

13s 4d; Margaret, Duchess of Clarence,

Joan, Duchess

John, Earl of Somerset, £333 6s 8d; John, Earl of York, of Huntingdon, £123 6s 8d; the Earl of Suffolk and Alice his wife, £100; and other various persons, having annuities at the exchequer, £2,059 12s 1d. 2. Rewards to custumers and controllers

£582 6s 8d.

3. Fee of the Earl of Huntingdon as constable of the Tower

£100 0s 0d.

4. Wages of the treasurer of England, the keeper of the privy seal, justices, barons of the exchequer, and other officers Total

£2,914 2s 5d. £11,152 12s 0d.

C. Ireland, Scotland, Aquitaine, and Fronsac 1. Ireland

£2,666 13s 4d.

2. East March of Scotland, in peace—double in wartime

£2,566 13s 4d.

Royal finance

519

3. West March of Scotland, in peacedouble in wartime

£1,250 0s 0d.

4. Roxburgh, in peace-time, double in war-time

£1,000

5. Seneschal of Aquitaine, at 45 a day, and wages of 200 archers, at 20 marks each a year

£2,739 13s 4d.

6. Castle of Fronsac

£666 13s 4d. Total

£10,889 13s 4d.

D. Rewards, etc. 1. Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester

£333 6s 8d.

2. Royal counsellors, for attendances—Archbishops of Canterbury & York and chancellor, £200 each; Bishops of Lincoln, Ely, Rochester, Earls of Stafford, Suffolk, and treasurer of England, 200 marks each; lords Scrope, Hungerford, Tiptoft, and William Philip, £100 each

£1,800 0s 0d.

3. Giles, son of the Duke of Brittany

£166 13s 4d.

4. John, Earl of Warwick, attending the king’s person

£166 13s 4d.

5. Three lions (6d a day) and their keepers (6d a day)

£36 10s 0d.

Total

£5,503 3s 4d.

E. Prisoners, naval repairs, wages of royal household servants and of ambassadors 1. Custody and repair of king’s ships

£100

2. Dukes of Orléans, Bourbon, and Eu

£670

3. Grooms and pages of royal household

£100

4. Ambassadors to and from the king

£2,626 13s 4d.

5. Messengers

£200

6. Grooms and pages of the king’s chamber

£26 13s 4d. Total

£3,723 6s 8d.

F. Calais and the March. Memorandum, provision still to be made for the kingdom of France, Aquitaine, the keeping of the sea, and the repair of Newnham bridge. Total

English historical documents

520

expenditure Expenditure thus exceeds revenue by following debts:

Provision has still to be made for the

1. Debts of the household, wardrobe, and clerk of works of the king..........

£11,101 0s 7d

2. Annuities and fees.......... 3. Loans.......... 4. Rewards and grants..........

£2,889 5s 0d.

5. Costs and expenses of prisoners.......... 6. Ancient debts, i.e. for Calais, the Marches of Scotland, Aquitaine, Fronsac, and Ireland..........

£110,584 2s 6d.

Total

Memorandum of £400 and more due to the Bishop of Rochester for his embassy, £2,119 14s 2d due to the Duke of Bedford by ancient tallies of the reigns of Kings Henry IV and V, and Henry V.

due to the Duchess of Clarence for a journey of the third year of

327. The fees of the Exchequer, 1456 (E 159/234. King’s Remembrancer’s Memoranda Roll for 36 Henry VI, Communia for Michaelmas Term, 36 Henry VI [Latin preambles quoting English petition and ordinances]) In 1455 the commons in parliament petitioned against the expensiveness of auditing in the Exchequer (Rot. Parl. v, 323), and the act of 33 Henry VI, c. 3, based on this, forbade fees from accountants for Exchequer audits. This was, however, too drastic to be accepted by the Exchequer officials, and was superseded by a council ordinance of 28 July 1456, which was recorded on this memoranda roll.

The lord king sent this his writ of privy seal directed to his treasurer and barons of this Exchequer in these words. Henry by the grace of God King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, greeting. To the treasurer and barons of our Exchequer…greeting. For as much as in our parliament commenced at Westminster the 9th day of July the 33rd year of our reign, We by the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal and the commons of this our realm assembled in the same gave our assent to a common petition made unto us by

Royal finance

521

our commons that the lords of our council chamber should take direction in that matter, such as should be thought reasonable, before the feast of St Michael, the 35th year of our reign, or else the petition to stand in its strength. And the said lords the 28th day of July next before the feast of St Michael have in that matter taken direction such as is contained in an act of our council made by the lords. We send unto you the act, ordinance, and direction made and taken by the lords, willing and charging you strictly that you observe and make to be observed in our Exchequer the ordinance and direction, so that hereafter all grudgings and complaints against the officers and clerks of our Exchequer may cease and be laid apart. And that you cause the said direction and ordinance to be opened and made known to our people. And that they be read openly in the same our Exchequer at the receiving of these our letters, and afterwards as often as it shall be thought by you necessary. Given under our privy seal at Westminster the 11th day of November the 36th year of our reign. And then the ordinance follows in these words: The 28th day of July the 34th year of our sovereign lord King Henry VI the lords of the king’s council assembled at Westminster in the Star Chamber considering the answer made by the king’s highness to a common petition made to his said highness by the commons of this his realm, whereof the copy is annexed, have ordained, advised, and taken direction such as follows to be kept and observed in the said Exchequer on such things and by such officers and their clerks as are noted and specified in the said common petition and by those who shall hereafter occupy their places, willing and ordaining that if any of the said officers and clerks do contrary to this present ordinance made by the said lords that then he shall run into the pain contained in the said petition…. In the office of the kings remembrancer, first for the entry of a customer’s view of accounts in the ports of Bridgwater, Chichester, Newcastle, Plymouth, Fowey, Poole, and Berwick, 3s 4d. Also for the entry of a customer’s view of account of every other port, 6s 8d…. Also for the entry of processes or pleas of accountants containing half a roll, 3s 4d. Also if it contain a whole roll, 6s 8d and so according to the amount if it contain more. Also for the entry of writs under the great or privy seal directed to the treasurer and barons for an accountant if it contains half a roll, 2s; and if it contains only one side of a roll, 12d; and if it contains less, 4d; and if it contains more than half a roll, according to the amount. Also the clerk for the entry of foreign accounts of Scottish money, 20d. Also to the clerk for the entry of warrants of attorney, 4d…. In the office of the treasurer’s remembrancer. First, to the master for making, proving, casting, discharging and allowance of the views of the shires of Cornwall, Worcester, Rutland, and Westmorland, and each of them, 5s; and cities and boroughs made shires, 3s 4d; and of other double and great shires, 6s 8d. Also to the clerk labouring in writing and charging of the said views, 2s. Also to the master for the entry of sheriffs’ days, escheators, and other accountants except tenths and fifteenths, 20d…. Also to the master for making, proving, and discharging of every view of bailiff of franchises, 20d. Also to the clerk labouring, writing, and charging of every such view, 12d. Also of collectors of tenths and fifteenths, £2…. In the office of the engrosser. First, to the master for his fee, making of allowance and discharge of the sheriffs of Cornwall, Worcester, Rutland, and Westmorland, of each of them, 5s. Also to the master of cities and boroughs made shires, of each of them, 3s 4d; and of every double shire and each other great shire, 10s…. Also for the engrossing of a

English historical documents

522

great account with set hand, that is to say, of the treasurer of the king’s household, 26s 8d, of the king’s wardrober, 26s 8d, of the treasurer of Calais, 26s 8d, of the victualler of Calais, 13s 4d, of the clerk of the king’s works, 13s 4d and of the Duchy of Cornwall, 20s; and these sums of the same great accountants to be divided between the said master and the clerks, that is to say, two parts to the master and the third to the clerk…. [In the office of the controllership. Fees and rewards from sheriffs of Cornwall, Worcester, Rutland and Westmoreland, 3s 4d each, cities and boroughs made shires 2s each; double and other great shires, 6s 8d each.] In the office of the clerk of the pleas of the Exchequer. First, for an original writ at the suit of any accountant in the aforesaid Exchequer prosecuting against any other person, 2s. Also for a judicial writ, 6d. Also for the entry of declaration made thereon in the roll, 2s. Also for the entry of return of judgement, 2s…. For the auditors and their clerks. First, for making and writing of every view of an escheator, 5s…. Also for the examining, proving, dividing, casting, and writing of every account of customers in the ports of London, and the great customs of Sandwich, Southampton, Hull, Boston, and Ipswich, if there be shipping of wools and no retainers or licence, for every such account of a year or more 26s 8d…. Also for the examination, proving, casting, and making of the accounts of the treasurer of the household, 40s; for the king’s wardrober, 26s 8d; for the clerk of the works, 26s 8d; for the treasurer of Calais, 40s; for the victualler of Calais, 33s 4d…for the Duchy of Cornwall, 40s…for the accounts of the chamberlains of North and South Wales, 26s 8d each; for the accounts of the chamberlain of Chester, 26s 8d. In the office of the foreign apposer. First of the sheriffs of [twenty-nine shires named] of every sheriff of these shires the apposer 6s 8d and his clerks 40d. Also for bills of allowance of justices of the peace, fees of everyone of the said sheriffs, 3s 4d. [Sheriffs of eight shires and eight cities—Norwich, York, Lincoln, Hull, Newcastle, Bristol, Coventry and Nottingham, 3s 4d each, and 20d to the clerks each….] In the office of the chamberlains. First of every sheriff of the shires of London and Middlesex, Surrey and Sussex, Somerset and Dorset, Warwick and Leicester, Oxford and Berkshire, Bedford and Bucks., Essex and Herts., Norfolk and Suffolk, York, Lincoln, for joining of tallies, of everyone of these sheriffs 3s 4d…. Also of the sheriffs of Kent, Southampton, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, Notts, and Derby, Hertfordshire, Salop, Cambridge and Huntingdon, and Cumberland for joining tallies, of everyone of the said sheriffs, 2s…. [From sheriffs of Devon, Cornwall, Stafford, Northumberland, Worcester, Rutland, Westmorland, and of each city made a shire, 20d for joining tallies; escheators, 20d or 12d; customers of ports, 5s, 3s 4d, or 2s, according to importance.] Also of every farmer or debtor not an accountant for joining of every tally to be allowed to the said farmer or debtor, not allowed to any sheriff or bailiff, if the said tally be beneath £20, 4d; if the said tally be of £20 or more, under £40, 6d; if the said tally be of £40 or above, 12d. Also, of every collection of tenths granted by the clergy, 12d. Also, of collectors of fifteenths £2. In the office of the clerk of the estreats. Only his fees and rewards of the king. [This ordinance takes four sides—two whole membranes—of the roll.]

Royal finance

523

328. The legalism of the Exchequer, 1457 (E 159/234. Brevia directa baronibus de termino Saneti Michelis anno 36 regis Henrici VI (King’s Remembrancer’s Memoranda Roll, Michaelmas Term, 36 Henry VI) [English]) Henry by the grace of God King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland, to the treasurer and barons of our Exchequer greeting. We have understood by the relation of our well beloved Robert Wodelark, clerk, provost of our college royal of our Lady and St Nicholas of Cambridge, how we were indebted to John Seyntlo for money lent to the value of £44. And for the settlement thereof assignment was made unto him by a tally raised at the receipt of our said Exchequer the 12th day of July the 31st year of our reign upon the farmer of the subsidy and aulnage of salecloth in the county of Somerset of his farm, as by the same tally it appears more at large. Which John Seyntlo for certain money that he owed unto the said provost delivered the same tally unto him; and how be it that the same provost has received of John Gauter, farmer of the said subsidy, the said sum, and for his discharge thereof has delivered unto him the said tally, nevertheless for as much as the said 12th day of July was before the date of our letters patent by which the said John Gauter had and occupied the said farm and for other ambiguities in that matter noticed in our said Exchequer the said John Gauter by force of the said tally can have no allowance of the said £44 to the grievous hurt and vexation as well of himself as of the said provost. We, having consideration of the foregoing, will and charge you that you receive of the said John Gauter the said tally and caused it to be cancelled, along with the foil of it. And thereupon discharge the same John Gauter, in payment of his said farm, of the said £44 and cause him to be acquitted of the same in our said Exchequer towards us for ever. Given under our privy seal at our castle of Kenilworth, the 12th day of August the 35th year of our reign. 329. Edward IV’s government accepts responsibility for debts contracted by Henry VI, 1464 (P.R.O., Exchequer of Receipt, Warrants for Issues, E 404, Box 72, Pt 3, No. 13 [English]) Edward by the grace of God King of England and France and Lord of Ireland. To the treasurer and chamberlains of the Exchequer, greeting. We will and charge you that you make payment to our trusty servant Hugh Fenne the sum of £9, which he lent in the 38th year of Henry VI, late in deed and not in right King of England, as it appears in the pell at the receipt of our Exchequer. Also the sum of £10 5s 0d due to him for his fee of his office in our Exchequer by four tallies raised at our receipt in the time of Henry, restoring the same tallies to be cancelled there. And we will that these our letters be to you in this matter sufficient warrant at all times. Given under our privy seal at our Tower of London, the 11th day of April the 4th year of our reign. [Ibid. No. 62 is a similar warrant for payment of a debt dating from 23–34 Henry VI when William Fallan was treasurer of the household.]

English historical documents

524

330. The king’s speech in parliament, 1467 (Rot. Parl. v, 572 [English]) In 1461 Edward had made a speech to the commons with his own mouth, promising to be their good and gracious lord. Also on the Saturday next following [6 June 1467, when the commons presented their speaker John Say] the lord king, with his own mouth, spoke to the aforesaid commons in this way: John Say, and you, sirs, who have come to this my court of parliament for the commons of this my land; the cause why I have called and summoned this my parliament is that I purpose to live upon mine own, and not to charge my subjects except in great and urgent causes, concerning more the welfare of themselves, and also the defence of them and of this my realm, rather than my own pleasure, as hitherto has been done and borne to my progenitors in time of need; wherein I trust that you, sirs, and all the commons of this my land will be as tender and kind to me in such case as hitherto any commons have been to any of my said progenitors. And for the good wills, kindness, and true hearts that you have borne, continued and shown to me hitherto at all times, I thank you as heartily as I can, as I trust you will continue in time to come; for the which by the grace of God I shall be to you as good and gracious king and reign as righteously over you as ever did any of my progenitors over commons of this my realm in days past, and shall also, in time of need, apply my person for the welfare and defence of you and of this my realm, not sparing my life or body for any jeopardy that might happen to the same. [This was the prelude to an act of resumption, more stringently worded than its predecessors, though accompanied by 281 clauses of special exemption.]

331. The views of Sir John Fortescue on the king’s finances, c. 1471–6 (i) The harm that comes of a kings poverty (Fortescue, The Governance of England, 118 [English]) First, if a king be poor, he shall by necessity make his expenses, and buy all that is necessary to his estate, by credit and borrowing; whereby his creditors will win upon him the 4th or the 5th part of all that he spends. And so he shall lose when he pays, the 4th or 5th part of his revenues, and thus be thereby always poorer and poorer, as usury and borrowing increases the poverty of him that borrows…. For such manner of borrowing makes the great lords to be poorer than their tenants. What dishonour is this, and abating of the glory of a king! But yet it is most to his insecurity. For his subjects will rather go with a lord that is rich and may pay their wages and expenses, rather than with their king that has nought in his purse, but they must serve him, if they will do so, at their own expenses.

Royal finance

525

(ii) The kings ordinary charges (Ibid. 120) The king’s yearly expenses stand in charges ordinary and in charges extraordinary…. The ordinary charges, which the writer hereof can now remember, are these; the king’s household, his wardrobe. And even if the king pleases now, or wills hereafter, to make his household less than it was wont to be; yet his highness shall then have therefore about his person, for his honour and surety, lords, knights, and squires, and others, also in great number, or greater than his household was wont to be…. The second ordinary charge is the payment of the wages and fees of the king’s great officers, his courts, and his council; which charge will always be great, and these men need to be always readily paid…. The third ordinary charge is the payment of the keeping of the marches…. The fourth charge is the keeping of Calais, which charge is well enough known. The fifth charge is for the king’s works, of which the yearly expenses may not be estimated, but yet the accounts of the clerks of the works will show the likeness thereof, while the king makes no new works. The keeping of the sea I reckon not among the ordinary charges, although it is annually borne, because it cannot be estimated, and the king has therefore the subsidy of tunnage and poundage. (iii) The kings extraordinary charges (Ibid. 123) The king’s extraordinary charges are so casual that no man may know them for certain. Such of the extraordinary charges as the writer hereof can now remember are these. First, the king shall often send out of this land his ambassadors, as well to the pope, as to diverse kings, princes, and nations; and at other times he shall send his procurators and messengers to the councils general…. Also the king shall bear yearly charges unknown in receiving of legates and messengers sent from the pope, and of ambassadors sent from kings and other princes…which will put the king to great expenses while they are here and at their departing they must needs have great gifts and rewards…. Item since it is not good that he reward such as do and shall do to him service, or other manner of pleasures, with the possessions and revenues of his crown…it shall therefore be necessary that the king make such rewards with money out of his coffers…. Item, it shall be necessary that the king have such treasure that he may make new buildings when he will for his pleasure and magnificence; and so that he may buy himself rich clothes, rich furs, other than be accustomed to fall under the yearly charges of his wardrobe, rich stones…and other jewels and ornaments convenient to his estate royal…. Item the king shall often send his commission in great might, and also his judges, to repress and punish rioters and risers, for which cause he shall otherwise ride in his own person mightily accompanied; which things will not be done without great costs…. Item, if there come a sudden army upon this land by sea or by land, the king must encounter them with a like army or a greater; for the expenses whereby he shall not so suddenly have any aid of his people. Wherefore he must then pay the expenses with money out of his coffers, or put all his lands in jeopardy…. Wherefore now it is time that it be shown, how the king may have revenues and livelihood sufficient to bear their two charges.

English historical documents

526

332. Edward IV’s methods of extracting money for his expedition to France, 1475 (Archivio di Stato, Milan, Potenze Estere, Inghilterra, Cassa 567. Here translated from the original; published in English in Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts of Milan, vol. 1, 193–4 [Italian]) Battesta Oldovini de Brugnato to Antonio de Bracellis, 17 March 1475, London. Since I reached England I have written by every post save one, when I had to write for my masters and had no time for even the shortest letter except to your father-in-law. Now, though I am still very pressed with business, I have decided to snatch this little time to tell you about some of the events that have taken place here. You must have heard that some time ago this most serene king constantly said that he wanted to cross to the continent to conquer France. Especially for the last four months he has been very ardent in the matter, and has discovered an excellent device for raising money. He has plucked the feathers from the magpies without making them cry out. This autumn the king went about the country from town to town, and he made a note of how much each man from that town could pay. He sent for them all one by one and told them how he wished to cross to France to conquer it, with other words that ensnared their minds. Finally he worked to such a conclusion that there is nobody whatsoever who has not contributed money to the value of £40 sterling and more. Everyone seemed to give willingly. I have many times seen our neighbours here who were called before the king; when they went they looked as if they were going to the gallows; when they returned they were elated, saying that they had talked with the king; and because he had spoken to them so many kind words, they did not regret the money they had paid. From what some have told me, the king adopted this method. Whenever any person appeared before him, he gave him a very great welcome as though he had always known him. After some conversation he asked him what he could pay of his own free will towards this expedition. If the man made an honest offer, the king had his clerk ready, who noted the name and the sum. If, the king thought otherwise, he said: “Such a man, who is poorer than you, has paid so much; you who are richer can easily pay more” and by such means he brought him with fair words up to the mark; and in this way it is agreed that he has extracted a very large quantity of money. Now he has had everything put in order and every day he inspects all his artillery, and he has assembled it all in the castle of St Catherine here in London; and although he has a large number of bombards, he has fresh ones made every day. And now he has given money to a great part of his captains, who are to be ready on 26th May with their men, and to make a muster of them. And indeed, everyone is putting his harness in order and everything else that is needed for a campaign…. [See The Coventry Leet Book, 409, for the king’s privy seal letter of 21 December 1474, urging the mayor of Coventry and eight named leading burgesses to interview all persons of any substance in Coventry (except those whom the king has interviewed personally, whose names with their grants were enclosed in a schedule) to expound to them the king’s urgent need for help for the great preparations that were being made for the renewal of the French war. Such persons were to be asked to give to the

Royal finance

527

mayor and his colleagues a sealed bill, stating the amount of the grant that they would make, and when they could pay it. They were to be told that the French war was desirable, not only for the recovery of the king’s ancient rights in France, but for the promotion of peace within the English realm and trade with its neighbours. For Richard III’s act of parliament of 1484 forbidding benevolences, see Stat. Realm, II, 478.]

333. The council of the Duchy of Lancaster tours its estates and makes recommendations for their better management, 1476 (Duchy of Lancaster Council Register, P.R.O., D.L. 5/1 [English]. Printed by A.R.Myers in Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, II (1964)) (i) Itinerary through the duchy properties in Yorkshire, 1476 (f. 89b) A progress to be made by the king’s council of his duchy of Lancaster as follows: First, the council to meet at York the Saturday in the second week of clean Lent,1 that is to say, the 16th day of March, 16 Edward IV, and there tarry Sunday, till they have dined and the same night be at Pickering. And there to tarry Monday and Tuesday and there that day the tourn to be held and there all that night. And on the morrow, Wednesday the 20th March, to ride into Pickering and oversee it by advice. Item on the morrow, Thursday 16th March, to be at York at dinner and the same night to be at Knaresborough. And there to tarry Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, and the same Monday the tourn to be held. And on the morrow, Tuesday the 26th March, to be at Leeds and there tarry that night and Wednesday all day. Item on the morrow, Thursday the 28th day of March, to be at Pontefract afore noon and there tarry Friday, and there the same day the tourn to be held. And there to tarry Saturday and Sunday till noon. And the same Sunday at night to be at Boroughbridge and there to tarry Monday and Tuesday till noon. And the same Tuesday at night, the second day of April, to be at Snaith, and there to tarry Wednesday and Thursday. And there that day the tourn to be held. And on the morrow, Friday the 5th April, to be at Gringley Park. And the same night to Tickhill there to tarry Saturday and Sunday till noon. (ii) Recommendations during the itinerary of Cheshire and Lancashire, AugustSeptember 1476 (Ibid. ff. 136b-148b passim) [At Halton] Item as to the herbage of Halton Park, Sir John Savage will increase the rent by 6s 8d. 1

The days of Lent reckoned from Ash Wednesday. The name arose because the faithful would have been absolved or shriven or cleansed on Shrove Tuesday, and because there were other definitions of Lent, e.g. from Septuagesima Sunday.

English historical documents

528

Item it is ordained that John Maynwaryng, who owes the king in the lordship of Whitley 30s., shall be distrained for the same, unless he agrees with the council before they come to Manchester…. Item as to the rent called the market gold, it is ordained that the bailiff shall distrain every township, that ought to pay it, for arrears, except the abbot of Norton who is pardoned of his arrears in consideration of his poverty, and as for this year’s rent due at the feast of Michaelmas, he has settled it. [At Liverpool] Item the great timber of Simonswood is wasted by sales made thereof in Henry VI’s days, as it is said. And now it is ordained that there shall no sale be made nor wood be delivered but by warrant made under the seal of the duchy and by the oversight of the receiver or his deputy. The manor of Chief Walton and diverse other manors, lands, and tenements let to farm to Thomas Walton for a term of years, yielding £82 9s 3d, and 6s 8d of increase, of which increase the king has not been answered before this time. And now it is charged and the said Thomas is charged to repairs of the said manors and the other premises in all things, having of the king great timber [for the purpose]…. [At Clitheroe] Item Richard Towneley has taken to farm the king’s mill at Colne and by the same constrains the king’s tenants of Burnley and other places there adjoining that mill, whereas of right they ought to grind at the king’s mill of Burnley, whereby the farm of the same mill is decreased and the king not increased in his farm of his mill at Colne. Wherefore it is ordained that the said mill of Colne shall be taken from him and let to the king’s most advantage. Item the said Richard Towneley has set a house in a place called Dereplay Flashes and daily keeps his cattle there, which is supposed by the foresters of Rossendale to be within the bounds of the same forest. Wherefore it is ordained that search shall be made at London for the bounds of the forest, so that if it be within the forest it be taken down, and he not allowed to have his beasts going there…. [In Salfordshire] Item that all repairs to be made hereafter shall be made by the oversight of the steward and receiver or their deputies, and bills thereof to be made and they to see the repairs and bills together and to affirm or deny the bill or such part thereof as they find not done according to the bill. And the same bill to be delivered by them to the steward or his deputy to be entered into the court roll according to their verdict in that matter. Item a copy of the feodary of all Lancashire is delivered to Hugh Garthside to enquire and examine it by old folks of any lordship where there are tenants and occupiers of such manors and lands as are expressed in the same book to be held of the king, and thereof to make a book and cause it to be brought to the king’s council at London. 334. The council of the duchy of Lancaster enquires into knight service in Lincolnshire, 1480 (P.R.O., Register of the Council of the Duchy of Lancaster, D.L. 5/1, f. 42a [English]) [Latin] Friday, 27 October, 20 Edward IV Also, whereas the king has not for a long time been answered of his tenants of his duchy of Lancaster holding by knight service within the county of Lincoln as to homage,

Royal finance

529

fealties, reliefs, and other services, nor of fines for respite of the same, to his great hurt and damage. It is therefore ordained and advised that a letter under the seal of the said duchy be directed to Sir Thomas Burgh, knight, steward of the lordships, manors, lands, and tenements of the said duchy within the said county, to cause enquiry to be made in the king’s courts there of all such tenants that owe the king such service, and according to the presentments so taken by him he assess such of them as will offer to make fines to the king for respite of their said service according to the old ordinance and usage of the said duchy made in that regard, that is to say, a duke to pay for the fine of his respite for every knight’s fee that he holds of the said duchy for a whole year 20s, an earl 13s 4d, a baron 6s 8d, a bachelor knight, and all others who hold by knight service 3s 4d and if it be more or less than a knight’s fee to take of each of the said tenants according to the rate and quantity of his tenure. And of all fines so assessed upon each of the said tenants, the said steward shall make estreats1 to the feodary and bailiff of the franchise of the said duchy within the said county, that he distrain every such tenant for his said fine, or else for the services, making bills indented between them, specifying every sum so to be levied and the ground or place for which they owe such service and the quantity of the said tenures, the one part whereof the said steward shall send to the chancellor of the said duchy that it may rest as an evidence in the registers of the same, and the other part to remain with the said feodary and bailiff, that thereby he may make a levy of the said sums and truly answer the king thereof at his next accounts. Also, it is advised that the said feodary have in commandment under the seal of the said duchy to give his attendance upon the said steward, upon convenient warning when the presentments of the said tenants shall be so taken by him, and the estreats thereof made and delivered to the said feodary, that then he endeavour with all diligence to distrain the said tenants for their said services or else for the fines according to the said estreats by bills indented, as it is said above. 335. Memorandum on improvements in the yield and audit of the king’s revenues, 1484 (Letters and Papers…of Richard III and Henry VII, ed. J.Gairdner (Rolls Series, 1861), 81, from B.M., Harleian MS. 433, f. 27 [English]) A memorandum made, as well for the speedy levy of the king’s revenues arising from all his possessions and hereditaments, as for the profitable state and governance of the same possessions. First, that all the king’s officers of his court of Exchequer must use and execute speedy process against all manner of persons who are accountable, and others being the king’s debtors, as the case shall require; and also to hear and determine accounts of the same, and the issues, profits, and revenues arising therefrom to be levied and paid into the king’s receipt without delay. Also that no person accountable, or any other person being in debt to the king, have any respite, postponement, or favour in the said court, whereby the king’s dues may be 1

Extracts from the court record.

English historical documents

530

delayed longer than the space of four months next after the time that any such person ought to render his account, or ought to pay his debt, whatsoever it be. For it has been said that many divers officers accountable have been respited in their accounts from year to year, and also in their payments by the space of many years, to the king’s great hurt, in times past. Also that no officer having any office in the said court of Exchequer have or occupy any office in the receipt. Also it is thought that the auditors of the said Exchequer should yearly make a book of all the revenues, issues, and profits arising from all sheriffs, escheators, collectors of customs and subsidies, the treasurer of Calais and Guînes, collectors of tenths, bailiffs of cities, boroughs, and ports, and of all other kinds of officers accountable at the said Exchequer, with the abatement and deductions thereof, and should declare the same book before such persons as the King’s good grace shall be pleased to assign to hear and to see it; whereupon his grace may yearly see the profits of the said court. Also that the treasurer of England for the time being should make a declaration of all such money which is received or assigned within his office, whether in the receipt or otherwise, for the previous year. Also the said court of Exchequer should be clearly dismissed and discharged from any interference with any outside income in the taking of accounts, as for instance Wales, the duchies of Cornwall, York and Norfolk, the earldoms of Chester, March, Warwick, Salisbury, and all other lands being in the king’s hands by reason of forfeiture. These are thought most fitting and profitable to be assigned to other outside auditors for diverse causes as follows, that is to say: First, for more speedy levy of money. Also for greater ease and less cost of the officials of such income. Also that the estates may be yearly surveyed by the stewards, auditors, and receivers in the time of accounts of officials of the same for repairs, sales of wood, and for other directions to be had among the tenants, with many more causes necessary, etc. And whereas many lordships, manors, lands and tenements belonging to the crown are committed to various persons for definite farms, by which the king’s woods and his courts, with other incidental revenues, are wasted and lost to his great hurt, and great allowances are made for repair of his castles and manors, which are not therefore repaired, as it is said; and also the lordships are often leased at less than their value; it is thought that an outside auditor should be assigned for all lordships, manors, lands and tenements belonging to the crown, and a receiver ride yearly to inspect the same, and survey, receive, and note in every matter that might be most for the king’s profit and to make an annual report of the state and condition of the same, by which the king’s grace may know all the lordships that pertain to his crown, whereas they are now unknown (in value), as it is said, etc. Also, it is thought that such auditors as are of good, true, and serious disposition and discretion should be assigned to hear and determine the accounts of all the king’s outside income as is thus discharged from the Exchequer, and there should be as many auditors and no more as may conveniently and diligently determine the said income between Michaelmas and Candlemas, with responsible and discreet examination of all faults and injuries of all officials accountable severally in their offices, wherein the auditors of the Exchequer can never have so evident knowledge for the reformation of the same.

Royal finance

531

Also that receivers of good and true disposition…see to the repair of castles, manors, mills, parks, and others, and in the circuit of their receipt see to the welfare of every lordship. Also it is thought that all the auditors aforesaid, as well those of the Exchequer as those of the outside income, should yearly make declaration of all such income as they have in charge before such persons as the king’s grace will assign thereto in London, always between Candlemas and Palm Sunday, so that his grace may be informed yearly of the whole revenues of all his income, and what thereof is paid and what is owing and in whose default. Also whereas lords, knights and squires, many of them unlettered, are made stewards of the king’s income in divers regions, they taking great fines and rewards of the king’s tenants to their own use, to the king’s hurt and impoverishment of his said tenants, and also lacking wisdom and discretion to order and direct the said income properly, with many more inconveniences, therefore it is thought that men learned in the law would be most profitable to be stewards of the said income for many causes concerning the king’s profit and the welfare of his tenants. Also it is thought that all lands in the king’s hand by reason of wardship of lords’ sons or other noble men should not be let to farm on a definite tenure, but that the same lands should remain in the king’s hands during the nonage and that auditors of the same lands should yearly determine the accounts thereof and make declaration as is above said, for the greater profit to the king, etc. Also, for temporalities of bishoprics, abbeys, and priories likewise. Also it is thought that all the aforesaid auditors, every year at the feast of Michaelmas next after the declaration made of all outside income before the said persons so assigned by the king, should deliver or cause to be delivered the books of account of the same into the king’s Exchequer before the barons…there to remain of record so that the books of accounts of the latter year be always in the hands of the said auditors as precedents, the Duchy of Lancaster, the lordships of Glamorgan and Abergavenny always excepted.

F. LOCAL GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE THE TOWNS 336. The keepers of the peace, 1327, 1330 (i) 1327 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 257 [French]) Also, for the better keeping and maintenance of the peace, the king wishes that in every shire good and lawful men who are not maintainers of evil barretors in the neighbourhood shall be assigned to keep the peace. (ii) 1330 (Ibid. 261 [French]) Also it is ordained that good and discreet persons, other than of the places, if they may be found sufficient, shall be assigned in all the shires of England, to take assizes, juries and certifications, and to deliver the gaols; and that the justices shall take the assizes, juries, and certifications, and deliver the gaols, at the least three times a year, and more often if need be; also there shall be assigned good and lawful men in every shire to keep the peace; and at the time of the assignments mention shall be made that such as shall be indicted or taken by the keepers of the peace shall not be let to mainprise1 by the sheriffs, nor by any other ministers, if they be not mainpernable by the law; and that such as shall be indicated shall not be delivered but at the common law. And the justices assigned to deliver the gaols shall have power to deliver the same gaols of those who shall be indicated before the keepers of the peace; and that the said keepers shall send their indictments before the justices, and they shall have power to enquire of sheriffs, gaolers, and others, in whose custody such indicted persons shall be, if they make deliverance, or let to mainprise any so indicated, who are not mainpernable, and to punish the said sheriffs, gaolers, and others, if they do anything against this act. [For the contrast between the commission of the peace in 1327 and the much fuller one of 1475, see Proceedings before the Justices of the Peace in 14th and 15th Centuries, ed. B.H.Putnam (1938), I, 257.] 1

Bail for their appearance in court.

Local government outside the towns

533

337. Order for disafforestation, 1330 (Calendar of Close Rolls, 1330–3, 147 [English summary from Latin original]) To John Mautravers, keeper of the Forest this side Trent, or to him who supplies his place in the forest in co. Salop. Order not to molest abbots, priors, earls, barons, knights, or others of that county in their woods and lands in that county that were put outside the forest by the perambulations made in the times of Edward I and Edward II, by reason of any trespasses of vert and venison made therein after the perambulations, and not to permit them to be molested or aggrieved by the regarders, foresters, or other ministers of the forest, contrary to the form of the perambulations, as the king wills that the said perambulations shall be observed in all things. By privy seal, 12th July, 1330. 338. Judicial powers given to keepers of the peace, 1332 (Rot. Parl. II, 64 [French]) Sir Geoffrey le Scrope, by the command of our lord the king and in his presence and that of all the prelates, earls, barons, and other great men, stated how the king had heard, and this was known to all, that various people defying the law, had risen in great companies, destroying the liege people of our lord the king, both men of Holy Church, justices of the king, and others, taking some of them and detaining them in prison, until they had paid, to save their lives, heavy fines and ransoms at the will of the malefactors, putting some to death, stripping some of their goods and chattels, and doing many other evil deeds and felonies, in despite of the king, breach of his peace, and destruction of his people. [The lords were asked to advise on a remedy, and the lay lords met together and proposed to the king the following law.] That in each county of England some of the greater men of the shire should be assigned keepers of the shire by the king’s commission, and that the ordinary keepers of the peace at present assigned, sheriffs, and all the people of the shires where they are assigned, shall be responsible to the great men to keep the peace, as if they were responsible to the body of the king himself. And that the great men should cause to come before them four men, and the provost of each town, and cause them to array the people of the towns, so that if armed men, or others of whom people have cause to be suspicious, pass through the town in companies, or otherwise, the townsmen should cause the hue and cry to be raised, and pursue them from town to town, and hundred to hundred, and from shire to shire, and arrest them and keep them safe, and shall certify the great men of this. And if it should happen that the men of the towns cannot arrest such wrong-doers, that they should certify the great men where they can be found; and the great men, with all the power of the shire, shall pursue them from shire to shire until they are taken. And let the great men have power to hear and determine both felonies committed by those who are thus arrested and taken, and also by those who are indicted before them. And they are also to punish those who disobey them…. These points were ordained by the earls, barons, and other great men, and read before our lord the king, and the prelates, knights of the shire, and people of the commons, and were pleasing to them all, and were fully assented and agreed by our lord the king, and the prelates, earls, barons, and other

English historical documents

534

great men, and also by the knights of the shire, and people of the commons. And also it was agreed and assented by our lord the king…that a proclamation should be made by the prelates and clergy in St Paul’s Church in London, and should be sent to all the bishops of England to proclaim, the form of which proclamation here follows. 339. Claims made during the forest eyre of 1334–6 in Lancashire (R.Cunliffe Shaw, The Royal Forest of Lancaster (Preston, 1956), from P.R.O., Duchy of Lancaster Forest Proceedings, 39/17/1 [Latin, trans, by editor]) (150) The burgesses of Preston claim to have pasture of the forest called Foullewode [Fulwood] and of the same forest as many oaks as they may need to build their town, by view of the foresters. And that their moor towards the wood of Fullewoode outside the covert of the wood within their bounds, that is to say by the stream of Evesbrok at Ribletonscales, to where that stream falls into the water of Lavok, and thus descends by the water of Lavok to the old ditch, (which is the boundary between Preston and Tulkyd) they may leave uncultivated or bring it back into cultivation as they shall wish without contradiction of the foresters and verderers, (excepting forty perches of land adjoining the covert of the wood), and to the burgesses and their heirs turbary1 and pasture in the moor they claim sufficient enclosure in the wood without waste or impediment of the foresters and verderers, at will, to build their tenements in Preston, and that the lord Henry once king of England, great-grandfather of the now king, by his charter, here produced, granted to the burgesses pasture of the wood and of the forest such oaks to be used in building their town by view of the foresters; the same charter given at Windsor 29 Oct. 1252. And the burgesses seek that claim by the word pasture. Who say that for that word pasture they claim to have common pasture for all beasts and animals except goats all the time, as well for pigs to pasture and common in the forest at all times of the year, and have commons of pasture as well pigs as other animals from the time of pannage until the feast of St Martin. And they say that of such common in the forest from the time of the making of the charters until now they have been used to have without hindrance by the foresters, verderers, or other ministers of the same forest. And the same burgesses were asked what they understood by those words “to build their town, etc.” They say that by virtue of the same words “of the same forest to take oaks etc.” they claim to take, and ought to have as much timber in the forest to make, repair, and build their houses in their town of Preston, as often and when it should be necessary and this by view of the foresters, and to take such estovers2 in the forest as are necessary. And this they ask to be verified, whereupon the jurors being elected and sworn say that the burgesses at the time of the making of the charter of Henry III until now were accustomed to have common of pasture in the forest of Foulwode for all their cattle as well pigs as sheep as other animals, goats excepted. They say that of their moor outside the covert of Foulwode by virtue of the same charter they may leave uncultivated or return it to cultivation as they wish. Touching the metes [borders] and bounds in the same charter they do not extend beyond the turbary and 1 2

The right to cut and carry away turf- usually peaty turf for burning. Necessary wood for repairs.

Local government outside the towns

535

pasture which they have in the moor according to the tenor of the same charter. They say that in the forest they took blackthorn for sufficient enclosure and not more to enclose their gardens in Preston, and their pasture in the moor towards the forest. They say that they were accustomed to take from the forest such oak as was necessary to build their town of Preston, from the time of the making of the charter by virtue of the same until now by view of the foresters. They say that up till now the burgesses had crops and tops of wood by delivery of the foresters worth 13s 4d which they took and carried away to burn. And because it is found that the burgesses had pigs and sheep commoning in the forest which are not communable animals, as they drive away the deer, and that the burgesses took estovers from the forest to burn, against the tenor of the charter, therefore as well the pasture as the estovers be taken into the earl’s hand. Afterwards, they made a fine for the pasture and estovers according to the tenor of the charters rehearsed. And they gave £13 5s 8d for all the beasts except goats for the whole year, and for pigs in the time of sowing and mast until the feast of St Martin [11 November]…. 340 (a). Sheriffs to be appointed annually, 13401 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 283 [French]) Also, whereas some sheriffs have their shrievalties for a term of years by the king’s grant, and some take such advantage of their long stay in their shrievalty by procurement that they are encouraged to make many oppressions of the people, and to serve the king and his people ill; it is assented and established that no sheriff shall occupy his shrievalty more than a year, and then another suitable person shall be ordained in his place, who has sufficient land in his bailiwick, by the chancellor, treasurer, and chief baron of the exchequer, taking to them the chief justices of both benches, if they should be present; and let this be done each year on the morrow of All Souls [3 November] at the exchequer. 340 (b). Sheriffs not to be re-elected for three years, 1377 (Ibid, II, 4 [French]) Also it is ordained that no one who has been sheriff of a shire for an entire year shall within three years next following be re-elected or put back into the said office of sheriff, if there is any other person sufficient in the shire in possessions and goods to answer the king and people. 1

Cf. C.G.Crump’s “Eo Quod Expressa Mentio, etc.”, in Essays in History presented to R.L.Poole (Oxford, 1927), 39, for an instance of a sheriff being appointed for life in the late fifteenth century, by the exercise of the royal prerogative in letters patent.

English historical documents

536

341. The commons complain of oppressions connected with the forests, 1347 (Rot. Parl. II, 169 [French]) Also pray the commons that as King Edward, grandfather to our lord the king who now is, formerly granted to his people a perambulation of all the forests of England, and granted his charters to all who wished to have them, defining the bounds of the forests according to the perambulation. And then King Edward, father of our lord the king who now is, by his charter ratified and confirmed the same; which thing has been continued until lately, that the officials of our lord the king, of their malice, have afforested and strive from day to day to afforest, what was disafforested; and they put in Regard what was out of Regard:1 against the perambulations and the charters of the kings abovesaid. And also the said officials cause to be summoned low-born folk from strange parts to indict the people at their will; and cause them to travel from place to place, and menace them until they have made indictment at their ordinance and desire. And also the officials contrive and propose to afforest towns that are on the edge of the forests, where there are no wild beasts within ten leagues, to burden the people by frequent visits of the foresters without any profit to the king. And also, where a forest is in several shires, the king’s officials attach people from one shire and the other to make indictments and press by force people from one shire to indict people of the other shire, for what purpose they know afterwards to the great damage of the people. For which grievances it is impossible to get a writ or any other remedy in the chancery; for which the commons pray remedy, and ask that the statute of the forest should be firmly kept. Reply: The king is pleased to answer that the charter of the forest should be kept at all points. And as for the perambulations, if any wishes to complain of any harm done to him, let him show his grievance precisely, and on this a writ will be issued to him in the chancery that right may be done to him. 342. Case before the justices of the peace, 1351–78 (Proceedings before the Justices of the Peace in the 14th and 15th Centuries, ed. B.H.Putnam (1938) [Latin]) (66) Devon, 1351–3. Roll vii, No. 87. Also they present that John Donne, chaplain, has impleaded Thomas de Hurtecombe in the court of Christianity [the ecclesiastical court— possibly the bishop’s consistory court] for matters not touching wills nor marriage, to the injury of the crown of the lord king. Margin, transgression of John Donne chaplain. [Similar case, roll vii, No. 292] (Ibid. 109) Norfolk, 1378. Roll xxiii, No. 2. Also that John de Love of Herdwyk [Hardwick] 1

The list of offences against the forest law which were investigated every three years by a special commission of enquiry, held by twelve “regarders”, usually knights.

Local government outside the towns

537

refuses to go any longer to the plough and took per day 2d and food, and in the autumn 8s, in the same year. No. 4. Also that William Peter of Thorp, thresher, takes per diem 2d and food and for threshing a quarter of corn 5d without food and for every quarter of barley and oats, 3d. No. 8. Robert Johntus of Weston labourer takes 14s from the vicar of Hemenhale [Hempnall] and food this year. No. 9. John Anneys, tailor staying in Frerton’ takes for making one simple tunic 10d and for making a “wardcors” 6d or more this year. Robert Archer dwelling in Fornesete [Forncett] leads away from the said township every autumn to receive a bigger wage elsewhere than in the said township six or eight labourers, by which the men of the township of Fornsete are greatly injured and impoverished; and he takes for himself and his comrades 6d a day and food and this he does against the command of the constable of the said township this year…. No. 22. Also that John Deryng dwelling at Op ton [Upton] on Monday next after Michaelmas 2 Richard II made an assault on Peter Bentyg’, beat him, wounded him, and ill-treated him, so that his life is despaired of, against the peace, etc, this year. No. 24. Also that Richard Iue of Norwich on Wednesday in the vigil of the Nativity of St John the Baptist in the year at Chelton by force and arms took and abducted Margaret Crombe, working woman, from the service of Stephen Crombe, father of the said Margaret, and detained her at Norwich and still detains her against the peace, of this year. Inquisition at Aylsham, May, 1377,… No. 31. And that Thomas Gilmyn vicar of the church of Aylsham, as it is said, on the Tuesday next before the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Aylsham in the 51st year of Edward III came with four strangers by force and arms, that is to say, with bows, arrows, and swords and made an attack on Roger Bettes and wounded him maliciously in a great affray of the whole township. (Ibid. 110) Norwich, December 1378, No. 36. John de Colneys on Tuesday next after the feast of St Paul, I Richard II, feloniously broke a window, entering the chamber of the vicar of Martham in Martham, and carried away six silver spoons price 6s 8d and other various chattels against the peace. Margin felony. No. 37. Also they say that John Son of John Gannock senior, on Thursday next after the feast of St Martin 2 Richard II feloniously stole from John Rysengles and Richard Rakbeych at Wynterton two oxen and fled, price 13s 4d, and so he continues. Margin Felony. (Ibid. 111) Eynesford, June, 1378. No. 40. John Hageyerd of Hakford [Hackford] lent Thomas Waleys of Boton twelve pounds of gold and silver, that is at the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, I Richard II, and by reason of the loan from then to the Epiphany of the Lord next following [14 September 1377–6 January 1378] the same John took from the said Thomas 40s in usury, and thus he exacted unjustly and against the law of Christianity and against the law of England from the aforesaid Thomas and from various other men for one year 43s 4d. against the law. Margin Transgression.

English historical documents

538

No. 45. Also they present that William Selthe of Wodedallyng [Wood Dalling] is a common labourer and does not wish to work anywhere unless he can have 2d a day and his food, and so he took excessively from Adam Dickes in Salle and elsewhere for six years 20s against the statute of the lord king. Margin Transgression. No. 47. Also they present that Adam atte Heg de Thymelthorp [Themelthorpe] is a common forestaller in the market of Reffham [Reepham] and elsewhere, and buys hens, capons, chickens, cocks, and sells them there on that day for a higher price against the statute of the lord king and to the great hurt and damage of the people, and so he extorted against the statute in Refham and elsewhere for these three years, by this forestalling 6s 8d. Margin Transgression. No. 53. And that Reginald Miller of Hapesburgh [Happisburgh] milled the corn of various men at Hapesburgh and took from Roger Randolf and Roger Wright a toll of corn more than he ought to take, that is in 49, 50, and 51 Edward III and thus in excess to the value of 40d. Margin Transgression. Depwade No. 62. Also they say that Ralph Gardoun chaplain unjustly vexed Edmund atte Grene and Margaret his wife in the court Christian in various articles of his own malice without presentation of an inquisition; and similarly the same Ralph vexed John Martyn and John Cler’ and that the same Ralph is a common adulterer with women in his parish of Hapton. Margin Transgression. (Ibid. 113) Walsingham, 1378. No. 66. Bartholomew Crampe otherwise called Bartholomew Ionkyn, John Cutt’, John de Lopham, Richard Banyard, John Madour, and a certain man called Long Tom of Hunstanton, and many other unknown persons came to Hunstanton on Thursday on the morrow of St Hilary, 1 Richard II, by force and arms and against the peace, etc., and attacked Robert Nolle and Thomas Cardinal bailiffs of the lord duke of Lancaster, holders of the leet of the lord king and of the said lord duke there, and also attacked William Gaily and John of Wesenham constables and keepers of the peace with swords, sticks, knives, and other arms, beat and wounded them, and ill-treated and despoiled them, so that they have languished long and their lives are despaired of, etc. (Ibid. 117) [Inquisition taken on Saturday after St. Andrew’s Day, 1372, at Swaftham (Swaftham). The jury say] No. 125…that Peter Cary of Holkham on Thursday next after the feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul, 43 Edward III, entered the home of Margaret Esser in the township of Holkham and feloniously stole one brass pot and carried it away. Margin Felony. 343. The Cheshire institution of avowries, 1358 (The Register of Edward the Black Prince, ed. M.C.B.Dawes (H.M.S.O., 1932), Pt III, Palatinate of Chester, 1351–65 [Latin, Calendar in English]) The avowry was an institution peculiar to the palatinate, whereby an escaped felon or bondman would, with

Local government outside the towns

539

permission, “avow” himself the man of some Cheshire lord and live in protection on his lands thenceforth.

(313–14) September 13th, 1358. Order by advice of the princes’ council to John de Delves, lieutenant of the justice of Chester, and Master John de Brunhem, chamberlain there—on a complaint by William le Braban of Knutsford that the farmers of the prince’s avowries in the county of Cheshire claim that he is within the said avowries, and levy from him a sum of money every year to excuse him thereof, whereas in fact he is neither a fugitive bondman nor a felon—to enquire into this matter at the next county court of Chester, and if it be found that William is neither a fugitive bondman nor a felon, to discharge him from making such payment henceforth, as reason demands. By petition endorsed. 344. The separate commissions of justices of labourers are suspended, 1359 (i) (Writs of Privy Seal, Chancery, Series I, File 369, No. 23,335), printed by B.Putnam, in The Enforcement of the Statute of Labourers (New York, 1908), App., 31 [French]) Edward by the grace of God King of England and of France and Lord of Ireland to the honourable father in God the Bishop of Winchester, our chancellor, greeting. Whereas many evils and errors have arisen because of the special commissions which have been made previously in various franchises and towns to enquire into the excesses of labourers, we have ordained and wish that henceforth all such special commissions granted in whatever franchises and towns of our realm should be repealed and that certain good and loyal persons should be generally assigned throughout the shires of the realm, so that they and no others shall hold the sessions of the labourers. We therefore order you that after the repeal of the special commissions as is abovesaid, sufficient persons shall be assigned for the same sessions through-out the shires. Given under our privy seal at Westminster the 8th day of February, the 31st year of our reign in England and the 18th year of our reign in France. (ii) (Close Roll, 33 Edward III, m. 10d, printed in ibid. 31–2 [Latin]) For the suspension of the commission of justices of the statute of labourers. The king to his beloved and faithful subjects, John of Lyons and his fellows, the justices for the enforcement of the ordinance and statute of labourers, servants, and artificers, and of weights and measures in Northamptonshire, greeting. For certain causes which move us we order you that you should suspend the enforcement of our commission in this matter henceforth until you have further orders from us in this matter. Witnessed by Thomas our dearly beloved son Guardian of England, at Woodstock, on November 4th. By the same guardian and counsel.

English historical documents

540

Similar writs were sent to all the justices of labourers in every shire throughout the realm, that the enforcement of the royal commission should be suspended. 345. Justices of the peace, 1361 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 364–5 [French]) That in every shire of England shall be assigned for the keeping of the peace one lord, and with him three or four of the most worthy in the shire, with some learned in the law; and they shall have power to restrain the offenders, rioters, and all other barrators, and to pursue, arrest, take, and chastise them according to their trespass or offence; and to cause them to be imprisoned and duly punished according to the laws and customs of the realm, and according to what shall seem best to them to do by their discretions and good deliberation; and also to inform themselves and to inquire of all those who have been pillagers and robbers in the parts beyond the sea, and have now returned and go wandering and will not labour as they were wont to do in times past; and to take and arrest all those that they may find by indictment or by suspicion and to put them in prison; and to take of those who are not of good reputation, wherever they shall be found, sufficient surety and mainprise for their good behaviour towards the king and his people; and they are to punish the others duly, to the end that the people may not be troubled or injured by such rioters or rebels, nor the peace be endangered, nor merchants or others passing on the king’s highway, be disturbed…. And they are also to hear and determine at the king’s suit all manner of felonies and trespass done in that shire, according to the laws and customs; and that writs of oyer and terminer shall be granted according to the statutes made with regard to them, but the justices who shall be assigned thereto shall be named by the court and not by the party. And the king wills that all general inquiries granted before this time in any lordship whatsoever shall cease utterly and be repealed, on account of the mischiefs and oppressions which have been done to the people by such inquiries. And that fines which are to be made before the justices for trespasses done by any person shall be reasonable and just, having regard to the quantity of the trespass and the cause for which they are made. 346. The justices of the peace are ordered to meet four times a year, 1362 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 374 [French]) A lso that in the commission of the justices of the peace and of labourers, express A mention should be made that the same justices should hold their sessions four times a year; that is to say, one session in the octave of Epiphany [6–13 January], the second in the second week of mid-Lent, the third between the feasts of Whitsuntide and St John the Baptist [24 June], the fourth in the octave of Michaelmas [29 September-6 October].

Local government outside the towns

541

347. The justices of the peace made responsible for the enforcement of the Statute of Labourers, 1368 (Statutes of the Realm, I, 388 [French]) Also, it is agreed and assented that the statute and ordinance made of labourers and artificers shall be upheld and kept and duly executed; and to this end let commissions be made to the justices of the peace in each shire to hear and determine the points of the statute, and to award damages at the suit of the plaintiff according to the degree of the offence. 348. The defiance of bondmen, 1377 (Rot. Parl. III, 21 [French]) To our lord the king and to the council of parliament show the commons of the I realm that in several parts of the realm of England the bondmen, and landtenants in villeinage, who owe services and customs to lords by whatever cause in various lordships, as well of Holy Church as of lay lords, have by the counsel, enticement, maintenance, and abetting of certain persons, for profit taken from the bondmen and land-tenants abovesaid, purchased in the king’s court exemplifications of Domesday Book, of manors and towns in which the said bondmen and land-tenants dwell, by colour of which exemplifications, by misunderstanding of them and by evil interpretation made by the said counsellors, enticers, maintainers, and abettors, they have withdrawn and do withdraw their customs and services due to their lords, intending that they should be completely discharged from all manner of service due as well from their bodies as from their tenures abovesaid. And they have prevented the officials of the said lords from distraining them for the customs and services abovesaid, and are confederates and allies to resist their said lords and their officials by force. And thus each will help the other when they shall be distrained for this cause, and they menace the officials of their said lords to kill them if they distrain them for the customs and services abovesaid, so that the lords and their officials do not distrain them for their customs and services, for fear of death, which might easily happen by their rebellion and resistance. And so the said lords lose and have lost great profit from their lordships, to the very great disinheritance and destruction of their estate, and the crops of several parts of the realm remain not cut, and are lost for ever for the reason stated, to the great damage of all the community so that if hasty remedy is not found, there is a risk that strife could easily become grave within the realm because of their rebellion, or that they could be adherents of the enemies overseas to revenge themselves on their lords, if these enemies should make a sudden attack. And for the support of these errors and rebellions they have gathered between them a great sum of money, to defray their costs and expenses. And several of them have now come to court, to gain support for their purpose abovesaid. Wherefore may it please our said lord the king and to the council, to ordain a due and speedy remedy, as well against the said counsellors, enticers, maintainers, and abettors, as against the said bondmen and land-tenants, and especially against those who have now come, as is said, so that those dwelling in the household may have knowledge of their punishment, and to avoid such peril as recently befell the kingdom of France by such rebellion and conspiracy of the bondmen against their lords.

English historical documents

542

Reply. As for the exemplifications granted and made in the chancery, it is declared in parliament that these shall not have and ought not to have, any value or force as for the enfranchisement of their bodies or changing of the condition of their tenures and customs anciently due, nor be prejudicial to the lords, to have their services and customs as they were accustomed to do in ancient times. And let the lords have letters patent under the great seal made on this declaration, if they wish to have them. And as for the remnant of the said article, let those lords who feel aggrieved have special commissions under the great seal to the justices of the peace, or other sufficient persons, to inquire of all such rebels, and of their counsellors, enticers, maintainers, and abettors. And let those who are indicted before them, as well for the time past as in the future, be imprisoned, without being delivered out of prison by mainprise, bail, or otherwise, without the consent of their lords, until they should be convicted or acquitted. And if they should be convicted, let such rebel tenants in no wise be released until they have made fine to the king, and have the assent of their lords; saving always, as to the said fines, the franchises and liberties of the lords who have fines and amercements of their tenants. (Similar penalties are to be exacted from those who counsel or maintain such tenants.) 349. The revision of the commission of array, 1404 (Rot. Parl. III, 526–7 [French preamble, Latin text]) Cf. Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Pt I, Act iv, Sc. 2, and Pt II, Act in, Sc. 2, for satires on recruitment under commissions of array.

Also, touching the commission of array, there were many forfeitures and other various clauses and words included in it, which were too grievous, damaging, and perilous for the commissioners named in the same commission in various shires of England. So the copy was delivered to the commons to be considered by them, and to be corrected according to their intentions. The commons, having had deliberation and consideration in this matter, caused certain clauses and words included in it to be cancelled, and prayed to the king that henceforth no commission of array should be issued otherwise, or in any other words, than those contained in the said copy…. Which prayer our lord the king, on the advice of the lords, having had communication on this matter with the judges of the realm, very graciously granted in parliament. The tenor of this copy follows in these words. The king to his beloved and faithful subjects Thomas Sackville [and also to thirteen others] and the sheriff of Buckingham, greeting. Know that since certain enemies of ours have now recently entered our realm of England in hostile manner with no small power, notwithstanding the present truces, and have burned in various parts of the same realm. Wishing to dispose and ordain, as we are bound to do, so that we may resist, by the favour of divine grace, the malice of these our enemies if they should presume to invade

Local government outside the towns

543

our kingdom again, which Heaven forbid, and for the salvation and defence of ourselves and our realm and our lieges, We have assigned you, singly and collectively, to array and inspect all and singular men-at-arms, and hobelars, and archers dwelling in the shires, within liberties and without, and to cause to be armed all those who are powerful in body, and fit to be armed, who from their own means have the ability to arm themselves, i.e. each of them according to his estate and faculties, and to assign and apportion them according to your judgement and discretion. And you are also to distrain all those who are powerful in land and goods, but impotent to fight on account of the weakness of their bodies, to find arms for the men-at-arms and hobelars, and bows and arrows for the archers, according to the quantity of their lands and estates, and as far as they can reasonably bear. So those who shall remain, or can be kept, at home in their own countryside, for the defence of the same against our enemies, if danger should arise, shall not take wages nor expenses for their sojourn at their own homes. And you are to cause the said men-at-arms and hobelars and archers thus arrayed and armed to be placed and held continuously in array in thousands, hundreds, and scores, and otherwise as is convenient and necessary. And you are to command and enjoin them to go to the sea-coast and other places, where and when need shall arise, to expel, fight, and destroy our foes, from time to time when danger shall occur. And from time to time, when need shall arise, you shall cause a muster or parade of those men-at-arms, hobelars, and archers, to be made and supervised. And also you are to proclaim, ordain, and diligently examine, that all and singular of these men-at-arms, and hobelars, and archers, shall come to the muster in their own arms, and not in another kind, under pain of losing them, except those who ought to be armed at the expense of others, as is aforesaid. And all whom you shall find obstinate or rebellious shall be arrested and seized; and you are to commit them to our prisons, where they are to stay until we shall ordain otherwise for their punishment. And therefore we enjoin and order you, and each of you, as strictly as we can, on the faith and allegiance which you owe to us, that as soon as you have seen these letters you should array and prepare them as well and securely as you can. And you shall cause to come and to be called before you on certain days and at certain places which shall seem to you fitting and suitable, and not injurious to the people, all the men dwelling in your countryside, so that the array and arming can best be made and accomplished; and those who are thus arrayed and armed you shall cause to be kept in array. And moreover the signs called beacons you shall cause to be set in the accustomed places, by which the people of the countryside can be forewarned about the arrival of our foes. And you shall cause the same men thus arrayed and armed, when danger arises, to be led from time to time to the coasts of the sea or other places where the greatest need shall be, for the defence of the realm and the countryside. So that no harm shall come to the countryside from our foes in any way by your negligence, for defect of the defence, array or leadership of these men. [All men, from earls downwards, are to help the commissioners as much as possible to carry out their duties; and the commissioners are to cause to come before them all those in the shire who can help them. In witness whereof, etc. Witnessed by the king at Westminster, 20th day of October.]

English historical documents

544

350. The commons ask for commissions of oyer and terminer to suppress disorder in the north, 1410 (Rot. Parl. III, 624 [French]) Also, may it please our lord the king and his council to ordain and establish in this parliament that all the uproars and riots made and perpetrated from day to day against the crown, the peace, and the law, in every part of the realm, should be heard and determined by his justices with other sufficient lords to be assigned for this and sent thither, as well at the suit of the king as of the parties, and due execution wrought on the offenders and trespassers without favour in any way; and especially in the shires of Northumberland, Westmorland, Cumberland, York, Lancaster, Stafford, Derby, Nottingham, Shropshire, and Devon, where the greatest uproars have taken place, as it is said. Though it belongs to the king to grant such commissions of his right and prerogative, he wishes that commissions of oyer and terminer should be made as many times and in such places, as shall seem necessary, according to the advice of the king’s council, especially in the shires of Northumberland, Westmorland, York, Staffordshire, Derby, and Nottingham. 351. The term Quorum used as a noun in a statute, 1414 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 177 [French]) And that the justices of the peace in each county named in the quorum resident within the same county, except the justices of one Bench and the other, the chief baron of the exchequer, the serjeants-at-law and the king’s attorneys, during the time that the same justices, chief baron, serjeants and attorneys are attending and occupied in the king’s courts or elsewhere occupied in the king’s service, should make their sessions four times a year. [In 1439 it was enacted that no one should be appointed a justice of the peace who had not lands and tenements to the value of £20 a year, ibid, II, 309.] 352. The sessions in the lordship of Chepstow, 1415 (Cardiff Public Library, Phillipps MS. 30341, printed by T.B.Pugh, The Marcher Lordships of South Wales, 1415–1536 (Wales, 1963), 49 [French]) John, Earl Marshal and Earl of Nottingham, Marshal of England, Lord of Mowbray, of Segrave and of Gower, to all those who shall see or hear our letters, greeting. Know that we, confiding fully in the good sense, loyalty, and circumspection of our very loved cousin Walter Lucy, and in our very well loved lords, John Grendore, knight, Thomas Walweyn, John Lancastre, Richard Steresacre, Thomas Holcotes, William Boteller, Nicholas Ledewiche, Hugh Dalby, and Nicholas Blaxhale, have ordained and constituted them our justices by these presents, ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, four of them to enquire by oath or accusation of good and loyal men throughout all the lands and lordships that we have in Wales and in the marches of the same of all manner of felonies, rebellions, trespasses, contempts, offences, misprisions, ignorances, oppressions,

Local government outside the towns

545

confederacies, double-dealings, and extortions in our lordships and lands, by whatever persons done or perpetrated, and of all other articles against us and the laws and customs of these parts done, of which the punishment belongs to us…according to the laws, usages, and customs of the parts of Wales and the marches of the same, used, approved, and accustomed, as well at our suit as at the suit of any party who wishes to sue or complain before them, as well for us as for him to hear and determine them (oier et terminer). And we give moreover to our justices, ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four of them, full power by these presents to make fine or fines and to assess and pardon offences, if it should seem to them for the best for us and in our name, with all those and to all those and to each of those who should be accused or should accuse, before them, of felonies, rebellions, trespasses, contempts, offences, misprisions, ignorances, oppressions, confederacies, double-dealings, and extortions abovesaid…. Provided always that none or our said justices should have power by these presents…to assess, fine, or pardon anyone in the lordship in which he is our steward in Wales and the marches thereof. And if there should be any error in any record or process in any court or county in our said lordships or lands, we give full power to our said justices, ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four of them, by these presents to cause such record and process to come before them, as well at our suit as at the suit of the party who wishes to complain, and to reverse and annul the judgements or judgement made on this and to do right to the parties according to the laws and customs of the land and marches. And also we wish and especially command by these presents to our justices, ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, or four of them, that they should diligently enquire in the form above-said of all our officers and ministers and their lieutenants in all our lordships and lands abovesaid on all the points and articles abovesaid and…on the enquiry to hear and determine the findings…in the form abovesaid. And for this we order our justices by these that they, ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five or four of them, should be present at the foregoing, and do and execute them in the form abovesaid. Giving firmly in command by these presents to all our stewards, mayors, constables, bailiffs, provosts, and to all our ministers, officers, subjects, and tenants in these parts that to our said justices, ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five, four of them, in the matters abovesaid, and in their sessions from time to time they should help, assist, obey, and attend, as much as belongs to them. In witness of which we have caused our seal to be affixed to these presents for the duration of our will. Given at London the 13th of March, the second year of the reign of our lord King Henry V. 353. Abuses of sheriffs, 1426 (Nicolas, Council Proceedings, III, 219, from B.M., Cottonian MS. Cleopatra, F. iv [English]) Item for as much in various shires of this realm both lords and others have many matters to be done, it seems expedient that such were made sheriffs as were of name and fame true and indifferent between the king and the people and all parties; and specially that no man of law be sheriff, for always it is to be supposed that they have one party’s matter or another’s on hand.

English historical documents

546

Item for as much as under-sheriffs be wont to do execution of sheriff’s offices though others have the name, and in them lies return of writs…both touching men’s lives and inheritances, it is therefore thought expedient that such under-sheriffs and also bailiffs be changed every year, and that the sheriff make his oath not to let it to farm nor to make anyone under-sheriff or bailiff who occupied that office the previous year, but another such as he will answer for at the peril, of good fame and name, and true to the king and to his people…. Item that no man being steward with any lord be either sheriff or escheator in the shires where he is such an officer. [In 1425 the commons had petitioned in parliament against abuses committed by sheriffs, in taking great sums of money from persons who had been arrested before they could be released on bail, and in empanelling persons as jurors without due warning. An ordinance was made, to endure until the next parliament, ordering the sheriffs to cease from such practices, and empowering the justices of the peace, stewards of leets, and hundreds, to enquire into such abuses of sheriffs (Rot. Parl. IV, 306).]

354. Sanctuary, abjuration of the realm, and lynch-law, 1427 (The Brut Chronicle, ed. F.W.D.Brie, 442 [English]) This incident succinctly illustrates three characteristic phenomena of the period: violence, resort to sanctuary and lynch-law.

And in the same year a false Breton, between Easter and Whitsuntide, murdered a good widow in her bed, who had taken him into her house for charity, outside Aldgate, in the suburbs of London. And he bore away all that she had, and afterwards took sanctuary of Holy Church at St George’s in Southwark, but finally he took the Cross1 and forswore the king’s land.2 And as he went his way, it happened to him to come by the same place where he did that cursed deed. And women of the same parish came out to him with stones and with gutter dung and there made an end of him in the high street, so that he went no further, notwithstanding the presence of the constable and other men also, who had him in custody, to convey him forth in his way. For there was a great company of them [i.e. the women] and on him they had neither mercy nor pity. And thus this false thief ended his life in this world for his falseness. 1

I.e. the emblem of a pilgrim to the Holy Land. I.e. abjured the realm. When he did so, a felon was assigned the nearest port from which he could go overseas. He was escorted thither by the constables of the hundreds on the way, he had to keep to the highway, and to take the first ship that he could overseas. If he obeyed these rules, he was supposed to be protected by royal authority. 2

Local government outside the towns

547

355. The manner of holding a (manorial) court with view of frankpledge, c. 1440 (British Museum, Harleian MS. 773 [Latin and English]) (f. 39a) [Latin] In the first place is set down the order made by the steward, directed to the bailiff, for summoning the court. Thomas Basset, chief steward of the lord John de Vere, Earl of Oxford, to Robert Power, bailiff of the earl for his manor of H., greeting. By virtue of my office I order you that you should diligently cause the court there to be summoned, to be held on the Monday next after the feast of St Clement next after the date of this present writ.1 And therefore in the meantime attend to those matters which appertain to your office to be done. And observe this order effectively in the foregoing, so that you may be able to prove yourself blameless when I shall be there. Given under my seal, 10th July. The steward who holds the court writes the title in this way on his paper. First, he puts the name of the place; for example, Brentwood. The court with view of frankpledge to be held there on Monday next after the feast of St Laurence, in the thirteenth year of King Henry VI after the conquest of England [16 August 1435]. When this has been done, the steward causes the bailiff or bedel who is serving to proclaim with a high voice: “Oyes”. If it is a leet day, he does this three times; if it is only a court day, he does it only once. And then he says: [English] “All manner of men who have to do here at this day, as for the court or for the leet, draw you inward and listen unto the court.” [Latin] Then let there be called, according to the custom of the court, the essoins and proffers of suit or of plea, three times. And then if any name be essoined,2 enter it in the paper in this way: Essoins Richard B, from common business, by William H. etc. Thomas N, for the same, by Robert B, etc. John C, for the same, by Walter B. And so for the others. And when this has been done, let the chief pledges be called by name as it is set out in the old roll of the court, if it should be a leet day; and if it should not be a leet day but only a court day, then let twelve of the tenants standing by be called. And let their names be noted in the paper. [English] And see if there are any plaints, precepts, attachments, or distraints pending in the previous rolls, and read them out openly in the court how the bailiff has served them. And also if there are any new plaints or old pending in the court rolls before this court, let the parties be called and conclude them before the quest is charged. If the plaint shall pass by the quest’s knowledge, as of the homage, then give them their charge with the others. And when that is done, call the quest, and bid the first lay his hand upon the book. “Thou shalt truly enquire and make true present-ment of those matters that thou shalt be charged of on the king’s behalf, and on behalf of the lord of this franchise, that is worthy to be presented. Thou shalt well and truly keep the king’s counsel, thy fellows’, and thine own, and not hinder for any thing. 1 2

Probably 30 November 1439; see the last paragraph of this document. Excused for not appearing in court.

English historical documents

548

but thou shalt tell the truth. So help thee God and the company of saints.” And bid him kiss the book. And then call two or three together and bid them lay their hands upon the book, and say in this manner: “All such oath as John here swore, you shall hold towards you well and truly, so help you God and the company of saints”, and bid them kiss the book, and so call forth all the quest in the same way, and then bid them stand together and hear their charge, etc. The charge of the court. First, the good men who are sworn, you shall enquire of them and truly present to them all the suitors who owe suit to the court at this day, as for their tenure, if they be here or not, and present their names if they make default, etc. (Ibid. f. 39b) And if there be any tenant dead since the last court you shall enquire and let us know what he held of this lordship at the day of his death, and what advantage my lord ought to have by his death, as marriage, relief, escheat, or heriot, or any other particular gain or profit and who is his next heir, and what age he is of, and whether it be man or woman, and in whose keeping. Also if there be any custom, rent, or service withdrawn from this lordship that ought to be done by right, you shall enquire by whom it is withdrawn and what rent or service it is, and in what bailiff’s time, and how long it has been withdrawn and where the land lies, that we may distrain for the arrears that are behindhand. Also if there be any bond man of blood within this lordship that puts his son to school and makes him a priest, or makes him an apprentice, or sets him to a craft, or marries his daughter without leave, you shall let us know of it. Also of all manner of waste done upon your bond land, as felling timber, oaks or elms, unless it be for repairs of his bond-holding, and not to sell it to his own use, let us know of his name; or else if any bond man purchase any charter land without leave, you shall let us know what it is worth annually and where it lies. Also if there be any bond man who lets his land to sow in return for the half or the third sheaf without leave; or else if there be any bondman who withdraws himself or his goods and chattels out of this lordship into any other without leave, you shall let us know of it. Also if any man overcharge any of the lord’s commons with more beasts than he should according to the quantity of his tenure, or any man of his own tenure, you shall let us know of it. Also if any man make any rescues or break any arrest made by the bailiff or any other officer. Or else if any man break the lord’s pound, that is to say, a distress put into the lord’s pound by an officer and take it out again without any leave or deliverance, let us know of it. Also if any man remove or pull up any markstones or markstakes that are boundaries, or make boundaries between lordship and lordship, or tenant, free or bond, tell us of their names. Also if any man give any land into Holy Church, that is to say, into mortmain since the statute was made thereof, without the king’s licence and that of my lord of this lordship, you shall let us know the value thereof annually, what it is, and what are their names.

Local government outside the towns

549

Also you shall enquire if any man has encroached on and occupied any of my lord’s land, that is to say, [arable] land, meadow, moor, pasture, or any other vacant ground without leave, you shall let us know of it. Also you shall enquire of your bond tenements, if they are kept and repaired as they ought to be, that is to say, in timbering, covering and walling, or else let us know of their names. Also if there is any man who holds two tenements and wastes one and withdraws any trees from the one to the other, let us know of his name. Or else if any tenant has made any strip or waste upon his tenement. “Strip” is to say, to pull up trees or raise up hedges, “waste” is to let houses fall down for default of carpentry, daubing, or diking, etc. Also you shall enquire of bargains and alienations made out of court of copy land for more than a twelvemonth and a day, or if so be that any lease is made of copy land for a term of years, or if it be let in fee simple or in the fee taille without license of the court, let us know of it. Also of trespassers in corn, grass, or pasture, you shall let us know what beasts they were, whose they were, and the quantity of the trespass. Also of trespass done in my lord’s woods, or waste made in my lord’s woods, or waste made in my lord’s greens, as felling of timber, oaks, elms, or ashes, or rods, or any other manner of waste done without license, tell us of their names. (Ibid. f. 40a) Also you shall enquire of hunters or hawkers who hunt or hawk within the lordship for coneys, hares, partridges, pheasants, or larks, or take any other beast of warren, or else fish in my lord’s several waters without license, tell us their names. Also you shall enquire if there be any tenants who implead any other tenant outside this court, whether in the hundred or the shire or in the court Christian, or in any place without the jurisdiction of this court without leave, tell us of their names, for it is against the custom of the manor. Also if any tenant embezzle or keep any evidence that belongs to this lordship, as court-rolls, rentals, or customaries, or any other evidence of this lordship, let us know thereof. And of all these points, and all others that belong unto the court, you shall go together and enquire, by your oaths, and bring us up a true verdict. [Latin] The charge of the leet follows. [English] And as for the leet, you shall enquire by your oaths what you pay to your common fine of court as at this day, and that it be gathered among you, as you have done before this time. And you shall enquire of all your headboroughs with all their tithingmen who ought to be here this day, whether they are here or not, and tell us the names of those who have defaulted. Also if all those who are sworn in the king’s assize are here at this day to show their heads as for a suit royal, whether they be here or not, let us know. Also if there be any small thieves among you who steal small gear, as hens, geese, capons, pigs, or poultry, broadcloth, or towels, or corn in harvest, or draw men’s latches, or pick men’s locks, if there be any such small thieves amongst you, tell us their names.

English historical documents

550

Also if there be any man among you who knowingly receives or harbours any thieves, or who goes on a message for felons for their victuals, or any other to their behalf, you shall let us know of them. Also if there be any among you who know any great thieves that steal neats, oxen, cows, horses, sheep, or any other goods of great value, robbers or revers [i.e. plunderers], you shall let us know. Also if there be any among you who have been arrested for suspicion of felony, and let go again without any lawful authority, let us know of it. Also if there be any dwelling among you that have taken to the church for felony and have escaped without any abjuration of the realm, as the law wills, let us know of it. Also if there be any man dwelling among you who has forsworn the king’s land and returned again without any special grace of the king, and is dwelling without this lordship, let us know of it. Also if there have been made any hue and cry raised against the king’s peace and not pursued, let us know by whom and at whose suit. Also of all assaults made and affrays against the king’s peace amongst you, you shall let us know who made them and the names of them. Also of all wounds made and bloodshed or drawing of weapons against the king’s peace, you shall let us know of them. Also if there have been any rescues, or arrests broken, against any of the king’s officers, in hindering them from doing their offices as they ought to do by night, you shall let us know of it. Also of common bakers among you who make pastry unwholesome for man’s body, and do not keep the assize, let us know of it. Also of all brewsters and hucksters who sell ale and do not keep the assize, and sell by cups and bowls and measures unsealed; and if they sell any ale to the alefinders and have set thereon a high price, let us know of it. Also you shall enquire if there be any among you who use double measures, a greater to buy with and a smaller to sell with, or use false balances, weights, yards, ells, and deceit of the king’s people, you shall let us know of them. Also butchers, fishers, or any other victuallers that sell victuals corrupt and unwholesome for man and sell too dearly, let us know of them. Also if there are any ways or waterpaths restricted, stopped, or turned out of their right course into a wrong course to the annoyance of the people, let us know by whom it is done and the names of them. Also of all purprestures made on land or water or with blocks or stocks or any other thing in the highway, to common nuisance, you shall let us know of it. Also if there are any houses, hedges, walls, or dikes raised or cast down to the nuisance of the people, you shall let us know of it. Also of all white tawers who do not sell good bargains as they ought reasonably to do, and buy their skins in any other place than in a marked town, let us know. Also of all tanners, cordwainers, and artificers who do not make good bargains for the people as they ought to do, and sell too dearly, you shall let us know of them. Also of all those who are 12 years old and more, and have dwelt within this lordship twelve months and a day (Ibid. f. 40b) and are not sworn to the king, let us know of them and of their receivers.

Local government outside the towns

551

Also of raisers and breakers of mark stones, stocks, and engines1 of house-doves with nets or any other contrivance, you shall let us know of it. Also of all common chiders and brawlers to the nuisance of their neighbours, and eavesdroppers under men’s walls and windows, by night or by day, to bear away tales or discover their counsel, to make debate and dissension among their neighbours, you shall let us know their names. Also of all manner of waifs of goods or of chattels of fugitives or felons which are forfeit within this lordship, you shall let us know thereof, whether the lord has been answered thereof or not, and in whose hands they are. Also if there be any stray come into this lordship, of beasts, horses, cattle, sheep, swine, swans, which have been within this lordship twelve months and a day, and have not been challenged, and have been proclaimed in church and chipping [market], whether the lord be answered thereof or not, etc. Also if there be clippers or washers of the king’s money and counterfeiters of the king’s seal, or purse-cutters, you shall let us know of their names. Also if there be any regrators or forestalled among you that lie in wait to buy corn or any other victuals at the town end, or in any other place, to make the purchase thereof dear, let us know of their names. Also if there be any millers among you that are accustomed to take excessive toll otherwise than they ought to do by right, you shall let us know of their names. Also if there be vagabonds, hasty-doers, or rioters among you, who wake at nights and sleep by day, and are accustomed to haunt taverns and ale houses, and rioters, and no men know whence they come nor whither they will go, you shall let us know of them and those who receive them. Also of all treasure found under the earth or above the earth, as gold, silver, or any other riches, and whether the lord has been answered thereof. Also of all encroachments made upon the king or of possessions. Also of all Lollards, if there be any among you, and of their scholars that you know of, you shall enquire. Also you shall enquire by the oaths that you have taken whether the constables, alefinders, bailiffs, and all other officers that belong to this lordship have well and truly done their office, as they ought to do. Also of all ravishers of women, if there be any among you within this lordship, you shall let us know their names. Also of all manner of felonies, and robberies feloniously done within the precinct of this lordship, you shall let us know by whom, where, and what time. And if you find any such men among you, you shall present your verdict between a clerk and you, and set your seals thereto and keep the king’s counsel and your own. Also you shall enquire by the oaths that you have made of all the defaults and plaints that were prepared at the last leet day, whether they are amended now or not, as they ought to be. 1

Snares, traps.

English historical documents

552

And of these points and of all others that you have been accustomed to be charged with, as for the court and for the leet, which are worthy to be presented, you shall go together and bring us in a true presentment. [Latin] And then let the jurors go away to make enquiry, and let them come back again. Let the steward say to them: [English] “Sirs, you are all agreed who shall speak for you? And are you all agreed to what he says? Have you any thing that is the king’s counsel?” [Latin] And then the clerk shall write the verdict according to their statement. If it should be a court with a view of frankpledge, then the clerk shall write the roll of the court in the following manner. [English] And if there is any plaint between parties that the homage shall be charged of what shall pass by them, inform them before they go out. The manner of writing how the clerk ought to write the roll of the court with view according to the more modern form. And it is to be known that the first form of the court ought to be written in the roll, then the leet as follows: Hastings. The court with the view held there on Monday next after the feast of St Clement, in the eighteenth year of the reign of King Henry VI after the conquest of England [30 November 1439]. Repyngham. 356. A defence of the liberties of the Earldom of Chester, 1450 (Archaeologia, vol. 57 (1900), 75, from Shavington Estate MSS [English]) Most gracious, benign, and merciful king. We your humble subjects and true obedient liege people, the abbots, priors, and all the clergy, barons, knights, squires, and all the commonalty of your county palatine of Chester, meekly pray and beseech your highness. Whereas the said county is and has been a county palatine as well before the conquest of England as since, distinct and separate from your crown of England, within which county you and all your noble progenitors…have had your high courts of parliaments to hold at your wills, your Chancery and Exchequer, your justice to hold pleas as well of the crown as common pleas, and by authority of such parliaments to make or admit laws within the same such as be thought expedient and necessary for your will and that of the inheritors and inhabitants of the same county, and the inheritors of the same county…have not been bound, charged, nor hurt of their lands, goods, or possessions within the same county nor the inhabitants of the same county of their bodies before this time by authority of any parliament held in other places than within the same county by any act but such as that by their own consent assembled by authority within the same county have agreed…they have no knights, citizens, burgesses of the said county to a parliament out of the same county…. Notwithstanding this franchise, there are your commissions directed out to several commissions of the same county for the levy of a subsidy granted by the commons of your land at your parliament lately held at Leicester to make levy thereof contrary to the liberties, freedoms, franchises of the said county…. May it please your most noble grace of your blessed favour graciously to consider the foregoing, and also how we your said beseechers have been as kind of our true hearts with our goods at times of need as other parties of your land and also ready to obey your laws and ordinances made and ordained within the said county…and of your more especial grace ordain

Local government outside the towns

553

that…there be no act in this parliament nor in any other parliament to be held hereafter outside the said county to the hurt of their goods, lands, tenements, or possessions within the said county…. And in witness that this is the will, assent, desire, and agreement of us, John, Abbot of Chester, Thomas, Abbot of Vale Royal, Richard, Prior of Birkenhead, Edmund, Lord Grey, John, Lord Dudley, Thomas Stanley, Andrew Ogart, John Manewaring, knights, John Troutbeck, William Stanley, Thomas Danyell, John Donne, Hugh Calviley, Randall Brereton, Richard Cholmondeley, Rankin Grosvenor, John of Eggerton, Thomas Beston, Thomas Manley, Ralph Gamul, squires, Thomas Pull, John Dutton of Hatton, William Whitmore, William Holford, Richard Bunbury, Thomas Venables, William Maynewaring, Richard Swynnerton, Richard Spurstowe, Richard Clyve, Henry Ravenscroft, Thomas Hogh, and Jenkin of Bebington, and of all other gentles and commons of the said county that John Maynewaringe knight, Rankin of Eggerton, Robert Legh of Adlington, John Daven-port of Davenport and John Nedeham, sue a petition in the form above written to the king our sovereign lord for us and all the inheritors and inhabitants of the said county and in our name, and we to abide by the said suit, and to this present writing we have set our seals. The king’s reply Trusty and well beloved in God and trusty and well beloved, we greet you well. And for as much as we have a supplication granted unto us, on behalf of all our liege people within our county palatine of Chester, how their predecessors and ancestors have not been charged before this time with any fifteenth or subsidy, granted unto us or any of our progenitors by authority of any parliament, held outside our county. For which cause we have charged our chamberlain of our said county to make our writs, directed to all our commissioners, ordained for the assessing and levy of the said subsidy last granted unto us, charging them to cease from any execution of our letter of commission made unto them in that matter. Wherefore according to your commandment lately given by us unto our said chamberlain, we will that you on our behalf open and declare unto all our liege people, how it is our full will and intent that they be not charged with any such grant otherwise than they their predecessors and ancestors have been charged with aforetimes. And that they have and hold, possess and enjoy, all their liberties, freedoms and franchises in as ample and large a form as ever they had in our day or those of any of our progenitors. And that you fail not thereof, as we trust you, and as you wish to please us. Given under our signet of the eagle, at our palace of Westminster the 8th day of March, 29 Henry VI. To our trusty and well beloved in God the Abbot of our monastery of Chester; to our trusty and well beloved knights, Sir Thomas Stanley, our Justices of Chester, and Sir John Maynwaring, and to every one of them.

English historical documents

554

357. The sheriff’s oath, 1460 (Literae Cantuarienses, III (Rolls Series, 1889), 235, from Christ Church, Canterbury MSS, Reg. N. 190 [English]) The king had issued a writ directing the Prior of Christ Church and another commissioner to administer the oath of office to the sheriff of Kent, the writ being dated 8 September, 39 Henry VI; and the prior records that on 19 September, 39 Henry VI, he administered the required oath to John Scot, who was to be sheriff of Kent, in the following form:—

You shall serve the king well and truly in the office of the sheriff of Kent, and to the king’s profit, in everything that belongs to you to do by way of your office, as far as you can. You shall truly keep the king’s rights and all that belongs to the crown. You shall not assent to the decrease, lessening, or concealment of the king’s rights or of his franchises and wherever you shall have knowledge that the king’s rights or the rights of crown are concealed or withdrawn, whether in lands, rents, franchises, suits, or any other things, you shall do your power to make them to be restored to the king; and if you may not do it, you shall certify the king or some of his council thereof, such as you hold for certain will say it to the king. You shall not respite the king’s debts for any gift or favour, wherever you may raise them without great grievance of the debtors. You shall treat the people of your shrievalty truly and righteously, and do right as well to poor as to rich in what belongs to your office. You shall do no wrong to any man for any gift, or good behest, or promise of good, or favour, or hate. You shall disturb no man’s right. You shall truly acquit at the Exchequer all those of whom you shall receive anything of the king’s debts. You shall take nothing whereby the king may lose, or whereby that right may be disturbed, hindered, or the king’s debts delayed. You shall truly return and truly serve all the king’s writs as completely as it shall be in your capacity. You shall have none to be your undersheriff or any of your sheriff’s clerks of the past year. You shall take no bailiff into your service but such as you shall answer for. You shall make each of your bailiffs to make such oath as you make yourself in what belongs to their occupation. You shall receive no writ unsealed by you or any of yours, under the seal of any justice save of justices in eyre, or justices assigned in the same shire wherein you are sheriff, or of a justice of Newgate. You shall make your bailiffs of the true and sufficient men of the country. Also you shall do all your pain and diligence to destroy and make to cease all manner of heresies and errors commonly called heresies within your bailiwick from time to time to all your power, and to assist and help all the ordinaries and commissaries of Holy Church, and favour and maintain them as often as you shall be required by the said ordinaries or commissaries. You shall dwell in your person within your bailiwick for the time that you shall be in the same office. You shall not let your sheriffwick or any bailiwick thereof to farm to any man. You shall truly set and return reasonable and due issues of those who are within your bailiwick, according to their estate or their behaviour and make your panels yourself. And moreover in eschewing and restraint of the

Local government outside the towns

555

manslaughters, robberies, and other manifold grievous offences that be done daily, namely by such as name themselves soldiers and by other vagrants, which continually increase in number and multitude, so that the king’s true subjects may not safely ride or go to do such things as they have to do, to their intolerable hurt and hindrance, you shall truly and effectually, with all diligence possible to you, execute the statutes of which you have knowledge. All these things you shall truly keep, as God help you and the saints. 358. The sheriff’s criminal jurisdiction in the tourn is transferred to the justices of the peace, 1461 (Statutes of the Realm, II, 389–91 [French]) For a complaint from Cornwall to the commons in parliament in 1432 about abuses of the sheriff’s tourn, especially by wrongful and oppressive amercements, see Rot. Parl. IV, 403.

Also, whereas many of the faithful liege people of the king, as well spiritual as temporal, by the inordinate and immoderate indictments and presentments, as well of felonies, trespasses, and offences, as of other things, which have long been taken, had, and used…before sheriffs…their under-sheriffs, their clerks, bailiffs, and their servants, at their tourns or lawdays held before them severally in their shires, which indictments and presentments are often affirmed by jurors having no conscience nor free holding, and few goods, and often by menial servants and bailiffs of the sheriffs and their under-sheriffs, by which indictments and presentments the faithful liege people are attached, arrested…and put in prison by the sheriffs, etc…. and those who are in prison are constrained…by the sheriffs, etc. to make with them great fines and ransoms…. After these fines, ransoms, and amercements are thus made…by the sheriffs, etc…. these persons are released from prison, and the indictments and presentments are removed, embezzled, and withdrawn. Our sovereign lord the king, considering the foregoing, by the advice and assent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and at the request of the commons in the parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, has ordained and established that in all manner of indictments and presentments which shall be taken in future before any of his sheriffs, under-sheriffs, clerks, bailiffs, or other servants at their tourns or lawdays, they shall not have any power or authority to arrest, attach, or put in prison, or levy any fines or amercements from any person or persons thus indicted or presented—but that the sheriffs, etc…. should bring…all such indictments or presentments taken before them…in their tourns or lawdays…and deliver them to the justices of the peace in their next session of the peace which shall be held in the shire or shires where such indictments and presentments were taken…. And that the justices of the peace shall have power to award process on all such indictments and presentments as the law requires. [A penalty is laid down for failure to deliver such indictments and a further penalty for breaches of the statutes by sheriffs and their subordinates.]

English historical documents

556

[In 1484 the powers of the justices of the peace were to be further increased by allowing them to release on bail persons suspected of felony, S.R. II, 478–9.]

359. The appointment of a council to govern the principality and marches of Wales, and definitions of its powers, 1471–6 (Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1467–77 [English from Latin original]) (283) [On 8 July 1471, fifteen persons enumerated were appointed as administrators of the principality of Wales, the duchy of Cornwall and the county of Chester for the Prince of Wales, till he should reach the age of fourteen years. A proviso was added that they should grant no office for life or for a term of years, but only during the pleasure of the prince. The prince was then aged nine months, having been born on 2 or 3 November 1470; he had been created Prince of Wales on 26 June 1471.] (Ibid. 366) 20th February, 1473. Appointment of the king’s consort Elizabeth, queen of England, the king’s kinsman Thomas, Cardinal Archbishop of Canterbury, the king’s brothers George, Duke of Clarence, and Richard, Duke of Gloucester, Robert, Bishop of Bath and Wells, and Chancellor, L.Bishop of Durham,1 E.Bishop of Carlisle,2 J.Bishop of Rochester; the king’s kinsman John, Earl of Shrewsbury, and Anthony, Earl of Rivers, Thomas, Abbot of Westminster, Chancellor of the king’s firstborn son Edward, Prince of Wales, William Hastings of Hastings, knight, the king’s chamberlain, Richard Fenys of Dacre, knight, Walter Devereux of Ferrers, knight, John Fog, knight, John Scot, knight, Thomas Vaughan, chamberlain of the said prince, John Nedeham, knight, Richard Chokke, knight, Richard Fowler, Master Richard Martyn, clerk, William Arlyngton, Richard Haute, John Sulyard and Geoffrey Coytemore as tutors and councillors of the said prince until he shall be of the age of fourteen years, with full power to administer his possessions within the principality of Wales, the duchy of Cornwall, the counties of Chester and Flint and elsewhere, to grant licences for ecclesiastical elections, to receive fealties, to present to churches and other benefices, to dispose of custodies of lands and marriages of heirs, to grant pardons, to appoint and remove stewards, sheriffs, bailiffs, reeves, chamberlains, escheators, and other ministers and officers and to grant letters patent, provided that no office shall be granted for life or for a term of years but during the pleasure of the said prince only By King and Council. 1

Laurence Booth, translated to York in 1476. Edward Story, translated to Chichester in 1478. 3 John Alcock, later president of this council, translated to Worcester in 1476. 1 John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, son of Richard III’s eldest surviving sister, Elizabeth, Duchess of Suffolk, whom Richard had made his heir after his only son, Prince Edward, had died suddenly on 9 April 1484. 2

Local government outside the towns

557

(Ibid. 401) 10th November, 1473 Appointment, during pleasure, of the Bishop of Rochester as teacher of the king’s son the prince, that he may be brought up in virtue and cunning, and as president of the council. By the King [in English]. (Ibid. 574) 2nd January, 1476. General commission of oyer and terminer to the king’s first-born son Edward, Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, and Earl of Chester and Flint, within the counties of Salop, Hereford, Gloucester, and Worcester and the Marches of Wales adjacent, and Wales, with power to array the men at arms, archers, and others there if necessary, and with authority to substitute other persons for himself, provided that one of the justices of one or the other Bench shall be one of those thus substituted in the said counties. 23rd February, 1476. Commission to the prince and his council to be at Ludlow on 24th March next to discuss with the lords of the marches, to whom the king has written separately, the ways and means for the punishment of many homicides, murders, robberies, spoliations and oppressions in Wales and the marches of the same, for which the king is going in person to those parts after Easter. (Ibid. 605) 16th March, 1476. Appointment, during pleasure, of the king’s firstborn son Edward, Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, and Earl of Chester and Flint, or such persons as by the advice of his council he may substitute, to enquire about all liberties, privileges, and franchises in the counties of Salop, Hereford, and Gloucester, and the marches of Wales adjacent which should be taken into the king’s hands and all escapes of robbers and felons in the same counties and marches. By the King. 360. The regulations for the Council of the North, 1484 (Letters and Papers…of Richard III and Henry VII, ed. J.Gairdner, I, 56, from B.M., Harleian MS. 433, f. 264b [English]) These following articles are ordained and established by the king’s grace, to be used and executed by my Lord of Lincoln,1 and the lords and others of his council in the North parts for his surety and the well-being of the inhabitants of the same. First, the king wishes that no lord, nor any other person appointed to be of his council, for favour, affection, hate, malice, or bribery, shall speak in the council otherwise than the king’s laws and good conscience shall require, but be indifferent and in no way partial, as far as his wit and reason will allow him, in all manner of matters that shall be administered before them.

English historical documents

558

Also, if there be any matter in the said council moved which touches any lord or other person of the said council, then the same lord or person shall in no way sit or remain in the said council during the time of the examination and ordering of the said matter unless he be called, and that he obey and be ordered therein by the rest of the said council. Also, that no manner of matter of great weight or substance be ordered or determined within the said council unless two of these…with our said nephew be at the same, and they shall be commissioners of our peace throughout these parts. Also, the said council shall meet, wholly if it may be, once in the quarter of the year at least, at York, to hear, examine, and order all bills of complaints and other petitions to be shown before them there, and oftener if the case require. Also the said council shall have authority and power to order and direct all riots, forcible entries, distress takings, variances, disputes, and other misbehaviours against our laws and peace committed and done in the said parts. And if any such exist whom they can in no way thoroughly order, then they shall refer the matter to us, and certify us thereof in all goodly haste thereafter. Also the said council shall in no wise determine matters of land without the assent of the parties. Also, our said council for great riots done and committed in the great lordships or otherwise by any person shall commit the said person to ward to one of our castles near where the said riot is committed. For we will that all our castles shall be our gaols; and if no such castle be near, then the next common gaol. Also, we will that our said council, as soon as they have knowledge of any assem-blies or gatherings made contrary to our laws and peace, arrange to resist, with-stand, and punish the same in the beginning according to their deserts, without further postponement or putting it into undue regard. Also that all letters and writings to be made by our said council for the due executing of the foregoing shall be made in our name, and shall be endorsed with the hand of our nephew of Lincoln underneath with these words “Per consilium regis”. Also, that one sufficient person be appointed to make out the said letters and writings and register the same from time to time, and our said nephew and such with him of our council who are then present shall set their hands in the register; and a seal shall be provided free for the sealing of the said letters and writings. Also, we will and straightly charge all and each of our officers, true liegemen, and subjects in these north parts to be at all times obedient to the commandments of our said council in our name, and duly to execute the same, as they and every one of them will eschew our great displeasure and indignation. Memorandum, that the king’s grace before his departure do name the lords and others that shall be of his council in those parts to assist and attend in that behalf on his nephew of Lincoln. Also, memorandum that the king name certain learned men to be attendant here, so that one always at the least be present, and at the meeting at York all of them to be there. Also, that the king grant a commission to my lord of Lincoln and others of the council, according to the effect of the foregoing.

G. TOWN GOVERNMENT 361. Bristol, the first provincial town to be made a county, 1373 (i) (Bristol Charters, I (1155–1373), ed. N.D.Harding (Bristol Record Soc., 1930) [Latin]) 142 Edward, etc…to the venerable fathers in Christ John Bishop of Bath and Wells, William Bishop of Worcester (and the Abbots of Glastonbury and Cirencester and Edmund Clyvedon, Richard Acton, Theobald Gorges, Henry Percehay, Walter Clopton, and John Serjaunt) greeting. Know that since the 8th of August last past we have conceded to our beloved burgesses of our town of Bristol and to their heirs and successors in perpetuity that the town of Bristol with its suburbs and precincts shall henceforth be separate from the counties of Gloucester and Somerset, and be in all things exempt both by land and sea, and that it should be a county by itself, to be called the county of Bristol in perpetuity, and that the burgesses and their heirs and successors should have in perpetuity within the town of Bristol and its suburbs and precincts certain liberties and exemptions and enjoy them fully and use them as is more fully contained in the said charter. [The persons to whom the letters patent are addressed are to act as boundary commissioners to determine the boundaries between the shires of Gloucester, Somerset and Bristol.] In witness [whereof] we have caused these our letters patent to be made. Witnessed by [myself] at Westminster on the first day of September, in the 47th year of our reign in England and the 34th of our reign in France. (ii) A sheriff of Bristol is appointed, 1373 (Ibid. 166 [Latin]) Edward, etc…to the mayor, burgesses, freemen and the whole community of the town of Bristol and its suburbs and precincts greeting. Since we have committed to our beloved John Viel our county of Bristol to be kept for a year according to the liberties conceded and confirmed to our beloved burgesses of the town by our charter, so that he should pay annually the farms due to us, and should account for our debts at our Exchequer and all other things belonging to the office of sheriff of the said county of Bristol, as is more fully contained in our letters patent made on this matter. We order you that you should be obedient and responsible to the same John as sheriff of the county of Bristol in all things which belong to the office of sheriff of the same shire. In witness whereof we have caused our letters patent to be made. Witnessed by myself at Westminster on the first day of October in the 47th year of our reign in England and the 34th of our reign in France.

English historical documents

560

[For the charter of 1404 which made Norwich a county of a city, see W.Hudson and J.C. Tingey, The Records of the City of Norwich, vol. 1 (1906), 31.]

362. The roll of the jurors of the Great Tourn of Nottingham, 1408 (Records of the Borough of Nottingham, ed. W.H.Stevenson, II (1883), 61–4 [Latin]) Inquest of the Great Tourn taken before John Samon, Mayor of the town of Nottingham, on Monday next before the feast of Saint Mark the Evangelist, in the 9th year of the reign of King Henry the Fourth [23 April 1408]. Which jurors say, that John London occupied [as] a croft with tenters1…the common ground [near the Postern] from the walls of the town towards the south in breadth 40 feet and in length so far as the croft reaches. They also say, that Henry Smith occupies another croft near, in the same way. They also say, that Robert Trowell, hosier, has made a wall on the common ground in Berwardlane. They also say, that Thomas Mapperley occupies a parcel of the common ground with a tree-trunk near the Orgarlane towards the west. They also say, that Thomas occupies another parcel of the common ground with a tree-trunk near the Swynebarre. They also say, that Thomas Mapperley has blocked up the watercourse of the Beck at the end of Beklane, and has diverted it into a wrong course…. They also say, that John Langton [encroaches on] the highway with timber near the Friars Minor. They also say, that Thomas Kay has made a dunghill in the highway in the Broadmarche. They also say, that John Plumptre has made a [pit] and [has placed] a tree-trunk on the common ground belonging to the place whereon Henry Parchemener dwells. They also say, that Roger Mokington is a common host, against the Assize, to wit, [he harbours] dicers. They also say, that Juliana Brown is a common hostess, against the Assize, to wit, [she harbours] thieves and harlots. They also say, that William Bainton entered the house of Joan, wife of Robert Selston, in the night, unlawfully and against the peace of our Lord the King. They also say, that Robert Leadbeater, here at Nottingham, on the 8th of September, in the 8th year of the reign of King Henry, stole shoes of the goods and chattels of Robert Hayward: whereupon Robert Hay ward received his goods back and certain vessels of pewter by way of amends for that default. They also say, that John Dighton, cooper, here at Nottingham, on the 9th day of the month of June, in the 8th year of the reign of King Henry, carried away, by force and arms, boards and poles from the chamber of our Lord the King in the Saturday Market, and a cupboard of the goods and chattels of Thomas Bythestreet. Richard Palmer in mercy—20d. Hugh Skorer in mercy—12d. John Bilby in mercy— 6d. William Whitehals in mercy—12d. Robert Sutton—4d. Joan Clerk—4d. John 1

Racks on which cloths could be stretched on hooks to dry after being fulled,

Town government

561

Tamworth—4d. William Paw—4d. John Bytheway—4d. Thomas Bytheway—4d. John Sery—4d. John Bell—2d. John Bolton—4d. John Bank’—2d. Robert Ockley—4d. William Whitehals for breach of the pinfold, 2d. Thomas Baxter, 6s 8d. 363. The regulation of the collection of taxes at Shrewsbury, 1416 (Shrewsbury Borough Archives, Guildhall, Shrewsbury, Assembly Book No. 1, f. 84a [English]) Ordinance made touching the tax of the town of Shrewsbury for profit of all the commonalty of the aforesaid town in the time of Roger Corbet and John Perle, bailiffs of the same town, the Friday next after the feast of the Conception of Our Lady the fourth year of the reign of King Henry the Fifth after the Conquest [11 December 1416]. First, for as much as when a tax is granted to our liege lord the king the aforesaid town of Shrewsbury bears so high a charge of tax that it is insupportable for them, that is to say, and when the commission of the tax of the same town is come, the collectors of the same town have chosen six men as assessors, and they together with them have laid the tax by a great sum more than the tax comes to, and moreover that the collectors have taken much more than was laid, to the great harm and hindrance of the aforesaid commons. And thereupon the aforesaid bailiffs, the good men and commons, in the year and on the day before said, assembled in their common hall, by advice and assent of David Holback, Reynald Mutton, Simon Tour, John Gamel the elder, Thomas Pryde, Nicholas Gerard, William Toure, William Herd, David Rathebone, Nicholas Shetton, John Glover, John Shetton, Robert Horseley, Walter Pyry, John Beget, John Paunton, John Northampton, Benjamin Godeber, Edward Acton, John Colle, John Hulle, John Pontesbury, Matthew Fyssher, William Trentham, William Spyre, Thomas Neubald, John Dun, and of all other good men and commons, seeing this harm and mischief, are fully assented and agreed that from this day forth when the commission of the tax of the aforesaid town is come to the collectors of the same town, that for the time shall be, that the same collectors shall take to them the bailiffs that for the time shall be, to choose four or six assessors of the same town as the commission makes mention. The aforesaid Roger Cocket and John Perle, bailiffs, and the other good men and commons are also assented and agreed that the same six men assessors, that for the time shall be, shall be sworn openly before all the commons on a book well and truly to assess each man and woman according to their possessions, with all outsiders who have land, rents, goods, or chattels within the aforesaid town and franchise, and all other foreign burgesses who are sworn to be contributory to pay taxes with the same town, so that the sum that is levied shall come to the same whole sum of the tax, that is to say, and no more. And that the collectors, who shall be for the time being, shall not be present in any way with the aforesaid six men assessors, that shall be for the time being, while they assess the aforesaid taxes. And when this is done, the bailiffs that shall be for the time being, shall assemble the good men and all the commons in their com-mon hall, there to choose six good men and true to assess the same six assessors well and truly by their oaths, so that the sum that the aforesaid collectors are assessed be within the aforesaid sum of

English historical documents

562

And also the collectors of the tax…as soon as the whole tax is assessed by the six assessors, shall deliver a true copy of all the names, that are assessed to the tax, to the bailiffs…so that every man and woman may come to the same bailiffs to see what he is assessed at. And that the same copy be well and truly examined by the bailiffs…that it be true and that the sum of all manner of names that are assessed to tax come to no more And also that the bailiffs…and the six men of the than to the whole sum of place shall allow the collectors of the tax…for their labour to London of the common good according to their advice and discretion. 364. The progress of incorporation of the London livery companies (a) The incorporation of the Goldsmiths, 1393 (Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1391–96, 219 [Latin, English summary]) 6th February, 1393. Winchester. Licence, for 20 marks paid in the hanaper by men of the mistery of goldsmiths of London, and upon their petition alleging that letters patent of the late king, granting them licence to acquire tenements and rents in London to the value of £20. a year for the support of the blind and infirm of that mistery and of a chaplain to celebrate mass to the infirm daily for the souls of all the faithful departed, have not yet been executed, because no person [legally] capable [of holding such property] is named therein, for the men of that mistery to have henceforth a perpetual commonalty of themselves, and for the commonalty to elect yearly four wardens from their number to govern the mistery and commonalty and all men thereof; and further, licence for the said wardens and commonalty to acquire in mortmain tenements and rent in the city and suburbs to the value of £20 a year, in aid of the support of the blind and infirm of the said mistery and their chaplain. (b) The incorporation of the Drapers, 1438 (Ibid. 1436–41, 244 [English summary]) 30th November, 1438. Grant that the king’s liegemen of the mistery of drapers within the city of London may found a guild of men of that mistery and others in honour of the Virgin, the men of which may yearly elect from their number a master and four wardens, who, at the time of election, must be drapers and freemen of the city. Grant also that the master, wardens, brethren and sisters be a body corporate with power to purchase land and to sue and be sued under the style of the master and wardens of the guild or fraternity of St Mary of the drapers of London. By privy seal and for 40s paid in the hanaper. [It will be noted that an early charter, like that to the Goldsmiths in 1393, puts in the forefront the need to strengthen the social and religious duties of a fraternity—perhaps to disarm opposition. The charter to the Drapers

Town government

563

in 1438 is a landmark, in that for the first time the government of the craft appears as the main object of incorporation.]

365. The court of Pie Powder in Winchester, 1426 (The City Government of Winchester from the Records of the 14th and 15th centuries, ed. J.S.Furley (Clarendon Press, 1923), 185 [Latin]) (i) Adjournment—the six courts The court of pie-powder held there on Wednesday after the feast of St Michael the Archangel before Richard Turnant, the mayor, and Nicholas Warnere and William Fromond, the bailiffs, in the 5th year of the reign of King Henry VI. At 8 o’clock before dinner on Wednesday next after the feast of St Michael the Archangel [2 October], 5 Henry VI. Thomas Horshock, by his attorney Thomas Porter, complained against John Harpur, oysterman, for a plea of debt; therefore it was ordered that he should be attached in respect of the said hour because he was a stranger. The pledge for prosecuting was William Merssh. At this hour the parties were solemnly called, and the plaintiff appeared in his own person and the defendant did not appear, and it was agreed that he should be distrained by a horse of grey colour. Therefore it was ordered that he should be distrained to appear at 10 o’clock before dinner on the same day. [The defendant did not appear at 10 o’clock; so the case was postponed to 2 pm, then to 4pm, then to 8am the next day, Thursday.] This court is the 6th court, and because the defendant did not appear, the Serjeant of the court was told to cause Roger Cagere and John Baketon, tailor, to value the horse at the hour of 8 o’clock before dinner on Friday, the next day. At which day Roger and John appeared and valued the horse at 45; it was delivered to the plaintiff by name of essoin of 2s 10d; the pledge of the horse and of the price of the horse was William Merssh, saving a year and a day, according to custom; and the defendant is in mercy. [Marginal note—fine 3d.] (ii) A clerical plaintiff At 8 o’clock before dinner on Friday next before the feast of St Faith [4 October], 5 Henry VI. Reginald, chaplain of Maule, complains against John Knyght on a plea of the detention of a dagger with silver mounted sheath for the same; therefore he is ordered to be attached because he is a stranger. [Marginal note—attached, fine 3d.] (iii) Drover v. butcher William Teysant, drover, complains against Thomas Parkere of the Soke of Winchester, butcher, for a plea of debt; the pledge for prosecuting is William Sequence: therefore he was ordered to attach him because he is a stranger; the pledge of the defendant is William Farle.

English historical documents

564

At which hour the parties were called and appeared and continued the court by their essoins until 3 o’clock after dinner on Saturday the next day, by the pledge of William Farle…. At which hour the parties were called and the plaintiff appeared by his aforesaid attorney, and the defendant did not appear, therefore the pledge is in mercy. And William Farle, pledge of the aforesaid Thomas Parkere, was ordered to produce him at 2 o’clock after dinner on Sunday, the next day, under pain of 4d. At which hour the parties were called and the plaintiff appeared by his attorney, and the defendant did not appear. Therefore the pledge is in mercy because he has not produced the defendant; therefore William Farle, the pledge of Thomas Parkere, was ordered to have him at 1 o’clock before dinner on Monday, the next day, on pain of 6d. At which hour the parties were called, and the plaintiff appeared by his attorney, and the defendant appeared in his own person, and he acknowledged 8s 8d, which he paid into the court, as owing for sheep bought from the plaintiff on 20th August, 4 Henry VI, to be paid at his will; therefore it was considered by the court that the plaintiff should recover the sum with damages allowed by the court at 6d, and the defendant is in mercy. [Marginal note—fine 3df.] 366. The dispute between Christ Church, Canterbury, and the townsmen of Canterbury, 1428 (Bodleian Library MS., Tanner, 165, ff. 8V–10V [English]) For the complaints of the townsmen of Canterbury, followed by the replies of the prior and convent of Christ Church, and the award of Archbishop Chichele, see the document (Dean and Chapter of Canterbury, Ch.Ant.C. 1232), printed by E.F.Jacob in Essays presented to F.M.Powicke (Oxford, 1948), 398 ff). These are the grievances and wrongs done to the Prior and to the Convent of Christ Church of Canterbury and to their predecessors by the Bailiffs and the Commonalty of the city of Canterbury. 1st article First, whereas the same prior and convent and their predecessors ought to have of right a certain water-mill with certain grounds belonging thereto as their own severally within the said city within a place called St Mildred’s and they and all their predecessors, from the time that no mind is of, have had there a mill or an enclosure in their own disposition and advice, as by the authority of a composition made thereof and afterwards by award and judgement of Richard Norton, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas at that time, John Darell and Roger Rye, the said place was enclosed with certain barriers by the assent and agreement of the said bailiffs of the said city… and the said barriers are broken up by the servants of the said city, and claiming the said place as part of the city, they dug the ground and bore away the foliage and the grass in the same place. And in Wynchepe meed and in the Cofferer’s meed they destroyed the fowls and bore away the fishing and the fowling in the same place… to the destruction and annihilation and great harm of the same church.

Town government

565

Reply of the bailiffs As to the composition of which this article makes mention the said bailiff and commonalty will that the matter contained in the same article be governed from that time forth by the tenor of that same composition, so that it be sued and annexed by my lord of Canterbury. And as to any award or judgement…the same bailiffs and city say that they never assented to any such award or judgement. And as to breaking of barriers, fishing, and fowling…the aforesaid bailiffs and commonalty say that they and their predecessors have been seized of fishing and fowling in the aforesaid places at all times since the time that no mind is of. And such barriers as were set in the same water, to the hindrance of their said fishing and fowling, and contrary to the aforesaid composition, they broke and removed as was lawful to them; and of all the remainder of trespass supposed in the same article they are not guilty, except that they claim a certain parcel of ground called the Roser as the freehold and right of the same city, as it appears by the articles of their complaints. Judgement Upon this article my lord of Canterbury, having full understanding of all the representations of the parties aforesaid and with the assent of the same parties, ordains and awards that the barriers and enclosure be regulated by the composition made between the prior and convent of the said church and the bailiffs and the commonalty of the said city of old time. 2nd article Also whereas the said prior and convent and all their predecessors, from the time that no mind is of, have had full and plain liberty to buy all manner of victuals and merchandise in the said city at every time of the day without interruption or disturbance, the said bailiffs and commonalty, proposing to disinherit the said church of the said liberty, the 9th day of May, the 5th year of King Henry the Sixth, took from William Goodwyne, catourer of John Thanne, being prior of the said church, a halibut, worth 16s, bought in the open market of the said city, against the aforesaid liberty, to the heavy example and great hindering of the said church. Reply of the bailiffs Whereas this article makes mention of a liberty which the said church should be seized of, the same bailiffs and commonalty say that the same church has not been seized of any other liberty in buying of victuals or merchandise in the said city, except as the common law gives to all the king’s lieges. And as to the taking of the aforesaid halibut, the same bailiffs and commonalty say that they arrested it by title and cause described in the articles of their complaints, which makes mention of the same halibut. Judgement As to this article, my said lord, by the assent aforesaid, awards and ordains that the said prior and convent and their successors and all their servants have free and plain liberty to buy all manner of victuals in the said city at all times, to the use of the said prior and convent and their successors, without interruption or impediment of the said bailiffs and

English historical documents

566

commonalty or of their successors, as my said lord of Canterbury and his predecessors have had and used in the same city. 3rd article Also whereas divers recognisances by statutes merchant were made before divers persons, as John Lange, William Lange, Nicholas Phylipp, and John Benet, to the predecessors of that said prior of divers sums of 4,000 marks, the records of the same recognisances are embezzled. Wherefore the said prior may not have execution and recovery of the said sums, according to the form of the statute thereof ordained, to the great hindrance of the said church. Reply of the bailiffs This article makes no mention what year, what day, nor for which bailiffs the said recognisances were taken, and if the aforesaid prior will state the years or bailiffs’ names in certainty, the present bailiffs will make for him due and diligent search. And as for the embezzling of any recognisance or record, they say that they are not guilty and never could be. Judgement As to this article my said lord, by the assent aforesaid, awards and ordains that the said bailiffs shall cause a search to be made for the said recognisances, and if they can be found, they shall make certificate thereof, when they are required, by the council of the said prior, paying reasonably for it. 4th article Also whereas the said prior and convent should have of right, and they and all their predecessors have had by grant of St Ethelbert, founder of the said church in his first foundation, the use and possession of the issue going out of the petty-dorter of the said church into the ditch outside the close of the said church beside Northgate, and also the freehold and the possession of the same ditch, as it appears by open evidences of the said church, the bailiffs and the commonalty of the said city in late time have narrowed, misturned, and almost fully stopped the said issue with stakes, timber, houses, earth, and dung, and have built houses and laid dung in the said ditch, so that the people might climb and come over the wall of the close of the said church, in disinheritance of the said church and great hindering, nuisance, and peril to the said prior and convent, and others dwelling nearby. Reply of the bailiffs Hereto the aforesaid bailiffs and commonalty say that the aforesaid ditch is their soil and freehold, as in the right of the said city, without the said prior and his predecessors having any such issue there, as the said article makes mention of, at all times since time out of mind. And of all the rest contained in the said article, they deny that they did any of this. Judgement As to this article, that it await the coming of my said lord of Canterbury, then to be decided according to the discretion of my said lord.

Town government

567

5th article Also whereas by the old franchises granted to the said church by divers kings, progenitors of our sovereign lord the king, all the tenants of the said church should be free and quit in all the realm of England, as well in cities and boroughs as in other places, of toll, pavage, pickage, stallage,1 and of all other customs, for buying and selling of all manner of merchandise and victuals, the said bailiffs and servants of the said city have distrained and compelled the tenants of the said church to pay to pavage in the said city, and also compelled the tenants of the said church repairing to the said city with merchandise and victuals to pay tallage, toll, and other customs against the form of the said franchises in disinheritance of the said church and to the great harm of the said prior and convent. Reply of the bailiffs As to toll, stallage, and pickage, the said bailiffs and their commonalty say that they have been seized thereof since time out of mind, as in the right of the same city and as part of the farm of which stallage and pickage they pay yearly to the hospital of Herbaldown, by grant and patents of the forebears of our sovereign lord, 20 marks. And as to the pavage they neither distrained nor compelled the tenants of the same prior to pay any pavage, as it is complained of in the said article. Judgement As to this article, my said lord, by the assent aforesaid, awards and ordains that the said bailiffs and commonalty shall not take nor distrain for any toll or any pavage according to the form contained in the same article. And as to the remnant of the same article, they shall be governed as the tenants of my said lord of Canterbury are governed. 6th article Also that the said bailiffs and commonalty have broken and made an open way for all manner of carriages in the south side of the said city at Redingate, which wall of old, by forebears of our sovereign lord the king, by the advice of all the council of England at that time, for the great peril that might befall both to the same city and to the church of Canterbury, was enclosed for high surety of both places. And now in this opening again the Church aforesaid stands in greater peril than ever it did before, having consideration both to the wars and the high malice of these mischievous heretics and Lollards, and moreover to the great hindrance and annihilation of the said prior and convent and all their tenants dwelling and abiding in the same city. Reply of the bailiffs As to this article, it was not done by the said bailiffs nor by ordinance of the said city. Wherefore the said bailiffs ordained a postern of stone of the breadth of four feet to be set there with sufficient closure, which lies there not made as yet. 1

Pavage was the toll towards paving the highway; pickage was the toll for breaking up ground in setting up booths, stalls, etc., at a fair or market; stallage was the toll for having a stall at a market or fair.

English historical documents

568

Judgement As to this article my said lord, by the assent aforesaid, awards and ordains that the with a bar of iron, that no horse may pass through the same postern. And a sufficient gate there to be made according to the form of the postern at the Waterlock. And that all this be done and fully performed by the feast of…. [Four leaves of the manuscript have been cut away here, so that the end of the judgement is lost.] 367. The privileges of freemen of the city of Canterbury, c. 1430 (Bodleian, MS. Tanner 165, Register of Prior William Molassh, of Christ Church, Canterbury, from 1428 [English]) These are the privileges and the benefits that freemen of Canterbury have, more than others who are not free of the same city. One is that freemen may come to the council of the city and there speak and be heard, whereas others must keep away or be put out. Also freemen of the city may exercise a craft and open windows1 without leave, whereas others must make agreement and come to terms with the chamber2 of the said city. Also freemen of the city are quit of toll of customs, of lastage, and of shewing throughout England, and along sea-coasts, as allowed by their charters, whereas others do not have this privilege. Also freemen of the city by their charters are quit of prises of wine in every haven of England. Also if any man has taken toll or custom of any freeman of Canterbuty wrongfully, he may have a withernam3 at Canterbury for it, by their charters confirmed and allowed. Also no freeman of Canterbury shall be pledged out of Canterbury unless it be for outside matters. Also no freeman of Canterbury shall be condemned or convicted by outsiders of any offence, crime, or trespass, save only by his fellow-citizens and in the same city, allowed by their charter. Also no freeman of Canterbury shall do battle4 with any appealer, though he be appealed, allowed by their charter. Also if any freeman of Canterbury should be taken by his body or arraigned, by which he should suffer imprisonment, he shall nowhere be in prison but only in the prison of Canterbury, nor denied this right. Also if any freeman be impleaded in Canterbury at the oath of any man, he may have three delays. 1

I.e. open a shop, which usually consisted simply of a front room, with a window opening on to the street and secured by a shutter at night. 2 I.e. the city treasury. 3 I.e. the right of reprisal against any fellow-burgess from the town whose citizen had committed the offence. 4 I.e. be compelled to accept the archaic legal procedure of trial by battle, initiated by an appeal of the plaintiff.

Town government

569

Also if a freeman be condemned at the suit of any man for debt, the freeman may have 15 days in which to pay, under surety, by right of his freedom. Also if a freeman impleads any other man of debt, he may prove his debt with the third hand1 and have the debt. Also a freeman of Canterbury may ask and have a part of victuals and corn and other things that come to market.2 Also a freeman may take an apprentice for a term of years, and in the first year he shall enrol him and pay 2s, and this shall be accredited as the record of the apprenticeship. Also, if any such freeman have an apprentice after 7 years truly served, the apprentice shall pay 4s 8d and be free. Also every freeman’s child, freeborn, may pay his fees in the chamber and be free as his father was.3 Also if any man wed a freeman’s daughter, freeborn, he may pay his dues in the chamber and become a freeman. Also a freeman or a freewoman of Canterbury may devise by testament his freehold within the franchise, both the husband to the wife and the wife to the husband, as well as to other persons.4 Also freemen of Canterbury shall have their hunting, fowling, and fishing everywhere within the purlieus. Also no man shall billet or lodge anyone at any freeman’s house against his will, except for payment. Also every freeman of Canterbury is free of childwite, earesgeue, and brudtol, and of scot-ale, by charter.5 Also if a bondman have issue born within the franchise that issue shall be free of bondage. Also if a bondman be resident within the franchise, his lord shall take no action against him within the franchise. 368. The incorporation of Hull, 1440 (Calendar of Charter Rolls, 1427–1516 (London, 1927), 8–11 [Latin, English summary]) Out of special affection to the town of Kingston-upon-Hull and the mayor and burgesses thereof and in consideration of their charges and expenses in the service of the king and his ancestors, and for the relief and increase of the town, the king has hereby granted to the burgesses the following liberties : 1

I.e. with three oath-helpers, swearing to the truth of his assertions. I.e. a right to share in all market produce before it was offered to the general public. 3 I.e. a freeman’s freeborn son who has paid his fees into the city treasury may inherit his father’s freedom of the city. 4 By common law a man could not normally devise freehold land by will, and his wife had by common law no property of her own at all; hence the greater freedom of Canterbury city custom in these matters was worthy of remark. 5 Childwite was the fine payable to a lord for getting one of his bondwomen with child. “Earesgeue” may be New Year’s gift payable to the sheriff. Brudtol=bride-toll, the payment to a 2

English historical documents

570

lord on the marriage of a bondwoman to a freeman. Scot-ale=an ale festival for which the lord of the manor or his bailiff levied a forced contribution.

The town of the mayor and burgesses shall be corporate and the mayor and burgesses shall be a perpetually corporate commonalty of the town so incorporated under the name of the mayor and burgesses of that town and shall have a perpetual succession; and the mayor and burgesses by that name shall be persons able to pursue and defend all pleas, suits, plaints and demands, and real, personal and mixed actions in any court; And the mayor and burgesses shall be persons able and capable in law of acquiring lands, tenements, rents, services and possessions within the said town and its liberty, to be held by them and their successors, notwithstanding the statute of mortmain or any other ordinance or statute to the contrary, saving always to the king the services due; The town of Kingston-upon-Hull and its precincts, which are now within the corpus of the county of York, in future shall be separated from the county from the morrow of Holy Trinity next; and the town and its precincts from that date shall be a county by themselves and not a parcel of the county, and shall be called the county of the town of Kingstonupon-Hull; and the burgesses of the town shall have in the town and its precincts by the boundaries thereof the following liberties and franchises; Every burgess of the town, who shall henceforth be elected to be mayor of the town, shall be elected, in the same manner as they were elected in times past; and every future mayor so elected and the present mayor shall be the king’s escheator there during his time of office; The burgesses, in lieu of four bailiffs of the town, shall have one sheriff and the office of sheriff, and the said sheriff shall be elected in the following manner; the burgesses on the morrow of Holy Trinity next shall choose of themselves a burgess to be sheriff of the said town to be sheriff up to and including Michaelmas day next following, and on the morrow thereof until another burgess shall be chosen to be sheriff; and that after that date the sheriff shall be elected as follows; The burgesses shall elect yearly one fit burgess to be sheriff of the town, at the time and in the manner in which the burgesses were formerly elected to be bailiffs; and every burgess so elected to be sheriff immediately after his election shall make oath before the mayor of that town and shall not leave the town for that purpose; and the name of the sheriff under the common seal of the town shall be sent yearly into the king’s Chancery; no other escheator or sheriff shall have any juri