Chapter III: The History of Castile to the Death of Pedro the Cruel (2)

The knights of Toledo, by the many representations made to them, with tears for the imprisonment and death of so noble a lady as Queen Blanche, who was a creature without blame and of so high lineage, and because the highest and best in the kingdom were ill contented with the kinsmen of Doña Maria de Padilla, were for the most part moved to defend the queen to the utmost of their power, and to hazard their lives and possessions for her. And when the knights and squires and true men of the city heard that Juan Ferrandez de Henestrosa was coming to Toledo, although he was with the king, and that he was about to seize the queen and imprison her, as they were given to understand, they took Queen Blanche from the church of Sancta Maria where she abode, and placed her in the Alcazar of the said city, on Thursday at the hour of tierce, on the eve of the feast of St. Mary in August, of that year. And with her all her ladies and damsels, and many other ladies of the city. And they gave the towers of the Alcazar and of the city into the keeping of the knights and loyal citizens of that city, for their defence; for all came to this work right willingly. And on the day that this was done they seized all their kinsmen who would not take part in it.[h]

PEDRO’S FALSE MARRIAGE

In the meanwhile Pedro wavered in his fidelity to his mistress long enough to be infatuated with Doña Juana de Castro. Not being able to win her to his desires, he proposed marriage; and the bishops of Avila and Salamanca stooped first to substantiate his pretence that he had not really married Blanche of Bourbon and then to marry him to Juana de Castro. When he had tired of her person, the king told her that his marriage with Blanche was a true marriage, and the other only a ruse to overcome her scruples. A son was born of this outrageous deception.[a]

When news of this base transaction reached the brother of Juana, Ferdinand Perez de Castro, who was one of the most powerful lords of Galicia, he instantly joined the league of the discontented. A civil war now commenced, which, during some months, raged with more animosity than success to either party. On its commencement, the king, persuaded that the fortress of Arevalo was not a secure prison for the unfortunate Blanche, ordered her, as we have seen, to be conveyed to Toledo and lodged in the Alcazar of that city. She was immediately rescued from the power of her jailer, who returned to acquaint his employer with the event. Furious at the intelligence, Pedro ordered the commanders of Santiago, first to depose their grand-master, his brother Fadrique, then to march on Toledo, and force the princess from her sanctuary. But she was no longer there; the whole city had taken her part, and honourably placed her, under a strong guard, in the palace of their kings. These defenders of oppressed innocence were now joined by the heads of the league, whose party daily acquired strength.

[Sidenote: [1354-1355 A.D.]]

Neither the sudden, perhaps suspicious, death of Albuquerque, nor the deposition of Don Fadrique, depressed their zeal. To show that a redress of grievances, and not individual ambition, was their object, they despatched messengers to the king, with the assurance of their attachment to his person, and proposed that, if he would dismiss his mistress with her kinsmen, and return to his queen, they would instantly lay down their arms. Pedro was resolved to do neither; but, as it suited his views to protract the negotiation, he nominated commissioners to treat with those of the league, which was now strengthened by the accession of the queen-mother. To bring about an amicable adjustment between her son and his barons, she invited both to Toro, where she then abode--an invitation which both accepted. But Pedro now found that he was the prisoner of the leaguers, who changed the officers of his household, substituted others from their own body, and closely watched his motions at the time they were treating him with the highest outward respect. To escape from his situation, he had recourse to his usual arts--to bribing some heads of the league, and, above all, to dissimulation, in both cases with success. The king soon contrived to escape, and threw himself into the fortress of Segovia.

After his escape (1355), Pedro assembled his states at Burgos, and, by artfully representing himself as thwarted in all his proceedings for the good of his people by his mother, his brothers, and the other rebels, whose only aim was to tyrannise over the nation, he procured supplies for carrying on the war. These supplies, however, were granted on the condition of his living with Queen Blanche--a condition which he readily promised to fulfil, without the slightest intention of so doing. After an unsuccessful assault on Toro, he returned to Toledo, the peculiar object of his hatred. Contrary to all reasonable expectation, he forced an entrance, and expelled the troops of his brother Henry. This success would, however, have been unattainable, had not most of the inhabitants believed in the sincerity of his declaration to the pontifical representative. The unfortunate Blanche was transferred--not to his palace, to enjoy her rights as queen, but to the fortress of Siguenza; the bishop of that see was also consigned to a prison; and some of the most obnoxious individuals of the league were beheaded or hung.

The legate, Bertrand, no longer withheld the thunders of the church: Pedro, Maria de Padilla, and even Juana de Castro, were excommunicated, and the kingdom subjected to an interdict. But these thunders passed harmless over the head of the royal delinquent, who lost no time in marching against Toro, where his mother and many of the leaguers still remained. His first attempt on that place was repulsed with loss; but, after a siege of some months, he prevailed on the inhabitants, by lavishing extraordinary promises of clemency, to open their gates to him. How well he performed his promise appeared the very day of his entrance, when he caused some barbarous executions to be made in his mother’s sight.[33] The queen fainted at the spectacle; and, on recovering her senses, requested permission to retire into Portugal, which was granted. About the same time many Castilian barons fled into Aragon.

[Sidenote: [1355-1358 A.D.]]

During the next few years Pedro waged a desultory war against the king of Aragon, both by sea and land; but the result was decisive to neither of the belligerents. In this war many of the disaffected barons fought in the ranks of the latter--a policy for the condemnation of which no words are sufficiently strong, and which greatly detracts from the commiseration that must be felt at the fate of some who afterwards fell into his hands. It cannot be denied that the Castilian king had many provocations to vengeance: his nobles rebelled for the slightest causes--often without any cause at all; nor is he known to have put to death any of his subjects, whom he did not conceive, at one time or other, either openly or secretly to have aimed at subverting his authority. But the barbarity of his executions; the duplicity with which he planned the destruction of such as submitted under the assurance of pardon; his perfidious disregard of promises, or even oaths, when the openly pardoned objects of his hatred were fully in his power--not even excepting his nearest connections--stamp him at once as a ruthless barbarian, and a bloody tyrant.

The execution of his brother Fadrique, grand-master of Santiago, in 1358, is, perhaps, more characteristic of him than any other of his actions. On some suspicion--whether founded or not in justice must remain unknown--that the grand-master maintained an understanding with the king of Aragon, Fadrique was recalled from the Valencian frontier to Seville, where Pedro then was. He found the king apparently in the best of humours, and his reception was very friendly.[b]

The account of the horrible and cold-blooded deed which followed may be quoted from the contemporary Ayala.

AYALA’S ACCOUNT OF THE MURDER OF FADRIQUE

[Sidenote: [1358 A.D.]]

The king Don Pedro being in Seville in his Alcazar, on Tuesday the 29th day of May of this year, there came thither Don Fadrique his brother, master of Santiago, who had just recovered the town and fortress of Jumilla which is in the kingdom of Murcia. In the truce of a year established by the cardinal Don Guillen between Castile and Aragon, this town was claimed for Aragon by a nobleman called Don Pero Maza, who said it belonged thereto and not to the dominion of the king of Castile, and that it was not included in the truce. But in this war that town was first for Castile, and as soon as the master Don Fadrique heard of it, he went thither and besieged and recovered it, to do the king service. For the master Don Fadrique was eager to serve the king and do him pleasure. And when the master had recovered the said town and castle of Jumilla, he went to the king, from whom letters came every day requesting his presence.

The master arrived in Seville on the said Tuesday in the morning, at the hour of tierce, and coming immediately to pay his duty to the king, he found him playing draughts in the Alcazar. And as soon as he came in the master kissed his hand, and the many knights who came with him likewise. The king received him with a show of good-will, asking him from whence he came that day, and if he had good lodgings. The master replied that he had set out that day from Cantillana, which is five leagues from Seville, and for his lodgings he knew not of them yet, but was full sure they would be good. The king bade him go and look to his lodging and then return to him; and the king said this because many companies had come into the Alcazar with the master.

Then the master left the king and went to see Doña Maria de Padilla and the king’s daughters, who were in another part of the Alcazar called the Caracol. Doña Maria de Padilla knew all that was planned against the master and at the sight of him she assumed a countenance so mournful that all might read it; for this lady had a very good heart, and sound judgment, and liked not the deeds of the king, and the death decreed against the master lay heavy on her.

After the master had visited Doña Maria and his nieces the king’s daughters, he went down to the courtyard of the Alcazar, where he had left his mules, intending to seek his lodgings and bestow his companies. But when he reached the courtyard of the Alcazar he found that his beasts were gone, for the king’s porters had given orders for everyone to leave the courtyard, and they turned out all the beasts and closed the gates; for so they had been commanded, that there might not be many there. When the master could not find his mules he was at a loss whether he should return to the king or what he should do; and one of his knights, whose name was Suer Gutierrez de Navales, an Austrian, perceived that some mischief was afoot, for he saw a stir in the Alcazar, and he said to the master, “My lord, the postern of the courtyard stands open; go out and you shall not lack mules.” This he repeated many times, for he thought that if the master got outside the Alcazar he might perchance escape, and there they must needs slay many of his followers ere they could take him.

In the meanwhile there came to the master two knights who were brothers, and their names were Ferrand Sanchez de Tovar, and Juan Ferrandez de Tovar, and they knew nothing of this business. By the king’s orders they said to the master, “My lord, the king calls for you”; and the master turned back to go to the king, in dread, for he now suspected evil. As he passed the doors of the palace and of the different apartments the number of his followers grew less and less, for those who guarded the doors had ordered the porters not to let them pass.

When the master came to the place where the king was, none was allowed to enter save only the master Don Fadrique, and the master of Calatrava, Don Diego Garcia (who that day accompanied Don Fadrique, the master of Santiago, and knew nothing of all this), and two other knights. The king was in a hall called “del Fierro” with the door closed. And when the masters of Santiago and Calatrava came to the door of the hall where the king was, it was not opened to them, and they stood at the door. And Pedro Lopez de Padilla, the king’s ballestero mayor, was outside with the masters, and thereupon a wicket opened in the hall where the king was, and the king said to Pedro Lopez de Padilla:

“Pedro Lopez, seize the master;” and he replied, “Which of them?” and the king said, “The master of Santiago.” Then Pedro Lopez de Padilla laid hold of the master Don Fadrique, and said, “I arrest you,” and the master stood silent full of dread, and the king said to some ballesteros who stood by, “Ballesteros, kill the master of Santiago.”

But even so the ballesteros durst not do it. Then one of the king’s bedchamber, a man named Rui Gonzalez de Atienza who was in the secret, cried aloud to the ballesteros:

“Traitors! what are you about? Did you not hear the king command you to kill the master?”

Then the ballesteros, seeing that it was indeed the king’s order, raised their maces to strike the master Don Fadrique. When the master of Santiago saw this, he disengaged himself from the grasp of Pedro Lopez de Padilla, and jumped into the courtyard. He seized his sword but could not draw it, for it was slung round his neck under the tabard which he wore, and when he would have drawn it the hilt caught in the strap and he could not get it free. The ballesteros pursued him to wound him with their maces but they could not succeed, for he eluded them and fled from side to side, in the courtyard.

Then Nuño Ferrandez de Roa, who pursued him more closely than the rest, came up with him and dealt him a blow on the head with his mace, so that he fell to the ground, and thereupon all the other macemen came up and wounded him. As soon as the king saw the master lying on the ground, he went through the Alcazar thinking to find some of his followers and put them to death, and he found none; for some had not entered the palace when the master returned in answer to the king’s summons, because the doors were well guarded, and some had fled and concealed themselves. But the king found a squire named Sancho Ruiz de Villegas, who was surnamed Sancho Portin, and he was the master’s chief equerry. The king found him in the part of the palace called the Caracol, where Doña Maria de Padilla dwelt with the king’s daughters, where he had taken refuge when he heard the noise of the master’s murder. The king entered the room, and Sancho Ruiz had taken Doña Beatrice, the king’s daughter, in his arms, thinking to escape death through her. But when the king saw it, he caused his daughter Doña Beatrice to be torn from his arms, and stabbed him with the dagger which he wore in his belt.

The king returned to where the master lay, and found that he was not yet dead, and the king took a dagger from his belt and gave it to a groom of the chambers, to kill him with. When it was done the king sat down to eat in the place where the master lay dead, a hall called the Azulejos, which is in the Alcazar. Then the king sent for his cousin, the infante Don Juan, (of Aragon) and told him in secret that he was going from thence to Biscay at once, and that he should come with him, for it was his intention to put Don Tello to death and give Biscay to Don Juan. For the infante Don Juan was married to Doña Isabella, sister of the wife of Don Tello, and both were daughters of Don Juan Nuñez de Lara, lord of Biscay, and of Doña Maria his wife. And the infante kissed the king’s hands, thinking that he would act according to his word. That day, after the death of the master Don Fadrique, the king took the adelantadoship of the frontier from his cousin the infante Don Juan, saying that he would make him lord of Biscay, and bestowed it upon Enriquez, who was alguacil mayor of Seville; and he gave that office to Garci Gutierrez Tello, an honourable gentleman dwelling in Seville.

That same day on which the master of Santiago died the king sent orders to Cordova for Pero Cabrera, a gentleman who dwelt there, to be put to death, as well as a _zurat_ whose name was Ferrando Alfonso de Gabete. And he sent to kill Don Lope Sanchez de Bendaña, chief commander of Castile, and they killed him in Villarejo, a place belonging to the order of Santiago, the property of the commander. In Salamanca they killed Alfonso Jufre Tenorio; and Alfonso Perez Fermosino in Toro. In the castle of Mora they slew Gonzalo Melendez de Toledo, who had been held a prisoner there. And the king ordered all these to be put to death, saying that they were concerned in the rebellion when some in the kingdom took up the causes of Queen Blanche, as has already been related. And although he had indeed pardoned them it appeared that his wrath against them was not dead.[h]

OTHER ROYAL MURDERS

[Sidenote: [1358-1361 A.D.]]

The king and the prince of Aragon departed for Biscay; but, on reaching Aguilar, they found that Don Tello had been apprised of his intended doom, and had fled. Pedro followed him to Bermeo, where he learned that the fugitive had just embarked for Bayonne. In his blind fury he embarked in the first vessel he found in the harbour, and ordered a pursuit; but the sea began to rise so high that he soon abandoned it, and returned to the port. The infante Juan now requested the fulfilment of the royal promise; but he who had made it had now changed his mind. With his usual duplicity, however, he amused his cousin, saying that he could do nothing without the states of the province; that he would speedily convoke them, and procure the recognition of the new feudatory. He did convoke them; but it was to persuade them to confer their sovereignty on himself alone.

The disappointed claimant now left Pedro in disgust; but was speedily recalled to Bilbao, where the king repaired, by the promise that his ambition should be gratified. The infante hastened to that town, and proceeded to the house occupied by the court. As he approached the royal apartments, some of the tyrant’s creatures, as if in jest, deprived him of his poniard--the only weapon which he had about him, and, at the same moment he was struck on the head by a mace; another blow brought him lifeless to the ground. His corpse was thrown from the window of the apartment occupied by the king into the street; but was afterwards conveyed to Burgos, and cast into the river.

To revenge the murder of these victims, the two brothers, Henry and Tello, who had returned to Aragon, made frequent irruptions into Castile. In a battle fought in 1359, they triumphed over Henestrosa, whom they left dead on the field; and, in subsequent invasions, they obtained no small portion of plunder.[34] But none of these things moved the king, who persevered in his course of barbarities as if his throne rested on a rock of adamant. It is impossible to specify all his individual acts of murder; such only can be represented here as are either more than usually characteristic of him, or as exercised some influence on following events: in revenge for the aid afforded to his revolted subjects by the infante of Aragon, he put to death Leonora, the dowager queen of that country, who had long resided in Castile, and who was also his own aunt. But his famous, or rather infamous compact with the Portuguese king, Pedro, is most indicative of the man. Knowing how much that sovereign longed to extirpate all who had been concerned in the murder of Iñes de Castro,[35] and of whom a few had sought refuge in Castile; and no less eager on his own part to take vengeance on three or four of his own obnoxious subjects, who had implored the protection of the Portuguese, he proposed to surrender the Portuguese in exchange for the Castilian refugees. The kindred soul of the Lusitanian felt a savage joy at the proposal; in 1360, the men were exchanged and put to death.

That he cared as little for the king of France as for the pope--both were distant enemies--Spain had a melancholy proof, in 1361, in the tragical death of that unhappy queen, Blanche de Bourbon. His orders for her removal by poison were first given to the governor of Xeres, to whom the custody of her person had for some time been intrusted; but that governor, whose name (Iñigo Ortiz de Zuñiga) ought to be revered by posterity, refused to become the executioner of his queen. It is somewhat surprising that his life was not the penalty of his disobedience--a doom which he doubtless expected. A less scrupulous agent for this bloody business was found in one of the king’s ballasteros, Juan Perez de Robledo, who hastened to the fortress, superseded the noble Iñigo Ortiz in the command, and perpetrated the deed--whether by poison or by steel is unknown. The same violence befell Isabella de Lara, widow of the infante Don Juan, whom the tyrant had murdered at Bilbao.

[Sidenote: [1361-1366 A.D.]]

The death of Blanche was followed by the natural one of the king’s mistress, Maria de Padilla. Whether through the example of the Portuguese sovereign, who had shortly before proclaimed his secret marriage with Iñes de Castro, or whether because the Castilian had in like manner actually married Maria, certain it is, that, in 1362--immediately after the murder of the king of Granada by his own hand--Pedro convoked the cortes at Seville, and declared that Maria de Padilla had been his lawful wife, and that for this reason alone he had refused to live with Blanche de Bourbon: he therefore required that his son Alfonso should be declared his legitimate successor. Three of the king’s creatures were brought forward, who swore on the holy Gospels that they had been present at the nuptials; and the cortes, though far from convinced of the fact, affected to receive it as such, declared Maria the queen and Alfonso the heir of the kingdom; and, after him, the daughters of their monarch by that favourite. If such a marriage were really contracted, Blanche was deceived as well as Juana de Castro; but, from want of sufficient evidence, history can place the French princess only in the rank of Castilian queens. The man who had imposed on the credulity of Doña Juana, who had broken his faith whenever it suited his views, whose character was as much distinguished for duplicity as for violence--must produce some better voucher than his word, or his oath, or those of his creatures, before he will obtain credit with posterity.

THE WAR WITH HENRY OF TRASTAMARA

It was to defend himself against the probable vengeance of France, and the present hostility of Aragon, that, in 1363, Pedro sought the alliance of Edward III of England and the heroic Black Prince. The danger was the more to be apprehended, when the king of Navarre joined his brother of Aragon. For some time, the advantage lay on the side of the Castilian; who, early in 1364, reduced several towns in Valencia, and invested the capital of that province; the siege of which, however, he was soon compelled to raise. But these temporary successes were more than counterbalanced by the activity of Henry; who, in 1365, prevailed on Bertrand du Guesclin, the count de la Marche, and other French chiefs, to aid him in his projected dethronement of the Castilian tyrant.

The French king, Charles V, anxious to avenge the cruel insult done to his royal house, espoused the cause of Henry, and commanded his disbanded soldiers to serve in the expedition destined against Castile. To meet it, Pedro, in 1366, assembled his troops at Burgos. He had not long to wait: under some noted leaders, the French soon entered Catalonia; they were favourably received by their ally the king of Aragon, and reached Calahorra unmolested, the gates of which were speedily opened to them. There Henry was solemnly proclaimed king of Castile.

The inactivity of Pedro on the invasion of his kingdom was such as to leave it a doubtful point with posterity whether he was a coward, or whether he knew too well the disaffection of his people to hazard a battle with the enemy. In opposition to the urgent remonstrances of the inhabitants, he precipitately left Burgos for Seville, without venturing his sword with his aspiring brother. Henry hastened to the abandoned city, where he was joyfully received by many deputies of the towns, and crowned in the monastery of Huelgas. With the money he found in the Alcazar, and the presents made him by the Jewish inhabitants, he was able to gratify his followers; their chiefs he rewarded more nobly: thus, to Du Guesclin he gave the lordship of Molina and Trastamara; and to the Englishman Hugh de Calverley, who, with the former, had the chief command of the auxiliaries, the city and lordship of Carrion; on his brother Tello he conferred the sovereignty of Biscay; on Sancho, another brother, that of Albuquerque and Ledesma. He now lost no time in pursuing the fugitive Pedro. Presenting himself before Toledo, he summoned that important place to surrender; which, after some deliberation, obeyed the summons. There he was joined by deputies from Avila, Segovia, Madrid, Cuenza, Ciudad Real, with the submission of those towns. He was now master of the whole of New Castile.

The rapidity of these successes convinced the guilty Pedro that his own subjects alone would form but a poor rampart against the assaults of his brother. To procure the aid of Portugal, he sent his daughter Beatrice, now the heiress of his states (his son Alfonso was no more), into that country, with a great treasure as her marriage portion, for the infante Don Ferdinand, to whom she had been promised. He was himself soon obliged to follow her: an insurrection of the Sevillians, who openly declared for Henry, inspiring the detested tyrant with a just dread of his life, he fled into the territories of his uncle and ally. But here new mortifications awaited him: the Portuguese returned both his daughter and his treasures, on the pretext that, the states of Castile having acknowledged Henry, the latter had no wish to plunge the two kingdoms into war; all that he could obtain was permission to pass through the Portuguese territory--he durst not venture into Estremadura--into Galicia. No sooner was he arrived at Monterey, than the archbishop of Santiago, Ferdinand de Castro, and other Galician lords, joined him, and advised him to try the fortune of arms; especially as Zamora, Soria, Logroño, and other cities still held for him: but, though they offered to aid him with two thousand foot and five hundred horse, either through cowardice or distrust he rejected the proposal, and set out for Santiago, with the resolution of proceeding thence to Corunna, and embarking for Bayonne, to join his ally the prince of Wales.

[Sidenote: [1366-1367 A.D.]]

Pedro reached the city of Santiago about the middle of June. While there, he resolved on the murder of Don Suero the archbishop--a resolution almost too extraordinary to be explained, yet sufficiently characteristic of the man; who, whenever blood was to be shed, or plunder to be procured, little troubled himself about reasons for his conduct. But his most powerful motive for this atrocious deed was his desire to obtain the towns and fortresses of Don Suero. The fortresses of the murdered prelate were immediately occupied. The assassin, leaving them, as well as the support of his interests, to the care of Ferdinand de Castro, proceeded with his daughter to Corunna, where, with a fleet of twenty-two sail, he embarked for Bayonne. Thus, in three short months, without a single battle on either side, was this cowardly tyrant deprived of a powerful kingdom. It may, however, be doubted whether the majority of the people cared much for either prince; on them the fantastic cruelties of Pedro fell harmless: indeed, there is room for believing that, whatever were his cruelties towards his obnoxious and usually rebellious barons, he caused justice to be impartially administered, and wished no unnecessary imposts to be laid on the great towns.

The exiled king was well received by the English hero, who undertook to restore him to his throne. The treaty into which the two princes had entered rendered the aid of Edward almost imperative: besides, it was his interest to oppose the close ally of France; and his own personal ambition was not a little gratified by the offer of the lordship of Biscay, with 56,000 florins of gold for his own use, and 550,000 for the support of his army. To insure the punctual performance of the other conditions, Pedro delivered his daughters as hostages into the hands of the Black Prince. The enterprise was sanctioned by the English monarch, and the necessary preparations were immediately commenced.

In the meantime Henry had been joyfully received at Seville, and acknowledged by the whole of Andalusia. Seeing himself thus master of the kingdom, except Galicia, he marched to reduce it. He closely invested Ferdinand de Castro in the city of Lugo. From Lugo the king proceeded to Burgoo, where he convened his states and obtained the necessary supplies for the defence of the kingdom. He renewed his alliance with the king of Aragon; and, in an interview with the sovereign of Navarre, on the confines of the two monarchies, he prevailed on the latter, for a gift of 60,000 pistoles, and by the promise of two fortresses, to refuse a passage to the prince of Wales. No sooner, however, was the king of Navarre returned to Pamplona, than he received messengers from the dethroned Pedro, who offered to put him in possession of Alava and Guipuzcoa, with the two important places of Logroño and Vittoria, if he would suffer the English prince to march through his territories unmolested. Charles had no difficulty in accepting the latter proposition, as he had accepted the former.

The preparations of the English prince being completed early in the spring of 1367, he passed the Pyrenees at Roncesvalles, and descended into the plains of Navarre. In his combined army of English, Normans, and Gascons, were some of the flower of English chivalry. Instead of opposing his passage, Charles secretly desired Oliver de Manny, one of Edward’s generals, to seize him (the king of Navarre) while hunting in a certain place, and make him prisoner: by this contrivance he hoped to excuse his inactivity to Henry. Oliver did as directed, and the English prince pursued his march towards the Castilian frontiers. He was joined by Sir Hugh de Calverley, who preferred the loss of the new lordship of Carrion to violating a vassal’s faith by bearing arms against his natural chief. Henry also advanced; but so well was he acquainted with the valour of his renowned antagonist, that he was undetermined whether he should do more than hover round the flanks of the invaders, cut off their supplies, and force them, by famine, to return. In a council of war, however, which he assembled to hear the opinion of his officers as to the plan of the campaign, his Castilian chiefs so justly convinced him that, if he refused the battle, several towns would immediately declare for Pedro, that he resolved to risk all. No wonder that he should; for if, as Froissart[i] informs us, his army was near seventy thousand strong, he might well have little fear as to the result. One of his detachments had the advantage over a foraging party of the allies. On the 2nd of April, the two hostile armies met, west of Logroño, a few miles south of the Ebro.

BATTLE OF NAJERA OR NAVARRETE (1367 A.D.)

[Sidenote: [1367 A.D.]]

The Castilians immediately occupied the vicinity of Najera: the allies encamped at Navarrete. To spare the effusion of Christian blood, Edward sent a letter, by a herald, to the camp of Henry, explaining the causes which had armed the English monarch in defence of an ally and a relation; but offering, at the same time, to mediate between the two parties. His letter, which was addressed, “To the noble and powerful Prince Henry, count of Trastamara,” not to the king of Castile, was courteously received by Henry. In his reply, he dwelt on the cruelties and oppressions of Pedro’s government, whose expulsion he represented as the act of an indignant nation, and expressed his resolution to maintain both that nation’s rights and his own by the sword.

The battle which decided the fate of the two kings commenced the following morning, April 3rd, 1367. The war-cry of “Guienne and St. George!” on the one side, and of “Castile and Santiago!” on the other, were soon drowned by the clash of arms, the shouts of the victors, and the groans of the dying. The struggle was for a short time desperate: but who could contend with the victor of Crécy and Poitiers? A fierce charge on the left wing of Henry, by the prince in person, so terrified Don Tello, who commanded a body of cavalry, that he fled from the field; perhaps he was as treacherous as he was cowardly. Henry fought nobly; so also did his antagonist, who, like his celebrated counterpart, Richard III of England, was as brave as he was cruel. But after the flight of Don Tello, the infantry of Castile began to give way; and, after some desperate efforts by Henry to support the contest, resistance was abandoned. The number of slain, on the part of the vanquished, was eight thousand. Many thousands were made prisoners--all but a handful, who accompanied the defeated count into Aragon, whence he escaped into France. Success so splendid is seldom to be found in the annals of history: it at once restored Pedro to the Castilian throne. But the heroic victor met with little gratitude from his faithless ally: as on a former occasion, the states of Biscay were secretly advised not to accept him for their ruler; and it was not without difficulty that he could obtain from Pedro an oath that the money due to his troops should be paid at two instalments--the first in four, the second in twelve months. But what most disgusted the humane conqueror was the eagerness which the restored king showed to shed the blood of the prisoners.[b]

The Spanish historian Ayala has drawn a picture of the Englishman’s protest against Spanish ruthlessness.

AYALA’S ACCOUNT OF THE QUARREL BETWEEN EDWARD AND PEDRO

You must know that so soon as the battle was won, from that day onwards there was little harmony between Don Pedro and the prince, and the reason thereof was as follows. In the first place, upon the day of the battle, a gentleman named Iñigo Lopez de Orozco was taken prisoner by a gentleman of Gascony, whereupon Don Pedro rode upon horseback, and slew the said Iñigo Lopez; and the gentleman whose prisoner he was complained to the prince that, this man being his prisoner, Don Pedro came up and killed him; and he complained not only for the loss of his prisoner, but also because he held himself greatly dishonoured by the death of this gentleman who had surrendered to him, and was in his power.

The prince said to Don Pedro that it was not well done of him, for he knew full well that one of the chief articles of those agreed, sworn, and signed between them, was that the king should not put to death any gentleman of Castile, nor any person of note, while the prince was there, until he had been justly judged, save those whom he had previously sentenced, among whom this Iñigo Lopez was not included. And that it appeared from this that the king did not intend to fulfil his engagements towards him, and he presumed that his fidelity on all points would be the same as in this matter. The king excused himself as best he might, but neither he nor the prince was well pleased that day. The day after the battle Don Pedro asked the prince that all the knights and squires of note, natives of Castile, who were taken prisoners in the battle, should be delivered to him, and that a reasonable price should be set upon them, and he would pay it to those who held them prisoners. And that the prince should be security for such payments to the knights and men-at-arms who held them prisoners; and the king, Don Pedro, would pledge himself to the prince for the sum to which they amounted. And the king said that, if these knights were delivered to him, he would deal and speak with them in such a way that they should remain on his side; but if their ransom should be procured by other means, or they should escape from the imprisonment in which their captors held them, they would always remain his enemies and be active in his dis-service. Don Pedro insisted strongly on this point, on Sunday, the day after the battle, which was fought on the Saturday before Lazarus Sunday, the 3rd of April. The prince of Wales said to Don Pedro that, saving his royal majesty, his request was beyond reason, for these lords, knights, and men-at-arms, who were there in the king’s service and his own, had laboured for honour, and if they had taken any prisoners they were theirs. And the knights who held them were of such sort that for all the wealth of the world, though it were a thousand times the worth of their prisoners, they would never deliver them to him, for they would think his purpose was to kill them. And he bade the king urge the point no more, for it was a thing to which he never could agree; however, if there were any among the captive knights against whom he had passed sentence before the battle, he would order them to be delivered to him.

The king said to the prince that if things were to fall out thus, his kingdom was now more surely lost than ever, for these prisoners were those by whose fault he had lost his kingdom, and if they were to escape thus, and not be delivered to him, that he might come to terms with them and win them to his cause, he held that the prince’s help was of small account, and that he had expended his treasure in vain. Then the prince was angry at the words the king, Don Pedro, had spoken to him, and thus made answer:

“Sir kinsman, methinks you are now more like to recover your kingdom than when it was yours indeed, and you governed it so ill that you were fain to lose it. And I would counsel you to cease these executions and seek some means whereby you may recover the good will of the lords, knights, and noblemen, and the towns and cities of your kingdom; but if, on the contrary, you govern yourself as you did formerly, you are in sore peril of losing your kingdom and life, and of being brought to such a pass that neither the king of England, my lord and father, nor myself, will avail to help you, though we were so minded.”

Such was the discourse held between Don Pedro and the prince that day, Sunday, after the battle, when they lay in that camp[h]

A NEW REVOLT; THE END OF PEDRO THE CRUEL

[Sidenote: [1367-1368 A.D.]]

Pedro’s cruelty soon raised new discontent of which Henry was ready to take advantage, while the English prince was too disgusted[36] to support further with his bravery the odious tyranny of the Spanish Nero.[a]

Towards the close of the year (1367), Henry entered Spain by Roussillon, at the head of a very small force, not exceeding four hundred lances. At first the king of Aragon attempted to arrest his progress through that kingdom, but with little zeal; the soldiers sent to oppose him connived at his passage into Navarre. Having passed the Ebro at Azagra, and set foot on the Castilian territory, he drew a cross on the sand, and by it swore that he would not desist from his undertaking while life remained. The neighbouring inhabitants of Calahorra readily received him within their walls. He was joined by many of the Castilian barons with considerable reinforcements, and by the archbishop of Toledo. Leon was besieged and taken; the Asturias submitted; Illescas, Buytrago, and Madrid opened their gates after a short struggle; and Toledo, which promised a more obstinate resistance, was invested. It is useful to observe that the resistance of these places was the work of the citizens who were generally attached to Pedro; while the barons and hidalgos were generally for Henry. This circumstance gives great weight to the suspicion that, while Pedro ruled the privileged orders with an iron sceptre, he favoured the independence of the people.

[Sidenote: [1368-1369 A.D.]]

The success of the invader roused Pedro to something like activity in defence of his tottering crown. His ally, the king of Granada, was persuaded to arm in his behalf; and to join him with six thousand horse and thirty thousand foot. His own troops did not much exceed seven thousand, but the united force was formidable. Cordova was immediately assailed by the two kings; but the defence was so vigorous, and the loss on the part of the besiegers so severe, that the enterprise was soon abandoned. The troops of Muhammed V returned to Granada; and though they afterwards took the field, they did so, not so much to aid their ally, as to derive some advantage for themselves from the confusion of the times. The operations of the war were now very desultory, though destructive to the kingdom. In the north, Vittoria, Salvatierra, Logroño, and some other places which held for Pedro, submitted to the king of Navarre in preference to Henry--so great was their repugnance to that champion of feudal tyranny. Toledo manfully resisted his assaults. To relieve that important city, which had now been invested nearly twelve months, Pedro left Seville in March, 1369, and passed by Calatrava towards Montiel, with the intention of waiting for some reinforcements advancing from Murcia, before he ventured an action with his rival.

At this time, Bertrand du Guesclin arrived from France with an aid of six hundred lances. Henry now put his little army in motion; was joined by the grand-master of Santiago; and, arriving at Montiel with incredible despatch, he fell on the outposts of his rival, and forced them precipitately into the fortress. With a very inadequate force, Pedro was now besieged in this place, and cut off from all supplies, which yet reached Henry every hour. What added to his difficulties was the want of provisions and of water; so that his men began to desert one by one to the enemy, or retire to their respective homes. In this critical situation he meditated the means of escape.[b]

After the combat Don Henry took steps to prevent his enemy from escaping from the castle of Montiel, causing the exits to be strictly guarded, and surrounded by a wall of uncemented stones, presumably to prevent any inmate from escaping on horseback.

(From an old print)]

Mendo Rodriguez of Sanabria, who was with the king, on the strength of having at one time been Du Guesclin’s prisoner, attempted to negotiate with him for the king’s escape. The conference began from the ramparts and was secretly continued at night in the besieger’s camp. Rodriguez offered the French warrior, on the part of his lord, 200,000 doubloons of gold and dominion over towns as important as Almazan, Atienza, Monteagudo, Deza and Seron, if he would assist in the king’s flight and join his party. The prayer was most natural and just from one so distressingly situated; the answer was noble and befitting a knight. Du Guesclin replied that he served in this expedition by order of his lord the king of France, and in the service of the count of Trastamara, and therefore, without dishonour, he could not accede to this prayer; upon which Rodriguez returned to the fortress, suspicion being afterwards held by some as to his sincerity and loyalty in this attempt.

Bertrand related what had occurred to Don Henry, and the bastard with his natural generosity rewarded him by paying him what Rodriguez had offered, though in acting thus Bertrand had but been faithful to his duty and to the dictates of honour. He then induced the Frenchman to continue the negotiations and promise safety to Don Pedro, so that upon the latter’s coming to his tent he might summon thither Don Henry. The Frenchman had some suspicion as to the proceeding being unworthy of a knight, but eventually he conquered his scruples, and acceding to Don Henry’s request entered into the ignoble plot.

The result was that the king, trusting in the safe escort promised by Du Guesclin, left the castle of Montiel, where resistance was hopeless, and where it was impossible to remain as there was even a scarcity of water, and one by one the defenders were deserting. Armed and on horseback he came to Bertrand’s tent, and dismounting entered and said to him: “Mount, for it is time to be away.” Obtaining no reply, the unhappy monarch was alarmed and attempted to remount, but a traitor’s hand detained him, and he was made prisoner with his faithful followers Ferdinand de Castro, Mendo Rodriguez of Sanabria, Garcia Fernandez de Villodre, and others.

The news was speedily carried to Don Henry, if indeed he was not awaiting it near by, and well armed he hurried to the spot where the king was. As this scene took place at night in presence of numerous witnesses, and it was long since they had met, they did not immediately recognise one another. Don Henry being informed of his brother’s presence, the latter confirmed the news with noble arrogance, saying: “’Tis I! ’Tis I!”

Then occurred one of the most terrible scenes related in history for the horror of mankind. Don Henry wounded the king in the face with his dagger, and both grappling they fell to the ground. Don Henry succeeded, either by his own strength or with the assistance of a bystander, in falling on the top and wounding the unhappy king mortally, finally cutting off his head with furious wrath. Thus on March 23rd, 1369, was consummated a great crime against the legitimate king, and a repellent fratricide which, if Don Henry had refrained from presenting himself at that place, would have been avoided. It may be that he had no intention of killing the king with his own hand, and that infuriated by his hateful presence he flung himself upon him precipitately; but he should have foreseen the result, knowing that Pedro was about to become his prisoner through Du Guesclin’s treachery. It may be that the latter was merely actuated by a desire to bring this long war to an end, and secure the throne to Don Henry whom he served, and who had almost succeeded in winning it; but his intervention in this business, which terminated in a most horrible fratricide, was disloyal and unworthy of one whom the French esteem their greatest knight, nor was treachery called for, as Don Pedro must speedily have surrendered.

To conclude, this tragedy was shameful for the principal actors in it, the victim alone being free from taint, and to a certain extent his memory was purified by the shedding of his blood; for had not his tempestuous life come to so untimely an end, we may feel certain that passionate defenders would never have arisen to obliterate the title of “cruel” by which he is and ever will be known in history.[j]

A FINAL ESTIMATE OF PEDRO THE CRUEL

In recent times, attempts have been made by Mondejar,[k] and other historical critics, to vindicate the memory of this king, on the ground that his chronicler and contemporary, Pedro López de Ayala,[h] was a blind partisan of his rival’s, and has injuriously treated his memory. They tell us of a chronicle of this king, written by Don Juan de Castro, bishop of Jaen, in which Pedro is represented as one of the best sovereigns of the age--as one who, while he protected the oppressed, was severe only against his turbulent and lawless barons. There may be some truth in this latter assertion: Pedro, like Richard III of England, whom he partially resembles, was probably no enemy to the humbler orders, but eager only to break the formidable power of the nobles. Even admitting, what is very probable, that his character has been somewhat unfairly treated by Ayala, if one-half the deeds narrated by that author were actually perpetrated by him,--and the careful minuteness with which they are recorded gives them the appearance of authenticity,--he has had but one equal in ferocity, and that one was the czar Ivan IV of Russia. Until Castro’s pretended chronicle is actually produced--and it has been sought for in vain these three hundred years--and compared with Ayala, criticism is compelled to receive the testimony of the latter, confirmed, as it incidentally is, by Froissart[i] and other contemporary writers. That he was a man of lust, as well as of cruelty, is apparent from the number of his mistresses, to say nothing of his two pretended wives.[b]

Prosper Mérimée[m] is one of the modern defenders of Pedro, but while his tone is apologetic, his facts leave the resulting opinion only the stronger. Hume[n] admits the black heart of Pedro, but denies that he was exceptionally heartless for that time, and insists that his struggles against the nobles were for the good of the people and his failure to restrain their feudal power a calamity. It is hard, however, to believe that a monstrosity whom even his contemporaries found worthy of the fame of the most cruel of the cruel, could have been moved by any altruistic care for his people, or any motive except ferocious hatred of any resistance to his unutterable selfishness.

It is difficult to find in history a monarch whose reign had not some effort for good, since perfection in vice is as impossible as perfection in virtue. But surely no other king ever deserved less sympathy than Pedro for his failure to check the noblemen in their greed. Surely the feudal lords rarely used their power with better excuse than in protecting for a time the unhappy girl-wife Blanche de Bourbon whom Pedro sought to murder, and finally put to death. And the revolt of Trastamara can only be blamed by those to whom legitimacy of descent is a sacred claim on loyalty, even though the legitimate monarch wield his dagger right and left and have his kinsmen beaten to death with clubs till the floor of his own palace was ankle-deep in blood, as the chronicler asserts of Pedro.

It is unjust to deny the monarch the one distinction he earned by consistency and perseverance in the cause of evil. “Cruel” was his epithet in his own day; let “cruel” be his epitaph in ours.[a]

FOOTNOTES

[30] [Usually, but improperly termed, “the Wise” and also “the Astronomer.”[b]]

[31] [The reader may remember that the Templar Jacques de Molay, when burned alive, similarly summoned Philip the Fair of France and the pope to meet him before the Judgment Seat, and that they died soon after.]

[32] A sort of men-at-arms, whose usual weapon was a short club, or mace.

[33] [It is said that she stood to her ankles in the blood of the slaughtered noblemen.]

[34] While Pedro was at Najera, for the purpose of protecting his frontiers against these irruptions, a priest of San Domingo de la Calzada is said to have waited on him, and foretold, that, unless he kept on his guard, he would be assassinated by his brother Henry. “Who has advised you to tell me this?” asked the king. “No one,” replied the priest, “except San Domingo.” Pedro regarded this as some “weak invention of the enemy,” and caused the priest to be burned alive. This anecdote, true or false, is extracted from the chronicle of the contemporary López de Ayala.[h]