Chapter IV: Part 4

In the year 1544, the 35th of Henry VIII., on the 16th of May, proclamation was made for the enhancing of gold to forty-eight shillings, and silver to four shillings the ounce. Also the king caused to be coined base moneys, to wit, pieces of twelve pence, six pence, four pence, two pence, and a penny, in weight as the late sterling, in show good silver, but inwardly copper. These pieces had whole, or broad faces, and continued current after that rate till the 5th of Edward VI., when they were on the 9th of July called down, the shilling to nine pence, the groat to three pence, etc., and on the 17th of August from nine pence to six pence, etc. And on the 30th of October was published new coins of silver and gold to be made, a piece of silver five shillings sterling, a piece of two shillings and five pence, of twelve pence, of six pence, a penny with a double rose, half-penny a single rose, and a farthing with a portclose. Coins of fine gold: a whole sovereign of thirty shillings, an angel of ten shillings, an angelet of five shillings. Of crown gold: a sovereign twenty shillings, half-sovereign ten shillings, five shillings, two shillings and six pence, and base moneys to pass as before, which continued till the 2nd of Queen Elizabeth, then called to a lower rate, taken to the mint, and refined, the silver whereof being coined with a new stamp of her majesty, the dross was carried to foul highways, to heighten them. This base money, for the time, caused the old sterling moneys to be hoarded up, so that I have seen twenty-one shillings current given for one old angel to gild withal. Also rents of lands and tenements, with prices of victuals, were raised far beyond the former rates, hardly since to be brought down. Thus much for base moneys coined and current in England have I known. But for leather moneys, as many people have fondly talked, I find no such matter. I read,[77] that King John of France, being taken prisoner by Edward the Black Prince at the battle of Poictiers, paid a ransom of three millions of florences, whereby he brought the realm into such poverty, that many years after they used leather money, with a little stud or nail of silver in the middle thereof. Thus much for mint and coinage, by occasion of this Tower (under correction of others more skilful) may suffice. And now to other accidents there.

In the year 1360, the peace between England and France being confirmed, King Edward came over into England, and straight to the Tower, to see the French king then prisoner there, whose ransom he assessed at three millions of florences, and so delivered him from prison, and brought him with honour to the sea.

In the year 1381, the rebels of Kent drew out of the Tower (where the king was then lodged) Simon Sudberie, archbishop of Canterbury, lord chancellor, Robert Hales, prior of St. John’s, and treasurer of England, William Appleton, friar, the king’s confessor, and John Legg, a sergeant of the king’s, and beheaded them on the Tower hill, etc.

In the year 1387, King Richard held his feast of Christmas in the Tower. And in the year 1399, the same king was sent prisoner to the Tower.

In the year 1414, Sir John Oldcastell brake out of the Tower. And the same year, a parliament being holden at Leycester, a porter of the Tower was drawn, hanged, and headed, whose head was sent up, and set over the Tower gate, for consenting to one Whitlooke, that brake out of the Tower.

In the year 1419, Friar Randulph was sent to the Tower, and was there slain by the parson of St. Peter’s in the Tower.

In the year 1428, there came to London, a lewd fellow, feigning himself to be sent from the Emperor to the young King Henry VI., calling himself Baron of Blakamoore, and that he should be the principal physician in this kingdom; but his subtlety being known, he was apprehended, condemned, drawn, hanged, headed, and quartered, his head set on the Tower of London, and his quarters on four gates of the city.

In the year 1458, in Whitsun week, the Duke of Somerset, with Anthonie Rivers, and other four, kept jousts before the queen in the Tower of London, against three esquires of the queen’s, and others.

In the year 1465, King Henry VI. was brought prisoner to the Tower, where he remained long.

In the year 1470, the Tower was yielded to Sir Richard Lee, mayor of London, and his brethren the aldermen, who forthwith entered the same, delivered King Henry of his imprisonment, and lodged him in the king’s lodging there; but the next year he was again sent thither prisoner, and there murdered.

In the year 1478, George Duke of Clarence was drowned with malmsey in the Tower; and within five years after King Edward V., with his brother, were said to be murdered there.

In the year 1485, John Earl of Oxford was made constable of the Tower, and had custody of the lions granted him.[78]

In the year 1501, in the month of May, was a royal tourney of lords and knights in the Tower of London before the king.

In the year 1502, Queen Elizabeth, wife to Henry VII., died of childbirth in the Tower.

In the year 1512, the chapel in the high White Tower was burnt. In the year 1536 Queen Anne Bullein was beheaded in the Tower. 1541, Lady Katherine Howard, wife to King Henry VIII., was also beheaded there.

In the year 1546, the 27th of April, being Tuesday in Easter week, William Foxley, potmaker for the Mint in the Tower of London, fell asleep, and so continued sleeping, and could not be wakened with pricking, cramping, or otherwise, burning whatsoever, until the first day of the term, which was full fourteen days and fifteen nights, or more, for that Easter term beginneth not before seventeen days after Easter. The cause of his thus sleeping could not be known, though the same was diligently searched after by the king’s physicians, and other learned men; yea, the king himself examining the said William Foxley, who was in all points found at his awakening to be as if he had slept but one night. And he lived more than forty years after in the said Tower, to wit, until the year of Christ 1587, and then deceased on Wednesday in Easter week.

Thus much for these accidents: and now to conclude thereof in summary. This Tower is a citadel to defend or command the city; a royal palace for assemblies or treaties; a prison of state for the most dangerous offenders; the only place of coinage for all England at this time; the armoury for warlike provision; the treasury of the ornaments and jewels of the crown; and general conserver of the most records of the king’s courts of justice at Westminster.

TOWER ON LONDON BRIDGE

The next tower on the river of Thames is on London bridge, at the north end of the drawbridge. This tower was newly begun to be built in the year 1426. John Reynwell, mayor of London, laid one of the first corner stones in the foundation of this work, the other three were laid by the sheriffs and bridge masters; upon every of these four stones was engraven in fair roman letters the name of “Ihesus.” And these stones I have seen laid in the bridge storehouse since they were taken up, when that tower was of late newly made of timber. This gate and tower was at the first strongly built up of stone, and so continued until the year 1577, in the month of April, when the same stone arched gate and tower being decayed, was begun to be taken down, and then were the heads of the traitors removed thence, and set on the tower over the gate at the bridge-foot towards Southwark. This said tower being taken down, a new foundation was drawn, and Sir John Langley, lord mayor, laid the first stone in the presence of the sheriffs and bridge masters, on the 28th of August; and in the month of September, in the year 1579, the same tower was finished--a beautiful and chargeable piece of work, all above the bridge being of timber.

TOWER ON THE SOUTH OF LONDON BRIDGE

Another tower there is on London bridge, to wit, over the gate at the south end of the same bridge towards Southwark. This gate, with the tower thereupon, and two arches of the bridge, fell down, and no man perished by the fall thereof, in the year 1436;[79] towards the new building whereof divers charitable citizens gave large sums of money; which gate, being then again newly built, was, with seventeen houses more on the bridge, in the year 1471, burnt by the mariners and sailors of Kent, Bastard Fauconbridge being their captain.

BAYNARD’S CASTLE

In the west of this city (saith Fitzstephen) are two most strong castles, etc. Also Gervasius Tilbury,[80] in the reign of Henry II., writing of these castles, hath to this effect:--“Two castels,” saith he, “are built with walles and rampires, whereof one is, in right of possession, Baynardes; the other the Barons of Mountfichet.” The first of these castles, banking on the river Thames, was called Baynard’s Castle, of Baynard a nobleman, that came in with the Conqueror, and then built it, and deceased in the reign of William Rufus; after whose decease Geffrey Baynard succeeded, and then William Baynard, in the year 1111, who by forfeiture for felony, lost his barony of Little Dunmow, and King Henry gave it wholly to Robert, the son of Richard, the son of Gilbard of Clare, and to his heirs, together with the honour of Baynard’s Castle. This Robert married Maude de Sent Licio, lady of Bradham, and deceased 1134; was buried at St. Needes by Gilbert of Clare, his father. Walter his son succeeded him; he took to wife Matilde de Bocham, and after her decease, Matilde, the daughter and co-heir of Richard de Lucy, on whom he begat Robert and other: he deceased in the year 1198, and was buried at Dunmow; after whom succeeded Robert Fitzwater, a valiant knight.

About the year 1213 there arose a great discord between King John and his barons, because Matilda, surnamed the Fair, daughter to the said Robert Fitzwater, whom the king unlawfully loved, but could not obtain her, nor her father would consent thereunto, whereupon, and for other like causes, ensued war through the whole realm. The barons were received into London, where they greatly endamaged the king; but in the end the king did not only therefore banish the said Fitzwater, amongst other, out of the realm, but also caused his castle called Baynard, and other his houses, to be spoiled; which thing being done, a messenger being sent unto Matilda the Fair about the king’s suit, whereunto she would not consent, she was poisoned;[81] Robert Fitzwater, and other, being then passed into France, and some into Scotland, etc.[82]

It happened in the year 1214, King John being then in France with a great army, that a truce was taken betwixt the two kings of England and France for the term of five years; and a river, or arm of the sea, being then between either host, there was a knight in the English host, that cried to them of the other side, willing some one of their knights to come and joust a course or twain with him; whereupon, without stay, Robert Fitzwater, being on the French part, made himself ready, ferried over, and got on horseback, without any man to help him, and showed himself ready to the face of his challenger, whom at the first course he struck so hard with his great spear, that horse and man fell to the ground; and when his spear was broken he went back to the King of France; which when the king had seen, “By God’s tooth,” quoth he (after his usual oath), “he were a king indeed that had such a knight.” The friends of Robert, hearing these words, kneeled down, and said:--“O king, he is your knight; it is Robert Fitzwater.” And thereupon, the next day he was sent for, and restored to the king’s favour; by which means peace was concluded, and he received his livings, and had license to repair his castle of Baynard, and other castles.

The year 1216, the 1st of Henry III., the castle of Hartford being delivered to Lewis the French prince, and the barons of England, Robert Fitzwater requiring to have the same, because the keeping thereof did by ancient right and title pertain to him, was answered by Lewis, “that Englishmen were not worthy to have such holds in keeping, because they did betray their own lord,” etc. This Robert deceased in the year 1234, and was buried at Dunmow, and Walter his son that succeeded him. 1258, his barony of Baynard, was in the ward of King Henry, in the nonage of Robert Fitzwater. This Robert took to his second wife, Ælianor, daughter and heir to the Earl of Ferrars, in the year 1289; and in the year 1303, on the 12th of March, before John Blondon, mayor of London, he acknowledged his service to the same city, and sware upon the Evangelists, that he would be true to the liberties thereof, and maintain the same to his power, and the counsel of the same to keep, etc.

THE RIGHTS THAT BELONGED TO ROBERT FITZWALTER CHASTALIAN OF LONDON, LORD OF WODEHAM, WERE THESE:--

The said Robert, and his heirs, ought to be, and are chief bannerers of London, in fee of the chastilarie, which he and his ancestors had by Castle Baynard, in the said city. In time of war the said Robert, and his heirs, ought to serve the city in manner as followeth: that is, The said Robert ought to come, he being the twentieth man of arms on horseback, covered with cloth, or armour, unto the great west door of St. Paul, with his banner displayed before him of his arms; and when he is come to the said door, mounted and apparelled, as before is said, the mayor with his aldermen and sheriffs armed in their arms, shall come out of the said church of St. Paul, unto the said door, with a banner in his hand, all on foot, which banner shall be gules, with the image of St. Paul, gold, the face, hands, feet, and sword, of silver; and as soon as the said Robert shall see the mayor, aldermen, and sheriffs, come on foot out of the church, armed with such a banner, he shall alight from his horse, and salute the mayor, and say to him,--“Sir mayor, I am come to do my service, which I owe to the city.” And the mayor and aldermen shall answer,--“We give to you, as our bannerer of fee in this city, this banner of this city to bear, and govern to the honour and profit of the city to our power.” And the said Robert and his heirs shall receive the banner in his hands, and shall go on foot out of the gate with the banner in his hands; and the mayor, aldermen, and sheriffs, shall follow to the door, and shall bring a horse to the said Robert worth twenty pounds, which horse shall be saddled with a saddle of the arms of the said Robert, and shall be covered with sandals of the said arms. Also they shall present to him twenty pounds sterling money, and deliver it to the chamberlain of the said Robert for his expenses that day. Then the said Robert shall mount upon the horse which the mayor presented to him, with the banner in his hand, and as soon as he is up, he shall say to the mayor, that he cause a marshal to be chosen for the host, one of the city; which marshal being chosen, the said Robert shall command the mayor and burgesses of the city to warn the commoners to assemble together, and they shall all go under the banner of St. Paul, and the said Robert shall bear it himself unto Aldgate, and there the said Robert and mayor shall deliver the said banner of St. Paul from thence, to whom they shall assent or think good. And if they must make any issue forth of the city, then the said Robert ought to choose two forth of every ward, the most sage personages, to foresee to the safe keeping of the city after they be gone forth. And this counsel shall be taken in the priory of the Trinity near unto Aldgate. And before every town or castle which the host of London besiege, if the siege continue a whole year, the said Robert shall have for every siege of the commonalty of London an hundred shillings for his travail, and no more. These be the rights that the said Robert hath in the time of war.--Rights belonging to Robert Fitzwalter, and to his heirs in the city of London, in the time of peace, are these: that is to say, the said Robert hath a soken or ward in the city, that is, a wall of the canonry of St. Paul, as a man goeth down the street before the brewhouse of St. Paul unto the Thames, and so to the side of the mill, which is in the water that cometh down from the Fleet bridge, and goeth so by London walls, betwixt the Friers preachers and Ludgate, and so returneth back by the house of the said Friars unto the said wall of the said canonry of St. Paul, that is, all the parish of St. Andrew, which is in the gift of his ancestors by the said seigniority. And so the said Robert hath appendant unto the said soken all these things under-written,--that he ought to have a soke man, and to place what sokeman he will, so he be of the sokemanry, or the same ward; and if any of the sokemanry be impleaded in the Guildhall, of any thing that toucheth not the body of the mayor that for the time is, or that toucheth the body of no sheriff, it is not lawful for the sokeman of the sokemanry of the said Robert Fitzwalter to demand a court of the said Robert, and the mayor, and his citizens of London, ought to grant him to have a court, and in his court he ought to bring his judgments, as it is assented and agreed upon in this Guildhall, that shall be given them. If any, therefore, be taken in his sokenly, he ought to have his stocks and imprisonment in his soken; and he shall be brought from thence to the Guildhall before the mayor, and there they shall provide him his judgment that ought to be given of him; but his judgment shall not be published till he come into the court of the said Robert, and in his liberty. And the judgment shall be such, that if he have deserved death by treason, he to be tied to a post in the Thames at a good wharf where boats are fastened, two ebbings and two flowings of the water. And if he be condemned for a common thief, he ought to be led to the Elms, and there suffer his judgment as other thieves. And so the said Robert and his heirs hath honour that he holdeth a great franchise within the city, that the mayor of the city and citizens are bound to do him of right, that is to say, that when the mayor will hold a great council, he ought to call the said Robert, and his heirs, to be with him in council of the city, and the said Robert ought to be sworn to be of council with the city against all people, saving the king and his heirs. And when the said Robert cometh to the hustings in the Guildhall of the city, the mayor, or his lieutenant, ought to rise against him, and set him down near unto him; and so long as he is in the Guildhall, all the judgment ought to be given by his mouth, according to the record of the recorders of the said Guildhall; and so many waifes as come so long as he is there, he ought to give them to the bailiffs of the town, or to whom he will, by the counsel of the mayor of the city. These be the franchises that belonged to Robert Fitzwalter in London, in time of peace; which for the antiquity thereof I have noted out of an old record.

This Robert deceased in the year 1305, leaving issue Walter Fitzrobert, who had issue Robert Fitzwalter, unto whom, in the year 1320, the citizens of London acknowledged the right which they ought to him and his heirs for the Castle Baynard; he deceased 1325; unto whom succeeded Robert Fitzrobert, Fitzwalter, etc. More of the Lord Fitzwalter may ye read in my Annals in 51st of Edward III. But how this honour of Baynard’s castle, with the appurtenances, fell from the possession of the Fitzwalters, I have not read; only I find, that in the year 1428, the 7th of Henry VI., a great fire was at Baynard’s castle, and that same Humfrey, Duke of Gloucester, built it of new. By his death and attainder, in the year 1446, it came to the hands of Henry VI., and from him to Richard, Duke of York, of whom we read, that in the year 1457 he lodged there, as in his own house. In the year 1460, the 28th of February, the Earls of March and of Warwick, with a great power of men, but few of name, entered the city of London, where they were of the citizens joyously received; and upon the 3rd of March, being Sunday, the said earl caused to be mustered his people in St. John’s field; whereunto that host was showed and proclaimed certain articles and points wherein King Henry, as they said, had offended; and thereupon, it was demanded of the said people, whether the said Henry was worthy to reign as king any longer or not: whereunto the people cried Nay. Then it was asked of them, whether they would have the Earl of March for their king; and they cried, Yea, Yea. Whereupon, certain captains were appointed to bear report thereof unto the said Earl of March, then being lodged at his castle of Baynard. Whereof when the earl was by them advertised, he thanked God, and them for their election; notwithstanding he showed some countenance of insufficiency in him to occupy so great a charge, till by exhortation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Excester, and certain noblemen, he granted to their petition; and on the next morrow at Paul’s he went on procession, offered, and had _Te Deum_ sung. Then was he with great royalty conveyed to Westminster, and there, in the great hall, set in the king’s seat, with St. Edward’s sceptre in his hand.

Edward IV. being dead, leaving his eldest son Edward, and his second son Richard, both infants, Richard, Duke of Glocester,[83] being elected by the nobles and commons in the Guildhall of London, took on him the title of the realm and kingdom, as imposed upon him in this Baynard’s castle, as ye may read penned by Sir Thomas More, and set down in my Annals.

Henry VII., about the year 1501, the 16th of his reign, repaired, or rather new built this house, not embattled, or so strongly fortified castle like, but far more beautiful and commodious for the entertainment of any prince or great estate. In the 17th of his reign, he, with his queen were lodged there, and came from thence to Powles church, where they made their offering, dined in the bishop’s palace, and so returned. The 18th of his reign he was lodged there, and the ambassadors from the king of the Romans, where thither brought to his presence, and from thence the king came to Powles, and was there sworn to the king of the Romans, as the said king had sworn to him.

The 20th of the said king, he with his knights of the order, all in their habits of the Garter, rode from the Tower of London, through the city, unto the cathedral church of St. Paul’s, and there heard evensong, and from thence they rode to Baynard’s castle, where the king lodged; and on the next morrow, in the same habit they rode from thence again to the said church of St. Paul’s, went on procession, heard the divine service, offered, and returned. The same year the king of Castile was lodged there.

In the year 1553, the 19th of July, the council, partly moved with the right of the Lady Mary’s cause, partly considering that the most of the realm were wholly bent on her side, changing their mind from Lady Jane, lately proclaimed queen, assembled themselves at this Baynard’s castle, where they communed with the Earl of Pembroke, and the Earl of Shrewsbury, and Sir John Mason, clerk of the council, sent for the lord mayor, and then riding into Cheap to the cross, where Garter King at Arms, trumpet being sounded, proclaimed the Lady Mary, daughter of King Henry VIII., and Queen Katherine, queen of England, etc.

This castle now belongeth to the Earl of Pembroke.[84]

Next adjoining to this castle was sometime a tower, the name whereof I have not read; but that the same was built by Edward II. is manifest by this that followeth. King Edward III., in the second year of his reign, gave unto William de Ros, of Hamolake, in Yorkshire, a tower upon the water of Thames, by the castle of Baynard in the city of London, which tower his father had built; he gave the said tower and appurtenances to the said William Hamolake, and his heirs, for a rose yearly, to be paid for all service due, etc. This tower, as seemeth to me, was since called Legat’s inn, the 7th of Edward IV.

TOWER OF MOUNTFIQUIT

The next tower or castle, banking also on the river of Thames, was, as is afore showed, called Mountfiquit’s castle, of a nobleman, Baron of Mountfiquit, the first builder thereof, who came in with William the Conqueror, and was since named Le Sir Mountfiquit. This castle he built in a place not far distant from Baynard’s, towards the west. The same William Mountfiquit lived in the reign of Henry I., and was witness to a charter then granted to the city for the sheriffs of London. Richard Mountfiquit lived in King John’s time; and in the year 1213, was by the same king banished the realm into France, when peradventure King John caused his castle of Mountfiquit, amongst other castles of the barons, to be overthrown; the which after his return, might be by him again re-edified; for the total destruction thereof was about the year 1276, when Robert Kilwarby, archbishop of Canterbury, began the foundation of the Fryers Preachers church there, commonly called the Blacke Fryers, as appeareth by a charter the 4th of Edward I., wherein is declared that Gregorie de Rocksley, mayor of London, and the barons of the same city, granted and gave unto the said Archbishop Robert, two lanes or ways next the street of Baynard’s castle, and the tower of Mountfiquit, to be applied for the enlargement of the said church and place.

One other tower there was also situate on the river of Thames near unto the said Blacke Fryers church, on the west part thereof built at the citizens’ charges, but by license and commandment of Edward I. and of Edward II., as appeareth by their grants; which tower was then finished, and so stood for the space of three hundred years, and was at the last taken down by the commandment of John Shaw, mayor of London, in the year 1502.

Another tower, or castle, also was there in the west part of the city pertaining to the king. For I read, that in the year 1087, the 20th of William I., the city of London, with the church of St. Paul, being burned, Mauritius, then bishop of London, afterward began the foundation of a new church, whereunto King William, saith mine author, gave the choice stones of this castle standing near to the bank of the river of Thames, at the west end of the city. After this Mauritius, Richard his successor purchased the streets about Paul’s church,[85] compassing the same with a wall of stone and gates. King Henry I. gave to this Richard so much of the moat or wall of the castle, on the Thames side to the south, as should be needful to make the said wall of the churchyard, and so much more as should suffice to make a way without the wall on the north side, etc.

This tower or castle thus destroyed, stood, as it may seem, where now standeth the house called Bridewell. For notwithstanding the destruction of the said castle or tower, the house remained large, so that the kings of this realm long after were lodged there, and kept their courts; for until the 9th year of Henry III. the courts of law and justice were kept in the king’s house, wheresoever he was lodged, and not elsewhere. And that the kings have been lodged, and kept their law courts in this place, I could show you many authors of record, but for plain proof this one may suffice. “_Hæc est finalis concordia, facta in Curia Domini regis apud Sanct. Bridgid. London. a die Sancti Michaelis in 15 dies, Anno regni regis Johannis 7. coram G. Fil. Petri. Eustachio de Fauconberg, Johanne de Gestlinge, Osbart filio Hervey, Walter De Crisping Justiciar. et aliis baronibus Domini regis._”[86] More, as Matthew Paris hath, about the year 1210, King John, in the 12th of his reign, summoned a parliament at St. Bride’s in London, where he exacted of the clergy and religious persons the sum of one hundred thousand pounds; and besides all this, the white monks were compelled to cancel their privileges, and to pay forty thousand pounds to the king, etc. This house of St. Bride’s of latter time being left, and not used by the kings, fell to ruin, insomuch that the very platform thereof remained for great part waste, and, as it were, but a laystall of filth and rubbish; only a fair well remained there. A great part of this house, namely, on the west, as hath been said, was given to the Bishop of Salisbury; the other part towards the east remaining waste until King Henry VIII. built a stately and beautiful house thereupon, giving it to name Bridewell, of the parish and well there. This house he purposely built for the entertainment of the Emperor Charles V., who in the year 1522 came into this city, as I have showed in my Summary, Annals, and large Chronicles.

On the north-west side of the city, near unto Redcross street, there was a tower, commonly called Barbican, or Burhkenning; for that the same being placed on a high ground, and also built of some good height, was in old time as a watch-tower for the city, from whence a man might behold and view the whole city towards the south, and also into Kent, Sussex, and Surrey, and likewise every other way, east, north, or west.

Some other Burhkennings, or watch-towers, there were of old time in and about the city, all which were repaired, yea, and others new built, by Gilbart de Clare, Earl of Glocester, in the reign of King Henry III., when the barons were in arms, and held the city against the king; but the barons being reconciled to his favour in the year 1267, he caused all their burhkennings, watch-towers, and bulwarks, made and repaired by the said earl, to be plucked down, and the ditches to be filled up, so that nought of them might be seen to remain; and then was this burhkenning, amongst the rest, overthrown and destroyed; and although the ditch near thereunto, called Hound’s ditch, was stopped up, yet the street of long time after was called Hound’s ditch; and of late time more commonly called Barbican. The plot or seat of this burhkenning, or watch-tower, King Edward III., in the year 1336, and the 10th of his reign, gave unto Robert Ufford, Earl of Suffolk, by the name of his manor of Base court, in the parish of St. Giles without Cripplegate, of London, commonly called the Barbican.

Tower Royal was of old time the king’s house. King Stephen was there lodged; but sithence called the Queen’s Wardrobe. The princess, mother to King Richard II. in the 4th of his reign was lodged there; being forced to fly from the Tower of London when the rebels possessed it. But on the 15th of June (saith Froissart), Wat Tyler being slain, the king went to this lady princess his mother, then lodged in the Tower Royal, called the Queen’s Wardrobe, where she had tarried two days and two nights; which tower (saith the record of Edward III., the 36th year[87]) was in the parish of St. Michel de Paternoster, etc. In the year 1386, King Richard, with Queen Anne his wife, kept their Christmas at Eltham, whither came to him Lion, king of Ermony,[88] under pretence to reform peace betwixt the kings of England and France; but what his coming profited he only understood; for besides innumerable gifts that he received of the king and his nobles, the king lying then in this Tower Royal, at the Queen’s Wardrobe in London, granted to him a charter of a thousand pounds by year during his life. He was, as he affirmed, chased out of his kingdom by the Tartarians. More concerning this tower shall you read when you come to Vintry Ward, in which it standeth.

Sernes tower in Bucklesberie, was sometime the king’s house. Edward III., in the 18th of his reign, appointed his exchange of moneys therein to be kept; and in the 32d, he gave the same tower to his free chapel of St. Stephen at Westminster.

FOOTNOTES:

[64] W. Malmesbury, Matthew Paris, John London.

[65] Ex charta.

[66] Roger Wendover, John Bever.

[67] “St. Katherine’s mill stood where now is the Iron Gate of the Tower.”--_Stow._

[68] Lynxes, porcupines.

[69] Patent, the 15th of King John.

[70] Matthew Paris.

[71] W. Malmsbury.

[72] Roger Hoveden.

[73] Guthuron’s lane, now Gutter lane, leading out of Cheapside, was a small lane, formerly tenanted by goldsmiths; the person who gave his name to the lane, was evidently of Saxon or Danish origin.

[74] That is, seventeen pence halfpenny farthing to be alloy.

[75] By the terms _force_ and _deble_, it is presumed the maximum and minimum weights are intended.

[76] Thomas Walsingham.

[77] Philip Comines.

[78] Patent, 1st of Henry VII.

[79] W. Dunthorne.

[80] Fitzstephen, Gerv. Tilbury.

[81] “Virginitie defended with the losse of worldly goods, and life of the bodie, for life of the soule.”--_Stow._

[82] Liber Dunmow.

[83] Stow in his first edition says, “there practised for the crown ...;” and the admirable scene in _Richard the Third_ (act III., sc. 7), in which Gloucester is by Buckingham, the mayor, and citizens of London, “enforced to a world of cares,” is laid by Shakspeare with great historic truth in “the court of Baynard’s castle.”

[84] It was destroyed in the Great Fire, before which time it had become the residences of the Earls of Shrewsbury.

[85] Vita Arkenwald.

[86] Liber Burton, super Trent.

[87] Liber Sanct. Mariæ Eborum.

[88] Armenia. Ermony, from the Old French “Ermenie.” See Roquefort’s _Glossaire_, s. v.

Chaucer, too, in his _Monke’s Tale_, line 14,343, etc., says:--

“Ne dorste never be so corageous
Ne non _Ermin_, ne non Egiptien,
Ne Surrien, ne non Arabien.”

OF SCHOOLS AND OTHER HOUSES OF LEARNING

“In the reign of King Stephen and of Henry II.,” saith Fitzstephen, “there were in London three principal churches, which had famous schools, either by privilege and ancient dignity, or by favour of some particular persons, as of doctors which were accounted notable and renowned for knowledge in philosophy. And there were other inferior schools also. Upon festival days the masters made solemn meetings in the churches, where their scholars disputed logically and demonstratively; some bringing enthimems, other perfect syllogisms; some disputed for shew, other to trace out the truth; cunning sophisters were thought brave scholars when they flowed with words; others used fallacies; rhetoricians spake aptly to persuade, observing the precepts of art, and omitting nothing that might serve their purpose: the boys of diverse schools did cap or pot verses, and contended of the principles of grammar; there were some which on the other side with epigrams and rymes, nipping and quipping their fellowes, and the faults of others, though suppressing their names, moved thereby much laughter among their auditors.” Hitherto Fitzstephen, for schools and scholars, and for their exercises in the city in his days; sithence the which time, as to me it seemeth, by the increase of colleges and students in the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, the frequenting of schools, and exercises of scholars in the city, as had been accustomed, hath much decreased.

The three principal churches which had these famous schools by privileges, must needs be the cathedral church of St. Paul for one; seeing that by a general council, holden in the year of Christ 1176, at Rome, in the patriarchy of Laterane, it was decreed, that every cathedral church should have his schoolmaster to teach poor scholars, and others as had been accustomed, and that no man should take any reward for license to teach. The second, as most ancient, may seem to have been the monastery of St. Peter’s at Westminster, whereof Ingulphus, Abbot of Crowland, in the reign of William the Conqueror, writeth thus:--“I, Ingulphus, an humble servant of God, born of English parents, in the most beautiful city of London, for to attain to learning, was first put to Westminster, and after to study of Oxford,” etc. And writing in praise of Queen Edgitha, wife to Edward the Confessor: “I have seen her,” saith he, “often when being a boy, I came to see my father dwelling in the king’s court, and often coming from school, when I met her, she would oppose me, touching my learning and lesson; and falling from grammar to logic, wherein she had some knowledge, she would subtilly conclude an argument with me, and by her handmaiden give me three or four pieces of money, and send me unto the palace where I should receive some victuals, and then be dismissed.”

The third school seemeth to have been in the monastery of St. Saviour, at Bermondsey in Southwark; for other priories, as of St. John by Smithfield, St. Bartholomew in Smithfield, St. Mary Overie in Southwark, and that of the Holy Trinity by Aldgate, were all of later foundation, and the friaries, colleges, and hospitals, in this city, were raised since them in the reigns of Henry III., Edward I., II., and III., etc. All which houses had their schools, though not so famous as these first named.

But touching schools more lately advanced in this city, I read, that King Henry V., having suppressed the priories aliens, whereof some were about London; namely, one hospital, called Our Lady of Rouncivall, by Charing Cross; one other hospital in Oldborne; one other without Cripplegate; and the fourth without Aldersgate; besides other that are now worn out of memory, and whereof there is no monument remaining more than Rouncivall, converted to a brotherhood, which continued till the reign of Henry VIII. or Edward VI. This, I say, and other their schools being broken up and ceased, King Henry VI., in the 24th of his reign, by patent, appointed, that there should be in London grammar schools, besides St. Paul’s, at St. Martin’s le Grand, St. Mary le Bow in Cheap, St. Dunstan’s in the west, and St. Anthony’s. And in the next year, to wit, 1447, the said king ordained by parliament that four other grammar schools should be erected, to wit, in the parishes of St. Andrew in Oldborne, Allhallowes the Great in Thames street, St. Peter’s upon Cornhill, and in the hospital of St. Thomas of Acons in West Cheap; since the which time as divers schools, by suppressing of religious houses, whereof they were members, in the reign of Henry VIII., have been decayed, so again have some others been newly erected, and founded for them; as namely Paul’s school, in place of an old ruined house, was built in most ample manner, and largely endowed, in the year 1512, by John Collet, Doctor of Divinity, Dean of Paul’s, for one hundred and fifty-three poor men’s children, for which there was ordained a master, surmaster, or usher, and a chaplain. Again, in the year 1553, after the erection of Christ’s hospital, in the late dissolved house of the Gray Friars, a great number of poor children being taken in, a school was also ordained there at the citizen’s charges. Also, in the year 1561, the Merchant Taylors of London founded one notable free grammar school, in the parish of St. Laurence Poultney by Candleweeke street, Richard Hils, late master of that company, having given five hundred pounds towards the purchase of a house, called the Mannor of the Rose, sometime the Duke of Buckingham’s, wherein the school is kept. As for the meeting of the schoolmasters on festival days, at festival churches, and the disputing of their scholars logically, etc., whereof I have before spoken, the same was long since discontinued; but the arguing of the schoolboys about the principles of grammar hath been continued even till our time; for I myself, in my youth, have yearly seen, on the eve of St. Bartholomew the Apostle, the scholars of divers grammar schools repair unto the churchyard of St. Bartholomew, the priory in Smithfield, where upon a bank boarded about under a tree, some one scholar hath stepped up, and there hath opposed and answered, till he were by some better scholar overcome and put down; and then the overcomer taking the place, did like as the first; and in the end the best opposers and answerers had rewards, which I observed not but it made both good schoolmasters, and also good scholars, diligently against such times to prepare themselves for the obtaining of this garland. I remember there repaired to these exercises, amongst others, the masters and scholars of the free schools of St. Paul’s in London, of St. Peter’s at Westminster, of St. Thomas Acon’s hospital, and of St. Anthonie’s hospital; whereof the last-named commonly presented the best scholars, and had the prize in those days.

This priory of St. Bartholomew being surrendered to Henry VIII., those disputations of scholars in that place surceased; and was again, only for a year or twain, in the reign of Edward VI., revived in the cloister of Christ’s hospital, where the best scholars, then still of St. Anthonie’s school,[89] were rewarded with bows and arrows of silver, given to them by Sir Martin Bowes, goldsmith. Nevertheless, however the encouragement failed, the scholars of Paul’s, meeting with them of St. Anthonie’s, would call them Anthonie pigs, and they again would call the other pigeons of Paul’s, because many pigeons were bred in St. Paul’s church, and St. Anthonie was always figured with a pig following him; and mindful of the former usage, did for a long season disorderly in the open street provoke one another with, _Salve tu quoque, placet tibi mecum disputare? Placet._ And so proceeding from this to questions in grammar, they usually fell from words to blows with their satchels full of books, many times in great heaps, that they troubled the streets and passengers; so that finally they were restrained with the decay of St. Anthonie’s school. Out of this school have sprung divers famous persons, whereof although time hath buried the names of many, yet in mine own remembrance may be numbered these following:--Sir Thomas More, knight, lord chancellor of England, Dr. Nicholas Heath, sometime Bishop of Rochester, after of Worcester, and lastly Archbishop of York and Lord Chancellor of England; Doctor John Whitgift, Bishop of Worcester, and after Archbishop of Canterbury, etc.

Of later time, in the year of Christ 1582, there was founded a public lecture in chirurgerie, to be read in the College of Physicians in Knight riders street, to begin in the year 1584, on the sixth of May, and so to be continued for ever, twice every week, on Wednesday and Friday, by the honourable Baron, John Lord Lombley, and the learned Richard Caldwell, doctor in physic, the reader whereof to be Richard Forster, doctor of physic, during his life.

Furthermore, about the same time there was also begun a mathematical lecture, to be read in a fair old chapel, built by Simon Eayre, within the Leaden hall; whereof a learned citizen born, named Thomas Hood, was the first reader. But this chapel, and other parts of that hall, being employed for stowage of goods taken out of a great Spanish caracke, the said lecture ceased any more to be read, and was then in the year 1588 read in the house of master Thomas Smith in Grasse street, etc.

Last of all, Sir Thomas Gresham, knight, agent to the queen’s highness, by his last will and testament made in the year 1579, gave the Royal Exchange, and all the buildings thereunto appertaining; that is to say, the one moiety to the mayor and commonalty of London and their successors, upon trust that they perform as shall be declared; and the other moiety to the mercers in like confidence. The mayor and commonalty are to find four to read lectures of divinity, astronomy, music, and geometry, within his dwelling-house in Bishopsgate street, and to bestow the sum of two hundred pounds; to wit, fifty pounds the piece, etc. The mercers likewise are to find three readers, that is, in civil law, physic, and rhetoric, within the same dwelling-house, the sum of one hundred and fifty pounds; to every reader, fifty pounds, etc.: which gift hath been since that time confirmed by parliament, to take effect and begin after the decease of the Lady Anne Gresham, which happened in the year 1596, and so to continue for ever. Whereupon the lecturers were accordingly chosen and appointed to have begun their readings in the month of June, 1597; whose names were, Anthony Wootton, for divinity; Doctor Mathew Guin, for physic; Doctor Henry Mountlow, for the civil law; Doctor John Bull, for music; Beerewood, for astronomy; Henry Brigges, for geometry; and Caleb Willis, for rhetoric. These lectures are read daily, Sundays excepted, in the term times, by every one upon his day, in the morning betwixt nine and ten, in Latin; in the afternoon, betwixt two and three, in English; save that Dr. Bull is dispensed with to read the music lecture in English only upon two several days, Thursday and Saturday, in the afternoons, betwixt three and four of the clock.

FOOTNOTE:

[89] “Howsoever the same be now fallen, both in number and estimation.”--_1st edition_, p. 56.

HOUSES OF STUDENTS IN THE COMMON LAW

But besides all this, there is in and about this city a whole university, as it were, of students, practicers or pleaders, and judges of the laws of this realm, not living of common stipends, as in other universities it is for the most part done, but of their own private maintenance, as being altogether fed either by their places or practice, or otherwise by their proper revenue, or exhibition of parents and friends; for that the younger sort are either gentlemen or the sons of gentlemen, or of other most wealthy persons. Of these houses there be at this day fourteen in all; whereof nine do stand within the liberties of this city, and five in the suburbs thereof; to wit:

_Within the liberties_

Serjeants’ inn in Fleet Street, Serjeants’ inn in Chancery lane; for judges and sergeants only.

The Inner temple, the Middle temple, in Fleet street; houses of court.

Clifford’s inn in Fleet street, Thavies inn in Oldborne, Furnival’s inn in Oldborne, Barnard’s inn in Oldborne, Staple inn in Oldborne; houses of Chancery.

_Without the liberties_

Gray’s inn in Oldborne, Lincoln’s inn in Chancery lane by the old Temple;[90] houses of court.

Clement’s inn, New inn, Lion’s inn; houses of Chancery, without Temple bar, in the liberty of Westminster.

There was sometime an inn of sergeants in Oldborne, as you may read of Scrop’s inn over against St. Andrew’s church.

There was also one other inn of Chancery, called Chester’s inn, for the nearness of the Bishop of Chester’s house, but more commonly termed Strand inn, for that it stood in Strand street, and near unto Strand bridge without Temple bar, in the liberty of the duchy of Lancaster. This inn of Chancery, with other houses near adjoining, were pulled down in the reign of Edward VI. by Edward Duke of Sommerset, who in place thereof raised that large and beautiful house, but yet unfinished, called Sommerset house.

There was moreover, in the reign of King Henry I., a tenth house of Chancery, mentioned by Justice Fortescue in his book of the laws of England, but where it stood, or when it was abandoned, I cannot find, and therefore I will leave it, and return to the rest.

The houses of court be replenished partly with young students, and partly with graduates and practisers of the law; but the inns of Chancery, being, as it were, provinces, severally subjected to the inns of court, be chiefly furnished with officers, attorneys, solicitors, and clerks, that follow the courts of the King’s Bench or Common Pleas; and yet there want not some other being young students, that come thither sometimes from one of the Universities, and sometimes immediately from grammar schools; and these having spent some time in studying upon the first elements and grounds of the law, and having performed the exercise of their own houses (called Boltas Mootes,[91] and putting of cases), they proceed to be admitted, and become students in some of these four houses or inns of court, where continuing by the space of seven years or thereabouts, they frequent readings, meetings, boltings, and other learned exercises, whereby growing ripe in the knowledge of the laws, and approved withal to be of honest conversation, they are either, by the general consent of the benchers or readers, being of the most ancient, grave, and judicial men of every inn of the court, or by the special privilege of the present reader there, selected and called to the degree of utter barristers, and so enabled to be common counsellors, and to practice the law, both in their chambers and at the bars.

Of these, after that they be called to a further step of preferment, called the Bench, there are twain every year chosen among the benchers of every inn of court to be readers there, who do make their readings at two times in the year also; that is, one in Lent, and the other at the beginning of August.

And for the help of young students in every of the inns of Chancery, they do likewise choose out of every one inn of court a reader, being no bencher, but an utter barrister there, of ten or twelve years’ continuance, and of good profit in study. Now, from these of the said degree of counsellors, or utter barristers, having continued therein the space of fourteen or fifteen years at the least, the chiefest and best learned are by the benchers elected to increase the number, as I said, of the bench amongst them; and so in their time do become first single, and then double, readers to the students of those houses of court; after which last reading they be named apprentices at the law, and, in default of a sufficient number of sergeants at law, these are, at the pleasure of the prince, to be advanced to the places of sergeants; out of which number of sergeants also the void places of judges are likewise ordinarily filled; albeit, now and then some be advanced, by the special favour of the prince, to the estate, dignity, and place, both of sergeant and judge, as it were in one instant. But from thenceforth they hold not any room in those inns of court, being translated to one of the said two inns, called Sergeante’s inns, where none but the sergeants and judges do converse.

FOOTNOTES:

[90] “In Oldborne.”--_1st edition._

[91] Cowell, in his _Law Dictionary_, says, “Bolting is a term of art used in Gray’s Inn, and applied to the bolting or arguing of _moot_ cases.” He endeavours to show that the bolting of cases is analogous to the _boulting_ or sifting of meal through a bag. All readers of Shakspeare must be familiar with the use of the word in the latter sense.

OF ORDERS AND CUSTOMS