Chapter IV: Part 4

In this rising of the commons were many great men of the land in many places beheaded. The Savoy, the palace of the Duke of Lancaster and the fairest in the kingdom, standing near London, on the bank of Thames, was, from the commons' hatred of the duke, utterly destroyed by them with fire; and the duke himself, for fear of them, fled into Scotland. To appease them and to quiet their fury, the King granted that the state of villeinage, as well in their persons as in their labour, should be henceforth done away, freedom fully given, and all prisoners set at large. And this he commanded and made to be openly proclaimed throughout the counties of the kingdom. And then what a throe of grief passed through the desolated land! For they boasted that they would slay all those of higher birth, would raise up King and lords from among themselves, would stablish new laws, and, in a word, would make new, or rather disfigure, the face and estate of the whole island. Then every man struck off the head of his enemy, and despoiled his richer neighbour. But, by the mercy of God, when their leader, being in Smithfield near London, doffed not his hood before the King nor in anything did reverence to the King's Majesty, his head was deftly struck off, in the very midst of his flock of kites, by Sir William Walworth, knight and citizen of London: and straightway, being raised on the point of a sword, it was shown before them. Then the commons, in sore dread, sought flight by stealth, and there and then casting away their rebellious weapons, as though unguilty of such riot and wickedness, like foxes into their holes, they pitifully crept home. But the King and the lords pursued them, and some they made to be dragged behind horses, some they slew with the sword, some they hanged on the gallows, some they quartered; and they destroyed thousands.

WONDROUS AND UNHEARD-OF PRODIGIES (1381).

SOURCE.--H.T. Riley's _Memorials of London_ (London, 1868), 449-451.

Among the most wondrous and hitherto unheard-of prodigies that have ever happened in the City of London, that which took place there on the Feast of Corpus Christi, the 18th day of June, in the 4th year of the reign of King Richard the Second, seems deserving to be committed to writing, that it may be not unknown to those to come.

For on that day, while the King was holding his Council in the Tower of London, countless companies of the commoners and persons of the lowest grade from Kent and Essex suddenly approached the said City, the one body coming to the town of Southwark, and the other to the place called "Mileende," without Algate. By the aid also of perfidious commoners within the City, of their own condition, who rose in countless numbers there, they suddenly entered the City together, and, passing straight through it, went to the mansion of Sir John, Duke of Lancaster, called "Le Savoye," and completely levelled the same with the ground and burned it. From thence they turned to the Church of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, without Smithfield, and burnt and levelled nearly all the houses there, the church excepted.

On the next morning, all the men from Kent and Essex met at the said place called "Mileende," together with some of the perfidious persons of the City aforesaid; whose numbers in all were past reckoning. And there the King came to them from the Tower, accompanied by many knights and esquires, and citizens on horseback, the lady his mother following him also in a chariot. Where, at the prayer of the infuriated rout, our Lord the King granted that they might take those who were traitors against him, and slay them, wheresoever they might be found. And from thence the King rode to his wardrobe, which is situated near to Castle Baynard; while the whole of the infuriated rout took its way towards the Tower of London; entering which by force, they dragged forth from it Sir Simon, Archbishop of Canterbury, Chancellor of our Lord the King, and Brother Robert Hales, Prior of the said Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, the King's Treasurer; and together with them, Brother William Appeltone, of the Order of Friars Minor, and John Leg, Serjeant-at-Arms to the King, and also, one Richard Somenour, of the Parish of Stebenhuthe; all of whom they beheaded in the place called "Tourhille," without the said Tower; and then carrying their heads through the City upon lances, they set them up on London Bridge, fixing them there on stakes.

Upon the same day there was also no little slaughter within the City, as well of natives as of aliens. Richard Lions, citizen and vintner of the said City, and many others, were beheaded in Chepe. In the Vintry also, there was a very great massacre of Flemings, and in one heap there were lying about forty headless bodies of persons who had been dragged forth from the churches and their houses; and hardly was there a street in the City in which there were not bodies lying of those who had been slain. Some of the houses also in the said City were pulled down, and others in the suburbs destroyed, and some, too, burnt.

Such tribulation as this, greater and more horrible than could be believed by those who had not seen it, lasted down to the hour of Vespers on the following day, which was Saturday, the 15th of June; on which day God sent remedy for the same, and His own gracious aid, by the hand of the most renowned man Sir William Walworthe, the then Mayor; who in Smithfield, in presence of our Lord the King and those standing by him, lords, knights, esquires, and citizens on horseback, on the one side, and the whole of this infuriated rout on the other, most manfully, by himself, rushed upon the captain of the said multitude, "Walter Tylere" by name, and, as he was altercating with the King and the nobles, first wounded him in the neck with his sword, and then hurled him from his horse, mortally pierced in the breast; and further, by favour of the divine grace, so defended himself from those who had come with him, both on foot and horseback, that he departed from thence unhurt, and rode with our Lord the King and his people towards a field near to the spring that is called "Whittewell-beche"; in which place, while the whole of the infuriated multitude in warlike manner was making ready against our Lord the King and his people, refusing to treat of peace except on condition that they should first have the head of the said Mayor, the Mayor himself, who had gone into the City at the instance of our Lord the King, in the space of half an hour, sent and led forth therefrom so great a force of citizen warriors in aid of his Lord the King, that the whole multitude of madmen was surrounded and hemmed in, and not one of them would have escaped if our Lord the King had not commanded them to be gone.

Therefore our Lord the King returned into the City of London with the greatest of glory and honour, and the whole of this profane multitude in confusion fled forthwith for concealment in their affright.

HERETICAL AND ERRONEOUS CONCLUSIONS OF WICLIF (CONDEMNED AT LONDON, 1382).

SOURCE.--_Fasciculi Zizaniorum_ (Rolls Series), 277-282.

Heretical conclusions, contrary to the determination of the Church:....

I. That the material substance of bread and wine remains after consecration in the sacrament of the altar.

II. That accidents do not remain without a subject in the same sacrament.

III. That Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar inherently, truly, and really, in His own corporal presence.

IV. That if a bishop or priest be in mortal sin he may neither ordain, consecrate, nor baptize.

V. That if a man be duly penitent all outward confession is superfluous or useless to him.

VI. To tenaciously affirm that it is not stated in the Gospels that Christ ordained the Mass.

VII. That God should obey the Devil.

VIII. That if the Pope be a worthless and evil man and so a member of the Devil, he has no power over the faithful of Christ granted to him by any, except perchance by Cæsar.

IX. That after Urban VI. no one is to be received as Pope, but it is necessary for us to live, like the Greeks, under our own laws.

X. To assert that it is contrary to Scripture that ecclesiastical men should have temporal possessions.

Erroneous conclusions contrary to the determination of the Church: ...

XI. That no prelate should excommunicate anyone unless he first knows he is excommunicated by God.

XII. That if he excommunicates he is thereby a heretic or excommunicate.

XIII. That a prelate excommunicating a clerk who has appealed to the King and the Council of the realm is thereby a traitor to God, King, and realm.

XIV. That those who abstain from preaching or hearing the Word of God or the Gospel, preached, on account of the excommunication of men, are themselves excommunicate, and in the day of judgment shall be held to be traitors to God.

XV. To assert that it is lawful to anyone, either deacon or priest, to preach the Word of God without the authority of the Apostolic See, or a Catholic bishop, or some other sufficiently authorized.

XVI. To assert that no one is a civil lord, bishop, or prelate while he is in mortal sin.

XVII. That temporal lords can at their will take away temporal goods from ecclesiastics habitually sinful, or that the public may at their will correct sinful lords.

XVIII. That tithes are pure alms, and that the parishioners may detain them on account of the sins of their curates and confer them at pleasure on others.

XIX. That special prayers restricted to one person by prelates or religious do no more avail the same person, other things being equal, than general prayers.

XX. That the fact of anyone entering into any private religion makes him more unfit and unable to perform God's commandment.

XXI. That holy men who endow private religions either of possessioners or mendicants had sinned in so endowing.

XXII. That the religious living in private religions are not of the Christian religion.

XXIII. That friars are bound to get their living by the labour of their hands and not by begging.

XXIV. That anyone conferring alms on friars or preaching friars is excommunicate; as is the one who receives.

THE FOLLOWERS OF THIS MASTER JOHN (1382).

SOURCE.--_Chronicle of Adam of Usk_ (translated and edited by Sir E. Maunde Thompson, 1904), 140, 141.

According to the saying of Solomon, "Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child," in the time of the youth of the same Richard many misfortunes, both caused thereby and happening therefrom, ceased not to harass the kingdom of England ... even to the great disorder of the State, and to the last undoing of King Richard himself and of those who too fondly clung to him. Amongst all other misfortunes, nay, amongst the most wicked of all wicked things, even errors and heresies in the catholic faith, England, and above all, London and Bristol, stood corrupted, being infected by the seeds which one master John Wycliffe sowed, polluting, as it were, the faith with the tares of his baleful teaching. And the followers of this master John, like Mahomet, by preaching things pleasing to the powerful and rich, namely, that the withholding of tithes and even of offerings and the reaving[44] of temporal goods from the clergy were praiseworthy, and, to the young, that self-indulgence was a virtue, most wickedly did sow the seed of murder, snares, strife, variance, and discords, which last unto this day, and which, I fear, will last even to the undoing of the kingdom.... The people of England, wrangling about the old faith and the new, are every day, as it were, on the very point of bringing down upon their own heads rebellion and ruin. And I fear that in the end it will happen as once it did, when many citizens of London, true to the faith, rose against the Duke of Lancaster to slay him, because he favoured the said Master John, so that hurrying from his table into a boat hastily provided, he fled across the Thames, and hardly escaped with his life.

FOOTNOTES:

[44] Plundering.

THE PARLIAMENT OF 1384 (APRIL, 1384).

SOURCE.--Higden's _Polychronicon_ (Rolls Series), ix. 32-40.

[This Parliament has been well called the turning-point of Richard's reign. It marked his first deliberate attempt to enforce his own policy in Parliament.]

Moreover, on the 29th day of April the King of England held a Parliament at Salisbury, and it lasted until the 27th day of the month of May. At the beginning of which several extraordinary things happened. _Firstly_, because both the lords spiritual and temporal, quarrelling among themselves, almost frustrated the object of Parliament. But the Duke of Lancaster intervening pacified them, mingling threats with much eloquence of words. _Secondly_, because of the words of the Earl of Arundell; for, in the hearing of all, in full Parliament, when the King was present, he said these words, or to this effect:

"My Lords, you know that the whole kingdom stands in peril of destruction through lack of prudent government, and the thing is now apparent, because, as you know, this kingdom has long begun to languish, and is now almost decaying. And unless it is quickly succoured by fitting remedies, and immediately snatched out of the tempestuous whirlpool in which it is involved, one indeed fears lest it may shortly suffer even greater misfortunes and heavy damages, and may be lacking in everything, all power of relief being withdrawn in the future, which God forbid."

At these words the King leapt up, and turning himself in fury, and looking angrily at the earl, said to him:

"If you charge it on me and say it is my fault that the kingdom is badly governed, I say to your face, you lie, go to the devil!"

Hearing these words all kept silence, nor was there one who stood by who dared to speak. Then the Duke of Lancaster, breaking the silence, interpreted the speech of the earl in his own words; thus was the fury of the King mitigated.

_Thirdly_, because a certain Carmelite friar, influenced by a foolish zeal, came to the King's Court with the intention of accusing the Duke of Lancaster of craftily and treacherously plotting the King's death. Therefore, after the said friar on a certain day had celebrated Mass before the King in the chamber of the Earl of Oxford, and had obtained to speak with the King ... he immediately accused the Duke of Lancaster, and so bitterly that the King without trial ordered the duke to be put to death. But the other nobles present with the King utterly opposed this, declaring that it was unlawful for anyone to be condemned without judgment. Hearing this, the King wisely promised he would do as they said. Then, as Sir J. Clanvowe has said, immediately he had dissembled his fury burst out, and flinging his cape and boots out of window, behaved like a madman....[45]

The Duke of Lancaster hearing that he was to be gravely accused before the King, hastened to him, and so completely cleared himself that the King afterwards held him excused....

In the meanwhile, those elected to Parliament by the commonalty for the common weal of the kingdom earnestly complained concerning [the frustration of justice by] those who were in power in certain parts of the country ... whence they prayed for a general statute coercing them so that in future their fraud and cunning might not prevail to the detriment of the kingdom.

To this the Duke of Lancaster replied that the charge was too general; saying moreover ... that any lord was powerful enough and had authority enough to correct and punish such excesses in his parts. For in things temporal, after the King, he said, he himself was above all other lords of the kingdom. And he himself, if any of those in his parts were found guilty, and it should come to his notice, he would subject them to such punishment that it would inculcate fear in others against doing likewise.... Truly those elected by the commonalty of the kingdom hearing these things, since no remedy would be given, remained silent.

The King and his Council were then eagerly seeking to extort money from both clergy and people. And after much consultation and discussion of pros and cons, the clergy conceded to him the said moiety of a tenth which had been before conceded to him, under conditions, in another Parliament. The laity also granted a fifteenth. But the King, not content with these concessions, declared he would employ that most severe inquisition against usurpers of the Crown called Trailbastoun,[46] unless they made him a more ample grant. Having heard this and consulted together, the clergy conceded to him another moiety of one-tenth, and the laity likewise another moiety of a fifteenth; according to that [saying], as is his darkness so is his light. For behold in these days almost all the lights of the Church of God are about to be extinguished; which thing is grievous since great darkness is obscuring her surface everywhere, nor is there anyone now who will rise up and defend the Church of God. The prelates are as dumb dogs that are not strong enough to bark. Wherefore it is to be feared, which God forbid, lest there shall come upon ecclesiastics in high place, a sudden calamity, an immeasurable sorrow, an intolerable distress and lamentable misfortune.

FOOTNOTES:

[45] Here follows an account of the torture of the friar by the Lancastrian party. Evidence seems to prove that he was a tool of the King, who showed sorrow at the cruel treatment he received, but was powerless to save him.

[46] The office of the justices of Trail-Baston, so styled for "trailing or drawing the staff of justice," was to make inquisition through the kingdom concerning extortion, bribery, etc., of intruders into other men's lands, robbers, etc. Some offenders were punished with death, some with ransom; the land was quieted and the King gained riches for his wars. Edward I. appointed them during his absence in the Scotch and French wars; Edward III. also granted a commission at least once.

THE PLOT AGAINST LANCASTER (FEBRUARY, 1385).

SOURCE.--Higden's _Polychronicon_ (Rolls Series), ix. 55-59.

A conspiracy, said to be approved by the King, was set on foot by certain lords, to put the Duke of Lancaster to death, but he himself, being warned of this thing, fled secretly with a few of his companions. Now the cause why they wished to kill him was this, as some claim. A little while before, the government of the kingdom and the rule of the King, and what it would be most expedient for the King to do for the safety of the realm in the coming autumn, was discussed in Council. Then the Duke of Lancaster declared it seemed to him most necessary for the good of the kingdom that the King should cross to France with an army, and should fight his enemies boldly with armed fist, rather than give them the opportunity of coming into this land, since they would continually infest us, not without grave danger and loss. Upon this certain of the Council, thinking differently, proceeded to reject, and violently attack the advice of the duke, asserting it would be madness for the King to cross the sea and enter France for many causes; but rather he should remain safely in his own land to defend it from the attacks of enemies, and not cross unadvisedly to foreign provinces, adding nothing to the glory of his fame. This pleased all the Council except the Duke of Lancaster and his brothers, who, indignant at this, stalked out of the Council. Further, the Duke of Lancaster declared neither he nor his vassals would aid the King again unless he should determine to cross to France. Which saying much displeased both the King and his Council. Wherefore, on account of this, they declared he was neither faithful to the King nor to the kingdom. Nevertheless, these temporal lords were always fearful of the Duke of Lancaster on account of his great power, his remarkable prudence, and his wonderful ability....

On the 23rd day of February the Duke of Lancaster, having gathered a company of armed men, came by night to the King at Sheen, and, having first of all disposed the main body of men on this side the Thames, he crossed the river, leaving there some of his men to guard the skiff until his return. Then he hastened to the gate, and left certain of his men to await there until his return, and deny anyone entrance or exit. At length, in full armour, he entered with a few of his men into the King's presence, where, having made due reverence, he at first addressed him harshly, and sternly, upbraiding him for retaining such evil councillors with him, and finally counselling him to remove such men from him, and henceforward to adhere to the wiser men in his Council. For unworthy is it for a King in his kingdom, when he may be lord of all, to avenge himself by private homicide when he himself may be above the law, and is able to concede life and limbs, and what is more, if he wishes, may deprive men of them at his pleasure. Therefore is it the more necessary that he should have good and faithful councillors around him, by whose good advice he should ever withdraw from illegal actions, and should not fear any jealousy to perform those things which are right.

The King replied graciously, in suave and gentle words, saying undoubtedly he would give his attention to reforming those things which before time had been unjustly done. Then the Duke of Lancaster, having sought license, excused himself from coming to him in future, as was hitherto accustomed, since he saw certain men still adhering to the King who would gladly see him (Lancaster) deprived of life. And immediately he left the King, and came by night with his men to the village of Tottenham, where he rested a little while, and then hastened to his Castle of Hertford, where he decided to abide in safety with his men.

The King's mother, having news of this, was much disturbed, and hastened to the King, persuading him to avoid discords with any of his nobles, more especially with the Duke of Lancaster and his brothers. Therefore, at her persuasion, he came with a large following of knights to Westminster on the 6th of March. His mother then hastened to the Duke of Lancaster, and so persuaded him that she led him to the King, and by her mediation they were straightway reconciled.... Afterwards, council having been taken at Westminster, the Archbishop of Canterbury and other lords, spiritual and temporal, complained sorely of these councillors abiding round the King, since they had induced the King to assent to a plot to kill the Duke of Lancaster, both because the thing was of bad example, and because it followed from this that whenever the King's heart or mind was raised in hatred against anyone, whether of small or great estate, he would perchance order him to be killed in a like manner, which God forbid! That in this way the approved laws and constitutions will be exposed to serious breach, and perchance, which God forbid, quarrels, strife, disputes, contentions, discussions, and other such things will be born in the kingdom. Therefore, such crimes must be avoided in the future, lest a lawless deterioration of this kind shall befall the kingdom. These words, or words to this effect, the Archbishop of Canterbury repeated to the King, on behalf of the lords then assembled there. Hearing which, the King was incensed against the archbishop, and, rising up, there and then began to threaten him. That same day the King was dining with the Mayor of London: at the end of the meal he went on the Thames, and met the archbishop between his palace and Lambeth. For the aforesaid archbishop had come to the King under safe conduct of the Duke of Buckingham. Then, indeed, when the archbishop repeated what he had said before, the King drew his sword on the spur of the moment, and would have transfixed the archbishop had not the Duke of Buckingham, Sir John Devereux, and Sir Thomas Trivet strongly resisted him. With whom the King was so enraged that in fear they sprang out of the royal barge into the archbishop's skiff, and thus retired.

THE FRENCH IN SCOTLAND.

ARRIVAL OF THE FRENCH INTO SCOTLAND IN AID OF THE SCOTS AGAINST THE ENGLISH (1385).

SOURCE.--_The Book of Pluscarden_ in _Historians of Scotland_, x. 246, 247.

In the year 1385 the King of France, beyond measure rejoiced at the success of the Scots, sent a certain knight of Burgundian origin, named John de Vienne, Count of Valentinois and Admiral of France, with a considerable train of men-at-arms, belted chivalry, eighty knights with their followers, admirably equipped as was meet and ready to battle. They landed at Dunbar and Leith, and presented the King, who was at Edinburgh with his magnates, with fifty complete suits of armour from the King of France, with as many lances and targes;[47] and they also handed over to the King of Scotland from the King of France as a free gift from him fifty thousand francs in gold in ready money as well as the said Frenchmen, with their pay fully and entirely paid up for six months to come and the sailors; and there were royal letters addressed to the King, telling him to send them on service in his war against the English. These Frenchmen, together with Archibald Douglas, Lord of Galloway, and with a very large force of men-at-arms, seeing that he was guardian of Wester-March, raided into England two or three times and wrought much mischief. On their return they first proposed to besiege the Castle of Carlisle; but assembling a larger army they laid siege to Roxburgh. Here the general and commander was Robert Stewart, the King's son, Earl of Fife, and afterwards Duke of Albany; and he had with him the Earls of Douglas and March, Archibald Douglas, Lord of Galloway, and a great knightly rout of nobles. But there arose a dispute among them whether, if the castle happened to be taken, it should remain for ever with the King of France, or be converted to the uses of the King of Scotland. Some indeed said the French offered that they themselves should recover the castle entirely, assigning to them either the honour or the profit. And thus, because they could not agree, they returned without doing anything; and not many days after this the Frenchmen embarked about the Feast of All Saints, and returned safely to France. The following year Richard, King of England, the second of this name, being nineteen years of age, entered Scotland about the Feast of Saint Lawrence, and attacked, overthrew and ravaged everything in his pride, sparing nothing, saving nothing, sparing neither age, nor order, nor religious community. He pillaged and burnt down many churches and monasteries and other sacred places, such as Melrose, Dryburgh, Newbottle; he also destroyed the noble town of Edinburgh, with the church thereof, erected in honour of St. Giles, and the whole of Lothian; and he returned home to his own kingdom without loss, having, however, before his departure in like manner pillaged and burnt the monastery of Holyrood. Wherefore, and by the vengeance of God alone, this King Richard wandered about the Scottish isles as a poor beggar, and was found living most wretchedly for a while in a certain lord's kitchen; and, being afterwards recognized by someone, he was brought to the King of Scotland, and there ended his days in idiocy. And thus, as is presumed, by the hidden judgment of God and in revenge for the foregoing, his uncle, who had been most shamefully exiled and cast out from the kingdom by the wickedness and power of the peasants, put an end to his life in great wretchedness among his enemies, according to the word of the prophet, saying: "The Lord delivered them into the hand of the enemy, and they who hated them had dominion over them."

FOOTNOTES:

[47] Small shields.

THE DEATH OF WICLIF (1385).

SOURCE.--Capgrave's _Chronicle of England_ (Rolls Series), 240.

In the 9th year of this King, John Wiclif, the organ of the devil, the enemy of the Church, the mirror of hypocrisy, the nourisher of schism, by the rightful doom[48] of God, was smitten with a horrible palsy throughout his body. And this vengeance fell upon him on St. Thomas' Day in Christmas, but he died not till St. Silvester's Day. And worthily was he smitten on St. Thomas' Day, against whom he had greatly offended, letting[49] men of that pilgrimage; and conveniently died he in Silvester's feast, against whom he had venomously barked for dotation[50] of the Church.

FOOTNOTES:

[48] Judgment.

[49] Hindering.

[50] Endowment.

CHARLES VI.'S FRUSTRATED INVASION OF ENGLAND (AUGUST, 1386).

SOURCE.--Froissart's _Chronicle_ (Hafod Press, 1803), iii. 285-292, 294, 295, 329, 330.

The young King of France had ever shown great desire to invade England with a powerful army and navy. In this he was joined by all the chivalry of the realm, but especially by the Duke of Burgundy, the Constable of France, and the Count de St. Pol, although he had married King Richard's sister, and the Lord de Coucy.

These lords said: "Why should not we, for once, make a visit to England to see the country and its inhabitants, and learn the way thither, as the English have done in France? This year, therefore, of 1386, we will go thither, as well to break up the expedition of the Duke of Lancaster, and force him to return home, as to give the alarm to the English, and see how they will behave." Greater armaments were made in France than had hitherto been done. Heavier taxes were imposed on all the towns and country than for one hundred years, and such sums had never been raised, nor were ever greater preparations made by sea and land. The whole summer, until September, was employed in grinding flour and making biscuit in Arras, Bethune, Lille, Douay, Amiens, St. Omer, and in all the towns near to Sluys; for it was the plan of the King to embark at Sluys, sail for England, and destroy the whole country....

All that was going forward in France, Flanders, Bruges, Damme, and Sluys was known in England, and with many additions to the real truth. The people in several places were exceedingly alarmed, and generally the priests made processions in many towns three times a week; where, with much devotion, they offered up their prayers to God, to avert this peril from them. There were upwards of one hundred thousand who were desirous the French should come to England, saying, to comfort the weak-hearted: "Let them come; by God! not a soul shall return back to tell their story." Such as were in debt, and had not any intentions nor wherewithal to pay, were delighted, and said to their creditors: "Hold your tongues! they are coining florins in France, and we will pay you with them"; and thus they lived extravagantly, and expended largely, for credit was not refused them. Whenever they were asked to pay, they replied: "How can you ask for money? Is it not better that we spend it than Frenchmen should find it and carry it away?" Thus were many thousand pounds sterling foolishly spent in England.

... Every port and harbour from the Humber to Cornwall was well provided with men-at-arms and archers, and watchmen were posted on all the hills near the sea-coasts opposite to France and Flanders. The manner of posting these watchers was as follows: they had large Gascony casks filled with sand, which they placed one on the other, rising like columns; on these were planks, where the watchmen remained day and night on the look-out. They were ordered, the moment they should observe the fleet of France steering towards land, to light torches and make great fires on the hills to alarm the country, and the forces within sight of these fires were to hasten thither. It had been resolved to allow the King of France to land, and even to remain unmolested for three or four days; they were first to attack the fleet and destroy it and all their stores, and then to advance on the King of France, not to combat him immediately, but to harass his army, so that they might be disabled and afraid to forage, for the corn countries were all to be burnt, and England, at best, is a difficult foraging country; by which plan they would be starved and easily destroyed.

Such was the plan laid down by the Council of England. Colchester Bridge was ordered to be broken down, for a deep river runs under it, which flows through Essex, and falls into the Thames opposite the island of Sheppey. The Londoners would pull this bridge down for the greater security of their town.

If the taxes were burdensome on towns and persons in France, I must say they were not much lighter in England, and the country suffered from them a long time afterwards; but they were paid cheerfully, that they might be more effectually guarded. There were at this time ten thousand men-at-arms and one hundred thousand archers in England.

... From Senlis the King of France came to Compiègne, Noyon, Peronne, Bapaume, and Arras; and there were such numbers of men-at-arms pouring into those countries from all quarters, that everything was destroyed or devoured without a farthing being paid for anything. The poor farmers, who had filled their barns with grain, had only the straw, and if they complained, were beaten or killed. The fish-ponds were drained of fish, and the houses pulled down for firing, so that if the English had been there, they could not have committed greater waste than this French army did. They said: "We have not at present any money, but shall have enough on our return, when we will pay for all." The farmers, not daring to speak out, cursed them inwardly, on seeing them seize what was intended for their families; and said: "Go to England, and may never a soul of you come back!"

... Sir Simon Burley was Governor of Dover Castle, and, from his situation, received frequent intelligence from France by the fishermen of the town, who related to him what they heard from the French fishermen, as they were often obliged to adventure as far as Wissan or Boulogne to obtain good fish. When the fishermen from France met them at sea, they told them enough, and more than they knew; for, though there were wars between France and England, they were never interrupted in their pursuits, nor attacked each other, but, on the contrary, gave mutual assistance, and bought or sold, according as either had more fish than they were in want of; for, if they were to meddle in the national quarrels, there would be no fishing, and none would attempt it, unless supported by men-at-arms. Sir Simon learnt from the fishermen, that the King of France was absolutely determined on the invasion; that he intended to land one division at or near Dover and another at Sandwich, and that his forces were immense. He, as well as the rest of England, believed all this was true; and one day he set out for Canterbury to visit the abbey, which is very large and handsome; near it is Christ-church, which is also rich and powerful.

The Abbot inquired, "What news?" and Sir Simon told him all he knew, adding: "That the shrine of St. Thomas, so respectable and rich, was not safe in Canterbury, for the town was not strong; and if the French should come, some of the pillagers, through avarice, would make for Canterbury, which they would plunder, as well as your abbey, and make particular inquiries after the shrine, and will take it away, to your great loss. I would therefore advise that you have it carried to Dover Castle, where it will be perfectly safe, though all England were lost." The abbot, and all the convent, were so much angered at this speech, though meant well, they replied: "How, Sir Simon, would you wish to despoil this church of its jewel? If you are afraid yourself, gain courage, and shut yourself up in your castle of Dover, for the French will not be bold enough, nor in sufficient force, to adventure themselves so far." This was the only answer he had; but Sir Simon persisted so long in his proposition, the common people grew discontented, and held him for an ill-inclined person, which, as I shall relate, they afterwards showed more plainly. Sir Simon made but a short stay, and returned to Dover.

... [Meanwhile mismanagement and bad weather were breaking up the French armada at Sluys.] ...

Some of the young princes of the blood-royal, with a desire to display their courage, had indeed made a few cruises near the harbour, saying that they would be the first to land in England, should none others venture thither. In this number were Sir Robert and Sir Philip d'Artois, Sir Henry de Bar, Sir Peter de Navarre, Sir Peter d'Albreth, Sir Bernard d'Armagnac, with many more. These young lords, having once begun, were so impatient to sail in earnest, that a council was held, in the presence of the King, to determine how they should proceed. The Duke of Berry broke up the whole; and gave such well-grounded reasons, that the greater part of those who were the most forward to embark were discouraged; and said it would be folly and madness to advise the King, who was then but a child, to put to sea in such weather, and to make war on a people and country whose roads no one was acquainted with, and which was likewise disadvantageous for warlike exploits. "Now, suppose," said the Duke of Berry, "we were all landed in England, we cannot fight the English unless they like it, and we dare not leave our purveyances behind, for whoever would do so would lose the whole. But if anyone wished to make this voyage, though of no great length, he would do it in the middle of summer, and not in the heart of winter. Summon all the sailors who are here, and they will tell you that what I say is true; and that, notwithstanding the very numerous fleet we have collected, should we put to sea, of the fifteen hundred sail, there would never be three hundred together, or within fight. Now, consider what risks we may run; but I do not say this out of any desire to be excused from being of the party myself, but solely as I believe it sound sense, and that the council, and the majority of France, are of my way of thinking. I am willing, brothers of Burgundy, that you and I undertake this expedition, but I will never advise the King to do so; for, should any accident happen to him, the whole blame would be laid on us for having consented to it." "In God's name," replied the King of France, "I am resolved to go, should no one follow me." The lords laughed, and said the King had a strong inclination to embark.

THE STATE OF ENGLAND (1386).

SOURCE.--Froissart's _Chronicle_ (Hafod Press, 1803), iii. 409-412.

England was, at this period, in greater danger than when the peasants, under Jack Straw, rose in rebellion, and marched to London; and I will tell you the cause. The nobles and gentlemen were unanimous, at that time, in their support of the King, but now there were many serious differences between them. The King quarrelled with his uncles of York and Gloucester, and they were equally displeased with him, caused, as it was said, by the intrigues of the Duke of Ireland [Robert de Vere], the sole confident of the King. The commonalty, in many towns and cities, had noticed these quarrels, and the wisest dreaded the consequences that might ensue; but the giddy laughed at them, and said they were owing to the jealousy of the King's uncles, and because the crown was not on their heads. But others said: "The King is young, and puts his confidence in youngsters: it would be to his advantage if he consulted his uncles more, who can only wish the prosperity of the country, than that puppy, the Duke of Ireland, who is ignorant of all things, and who never saw a battle." Thus were the English divided; and great disasters seemed to be at hand, which was perfectly known all over France, and caused them to hasten their preparations for invading the country, and adding to its miseries....

Parliament was harangued on the subject of the finances, and assured that there was not in the royal treasury more than sufficient to support, even with economy, the usual expenses of the King. The council said there was no other means than laying a general tax on all the country, if they were desirous of paying the great sums the defence of the kingdom had cost.

Those from the Archbishopric of Canterbury, the Bishoprics of Norwich and Warwick, the counties of Devonshire, Hampshire, and Wiltshire, readily assented, because they knew better what had been done, and were more alarmed than those at a greater distance, in Wales, Bristol, and Cornwall, who were rebellious, and said: "We have never seen any enemies come into this country, why therefore should we be thus heavily taxed and nothing done?" "Yes, yes," replied others, "let them call on the King's Council, the Archbishop of York, and the Duke of Ireland, who received sixty thousand francs, for the ransom of John of Brittany, from the Constable of France, which ought to have gone to the general profit of the Kingdom. Let them call on Sir Simon Burley, Sir William Elmham, Sir Thomas Brand, Sir Robert Tresilian, and Sir John Beauchamp, who have governed the King. If they gave a true account of the sums raised in England, or were forced so to do, there would be more than money enough to pay all expenses, and poor people remain in quiet."

The King's uncles were much pleased when these speeches were told them, for those they had named were unfriendly to their interests, and opposed their obtaining any favours from the Court. They encouraged such discourses, and, to gain popularity, said: "The good people who hold such language are well advised in wishing to have an account of the management of the finances, and to refuse to pay their taxes, for, in good truth, there is cash enough in the purses of the King or of those who govern him."

By degrees, this discontent was much increased among the people, who declared against any tax being laid on, and who grew bolder in their language when they saw that the King's uncles, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Earls of Salisbury and Northumberland, with many other great barons, supported them. The ministers, therefore, withdrew the tax, and said nothing should be done in the matter until Michaelmas, when the Parliament would again meet.

THE WONDERFUL PARLIAMENT (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER, 1386).

SOURCE.--_Chronicle of Adam of Usk_ (translated and edited by Sir E. Maunde Thompson, 1904), 142, 143.

Owing to the many ill-starred crises of King Richard's reign which were caused by his youth, a solemn Parliament was holden at Westminster, wherein twelve[51] of the chief men of the land were advanced by full provision of Parliament to the government of the King and the kingdom, in order to bridle the wantonness and extravagance of his servants and flatterers, and, in short, to reform the business of the realm; but, alas! only to lead to the weary deeds which are hereinafter written.

The King, bearing it ill that by this appointment the due freedom of His Majesty should be bridled by his own lieges, and urged by his servants, who were thus set in authority, till the end came in the destruction of the King himself, his abettors, and many of these same rulers.

FOOTNOTES:

[51] The actual number appointed was eleven--namely, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Dukes of York and Gloucester, the Bishops of Winchester and Exeter, the Abbot of Waltham, the Earl of Arundel, John de Cobham, Richard le Scrope, and John Devereux.

RICHARD APPEALS TO THE JUDGES (AUGUST, 1387).

SOURCE.--Henry Knighton's _Chronicle_ (Rolls Series), ii. 236.

At the same time the King came to Shrewsbury, where, by the Royal command, certain of the justices of the kingdom had gathered. Then the aforesaid seducers of the King, Alexander, Archbishop of York, Robert Vere, Duke of Ireland, Michael de la Pole, Robert Tresilian, and others, asked them [the justices] whether it would be lawful for the King to oppose and resist the ordinances made in the last Parliament concerning the King and kingdom by the princes and commons of the realm with the consent of the King, which consent, they said, had been obtained by force. They answered that the King was able to annul and alter such ordinances at pleasure for the bettering of affairs since he was above law.

DEFEAT OF THE KING'S FRIENDS (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1387).

SOURCE.--_Chronicle of Adam of Usk_ (translated and edited by Sir E. Maunde Thompson, 1904), 143-145.

Then the King passed with his mother[52] to Westminster Hall, and there, seated on his throne of state, by her mediation, made his peace with his twelve guardians;[53] yet he did it falsely and with deceit.

Soon afterwards the Earl of Oxford[54] went with royal letters into the county of Chester, and led back with him a great armed power of the men of those parts for the destruction of the twelve. But the Duke of Gloucester and the Earls of Derby, Arundel, Nottingham, and Warwick were forewarned thereof, and arrayed in a glorious host before the men of Chester could reach the King, they routed the earl's army on the eve of St. Thomas the Apostle [December 20] at Radcot Bridge in Oxfordshire. And the earl himself they drove in flight beyond hope of return; for he died beyond seas....

At that time, I, the writer of this chronicle, was at Oxford an "extraordinary" in canon law, and I saw the host of the five lords march through the city on their way to London from the battlefield; whereof the Earls of Warwick and Derby led the van, the Duke of Gloucester the main body, and the Earls of Arundel and Nottingham the rear.

The Mayor of London, hearing of their coming, sent forth to them the keys of the city, and thereafter those same five lords did, on the feast of St. John the Evangelist [December 27], blockade the Tower of London till it yielded: then straightway they placed the King, who was therein, under new governance, and delivered his fawning councillors into divers prisons until the next following Parliament.

FOOTNOTES:

[52] She died in 1385: hence the chronicler must be in error.

[53] Namely, the eleven.

[54] Robert de Vere.

THE MERCILESS PARLIAMENT (FEBRUARY, 1388).

SOURCE.--William Caxton, _The Polychronicon_ (published 1482), ii., fols. 396_b_, 397.

In the eleventh year of his reign was the arising of certain lords in England in destruction of rebels, etc., that is to say Sir Thomas Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, Sir Richard, Earl of Arundell, Sir Richard, Earl of Warwick, Sir Harry of Bolingbroke, Earl of Derby, and Sir Thomas Mowbray, Earl Marshall. These five lords understood the mischief and government of the King's Council, wherefore they, that were that time of the King's Council, fled out of the land, that is to say, Master Alexander Nevill, Archbishop of York, Sir Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk and Chancellor of England, and the Marquis of Dublin, Sir Robert de Vere. These three lords came never again into England, for they died beyond the sea. These five lords abovesaid made a Parliament at Westminster and there they took Sir Robert Tresilian, justice, Sir Nicholas Brember, knight and citizen of London, Sir John Salisbury, knight, and Uske Serjeant, with other more which were judged to death and were drawn to Tyburn and there hanged. Also in the same Parliament, Sir Simon Burley, Knight of the Garter, Sir John Beauchamp, knight, steward of the King's house, and Sir John Berneis were beheaded at Tower Hill. Also Richard Belknap, John Holt, John Cary, William Burgh, Robert Frilthorp, and John Lockton, justices, were exiled into Ireland, there for to dwell all their lifetime.

ON THE TRUCE BETWEEN ENGLAND AND FRANCE (1394).

BY EUSTACE DESCHAMPS.

SOURCE.--_Political Poems and Songs_ (Rolls Series), i. 300.

Antre[55] Beauraym et le parc de Hedin,
On moys[56] d'Aoust, qu'on soye les fromens,[57]
M'en aloye jouer[58] par un matin;
Si vi bergiers et bergieres[59] aux champs,
Qui tenoient là leurs parliers moult grans,[60]
Tant que Bochiers dist à Margot la broingne,[61]
Que l'en aloit[62] au traitté à Bouloigne,
Et que François et Anglois feront paix.
Elle respont: "Foy que doy Magueloigne,
Paix n'avez jà s'ilz ne rendent Calays."[63]

Lors vint avant Berthelot du Jardin,
Qui respondit: "La paix suis desirans;
Car je n'ose descouchier[64] le matin.
Pour les Anglois que nous sont destruisans;
Mais dire oy, il a passé dix ans.[65]
Qu'à leur dessoulz quierent tondis aloingne[66]
Pour mettre sus[67] leur fait et leur besoigne,
Et puis courent[68] le regne à grans eslays;[69]
Maint l'out veu,[70] et pour ce je tesmoigne,
Paix n'avez jà s'ilz ne rendent Calays."

Après parla, par grant courroux,[71] Robin
A Berthelot, et lui dist: "Tu te mens,
Car les François et les Anglois enfin
Veulent la paix, il en est dès or temps;[72]
Trop a duré la guerre et li contens,[73]
Ne je ne voy nul qui ne la ressoingne.[74]
Certes, tout ce ne vault une escaloigne."[75]
Ce lui respont Henris li contrefais:[76]
"Encor faulra chascun (prengne) sa broingne;[77]
Paix n'avez jà s'ilz ne rendent Calays.

Car l'autre jour oy maistre Martin,[78]
Qui racontoit le roy est mendre d'ans,[79]
Et qu'il estoit une loy[80] en Latin
Qui deffendoit[81] rien vendre des enfans.[82]
En Guyenne sont deux mille et cinq cens
Villes, chasteauls,[83] qu'Angleis veulent qu'on doingne.[84]
Et grant tas[85] d'or, et que le roy esloigne[86]
De roy en duc l'ommaige[87] qui est fais."
"Qui fera ce?" respon sote Caroingne;[88]
"Paix n'avez jà s'ilz ne rendent Calays."

Guichars si bruns, qui fu nez à Seclin,[89]
Dist que cilz faiz est doubreux et pesans:[90]
Voire, et qu'Englès y pensent mal engin[91]
De retenir ce port, qui est constans.
"Se ce ne fust bien se fussent rendans:[92]
Mais ils pensent barat,[93] guerre, et alloingne[94]
Faire au derrain.[95] Ne le duc de Bourgoingne
Et de Berry ne feroient jamais
Tel paix à eux. Qui voulra si me perdoingne,[96]
Paix n'avez jà s'ilz ne rendent Calays."

ENVOY.

Princes, là fu Bertrisons, et Hersans,
Et Alizons, qui moult orent de sens;[97]
Et jugierent, quand li parlers fu fait,
Que telle paix seroit orde et meschans;[98]
Et concluirent aux bergiers eulx disans:[99]
"Paix n'avez jà s'ilz ne rendent Calays."

FOOTNOTES:

[55] Between.

[56] Month.

[57] When they reap the wheat.

[58] I went to enjoy myself.

[59] I saw shepherds and shepherdesses.

[60] Very great talk.

[61] Stout.

[62] People were going.

[63] By the faith I owe the Magdalene, you will never have peace unless they restore Calais.

[64] For I do not dare rise from bed.

[65] But I have heard say this ten years gone.

[66] That underneath they seek always delay.

[67] In order to cover.

[68] Overrun.

[69] Rapidity.

[70] Many have seen it.

[71] In great rage.

[72] It is high time for it.

[73] Contention.

[74] Who does not fear it.

[75] Is not worth an onion.

[76] Deformed.

[77] Everyone will still have to take his cuirass.

[78] I heard Master Martin.

[79] A minor.

[80] Law.

[81] Prohibited.

[82] Children's property.

[83] Castles.

[84] Will give.

[85] Heap.

[86] Alienate.

[87] Homage.

[88] Caroingue the fool.

[89] Guichard the brown, who was born at Seclin.

[90] Grave.

[91] It is true that the English have an ill design in their thoughts.

[92] They would restore it.

[93] Strife.

[94] Delay.

[95] To make it last.

[96] Who will, let him pardon me.

[97] Who had much sense.

[98] Disgraceful and injurious.

[99] Saying to them.

SUPPOSED PLOTS (1397).

SOURCE.--Froissart's _Chronicle_ (Hafod Press, 1803), iv. 546, 552, 553.

[This story, given by Froissart and the Monk of St. Denis, both admirers of Richard, seems to be absolutely unfounded.]

The Duke of Gloucester would gladly have seen this nephew, called John, Earl of March, on the throne of England, and King Richard deposed from it, saying he was neither worthy nor capable to hold the government of England; and this opinion he made no secret of to those who were in his confidence.