Some readers of this tale may desire to know on what historical
foundation it rests, and in what points the fiction departs from truth.
The Order of Predicant Friars was instituted by Dominic in 1215, with
the avowed object of maintaining Roman doctrine and supremacy, and of
opposing and superseding the wandering preachers sent out by the
Waldensian Church into all parts of Europe, and known chiefly as
_Boni-Homines_, or _Poor Men of Lyons_. But the Waldensian Church was
acute enough to take advantage of this movement; and no sooner had the
Order been founded than an army of "Gospellers" (as even thus early they
were called), issued forth under its shelter. It appears probable that
at an early period of their preaching, a very large percentage of the
Predicant Friars were Gospellers. It is, moreover, an historical fact,
that during the struggle between Edward the Second and his wretched
Queen, the Predicant Friars ranged themselves on the side of the King,
who had always been their friend, and whose own confessor, Luke de
Wodeford, was of their Order. (_Rot. Ex., Pasc_, 2 Ed. III.) That the
Despensers also patronised them is rather an inference founded upon
fact, yet on such facts as very decidedly point to this conclusion. It
should not be forgotten, that all accounts of the reign and character of
Edward the Second which have come down to us were written by monks, or
by persons educated in the opinions of the monks; and the Church of Rome
has never, at any period of her history, hesitated to accuse of the
vilest crimes any who endeavoured to escape from her toils into the pure
light of the Gospel of Christ.
That Hugh Le Despenser the Elder was an unprincipled and avaricious man,
there can be little question. With him, if he embraced the principles
of the _Boni-Homines_ at all, it was evidently a mere matter of
intellectual opinion. Much less evidence can be found against his son,
whose chief crime seems to have been that he aroused the hatred of the
"she-wolf of France." Joan La Despenser (the ladies of the family are
always distinguished as _La_ Despenser in contemporary records) lived to
a good age, for she was probably born about 1310, and she died in her
nunnery of Shaftesbury, November 8, 1384 (I.P.M. 8 Ric. II., 14).
Richard Earl of Arundel, surnamed _Copped-Hat_, the elder of the two
sons of Earl Edmund and Alesia, heiress of Surrey, was born about 1308,
and died January 24, 1376. (Arundel MS. 51, fol. 18.) His father was
beheaded with Hugh Le Despenser the Elder, October 8 or 27, 1326; his
mother died before May 23, 1338. (Froissart's Chronicles, Book I.,
chapter xi.; _Rot. Pat_. 12 Ed. III., Part 2.) His first marriage was
before February 2, 1321 (_Ib_. 14 Ed. II., Pt. 2); and his baby Countess
was probably not more than three years old at that time. Her divorce
immediately preceded the second marriage, and it was apparently just
before June 24, 1345. On that day, "Isabel La Despenser, and Alianora
daughter of Henry Earl of Lancaster," are returned among the tenants of
Richard Earl of Arundel (_Ib_., 19 Ed. III., Pt. 1): the designation
showing that on that day neither was Countess of Arundel, but that the
marriage-settlements of Alianora were already executed. After this date
all trace of Isabel disappears, until we meet with the name of "Dame
Isabel, daughter of Sir Hugh Spencer," among the persons buried in the
Chapter House of Westminster Abbey. (Harl. MS. 544, fol. 78.) The
Countess Alianora, at the time of her marriage, was the widow of John
Lord Beaumont, and the mother of two infant children; she had only just
returned from a pilgrimage to the shrine of Saint James of Compostella.
(_Rot. Pat_. 18 Ed. III., Pt 1.) She died January 11, 1372 and was
buried at Lewes. (Reg. Lewes, fol. 108.) Her second family consisted
of three sons and three daughters--Richard, John, Thomas, Joan, Alesia,
and Alianora. The last-named died in childhood; all the rest survived
their parents.--Richard, a well-meaning and brave, but passionate and
narrow-minded man, was governed by his stronger-minded brother Thomas,
and under his evil influence entered upon a treasonable conspiracy, for
which he paid the penalty on Tower Hill in the spring of 1397.--John is
chiefly remarkable for having married the heiress of Maltravers, and
becoming eventually the root of the family.--Thomas became Bishop of Ely
and Archbishop of Canterbury--the persecuting Archbishop Arundel who
will perhaps be remembered by the readers of "Mistress Margery"--and
after suffering for his treasonable practices a richly-deserved
banishment, was at once recalled and restored by his friend and
fellow-conspirator, Henry the Fourth. He died in 1413. That the House
of Arundel had no "Gospel" sympathies is shown by more evidences than
one; though the Archbishop himself had at one time pretended friendship
towards the Lollards. It did not last long; he would scarcely have been
a true Arundel had it done so.--Joan Fitzalan was a woman of intense
energy and terrible passions. She did not live happily with her
husband, Humphrey Earl of Hereford, as appears from a curious and unique
entry on the Patent Rolls (33 Ed. III., Pt. 3), providing that Humphrey
should not divorce Joan on any pretence of precontract. The Earl,
however, died at the early age of thirty-one, and Joan, whose two
daughters were married to Princes (Alianora to Thomas Duke of
Gloucester, Mary to Henry the Fourth), became a very powerful and
wealthy widow. One anecdote will show what her character was better
than volumes of description. She presided in person at the execution of
John Duke of Exeter (brother of her sister Alesia's husband), he being
loyal to his half-brother, King Richard, while Joan was a vehement
partisan of her son-in-law, Henry the Fourth. When no one came forward,
in answer to her appeal, as the Duke's executioner, Joan exclaimed,
"Cursed be you villains! are none of you bold enough to kill a man?" A
squire volunteered to officiate, but when he had seen and heard the man
whom he was to slay, he shrank from the terrible task. "Madam," was his
remonstrance to the Countess, "for all the gold in the world, I cannot
kill such a Lord!" "Thou shalt do what thou hast promised," said Joan,
"or I will cut thy head off." And, probably knowing that she was likely
to "do what she had promised," the squire preferred the fall of the
Duke's head to his own. (_Lystoire de la Traison et Mort du Roy
Richart_, pp. 98-9.) This strong-minded woman died April 7, 1419, and
was buried at Walden, having previously been admitted a sister of the
Grey Friars in her brother's Cathedral of Canterbury. (I.P.M. 7 H.V.,
59:--Arundel MS. 51, fol. 18:--_ib_. 68, fol. 51, b.) Of Alesia,
Countess of Kent, little personal is known. She left no mark on her
time, though the members of her numerous family were very prominent
characters. She died March 17, 1416 (I.P.M. 4 H.V., 51).
By all genealogists who have hitherto written on the Arundel family, two
more daughters are ascribed to Earl Richard the Copped-Hat. These are
Philippa Sergeaux, the heroine of the tale; and Mary L'Estrange. At the
time when this story was written, I was misled to follow this
supposition, though I had already seen that in that case, Isabel, and
not Alianora, must have been the mother of Philippa. Some months after
the story was first published, I began to suspect that this was also the
case with regard to Mary L'Estrange. But I was not prepared for the
discovery, made only last May, that Philippa Sergeaux was not the
daughter of Earl Richard at all! In two charters recorded on a Close
Roll for 20 Ric. II., she distinctly styles herself "daughter of Sir
Edmund of Arundel, Knight," This was a younger brother of Earl Richard;
and his wife was Sybil Montacute, a daughter of the Lollard House of
Salisbury. It is probable, though no certainty has yet been found, that
Mary L'Estrange was also a daughter of Sir Edmund, since dates
conclusively show that she cannot have been the daughter of Alianora of
Lancaster. She died August 29, 1396, leaving an only child, Ankaretta
Talbot. (I.P.M. 20 R. II., 48).
As early, therefore, as I have the opportunity of doing it, I make the
_amende honorable_ to my readers for having unwittingly misled them on
this point. It is scarcely a discredit not to have known a fact which
was known to none. The tale must therefore be regarded as pure fiction,
so far as Philippa is concerned; for Isabel La Despenser apparently had
no child. The facts remain the same as regards other persons, where
their history is not affected by the discovery.
Philippa Sergeaux is represented in the opening of the story as a child
of three years old. It is more than probable that she was about ten
years younger. The date of her marriage is not on record. She was
eventually the mother of five children, though all were born subsequent
to the period at which my story closes. They were--Richard, born
December 21, 1376, and died issueless, June 24, 1396; Elizabeth, born
1379, wife of Sir William Marny; Philippa, born 1381, wife of Robert
Passele; Alice, born at Kilquyt, September 1, 1384, wife of Guy de Saint
Albino; Joan, born 1393, died February 21, 1400. Philippa became a
widow, September 30, 1393, and died September 13, 1399. (I.P.M., 17
Ric. II., 53; 21 Ric. II., 50; 1 H. IV., 14, 23, 24.)
Some of the Christian names may strike the reader as having a very
modern sound. I may therefore note that not one name occurs in the
story which is not authenticated by its appearance in the state papers
of the time.
It only remains to be added, that the fictitious characters of the tale
are Giles de Edingdon and Guy of Ashridge, the nurse Alina, Agnes the
lavender, the nuns Laura and Senicula, and the woodcutter's children
Elaine and Annora. The details given of Earl Richard's will are true;
but the presence of the Earl and Sir Richard Sergeaux in the train of
John of Gaunt in Guienne, has been assumed for the purposes of the
story.