THE PRINCE COMMISSIONED TO RECEIVE THE REBELS INTO ALLEGIANCE. -- THE
KING SUMMONS NORTHUMBERLAND. -- HOTSPUR'S CORPSE DISINTERRED. -- THE
REASON. -- GLYNDOWR'S FRENCH AUXILIARIES. -- HE STYLES HIMSELF "PRINCE
OF WALES." -- DEVASTATION OF THE BORDER COUNTIES. -- HENRY'S LETTERS
TO THE KING, AND TO THE COUNCIL. -- TESTIMONY OF HIM BY THE COUNTY OF
HEREFORD. -- HIS FAMOUS LETTER FROM HEREFORD. -- BATTLE OF GROSSMONT.
1403-1404.
No sooner had the King gained the field of Shrewsbury than he took the
most prompt measures to extinguish what remained of the rebellion of
the Percies. On the very next day he issued a commission to the Earl
of Westmoreland, William Gascoigne, and others, for levying forces to
act against the Earl of Northumberland. That nobleman, as we have seen,
remained in the north, probably in consequence of a sudden attack of
illness, when Hotspur made his ill-fated descent into the south: but
the King had good reason to believe that he was still in arms against
the crown; and although he despatched that commission of array to the
Earl of Westmoreland within only a few hours of the battle, yet (p. 179)
he resolved to march forthwith in person,[170] and crush the rebellion
by one decisive blow. On Monday the 23rd, the Earl of Worcester was
beheaded; and on the same day all his silver vessels, forfeited to the
King, were given to the Prince.[171] On the Tuesday the King must have
started for the north; for we find two ordinances dated at Stafford, a
distance of thirty miles from Shrewsbury, on Wednesday the 25th.
Whilst one of these royal mandates savours of severity, the other not
only is the message of mercy and forgiveness, but recommends itself to
us from the consideration of the person to whom the exercise of the
royal clemency was intrusted with unlimited discretion. Henry of
Monmouth, perhaps, left Shrewsbury after the battle, and proceeded
with his father on his journey northward; but we conclude Stafford to
have been, at all events, the furthest point from the Principality to
which he accompanied him. Whether the measure of mercy originated with
the King or the Prince, certainly both the King believed that his son
would gladly execute the commission, and the Prince felt happy in (p. 180)
being made the royal representative in the exercise of a monarch's
best and holiest prerogative. An ordinance was made by the King at
Stafford, investing the Prince of Wales with full powers to pardon the
rebels who were in the company of Henry Percy. The Prince probably
remained in or near Shrewsbury for the discharge of the duties assigned
to him by this commission. The King, having despatched messengers
throughout the whole realm announcing Henry Percy's death and the
defeat of the rebels, and commanding all ports to be watched that none
of the vanquished might escape, proceeded northward. On the 4th of
August we find him at Pontefract, from which place he issued an order
to the Sheriff[172] of York, which certainly indicates anything rather
than a thirst of vengeance on his enemies. It appears that many
persons, reckless of justice and confident of impunity, had laid
violent hands on the goods of the rebels; and different families had
thus been subjected to most grievous spoliation. The King's ordinance
conveys a peremptory order to the Sheriff of Yorkshire to interpose
his authority, and prevent such acts of violence and wrong, even upon
the King's enemies. On the 6th, we find him still at Pontefract, (p. 181)
and again on the 14th. Official documents, without supplying any matter
which needs detain us here, account for him through the intervening days.
Walsingham also relates that the King proceeded to York, and summoned
the whole county of Northumberland to appear before him. The Earl, who
had started with a strong body a few days after the battle, either in
ignorance of his son's failure, or to meet the King for the purpose of
treating with him for peace, had been resisted by the Earl of
Westmoreland, and compelled to retire to Warkworth. On receiving the
King's summons, leaving the commonalty behind, he approached the royal
presence with a small retinue, and, in the humble guise of a
suppliant, besought forgiveness.[173] The King granted him full
pardon, on the 11th of August;[174] and then began his return towards
Wales. We find him, from the 14th to the 16th,[175] at Pontefract; on
the 17th, at Doncaster. On the 18th, at Worksop; on the 26th, at (p. 182)
Woodstock; and on the 8th of September, at Worcester.[176]
[Footnote 170: Sir Harris Nicolas, in his very
valuable preface to the first volume of the Acts of
the Privy Council, has fallen into the most
extraordinary mistake of stating that the King,
after the battle of Shrewsbury, "remained in or
near Wales until November." He was certainly absent
through six full weeks on his northern expedition.
The same Editor more than once affirms that the
battle of Shrewsbury was fought on the 23rd of
July.]
[Footnote 171: MS. Donat. 4597.]
[Footnote 172: Mr. Morritt of Rokeby, in a letter
to Sir Walter Scott, (Life of Scott, vol. ii. p.
387,) says, "In the time of Henry IV. the High
Sheriff of Yorkshire who overthrew Northumberland,
and drove him to Scotland after the battle of
Shrewsbury, was a Rokeby. Tradition says that this
Sheriff was before an adherent of the Percies, and
was the identical knight who dissuaded Hotspur from
the enterprise, on whose letter the angry warrior
comments so freely in Shakspeare."]
[Footnote 173: His friends and retainers spread
strange reports throughout the north, of the King's
death; and, assembling in great force, held the
castles of Berwick, Alnwick, and Warkworth against
the royal authority. The Earl of Westmoreland,
Warden of the West March, therefore requested to be
supplied with cannon and other means of assault to
reduce these fortresses. The proceedings are given
in detail among the Acts of the Privy Council, but
do not call for a minute examination here.]
[Footnote 174: Walsingham says expressly, it was on
the morrow of St. Lawrence, August 11th.]
[Footnote 175: On the 15th, he issues a
proclamation for an array, to meet him at
Worcester, on the 3rd of September at the latest,
to proceed against Owyn.]
[Footnote 176: It was on his return towards Wales
that the military recommended Henry (then much in
need of money) to take from the bishops their
horses and gold, and send the prelates home on
foot. The Archbishop resisted the outrage in a
manly speech; and the King prayed a benevolence,
which the clergy granted.]
After these acts of grace and pardon to Lord Douglas, Northumberland,
and all others who were joined to Sir Henry Percy, we should not expect
to find a charge substantiated of wanton and brutal cruelty and vengeance
on the part of the King against the corpse of that gallant knight.
Such a charge, however, is brought in the most severe terms which
language can supply in the manifesto said to have been made by the
Archbishop of York. The fact of Hotspur's exhumation may be granted,
and yet the King's memory may remain free from such a charge.[177]
That the body was buried, and afterwards disinterred and exposed to
public view, seems not to admit of a doubt. As it appears from the
Chronicle of London, "Persons reported that Percy was yet alive. He
was therefore taken up out of the grave, and bound upright between two
mill-stones, that all men might see that he was dead." "The cause of
Hotspur's exhumation is therefore satisfactorily explained; and, (p. 183)
since it must have been very desirable to remove all doubt as to the
fact of his death, the charge of needless barbarity which has been
brought against the King for disinterring him is without foundation."[178]
[Footnote 177: The King, speaking of the death of
Hotspur, merely says, "He hath gone the way of all
flesh."--Rot. Pat. 4 Hen. IV. p. 2.]
[Footnote 178: Sir Harris Nicolas.]
The King now adopted prompt and vigorous measures for the suppression
of the rebellion in Wales; and with that view issued from Worcester an
ordinance to several persons by name, to keep their castles in good
repair, well provided also with men and arms. Among others, the Bishop
of St. David's is strictly charged as to his castle of Laghadyn;
Nevill de Furnivale, for Goodrich; Edward Charleton of Powis, for
Caerleon and Usk; John Chandos, for Snowdon. On the 10th of September,
the King, still at Worcester, created his son, John of Lancaster,
Constable of England. On the 14th he was at Hereford,[179] when he
gave a warrant to William Beauchamp, (to whom was intrusted the care
of Abergavenny and Ewias Harold,) to receive into their allegiance the
Welsh rebels of those lordships. A similar warrant for the rebels of
Brecknock, Builth, Haye, with others, is given, on the 15th, to Sir
John Oldcastle, John ap Herry, and John Fairford, clerk, dated
Devennock. The King was then on his route towards Caermarthen,[180]
where he stayed only a short time; and left the Earl of Somerset, (p. 184)
Sir Thomas Beaufort, the Bishop of Bath, and Lord Grey to keep the
castle and town for one month. He shortly afterwards commissioned
Prince Henry to negociate with those persons for their pardon who had
been excepted from the act of oblivion after the battle of
Shrewsbury.[181]
[Footnote 179: On the 12th, he had issued a
proclamation from Hereford for his lieges to meet
him there forthwith.]
[Footnote 180: Caermarthen suffered very seriously
in this war: the Pell Rolls, June 26, 1406, record
the payment of a sum to the Burgesses and Goodmen
of Caermarthen, in mitigation of the losses they
had sustained. On this occasion the King arrived
there on the 25th and stayed till the 29th.]
[Footnote 181: On the 2nd of October, the King
issued a proclamation against Owyn. He seems to
have returned through Gloucester to London,
immediately after the 17th October; on which day a
warrant to Robert Waterton, to arrest Elizabeth
wife of the late Henry Percy, is dated Gloucester.
On the 8th of October, those four persons whom
Henry had left in charge of Caermarthen, implore
the council by letter to send the Duke of York, or
some other general, to take charge of the King's
interests in that district, and to furnish troops
to succeed those whom the King had left in trust
there, since they had expressed their determined
resolution not to remain beyond their month.]
The Welsh, though driven probably from Caermarthenshire[182] in the
early part of this autumn, seem to have carried on their hostilities
in other districts with much vigour into the very middle of winter.[183]
On the 8th of November, the King, being then at Cirencester, (p. 185)
issued strict orders for the payment of 100_l._ to Lord Berkeley, for
the succour of the garrison of Llanpadarn Castle, then straitly besieged
by the rebels, and in great danger of falling into their hands. Lord
Berkeley was appointed Admiral of the Fleet to the westward of the
Thames, on the 5th of November 1403.
[Footnote 182: On the 1st of December the King
acknowledges that the people of Kedwelly had
repaired their walls which Owyn had injured; and,
on the 19th, the castle of Llanstaffan is given to
the custody of David Howell, who undertook to
defend it with ten men-at-arms and twenty archers
at his own expense, the late captain having been
taken by Owyn.]
[Footnote 183: On the 26th of October, the King
commissions the Earl of Devon, with the Courtenays
and others, to press as many men as might be
necessary wherever they were to be found, and to
proceed forthwith by sea to rescue the castle of
Caerdiff, then in great peril.]
On the 22d of November the King issued a proclamation for all rebels
to apply for an amnesty before the Feast of the Epiphany next ensuing,
or in default thereof to expect nothing but the strict course of the
law.
It is matter of doubt whether Prince Henry remained in Wales and the
borders through the winter, or returned to his charge in the spring.
On the opening of the campaign, however, in 1404, we find the Welsh
chieftain aided by a power which must have made his rebellion far more
formidable than it had hitherto been. A truce between England and
France had been concluded just before the battle of Shrewsbury, but it
was of very short duration. Early in the spring, the French appeared
off the shores of Wales in armed vessels, and in conjunction with
Glyndowr's forces, laid siege to several castles along the coast. As
early as April 23rd, a sum of 300_l._ is assigned by the council for
equipping with men and arms, provisions and stores, five vessels (p. 186)
in the port of Bristol, to relieve the castles of Aberystwith and
Cardigan, and to compel the French to raise the siege of Caernarvon
and Harlech.[184] Not only were the castles on the coast brought into
increased jeopardy by this accession of a continental force to Owyn's
army of native rebels, but the inhabitants of the interior, already
miserably plundered, and in numberless cases utterly ruined, by the
ravages of the Welsh, now began to give themselves up to despair. A
letter from the King's loyal subjects of Shropshire (which we must
refer to this spring), praying for immediate succour against the
confederate forces of Wales and France, furnishes a most deplorable
view of the state of those districts. One-third part of that county,
they say, had been already destroyed, whilst the inhabitants were
compelled to leave their homes, in order to obtain their living in
other more favoured parts of the realm. The petition prays for the
protection of men-at-arms and archers, till the Prince[185] himself
should come.
[Footnote 184: Measures had been taken, in
expectation, as it should appear, of these sieges.
January 31, 1404, money is paid to the Prince to
purchase sixty-six pipes of honey (to make mead),
twelve casks of wine, four casks of sour wine,
fifty casks of wheat-flour, and eighty quarters of
salt, for victualling Caernarvon, Harlech,
Llanpadarn, and Cardigan.]
[Footnote 185: From this expression, Sir Harris
Nicolas is induced to refer the letter (which is
dated April 21st) to the year 1403, the Prince
having been appointed Lieutenant of Wales on the
7th of March preceding. But the mention of the
_French_ auxiliaries, who appear not to have
visited those parts till the year following, seems
to fix the date of this document to the year 1404.]
Soon after the French had carried on these hostile movements, (p. 187)
their King made a solemn league with Owyn Glyndowr, as an independent
sovereign, acknowledging him to be Prince of Wales. Owyn dated his
princedom from the year 1400, and assumed the full title and authority
of a monarch.[186] In this year he commissioned Griffin Young his
chancellor, and John Hangmer, both "his beloved relatives," to treat
with the King of France, in consideration of the affection and sincere
love which that illustrious monarch had shown _towards him_ and _his
subjects_.[187] This commission is dated "Doleguelli, 10th May, A. D.
1404, and in the fourth year of our principality." In conformity with
its tenour, a league was made and sworn to between the ambassadors of
"_our illustrious and most dread lord, Owyn, Prince of Wales_," and
those of the King of France. That sovereign signed the commission (p. 188)
on the 14th of June; and the league was sealed in the chancellor's house
at Paris, on the 14th July. Its provisions are chiefly directed against
"Henry of Lancaster."
[Footnote 186: Owyn does not, however, seem to have
exercised the princely prerogative of coining
money. Indeed, no Welsh coin of any date is known
to have been ever in existence. Thomas Thomas, the
Welsh antiquary, says that a coin (or Dr.
Stukeley's impression from a coin) of King Bleiddyd
is now in the Cotton museum, of a date above nine
hundred years before Christ; and that there are
others of Monagan about the year one hundred and
thirty before the Christian era. A search for them,
it is presumed, would be fruitless.]
[Footnote 187: The words in italics are in the
original "erga nos et _subditos_ nostros."
"Illustris et metuendissimi domini nostri Owini
Principis Walliarum."--See Rymer.]
The reinforcements which Owyn Glyndowr received from France at the
opening of the campaign in the spring of 1404, enabled him not only to
lay siege to the castles in North and West Wales (as it was called),
but to make desperate inroads into England, as well about Shropshire
as in Herefordshire. A letter addressed to the council, June 10th, by
the sheriff, the receiver, and other gentlemen of the latter county,
conveys a most desponding representation of the state of those parts;
especially through the district of Archenfield. The bearer of this letter
was the Archdeacon of Hereford, Dean of Windsor, the same person who
wrote in such "haste and dread" to the King the year before. Some
parts of this letter deserve to be transcribed, they afford so lively
a description of the frightful calamities of a civil war. "The Welsh
rebels in great numbers have entered Irchonfeld,[188] which is a
division of the county of Hereford, and there they have burnt houses,
killed the inhabitants, taken prisoners, and ravaged the country, (p. 189)
to the great dishonour of our King, and the insupportable damage of
the county. We have often advertised the King that such mischiefs
would befal us. We have also now certain information that within the
next eight days the rebels are resolved to make an attack in the March
of Wales, to its utter ruin if speedy succour be not sent. True it is,
indeed, that we have no power to shelter us, except that of Lord
Richard of York and his men, far too little to defend us. We implore
you to consider this very perilous and pitiable case, and to pray our
sovereign lord that he will come in his royal person, or send some
person with sufficient power to rescue us from the invasion of the
aforesaid rebels; otherwise we shall be utterly destroyed,--which God
forbid! Whoever comes will, as we are led to believe from the report
of our spies, have to engage in battle, or will have a very severe
struggle, with the rebels. And, for God's sake, remember that
honourable and valiant man the Lord Abergavenny,[189] who is on the
very point of destruction if he be not rescued. Written in haste at
Hereford, June 10th."
[Footnote 188: Irchonfeld, now called Archenfield,
contains some of the most fertile land in
Herefordshire. The inhabitants of Whitchurch, in
that district, used to say, before modern luxury
had taught us to reckon foreign productions among
the necessaries of life, that, excepting salt,
their parish supplied whatever was needed for their
subsistence in comfort.]
[Footnote 189: This was William Beauchamp, to whom
the King had given, in the first year of his reign,
the castles[189-a] of Pembroke, Tenby, Kilgarran, with
others, by patent, 29th November, 1 Henry IV; and
who was very closely besieged in the spring of
1401, and the summer of 1404, in the castle of
Abergavenny.]
[Footnote 189-a: MS. Donat. 4596.]
The King had in some measure anticipated this strong memorial, (p. 190)
by signing, on the very day preceding its date,[190] a commission of
array to the sheriffs of Hereford, Worcester, Gloucester, and Warwick
to raise their counties and proceed forthwith to join Richard of York,
and to advance in one body with him for the rescue of William Beauchamp,
who was then straitly besieged in his castle of Abergavenny, and entirely
destitute. Though no mention is here made of the Prince, nor any
allusion to him, we have the best evidence that he was personally
engaged during this summer in endeavouring to resist the violence and
excesses of the rebels. He was crippled by want of means; he was
forced to pawn his few jewels for the present support of himself and
his retinue; and, when the money raised on them was exhausted, he was
compelled to assure the council in the most direct terms, of his utter
inability to remain on his post, if they did not forthwith provide him
with adequate supplies. He seems to have acted both with vigour and
discretion; and the council placed throughout the fullest confidence
in his judgment and integrity.
[Footnote 190: At Doncaster, June 9th.]
Three documents at this point of time deserve especial attention. The
first is a letter, in French, from the Prince, addressed to his father,
and dated Worcester, 25th of June 1404; the second is another letter
of the same date, written by the Prince to the council; the third (p. 191)
contains the resolutions adopted by them in consequence of this
communication.
[Footnote 191: The Author leaves this sentence as
he wrote it, before he had read the late account of
the Field of Agincourt: in that work Henry of
Monmouth is in these days, for the first time,
accused of hypocrisy; with what justice the reader
will decide after reading the charge, and the
arguments by which it is now presumed to have been
destroyed root and branch. They will be found in
the second volume.]
It is very true that letters afford no infallible proof of the writer's
real sentiments and feelings; and it has been said, that expressions
of piety or affection in epistles of past ages are not to be interpreted
as indices of the mind and state of him who utters them, any more than
the ordinary close of a note in the present day proves that it came
from a humble-minded and gratefully obliged person. Nevertheless, with
these general suggestions before us, and not impugned, there does seem
to pervade the following letter from Henry to his father, somewhat
more than words of course, or matter-of-form expressions, indicative
(unless the writer be a hypocrite,--and hypocrisy has never been laid
to Henry of Monmouth's charge[191]) of filial dutifulness and affection,
as well as of a pious and devout trust in Providence. At all events, it
is incumbent on those who forbid our inference in favour of any one from
such testimony to show some act, or to quote some words, or direct us to
some implied sentiments in the individual, whose letters we are (p. 192)
discussing, which would give presumptive evidence against our decision
in his favour. But history has assigned no act, no sentiment, no word
of an irreligious or immoral tendency, to Henry of Monmouth up to the
date of this letter. It is not here implied, or conceded, that history
possesses facts of another character subsequently to this date; that
point must be the subject of our further inquiry. When this letter was
written, as far as we can ascertain, fame had not begun to breathe a
whisper against the religious and moral character of the Prince of
Wales.
LETTER FROM PRINCE HENRY TO THE KING HIS FATHER.
"My very dread and sovereign lord and father.--In the most humble
and obedient manner that I know or am able, I commend myself to
your high Majesty, desiring every day your gracious blessing, and
sincerely thanking your noble Highness for your honourable
letters, which you were lately pleased to send to me, written at
your Castle of Pontefract, the 21st day of this present month of
June [1404]; by which letters I have been made acquainted with
the great prosperity of your high and royal estate, which is to
me the greatest joy that can fall to my lot in this world. And I
have taken the very highest pleasure and entire delight at the
news, of which you were pleased to certify me; first, of the
speedy arrival of my very dear cousin, the Earl of Westmoreland,
and William Clifford, to your Highness; and secondly, the arrival
of the despatches from your adversary of Scotland, and other
great men of his kingdom, by virtue of your safe conduct, for the
good of both the kingdoms, which God of his mercy grant; and that
you may accomplish all your honourable designs, to his (p. 193)
pleasure, to your honour, and the welfare of your kingdom, as I
have firm reliance in Him who is omnipotent, that you will do. My
most dread and sovereign lord and father, at your high command in
other your gracious letters, I have removed with my small
household to the city of Worcester; and at my request there is
come to me, with a truly good heart, my very dear and beloved
cousin, the Earl of Warwick, with a fine retinue at his own very
heavy expenses; so he well deserves thanks from you for his
goodwill at all times.
"And whether the news from the Welsh be true, and what measures I
purpose to adopt on my arrival, as you desire to be informed, may
it please your Highness to know that the Welsh have made a
descent on Herefordshire, burning and destroying also the county,
with very great force, and with a supply of provisions for
fifteen days. And true it is that they have burnt and made very
great havoc on the borders of the said county. But, since my
arrival in these parts, I have heard of no further damage from
them, God be thanked! But I am informed for certain that they are
assembled with all their power, and keep themselves together for
some important object, and, as it is said, to burn the said
county. For this reason I have sent for my beloved cousins, my
Lord Richard of York and the Earl Marshal, and others the most
considerable persons of the counties of that march, to be with me
at Worcester on the Tuesday next after the date of this letter,
to inform me plainly of the government of their districts; and
how many men they will be able to bring, if need be; and to give
me their advice as to what may seem to them best to be done for
the safeguard of the aforesaid parts. And, agreeably to their
advice, I will do all I possibly can to resist the rebels and
save the English country, to the utmost of my little power, as
God shall give me grace: ever trusting in your high Majesty to
remember my poor estate; and that I have not the means of (p. 194)
continuing here without the adoption of some other measures
for my maintenance; and that the expenses are insupportable to
me. And may you thus make an ordinance for me with speed, that I
may do good service, to your honour and the preservation of my
humble state. My dread sovereign lord and father, may the
allpowerful Lord of heaven and earth grant you a blessed and long
life in all good prosperity, to your satisfaction! Written at
Worcester the 26th day of June.
"Your humble and obedient Son, HENRY."
The second letter, written at the same time and place, but addressed
to the council, is nearly word for word identical with this till
towards its close, when it gives the following strong view of the
straits and difficulties to which the Prince and the government were
then driven by want of money;[192] and the personal sacrifice which he
was himself compelled to make. "We implore you to make some ordinance
for us in time, assured that we have nothing from which we can support
ourselves here, except that we have pawned our little plate and
jewels, and raised money from them, and with that we shall be able to
remain only a short time. And after that, unless you make provision
for us, we shall be compelled to depart with disgrace and (p. 195)
mischief: and the country will be utterly destroyed; which God forbid!
And now, since we have shown you the perils and mischiefs [which must
ensue], for God's sake make your ordinance in time, for the salvation
of the honour of our sovereign lord the King our father, of ourselves,
and of the whole realm. And may our Lord protect you, and give you
grace to do right!"
[Footnote 192: About this time, the King's treasury
was in a deplorable state. The minutes of council
suggest the payment of 1000 marks in part of the
debts of the household, incurred in the time of
Atterbury: and the allowance of a sum "for the time
past, and to avoid the clamour of the
people."--Minutes of Council, vol. ii. p. 37.]
The Prince, finding his difficulties increasing, wrote another letter,
dated June 30, to the council, urging them to prompt measures; and
stating in very positive terms the utter impossibility of his remaining
in those parts without supplies. What immediate notice was taken of
these pressing communications, does not appear; that the council enabled
him to remain on the borders, and to protect the country effectually
from the rebels, is proved by their proceedings at Lichfield on the
29th and 30th of the August following. The minutes of those two councils
are full of interest. By the first we are informed that the French,
under the French Earl of March, had equipped a fleet of sixty vessels
in the port of Harfleur, full of soldiers, for the purpose of an
immediate invasion of Wales. To meet this rising mischief, the council
advise that, since the King could not soon raise an army proportionate
to his high estate and dignity, to proceed forthwith into Wales, he
should remain at Tutbury until the meeting of parliament at Coventry
in the October following; and in the mean time proclamations (p. 196)
should be made, directing all able-bodied men to be ready to attend
the King. Orders were also given to the officers of the customs in
Bristol to supply wine, corn, and other provisions for the soldiers in
the town of Caermarthen, in part payment of their wages. The minutes
then record, that, with regard to the county of Hereford, the sheriff
and the other gentlemen had requested the lords of the council to pray
the King that he would be pleased to thank the Prince for the good
protection of the said county since the Nativity of St. John (June
24th), and likewise, that for the well-being of that county, and also
of the county of Gloucester, the Prince might be assigned to guard the
marches of the said counties, and to make inroads into Overwent and
Netherwent, Glamorgan and Morgannoc; and "to carry this into effect,
they must provide the wages of five hundred men-at-arms and two
thousand archers for three weeks, and through another three weeks
three hundred men-at-arms and two thousand archers." In another
council, probably at the end of August, the lords recommend that the
sum of 3000 marks, due to the King as a fine from the inhabitants of
Cheshire, to be paid in three years, should be assigned to the Prince
for the safeguard of the castle of Denbigh, and towards the expenses
of his other castles in North Wales.[193] They recommend also (p. 197)
that the people of Shropshire be allowed to make a truce with Wales
until the last day of November; and with regard to Herefordshire, that
the Prince remain on its borders to the last day of September, and
have the same number of men-at-arms and archers (or more) as he had
had since the 29th of June; that he have on his own account 1000 marks,
and that on the first day of October he be ready with five hundred
men-at-arms and two thousand archers to make an incursion into Wales,
and stay there twenty-one days, for the just chastisement of the
rebels. And since for these charges the Prince should be paid before
his departure, measures had been taken to raise money of several
persons by way of loan. Sir John Oldcastle and John ap Herry were to
keep the castles of Brecknock and the Haye till Michaelmas. The King
also issued his mandate, 13th November 1404, to the sheriffs of
Worcester, Gloucester, and other counties, to provide a contingent
each of twenty men-at-arms and two hundred archers to join the army of
his sons; premising that he had, by the advice of his parliament, sent
his two sons, the Prince and the Lord Thomas, to raise the siege of
Coitey,[194] in which Alexander Berkroller, lord of that place, was
then besieged: we may therefore safely conclude that, through the
first part of the winter at least, young Henry was most fully (p. 198)
occupied in the Principality.[195]
[Footnote 193: August 26, 1404, a thousand marks
were assigned to the Prince for the safekeeping of
Denbigh and other castles.--MS. Donat. 4597.]
[Footnote 194: The ruins of Coity Castle are still
interesting. They are near Bridgend, in
Glamorganshire.]
[Footnote 195: MS. Donat. 4597.]
Of the Prince's proceedings in consequence of these instructions we
hear nothing before the beginning of the next March: but through the
winter[196] (as it should seem) the Welsh chieftain and his French
auxiliaries were most busily engaged, especially towards the northern
parts. Indeed, it may be surmised, not without probable reason, that
the King's troops under the Prince in Monmouthshire, Glamorganshire,
and its adjacent districts, and perhaps the forces of Thomas Beaufort,
or the Duke of York, in Caermarthen, had driven Owyn and his partisans
northward, by the vigorous efforts which they made through the autumn
and the early part of the winter. To this season also we are induced
to refer those despatches from Conway and Chester,[197] which give the
most alarming accounts to the King of the insolence and activity (p. 199)
of his enemies, and the imminent peril of his friends, his castles,
and the whole country. One letter speaks of six ships coming out of
France "with wyn and spicery full laden." Another reports that the
constable of Harlech had been seized by the Welsh and carried to Owyn
Glyndowr; and that the castle was in great danger of falling into his
hands, being garrisoned only by five Englishmen and about sixteen
Welshmen. A third apprises the King that the deputy-constable of
Caernarvon had sent a woman to inform the writer, William Venables,
the constable of Chester, (by word of mouth, because no man dared to
come, and no man or woman could carry letters safely,) of Owyn
Glyndowr's purpose, in conjunction with the French, "to assault the
town and castle of Caernarvon with engines, sows,[198] and ladders of
very great length;" whilst in the town and castle there were not more
than twenty-eight fighting men,--eleven of the more able of those who
were there at the former siege being dead, some of their wounds,
others of the plague. In the fourth, the constable of Conway informs
the same parties that the people of Caernarvonshire purposed to go
into Anglesey to bring out of it all the men and cattle into the
mountains, "lest Englishmen should be refreshed therewith." The (p. 200)
writer adds, "I durst lay my head that, if there were two hundred men
in Caernarvon and two hundred in Conway, from February until May, the
commons of Caernarvonshire would come to peace, and pay their dues as
well as ever. But should there be a delay till the summer, it will not
be so lightly (likely), for then the rebels will be able to lie without
(in the open air), as they cannot now do. Also I have myself heard
many of the commons and gentlemen of Merionethshire and Caernarvonshire
swear that all men of the aforesaid shires, except four or five
gentlemen and a few vagabonds (vacaboundis), would fain come to peace,
provided Englishmen were left in the country to help in protecting
them from misdoers; especially must they come into the country whilst
the weather is cold." In the fifth letter, we learn that Owyn had
agreed with all the men in the castle of Harlech, except seven, to
have deliverance of the castle on an early fixed day for a stated sum
of gold. A letter, dated Oswestry, February 7th, from the Earl of
Arundel and Surrey, conveys the very same sentiments with those of the
constable of Conway as to the probability of the immediate termination
of the rebellion, either by peace or victory, should any vigorous
measures be adopted. He was appointed to take charge of Oswestry, with
thirty men-at-arms and one hundred and fifty archers, for eight weeks.
He complains that the grand ordinance resolved upon by the late (p. 201)
parliament at Coventry[199] had not been put into execution; and states
that the rebels were never at any time so high or proud, from an
assurance that it, like the others, would become a dead letter.[200]
[Footnote 196: A few days before Christmas, some
French effected a landing in the Isle of Wight, and
boasted that, with the King's leave or without it,
they would keep their Christmas there: but they
were routed. The French demanded a tribute in the
name of Richard and Isabella.]
[Footnote 197: These letters are the tenth,
eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth, in
Sir Henry Ellis' Second Series. He does not assign
them to any date positively. "They were probably
written," he says, "about 1404." It is here
presumed, that they were not written till the
opening of the year 1405. They all bear date
between the 7th of January and the 20th of
February.]
[Footnote 198: The sow was an engine of the nature
of the Roman Vinea, which, by protecting the
assailants from the missiles of the besieged,
enabled them to undermine the wall of a town or
castle.]
[Footnote 199: The parliament called Indoctum, or
Lacklearning. It was in this parliament that the
confiscation of the property of the bishops was
proposed.]
[Footnote 200: At this time Owyn Glyndowr confirms
his league with the King of France by deed, dated
and signed "in our Castle of Llanpadarn, the 12th
of January 1405, and of our principality the
sixth."]
The letter from Henry to his father in the preceding June, and the
testimony of the gentlemen of Hereford, who prayed that thanks might
be presented to the Prince for his watchful and efficient protection
of their county, inform us that the rebels towards the south marches
had been kept in check since the Prince's arrival; but they were ready
to renew their violence at the very opening of spring. Two letters,
one from the King to his council, the other from the Prince to the
King, require to be translated literally, and copied into these pages.
The former, which is now published for the first time in "The Acts of
the Privy Council," proves the hearty good-will entertained by the
King towards his son, and the lively paternal interest he took up to
that time in his honourable career. It assures us also of the great
importance attached by the King to the victory then gained over the
rebels. The latter, though published by Rymer and Ellis, and (p. 202)
others, and though often commented upon before, yet appears to throw
so much light upon the character of Prince Henry as a Christian at
once and a warrior, especially in that union of valour and mercy in
him to which Hotspur first bore testimony four years before, that any
treatise on the life and character of Henry of Monmouth would be
altogether defective were this letter to be omitted. The King's letter
to his council bears date Berkhemstead, March 13, 1405.
"FROM THE KING.
"Very dear and faithful! We greet you well. And since we know
that you are much pleased and rejoiced whenever you can hear good
news relating to the preservation of our honour and estate, and
especially of the common good and honour of the whole realm, we
forward to you for your consolation the copy of a letter sent to
us by our very dear son, the Prince, touching his government in
the marches of Wales; by which you will yourselves become
acquainted with the news for which we return thanks to Almighty
God. We beg you will convey these tidings to our very dear and
faithful friends the Mayor and good people of our city of London,
in order that they may derive consolation from them together with
us, and praise our Creator for them. May He always have you in
his holy keeping.--Given under our signet at our Castle of
Berkhemstead, the 13th day of March."
The following letter, the copy of which the King then forwarded, was
written by the Prince at Hereford, on the 11th of March, at night.
LETTER FROM PRINCE HENRY TO THE KING HIS FATHER. (p. 203)
"My most redoubted and most sovereign lord and father, in the
most humble manner that in my heart I can devise, I commend
myself to your royal Majesty, humbly requesting your gracious
blessing. My most redoubted and most sovereign lord and father, I
sincerely pray that God will graciously show his miraculous aid
toward you in all places: praised be He in all his works! For on
Wednesday, the eleventh day of this present month of March, your
rebels of the parts of Glamorgan, Morgannoc, Usk, Netherwent, and
Overwent, were assembled to the number of eight thousand men
according to their own account; and they went on the said
Wednesday in the morning, and burnt part of your town of Grosmont
within your lordship of Monmouth. And I immediately[201] sent off
my very dear cousin the Lord Talbot, and the small body of my own
household, and with them joined your faithful and gallant knights
William Neuport and John Greindre; who were but a very small
force in all. But very true it is that VICTORY IS NOT IN A
MULTITUDE OF PEOPLE, BUT IN THE POWER OF GOD; and this was well
proved there. And there, by the aid of the blessed Trinity, your
people gained the field, and slew of them by fair account on the
field, by the time of their return from the pursuit, some say
eight hundred, and some say a thousand, being questioned on pain
of death. Nevertheless, whether on such an account it were one or
the other I would not contend.
"And, to inform you fully of all that has been done, I send you a
person worthy of credit in this case, my faithful servant the
bearer of this letter, who was present at the engagement, (p. 204)
and did his duty very satisfactorily, as he does on all occasions.
And such amends has God ordained you for the burning of four houses
of your said town. And prisoners there were none taken excepting
one,[202] who was a great chieftain among them, whom I would have
sent to you, but he _cannot yet ride at his ease_.
"And touching the governance which I purpose to make after this,
please your Highness to give sure credence to the bearer of this
letter in whatever he shall lay before your Highness on my part.
And I pray God that He will preserve you always in joy and
honour, and grant me shortly to comfort you with other good news.
Written at Hereford, the said Wednesday, at night.
"Your very humble and obedient son,
"To the King, my most redoubted HENRY.
and sovereign lord and father."
[Footnote 201: All the writers who have copied this
letter, from Rymer downwards, have fallen into a
ludicrous mistake here. Reading an _n_ instead of a
_v_ in the words _J'envoia_ (I sent), they have
translated the passage, "within your lordship of
Monmouth and Jennoia." Sir Harris Nicolas first
supplied the true reading. The mistake led persons
well acquainted with Monmouthshire (among others,
the Author of these Memoirs,) to make different
inquiries as to the lordship of Jennoia: they will
now no longer wonder at the unfruitful issue of
their search.]
[Footnote 202: The author published under the name
of Otterbourne says, that Owyn's son was made
prisoner at Usk on the 25th of March, and one
thousand five hundred of his men were taken or
slain; and that, after the Feast of St. Dunstan,
his chancellor was taken. There is reason to doubt
whether that chronicler has not mistaken the place
and time of the battle to which he refers; though
it is not impossible that another battle (of which,
however, we have no authentic record,) was fought
at Usk a fortnight after the rebels were defeated
at Grosmont: Grosmont is about twenty miles distant
from Usk.]
The true reading of "I sent," instead of "Jennoia," at first might
seem to imply that the Prince was not present in person at the (p. 205)
battle of Grosmont: and there is no positive evidence in the letter to
show that he was there. The testimony which he bears to the gallant
conduct in that field of his faithful servant, whom he despatched with
his letter, has been thought to sanction a belief, that Henry was an
eyewitness of the engagement. But from this doubt the mind turns with
full satisfaction to the religious sentiments which are interwoven
throughout the epistle, and to Henry's considerate and humane treatment
of his prisoner. He would, no doubt, have felt a satisfaction and pride
in immediately placing a high chieftain of Wales in the hands of the
King, on the very day of battle and victory; but he shrunk from
gratifying his own wishes, when his pleasure involved the pain of a
fellow-creature, though that person was his prisoner. Many an incident
throughout his life tends to justify Shakspeare, when he makes Henry
IV. speak of his son's philanthropy and tenderness of feeling:
"He hath a tear for pity, and a hand
Open as day for melting charity."
2 HENRY IV. act iv. sc. iv.
Those united qualities of valour and mercy, of courage and kindness of
heart, which are so beautifully ascribed to a modern English warrior,
were never blended in any character of which history speaks in more
perfect harmony than in Henry of Monmouth:
"A furious lion in battle; (p. 206)
But, duty appeased, in mercy a lamb."
The lesson thus taught him during his early youth in the field of
Grosmont, whether by personal experience of that conflict, or by the
representation of his gallant companions in arms, of what may be
effected by courage and discipline against an enemy infinitely
superior in numbers, was probably not forgotten, ten years afterwards,
at Agincourt.