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.