1415: Henry V's Year of Glory (96 page)

27.
CPR
, p. 329. Aristocratic women did not suckle their own infants in the later middle ages.

28.
Foedera
, ix, p. 261;
CPR
, p. 346.

29.
Spinka,
John Hus at the Council of Constance
, p. 167. See also
ibid
., p. 142.

30.
CPR
, p. 330.

31.
CPR
, p. 331.

32.
Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 59.

33.
S&
I
, pp. 442–3.

34.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 449, n. 3.

35.
CCR
, p. 280.

36.
Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 59.

37.
The articles are in Spinka,
John Hus at the Council of Constance
, pp. 183–201.

38.
Spinka,
John Hus at the Council of Constance
, p. 221.

39.
Spinka,
John Hus at the Council of Constance
, pp. 221–2.

40.
Loomis (ed.),
Constance
, p. 252.

41.
Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 101, dates this event to 10 June on the strength of Thomas Gray of Heton’s letter of 2 August to Henry, which stated that it took place a week before he met Richard, earl of Cambridge, at Conisborough, which was a week before Midsummer’s Day (24 June). Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 516 dates this to 31 May.

42.
CPR
, p. 331 (Canterbury);
CCR
, p. 221 (Tonge).

43.
CCR
, p. 221.

44.
CCR
, pp. 279–80.

45.
CCR
, p. 277. For a good description about corrodies in practice, see Harvey,
Living and Dying
, chapter six.

46.
CPR
, p. 334.

47.
CPR
, p. 329.

48.
CCR
, p. 214.

49.
This statement is based on the expenditure of the household in Henry IV’s reign. See Given-Wilson,
Royal Household
, appendix one.

50.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 476.

51.
Issues
, p. 286.

52.
It is likely that he visited several holy shrines in the last days he was in London – he visited St Paul’s and Southwark on the 15th, according to Wylie.

53.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 494. Note: the date of all the Teutonic envoys’ meetings is approximate.

54.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 496.

55.
CCR
, p. 220 (Victore);
CPR
, p. 332 (Bury); Wylie, i, p. 482 (Chaucer);
CCR
, p. 221 (Burgh).

56.
Loomis (ed.),
Constance
, pp. 248–9.

57.
Fillastre placed it later in his journal, and described the events at Constance of the 15th before those in France of the 8th. See Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 249–51.

58.
Loomis (ed.),
Constance
, p. 251.

59.
See Gentien’s account of the attack in Fillastre’s diary, Loomis (ed.),
Constance
, p. 253. For confirmation of John’s whereabouts see Petit,
Itinéraires
, p. 419.

60.
Nicolas (ed.),
Privy Council
, ii, pp. 169–70;
CPR
, p. 333.

61.
CPR
, p. 339. The patent letter is dated ‘by the king’ Westminster, 17 June, but the council meeting was probably the same one as the other case of wrongful dismissal, prior to Henry’s departure.

62.
CCR
, pp. 220, 222 (Whittington), 221 (Venetians).

63.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, pp. 483–5. Most authors, like Wylie, date the king’s departure to the 16th. Given-Wilson in
PROME
gives the 15th. Although
Gregory’s Chronicle is alone in supplying this date, it is to be preferred since a patent letter ‘by the king’ is dated at Winchester on the 16th (
CPR
, p. 338). It is unreasonable to suppose that Henry performed these two religious duties and had travelled the 63 miles to Winchester, then dictated a letter which was written up and sealed by a chancery clerk, all on the same day. However, it is possible that Beaufort had taken the king’s instructions to draw up this patent letter in advance (see also n. 71 below). Arundel was still in London on the 19th and 24th, according to Nicolas (ed.),
Privy Council
, ii, pp. 170–1.

64.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 496.

65.
Although these are all dated today at Westminster they were dictated ‘by the king’.

66.
These were William Cheyne, Roger Horton (both King’s Bench) and John Preston and William Lodyngton (Common Bench). See
CPR
, pp. 332, 335, 338, 340.

67.
CPR
, pp. 336, 338.

68.
Foedera
, ix, pp. 269–70 (Patrington);
CPR
, p. 347 (Welsh Marches).

69.
Riley (ed.),
Memorials
, p. 613.

70.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 496.

71.
It was 63 miles along the old road from London to Winchester – normally a two-day journey at least. It is possible Henry took longer but the patent letter to his brother ‘by the king’ dated there on the 16th suggests otherwise. If Bishop Beaufort had travelled ahead, he may have taken Henry’s instructions to write up this letter and sealed it here while staying at Winchester.

72.
CPR
, p. 338.

73.
See the table of towns in
TTGME
, p. 10.

74.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, pp. 477–8. The matter was resolved when the men of Salisbury receieved an assignment on the wool customs at Southampton in return for their 100 marks.

75.
Chronica Maiora
, p. 402n; Bellaguet (ed.),
Chronique du Religieux
, v, p. 543; Johnes (ed.),
Monstrelet
, p. 329; Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 60. They went to London, and thence to Winchester, where they arrived on 30 June and met Henry on 1 July. Their nervous state is suggested by Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 486. Wylie’s statement that they were conducted by Sir John Wiltshire is probably an error, based on reading the French
Villequier
for Wiltshire; the Issue Roll in May clearly names Sir John Wilcotes.

76.
Foedera
, ix, p. 283.

77.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 502.

78.
For direct reference to Glendower see Thomas Gray’s letter in Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 166. David Howel is mentioned on the same page. Percy and March are mentioned throughout the confessions and letters on pp. 160–73.

79.
Brie (ed.),
Brut
, i, pp. 75–6.

80.
Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 162.

81.
For Mordach’s recapture being a week after his abduction, see Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, pp. 101, 107, n. 31. For Ralph Pudsay, see
CPR
, p. 339.

82.
Kirby (ed.),
Signet Letters
, pp. 196–7.

83.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 496.

84.
Nicolas (ed.),
Privy Council
, ii, pp. 170–1.

85.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 311. Maidstone is 41 miles from Westminster. It is therefore somewhat unlikely that Archbishop Chichele was at Westminster in the morning and presided at this consecration. But it is difficult to decide which is more likely to be in error – the council minute or the date of the consecration.
Given that it is possible that he did the whole journey in one day, as this was almost the longest day, this has been allowed to stand.

86.
Curry,
Agincourt
, p. 66.

87.
Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 168. The purpose of stirring the earl of March has been inferred – the original document is damaged.

88.
As Lucy declared that part of the plot was to raise the north once Percy was free, it probably took place before it was known in London that Mordach had been recaptured. Cambridge seems to have known on 17 June that Percy was to be delivered to the custody of Robert Umphraville and John Widdrington, so the plot to free Percy probably postdates the instructions regarding his delivery agreed at the council meeting on 21 May.

89.
The line just preceding this in Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 168, referring to the gathering of Lollards and coats of arms, does not necessarily relate to the Oldcastle rising of 1414 (as Pugh’s note suggests); it could be a gathering for a more recent event, such as the sermon on Horsleydown, mentioned under 3 March.

90.
Fears
, pp. 206–7.

91.
CPR
, p. 356;
ODNB
, under Patrington. Although one might explain this as being due to the hiatus in the papacy, it is noticeable that Henry did not write to Constance or the pope (whichever was in power) asking for his man to be provided, as he did with the new bishop of Norwich in November 1415. Nor did he need to wait for the new bishop to be confirmed by the pope (as Patrington was not provided until December 1417, a week before he died) whereas Henry released the temporalities in August 1416. It is very tempting to see a desire to take the money into royal hands behind this nomination.

92.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 472.

93.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 496.

94.
Foedera
, ix, p. 271.

95.
CCR
, p. 218.

96.
CCR
, p. 232.

97.
CCR
, p. 218.

98.
Hutton,
Rise and Fall
, p. 38.

99.
CCR
, p. 218.

100.
For the authorship of the will, see Nicolas (ed.),
Privy Council
, ii, p. 182. The will itself is printed in
Foedera
, ix, pp. 272–80.

101.
For Scrope’s statements against the campaign, see Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 164.

102.
Hutton,
Rise and Fall
, pp. 38–9.

103.
CCR
, p. 218.

104.
CPR
, pp. 340, 365. Woodhouse’s patent letters were dated 25 June and 6 July at Westminster ‘by the king’.

105.
CPR
, pp. 337–8.

106.
CPR
, p. 339.

107.
Pugh,
Southampton Plot
, p. 162.

108.
Spinka (ed.),
Letters of Hus
, p. 193.

109.
CCR
, p. 210;
CPR
, p. 353.

110.
CPR
, p. 355 (both grants).

111.
Foedera
, ix, pp. 282–3; Wylie,
Henry V
, i, pp. 486–7.

112.
CPR
, p. 342.

113.
CPR
, p. 351. This was issued from Westminster ‘by the king’. From Winchester today was a grant ‘by the king’ to the king’s servant William Wyghtman of the keeping and governance of a minor, John Harpesfield. See
CPR
, p. 355.

114.
Wylie,
Henry V
, i, p. 487 has mistranslated
le roi baisa la lettre
as ‘the king put down the letter’. It clearly means ‘kissed’ as the Latin version
rex osculatus est litteras
says (albeit referring to more than one letter).

115.
Bellaguet (ed.),
Chronique du Religieux
, v, pp. 513–14.

July

1.
For times of meals see Harvey,
Living and Dying
, p. 43.

2.
CPR
, p. 339. Other letters dated at Winchester today include an order for the justices of the peace and the royal justices not to hold any sessions in Hampshire while the king was lodged there (
CCR
, p. 216) and the presentation of William Croydon, a royal chaplain, to the vicarage of Amberly in the diocese of Chichester (
CPR
, p. 339).

3.
According to the chronicler Monstrelet the archbishop ended his speech with an offer of French lands and the hand in marriage of the king’s daughter, Katherine, stating that this was conditional on Henry disbanding the army he was mustering at Southampton and refraining from invading France. However, Monstrelet seems to be less reliable and more prone to later prejudice than the official St Denis chronicler, from whose account details of the French embassy in early July is taken. See Johnes (ed.),
Monstrelet
, i, p. 329.